RE: Lotus Elise Sprint
Discussion
HeMightBeBanned said:
SidewaysSi said:
As has been said, it is not really the point if the car. The average hot hatch buyer won't be cross shopping with an Elise. And vice versa.
Oh I dunno. I have a hot hatch as well as the Elise. Of the four cars, the Elise is the one I wouldn't part with.
Edited by SidewaysSi on Saturday 18th March 09:56
Here's a Cup 220 doing Snetterton recently. Standard road car no mods.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOf0vavgjV4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOf0vavgjV4
DPSFleet said:
a step in the right direction, just needs to be cheaper as it's not really in the Boxster class so a toy only.
Price seems logical. If someone can't afford an Elise then they can buy the Boxster which is still a very good car. It's not particularly special but very capable nonetheless. SidewaysSi said:
HeMightBeBanned said:
SidewaysSi said:
As has been said, it is not really the point if the car. The average hot hatch buyer won't be cross shopping with an Elise. And vice versa.
Oh I dunno. I have a hot hatch as well as the Elise. Of the four cars, the Elise is the one I wouldn't part with.
Edited by SidewaysSi on Saturday 18th March 09:56
The supercharged Elise's have always been quick, the standard bad car was sprightly when it launched but power outputs have come a long way since then and the base car has not kept pace. For 2017 the basic 1.6 looks very slow, take out the traffic light Grand Prix and acceleration from a rolling pace will be at the level of a 2 litre MX5.
Hard to justify 37k when you can find the exact same car a few years older for less money with a better engine.
Hard to justify 37k when you can find the exact same car a few years older for less money with a better engine.
The 0 - 60 is not that important, but 30 to 70 and 50 to 90 are. For 2017 this is where that 130hp 1.6 looks very unimpressive and expensive, foot down at 30 mph it won't even be remotely close to the Boxter or any other performance orientated car and that's a problem. Toyota had a 1.8 version of th same engine that knocked out 150hp with marginal differences in CO2/mpg and the only reason I can think of for going for the 1.6 was to save what was probably a very marginal amount.
when the S1 launched it was around 18k with good performance relative to other sporty cars of the time, and in relation to its price. It also had an engine that could be easily tuned at a relatively low cost which gave a good performance increase for the outlay if you wanted more.
Fast forward 20 odd years and it has poor performance relative to today's sporty cars.
The basic Boxter the S1 faced had 200 hp, today's one is 50% more than that
This Elise has 10% more than the car from 20 years ago, ok so the build is much better, but so is every other car compared to the version on sale 20 years ago.
I like the Elise a lot, but the basic car has got steadily more disappointing with every new iteration that came after the S1
when the S1 launched it was around 18k with good performance relative to other sporty cars of the time, and in relation to its price. It also had an engine that could be easily tuned at a relatively low cost which gave a good performance increase for the outlay if you wanted more.
Fast forward 20 odd years and it has poor performance relative to today's sporty cars.
The basic Boxter the S1 faced had 200 hp, today's one is 50% more than that
This Elise has 10% more than the car from 20 years ago, ok so the build is much better, but so is every other car compared to the version on sale 20 years ago.
I like the Elise a lot, but the basic car has got steadily more disappointing with every new iteration that came after the S1
peter450 said:
The 0 - 60 is not that important, but 30 to 70 and 50 to 90 are. For 2017 this is where that 130hp 1.6 looks very unimpressive and expensive, foot down at 30 mph it won't even be remotely close to the Boxter or any other performance orientated car and that's a problem.
If any kind of straight line performance figures matter to you, your'e clearly not in the target market for a 1.6 Elise. Yes it's slow (for a sports car, at least); for the people it's aimed that that just doesn't matter; for those who do care, Lotus will give you the same basic platform with anything up to 380bhp. andy_s said:
...and it's only £7k more for the supercharged 1.8 version anyway, if that's your thing.
Excellent point and exactly what I was hinting at. My daily driver is a supercharged Elise. I thought I'd drive a 718 Cayman to see what all the fuss was. A nice car but pretty disappointed with its pace despite 300 bhp. On the basis that the basic Boxster costs £7k without options more than I paid for mine, surely based on the argument above both or overpriced for their performance.Now both Porsche and Lotus fans would argue that neither cars are all about the straight line pace and I'd agree completely. My car puts a smile on my face no matter the pace and I'm sure there are like minded Porsche fans.
So the point made above by kambites is absolutely true. If numbers and acceleration are your thing, then you will see both propositions as being expensive and not for you.
kambites said:
If any kind of straight line performance figures matter to you, your'e clearly not in the target market for a 1.6 Elise. Yes it's slow (for a sports car, at least); for the people it's aimed that that just doesn't matter; for those who do care, Lotus will give you the same basic platform with anything up to 380bhp.
How depressing that it's come to this, how many people are more concerned about how the stats look on paper or beating some other car. I've a ridiculously underpowered Mk3 MR2 and yet its the most fun car I've driven, despite owning cars that have double the power or more, and it still doesn't feel "slow" if driving it properly. I guess some people will never get it...
Onehp said:
I like it.
Please do not start with silly dry weights too, can't drive a car starved of all fluids. Yes interesting for the sake of comparison, but still want the know the kerb wet weight with a full tank. Thanks.
Exactly this. Lotus have recently started quoting weight figures "dry" and "with lightweight options". This is the sort of silly stuff Ferrari etc... pull and I had hoped Lotus were beyond it.Please do not start with silly dry weights too, can't drive a car starved of all fluids. Yes interesting for the sake of comparison, but still want the know the kerb wet weight with a full tank. Thanks.
With regards to those who think it is expensive, the Elise was basically never £20k anyway, but we now live in a world with £110k 911s, and £40k Golfs. Zenos have already shown a car of this type at £30k doesn't work, so kudos to Lotus for somehow making it do so. It is my understanding that it is an extremely expensive car for them to make, I think they probably rely on very few people ordering the base model. As far as pure driving thrills go, I can't think of much better.
I'd still take a 111R though... which is why I have one.
Edited by jayemm89 on Monday 20th March 00:43
Pulse said:
Can I check a few things here? It's staying the same price for even the base model, at around £29,000? And even the base model will be 10kg less than it is now?
If so, where do I sign up?
Actually, that's a good idea If so, where do I sign up?
jayemm89 said:
I'd still take a 111R though... which is why I have one.
Speaking of which, when are you going to do a proper video on that thing? 
jayemm89 said:
Exactly this. Lotus have recently started quoting weight figures "dry" and "with lightweight options". This is the sort of silly stuff Ferrari etc... pull and I had hoped Lotus were beyond it.
Think of it as homologation! To be fair, a level playing field in this respect would be good - if everyone but Lotus quotes dry weight then it's probably better Lotus do too rather than launching into an explanation/excuse in the showrooms/magazines every time.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff