GoPro? Go Overboard More Like

I've been looking at GoPro mounts as I'm getting one for Christmas. A guy in the SKCC makes superb videos & extolls the virtue of alternate camera angles. This is great if you're Top Gear & have a dozen cameras to festoon a car with, I will just have the one, but I thought I might make the most of what I have with some mounts to put the camera in places you might not expect.

To this end I started sketching & through a few iterations & experiments came up with  a mount on the back of the passenger headrest (not that unusual a view), one in the radiator intake & I wanted one low down at the side of the car. After grubbing about in the garage I came up with this.

What it is, is the bottom section of one leg of a tripod, with the screw & foot removed & replaced by a 1/4 Whitworth bolt, which is shortened & has a GoPro tripod mount fitted.

 There are also a couple of brackets made from aluminium off-cuts pop-riveted on (riveted in two planes - the brackets wrap round). just to ensure I retain ownership of the GoPro, the tripod mount is wired to the leg which means that neither the push-in end can fall out, nor the tripod mount can unscrew.

This item can be attached to the car by two existing bolts holding the rear of the driver's side pod on. I did think of fitting it to the passenger side, to get dramatic footage of exhaust & undergrowth rushing past, but thought better of it when I realised just how close the undergrowth would be.


So here it is installed. All I need now is a camera to put in the case. Roll on January.

The GoPro & The Yogurt Pot

With the “graceful degradation” of the BlattCam, I’d been considering my options & had kind of decided on a GoPro as a combined Christmas & birthday present but as ever with me, there were complications. The current GoPro Hero3 is all fine & dandy, but uses the micro SD cards. Nothing wrong with that as such, but they are fiddly to change & easy to lose. The previous generation GoPro Hero 2 uses the postage-stamp sized cards which I already had a number of.

My conundrum was decided when a barely used Hero2 appeared for sale with the WiFi remote in nearby Weybridge. I put in an offer, the owner accepted it, he saved on PayPal fees, I saved on price.

The GoPro is undoubtedly an excellent piece of kit, but there’s one or two aspects that don’t work terribly well when used on a road trip. The principle one being the need to get a power wire & mic line into the waterproof case, which naturally renders it – not waterproof at all.

The “proof” bit of waterproof wasn’t too important, if the car gets submerged, having footage of the event won’t be my principle concern, but I was bothered that rain would enter through the holes drilled for wires & accumulate in the case. Which would prove expensive. I’d seen instructions on the interweb for modifying a USB lead such that it fitted within the case, the wires themselves could then come out via a hole in the removable door. Swapping to an alternative door would make the case watertight again.
Excellent! I tried it, it didn't work.

The only alternative was a large hole in the side of the case, but all was not lost, as a second-hand case with a scratched lens came up on Ebay, which I bought for £not-much-at-all. I could cut this one about & keep the watertight one for scuba diving off the Maldives (one can but hope).

I was still concerned that rain would enter the case though & looked at various ways of making a shield, including gluing a 35mm film pot to the side. After a few options were dismissed, I hit upon the following.

This is a yogurt pot. Being the preferred variety of my elder daughter, it is of course the expensive type. You can tell by the sturdy nature of the pot. No cheap polystyrene & foil lid here.

 

This is the part I cut out of the pot, compared to an unmolested pot.........

 

 

 

 

......... and this is what it looks like selotaped to the case. When I drill the case for the wiring, I’ll attach the shield with double sided foam “servo tape”, which should be strong enough to keep it attached at Oh – 70mph, & seal well enough that any rain gets carried past the opening in the side.

The only down-side I can see at the moment is that the "skins" available for the GoPro will no longer fit - though I may have a plan for that to

News

Little's been happening in Furyville. I went out on an SKCC blatt last weekend, there were two planned, the weather looked better for the Saturday one, so I picked that.

WRONG!

It was drizzling as I stepped out of the house, but the forecast had been for dryness, so it must just be the last of a shower passing over yes?

WRONG!

I'd looked at the route the night before & it began at one of our regular haunts, then came towards Guildford, so I elected to give the neighbours a lie in & meet the route in Shalford. Except that I woke early so I set off. I got as far as Dunsfold parked up & sent a text to say I'd meet the others there. Then the drizzle started again, so I sent another text to say I'd amble along the route to keep the wet at bay. Just before I got to Bramley my phone beeped, "ah" I thought "confirmation". I pulled over & read the message, it said "I think you may have the wrong No." I'd sent the messages to "GB", I should've sent it to "GB SKCC".

WRONG!

Sorry 'bout that GB.
Shortly after that, the other two of today's runners passed the layby I was laying-by, so off we went. After a few miles our leader's SatNav went a little odd, so I took the lead - generally when I'm leading something goes awry, usually I go off piste & end up at the back again, today it was a rainstorm, a real, proper hurling it down type rainstorm. After a while I pulled into a petrol station to take cover under the canopy. Only here did I think to remove the rear facing camera - then I put the roof up anyway.

The rest of our jaunt was conducted with tops erect (unusually all the cars on this run were equipped with screens & hoods) & by & by we arrived at "the chalet", where we breakfasted & bantered.

On arriving home I mopped a decent amount of water out of the car & took the roof & all the blatt gadgets into the house to dry. The rear camera had not fared well.

Water ran out of it.

I believe that expert opinion suggests that this is "not a good thing" for a camera.

I took the covers off each end & laid it to rest on a radiator. A couple of days later it was still not responding to prodding. It was only £14, so not a huge blow & now I have my GoPro (or will have come Christmas) so the failing BlattCam would be called to rear-facing duty.

BUT, now almost a week after it's dunking, the rear camera has come back to life - hurrah!

Next outing is the rememberance day run, so fingers are crosser for better weather for that.

Jumper

So, all the LED bulbs are in, the electronic flasher unit is in, the wiring for the near-side front indicator has been swapped +ve to -ve so the LED bulb works, & the large LED bulbs in the front indicators have been swapped for small ones so the Lucas 488 "flat" lenses fit AND - it all works.

Why have I done all this? What's the deep engineering-based reasoning behind the change? Well, there's nothing to do at work, so I've been spending far too much time on E-bay.

Time to put the dash back

I'd split the wiring loom on the dash so I can plug all the plugs in in the same place, previously the speedo & tacho had to be plugged in separately once the dash was in. My plan was flawed though because the dash won't physically fit unless the speedo's withdrawn, it's better than it was though.

One last thing I wanted to do:- the speedo had been reading about 15% over since my last attempt (guess) at calibrating it, not usually a problem because the Satnav's always on & that has a speed readout. But if I'm carrying a speedo about with me it ought to work, so I made up a "jumper" cable which plugged into the speedo connector & the speedo and I persuaded Mrs Blatter (at best a reluctant traveller in the Fury) to passenge while I drove along the A3 at 70 as shown on the SatNav, she then held the speedo in her hand & adjusted it to read 70.

Job done.

Back home, the jumper cable was removed & stored for next time & the speedo re-mounted in it's rightful place in the dash.

All ready for a blatt then yes? Well - no, rain has stopped play this weekend I'm afraid.

Living Day Lights

Yes, after a week of popping out to the garage a bit, the Daytime Running Lights are fully functional, as are the spot lights. I've done some other jobs too & I only set fire to the car once!

The fire incident occurred after I sensibly looked at the connection diagram printed on the relay, then wired it up wrong, filled the garage with acrid smoke & set myself back 20 mins while I replaced the burnt out wire.

So, here they are, with ignition on, & with ignition & main beam on - powering up the side lights automatically turns off the DRLs. The DRLs look brighter than that in real life, so hopefully I'll be hitting the hooter less in future.

Other jobs I've done while the car's laid up:-

I've removed the speakers, I took out the stereo some time back, but now the speakers & their panels (1,287 grams) have been replaced by plain panels made from the finest leatherette encapsulated waffier-theen fibreglass (166 grams).

I've ordered an LED indicator relay & a set of four LED bulbs, the relay is also a little lighter, but the bulbs are almost certainly heavier, the idea is to get the flash-rate left & right to be the same & hopefully re-fit the much nicer "flat" Lucas lenses.

Also on the shopping list is a pair of LED sidelight bulbs. One of the sidelights was noticeably brighter than the other & when driving at night, the 40a alternator struggles a bit with the side, main & spot lamps on as well as the windscreen heater, so that's 10w it won't have to provide. As LEDs get more powerful & less expensive, I may swap the spot-light bulbs too, losing another 110w off the total.

One job I've been unable to complete because of the non-arrival of an 8-way connector is separating the speedo & tacho plugs from the main loom. Pulling those two (particularly the speedo one) usually results in pain, but a connector nearer the centre of the car should mean I can take the dash out with the loom still attached to the clocks.

Light Fitting

I've fitted the lights, what a faff! Holding the brackets in the radiator intake, while fitting a bolt in the wheel arch would confound an octopus, but I got there in the end. I used my new digital angle finder to set up the spot lights so they light up more than just the tarmac 5ft ahead of the car. The DRLs are visible just below them, but they don't distract.

So yesterday I confirmed the spare slot in the fuse box was live-with-ignition & took out the dash. It is I have to admit a bit of a bird's nest behind there, but I found the appropriate wires, capped & stowed from when they used to run the amplifier. I'd bought the relay, but the there was inevitably a problem. The relay has a "tag" for attaching it to structure, but the rest of the relays have a tag on the relay BASE, & are fitted to a rail so they can be changed / tested easily (sigh). So I ordered a base with a tag, probably no more than 10p worth, but £3.50 delivered, & I'll fit it properly in line with the others. The last thing to do is run a wire through the car to the front & fit the waterproof connector that will supply the spots & the DRLs.

Not a moment too soon either - I took the car out - just to the post office - yesterday & got pulled out in front of AGAIN.

Fuelling Debate

There's been a kerfuffle about the imminent introduction of E10 fuel (10% ethanol) to the UK. There have been the usual "THIS EU DIRECTIVE WILL KILL YOUR CAR" horror stories, but an SKCC member found a report on the consequences online, so I read it. It's conclusion is that you can't use E10 in several million vehicles in the UK, but as usual that's not the full story - particularly where kit cars are concerned. Here's what I think, read & decide for yourself, but first a link to the report.

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/qinetiq-10-02471-assessing-fuel-system-compatability-with-bio-ethanol-and-risk-of-carburettor-icing/bioethanolstudyreport.pdf

Right - I've read the report end to end - yes, still not much going on at work.
 
The first thing to note is this:-
"The study was funded by Olleco, a business which collects and refines waste cooking oil to be used as biodiesel in vehicles, which Mr Bailey found was a better option to be mixed with fuel than ethanol."

Not an un-biased view then.

Secondly, no practical experimentation was done under this report, all it does is report the findings of other reports & note comments found on internet forums.

There are several important areas it comments on:-

Fuel filter blockage caused by the ethanol dissolving fuel tank sealants & fuel hoses.
It says there is a small amount of evidence this happens, BUT the use of E5 & detergents already in petrol mean the chances are that if it was going to be a problem it would've happened by now.

The only repeat problems identified were with cars with sealant in fuel tank seams, in-tank hoses made from incompatible material & one make of camper where the filler hose was eaten by the ethanol in six months.

Our cars generally have welded tanks, so no sealant, have the outlet at the bottom, so no in-tank hoses, the filler hoses we’ll have to keep an eye on.

Galvanic corrosion (dissimilar metal corrosion) caused by the ethanol being a conductor & having water dissolved in it.

One of the few bits of actual science in the report says that Amal (they make carbs in the UK) has done soak tests & found that after a while a white powder collected in the float chamber & the brass jets showed signs of corrosion, they have changed materials to cure the problem. On aluminium it notes a number of reports, some say aluminium is fine, others say it’s not. Those that say it’s not, seem to regard tarnishing / discolouration as being unacceptable because it shows the Ethanol has “an effect” – significantly one report on fuel storage tanks states that aluminium is OK if it’s anodised, ethanol contains a lot of oxygen, tarnishing of aluminium is the oxidation of the surface – which when it’s done deliberately is known as …… anodising. There’s little actual info about brass, but it looks like it’s the zinc content rather than the copper that’s the issue & zinc is right at one end of the dissimilar metal table, just above magnesium, so that seems likely. GRP fuel tanks seem to be a particular problem, but they only seem to be used on boats.

On my car I have copper fuel lines, so I assume these won’t be a problem. When I built the car I earthed the fuel lines to prevent static build up, so that may help to reduce the electrical potential & therefore any galvanic corrosion, but I’m guessing there. I also have an aluminium fuel tank, but aluminium corrodes to a white powder, so I can look for that in the pre-pump filter, if you’ve not got one, now could be a good time to fit one.

Enleanment
Here the report states that as Ethanol contains about 35% oxygen, the air/fuel mixture will be wrong on carb engines, with EFi, it’s only when running open loop that there is an issue & the issue is that the exhaust temp could rise by up to 30deg C, which it sees as a problem only for the longevity of the cat, which I haven’t got.

So at worst it’s a rolling road session for a re-jet or a re-map. If you have carbs, get jets made of the more recent materials, though it’s worth noting that if the jets corrode, the holes get bigger, richening the mixture.

Drivability
It says there is the potential for carburettor icing because the ethanol vapourises faster, lowering the inlet temperature more. It reports that internet forums dealing with running light aircraft on mogas (car petrol) suggest there’s a problem with carb icing. It goes on to say that in Canada they adjust the mix of petrol depending on the season to prevent carb icing, in the winter they add – ethanol.

So, inconclusive.

Deposit formation
The report says increased levels of inlet system and combustion chamber deposits have been reported with the use of E5 and E10 blends compared to E0. It goes on to say that those reports come from areas where they don’t add detergent so it’s unlikely to be a problem here.

So this shouldn’t be a problem either.

My conclusion is that the only real issue for my car is the flexible hoses. However, the major manufacturers all said that their cars made this century should be OK, all the fuel hose on my car was bought this century, so should be OK unless it was old stock when I bought it. But I had a similar problem with this when I built the car with some hoses not being compatible with unleaded. The first sign was a smell of petrol in the garage as the hoses soften & allow fuel to seep through, so I’ll be watching (sniffing) out for that.

Having said all this & concluded that the evidence is sparse, contradictory & apart from one or two instances (like the camper vans) not really serious, it goes on to say:-
“Vehicles ten years old or older, carburettored vehicles (including powered two wheelers) and first generation direct injection spark ignition vehicles should not be fuelled on E10 unless the manufacturer can state the vehicles are compatible with E10.” Which I guess is a legal disclaimer.