Megane 265 full fat cup

Discussion in 'Megane Projects' started by D7DPJ, Jul 7, 2021.

  1. Hello All,

    I started a thread in the newbie section but thought it was proper to have a progress thread.

    After having brand new Fords for the last 8 years (couple of ST's) I decided that ive had enough of paying a huge amount a month for something im really not using much. The decision was then to go grab a toy thats just practical enough for the baby and wife but in reality can be enjoyed on some b roads and the track.

    Quite quickly I came to the conclusion that the Megane RS was probably the car for me. A difficult purchase as ive never really been a fan of any of the french cars. However i had a clio 182 track toy a few years back and for that purpose it was perfect.

    Trolling the internet for all of a week and I came across the car I have today.

    Here is my 2012 Megane RS 265 with the addition of the cup pack including RS monitor. 70,000 miles, full Renault and Midlands Renault specialist service history. Brand new Pzero tyres, Cobra cat back and a bluefin plug in remap (still sat on the fence as whether to take this off or not) it was installed in 2014 and 50k miles ago and the car runs really well.

    8.jpg 9.jpg 11.jpg 10.jpg

    First Mods had to be the Zeropointone Extender in carbon along with the 3d printed drinks holder. A handy a nice little addition.


    Then came the short shifter, Clutch damper delete and strengthened gearbox mount bolt.

    What a pig all of these are to fit, hence why I have no fitting pics. Short shifter has made a nice difference along with the extender and also the piece of mind with the clutch hose and gearbox bolt is nice.

    Following on from this I have booked in with some friends to go to Brands Hatch on the 11th August.

    Even though the car has a full history I thought it would be good to upgrade the oils for the engine and gearbox. So had this lot delivered and sorted the same day :smile:.


    I also went ahead and test fitted the zeropointone tow extender and Sabelt tow strap for my up and coming track day. A quick blast with the dremal and it fits like a glove. Excuse the mucky car.


    Then the private plate arrived so swapped that over which i think now makes the car much younger... who would tell if this car is a 2012 or a 2020 hey.


    One thing I then noticed was that the rear sat lower than the front, had a little look and couldnt pin point anything specific apart from the original factory cup suspension could probably do with a refresh.

    So ive ordered all fresh suspension front and rear with some Grams springs on route. Also a stud conversion and some 20mm spacers all round to finish off the look. I just need to get them fitted.


    And while at it i ordered this lot :smile:

    Winmax w5 front pads, PBS ProTrack rears, full braided hose kit, Motul rf660 fluid, new caliper pins, BMC Panel filter and some genuine spark plugs to complete the full service.

    Panel filter and spark plugs (gapped to 0.6mm) have been fitted already.


    Im just waiting on some Brembo front grooved discs and some genuine rear grooved discs.

    So lots and lots of stuff to still fit, ill take pics and keep you posted on when I get round to this :smile:


  2. Grams springs arrived today. Bit disappointed in the packaging, I was expecting them to be in a proper box from Kam racing. I suppose it doesnt matter.

  3. Loving the update. Looking like good progress.

    Regarding the oil, you may want to consider using a product with the manufacturer approval RN17 RSA. You also need to use a W-40.

    Id not worry too much, but the C3 lubricant you have in your engine will increase component wear, over time.
  4. Im not concerned about the oil, this is a 5w40 so exactly whats needed. Its a track day/ fast road oil which should help prevent component wear but more importantly works better at higher temps. The new EE Performance has the Ester formula which is award winning. After all these engines do like to get hot and my typical use is weekend toy/track days so its better suited. Its not RN17 RSA Approved but that doesnt mean its not up to specs, its a warranty thing and as this car is 2012 that doesnt affect me, I think this overachieves on the standard requirements. The genuine oil from Renault (Castrol GTX) and Elf evo 900 SXR are C3.

    Same for the gearbox oil, I went with a more track day/fast road type oil to help protect against this type of driving.
    manugtt likes this.
  5. Sorry, that's my bad eyes, i thought the can was a 5W-30. I should stop using my phone to look at photos.

    How certain are you that Renault genuine oils are supplied by Castrol and Elf evolution SXR 900 is a C3?
  6. So the standard Renault branded oil is Castrol GTX then I think ELF evo is just a favourite to use. a quick google of both will show that they are G3.

    From my limited understanding the only difference between G3 and G4 is that G3 is mid SAP and G4 is low SAP. However as a lubricant G3 is actually better wearing than G4 on engine parts.

    Again lots of stuff on google to suggest the above. However from my understanding Millers oils are very good and used in lots of high powered, high end cars. Its also used in certain race series etc etc so its not crappy stuff. They just havent gone and secured the RN17 approval from Renault, and why would they.

    For every day use I would have went for the tried and tested Elf, however my 265 will be used on track etc and this oil fits the bill perfectly :smile:
    Racingblue182 likes this.
  7. Thank you for the reply.
    I'll come clean, I've worked in the industry for several years (and still do), with a number of major manufacturers, one of them being Total. I'm technically trained.

    If I can refer you to this website: ACEA Engine Oil Specifications -

    Can I also refer you to : UKLA - United Kingdom Lubricants Association

    There is good reason why the product you are using does not have Renaults approval. You may find this answer with the UKLA, you may not. I'll leave you to work this out.

    I'm not sure if you mean ACEA C3, rather than G3 and I'm also not sure what G4 is either.

  8. sorry replace all of the G for C, I mean C3 and C4 not G3 and G4.

    Probably getting to in depth for my tiny brain, however I know that all 3 oils, ELF, Castrol and Millers are all suitable for RN710 applications. Millers performs better at higher temperatures so will be perfectly fine for my application.
  9. If you would like to educate me on how this is the case, I'm keen to learn something new.
  10. I love a good healthy debate :smile:.

    The information was provided by opie oils however the tech sheet had noted that it had been tested between 260f-300f where as Elf peak is 230f.

    it also stated " • Ideal for fast road or track day use • Dyno proven by JB Racing to add power over other racing synthetics • Suitable for continuous operation at 260°F with peak temperatures up to 300°F"

    However I have noticed that Millers EE Performance also has an A3/B4 version. Not really sure of the difference between C3 and A3/B4 however found this on Lubrizol website. I know this wont be comparing these oils but atleast shows comparison between the two types. Ill likely be doing 6 month oil changes so maybe next time round I should switch to the A3/B4 version. Would be great to have your expertise to explain the difference.


    Im sure this is all overkill but its great to expand my knowledge.
  11. Oh boy! This is the kind of thread because I like the forum/club:grin::grin::grin:
    In my case, I use a 5w50 of Valvoline. As @D7DPJ say, don´t have the RN710 for Renault, but I know my car will be protect at high RPM, that is the usual.
    D7DPJ likes this.
  12. C spec oils are "Catalyst compatible oils". Explained here on page 21: Also some more information here a few pages down:

    Basically they have lower SAPS levels (Sulfated ash, phosporous and sulphur) which makes them compatible with DPFs and GPFs (particulate filters). Not needed on a Meg 3 but more than likely needed on the latest Meg 4 which has a GPF. But the key thing is both A3/B4 oils and C3 oils can meet the RN710 spec that is required for our cars, so you should be all good.
    manugtt, Lopes3d and D7DPJ like this.
  13. I see. This makes it correct when someone is selling to you.

    Let's just say, I know distributors well and there is a significant difference between manufacturer advice and distributor advice.

    Contact the technical department of a major oil company. Or alternatively, visit me at work.
  14. Discs have finally arrive so I now have everything I need, just need to get fitting.

    Managed to get the High carbon Brembo slotted Fronts discs for £140 and the Renault OE rear discs for £251 from Renault in Nottingham. A great bargain... I also love how big these things are :smile:

    Lopes3d and Mr Spoon like this.
  15. Yes it's one of the few tells for non rs fans to spot some level of poke
    D7DPJ likes this.
  16. Finally got round to fitting something. So today I tackled the rear. New oem discs, PBS pro track pads, hel braided lines, bleed using motul 660, 20mm spacers and a stud and nut conversion.






    20210721_191827.jpg 20210721_191829.jpg
    Lopes3d and Mr Spoon like this.
  17. Which standardized test shows it prevents component wear better than what oil?

    I have never heard of awards in the industry. The usual award is demanding approvals, like Mercedes-Benz approval 229.5. And there is not one ester, it is hundreds of different ester formulas existing, and alot of them does not belong in any motor oil at all. So which one is in this oil then?

    How do you know how this oil achieves compared to a RN17 oil? Do you know the values for all the requirements in the RN17 tests and how this Miller oil does in all those tests? That is usually propriatery info.

    A manufacturer approval is the only measurable, validated way to know an oils performance. Low/no approvals means that you have no idea what performance the oil in the container have on your RN17 requiring engine. And with the fine balance of 20-30 ingredients in a motor oil, the likelyness of it having poorer performance than an RN17 oil is very large. Remember, there is no good proofs.

    Many racing oils with ester have very low amount of magnesium and calcium in it, and low SAPS. It makes them low on starting total base number (TBN). An ester oil will have a high starting total acid number. That makes these racing only oils suitable for extremely short intervals. With long intervals you will se accelerated metal wear from oxidizing in your engine. ACEA C3 has lower starting TBN than A3/B4 oils.

    The RN17 is basically a ACEA A3/B4 test with additional parameters. That means A3/B4 is a lower spec than the RN17 approval.

    There is no high temperature test other than the TEOST and alike and Noack volatility test. If they are tested at different temperatures then there would be hard to compare them. All the proof that exists is with what manufacturer approvals they meet or have.

    The lubrizol comparision is a great tool, but it doesn't have all aspects you want to compare in a engine oil in that chart. That is what we have the full manufacturer approvals for. The lubrizol chart should also not compare specs from different manufacturers. ACEA specs can be compared within ACEA, and Renault specs can be compared within Renault only.

    It is interesting to see that uneducated persons thinks to know better what their engines need than the Renault engineers.
  18. Aren't you concerned about the VII content of that 5W-50 oil? Are the VIIs of a type that fits in a petrol engine or diesel engine?

    Petrol engine VIIs usually are not so shear stable, but copes with higher local temperatures without leaving deposits. A spread that is so large usually is from high amounts of VII (plastics). It is often VII-unloaded a 5W-30 oil or about that, and VII loads them up 5W-50. VIIs shear temprarily in the engine, and the shear rates differ from where in the engine the oil is. I have seen 5W-30s that is thicker in those high shear areas than the 5W-50s and even 10W-60. That means that where you need it the most the oil is thin, and nothing is gained. It exists lots of VII types, but the best ones cost most money. The approvals will tell you what types of engines they are made to suit the best.
    manugtt likes this.
  19. Svenia I fear your post will not be understood, hence my stopping in replying.

    My experience with these types of threads is the know it alls stop at nothing to prove their position but often do so with unreferenced statements and assumptions.

    It's clear as glass. Manufacturer approval every time.
  20. I don´t think that, this is a great forum to learn ones from anothers. Personally, appreciate a lot any advice or opinion. But we have to understand to many RS owners whose cars don´t know the needle under the 4000rpm. Maybe those cars need a different oil to protect the engine at those rpms. Is my opinion, and obviously can be wrong.:wink:
  21. As one seldom get an oil with all the benefits and not any drawbacks, there is ways to get better oils suited for a specific use, as long as one can live with the drawbacks. Tried and tested racing oils, one example is a 5W-40 Motul 300V, would probably do better in areas where on track, but this oil is for a very short oil changing intervals, so has drawbacks for street use, altho can be bared for a very short interval on street too. Another thing about that oil is that none other than Motul themselves know the propriatery information about how it will fit the requirements in the RN approvals. So there is hard to know if it actually is any better than the RN17 oils. Used oil analysis doesn't really help, and the tests required will cost you from 100.000 £ to 1 million. The third way would be just filling it and see when your motor blows up. It is the third way that uneducated persons usually choose. Absolutely not the smartest one. There is much to be lost by looking at advertisement claims.

    I usually choose petrol engine oil to engine without direct injection and GPF, from oils with the following approvals simultanously: Mercedes-Benz approval 229.5, BMW LL-01, Porsche A40. These three at the same time, will have the most stringent criterias to meet, which is on the market today. And I always look at the Mercedes BEVO site, to see if an oil actually has their approval, or if the oil is just faking it. Lots of fake oils around, and lots of manufacturers that list approvals or specs they doesn't actually meet. When choosing oil from a big vendor you are much more safe with both the actual approvals and that the content in the can is genuine. When I say big vendor I mean like Castrol, Mobil1, Total, and so on, and when buying from a trusted source, I mean not the usual newcommer ebay store. The first thing about identifying a counterfeit oil is the way they lists their viscosity. I saw the other day a Youtube film of someone pouring in a 5W40 labeled oil in their Megane RS. The correct SAE way to label an oil is 5W-40. Which means this youtuber doesn't have a clue the actual viscosity of the oil pouring in, or if it's actually used frying oil in the container, when it obviously isn't up to the branches standard and then can contain whatever.

    The last tool I use to choose between oils that is comparable with another is a tool for calculating theoretical high temp full shear viscosity (one step above HTHS - high temp high shear viscosity), as this HTFS can't yet be measured with the technology we have today. As this is not an completely exact and 100% verifiable tool, there is some procents marginal error. It can also show a estimate of the VII/VM (viscosity index improver/viscosity modifier) content in oils. Normally it is best with a low VII content and high HTFS/HTHS, but there is drawbacks of course too. This tool is focusing on just some parts of the whole oil, and needs to be understood with a good to very good basis knowledge about how to use the tool and what one is actually seeing in the tables.
    manugtt likes this.
  22. I think this is a great discussion and many interesting points have been raised, but some of the implied comments towards D7DPJ are a bit harsh. Let's be fair, they've done a very normal thing and gone to Opie who are very well regarded in the UK, and presumably stated they have a remapped Meg and want some quality oil, to which they've recommended Millers. The vast majority of people would not question that, particularly when Millers documents states it's a "track ready" oil that exceeds Renault and various other manufacturer standards.

    Where you guys are absolutely correct and what's quite shady is the wording used by Millers. "Recommended for X specification", which between the lines basically means they don't want to pay to get their oils officially tested and approved, and makes their claims pretty baseless. I've also think Opie seemingly pushing Millers an awful lot is a bit shady too, particularly if customers want officially approved oils when Millers do not offer such products but other manufacturers who Opie also sell for do offer this.

    In reality D7DPJ's car will be fine running on the oil purchased, but I completely agree that approved should be the way to go (unless you car is a track queen, in which case use Motul 300V and change more regularly). People get sucked up by the marketing but when you actually look in depth into these things, it's all just hot air. The datasheet for the Millers product in question is pathetically small, and combined with no official approvals this is quite the red flag in my opinion. This discussion spurred me to look into various oils and try to find the "best" based on datasheets. The 3 that stood out were Motul X-Cess Gen2, Shell Helix Ultra, and Ravenol VST. All have official Renault approval plus other stricter approvals (VW, Merc, BMW) and show very good numbers in their datasheets (probably doesn't matter but was interesting for comparison purposes).

    Btw guys it's RN710 that a Meg 3 needs, not RN17. There are no 5W-40 oils in the RN17 spec, as RN17 does not cover RS or Alpine cars. Closest new spec would be RN17RSA specifically for the Meg 4 and Alpines which run 0W-40.
    iyrix, Sveina, D7DPJ and 1 other person like this.
  23. So much learning, one thing I enjoy about car ownership and being part of a forum. Like Vulcan said ive taken the advise from Opie who ive been buying from for years. In my mind no need to question what they say, im not an expert or even close to knowing anything about oil. However the beauty of this is i can always change the oil. The car will go through regular oil changes and in 6 months ill swap it out. The advice above will help me with my next oil choice.
  24. The problem is when you leave info about oil on a forum, you are not just risking your own engine, but others might read and find it smart too. So maybe a disclaimer should be used when recommending something other than what Renault recommends. As a potential future owner of a Megane RS, I would like approved oils to have been used, and the same time not the car to be known for blowing engines. A bit harsh, I agree, everyone needs to pass the Dunning Kruger effect phase of oils too, and that is very normal. But this is the blood of the Megane, so I felt the need to intervene.

    I agree, the three oils Vulcan3 mentions stands out are of good quality. Used oil analysis labs have confirmed that brand does not matter statistically when the correct approvals and service regimes have been used - no one stands out as having high failure rate, on the whole groups of engines. Nearly all groups have some engines that do fail, but the amount that doesn't bring the statistics up into the acceptable range. To sum that up; the manufacturer engineers that specify the approvals for their engine does a good job, and there is reason to listen to them. And from that info there is reason to get the cheapest RN0710 approved genuine oil, as the UOA wouldn't be any better with the pricey one compared to the cheap one. As long as it is correct genuine approved oil for the engine.

    RN0710 yes, older and less demanding approval also, but with a higher HTHS target than RN17 and full-SAPS. RN17 and RN17+ is for GPF/DPF engines with medium demand on HTHS. I should have caught that for the Megane RS, as I have been doing some work on the Renault specs earlier, but some time ago, so I didn't.

    RN17 with a medium HTHS requirement often have only xW-30 oils, where the xW-40 oils tend to have too high of a HTHS, and would need lots of VII to temporarily shear get into the medium HTHS range. The kinematic viscosity (KV) that is labeled on the bottles in groups (5W, -40) are often not the target for the approvals, but HTHS is. A 5W-30 3,5 cP HTHS oil usually have less VII and higher quality base stock than a 5W-40 3,5 cP HTHS oil. That means the 5W-30 can do a better job potentially, in this example.

    The Millers oil with no approvals, as you say, that leads me to think a theory about that. Many small oil companies buy complete add packs for their oils, and follow a pre-made recipe from another oil company, usually to meet a certain spec. When blended within this recipe, you don't have to use money at developing it yourself, and that means you don't have to do all the different tests to see if your blend will pass it. That is economic. But then you might not be able to get the correct approvals without the test results. That is when they say it meets specs/approvals, but doesn't actually have them. Usually these oils will have an ACEA approval. There you can self-certify if you know the blend does meet the performance criterias. When there is no ACEA approval, then there must be either the blend does actually not comply with the ACEA approvals, is an outdated ACEA approval (oil ones can't be used on "new" oils), or they really have done too little testing on the oil at all so they don't know the performance results in the different tests needed. The last opportunity is that the oil is really racing inspired, so a lot of the long-term tests in approvals is not met, to suit racing better. But then again, there is no proof of how good it is for us outside of Millers.

    As you say, the PDSes doesn't really mean much, as they show some statistic about the oil that is not all useful, and as the oil have 20-25 different jobs in an engine, it shows little about that, just glimps, which with statistics can be looked at at 100 different ways. It is nearly impossible to predict the oils performance from the PDS, but the approvals do tell really all there is needed to know for 99% of people. There is ways to "tune" a PDS, but with a lousy oil in reality. The oil blend has to be looked at as a whole.
  25. Just to be clear, I believe the ee performance oil is ACEA approved. I know next to nothing about oil but I dont think we can say if this oil is not a good or suitable choice, can we?

    From what I understand Millers is quite a decent sized reputable oil company, that has a fairly long history i think. I know they are involved in a lot of motor spots and their other lubricants such as the racing brake fluid normally comes highly recommended also.

    Im happy with my engine oil choice, 6 months down the line I might change to something different.
  26. It is quite easy so say that the Millers EE performance (C3?) oil is unsuitable for the Megane RS.

    And it is quite easy to see that the label doesn't comply to the SAE regulation of how to write on the viscosity on the container. When they don't know how to write that, who knows what "rules" they follow with the content inside of the jug. I wouldn't have put this oil in my lawn mover. Red flags everywhere.
  27. Anyway I think it's been lightly touched on.

    Distributor= selling you what they have access to and is on the shelf.
    Manufacturer= selling you only what they manufacture.
    Automotive manufacturer = selling you want they have bought to spec at usually the lowest bidder who can meet said spec.

    Result - buy the correct viscosity with the correct approval and be done.

    Not all the information in this thread is accurate.
  28. I promise I'll have more general updates shortly. Then we can stop talking about oil :tearsofjoy:
    manugtt and Vulcan3 like this.
  29. So Latest update, Last time I updated I had fitted the new rear discs, PBS pads, rear braided hoses, stud and nut conversion and fitted 20mm spacers.

    A couple of days later I decided to tackle the fronts, sorry no pics of before or the parts but essentially I had a new set of Brembo front grooved discs, Winmax W5 Pads, front braided Hel hoses, stud and nut conversion and 20mm spacers.

    Let me tell you, what a mission. Wowzers those brembo pins are tough to get out. i wouldn't be surprised if they had been on there since factory. I tried the first pin in the normal way and gave it a good few whacks, would it budge... nope, did the pin bow a bit... yep... grrrr. So I thought about all the ways i could get this out, keep whacking it etc etc and then I just thought this really is a job for the dremmel. So about a min later, both pins were nicely cut and hit out with a centre punch. Easy :smile:.

    Then came the braided hoses, I had soaked the hardline with WD40 the night before so was hoping they would place nicely. Unfortunately it didn't and the union completely snapped..... NIGHTMARE!


    So i crimped the end to prevent any fluid loss and started on the other side. Went straight for the cut on the pins, didnt even attempt to hit them out. luckily this went nice and smoothly and new discs and pads fitted all round with no probs. Now to try the braided hoses on this side. So a little bit of luck and the union came lose, however half way through undoing it i think it got stuck and im almost certain it twisted the copper pipe inside. However new braided hose fitted but im not sure im happy with potentially twisting the hardline.

    So all is fitted minus a braided hose on the passenger side which needs sorting. Cars looks nice with the wheels slightly wider, might remove for track days but will see how I get on at Brands to see what the difference is. Also mud flaps have also gone, just wasnt a fan.


    Over the next few days ive been pondering over if I buy the kit and repair the hose, try and buy a new hose (not possible only used available), take the old hose off and with the kit build a new one. Or let it be someones elses nightmare.... guess which one I went with :tearsofjoy:.

    A good friend of mine has a trailer for his track car so he was able to pick me up and drop me at the garage. Ive asked the garage to completely re do both front lines and then bleed the full system and clutch using the Motul 660 ive supplied. Car should be back with me end of the week and ready to bed in the new brakes.

    Im just now rather jealous of my mates track car and think that both the BMW and the Megane look fantastic together.....:blush:.


    Attached Files:

    • 20.jpg
      File size:
      1.7 MB
  30. Lovely car and looking forward to watching the progress!

    Hoping the car is back soon too.
    D7DPJ likes this.
  31. Yeah the brake lines on these things have a habit of snapping like that. Once you get that sorted and new lines installed at least you won't ever have to touch them again!
    D7DPJ likes this.
  32. I've got a spinning union on the rear of one of mine. Its holding fine for now, but needs changing when I get the rear braided hoses put on.
  33. Cars back wooo :blush:.

    In the end its had a repaired line rather than full replacement. Apparently its so tight that they would have had to move engine or take it out a bit to get to the pipes. Not sure how much of that is true but for now it's repaired and back. Tbh I needed it back as tomorrow its at BiB performance to have the suspension refreshed and tracking done.

    Drive was interesting. As its not been driven since fitting the brakes they needed bedding in. I got some very strange looks and the smell of hot brakes was... smelly. :tearsofjoy:. They seem great though, looking forward to have a couple of nice drives out before my track day next week.

    Anyway couple of quick snaps of it today. It's wider stance does look better. Can't wait to see it with the new suspension and lowered.

    20210804_180249.jpg 20210804_180258.jpg 20210804_180318.jpg 20210804_180325.jpg

    And it's now also packed up for its trip to another garage in the morning :tearsofjoy:. Think the car has spent equal time with me and at a garage :tearsofjoy:

    iyrix, manugtt and Mr Spoon like this.
  34. Update, I have a new car... seriously I've just got the megane back and it did not drive like this before. Now I REALLY understand what people say about this u believable car. Wow.

    So the car was dropped off at BiB performance yesterday. What I didn't realise is that this is a fairly new business. BiB came highly recommended and I can see why. Such a perfectionist.

    Anyway the job was to fit new cup suspension with some grams springs. Then to check the front alignment.

    To say this was an difficult job was an understatement. So glad I hadn't tackled it on the drive.

    Started on the front:

    First issue on drivers side, siezed drop link so as its a cheap part cut and replace.




    Then quite quickly became issue number 2, siezed shock absorber bolt. Siezed is probably and understatement. Well and truly had become one with the strut.

    Tried some heat...erm nope that's not going to get it.


    Only option was to cut and drill and drill and drill and drill:tearsofjoy:






    And finally


    Finally assembled and back in.




    Now for passenger side...Next issue. Drive dhaft completely stuck in the hub. Decided best option was to take out from gearbox side rather than risk damaging anything.



    Now that shock bolt, this was was looking like a repeat of the others idea but slowly and carefully it finally came out.



    All assembled and back in it went


    Rears however a total different story, off and on in no time :blush:



    Suspension finally sorted, gearbox fluid topped back up and ready to go.

    One thing that we noticed was that the spacers previously fitted actually didn't sit flush. The hub was fouling on the inside of the spacer lip and was between 1-2mm from sitting flush. So unfortunately they have been taken off.

    Tracking up next and a good thing to, passenger toeing in and driver toeing out too much. All set and done.



    And the BiB performance signature shot :blush:


    Shake down drive was fantastic, completely transformed and confidence inspiring. Not what it was like previously. Got it home and a couple of final shots. Much better and ready for brands hatch on wednesday:blush:


    BillyA, manugtt, Poppaboost and 2 others like this.
  35. Small update. Ive had my first track day at Brands Hatch, what a fantastic day.

    After getting in a tuition session at 9:30 it set me up for the day. The car performed amazingly and even at Brands which felt quite big time it did well. A couple of tiny things to investigate on the car which ill probably post some bits up within the forum but nothing to bad.

    One let down, the Pzeros. Well I say let down, for road times in a 35 profile they did amazingly well. However they were the weakness as on a hot day like yesterday (26-30 degrees) those tyres went off very quickly. I had a good play with pressures and had the fronts down to around 33 psi and rears at 30 hot. the rears i did have lower but as the fronts got very hot and less grip it was actually better to increase the rears to help the back swing around more. could been totally the wrong thing to do but it was great fun playing around.

    Not that my times are going to be any good but i did use track addict stored in the glove box just to record progress throughout the day. My best was a 1.00.553 which for a fairly standard car, with a total novice and road tyres i was pretty chuffed. Put it this way with those tyres I could not have done anymore.

    The brakes were amazing, zero fading and slowed the car very well.

    My only gripe of the day were the Caterhams/track boys. As you do I was making sure that for the cars that I knew ill be slowing up id make sure they could pass but those guys dont give a crap. Cutting people up mid corners etc, actually almost took a white one out making my turn into Graham Hills bend. He was a bit behind me and was not in a position to overtake on that very small straight after Druids. So I took my corner like i should be is a real quick turn from the right to the left to hit the apex and bam he was coming around the inside. Zero F's given.... Organisers werent hot enough on that which was annoying, a decent straight followed were i would have let off for him to pass. Was pointless and he almost had a Renault badge plunged into his face.

    But a small gripe but not a downer on a fantastic day, these cars are epic and took a right old beating :grinning:

    23.jpg 22.jpg 21.jpg
    Poppaboost and manugtt like this.
  36. Glad it went well. One of the challenges I found with track days in cars, is the point and squirt brigade and every car is my next race scenario. Braking too close to the back of the car in front, diving up the inside like a race car would and general disregard for others. The megane is alot more capable than most think and as you have found out. Even those "faster" drivers would have a shock if you were a seasoned megane track driver at Brands.

    Still it won't teach them
    Poppaboost likes this.
  37. Track pics are in

    IMG_20210813_174534_345.jpg IMG_20210813_174534_381.jpg IMG_20210813_174534_442.jpg IMG_20210813_174534_461.jpg IMG_20210813_174534_488.jpg IMG_20210813_174534_514.jpg IMG_20210813_174534_544.jpg IMG_20210813_174534_601.jpg IMG_20210813_174534_670.jpg
  38. Awesome pictures mate. The Meg always looks right at home on a track
    D7DPJ likes this.
  39. teeny tiny update, a couple of small bits i wanted to replace.

    Firstly no pics but ive swapped out the boost pressure control valve, on track I had a check injection warning but no performance issues. Code cleared and hasnt come back so its a potential sign of either a boost leak which I cant find, recirc valve maybe on its way out or the boost pressure control valve. its a cheap enough part so ive just replaced that, will likely replace the recirc valve as well. Im just deciding on whether i replace with aftermarket for a bigger wooosh or go with a blanking plate and hear a bit more chatter...

    Anyway the other was the drivers door making that horrible sound when opening, a common fault so ive replace the check door strap. A nice quick 20 mins job and great thing is as the speakers have been replaced i didnt have to pull back to white bit, just remove the speaker gave me the access i needed.

    24.jpg 25.jpg 26.jpg
    manugtt likes this.
  40. Oh man! I have in mind to replace the speakers, OEM ones are horrible when bass are strong. In fact, I bought a fistful of clips, for sure I´ll broke some removing the panels!
    Awesome pics on track by the way, glad you had fun!
    D7DPJ likes this.

  • Share This Page