ScottR400D

I've had my 2015 R400D out at Silverstone and Snetterton. Not had a noise problem with side exit 7" sis silencer. Readings on the day between 95 and 100. That was at 210bhp. It now has RBTBs and seems louder so not sure how it'll be.

What alcal is referring to is a flange plate mounting. Has to be used with close centre wheels such as the French used to use a lot and can be advantageous when the wheel locates on the car by the studs rather than the central spigot, which most cars do to some extent. Having said that, I have two sets of Apollos, one with CR500s and one with ZZRs and they located pretty accurately on a back cone. (I have my own changer and balancer)

Buds, how did you "really put some strain on the battery"? I had a CTEK 3600 on the 997 911 I had until I built the 7. It was 7 years old, bought new, when I sold it, with 23000 miles and had the original battery, still working fine. Obviously the car stood in the garage a lot and the CTEK was always on.

Took my seven out yesterday for an hour. Not been used for two months though has had a conditioner attached every week or two for a few hours, last time a couple of weeks ago. Turned over but didn't start. Connected external booster, fired up and off I went. Banner is just over two years old, never looked at electrolyte. After reading above thread I got some deionised water this morning and checked levels of electrolyte. 1 cell below maximum but well above plates; other 5 up to peg.

I never had any noticeable vibration with the original mirrors though I did change them for Racetech ones fitted on the doors in the original location. They're fine too.

By the way JK, if you remember the thread about engine earthing points, you can see in the second image where my engine is earthed to. It is an M8 steel threaded insert and shows good continuity so far, after 18 months or so, but I'll be keeping an eye on it. As all three elements, the bolt, insert and cable end are zinc plated and its in a quite dry area, hopefully dissimilar metal corrosion wont be an issue.

This image shows the connection to the water sensor. The green wire is the original and now runs as the black one to the centre switch. The blue goes from the sensor to the switch (I take JK's point about colouring and I may redo mine next year but for now its a very simple stand alone bit of wiring). I used 8A cable but 5A would have been more than enough. I felt that the connectors fitted better to the slightly thicker cable. This one shows where all three wires (red from the oil sensor, blue from the water sensor and black for the gauge wire) come together and run through the bulkhead to the switch. This one show the switch with its waterproof cover.

No problem! My own fault for using the silly username, you're not the first! Will take pics soon and check wire size.

Chris, I used completely new wires. A SM25T hints, it avoids any doubt and is very straightforward. I couldn't get it through the big grommet, that's pretty much chock full. I drilled a 6mm hole next to the heater, put a grommet in it and fed the wires through there then directly to the switch. Peter.

Hi Jonathan. I did it the way I did because it's very simple and easily reversible. (Other than the hole for the switch!) Yes, a switch without the central 'off' position might have been better but I couldn't find a good one and I do t find it an issue. The one I got is good quality and waterproof, for what that's worth! I don't think a sprung one would be good because the sensors and/or gauge are heavily damped; it takes several seconds to adjust, especially if the oil is warming up and there's a significant, say 30 degree difference between water and oil. I wouldn't want my hand off the wheel for that long. Also there are times when I want to monitor the oil, e.g. cooling down on track. I'm sue there are many options but this works for me. Simple, effective and reliable without interfering with the loom. I'll get some pics and post them later. Peter Scott

I did this to my 2015 R400D. 3 pole switch on dash under water temp gauge. Wire from oil tank sensor to one side of switch. Wire from water temp sensor to other side of switch. Wire from central pole of switch back to loom where water temp sensor originally connected. I replaced both sensors with similar ones that have same rating but M4(?) thread connectors so that wires can be connected with a crimped on ring connector and nut rather than spades; the switch has standard spade connectors. Switch one way gives water temp, in middle nothing, other way reads oil. Very easy to fit and works fine. Only questions are whether low down the oil tank is best place for sensor and what temperature range should be there. No way of knowing what it is pre being cooled. On the road mine runs at 60/70c and 80c or so on a track day. I guess that's OK as it runs well, isn't otherwise modified and measuring there just sets a standard to use as a reference so I know when the oil has warmed up. I'll try to get images and switch details for you later if you're interested?

I'm a shortarse with 29" inside leg! I have a SV which I share with 6' son. It's got composite seats and I am fine with them on their forward setting. The SV has never felt too wide and the extra room gives other storage and access advantages both in the cockpit and under the bonnet.

There is a plastic cover fitted to the nut for IVA but no reason why that should cause it to come off. Of course, it is an ordinary nut so if not fully tightened it could come loose; a self locking nut isn't used for some reason, maybe because of the bobbin.

Yes, it does need a nut, M8 with a shakeproof washer; as on the underside of the bracket. You could get a nut almost anywhere, local hardware shop, car accessory shop etc The image seems to show a flat washer and a shakeproof already in place. It's hard to believe they would stay there without a nut!!

That makes sense, of course it could be fitted at the top!

I agree with the last comment. Only a few inches higher than the other lights and still very low in comparison with other traffic.

Thanks Nigel, that's exactly what I was wondering. I will keep an eye on it but so far it seems fine. As I said this method was proposed to me by CC in the first place, I was puzzled that it's not in keeping with the manual.

It's now actually fixed into the rivnut that can be seen just the other side of the hose from where it ends now. CC moved it there at the PBC. I assume that's into a solid part of the chassis but it has full continuity in any event. As I said the first image was sent to me by CC as an example, which I copied. I prefer it this way but wonder why it's not used commonly.

The engine block connects from the back of the block to the -ve terminal and then to the chassis via the shorter lead in the image. The lead with the yellow sleeve is connected to the back of the block, which is standard. The shorter cable, both ends of which are visible, then connects the block to the chassis.

Recently reading Rob Jones' 360 blog I was reminded how the instruction manual advises to remove a little coating from the chassis and the engine mount and to fit the main chassis/engine earth cable that way. When I built my car I was reluctant to do that and contacted CC Midlands to see if it was a necessity. They sent me the first image below which shows a different way of installing the earth lead, without any damage. My battery's centrally located but I did fit the cable as shown in the second image and its been fine. It seems to me that this type of fit is arguably better located in the car, and surely it cant be a bad thing not to have to remove coatings, but is there any long term advantage in doing it as the manual says?

I'm a shortarse but have lowered floors to suit my son. Visibility might be better for me without but I don't find it a problem and I do prefer the slightly stronger feeling that you're in the car rather than perched on it.

Search for helicopter tape.

My R400D before I had roller barrels fitted never idled that smoothly, it hunted between 1000 and about 1250 from new. Since fitting the RBs it idles perfectly steadily at 950. I'm not sure that a standard set up will idle that well but others may have more experience. As an aside, it's never a good idea to start a car and leave it idling to warm up. Just about the worst running conditions for the engine. Not that this would be responsible for your current issues.

I appreciate what your saying and agree that if there are signs of wear or damage from the damaged seal then the outer race should be changed. Being familiar with this bearing arrangement and the seal there's a good chance at that mileage that a full change wouldn't be necessary, IMO. All due respect but we aren't talking about the sort of bearings that you are involved in which sound quite interesting. This is a run of the mill thing that can be bought for less than a tenner. In fact the two parts can be bought separately if one wishes. Anyway, no wish to continue the argument, I'm sure the OP will find the right solution.

Cheers Dom, should have known!