RE: Driven: Westfield Sport Turbo

[ehasler]

RobM77 said:

I'd be interested to see the figures for this car, but it's worth bearing in mind that on the Circuit Driver 7 clone test a couple of years ago the R300 was the least powerful 7 there, but was 2 seconds a lap quicker than everything else around a wet circuit. The Westfield on that test had 200bhp...

I'm not sure you can read anything into a test on a wet circuit, especially as 200bhp in a 7 is probably more of a liability than an advantage in slippery conditions.

Plus it's always hard to compare different types of 7 as there is so much scope for adjustment, and a well setup Westfield will be quicker/better than a poorly setup Caterham, and vice versa.

Personally, I like Westfields (have got 2), but think Caterhams are great too - I'm just glad that we still have the choice to buy the one we like

[.Adam.]

RobM77 said:

or the advantages with the excellent Caterham owners club (L7C.

Can I add that the Westfield Owners Club, the WSCC, is excellent as well

[kambites]

Scottie - NW said:

Does the R300 have 339bhp/tonne, does it fk because it needs a driver in the car to move :-)

It still has a higher power to weight ratio with a driver (unless he's really fat) than the Westfield does without.

[RobM77]

ehasler said:

RobM77 said:

I'd be interested to see the figures for this car, but it's worth bearing in mind that on the Circuit Driver 7 clone test a couple of years ago the R300 was the least powerful 7 there, but was 2 seconds a lap quicker than everything else around a wet circuit. The Westfield on that test had 200bhp...

I'm not sure you can read anything into a test on a wet circuit, especially as 200bhp in a 7 is probably more of a liability than an advantage in slippery conditions.

Plus it's always hard to compare different types of 7 as there is so much scope for adjustment, and a well setup Westfield will be quicker/better than a poorly setup Caterham, and vice versa.

Personally, I like Westfields (have got 2), but think Caterhams are great too - I'm just glad that we still have the choice to buy the one we like

You're dead right about the setup, and either car could be optimised for the track (which isn't that hard to do). The usual consensus is that Caterham have the edge for a mixture of road and track driving.

Regarding the slippery conditions though, the driver was very competent (Mark Hales), so although the wet is a great leveller, a less powerful car should not be slower when it rains, just less far ahead.

You're right, it's a matter of taste That matters more than lap times. Although the lap time difference was down to handling apparently; the Caterham was also the only car Mark didn't spin that day.

[juansolo]

RobM77 said:

I think I'd just spend the extra £3k and get a Caterham.

The point I keep making over and over again is that the whole reason for this car is to be able to buy it in places that you CAN'T buy a Caterham or a more cooking Westfield. It is notoriously difficult to get kit cars legally on the road in some other European countries. This makes that first step simple for them. Where they take the base car from then is up to them and their local legislation.

This is why there's been a big furore over the Radical taking the production car Nurburgring record as the only place you can legally buy a road legal one is here. Sure you can buy it here and drive it in Europe. But you can't buy one in Europe or indeed import one and keep it there as it, and the Caterhams, are non- Euro compliant.

Yes you can get a better Caterham for the money, you can get better Westfields. None of that is relevant unless they are also Euro compliant.

This is actually a very forward thinking step Westfield has taken, and it would be brilliant if the likes of Caterham followed suit. It'd be great to see more British lightweight sports cars selling in Europe.

Edited by juansolo on Friday 23 October 11:29

[RobM77]

Sorry, forgot to mention that.

[juansolo]

RobM77 said:

You're dead right about the setup, and either car could be optimised for the track (which isn't that hard to do). The usual consensus is that Caterham have the edge for a mixture of road and track driving.

The usual concensus has obviously not driven enough of each car when it came up with that sweeping generalisation. I have driven lots of both and can catagorically say that not a single one of them, even the same models, handle the same. They're all hand built, they're all set up different, they all drive different. Just changing the brand of tyres on a SL can make a vast difference to the way it handles.

Edited by juansolo on Friday 23 October 11:44

[darth_pies]

juansolo said:

RobM77 said:

I think I'd just spend the extra £3k and get a Caterham.

The point I keep making over and over again is that the whole reason for this car is to be able to buy it in places that you CAN'T buy a Caterham or a more cooking Westfield. It is notoriously difficult to get kit cars legally on the road in some other European countries. This makes that first step simple for them. Where they take the base car from then is up to them and their local legislation.

This is why there's been a big furore over the Radical taking the production car Nurburgring record as the only place you can legally buy a road legal one is here. Sure you can buy it here and drive it in Europe. But you can't buy one in Europe or indeed import one and keep it there as it, and the Caterhams, are non- Euro compliant.

Yes you can get a better Caterham for the money, you can get better Westfields. None of that is relevant unless they are also Euro compliant.

This is actually a very forward thinking step Westfield has taken, and it would be brilliant if the likes of Caterham followed suit. It'd be great to see more British lightweight sports cars selling in Europe.

Edited by juansolo on Friday 23 October 11:29

Brilliant post mate.... flawed only by the inconvenient fact that Caterham sell compliant models in most European markets, Japan, USA etc. etc. and have done for years.

Pistonheads June 2009 said:

With the support of Ford, which supplies the Seven’s range of powerplants, Caterham can now boast European Community Small Series Type Approval (ECSSTA), the company says, allowing it to target previously untapped markets including Eastern Europe....

....Caterham's European customers now have access to the most comprehensive range of Sevens ever with the ECSSTA certification applying not only to the new 1998cc Ford Duratec-powered Roadsport 175 and Superlight R300, but also to the 120bhp version of the Ford Sigma 1.6-litre unit and the 2.3-litre 200bhp Duratec.

...In 2008, Caterham exported more than 50 per cent of its production to markets including France, Germany, Italy, Japan and USA.

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyI...

[juansolo]

I sit corrected. As for inconvenient? I'm not some sort of brand zealot. I'm happy you can buy Caterhams there, that's awesome.

Edited by juansolo on Friday 23 October 11:51

[briSk]

we only normally get this number of cockish responses when we have a 'news story'..!

pros:
euro approval
decent economy
12% cheaper than a caterham
it's a westfield not something more cheapskate*

cons:
turbo vs NA
maybe the weight who knows - i doubt it's actually an issue.

• i'll keep this vague but i know someone who is re-building a dax which was modified by one of the other very well known 7 builders (as in firms). whilst it's perfectly safe you should see the quality of the welding... and when this person wanted to take it in a different direction they asked the original modifier to make some parts - given their reputation (rather than the shoddy welding!) - and low and behold the bit's came back welded the wrong way around! to be fair they remade them but i really wonder how well considered some of the 'lesser' builders cars can be..

it comes down to the usual thing:
caterham coolest and most expensive and a lot of people reckon they do handle best but i have no real view
westfield is always the cheaper option
dax bit more substantial much less cool especially seeing as half of them have loads of shiny tat attached (but they CAN be berrilliant if look like a normal 'sporty' 7)
various others much of a muchness
and then robinhood..

[custardtart]

RobM77 said:

ehasler said:

RobM77 said:

I'd be interested to see the figures for this car, but it's worth bearing in mind that on the Circuit Driver 7 clone test a couple of years ago the R300 was the least powerful 7 there, but was 2 seconds a lap quicker than everything else around a wet circuit. The Westfield on that test had 200bhp...

I'm not sure you can read anything into a test on a wet circuit, especially as 200bhp in a 7 is probably more of a liability than an advantage in slippery conditions.

Plus it's always hard to compare different types of 7 as there is so much scope for adjustment, and a well setup Westfield will be quicker/better than a poorly setup Caterham, and vice versa.

Personally, I like Westfields (have got 2), but think Caterhams are great too - I'm just glad that we still have the choice to buy the one we like

You're dead right about the setup, and either car could be optimised for the track (which isn't that hard to do). The usual consensus is that Caterham have the edge for a mixture of road and track driving.

Regarding the slippery conditions though, the driver was very competent (Mark Hales), so although the wet is a great leveller, a less powerful car should not be slower when it rains, just less far ahead.

You're right, it's a matter of taste That matters more than lap times. Although the lap time difference was down to handling apparently; the Caterham was also the only car Mark didn't spin that day.

Sorry Rob I'm not sure what your point is?

Both great cars both different, dont people ever get bored trying to prove Caterham is better than Westfield? In the UK we should be celebrating the fact that we have two strong manufacturers of these cars, if one died that would be such a shame don't you think?

[darth_pies]

briSk said:

cons:
maybe the weight who knows - i doubt it's actually an issue.

Definitely an issue. Carrying a passenger noticeably takes the edge off the performance of all seven-style cars. 150kg is like having 1.5 to 2 passengers more on board the whole time. Even if the turbo helps offset that the handling and braking will absolutely suffer....although to be fair this particular Westie seems aimed at those wanting 'all the show without the go'.

Also you left out -

Cons:
Depreciation significantly higher than R300 - thus making the Westie actually more costly to run.

[.Adam.]

darth_pies said:

Brilliant post mate.... flawed only by the inconvenient fact that Caterham sell compliant models in most European markets, Japan, USA etc. etc. and have done for years.

Pistonheads June 2009 said:

With the support of Ford, which supplies the Seven’s range of powerplants, Caterham can now boast European Community Small Series Type Approval (ECSSTA), the company says, allowing it to target previously untapped markets including Eastern Europe....

....Caterham's European customers now have access to the most comprehensive range of Sevens ever with the ECSSTA certification applying not only to the new 1998cc Ford Duratec-powered Roadsport 175 and Superlight R300, but also to the 120bhp version of the Ford Sigma 1.6-litre unit and the 2.3-litre 200bhp Duratec.

...In 2008, Caterham exported more than 50 per cent of its production to markets including France, Germany, Italy, Japan and USA.

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyI...

Westfield have been selling around the world for a long time as well, they have dealers in America and Canada, all over Europe, in the Middle East, Asia and Australia.
This Westfield was the first euro-compliant car of its kind, just beating Caterham, I believe.
Regarding the Caterham that is full euro-compliant like this Westie, does anyone know if the full range can be had like this, or is it just one or two models? I guess one of these would be a better comparison to this car.

Edited by .Adam. on Friday 23 October 12:04

[RobM77]

custardtart said:

RobM77 said:

ehasler said:

RobM77 said:

I'd be interested to see the figures for this car, but it's worth bearing in mind that on the Circuit Driver 7 clone test a couple of years ago the R300 was the least powerful 7 there, but was 2 seconds a lap quicker than everything else around a wet circuit. The Westfield on that test had 200bhp...

I'm not sure you can read anything into a test on a wet circuit, especially as 200bhp in a 7 is probably more of a liability than an advantage in slippery conditions.

Plus it's always hard to compare different types of 7 as there is so much scope for adjustment, and a well setup Westfield will be quicker/better than a poorly setup Caterham, and vice versa.

Personally, I like Westfields (have got 2), but think Caterhams are great too - I'm just glad that we still have the choice to buy the one we like

You're dead right about the setup, and either car could be optimised for the track (which isn't that hard to do). The usual consensus is that Caterham have the edge for a mixture of road and track driving.

Regarding the slippery conditions though, the driver was very competent (Mark Hales), so although the wet is a great leveller, a less powerful car should not be slower when it rains, just less far ahead.

You're right, it's a matter of taste That matters more than lap times. Although the lap time difference was down to handling apparently; the Caterham was also the only car Mark didn't spin that day.

Sorry Rob I'm not sure what your point is?

Both great cars both different, dont people ever get bored trying to prove Caterham is better than Westfield? In the UK we should be celebrating the fact that we have two strong manufacturers of these cars, if one died that would be such a shame don't you think?

Sorry, my point was just that I think the Caterham is the better buy for just £3k more.

I see it as like the Caterham 21 / Renault Spider / Lotus Elise situation in 1996. The 21 and Spider were good cars, but 90% of people found the Elise better, so everyone bought those instead. It wasn't that the 21 and Spider were bad cars, just that spending a little extra meant your money was more secure and you got a better product (if you're in the 90% that prefer the Elise that is!).

Edited by RobM77 on Friday 23 October 12:23

[briSk]

darth_pies said:

briSk said:

cons:
maybe the weight who knows - i doubt it's actually an issue.

Definitely an issue. Carrying a passenger noticeably takes the edge off the performance of all seven-style cars. 150kg is like having 1.5 to 2 passengers more on board the whole time.

all i was meaning was that i wonder, like many others here, if it is actually 150kg heavier or if it's actually only 'a bit' heavier.

darth_pies said:

Even if the turbo helps offset that the handling and braking will absolutely suffer....

a fair point - it's to what extent though isn't it.

_____
it's a bit like the current CTR - we're all happy to jump on the 'torsion bar suspended bandwagon' but i bet most of us wouldn;t really tell much difference to the old boxy one. we're just offended by the apparent, but realistically and practically negligible, 'compromise' to the concept..!
_____

darth_pies said:

although to be fair this particular Westie seems aimed at those wanting 'all the show without the go'.

based on the story - I think this is either a little unfair or misunderstanding or some combination of the two. the story suggests that it's designed and built as a road car (or certainly an all rounder).and it sounds as though it may be quite accomplished at that. surely it's more appropriate to berate someone who has bought a screenless thing with rock hard suspension as a road car..(just so they can try and look more 'hardcore'!)! it sounds to me as though it's meant to be for people who have a dirty disel dog saab for the week and want a fast road car for the weekend... which seems entirely reasonable to me.

[Rickrjt]

I’ve driven a couple, not this one mind, so perhaps I was a little harsh and if anything this model moves Westfield away from Caterham territory, which might be a good thing for the firm. If it were a bit cheaper, it’d probably be a success, it might well still be, especially given the weak pound and therefore strong export potential.

[briSk]

RobM77 said:

I see it as like the Caterham 21 / Renault Spider / Lotus Elise situation in 1996. The 21 and Spider were good cars, but 90% of people found the Elise better, so everyone bought those instead. It wasn't that the 21 and Spider were bad cars, just that spending a little extra meant your money was more secure and you got a better product (if you're in the 90% that prefer the Elise that is!).

you know what, i thought i'd wager 50p on winning a fiat 500 commuter car in this morning's metro ( ) and then i thought to myself what 'other car' would i buy if i won. and i got it down to a caterham (probably some sort of roadsport for my budget) an elsie K, VX220T or spend a bit more on a spider. i know they didn;t get maximum 'autocar sign off' but that was mostly due to the perceived pace of the car. as a road car. as a 'classic car'. as a 'thing'...they're so awesome and they never depreciate. my only concern would be over ground clearance and dealing with cr4ppy b road surfacing. BUT But but... well i could be very tempted!

[.Adam.]

.Adam. said:

Regarding the Caterham that is full euro-compliant like this Westie, does anyone know if the full range can be had like this, or is it just one or two models? I guess one of these would be a better comparison to this car.

Answering my own question, Caterham have got 4 models approved to ECSSTA, including the R300.

[Sam_68]

RobM77 said:

No-one can argue with the depreciation difference between them (Caterhams depreciate really slowly, if at all, and Westfields depreciate like any other car...

That's simply not true, Rob.

The depreciation curves on Westfields and Caterhams really aren't all that different (in fact actual cash lost in depreciation can be lower on the Westy due to lower initial purchase price) and if you figure the depreciation cost per mile (which is the normal and sensible way of doing it) initial depreciation on either is horrendous - they'd both make buying a fully-specced Ssanyong Musso with lipstick pink paintwork and a beige velour interior look like a sound financial investment.

For example, if I'd bought this new, it would have cost me about £10K in depreciation before it got half way to the first service interval (about 3 months from date of purchase), if it was my 'any other car'. Put it another way - throwing my current daily driver away and buying a new one every other service would make more financial sense than buying a new, high-spec Caterham.

Edited by Sam_68 on Friday 23 October 12:46

[RobM77]

Sam_68 said:

RobM77 said:

No-one can argue with the depreciation difference between them (Caterhams depreciate really slowly, if at all, and Westfields depreciate like any other car...

That's simply not true, Rob.

The depreciation curves on Westfields and Caterhams really aren't all that different (in fact actual cash lost in depreciation can be lower on the Westy due to lower initial purchase price) and if you figure the depreciation cost per mile (which is the normal and sensible way of doing it) initial depreciation on either is horrendous - they'd both make buying a fully-specced Ssanyong Musso with lipstick pink paintwork and a beige velour interior look like a sound financial investment.

For example, if I'd bought this new, it would have cost me about £10K in depreciation before it got half way to the first service interval (about 3 months from date of purchase), if it was my 'any other car'. Put it another way - throwing my current daily driver away and buying a new one every other service would make more financial sense than buying a new, high-spec Caterham.

Edited by Sam_68 on Friday 23 October 12:46

Sorry, that's total rubbish. You've picked a one off unpopular overpriced model to try and demonstrate a trend across the range. You could have done the same with the R500. 99% of the cars that leave the Caterham factory (Roadsports, R300s and R400s) depreciate very slowly indeed. My Roadsport VVC was a typical Caterham - £21k new for its first owner, I paid £18k from Caterham themselves at 4k miles and 3 years old, and I sold it at 6 years old for £17k. Now worth about £15k.