Shortshift
-
Posts
2,606 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Blatmaps
Speed Championship Results
News
Website Help
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Everything posted by Shortshift
-
I'm at the point where I'd like to move on from my fantastic, sequential Duratec R500 and enjoy a Series 3 620R. Perhaps as a last hurrah before decrepitude takes over and I start a gentle decline into softer toys. Anyway, if anyone has a good condition, low mileage, standard body, good condition (did I mention good condition?) 620R that they're thinking of selling, either now or over the next few months, then please let me know. Either on here or via BlatMail would be good ways. Fingers crossed! James
-
"Why Buy - significant improvement to ride comfort and I strongly suspect that this in turn will improve performance" Many thanks Simon - I get it! James
-
"Ultimaetly I think road users will see most benefit." Thanks Simon - good to have your confirmation of the view expressed by others - but at risk of sounding like a cracked record, how will this on-road benefit be recognised by the driver and, possibly, the passenger? Is it improved performance (grip, traction, etc), or ride comfort (whether primary or secondary) or just control and overall handling - the driving pleasure element identified by BenF above. As a potential purchaser (I'm guessing I could be within the target customer profile) I didn't think it would be this difficult to get to the crux of the "why buy?" argument! Or is it just "bragging rights" after all? James
-
"I would imagine the main benefit is on public roads." Great, I follow that too. But is this public road 'benefit' primarily in terms of ride comfort, or outright performance, or just handling/driving pleasure now that you've added that dimension in to the mix? Sorry to be stubborn about this line of thinking but I just want to know how I would enjoy the benefits. As I said above, "why should I buy" (apart from bragging rights down the pub)? James
-
"I suspect that will be the prime differentiator..." Thanks Sam - very helpful, but I'm not sure what 'that' is referring to in your reply above. Are you talking about track surface quality being key to whether a DD or IRS would give best on-track performance in a Seven? If so, I can follow that. And hopefully Simon can add when he gets the chance. I suppose that, really, I'm asking "why buy?". Is it to make the car more comfortable when being driven on-road, or is it to extract improved performance when in track mode? James
-
"The iRS saves a small amount of weight overall - we were unable to weigh it ourselves as the car was a full refurb - we never had the same item to weigh. I promise the first car to be fitted (end of September) will be fully measured. However from Dominic's figures there was approx 1.5kg saved but 9.5 kg moved from unsprung to sprung." Thanks Simon - good to hear both those figures! Curious also to know - do you see the main benefit of IRS on a Seven as improved ride comfort or better (ultimate) performance? I can see the weight savings (particularly unsprung) helping with the ride, but others on this thread have suggested the DeDion is hard to beat for performance - I guess that means on track. I'm keen to know your views, given your experience with both systems. James
-
Ooohhh... James
-
A very good find Stephen! And written some years before CC did introduce IRS with the CSR development. I'd be interested to know the weight delta between a standard S3 and an equivalent S3 fiitted with IRS (the Meteor IRS car, for example) and also to understand what difference there might be between sprung and unsprung mass in both design types. I suspect that the benefits offered by IRS in terms of ride comfort might be greater than any performance gain over the DD set-up - which has been proven to be pretty effective on these little cars. So IRS for improved comfort, rather than outright (on-track?) performance?? James
-
Thank you Stu; I clearly have less energy than you! James
-
"Hopefully Meteor hold all the rights & registered. If so they there is money in that especially if Caterham wish to adopt" Oh dear... James
-
Good find, John. Looks as though the rear carriers were cast, initially, with later ones being machined from solid billet. But an important point is that the car is S3 sized and looks to be properly engineered for IRS. Intriguing! James
-
Ever considered a Birkin IRS? Rather nicely executed... I am curious to see the hub carriers in greater detail... James
-
Oh - the irony... James
-
Strange, and I don't know why, but whenever I read some of the posts on this thread, the topic of trolling springs to mind. Maybe it's just me... James
-
What are you like??!! James
-
Single Festival Of Speed Saturday ticket - NOW SOLD
Shortshift replied to Temple Cloud's topic in For Sale
Hi Temple Cloud As Nick just said above, I'd like to take it please. I'll BM you about details. Many thanks James -
"Now thats more like it gentlemen. Very helpful." I do hope you got my meaning... On road comfort being significantly impacted - to the point where I could hardly bear to drive the car on road. But it was ace on trackdays. And blissful on road (relatively speaking) with the OE Bilsteins refitted. James
-
"Changed standard suspension to Meteor recommended spring rates and Nitron NTR1 a couple of years ago. Made a substantial impact to the comfort on B road use." Me too. Impact being the operative word! One of the reasons for my perspective on this topic. And I know I'm not alone... James
-
"...swopped to a secondhand set of Nitron supplied NTR1s and they were night and day better." I assume you mean in terms of performance, possibly track related, Nick? But in terms of on-road comfort, which is the OP's area of interest, then...??? James
-
To reinforce what BenF is saying above. I suspect (in fact, I really believe) that most of the aftermarket shocks that are advertised for Caterhams are really oriented towards track and motorsports activity. Given that your starting point was 'comfort on road' then I think you'd have to tread very carefully. Just think about the amount of time, knowledge and resource that Caterham and their preferred supplier (Bilstein in this case) put into developing their OE damper specs. I struggle to think of the aftermarket specialists getting anywhere close to this... James
-
Replying to #7 There might well be more than one person in that category! James
-
"it seems there are reasons why the CC shims don't work" They do. It's wrong to say they don't. Just fit them (as they are intended to be) in pairs. That way you will have a secure mounting and the correct pedal/pivot/piston geometry to ensure that the piston strokes properly inline with the bore. (This has nothing to do with the effective ratio which is set by the pedal geometry). "Did you fit yours or have them fitted?" I've fitted these myself (in pairs, of course) to two cars I have owned and advised a friend with fitment to a 620. It's straightforward. "Anyone able to measure the angle of the taper on the shim by the way and how much different is that to a pair of washers?" I think you're missing the point - and in my view it's a fairly important one! James
-
Using washers to angle two plain surfaces relative to one another is just poor engineering practice - whether it 'works' or not. It's a bodge job. A pair of shims is the proper way to do it and works perfectly when correctly installed; the angle of inclination is not 'too big' as speculated above but is, in fact, designed to ensure that the m/c piston is correctly aligned with the bore and not off-centred. Just do it properly, using a single pair of shims. James
-
Away at present so it will be a week or so before I can take a new photo. I don't remember anything odd about the rod adjustment. So long as the clevis is still secured to the threaded shaft with full lock nut engagement, it doesn't really matter if the full rod length is needed. James
-
Sorry - can't find a photo at present. But as posted above, they ensure that the mounting bolts are torqued up square to the mounting surface. Without the second shim, I'd say there's a risk the MC is neither securely mounted nor correctly positioned. Either way, it's incorrect without the second half of the pair! James
