R400 or CSR260
Discussion
Dave J said:
One question that hasnt been asked - how fat are you ?
if your a chubby laddy then you will be best off with the CSR.
I've had all the K series variants of engine spec and driven the CSR260 and my first choice would be the Duratec R400 for all round ability, pace and fun.
Dave
6ft tall and not fat !if your a chubby laddy then you will be best off with the CSR.
I've had all the K series variants of engine spec and driven the CSR260 and my first choice would be the Duratec R400 for all round ability, pace and fun.
Dave
Rosco said:
James.S said:
Rosco...as for slower caterhams, you really think you run your c400 at 95%?? Tested one a month or so back-WOW! My neck still aches.
I seriously hope so. Not much point racing it if I wasn't 
Anyway, in answer to the original question, get an R400. More reliable
Using race laps as a yardstick, if you are around 1.5 secs behind a front row R400 race time from the current series on similar tyres then theoretically you are around something like 97% and even better than that on longer cct's. For a recreational trackday with no race team to set your car up and no real incentive to squeeze out every last ounce, thats very quick imo.
OK then, last outing at Rockingham, my best lap was 1.05 seconds slower than the best lap that day, so I was 98.8% on it!
The biggest reliability issue as far as I know with the CSR and C/R400 is the gearboxes. Already I've had mine rebuilt this season and if you are doing the CSR endurance series, you rebuild it after every weekend, or you are sure to have problems.
As for engines, they may well be perfectly strong enough, I've not been told of any horror stories about the Duratecs, but many about the K series.
Ive only come accross 2 CSR's while on trackdays and neither of them were as confident as me around the circuit, so they were no match, but in a straight line there really was hardly any difference what so ever. I personally couldn't justify the extra money for the CSR and would sooner have to drive harder than use the power. It also upsets CSR's when a C400 goes past them
I've spoken to a few race drivers who have gone from R400s to C400s and they've preferred the handling of the k-engined cars. Plus I think the appendages on the C400 race cars are rather ugly (extra intake on nosecone, and at pedal box). Are these still needed, or have Caterham now solved the thermal issues without these nasty add-ons?
Never heard of any problem with a duratec car on a track day (any burnt feet yet??), almost certainly as they never stay close behind a car in front for long enough.
But having had an r400 engine go pop, the handling differences would have to be pretty significant to overcome the extra reliability bonus.
Never heard of any problem with a duratec car on a track day (any burnt feet yet??), almost certainly as they never stay close behind a car in front for long enough.
But having had an r400 engine go pop, the handling differences would have to be pretty significant to overcome the extra reliability bonus.
bse said:
I've spoken to a few race drivers who have gone from R400s to C400s and they've preferred the handling of the k-engined cars. Plus I think the appendages on the C400 race cars are rather ugly (extra intake on nosecone, and at pedal box). Are these still needed, or have Caterham now solved the thermal issues without these nasty add-ons?
I've never raced an R400, so i couldn't compare the two. They are still rather ugly I'm afraid, see below:
Gassing Station | Caterham | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff