My first Westfield! but which one?

[LocoBlade]

Sam_68 said:

I'm not going to get into a detailed explanation of the differences (though 'almost exact copy' is certainly stretching the truth a little), but in any case the old (live axle) Westfield did indeed have some of the suspension geometry flaws of the Locost. The difference is that it's designer was prepared to admit (in writing) that it was far from perfect and to explain why he had accepted its deficiencies (for easy of availability of donor parts and for aesthetic reasons).

Spot the difference
Locost Chassis
Early Westie Chassis

What difference does it make that the Westie designer admitted it was a compromise though? If Ron Champion made the same written statement would that suddenly make it OK in your eyes? All kit car designs are a compromise to a certain extent anyway, you can't tell me that Jeremy Philips choice of suspension components on a lot of his (Sylva) cars aren't also compromises to a more or lesser degree for exactly the same reasons?

Sam_68 said:

LocoBlade said:

I'd love to hear your explaination as to how a car can be so bad yet put in competitive laptimes such as that?

Easy. A race track is very different to the road.

A kart, with negligible chassis stiffness and no suspension whatsoever can put up a fast time around a circuit, but would be completely undriveable on the road. Probably the most important factors on a race track are power:weight ratio, low CG and tyres. With current trends for very stiff suspension, everything else makes only limited difference.

It's on the road where the differences between a good car and a bad car will be most evident. On a race track, you might find that for cars of similar weight, layout, tyres and power, the different between a really good design and a really average one might be as little as, oooh, say half a second a lap.

More drivel in a poor attempt to back your argument Im afraid, to say that suspension setup and chassis dynamics is not important to the laptime of a fast lightweight car like a Seven is laughable. Just because a 50kg kart doesn't have suspension and can lap quickly on track, doesnt mean the same applies for cars that weigh ten times that amount with unsprung mass (wheels, hubs, brakes, driveshafts etc) that make up nearly a quarter of that weight. It's also a rather ironic claim to make considering (in your words) the Lotus was "designed by probably the greatest race car design genius ever to put pen to paper", a man who's design genius reputation is largely based on his ability to design novel and effctive suspension and chassis designs in order to go fast on track. See the inconsistencies in your argument yet?

I have to say though that if you'd said in your first couple of posts some of what you said in the replies to Dern and I thought it was genuine, I wouldn't have an issue. You said above to Dern that "my main worries with genuine Locost-type cars (ie. cars predominantly fabricated by their individual builder) are the uncertainties about chassis accuracy, build integrity and quality control". Fair enough if taken as read, a perfectly legitimate statement, but this is completely at odds with your original two posts where you fail to mention any of these concerns, instead they're almost entirely dedicated to slating the Locost design. If you simply said something along the lines of your reply to Dern, warning the OP to be careful if considering some Locosts due to the unknown of the home builder, and made a general observation that the Locost isn't the pinnacle of Seven clone design and suggested alternatives to look at, then there would be no issue.

All the time you continue your personal crusade portraying the Locost as you do though, there is an issue.

Edited by LocoBlade on Monday 12th November 21:17

[dern]

LocoBlade said:

I have to say though that if you'd said in your first couple of posts some of what you said in the replies to Dern and I thought it was genuine, I wouldn't have an issue. You said above to Dern that "my main worries with genuine Locost-type cars (ie. cars predominantly fabricated by their individual builder) are the uncertainties about chassis accuracy, build integrity and quality control". Fair enough if taken as read, a perfectly legitimate statement, but this is completely at odds with your original two posts where you fail to mention any of these concerns, instead they're almost entirely dedicated to slating the Locost design. If you simply said something along the lines of your reply to Dern, warning the OP to be careful if considering some Locosts due to the unknown of the home builder, and made a general observation that the Locost isn't the pinnacle of Seven clone design and suggested alternatives to look at, then there would be no issue.

Quite right. You initially post stuff (Sam) that you *know* will get our backs up. You know that we won't simply sit there and listen to it but you post it anyway and then you start bleating about personal abuse when we (mainly I) get arsed off with it all. You clearly have something interesting that we can all talk about as you do eventually manoeuvre your extreme views around to something more sensible. Just what is the point of it all Sam? What kick do you get out of firing off this nonsense, getting sensitive when I point out you're being an arse and start posting little hippy signs up in the rather absurd hope that you'll be seen as the innocent party?

[Jon Ison]

No comment

[dern]

Jon Ison said:

No comment

[Avoneer]

Powerstans - I have a lovely BEC powered car for sale for £6.5k.

http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/283638.htm

[PeteFf]

That's a Barry bargain there Pat, what are you thinking of replacing it with so we can tell you what's wrong with your choice

[Dualecosse]

Hello

while I cant be bothered entering into the petty (but not unsurprising) "locostbuilders" clique gang-up session, (most are beyond help, and not worth saving even from themselves anyway!!!) But everyone no matter what their allegiance is, be it kit car, roller skate, chaterham etc etc......

Surely everyone IS entitled to their OWN opinion no matter how distasteful that view is to another party, The whole point of a "forum" is to allow everyone an outlet/medium in which freedom of speech/typed/discussion of the merits/de-merits of a topic is actively encouraged.

[dern]

Dualecosse said:

while I cant be bothered entering into the petty (but not unsurprising) "locostbuilders" clique gang-up session, (most are beyond help, and not worth saving even from themselves anyway!!!) But everyone no matter what their allegiance is, be it kit car, roller skate, chaterham etc etc......

Surely everyone IS entitled to their OWN opinion no matter how distasteful that view is to another party, The whole point of a "forum" is to allow everyone an outlet/medium in which freedom of speech/typed/discussion of the merits/de-merits of a topic is actively encouraged.

Thanks for your patronising attempt to point out the obvious. Of course everyone is entitled to air their opinions as indeed everyone to reply to those opinions.

[Seabass]

Sam_68 said:

a middle-aged metalwork teacher. 'Those who can, do, those who can't...'

As a metalwork teacher myself I find this fairly offensive... Having built a locost, including welding the chassis, I am very proud of the car which continues to receive praise from the "fling money at it" brigade. I will admit that dynamically the chassis is not at the bleeding edge of stiffness or design. It is however great fun both on the road and track. It's just a shame that all Locosts are tarred with the same brush.

Rgds.
James

[Dualecosse]

dern said:

Thanks for your patronising attempt to point out the obvious. Of course everyone is entitled to air their opinions as indeed everyone to reply to those opinions.

No attempt at being "patronizing" in my last message, merely stating FACT nothing more, if you do not like those facts that sir is your problem.

I was also factually stating that just because one individuals point of view does not align with that of the locostbuilders clique, does not mean that it is correct for that individual to be harassed and personally verbally abused by the core clique for his his point view.

There is a difference between a healthy heated debate (which I agree with and encourage), but a line should be drawn when certain members start using expletives against another member just because the points of views do-not align with those of the core clique.

And after the treatment and verbal abuse the clique members have been using against another member I have reported this thread for the pistonheads moderators to monitor.

[dern]

Dualecosse said:

There is a difference between a healthy heated debate (which I agree with and encourage), but a line should be drawn when certain members start using expletives against another member just because the points of views do-not align with those of the core clique.

We've had this 'healthy debate' a number of times with Sam which is why we get so pissed off with the continual slagging off of locosts by him. If you want to jump in with both feet then why not stick around for a while and try and understand the context before making assumptions and reporting threads to moderators.

Edited by dern on Tuesday 13th November 11:53

[Sam_68]

LocoBlade said:

All the time you continue your personal crusade portraying the Locost as you do though, there is an issue.

OK… I’ll make this as simple as I can:

The majority of people (even Locost adherents) seem to agree/accept:
1) The Locost design isn’t quite as good as some competing cars that are available second-hand in the same price range.
2) There are potentially much greater issues of accuracy, structural integrity, and consistency of build quality with Locosts as a genre, compared to some competing cars available in the same price range.

Obviously, there will be some Locosts that are very good, and some Sylvas/Westfields that are badly built or in a poor state of repair, but unless commenting on a specific car for sale of which we have intimate knowledge, we can only offer generalised guidance.

For these reasons, I’ll continue to recommend that people buy Westfields or Sylvas rather than Locosts.

Whether they choose to take any notice of my advice is entirely up to them.

You might not like it, but there it is… as Dualecosse has said, this is a discussion forum and people are entitled to express their opinion…

I can only suggest that if you think there is a good reason why people should spend their money on a Locost rather than a Sylva or Westfield at the same price, you should make a case for it. All I’ve seen so far are rabid ‘kill the infidel’ ravings and limp ‘they’re not that much worse’ arguments.

Surely, if you are suggesting that someone buys a Locost in preference to another marque, you should be explaining why they are better?

[Dualecosse]

dern said:

Dualecosse said:

There is a difference between a healthy heated debate (which I agree with and encourage), but a line should be drawn when certain members start using expletives against another member just because the points of views do-not align with those of the core clique.

We've had this 'healthy debate' a number of times with Sam which is why we get so pissed off with the continual slagging off of locosts by him. If you want to jump in with both feet then why not stick around for a while and try and understand the context before making assumptions and reporting threads to moderators.

Edited by dern on Tuesday 13th November 11:53

You sir have made the INCORRECT assumption based on nothing more than supposition and certainly not fact, that.

"just because I have not posted much, that I have not sat and watched the systematic tirade of personal verbal abuse that you and your core clique have undertaken to the member discussed here and others like his who have a point of view that does not align with your own"


As for reporting a post for verbal abuse, as the old saying go's:

"if you cant do the time dont do the crime"

[dern]

Sam_68 said:

OK… I’ll make this as simple as I can:

The majority of people (even Locost adherents) seem to agree/accept:
1) The Locost design isn’t quite as good as some competing cars that are available second-hand in the same price range.
2) There are potentially much greater issues of accuracy, structural integrity, and consistency of build quality with Locosts as a genre, compared to some competing cars available in the same price range.

Obviously, there will be some Locosts that are very good, and some Sylvas/Westfields that are badly built or in a poor state of repair, but unless commenting on a specific car for sale of which we have intimate knowledge, we can only offer generalised guidance.

For these reasons, I’ll continue to recommend that people buy Westfields or Sylvas rather than Locosts.

Sam, if you initially express your point of view like you just have then we'd simply agree with you... no argument at all. The reason it gets all heated is that you always seem to initially wrap up your point of view in a way that seems to try and discredit locost design despite changes made to it since the first book (which you ignore) and to wind up the people involved in them. If you didn't do that and simply expressed perfectly reasonable views you just have we wouldn't have these arguments and we'd all get along fine. For the record we don't slag off any other make. Only you do this (and you do it in an invariably inflammatory way) so you must carry the lion's share of the responsibility for the arguments. Sure we could ignore you but then any OP would go away with a skewed view of what a locost can be and that just doesn't sit right with us. Maybe you do it just to wind me and the other guys up... if so why?

Edited by dern on Tuesday 13th November 12:37

[dern]

Dualecosse said:

You sir have made the INCORRECT assumption based on nothing more than supposition and certainly not fact, that.

"just because I have not posted much, that I have not sat and watched the systematic tirade of personal verbal abuse that you and your core clique have undertaken to the member discussed here and others like his who have a point of view that does not align with your own"


As for reporting a post for verbal abuse, as the old saying go's:

"if you cant do the time dont do the crime"

Err, right. Thanks for your comments.

[Sam_68]

dern said:

Stuff...

Without swearing or slinging puerile personal insults for once... well done!

... though there was still the teensiest hint of a rant in there, Dern, old buddy!

dern said:

Maybe you do it just to wind me up

Don't be silly! Why on earth would I want to do that?

like I said:

I can only suggest that if you think there is a good reason why people should spend their money on a Locost rather than a Sylva or Westfield at the same price...you should be explaining why they are better?

I'm waiting...

[dern]

Sam_68 said:

I'm waiting...

Do us all a favour and hold your breath while you're doing it.

[Meeja]

Note to all:

Healthy debate is welcomed.

Personal insults, swearing, and other childish behaviour isn't.

Let's keep to the facts and contributor's opinions, and that way interested parties can draw their own conclusions.

[Sam_68]

dern said:

Sam_68 said:

I'm waiting...

Do us all a favour and hold your breath while you're doing it.

QED

[PeteFf]

Dual Ecosse.
Is that you Calvin? I'm taking bets on it. It's got to be more interesting than the thread now.

Edited by PeteFf on Tuesday 13th November 16:51