RE: Lotus Exige Sport 350: Driven
Discussion
CABC said:
DonkeyApple said:
Yup. Agree. It's essential to Lotus but can never be large enough to actually pay all their bills such as they are structured. But Gales has viewed global profit growth as coming via the Evora and the move closer to having a much more mainstream product.
Porsche makes its largest margins via its SUVs and volumes. As you look at the Porsche products that get closer and closer to the Lotus ethos then numbers plummet and give an indication as to just how large the specialist sports car market is.
But Porsche make most of their money from their 50.2% holding in VW Group. So technically, their most important vehicle is going to be something like a Seat
i wonder if the GT4 actually loses money? But the halo of the GT series is priceless.Porsche makes its largest margins via its SUVs and volumes. As you look at the Porsche products that get closer and closer to the Lotus ethos then numbers plummet and give an indication as to just how large the specialist sports car market is.
But Porsche make most of their money from their 50.2% holding in VW Group. So technically, their most important vehicle is going to be something like a Seat
So, do we need Proton to develop some aspiration? After Datsun, Hyundai, Kia why not the turn of the (wealthy) Malaysians?
Maybe the board want someone to get a grip of Lotus first and then think about global exploitation and platform sharing.
Hopefull Gales will prove that the company is worthy of further investment so they can take all the models the next step forward.
I don't think anyone who just makes sports cars is making brilliant money and so to be secure need a doting parent or a range of much more conventional products.
For Lotus, I've long looked at the fastest growing and most lucrative motoring sector of the last decade and thought that if there was one thing that the massively overweight, thirsty and mostly poor handling SUV sector is crying out for is Lotusification. Purists can't abide the idea but it seems so blindingly obvious a move for Lotus and I'm pretty confident Chapman would have gone where the money was. Instead, it looks the Germans will do it with the Lambo instead.
Edited by DonkeyApple on Monday 11th January 20:22
Edited by DonkeyApple on Monday 11th January 20:26
otolith said:
kambites said:
Does the GT4 have any significant bespoke parts?
Isn't it a bit of a parts bin job with some 911 bits? (not that the 911 is reputed to cost any more to build)
Impasse said:
leglessAlex said:
Hasn't Gales made noises about building an SUV? Something Porsche Macan/BMW X3/Audi Q5 sized?
Yep, development is underway. The UK is not its intended market.Lotus does have a pedigree and the Asian market loves new/different/oneupmanship. Could work really well.
Asian market supplied with auto boxes mostly! They're not driving these little cars the way we do!
CABC said:
Impasse said:
leglessAlex said:
Hasn't Gales made noises about building an SUV? Something Porsche Macan/BMW X3/Audi Q5 sized?
Yep, development is underway. The UK is not its intended market.Lotus does have a pedigree and the Asian market loves new/different/oneupmanship. Could work really well.
Asian market supplied with auto boxes mostly! They're not driving these little cars the way we do!
It'd be nice if whatever engine they develop next had a twin clutch option, it would help it sell better too.
Impasse said:
leglessAlex said:
Hasn't Gales made noises about building an SUV? Something Porsche Macan/BMW X3/Audi Q5 sized?
Yep, development is underway. The UK is not its intended market.Not sure how selling a discount SUV in Asia will be that positive for selling the premium sports cars though? That bit didn't seem very clear.
Although, with China struggling and the whole of Asia committed to follow then maybe, just once, in the last 3 decades Lotus could end up at the leading edge of a market shift rather than arriving just as most are leaving. Luxury car sales in China have been plummeting and maybe it'll transpire that a cheap SUV was the correct investment call.
robm3 said:
I see the Toyota engine as a positive when it comes to an ownership proposition. Naturally due to perceived reliability.
Surprised so many argue different.
+1Surprised so many argue different.
I was looking for a car that was fast and handled well but that also gave some semblance of touring ability to make driving to tracks all over Europe bearable (i.e not Caterfield or Atom). The one critical factor was reliability. The car had to be able to cope with thousands of miles of track abuse whilst still being grin inducingly quick. It was the Toyota engine that swung the Exige for me. A taxi V6 is perfect!
SidewaysSi said:
Complete GT3 front end with bespoke rear suspension including helper springs. Changes to body in white too. It's a thorough engineering exercise and quite trick. Offers more suspension and aero adjustability than the GT3 I believe.
By "bespoke rear suspension", do you mean it actually has different chassis hard-points for the suspension mounts, or just different wishbone dimensions? (Sorry for going so far off topic, just intrigued). Regarding the question on where Porsche makes it's money..
Obviously the Touareg/Cayenne cash machine followed by the sold out Q5 based Macan help make it the highest margin car company (before absorption by VAG)
Their really clever move was to increase parts sharing between mid & rear engined products to a pretty amazing 70%.. that's right a 911 shares 70% of parts with Cayman/Boxster, so daddy 911 probably has a 20-25% margin, huge in the car business, the mid engined ones far less ..
Volumes ? sales in key mature market, USA, just out for 2015, in thousands:
Cayenne:16, Macan:13, 911:10 Boxster+Cayman:6, Panamera:5 (killed by Tesla S?)
Obviously the Touareg/Cayenne cash machine followed by the sold out Q5 based Macan help make it the highest margin car company (before absorption by VAG)
Their really clever move was to increase parts sharing between mid & rear engined products to a pretty amazing 70%.. that's right a 911 shares 70% of parts with Cayman/Boxster, so daddy 911 probably has a 20-25% margin, huge in the car business, the mid engined ones far less ..
Volumes ? sales in key mature market, USA, just out for 2015, in thousands:
Cayenne:16, Macan:13, 911:10 Boxster+Cayman:6, Panamera:5 (killed by Tesla S?)
Curious to see the Panamera doing so badly. I'd have expected the US to be a fairly big market for it.
The problem is, Porsche can make money on the SUVs because they buy in the platform and make a few styling and setup tweaks; the only really big cost to them will probably be engine development. Lotus would be developing the car from scratch and would be lucky to get 5% of the sales even if they produce a better product (which I suspect they wont). I'm not sure a Lotus SUV can be short-term profitable.
The problem is, Porsche can make money on the SUVs because they buy in the platform and make a few styling and setup tweaks; the only really big cost to them will probably be engine development. Lotus would be developing the car from scratch and would be lucky to get 5% of the sales even if they produce a better product (which I suspect they wont). I'm not sure a Lotus SUV can be short-term profitable.
Edited by kambites on Monday 11th January 21:53
DonkeyApple said:
I grew up with Lotus cars in my father's collection, my father worked with Chapman during the F1 years and I would argue I am far more of a Lotus fan than most. I just happen to think that a s
tty, Toyota V6 designed for cheap cars and commercial usage is utterly beneath a brand of the engine heritage of Lotus. I cannot wait for the day that Lotus is sufficiently financially stable to not have to compromise in this regard and revert to their old ways. It's blunt and I apologise but there is no way I'd pay money for such a special car with such an utterly unspecial engine stuffed in it because it's cheap and reliable.
The tone of many of your posts sound bitter - as if there's a chunk of brand snobbery going on.tty, Toyota V6 designed for cheap cars and commercial usage is utterly beneath a brand of the engine heritage of Lotus. I cannot wait for the day that Lotus is sufficiently financially stable to not have to compromise in this regard and revert to their old ways. It's blunt and I apologise but there is no way I'd pay money for such a special car with such an utterly unspecial engine stuffed in it because it's cheap and reliable. DonkeyApple said:
I agree. The core trouble with V6s is that they are usually built to emulate a big, lazyish V8 but cheaper.
Don't you also think that v6 could be seen as twice the capacity and half as many cylinders again as an i4 in the same space ?Just trying to work out why you dislike the choice of engine *so* much. IMO it was a sensible economical decision for lotus to make....
And back on the V6, really strange comments about V6s .. anyway
The problem is elsewhere, as much as I like the musical potential of a 6 pot, increasing efficiency for CO2 (CAFE) targets means that downsizing is here to stay.. so 3.5 litres of inefficieny is far too much
Also we all saw the increase in length (generating weight) needed to fit a V engine in an elise/exige before we even talk of the engine's weight
...so inline is better (a dream engine would be the Audi 2.5 inline 5 cylinder.. they let Doonkervort use it, and it exists sideways in the back of a TTRS..)
However as Toyota has more or less confirmed the arrival of 2.0 litre turbos to replace the V6 in the Camry (yawn) it may well end up in a Lotus..
Why doesn't Mr Gales try Honda ? right away the new Civic R engine in an S2 length car would be great!
The problem is elsewhere, as much as I like the musical potential of a 6 pot, increasing efficiency for CO2 (CAFE) targets means that downsizing is here to stay.. so 3.5 litres of inefficieny is far too much
Also we all saw the increase in length (generating weight) needed to fit a V engine in an elise/exige before we even talk of the engine's weight
...so inline is better (a dream engine would be the Audi 2.5 inline 5 cylinder.. they let Doonkervort use it, and it exists sideways in the back of a TTRS..)
However as Toyota has more or less confirmed the arrival of 2.0 litre turbos to replace the V6 in the Camry (yawn) it may well end up in a Lotus..
Why doesn't Mr Gales try Honda ? right away the new Civic R engine in an S2 length car would be great!
gavsdavs said:
Don't you also think that v6 could be seen as twice the capacity and half as many cylinders again as an i4 in the same space ?
Just trying to work out why you dislike the choice of engine *so* much. IMO it was a sensible economical decision for lotus to make....
That's exactly it. You are right, I agree and I've said it all along, it was a sensible economic decision for Lotus to make. I want to see Lotus financially healthy enough to be able to actually make a better type of decision. Just trying to work out why you dislike the choice of engine *so* much. IMO it was a sensible economical decision for lotus to make....
DonkeyApple said:
I want to see Lotus financially healthy enough to be able to actually make a better type of decision.
Lotus are not big enough to be manufacturing engines of their own, and I don't think that's what they should be aiming to do. Other people do that better, in volume, with support. Lotus should stick to lightness, handling and grip, which is their core selling point and something they do better than almost everyone else.There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the v6 form factor or the engine they used, though emissions will push the capacity smaller and FI into the mix. I prefer N/A delivery, maybe that's just me.
gavsdavs said:
DonkeyApple said:
I want to see Lotus financially healthy enough to be able to actually make a better type of decision.
Lotus are not big enough to be manufacturing engines of their own, and I don't think that's what they should be aiming to do. Other people do that better, in volume, with support. Lotus should stick to lightness, handling and grip, which is their core selling point and something they do better than almost everyone else.There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the v6 form factor or the engine they used, though emissions will push the capacity smaller and FI into the mix. I prefer N/A delivery, maybe that's just me.
I agree re NA but sadly legislation is steadily killing off high cc engines. I also suspect that Lotus are very heavily invested in the tech to run Toyota engines and so a change to another supplier would be a very major upheaval.
But this doesn't change the two issues, one of how Lotus are going to continue to play the BHP top trump game that they have embarked upon and judging by the growth in sales figures of these cars over the more traditional small cc products (and that Gales sees Evora sales as the future) has clearly been the correct call. And secondly, as they are focussing on the Evora to drive the main revenue growth (ie the more conventional road going market is much larger than the more specialist track focused market) and as the Evora once specced is pretty much an £80k car and will only become more expensive, at what point will their choice of engine partner impact sufficiently on sales to damage their growth plans of firstly tripling Evora sales but then the future replacements to the Evora which will clearly be aimed further upmarket?
Maybe it will transpire that the downsizing of the cc of the mainstream competitors will bring an end to the BHP wars of the last decade as you reach a genuine limit as to the drive ability of boosted 4 pots etc and so the pressure to exceed current BHP levels becomes a non issue?
Maybe the economic downturn in China forces buyers out of the more expensive brands and favours Lotus?
The point is that the Toyota V6 was chosen to do a specific job and that was to enter the top trumps arms race as cheaply as possible. I am merely highlighting that the more successful Lotus is the closer they are getting to needing to readdress that decision, whether it is due to needing to maintain the BHP arms race or whether it is to move the brand further upmarket to justify sales prices or whether it is because the recent downsizing by their competitors means Lotus have to revert to 'adding lightness' almost at the exact point that they have abandoned their 60 year mantra and their competitors have seemingly seized it?
One thing is for sure and that is that the 2GR has done a very good job to date but it will not be the engine that moves Lotus forward the next step. I am merely pointing out that the more they continue on their path of success the sooner they are going to reach that crunch point and that in some regards, such as the top trumps game, they are clearly at that point.
My thoughts on Lotus choice of engine and my interest in McLaren have certain commonalities.
McLaren has been praised from the beginning, albeit some didn't like the styling and most reviews seemed disappointed with the engine noise. Yet there they are, as a new(ish) road car company selling a few thousand Ricardo engined cars every year.
I wonder what it would cost Lotus to have Ricardo develop an I4-turbo engine. 2litres and 330bhp should be quite possible.
McLaren has been praised from the beginning, albeit some didn't like the styling and most reviews seemed disappointed with the engine noise. Yet there they are, as a new(ish) road car company selling a few thousand Ricardo engined cars every year.
I wonder what it would cost Lotus to have Ricardo develop an I4-turbo engine. 2litres and 330bhp should be quite possible.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff