FERRINO

Evening all, Well 39 days later (due to holidays/weddings/general life etc) I finally got time yesterday to fire her up again - first time since fitting the inline gauge. Apart from fitting the gauge, the only other thing I've done is to put another 5 litres of juice in the tank (maybe I shouldn't have just for continuity sake)? It did it's usual and wouldn't fire even after several 'primes' - totally as expected. I then cracked the fuel rail and let the pressure drop before retightening. After that, fired up first turn of the key - again totally as expected given previous performances. Pressure remained constant on the gauge at approx 2.5 Bar with engine running and revving up/down and sitting at tickover. This time though, when moving the hose to the fuel rail around, no drop in revs and no coughing/spluttering? Weird? Let it run for a while and as it got up to 3/4 temp, tickover was getting very low and needed the throttle opening a little to keep it running which it didn't do before. Struggling quite badly with tickover (sounded way too low). Couldn't see what rpm it was as gauge is not working at the mo. Put it back in the garage and switched it off. Left it 2 hours and went back in to do a test start (expecting the usual no-start situation and having to crack the rail etc). Pressure had dropped to just over 1 Bar on gauge. Primed it on the key and to my total surprise it fired up straight away?! Weird? Switched off and left it overnight. Went back in at lunchtime today. 0 Bar on the gauge - surely it won't start now. Primed on ignition and Bang up it went no problem?? Tried again 3 hours later - fired up straight away again. Fired up again every time I tried when hot and also several times when left to cool right down. Now - I can't quite believe I'm complaining about a a car firing up every time you turn the key lol, but I like a fault to remain until you definitively find the culprit. Logic would say that the addition of 5 litres more fuel is what has done it and I'd tend to agree at this point pointing to 'supply to pump' area that needs looking at. However - it's the new issue of the crappy running once getting up to temp that is concerning me now? It ran nicely before and now only ticks over nicely when cold. Popped a plug out to check and looks a little black/oily so maybe 'choke enrichment' is staying on now? Apologies for the essay - but this car is driving me nuts at the mo Cheers Tony

I agree - Sounds like they are after a log book if only offering 500 - then sell the bits and recoup all of that and more. Type 9 box and LSD would bring in most of that these days! It all depends what condition it's in - is it wishbone chassis or sliding pillar etc?

I bought this one from Kitspares:- https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Chassis-Plate-For-Great-British-Sports-Cars-GBS-MER0051/253802605108?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649

Nice Video! What engine do you have in your 2B?

Thanks Jez - that's good to know it's not something silly with the basic setup if you are running almost the same without issue. Unfortunately as you can see in the pic below - I stupidly ran the Injection hose solidly from the back of the car to the front via the tunnel and all the way back down the tunnel again. It's the properly marked SAE J30 R9 hose, but I'm hoping it won't need replacing for a couple of years at least as I'd have to rip all the tunnel panelling out to get at it.:- I've checked the lines all along the route to and from the engine and can't see any obvious point where it's bent too tightly or constricted anywhere. I've got a spare EFI rail with the bog standard Ford fuel line and rail fitting still attached - which I also checked. The hard black plastic fuel line Ford used is way smaller than 8mm I/D (less than 5 I would say looking at it) so it shouldn't really be flow rate issue? Cheers Tony

Thanks for the reply Dan - it certainly is an interesting one! With the fuel pipe, It needs to be more than just physical 'contact' to get it splutter - but it's really not a lot of pressure or downwards movement required to get it coughing. Almost a few mm is all it took last time which surprised me that it had any effect at all with 30+ PSI of fluid inside. That said though - I haven't had it running with the gauge now attached - so it may well be significantly lower than 30 PSI when its running due to some other other issue. Definitely need to make some time this week to annoy the neighbours and get it fired up again. If the gauge still sits at a rock steady 2.2 psi or above, then as you say - pulling it apart to see what's going on in the rail will have to be the next step. Cheers Tony

Thanks for the reply Nigel - food for thought certainly. I will def get a cheapo see through filter on order. I'm still perplexed as to why cracking the fuel rail connection sorts the problem (temporarily) though - that has to be trapped air doesn't it? Low fuel pressure would still be low fuel pressure even after breaking the joint temporarily? As you say - I've not had the engine running since fitting the pressure gauge so must try and get home early one night this week and get it fired up. Might give a further clue if we can see what's going on with pressures when it's running fine/struggling/conked out etc. Cheers again Tony

Evening all, I finally got the engine fired up and running a couple of weekends ago - great milestone! However, when I leave it running for 20 mins or so (or give it some revs under load), it conks out and won't start again. The only way to get it running again is to crack the connection to the fuel rail - retighten - wipe up the excess. After that it fires up again straight away. Setup is this:- Aluminium tank, baffled with swirl pot middle-center. 8mm I/D injection hose from swirl pot to low pressure Sytec filter (it looks uphill in pic but it straight and level). 8mm I/D injection hose running downhill to Sytec P3017.1 Injection pump. 8mm I/D Injection hose to high pressure Sytec Filter. 8mm I/D injection hose running down tunnel and up onto bog standard Pinto EFI fuel rail. 8mm I/D injection hose from bog standard fuel pressure regulator at end of fuel rail running back down tunnel and into top of fuel tank. Rollover vent valve fitted to fuel tank so it breathes. Pics below :- When the engine is running - if you lightly touch the Injection hose where it goes into the fuel rail, it coughs and splutters and nearly conks out. With that in mind I figured it must be a fuel pressure problem - so bought a cheap gauge set and plumbed it inline to see what pressure I'm getting. According to research, Pinto EFI fuel system runs at approx 2.5 bar. I haven't had the engine running with the gauge on - but priming pressure on the pump looks like approx 2.2 bar which seems close enough taking inaccuracy of the gauge into account etc. I've checked the fuel is returning to the tank - which it is. I've tried running it with the fuel cap off - same issue. Pump is rated at 8.5 bar so the standard fuel pressure reg is obviously working. When it stops - the only way to get it re-started is to crack the fuel rail connection? This makes me think that somehow I'm getting an air lock in the fuel line onto the rail and cracking it is releasing the trapped air? The thing that's confusing me is the the fact that there is no fuel escaping when running - so how is air getting in and trapped? Also why is it struggling so much with the lightest touch on the inlet hose to the fuel rail if the pressure is about right? I know the hose drops downhill onto the rail - but so does the standard Ford connector (admittedly not as much). But there shouldn't be any air in that hose - or if there was, wouldn't it get forced out of the injectors when they open? Is there something obvious I'm missing here please peeps? Got loads more jobs to do for IVA in the meantime - but this one one is bugging the hell out of me lol! Cheers Tony

I used the standard Sierra handbrake on top of the chassis tube - stood off with some spacers. Shortened the handbrake cable and ran it out through the rear panel. Then boxed it in with ali sheet as part of the center console:-

A guy on the locostbuilders forum came up with a very inventive (and cheap) way of getting round the exhaust can edge issue for IVA. He chopped up an old stainless dog bowl and fitted it over the area. I bought it off him after IVA actually but have since lost it during a house move. It was made to bolt on to the 2 holes on his motorbike can but you could make one that clamps on using a hose clamp or something:- Cheers Tony

You can get thermally insulating and heat reflective sleeving covers that can be applied with the cable in situ. Randomly selected example below - https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Retrofit-Aluminium-Fiberglass-Heat-Reflective-Sleeving-With-Adhesive-Strip-10mm/263832835660?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&var=563188448403&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649

Hi - The spring is just a standard 1.9" I/D jobbie. I believe the red one that came with the kit was something like 175lb and 9" long. The shock is apparently off a traditional Mini - so you can get uprated/adjustable versions. Cheers Tony

Still about 6 months away from IVA on my 2B - but this is how I did the seat supports to try and make sure there is no room for doubt. Cheers Tony http://www.rhocar.org/index.php?showtopic=38040&hl=

Hi Pete, As mentioned - nobody does replacement GRP panels specifically for the 2B unfortunately. Like yourself - I wanted to ditch all the steel for GRP too. It's probably not much/any lighter than the steel - but it's certainly one less thing to rust (my panels were mild steel tho). I bought a couple of second hand Haynes Roadster side panels and found that they do fit with some work. They are virtually the same profile as the 2B, the only reason they won't fit straight on is the height. The 2B chassis rails are (annoyingly) only something like 4mm taller than the Roadster - but that means the top and bottom returns of the GRP splay outwards and stop the panel sitting flush. The only way I found to get them on was to virtually trim off the top and bottom flanges of the GRP completely. I think it's around 5mm left of the flange on each. This also means that you have fix the panels on through the sides rather than the usual neater top/bottom flange fixings. During initial fit-up:- More recent top view of chassis rail showing how much of the return is left:- I also found that the Haynes Roadster rear tub can be fitted (again with some work) - in order to get the flatter 'squarer' look . The 2B is wider than Roadster across the rear chassis rails (70mm or so). So I cut the panel down the centre and braced it back together with some Ali box section inside the returns. You can just about see the Ali box top/btm in this bad picture:- The gap has since been covered up with a strip of Ali:- Just stuck some wrap over to cover for now - but will have a racing stripe eventually:- Once you've got a nice square rear end instead of tapered - you can fit other types of rear arches (locost/roadster etc). I found the best fit seemed to be the GBS Zero arches - mainly because they are nice and wide and I have 8j 0 offset wheels. I suspect standard Roadster arches would look fine with normal width/offset wheels though :- Anywho - hope that helps. Cheers Tony

Ok no probs - cheers

Sent you a message about the U trim Jordie

Does the superspec use the full sierra rear beam like the 2B? If so this is how I did mine with 3mm piece of steel bent and the sensor clamped with rubber lined P clips:- From underneath:- Cheers Tony

Got this to do on mine soon - so interested in how people have 'fixed' the pipe on to the rail? I thought if the IVA examiner could just easily pull it off - then it wasn't acceptable as it's not 'permanent'?

My 1999 1.6 is approx £300/yr fully comp (3000 restricted mileage) with Performance Direct. Parked on drive, 43yr old driver with 3 points for speeding and no NCB (I use my NCB on the family hack-mobile). As others have said - just went on Go-compare to get that. I've been told the area where you live plays quite a big part in the quote you get these days (not sure how true that is though). Cheers Tony

Thanks for the heads-up anyway Zed! Hopefully you're right about it being the single fixing thing. Cheers Tony

Oh crikey - really?! Hopefully somebody can confirm/rule out that seat belt anchorage issue as it would be a right ballache to sort at the moment! Thanks for the heads-up! I think I've gotta put the extra link in the steering column anyway tbh. I'm sure I don't have even 5 degree offset on it at the moment let alone the 10 or so that I hear the testers are ideally looking for? It stems from the fact that I have a Sierra rack rather than the upside down-back to front-inside out original Metro jobby. Even with the rack packed up high - the steering column only just misses the exhaust manifold and also one of the chassis members by 5mm (if that) which I think would be too tight for the tester anyway. Cheers Tony

Thanks - Yeah planning to powder coat the bonnet gloss black to match. Still need to do a final coat and lacquer on (your exmo) nosecone and also the rear arches. Biggest headache (prior to this emissions worry) is sorting out the front steering geometry. Once I got round to looking at sorting the front suspension a month or 2 ago - I realized that I'd packed the rack up really high to get the steering column to 'just-miss' the exhaust manifold. With the springs removed and sliding the hub up the pillar, it toes out wildly to start with - then returns to normal - then toes in a bit! All due to the fact that the steering arms droop downwards at rest rather than upwards (because I'd packed the rack up)! So now need to drop the rack right down to where it should be to sort suspension - and then work out an extra UJ mid span of the column (with bearing block of course) to route the shaft around the manifold down to the repositioned rack! All good fun with these kits eh - fix one area, cause a problem in another lol!

Thanks for the replies chaps! I know I'm jumping the gun somewhat looking at this issue now - but being a pessimist/realist (delete as applicable) I'm fairly sure this will probably happen despite our reasonable requests for a grace period - hence spending an evening or 3 this week weighing up the possible options. The version of the silencer with the CAT already inside is £425! (which is probably more than my entire car is worth!) I agree it would be a perfect solution though - just unbolt and replace with the CAT version - job sorted! I am continuing to crack on with the remaining build jobs and haven't stopped to fixate on this issue - but there are lots more still to resolve. I think because a bit of time was spent the other year doing the outer body work areas to try and make it look a bit more presentable - people see it and think it's nearly finished which is far from the case unfortunately:- It just looks further along than it is (just trying my daily driver no.plate for clearance by the way):- Cheers again for your help/advice Tony

After the latest emissions proposal - I'm looking at how to fit a CAT on my system should it be passed. Trouble is - I've got a big silencer which is using all the available space to fit one! It's the large £300 one that kitspares sell as it's very quiet and ironically I bought to ensure an IVA pass for the DB level!:- http://www.kitspares.co.uk/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=856&search=silencer It's looking like you need approx 270-300mm for a half decent size CAT. I really don't want to have to get rid of the big silencer - but it seems I may need to if the worst happens. With that in mind - can anybody recommend a decent (cheap) contact that could knock up something that would get through IVA db easily but would be a bit shorter than what I have (6" dia x 29" Long)? I do actually have 2 'over chassis' manifolds that I have offered up to try - but both would hit the chassis rails on a 2B annoyingly. Also they both terminate in approx the same position as I have now. Any suggestions gratefully received! Cheers Tony

Hi emptyat - I think this is the part that was causing a little confusion. Although it's in a 'proposal document' - 4.10 is actually just reiterating how it stands with the 'current' system. 4.11 goes on to detail what they are proposing to change it to. As it states - when they register your car, it must comply with current mot emission standards which means it must have been tested at that level at IVA. Snapper - I think everybody totally understands that it couldn't possibly be applied retrospectively. As you rightly say - motoring changes of this magnitude never are.