RE: Caterham launches new Super Seven 600 and 2000

[anonymous-user]

Robert Green said:

One could say that about most new cars. Second hand they are cheaper. New 911 or a 997 and Aston Martin V8 Vantage….

Yes, I get that, it's just that in the case of Caterhams it's not as if they have moved on a great deal in the intervening years, you're getting essentially the same car. They're also so simple that it doesn't take a lot to bring them up to a pretty good standard of preparation.

An 997 is a massively different beast to a 992 (although there's an argument to be had about which is 'better'!)

[Skyedriver]

Tobermory said:

Much as I love Caterham's, having built one and run it as an only car for 20,000 miles and bought another one more recently (now gone) I struggle to see the value at those prices. Clearly there is a market though and good luck to them, they must suffer from massive (in)economies of (small) scale.

For the price of one of those you could buy a used Roadsport as well as an Elise/ VX220 and have two bites of the light weight cherry.

As a road car to enjoy on s sunny day though there's not much to beat them. I wouldn't be brave enough to go on track in such an insubstantial thing mind you!

.

Built mine in 1991, sold it 12 years later then bought it back about 8 years ago. Currently in the process of selling for the second time.
Love it when I take it out but most of the time it no longer fits with wife, son, 2 dogs...so it's rarely used. Gave it a good run out a couple of weeks ago, I was a little more unsure of the safety aspects than I used to be, maybe the weather, the road surface or other vehicles. I never used to suffer from any anxiety when driving but this time I did.

[Numeric]

Skyedriver said:

Tobermory said:

Much as I love Caterham's, having built one and run it as an only car for 20,000 miles and bought another one more recently (now gone) I struggle to see the value at those prices. Clearly there is a market though and good luck to them, they must suffer from massive (in)economies of (small) scale.

For the price of one of those you could buy a used Roadsport as well as an Elise/ VX220 and have two bites of the light weight cherry.

As a road car to enjoy on s sunny day though there's not much to beat them. I wouldn't be brave enough to go on track in such an insubstantial thing mind you!

.

Built mine in 1991, sold it 12 years later then bought it back about 8 years ago. Currently in the process of selling for the second time.
Love it when I take it out but most of the time it no longer fits with wife, son, 2 dogs...so it's rarely used. Gave it a good run out a couple of weeks ago, I was a little more unsure of the safety aspects than I used to be, maybe the weather, the road surface or other vehicles. I never used to suffer from any anxiety when driving but this time I did.

Economics dictates that as things become more scarce they become more valuable assuming they have a utility, as we get older the years left become more scarce so perhaps we value them more while their use, looking after the things we love might be that use, increases their utility. Perhaps that's why I dress as the Michelin Man on my motorbike these days where jeans and pullover used to be perfectly adequate protection many years ago?

[blearyeyedboy]

big_rob_sydney said:

The Caterham simply has less of everything, so it should actually cost less in materials cost, and given it is a simplistic car to build, should be cheap.

There are three reasons, disregarding economies of scale:

1) They charge these prices because they can. Any company that sells out of an in-demand product at a lower price than they need to are clearly bad at business.

2) There's an old joke about an IT guy who charges £1000 to fix a company's network in five minutes. "But it only took you five minutes!", protests the company's accountant. "I demand an itemised bill explaining this cost!"

The bill read:
Tapping buttons for five minutes: £5
Knowing which buttons to press: £995

Caterham know which emotional buttons to press for its customers.

3) Caterham are currently doing very nicely but are facing an existential threat. They need a very large amount of money to plan a post-ICE strategy which allows them to survive without losing their USP; a tall order when batteries are heavy and anything with poor aero has a very poor range.

They will also need a dollop of judgement and a side order of flipping good luck to go with all that money. They will likely need every penny if our grandchildren are to enjoy Caterhams some day.

[Simon Owen]

5lab said:

they really need to pick up an engine to fill in the gap in their range between the 600cc engine and the 2l. There were rumours it'd be the 1.5 mx5 lump but I haven't seen anything more about it

This !! Both Skyactive engines from the ND would work a treat from my experience of them in the Mazda.

[chappj]

rjfp1962 said:

Caterham 600 every time for me... I don't get the whole three-wheel Morgan thing..!

When the super 3 was launched I was convinced this would be my next car and spent many hours in the configurator. I held off putting down a deposit as I wanted the wife to drive one first. Glad I did as it looks as though they are plagued with supply chain issues so production hasn’t started (to my knowledge) and having now seen them in the flesh the front end looks far too wide.

I’m very tempted by a retro 600 caterham to build to go alongside my FE240 Elise.

[BertBert]

What utter nonsense from caterham. Not an original thought to be had. Let's just rehash the past and charge duck loads for it.

Makes my bench seat, long cockpit xflow look rather good value.

[_Bozzy]

£40k for this in 2.0 form, or £70k for that stupid yellow abomination of an MX5 that was on the other day. You'd need to be short on brain cells to buy the MX5!

[asci.white]

Not sure if its been mentioned yet but they suffer very low depreciation which must surely off set the price to some degree?

[parabolica]

BertBert said:

What utter nonsense from caterham. Not an original thought to be had. Let's just rehash the past and charge duck loads for it.

Makes my bench seat, long cockpit xflow look rather good value.

If it ain't broke...

[Pflanzgarten]

chappj said:

rjfp1962 said:

Caterham 600 every time for me... I don't get the whole three-wheel Morgan thing..!

When the super 3 was launched I was convinced this would be my next car and spent many hours in the configurator. I held off putting down a deposit as I wanted the wife to drive one first. Glad I did as it looks as though they are plagued with supply chain issues so production hasn’t started (to my knowledge) and having now seen them in the flesh the front end looks far too wide.

I’m very tempted by a retro 600 caterham to build to go alongside my FE240 Elise.

I was the same, held off until I sat in the demo at the JYS Classic in the summer and couldn't believe how compromised the cabin was in the super 3 compared to the Caterham. You sit bolt upright and high up (there's space for batteries under the seat in the Super for the inevitable) and there's just no where for your outside elbow to go.

I loved the car and was convinced I would order but even setting driving dynamics aside (which I know the 7 will be better at) the little Sprint/600/130 is a much better proposition.

[CABC]

BertBert said:

What utter nonsense from caterham. Not an original thought to be had. Let's just rehash the past and charge duck loads for it.

Makes my bench seat, long cockpit xflow look rather good value.

You should feel content that you’ve had the motoring experiences you’ve had so cheap! Morgan are far worse. The Germans have abandoned sports cars. I’m happy for Caterham to launch these as I think more innovative products are upstream. Mainstream manufacturers have abandoned pure driving fun, so let’s support the remaining niche suppliers.

[Pan Pan Pan]

g7jhp said:

Fabulous cars, I was thinking about getting another one.

Retro cars look good, but the aero wings over the wheels are better dynamically as you don't get the lift.

As they've been built for years there are plenty of cars with flared wings around so no reason not to buy second hand if you want a more affordable route into one.

There is no car that is as fun and gives as pure a driving experience as a 7.

As was said above go and get a test drive or hire one for the day to live the experience. You won't be disappointed.

Probably not much in it aerodynamically, between the flared wings, and the cycle wings (but who ever worried too much about the aerodynamics of a Caterham?)
The flared wing can cause lift at speed, but the larger part of the flared wings are `in line' with airflow, in fact it is the slightly longer path for the air passing over the top of the wing which causes reduced air pressure above the wing which can generate the lift, (and like any wing, drag forms an integral part of the picture) the but the cycle wings act like two airbrakes, not that the front wheel themselves are in any way aerodynamic.
Ever seen a what a swan does with its feet to slow itself down, when landing on water?

[FA57REN]

asci.white said:

Not sure if its been mentioned yet but they suffer very low depreciation which must surely off set the price to some degree?

If you're considering depreciation as part of the purchasing decision then you should be considering the investment potential of the cost difference between a new and used model.

To beat inflation, or even any mundane investment account, a car has to actively appreciate - not just depreciate slowly.

[Pflanzgarten]

FA57REN said:

asci.white said:

Not sure if its been mentioned yet but they suffer very low depreciation which must surely off set the price to some degree?

If you're considering depreciation as part of the purchasing decision then you should be considering the investment potential of the cost difference between a new and used model.

To beat inflation, or even any mundane investment account, a car has to actively appreciate - not just depreciate slowly.

It's relatively surprising that the Sprints (or Super Sprints if you prefer cycle wings) continue to trade well below the cost of a new 160 or 600, especially considering the waiting list from the factory (currently over a year) for a new build.

In fact, to get a new 600 spec'd up to Super Sprint spec (or a little less as the racing suspension doesn't seem to be available) you're within a couple of hundred quid of £40k!

[kambites]

FA57REN said:

asci.white said:

Not sure if its been mentioned yet but they suffer very low depreciation which must surely off set the price to some degree?

If you're considering depreciation as part of the purchasing decision then you should be considering the investment potential of the cost difference between a new and used model.

To beat inflation, or even any mundane investment account, a car has to actively appreciate - not just depreciate slowly.

True but if you're comparing a car which holds in value, even if only in absolute terms, against a car which depreciates heavily, it's rather irrelevant. I doubt there are many brand new cars with a lower total cost of ownership over the first few years than a Seven even if they have half the list price.

Of course if you're comparing buying a Seven to buying nothing at all, it's a very different story!

[Equus]

kambites said:

I doubt there are many brand new cars with a lower total cost of ownership over the first few years than a Seven even if they have half the list price.

But then try comparing on the basis of cost (including depreciation) per mile of actual use... otherwise it's just finest man-maths.

[framerateuk]

ghibbett said:

Let me put 'cost' into perspective.

I am on my second Caterham.

My first, I bought at 18 months old and with 2.5k miles, ran it for 4 years and did 6k miles.
So 1.5 years -> 5.5 years old. And trebled the mileage.
I sold it in a rush, to a dealer, and in the middle of winter and lost £4k (which massively pained me).

My second, which I've had for 2.5 years now, is currently worth £4k more than I paid for it.

So over 2 cars, 6.5 years of ownership and just under 10k hilarious and enjoyable miles, it's cost me nothing*.

How can that ever compare to a Fiat Panda or Kia Picanto??????

• of course, in terms of upgrades, trackdays etc, it's actually cost me rather a lot!

They hold their value incredibly well.

My Sigma 140 was 17k second hand back in 2012. Could have easily sold it for the same price now (or a little higher).

I actually had it re-painted (I never liked the original black), and it was valued at 24k after finishing. Even including the cost of the parts and spray job (about 3.5k), I'd be quids in *

• of course, I too have spent a small fortune on trackdays, random upgrades ect!

[kambites]

Equus said:

kambites said:

I doubt there are many brand new cars with a lower total cost of ownership over the first few years than a Seven even if they have half the list price.

But then try comparing on the basis of cost (including depreciation) per mile of actual use... otherwise it's just finest man-maths.

Well yeah, but if someone is comparing something else directly to a Caterham when making a purchase decision, one has to image that they would be intending to use them for similar purposes and hence cover similar mileages? If someone was looking for an all-purpose sports car to cover 10k miles a year in, I doubt a Caterham would be on their shortlist!

Whether it's worth having a low-mileage toy at all is an entirely different (but also interesting) question. For me it is not, which is why I don't own a Caterham.

Edited by kambites on Friday 23 September 15:26

[MKnight702]

Christ on a bike.

I just used the configurator for the new 2000 to build a reasonable spec car and I got a huge shock when I scrolled to top, just over £50k!!!! I did a similar exercise back end of last year for a 360R and got it to about £38k so what the hell happened??

I love Caterhams and I really like the clamshell wings but £50k is sheer madness. There is just no way that the car can cost so much, I think Caterham have finally priced themselves out of business.