#84

Maybe it could be of value to add that these two damper sets are measuring quite similar to each other in a range of settings where I found them to work best and they are not that different from the stock dampers either, in terms of overall F vs v characteristics. But the real result differs substantially, for reasons other people are better on explaining than me. The 46 R1's are actually, despite matched with brutally stiff springs, quite forgiving over rougher obstacles - i.e. less harshness, which is confirmed in dyno tests over a higher velocity range than presented in most plots. The Club Sports are less forgiving in that particular respect, but otherwise more civilized.

Really nice build. I must say that I envy you for starting your project on a GT410 with everything looking brand new and being developed a bit further before start, than my 2011 Evora S. So, what are your impressions after this season?

.. boring work fitting pbody panels, getting the gaps right, arranging cables, hoses and other boring stuff - not to mention the interior panels which is not a job for the faint hearted. Well, almost done. But. In the background another thing has been going on. Considering the effort I put into chassi modifications and all testing and tweaking I have been doing, I have decided to switch to a chassie / damper solution where I can work together with a local expert. Yet to be disclosed. This means that both setups of Nitrons will go. Nitron are always supportive and nice to talk to, but I need to find a solution where I not need to pay 1000 € for each iteration and also a technology platform with some additional feature I see that I need. So, up for sale are: Nitron Club Sport (40 mm), 1-way, 425/625 springs, other alternatives could be discussed. Used for 5 weeks only with protective neoprene socks, 3017 km. €2200 (€550 off new price). Nitron 46 R1, 1-way, 900/1100 springs, other alternatives could be discussed. Used for 5 months, 3720 km. €2800. Data, settings, advices for possible updates at next service will be shared with both alternatives. The Club Sports are, considering all parameters 2-2.5 s quicker than a standard chassi per 1 minute lap. The 46 R1's are 0.5-1 s quicker than the Club Sports per 1 minute lap, which I have same day test results of. The Club Sports is a cost effective, easy to live with every day, update over standard chassi. And it removes a huge amount of weight, as listed earlier in this thread. Almost as comfortable as standard Bilsteins. I ran them with 475 springs front with a stiffer anti-roll bar. Maybe counter intuitive, but I wanted the inner wheel to over-come the anti roll bar mid-corner. With standard anti-roll bar, I believe the 425's are right. The 46 R1 is superior to the Club Sport in every measurable parameter and a damper that you could build on to further develop the performance. The larger piston is a must to get control over stiffer springs. However, they may be noisy and if your focus is not to lower lap times and have more fun on the track, this is probably not the option to go for. I have some ideas on springs, but that can also be discussed. I will put up a proper add some day :-)

Alive! Well, almost. It has been quite silent in this thread for a while but it doesn't mean that nothing has happened. The engine, with rebuilt belt circuit, 1-piece super-light flywheel with 600 Nm AP clutch and greabox with new re-inforced gear-set + Drexler LSD went in late last summer. Still issue swith the clutch and the season ended. I am quite busy winter time, so only a few things happened, but not mutch. Just before Christmas Greg from RRR texted me that the new ECU Master EMU PRO-16 with Gateway was ready to be shipped, so I decided to install the FlexFuel sensor and the Detschwerks DW65C fuel pump. Fast forward. Car runs well with the PRO-16 and now a bracket is manufactured and it seems to fit. Flex fuel connected. Rear clam will come on the coming days. All the mods will be described in detail 🙂 In the pipeline is both a delicate crankcase ventilation concept and a new rear anti-roll bar system. To be continued.

I actually watched the video once more and read 50 something comments. There are off course a few details that are left out about how the test is performed, but the setup of the rig, the reasoning about oil seclections and the use of standard dirt is just by the book (as I see it). I have hired national test labs for oil related tests that have had a much sloppier or less systematic approach. Unfortunately. However filtering of dirt is nothing I have personal experience of. Anyway, among comments high and low (quite a few low .. 🙉) I must say that this one was very well balanced and put the finger on the fact that there is nothing right, or wrong here, just different - and for a reason: Screenshot_oilfilter_comment.pdf

That was how I have reasoned with myself as well. Thanks for your input! I have spent quite some time with development of oil systems, oil selections and filtration levels, still there are unexpected questions that leaves oneself completely puzzled 🙂

This one popped up in my youtube flow: https://youtu.be/RLcfBG9yUmg?si=h0VezoZgLuV9ToCF Since the conclusion is that the OE Toyota oil filter is crap I got quite concerned. I only buy the OE Toyota filter for the 2GR-FE engine and hence asked myself if that is a stupid move. Anyone who have tested other brands, or have knowledge or experience about our OE filter being hit or shit?

And the rear toe rod adjustment screw is unfortunately very likely to require heating from a torch / gas burner to come loose.

Interesting thread! Sorry to be a late in the discussion, but I have stayed out of the forum for some time since I have .... had the gearbox rebuilt and fitted a LSD .... and while having the car apart being doing a "few" other mods. Given your arguments, it is probably the right decision you made. For me, with an Evora S with 450 Nm, I rarely experience traction issues with semi-slicks, but came to the decision as follows: When I elaborate with damper settings; loss of traction is always the first issue that limits me in the rear. Then I back off one click and is good again. No matter what I do, how unbalanced the car is, a more settled chassis always pays off in lap times => I want to turn up the damper stiffness A number of indications led me towards the decision to design a stiffer rear anti-roll bar => traction issues will increase I currently work with Nitron and in a dialogue of next step, we were in complete agreement that we do not do any revalving until a LSD have been fitted. It has been a recommendation from their side since before. So, I would rather say that the LSD, a Drexler in my case, may pay off in secondary effects rather than in primary effects (=Traction / No traction). If you had/have the chance to drive different models of Porsche 944 Turbo (LSD standard from -88), you will find that it is much easier to sort out the settings / driving style of the later one. My experience is that you get a far better front/rear balance with LSD in a 944 when you can disregard traction in the equation. Maybe that car is more extreme in this sense, but at least a good example.

@pat_t I also looked at those colourful pulleys and see a point in reducing the weight on the crank pulley, but in terms of priority it ended up further down, partly due to my concern of messing with the 250 Nm tightened crank pulley screw. As far as I understand, Komo-tec are overspending the crank pulley in some of their tuning stages. And if you want to go the other way around, Track Group UK offered som kind of re-grind of the TVS1320 original pulley. I do not know if they offer it for the TVS1740 SC as well. The drawback of increasing the crank pulley size is that you increase the speed on power steering pump, the alternator, the AC compressor and all idler pulleys. I do not know what the bracket and mid-section idler pulleys looks like on the 400, but on the TVS1320 equipped cars they are obviously spinning too fast already.

So, this is what it looks like now. JUBU performance 3 x 70 mm pulleys in the lower circuit. Much beefier bearings. Slight weight increase. Elise parts 1 x 60 mm flat + 1 x 52,5 ribbed pulley around the supercharger. Hybrid ceramic bearings with higher spec grease and ball carrier. Larger clearance. Hard anodized pulleys that are significantly lighter. Uprated bearings in refreshed original 50 mm pulleys. Better grease, lighter ball carrier and increased internal clearance, sourced from large SKF distributor Momentum. Elise parts sourced SKF belt. I haven't digged deeper in the properties for this specific belt, but it feels like it offers better friction / grip. JUBU performance larger alternator pulley. Hard anodized aluminum. Much lighter. JUBU performance smaller water pump pulley. Hard anodized aluminum. Much lighter.

Thanks. Everything is no sourced and fitted, still waiting for the correct length belt ..... I wrote a few words about it on the Lotus Talks forums. Once everything is done, my intention is to summarize it here.

@pat_t I used these for the front ARB: https://www.ddesign.nu/sv/universala-justerbara-krangningshammarstag-2-delar-set-hardrace-2 Rear, I went for the M10 version instead, which came with the benefit that they are adjustable without removal, but requieres a radial spacer. The M12’s in the link has to be disconnected in one end. Regarding ARB’s I will soon share details on my latest product 😎 How are the KW’s? Do you run the car on track?

And. I never got a clear picture of the difference since this happened just when they went off to Pikes Peak with the Type 62-2 they prepared, but I went for the upgrade to the latest internals, which you can see in the Lotus parts list as fitted after a certain VIN number and off course quite a bit more costly than the original Evora S stuff.

I am sorry to hear about that tragic gearbox failure @electro_boy. My gearbox worked fine, besides the issue with gear changes when hot, which was postponed 2x-3x as long with the Mobilube SHC 75W-90 vs original oil. But, I wanted to fit a Drexler LSD, with stronger shoulder bearings and ordered an inspection. I went for JUBU Performance in Austria since they had an overall best clutch solution for my preferences, they listed the overhaul/inspection as a standalone service task and they got good review by the Radford team when I had to do with them for other reasons. In the end you pay by hour work (7,5 h), so it is not that you pay €895 on top of everything else. So, given the gear specs they didn't recommend to put it together again given my strong track focus, which I expressed. If I wanted to do an occasional trackway here and there, I could probably have continued with that 10-15 years ahead given, proper maintenance. The gear set is up for grab. They replaced 2-6 + reverse + input shaft + all syncros. The input shaft was a bit sad (expensive) surprise in the last second. The part prices are very much the same as in the Bell & Covill online part list, even if there might be some Brexit percentage on top of it for the export. Price in PM.