What grade of petrol do Evoras need?
Discussion
What petrol do you use? Do you notice a difference?
I tried to find an on-line manual to see the official recommendation but could only find the US version.
I’m thinking particularly about the N/A cars which don’t have a high specific output.
There might be a bit of man maths involved here as I’m trying to justify the running costs against an S2000 that needs super unleaded
Is there much difference in running costs between the NA, S, and 400?
I tried to find an on-line manual to see the official recommendation but could only find the US version.
I’m thinking particularly about the N/A cars which don’t have a high specific output.
There might be a bit of man maths involved here as I’m trying to justify the running costs against an S2000 that needs super unleaded
Is there much difference in running costs between the NA, S, and 400?
Mr Sparkle said:
What petrol do you use? Do you notice a difference?
I tried to find an on-line manual to see the official recommendation but could only find the US version.
I’m thinking particularly about the N/A cars which don’t have a high specific output.
There might be a bit of man maths involved here as I’m trying to justify the running costs against an S2000 that needs super unleaded
Is there much difference in running costs between the NA, S, and 400?
My SC with C/R box did 18-20mpg pottering about, & 25mpg on a run. I used super unleaded where possible, due to the cleaning agents of some of the main brands (Esso, Shell, BP). If I had to put unleaded in, I'd top up with super when i could. I tried to find an on-line manual to see the official recommendation but could only find the US version.
I’m thinking particularly about the N/A cars which don’t have a high specific output.
There might be a bit of man maths involved here as I’m trying to justify the running costs against an S2000 that needs super unleaded
Is there much difference in running costs between the NA, S, and 400?
Various info/costs on another PH thread here;- https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
SC versions will have more expensive RFL, servicing & possibly insurance, together with tyres due to increased wheel size. Back in 2017ish, a rear tyre was about £260 fitted. You have to be careful with the Geo setup, as Evoras are set up to grip, at the expense of tyre wear, & can wear unevenly, but this can be dialled out.
400s were a bit lighter than the S, & had longer gearing for better mpg, but will be far more expensive in the first place.
Unless you're doing big miles, then other factors may outweigh mpg anyway.
TrotCanterGallopCharge said:
SC versions will have more expensive RFL, servicing & possibly insurance, together with tyres due to increased wheel size. Back in 2017ish, a rear tyre was about £260 fitted. You have to be careful with the Geo setup, as Evoras are set up to grip, at the expense of tyre wear, & can wear unevenly, but this can be dialled out.
This is a good point, mine used to chew a set of 20" rears in about 6000 miles until I knocked a bit of camber off the back. Made it easier to slide too 
I use a mix of UL and Super on my NA, more due to the "issues" with the E10 variant than for any other reason, and better cleaning etc as noted above - I generally avoid supermarket stations for that reason, rightly or wrongly.
The NA does run better on Super but for my use it is less of an issue, as not hooning much in mine. It did not run badly on UL, just the usual higher octane improvement (as with the Honda). You do get the slightly improved fuel consumption with super if that helps with the man maths.
I get low 20's mpg on my NA, and less if hooning (CR box), but hardly ever more than 30 even on a gentle long run.
I drove Honda S2000s for 10 years on a mix of UL and SUL depending on where I was/how extravagant I was feeling, all with no issues.
Re overall running cost comparison, no idea what RFL is like for the Honda these days, but the mpg is markedly better than the Lotus (although it is all relative). A lot less to go rusty though on the Lotus of course, but bits that break/wear out can sometimes be expensive - I recently had to replace an AC condensor, and the bill from an independent specialist was not much under a grand
Anything needing looked at under the front clam is going to be more pricey, and I had to wait a few months for the part itself to arrive.
Normal servicing in general isn't too bad where I take mine, nor is insurance, and with the glacial depreciation (up to now) it is a surprisingly cheap car to run.
The NA does run better on Super but for my use it is less of an issue, as not hooning much in mine. It did not run badly on UL, just the usual higher octane improvement (as with the Honda). You do get the slightly improved fuel consumption with super if that helps with the man maths.
I get low 20's mpg on my NA, and less if hooning (CR box), but hardly ever more than 30 even on a gentle long run.
I drove Honda S2000s for 10 years on a mix of UL and SUL depending on where I was/how extravagant I was feeling, all with no issues.
Re overall running cost comparison, no idea what RFL is like for the Honda these days, but the mpg is markedly better than the Lotus (although it is all relative). A lot less to go rusty though on the Lotus of course, but bits that break/wear out can sometimes be expensive - I recently had to replace an AC condensor, and the bill from an independent specialist was not much under a grand
Anything needing looked at under the front clam is going to be more pricey, and I had to wait a few months for the part itself to arrive.Normal servicing in general isn't too bad where I take mine, nor is insurance, and with the glacial depreciation (up to now) it is a surprisingly cheap car to run.
Edited by s2kjock on Wednesday 2nd August 22:03
The Wookie said:
TrotCanterGallopCharge said:
SC versions will have more expensive RFL, servicing & possibly insurance, together with tyres due to increased wheel size. Back in 2017ish, a rear tyre was about £260 fitted. You have to be careful with the Geo setup, as Evoras are set up to grip, at the expense of tyre wear, & can wear unevenly, but this can be dialled out.
This is a good point, mine used to chew a set of 20" rears in about 6000 miles until I knocked a bit of camber off the back. Made it easier to slide too 
, I'd hope a tyre would last longer than that. Did you notice much difference in the balance with less rear camber?s2kjock said:
I use a mix of UL and Super on my NA, more due to the "issues" with the E10 variant than for any other reason, and better cleaning etc as noted above - I generally avoid supermarket stations for that reason, rightly or wrongly.
The NA does run better on Super but for my use it is less of an issue, as not hooning much in mine. It did not run badly on UL, just the usual higher octane improvement (as with the Honda). You do get the slightly improved fuel consumption with super if that helps with the man maths.
I get low 20's mpg on my NA, and less if hooning (CR box), but hardly ever more than 30 even on a gentle long run.
I drove Honda S2000s for 10 years on a mix of UL and SUL depending on where I was/how extravagant I was feeling, all with no issues.
Re overall running cost comparison, no idea what RFL is like for the Honda these days, but the mpg is markedly better than the Lotus (although it is all relative). A lot less to go rusty though on the Lotus of course, but bits that break/wear out can sometimes be expensive - I recently had to replace an AC condensor, and the bill from an independent specialist was not much under a grand Anything needing looked at under the front clam is going to be more pricey, and I had to wait a few months for the part itself to arrive.
Normal servicing in general isn't too bad where I take mine, nor is insurance, and with the glacial depreciation (up to now) it is a surprisingly cheap car to run.
Yeah, I did think about rust, MY S2000 is 21Y/O so it's oxidising nicely now. Also being tempted by the i8, think they are a bit riskier and less practical.The NA does run better on Super but for my use it is less of an issue, as not hooning much in mine. It did not run badly on UL, just the usual higher octane improvement (as with the Honda). You do get the slightly improved fuel consumption with super if that helps with the man maths.
I get low 20's mpg on my NA, and less if hooning (CR box), but hardly ever more than 30 even on a gentle long run.
I drove Honda S2000s for 10 years on a mix of UL and SUL depending on where I was/how extravagant I was feeling, all with no issues.
Re overall running cost comparison, no idea what RFL is like for the Honda these days, but the mpg is markedly better than the Lotus (although it is all relative). A lot less to go rusty though on the Lotus of course, but bits that break/wear out can sometimes be expensive - I recently had to replace an AC condensor, and the bill from an independent specialist was not much under a grand
Anything needing looked at under the front clam is going to be more pricey, and I had to wait a few months for the part itself to arrive.Normal servicing in general isn't too bad where I take mine, nor is insurance, and with the glacial depreciation (up to now) it is a surprisingly cheap car to run.
Edited by s2kjock on Wednesday 2nd August 22:03
Earlier S2000s are £395/y, later ones are £675 same as the Evora S.
I did notice that if you get the Evora S auto it ducks under the top band unlike the manual.
Mr Sparkle said:
The Wookie said:
TrotCanterGallopCharge said:
SC versions will have more expensive RFL, servicing & possibly insurance, together with tyres due to increased wheel size. Back in 2017ish, a rear tyre was about £260 fitted. You have to be careful with the Geo setup, as Evoras are set up to grip, at the expense of tyre wear, & can wear unevenly, but this can be dialled out.
This is a good point, mine used to chew a set of 20" rears in about 6000 miles until I knocked a bit of camber off the back. Made it easier to slide too , I'd hope a tyre would last longer than that. Did you notice much difference in the balance with less rear camber?I was also told headlights were £1000 ea (not necessarily a new thing these days), but they may be cheaper or available from breakers now.
Mr Sparkle said:
Ouch, I'd hope a tyre would last longer than that. Did you notice much difference in the balance with less rear camber?
Mine it knocked out the inside edges most of the meat of the tyre was untouched, I'd hope a tyre would last longer than that. Did you notice much difference in the balance with less rear camber?On the road I never really noticed much difference, the tracking stability might have been a touch better and it might have felt like it had a touch more initial roll motion at the backend but it wasn't night and day.
I never took it on track but I'd assume it would be a bit more oversteery, albeit progressive
TrotCanterGallopCharge said:
I was also told headlights were £1000 ea (not necessarily a new thing these days), but they may be cheaper or available from breakers now.
Headlights are nearer £2000 each new nowadays. There are usually some available on ebay for much less, but getting a matching pair is usually a challenge, particularly as they removed the logo decoration on the newer assemblies.Tyres - I get over 10k out of mine, but perhaps I don't drive it hard enough.
MPG - I can easily get over 30mpg on a run (NA long manual box), and mid 20s in 'normal' use... again, perhaps i don't drive it hard enough.
Gassing Station | Evora | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff