CATERHAM V'S WESTFIELD
Discussion
Sam_68 said:
Noger said:
I don't think anyone really kids themselves that they have that much of a physical link. Rather like a MINI is nothing like a Mini. But the idea is much the same.
I agree with Noger! 
...especially the Mini analogy; another fine example of a car that is merely a visual pastiche, sharing few technical or behavioural characteristics with the 'classic' it is attempting to feed off.
But if you acknowledge the facts that there's not much of a physical link but that the the idea is much the same, why all the snottiness and superiority amongst some Caterham owners towards Westfields (or any other 'Seven' type cars)? They all follow 'much the same idea' (and it's not as if the Seven was even the first 'Seven'-type car).
I wonder if Buckler owners were as far up their own arses about Lotus 'copying' their cars, back in the 1950's?
Somehow, I doubt it...
Edited by Sam_68 on Thursday 10th April 17:55
The MINI analogy is a poor one, because there was no evolution, it was just a step from old Mini to new MINI. The 7 has been in continuous production since it came out as a Lotus all those years ago, and as just evolved over the years gradually. There was no step or jump, other than sticking a Caterham badge on the nose of the car instead of a Lotus one. I suppose it's a bit like Trigger's broom or Aristotle's ship physically, but of course a Caterham is a proper 7 and a Westfield a copy - a court case even decided this!
Sam_68 said:
...especially the Mini analogy; another fine example of a car that is merely a visual pastiche, sharing few technical or behavioural characteristics with the 'classic' it is attempting to feed off....
The Mini analogy was very poor!As Rob notes, aside from the letters in the name being the same, the new Mini bears absolutely no relation to the original in any way, shape or form.
If you're are honestly suggesting that the std chassis'd Caterham 7 cannot trace its lineage directly back to the S3 Lotus 7, then I suspect you're being contrary for the sake of it.
Murph7355 said:
If you're are honestly suggesting that the std chassis'd Caterham 7 cannot trace its lineage directly back to the S3 Lotus 7, then I suspect you're being contrary for the sake of it.
Not at all... I don't deny that you can trace a line of descent. Allegedly, Princess Diana could trace her lineage back to Gengis Khan. They bore very little in common, though, apart from both being a bit mentally unstable.
The changes have been so numerous, and the design principles of 'Seven' type cars are now so well known, that the Caterham feels no more like the Lotus Seven than any of the other 'Seven' type cars on the market, these days. Indeed, as I've said earlier on this thread, the closest currently available car to the early Lotus Seven in terms of chassis behaviour that I've come across is the Westfield Eleven.
The Caterham is a good car in its own right; I've owned one, and I loved it, but I think it's a little bit sad that so many Caterham owners feel the need to justify their purchases, and disparage fellow enthusiasts, by claiming some sort of moral superiority on such spurious grounds.
...and for what it's worth I've been equally blunt towards Westfield Eleven owners who insist that their car is in any way a 'genuine' Eleven. It's a great car (again, I love them, and my next purchase will more than likely be a Westfield Eleven), but for heavens sake accept it on it's own merits instead of trying to lay claim to some meaningless, absurdly diluted 'bloodline'!
Sam_68 said:
Murph7355 said:
If you're are honestly suggesting that the std chassis'd Caterham 7 cannot trace its lineage directly back to the S3 Lotus 7, then I suspect you're being contrary for the sake of it.
Not at all... I don't deny that you can trace a line of descent. Allegedly, Princess Diana could trace her lineage back to Gengis Khan. They bore very little in common, though, apart from both being a bit mentally unstable.
The changes have been so numerous, and the design principles of 'Seven' type cars are now so well known, that the Caterham feels no more like the Lotus Seven than any of the other 'Seven' type cars on the market, these days. Indeed, as I've said earlier on this thread, the closest currently available car to the early Lotus Seven in terms of chassis behaviour that I've come across is the Westfield Eleven.
The Caterham is a good car in its own right; I've owned one, and I loved it, but I think it's a little bit sad that so many Caterham owners feel the need to justify their purchases, and disparage fellow enthusiasts, by claiming some sort of moral superiority on such spurious grounds.
...and for what it's worth I've been equally blunt towards Westfield Eleven owners who insist that their car is in any way a 'genuine' Eleven. It's a great car (again, I love them, and my next purchase will more than likely be a Westfield Eleven), but for heavens sake accept it on it's own merits instead of trying to lay claim to some meaningless, absurdly diluted 'bloodline'!
What people are trying to say is that there is a lineage, and a Caterham is the real deal, whereas a Westfield or Dax etc is a replica. By historical definition, not how they are to drive. As I said before, as a human being, I'm related to crocodiles and fish, but I don't look like one!To draw on the 911 analogy again, no doubt I could build a 911 in my garage with some VW Beetle parts and it would drive more like the original 911 from the 60s than a 997 GT3 RS (as could Westfield, they seem to like copying things I'm surprised they haven't done so already!); that wouldn't make it a real 911 though!! The 997 GT3 RS is the real 911 as it is built by Porsche.
As for which drives better on the road, I suppose that's subjective. I've only had a few brief goes in a Westfield, so I think it would be best to rely on the reviews from Circuit Driver (for the track) and EVO and Autocar (for the road). All of them that I've ever seen claim that the Caterham is better; due to having better developed ride and handling, being lighter and also better put together. I've never read a magazine review that claims a Westfield is better than a Caterham, ever. I'm not saying they don't exist (they might!), but I've certaily never read one, and I type that surrounded by literally mountains of car magazines stretching back to the 80s. I've known a few Westfields go faster around tracks in reviews, but that's faster, not better
Easy to do with more power.There's also no denying that a Caterham's stretched aluminium panels make for a much prettier car than the "upside down bathtub" appearance of the fibreglass bodied Westfield "7". I'm not sure how much of that is due to the court case though?
Finally, there is of course the superb owners club. I've been involved with a few different car clubs over the years, and the Lotus 7 Club is easily the best. That alone would sway me. Almost everyone in the country lives within half an hour to an hour's blat of a great local meeting in a pub, with 20 or 30 enthusiastic owners there every month. Not to mention several runs, track days, autotests etc that occur every week.
It seems to me that the evidence is strongly in favour of Caterham as making the better car. Yes, of course there will be people that disagree, but the vast majority of people will choose a Caterham over a Westfield for the above reasons.
RobM77 said:
I've known a few Westfields go faster around tracks in reviews, but that's faster, not better Easy to do with more power.
Easy to do with more power.
It's a shame you don't get any points for going round a track 'better' - Maybe Ron Dennis sleeps happily in the knowledge his McLarens finished the race 'better' after the Ferrari's hand him his arse again and again...Sam_68 said:
Not at all... I don't deny that you can trace a line of descent.
Allegedly, Princess Diana could trace her lineage back to Gengis Khan. They bore very little in common, though, apart from both being a bit mentally unstable.
The changes have been so numerous
True, and the Queen can trace her bloodline back very very vaguely to prior Kingsand Queens of England, sort of. Is she the direct descendant of some old Queen or other ? No, but she is STILL the queen nonetheless.Allegedly, Princess Diana could trace her lineage back to Gengis Khan. They bore very little in common, though, apart from both being a bit mentally unstable.
The changes have been so numerous
Mini/MINI works for the CSR. It is a "pastiche" is you like, there is no real reason for it to look like a Seven other than harking back to the past (MINI, Beetle, Fiat 500 .... not alone there).
But again, you are falling into that same trap you always do, the CSR isn't the only Caterham.
Your Supersprint (?) shared quite a lot with the S3, did it not ? Same chassis dimensions, check. Ford Crossflow, check. Triumph front end, check. Triumph drums, check.
Most 7-esque chassis are a lot larger than the Caterham. That is why they produced the SV ! It is still the same dimensions, yes there was the long-cockpit, but that just moved the bulkhead. I reckon most people couldn't tell the difference between a shotblasted original S3 chassis and a Caterham Classic chassis. As I said, side by side with an S3, my Supersprint single wish bone front end looks identical.
What about the Rover Mini ? Is it a Mini ? There were changes. I still thought of mine as a Mini.
If all Caterham owners had CSR260s, then yes perhaps you would be right. But that isn't the case. Remember that Caterham Cars were "producing" the Seven for Lotus before the sale. So you can have Lotus-Caterham. A Caterham that is identical to a Lotus from several years after the sale. As we have said, a Supersprint shares a fair amount of parts and the dimensions and the chassis is made by the same people. Diluted bloodline perhaps, but still there, and still the Queen
Internet fora are not real life, and as above, I have never seen any Westfield owner treated with anything other than respect and interest. And a bit of mild ribbing
Anyway, as I have proved, I am the Queen, and you are the dirty rascal (didn't really think this through, did I
) so off you go and dig dung or whatever serfs do RobM77 said:
I think there's just some simple confusion going on here. What people are trying to say is that there is a lineage, and a Caterham is the real deal...
It was developed from the 'real deal'. Like the STM Phoenix has been developed from the 'genuine' Sylva Phoenix/Clubmans. At the moment, the STM hasn't been developed very far - not far enough to feel different to drive - but if it continues to evolve, there will come a point where to claim it is a Jeremy Philips design is nonsensical.
The point where the Caterham could lay any claim to being a Colin Chapman design was passed long ago.
RobM77 said:
......I type that surrounded by literally mountains of car magazines stretching back to the 80s.
See, that's where we fundamentally differ. I've done quite a bit of freelance work as a motoring journalist myself. I might even have written some of the articles you're referring to. I also have good friends who are still motoring journalists. I know their limitations and I know the editorial and advertising influences they work under.As a result, I choose to make my own judgements based on personal experience, rather than what is written in the magazines.
RobM77 said:
I've known a few Westfields go faster around tracks in reviews, but that's faster, not better
As FW500 said, if it’s circuit performance you’re interested in, you don’t get points for style. 
…and if it’s road performance, as I’ve said repeatedly on this thread, a well-set-up IRS Westfield is actually less of a handful than the de Dion Caterham on anything but the smoothest of tarmac (not just because of the IRS; the Westie’s set up is a bit softer and it doesn’t have a front ARB as standard, so it’s more compliant and progressive all round).
RobM77 said:
Easy to do with more power.
Like the R400’s and R500 ‘s that are no quicker than a 180bhp Megabusa or my 175bhp FW400, you mean?
You could have a point, I guess…. 
RobM77 said:
… the vast majority of people will choose a Caterham over a Westfield for the above reasons.
Check your production figures. Then bear in mind Caterham’s much bigger expenditure on advertising (funded by the fact that they hike their prices by selling to people who swallow the ‘heritage’ and ‘development’ claims hook, line and sinker). There’s no doubt that advertising (and lending ‘long term test’ cars to motoring hacks, and sending said hacks on jollies to Silverstone on a regular basis) pays dividends in terms of image and production figures, but it doesn’t do much for performance and it does nothing at all for your prices
Don’t get me wrong; I’ll happily admit that the Caterham is a better quality, better developed product. But it doesn’t offer the crushing superiority that some Caterham owners would like to think it does. And you pay heavily for that extra quality and development, because what you’re really funding – at least in part – is the PR to convince you that it’s better developed, not the development itself.
I think you’ll find that Westfield are doing really quite well in terms of both production and profitability, given their much lower advertising and PR profile.
Edited by Sam_68 on Friday 11th April 12:41
Sam_68 said:
At the moment, the STM hasn't been developed very far
Might be because they don't produce them anymore ?Still ,they did quite well in 2004 and 2005 in RGB. Which is why I got them to do the engine work on my BEC - whilst I might joke about other cars, in reality I wanted the best at the time so went with them. Nice that the season after they had my purple car in the workshop they the purple Phoenixeses
Sam_68 said:
As a result, I choose to make my own judgements based on personal experience, rather than what is written in the magazines.
And we have done the same based upon ours. And we differ. So what to do ? Go to what is perhaps an independant arbiter ? Sam_68 said:
…and if it’s road performance, as I’ve said repeatedly on this thread, a well-set-up IRS Westfield is actually less of a handful than the de Dion Caterham on anything but the smoothest of tarmac (not just because of the IRS; the Westie’s set up is a bit softer and it doesn’t have a front ARB as standard, so it’s more compliant and progressive all round).
The buy an IRS Caterham !Sam_68 said:
Check your production figures.
Car or Kit ? Easy to fiddle the figures !Sam_68 said:
I think you’ll find that Westfield are doing really quite well in terms of both production and profitability , given their much lower advertising and PR profile.
OK, so what is the pre-tax profit for Westfield, and laterly Potenza (willing to bet they don't split our the various parts of the business in the annual accounts !) for the last 5 years ? Or just guessing ? Actually I know the answer already, you ARE their accountant
Noger said:
The buy an IRS Caterham !
Is that the genuine, Chapman designed IRS Caterham I want, then, Noger? Noger said:
Car or Kit ? Easy to fiddle the figures!
Noger translated said:
If I don't like the truth, I'll just claim it's a lie
Since introduction of SVA, all Westfields, regardless of whether kit of fully built, have to be registered as Westfields with the DVLA.But is there really any point me discussing this with you? You'll just say that black is white, if the facts don't suit your argument.
Noger said:
Or just guessing?
To be honest, I haven't taken much interest in the company since Potenza took over, but lets just say that pre-Potenza, I probably had as good an idea of how well the companies were doing, relative to each other, as anyone outside of either. Both always gave the impression of being financially stable (and neither would have sold to their new owners, if they weren't) but annual production figures weren't as dramatically different as you might like to think...Insider Journo hint: An easy way of getting relatively accurate statistics on any marque that's been in production for a while is to extract the figures from numbers of cars for sale on the second hand market. Our very own PistonHeads classifieds is quite a useful tool in itself for the 'PistonHeads' type marques.
I can tell you that the current number of Westfields and Caterhams for sale (56 vs. 74, at the present moment) correlates remarkably well with the relative production levels I was being quoted when I took an interest in such things.
It's certainly proof enough for anyone but Noger that there isn't a vast majority in favour of Caterhams.
Sam_68 said:
Since introduction of SVA, all Westfields, regardless of whether kit of fully built, have to be registered as Westfields with the DVLA.
What, even ones for Export Sam_68 said:
But is there really any point me discussing this with you? You'll just say that black is white, if the facts don't suit your argument.
Apart from those facts on which you are just plain wrong, which never get raised again do they Sam_68 said:
some waffle whilst avoiding the answer
As above, you are ignoring the export market. Which has accounted for just under 50% of Caterham production in previous years. Westfield is only recently getting into the International market.
So come on, you make bold assertions and then weasel out of giving any answer that is verifiable. Saying vague stuff about insider knowledge and pointing at PH adverts doesn't hold much water. I am not the one making claims for production figures and profit (which you have now watered down to being financially stable, not the same thing). Give us some figures!
Sam_68 said:
It's certainly proof enough for anyone but Noger that there isn't a vast majority in favour of Caterhams.
...though you might perhaps expect a significant majority to favour Caterham on say, a Caterham forum!Do you also go on the Subaru forum and tell them how good the evo is or maybe the Arsenal supporters forum to extol the virtues of Tottenham Hotspur?
rubystone said:
Do Caterham really spend their budget on jollies for scribes at Silverstone?...Do they even NEED to do that?
Speaking as someone who has been lucky enough to enjoy the odd day of "corporate entertainment" at such venues as the Bedford Autodrome, it is interesting that they have a large fleet of caterhams, bought with Mr Palmers hard earned, to provide the ultimate handling experience! In fact it's the only car which is used for two separate events in the 8 drives he runs currently. Must have been bribed by Caterham I suppose.Sam's happy with his Westfield. And equally happy that for him there's no difference between his Westfield and a Caterham. Indeed the former is the better car. That's his opinion and it is, of course, valid. Even if it is wrong
Some people like to wear polyester suits. Some people rate washable ties. For some, a Texet watch is the height of the watchmaking art. All serve a purpose, all do a job.
Vive la difference!
Some people like to wear polyester suits. Some people rate washable ties. For some, a Texet watch is the height of the watchmaking art. All serve a purpose, all do a job.
Vive la difference!
What a load of horsehit, get on the track and drive your westfields against caterhams and vise versa see how quick they are across the line. 0-60 times 30-70 times etc mean nothing if it doesnt handle. facts and figures blah blah blah a good track a few different 7 type cars and a stop watch is all thats needed
sam919 said:
What a load of horsehit, get on the track and drive your westfields against caterhams and vise versa see how quick they are across the line. 0-60 times 30-70 times etc mean nothing if it doesnt handle. facts and figures blah blah blah a good track a few different 7 type cars and a stop watch is all thats needed
Check out the Mark Hales test in Circuit Driver. The Caterham was the least powerful by some margin (160bhp R300) yet was 2 seconds a lap quicker than any other 7 type car there (Bedford Autodrome in the wet).surely it's about how fast the car is driven by it's owner? I've got an SLR, but at both the ring and several UK circuits, it's amazing how many high spec caterhams there are in attendance which are not being driven to their limit.
The fact that an R500 may do 0-100 in 8 odd seconds is irrelevant other than when playing top trumps, if *you* do not drive the car to it's max potential.
FWIW, most of the 'caterham copies' are driven in anger 9 times out of 10.
I think my caterham is ugly, but I don't think I could find anything faster around the ring (sub 8 mins available on video if anyone cares....?)
Why does it matter whether a car has x years heritage, etc? For me, it's about the driving experience, nothing else.
PS anyone who needs their g/box rebuilding, I can suggest a better alternative than R&R where they wouldn't appear to have used quality internals in it's prev 2 rebuilds.......
The fact that an R500 may do 0-100 in 8 odd seconds is irrelevant other than when playing top trumps, if *you* do not drive the car to it's max potential.
FWIW, most of the 'caterham copies' are driven in anger 9 times out of 10.
I think my caterham is ugly, but I don't think I could find anything faster around the ring (sub 8 mins available on video if anyone cares....?)
Why does it matter whether a car has x years heritage, etc? For me, it's about the driving experience, nothing else.
PS anyone who needs their g/box rebuilding, I can suggest a better alternative than R&R where they wouldn't appear to have used quality internals in it's prev 2 rebuilds.......
Gassing Station | Caterham | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff