RE: Driven: Lotus Evora IPS
Discussion
McSam said:
kambites said:
I can see that the size (and weight) of the car matters, but why is a 1000kg car with a 300bhp 6 litre V8 inherently less sporty than the same car with a 300bhp car with a 3 litre V6?
Drive two cars like that back to back and you will answer your own question, surely?You'd have one great big lazy low-revving torque-laden engine making a heavy-nosed car, or a much more compact and lighter revvy and responsive high-end unit. Think I know what I'd take it my sports car, same power figures or not!
300 might disagree with me, but hey
Also I suspect the LS V8 weighs a very similar amount as most DOHC V6's, maybe slightly less than some.
Also PEAK power figures are not always a good comparison. Large displacement will make more torque, so for most of the rpm range they'll also be making more HP more of the time.
300bhp/ton said:
They DO need to target world markets though, the UK is tiny even if it is Lotus's current biggest market.
As for the sales - easy! It's price.
Lotus while never a budget car was affordable and attainable, hence the success of the Elan M100 and Elise. Lots of people could buy and run them. The Esprit despite its long production run sold in relatively low numbers, esp towards the end.
The Evora is a darn good car, but £60k is a lot of money. For example a 340hp Z4 is £45k which maybe isn't as supercar looking as the Evora still hugely out performs it for a fair chunk of money less.
This means for someone to buy an Evora you need to critical things:
-A real WANT to buy an Evora
-Enough money
There are probably lots in the WANT camp, many current Elise owners maybe. But the price difference is huge. Today's Elise owners probably aren't tomorrows Evora owners, or at least a large percentage of them aren't - error 1
Enough money. There are lots of people with the money. But at this price level it opens up a huge array of options. And if a person isn't in the WANT camp, then the Evora probably doesn't even get a mention, let alone considered.
BTW - look what happened to TVR when they also moved to this level of pricing (and arguably Marcos too).
Agree with that. As for the sales - easy! It's price.
Lotus while never a budget car was affordable and attainable, hence the success of the Elan M100 and Elise. Lots of people could buy and run them. The Esprit despite its long production run sold in relatively low numbers, esp towards the end.
The Evora is a darn good car, but £60k is a lot of money. For example a 340hp Z4 is £45k which maybe isn't as supercar looking as the Evora still hugely out performs it for a fair chunk of money less.
This means for someone to buy an Evora you need to critical things:
-A real WANT to buy an Evora
-Enough money
There are probably lots in the WANT camp, many current Elise owners maybe. But the price difference is huge. Today's Elise owners probably aren't tomorrows Evora owners, or at least a large percentage of them aren't - error 1
Enough money. There are lots of people with the money. But at this price level it opens up a huge array of options. And if a person isn't in the WANT camp, then the Evora probably doesn't even get a mention, let alone considered.
BTW - look what happened to TVR when they also moved to this level of pricing (and arguably Marcos too).
It does not have the 'first sight' Wow! I really want on of those look. It is a big car for Britain's country roads. It is Lotus' 'children carrier' Not exciting enough, a lot of money, at a level where there are plenty of very desirable cars in new and a couple of years old range.
Pehaps Lotus have settled for just the "Desperate Housewives" market in the USA with this car .
Edited by RTH on Wednesday 15th June 11:14
300bhp/ton said:
DaveR said:
That's effectively what I was trying to say - you just made a better job of it!
300bhp from 3 litres might be fairly sporty. 300bhp from a massive lump isn't.
Depends what it's in though. Also 300hp from an unstressed motor will likely to 200,000-250,000 miles on nothing but oil and filter changes.300bhp from 3 litres might be fairly sporty. 300bhp from a massive lump isn't.
My leaf springs comment was in jest, of course, but do Americans tend to cling onto old tech a bit longer, perhaps as a cultural thing? For example, they were still running big heavy front engined cars at Indianapolis when most of Europe had gone over to mid engined monocoque, and they only started to follow our lead when Lotus went over in '65 with a 38 and obliterated the competition. I'm wondering whether the engine tech these days is also a bit behind.
RobM77 said:
In truth though, most BMW, Merc, VW and Audi engines will do that. I took a 325i to 150k miles and it never used a drop of oil, and I know people who've gone well over 200k, even 300k. The gearbox bearings tend to suffer, and you'll need a new clutch at some point but the actual engine shouldn't need opening.
That's not been my experience of modern European cars. Most of them have regular replacements of far more than oil and filters and I don't even know anyone who's got a European car to 100k without having to repair something outside the service schedule. I know a few who have with Japanese cars. In a copy of Car Magazine that I bought earlier in the year they said don't buy an Evora as there is a material facelift looming.... Does the launch of this 'box in the present shape mean that this is any less iminient? I would have thought that a facelift would have been a good time to roll out a new 'box...
"You have probably worked out that the Lotus Evora IPS has been born of convenience; in a market that favours twin clutches and robotised manual gearboxes, expedience and cost means Lotus has had to go down the torque converter route."
Doesn't really fit with having the funds to develop 3 or 4 new cars that. Is the Toyota V6 getting carried over into any of the newer models? If it is then I would have thought this was the ideal opportunity to develop a two pedal engine and 'box combo that is more sports car orientated than than a TC 'box.
Doesn't really fit with having the funds to develop 3 or 4 new cars that. Is the Toyota V6 getting carried over into any of the newer models? If it is then I would have thought this was the ideal opportunity to develop a two pedal engine and 'box combo that is more sports car orientated than than a TC 'box.
RobM77 said:
In truth though, most BMW, Merc, VW and Audi engines will do that. I took a 325i to 150k miles and it never used a drop of oil, and I know people who've gone well over 200k, even 300k. The gearbox bearings tend to suffer, and you'll need a new clutch at some point but the actual engine shouldn't need opening.
My leaf springs comment was in jest, of course, but do Americans tend to cling onto old tech a bit longer, perhaps as a cultural thing? For example, they were still running big heavy front engined cars at Indianapolis when most of Europe had gone over to mid engined monocoque, and they only started to follow our lead when Lotus went over in '65 with a 38 and obliterated the competition. I'm wondering whether the engine tech these days is also a bit behind.
I think its a case of depending how you look at it. The Americans do take a good idea and stick with it and make it work through minor enhancements and improvements. As they say "don't fix what ain't broke".My leaf springs comment was in jest, of course, but do Americans tend to cling onto old tech a bit longer, perhaps as a cultural thing? For example, they were still running big heavy front engined cars at Indianapolis when most of Europe had gone over to mid engined monocoque, and they only started to follow our lead when Lotus went over in '65 with a 38 and obliterated the competition. I'm wondering whether the engine tech these days is also a bit behind.
But I think they are generally way ahead too.
How about fuel injection in the 60's. Or IRS quipped vehicles from the early 60's.
Many mass production turbo motors in the 70's. And lots in the 80's. They even had forms of electronic traction control in the 1970's!!
Alloy blocks being used and pioneered 50 years ago.
Displacement on demand tech for years.
Their diesels have been way ahead using common rail tech and variable nozzle turbo's for a long time.
Nearly all of the above is 1990's or newer in Europe.
Even today in terms of size vs weight vs performance vs durability nothing really beats a Chevy LS V8. And to top this it's also easy and cheap to make and maintain and has class leading mpg and emissions standards.
DaveR said:
300bhp from 3 litres might be fairly sporty. 300bhp from a massive lump isn't.
It really is time to stop pedalling that kind of ignorance on PH.If the Evora was a good sportscar I'd have bought one. But you can rest assured that sticking an auto box in it will not save the day on either side of the Atlantic. IMO it needs to be restyled and re-engined as a matter of urgency if they want a realistic stop-gap pending the fruition of Bahar's dreams.
kambites said:
RobM77 said:
In truth though, most BMW, Merc, VW and Audi engines will do that. I took a 325i to 150k miles and it never used a drop of oil, and I know people who've gone well over 200k, even 300k. The gearbox bearings tend to suffer, and you'll need a new clutch at some point but the actual engine shouldn't need opening.
That's not been my experience of modern European cars. Most of them have regular replacements of far more than oil and filters and I don't even know anyone who's got a European car to 100k without having to repair something outside the service schedule. I know a few who have with Japanese cars. Thinking about it now, I'm actually the other way round to you; I don't know of anyone who's had to have engine work done on a European (road) car under 100k miles. The only exception is the k series engine, for which I've heard of head gasket failures happening, but only on the web, I don't actually know anyone first hand who's had that happen.
I do know people with engine failures under 100k miles, but they're all Fords and Vauxhalls. For the Fords, I good friend of mine who drives extremely carefully had a big end bearing go at 60k miles (following a complete exhaust failure at 30k miles), and another mate of mine had a flywheel failure of some description at 80k miles. We used to run Vauxhall pool cars here at work and had a few engine failures on those at under 100k miles. I think that's generally accepted for Fords and Vauxhalls though - if you look at the fleet sale price they're a much cheaper car than the equivalent from another manufacturer.
RobM77 said:
I was of course referring just to the engine, other components on European cars usually prove less reliable compared to, say, Japanese cars.
Thinking about it now, I'm actually the other way round to you; I don't know of anyone who's had to have engine work done on a European (road) car under 100k miles. The only exception is the k series engine, for which I've heard of head gasket failures happening, but only on the web, I don't actually know anyone first hand who's had that happen.
I do know people with engine failures under 100k miles, but they're all Fords and Vauxhalls. For the Fords, I good friend of mine who drives extremely carefully had a big end bearing go at 60k miles (following a complete exhaust failure at 30k miles), and another mate of mine had a flywheel failure of some description at 80k miles. We used to run Vauxhall pool cars here at work and had a few engine failures on those at under 100k miles. I think that's generally accepted for Fords and Vauxhalls though - if you look at the fleet sale price they're a much cheaper car than the equivalent from another manufacturer.
I was just referring to the engine too, but including the ancillaries not just the internals. I consider Ford and Vauxhall models sold here to be European cars, personally.Thinking about it now, I'm actually the other way round to you; I don't know of anyone who's had to have engine work done on a European (road) car under 100k miles. The only exception is the k series engine, for which I've heard of head gasket failures happening, but only on the web, I don't actually know anyone first hand who's had that happen.
I do know people with engine failures under 100k miles, but they're all Fords and Vauxhalls. For the Fords, I good friend of mine who drives extremely carefully had a big end bearing go at 60k miles (following a complete exhaust failure at 30k miles), and another mate of mine had a flywheel failure of some description at 80k miles. We used to run Vauxhall pool cars here at work and had a few engine failures on those at under 100k miles. I think that's generally accepted for Fords and Vauxhalls though - if you look at the fleet sale price they're a much cheaper car than the equivalent from another manufacturer.
Of the people I know who've bought prestige German cars new, I don' think any of them have got more than 10k miles without having to claim for something to do with the engine on the warranty, including a whole new engine in one BMW 330d. Mostly though, it just seems to be sensors failing (or wires falling off), or whatever - not big things, but failures none the less.
All of the cars I've had (including on VW) have needed new alternators, water pumps or such like in the first 100k miles.
Edited by kambites on Wednesday 15th June 11:45
RobM77 said:
300bhp/ton said:
DaveR said:
That's effectively what I was trying to say - you just made a better job of it!
300bhp from 3 litres might be fairly sporty. 300bhp from a massive lump isn't.
Depends what it's in though. Also 300hp from an unstressed motor will likely to 200,000-250,000 miles on nothing but oil and filter changes.300bhp from 3 litres might be fairly sporty. 300bhp from a massive lump isn't.
I'm not saying Euro engines aren't good. Although I think with American stuff it's more the expected norm rather than the exception.
kambites said:
Ah now you're talking about the weight of the engines, not their capacity. There are plenty of big engines that are lighter than plenty of small engines - I wouldn't be at all surprised if the 5.7 small block mentioned earlier is lighter than this V6.
Big doesn't necessarily mean low-revving either. They may tend to go together, but they certainly don't have to.
To my mind, engine capacity is utterly irrelevant to everything. Sure, other characteristics of the engine matter, but capacity does not. Especially in these days in which forced induction is so common.
Not entirely the weight, no, though obviously it and the size are factors to consider. Of course big doesn't necessarily mean low-revving, but if you're just taking the general characteristics of engines, a six-litre V8 is normally going to be a lower-revving and certainly torquier engine than a three-litre V6 of the same power, while the smaller V6 will usually give more reward for using the top of the rev range. It's just the way the increased weight and inertia of the larger components affects the way it performs.Big doesn't necessarily mean low-revving either. They may tend to go together, but they certainly don't have to.
To my mind, engine capacity is utterly irrelevant to everything. Sure, other characteristics of the engine matter, but capacity does not. Especially in these days in which forced induction is so common.
Edited by kambites on Wednesday 15th June 10:50
Turbos, of course, skew things like the Focus ST completely so I'm only talking about naturally aspirated stuff.
Naturally, there are plenty lazy small V6s and plenty high-revving big V8s, but I'm talking about the general idea, and the general idea of a low specific output V8 is not a sporty image
Edited by McSam on Wednesday 15th June 11:47
McSam said:
Naturally, there are plenty lazy small V6s and plenty high-revving big V8s, but I'm talking about the general idea, and the general idea of a low specific output V8 is not a sporty image
And yet somehow a small capacity turbo or supercharged unit often is, despite producing a vaguely similar feeling engine... kambites said:
And yet somehow a small capacity turbo or supercharged unit often is, despite producing a vaguely similar feeling engine...
Ah, you got there before I edited in about talking only about naturally aspirated engines, after I read 300's post Personally, I don't like small turbos, and certainly not in a "sporty" car. Rev the nuts off it, please. Peaky delivery is my idea of "sporty", and the trend towards smaller turbos is a bit too typical of people confusing fast with "sporty".
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff