RE: PH Fleet: Lotus Elise Sport 135

RE: PH Fleet: Lotus Elise Sport 135

Author
Discussion

Danny Milner

128 posts

202 months

Friday 29th June 2012
quotequote all
I've done a side-by-side comparison video - hopefully Dan will put it up later. Most of the lost lap time seems from Surtees onwards.

I haven't had time to read all the comments yet, but thanks and i did have to chuckle at the Top Gear Avantime reference, and the "you need an S2 comment"!

marc2

109 posts

174 months

Friday 29th June 2012
quotequote all
suffolk009 said:
Just a thought,... but maybe the ride and handling engineers at Lotus got it right.
Yep +1 thumbup In my experience, unless you are a chassis engineer (and I'm not) you would have to be very lucky to improve on a well set up standard car (like the Elise) It's easy to spend a lot of money & make the ride quality unbearable therefore convincing yourself it must be faster/handle better. Usually-you just ruined it....as I have, more than once whistle

Danny Milner

128 posts

202 months

Friday 29th June 2012
quotequote all
Link to the side by side comparison:

https://vimeo.com/44926550

juansolo

3,012 posts

277 months

Saturday 30th June 2012
quotequote all
hughcam said:
Dont you think Lotus compromise when they build all there cars (like most manufacturers)? Im sure they would have loved to stick decent shocks, wheels, tyres ect and set it up appropiately but the price would probably have made their product double. So yes IMO I do think you can easily improve a standard Elise.
This was Lotus who when questioned about why the didn't add an LSD they replied (something along the lines of): because we set it up properly in the first place it doesn't need one. All you have to do is drive an Evora to realise that Lotus know how to set up a car very well indeed and it's not an area they exactly compromise on (unlike build quality).

Edited by juansolo on Saturday 30th June 05:45

wevster

763 posts

156 months

Saturday 30th June 2012
quotequote all
I modified my S1 and went from boggo S1 to Nitron NTR's, Toyo 888's, CL pads and Ali bellied discs and the handling and braking of the car was a revelation. With the changes you have made I would expect quite an improvement.

IIRC Nitron street series are adjustable, I would have a play with the settings next time on track, the first track day I did with the Nitrons at Anglesey the car was fantastic, I used the same settings at Croft and the car didn't feel anywhere as good, I tweaked the setting slightly (stiffened it up in this case) and the car was spot on again.

As long as you remember the base settings don't be afraid to experiment.

2mad

180 posts

178 months

Saturday 30th June 2012
quotequote all
Make up a front splitter understeer solved.

trickymex

85 posts

181 months

Saturday 30th June 2012
quotequote all
First rule of track tuning is change one thing at a time.

I'd say you should try your current setup with the old tyres if you still have them to get a comparison

It's forever possible that the tyres are not performing as well as the old ones

Dan Trent

1,866 posts

167 months

Saturday 30th June 2012
quotequote all
MagicalTrevor said:
This thread needs the latest video. And the previous video for comparison
Ask and you shall get! Story now updated with before and after video with side-by-side comparison of the laps.

Cheers!

Dan

anonymous-user

53 months

Saturday 30th June 2012
quotequote all
From the "side by side" it's quite clear that the vast majority of the time difference is simply between the terminal speed at the end of the main straight. You enter Paddock much quicker in L1, and carry that speed all the way up the hill to druids. The rest of the lap is pretty much like for like.

Assuming the engine isn't broken / tired, then it's almost certainly the exit speed from clearways/clark that is giving you this advantage.

Now looking at the video, it is easy to see the car is significantly stiffer in L2, less dive, less roll. BUT, these movements (dive and roll) are key in returning information to the driver on how hard they are pushing. Looking at your handwheel inputs, L2 is much much smoother and less hurried than L1, but the car underneeth you simply isn't reponding the same. In effect you are driving "harder" in L1 than L2 (look at the handwheel corrections in L1 compared to L2, you are keeping the front wheels much closer to the limit in l1!)

Also, less longitudinal mass transfer, resulting in less dive makes the "optimum braking" window feel much narrower. It's very much easier to lock a wheel or feel that the car isn't slowing (it is, and the video shows very little difference in brake performance) because of the lack of dive (effectively we don't sense absolute G forces very well, we sense the change in G, or the change in angle of the car as the G load increases. By stiffening the car, you have narrowed the window where it(and you) operates best.

The advantages are that with the stiffer car you don't have to wait as long for it to stabilise as the lopads change. In L1 it is nodding and lolling all over the shop on the entry/exit of the corners, in L2 it is much more stable. You need to take advantage of this stability to carry more speed around the corner. However, because the mass is better controlled, some of the mass transfer that is actually helping the car "get into the corner" in L1, is missing in L2, and it is clear that more handwheel angle is required to put the nose into the corner initially. Either 1) drive around this by using non linear handwheel inputs or better 2) change the spring rates and ride height to give the car a bit more attitude (slip angle) in the corners.

Finally, the car has "road" kinematics. Particularly in the rear suspension, dynamic toe and camber are still set to work with the suspension movements that would be expected from the std ride height and rates. If you lower / stiffen the car, simply put the wheels will not be pointing the in same direction as before under load. Generally, because changing the dynamic wheel paths would be an angle grinder to the chassis mounting point job ;-) most people will just resort to resetting the static geometery (that which exisits whilst the car is stationary and unloaded) to better suit the loaded case (almost certainaly more rear toe out for example)

All of these changes do of course narrow even further the "window" in which is works, Lotus are masters at making the car work across a wide window, but you must sacrifice some of this broad capability to the church of ultimate pace..........


Purely from the video, if the car was driven with the same "vigour" as in L1, i'd say it would be 1 to 1.5s per lap faster than the original lap.



Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 30th June 11:58

Toaster

2,938 posts

192 months

Saturday 30th June 2012
quotequote all
suffolk009 said:
Just a thought,... but maybe the ride and handling engineers at Lotus got it right.
Reckon you could have a good point........the rest of us are just mere mortals :-)

Danny Milner

128 posts

202 months

Saturday 30th June 2012
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
From the "side by side" it's quite clear that the vast majority of the time difference is simply between the terminal speed at the end of the main straight. You enter Paddock much quicker in L1, and carry that speed all the way up the hill to druids. The rest of the lap is pretty much like for like.

Assuming the engine isn't broken / tired, then it's almost certainly the exit speed from clearways/clark that is giving you this advantage.

Now looking at the video, it is easy to see the car is significantly stiffer in L2, less dive, less roll. BUT, these movements (dive and roll) are key in returning information to the driver on how hard they are pushing. Looking at your handwheel inputs, L2 is much much smoother and less hurried than L1, but the car underneeth you simply isn't reponding the same. In effect you are driving "harder" in L1 than L2 (look at the handwheel corrections in L1 compared to L2, you are keeping the front wheels much closer to the limit in l1!)

Also, less longitudinal mass transfer, resulting in less dive makes the "optimum braking" window feel much narrower. It's very much easier to lock a wheel or feel that the car isn't slowing (it is, and the video shows very little difference in brake performance) because of the lack of dive (effectively we don't sense absolute G forces very well, we sense the change in G, or the change in angle of the car as the G load increases. By stiffening the car, you have narrowed the window where it(and you) operates best.

The advantages are that with the stiffer car you don't have to wait as long for it to stabilise as the lopads change. In L1 it is nodding and lolling all over the shop on the entry/exit of the corners, in L2 it is much more stable. You need to take advantage of this stability to carry more speed around the corner. However, because the mass is better controlled, some of the mass transfer that is actually helping the car "get into the corner" in L1, is missing in L2, and it is clear that more handwheel angle is required to put the nose into the corner initially. Either 1) drive around this by using non linear handwheel inputs or better 2) change the spring rates and ride height to give the car a bit more attitude (slip angle) in the corners.

Finally, the car has "road" kinematics. Particularly in the rear suspension, dynamic toe and camber are still set to work with the suspension movements that would be expected from the std ride height and rates. If you lower / stiffen the car, simply put the wheels will not be pointing the in same direction as before under load. Generally, because changing the dynamic wheel paths would be an angle grinder to the chassis mounting point job ;-) most people will just resort to resetting the static geometery (that which exisits whilst the car is stationary and unloaded) to better suit the loaded case (almost certainaly more rear toe out for example)

All of these changes do of course narrow even further the "window" in which is works, Lotus are masters at making the car work across a wide window, but you must sacrifice some of this broad capability to the church of ultimate pace..........


Purely from the video, if the car was driven with the same "vigour" as in L1, i'd say it would be 1 to 1.5s per lap faster than the original lap.



Edited by Max_Torque on Saturday 30th June 11:58
Thanks very much for that; very informative and makes a lot of sense. Probably took you longer to write the response than it did my original article as well, so thanks for taking the time!



england_r

32 posts

188 months

Saturday 30th June 2012
quotequote all
Podger said:
Toya 888's every time , every day , the most superior tyre for a Lotus Elise/ Exige.

Just take a look at any of the Lotus Forim , and in particular Exiges.com
I'd personally say this is probably very relevant. From the photo of your car, the rear camber looks quite aggressive so you'll be wanting to push hard to get benefit and would that be something that the Advan Neovas could handle? Try some stickies IMO. I think it's also difficult to pinpoint the problem as you've changed a lot of bits at once. The older Bilsteins would have had a bit more give in them too which probably suited the road biased Advans better. I've driven on track with Advans on S2 Bilsteins, Kumho KU31 and S2 Bilsteins, R888's on very stiff Gaz shocks and Kumho KU31's on the stiff Gaz as well. The car was good with S2 Bilsteins and Advans / Kumhos. When we switched over to the Gaz and tried the Kumhos the car wasn't as good. We stuck the stickies on and it was great!

Edited by england_r on Saturday 30th June 23:12

Backontrack

7 posts

254 months

Sunday 1st July 2012
quotequote all
I'm a bit surprised that there are a lot of comments saying the car needs setting up or just sticking dampers on without looking at the geometry maybe the problem. Obviously you cant be bothered to read the previous articals which show the cars current geo set up at the bottom of the page! Also saying that the standard set up on an Elise is the best is complete tosh. They are great handling cars dont get me wrong, but they are limited in set up on relatively cheap dampers. Fitting some Nitrons as we have done to Danny's allows you to fine tune the car to the drivers use/needs. In this case fitted with NTR Fast Road dampers to give a complient road set up and still be extremely competent on track. Danny's artical is very honest and shows us all that spending money upgrading your car is just one part of the story.....I'm looking forward getting out on track with him and trying to see were the problem lies. From talking to him I know that he's not feeling confident with the brakes, it maybe a simple as that. Let's see what next feature reveals?

Edited by Backontrack on Sunday 1st July 09:50


Edited by Backontrack on Sunday 1st July 09:51

Loafing Wafu

48 posts

209 months

Sunday 1st July 2012
quotequote all
^^^ what B-o-T say.

I'd suggest a lot will be to do with confidence. Certainly was with me when I changed a couple of things on my car, took a while to get used to it and now I'm ultimately quicker.

Also odd that people are saying that Lotus got it spot on. Quite sure they openly admit to compromising the setup of the Elise to make it understeer. Also I can guarantee that non of the Elise Trophy or Cup guys are using standard shocks.

Lotus made a cracking car which was setup for the road, but in doing so they compromised it for track work.

jcl

227 posts

242 months

Sunday 1st July 2012
quotequote all
This is a classic case of the investment/risk ratio. You can clearly see in the new video how you're much more tentative with car after spending a wack of cash on the thing wink

Edited by jcl on Monday 2nd July 02:10

4pot

477 posts

223 months

Monday 2nd July 2012
quotequote all
Having reviewed the footage, I would concur with several others, that the author simply isn't on it in the second video. Spending ££££ doesn't immediately translate into quicker lap times. You need to re-learn the car and it's new set up, before having the confidence to nail it.

Some drivers can do this pretty much from the off, whereas most can't, me included. Driving quickly is about confidence, mixed with natural ability or tuition to extract those extra tenths.

VinZ

10 posts

143 months

Tuesday 3rd July 2012
quotequote all
The side by side video is awesome. You can see you shifted differently.
Increased spring rate is only needed when the car is lowered. Then you also need to change the dampers. And if you lower the car you will need another geo setup - and that is not easy to get right. ride height, spring rate, damper characteristic, camber, castor, toe in/out, tyre pressure ...you change one and it will affect the other.

Everyone starts off changing stuff on their car and like many comments say: Lotus know what they are doing.

First get the car at standard geo and start playing with the tyre pressure. You will notice that the Elise is very sensitive to tyre pressure changes. To make it easier Lotus did some work for you. You can change your geo to the Exige S1 setup. Lotus has several track orientated geo's published you can try. After you have changed your geo: play with tyre pressure first.

If you want the best geo make sure you have the right ballast in the seats. You sitting in the car will change the ride height thus camber and toe. Be careful with spoilers. (Most) Spoilers increase drag. A Formula 1 car is less aerodynamic than a brick/truck. They are designed for maximum downforce with minimum drag (Cd Truck=0.6+ ; F1=0.7~1.1 depending on setup). There are plenty of guidelines on the net on how to setup you car. In my opinion it s better to change driver skill level before changing your car. Even talents like Sarah Ganzer and Bietske Visser are still doing driving academies.

Captain Muppet

8,540 posts

264 months

Wednesday 4th July 2012
quotequote all
hughcam said:
Captain Muppet said:
The fact you think it's a derogatory post is pretty derogatory to the ride and handling engineers at Lotus.

[/promotingharmonyandeveryonejustgettingalong]
Dont you think Lotus compromise when they build all there cars (like most manufacturers)? Im sure they would have loved to stick decent shocks, wheels, tyres ect and set it up appropiately but the price would probably have made their product double. So yes IMO I do think you can easily improve a standard Elise.
Quote me out of contect why don't you? I was replying to this:

Captain Muppet said:
hughcam said:
suffolk009 said:
Just a thought,... but maybe the ride and handling engineers at Lotus got it right.
No real need for the derogatory post.....
The fact you think it's a derogatory post is pretty derogatory to the ride and handling engineers at Lotus.

[/promotingharmonyandeveryonejustgettingalong]
The possiblity that the people who built it might be better than a man fitting aftermarket parts was "derogatory" to the chap modifiying his car.

It's hard not to see that as insulting to guys who do this professionally. Maybe derogarty wasn't the right word to use, maybe "unhelpful" or "inflamatory" would have been nicer.

As for improving on Lotus's products: mine isn't standard and I prefer it. Any car can be tweaked to better suit a particular use or driver.