Nicks Vitesse

[Gt6s]

22 hours ago, JohnD said:

 

Was it from the insert between the two valves on No.6 cylinder, that feeds the heater, with a bypass going under the manifolds back to the water pump?    I have no heater in SofS, and made sure that the insert was connected to the bypass, as without it the rear two bores can over heat, so flow needs to be maintained from there, especially under competition stress.    Increasing that flow to an oil to water cooler won't rob the rear cylinders of cooling flow, it will increase the flow and heat removal, cooling the bores.

 

I can assure you John you can (localised) overheat the rear cylinders BADLY by too much flow going through the cooler. I fixed the problem by running  a pipe from the heater outlet at no 6 down to the heater return pipe into the pump. (no heater) PROBLEM SOLVED. 

Laurence

[JohnD]

AH!   Then you cured the problem by solving another!      That heater take off MUST be connected to the return pipe, else the rear cylinders overheat under stress.     Nothing to do with the oil cooler!

John

Edited July 2, 2019 by JohnD

[Gt6s]

9 minutes ago, JohnD said:

Weird!   You found that at high revs , the flow into the head became inadequate, because it was being diverted to your oil cooler?    

Wish I could have worked that out earlier and saved that lovely cross drilled crank. Lot of work went on that crank.

[Nick Jones]

So.…… with a continental journey the better part of 3000 miles long fast approaching, the fear of a massive fuel bill (thanks in no small part to the continuing blartings of Al de Piffle, that ripe boil on the arse of the tory picnic), has got me considering how to improve the slightly-less-impressive-than-previously fuel economy.

I've long suspected that the ancient, mis-matched set of injectors robbed from a couple of elderly Peugeots nearly 15 years ago may be past their best.  Car still runs pretty well but was smelling a bit fuelly at idle and showing a couple of other signs of leaking injectors.  Economy still pretty fair for what it is, but not as good as it has been.

Some time ago I liberated a set of injectors from a 2.6 V6 Audi.  Basically the same shape as the original Bosch ones, these are in fact Siemens ones with a two hole plate rather than a nozzle with a pintle.  Supposed to give better atomisation.....  I wanted a 4 hole version really, which are even better, but was too lazy to invest the entire morning needed to liberate a set from the BMW next to the Audi!

Being Siemens, the "new" ones are rather hard to find reliable info on.  I found 3 different flow rates listed for them.  One of these suggested they were more or less the same as the existing ones - so I chose to believe that!

After checking that they worked and blasting them through with injector cleaner I fitted them at the end of last week, which was a fairly straight-forward swap.  Removing the originals showed considerable carbon build-up around the nozzles with 5 & 6 both being wet, even the though the engine hadn't run for a couple of days - I'd just run the fuel pump briefly prior to strip-down to build fuel pressure.  Leakage proven!

On first fire-up it became immediately obviously the new injectors have lower flow as it was very lean.  I dragged out the ancient laptop and changed the "required fuel" setting (like winding down the jet on an SU) and got it back to something like right.  Had a quick run up the road and added a bit more fuel.  Now pretty much back where it was but with a better idle and smoother running.  The current tankful has injector cleaner in it too.  Bit early to say whether anything has been won on the economy side - but I'm hopeful!

[JohnD]

Nick, I am constantly astonished that such items are so transplantable, and admiring of your enterprise in proving it (and building devices that make them so).    

Truely a Christiaan Barnard among engineers!   (and more successful!)

John

Edited July 31, 2019 by JohnD

[rogerguzzi]

Hello Nick

                 I may be a bit thick but how do you get carbon build up on injectors that are not direct injection?

I think I will stick to Spitty for long trips at 42/45 mpg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Roger

[Nick Jones]

41 minutes ago, rogerguzzi said:

long trips at 42/45 mpg

Vitesse usually manages 36 mpg average  on 10CRs in spite of a right royal thrashing in the Alps.  Best tank ever is over 40 mpg.  38 - 39 has been achieved reasonably often.

Not so far away and quite respectable considering the "outhouse" aerodynamics

[rogerguzzi]

40 minutes ago, Nick Jones said:

Vitesse usually manages 36 mpg average  on 10CRs in spite of a right royal thrashing in the Alps.  Best tank ever is over 40 mpg.  38 - 39 has been achieved reasonably often.

Not so far away and quite respectable considering the "outhouse" aerodynamics

Hello Nick

                    But I can still see some areas that could be a bit leaner!

Roger

[Nick Jones]

Me too, but leaner doesn't always mean more economical......

Injector deposits are around the nozzles where fuel has either dribbled or blown back and cooked on.  I suspect the cam timing and resultant reversion doesn't help with the blow-back and my injector pockets are bit "simplified" which allows more space for this to happen.

 

3 hours ago, JohnD said:

I am constantly astonished that such items are so transplantable

Individual components don't care what car they are on.  With injectors it's mostly a case of picking a donor with roughly the bhp per cylinder you hope to have.  Also, the same injector part numbers are often used on quite a few cars from the factory.  Also surprising how many physically identical injectors there are with very similar flow rates.

This effect is dying off a bit as the more modern stuff has more specialised part making re-purposing them a bit harder!

[TimBancroft]

3000 miles, where are you off to then?

[Nick Jones]

Visiting family in Switzerland, then a few days in Italy before returning via Austria and Germany. Not unlike 10CR but with more time on the ground, making it acceptable to Senior Management. Bit less than 3k hopefully......

[Nick Jones]

So full report in the making elsewhere but we did just under 3,000 miles in 15 days in 8 countries.

We used it as a modern and it just shrugged it off. 36.4 mpg average. Two tanks over 40 mpg.

Two failures to report. The glove box catch failed (surprisingly irritating) and the wide band sensor also seems to have thrown in the towel (illustrating why you shouldn’t give it too much authority on mixture correction as even 5%is noticeable when the ECU thinks you are running at 10:1 AFR and uses its whole 5% to try and correct it!).

Senior Management drove it a fair bit and coped very well. I must have done something right with the brakes as she didn’t moan about them once, though the absence of power steering was noted!  She also deserves an honourable mention for superior navigation, not least for maintaining her calm while directing an increasingly tetchy driver across Turin in difficult conditions.

Dunno what it is about Italian city drivers..... do they smoke a couple of pipes of crack before setting off or what?!

As usual it attracted a certain amount of interest (usually of the “wtf is that thing” nature) and got its picture taken frequently.  The Italians seemed particularly appreciative. 

It got to talk to some fairly high powered company too...... Hotel car park in Charleroi

[Mark]

Good looking Vitesse. That's great mpg, and reliability. Hope I can replicate that one day.

[Nick Jones]

Thanks.  It's getting very scruffy...... but then it's 30 years since it was last painted and I've not done much bodywork in those 30 years.  It's mostly still fairly rot-free though - except the bonnet which is nasty in places.

I believe it's chassis is to be the subject of some university dissertation level studies on its torsional stiffness (negligible!), possibly with body on/off scenarios and hopefully with some  design changes modelled to improve matters.  This may prompt a little bodywork......

Mechanically it's in fair shape though the diff is still grizzling and I have the parts to build another 3.63 with Blackline ATB centre.  I've also got a part-done throttle body conversion which is hoped might improve it's "pottering-about" manners and economy by better controlling reversion.  I could just fit a milder cam...... but where's the fun in that!

Here it is again on the road between Bormio and Livigno (Stelvio being closed).  There had been snow.... it was bloody cold with the top down!

[Nick Jones]

And another, actually in the same parking space as the earlier post but in different company, looking a bit like a childs pedal car

[Mark]

12 hours ago, Nick Jones said:

I believe it's chassis is to be the subject of some university dissertation level studies on its torsional stiffness (negligible!), possibly with body on/off scenarios and hopefully with some  design changes modelled to improve matters.  This may prompt a little bodywork.

Yes please 

[Nick Jones]

So...... differentials.  Not something I know much about.  Simple enough devices apart from need to get the crown wheel and pinion in the right relative positions and the slightly arcane methods needed to achieve this, especially when you don't have all (or even any!) of the special Churchill tools.

I've had the dismantled remains of a 3.63 from Alan for over a year.  Have determined as far as possible the the CWP from this were in decent condition, I also splashed out on a Blackline ATB spool (chinese Quaife copy) and a new set of Timken bearings.

All cleaned and new bearings fitted.  I don't have access to the pinion height checking tool, so had to content myself with comparing the heights of the old and new pinion head bearing, which ought to work as the same pinion is going back in the same housing.  The new one was a whole 0.1mm lower (unaccustomed precision for me!) but I was able to find a suitable 0.1mm shim in my random shims collection to correct that.

setting the pinion bearing preload. That socket weighs 16 oz and is sat 12" from the centre.  Move it 1" to the right and it rotates which puts it within the 12 - 16"/lbs range given. Set with shims not a crush spacer so some trial and error was needed.

Crown wheel assembly in.  I'd already calculated the total shim pack needed to give the correct pre-load here (0.003" or really not alot) but had to fiddle about with their positions to get the correct backlash figure.  Couple of attempts saw that right.....

Which then leaves the miserable business of trying to a) find a method that gives a good mark of the contact patch and b) decide which of the little pictures in the manual it best represents.....

Take 1 - engineers blue - you are looking at where it's been rubbed away not where it's been deposited....

Take 2 - light dusting of satin black paint......  doesn't look that bad to my inexperienced eye.  But the last diff I built (more than 20 years ago) absolutely howled!  Expert opinions welcome!

Still pondering that one.  Meanwhile I've been trying to change the side-shaft seals and bearings.  One side has "succumbed" to the press - squeeze it up until it will go no more, then smack the top of the press cylinder with a big hammer producing a HUGE bang .  Bent the seal holding plate as usual but they straighten easily enough.  New seal and bearing fitted no bother.  The other side however......... is still resisting.  There is a bigger press at work.....

[richy_rich]

I found reading the contact patch a bit like reading tea leaves tbh.. I used gear marking paint and tried multiple times but the best I got was about as good as your first pics. I'm not really experienced in cogs and gears but when I did it I aimed for the patch to be closer to the heel than the toe side whilst still being fairly central (if that makes sense).

All harder done than said, in the end I went for the best combination of backlash readings/pre-load/wipe pattern that I could manage then plugged the output shafts in and checked that it 'felt' about right..  It's on the car and doesn't whine or clunk and I've done some pretty hard driving on it and all seems fine so far...

[Nick Jones]

So the old girl is on the rack.  Which is to say the back end is supported by the damper mounts on a some sturdy stands bolted to the floor and the front end is supported on a ball bearing on a single stand under the front cross-member.

The body is detached and hovering just above the chassis, as is the engine.  The diff is out.  Front suspension is partially removed and solid struts made plus hangers and pulleys for weights.  There won't be any detail until Chris has finished his piece of work and been marked.  However, I can report that the bare chassis is horrifically unresistant to twist.  We are seeing more than 2º of twist for fairly modest (< half the front-end weight) loadings, most of which occurs in the centre 0.5m of chassis around the centre X-member......  I wasn't expecting much...... but this is way worse than I expected.  Seems the tub must be contributing more than I thought.

Will be repeating measurements with diff fitted, engine re-attached and body bolted down.  Also hoping for some pointers for improvement!

[Mark]

This is going to be very interesting. Thanks go to Chris for choosing this to study. 

Edited December 29, 2019 by Mark

[JohnD]

 

Looking forward to reports to the research symposium!      Literature research, Nick, do you have a copy of John Thomason's article in the International Courier Journal in ?2000?  He used a similar technique, and proposed a small structure on that narrow part of the chassis that improved stiffness a lot.     Pm me and I'll send a copy if you don't.

John

[Nick Jones]

Thanks John. We do have that. Also, thanks to Ian Horsfall, the original supervisor of the project, we have a copy of the original paper in full. 

Havent got to the improvement stage yet but this time we will be testing the effects of the other components including the tub.

[Nick Jones]

There will be detail later in the year when the primary purpose of the work is done.

Meanwhile I can report that 
- the chassis on it's own is remarkably floppy, especially the narrow section in the middle.
- The weak points are in the same area (the middle) for both body and chassis.
- refitting the body improves matters roughly four-fold - but only if the doors are shut and the hood up!
- The hood alone makes nearly 30% difference.  Admittedly my hood is pretty damn tight so there's probably some preload and additional door-wedging going on, but even so....

The chassis and body are both in decent shape but I'm struck by the feebleness of the side rails and their attachment to the outriggers, and also the big gap between the body mounts along the sides.  Hopefully the computer wrangler can tell me whether changing this will make a worthwhile difference before I break out the grinder!

[Mark]

I noticed how much influence the hood frame has on the front and rear tubs when fitting a new hood. To much tension is easily created when folding the front edge of the Hood material around the hood rail and fixing in place, even just using contact adhesive. When latching the frame down I could see the top of the screen surround move back. Initially I thought it was just the screen frame flexing but when closing the passenger door to check the door glass to hood frame alignment the door latch was hitting the edge of the door catch on the B post. After repeating the process it was clear that the whole front tub was tilting backwards slightly, and then spring back when the latches where released. I only used ally and steal washer spacers between the tubs and chassis,  and the chassis's has been substansially reinforced in all the areas that initially appeared weak to me.

I believe the flex/movement is between the front and rear tub joint. I used a strong adhesive along the seam, and used nuts and bolts instead of screws through the centre outriggers that were reinforced and boxed in. Side rails are Heavy gauge where I added  vertical metal plates every few inches and then boxed it in. I think as you suggest there needs to be additional mounts under the tread plates, and specially under the join where both tubs meet.

Another thought I had when bolting the tubs to the chassis, was the feeble mounting plates which has a nut welded to it. These easily distort and bow when bolting down tight so I made some out of 5mm plate with a threaded hole. The mounting bracket has an oversized hole that the mounting bolt goes through so the clamping force of the mounting bolt may not be enough to stop the tub moving when the centre rails flex and twist.

lots to think about.

Mark 

[Nick Jones]

Tunnel cover wrestled off to investigate the non-functioning speedo.  Cable intact...……. angle drive not.  The little cover/thrust plate has fallen out, allowing the primary gear to move out of mesh.  The thrust plate is lying in the road somewhere but, remarkably, the primary gear was still present even though gravity was favouring escape.

This is a relief as the hybrid Toyota/Smiths angle drive is a special "red-monkey-tuning" part that would be hard to replicate.  Pity the aforementioned monkey didn't peen the casing properly when he did it 14 years ago...….