Reducing the rev limiter of R500

Reducing the rev limiter of R500

Author
Discussion

Modena Scotland

Original Poster:

261 posts

223 months

Monday 14th July 2008
quotequote all
Hi

I am thinking of buying an R500 but am concerned about the refresh at every 3k miles or so. In order to avoid this, would it be possible to lower the rev limit by changing the set up?

I know some bhp will be lost but will this give me a better reliability without the need to refresh so often? I expect to do about 5k per year mostly for driving to and on tracks.

Look forward to hearing your opinions.

fergus

6,430 posts

276 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all
any aftermarket ECU, Emerald/MBE being the most popular for Caterhams, will allow you to set both the soft and hard cut limiters lower than the engine's max rpm. 8k should allow you plenty of fun. Don't forget that the VPHD engine goes round to around 8100 and has an iron crank and rods, etc. An R500 engine is built for the job. Key thing is to let everything warm up properly (not just the water jacket) before thraping it.

Rubystone will be along soon to tell you all about it.

Settle down now.

Once upon a time there was an engine famed for short longevity, but with a bit of cunning, surprise surprise, some people have managed to get 10k+ miles out of their engines.....

rubystone

11,254 posts

260 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all
Whenever they refresh an R500 engine, which isn't that often nowadays rolleyeshehe Graham and da boys set a rev limit of 8600, rather than the 9200 that the cars originally had. Some people (no names, no pack drills) chose to keep their rev limits at 9200.

Personally, not having ever experienced the delights of 9200, I can't say whether my car is any slower than one with the higher rev limit. What I do know after a nice run last night is that the car is plenty quick enough with the 8600 limit, although I could have done with a tad more power at Snetterton last year, but then couldn't we all?

Stuart at Minister (posts here sometimes, but rarely) did tell me that the engine produces max power at 8,000sometihng - i.e. there isn't much point going to 9200 in any case.

Frankly, have it set up on a good rolling road (I'm going to have Steve Greenauld have a play with mine soonish) and let them set the limiter at 8600, just in case you're on a track day and feel the need to bang it round to 9200 in every gear, which I do think would have an effect on the engine's life. As Fergus says though, the internals are built to take a pounding just so long as you've warmed it up properly (oil and water) before driving it hard.

dino ferrana

791 posts

253 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all
Refresh was quoted at 3,000 track miles (which is a lot of track days) and that is the pessimistic opinion. Several R500s have been taken way beyond 10,000 miles between refresh and some beyond 20k.

Don't be scared by the naysayers!

clarkey

1,365 posts

285 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all
Doesn't an R400 produce more power at 8000rpm than an R500, and have more chance of getting past a noise test at most tracks? I understand the need for an R500 (I've had 2) but an R300 or R400 is cheaper to buy, quieter, less stressful to own and pretty much as fast.

But if you are set on an R500, if you only take it to 8000rpm, it must be very durable because of the strength of the bottom end - I've never had to rebuild one, but I've been told that it is sustained high revs that causes the wear, so avoid this and you'll be fine.

Hunttheshunt

1,093 posts

241 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all
clarkey said:
Doesn't an R400 produce more power at 8000rpm than an R500, and have more chance of getting past a noise test at most tracks? I understand the need for an R500 (I've had 2) but an R300 or R400 is cheaper to buy, quieter, less stressful to own and pretty much as fast.

But if you are set on an R500, if you only take it to 8000rpm, it must be very durable because of the strength of the bottom end - I've never had to rebuild one, but I've been told that it is sustained high revs that causes the wear, so avoid this and you'll be fine.
Stephen, did you bin the 999R then?

clarkey

1,365 posts

285 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all
Yep, sold it last summer, I've just got a KTM RC8 actually, which is almost as fast and far more comfortable.....

VXJON

45 posts

214 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all
Nice one Mass smile


BTW your welcome to have a go in my car at the next trackdaywink

Modena Scotland

Original Poster:

261 posts

223 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all
Thank you guys for your input. What BHP are expected at 8,000 and 8,500 rpm? I'd rather have the R500 over R400 if I can keep it relaible due to its weight advantage. I do lots of track driving and always warm up the engines before hand. Sustained over reving will kill any highly tuned engines so I won't be doing that.

Hi Jon, nice to find you here! Thanks for the offer. When is your next outing at KH? I will be there on Fri and Sat in the club racer as usual.

Mass

POORCARDEALER

8,526 posts

242 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all


Steve Greenald did a great job of mapping my old R500. Not cheap, but blimey it flew

clarkey

1,365 posts

285 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all
Modena Scotland said:
Thank you guys for your input. What BHP are expected at 8,000 and 8,500 rpm? I'd rather have the R500 over R400 if I can keep it relaible due to its weight advantage. I do lots of track driving and always warm up the engines before hand. Sustained over reving will kill any highly tuned engines so I won't be doing that.
In reality, I think there is little or no difference in weight between the two - kevlar seats, magnesium bellhousing, that's about it. A good dump before you go out would make more difference....

Not sure about bhp at revs, but I'm sure the information is over on www.blatchat.com.

James.S

585 posts

213 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all
If your after an R500 speak to Stuart Faulds, he has one coming up that is going to be very nice.......www.fauldsport.com

Modena Scotland

Original Poster:

261 posts

223 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all
I thought the published weight of an R500 is 470kg and the R400 490kg.......

simon clark

306 posts

249 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all
Hi Mass,

I have PM'ed you my number. My R500 is at Minister at the moment having a full rebuild including Pistons, Liners and a new head! I am trying to get an advert up on the site (but having problems!) as I am thinking it's time to move on, particularly as my father-in-law is rebuilding another 7 that I will have access to - given that we always do trackdays together, it seems greedy (and unecessary) to have one each!

A prospective buyer could take delivery of the car without it having turned a wheel!

Give me a shout.

Cheers

Simon


VXJON

45 posts

214 months

Tuesday 15th July 2008
quotequote all
Modena Scotland said:
Hi Jon, nice to find you here! Thanks for the offer. When is your next outing at KH? I will be there on Fri and Sat in the club racer as usual.

Mass
Wont make it back till from holiday till august, so it will be the next HM night on the 28th frown Also doing the kames dates in August.smile



rubystone

11,254 posts

260 months

Wednesday 16th July 2008
quotequote all
simon clark said:
Hi Mass,

I have PM'ed you my number. My R500 is at Minister at the moment having a full rebuild including Pistons, Liners and a new head!
Out of interest, why did it need all that work? it was the last one built wasn't it?

clarkey

1,365 posts

285 months

Wednesday 16th July 2008
quotequote all
Modena Scotland said:
I thought the published weight of an R500 is 470kg and the R400 490kg.......
I built an R500 with aeroscreen and paint, and it was 498kg. I had a SLR with aeroscreen, dry sump, carbon wings and nose and tillets, that was 505kg. In reality they are the same basic car with some other bits - kevlar seats, aero wishbones, carbon aeroscreen, more standard carbon, and thats about it - about 5kg difference.

Now the new R500 looks better value than a good spec new R400, but that is another argument entirely. Indeed if I was looking to spec £25k on a second hand R500, I'd probably check down the back of the sofa to find the extra needed to buy a new one....

rubystone

11,254 posts

260 months

Wednesday 16th July 2008
quotequote all
clarkey said:
Indeed if I was looking to spec £25k on a second hand R500, I'd probably check down the back of the sofa to find the extra needed to buy a new one....
Can't argue with that, but fully specced with sequential it's £15k more isn't it?

Modena Scotland

Original Poster:

261 posts

223 months

Wednesday 16th July 2008
quotequote all
I suppose like most other car makers, Caterham publishes less weight and may be more power than the real cars .... If the R500 weights close to 500kg, its power to weight doesn't make anywhere near the 500 quoted mad.

clarkey

1,365 posts

285 months

Wednesday 16th July 2008
quotequote all
That's right, can only reach 500bhp/tonne with no paint, light roll bar, etc.

Rubystone, yes I think a new R500 is £15k more than a previous one, I'm just of the opinion that if you can find £25k for a completely irrational buy like a 7 you can probably justify spending £40k with a bit of work! Maybe we're not all the same, I'm just incredibly weak....