Why is the Lotus Esprit not appreciating in value??

[MC Bodge]

peatmoor said:

When I was born, The Spy Who Loved Me was 5 years old already. It must have taken at least another 5-10 years for me to watch it, but I do remember being completely smitten with the Esprit.

Great Bond theme tune too

[Finlandese]

TP321 said:

Stelvio1 said:

I can only comment on my personal experience - I purchased a S3 Turbo Dry Sump for just under £6k 3 years ago (spent £2k on it whilst in my ownership)and sold it to an European buyer last year for £18k - wish my other 'investments' had returned equal return in 2 years

You just got lucky - don't see other owners being in this position.

Friend of mine just sold a perfect lhd Giugiaro Turbo at between 40 to 50k euros and he has a lhd S1 for sale at 39k.

[budfox]

MC Bodge said:

Great Bond theme tune too

Indeed, probably the best of all, though I'd put a left-field choice "All Time High" as the best of the lot.

[MC Bodge]

kiseca said:

I don't really get why there are so many negative comments about the performance. The Esprits were always quicker than the contemporary Ferraris and Porsches. Then the SE came along and posted standing start and in gear acceleration times that beat the Countach QV! Never mind the V8 which one mag described as a "force of nature".

One thing the Esprit has always been is astonishingly quick for its time and for its power. Even the earliest Turbos, 34 years old now, aren't going to be embarrassed by todays best hot hatches. Unless they break down.

Yes, they were considered fast and great handling in the 80s. Some people must have short or non-existent memories.

They probably don't weigh much compared with a contemporary car and a lot less than a modern one.

[blade7]

MC Bodge said:

kiseca said:

I don't really get why there are so many negative comments about the performance. The Esprits were always quicker than the contemporary Ferraris and Porsches. Then the SE came along and posted standing start and in gear acceleration times that beat the Countach QV! Never mind the V8 which one mag described as a "force of nature".

One thing the Esprit has always been is astonishingly quick for its time and for its power. Even the earliest Turbos, 34 years old now, aren't going to be embarrassed by todays best hot hatches. Unless they break down.

Yes, they were considered fast and great handling in the 80s. Some people must have short or non-existent memories.

They probably don't weigh much compared with a contemporary car and a lot less than a modern one.

In the 80's they weren't faster than the 944 turbo.

[Stelvio1]

blade7 said:

MC Bodge said:

kiseca said:

I don't really get why there are so many negative comments about the performance. The Esprits were always quicker than the contemporary Ferraris and Porsches. Then the SE came along and posted standing start and in gear acceleration times that beat the Countach QV! Never mind the V8 which one mag described as a "force of nature".

One thing the Esprit has always been is astonishingly quick for its time and for its power. Even the earliest Turbos, 34 years old now, aren't going to be embarrassed by todays best hot hatches. Unless they break down.

Yes, they were considered fast and great handling in the 80s. Some people must have short or non-existent memories.

They probably don't weigh much compared with a contemporary car and a lot less than a modern one.

In the 80's they weren't faster than the 944 turbo.

Erm I quote an independent site:

According to the Car Specifications Directory, the base 1986 Porsche 944 accelerates from 0 to 60 mph in 8.9 seconds, running through the quarter mile in 16.6 seconds. The 944 Turbo is considerably faster, accelerating from 0 to 60 mph in 6.0 seconds with the quarter mile coming in 14.4 seconds. Porsche claims a top speed of 138 mph for the naturally aspirated car and 152 mph for the Turbo. Drivers should expect 21 mpg in the city and 26 mpg on the highway for the base car. For the Turbo, fuel consumption should be around 19 mpg in the city and 25 mpg on the highway

Read more : http://www.ehow.com/list_7554825_1986-porsche-944-...

The S3 Turbo buries the 944 Turbo performance figures - let alone the later more powerful 80' Esprits -

[blade7]

ehow FFS . Road test reprints on the Esprit sites suggest the 944 and Esprit turbos were closely matched.

[jhoneyball]

As an ex lotus owner (Excel Celebration in red, one of 3 (?) made) I wouldnt go near them now. Parts supply back then was horrendous, and that is a *huge* impact on the desirability of a car as it moves into middle age.

If I remember rightly (it was a decade ago) there were no inlet camshafts. No wiring looms. The parts operation had been shut down, or moved to Proton or something equally disasterous.

Sure, there is a cottage industry keeping these things going. But lack of any sort of meaningful factory interest is a killer. Maybe things have improved since then. But I doubt it

[kiseca]

blade7 said:

In the 80's they weren't faster than the 944 turbo.

They accelerated faster than the 911 carreras of the time, never mind the 944. The SE was quicker than the 911 Turbo until the 964 came out.

I've never seen a single article from the period where the road tester has suggested that the Esprit Turbo could do with a bit more pace. On the other hand, I've read over and over again about how quick they were.

[Finlandese]

jhoneyball said:

As an ex lotus owner (Excel Celebration in red, one of 3 (?) made) I wouldnt go near them now. Parts supply back then was horrendous, and that is a *huge* impact on the desirability of a car as it moves into middle age.

If I remember rightly (it was a decade ago) there were no inlet camshafts. No wiring looms. The parts operation had been shut down, or moved to Proton or something equally disasterous.

Sure, there is a cottage industry keeping these things going. But lack of any sort of meaningful factory interest is a killer. Maybe things have improved since then. But I doubt it

As a current Excel and Esprit owner I have to say that things have changed. The parts supply from independents is in my opinion excellent and as far as factory involvement goes, I can´t imagine many manufacturers have programs such as the one in the link below for their classic models:

http://www.lotusespritworld.co.uk/EGuides/EModific...

[jhoneyball]

Good to hear things have improved then

[Fat Albert]

kiseca said:

blade7 said:

In the 80's they weren't faster than the 944 turbo.

They accelerated faster than the 911 carreras of the time, never mind the 944. The SE was quicker than the 911 Turbo until the 964 came out.

I've never seen a single article from the period where the road tester has suggested that the Esprit Turbo could do with a bit more pace. On the other hand, I've read over and over again about how quick they were.

The Esprit Turbo and 944 T were often tested against each other at the time and tended to come out equal in terms of overall experience and choice was down to personal taste, either solid german Engineering or british Nimbleness, but both with excellent handling and Chassis

BTW the 944 turbo was faster, quicker and more Expensive than the 911 SC 3.2 in 1988 (£33k vs £32k of the 911 and £22k of the base 944 Lux)

I still want an Esprit, the S1/S2 were the best looking ones, but I also like the looks of the later ones too....so I may have to have both at some point!

[peatmoor]

Finlandese, your Esprit must be a rare thing on Finnish roads. Do you know if you are the only one?

I just moved to Helsinki, all I've seen of interest has been American muscle - which is a nice change actually because you don't see much in the UK.

[The Pits]

Pat your Turbo HC looks to be a particularly stunning example. However did you sell it twice?!

By way of encouragement for you to post some more pics here is another one of mine.



and a video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKY2cCswG0Q&li...

[benters]

Finlandese said:

As a current Excel and Esprit owner I have to say that things have changed. The parts supply from independents is in my opinion excellent and as far as factory involvement goes, I can´t imagine many manufacturers have programs such as the one in the link below for their classic models:

http://www.lotusespritworld.co.uk/EGuides/EModific...

I have not had any issues yet with getting parts for mine. . more often than not there seems to be a choice of where to buy, not, can i buy. . fortunately

mine is a 98 car though, so perhaps that makes a difference.

As for the original question on values, i would be very surprised if i didn't get more for mine than i paid, and i cant say that for any of my other cars i have owned so, in truth the Esprit has done me fine thanks.

[Le TVR]

benters said:

As for the original question on values, i would be very surprised if i didn't get more for mine than i paid,

^^This^^

Here in France the situation is quite different. The Esprit (and Lotus generally) is extremely highly regarded. You will struggle to get any Esprit for under 25,000 euro. 40,000 euro might get you a very early V8.
The last late model V8 to change hands was just over 60,000 euro and as for Sport300s you're looking at 65k or more.
Good ones get sold very quickly by word of mouth and never even get advertised.

What I've been offered for mine compared to what I paid is better than 100% return but it's not for sale.

[MarshPhantom]

Impasse said:

MarshPhantom said:

Cool at the time, now I'd much rather have an Alpine GTA which seems like a bargoni compared with the Espirit. Small engines and performance that didn't really match the looks doesn't help the Lotus.

1989 GTA V6 Turbo. 200bhp, 0-60 in 6.3 secs, 155mph
1989 Esprit SE 264bhp, 0-60 in 4.7 secs, 165mph.

Yep, I can understand your thoughts...

I was referring to the earlier versions re lack of performance - 2 litre 4 pot engine with 160 brake doesn't really cut the mustard in something that looks like the Esprit.

I personally much prefer the Alpine.

[FeelingLucky]

MarshPhantom said:

Impasse said:

MarshPhantom said:

Cool at the time, now I'd much rather have an Alpine GTA which seems like a bargoni compared with the Espirit. Small engines and performance that didn't really match the looks doesn't help the Lotus.

1989 GTA V6 Turbo. 200bhp, 0-60 in 6.3 secs, 155mph
1989 Esprit SE 264bhp, 0-60 in 4.7 secs, 165mph.

Yep, I can understand your thoughts...

I was referring to the earlier versions re lack of performance - 2 litre 4 pot engine with 160 brake doesn't really cut the mustard in something that looks like the Esprit.

I personally much prefer the Alpine.

GT (non turbo) The PRV engine in the naturally aspirated model was identical to the version used in the Renault 25, a 2849 cc unit producing 160 hp (119 kW).

Possibly a 6 pot engine producing the same power does cut it in something that looks a little odd?

[Impasse]

FeelingLucky said:

MarshPhantom said:

Impasse said:

MarshPhantom said:

Cool at the time, now I'd much rather have an Alpine GTA which seems like a bargoni compared with the Espirit. Small engines and performance that didn't really match the looks doesn't help the Lotus.

1989 GTA V6 Turbo. 200bhp, 0-60 in 6.3 secs, 155mph
1989 Esprit SE 264bhp, 0-60 in 4.7 secs, 165mph.

Yep, I can understand your thoughts...

I was referring to the earlier versions re lack of performance - 2 litre 4 pot engine with 160 brake doesn't really cut the mustard in something that looks like the Esprit.

I personally much prefer the Alpine.

GT (non turbo) The PRV engine in the naturally aspirated model was identical to the version used in the Renault 25, a 2849 cc unit producing 160 hp (119 kW).

Possibly a 6 pot engine producing the same power does cut it in something that looks a little odd?

Not only that, the 4 cylinder 160bhp car was released in 1976! Its performance figures were perfectly acceptable for the era.

[Scotty2]

Mine. 89SE Chassis no 11.