260

[Shred-head]

Three Wells said:

...or would your money be on an R500 Evolution?

My moneys on the CSR260, I'd say it's just better at getting the power down.

[jackal]

without having read the article I would imagine that the whole point is that the CSR's chassis and suspension means that its a lot more stable (elise-like is the phrase thats been touted to me even by caterham salesman) and composed across country roads so point to point yes, its bound to be more effective than any series 3 car, including the R500 evo ....

but it sounds really like making a pointless journalist story up around nothing etc.. If you want to go tearing around the B roads and single track farm lanes of Great Britain and lose your license/kill a dozen horses within the first couple of hours, then get a sorted Impreza or an EVO.. they will demolish any caterham out there, in part because A to B driving is often about dealing with puddles, sump shearing rough terrain, mud, stray leaves and pine cones, farmyard excrement, horse deposits, loose gravel etc..

I can't see how ultimate ground covering ability matters that much ... composure and ride quality yes but who in earths name is going to try and get from John O groats to lands end in 1 hr 50 mins in a CSR just to prove a point and kill himself in the process ? It reminds me of the current trend now with all these car programmes to bang on about oversteer and progressiveness and how benign a car is or isn't at the limit... I mean, for crying out loud, exactly how many people who watch top gear will buy a car and then go and hold it in a 11 second power-on oversteer slide round the M25/Leatherhead Roundabout in Oxshott Surrey..... basically, none of them. 99.9% of people absolutely cack themselves the moment they detect even a hint of lightness at the steering or direction of wheel/travel disagreement.

[L100NYY]

I would still have an R500 Evo over a CSR though, for the simple reason that no matter how hard I try I just cannot get used to the looks of the wider bodied CSR.

I'm sure that down a typical B-road the CSR would be smoother and easier to drive than an R500, and yes therefore quicker, but I relished the challenge of driving my R400 fast down a none too perfect road.

The fact that you had to really, really read the road for bumps, camber changes and varying grip levels made every bladt an adventure and a real test of car control. That's the reason I had 5 Caterham's in a row and also why I cannot wait to get back behind the wheel of one again.

[RobM77]

Well said. My money's on the R500 EVO as well as it would put a bigger smile on my face (as would an R400 actually..). The original seven is smaller, more intimate and miles more fun because it is less stable.

Caterhams are very fast A to B and round tracks, but I'm fairly sure that this isn't why people buy them. Sure, it helps sales to top the lap times in car mags, but at the end of the day I want a car that is exciting and constantly involving to drive, whilst not having any vices or tricky handling that are going to cause a spin or an accident. An original Caterham is exactly that car.