Cam timing ECU then set up....Is it so wrong????

[call_me_fluffy]

www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evolongtermtests/49130/lotus_340r.html

http://alcester-racing-sevens.com/cam

www.dvapower.co.uk/

Edited by call_me_fluffy on Thursday 24th August 23:00

[pupp]

Don't think anyone said it was 'wrong' mate, certainly not on your part... think the sentiment was it was a shame such a tremendous car needed fundamentals like cam timing to be set-up by the aftermarket. Like Tivs, Lotii are not 'cheap' items and are bought for a specific job; is it 'wrong' to expect them to do what they promise on the tin from the off? Afraid you just described (to my ears at least) a depressingly familiar story of British sportscar manufacturers fobbing off the punter with partially developed products. Can't think of any other industry where that would wash... With CNC techniques (or even with basic decent production engineering and QC) cam pulleys should be within a gnat's cock of each other and timing shouldn't vary from what the designer intended by more than fractions of a degree. There's a world of difference between 'blueprinting' out tolerance errors and fixing plainly shoddy production shortcomings. Of course, if the cams are being dialled in to some settings different from 'standard' because gains are believed to be had, that's quite different. But that's not what I understood you to be saying...

Just out of interest, what do you think you've gained and at what cost per hp? Do you think you 'should' have to go to those lengths to get what you originally paid for?

Not in any way dissing the car, I've always thought it's a fabulous tool and admire the single mindedness of its design... just annoys me to see it (and punters' enjoyment) fugged up by arrogance and complacency in the industry about what people 'should' accept. Rant over

[mark r skinner]

call_me_fluffy said:

www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evolongtermtests/49130/lotus_340r.html

http://alcester-racing-sevens.com/cam

www.dvapower.co.uk/

Edited by call_me_fluffy on Thursday 24th August 23:00

Don`t really understand it but the mpg on the EVO article is amazing!

[call_me_fluffy]

If you buy an S1 Exige expect a long list of things to sort out. I feel sorry for the first owners that didn't realise they were getting poor paint, poor performance, loose coolant hoses..... the list is long so i'll stop there. I knew what to expect when I bought the car and realized that even on a good Exige there would be a lot of things to "finish off". When you buy an Exige you become Q C. It's poor but thats the way it is, if people are unhappy with this then an Exige is not for them.

As for cost per horse power it doesn't matter. I'm looking for the ECU to manage what it's got the best it can. I accept the situation and am happy to spend the money. I am sure it will make the Exige run smother and pick up cleaner, the way it should have been from the start.

www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evolongtermtests/48275/lotus_340r.html

More info on the poor mapping from the Lotus ECU.

Edited by call_me_fluffy on Friday 25th August 00:21

[tyre_tread]

I see what you meant about the MPG. 50% improvement

Looks like it makes the car smoother and more useable as well which makes it more useable in real world driving conditions.

I know its not all about cost, and I am notoriously thrifty when it comes to spending on upgrades for cars (learned that lesson many years ago) but you should recoup your costs after very little mileage if the articles are correct.

If it makes the car more usable from running cost, comfort and enjoyment points of view then it sounds like a good investment.

[call_me_fluffy]

I always look at money spent on cars as lost money, what ever you get back when you sell is a bonus. If you buy a new car that has a waiting list a year later then you may get lucky and even sell it for more. I've spent a couple of grand on the car, I payed 18k for it and think i'd be very lucky to get my 18k back. Saying that i'm a lucky guy so who knows!!!