dclare

Yep, in layman's terms a smaller master cylinder means the pressure from your foot is concentrated into a smaller area, therefore higher pressure at the piston. A larger cylinder means more foot pressure is required to create the same pressure at the piston. Also if the pedal travels the same distance with the larger cylinder it will move more fluid. So, the summary of both effects is more force required at the pedal and less movement to push the same amount of fluid.

I'd try the old tyres to see if they hold air first - its best to buy new tyres when you need them rather than buy new then have it sitting on them for another year (not sure what your timescales are). How far have you got to move it? If its going on a trailer then just leave it on the old flat tyres and winch it up. The old tyres will be binned anyway. You can make a rope sling for the driveshafts, just let them hang loose in a loop and they will rotate as you move the car, but not tangle on anything or drag on the ground. If you simply want to move it around the workshop you could buy some wheel dollies...£60 per pair from Machine Mart.

This may not be relevant to others with big brake conversions because its all dependent on the caliper piston sizes but I thought I’d document in case anyone has a similar issue. My car is fitted with 6 pot Alcon fronts calipers and 4 pot AP rear calipers which provide fantastic stopping power and resilience, but the pedal travel with the standard master cylinder was very long and overly light, so the only answers to giving a shorter and heavier pedal were to either change the pedal ratio or fit a larger master cylinder. I didn’t fancy messing about with the pedal box so I started the search for a master cylinder that would be as close as possible to the original but with a bigger bore. The standard Bendix master cylinder is 23.8mm bore and after a few false starts I found a VW part with a 25.4mm bore from a company called Retrofication – so 13.9% greater piston area. https://www.retrofication.co.uk/vw-mk1-mk2-mk3-golf-254mm-brake-master-cylinder-16v-vr6-18t-tdi-brake-upgrade.html When the part arrived it was manufactured by Topran, Part Number 110 041 – so pretty freely available on-line. The cost from Retrofication was £49.50, so relatively inexpensive… Examination of the two parts side by side looked pretty good, however the ports on the new cylinder are M12 rather than the standard M10 size, however the servo mount and reservoir ports/mount are perfect. This meant changing the union on the end of the brake pipes from the ABS block….easier said than done! After cutting off the old one I tried to fit a new union with the pipes in situ, but there just isn’t enough room to get the flaring tool in properly and there isn’t really enough length in the pipe, so I decided to remove the pipes and make up a new ones altogether. What a ball-ache it was getting the old ones out of the ABS block! Without removing all the unions from the block it is very hard to get onto the necessary pipes, and the unions themselves were very tight/semi-ceased. The new unions fouled the black plastic relay cover so this was reshaped with the Dremmel and once fitted at all looks pretty OEM, so I’m happy with the result. Once everything was reconnected it was simply a matter of double checking everything re-filling with new fluid and bleeding all the brakes and checking for leaks. Conclusion Definitely a worthwhile change for me. The brakes are far more intuitive now and much easier to modulate. In fact I stopped thinking about them after a few miles, so they definitely feel better. Its also much easier to heel and toe now because the pedal works so much higher. PS - why do photos make everything look so dirty!!

You're very welcome to come over any time, just PM me when youre thinking of coming. If you are looking for something more compliant I think the Monroe's are hard to beat. Ive got some spares if you're interested in them.

After a brief flirtation with Nitrons on my v8 (which I found a little to harsh for my kind of use) I decided to change over to the Lotac Bilsteins, however, I didn’t see the point of the Eibach springs as they are the same rate as the standard springs and my original springs are in good condition, so I only ordered the shocks. Fitting the standard springs to the rear Bilsteins needs an adaptor LOTAC05449, so be sure to order this if you are retaining the standard springs. See pic for the order the bushes and washers need to be assembled in – note that the two rubber bushes/isolators and their respective (thinner) cupped washers go on either side of the top spring platform. There are other bits and bobs in the box which can be discarded. While I was waiting for the Bilsteins to be delivered I had the old springs blasted to remove the old paint and crud and re-painted with primer and blue Plasti-Dip flexible “rubber” paint. I also removed the front ARB and loosened the wishbone bolts to take the stress out of the bushes. Next job was to assemble the fronts and once this was done I spent a lot of time swearing while trying to get them bolted up onto the car. In the end I used the following Heath Robinson method (don’t try this at home folks!!!) to take some compression out of the springs while I levered the assembly in place against the shock’s gas pressure. Don’t know if it was just me but this was a ball-ache to do (as it was for the Nitrons) so maybe I’m missing a trick here. I couldn’t get any of my spring compressors to fit with the spring/damper unit in the car, so the ratchet straps were the only way I could find to help with this (see pic) – not recommended, but a last resort, just mind your fingers when you release the tension on the straps! Next job was to fit the rears which was much easier because they can be offered up with the heavy duty spring compressor in place. Note that the Esprit parts bible is incorrect and shows a rear upper spring “Insulator, 12mm alloy, road spring to chassis” – part A082D4122F. This does not fit, and my car originally was fitted with rubber isolators, not alloy. The only place I could find the correct part was from SJ Sportscars, so kudos to them for knowing their stuff!! Ride Height First things first. My car runs 245/35 18s on the front and 295/30 19s on the rear so the front diameter is 9mm larger than standard and the rear is 3mm larger on the rear, so this needs to be factored into the ride height measurement. With the new assemblies fitted and the suspension settled (drive back and forth a few times) the ride height with the spring seat circlip in the TOP position was 188mm at the front and 180mm at the rear, so too high against the spec of 170/164mm (admittedly this was with 2 x 60kg ballast and half a tank rather than the recommended 2 x 75Kg). Because the springs are the original “used” springs I don’t anticipate them settling at all, so I regard this as representative. To my eyes the car also looks like the ride height is too high at this setting, and I know this has already been debated endlessly, but I decided to see what it was like on the lower circlip setting. Its not hard to change the circlips with the suspension in place – use the spring compressor on the rear and you should be able to lift the spring platform enough to get to the circlips. They aren’t very strong, so pretty easy to drop in to the lower slot. Again the front is more of a challenge so I made up a timber yolk that went around the lower wishbone and located under the spring seat and I used a jack from underneath to compress the sprint/damper unit enough to expose the circlip. Again the switch to the lower slot is pretty easy once you can get to the circlip. With the spring seats at the lower setting the ride height was 174mm (front) and 166mm (rear) ..….so pretty close to spec given the 4.5mm and 1.5mm increase caused by the larger tyres on my car. My garage floor isn’t perfectly flat (although not bad) and moving the car around leads to small inconsistencies so this is close enough for me, and to my eyes the stance of the car looks much better without appearing “slammed”. I’m not going to be looking for a ‘Ring record with this car (although it has been there), so for me this is the best compromise compared with the Nitrons which allow you to run a much lower ride height (but with associated bump steer problems if you go too far). Pics below for reference between the top and bottom circlip settings. Maybe the purpose of the two circlip settings is to use the top for the new Lotac Eibach springs and the lower one for the standard original springs, although I have never seen that written anywhere. The last job was to tighten up the suspension and shock mounting bolts at the final ride height, so I ran her up on four small wheel jacks, raised her up (with the weight still fully on the wheels) and tightened everything up. Job done. How Does It Drive Now? Definitive Bilstein vs Nitron Conclusion The car is definitely quieter riding than with the Nitrons, but not as “cushy” as the old Monroes. So, on an NVH scale of 1-10 with the Monroes at 10 I’d put the Nitrons at about 6 and the Bilsteins at 8. This isn’t surprising given the Nitrons have solid mountings with no rubber bushes in their bottom mounts and the Monroe’s had done about 70k miles! From a handling perspective its hard to tell on the road without going to a track. The Nitrons could be adjusted to give a quicker turn-in by going a click or two harder on the front, but at the expense of understeer. With no adjustment on the Bilsteins you get what you’re given (and what Lotus intended), but overall I’m pleased with the change and there is no doubt the car is still epic in the twisty bits! Of course, if you are intending to turn your car into a road-racer or regularly heading to the track then the Nitrons are probably the best bet becasue of the adjustability. Hope this helps if anyone is contemplating changing their springs/shocks.

Or ditch the Lotus AP set up and fit the JAE system - supposedly much more progressive and easier to modulate.... I dont have personal experience, but all the reports on it are positive. This was from Joe when I enquired: "AP has two solid hubs for pretty instantaneous engagement. When brand new, they drive rather well. Once they have bedded in and have some miles on them, they tend to engage as you’re describing – abruptly and with limited variability at the pedal. Ours has one solid hub, and one sprung hub. This helps to dampen the rotational engagement to the clutch shaft, making the whole assembly “flow” into movement better. Of course, we’re not talking night/day difference, but it is a noticeable improvement."

I have to say I keep thinking about doing this coversion for no other reason than I think the standard gearbox and clutch really detract from the driving pleasure of the Esprit. The rest of the car is really tactile and has lovely control weights but the clutch and gearchange are just not a pleasure to use (in my opinion of course!) and results in a series of lunges rather than a flow when you're pressing on. There are now many higher powered versions of the Boxster/Cayman and even the 718S 4 cylinder versions put out over 300 ft lbf as standard so will support a higher load quite easilly. The problem seems to be a very high 2nd gear ratio, but different gearsets are available if the Lotus v8 torque doesnt mask the gap. The issues of driveshafts needing fabricting, mounts need fabricating and gear change/linkage are not really big issues. Any number of companies will make up a hybrid driveshaft if to take the old donor shafts to them and specifiy the overall length of the new shaft (Ive used DaveMac Propshafts in the past). The gearchange and (I think) cables will transplant directly from the donor Boxster/Cayman so that just leaves the simple fabrication of new mounts and cross-member. Not difficult jobs if you are into any kind of fabrication, or know someone who is. Still just musing, but I do dislike the standard gearbox.....

Back to the original problem. Ive been thinking about this too as my area is a nightmare with speed bumps. This is the kit I've been looking at as it fits at the bottom of the coil-over rather than the top like most air cup systems... https://www.kwsuspensions.net/products/hydraulic_lift_system

Mine is R472AAH and was used as one of the motorshow cars when the update was announced. Painted in Nautilus Blue. According to the letter that came with the CoP it was signed off from production on 24th Sept '97 and then passed to engineering for homologation use (hopefully not crash testing!!). Currently mine is on axle stands while Im fitting Lotac Bilsteins (I didnt like my Nitrons and sold them to ChrisW for his 350) and a bigger brake master cylinder to go with the bigger brakes. I just wish Lotus would deliver the rear shocks so I can get the job finished....they have been on order since November! Its good to know that these cars are still around and being loved.

Hormann also do a side sliding door that disappears down the side (inside) of the garage. With that you wouldnt have to reduce the opening size becasue they go up to pretty big sizes...

Unfortunately I dont know.....I sold the project when I moved to a new place and didnt have the space to finish it......

Thanks Ruud. Despite all my previous comments I do feel that your most likely cause is a failed primary pump. Your engine only runs on the pressure created while the secondary pump runs briefly when you turn the ignition on. As soon as that that pressure is used to run the engine for a few seconds the engine dies because it isn't getting its main (primary pump) fuel supply...... Although the primary pump runs when its out of the tank that's no guarantee it can generate any pressure. This fuel pressure test kit has all you need (although it is £60) - https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0727NDK81/ref=pe_3187911_185740111_TE_item

Interesting couple of purchases. If you need any help with the K3 I know a couple of people that have had them in the past that I could put you in touch with (including track-day modded ones) Ive had a couple of GTMs - a standard Spyder 1.8 that morphed into something called Big Lairy Spyder (Google it!) and a frankenstein Spyder that ended up with a KV6 engine and MGTF rear subframe that we built for trackdays (the yellow one)

Hi, Im pretty sure they do, otherwise how would the system retain pressure after the pump is turned off? There is no separate check valve on an Esprit v8. To test if this is the problem you can buy a stand-alone in-line valve for a few pounds from ebay (https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/352823213738 - good quality but there are much cheaper ones if you want to risk it) and make up a temporary feed hose with a length of fuel hose, jubilee clips and a few cheap fittings. Make up the pipe to the fuel rail (make sure the check valve is the right way round to stop the fuel flowing back to the pumps) and fit it between the fuel rail and the existing feed pipe - if the engine then runs you know the pump's valve is faulty. If you don't want to grub around in the tank changing the pumps (horrible job) you could even keep the stand-alone check valve/hose in place if you make it well, rather than make a quick test hose.......