`Superlight` question
Discussion
Mechanically, my Supersport was specced with all the same bits as a superlight (dry-sump excepted), but GRP rather than Carbon panels, plus carpets, heater, leather seats, full screen, wipers, weather gear and spare wheel and carrier etc, so it does weigh a bit more. (Of course, some Superlights have some of those features as well.) The daft part is that it then ends up as being a sort of Superlight deLuxe, but cost considerably less secondhand. 
A Superlight is a good investment - they seem to hold more of their money than most other Caterhams and for that reason alone are worth seeking out (we have a mint 1999 one tucked away in the garage - 15,000 miles from new).
But as others say, the car's spec can be replicated with Supersports. Bit of ambiguity in Can Am's posting so for the avoidance of doubt, the dry sump wasn't a standard fitment on the Superlight.
See next month's Track and Racecar magazine (out on the 23rd April IIRC) a feature on the KR300 and KR500 versus the Duratec R300. I think that the latter is now the benchmark car for anyone looking to buy a Caterham that rewards equally on-track and on the road. Now this may be controversial, but I think it's a better car than even the original Superlight
But as others say, the car's spec can be replicated with Supersports. Bit of ambiguity in Can Am's posting so for the avoidance of doubt, the dry sump wasn't a standard fitment on the Superlight.
See next month's Track and Racecar magazine (out on the 23rd April IIRC) a feature on the KR300 and KR500 versus the Duratec R300. I think that the latter is now the benchmark car for anyone looking to buy a Caterham that rewards equally on-track and on the road. Now this may be controversial, but I think it's a better car than even the original Superlight
rubystone said:
A Superlight is a good investment - they seem to hold more of their money than most other Caterhams and for that reason alone are worth seeking out (we have a mint 1999 one tucked away in the garage - 15,000 miles from new).
But as others say, the car's spec can be replicated with Supersports. Bit of ambiguity in Can Am's posting so for the avoidance of doubt, the dry sump wasn't a standard fitment on the Superlight.
See next month's Track and Racecar magazine (out on the 23rd April IIRC) a feature on the KR300 and KR500 versus the Duratec R300. I think that the latter is now the benchmark car for anyone looking to buy a Caterham that rewards equally on-track and on the road. Now this may be controversial, but I think it's a better car than even the original Superlight
I stand corrected; in that case mine is even closer to a Superlight than I thoughtBut as others say, the car's spec can be replicated with Supersports. Bit of ambiguity in Can Am's posting so for the avoidance of doubt, the dry sump wasn't a standard fitment on the Superlight.
See next month's Track and Racecar magazine (out on the 23rd April IIRC) a feature on the KR300 and KR500 versus the Duratec R300. I think that the latter is now the benchmark car for anyone looking to buy a Caterham that rewards equally on-track and on the road. Now this may be controversial, but I think it's a better car than even the original Superlight
. As Rubystone says, the Superlight would have been a far better investment than a Supersport brought up to virtually the same spec. On the other hand, I am happy with a s/h bargain.And the new R300 looks like a fine car to me too.
rubystone said:
...the Duratec R300. I think that the latter is now the benchmark car for anyone looking to buy a Caterham that rewards equally on-track and on the road. Now this may be controversial, but I think it's a better car than even the original Superlight
I was wondering about that, a few people have said it. What is it that makes the duratec R300 such a good un in comparison with the original superlight? I would have thought they were a bit different in terms of engine characteristics? As I am betwen Caterhams at the moment, I am thinking of what to do. Having done a few k-series cars and not being a seeker anymore of the highest power, the DR300 seems a good place to be potentially.Out interest for the OP (although almost certainly irrelevant), the Superlight R500 originally had two chassis. The lighter one was lightened in sev places (holes in the steering rack bridge, wiper motor bracket removed etc). For those who wanted a screen they had the heavier chassis.
I don't think the original 1600 superlight had that.
Bert
BertBert said:
I was wondering about that, a few people have said it. What is it that makes the duratec R300 such a good un in comparison with the original superlight? I would have thought they were a bit different in terms of engine characteristics? As I am betwen Caterhams at the moment, I am thinking of what to do. Having done a few k-series cars and not being a seeker anymore of the highest power, the DR300 seems a good place to be potentially.
For me the revelation was that you really can use the full 175bhp of the DR300 - the power delivery is so linear. This in turn makes it easier to string together fluid laps compared to a eaky higher powered K series car (such as my R500). If you've driven a K Series Superlight spec car on track you'll know how fluid one of those is - the 138bhp is accessible enough to be "on it" all the time, but inevitably another car with more grunt will hold you up on the straights. The DR300 has the same fluid characteristics but gives you that necessary "grunt" to pass those other cars, yet still allows you to fully exploit the power.I'd heartily recommend that you speak to Simon Lambert about a run in the car.
I believe the DR300 I drove was the subject of a large test of track cars a week or so ago. I think it's for Autocar, but can't be 100% sure. When I drove the DR300, TRC magazine were working on the setup - road first, track second. I only drove it on the track settings but it still remained remarkably compliant and I am sure those settings would work very well indeed on road too. And all this on CR500s that didn't yield that usual nasty understeer when hot at McLaren at Brands.
rubystone said:
BertBert said:
I was wondering about that, a few people have said it. What is it that makes the duratec R300 such a good un in comparison with the original superlight? I would have thought they were a bit different in terms of engine characteristics? As I am betwen Caterhams at the moment, I am thinking of what to do. Having done a few k-series cars and not being a seeker anymore of the highest power, the DR300 seems a good place to be potentially.
For me the revelation was that you really can use the full 175bhp of the DR300 - the power delivery is so linear. This in turn makes it easier to string together fluid laps compared to a eaky higher powered K series car (such as my R500). If you've driven a K Series Superlight spec car on track you'll know how fluid one of those is - the 138bhp is accessible enough to be "on it" all the time, but inevitably another car with more grunt will hold you up on the straights. The DR300 has the same fluid characteristics but gives you that necessary "grunt" to pass those other cars, yet still allows you to fully exploit the power.I'd heartily recommend that you speak to Simon Lambert about a run in the car.
I believe the DR300 I drove was the subject of a large test of track cars a week or so ago. I think it's for Autocar, but can't be 100% sure. When I drove the DR300, TRC magazine were working on the setup - road first, track second. I only drove it on the track settings but it still remained remarkably compliant and I am sure those settings would work very well indeed on road too. And all this on CR500s that didn't yield that usual nasty understeer when hot at McLaren at Brands.
Gassing Station | Caterham | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff