the great conversion debate-my question

[cabbron]

hi guys,just after some hard facts from those who have or have had an audi or honda elise- who's had problems,what sort and any inherent faults or pattern of problems.brutal honesty would be good as it is really hard to find from those with a vested interest in one or the other!got an sc k series s1 at mo and use only for fast road work-i live abroad and its hot and not so many speed traps so taking these factors into consideration plus absolute reliability will be a priority as trips back to specialists cost sooo much, thanks in advance for any advice.

[tricky 100]

Just my opinion of course and not saying its right or wrong but , Lotus dont make a car with an Audi or Honda engine ,therefore in my eyes if any cars been converted its no longer a Lotus its just a kind of kit car , so why not do the job properly and build a proper kit car like a Caterham or something .I think cars should be kept as close to the way manufactuers made them as possible , i wouldn't want a Ferrari with a Lambo engine it would devalue it .

[S Works]

Apologies if this sounds like I'm teaching you to suck eggs, but no car is absolutely reliable, to think anything will be is folly. So you'll have to adjust expectations there a little.

The Honda's are, by-and-large, very reliable. I've had a few issues with mine, but largely to do with small niggles that I'd expect in any car quite frankly... a link-pipe on the exhaust broke off due to a small weld failure, the gear selector cable broke, the manifold cracked (caused by a worn engine mount I suspect). Currently its at the doctors because the ECU has gone funny, awaiting news from Mr Scuffham's diagnostics.

Nothing inherently wrong with the kit (Link-Up), which has been developed over hundreds of thousands of racing miles. Can't comment on any others.

[S Works]

tricky 100 said:

Just my opinion of course and not saying its right or wrong but , Lotus dont make a car with an Audi or Honda engine ,therefore in my eyes if any cars been converted its no longer a Lotus its just a kind of kit car , so why not do the job properly and build a proper kit car like a Caterham or something .I think cars should be kept as close to the way manufactuers made them as possible , i wouldn't want a Ferrari with a Lambo engine it would devalue it .

Utter boocks.

Honda wouldn't give Lotus the K20A, hence they had to get the Yamaha.

[ptp170]

S Works said:

tricky 100 said:

Just my opinion of course and not saying its right or wrong but , Lotus dont make a car with an Audi or Honda engine ,therefore in my eyes if any cars been converted its no longer a Lotus its just a kind of kit car , so why not do the job properly and build a proper kit car like a Caterham or something .I think cars should be kept as close to the way manufactuers made them as possible , i wouldn't want a Ferrari with a Lambo engine it would devalue it .

Utter boocks.

Honda wouldn't give Lotus the K20A, hence they had to get the Yamaha.

Indeed...does that mean that my Elise is crap as it has an engine from Rover in it?

Does it also mean that the later Toyota engined cars are also not a 'Lotus'.

[S Works]

ptp170 said:

S Works said:

tricky 100 said:

Just my opinion of course and not saying its right or wrong but , Lotus dont make a car with an Audi or Honda engine ,therefore in my eyes if any cars been converted its no longer a Lotus its just a kind of kit car , so why not do the job properly and build a proper kit car like a Caterham or something .I think cars should be kept as close to the way manufactuers made them as possible , i wouldn't want a Ferrari with a Lambo engine it would devalue it .

Utter boocks.

Honda wouldn't give Lotus the K20A, hence they had to get the Yamaha.

Indeed...does that mean that my Elise is crap as it has an engine from Rover in it?

Does it also mean that the later Toyota engined cars are also not a 'Lotus'.

To be fair, while I agree with your sentiment, the argument doesn't stack up as the K-series and Yota lumps do come from Hethel.

I personally think that cars should be made as good as they can if you have pockets deep enough. Are AMG Merc's kit cars? Brabus? Manthey Porsches? Cosworth Fords? Of course not.

[tricky 100]

S Works said:

Honda wouldn't give Lotus the K20A, hence they had to get the Yamaha.

Like i said just my humble opinion. They didn't use the Honda engine so i wouldn't want a Lotus without a Lotus supplied engine .
AMG and Brabus can be brought at Merc main dealers as can Cosworth fords be brought at Ford (well you used to be able to when they had some sense), therefore they are genuine items .

Edited by tricky 100 on Monday 24th December 19:21

[tricky 100]

ptp170 said:

S Works said:

tricky 100 said:

Just my opinion of course and not saying its right or wrong but , Lotus dont make a car with an Audi or Honda engine ,therefore in my eyes if any cars been converted its no longer a Lotus its just a kind of kit car , so why not do the job properly and build a proper kit car like a Caterham or something .I think cars should be kept as close to the way manufactuers made them as possible , i wouldn't want a Ferrari with a Lambo engine it would devalue it .

Utter boocks.

Honda wouldn't give Lotus the K20A, hence they had to get the Yamaha.

Indeed...does that mean that my Elise is crap as it has an engine from Rover in it?

Does it also mean that the later Toyota engined cars are also not a 'Lotus'.

Huh , are you moaning at me?? I never said anything was crap . i said your Lotus should keep its K series engine .
As far as im aware Lotus have never built a car with an engine built by themselves only engines worked on by them .

[S Works]

tricky 100 said:

S Works said:

Honda wouldn't give Lotus the K20A, hence they had to get the Yamaha.

Like i said just my humble opinion. They didn't use the Honda engine so i wouldn't want a Lotus without a Lotus supplied engine .
AMG and Brabus can be brought at Merc main dealers as can Cosworth fords be brought at Ford (well you used to be able to when they had some sense), therefore they are genuine items .

Utter cobblers again. You've totally contradicted your first post, and now you're back-pedalling for all you're worth. You have no frame of reference whatsoever. Lotus don't *supply* engines, they map vendor sourced ones (and not particularly well I might add). Keep digging...

[S Works]

tricky 100 said:

ptp170 said:

S Works said:

tricky 100 said:

Just my opinion of course and not saying its right or wrong but , Lotus dont make a car with an Audi or Honda engine ,therefore in my eyes if any cars been converted its no longer a Lotus its just a kind of kit car , so why not do the job properly and build a proper kit car like a Caterham or something .I think cars should be kept as close to the way manufactuers made them as possible , i wouldn't want a Ferrari with a Lambo engine it would devalue it .

Utter boocks.

Honda wouldn't give Lotus the K20A, hence they had to get the Yamaha.

Indeed...does that mean that my Elise is crap as it has an engine from Rover in it?

Does it also mean that the later Toyota engined cars are also not a 'Lotus'.

Huh , are you moaning at me?? I never said anything was crap . i said your Lotus should keep its K series engine .
As far as im aware Lotus have never built a car with an engine built by themselves only engines worked on by them .

• worked on*...

Most of the engines they "worked on" in the Elise/Exige have been a mess, generally best sorted out by aftermarket tuners. Where they excel is ride and handling. Another miss in your repertoire of nonsense. What's next?

[beaniegti]

To a certain extent, who really cares what engine is used? As you say, loutus didn't produce their own engine so why be sentimental about an externally sourced powerplant? As long as the essence of the vehicle remains intact (and i believe its improved when using the honda lump) then surely thats what makes it a lotus, not the badge on the rocker.

It is only an elise at the end of the day and not some super rare/exotic historic special

Oh, and hi all btw , you may be hearing a bit more from me in the future depending on how a few test drives go over the following week or so.

Edited by beaniegti on Tuesday 25th December 01:18

[Scuffers]

• crying*

Lotus of old would use *any* engine they could get their hands on....

from the Climax to the GM engine in the current Europa, to get all snobby about engine swaps just shows your ignorance of the mark.

[Russ H]

My Elise must be a Vauxhall as its get GM sourced switch gear.

Why are you two so hostile and on Christmas day FFS.

[cabbron]

hi guys,a bit off track there apart from s.works whose reply was exactly what i was asking. just trying to make the right decision which way to go audi or honda.i read all the threads on the subject and am onto my 7th lotus and have had a very expensive year with my s/c k series so i am well aware of living with marque! being so far from all the specialists just makes the decision a little harder in that any problems are so much harder to sort so reliability is king.either would of course be a huge improvement. cheers

[Mark82]

With respect to History and Marque empathy, I like the Idea of the Honda and Duratec solutions - both examples of engine suppliers used by lotus in Formula one...

[Gooby]

S Works said:

tricky 100 said:

Just my opinion of course and not saying its right or wrong but , Lotus dont make a car with an Audi or Honda engine ,therefore in my eyes if any cars been converted its no longer a Lotus its just a kind of kit car , so why not do the job properly and build a proper kit car like a Caterham or something .I think cars should be kept as close to the way manufactuers made them as possible , i wouldn't want a Ferrari with a Lambo engine it would devalue it .

Utter boocks.

Honda wouldn't give Lotus the K20A, hence they had to get the Yamaha.

Hmmm .
Not quite - Lotus have a good relationship with Toyota and have been sharing information since the early 80's. Toyota also own a large chunk of Lotus. The business realtionship was already there so it was leveraged.

After Honda sell the k20's to atom, why wouldnt they sell to Lotus?

[tricky 100]

Cant see any contradiction from my original post . Like i said , for me i like cars to be reasonably standard not modified to much , as the kids call it now . Changing the engine to a differant make would be heavily modifing i think , therefore not for me . As i said all along just my opinion , not right or wrong , high horses not required.
I think Lotus did a pretty good job at the time with their Ford twincams ,so theres one good engine they worked on, of course not compared to todays cars .

[4pot]

I think you'll find the converted cars offer the best alround package. If only Lotus had been able to supply such cars from the factory.

I've been in an Audi converted car, very quick indeed, great package. They appear to have a minor issue with coil packs.

I'm on my second Honda powered car (N/A), nothing's went wrong with my first car in 11 months and 18.5k. The second one I've only done around 600 miles in. The Honda cars can suffer from driveshaft issues.