RE: Lotus: we're keeping going

[Tuna]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Otherwise it's a question of balance. Porsche have been moving their 911 rear-engine further and further forwards while Lotus have been moving their mid-engine further backwards. They can't both be right.

Porsche believe in electronic aids, Lotus on the whole don't. If there was one true way of producing the perfect car, Ford would be doing it and everyone else would be out of business. Luckily, there isn't.

[Tuna]

j123 said:

again positively no rear visibility-- not good enough---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2013_Lotus_Espri...

And this is dramatically better?



I believe sir might prefer something like this:

[Dave Hedgehog]

j123 said:

again positively no rear visibility-- not good enough---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2013_Lotus_Espri...

didnt affect countach sales or desirability

just drive faster than everyone else, no issues

[j123]

Take a look at in car video as just look at the rear visibility for yourselves. It is much much better than anything from lotus. Its actually pretty good in general.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IANkl7ohqnw

Tuna said:

And this is dramatically better?



I believe sir might prefer something like this:

Ask anyone who has been inside one and they will tell you the visibility is dramatically better. And dramatically lighter and safer in a crash and can be the basis of a whole line of cars to come. Mclaren are in a much better place than Lotus. j

Edited by j123 on Monday 20th February 21:49

[Tuna]

j123 said:

Ask anyone who has been inside one and they will tell you the visibility is dramatically better. And dramatically lighter and safer in a crash and can be the basis of a whole line of cars to come. Mclaren are in a much better place than Lotus. j

I really do think you're trolling.

The Mclaren, as a two seater, is slightly heavier than the Evora. In fact, the GTE which is more comparable, is about 100kg lighter than the Mclaren.

Evora GTE: 1276 kg (wet, full tank of fuel)
Mclaren : 1301 kg (dry)

The Evora chassis is part of the Lotus VVA programme - and is (not can be, actually is) the basis of the forthcoming Esprit, Elan, Elite and Eterne. It's designed from the outset to allow development of everything from an MPV to both front and rear engined sports cars.

It has also demonstrated pretty impressive results in crash testing. Unlike the Mclaren, the front and rear subframes are removable. In testing they were so effective that they could re-test the same car by replacing the relevant subframe. Do that in a Mclaren and you'll have written off the whole car.

Edited by Tuna on Monday 20th February 22:32

[j123]

Your comparing the weight of a v6 evora with a manual to the Maclaren with bigger wheels, tires, brakes, a bigger engine, twin turbo's, and a heavy dual clutch transmission.. "If a evora had that it would weigh well over 1500kg's. And conversely if the Mclaren had the spec of the Lotus it would weigh around 1200kg's."

And you ask any engineer which they would rather have a crash in a modern carbon tub or an al one and 10/10 it will be a well designed carbon tub. Its not even close. That is why most big makers BMW, MB, LAmbo, Mclaren will be going mainstream with this technology.

Tuna you don't understand the conceptual very well. Lets leave it alone. You believe Lotus' and their aluminum chassis will be enough to carry them forward towards a successful future and I and many others feel they are behind the times- like Aston- for all the reasons I have given in this thread with a particular emphasis on lack of high technology. Lets simply let the next few years take their course and we can talk again.

Tuna said:

I really do think you're trolling.

The Mclaren, as a two seater, is slightly heavier than the Evora. In fact, the GTE which is more comparable, is about 100kg lighter than the Mclaren.

Evora GTE: 1276 kg (wet, full tank of fuel)
Mclaren : 1301 kg (dry)

The Evora chassis is part of the Lotus VVA programme - and is (not can be, actually is) the basis of the forthcoming Esprit, Elan, Elite and Eterne. It's designed from the outset to allow development of everything from an MPV to both front and rear engined sports cars.

It has also demonstrated pretty impressive results in crash testing. Unlike the Mclaren, the front and rear subframes are removable. In testing they were so effective that they could re-test the same car by replacing the relevant subframe. Do that in a Mclaren and you'll have written off the whole car.

Edited by Tuna on Monday 20th February 22:32

[Scuffers]

Tuna said:

It has also demonstrated pretty impressive results in crash testing. Unlike the Mclaren, the front and rear subframes are removable. In testing they were so effective that they could re-test the same car by replacing the relevant subframe. Do that in a Mclaren and you'll have written off the whole car.

you might just want to re-think that.

front and back of the mclaren bolt on too, (and the CF tub is some 75Kg's)

[Tuna]

Scuffers said:

you might just want to re-think that.

front and back of the mclaren bolt on too, (and the CF tub is some 75Kg's)

My mistake, I was under the impression that the Mclaren was a single moulding. That makes a lot more sense.

So we have:

Mclaren tub: 75kg - no idea what the front and rear modules weigh.
Evora tub: 116 kg + Front module 29 kg Rear module 58 kg

The Evora looses 41 kg to the Mclaren. Not quite the disaster that some would have it being.

[zebedee]

Tuna said:

Scuffers said:

you might just want to re-think that.

front and back of the mclaren bolt on too, (and the CF tub is some 75Kg's)

My mistake, I was under the impression that the Mclaren was a single moulding. That makes a lot more sense.

So we have:

Mclaren tub: 75kg - no idea what the front and rear modules weigh.
Evora tub: 116 kg + Front module 29 kg Rear module 58 kg

The Evora looses 41 kg to the Mclaren. Not quite the disaster that some would have it being.

But it is also rather cheaper chaps, let's be honest.