IanJ

here are some photos and notes I took whilst assisting a fellow blatchatter who undertook the same exercise with a dry-sumped (no Apollo) K-Series. Hopefully they will be of some use. He aligned the clutch plate by feel rather than using an alignment tool. Took a bit of jiggling, but it seemed to go back together in the end. I think my preference would have been to use an alignment tool... Ian and Debbie 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

Does it have a towbar and if so, how fast could I get my my Superlight on a Minno to Anglesey? Ian and Debbie 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

Another vote for A048s: Soft Front and Medium Rear. I run 185s all round and only have 138 BHP so this setup helps to keep the rear of the car lively enough to have fun whilst the front feels rock solid. I've tried Soft all round and this makes the car feel more docile, but less involving. A048s tramline way less than ACB10s, but I guess it depends what you're used to! The A048s are a lot heavier than the CR500s, but also a lot cheaper and do give the option of different compounds. Ian and Debbie 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

Well I did wonder, Neil! I'm thinking at the moment it could be a combination of soft tyres and low trailer nose weight then. That's interesting, Graham - it hadn't occurred to me that switching the rears back to the fronts might actually even out the wear - could be worth a try! Knackered bearings is pretty much what it sounds like and then the problem magically goes away with different tyres on the rear. Thanks for all the comments. Ian and Debbie 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here Edited by - IanJ on 12 Jan 2009 09:01:36

A Volvo related posting here reinforces Neil's thoughts. The last post is particularly interesting: "Sounds to me awfully like the wear pattern you would get from shock absorbers which are past their best, and allowing the wheels to 'patter' over bigger bumps. Once the wavy pattern has been established, its sort of self reinforcing." The shock absorbers seem OK, but I am wondering if insufficient trailer nose weight could be causing the rear of the car to be lifted by the trailer and allow the wheels to "patter" over bumps in the road. Ian and Debbie 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

Thanks for all the comments - I'll respond in order. In my case, the problem is characterized by large flatspots around the circumference of the tyre rather than asymmetric wear of the tread blocks. I'm not convinced that uneven tread block wear is a contributory factor. However, the suggestion to swap over sides is a good one and if I will consider buying non-directional tyres next time round to give me more flexibility (my current Paradas are directional). The car spends a very small percentage of it's time towing. I went through a complete set of Paradas without issue before acquiring the trailer. The rears from the next set which came off (after say roughly 1K miles of trackday towing) had massive flatspots. At this time the fronts were swapped onto the rears and ran fine for a couple of thousand miles or so. Then I towed to the club trackdays at Brands and Rockingham (September/October) last year. Immediately after this, a sensation/noise best described as the "tyre slap" referenced in the post by Neil was noticeable (although not yet pronounced). I think that the issue is related to towing and the suspicion is that insufficient nose-weight on the trailer may be causing the rear of the car to be lifted as the trailer pitches which causes uneven wear. The car originally came with Pirelli P Zeros. I am considering trying something other than the Yokohama Paradas next time round. Contis good be an option! Ian and Debbie 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

I was wondering if the power of BC could shed any light on likely causes of uneven wear on the rear of my tow car when towing the Caterham. In all other respects, the car seems to cope fine (1200Kg towing capacity) and the trailer seems to be very stable. Tow car is a Toyota Celica, tyres are Yokohama Parada Spec 2 and the trailer is a Minno. The tyres wear unevenly around their circumference and the resultant 50p shape is far from ideal! I have been advised that this type of wear is not uncommon on front wheel drive tow cars. It has also been suggested that insufficient nose weight on the hitch may be a major contributing factor. I have since moved the Caterham forward to achieve a nose-weight which is very close to the stipulated 75Kg maximum (it was about 55Kg before which was a little too light for my liking). Not had a chance to determine whether this has improved the situation yet. It also occurs to me that the Paradas are inherently fairly soft and perhaps not ideally suited to towing! I'm wondering if I may also benefit from a more robust choice of tyre for towing purposes. I would be interested to hear from anybody who has had a similar experience... Ian and Debbie 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

At the recent Brands trackday, I used the built in mic on my Drivedata DR2 which was mounted in the boot in a plastic box with holes drilled in the sides. The results were much better than I was expecting so I'm planning to stick with that arrangement for the moment. Ian and Debbie 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

Switching from A021Rs to A048Rs (Soft) front and A048Rs (Med) rear in conjunction with a change to my driving style (more gradual turn-in) has left my car on the oversteery side of neutral with just 138BHP. Depending on the sump arrangement you have, you might need to be concerned about oil surge if you use stickier tyres. Ian and Debbie 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

Bedazzled: that certainly matches my experience and was an approach that had crossed my mind. Thanks! Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

Interesting - thanks for the responses. The trailer reverses OK on the flat, but is a real struggle to reverse uphill (empty) with the hitch significantly more compressed. I don't believe it's a hydraulic hitch. I certainly wouldn't try man-handling it on a hill that steep. It could indeed be the case that there is some clever auto-reverse mechanism which prevents the brakes from activating in reverse even when the hitch is fully compressed. I hadn't considered that as a possibility. It just seemed a bit harder to reverse uphill backwards than I was expecting. Maybe it's just gravity after all... Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

I have a second-hand 7(ish) year old Brian James Minno and a rather steep driveway. Reversing the trailer uphill activates the brake and makes things even more difficult than the effects of gravity alone. Is anybody aware of something like a reversing lock to disable the braking system (perhaps as an option) on Minno hitches? Thanks. Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

I was sitting outside Chambre Neuf drinking beer in the sunshine after a good day's riding up at Grand Montets. Seeing a Caterham blatting around Chamonix on my final day finished off the holiday perfectly No photos I'm afraid. You were too quick for my annebriated friend who was a bit slow on the draw with his camera. Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

Hi Markus, This wasn't you here by any chance was it? If the car got dripping wet, pull the plug leads and check to make sure none of the sparkplug recesses has filled up with water. Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

Dropping off passenger outside Chamonix Mont Blanc station on Saturday evening. Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

Rob/Simon, Apologies for the late posting on this. Having read through all the specs etc on this, it looks like a great bit of kit. If it's not too late, I would like to join this bulk buy with an order for a DR2 on it's own assuming it accepts an RCA video input (I already have an RF Concepts bullet camera). The spec/photos seem a little unclear regarding video input ports: "IRIS, 1Vpp, 75ohm, RCA optional", so I would be grateful if somebody (Simon?) could clarify whether it will take an RCA input out of the box. If you blatmail me payment details, I can get a cheque in the post to you this evening. Many thanks. Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

Yes, a handheld camera does look like the best option as a recording device for quality. However, this restricts your possible mounting locations unless you connect it to a bullet camera. I am looking for a solution which I can use as a helmet camera for snowboarding as well as for in-car footage. So my only real option is a bullet camera. The question is what to connect it to. I like the idea of a solid state device because they are small and have no moving parts so are potentially less sensitive to shock/vibration. A compact unit is important because I want to be able to carry it easily inside my jacket to ensure that the battery packs are somewhat protected from sub-zero temps and reduced performance. Size and price is important because I don't want to break too many ribs or the bank if I land on it! I am prepared to accept some compromise on recording quality to meet the requirements outlined above and have the added convenience. However, the quality of the recordings I have captured so far on the Archos have been less than acceptable. Hence the interest in other recommendations such as the Mustek. Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

Darren, The spec sheet for my Sony VB21HQ-R43 gives the following fields of view for different lens sizes: 2.9mm 120 deg 3.6mm 92 deg 4.3mm 78 deg 6.0mm 54 deg 8.0mm 39 deg 12.0mm 26 deg 16.0mm 15 deg Hope that helps. Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

Roger, Thanks for your comments - they are all good points and are consistent with my observations. The files I posted were as recorded by the Archos with no post-processing. I guess I was stressing it a bit! The picture quality is excellent when stationary and seems to be acceptable at anything up to about 40mph. After that, the compression algorithm really starts to struggle when there is significant detail in the frame. I've had a couple of other thoughts on tweaks I can apply to my setup, but I would obviously be very hesitant to recommend it for in-car use on the basis of results so far. When I record directly from a DVD player (for example 956 in-car), it seems to cope much better and the resulting file shows a much higher bitrate, even though it's on the same recording settings. I'm wondering if the DVR copes better with the resolution of the input signal from the DVD than the camera, but I'm still puzzled as to the significant difference in quality! Richard, As a comparison, can you tell me the resolution and bitrate your Mustek is actually saving files at? Thanks. Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

.

I've uploaded a few MPEG 4 test videos here They are a bit more blocky than I was hoping for. The MPEG 4 compression seems to struggle as the speed increases, especially when there is a lot of detail in the picture and/or the light conditions change rapidly. Has anybody managed better results with an MPEG 4 recorder? I'm thinking that something which saves to the less-lossy MPEG 2 format might be a better option as Adam mentioned earlier. Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here Edited by - IanJ on 23 Jan 2008 08:37:38

Roger, Those specs came respectively from: 320X240 - an enquiry to RF concepts regarding this here 640X480 - here 752 X 582 - here However, I totally agree that specs don't tell the whole story on their own. There is a lot more to all this stuff than I first realised so I'm on a steep learning curve at the moment! I captured some test video onto my Archos from the tintop last weekend. I downloaded the results to my PC and then went through usual codecs learning process. The results were slightly less impressive than I had been expecting. After comparing my efforts with other peoples in-car videos that I downloaded from the web, I arrived at the conclusion that the Archos default bitrate (1500Kbps) is insufficient for in-car recording at 640X480 resolution. I am hoping to have another go this weekend and try out a few different bitrates and and sampling frequencies. I''ll upload the results and post links if I manage to come up with anything that looks half decent! Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

As far as DVR specs are concerned, you need to be aware that some models will only record at 320x240 resolution, whilst some will record at 640x480. The RF Concepts Pack 5 camera will capture at a resolution of 752x582. Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here

David, The Archos doesn't have lanc capability. Recordings have to be started/paused/stopped from the main DVR itself unless you buy the archos helmet cam kit. I went for the RF Concepts camera pack in preference to the Archos one because it seemed to offer a better quality camera and I wasn't fussed about the the remote control capability. Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here Edited by - IanJ on 5 Jan 2008 22:25:17

I got the RF Concepts Pack 5 for Christmas along with this: http://www.archos.com/products/gen_5/archos_405/index.html?country=global&lang=en and the travel dock. Early indications are that the DVR is particularly impressive, but I need to play with it a bit more to confirm whether or not I would recommend it. Ian 😬 1.6K SS Superlight #006 Penn Sevens Here