RE: Caterham confirms supercharged R600
Discussion
I race my 100bhp Caterham in a single-spec race series, and although I've had this Caterham since 2009, and it's only modestly powered, I'm still not getting 100% out of it.
I have tested an R300 on a greasy Rockingham circuit and exploiting that car to it's full potential seems as though it'd require super-human skill to me!
I have tested an R300 on a greasy Rockingham circuit and exploiting that car to it's full potential seems as though it'd require super-human skill to me!
HustleRussell said:
Blindswelledrat- look up 'economies of scale', and for further reading, research the cost of land, labour, overheads etc in the UK and compare & contrast with those of 'Asia, Africa, South America, New Zealand and Thailand' (assembly facilities for Mk3 Focus according to Wikipedia). Then consider the number of Caterhams produced vs the number of Ford Foci.
Fair point.DOes it make the car good value because the company making it are highly inefficient though?
Not in my opinion. I would still argue that you are getting very little for an awful lot of money.
How does the disproportionate overheads of caterham render my assertion that it is overpriced laughable?
blindswelledrat said:
I am purely referring to the cost of producing a 300bhp car.
I think I get what you're saying and will attempt a grown up response. I suppose the cost of the Catherham V say the Evo or Focus RS comes from it being a low volume car maker, who is buying in engines and then rebuilding them, along with producing their own chassis and doing their own development work. They are essentially producing race cars and then getting them SVA approved rather than the other way around.
The larger car makers build more of the same basic shell/chassis and then add different bits to it, offset development costs over their whole range and make profit from selling engines to the likes of Catherham and cut costs through platform/drivetrain sharing.
If ford were building the 7 without any competition you would expect them to be either cheaper or have a bigger margin than they do for Catherham.
ETA: I believe the luxury stuff that you get in a proper car, where we are led to believe the money goes is actually very cheap as part of the overall package.
Edited by Chrisw666 on Thursday 4th October 12:58
robmlufc said:
blindswelledrat said:
Sigh.
Of course it wouldn't. That isnt my point in the slightest.
I am purely referring to the cost of producing a 300bhp car.
Slower car costs less, faster car costs more. Makes sense. Of course it wouldn't. That isnt my point in the slightest.
I am purely referring to the cost of producing a 300bhp car.
Edited by blindswelledrat on Thursday 4th October 13:00
scubadude said:
<mouth hanging open in shock smilie>
What?
I bet your some nutless looser who works in health and safety, has to do a risk accessment before using a toilet and buys bread thats pre-sliced and the crust is removed aren't you?
Joe Public does not buy Caterhams, you need to be informed and finaced to even consider one.
There needs to be risk in life, there needs to be 300bhp lightweight cars, there needs to be sharp points on scissors and some source of adrenalin- modern man is reduced to such a dribbling wreck by the nanny state as it is and you want driver aids on a powerful lightweight specialist car???
Christ- grow a real pair or hand your girlie ones in on the way out sunshine- this is a motoring forum FFS.
Good stuff Caterham, this looks awesome- PLEASE do not ever listen to boneheads like the above. The best traction control for a caterham is a rightfoot with a brain behind it.
Just IMVHO of course :-)
But it appears you drive a Renault Megane 1.9Dci SportTourer?What?
I bet your some nutless looser who works in health and safety, has to do a risk accessment before using a toilet and buys bread thats pre-sliced and the crust is removed aren't you?
Joe Public does not buy Caterhams, you need to be informed and finaced to even consider one.
There needs to be risk in life, there needs to be 300bhp lightweight cars, there needs to be sharp points on scissors and some source of adrenalin- modern man is reduced to such a dribbling wreck by the nanny state as it is and you want driver aids on a powerful lightweight specialist car???
Christ- grow a real pair or hand your girlie ones in on the way out sunshine- this is a motoring forum FFS.
Good stuff Caterham, this looks awesome- PLEASE do not ever listen to boneheads like the above. The best traction control for a caterham is a rightfoot with a brain behind it.
Just IMVHO of course :-)
The poster is totally correct, anything more that 200HP in a Caterham on the road is utterly pointless, I would say 180-200 is the sweetsport. Thereafter it becomes more about managing grip. Perhaps before you start throwing insults around you should engage your brain a little?
Chrisw666 said:
I think I get what you're saying and will attempt a grown up response.
I suppose the cost of the Catherham V say the Evo or Focus RS comes from it being a low volume car maker, who is buying in engines and then rebuilding them, along with producing their own chassis and doing their own development work. They are essentially producing race cars and then getting them SVA approved rather than the other way around.
The larger car makers build more of the same basic shell/chassis and then add different bits to it, offset development costs over their whole range and make profit from selling engines to the likes of Catherham and cut costs through platform/drivetrain sharing.
If ford were building the 7 without any competition you would expect them to be either cheaper or have a bigger margin than they do for Catherham.
I agree with you, and this does explain it's pricing. I assume you are correct.I suppose the cost of the Catherham V say the Evo or Focus RS comes from it being a low volume car maker, who is buying in engines and then rebuilding them, along with producing their own chassis and doing their own development work. They are essentially producing race cars and then getting them SVA approved rather than the other way around.
The larger car makers build more of the same basic shell/chassis and then add different bits to it, offset development costs over their whole range and make profit from selling engines to the likes of Catherham and cut costs through platform/drivetrain sharing.
If ford were building the 7 without any competition you would expect them to be either cheaper or have a bigger margin than they do for Catherham.
But again, this doesn't make my assertion incorrect. If we accept that due to Caterham being a low volume car maker its costs are high. The net result is that you are paying an awful lot of money for not very much car. That's all I've said.
blindswelledrat said:
Sigh.
Of course it wouldn't. That isnt my point in the slightest.
I am purely referring to the cost of producing a 300bhp car.
~£45k is fair. I would expect their bill of materials to be ~£20-25k, possibly a touch over, with the engine and box being half of that alone. And say £2k of labour? I've worked on a small car project before so got a reasonable feel of these things.Of course it wouldn't. That isnt my point in the slightest.
I am purely referring to the cost of producing a 300bhp car.
Low volume production is expensive, no two ways about it. If you look at the Caterham and compare it to a Focus ST, the Caterham wheels & tyres will be approaching £1k, the gearbox £4-5k, engine same again, it all adds up. In the Ford, it would be a fraction of that.
Add development costs, marketing, overheads and profit and £45k seems reasonable. I doubt they'll be making huge profits out of it. Look at an Atom 300 - they're generally around £50k when you've ticked a few boxes.
And ultimately what it costs to make doesn't really matter - it's whether they can sell them at that price. I paid about £45k for my R500 a couple of years back, and I reckon it was welll worth it.
yonex said:
But it appears you drive a Renault Megane 1.9Dci SportTourer?
The poster is totally correct, anything more that 200HP in a Caterham on the road is utterly pointless, I would say 180-200 is the sweetsport. Thereafter it becomes more about managing grip. Perhaps before you start throwing insults around you should engage your brain a little?
Is managing grip not also fun? I know I'd enjoy giving it a try, not getting 100% out of the car on the road wouldn't bother me, I'd get a lot of satisfaction from exploring the depths of its talents while challenging myself to eek a bit more from the motor. The poster is totally correct, anything more that 200HP in a Caterham on the road is utterly pointless, I would say 180-200 is the sweetsport. Thereafter it becomes more about managing grip. Perhaps before you start throwing insults around you should engage your brain a little?
blindswelledrat said:
HustleRussell said:
Blindswelledrat- look up 'economies of scale', and for further reading, research the cost of land, labour, overheads etc in the UK and compare & contrast with those of 'Asia, Africa, South America, New Zealand and Thailand' (assembly facilities for Mk3 Focus according to Wikipedia). Then consider the number of Caterhams produced vs the number of Ford Foci.
Fair point.DOes it make the car good value because the company making it are highly inefficient though?
Not in my opinion. I would still argue that you are getting very little for an awful lot of money.
How does the disproportionate overheads of caterham render my assertion that it is overpriced laughable?
It's a bit like comparing a broadsword with a samurai sword, you get more with the broadsword (weight, length etc) but the samurai sword will be more clinical.
Hopefully this makes sense, it almost didn't when I was tping it!
edb49 said:
~£45k is fair. I would expect their bill of materials to be ~£20-25k, possibly a touch over, with the engine and box being half of that alone. And say £2k of labour? I've worked on a small car project before so got a reasonable feel of these things.
Low volume production is expensive, no two ways about it. If you look at the Caterham and compare it to a Focus ST, the Caterham wheels & tyres will be approaching £1k, the gearbox £4-5k, engine same again, it all adds up. In the Ford, it would be a fraction of that.
Add development costs, marketing, overheads and profit and £45k seems reasonable. I doubt they'll be making huge profits out of it. Look at an Atom 300 - they're generally around £50k when you've ticked a few boxes.
And ultimately what it costs to make doesn't really matter - it's whether they can sell them at that price. I paid about £45k for my R500 a couple of years back, and I reckon it was welll worth it.
Good post. I think our opinions just differ. My natural response reading your first line was "Easy to say, but would you put your money where your mouth is?" only to subsequently read that you had.Low volume production is expensive, no two ways about it. If you look at the Caterham and compare it to a Focus ST, the Caterham wheels & tyres will be approaching £1k, the gearbox £4-5k, engine same again, it all adds up. In the Ford, it would be a fraction of that.
Add development costs, marketing, overheads and profit and £45k seems reasonable. I doubt they'll be making huge profits out of it. Look at an Atom 300 - they're generally around £50k when you've ticked a few boxes.
And ultimately what it costs to make doesn't really matter - it's whether they can sell them at that price. I paid about £45k for my R500 a couple of years back, and I reckon it was welll worth it.
Personally I just need better value for money in my cars and the reality of the low-volume production costs doesnt really add to that vaule in any way (in my view). Its not that I dont like them, I love them, I just think of Caterhams as an awful lot of fun for little money and this doesnt fit the bill at all!
Glad you're right about them being able to sell at that price, too, because I am glad these things get made. Just not for me!
blindswelledrat said:
The net result is that you are paying an awful lot of money for not very much car. That's all I've said.
I agree, but like anything niche it has a cult following and some will love it some won't. If I was buying a Catherham I'd want to buy a kit (It's been an ambition of mine for years) or would buy a used one, but at the point it came to buying it I would think what else can I buy that I would use more often and would give me a good portion of the enjoyment.
I don't think we can rationalise car prices and values too heavily because it is a purely personal preference thing.
Chrisw666 said:
Is managing grip not also fun? I know I'd enjoy giving it a try, not getting 100% out of the car on the road wouldn't bother me, I'd get a lot of satisfaction from exploring the depths of its talents while challenging myself to eek a bit more from the motor.
It can be but take an R500 out in the wet and you'll find it nowhere near as rewarding as a Roadsport etc. The dynamic of the car changes from something that is very well balanced to something that you point and squirt everywhere. Less really is more with them; I spent a fair amount of time and effort chasing power only to realise I was going the wrong way 
Don't get me wrong its nice having bonkers output sometimes but overall a sweet spinning 1600 would probably be my choice of motor. The supercharged car is pretty cool but I would be looking at a Radical if I wanted serious track performance. Each to their own.ikarl said:
You need to look at it another way, you're not paying for what you're not getting. You're paying for the skills and expertise that went into making it pretty much THE best 'kit' type car in the world.
It's a bit like comparing a broadsword with a samurai sword, you get more with the broadsword (weight, length etc) but the samurai sword will be more clinical.
Hopefully this makes sense, it almost didn't when I was tping it!
It's a bit like comparing a broadsword with a samurai sword, you get more with the broadsword (weight, length etc) but the samurai sword will be more clinical.
Hopefully this makes sense, it almost didn't when I was tping it!
That all depends on whether the broadsword has a supercharger and air conditioning.Anyway, have a long long look at yourself. When normal people analogise, they invent an analogy that they assume most people will relate to. And the first thing you think of is...... swords?
yonex said:
It can be but take an R500 out in the wet and you'll find it nowhere near as rewarding as a Roadsport etc. The dynamic of the car changes from something that is very well balanced to something that you point and squirt everywhere.
I've always viewed Catherhams and Westfields like they would be a point and squirt device. I don't think I have the balls to go near the limits of even a 1.6 roadsports grip in corners which is why I'd compensate my lack of talent with straight line lunacy. blindswelledrat said:
HustleRussell said:
Blindswelledrat- look up 'economies of scale', and for further reading, research the cost of land, labour, overheads etc in the UK and compare & contrast with those of 'Asia, Africa, South America, New Zealand and Thailand' (assembly facilities for Mk3 Focus according to Wikipedia). Then consider the number of Caterhams produced vs the number of Ford Foci.
Fair point.DOes it make the car good value because the company making it are highly inefficient though?
Not in my opinion. I would still argue that you are getting very little for an awful lot of money.
How does the disproportionate overheads of caterham render my assertion that it is overpriced laughable?
However, the Caterham is a niche product and as such attracts a small market, so it will never be mass produced (in fact, it would be literally impossible to significantly increase production volume for legislative reasons).
So, Caterham must develop their chassis, engines, gearboxes, other components all the wile, whilst making a profit on the small numbers of cars they sell which is large enough to cover costs and produce a profit. The cost per unit to Caterham is high, so the sale cost must be high, plus a not-so-insignificant mark-up to cover the more expensive and less efficient design, development and production methods.
And that's before you consider the fact that Caterham spend a lot of money buying engines from Ford, differentials from BMW etc etc rather than developing and mass-producing their own.
And that's before you look at how much it costs for Caterham to have a chassis assembled by hand on a jig in Somerset, welded together, powdercoated etc etc compared to a steel floorpan pressed at a rate of several per minute.
So that begins to explain why Caterhams are expensive.
But, Caterham are still in business- thriving, in fact. So there must be more than enough folk out there who understand all this and are well-off enough to buy them. This fact alone is enough to justify the price when you are already building as many as you can.
And then you look at the competition in the 'top-spec Caterham' marketplace- Atoms, KTM X-bows etc etc. All more expensive. Justification number 3.
And then there's the 'want' factor. Caterham has an F1 team. It's historically linked to Lotus. It makes the closest car to 'the original' 7.
Finally there is that old cliche- 'greater than the sum of it's parts'. Even if they were cheap to make, they'd still be 'worth' simular money, because there is nothing which comes close for the money in terms of new cars. No downwards market force or significant competition. That's why they barely depreciate.
Chrisw666 said:
yonex said:
It can be but take an R500 out in the wet and you'll find it nowhere near as rewarding as a Roadsport etc. The dynamic of the car changes from something that is very well balanced to something that you point and squirt everywhere.
I've always viewed Catherhams and Westfields like they would be a point and squirt device. I don't think I have the balls to go near the limits of even a 1.6 roadsports grip in corners which is why I'd compensate my lack of talent with straight line lunacy. Adma/HR
What this boils down to is purely opinion.
In your view £45k represents good value due to the high costs from a niche company. It is a valid opinion, and as this thread demonstrates, one shared by many.
In my view £45k represents poor value because the net result of those high costs are not very much car for your money compared with alernatives. This is an equally valid opinion.
What this boils down to is purely opinion.
In your view £45k represents good value due to the high costs from a niche company. It is a valid opinion, and as this thread demonstrates, one shared by many.
In my view £45k represents poor value because the net result of those high costs are not very much car for your money compared with alernatives. This is an equally valid opinion.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff