RE: PH Blog: why Lotus-Mansory makes sense
Discussion
Big Six said:
Lotus need to use move exotic engines. Look at Morgan.
Mansory's expertise is in carbon fibre. They pioneered a lot of the processes & already supply to other manufacturers.
There interpritation in the pictures looks a thousand times better than the standard item....but I still wouldn't concider one because of the engine.
Porsche lumps could prove quite interesting Mansory's expertise is in carbon fibre. They pioneered a lot of the processes & already supply to other manufacturers.
There interpritation in the pictures looks a thousand times better than the standard item....but I still wouldn't concider one because of the engine.
Always remember.....there is no such thing as bad publicity! All this emotion ! Today I towed my Hobie 16 about town while I carried 3 saxophones- 2 in the passenger seat and 1 in the boot. Earlier I nailed one of my favorite sections of road and Last week tore up the parkway to NYC and back and was sooo comfortable. An Elise r .. of course it is my daily drive! AND I like the Mansory red chrome finish! I want to see Lotus keep going whatever it takes...just so they do not do bloated SUVs..any real sports car company would rather die than do that, right? Don
I'm so glad that Mansory have tied up with Lotus..just can't wait to place an order for a Lotus 2-Eleven with african elephant ear leather seats and dash held up by 3mm wide gold stitches..and wow, faded light purple steering wheel with gold spokes and sharks fin leather skales for the passenger seat between where the thigh's rest..to get the girl going. My body kit theme would be dubbed, hovercraft, of course..pink side skirts held up by massive golden bolts shaped like a coin for skank baiting. Love is in the air..partnership certainly make sense..
The Mansory tie up sticks in the throat because of the desperate lack of taste. But the principle of what Lotus is up to makes plenty of sense.
Don't tell me that Chapman is spinning in his grave, for he pretty much invented this sort of arrangement.
He prostituted his racing cars back in the 1960s and 1970s by painting them to look like Gold Leaf and JPS fag packets, then milked the concept by doing the same to Elans and Esprits.
It worked rather well and those special edition road cars are now worth a premium.
So I don't have a problem with overt sponsorship, or a close association with another brand. It makes financial sense.
The issue is not the theory, but the execution.
I don't know anything about Mansory, apart from the fact that they seem to commit crimes of bad taste. If it helps Lotus sell lots of cars in the Middle East then it is a good thing.
I would prefer a Cosworth Evora or a JPS flavoured Elise, but I am more likely to buy an Elan or a 1970s Esprit than a new Lotus. I am not their target customer, so my opinions will be of no concern to them.
Don't tell me that Chapman is spinning in his grave, for he pretty much invented this sort of arrangement.
He prostituted his racing cars back in the 1960s and 1970s by painting them to look like Gold Leaf and JPS fag packets, then milked the concept by doing the same to Elans and Esprits.
It worked rather well and those special edition road cars are now worth a premium.
So I don't have a problem with overt sponsorship, or a close association with another brand. It makes financial sense.
The issue is not the theory, but the execution.
I don't know anything about Mansory, apart from the fact that they seem to commit crimes of bad taste. If it helps Lotus sell lots of cars in the Middle East then it is a good thing.
I would prefer a Cosworth Evora or a JPS flavoured Elise, but I am more likely to buy an Elan or a 1970s Esprit than a new Lotus. I am not their target customer, so my opinions will be of no concern to them.
The Pits said:
why would 'digs' bother you in the slightest? your favourite car maker is not in danger of extinction. Mine is.
boxster/cayman is by far my favourite porsche but honestly back to back with an elise on an alpine pass it was a blunt instrument, but only in direct comparison of course. A boxster would have a similar effect on an M3 or similar I'm sure.
but the promise of the concept boxster has never been delivered on. too many focus groups, too many compromises for daily usability and civility and trying to hard to be all things to all men. that's what makes a boxster a fundamentally sound and very well resolved but ultimately uninspiring for something that could and should be more focused. The little glimpses of its potential as seen in the boxster spyder and Cayman R only support this view.
It's all there on paper. Sweet, proper mid engined balance, enhanced further with a low Cof G flat 6, 300 odd bhp, 13 something kg weight, massive porsche resources available for development. It should be roughly twice as much fun as a Honda S2000 but it just isn't. It's much better than a Honda S2000 but not as much fun. And my Elise is roughly 10 times more fun than the Honda S2000 I used to have. The linear power delivery, porsche's obsession with things like small turning circles (for practical, city use), dreary inoffensive interior, too much driver isolation, too little feedback (that would make it feel unrefined and crude to the average man, not therefore not 'classy' enough).
Not even porsche resources can achieve a car that's focused as well as being a practical, daily usable all rounder. It will always involve some compromises and there's no way I'll give up on what matters most to me in exchange for ability I don't and won't use. That's also why I'm happy to accept the compromises a Lotus asks - because they deliver in spades in the areas that matter most to me.
They (digs) don't bother me at all mate. Rather I was suggesting that the sometimes underlying tone of sarcasm in your posts tends to detract from some good stuff. May just be how you phrase things. no biggy really. boxster/cayman is by far my favourite porsche but honestly back to back with an elise on an alpine pass it was a blunt instrument, but only in direct comparison of course. A boxster would have a similar effect on an M3 or similar I'm sure.
but the promise of the concept boxster has never been delivered on. too many focus groups, too many compromises for daily usability and civility and trying to hard to be all things to all men. that's what makes a boxster a fundamentally sound and very well resolved but ultimately uninspiring for something that could and should be more focused. The little glimpses of its potential as seen in the boxster spyder and Cayman R only support this view.
It's all there on paper. Sweet, proper mid engined balance, enhanced further with a low Cof G flat 6, 300 odd bhp, 13 something kg weight, massive porsche resources available for development. It should be roughly twice as much fun as a Honda S2000 but it just isn't. It's much better than a Honda S2000 but not as much fun. And my Elise is roughly 10 times more fun than the Honda S2000 I used to have. The linear power delivery, porsche's obsession with things like small turning circles (for practical, city use), dreary inoffensive interior, too much driver isolation, too little feedback (that would make it feel unrefined and crude to the average man, not therefore not 'classy' enough).
Not even porsche resources can achieve a car that's focused as well as being a practical, daily usable all rounder. It will always involve some compromises and there's no way I'll give up on what matters most to me in exchange for ability I don't and won't use. That's also why I'm happy to accept the compromises a Lotus asks - because they deliver in spades in the areas that matter most to me.
We also differ hugely in that I have no 'favourite' manufacture. If the car attracts me - for whatever reason - then I'll drive it/buy it/whatever.Your constant Boxster/Porsche/Elise comparisons are missing the point I was trying to argue with you. That is, that WHY should I have to compromise on build quality etc in return for even a sublime driving experience. Maybe that was understandable when I bought my first S1 Elise new at a little over £20k but, come on, I really can't understand why you say you'll accept substandard build when you're spending £70k?? Or even +£40k. It's basic stuff and at those prices Lotus just can't say "at these prices what do you expect?" Don't think I'm saying I don't like 'basic' either - I love the basic feel of an early Elise interior. It's quality, finish and build standards I'm talking about.
Absolutely nothing to do with whether one car is better on your favourite mountain pass than another. That's a whole different subject.
redsq01 said:
Given that Mansory appear to have made a decent stab at making the Maclaren exciting as opposed to the blandest supercar on the road then they should have a stab at turning the Evora from a horrible blot on the landscape to a machine worthy of a 60K price tag.
Decent stab you say? Really?
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/mansory-mclaren-mp4...
Huff said:
No.
Mansory's use of carbon-fibre is purely for cosmetics. I don;t believe they know a damn thing about production structural use for the stuff- that's the preserve of big money, McLaren and Porsche perhaps.
I've made replacement carbon fibre panels for my car outside sat on the driveway. It really isn't rocket science - I made a vacuum bagging rig and a curing oven big enough to make bonnets. The guy I was working with made expoxy wet-lay up seats that were lighter and stiffer than some of the commercially available ones. If a man in a shed can have good results then a man with a factory and an autoclave will definitely have good results.Mansory's use of carbon-fibre is purely for cosmetics. I don;t believe they know a damn thing about production structural use for the stuff- that's the preserve of big money, McLaren and Porsche perhaps.
Replacing GF panels with autoclaved carbon ones will be lighter. Even if their intent is "purely cosmetic" they will get less weight as a result.
Part of me is glad Lotus is trying something different instead of being forced into that corner of the add lightness BS which ultimately restricted Lotus from properly developing a product a wider audience would buy.
As well time served ex-Lotus owner also glad they have recognised its not enough just to have good handling at its price mark it needs higher quality trim inside and out to make a competitive package instead of relying on brand name and the ever diminishing pool of hardcore rose-tinted fans.
As well time served ex-Lotus owner also glad they have recognised its not enough just to have good handling at its price mark it needs higher quality trim inside and out to make a competitive package instead of relying on brand name and the ever diminishing pool of hardcore rose-tinted fans.
dlockhart said:
Grammar Nazi:
And then I saw it and I thought "blimey, you know, that doesn't actually look half had." And it doesn't
Shouldn't that be half BAD
as [As] for the artical [article] - I think the Masonary [Mansory] make over of the Mclaren was required - A boss of mine handed back his deposit and broughr [bought] an Aston Martin because he didnt feel special in the Mclaren. If I were to buy a new car I'd still buy a Cayman S rather than a Mansoned [Mansoried?] Lotus.
That's a spelling error, not grammar. It's arguably a typo.And then I saw it and I thought "blimey, you know, that doesn't actually look half had." And it doesn't
Shouldn't that be half BAD
as [As] for the artical [article] - I think the Masonary [Mansory] make over of the Mclaren was required - A boss of mine handed back his deposit and broughr [bought] an Aston Martin because he didnt feel special in the Mclaren. If I were to buy a new car I'd still buy a Cayman S rather than a Mansoned [Mansoried?] Lotus.
Anyway, if you're going to be pedantic: See above.
If the choice is Lotus selling 110 cars I like to purists and going under or Lotus selling 100 cars I like to purists, losing 10 old customers and selling 1000 pink and lime green Evoras to the Middle East and China, which pays the bills and development of new models, then I'll pick the second one.
Pugsey said:
They (digs) don't bother me at all mate. Rather I was suggesting that the sometimes underlying tone of sarcasm in your posts tends to detract from some good stuff. May just be how you phrase things. no biggy really. We also differ hugely in that I have no 'favourite' manufacture. If the car attracts me - for whatever reason - then I'll drive it/buy it/whatever.
Your constant Boxster/Porsche/Elise comparisons are missing the point I was trying to argue with you. That is, that WHY should I have to compromise on build quality etc in return for even a sublime driving experience. Maybe that was understandable when I bought my first S1 Elise new at a little over £20k but, come on, I really can't understand why you say you'll accept substandard build when you're spending £70k?? Or even +£40k. It's basic stuff and at those prices Lotus just can't say "at these prices what do you expect?" Don't think I'm saying I don't like 'basic' either - I love the basic feel of an early Elise interior. It's quality, finish and build standards I'm talking about.
Absolutely nothing to do with whether one car is better on your favourite mountain pass than another. That's a whole different subject.
Which is better on the mountain pass is all that really matters to me. I have a boring daily driver for the slog and no porsche can touch it for that job. It's a Lexus hybrid. Utterly serene inside when all about me are boiling with rage. It's like a mobile meditation class. If you want isolation from the road. We also differ hugely in that I have no 'favourite' manufacture. If the car attracts me - for whatever reason - then I'll drive it/buy it/whatever.Your constant Boxster/Porsche/Elise comparisons are missing the point I was trying to argue with you. That is, that WHY should I have to compromise on build quality etc in return for even a sublime driving experience. Maybe that was understandable when I bought my first S1 Elise new at a little over £20k but, come on, I really can't understand why you say you'll accept substandard build when you're spending £70k?? Or even +£40k. It's basic stuff and at those prices Lotus just can't say "at these prices what do you expect?" Don't think I'm saying I don't like 'basic' either - I love the basic feel of an early Elise interior. It's quality, finish and build standards I'm talking about.
Absolutely nothing to do with whether one car is better on your favourite mountain pass than another. That's a whole different subject.
To me a porsche is sub standard when it comes to driving pleasure because it's too compromised for daily use and to appeal to mr average. So too much of my £70k is wasted on stuff I don't want and that doesn't contribute to driving pleasure when it really counts. Stuff like soft touch plastics and nicer plastic indicator stalks. I would rather my £70k went on chassis rigidity, damper development and was put in the hands of engineers obsessed with steering feel.
Clearly for you porsches drive well enough and lotuses aren't built well enough. But you're not 'having it all' for £70k, you're having to accept a compromise, one that works for you. But it doesn't work for me. For me Lotuses are built well enough, my Elise is basic but perfectly well put together, crucially, there's nothing to detract from the driving pleasure. Nothing. Maybe that's just me.
What really cheeses me off though is that Chris Harris can have plenty of issues (well documented on here) with his GT3 4.0 and it's all put down to it being 'largely hand made'. So now it's a good thing when it's a porsche?! It's outrageous. That car was £135k!!! And he's the first person to slag the Evora off for not being up to scratch for £70k! Appalling double standards at best. Evidence of a some kind of agenda at worst.
Edited by The Pits on Wednesday 28th March 10:56
Actually, do you know what?
I'll take the unhinged lunacy of Mansory over the bland, conservative, homogenized, any shape you like as long as it looks like an egg, world that the porsche obsessed aspire to.
It's genuinely funny reading posts from people who honestly think the new boxster looks in any way meaningfully different to the last one. A bigger air intake does not constitute a restyle for any other manufacturer.
I'll take the unhinged lunacy of Mansory over the bland, conservative, homogenized, any shape you like as long as it looks like an egg, world that the porsche obsessed aspire to.
It's genuinely funny reading posts from people who honestly think the new boxster looks in any way meaningfully different to the last one. A bigger air intake does not constitute a restyle for any other manufacturer.
The Pits said:
Clearly for you porsches drive well enough and lotuses aren't built well enough. But you're not 'having it all' for £70k, you're having to accept a compromise, one that works for you. But it doesn't work for me. For me Lotuses are built well enough, my Elise is basic but perfectly well put together, crucially, there's nothing to detract from the driving pleasure, no irritating noises or flapping trim. Nothing. I wouldn't mind a smaller rear view mirror but what it's made of I couldn't give a stuff. Maybe that's just me. But the one and only time I prodded about in an Elise was in the showroom.
What really cheeses me off though is that Chris Harris can have plenty of issues (well documented on here) with his GT3 4.0 and it's all put down to it being 'largely hand made'. So now it's a good thing when it's a porsche?! It's outrageous. That car was £135k!!! And he's the first person to slag the Evora off for not being up to scratch for £70k! Appalling double standards at best. Evidence of a sinister agenda at worst.
Good points well made. I agree 100%. Every car ever built is a compromise in some respect, choice all comes down to needs, wants and budget. What really cheeses me off though is that Chris Harris can have plenty of issues (well documented on here) with his GT3 4.0 and it's all put down to it being 'largely hand made'. So now it's a good thing when it's a porsche?! It's outrageous. That car was £135k!!! And he's the first person to slag the Evora off for not being up to scratch for £70k! Appalling double standards at best. Evidence of a sinister agenda at worst.
The point with Porsches is also valid, considering the cost of the car (not to mention parts and servicing), it damn well should be well put together, yet just like every other car out there, they can and do fail. Failure interval and repair cost statistics would be interesting (but impossible to collect I suspect).
toppstuff said:
Lotus should, IMO,
1. Reference the past. Reference the fact that Lotus stands for chassis engineering that changed the world of motorsport and supplied the worlds finest GP drivers.
2. Show that just as in the past Lotus innovated and succeeded, it is still doing it now. Make it clear that a Lotus provides more "feel" for the road you are driving than other cars ( especially German ones ! ). Exploit the fact that as Porsche moves toward electronic, lifeless steering, a Lotus gives you a connection to the road. A connection that goes all the way back to Senna himself.
3. Lotus is not about bling. Lotus is about engineering. Lotus is about being clever. Lotus is about being the "thinking mans' Sports car. The fashion victim buying a car because of the bling and the bodykit is never going to be loyal to the Lotus brand, because they do not understand the brand anyway. Lotus should be pitching to a smarter customer than that.
Am I living in the past? No way. But Lotus should look to the future by understanding what already makes it special.
All this Mansory nonsense means nothing. It does not seem to fit at all to the Lotus brand values.
It is sad to see that Lotus management really do not understand their own company. They do not understand it at all.
We should be seeing clever marketing, referencing the clever , alternative thinking of Lotus cars. About feeling the road. About efficiency. About "feel" rather than bling. About Senna, not Swiss Beatz...
It is tragic that they don't see this...
Brilliant post, I agree wholeheartedly with this, why don't car companies employ intelligent people who understand things like this? They all seem to come from a marketing job on Mars. I'm 32 and have a deep understanding of what Lotus should embody as a brand and Colin Chapman died when I was 3.1. Reference the past. Reference the fact that Lotus stands for chassis engineering that changed the world of motorsport and supplied the worlds finest GP drivers.
2. Show that just as in the past Lotus innovated and succeeded, it is still doing it now. Make it clear that a Lotus provides more "feel" for the road you are driving than other cars ( especially German ones ! ). Exploit the fact that as Porsche moves toward electronic, lifeless steering, a Lotus gives you a connection to the road. A connection that goes all the way back to Senna himself.
3. Lotus is not about bling. Lotus is about engineering. Lotus is about being clever. Lotus is about being the "thinking mans' Sports car. The fashion victim buying a car because of the bling and the bodykit is never going to be loyal to the Lotus brand, because they do not understand the brand anyway. Lotus should be pitching to a smarter customer than that.
Am I living in the past? No way. But Lotus should look to the future by understanding what already makes it special.
All this Mansory nonsense means nothing. It does not seem to fit at all to the Lotus brand values.
It is sad to see that Lotus management really do not understand their own company. They do not understand it at all.
We should be seeing clever marketing, referencing the clever , alternative thinking of Lotus cars. About feeling the road. About efficiency. About "feel" rather than bling. About Senna, not Swiss Beatz...
It is tragic that they don't see this...
This Mansory Lotus tie up is the worst thing that has ever happened in Lotus' history. Lots of people thought the Proton buyout was bad (what brand values did they share exactly?!), it's nothing compared to this. I say this as a true Lotus enthusiast and lover of the marque (why else would I put myself through owning a 42 year old Lotus when I have a 1 year old baby?), this is quite literally a nightmare. Lotus, as a current brand, are dead to me now.
handbraketurn said:
redsq01 said:
Given that Mansory appear to have made a decent stab at making the Maclaren exciting as opposed to the blandest supercar on the road then they should have a stab at turning the Evora from a horrible blot on the landscape to a machine worthy of a 60K price tag.
Decent stab you say? Really?http://www.autoblog.com/photos/mansory-mclaren-mp4...
The Pits said:
Pugsey said:
They (digs) don't bother me at all mate. Rather I was suggesting that the sometimes underlying tone of sarcasm in your posts tends to detract from some good stuff. May just be how you phrase things. no biggy really. We also differ hugely in that I have no 'favourite' manufacture. If the car attracts me - for whatever reason - then I'll drive it/buy it/whatever.
Your constant Boxster/Porsche/Elise comparisons are missing the point I was trying to argue with you. That is, that WHY should I have to compromise on build quality etc in return for even a sublime driving experience. Maybe that was understandable when I bought my first S1 Elise new at a little over £20k but, come on, I really can't understand why you say you'll accept substandard build when you're spending £70k?? Or even +£40k. It's basic stuff and at those prices Lotus just can't say "at these prices what do you expect?" Don't think I'm saying I don't like 'basic' either - I love the basic feel of an early Elise interior. It's quality, finish and build standards I'm talking about.
Absolutely nothing to do with whether one car is better on your favourite mountain pass than another. That's a whole different subject.
Which is better on the mountain pass is all that really matters to me. I have a boring daily driver for the slog and no porsche can touch it for that job. It's a Lexus hybrid. Utterly serene inside when all about me are boiling with rage. It's like a mobile meditation class. If you want isolation from the road. We also differ hugely in that I have no 'favourite' manufacture. If the car attracts me - for whatever reason - then I'll drive it/buy it/whatever.Your constant Boxster/Porsche/Elise comparisons are missing the point I was trying to argue with you. That is, that WHY should I have to compromise on build quality etc in return for even a sublime driving experience. Maybe that was understandable when I bought my first S1 Elise new at a little over £20k but, come on, I really can't understand why you say you'll accept substandard build when you're spending £70k?? Or even +£40k. It's basic stuff and at those prices Lotus just can't say "at these prices what do you expect?" Don't think I'm saying I don't like 'basic' either - I love the basic feel of an early Elise interior. It's quality, finish and build standards I'm talking about.
Absolutely nothing to do with whether one car is better on your favourite mountain pass than another. That's a whole different subject.
To me a porsche is sub standard when it comes to driving pleasure because it's too compromised for daily use and to appeal to mr average. So too much of my £70k is wasted on stuff I don't want and that doesn't contribute to driving pleasure when it really counts. Stuff like soft touch plastics and nicer plastic indicator stalks. I would rather my £70k went on chassis rigidity, damper development and was put in the hands of engineers obsessed with steering feel.
Clearly for you porsches drive well enough and lotuses aren't built well enough. But you're not 'having it all' for £70k, you're having to accept a compromise, one that works for you. But it doesn't work for me. For me Lotuses are built well enough, my Elise is basic but perfectly well put together, crucially, there's nothing to detract from the driving pleasure. Nothing. Maybe that's just me.
What really cheeses me off though is that Chris Harris can have plenty of issues (well documented on here) with his GT3 4.0 and it's all put down to it being 'largely hand made'. So now it's a good thing when it's a porsche?! It's outrageous. That car was £135k!!! And he's the first person to slag the Evora off for not being up to scratch for £70k! Appalling double standards at best. Evidence of a some kind of agenda at worst.
Edited by The Pits on Wednesday 28th March 10:56
So, again, my point was/is merely that while I very much wanting another Lotus I wouldn't consider blowing £70k on one while the build quality/finish is as it is.
Again the digs:- "a Porsche is sub standard when it comes to driving pleasure" REALLY?? and built "to appeal to Mr average". You've not driven the latest GT3 then? Again though, I agree, very different to a Lotus of course.
Anyway, we seem to be going round in circles so I'll call time at that - I'm sure we're boring others on here for which I apologise!
not digs. just explaining why I'd be wasting £70k if I spent it on a porsche.
I agree, for the sake of everyone else, happy to call it a day here.
As for all this fuss about Mansory, they have done some tasteless stuff and worse for me, they are german too
but to pick up on the author's point, is the work they've done to date really so bad?
I'm not sure it quite deserves this level of hysteria.
I agree, for the sake of everyone else, happy to call it a day here.
As for all this fuss about Mansory, they have done some tasteless stuff and worse for me, they are german too
but to pick up on the author's point, is the work they've done to date really so bad?
I'm not sure it quite deserves this level of hysteria.
The Pits said:
not digs. just explaining why I'd be wasting £70k if I spent it on a porsche.
I agree, for the sake of everyone else, happy to call it a day here.
As for all this fuss about Mansory, they have done some tasteless stuff and worse for me, they are german too
but to pick up on the author's point, is the work they've done to date really so bad?
I'm not sure it quite deserves this level of hysteria.
I agree, for the sake of everyone else, happy to call it a day here.
As for all this fuss about Mansory, they have done some tasteless stuff and worse for me, they are german too
but to pick up on the author's point, is the work they've done to date really so bad?
I'm not sure it quite deserves this level of hysteria.
I really like the white effort actually.
It's merely Lotus offering well-heeled customers a bespoke option. I'd rather it wasn't Mansory but really it's hard to see it 'As the worst thing that's ever happened to Lotus.'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fEiR5fNSMI&fea...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fEiR5fNSMI&fea...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff