I tackled the Porsche and Westfield logos this week. Both were surprisingly easy to trace, but the printing was time consuming, taking nearly a full day. For the Porsche logo, I opted to max out the Bambu's print bed and went with 5" tall letters that result in a 6' long logo. The constraining factor to print size was the width of the stylized letter E -- it's wide! Taking a cue from Porsche dealer signs, I went with red filament. 

The Westfield logo was a little more involved. Their logo is two colors: silver on a black background. Although I considered printing it as a single part, I opted to break it into two 9-3/8" (238mm) diameter pieces, plus the Westfield name, then press fit everything together via pins and mating holes printed into the surfaces. This gives it more dimensionality and it was also a new thing for me to try. Unfortunately, I am out of silver filament and had to substitute light gray, which isn't ideal. It looks fine, but the logo really needs silver for the starburst and name to pop. I'll treat this as a POC for now and will reprint it when I receive my next filament order. 

I decided to try my hand at tracing a couple of car logos and printing them from PLA. My first attempts were the Caterham written logo that uses their custom font, and the Lotus logo using the font style and layout from the logo used until the early '70s. For scale, each letter in the Caterham logo is 4" tall (100mm) and spelled out is a bit under 50".  The Lotus logo is a little smaller, with the diameter of the C in the ACBC portion coming in at 6.5" and the letters a little over 3" tall (80mm). Each piece is attached to the wall with a non-hardening adhesive putty which makes it easy to make slight adjustments. Photos below include close ups of the finish. Next up, are attempts at the Porsche written logo and the Westfield starburst logo

If you're a car enthusiast — and if you're reading this blog, then you either are or you're horribly lost...or you're my mom — you really need to investigate 3D printing. Learning enough CAD to make interesting parts is surprisingly easy, and with a good 3D printer, the printing process is very straightforward. 

Although I show a number of the 3D parts created for my Caterham throughout this site, it's not the complete list, and those photos are spread across multiple pages and blog posts rather than cataloged in one location. I also haven't discussed the CAD software and 3D printer used for these projects. With this post, I hope to correct those shortcomings. 

CAD software
When investigating CAD options, my objectives were simple: it should be free or inexpensive, easy to use, and should have a good support base via forums or YouTube videos to help me learn how to do various things. After a lot of research, I settled on OnShape. Is it the best software that currently meets those criteria? I have no idea. Do I regret my choice? Not at all. It's been easy to use, there are a ton of good YouTube channels that explain how to do different things, the forums are vibrant, and I've been able to pound my way through various design quandaries to produce things I had initially assumed were out of my reach. 

3D printers
There are a number of choices today and a lot of YouTube reviews that dig into the pros and cons of each. After whetting my teeth on a Prusa Mini +, I graduated to a Bambu X1C for the Caterham parts and I love it. The Bambu can print engineering materials like Nylon, which require higher print temperatures and an enclosure to prevent warping, as well as various features like lidar for the first layer that make printing really easy. I also love the fact that the camera allows me to monitor a print while I'm in the house or my office. I have absolutely zero regrets with this choice.  Bambu's printers just work and they're easy to use.

The gallery below contains the various 3D prints I made for the Caterham that I remembered to photograph prior to installation. Click on a photo to launch the annotated slide show which describes each item. Hopefully these will give you some ideas and inspire you to pick up this skill to supplement your car hobby. Afterall, if I can do it, well...you have no excuses.

The electric windows in the Elan are notorious for their glacial-like pace. When I bought the car six years ago, the passenger side upheld that reputation, but the driver's side needed a helping hand to close. Rebuilding the pulley system on that side improved things, but like the passenger side, it was still slow. In the intervening years, both windows have regressed, with driver's side once again requiring assistance. This year, I decided to replace the old motors with modern units using the excellent conversion kit from ae_mike on LotusElan.net. The new GM motors are much smaller and even with the mounting brackets save over 1.6 lb. per door. That's good. The bad is they made virtually no difference to window operation. 

​Troubleshooting commenced which included alternately bypassing the ground and 12v+ in the harness with straight connections to the battery (the switches control motor direction by alternating which motor wire receives 12v+ and which connects to ground.) This showed that although the 12v+ wiring was definitely slowing things down, it was the ground wiring bringing things to a halt. Cleaning the three chassis grounding points made no difference. A look under the dash revealed a rat's nest of wires that didn't inspire confidence given the combination of changes made by previous owners and 57-year-old wire insulation. But as bad as that appeared, the wiring in the nose of the car was worse. Insulation was brittle from the age and heat, and repairs were made using nasty connectors.  Ugh.

Next, I began the tedious process of removing the dash to get better access to the wires and the back of the window switches. Checking resistance of the ground between the switch and motor showed about 3 ohms even after cleaning the connections. At this point, I realized rewiring the dash was the right long-term fix. Based on what I saw in the nose, that quickly devolved into a decision to rewire the entire car.

​This is where the slippery slope rears its expensive head. First is the wiring harness decision. Do I go with the replacement loom made by Autosparks in the UK, which is faithful to the factory loom, or do I go modern? The stock Elan only has 2 fuses for the entire car, the old school relays are spread around the car, and the wire is PVC coated: thick and subject to age and heat hardening. All these shortcomings remain with the Autosparks harness. Going modern would provide added protection in the form of multiple fuses, a single location for fuses and relays, and the option of using modern wire with thinner, lighter, more robust insulation. The downside is more opportunities for me to screw up the wiring (um, why do the hazards flash while braking with the wipers on??) and the onus is on me to create and document everything for future troubleshooting. Enter Advanced Auto Wire.  

​AAW has been doing upgraded looms for MGs and Triumphs for years. They now make one for the Elan. It's not perfect though. The fuse and relay box (AAW calls it the powerblock) is bulky at 7" x 7" x 2.75", and the harness doesn't have provisions for either the headlight flasher or the headlamp pod limit switches which prevent the headlights from turning on when the pods are retracted. However, neither of these are issues for me. I don't use flash to pass and the limit switches are frequently disabled by owners given they can be problematic. The benefits though seem significant. The loom should be much lighter and simpler than stock, it uses modern GXL wire in standard British/Lotus colors (except for replacing Brown with Yellow), there are twelve fuses, including four in the headlight circuit, X relays, and AAW provides excellent documentation including a color-coded wiring diagram. To top it off, support through the sales process was top notch. As a one-man shop, you are always dealing with the business owner, and Steve genuinely seems interested in customer satisfaction. The loom should be here in 8-10 weeks.

V2 of the Beeline mount is finished.  It relocates the display from the face of the dash to the top of the scuttle, where it's in direct line of sight while driving.  To make this location work while maintaining the design brief of being quick to mount/unmount without leaving a trace, it was clear the magnetic clamping system required a big redesign.  After straining my few remaining brain cells looking for the right solution, I eventually opted to change from a large standalone magnet that clamps to a thick steel washer embedded in the mount, to a two-part mount with several smaller magnets embedded in each section.  This smaller footprint allows the mount to fit on the leading edge of the scuttle where it overhangs the top of the dash.  I had initially dismissed this location as an option for anything other than a screw or spring clamp given the overhang is less than an inch at the top and quickly reduces to nearly zero due to the rake of the dash, but this just fit.

To add a little more friction and to protect the paint, the bottom of the base is covered with 1/32" thick neoprene sheet.  This setup has proven even easier to mount/unmount and store in the glovebox than V1; it literally takes just seconds.  Although a short test drive revealed no movement issues, a proper blat is still required before calling it done.  If there is movement, the plan is to stick with this design but invest in higher quality magnets to increase the clamping force.

Two weekends ago, I drove the Caterham followed by the Westfield.  That second drive confirmed the MOG seats are definitely more comfortable for me, but I also noticed they are slightly more reclined, which is a contributing factor.  Subsequent experimentation with rake revealed an additional10mm lift in the front of the Caterham's seat is my sweet spot for comfort and driving position; that's the equivalent of one Tillet spacer. Rather than use those spacers, which only achieve partial contact with the seat base given the base isn't parallel to the runners when tilted, I decided to print spacers designed to fit.  Certainly not necessary, but it soothed my OCD.  

​An 80-mile blat Sunday confirmed this seemingly simple change has made a noticeable difference to comfort.  For me, the MOGs are still a better fit, but that difference is now far more tenable.  I can live with this.

That drive was also a great test for the Beeline.  It proved that while it isn't perfect, it's still pretty damn good.  The biggest glitch occurred when approaching a street on the right, that from memory, was the direction we needed to take.  However, the Beeline indicated the next right turn was still over 8 miles away.  As I passed the street, the blue LEDs suddenly flashed twice, indicating the next turn was 50 meters ahead.  The display then immediately showed "rerouting" and a few seconds later instructed me to make a U-turn.  It felt like an indecisive backseat driver was telling me how to get somewhere, but at least it ultimately got it right.

The other issues are really just annoyances.  It appears the Beeline treats a waypoint as a direction point, counting down the mileage until reached and flashing the blue LEDs when 50 meters away indicating you're "almost at the turn."  That's fine when a waypoint is actually intended as a stop, but when not, it can be a little confusing for the perpetually paranoid; OMG did I just miss a turn??  There were also a couple of occasions when extremely tight turns resulted in the same behavior.  I suspect the road names changed at these points, but it was still a bit confusing, particularly when it's a blind corner and my paranoia tells me there must be a street immediately after the apex.  

The magnetic mount worked great with no movement from g-forces.  The display position is fine, although I may experiment a bit with a redesign that would place it above the top of the dash and therefore directly in line of sight.  Although more optimal for visibility, I'm not sure I want the Beeline to stand out quite that much.  With the current dash mount, it looks like some type of permanently attached gauge, and not something for a mouth-breather to opportunistically steal while the car is temporarily parked out of sight for an on-tour meal.  Regardless, the original design brief of an easily removable mount that leaves no trace will remain.  I have a couple of ideas though and may print some test parts this week.

​Back in early May, I wrote my preliminary thoughts on the Caterham with the intention of following them up with a more informed take a few weeks later.  I didn't expect those few weeks to turn into a few months.  Oh well.  After rereading my earlier ramblings, I don't think any of my initial comments are off base.  Yes, I still wish it was smaller. the steering was quicker, and the turning radius was less SUV-like.  I'd also be happier if the Tillets were as comfortable for me as the MOGs, and if the back of the transmission tunnel didn't interfere with my elbow when shifting.  And yes, the boot procedure continues to annoy.  But on the positive side, the steering and handling don't disappoint, I still like all my modifications, and the engine...it's epic.  The Westfield is a very quick car, but this...this is in a different league.  An additional 30+ horsepower and gearing over 8% shorter are very, very noticeable changes. 

Here is a very short video that shows acceleration to 85mph.  To avoid wheelspin, I had to slowly feed in the throttle in first gear and to a lesser extent in second gear.  For the full effect, open the video in YouTube and manually change video quality to 4K, then watch the tach.  This thing is nuts.  BTW the wavy video is a result of screwing up a setting in the camera.  I'll try to grab a better quality version in the future.  

​A few more words on the shorter gearing.  The Westfield has a 3.62 diff coupled to a BGH E2 Type-9, whereas the Caterham has a Miata box, a 3.92 diff, and slightly shorter rear tires.  As shown in the chart below, depending on the gear, the difference ranges from 5.2% to 13.7%.  Although the Caterham (B) would greatly benefit from the Westfield's (A) taller first gear, the shorter nature of the other gears is a nice change for local back roads and encourages more shifting.

​As I've begun to explore the power, the Caterham's traction has been a pleasant surprise.  First, the plate-type LSD and deDion make breakaway under power a very, very smooth process, particularly noticeable when making a left turn from a stop.  I've always thought the Westfield did great in this situation, but the Caterham is even more subtle and progressive.  Second, aside from first gear, which is useless, traction in other gears is better than expected.  Yes, it's a little variable in second and third, but it's not to the concerning degree I feared. 

Bottom line, I am warming up to the car.  Do I think it's worth the money?  Well...going through the configurator with the latest price increases, of which there have been many since placing my order in May of 2021, and using today's currency conversion, then adding in the $8k I spent on shipping to Seattle, an identical – but stock – 420R would currently cost over $77,000.  Factor in my extensive mods, partially offset by selling parts no longer needed, and well...it would be more. 

For comparison purposes, that same $77k would buy a new Porsche Cayman with PASM and mechanical LSD.  Or going a different route, a brand new Mazda MX5 Club Sport AND a Toyota GR Corolla to ensure you have a toy for any weather conditions.  Ok, ok, I get it.  People, including me, don't cross-shop a Caterham with those options, but it does put the price in perspective.  It also explains why I get frustrated with Caterham as a company.  They charge quite a bit for the car, but they don't appear to feel a customer's experience and expectations should be commensurate that investment.  Simply put, from a customer experience perspective, they under deliver.  Where I have always felt some sense of loyalty and pride in Westfield as a company given how they have operated during my ownership, I don't with Caterham.  Yes, I like the car, but I'm not a company fanboy like I am with my other cars.  Sorry Bob Laishley, but you have not moved the ball forward in those areas.

Smart phones are amazing devices. By simplifying many tasks that were previously considered complicated or time consuming, they bring convenience to our daily lives. But when that same convenience makes you accessible to the office 24 hours a day via email, texts, Teams, Zoom, etc, it quickly loses its luster. Particularly on those occasions when you're trying to decompress from work. And nothing helps me decompress from the daily grind more than driving an engaging car down a back road for no other reason than to bludgeon corners into submission. That means looking at my iPhone for navigation while on a blat in the Caterham presents a contradiction.  

Enter the Beeline Moto II. Beeline combines a navigation app optimized for planning fun-to-drive routes, with a small device that leverages your Smart phone's GPS, but streamlines the directions into a small 37mm diameter screen that provides just the information you need to get from point A to point B. It's a simplified map display that shows both the distance to your next turn and the direction, as well as the current speed limit and how far into your journey you've travelled. Additionally, a small LED blinks once when you're 200 meters from the next turn, and twice when you're just 50 meters away. There are other screens available such as a compass mode that always points towards your destination, speedometer, journey progress, and battery levels of both the Beeline and your phone. Bottom line, it packs a lot into a small space while allowing you to keep your phone in your pocket where it's less of a distraction.  

​The Beeline is also light. Obviously, this weight is incremental to your smart phone, but at just 42 grams, the Beeline doesn't present the same type of load to its mounting system as a phone. This matters when you are bludgeoning corners into submission. Just ask anyone whose phone went left while their car went right.

For my installation, I 3D printed a small mount angled to face me and embedded a 3mm thick steel washer into the base. A fishing magnet located at the back of the carbon fiber dash grabs onto the washer and holds the mount in place. It's very secure when underway and very easy to mount and unmount, leaving no trace upon removal.

A busy, uncooperative Fall and Winter got in the way of putting miles on the Caterham. Either weekend weather was suboptimal, or other commitments trumped driving time.  As a result, I'm still just getting to know the car, but initial impressions are mixed.  There are some things it does well, but there are a few aspects of the Westfield I prefer.  Some of these can be addressed with work, while others are things to which I will adjust or simply must learn to accept.  I suspect rereading this post at the end of the summer will reveal some inner dissent on these initial opinions.  Hopefully for the better.
​
Build decisions
I'll begin with things I like. Thankfully, and without exception (thus far), I'm very pleased with the various design and practicality changes made during the build; I wouldn't do a single one differently. The dash and controls work and look great.  Within the break-in-imposed limitations, the engine is fantastic. And thus far, all the 3D printed parts are holding up well. Until I drive another 420R SV back-to-back (coming this summer) I can't comment on the CORE dampers from an improvement perspective, but absent of a comparison, I have zero negative things to say about the damping. The exterior color is another positive. I agonized over this during the order phase given I had never seen Roulette Green in the flesh and online photos were very inconsistent. In person though, I love it. There is a pearl that adds a yellowish tone to the vertices of curves in certain lighting that really works and looks special. I suspect goldish tone wheels would be spectacular with this color.

Size
Although I haven't really explored the handling, at 7/10ths it feels great, if a little subdued. The Westfield rides more firmly, yet rolls more (no ARBs) but there is an eagerness to it that is missing in the Caterham. I think this is down to two things and my two biggest complaints with the car. First, it's too damn big. All other things being equal, I'm sure I'd be much prefer the smaller S3, but I'm convinced that the far more limited room under bonnet would have been too challenging given all my changes, and from experience, I know the lack of shoulder room with driving two-up makes it very uncomfortable for me. Bottom line, I think I would still be less than completely happy with the S3, but for different reasons.  

In contrast, the Westfield is my Goldilocks for size. Shoulder and hip room are precisely midway between the S3 and the 4" wider SV, while the scuttle and windscreen are about the same width as the S3. It's wide enough not to feel crowded two-up, but the rest of it still feels small and cosseting. Add Caterham's center tunnel height into the mix, which interferes with my elbow when shifting, and it misses the mark for me. To be fair, my car has the lowered floors which drop the seat by 2 inches, exacerbating this problem, but the standard floors left me feeling sitting too high.  Perhaps raising the seats by an inch will be a good compromise.

Steering
Second big dislike is steering speed. In my opinion, it is too slow for the chassis. A se7en is all about quickness and agility, yet the steering speed feels more appropriate for a heavier, less focused car. Interestingly, I initially had the same complaint about the Westfield, which was addressed with a quicker steering rack. Although that option exists for the S3, there is no such option for the SV.  Why? I have no idea.  This is something to which I simply need to adjust. On a related note, and also requiring acceptance, the turning circle is enormous. It makes it feel like you're maneuvering a far larger car, or -- gasp! -- an SUV. The steering feel however, is superb.  

Boot 
There are other nits. Sarting with the boot cover, it is less practical than necessary. The Westfield has a lockable boot cover with a reasonably large opening. In contrast, the Caterham cover attaches via snaps, and although the option exists to only unsnap the middle three to access the boot, the resulting opening is very short, thereby severely limiting what can be inserted or removed. That means unsnapping, then resnapping several more poppers to open the full cover; something I find cumbersome. Complaining about a seemingly daily-driver practicality issue may seem odd, but it's very common for me to stop off at the grocery store on the way back from a drive, or use the need for food as an excuse to take a drive, so it's something I frequently run into.  

Seats
The seats are not quite as comfortable as the Mogs in the Westfield, and they are a bit wider, particularly in the ribs. As a result, they don't hold me in place as well when cornering and further remove me from feeling part of the car. Whether the comfort proves problematic will need to wait for a proper multi-hour drive; however, it is clear that I would have been very unhappy with the SV width carbon seats rather than my special-ordered S3 width versions.  

Next step
Provided weather cooperates, I'm hoping to do a longer back-to-back drive with the cars in a couple of weeks. It should help me better identify how much of the above is attributable to lack of familiarity with the car and how much is genuine.  Stay tuned...

I rarely use sidescreens on the Westfield, and don't expect that behavior to change with the Caterham.  This means I need a safe, out of the way place to store them.  Unfortunately, my storage method for the Westfield's screens – fold in half, place vinyl windows face-to-face, then store in a made-to-fit bag – won't work for the new car.  Whereas the Westfield's method to secure the screen to the body when underway is a snap fastener on a small strap at the rear, the Caterham places its snap on the bottom of a foldable armrest that covers the lower door opening.  It's a better design as it firmly seals the bottom of the sidesreen at speed, but the armrest prevents the screen from folding flat for storage, and when it is folded, the armrest pushes against the vinyl window which can lead to distortion over time.

​The solution was to wall mount the screens in the garage.  I opted to mirror the car's mounting method and orientation by 3D printing receivers for the hinge pins, then attaching those to a piece of scrap plywood offset from the garage wall.  To increase visual interest, a removable 7 logo was printed to cover the screws that secure the top section to the base, which in turn is mounted to a wall stud. Click the first photo to launch an annotated slide show.