elephant in the room - Lotus elise S v alfa 4C
Discussion
soooo the 4C, if I had £50k to punt on a new car and wasnt into "fresh air motoring", (both will never happen) I think that's where my money would be going.
As far as I can see, its basically an updated slightly better Elise SC.
Never felt the cayman was a worthy competitor, because just too heavy (great car though).
As this is a lotus forum i have sought out the most hideous angle possible.
Personally (not this photo) I think it looks pretty good generally, and even quite like the lights.
Comments?
O/T what is the hartdop elise now called if the V6 is the exige? (or is it dropped altogether?)
As far as I can see, its basically an updated slightly better Elise SC.
Never felt the cayman was a worthy competitor, because just too heavy (great car though).
As this is a lotus forum i have sought out the most hideous angle possible.
Personally (not this photo) I think it looks pretty good generally, and even quite like the lights.
Comments?
O/T what is the hartdop elise now called if the V6 is the exige? (or is it dropped altogether?)
Interesting to see what people think. To me it's a sort of tribute to Lotus and Colin Chapman. Hardly rocket science when people finally wake up to the idea of a small and lightweight car with few frills in standard form. Chapman saw it decades ago. I personally think it looks good. Most reviews here in France are favourable. Body weight at under 900 kg and 240 BHP is pure Lotus philosophy. All compare it to an Elise in various forms. One or two drawbacks. Low production (less than 3500 per year) and relatively poor finish by modern standards, but thats sort of Lotus like aswell. Alfa being part of the Fiat group would seem to have more resources to have perhaps paid more attention to detail. Rumours abound that Audi wish to buy the brand. Italian design with germanic precision could be a winner but it would no doubt be spoilt by German pricing.
All in all a refreshing change and I wish them well. Only time will tell.
All in all a refreshing change and I wish them well. Only time will tell.
On paper, I like everything about the 4C except the power-train. A small-capacity turbocharged engine and an automatic gearbox just aren't what I look for in a sports car.
The 4C is also about £10k more than the Elise, isn't it?
If they did a £35k version with a normally aspirated engine (I'd be quite happy with, say, 170bhp) and a manual gearbox, I'd give it serious consideration second-hand a few years down the line. Of course there is no reason for them to do so.
The 4C is also about £10k more than the Elise, isn't it?
If they did a £35k version with a normally aspirated engine (I'd be quite happy with, say, 170bhp) and a manual gearbox, I'd give it serious consideration second-hand a few years down the line. Of course there is no reason for them to do so.
Edited by kambites on Thursday 17th October 13:48
kambites said:
On paper, I like everything about the 4C except the power-train. A small-capacity turbocharged engine and an automatic gearbox just aren't what I look for in a sports car.
The 4C is also about £10k more than the Elise, isn't it?
If they did a £35k version with a normally aspirated engine (I'd be quite happy with, say, 170bhp) and a manual gearbox, I'd give it serious consideration second-hand a few years down the line. Of course there is no reason for them to do so.
kambites The 4C is also about £10k more than the Elise, isn't it?
If they did a £35k version with a normally aspirated engine (I'd be quite happy with, say, 170bhp) and a manual gearbox, I'd give it serious consideration second-hand a few years down the line. Of course there is no reason for them to do so.
Edited by kambites on Thursday 17th October 13:48
interesting point.... raises a few questions close to home....
with a 170bhp engine it wouldn't be quick enough to compete and would rely on huge volume at £35k to break even so cant see it either... what i can see is the current 4c will be the cheapest. all derivatives will become more and more expensive with bigger engines.
times are a changing, the 4c has put immense pressure on lotus. i really think the lotus exige v6 will be the last fast lotus with a manual box, an s1 derivative chassis and an alu tub .. like it or not.. all imho.
its compete or die time unfortunately.
lotus wont survive making low volume cheapish elises with no real profit margin. they need to move into the low volume premium market asap. the 4c is a great example of this. just imagine a 4c developed by lotus with a coco elan shell on it, a high end aspirated v6 and dsg (like that bit or not).
they would have em queuing round the block at £70k+ a piece .... ...that would ensure the marque we all love stays afloat, yet another 170bhp 4c or elise wont unfortunately
I don't think a carbon fibre chassis is essential. Having an aluminium chassis hasn't hurt the popularity of Aston Martins, Ferraris, etc.
The 4C hasn't reviewed that well since launch - they've been positive but don't really seem to regard it as a perfectly honed drivers car. I think it'll be viewed in a similar way to the 8C in the longer term, a pretty car with limited availability but never regarded as a classic.
The 4C hasn't reviewed that well since launch - they've been positive but don't really seem to regard it as a perfectly honed drivers car. I think it'll be viewed in a similar way to the 8C in the longer term, a pretty car with limited availability but never regarded as a classic.
Thorburn said:
I don't think a carbon fibre chassis is essential. Having an aluminium chassis hasn't hurt the popularity of Aston Martins, Ferraris, etc.
couple of devils advocate assumptions....the next elise/exige has to be bigger if you want to up sales.
an evora chassis'd exige v6 would have been too heavy even with a 350bhp sc v6 (according to 2 people i asked at lotus)....
is it that hard/expensive to (mass) produce a carbon chassis now? that 4c chassis will filter into the fiat group so both maserati and ferrari so i dont think we can assume that the next gen fiat group cars wont use the same process if they can get the costs down....
from a marketing perspective if alfa romeo are doing it (and when they button down the handling of the 4c and start using bigger powerplants) can lotus afford not to?
finally just my personal 2p .... having sat in the 4c carbon tub of this sub £50k sports car, anything else (inc alu) feels prehistoric/agricultural.
its all about selling cars and being profitable (isnt it?)
bobo said:
is it that hard/expensive to (mass) produce a carbon chassis now? that 4c chassis will filter into the fiat group so both maserati and ferrari so i dont think we can assume that the next gen fiat group cars wont use the same process if they can get the costs down....
Ferrari have already said they won't be switching to carbon fibre for their mains models (ie. not the LaFerrari) for the foreseeable future.http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1068406_others-...
The McLaren 12C uses a carbon fibre chassis at the supercar level, but it hasn't rendered Ferraris, Aston Martins, Porsches, etc, unsellable.
Thorburn said:
Ferrari have already said they won't be switching to carbon fibre for their mains models (ie. not the LaFerrari) for the foreseeable future.
http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1068406_others-...
The McLaren 12C uses a carbon fibre chassis at the supercar level, but it hasn't rendered Ferraris, Aston Martins, Porsches, etc, unsellable.
was referring to the next generation exige ie clean slate completely new design .. why chose alu over carbon if you start from scratch ? .. ferrari are saying that only because they are already down the line on development of their next gen italia etc ... would look a bit silly if they didn't say it http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1068406_others-...
The McLaren 12C uses a carbon fibre chassis at the supercar level, but it hasn't rendered Ferraris, Aston Martins, Porsches, etc, unsellable.
if you can produce a carbon tub cheaply and effectively for a sub £50k sports car - a material reserved exclusively for hyper cars - cant see lotus having any choice in the matter IF they want to compete .... only downside i can see is for the owner when he bashes it
Edited by bobo on Friday 18th October 12:29
GTRene said:
lotus have to come with a "real" sports-car, with a longitudinal mid engined car not a transverse laying engine and of course as light as possible.
alu chassis is good, but make a platform which is usable for more types of engines, from 4-pot longitudinal to V6 and V8.
isnt that the VVA thingymebob? alu chassis is good, but make a platform which is usable for more types of engines, from 4-pot longitudinal to V6 and V8.
bobo said:
was referring to the next generation exige ie clean slate completely new design .. why chose alu over carbon if you start from scratch ?
I'd guess because they own the company which makes the extruded aluminium chassis and use the cars to showcase the technology for others to use. I imagine you'll see far more aluminium chassis cars out there than CF and there is probably more consultancy money in it if you promote that side of your business.They do undoubtedly need to grow the interior dimensions of the Elise though, so I'd hope to see one built around a new chassis, but I can't see it being carbon fibre.
bobo said:
ferrari are saying that only because they are already down the line on development of their next gen italia etc ... would look a bit silly if they didn't say it
Would these cars development pre-date the techniques being used for the 4C chassis? The KTM XBow was a £50k carbon fibre chassis car in 2008 so they'd have been making these decisions within the time-scale of more affordable CF manufacturing methods.They've been making carbon fibre chassis road cars since the Ferrari F50, so there must be a good reason that almost 20 years on they haven't chosen to bring the material in to use on their mainstream models.
I'd guess the sheer time and the manpower involved in the CF chassis would quickly become the limiting factor - the 4C is a relatively small car, but I believe the annual production is chassis construction constrained at 3,500 units. Make something Ferrari 458 sized and you're going to be throwing money away because you simply can't produce enough to meet demand.
Edit: I'd also be very surprised if the 4C is ever a profit making car. It's a halo product to rebuild the reputation of a brand which has been living off past glories from the 60's and 70's but mostly producing pretty bland cars. The 4C will tick all the boxes in terms of desirability and perhaps bring them back in to peoples minds when they are buying a normal car, but I doubt it'll actually help their bottom line.
Edited by Thorburn on Friday 18th October 12:54
Thorburn said:
Would these cars development pre-date the techniques being used for the 4C chassis? The KTM XBow was a £50k carbon fibre chassis car in 2008 so they'd have been making these decisions within the time-scale of more affordable CF manufacturing methods.
They've been making carbon fibre chassis road cars since the Ferrari F50, so there must be a good reason that almost 20 years on they haven't chosen to bring the material in to use on their mainstream models.
I'd guess the sheer time and the manpower involved in the CF chassis would quickly become the limiting factor - the 4C is a relatively small car, but I believe the annual production is chassis construction constrained at 3,500 units. Make something Ferrari 458 sized and you're going to be throwing money away because you simply can't produce enough to meet demand.
Edit: I'd also be very surprised if the 4C is ever a profit making car. It's a halo product to rebuild the reputation of a brand which has been living off past glories from the 60's and 70's but mostly producing pretty bland cars. The 4C will tick all the boxes in terms of desirability and perhaps bring them back in to peoples minds when they are buying a normal car, but I doubt it'll actually help their bottom line.
all good points and well made.... 4c isnt that small though. who knows, perhaps lotus can still produce a alu car that can compete with a carbon one. by virtue of the fact that the 4c actually exists and will get further performance 'treatment' i cant see how much choice they have in the matter though. They've been making carbon fibre chassis road cars since the Ferrari F50, so there must be a good reason that almost 20 years on they haven't chosen to bring the material in to use on their mainstream models.
I'd guess the sheer time and the manpower involved in the CF chassis would quickly become the limiting factor - the 4C is a relatively small car, but I believe the annual production is chassis construction constrained at 3,500 units. Make something Ferrari 458 sized and you're going to be throwing money away because you simply can't produce enough to meet demand.
Edit: I'd also be very surprised if the 4C is ever a profit making car. It's a halo product to rebuild the reputation of a brand which has been living off past glories from the 60's and 70's but mostly producing pretty bland cars. The 4C will tick all the boxes in terms of desirability and perhaps bring them back in to peoples minds when they are buying a normal car, but I doubt it'll actually help their bottom line.
Edited by Thorburn on Friday 18th October 12:54
cant see them beating a CF car on weight (especially as cars are getting bigger), that 4c is impressively light considering its size and there's no point producing a lardy alu evora based exige that once again goes back to punching below its weight.
agree on the 4c, perhaps running at a loss.... but its mandate is very different to that of a bread and butter lotus as you recognize. i think the numbers can stack up depending on the ticket price at 3k pa sales volume. i think we will see the next gen elise/exige costing a whole lot more money to do that though.
interesting times ahead.
Beachbum said:
Not sure how accurate this is, but a comment made on SELOC recently, was that the Alu chassis was actually lighter than the Carbon Fibre one
I think it was inaccurate. Figure was for the Elise aluminium tub vs. full 4C chassis, so didn't include the steel rear sub-frame on the Elise. Thorburn said:
Beachbum said:
Not sure how accurate this is, but a comment made on SELOC recently, was that the Alu chassis was actually lighter than the Carbon Fibre one
I think it was inaccurate. Figure was for the Elise aluminium tub vs. full 4C chassis, so didn't include the steel rear sub-frame on the Elise. IMO CFRP is more a marketing exercise than an engineering solution in this sort of car, but that's not to say it doesn't have engineering merit.
Edited by kambites on Friday 18th October 14:45
kambites said:
Thorburn said:
Beachbum said:
Not sure how accurate this is, but a comment made on SELOC recently, was that the Alu chassis was actually lighter than the Carbon Fibre one
I think it was inaccurate. Figure was for the Elise aluminium tub vs. full 4C chassis, so didn't include the steel rear sub-frame on the Elise. kambites said:
IMO CFRP is more a marketing exercise than an engineering solution in this sort of car, but that's not to say it doesn't have engineering merit.
yep agree on this.....sums it up..... or does it ? agree on the marketing bit 100pc thoEdited by kambites on Friday 18th October 14:45
Evora total chassis weight 203 kg, Front module 29 kg, Rear module 58 kg, Chassis tub 116 kg...
The 4c is 65kgs for the tub.
4c
Length 3,989 mm (157.0 in)[3]
Width 2,090 mm (82.3 in) (Including Door Mirrors)[3]
Evora
Length 4,342 mm (170.9 in)
Width 1,848 mm (72.8 in)
other things to discuss - for a co thats mantra is add lightness and sells low volume sports cars it really has to get involved in this material assuming its now cheaper to fabricate? the potential for excellence/development is really untapped on a lowish volume cheapish sports car. is that the same for alu as lets face it, havent the other autos closed the gap significantly on lotus' edge of late?
Edited by bobo on Friday 18th October 16:41
Gassing Station | Elise/Exige/Europa/340R | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff