megadodo

An LSD is definitely worth it. I too was looking for a rear disc axle and it just happened to be an LSD diff as an added bonus. It makes any rear end break away far less savage and therefore more controllable. I, of course, drive my car sensibly on the public roads and have never got my back out while hacking out of of corner under power to find the LSD gently controlling the amount of slide the car has, you can feel it working. Well, you could if I did that sort of thing.

I have no need for my 2B build DVDs any more if anyone want's them, providing they promise not to "sell them on" but just give them to someone else who needs them when they are finished with their build!

On mine, I could have left the stone guards off and it would have left no gap but I was very careful when building and aligning the side panels and arches and did them at the same time. I put the stone guards on as I like the look. You could of course wrap the arches, stone guards or both. You wont know how much of a gap the lack of stone guards leaves on your car without trying it I guess, then you would have to consider how to cover the holes used to fix the stone guards on in the first place. I considered wrapping just the guards in carbon (3M) wrap to match other parts on the car but went with the stainless.

I'm sure I remember someone on here is building a Roadrunner, or am I going mad? If there is someone could you let me know as I need your help please. A friend has built SR2 which has blown its diff and we can't get it out and I just need a confidence building response to how many bolts hold the diff to the chassis. Thanks folks

Thanks for all your king thoughts and word folks, they have made me feel less guilty and all the better for sharing the event.

Recently, I lost my Father to a hospital acquired infection after 2 serious ops in quick succession. He was 83 and had lived his life to full and was a joy to be with, entertained by, educated by etc. He will be sorely missed by the family and I never did get him into the 2B with his "gamy" knee! However, having returned home today from yesterdays funeral I can honestly say it was a wonderful event (overall of course). There was a great get together of my brothers and their families, my small family, dad's remaining brother and his wife, neighbours, ex colleagues of dad's, the friends I grew up with, my brother's friends, cousins etc. Then the service was moving (and very hard for all of us) and the Eulogy given by my Uncle was astonishingly entertaining and moving at the same time (how he delivered it without cracking up I'll never know), the burial in magnificent weather so he is now by his beloved wife and my mother. The wake in the pub was brilliant and then the fireworks (which he would have loved, loud bright and expensive) helped the evening go very well. The number of empty bottles this morning was also very indicative of an event enjoyed by all. It was weird leaving the house this morning and somehow I feel slightly guilty that I enjoyed the whole thing so much but I think he would have approved. RIP Prof. William Taylor Windle Potts 1928 -2012 Sorely missed (Now blubbing like a baby!)

It is a resistance to ground not a voltage. You supply 12 volts to the gauge and the "sender"s resistance to ground dictates the the reading on the gauge. So if you set a DVM to read resistance it will vary with the oil pressure when connected to ground and I'm guessing somewhere between 50 ohms and 2000 ohms but that will depend on the manufacturer as I guess there is no standard.

As long as it's solidly mounted it will work as a leading or trailing edge. However there are other issues that may dictate your choice! Handbrake cable route is one to consider for the zero I believe? I'm sure someone will give you the definitive answer. It may mean that your nipples have to hang down meaning the caliper comes off for bleeding.

Does these rolling road guys give torque values as well as BHP? Just as important IMHO.

I used m4 allen & pan headed stainless bolts with ss penny washers and nylocks. Looks good from both sides. Just get your distance from the edges even and inter bolt spacing even. DONT over tighten though.

I'm a tight bugger and wasn't going to spend another £45 and to be honest the forms are very straight forward. Any doubts were answered with a quick call to either GBS or reference to the supporting documentation off the DVLA website. If you can build the car then you fill out the forms. When registration came round the folks in the Peterborough DVLA office couldn't have been more helpful!

Sump off, check for distorted seal lip, fit new gasket with hammerite red. CAREFULLY hand tighten all the bolts to "nip" the sump up to the block. Then using a small tightening on each bolt work round the sump until you can see the gasket start to be "squeezed". Then run the engine until warm and then re-tighten. DON'T over tighten as that can squeeze the gasket too much. HTH

I can't see them stretching as the UJs will allow movement of the shaft in relation to the bolted up plates and the torque setting isn't that much (unless my memory has gone (again)) . I would use the proper bolts if I could with the correct torque setting but I would also use some thread-lock as well. Did you torque you hex heads to the correct limit with a good quality torque wrench?

A self tapper would be fine but I bought a rivnut tool and a load of rivnuts. Everything on my 2B is rivnuttted rather than screwed down. Better? Not sure, neater and easier for a good looking build? Yes! A neat build instils confidence in the IVA tester!

I think even you could change Zorro's bulbs Stewart! Or is it beneath you nowadays?

My 2B with a pinto was 750kg at IVA, Superspec must be similar

If you pass the belts through the seat holes you have to prove the seat has been tested to the appropriate standards. If not as per mine you have to show when you are sat in the seat, that the belts sit on your shoulders and aren't twisted on the mounting buckles. My upper mounts were fitted to the standard 2B chassis (2007 style, round tube bolts passing through the centre of the tube). They were firmly fixed at the angle required to pass the seat back with out twisting the belts, and it passed IVA. He said it didn't even need the covers I had put on but I wouldn't take that chance for a few a pennies worth of belt mount cover from a scrappy! From a practical viewpoint if (after test) you do pass the belts through the seat, in my case anyway, the belts would then pass through an down, up, down again route that I think in a crash would allow the belt to straighten out too much.

Remember to align the brackets in the same plane of movement as the swing arm so that there is no "moment of twist" on the damper.

Just bolt the bracket straight to the swinging arm. The shocks have their own rubber bushes.

To keep weight down, don't stiffen the dash with wood, just brace it against the central chassis tubes with a small metal bracket. My fibreglass dash doesn't even have that, but I only have the 1 Evodash module which is probably lighter than a full ETB set.

GBS were looking at making kits to suit other donors. They were looking at MX-5s and E36 BMW bits. Give them a ring and see how far the have got with that. The certainly had all the running gear from an E36 when I went up there last year and Richard was saying that he saw no issues with making a chassis to suit. There are a lot more E36s around than Sierras or MX-5s nowadays. The M42/4 engine at 1900cc produces 140 bhp and the 6 pots a lot more, there are lots of rusty ones around going for well under a £1000.

I would agree that a regular test is needed and that it's frequency is under debate. The problem is that a lot of bureaucracy doesn't actually address the problem and "appears" to be fatuous in nature. As has been pointed out 1 in 6 cars doesn't have an MOT and I'Il bet those are more dangerous than most cars as their owners don't give a monkeys, what is being done about those? A lot of tested faults have been on the car car for several months with the owner ignoring them so not increase the frequency of the MOT? The addition of tow bar electrics (it's often the trailer and not the car that causes the lights not to work anyway!) and seat runner tests will be seen by many as not required. I despise the "nanny" state and see it only as a way for lots of people especially lawyers to make money and I believe the responsibility should sit squarely with the individual. Where this has been proved to be lacking e.g. driving around in an an unsafe car, untaxed car etc then the individual should be heavily punished. I for one do not rely on the MOT to tell me my car is safe at a particular moment in time. I check mine and my wife's cars regularly for all aspects of safety. How about a compulsory extended MOT every 2 years with fines for those seen to be driving around in cars that clearly have had long term issues? For those unable to check their own vehicles they can book themselves in for MOT style check up as often as they want. I would still want a compulsory annual tyre check. This is a suggestion and I don't state that it's the best solution I am just trying to start a debate. I still can't find anything on t'internet that actually says what mechanical failure caused a particular accident. Funnily enough a friend mentioned that he had a slight accident when his front spring broke and the suspension collapsed! no warning and no sign of rust on the spring! Would an MOT have spotted that, maybe? The other issue I have is the ability of some garages to deliver an "accurate" MOT. This is clearly a sweeping statement and does NOT APPLY TO THE MAJORITY OF GARAGES but the number of times I have seen faults missed or "added" in the attempt to gain work cannot be limited to just me! I know of several people who have had second opinions at local council testing stations where the don't repair and have no incentive to "make up" faults only for their cars to now mysteriously pass!

Devil's advocate here.....discuss! How many accidents are actually caused by mechanical failure. Do we honestly think that if the test went to 2 years that the accident rate would increase significantly? Is the reluctance of testing stations to accept the switch due to the potential halving of revenue? Personally if Germany accepts 2 yearly testing then I suspect their safety stats don't perceive it as an issue. I'm pretty certain 99.9999% of accidents in the UK are driver error and not something breaking or falling off. Anyone know of where that data could be found on gov.org! I would however like to see a yearly tyre check, the number of those that I see bald or near bald is astonishing.

Standard Sierra one does exist! Mine passed it's IVA with one this year. I mounted it at the same angle as it was in the donor in the rear feed line. The fiesta one that is screwed directly into the master cylinder will be easier to fit now though although I can't tell you which model or year you need. It screws in the cylinder on the rear line feed, dead easy. The Sierra column has 2 devices, The concertina (corrugated would be another description) metal tube near the top and the sliding tube in tube triangle section just below the mount. HTH

Bloody funny....... And so true, allegedly!