RE: New Caterham Seven revealed
Discussion
I know that Seven started with approx 1-litre engines but that was when 45 bhp was enough.
And when i read about those 1-litre turbocharged 3pot Ecoboosts or something like this i´m not quite sure if it´s the right way.
On paper, the power and torgue is better than 1.6 Sigma but we all know, that on the road it´s not about paper figures.
I´m curious about the costs saving. 5K pounds is a lot.
And when i read about those 1-litre turbocharged 3pot Ecoboosts or something like this i´m not quite sure if it´s the right way.
On paper, the power and torgue is better than 1.6 Sigma but we all know, that on the road it´s not about paper figures.
I´m curious about the costs saving. 5K pounds is a lot.
They could still go more simple by not having adjustable dampers, sticking with narrow track suspension without the watt's linkage rear.
I guess sticking with a bench rear seat or cheaper tillets would be a cost saving over the comfier seats which are standard in the cheapest roadsport.
Those are some skinny wheels on the front though!
I guess sticking with a bench rear seat or cheaper tillets would be a cost saving over the comfier seats which are standard in the cheapest roadsport.
Those are some skinny wheels on the front though!
KTF said:
Kiltie said:
I've read the article a number of times now ... searching for meaningful facts.
I'm afraid I can't spot any.
Pointless.
I also notice that the photo has been nicked from here.
Its almost like they got sent a press release about the new car and used the material to make this piece I'm afraid I can't spot any.
Pointless.
I also notice that the photo has been nicked from here.
I think, if I was doing that job, I might have picked up the phone or something ... you know, to try and find out something interesting.
framerateuk said:
They could still go more simple by not having adjustable dampers, sticking with narrow track suspension without the watt's linkage rear.
I guess sticking with a bench rear seat or cheaper tillets would be a cost saving over the comfier seats which are standard in the cheapest roadsport.
Those are some skinny wheels on the front though!
Unless it's changed recently I don't think the standard 7 has adjustable dampers, wide track or Watts link rear.I guess sticking with a bench rear seat or cheaper tillets would be a cost saving over the comfier seats which are standard in the cheapest roadsport.
Those are some skinny wheels on the front though!
BertBert said:
Sounds like guess the engine then. We all know how they build a "stripped out" 7. No paint, no screen, no carpets. It needs about 120bhp. Perhaps they've found a NOS supply of live axles too 
So, very light cheap EU6 120 bhp engine?
Agreed on paint and carpets - I reckon it will have a screen (although perhaps no heater) as it's entry level rather than hardcore. Perhaps moulded plastic seats (rather than composite or cloth-covered). Reference to a "compact" engine would suggest less than 4 cylinders to me, and it'll be 5 speed rather than 6, so I reckon torquey turbo 3-pot. Presumably £17k is kit form, so c£20k if you want it built. So, very light cheap EU6 120 bhp engine?
bertie said:
Unless it's changed recently I don't think the standard 7 has adjustable dampers, wide track or Watts link rear.
Sorry I just meant height adjustable suspension... which by the looks of this photo it looks like it has.With the rest I just meant they they'd be sticking with not having those (I'm aware they're optional extras). It's going to have to be a cheaper engine to have that much of a discount though.
Edit: Also to add, I can't see see the exhaust, which suggests it isn't a Sigma as it's on the wrong side.
Edited by framerateuk on Wednesday 29th May 12:05
vrooom said:
still £10k too much.
Perhaps not at 17 grand but I kind of see your point, they always seem inordinately expensive for a stripped out car based on a tubular steel frame with not that much attached to it. I suppose it is down to economies of scale, labour intensive build (for a full built one !) or whatever. When you take depreciation into consideration they dont seem that bad,especially if you buy one second hand.
J4CKO said:
vrooom said:
still £10k too much.
Perhaps not at 17 grand but I kind of see your point, they always seem inordinately expensive for a stripped out car based on a tubular steel frame with not that much attached to it. I suppose it is down to economies of scale, labour intensive build (for a full built one !) or whatever. When you take depreciation into consideration they dont seem that bad,especially if you buy one second hand.BOR said:
I'm bemused why Caterham are taking so long to attack the zero-emissions/low fuel-consumption market. An ecoboost or twin-air engine is still good for 100+bhp, which would make an enjoyable road car with low running costs.
.
Heres one they made earlier.
http://www.motortorque.com/car-news/caterham-produ...
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=292...
bobberz said:
Yeah, my guess is any EcoBoost version would be at a much higher price point than this "entry-level" model. I quite like Caterhams.
Anybody know if they're available in the US? I know of at least one around me (a Superlight R with an SVT Zetec), but I don't know if he imported it.
There you goAnybody know if they're available in the US? I know of at least one around me (a Superlight R with an SVT Zetec), but I don't know if he imported it.
http://www.uscaterham.com/contact/contact.html
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff