Tony P

Think Automotive would be a good place to start... they have a whole load of quality 'Aero' style filler caps (one item is described as a direct replacement for a Caterham - but which particular cap it is a direct replacement for, I cannot tell). I think you need to buy the backing funnel and retaining ring separately - but if the outer cap will actually fit to the in-boot arrangement you already have, then you might save some money (otherwise... probably not). They also have 'faux' aero style cap replacements with centre-locking which might work if there is one of the correct size.

I seem to recall, way back when, it was determined (by whom, I cannot remember) that the presence of those two small, outer, setscrews was more to do with a requirement for the number of individual fixings employed, rather than their location or function (for competition accreditation, presumably, when it was said to have FIA approval). They must, obviously, add 'something' to the integrity of the mounting, but how much? As mentioned above, the oversizing of the hole suggests that some latitude is expected (though I don't think I've seen that much on earlier bars). Unfortunately, given the size of the hole (esp. if you enlarge it a touch) - and that very ugly welding next to it - you may not be able to satisfactorily cover it, and give the head full bearing surface, with a large washer. It seems doubtful, also, that you'd be able to force fit it with the other fastenings in place; and if you could I might be wondering what stresses were being induced in the chassis (that's just a thought mind). (When I replaced my 'FIA' bar with an Arch-made 'FIA+2' bar - on an Arch-made car - I recall it fitted with very little difficulty at all.)

The film 'American Graffiti' was shown on tv again the other day. Their method might leave more remedial work to be done though...

Just out of interest -- on later 'metric' cars, are the top joints and the steering arm joints still the original Imperial thread components? If so, I have noted down somewhere the amount by which you need to turn the steering joint to redress the existing toe-in or -out, per rotation of adjustment made to the top joint. (Obviously this is of no relevance to Rich just yet as he has to set the camber and toe to start with... but when it comes to fiddling and tuning it can be useful to know.)

Interesting… No. 12 (part 1): this was , reputedly, a stumbling block for a number of drivers in relation to Lotus. No. 45: Chapman never believed this to be a requirement until he’d seen how much out-of-shape recovery that drivers could achieve at Rob Slotemaker’s school at Zandvoort! Given the date shown at the end, it would appear - from the difficulty that beset the Lotus 72 upon its press launch at Hethel (April 1st, 1970) - that people involved in the design hadn’t taken all points of this methodology to heart! E.g. the torsion bars took a ‘set’ in set-up, pre-load and in use; when the mechanics reassembled the car prior to the demo, nobody had told them those unlabelled components had, in effect, become ‘handed’, they got put back on the opposite sides and dropped the car so low that Rindt had to stop driving it. It seems that Maurice Philippe, who designed the car, hadn’t provided the paperwork. I wonder if the riot act was read out?

Here's a crew doing their routine between-runs prep on a John Force-run Funny Car. Great team work here; inside six minutes they have the liners out of the block...! If the car reaches the final, I guess they'd be going through this routine half a dozen times in a weekend... (Unfortunately, the films ends rather abruptly, before they fire it up.)

I’d imagine that 13-inch is at the large end of the viability scale for a modern Seven. The MotoLita wheel, as seen in the second of ACFowles’s pic is about 11.5 inches; that wheel became the de facto ‘standard’ item for many years (it was, strictly speaking, an option), and a lot of folks opt for a smaller one. It will depend rather on your height, your seat choice and your driving position as to whether you can actually get your legs under the wheel and drive comfortably. I’d advise not splashing out on a new wheel until you’ve tried driving with the one supplied. Even if you then want to change it purely on aesthetic grounds it will give you an idea whether a change of size is desirable or viable for you.

Well.. the brand, historically, has a link to the Lotus Seven Club (or, at least, to one of its longest-standing stalwart members).

Could Caterham Cars possibly supply evidence that the car was originally purchased as a Starter Kit (body-chassis unit)?Anything not assembled and sold complete by them could, I believe, count as amateur built. If it was built up over a number of years, the components were probably not all purchased or sourced at once. But if a Certificate of Newness is available, it must have surely been purchased originally as a Starter Kit (at least) and presumably a significant proportion of the parts known by Caterham to be new. This situation, or one similar, must surely have arisen in the past... EDIT: apologies - just noted that you have the original order - so much of my original suggestion is already satisfied (unless they are prepared to furnish copies of invoices for other parts). Somewhat baffled here as I'd have thought an application for IVA from a private individual would seem, by definition, to say 'amateur built'. Sorry, not much help am I ...

I think it really depends on which side you want the buckle/release mech to be when the belts are undone. If on the outside, it can clatter over the side of the cockpit and damage the paint and sideskin. Can’t, for the moment, think of any other restriction (?) Usually the slots for the tangs are not equally displaced around the mechanism - so you can’t swap them around ‘cos the mech would be upside down and the belts would not fit in any usable arrangement. There are some 5/6 point harnesses which have the mechanism attached to the straps that go between the legs (and thus can only be used with all of the straps done up - which you may or may not regard as a benefit), which would not be handed.

Maybe we're just dense?

You really need to try one to find out - there are many variables. I'm 6'2" (and not with particularly long legs for my height, but a bit long-ish in the torso). S3 de Dion (i.e. "long cockpit") and have fitted without problem, using a fixed molded-to-fit seat (better in every respect than any other kind of seat, unless a variety of drivers are expected to drive). With care, you can contrive different molded seat backs or inserts to swap side to side. Pedals at furthest setting (of 2 in my case). With an "FIA+2" bar, have never had any need, or desire, to fit lowered floors (which can cause problems with speed humps - a major concern where I am).

Build manual (c. 1990 ed.) says 3.3 litres of SAE 15W/40, for "UK climate" - (does not appear to specify what increase might be required for cooler installation).

Great story, Scott! There was also the story of a long-time Club member who found his missing socket (13mm from memory) when his gearbox started misbehaving and making odd noises...

Before you purchase, check the size (i.e. the size of the glass area). The models intended primarily for (or at least named as such) single seaters are small; I mean tiny. They may suit you fine (as they appear to have done for Alan) but on the other hand, even if convex, they might not be what you were expecting.

On my (admittedly now old) SPA mirrors the screw on the top holds the mirror body's rotation in the horizontal plane. The screw for holding the arm in position is in the back of the lozenge shaped mounting plate, and acts on the back of the ball joint. If yours are the same, it looks like that screw might be inaccessible with those mirror mounts you are using. << Is there a common approach to fixing mirrors to the main body of the car...>> Not really, rather a host of individual ones... one common drawback is that you cannot fold the doors forward to rest open on their own because the mirrors impact the screen.(Some wag will be along soon to tell you to ditch the screen!)

I have tried to banish the crudeness of self tapping screws from my life - particularly on the Seven! (But then we all have our own little hang-ups and obsessions...)

I think the installed rivnut method described, above, by 'aeroscreens' is the most elegant method - rather than mullering the thing with chisels and mole grips or progressively enlarging the hole! :-) I did a piece on this in Lowflying, way back when, after I hit on the idea... only to find subsequently that - of course - it had been done before; though I'd thought it worth sharing. I found that the most commonly found size of M5 rivnut was too long once fitted - hence M4. Yes, you do end up with a slightly larger hole in what is supposed to be a dust cap, but a dab of grease solves that (and protects the threads ahead of you needing them). Just remember to keep a long M4 setscrew in the toolkit.

I made one (of the standard issue type) before drawing up a revised layout for Bruce at Arch to make a custom dash for me (I ended up cutting some of the apertures myself though). I can't be certain that I'll be able to find it in a hurry... EDIT: Ah, sorry... LHD? Would it be a mirror image of RHD or something different?

“Nothing is permanent but woe.” (quote: Fungus the Bogeyman, Raymond Briggs).

I'd try Elie's suggestion first (for example, Staedtler Lumocolour 'permanent' - though it won't be truly permanent, but quick, easy and cheap). If you don't like that, and you're having to buy paint just for this job, why not look at Humbrol? In Acrylic or Enamel, satin finish, either are only a couple of quid for a little tin.

From memory, there are exploded diagrams of two variants of drum layout in Tony Weale's book... I could check those when I'm home tomorrow if you haven't found what you need by then.

Thanks Jonathan. I copped the tail end of that... (Although with hindsight, and the wisdom of age - and the knowledge that I'd never want to sell the car - I would probably have opted for a Q-plate and spent the money on upgrades/petrol/beer!)

This might be a red herring, but from that era “KDxxxx” was the engine number quoted on a Caterham-issued certificate of newness (which, given the Q-plate, this car may not have had have - though that doesn’t necessarily mean it wasn’t all-new. When did ‘Special Car Tax’ end? Certainly post-1990, since I coughed up for it around then. SCT could be avoided by going for a Q-plate, whether or not the car was all new). This was when a chassis number (for a kit-built car, at least) would be, for example, KLDxxxxR, where K=supplied as a kit; L=long cockpit**; D=de Dion; x=the digits, normally the same on the chassis plate used for the engine No., where chassis and engine were both Caterham-supplied; and R=right hand drive. (** subsequently of course, all production de Dions would be long cockpit). Obviously the engine wouldn’t know who assembled the car or what the cockpit arrangement was, I assume they used that format as a form of ‘matching numbers’ (so loved of historic car auctions…) regardless of what was already stamped/embossed on the original casting. As per Robert's comment, my Caterham-supplied 1700 was an AX block.

<< (I know that for racing the buckle will be on the crotch strap) >> Not necessarily... I've always found the most comfortable 6-point belt is the so-called "D-ring" type, which also gives you the option of wearing it as a 4-point if you wish (and the tails of the crutch straps have no buckles, just a loop, so they easily tuck out of the way). The 5/6-point type with the QR unit in the crutch strap (like an old Luke belt I had - from Caterham) won't let you do that. However, my car has the original style welded-on lugs for mounting the seats at the rear of the cockpit (but unused in my case - foamed-in moulded seat) which are ideal for attached the crutch straps to. QR buckles definitely on the inboard side, or they'll clatter over the cockpit sides at some point and damage the paintwork. I found "pull down to adjust" for the waist straps to be an absolute disaster of inconvenience. However, some here have expressed a preference for that arrangement (though I could, honestly, never work out why). That may vary depending on your particular seat, slots, cut-outs etc. I found all of my preferred features on Willans harnesses (from memory, I think they were ordered and made via James Whiting).