Page 7 of 8

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2025 6:15 pm
by mr edd
Hi Jason .All good here . Yourself?.. with regards tre702x it is currently sorned/historic and in one piece on my drive.cant for the life of me remember how to upload pics so put one on the Facebook page.

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2025 11:47 pm
by drjim
I'm lurking too.

Amazing how much the very few E21's for sale are costing nowadays. I bought my first UK one for £375 and I think GWR135Y blue one cost me a grand. That buys you some spares now it seems.

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Thu Jan 23, 2025 8:44 am
by Reck
Saw the picture on the Facebook group - thanks Paul. Glad to know it's still around. Any plans for it?

Jim - agreed. Price of parts now is staggering, let alone the cars. No wonder so many are being broken when you can charge £250 for a rear light lens. I think I paid £900 for the car in this thread which was back in 2011 (!).

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Fri Jan 24, 2025 12:28 pm
by Reck
New steering wheel going in. Not period I suppose, but I like it. :driving

Image

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2025 8:54 pm
by uwbuurman
Cool wheel!!

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2025 11:53 am
by Reck
Test fit of the 15x8 Rota OS Mesh Alloys (bought ten years ago :lol: - see page 5 of this thread)

I think it looks a bit strange honestly - I think I need to go a bit lower, but I need to be careful of fouling the front wings/bumperfront spoiler. Might even need to roll the arches too. What do you think? Does it look okay as is or should I go lower?

Image
Image
Image

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Fri Feb 07, 2025 11:56 am
by Reck
P.S. You can see the previous owner already trimmed the front wings and front spoiler to fit bigger wheels... I'll be replacing the front wings and BBS spoiler to fix that.

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Mon Feb 10, 2025 12:23 pm
by Jeroen
Rear will probably be ok, but the front is too wide if you ask me, defo need more room there.

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 2:36 pm
by Reck
Jeroen wrote: Mon Feb 10, 2025 12:23 pm Rear will probably be ok, but the front is too wide if you ask me, defo need more room there.
Thanks Jeroen. So you think, even if I keep the current ride height, I should still flare the front wings to be safe?

Also, I could do with some help understanding the ET values - I believe the rear alloys are ET0, and the front alloys are ET20 (fitted with 8MM hubcentric spacer). Does anyone know if this is correct setup for an E21?

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 3:48 pm
by Jeroen
Reck wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2025 2:36 pm Thanks Jeroen. So you think, even if I keep the current ride height, I should still flare the front wings to be safe?
Eh well you mentioned plans to lower the suspension. In the current -or any- situation it very much depends on how stiff the suspension is, how much suspension travel you will have when hitting a bump, especially when the wheels are not straight (making a turn on a speed bump for example).
Reck wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2025 2:36 pm Also, I could do with some help understanding the ET values - I believe the rear alloys are ET0, and the front alloys are ET20 (fitted with 8MM hubcentric spacer). Does anyone know if this is correct setup for an E21?
The lower the ET is, the more the wheel is offset to the outside, measured from the center. As the ET for the front wheels is too high, you need these spacers to clear either the brake calipers or the control arms. But since you use a wheel that is wider than usual, you end up outside the car.

In the current situation the track width at the front is significantly greater than at the rear and this should be the other way round, which may have quite a negative impact on handling. Did you ever try the rear ET0 wheels at the front? Just out of curiosity!

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 4:27 pm
by Reck
Thank you as always, I appreciate your help!
Jeroen wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2025 3:48 pm
Reck wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2025 2:36 pm Thanks Jeroen. So you think, even if I keep the current ride height, I should still flare the front wings to be safe?
Eh well you mentioned plans to lower the suspension. In the current -or any- situation it very much depends on how stiff the suspension is, how much suspension travel you will have when hitting a bump, especially when the wheels are not straight (making a turn on a speed bump for example).
Yes, I suppose it's quite a difficult question to answer since there are so many variables as you state. Maybe I just need to proceed with utmost caution (or forget the idea of non-spec rims altogether!).
Jeroen wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2025 3:48 pm
Reck wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2025 2:36 pm Also, I could do with some help understanding the ET values - I believe the rear alloys are ET0, and the front alloys are ET20 (fitted with 8MM hubcentric spacer). Does anyone know if this is correct setup for an E21?
The lower the ET is, the more the wheel is offset to the outside, measured from the center. As the ET for the front wheels is too high, you need these spacers to clear either the brake calipers or the control arms. But since you use a wheel that is wider than usual, you end up outside the car.
Understood. What are the default ET values for an E21 on factory wheels?
Jeroen wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2025 3:48 pm In the current situation the track width at the front is significantly greater than at the rear and this should be the other way round, which may have quite a negative impact on handling. Did you ever try the rear ET0 wheels at the front? Just out of curiosity!
I haven't actually, but maybe I should. So perhaps try the ET20 in the rear (with no spacers), and the ET0 on the front with spacers (if yes, what size)?

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2025 4:54 pm
by Reck
Also, I don't wish to question your wisdom, but under the current setup - is the front wider than the rear?? I thought it would be the following;

Front: ET20 wheels + 8mm spacers = ET12 effective offset
Rear: ET0 wheels (no spacers) = ET0 effective offset

Since lower ET means the wheels sit further out, the rear track is currently wider than the front by 12mm per side (24mm overall).

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2025 1:31 pm
by Jeroen
Don't have time for calculations with the original track with from the flages atm, but just looking at the front wheels now being much more outside the car than the rears give me the impression that the track width at the front increased more than at the rear.

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2025 4:51 pm
by Reck
Disassembly has started for repainting. Found quite a bit of rot but it will all be welded before painting.

Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

Re: Hennarot 316 - 1983 - M10 1.8 Twin 40

Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2025 10:17 pm
by Jeroen
Mostly hidden spots so you'll only find them once you start disassembling. But trunk floor didn't come as a surprise I reckon.