1
FS / WTB: Cars and Rollers / Re: FS 1972 Europa S2 with Twin Cam Big Valve
« Last post by s2europa on Today at 08:59:06 AM »Please post photos of the car.
Lotus Europa Community
This Forum is Dedicated to the Lotus Europa and It's Variants
News:
July 1, 2023 Forum membership reaches 1,465 !!
This Community became 11 years old in April 2023.
Recent Posts
2
Garage / Re: Brake Master Question
« Last post by surfguitar58 on Today at 07:12:47 AM »
I'd like to know what you find out; I have a standard TC MC here, as well as an S2 (albeit rusty, but with the proper innards) that's been sitting for a while. If they COULD sleeve down properly, use the TC as the base with the S2 innards...that would be the hot ticket, I think.
Going to have to make a decision soon; filled the reservoir a couple weeks ago, but when I checked last night, it was down again, above the 'MIN' line, but still down...
Bryan, would you be willing to lend me your S2 MC so I could do some reverse engineering on it? I have the TC MC drawn up in CAD and it would be great to do the same for the S2 MC to see if merging the two is feasible. I would gladly pay shipping both ways, obviously.
Tom
3
Garage / Re: Faulty Distributor Cam Lobes
« Last post by 4129R on Today at 06:37:40 AM »P.S. Lottery tickets bought ...............
Did you win......
Sadly my investment enriched others.
But the car started easily and ran well today. The "to do" list has no major items on it.
4
Garage / Re: Brake Master Question
« Last post by jbcollier on Today at 06:23:56 AM »I have fitted a lot of master cylinders and worked on a lot of older cars. Single circuit masters last much longer than duals and give far less grief. Single circuits are also simple to install and bleed. Fit a cap with a level sensor and you have all the warning you need if there is an issue.
I have seen both leak due to corrosion at the exposed end but only dual circuit masters have internal issues and bypass. One famous example was when VW upgraded from single to dual. Again no notable problems with the single but the dual was famous for going from good to ON-THE-FLOOR in an instant. Yup, would bypass BOTH circuits!! If you have a dual system, by all means keep it that way. Just remember to change the master every 40K or so as preventative maintenance. If you have a single circuit, just fit a sensor cap and thank your lucky stars.
I have seen both leak due to corrosion at the exposed end but only dual circuit masters have internal issues and bypass. One famous example was when VW upgraded from single to dual. Again no notable problems with the single but the dual was famous for going from good to ON-THE-FLOOR in an instant. Yup, would bypass BOTH circuits!! If you have a dual system, by all means keep it that way. Just remember to change the master every 40K or so as preventative maintenance. If you have a single circuit, just fit a sensor cap and thank your lucky stars.
5
Garage / Re: Brake Master Question
« Last post by Bryan Boyle on Today at 05:58:41 AM »Very timely that this discussion should come up (again) now. I wave waffled all over the map wrt the deleted booster/MC debate. I had settled on a pedal geometry change solution that I was going to get to, one of these days (detailed in another thread somewhere) but, predictably, never got around to it. I actually am pretty used to having to “brake with authority” with the stock .875” MC. (The poor guy who is required by law to drive the car into the inspection bay has a “no brakes” panic attack every year, however.)
However, for the first time in eight years I am treating the car to a “professional” spring tune-up and re-commissioning and the mechanic found corrosion in the MC bore that simple honing won’t clean-up.
So:
-Simply sleeve-the-original MC ($245 quote from Apple Hydraulics), with or wo the pedal geometry change?
-Replace the original MC with a smaller bore MC from another vehicle, with all the inherent pipe-routing, mismatched fittings and funky reservoir mounting problems?
-Or, my dream solution: Sleeve the original MC down to a smaller dia, turn the pistons and seal-ring grooves down to match, source replacement seals, and keep the original MC look and plumbing with a lighter touch on the brakes?
Stepping the original .875” MC down to .750” would give a nice 27% increase in brake pressure (and corresponding increase in panel stroke), while reducing to .705” (stock S2 bore dia, if I’m not mistaken) would be 35%. The .705” solution might also allow swapping S2 MC innards into the reduced-bore TCS MC body. I’m digging into the possibilities with the shop next week and will let everyone know where the chips land.
Tom
I'd like to know what you find out; I have a standard TC MC here, as well as an S2 (albeit rusty, but with the proper innards) that's been sitting for a while. If they COULD sleeve down properly, use the TC as the base with the S2 innards...that would be the hot ticket, I think.
Going to have to make a decision soon; filled the reservoir a couple weeks ago, but when I checked last night, it was down again, above the 'MIN' line, but still down...
6
Garage / Re: The revival of 650143R, 1970 with TS.
« Last post by TurboFource on Today at 04:58:52 AM »Richard,
If you need any of the rubber chassis grommets that D’Man mentioned I can send you 4 ( I bought a bag of them from McMaster) (same goes for anyone else)
If you need any of the rubber chassis grommets that D’Man mentioned I can send you 4 ( I bought a bag of them from McMaster) (same goes for anyone else)
7
Garage / Re: Faulty Distributor Cam Lobes
« Last post by SilverBeast on Today at 02:47:23 AM »P.S. Lottery tickets bought ...............
Did you win......
8
Garage / Re: It's not easy being green - 1971 TC
« Last post by Cheguava on Today at 01:13:40 AM »Hi Brian, that is really helpful info on the alternator - I'm spoilt for choice now!
Thanks for the link to your website, which is fantastic - no idea what you mean about Yorkshire Pennine weather though.
Many happy hours of reading ahead - looks like you've done all the stuff I'm going to have to go through. Massive help.
Best wishes,
Jeff
Thanks for the link to your website, which is fantastic - no idea what you mean about Yorkshire Pennine weather though.
Many happy hours of reading ahead - looks like you've done all the stuff I'm going to have to go through. Massive help.Best wishes,
Jeff
9
Garage / Re: Brake Master Question
« Last post by surfguitar58 on Today at 12:42:10 AM »Very timely that this discussion should come up (again) now. I wave waffled all over the map wrt the deleted booster/MC debate. I had settled on a pedal geometry change solution that I was going to get to, one of these days (detailed in another thread somewhere) but, predictably, never got around to it. I actually am pretty used to having to “brake with authority” with the stock .875” MC. (The poor guy who is required by law to drive the car into the inspection bay has a “no brakes” panic attack every year, however.)
However, for the first time in eight years I am treating the car to a “professional” spring tune-up and re-commissioning and the mechanic found corrosion in the MC bore that simple honing won’t clean-up.
So:
-Simply sleeve-the-original MC ($245 quote from Apple Hydraulics), with or wo the pedal geometry change?
-Replace the original MC with a smaller bore MC from another vehicle, with all the inherent pipe-routing, mismatched fittings and funky reservoir mounting problems?
-Or, my dream solution: Sleeve the original MC down to a smaller dia, turn the pistons and seal-ring grooves down to match, source replacement seals, and keep the original MC look and plumbing with a lighter touch on the brakes?
Stepping the original .875” MC down to .750” would give a nice 27% increase in brake pressure (and corresponding increase in panel stroke), while reducing to .705” (stock S2 bore dia, if I’m not mistaken) would be 35%. The .705” solution might also allow swapping S2 MC innards into the reduced-bore TCS MC body. I’m digging into the possibilities with the shop next week and will let everyone know where the chips land.
Tom
However, for the first time in eight years I am treating the car to a “professional” spring tune-up and re-commissioning and the mechanic found corrosion in the MC bore that simple honing won’t clean-up.
So:
-Simply sleeve-the-original MC ($245 quote from Apple Hydraulics), with or wo the pedal geometry change?
-Replace the original MC with a smaller bore MC from another vehicle, with all the inherent pipe-routing, mismatched fittings and funky reservoir mounting problems?
-Or, my dream solution: Sleeve the original MC down to a smaller dia, turn the pistons and seal-ring grooves down to match, source replacement seals, and keep the original MC look and plumbing with a lighter touch on the brakes?
Stepping the original .875” MC down to .750” would give a nice 27% increase in brake pressure (and corresponding increase in panel stroke), while reducing to .705” (stock S2 bore dia, if I’m not mistaken) would be 35%. The .705” solution might also allow swapping S2 MC innards into the reduced-bore TCS MC body. I’m digging into the possibilities with the shop next week and will let everyone know where the chips land.
Tom
10
Garage / Re: Brake Master Question
« Last post by EuropaTC on Friday,April 26, 2024, 10:23:29 PM »I have toyed with the idea of fitting a remote reservoir on my Europa simply to raise the reservoir and provide improved head pressure for maintenance, bleeding, etc. As it is now, the height of the OEM reservoir can't be much higher then the bleeders on the front calipers. I will eventually tackle a complete brake service project (all new lines, other mods, etc) and considering the remote reservoir for that reason alone.It is a strange one, the remote reservoir was standard on the UK single circuit brakes and honestly there's no great effort to fit a remote to a tandem m/cyl. I can only think that when Lotus moved to dual circuits for the Federal cars they decided it was cheaper to leave the tandem cylinder as it came and save on the production line costs for a remote + pipework.
Having said that, the single circuit m/cyl is much easier to fit a remote to, the reservoir connection is threaded so it's easy to fit a feed pipe.
When I was researching braking systems I found several references to the advantage of having a head of fluid above the tops of the calipers/drums. So yep, if you're refreshing the whole system I'd say it's a good idea, plus of course it's much easier to fill and monitor.
Brian