RE: Supercharged Lotus Exige
Discussion
peter450 said:
i think autocar have done 4.8 in a 111r in one of there tests, lotus average the runs so i've no doubt the figures are do able but these are ideal conditions with no clutch sympathy whats so ever, its also down to how quick the driver can get off the mark, temperature etc thats y you get different stats from different mags to many variables for it to be a consistant figure, I remeber an article on a ferrari 360 they couldn't get the 60 time under 5 and this was the challange stradale version, no doubt it can do it but on the day under the conditions tested they could'nt.
and thats the problem people see these figures an think thats hwat there gonna make from the traffic lights, the 30 to 70 through the gears is proabbly the best real world indicator shame its not widely used
I agree with a new standard sprint put into all tests! not only 0 to 60 but also always the 30 to 70! and a 1/4 mile time
that is also much better for tires and engine mounts! and give's a better view at his torque powerrrr GTRene
Surprised to find this whole thread rating the differences between the various flavours of Lotus based on their 0-60 time. What baring does that give? In any circumstance the 0-60 means virtually nothing, but when have Lotuses ever been about speed off the line over poise, agility and balance? Particularly off to read about a track-day biased car like the Exige, as what is the one thing you never do on a trackday? A standing start...
Would expected to have been reading here about the differences the engines make to drivability and weight transfer, predictability etc. This has ended up reading like a game of Top Trumps.
Still, your thread....
Hendry - I agree in principle with what you are saying, but if you sift through the figures, it does give you a few clues - eg look at 0-60 time (lotus say 4.5 sec) then look at 0-100 time (11.3 acc to lotus) hence 60-100 which might be relevant on a track is looking at nearly 7 seconds. Not really great performance for a car of this cost. Basically it is a far more expensive exige with not a lot more than additional power and sadly more weight. Not that great in terms of straight line performance for the added money.
As regards flexibility, handling, predictability etc etc, as there are none in the dealers yet, it is rather difficult to debate this: None of us have driven it yet. We have the collective opinion of one or two journalists re the 240 cup. The only objective comments can be made about the headline figures at this stage. Hence before criticising, you may want to clarify your facts.
I have booked a test drive in December once a Bell-Colvill demonstrator has been delivered and has 1000 miles on it. Once they are available more meaningful comments will surface. For the moment, it looks an expensive option that is heavier and slower than eg a honda'd exige. If that is such a pointless debate, noone is forcing you to read it. I personally like getting the collective impressions of things from people more experienced than I, as it has prevented me making costly mistakes in the past.
As regards flexibility, handling, predictability etc etc, as there are none in the dealers yet, it is rather difficult to debate this: None of us have driven it yet. We have the collective opinion of one or two journalists re the 240 cup. The only objective comments can be made about the headline figures at this stage. Hence before criticising, you may want to clarify your facts.
I have booked a test drive in December once a Bell-Colvill demonstrator has been delivered and has 1000 miles on it. Once they are available more meaningful comments will surface. For the moment, it looks an expensive option that is heavier and slower than eg a honda'd exige. If that is such a pointless debate, noone is forcing you to read it. I personally like getting the collective impressions of things from people more experienced than I, as it has prevented me making costly mistakes in the past.
Hendry said:
Surprised to find this whole thread rating the differences between the various flavours of Lotus based on their 0-60 time. What baring does that give? In any circumstance the 0-60 means virtually nothing, but when have Lotuses ever been about speed off the line over poise, agility and balance? Particularly off to read about a track-day biased car like the Exige, as what is the one thing you never do on a trackday? A standing start...
Would expected to have been reading here about the differences the engines make to drivability and weight transfer, predictability etc. This has ended up reading like a game of Top Trumps.
Still, your thread....
Never do a standing start on the track? when you are "racing" in competition you do a standing start and then its very importand to get to the first corner first! and also the "power" of acceleration out the corner is importand, and when you've got a spin, every second counts then!
And even not on the track its big fun at the stoplights doing a sprint with someone else, and loosing its no fun, but winning is
So you can drive in the back of the field (with same driver scils and experience) and the other drives a few seconds faster each round with a more powerful car that can accelerate faster...so 0 to 60 and especialy 30 to 100 times, can be very importand on the track and on the road...
GTRene
GTRene said:
Surprised to find this whole thread rating the differences between the various flavours of Lotus based on their 0-60 time. What baring does that give? In any circumstance the 0-60 means virtually nothing, but when have Lotuses ever been about speed off the line over poise, agility and balance? Particularly off to read about a track-day biased car like the Exige, as what is the one thing you never do on a trackday? A standing start...
Would expected to have been reading here about the differences the engines make to drivability and weight transfer, predictability etc. This has ended up reading like a game of Top Trumps.
Still, your thread....
Never do a standing start on the track? when you are "racing" in competition you do a standing start and then its very importand to get to the first corner first! and also the "power" of acceleration out the corner is importand, and when you've got a spin, every second counts then!
And even not on the track its big fun at the stoplights doing a sprint with someone else, and loosing its no fun, but winning is
So you can drive in the back of the field (with same driver scils and experience) and the other drives a few seconds faster each round with a more powerful car that can accelerate faster...so 0 to 60 and especialy 30 to 100 times, can be very importand on the track and on the road...
GTRene
Agreed. That's why I said "track-day focused" rather than a competition car. And one would surely not buy an Exige if one's only interest was beating other cars away from traffic lights - buy a fast saloon and get to move your mates and shopping around too.
By the way, completely agree 30 - 100 is important, but who has mentioneed that in thsi thread so far?
GTRene said:
when you are "racing" in competition you do a standing start
I beleve that most folks here are not racing but participate in non-competative track days and that plus road driving would be the context for the conversation.
If your racing then whatchu doing wasting your time talking about stock configurations ? If your ego needs to be the fastest "off the lights" I'd suggest chilling in the TVR forum since they, for the money, simply are.
shangani said:
As regards flexibility, handling, predictability etc etc, as there are none in the dealers yet, it is rather difficult to debate this: None of us have driven it yet. We have the collective opinion of one or two journalists re the 240 cup. The only objective comments can be made about the headline figures at this stage. Hence before criticising, you may want to clarify your facts.
not quite true...
240R's and Exige cups + SC have been about for some time now, I have driven both, as have many others.
perfomance wise, there are some times up for one that Lotus entered in Mid-Engined at Snett with Gavan driving it, I would suggest that this would be the fastest that one will actually go (round a track) so it's a good benchmark to use.
By "us" - I was referring to the people who had posted at the point that the initial criticism was levelled. I someone wanted / was able to comment on the handling, precision etc they were free to do so. I simply objected to someone criticising everyone who had posted to that point for a lack of discussion on issues few / none of us were in a position to debate.
Was the latter car (Kershaw's) a good reflection of what the road-going 240 cup will be like? I only ask because I genuinely don't know the answer.
For those of us not as connected with the racing scene / lotus, it is presently quite difficult to get a drive in one - I phoned several dealers and the earliest they suggested one could get a drive was late December or early January. The 240r's were snapped up in no time and I certainly never saw one at a dealer that was available to be driven. Barring a long trip to see a used 240r, I still don't see how most of the rest of us would be in a position to comment specifically on a car that is only going to be delivered in the next few days / weeks. I still don't even know if I would fit in it with a helmet on. The other aspect re the handling relates to traction control - present on the cup but not the 240r.
>> Edited by shangani on Friday 2nd December 17:52
Was the latter car (Kershaw's) a good reflection of what the road-going 240 cup will be like? I only ask because I genuinely don't know the answer.
For those of us not as connected with the racing scene / lotus, it is presently quite difficult to get a drive in one - I phoned several dealers and the earliest they suggested one could get a drive was late December or early January. The 240r's were snapped up in no time and I certainly never saw one at a dealer that was available to be driven. Barring a long trip to see a used 240r, I still don't see how most of the rest of us would be in a position to comment specifically on a car that is only going to be delivered in the next few days / weeks. I still don't even know if I would fit in it with a helmet on. The other aspect re the handling relates to traction control - present on the cup but not the 240r.
>> Edited by shangani on Friday 2nd December 17:52
Hendry said:
Surprised to find this whole thread rating the differences between the various flavours of Lotus based on their 0-60 time. What baring does that give? In any circumstance the 0-60 means virtually nothing, but when have Lotuses ever been about speed off the line over poise, agility and balance? Particularly off to read about a track-day biased car like the Exige, as what is the one thing you never do on a trackday? A standing start...
Would expected to have been reading here about the differences the engines make to drivability and weight transfer, predictability etc. This has ended up reading like a game of Top Trumps.
Still, your thread....
Never do a standing start on the track? when you are "racing" in competition you do a standing start and then its very importand to get to the first corner first! and also the "power" of acceleration out the corner is importand, and when you've got a spin, every second counts then!
And even not on the track its big fun at the stoplights doing a sprint with someone else, and loosing its no fun, but winning is
So you can drive in the back of the field (with same driver scils and experience) and the other drives a few seconds faster each round with a more powerful car that can accelerate faster...so 0 to 60 and especialy 30 to 100 times, can be very importand on the track and on the road...
GTRene
Agreed. That's why I said "track-day focused" rather than a competition car. And one would surely not buy an Exige if one's only interest was beating other cars away from traffic lights - buy a fast saloon and get to move your mates and shopping around too.
By the way, completely agree 30 - 100 is important, but who has mentioneed that in thsi thread so far?
personally i dont think any lotus is really about standing starts, they've always been about handling and prescison, but some people seem to be arguing this point on the basis that the elise/exige isnt good at it, while the car may not be about a 0 - 60 traffic light gp the car is very good at the 0 - 60 sprint its light, and has good traction off the line being mid engined. What most people complain about is being caught up once you hit 70/80 which is really were the 190 and now 240 hp cars come in to there own, the 111r and now 240 cup simpley extend the performance envelope at higher speeds giving good acceleration at high speeds as well as off the mark
Gassing Station | Elise/Exige/Europa/340R | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff