RE: New Lotus Evora GT launched in North America
Discussion
jayemm89 said:
I don't know many people, if any, who bought the "sport" - and FWIW £112-120K WAS 911 GT3 money.
I priced up the GT430 Sport - as some of those were still available - but having to option in almost £10k of equipment to match the base spec of the 400 (a/c, reversing camera, 2+2) was a step too far....As for a 911 GT3 for £112k - I enquired about a 991.2 GT3 Touring manual and got a firm no for ordering one, but could buy someone elses delivery mileage, non-Touring, PDK, car for quite a bit over list.
Edited by Thorburn on Tuesday 30th July 10:02
Yeah the whole over-list thing skews stuff - it's just as annoying for me as dealing with manufacturers who give huge discounts too.
I agree with you, Lotus took on Porsche's charge more and give less policy and it was ridiculous - £3,000 for a hideously bad aftermarket radio and then they refused to fit a DAB aerial! A bad joke. At least with the GT3 you got a ludicrously good engine, can't say the same for the difference between Evoras
I agree with you, Lotus took on Porsche's charge more and give less policy and it was ridiculous - £3,000 for a hideously bad aftermarket radio and then they refused to fit a DAB aerial! A bad joke. At least with the GT3 you got a ludicrously good engine, can't say the same for the difference between Evoras
kbee540 said:
Love me some Lotus, but they’ve put themselves in a price bracket out of keeping with what is at its core a glued together rehash of the Elise platform with a mundane Toyota engine. At £50-£70k, you can just about make a case for it, but knocking up against and over £100k is always going to leave them floundering.
You can argue that the performance of the thing puts it up against pricier machines, but there’s more to a cars value than raw performance. It’s why an Ultima is a fraction of the cost of the Bugatti it can keep up with.
As much as I dislike the Vajayjay or whatever it’s called, maybe it’s the only option available to them. Try to vault themselves into the big leagues to find a selling point where they can survive on their low volumes.
Anyway, can’t see too many of our American cousins looking past a v8 mid-engined Corvette for a Toyota-toting Lotus that’s not all that much lighter and will cost a whole lot more. On a track...blah, blah, blah...but most of us don’t live on or commute via a racetrack.
People keep saying this stuff about the engine and chassis. Watch Harry's Garage review of the Evora 410 on youtube then tell us that the engine is mundane. You can argue that the performance of the thing puts it up against pricier machines, but there’s more to a cars value than raw performance. It’s why an Ultima is a fraction of the cost of the Bugatti it can keep up with.
As much as I dislike the Vajayjay or whatever it’s called, maybe it’s the only option available to them. Try to vault themselves into the big leagues to find a selling point where they can survive on their low volumes.
Anyway, can’t see too many of our American cousins looking past a v8 mid-engined Corvette for a Toyota-toting Lotus that’s not all that much lighter and will cost a whole lot more. On a track...blah, blah, blah...but most of us don’t live on or commute via a racetrack.
As for rehashed Elise platform, that is also incorrect, it uses similar glued aluminium chassis but then do do Aston and Ferrari and Morgan, in fact just about every manufacturer tweaks what it already has for the underpinnings of different models. If it works (an in Lotus it works very well) why fix it?
jayemm89 said:
To be fair, although the engine is much better than many give it credit for, it is mundane when one considers what you can/could get at similar prices from other manufacturers.
Mundane in terms of where it comes from I agree, but not in application. Plus the Toyota design means that they are pretty reliable.Manufacturer: "So this is our new car - it's got 15bhp more and is 20kgs lighter"
Reviewer: "You can feel it's just a bit sharper on turn in, and pulls that little harder"
It's what you know, not what you feel with cars. I'd love to see some "blind" tests of cars... There must be plenty of people who enjoy driving but find cars dreadfully dull - get them employed!
Anyways, still really like the Evora - cracking little car I'm sure.
Reviewer: "You can feel it's just a bit sharper on turn in, and pulls that little harder"
It's what you know, not what you feel with cars. I'd love to see some "blind" tests of cars... There must be plenty of people who enjoy driving but find cars dreadfully dull - get them employed!
Anyways, still really like the Evora - cracking little car I'm sure.
blueg33 said:
jayemm89 said:
To be fair, although the engine is much better than many give it credit for, it is mundane when one considers what you can/could get at similar prices from other manufacturers.
Mundane in terms of where it comes from I agree, but not in application. Plus the Toyota design means that they are pretty reliable.Yeah, sure, I get that it's a Toyota engine. How many people has that really put off buying the car though? Give it a load of revs and then ask anyone within earshot if they give a s
t where the engine came from. jayemm89 said:
To be fair, although the engine is much better than many give it credit for, it is mundane when one considers what you can/could get at similar prices from other manufacturers.
In what way? I can't say I've been that enamoured with any of the turbo engines I've tried - the new Vantage for example.If you ignore the whole "Its from a Camry" thing its got immediate throttle response, linear power delivery, sounds great at the top-end and generally hard to fault - could be a little better on fuel I guess, but still get 30mpg+ on a run.
Had this pair up at the Silverstone Classic, I was in the Vantage, wife in the Evora - on anything other than 100mph+ straight line performance and interior finish (fair enough considering the Vantage cost more than twice as much when new) I'd rather be in the Evora.
Thorburn said:
In what way? I can't say I've been that enamoured with any of the turbo engines I've tried - the new Vantage for example.
If you ignore the whole "Its from a Camry" thing its got immediate throttle response, linear power delivery, sounds great at the top-end and generally hard to fault - could be a little better on fuel I guess, but still get 30mpg+ on a run.
Had this pair up at the Silverstone Classic, I was in the Vantage, wife in the Evora - on anything other than 100mph+ straight line performance and interior finish (fair enough considering the Vantage cost more than twice as much when new) I'd rather be in the Evora.
Nice brace of cars - I too prefer the Evora.If you ignore the whole "Its from a Camry" thing its got immediate throttle response, linear power delivery, sounds great at the top-end and generally hard to fault - could be a little better on fuel I guess, but still get 30mpg+ on a run.
Had this pair up at the Silverstone Classic, I was in the Vantage, wife in the Evora - on anything other than 100mph+ straight line performance and interior finish (fair enough considering the Vantage cost more than twice as much when new) I'd rather be in the Evora.
jayemm89 said:
To be fair, although the engine is much better than many give it credit for, it is mundane when one considers what you can/could get at similar prices from other manufacturers.
the origins and it being a V6 will always count against it. how much different in reality is it to a std 911 though?a screaming Mezger is a halo that shines bright, but of course unavailable to me new, and quite a high price used.
I drove a Ferrari 360 at the weekend (looking to buy one). Performance was similar to my Evora but its was way less refined, it was more like an Exige, ie noisy.
Also the suspension was very hard, steering duller than the Evora, F1 gearbox 1000 times worse than the IPS. Shows you how much cars have come on in 15 years. In every aspect apart from engine the 2014 Evora S Sports Racer is better than the Ferrari.
However - I still want the Ferrari, mainly for that engine - high revving, titanium con rodded V8 loveliness. Will need to acquire earplugs for long trips
Also the suspension was very hard, steering duller than the Evora, F1 gearbox 1000 times worse than the IPS. Shows you how much cars have come on in 15 years. In every aspect apart from engine the 2014 Evora S Sports Racer is better than the Ferrari.
However - I still want the Ferrari, mainly for that engine - high revving, titanium con rodded V8 loveliness. Will need to acquire earplugs for long trips
Despite it's obvious failings, the M96/M97 powerplant in the 996/997 era 911 was a great engine, and developed similar power to the Evora without an SC. The V8 Vantage (old one) had a brilliant V8. The Jag supercharged V8 was a delight. Porsche's GT3 engines are blinding (and yep a 991.1 GT3 was £112k, the same as a GT430 although granted not at the same time).
Maserati have some very characterful engines, the one in the GranTurismo is old and paired with a rubbish box, but is a wicked engine.
The V6 in the Quadrifoglio Alfas is mad, albeit in a turbo way. BMW's S55 although not my favourite lump at all is a bespoke engine capable of silly numbers. The older S85 V10 (available in an M5 that cost barely more than the old Evora S) is a piece of motoring art.
I have had the pleasure of driving a Swindon engined Evora, they have the character which is missing from the stock units. I have literally nothing against the Toyota lump and have made many comments defending it BUT if Lotus had opened it up and messed around with it just a little, there is some real magic in that unit.
You could also argue that the 2ZZ used in the older Elise was far more special too. In fact, Toyota's own designation for the engine (2GR-FE) denotes that it isn't a performance motor. Those usually get GE suffixes
Maserati have some very characterful engines, the one in the GranTurismo is old and paired with a rubbish box, but is a wicked engine.
The V6 in the Quadrifoglio Alfas is mad, albeit in a turbo way. BMW's S55 although not my favourite lump at all is a bespoke engine capable of silly numbers. The older S85 V10 (available in an M5 that cost barely more than the old Evora S) is a piece of motoring art.
I have had the pleasure of driving a Swindon engined Evora, they have the character which is missing from the stock units. I have literally nothing against the Toyota lump and have made many comments defending it BUT if Lotus had opened it up and messed around with it just a little, there is some real magic in that unit.
You could also argue that the 2ZZ used in the older Elise was far more special too. In fact, Toyota's own designation for the engine (2GR-FE) denotes that it isn't a performance motor. Those usually get GE suffixes
jayemm89 said:
Despite it's obvious failings, the M96/M97 powerplant in the 996/997 era 911 was a great engine, and developed similar power to the Evora without an SC. The V8 Vantage (old one) had a brilliant V8. The Jag supercharged V8 was a delight. Porsche's GT3 engines are blinding (and yep a 991.1 GT3 was £112k, the same as a GT430 although granted not at the same time).
Maserati have some very characterful engines, the one in the GranTurismo is old and paired with a rubbish box, but is a wicked engine.
The V6 in the Quadrifoglio Alfas is mad, albeit in a turbo way. BMW's S55 although not my favourite lump at all is a bespoke engine capable of silly numbers. The older S85 V10 (available in an M5 that cost barely more than the old Evora S) is a piece of motoring art.
I have had the pleasure of driving a Swindon engined Evora, they have the character which is missing from the stock units. I have literally nothing against the Toyota lump and have made many comments defending it BUT if Lotus had opened it up and messed around with it just a little, there is some real magic in that unit.
You could also argue that the 2ZZ used in the older Elise was far more special too. In fact, Toyota's own designation for the engine (2GR-FE) denotes that it isn't a performance motor. Those usually get GE suffixes
Not sure I agree with the V8 vantage engine - sounds nice but is pretty gutless, after the vantage it was always a relief to get into the EvoraMaserati have some very characterful engines, the one in the GranTurismo is old and paired with a rubbish box, but is a wicked engine.
The V6 in the Quadrifoglio Alfas is mad, albeit in a turbo way. BMW's S55 although not my favourite lump at all is a bespoke engine capable of silly numbers. The older S85 V10 (available in an M5 that cost barely more than the old Evora S) is a piece of motoring art.
I have had the pleasure of driving a Swindon engined Evora, they have the character which is missing from the stock units. I have literally nothing against the Toyota lump and have made many comments defending it BUT if Lotus had opened it up and messed around with it just a little, there is some real magic in that unit.
You could also argue that the 2ZZ used in the older Elise was far more special too. In fact, Toyota's own designation for the engine (2GR-FE) denotes that it isn't a performance motor. Those usually get GE suffixes
BigChiefmuffinAgain said:
Will be interesting to see how this compares against the new Corvette. I know the Lotus will always appeal to a certain niche who want something "different" but imagine it will be getting increasingly hard to justify the price premium....
Times have changed. Less than 4 secs to 60 is more than enough power (on the public road) - for any car. Lotus combine this with amazing handling. Plus buying in the engine and more parts from Japanese makers ups the prices - but also improves reliability. And they have been working hard on that.Supercars rarely let you use the car on public roads making them boring. The Evora strikes the perfect balance. It's pretty good on gas too.
Edited by bivvyfox on Wednesday 31st July 13:36
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff