bjw

Hi Anthony, If the delay works then most of the electronics must be ok. Try bypassing the delay unit as previously described. If the high speed then works ok it's most likely a problem with Relay #2 (see diagram in post#3). If high speed still doesn't function then obviously it's switch, wiring, connectors or motor... There's an old post which talks about a simple mechanical problem with the relays (but the photos are long gone):- https://www.lotus7.club/forum/techtalk/fixed-caterhams-intermittent-wiper-control-box "However, unreliable component number 2 and 3 are the relays, which contain a small spring which latches the contact in it's default position - I found on mine the small spring had come off the end of the contact, inside the relay, and it was free to flap about. Easily solved with the components in place." Cheers

This looks like the one:- Available on eBay:- https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Connector-WPT-1091-1U2Z-14S411-AY-for-Ford-Mazda-Fuel-Pump-Mass-Air-Flow-Meter-/151760740881 Cheers

I don't think the 33449 is the correct version:- https://www.autoelectricalspares.co.uk/lucas-33449-6da-wiper-delay-control-unit-2584-p.asp I believe it's the 33404 that is required. Cheers

Recall seeing a post saying it could be the oscillator. That might be this one:- https://www.lotus7.club/forum/techtalk/fixed-caterhams-intermittent-wiper-control-box - but it's always risky to assume you have the same fault... Cheers

The underside of the Technisol case is glued and has to be prised off. You'll probably need to strip off the black outer sleeves to enable the board to be pulled out. The first thing to do is look for any corrosion, leaking capacitors, suspicious looking joints, broken wires... As you can from the pictures it's a pretty crudely made device. The 'afterthought' components on the rear aren't a good sign, and on mine the large electrolytic was pressed against the sharp points with no padding to prevent puncturing the insulation... Cheers

There is a Lucas unit (6DA) with the connectors moulded into the case, and the Technisol unit where the connectors are on flying leads. The Lucas unit uses a custom chip, whereas the Technisol uses a PIC microcontroller, but both use two relays in the same configuration to do the switchng. Technisol:- Lucas:- What is the fault? Cheers

Oh & Halfords have changed the product name to 'Advanced' with a life time guarantee (you or the wrench?) Actually, it wasn't just a change of name. The discontinued 'Halfords Pro' torque wrenches were re-badged 'Norbar Pro' wrenches. The replacement 'Halfords Advanced' ones are re-badged 'Nortorque' wrenches which are a more 'hobby' tier below the Pro. There's quite a price difference between the two ranges - e.g. Zoro sell the ('new professional') Norbar Pro 300 for £120.99 as compared to the Nortorque 300 at £79.99. That being said no Norbar wrench is going to disappoint! Cheers

Halfords Advanced Torque Wrench Model 300: 60 to 300 Nm. Reversible. £99, Club discount, as noted above, and possibly special offers. - That appears to be a a re-badged Nortorque 300 (Norbar 130105) which is available from Zoro for £79.99 (free p&p). Clarke PRO238 1/2" Drive Digital Torque Adaptor. £44.39. 40 to 360 Nm. A customer comment says that it is reversible: please can someone confirm. - The product manual at the link on that page states 'Torque function in both directions - Yes'. (Currently available from Tools House at £41 delivered.) Cheers

"(But the first K Guides had the old style diagram!)" Surely that's to be expected as the first K Guides must have been produced in 1992 (1.4) and so pre-date the VX 8V (1997) ? Cheers Barry

No need to apologise - you have no reason to accept everything some bloke says on the internet as gospel ! Cheers, Barry

Hi Jonathan, "PS: My guess is that all browsers can show them inline, but some need a bit of configuration." I clearly failed miserably to convince you otherwise when this last came up!! Just to re-iterate - when a user inserts a pdf within a post, the forum software attempts to display it using an <img> tag. As I suggested previously:- "As far as I have been able to ascertain, PDF's are apparently usually embedded with <object>, <iframe> or <embed> tags. In theory the <img> tag can be used with single page vector pdfs but the majority of browsers have never supported it." e.g. Firefox doesn't:- https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/img#Supported_image_formats - and by all reports neither does Chrome. Clearly Apple have implemented this (and perhaps some Linux distributions?), but these represent a small fraction of the total browser market, so no commercial website will ever use it. There's no obvious mechanism here for a poster to insert an in-line pdf in any other way that would be visible to all, ...but just posting a <link> to a pdf works for everybody ! Cheers Barry

Hi Paul, Emails/pdfs received. Thanks very much for doing this. Excellent quality scanning. I haven't read it through yet but a quick browse shows there's certainly a few things I haven't come across before. The loom diagram in the main manual pdf appears to tally closely with the car as far as I can see, but the wiring diagram in the other pdf is the same as the one in the 1995 guide and doesn't cover the 956i ECU and has the wrong fuse layout. I suspect this was acquired separately? As you're an original owner/builder I'm guessing there simply never was a wiring diagram for the VX 8V and this was the point where Caterham switched from the rather difficult to read circuit diagrams to the exceptionally difficult to decode loom manufacturing diagrams! Thanks again, Barry

Hi Paul, Interesting. (Your post shows as a reply to #30 but I'm guessing it was a reply to my question? - Forum bug.) Perhaps I should have asked '... found evidence of damage from vibration.' Flying against established wisdom perhaps, but I'm afraid I'm yet to be convinced that vibration is the villain in many, if any, of the failures... Cheers

Facet 'cube' pumps range from 1psi to 15psi and they all look the same, so unless you've found the number stamped into the mounting flange nothing is certain, but if you aren't having problems why worry? My pump has '40105' stamped on the flange which indicates it's a 3-4.5 psi unit. That's the correct one as specified by Caterham and the date code (notched into the top label) shows it's the original fitted in 1998 - working with twin DCOEs for over twenty years with no additional regulator. Cheers

Three things must be connected together: battery -ve, chassis and engine block. It doesn't matter how, but it requires two cables. In the Ikea manual, the connection is chassis - battery - block, so no cable is needed directly between the chassis and the block. With the usual chassis - block cable, the second cable can be be battery - chassis, or battery - block. Cheers

If you're referring to the 'Ikea' manual, page 43 ("It lives!") shows two leads from the battery -ve terminal , one connected to the chassis next to the battery and the other to the engine block (at what looks like a bellhousing bolt). That would mean there's no need for the usual direct chassis to engine connection. It might even be considered an improvement since starter current passes through one less terminal than usual! Cheers

As far as I can make out 9195109 is a Vauxhall part number for the FR8LDCU, not the FR8LDC. The 'U' suffix means it's supplied with a 1.0mm gap as opposed to 0.8mm. Whether that will be of any great consequence I wouldn't like to speculate. Cheers

Perhaps vibration can cause the sender to fail, but that's certainly not always the problem. Recently my (2016) sender started to behave erratically in the traditional manner. Testing off the car with a compressor and a multimeter showed a pattern of resistance variations which suggested that the mechanics were moving correctly but the wiper of the variable resistor was making poor contact. Either the contact pressure was low, or there was contamination on the working surface of the resistance wire. In the hope it was just contamination I drilled a couple of 2.5mm holes on opposite sides of the case and liberally blasted contact cleaner through each one. Cycling the pressure up and down quickly between 0 and 7Bar* a few times (sweeping the wiper from one end to the other) sorted out the resistance issues completely. Covered the holes with some aluminium tape and refitted. Normal operation was restored. Since the chamber is sealed at manufacture it's not clear how the contact surfaces become contaminated. I don't know if there's a rubber seal at the rolled over seam, but there seems to be one at the terminal. Speculation: Perhaps the seal isn't good enough, or there's moisture present when the unit is closed which leads to corrosion in the long term, or maybe the rubber or some other sealing compound is outgassing. (If it is some sort of outgassing then the lower operating temperature of a remotely mounted sensor may reduce it..?) I wouldn't like to predict how long the treatment will last, but to repeat it won't take long and contact cleaner is cheap... As a matter of interest has anyone ever actually cut open a bad unit and found evidence of mechanical damage? Cheers, Barry * (Note the sender is only rated for 7bar even though the gauge goes to 8...)

Thanks Paul. Good plan! Cheers, Barry

I would have to agree it sounds much more like a bush problem than a diff problem. As Nigel says, polyurethane bushes last a lot longer than the rubber ones. They're more expensive obviously, but only ~£15, and then pretty much fit and forget even if they're soaked in oil. Cheers

Just noticed similar. Replied to #6 (contents of #6 correctly displayed during editing), displayed as having replied to #8. #8 was the last post in the thread at the time. Cheers

Hi Paul (pellert) Thanks. Yes, I'm enjoying the car very much indeed. Suits me down to the ground. No doubt some find it inconceivable that anyone can be satisfied with a mere 100BHP..., but it takes all sorts and I refuse to condemn them for their beliefs. Quite enough power for road use as far as I'm concerned. A satisfying amount of low end torque. Live axle hops on bumps. It's all good fun. I'm not racing. I'm more a 'classic car' type - I enjoy working on the car as much as driving it, and spend considerably more time doing the former! The car was in pretty good condition when I bought it but things can always be improved. I'm excessively obsessive about detail, so it'll never quite be 'finished'. Yes, I'm an old... tinkerer, polisher, whatever. I've also recently restarted rebuilding my '67 S3 Elan which I stripped down in 1979... I don't like to rush things. It doesn't seem that long ago, until I remember that I paid £800 for it having sold my Mk 1 Escort GT for £825 and bought a year's insurance with the left over! Those were the days. Kids today... Cheers, Barry

Well thank you. As a matter of interest - without gaskets the sump is likely going to sit ~3.5 or 4mm higher - how do you then deal the misaligned bellhousing bolts? Cheers

Ever since I bought my 1600 VX Classic the question over the condition of the sump foam had been nagging away at the back of my mind. The car is 20 years old and came with no service history - how often had it been changed ? Maybe never ? An oil change was now due and it was time to bite the bullet. I've dropped a few sumps - how hard could it be to take a look? Turns out it wasn't quite as straightforward as I had hoped: - https://sites.google.com/view/bjw-caterham-seven/sump-foam Cheers, Barry

That's great Paul, brilliant! Thank you so much. I'd pretty much given up ever seeing one. I don't know where you're based but I'd be more than happy to pick it up and scan it for you if you're not too far away. (I'm in Iver, Bucks - a few miles from Heathrow.) Thanks also Regin. (The link to the 2002 manual appears to be broken at the moment). Cheers, Barry