caterhams... why?
Discussion
not trolling on this matter, but i need an answer. bought an r300 on the 18th march. sold it 1 month and 3 weeks later. without question the worst car i have ever owned. it was like driving a bobsleigh. ridiculous in every respect. i cannot see what the fuss is about, which is why there must be something clearly wrong with me. zero fun on the road, especially with the aeroscreen, nothing remarkable on the track AT ALL.... me thinks it is the automotive equivalent of the emporers new clothes. what is the deal with them. why do people buy them and think so much of them. they are hopelessly compromised in too many ways (mechnically, ride quality, reliability, open to the elements) to make it a viable automotive proposition in this day and age.
i am sure this post will go down well(!), but please respect my opinion and refrain from personal abuse in any responses you may wish to give...
i am sure this post will go down well(!), but please respect my opinion and refrain from personal abuse in any responses you may wish to give...
I have a few questions about your brief ownership experience.
How much did you drive it?
What type of roads?
Any track days?
What cars are you comparing it to?
What's your driving experience? Edit: just looked at your profile, obviously some fairly powerful cars there but the R300 should at least keep up on track, if not go quicker than most of them.
I guess if you disliked it that much then that sort of car just isn't for you. Horses for courses. I've had mine for 6 years, 5 of those as an only car (still doing 10k miles a year). I find going into it with the attitude of it being a practical motorbike rather than an impractical car helps
I find mine responsive, fast(ish, engine upgrade on the way), huge amounts of fun and superb on road and track. Yes, it's rubbish on motorways, I'd have expected nothing different.
>> Edited by ewenm on Monday 22 May 17:43
How much did you drive it?
What type of roads?
Any track days?
What cars are you comparing it to?
What's your driving experience? Edit: just looked at your profile, obviously some fairly powerful cars there but the R300 should at least keep up on track, if not go quicker than most of them.
I guess if you disliked it that much then that sort of car just isn't for you. Horses for courses. I've had mine for 6 years, 5 of those as an only car (still doing 10k miles a year). I find going into it with the attitude of it being a practical motorbike rather than an impractical car helps
I find mine responsive, fast(ish, engine upgrade on the way), huge amounts of fun and superb on road and track. Yes, it's rubbish on motorways, I'd have expected nothing different.
>> Edited by ewenm on Monday 22 May 17:43
Rob_T said:
zero fun on the road, especially with the aeroscreen, nothing remarkable on the track AT ALL....
Rob, the R400 was too fast for its class at the VLN races at the 'Ring, so they banned it! Seriously though, for a while the R500 held the production car lap record. The R300 is not *that* much slower. Due to the dynamics of the car it may be initially hard to push it as hard as say your old GT2? The aeroscreen can give you a bit of a buffeting - can depend upon the design of your crash helmet as to whether the air pressure differential makes the lid try to throttle you! Which track did you take the car on, and what tyres were you running out of curiosity? Another point to note is that each car is different, and often requires a degree of setting up in terms of susp geo to get the most from it.
Rob_T said:
they are hopelessly compromised in too many ways (mechnically, ride quality, reliability, open to the elements) to make it a viable automotive proposition in this day and age.
Surely you knew (or were aware of) some of what you've said above prior to buying the car? Did you have a decent test drive? With respect to reliability, they are not sold as 'turnkey' cars neceserily, but I agree that support/info from the factory is sadly often found wanting.
Hope you have more luck with your next purchase! Different folks different strokes. I too may well be going back to 911 ownership soon. I fancy a GT3.
on the road, i tend to agree .. they are pretty damm hopeless and there's a whole list of cars id sooner have for road kicks. A basic 205 gti or elise will be as much fun & has enough power whilst being more palatable over UK roads.
on the track ? *shrugs* they are the most fun i've ever tired. Faster than any production car out there, zero weight so they make anything this side of a forumla ford feel portly and recalcitrant so basically you are talking almost single seater levels of speed and grip yet bearing none of the boring ills of stiff unforgiving racecar-ish dynamics or the slicks+wings type experience. They squirm under you constantly (for me the single biggest reason to drive one on the cct), dive for apexes, feel inertia free and ultra nimble, communication is amazing, just enough softness to make them comfortable/effective over bumps and stupid fun to drive. Pilot them silly and sideways, bung it in willy nilly and sort it out mid-bend, or drive it neat and smooth and go for the ultimate lap. If you want a tin top as fast as an R400/R500 then really you are talking GT3 cup car ..... a different price league all together, not road legal and it will never feel nice and light and nimble. Also, an aeroiscreened caterham at 130+mph down teh back straight at snet is a very sensory mad experience, it feels pretty damm exposed & fast. I view caterhams almost as one step backwards from stuff like a global lights, a jade, sports 2000 etc.. I dont view them as extreme road cars (like one step forwards from an elise) and if you approach them in this way they are actually pretty friendly and well specced. You will NEVER get the same 'second skin' feeling from a large tin top.... a caterham on track is like wearing a glove. Theres also teh whole hobbyist side of things, you really do have to be into modding them and tinkering with them.
Why the speed and dynamics and agility didnt appeal to you or wasn't to yur likening is anybody's guess. A lot of it depends on what you are looking from a car, how you like it to handle. If you're not 'on it' and at the fringes of a caterhams limit then there's not much point in any case. Was yours setup properly ? i have driven caterhams before (including demonstrators) that were just awful and tbh had i not known that they are not supposed to drive in that way I would have never have owned one.
>> Edited by jackal on Monday 22 May 18:17
>> Edited by jackal on Monday 22 May 18:20
on the track ? *shrugs* they are the most fun i've ever tired. Faster than any production car out there, zero weight so they make anything this side of a forumla ford feel portly and recalcitrant so basically you are talking almost single seater levels of speed and grip yet bearing none of the boring ills of stiff unforgiving racecar-ish dynamics or the slicks+wings type experience. They squirm under you constantly (for me the single biggest reason to drive one on the cct), dive for apexes, feel inertia free and ultra nimble, communication is amazing, just enough softness to make them comfortable/effective over bumps and stupid fun to drive. Pilot them silly and sideways, bung it in willy nilly and sort it out mid-bend, or drive it neat and smooth and go for the ultimate lap. If you want a tin top as fast as an R400/R500 then really you are talking GT3 cup car ..... a different price league all together, not road legal and it will never feel nice and light and nimble. Also, an aeroiscreened caterham at 130+mph down teh back straight at snet is a very sensory mad experience, it feels pretty damm exposed & fast. I view caterhams almost as one step backwards from stuff like a global lights, a jade, sports 2000 etc.. I dont view them as extreme road cars (like one step forwards from an elise) and if you approach them in this way they are actually pretty friendly and well specced. You will NEVER get the same 'second skin' feeling from a large tin top.... a caterham on track is like wearing a glove. Theres also teh whole hobbyist side of things, you really do have to be into modding them and tinkering with them.
Why the speed and dynamics and agility didnt appeal to you or wasn't to yur likening is anybody's guess. A lot of it depends on what you are looking from a car, how you like it to handle. If you're not 'on it' and at the fringes of a caterhams limit then there's not much point in any case. Was yours setup properly ? i have driven caterhams before (including demonstrators) that were just awful and tbh had i not known that they are not supposed to drive in that way I would have never have owned one.
>> Edited by jackal on Monday 22 May 18:17
>> Edited by jackal on Monday 22 May 18:20
Did you buy it from the factory brand new? If so, it will not have been set up properly and a poorly set up Caterham can be dreadful...plus it takes time to get used to one, just as it does to get used to driving a 911. The first time I drove a 7 I too couldn't see what the fuss was about.
I love Caterhams, and I have owned many supercars including an EB110........but I do not like aeroscreens, I always have a windscreen even if it slows me down, for me its been able to watch the suspension move around, nearest thing to an F1 car thats road legal, but they are not for everyone.
I'd have to agree with POORCARDEALER, when I test drove my last 7 it had an aeroscreen on and I hated it, got the seller to stick the screen back on and it was much better. The first time I drove a 7 I was pretty shocked at how raw the whole experience was (it was Feb with snow on the ground) but soon got used to it. Only sold it because I lost my garage space, replaced with a sensible hoon car (968CS).
I'd say the combination of an aeroscreen and possible dodgy geometry/suspension set up has ruined the experience for Rob T.
I'd say the combination of an aeroscreen and possible dodgy geometry/suspension set up has ruined the experience for Rob T.
There isnt many cars wher you can feel as "in touch" with the car as with a caterham
there point and squirt cars and very easy to drive once you get used to the steering, view, pedals and box.
I absolutely love driving caterhams/seven syle cars as there soo much bloody fun
If you prefer a fast drive in a merc convertible with all the luxuries then a caterham will be nothing like what your after
And i must admit your the 1st person ive ever heard sya they hated it
there point and squirt cars and very easy to drive once you get used to the steering, view, pedals and box.
I absolutely love driving caterhams/seven syle cars as there soo much bloody fun
If you prefer a fast drive in a merc convertible with all the luxuries then a caterham will be nothing like what your after
And i must admit your the 1st person ive ever heard sya they hated it
Not something thats easy to put in words, I think you've probably missed the point of the car. Your car list looks quite privileged. So perhaps having fast, but comfortable cars is more your thing? Caterhams (and other 7esque cars) are more about raw experience. As said above its close to a true race car (and I dont mean production sports/GTs), but not everyone likes racecars either! And the more people like you dislike Caterhams, the quicker they fall into price ranges that the rest of us can afford!
[R400!! Mmnnnn!!]
[R400!! Mmnnnn!!]
jackal said:
Lots of very good points
A superb post that one jackal and on taht has now got me searching for another Caterham! Bugger.
I think that I'm either going to go the ex-race car option or an original Superlight, which by the way is still the best Caterham that I have ever owned. Although the power of the R400 was quite addictive........
Whilst I can't agree as I love my R400, I can see where you're comming from on the road.
The R400 is very stiff and I sometimes struggle to keep up with a friends boggo 1.6 K series just because it's much moer supple, certainly on the road I reckon I'd be quicked in the Gallardo.
But on the track they are in a different league of alert responsiveness.
However good a "normal" car is you can't get away from the wieght and I've never found a 911, Elise or Ferrari on a track day that could keep up with the R400 through the twisties, but they catch on the longer straights.
I had a Caterham and went to an Elise Sport 160 which was undoubtedly a better road car but not as much fun on track, so I wen't back to the R400.
If it felt dodgy on track the suspension geometry must have been suspect or the tyres wrongly inflated, they are hugely sensitive to either of these.
As an aside, I'd like to get the R400 geometry optimised, anyone reccomend anyone in the East midlands?
The R400 is very stiff and I sometimes struggle to keep up with a friends boggo 1.6 K series just because it's much moer supple, certainly on the road I reckon I'd be quicked in the Gallardo.
But on the track they are in a different league of alert responsiveness.
However good a "normal" car is you can't get away from the wieght and I've never found a 911, Elise or Ferrari on a track day that could keep up with the R400 through the twisties, but they catch on the longer straights.
I had a Caterham and went to an Elise Sport 160 which was undoubtedly a better road car but not as much fun on track, so I wen't back to the R400.
If it felt dodgy on track the suspension geometry must have been suspect or the tyres wrongly inflated, they are hugely sensitive to either of these.
As an aside, I'd like to get the R400 geometry optimised, anyone reccomend anyone in the East midlands?
bertie said:
However good a "normal" car is you can't get away from the wieght and I've never found a 911, Elise or Ferrari on a track day that could keep up with the R400 through the twisties, but they catch on the longer straights.
Unless your corner exit speed is compromised then NO road car should be catching up with an R400 on the straights IMO (650bhp ultimas included !) From say 40mph up to ~120mph a ~200bhp caterham is as quick as all but the most rapid of supercars but then factor in its exit speed which will usually be at least 5mph greater and it should be completely uncatchable down those straights. To counteract a 5mph starting disadvantage you need a LOT of horse... like the 750bhp race GT2 on 385 section slicks that came past me down the revett straight like some sort of bullet !
jackal said:
....like the 750bhp race GT2 on 385 section slicks that came past me down the revett straight like some sort of bullet !
I wonder what sort of top speed he saw before he saw his braking marker! PS Jackal - what sort of setup would you recommend for the wet? I appreciate that generic setup advice is all you can offer as each car is different. I'm planning on using CR500s as my wet weather tyres - not got any A021s yet! TIA.
fergus said:
....like the 750bhp race GT2 on 385 section slicks that came past me down the revett straight like some sort of bullet !
PS Jackal - what sort of setup would you recommend for the wet? I appreciate that generic setup advice is all you can offer as each car is different. I'm planning on using CR500s as my wet weather tyres - not got any A021s yet! TIA.
Depends how wet,
If raining hard then remove the front ARB, Increase the pressures to 20 psi all round, and disconnect one side of the rear ARB, also run the CR500 tyres the correct way with the flags pointing forwards
at a guess, he would have been around 140-145mph
wet setup ... i could guess (disconnet arbs, 160lb rear springs, get more heat into tyres by running more toe etc..) but i would be guessing and just pointing out things that ive done in the past. Never did many wet trackdays and my spring rates were quite hard & not ideal for wet trackdays. Fire off an email to www.racecardoctor.com, they can setup your car just as you like.
wet setup ... i could guess (disconnet arbs, 160lb rear springs, get more heat into tyres by running more toe etc..) but i would be guessing and just pointing out things that ive done in the past. Never did many wet trackdays and my spring rates were quite hard & not ideal for wet trackdays. Fire off an email to www.racecardoctor.com, they can setup your car just as you like.
Finchy172 said:
Depends how wet, If raining hard then remove the front ARB, Increase the pressures to 20 psi all round, and disconnect one side of the rear ARB, also run the CR500 tyres the correct way with the flags pointing forwards
Surely disconnecting one side of the ARB is the same as disconnecting both sides, as there is no tortional resistance being offered? I guess this way saves you having to do both sides! I have a freestyle adjustable front ARB, so will set that to full soft. Why increase the tyre pressure. When I've raced bikes on the old type wets )'chocolate block' tread pattern), the pressures were increased to stop the blocks closing up on each other, but I can't see how this works on a CR500? thanks for the advice though. Currently, the tyres are all set to have the arrow pattern 'facing forwards'. I presume this is the best way for the tread to cut through the water?
Gassing Station | Caterham | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff