Wells Vertige - New British sportscar

[SpudLink]

I applaud the effort of someone who decides to make the car that he wants, market viability be damned.

I think it’s pretty enough. Reminds me of an early Ginetta.

I already have a rare IVA British sport car built an industrial unit, so I won’t be after one of these.

Although, to be honest, it’s not really for me. At that price I’d be looking for a used Elise Cup car.

[anonymous-user]

I think it looks OK, not so keen on the rear end but all around it's quite neat and fairly pretty and certainly fairly elegant, and having built a kit car and knowing just how much work goes into making something that someone else has already designed for you I can only imagine how much effort went into designing and building something from scratch, so I applaud anyone who's willing and able to do that.

Got to laugh at the usual over-reactions on this forum though - apparently a sensible alternative to what is effectively a brand new car is a 50 year old Lotus..... , and the touch-screen seems to be quite a devisive thing....

In todays world of bloated over-styled over-tyred over-powered over-assisted ego-extensions a small lightweight rwd NA sports car is something everyone should be in favour of and celebrate (while we can, it's going to last much longer it seems), and not be so keen to leap on and slam-down with such apparent enthusiasm.

[SpudLink]

JimSuperSix said:

I think it looks OK, not so keen on the rear end but all around it's quite neat and fairly pretty and certainly fairly elegant, and having built a kit car and knowing just how much work goes into making something that someone else has already designed for you I can only imagine how much effort went into designing and building something from scratch, so I applaud anyone who's willing and able to do that.

Got to laugh at the usual over-reactions on this forum though - apparently a sensible alternative to what is effectively a brand new car is a 50 year old Lotus..... , and the touch-screen seems to be quite a devisive thing....

In todays world of bloated over-styled over-tyred over-powered over-assisted ego-extensions a small lightweight rwd NA sports car is something everyone should be in favour of and celebrate (while we can, it's going to last much longer it seems), and not be so keen to leap on and slam-down with such apparent enthusiasm.

Well said.

[shih tzu faced]

Just done a bit more reading up about this car and need to correct something I said earlier. Assumed that it was front engined but just realised it’s actually mid engined.

Looking at the pictures again it’s now obvious that there wouldn’t be room up front for an engine. Still love the car but if the engine was in front it would be perfect. Obviously not for all-out handling but more for driving fun.

Still can’t over-emphasise how much I like it though. For the last few years the Alpine A110 has been my dream car, now I’m not so sure. The Emira doesn’t do much for me although it’s clearly a great product and manages a special trick by looking much more expensive than it is. They will sell loads and deservedly so.

Hopefully there is still a tiny bit of room in the market for the Vertige though, I really do think that just getting this far in the current automotive market is an outstanding achievement.

[anonymous-user]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I like it - the exterior at least.

Me too.

There are a few exterior bits that look a bit 'hmmmmm' but on the whole it's an attractive and interesting car.

I've previously criticised the interior. I think I could narrow it down to the screen and the instrument binnacle.
If they could resolve the integration of the screen a little better I would be happier.
The instrument binnacle looks like something I could make at home for a kit car.
Just that bit of extra effort would make miles of difference. I'm not thinking of a mass produced Audi or Jaguar level interior, maybe more towards Lotus or TVR.

To be fair even in a hugely expensive Tesla it does look like someone just plonked the screen on with some glue and went to the pub.

[anonymous-user]

I love it. 100%.

This is the car Lotus failed to build.  I'd take one in a heartbeat.  It really is wonderful. 
Why?
Elegant and beautiful.  No overbearing macho crap. 
Sensibly priced
Proven Ford engine, but with Jenveys so it'll sound mega
17" wheels (the upper limit of common-sense - anything larger is for muppets)
Simple, retro interior
LIGHT - light as a feather.  It's more Lotus at heart than any new Lotus will ever be. 
No power steering, thankfully

My wallet is stretched thin at the moment, but I want one

[Esceptico]

I think this car deserves a PH article. Compare with all the column inches for the nonsense that is the new TVR or an article on that ugly track only Lambo that costs £2m and has only found 10 buyers so far.

[Equus]

Esceptico said:

I think this car deserves a PH article. Compare with all the column inches for the nonsense that is the new TVR or an article on that ugly track only Lambo that costs £2m and has only found 10 buyers so far.

I quite like it, but then I'm into the late 50's/60's look... but quite aside from that, it's refreshing to find someone who has clearly kept their powder dry until they have a tested prototype and they're ready to go into production. It appears that the one thing it's not is a vapourware CGI, and for that reason alone it deserves some coverage.

[LaurasOtherHalf]

I'm astounded this isn't on the PH front page.

[MrGTI6]

LaurasOtherHalf said:

I'm astounded this isn't on the PH front page.

Esceptico said:

I think this car deserves a PH article.

I agree with you both. This is the sort of thing we want to be reading about. Not endless articles detailing the numerous iterations of VAG's latest plug-in MPV.

[livinginasia]

I saw them at Goodwood yesterday, nice looking car but I actually thought someone had a couple of old ginetta kit cars in their tent. I hope there is still a market for these little sports cars but it wouldn’t be for me, I would find an elan or similar.

[shih tzu faced]

Totally agree with the above posters that PH should be doing a feature in this car.

How many times do we have to see renders of 6/7 figure electric hypercars, or yet another half million pound god awful restomod with halo headlights?

Come on PH, this is a small British start up company with what looks like a fantastic (actual) product at a realistic asking price. We need a proper feature on it please.

[Ayahuasca]

Unless they are developing an electric version, what is the long term future for this, and what evidence is there that it is anything more than a kit car or at best a vanity project?

[Equus]

I've clicked the 'news' button on the post, so let's see if they pick up on it.

Ayahuasca said:

...what evidence is there that it is anything more than a kit car or at best a vanity project?

It's being offered as a complete car. Doubtless registered under IVA or LVTA, but that doesn't make it any more or less a kit car than stuff like the Noble M12 or LCC Rocket were, in their day.

Does it matter if it is a kit car, anyway?The Lotus Elite and Elan were kit cars; so are the Caterham, Westfield and Ultima. None the less worthy of interest on a forum for motoring enthusiasts?

Arguably all new car manufacturers are vanity projects. Maybe they should know their place and recognise that nothing they can do can match the development capabilities and well-rounded product ranges of companies like VAG, Toyota and Hyundai?

At least it actually exists, which is more than can be said of most of the startup supercars and retromod projects that PistonHeads reports on, and which are nothing more than glossy CGI's.

Edited by Equus on Sunday 11th July 09:47

[spikeyhead]

I like it, with another 100 horses I'd probably buy one if it drives well.

[kambites]

tommy1973s said:

This is the car Lotus failed to build.  I'd take one in a heartbeat.  It really is wonderful. 

Surely this is pretty much the car Lotus did build in the Elise. It's roughly the same same weight; power; engine engine location, orientation and configuration; price;... it's nice, but it doesn't seem to do anything ground-breaking. Shame they couldn't find a way to make the windows open properly.

Lotus (or at least Geely) have no interest in staying in such a small-volume market but that doesn't mean the market isn't still there. Hopefully they'll sell enough to stay afloat.

Edited by kambites on Sunday 11th July 09:50

[Equus]

kambites said:

Surely this is pretty much the car Lotus did build in the Elise. It's roughly the same same weight; power; engine engine location, orientation and configuration; price;... it's nice, but it doesn't seem to do anything ground-breaking.

It seems to have a nicer interior than the Elise. Doors/sill heights that you can actually get in and out of without looking like a tit, and a weight that is more comparable to the S1 Elise than the later cars (yes, I know there were good reasons for the latter, for the markets that Lotus were trying to address), so you groundbreaking or not, as you say, it may stand a chance against the market that Lotus have just vacated.

It's also a stload stiffer than any Elise (or Evora, or Emira) ever was, if the quoted figures on the manufacturers website (47 kNm/deg) are correct, and for that reason alone (in a car as light as this one claims to be), I'd be interested to see more technical detail on the chassis.

[kambites]

Equus said:

It seems to have a nicer interior than the Elise. Doors/sill heights that you can actually get in and out of without looking like a tit, and a weight that is more comparable to the S1 Elise than the later cars (yes, I know there were good reasons for the latter, for the markets that Lotus were trying to address).

It's also a stload stiffer than any Elise (or Evora, or Emira) ever was, if the quoted figures on the manufacturers website (47 kNm/deg) are correct, and for that reason alone (in a car as light as this one claims to be), I'd be interested to see more technical detail on the chassis.

I guess the big difference compared to the Lotus 111 platform is obviously the structural roof, which both makes it more rigid, means the sills are smaller, and sadly means they can't really make a convertible version without significant compromise.

I've never really felt that an 800kg car needed more structural rigidity than the Elise has, mind.

ETA: The interior looks OK certainly, in a slightly kit-carish sort of way (there must be a reason the instrument binacle is integrated into the dashboard like that, but I can't quite work out what it is!). It's a bit less pseudo-racing car than the Elise, a bit more retro. The fact they've managed to find a decent home for a double DIN head unit is nice. I hope the air-con is effective with those tiny window openings!

Edited by kambites on Sunday 11th July 10:05

[Equus]

kambites said:

I guess the big difference compared to the Lotus 111 platform is obviously the structural roof...

Even against cars with a structural roof, the quoted stiffness is pretty damned impressive, in something so light (and not constructed of exotic materials).

We'd need to see the chassis design (in fact, we'd need to see the FEA analysis of it), but if it's as stiff as that, they may very well be able to chop the top off and still have plenty of stiffness left over.

Lotus themselves published figures that showed the Evora's stiffness was pretty much exactly halved when the structural roof was removed (still leaving it stiffer than the Elise).

Half of 47 kNm/degree would still piss all over the Elise and pretty much every other open sportscar I know of (the Porsche Boxster is 17kNm/deg, for example).

I agree that such stiffness probably goes well into the realms of diminishing returns in terms of actual handling benefits, but if you can achieve it without any major cost or weight penalty, why wouldn't you?

[kambites]

Equus said:

Even against cars with a structural roof, the quoted stiffness is pretty damned impressive, in something so light (and not constructed of exotic materials).

True, but the question I'd ask is whether it actually gets any benefit from it. nearly 50k Nm/degree/tonne is very impressive on paper, but you can get no perceivable flex at half that so in what way is the higher figure actually "better" in any meaningful sense?

Certainly interesting from an engineering perspective though.