Early 2000 Minister R500 k engines - how reliable

[SET3]

So then, been doing a lot of research on different Caterhams and noticed afew r500s up for sale as well with approx 15 - 20000 miles on. Read a lot that these engines need frequent refreshes, is this really true ? Read somewhere it was some really low mileages as well, can't believe it too be this bad ???

What is the general maintaince then if doing say 5 track days a year and B road sort of driving..

Thanks, what with so many different engined cars about its a mine field sifting through everything and deciding what you want....

One day il make up my mind !

[Token Jock]

So you aren't going with the Superlight 1.6K then?

[DVandrews]

Some of the early engines had lubrication issues since the cranks were not cross-drilled. Most of these were fixed with work on the crank, VP2 big end bearings and a lower Rev limit. A lot will depend on the mode of usage of the engine, if is is regularly gunned fom cold then it will require a shorter refresh cycle, otherwise around 20,000 miles would be about right. Track based cars would require much shorter refresh cycles.

Dave

[IBDAET]

Many early R500's were also purchased by people with bags of money and a complete lack of mechanical sympathy, who ran them in short endurance races. Many of them obviously blew up. FWIW a highly tuned Duractec would yield the same unreliability if treated the same way.

For road and more occasional track use they are fine. As Dave says, let them warm up (oil and water) before giving them the full beans and you will be fine.

[SET3]

Hey token jock

I've yet to drive your old super light or any Caterham as yet as the weather always been so appalling which isn't ideal. Guess that's the problem trying to get one in the winter ready for the spring,

One day!! Hopefully soon I

Cheers
Stu

[IBDAET]

You'll only kill yourself in an R500 if its your first 7.

Hone you skills on something a bit slower first.

[Toaster]

IBDAET said:

You'll only kill yourself in an R500 if its your first 7.

Hone you skills on something a bit slower first.

Very wise words

[g7jhp]

Toaster said:

IBDAET said:

You'll only kill yourself in an R500 if its your first 7.

Hone you skills on something a bit slower first.

Very wise words

+1

You'll have more fun learning in a lower powered 7 and then moving up.

I'd aim for a model with 160-180bhp (I had a VX HPC on Carbs).

[Ult-Jim]

Toaster said:

IBDAET said:

You'll only kill yourself in an R500 if its your first 7.

Hone you skills on something a bit slower first.

Very wise words

I disagree. My R500 was my first toy car! A matter of fact it was my first bought car! Lived, played and worked on boats all my life, did not need a car. With a little maturity, respect for & understanding of how a high performance car ticks and with some mechanical sympathy, you will not have any worries. For me with the R500 I am still discovering the upper power band & improving my handling, driving knowledge & confidence in the process. This makes ownership exciting.

Edited by Ult-Jim on Saturday 29th November 17:02

[IBDAET]

"I am still discovering the upper power band"

You have resisted temptation, which is unusual.

[rubystone]

Ult-Jim said:

I disagree. My R500 was my first toy car! A matter of fact it was my first bought car! Lived, played and worked on boats all my life, did not need a car. With a little maturity, respect for & understanding of how a high performance car ticks and with some mechanical sympathy, you will not have any worries. For me with the R500 I am still discovering the upper power band & improving my handling, driving knowledge & confidence in the process. This makes ownership exciting.

Edited by Ult-Jim on Saturday 29th November 17:02

Depends on the map. If it's standard, there's no way you can drive the R500 WITHOUT exploring the upper power band. There's eff all grunt below 5000 revs.

Ergo I assume Ukt's car had been remapped.

My strong recommendation is indeed to buy something with around 140-160 bhp. I had to learn to drive my first 7 (came from a 964 RS...so hardly unused to slow cars...). Took me 6 months to do that.

[SET3]

rubystone said:

Depends on the map. If it's standard, there's no way you can drive the R500 WITHOUT exploring the upper power band. There's eff all grunt below 5000 revs.

Ergo I assume Ukt's car had been remapped.

My strong recommendation is indeed to buy something with around 140-160 bhp. I had to learn to drive my first 7 (came from a 964 RS...so hardly unused to slow cars...). Took me 6 months to do that.

My problem is, currently own a 996 GT3 (couple years now) before that a 993 for approx 8.5,years and still have a motorbike GSXR, used to generally fast vehicles and didn't want to buy a caterham and think it wasn't fast enough and be disappointed. Like said previous be used for occasional track day and b-roads.

Someone said the R500 needed refreshing at 20k, but I assume it obviously depends on its useage like said above.

I'm still currently waiting to drive one, at the moment a certain yellow super light seems to be hedging the bets so far...It sounded nice in the showroom.! Unless anyone knows of any R300/400s About?

[HurryUpAndWait]

It's often said that the R300 is the sweet spot for those worried about it not being swift enough, or getting used to the speed quickly. I thought about following that advice, but found a K-series R300 that had been fiddled with to 200-210bhp. The result is reasonably rapid

Am I correct in thinking that the additional power developed by the K-series R500s was from a rather high limiter? Could one not map it to limit to 7.8k - 8k for example, dropping peak power slightly (to 230 ish) but gaining reliability?

My only properly fast car pre-Caterham was an E46 M3 CS. If you're coming from a 996 GT3, I wouldn't bother with anything less than 180bhp personally. Now obviously the driving experience of a 7 is defined by much more than straight-line performance, but a bit of grunt is a good thing, particularly if you intend to track it - with the aerodynamic properties of a brick going sideways, it'll no longer be about bhp/tonne, but bhp full-stop.

I adore mine.

[IBDAET]

A 996 has things like ABS and Traction control. You may think them intrusive at times, but when you need them they do a good job.

A 993 is less powerful. Both also have the heavy bits over the driven wheels.

Driving an insanely fast Caterham which does not have such features takes a lot of getting used to. In the wet for example an R300 can still deliver a decent drive. Same conditions in an R500 you have to stay right off the cams and reign in your throttle use, or you will visit a hedge quite quickly.

[B@W]

SET3 said:

My problem is, currently own a 996 GT3 (couple years now) before that a 993 for approx 8.5,years and still have a motorbike GSXR, used to generally fast vehicles and didn't want to buy a caterham and think it wasn't fast enough and be disappointed. Like said previous be used for occasional track day and b-roads.

Someone said the R500 needed refreshing at 20k, but I assume it obviously depends on its useage like said above.

I'm still currently waiting to drive one, at the moment a certain yellow super light seems to be hedging the bets so far...It sounded nice in the showroom.! Unless anyone knows of any R300/400s About?

I'm from a similar background of fast cars and bikes and bought an R500k as my first Caterham seven years ago which I still own.

I was looking for an R400 but the right car came up at the right time.

Don't believe the naysayers: the handling is really transparent and the engine has enough torque that you don't have to drive around at 6000rpm plus all the time; great when you do though.....

[kenny.R400]

Was just on the verge of buying a 2002 R500 before my current car came up for grabs.

What impressed me was how docile it was at normal town speed and not cammy at all. I assume now that all R500's are not necessarily the same?

[Se7enheaven]

There is a saying that you know you have enough power when it will roll your 4skin back when accelerating.
The R500 power is pretty close to that.