tested an evora 400
Discussion
I have no issue in the origins of the engine.
It's performance is first priority, and 2nd (for me) is charisma. The Toyota V6 performs brilliantly and isn't hard to maintain. They're two big wins. I'd like some more charisma, but I'm being really fussy to say that.
My 996 had a charismatic engine, but was also a ticking time bomb (apparently). That concern did have an impact on the pleasure of owning it. Lotus are very smart in delivering engines that are very effective without carrying loads of risk and complexity.
It's performance is first priority, and 2nd (for me) is charisma. The Toyota V6 performs brilliantly and isn't hard to maintain. They're two big wins. I'd like some more charisma, but I'm being really fussy to say that.
My 996 had a charismatic engine, but was also a ticking time bomb (apparently). That concern did have an impact on the pleasure of owning it. Lotus are very smart in delivering engines that are very effective without carrying loads of risk and complexity.
Boogs said:
Personally I see it as a bonus, because if it goes bang (which is less likely) it will be a damned site cheaper to fix. A big reason why my money went into a lotus and not an Aston or Ferrari.
+1 I have a 2010 NA Evora the engine is brilliant, performs well, reliable and cost effective yet tuneable I have driven a 400 the engine feels and sounds totally different he engine is brilliant, performs well, reliable and cost effective. so to say its just a Camery engine is nonsense. I have owned two Jaguar F-Types; a V6S Roadster and a Coupe over a period of 2.5 years. I also own an Evora 400.
For anyone thinking of buy an F-Type over an Evora, I would suggest you spend 3-4 mins on the Jaguar Forum. If computers could emit a bad smell, their feedback would make you reach.
The AJ126 engine is a low budget creation taking the old V8 and cutting 2-cylinders off. They are notable for complete failures - ask Autocar about their first F-Type - and problematic sensor failures.
A lot of people buy it for the sound. The Evora trumps the Jag hands down. No contest.
You'd presume build quality might be better - No! F-Types are known for numerous paint flake issues, even recent cars, as well a stereo system that vibrates the door cards even at very low levels of volume which took Jaguar over 3-years to acknowledge and fix.
Then, last up you have the overall customer experience. I would NEVER purchase a JLR product ever again. Whilst their design department is top notch, the rest of the company has a customer care culture stuck in the 70's IMOP.
The worst you'll find on an Evora 400 is a creaky seat and a MAF sensor requiring a 30-second fix. And if you do ever have an issue then the dealer and factory engagement is unsurpassed.
For anyone thinking of buy an F-Type over an Evora, I would suggest you spend 3-4 mins on the Jaguar Forum. If computers could emit a bad smell, their feedback would make you reach.
The AJ126 engine is a low budget creation taking the old V8 and cutting 2-cylinders off. They are notable for complete failures - ask Autocar about their first F-Type - and problematic sensor failures.
A lot of people buy it for the sound. The Evora trumps the Jag hands down. No contest.
You'd presume build quality might be better - No! F-Types are known for numerous paint flake issues, even recent cars, as well a stereo system that vibrates the door cards even at very low levels of volume which took Jaguar over 3-years to acknowledge and fix.
Then, last up you have the overall customer experience. I would NEVER purchase a JLR product ever again. Whilst their design department is top notch, the rest of the company has a customer care culture stuck in the 70's IMOP.
The worst you'll find on an Evora 400 is a creaky seat and a MAF sensor requiring a 30-second fix. And if you do ever have an issue then the dealer and factory engagement is unsurpassed.
Headlights are fine, same as on the S1, I have had 2 S1 cars, the only think that hampers dipped beam is that the headlights are quite low, a common problem with sports cars. Also as they are nearly horizontal, condensation on damp mornings sites on the lights affecting performance, a 2 second wipe with a finger or a tissue sorts that.
Door seal leaks are pretty much sorted on most cars I have seen, where there are problems they are generally fixed quickly under warranty
Door seal leaks are pretty much sorted on most cars I have seen, where there are problems they are generally fixed quickly under warranty
This list points toward and early car. The heater controls have been changed, the seat design has been changed. The door seals are an adjustment and the MAF sensor positioning has been changed.
Headlight complaint I just don't understand. Having done 30k miles in an Evora I have never felt there are any issues with the headlights.
Headlight complaint I just don't understand. Having done 30k miles in an Evora I have never felt there are any issues with the headlights.
CTE said:
Have to say I am on my 3rd Evora...S, SR, and now a 400, and don`t recognise any of this faults. My satnav screen has developed a fault which is really strange, but will be fixed under warranty when I get around to getting the car into the dealer...otherwise, that`s it.
How do you find the sr compared the 400? fesuvious said:
2016 Evora400.
Do you know the build date? The aircon was changed fairly quickly I believe, the seats were changed circa August 2016. Is your expansion tank plastic or Ali?I believe mine was built around April/ May 2016 (Hethel edition) but registered on a 66. Mine has the altered aircon, but had the creaky seats and had to have the MAF service notice done although didn't actually have an issue - this by the way is merely reroute get the wiring and securing the plug better.
I see these as teething issues for a hand built car, unfortunately you seem to have had 2 issues that would actually stop you from using the car, so do understand the frustration, but they have been resolved now so should not manifest themselves in cars built now.
The only thing I have had that prevented the use of the car was my key fob gave up the ghost, which is a ford item. That said, if you phoned the ford factory, I doubt they'd talk you through bypassing the alarm and immobiliser system to get you home (obviously only once satisfied as to ownership).
Edited by Boogs on Wednesday 19th April 21:55
Check the 7th image down. The Ali expansion tank was only fitted to the very early cars. It was very quickly changed to a plastic one, it just helps to date the build.
http://www.carsifu.my/news/lotus-evora-400
A shame if it has put you off as a new car should be clear of these issues (excepting the headlights). That is a lovely blue, stunning car.
http://www.carsifu.my/news/lotus-evora-400
A shame if it has put you off as a new car should be clear of these issues (excepting the headlights). That is a lovely blue, stunning car.
How do the SR and 400 compare for me?
I really liked the SR and there are a couple of things which I prefer about it...lower and better seats being significant...although I have got used to the 400 seats and they are fine...and mine do not creak...June/July 2016 car.
For me I much prefer the styling of the 400, and overall it is a better finished car. I am 50/50 on the ride/handling compromise, but have not yet had a chance to really push it (400) yet...hope to soon...this is partly because it is a very fast car and can carry a lot of speed through a corner...too much for a public road. There are some silly details on the inside with the 400, but overall the interior is a step up and a nice place to be.
Whilst the gearing is a bit long legged for some reason (80 in second?), the performance is definitely stronger, especially above 6000rpm where it positively screams to the red line, and it just seems to get faster, the faster you go. I generally much prefer the exhaust tone, although mid range it can sound a bit flabby for my liking, but it is more than made up for at high revs...very anti social!! At least you can be heard coming, which has to be a good thing...in most cases.
Whilst there are a good number of very fast cars around these days, very little offers the thrill of a lotus...any modern (Elise onwards) Lotus that is...not been in anything older to know?
I really liked the SR and there are a couple of things which I prefer about it...lower and better seats being significant...although I have got used to the 400 seats and they are fine...and mine do not creak...June/July 2016 car.
For me I much prefer the styling of the 400, and overall it is a better finished car. I am 50/50 on the ride/handling compromise, but have not yet had a chance to really push it (400) yet...hope to soon...this is partly because it is a very fast car and can carry a lot of speed through a corner...too much for a public road. There are some silly details on the inside with the 400, but overall the interior is a step up and a nice place to be.
Whilst the gearing is a bit long legged for some reason (80 in second?), the performance is definitely stronger, especially above 6000rpm where it positively screams to the red line, and it just seems to get faster, the faster you go. I generally much prefer the exhaust tone, although mid range it can sound a bit flabby for my liking, but it is more than made up for at high revs...very anti social!! At least you can be heard coming, which has to be a good thing...in most cases.
Whilst there are a good number of very fast cars around these days, very little offers the thrill of a lotus...any modern (Elise onwards) Lotus that is...not been in anything older to know?
CTE said:
How do the SR and 400 compare for me?
I really liked the SR and there are a couple of things which I prefer about it...lower and better seats being significant...although I have got used to the 400 seats and they are fine...and mine do not creak...June/July 2016 car.
For me I much prefer the styling of the 400, and overall it is a better finished car. I am 50/50 on the ride/handling compromise, but have not yet had a chance to really push it (400) yet...hope to soon...this is partly because it is a very fast car and can carry a lot of speed through a corner...too much for a public road. There are some silly details on the inside with the 400, but overall the interior is a step up and a nice place to be.
Whilst the gearing is a bit long legged for some reason (80 in second?), the performance is definitely stronger, especially above 6000rpm where it positively screams to the red line, and it just seems to get faster, the faster you go. I generally much prefer the exhaust tone, although mid range it can sound a bit flabby for my liking, but it is more than made up for at high revs...very anti social!! At least you can be heard coming, which has to be a good thing...in most cases.
Whilst there are a good number of very fast cars around these days, very little offers the thrill of a lotus...any modern (Elise onwards) Lotus that is...not been in anything older to know?
Thank you for the reply. I am trying to convince myself the 400 is the next car but I am struggling with a number of things. Coming from an SR it is the perfect mix of sport and gt with seats, steering, ride firmness and also arm rests and storage (comforts) Styling is a personal thing so can't really comment on what others prefer. I just feel the 400 may have gone too far down the sports car route. Have to confess I love the alcantara interior though. I really liked the SR and there are a couple of things which I prefer about it...lower and better seats being significant...although I have got used to the 400 seats and they are fine...and mine do not creak...June/July 2016 car.
For me I much prefer the styling of the 400, and overall it is a better finished car. I am 50/50 on the ride/handling compromise, but have not yet had a chance to really push it (400) yet...hope to soon...this is partly because it is a very fast car and can carry a lot of speed through a corner...too much for a public road. There are some silly details on the inside with the 400, but overall the interior is a step up and a nice place to be.
Whilst the gearing is a bit long legged for some reason (80 in second?), the performance is definitely stronger, especially above 6000rpm where it positively screams to the red line, and it just seems to get faster, the faster you go. I generally much prefer the exhaust tone, although mid range it can sound a bit flabby for my liking, but it is more than made up for at high revs...very anti social!! At least you can be heard coming, which has to be a good thing...in most cases.
Whilst there are a good number of very fast cars around these days, very little offers the thrill of a lotus...any modern (Elise onwards) Lotus that is...not been in anything older to know?
Stuno1, I think you are right in that the two cars are slightly different really...the 400 is a higher performance vehicle and as a result has lost some of the suppleness in order to sharpen the dynamics, but you quickly adjust to it and its a pretty impressive balance really. Also the car gets better with the more miles you put on it...the dampers especially are quite tight when new.
I can certainly see what lotus have done to make It more focused. I just think the pay off was a more bespoke feel to the interior and some cheaper materials used. Also there was no need to make it less practical/comfortable by remove items like arm tests and cup holders. It takes it closer to a to the exige than a gt. ultimately there is still no package for the money that matches the 400, I think I was just expecting and hoping for something else.
Gassing Station | Evora | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff