RE: Caparo Lays Claim To Top Gear Power Lap
Discussion
LathamJohnP said:
FWIW, in a downpour I'd rather drive a screenless, roofless Caterham with decent wets that an M3 CSL on those cut slicks they were sold with (IIRC). You arrive wetter, but in one piece.
I wouldn't.This year has been one of the wettest in recent history.
I've done 20,000 miles in my M3 CSL since April, including 6500 of those round the nurburgring nordschleife. (315 laps)
I only switched back to PS2s yesterday, having been on semi slick tyres (either Pilot Sport Cups, Yoko A048, or Pzero Corsas) since April.
Frequently I drove in the wet, on semi slicks, in some case with only a couple of mm of tyre depth left. The tyres are fine in normal damp conditions, and once you have temperature in them they're brilliant. (yes it is possible on a damp track).
Of course you need to be careful in standing water, but I never arrived late due to my tyre choice.
I always arrived dry, in one piece....
Go spread your FUD elsewhere.
Edited by cpufreak on Wednesday 21st November 01:28
IMO its simple really -
A ROAD car is a car built primarily for road usage. A car that is designed to spend the majority of its time on a public highway. It may be classed as a sports car, or a brilliant track car, but its primary function is a fast road car.
A TRACK car is the opposite -
A car built mainly for use on a race track, usually not road legal, but occasionally with some concessions to the law to enable the car to be used on a public highway, e.g. driving to or from a track.
There are some cars which come close to standing in both camps, such as the lotus elise, but if we are honest we will admit that a car as focused as a caparo is really meant as a track car that you could OCCASIONALLY use on the road.
Standard elises, caterhams etc are designed as road cars - cars you would take out of the garage on a sunny day and go for a blat in the countryside with, yes they are also designed for use on a track, but are mainly road orientated.
This I beleive is how TG looks at the issue. Although I dont quite see why this applies to the ULtima, which if we are honest is designed, marketed and bought as something mainly for the road, which you wouldnt mind taking on a track now and then.
A ROAD car is a car built primarily for road usage. A car that is designed to spend the majority of its time on a public highway. It may be classed as a sports car, or a brilliant track car, but its primary function is a fast road car.
A TRACK car is the opposite -
A car built mainly for use on a race track, usually not road legal, but occasionally with some concessions to the law to enable the car to be used on a public highway, e.g. driving to or from a track.
There are some cars which come close to standing in both camps, such as the lotus elise, but if we are honest we will admit that a car as focused as a caparo is really meant as a track car that you could OCCASIONALLY use on the road.
Standard elises, caterhams etc are designed as road cars - cars you would take out of the garage on a sunny day and go for a blat in the countryside with, yes they are also designed for use on a track, but are mainly road orientated.
This I beleive is how TG looks at the issue. Although I dont quite see why this applies to the ULtima, which if we are honest is designed, marketed and bought as something mainly for the road, which you wouldnt mind taking on a track now and then.
Maybe what TG is trying to hint at, is that there must be a middle ground between a 2 tonne Bugatti "jet powered waterbed" Veyron and a half-tonne Caparo "ugly deckchair" T1. Can't we have something like a really, really fast Lotus that beats them all?
Seriously though, not very smart what you're doing there (if you are).
cpufreak said:
Frequently I drove in the wet, on semi slicks, in some case with only a couple of mm of tyre depth left.
Now that's hardly fair, how can anybody have an argument with a guy that is obviously going to end up as a flaming ball of fire sooner rather than later? Seriously though, not very smart what you're doing there (if you are).
Raising the Caparo to 90mm may well slow it to the point where it's within reach of the Ultima - now that's a race I'd like to see.
Arguably the ultimate in high-tech, CAD designed, CFC bodied, computer controlled modernity, Vs. the ultimate in high quality - but "Keep-It-Simple-Stupid hands-on engineering nous.
How about that TG - can the Stig be cloned to keep it fair?
Arguably the ultimate in high-tech, CAD designed, CFC bodied, computer controlled modernity, Vs. the ultimate in high quality - but "Keep-It-Simple-Stupid hands-on engineering nous.
How about that TG - can the Stig be cloned to keep it fair?
what a bunch of fairies. seriously, how soft are you? its not really a road car its a track car blah blah blah... road/track is a massive grey scale... if its a production car, ROAD LEGAL, its a road car, simple, the cut off is legal no matter how compromised the car may be. The only room for arguement in my book is one off SVA'd converted racecars. You lot need to spend a couple of years, in all weathers, with a sports bike for transport. Theres no reason you cant use a caterham/radical/t1 on road.
900T-R said:
CommanderJameson said:
I'm actually more interested in the Caparo and the Ultima than I am in the latest Ferrari/Porsche/Lamborghini, because I like the idea of things made in sheds by men in brown overjackets with woodbines behind their ears.
flemke said:
Frik said:
The Hitman said:
It isn't suitable to go on the board, there is no-way you can convince me that the T1 was designed with normal roads in mind, because it obviously wasn't. All the rest of those cars are designed to be enjoyed at the very least on the roads, and some others on the track aswell (the Atom fits here BTW).
Why let facts get in the way eh? It was very much designed with roadcar compromises in mind. Albeit less than many cars.How many of those road car compromises were made in order to enable the car to be tolerable on the roads, and how many were made in order to get the car SVA'd?
I think there is a difference.
It's not my background so I can't speak with authority on this but an example would be the amount of Ackerman employed. A Formula 1 car would typically run 0° but the T1 uses Ackerman specifically to make it easier to manoeuvre at low speeds.
Hardly a major compromise but an example of a concession to being a road car that would counter The Hitman's "obvious" assertion.
If the Caparo was exactly how it is with a Ferrari badge on the front, TG would somehow make excuses to include it.
If it's SVA'ed it's road legal. TG can make up whatever rule they want but some of the fastest cars in the world are the Caparo, Ultima and depending on the track, a few British kit cars. Ask any American that knows about cars what they think of TVR, Noble, Ultima, Morgan, Marcos and of course all the great British kit cars and they make a more of a fuss about them than they do Italian exotica - and in many cases their own muscle/supercars. Yet TG don't.
As for kit cars not being suited to everyday driving! Compare the cost in terms of petrol, depreciation, other running costs, insurance etc....a supercar can't compete. Of course a supercar has less chance of catching fire
If it's SVA'ed it's road legal. TG can make up whatever rule they want but some of the fastest cars in the world are the Caparo, Ultima and depending on the track, a few British kit cars. Ask any American that knows about cars what they think of TVR, Noble, Ultima, Morgan, Marcos and of course all the great British kit cars and they make a more of a fuss about them than they do Italian exotica - and in many cases their own muscle/supercars. Yet TG don't.
As for kit cars not being suited to everyday driving! Compare the cost in terms of petrol, depreciation, other running costs, insurance etc....a supercar can't compete. Of course a supercar has less chance of catching fire
Frik said:
flemke said:
Frik said:
The Hitman said:
It isn't suitable to go on the board, there is no-way you can convince me that the T1 was designed with normal roads in mind, because it obviously wasn't. All the rest of those cars are designed to be enjoyed at the very least on the roads, and some others on the track aswell (the Atom fits here BTW).
Why let facts get in the way eh? It was very much designed with roadcar compromises in mind. Albeit less than many cars.How many of those road car compromises were made in order to enable the car to be tolerable on the roads, and how many were made in order to get the car SVA'd?
I think there is a difference.
It's not my background so I can't speak with authority on this but an example would be the amount of Ackerman employed. A Formula 1 car would typically run 0° but the T1 uses Ackerman specifically to make it easier to manoeuvre at low speeds.
Hardly a major compromise but an example of a concession to being a road car that would counter The Hitman's "obvious" assertion.
That's an interesting point.
This is a track-day car, not a proper race car. I wonder how many future T1 owners would be bothered whilst driving on a track-day by the lack of Ackerman? I suspect that not half of them have ever heard of "Ackerman".
IMO, something that was designed primarily to be used somewhere other than the public roads is not a road car. An Abrams tank is not a road vehicle, nor is a John Deere tractor.
This is why I gave the example of the Rocket. It's not a normal road car, and it is certainly a compromised road car, relative to what is conventional. Nonetheless it was designed specifically to be used on the road, not on the track, and it is truly a joy to use on the road.
As I also said above, one of the Caparo engineers was quoted in a car mag as saying that "you wouldn't want to drive one on the road for more than five or ten miles". To me that said it all.
Cheers.
darth_pies said:
Caparo's PR team must be suicidal and/or unemployed. The bodged launches are a case study in how to cock up your PR...
flemke said:
one of the Caparo engineers was quoted in a car mag as saying that "you wouldn't want to drive one on the road for more than five or ten miles". To me that said it all.
Fort Jefferson said:
AJM6 said:
The distinction between road cars and cars that are road legal is simply one of utility.
A road car must have:
1. all weather protection
2. some useable storage space
3. The ability to carry at least one passenger
4. the ability to negotiate all standard road traffic obstacles (humps etc) without external adjustment.
Oh yes, and the owner must be happy to leave it unattended in a public place.
Whether the owner decides to make use any of the above is beside the point.
Therefore, Ferraris, Veyrons and Lambos etc are road cars and Atoms, Caparos and Radicals etc are street legal track cars. Comparing them is a bit daft - you wouldn't compare a Eurofighter with a 747 would you?
PS. This is my first post, so be gentle with me!
Welcome to PH, You talk far to much sense to be on here.A road car must have:
1. all weather protection
2. some useable storage space
3. The ability to carry at least one passenger
4. the ability to negotiate all standard road traffic obstacles (humps etc) without external adjustment.
Oh yes, and the owner must be happy to leave it unattended in a public place.
Whether the owner decides to make use any of the above is beside the point.
Therefore, Ferraris, Veyrons and Lambos etc are road cars and Atoms, Caparos and Radicals etc are street legal track cars. Comparing them is a bit daft - you wouldn't compare a Eurofighter with a 747 would you?
PS. This is my first post, so be gentle with me!
I agree completely, even if they make only one such car, the big car manufacturers can also make such special car if they want and even better that if they like so no complains to them..I love the underdog
GTRene
flemke said:
WombatinSwansea said:
That is, when you are as sexy as JC on TG, you can make and enforce whatever rules you like!
Is that what birds find sexy - a potbelly, yellow teeth and a simple mind?(Bit late with this but I've been busy!)
zagato said:
My idea of a road car is one that can take you and your girl to Europe for a weekend. Then remain on talking terms when you get back! Otherwise it's a bit of a sham.
You know, that's a good point. Must be why I took my brother to Le Mans in the Fury, it'd be terms for divorce if I'd taken the missus...
WombatinSwansea said:
But you didn't mention the sensible attitude, correct politics, good taste in cars (most of the time), sense of humour, or cute cheekiness. Plus he can drift and has driven a Veyron. What else matters?
Let's see..."Sensible attitude" - sometimes, but then he'll go off on one of his ludicrous, obnoxious tangents, such as when he advocated mowing down cyclists with his car, and he does great damage to the cause of motorists', as well as making an ass of himself,
"Correct politics" - you would think so, but he appeared on Question Time a couple of years ago. I was looking forward to his demolishing the lefties with trenchant arguments, but in the event they left him looking a one-dimensional, babbling fool,
"Good taste in cars" - This is a guy with an admitted aversion to Porsches, which is fair enough, but with a slavish devotion to the filth of Maranello, who have perfected the pursuit of style over substance whilst polluting motorsport to an unforgivable extent. Good taste? I think not.
"Sense of humour" - Perhaps a bit, although have we not had enough repetitions of his, "We needed to see what it would really do, so we gave it to...(queue deep voice)...the Stig."?
"Cute cheekiness" - If that means tongue-tied drooling over a boring, egomaniacal ice queen such as Kristin Scott Thomas, then I'll grant you cute cheekiness.
"He can drift" - Perhaps, but, if so, that would be a new skill for him. It wasn't that long ago that I tried to follow him around the Nordschliefe. I say "tried", because soon I was forced to overtake him - it was not possible to drive as slowly as he was doing.
"He's driven a Veyron" - I've driven three, but it didn't turn me into anything special.
Anyhow, this is all in good fun. I was just surprised that that sort of guy attracts women.
flemke said:
WombatinSwansea said:
But you didn't mention the sensible attitude, correct politics, good taste in cars (most of the time), sense of humour, or cute cheekiness. Plus he can drift and has driven a Veyron. What else matters?
Let's see..."Sensible attitude" - sometimes, but then he'll go off on one of his ludicrous, obnoxious tangents, such as when he advocated mowing down cyclists with his car, and he does great damage to the cause of motorists', as well as making an ass of himself,
"Correct politics" - you would think so, but he appeared on Question Time a couple of years ago. I was looking forward to his demolishing the lefties with trenchant arguments, but in the event they left him looking a one-dimensional, babbling fool,
"Good taste in cars" - This is a guy with an admitted aversion to Porsches, which is fair enough, but with a slavish devotion to the filth of Maranello, who have perfected the pursuit of style over substance whilst polluting motorsport to an unforgivable extent. Good taste? I think not.
"Sense of humour" - Perhaps a bit, although have we not had enough repetitions of his, "We needed to see what it would really do, so we gave it to...(queue deep voice)...the Stig."?
"Cute cheekiness" - If that means tongue-tied drooling over a boring, egomaniacal ice queen such as Kristin Scott Thomas, then I'll grant you cute cheekiness.
"He can drift" - Perhaps, but, if so, that would be a new skill for him. It wasn't that long ago that I tried to follow him around the Nordschliefe. I say "tried", because soon I was forced to overtake him - it was not possible to drive as slowly as he was doing.
"He's driven a Veyron" - I've driven three, but it didn't turn me into anything special.
Anyhow, this is all in good fun. I was just surprised that that sort of guy attracts women.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff