RE: Caterham gets Suzuki power
Discussion
dino ferrana said:
I imagine Caterham were after an engine that will pass EU6 easily, as well as be light etc.
I could be wrong here, but my understanding is that for petrol engines EU6 is unchanged relative to EU5.Chapppers said:
And if that was their plan, I think the CO2 output is going to be the least of their worries with what is essentially a 50-year-old car design.
Caterham already has EC-SSTA approval; large series homologation is a different sort of game altogether.
That said, I do reckon this is about EU sales: Italy and France have introduced huge annual/new-registration CO2 taxes in the last couple of years. The Netherlands and Scandinavian countries have had them for a while.
A car with only 100BHP-level emissions, but light enough to feel decently quick (200BHP/tonne is probably 98th percentile on EU roads), could look quite tempting to many who can't or won't pay a couple of thousand a year in taxes alone on a more traditional sports car, before even considering maintenance/fuel/insurance etc.
Shrewd move in my opinion.
kambites said:
DonkeyApple said:
kambites said:
Why would they care?
Won't they have to with the new products they are planning?
It does lead on to the thought as to who has the taxation advantage on the new car, Caterham or Renault?
Or have Renault been smart in that the Alpine business doesn't form part of the Group figures? Not sure how it works.
Edmundo2 said:
I get it but can't see why you wouldn't buy a second hand low miles roadsport etc. More fun + save 4k. Or for that matter a ballistic used superlight. I suppose some people will only buy new.
Presume it's foreign markets that this is aimed at?
I think that from a business perspective it is much more complicated to build second hand cars rather than new. Presume it's foreign markets that this is aimed at?
This little engine pushes a ~725kg Cappuccino along fine (nippy rather than fast) in standard form, so no doubt a few tweaks and a lighter weight will provide enough performance for those non driving gods. It revs to ~9k rpm, and sounds slightly special with its off-beat 3-cylinder noise. Chuck in some tiny turbo huffing and puffing, and its far better than it sounds on paper
So what, it comes with 100bhp... Is 200bhp/ton not enough? Have we become so used to R3/4/5/600's that the cooking spec is considered slow..
Similar in a way to some Lotus's where 189bhp was considered slow by many (Exige S2 - 880kg). Too many want lazy, easily accessible performance
So what, it comes with 100bhp... Is 200bhp/ton not enough? Have we become so used to R3/4/5/600's that the cooking spec is considered slow..
Similar in a way to some Lotus's where 189bhp was considered slow by many (Exige S2 - 880kg). Too many want lazy, easily accessible performance
Edited by gofasterrosssco on Monday 5th August 15:44
The K6A is a highly tunable, strong little engine and I'm sure Caterham will be able to get a fair bit of extra power out of it. 120hp just with simple upgrades is easily possible.
It should also be pointed out that Suzuki's quoted bhp figure is at the wheels instead of the flywheel. All other Kei manufacturers stuck to the letter of the law and stuck to 63bhp at the fly. Suzuki decided to be a little sneaky.
It should also be pointed out that Suzuki's quoted bhp figure is at the wheels instead of the flywheel. All other Kei manufacturers stuck to the letter of the law and stuck to 63bhp at the fly. Suzuki decided to be a little sneaky.
McWigglebum4th said:
DonkeyApple said:
I think that from a business perspective it is much more complicated to build second hand cars rather than new.
Audi are working on itThey can sell you a unreliable heap which the previous owner has ruined the ride and covered it in blingy tat from halfords
Mr2Mike said:
aww999 said:
surely a great chassis needs enough power to challenge it in order to make the whole experience entertaining?
Absolutely not. Just like driving a mini, or a Fiat Panda etc. you can use 100% of the performance on a regular basis without reaching ridiculous speeds or the car threatening to throw you into the nearest hedge.ash73 said:
Edmundo2 said:
I get it but can't see why you wouldn't buy a second hand low miles roadsport etc. More fun + save 4k
Depends how fussy you are, these cars don't carry the years all that well in my experience, even if they are looked after perfectly.Also, I disagree with posters who claim that these cars are fine with low power. They are not. My 135bhp 1.6 Supersport was fun on the road - but on track, you got very tired of working hard to stay with hot hatches in the straights and then being held up with them in the corners. On the road, in a car like a Seven, the punch required to safely overtake while making progress on those B-roads is pretty important. Hence the replacement car.
All IMHO, of course. But I'm much happier with the new car than the old, despite its less compromised setup and nature.
Edited by Harry Flashman on Monday 5th August 15:58
Surprised that Caterham didn't look at the Smart Engine, 700cc Triple + Turbo, (450 smart spec), 61 bhp stock but potential to exceed 100bhp in BRABUS spec ???
Always fancied putting one in the front of a Mini, Original and use the 6 speed Paddle shift, thats on my original 2003 Smart Cabrio.
Someone may well have done it !!!!!
Always fancied putting one in the front of a Mini, Original and use the 6 speed Paddle shift, thats on my original 2003 Smart Cabrio.
Someone may well have done it !!!!!
ash73 said:
Lot's of Cat owners think their cars are immaculate, and then you get them up on a ramp... it's just how they are; buy a new one and you get the best years out of it.
Agree this car isn't suited to the track, horses for courses.
I'm sure they do. Mine actually was (as the Caterham inspectors told me). Like anything else, you just have to care for them properly (or buy from someone who did Agree this car isn't suited to the track, horses for courses.
)In any case, these are kit cars, and (chassis rot/busted engines/gearboxes excepted) very cheap and easy to fix. Second hand one is a perfectly good prospect.
ash73 said:
Lot's of Cat owners think their cars are immaculate, and then you get them up on a ramp... it's just how they are; buy a new one and you get the best years out of it.
Agree this car isn't suited to the track, horses for courses.
Get under any car and you'll see rust.Agree this car isn't suited to the track, horses for courses.
My 2009 (16k on the clock) car has a few bits of rust on the chassis, but it's no worse than an everyday road car with similar mileage.
These cars are built to be driven. It would be a shame if it sat there in immaculate shape in a garage not being used!
On the other hand, I do agree this car isn't built for track work. My 140 suffers in the straights on track. It doesn't need much more power, but a smidge more wouldn't harm. That said, I'd rather spend the money on doing trackdays and driving it than on power at the moment.
ash73 said:
Edmundo2 said:
I get it but can't see why you wouldn't buy a second hand low miles roadsport etc. More fun + save 4k
Depends how fussy you are, these cars don't carry the years all that well in my experience, even if they are looked after perfectly.I would much rather buy a kit and knock it together than buy a used one.
And I like the idea of a minimalist old fashioned Seven with narrow track, a live axle and aeroscreens. (And clamshells, if I'm honest...)
But I'm a bit troubled by the prospect of a turbo charged motor, as they don't tend to suit lightweight cars terribly well.
And 100bhp really is a bit lacking these days.
Surely there's a 150bhp lightweight normally aspirated lump that is available somewhere? I really liked the K Series VVT Seven that I drove a few years ago.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff