Sport 160... what should I know?
Discussion
I'm looking very seriously at a Sport 160 and was hoping to tap the collective PH knowledge base for advice.
The car is a 2000 with 5,900 miles on it and a ticket price of 18,750.
I'd love to know anybody's experience of running costs/insurance etc. Anything else I should know about? The price seems ok to me (arranged lots of extras: removeable steering wheel, armourfend, K&N, C-service) but is it?
Gruffy
The car is a 2000 with 5,900 miles on it and a ticket price of 18,750.
I'd love to know anybody's experience of running costs/insurance etc. Anything else I should know about? The price seems ok to me (arranged lots of extras: removeable steering wheel, armourfend, K&N, C-service) but is it?
Gruffy
Great Car.... nto too bad to run - mines pretty reliable.... I've got about 15,000 miles.
This just about covers it:
Sport 160 detail
Particularly - don't worry about it stalling when cold. They all do it apparently - its an ECU feature.
Just watch the power delivery pulling out at a T-Junction when wet. The number of times I ended up looking at where I'd just been when I first had it was scarey. Go on a First Lotus course - to learn when the car is going to loose it, that saves a fortune.
This just about covers it:
Sport 160 detail
Particularly - don't worry about it stalling when cold. They all do it apparently - its an ECU feature.
Just watch the power delivery pulling out at a T-Junction when wet. The number of times I ended up looking at where I'd just been when I first had it was scarey. Go on a First Lotus course - to learn when the car is going to loose it, that saves a fortune.
Thanks Tom,
I actually test drove it yesterday in the wet and was impressed at how 'controllable' it was in those conditions. Also took out an S2 first, which I was determined to prefer (I love the looks) but it just didn't compare.
Insurance is the big factor. Can I ask who you are with? I've checked at confused.com and the best I've had back is 1.5k for a 111s (no 160s on the list!?).
I actually test drove it yesterday in the wet and was impressed at how 'controllable' it was in those conditions. Also took out an S2 first, which I was determined to prefer (I love the looks) but it just didn't compare.
Insurance is the big factor. Can I ask who you are with? I've checked at confused.com and the best I've had back is 1.5k for a 111s (no 160s on the list!?).
Darren, give Adrian Flux a call and see if they can do you anything decent. Also search the forum for 'insurance' and you'll get pretty much all the previous best deals ppl have found...
- Footman James
- Liverpool Victoria
- Tesco
- elephant.co.uk
- Adrian Flux
.... and various others seem to crop up regularly. As with all insurance tho it's a lottery as to whether or not identical twins buying identical cars and living in the same place will get the same quote!
- Footman James
- Liverpool Victoria
- Tesco
- elephant.co.uk
- Adrian Flux
.... and various others seem to crop up regularly. As with all insurance tho it's a lottery as to whether or not identical twins buying identical cars and living in the same place will get the same quote!
In the wet? Really ?
Yeah - I took out a standard S2 - I like the looks too - and sport 160 ( about the same price range ) and they are 2 very different beasts. The sport 160 just has more power - you really notice it on the motorway/at higher speeds.
I'm with elephant - instant quote, and a "Sport 160" category :-)
www.elephant.co.uk
Others often swear tesco is cheaper?
Yeah - I took out a standard S2 - I like the looks too - and sport 160 ( about the same price range ) and they are 2 very different beasts. The sport 160 just has more power - you really notice it on the motorway/at higher speeds.
I'm with elephant - instant quote, and a "Sport 160" category :-)
www.elephant.co.uk
Others often swear tesco is cheaper?
tom_burnley said:You're telling me!
In the wet? Really?The sport 160 just has more power - you really notice it on the motorway/at higher speeds.
Somebody very kindly loaned me their R500 the day before and after that the S2 just felt pedestrian but the 160 still felt brisk. I'm never normally comfortable hitting the rev limiter but in the 160 I found it in 1st, 2nd and 3rd. It just begs to be driven hard.
I was tempted to postpone the test drive until a drier day but then I figured it'd be useful to know what it's like 75% of the year
If it can impress in those conditions then I know I'm in for a treat come dry days!!Allegedly the sport 160 engine was knocked together on the cheap (off the shelf parts, no proper development) to hit that bhp figure for marketing purposes. In particular the cam timing is innacurate and the ECU mapping only half a job. There is a Lotus driveability fix which attempts to address these, but the only proper solution is vernier cams (at least on the exhaust), timed properly and set up using a remappable ECU.
It's a nice car, but the engine isn't sorted from the factory - don't let the salesman tell you you have to put up with cr*p running to get the power, it's not true.
AdrianR
It's a nice car, but the engine isn't sorted from the factory - don't let the salesman tell you you have to put up with cr*p running to get the power, it's not true.
AdrianR
Interesting adrianr
I was never quite sure.... I know you can get the software for the GEMS ECU ( mines an SVA ), and add verniers and CAMS ( was going to do this when I have the cambelt done - soon ), but I was never sure that you could get much more power out of the K - without having headwork done - so wasn't sure whether it was worth the cost?
I was never quite sure.... I know you can get the software for the GEMS ECU ( mines an SVA ), and add verniers and CAMS ( was going to do this when I have the cambelt done - soon ), but I was never sure that you could get much more power out of the K - without having headwork done - so wasn't sure whether it was worth the cost?
It's not so much the max power () but the driveability that would be improved - i.e. better spread across the rev band, no flatspots, kangarooing or stalling when cold.
I drove the Raceline 160 once - same quoted peak power figure but tractable from tickover and pulled all the way through the range, so it can be done.
AdrianR
) but the driveability that would be improved - i.e. better spread across the rev band, no flatspots, kangarooing or stalling when cold. I drove the Raceline 160 once - same quoted peak power figure but tractable from tickover and pulled all the way through the range, so it can be done.
AdrianR
Here we go again.
I posted this recently:
I think it's time we finally knocked this issue on the head.
I've seen a few things done to 160s and have tried many fixes - we seem to go round in circles and make the 'Lotus fix' out to be some new magic.
Firstly lets identify the problems with the 160s. The cams are of moderate lift and a little more duration than normal - BUT the timing is both inconsistent (fixed by the nature of the pulleys) and usually results in too much overlap. The inlet cam is usually too retarded and the exhaust too retarded (by far).
Also, the map in both varieties of ECU is shockingly bad (GEMS worse than EFi). The GEMS are in the SVA cars (first 50) and the EFis in the WVTA cars (later ones). The earthing left a lot to be desired as the wiring is a bit rearranged in both scenarios.
These problems result in rich running, poor idling, poor starting and a clogged up IACV. Largely due to pulsations being transmitted back into the plenum. So - the plenum is the route of the evil here, though the cam timing and map aren't ideal even on DTHTbs. DTHTBs mean that each cylinder has a separate air and fuel supply - so less pulsations and the car can idle.
now the potential solutions:
Vernier pulleys allow fine tuning of the cams - should be fitted by someone used to dealing with these engines and basically allow whatever cam timing you desire. They should be timed by the lift at top dead centre method (LATDC). Several settings are available, but basically it usually needs advancement of both cams to achieve a reasonable lift. The shifting can move the useable power - so as the 160 is set to be very peaky (ie so they could achieve the 160ps) with decent timing it can be shifted to the midrange making it actually seem faster with no noticeable loss of top end - bend exiting power is a lot better in the midrange. It is possible to go for mild or slightly wilder timing, basically the lower the LATDC the milder the timing. With the right settings (and personally I like low settings (mild)) it works very, very well on its own. The replacement pulley in the Lotus kit basically attempts to achieve something similar but again it's fixed and onconsistent, so will never be ideally matched to the car and cams.
BUT - the map is still an issue - the GEMS is not, I repeat for those who always argue with me - NOT remappable as it comes. It can be made remappable but for large sums of money (equivalent cost to a new ECU). Lotus do offer a remapping of the EFi ECU, which is part of the driveability kit. Again this is a fixed map and is not matched to the specific cam timing and driving characteristics / needs of the owner. This is where a mappable ECU comes in and the best VFM comes from Emerald IMHO. There are plenty of home grown 160 maps out there (I have dozens) and usually one can be found to run the car quite adequately without a mapping session on the RR. But excellent results can be achived with a RR session.
So in summary I would recommend verniers, an accurate retime (done PROPERLY), a 160TB and an emerald ECU. That should result in a car that starts, idles and pulls right through the rev range...ask Sho - I did exactly that to his.
Hope this helps and sorry for sounding opinionated but I'm so sick of reading and hearing the utter crap that is spouted about the 160s.
I posted this recently:
I think it's time we finally knocked this issue on the head.
I've seen a few things done to 160s and have tried many fixes - we seem to go round in circles and make the 'Lotus fix' out to be some new magic.
Firstly lets identify the problems with the 160s. The cams are of moderate lift and a little more duration than normal - BUT the timing is both inconsistent (fixed by the nature of the pulleys) and usually results in too much overlap. The inlet cam is usually too retarded and the exhaust too retarded (by far).
Also, the map in both varieties of ECU is shockingly bad (GEMS worse than EFi). The GEMS are in the SVA cars (first 50) and the EFis in the WVTA cars (later ones). The earthing left a lot to be desired as the wiring is a bit rearranged in both scenarios.
These problems result in rich running, poor idling, poor starting and a clogged up IACV. Largely due to pulsations being transmitted back into the plenum. So - the plenum is the route of the evil here, though the cam timing and map aren't ideal even on DTHTbs. DTHTBs mean that each cylinder has a separate air and fuel supply - so less pulsations and the car can idle.
now the potential solutions:
Vernier pulleys allow fine tuning of the cams - should be fitted by someone used to dealing with these engines and basically allow whatever cam timing you desire. They should be timed by the lift at top dead centre method (LATDC). Several settings are available, but basically it usually needs advancement of both cams to achieve a reasonable lift. The shifting can move the useable power - so as the 160 is set to be very peaky (ie so they could achieve the 160ps) with decent timing it can be shifted to the midrange making it actually seem faster with no noticeable loss of top end - bend exiting power is a lot better in the midrange. It is possible to go for mild or slightly wilder timing, basically the lower the LATDC the milder the timing. With the right settings (and personally I like low settings (mild)) it works very, very well on its own. The replacement pulley in the Lotus kit basically attempts to achieve something similar but again it's fixed and onconsistent, so will never be ideally matched to the car and cams.
BUT - the map is still an issue - the GEMS is not, I repeat for those who always argue with me - NOT remappable as it comes. It can be made remappable but for large sums of money (equivalent cost to a new ECU). Lotus do offer a remapping of the EFi ECU, which is part of the driveability kit. Again this is a fixed map and is not matched to the specific cam timing and driving characteristics / needs of the owner. This is where a mappable ECU comes in and the best VFM comes from Emerald IMHO. There are plenty of home grown 160 maps out there (I have dozens) and usually one can be found to run the car quite adequately without a mapping session on the RR. But excellent results can be achived with a RR session.
So in summary I would recommend verniers, an accurate retime (done PROPERLY), a 160TB and an emerald ECU. That should result in a car that starts, idles and pulls right through the rev range...ask Sho - I did exactly that to his.
Hope this helps and sorry for sounding opinionated but I'm so sick of reading and hearing the utter crap that is spouted about the 160s.
you may want to read these, too.
cheers
www.british-cars.co.uk/cgi-bin/gen5?runprog=lotusbbs&mode=archiveth&subject=2001&subjectar=2001&thread=2003060814093326643
www.british-cars.co.uk/cgi-bin/gen5?runprog=lotusbbs&mode=archiveth&subject=2001&subjectar=2001&thread=200407270936234124
There is also a Lotus official kit which many defend, though I have to admit I've never fitted one - I fail to see how it can work with fixed timing see here, where I get a little telling off:
www.british-cars.co.uk/cgi-bin/gen5?runprog=lotusbbs&mode=archiveth&subject=2001&subjectar=2001&thread=2004072611280526719
cheers
www.british-cars.co.uk/cgi-bin/gen5?runprog=lotusbbs&mode=archiveth&subject=2001&subjectar=2001&thread=2003060814093326643
www.british-cars.co.uk/cgi-bin/gen5?runprog=lotusbbs&mode=archiveth&subject=2001&subjectar=2001&thread=200407270936234124
There is also a Lotus official kit which many defend, though I have to admit I've never fitted one - I fail to see how it can work with fixed timing see here, where I get a little telling off:
www.british-cars.co.uk/cgi-bin/gen5?runprog=lotusbbs&mode=archiveth&subject=2001&subjectar=2001&thread=2004072611280526719
I've heard that 160's can be a pig around town, my brother has a 150 Elise (head conversion) and i need a 160 to keep ahead. Is this the case or just a couple of people with poor running examples. If you drive a 160, what would you be able to tell me, i'm also considering a 160 or possibly a standard and do the head conversion up to 150. What do you reckon?
Gassing Station | Elise/Exige/Europa/340R | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff