TopGear Power Laps
Author
Discussion

shot2bits

Original Poster:

1,273 posts

258 months

Friday 27th May 2005
quotequote all
www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/powerlaps/

Interesting that the VX 220 Turbo was quite a bit off the pace compared to the Exige - obviously expected the Exige to lap faster but not by so much! Also cool that the Exige is so far on the pace in the company of so much BHP and ££££'s...

I noted the 111R's laptime in the back of Evo on a wet track - wonder how much time would be made up in dry conditions?

I wonder why I'm posting stuff when I should be working?

boggy

4,603 posts

265 months

Friday 27th May 2005
quotequote all
Hi all,

I'm sure there wouldn't be much difference in times between the R & the Exige in dry conditions ?

Boggy

S Works

10,166 posts

280 months

Friday 27th May 2005
quotequote all
You reckon? I think the Exige would cane it (comparatively of course). More track focused set-up and those sticky rubbers...

Would make an interesting group test for EVO!

S1 S135
S1 Exige
S2 135R
S2 111R
Exige S2
VX220 T'bo
VX220R (or whatever its called)

ninjadave

2,101 posts

286 months

Monday 30th May 2005
quotequote all
What about a 111R setup the same as an Exige? Tyres, geometry, suspension, exhaust, etc...

Same running gear running the same outputs, with the same setup, weight slightly less in the 111R than the Exige, but less downforce from the wings (or lack of them).

I would also like to see what the difference would be on a track due to the engines - test a 111S against a 111R

shot2bits

Original Poster:

1,273 posts

258 months

Monday 30th May 2005
quotequote all
Interesting article in this months Evo (cars for track and road) - they say the track being used wasn't suited to the Toyota engine... Always the same response when people review the "R" and "Exige" - frustrating to drive because of power band... I wouldn't know yet as mine isn't run in...

nequeo

17 posts

256 months

Wednesday 8th June 2005
quotequote all
Does anybody know which Elise was tested on the Power Laps resulting in the 1.35.6 time?

sja

509 posts

258 months

Wednesday 8th June 2005
quotequote all
I think it was the 111s...

gooby

9,269 posts

264 months

Wednesday 8th June 2005
quotequote all
I think it was also wet...

sja

509 posts

258 months

Wednesday 8th June 2005
quotequote all
So thats a 1.31.6 then!

Davey S1

13,394 posts

284 months

Wednesday 8th June 2005
quotequote all
S2 Exige was a fraction of a second slower than the Gallardo and it was on a damp track.

I would love to see what it could do on a dry day with Gavan Kershaw behind the wheel.

charlieromeo

153 posts

260 months

Wednesday 8th June 2005
quotequote all
Hmmm... I'm not sure it's fair to compare the soft road car setup of the VX220 Turbo against the very track biased setup of the new Exige.

The VX220R would be a much more favourable comparison with the Exige. Considering that the VX in that form is basically an Exige with more power and torque it would be incredibly close to call.

On 5th gear the 111R was only a fraction of a second faster than the standard VX220 Turbo. Add in the handling of the Exige on the Turbo and I can't see how the VX could be beaten.

sja

509 posts

258 months

Wednesday 8th June 2005
quotequote all
Bit sad but just checked the episode that this run was on.. It was actually, 1.34.9, pouring down with rain as well. Faster than a 575 but the TG website differs and is wrong.. Same episode Gavan Kershaw shows JC how to drive elise properly.. back to work...

nequeo

17 posts

256 months

Wednesday 8th June 2005
quotequote all
So we are settled on a 130.9 (dry time) for the 111s, faster than a Porsche 911 turbo, sounds good to me ;-)

Where is that delivery date?!