RE: Driven: KTM X-BOW R

[Stu R]

I'd love one of these, but at Atom money I know which I'd rather have, and it isn't Austrian.

[Gingerbread Man]

When these first came out, I didn't think they would do overly well. They were going into a market full of Caterhams, Atoms, other 7 esque cars. The KTM is a very expensive option when compared to say the top Atom or R500 Caterham.
I also think they haven't a pretty angle to them!

How are their sales doing at the moment? I had heard that they had a lot of stock they couldn't shift?

[mikep7771]

How fast is the 1/4 mile for this?

[zakelwe]

Might be quite a good investment rather than a track car me thinks.

Andy

[loveice]

What's the point of all the expensive (costs twice as much as similar performance Ariel Atom)carbon fibre chassis and body/interior when it actually weights almost 50% more than 'cheap' steel chassis and plastic body/interior???

I understand for normal production cars from hatchback to proper supercars due to all the latest safety legislations all current models weight much more than let's say 8 years ago. But these low volume just road legal track day cars don't have normal road safety features to consider. So where are those 200kg+ weight comes from? Surely carbon fibre should be lighter than steel... VW 2.0T engine is heavier than Honda's and Ford's. But it isn't 200kg+ heavier!

I didn't get this car when it was released years ago. And I'm even more confused, now.

[adsvx220]

I have been lucky enough to be a passenger in a standard x-bow. But i didn't think it was lary enough, the exhaust note was too quiet and the engine just seems too refined, cars like these should have a bit of excitement about them. Don't get me wrong it is a fun car and holds the roads well and copes with everyday bumpy roads but if cost wasn't an option I would still go for a Caterham.

[andi_p]

loveice said:

What's the point of all the expensive (costs twice as much as similar performance Ariel Atom)carbon fibre chassis and body/interior when it actually weights almost 50% more than 'cheap' steel chassis and plastic body/interior???

I understand for normal production cars from hatchback to proper supercars due to all the latest safety legislations all current models weight much more than let's say 8 years ago. But these low volume just road legal track day cars don't have normal road safety features to consider. So where are those 200kg+ weight comes from? Surely carbon fibre should be lighter than steel... VW 2.0T engine is heavier than Honda's and Ford's. But it isn't 200kg+ heavier!

I didn't get this car when it was released years ago. And I'm even more confused, now.

The Carbon chassis is homologated to meet FIA crash standards for GT4. Agree the engine could be lighter too but actually its easily tunable to 400 plus BHP. There are a few running them at 450 or so.

[loveice]

andi_p said:

The Carbon chassis is homologated to meet FIA crash standards for GT4. Agree the engine could be lighter too but actually its easily tunable to 400 plus BHP. There are a few running them at 450 or so.

Well, I don't think by modifying a R400's or an Atom 3's chassis to GT4 standard would increase their overall weight to more than 800kg, though.

[carspath]

i ahd a close look at the X-BOW at about the same time as i bought my brooke 260 double r
the build quality on the x-bow is great and it has a lot of carbon fibre, but is heavy
i also liked the idea of the longitudinally mounted naturally aspirated cosworth engine in the brooke
what really swung it for me was the price, which was hugely in favour of the brooke

[British Beef]

George H said:

Love these, but for £58k, I would take an Ariel Atom and £15k change

Its 58k + VAT + any extras, lets call it £72k!!!

With £72k in your back-burner the options are limitless.
Trackday weapons you can drive to the track; Lotus eleven, Cat R500, Ultima GTR 720

Good on track & road: Corvette Z06 with £20k change

My choice for that money: a 2 year old Range rover TDV8 towing a Radical SR3 !!!

[British Beef]

loveice said:

What's the point of all the expensive (costs twice as much as similar performance Ariel Atom)carbon fibre chassis and body/interior when it actually weights almost 50% more than 'cheap' steel chassis and plastic body/interior???

I understand for normal production cars from hatchback to proper supercars due to all the latest safety legislations all current models weight much more than let's say 8 years ago. But these low volume just road legal track day cars don't have normal road safety features to consider. So where are those 200kg+ weight comes from? Surely carbon fibre should be lighter than steel... VW 2.0T engine is heavier than Honda's and Ford's. But it isn't 200kg+ heavier!

I didn't get this car when it was released years ago. And I'm even more confused, now.

Totally agree mate!!

Use the strongest, lightest and most expensive material to make a chassis....... 2 out of 3 is not bad ;-)

[BigBen]

I have had a good poke round one on behalf of a chap in the US who was buying it. The build quality and level of bespoke components shames the Atom but it should do at around 50% more expensive.

I have not driven one but would like to, it has downforce which an Atom / Crate does not so I would expect it to be a very different driving experience.

Ben

[ge0rge]

Schnellmann said:

I wouldn't say no to a KTM Duke or RC8 though!

Yeah the superdukes are a barrel of laughs