Caterham or Westfield?
Discussion
Hello to you all,
I can't seem to make my mind up as to whether to buy a 1700 supersprint Caterham (£10-£13000) or a V8 Westfield (£10-13000). I know the Westfield would chew and spit out the Caterham on performance and power, but I just cant make my mind up....please help me make my mind up......
I can't seem to make my mind up as to whether to buy a 1700 supersprint Caterham (£10-£13000) or a V8 Westfield (£10-13000). I know the Westfield would chew and spit out the Caterham on performance and power, but I just cant make my mind up....please help me make my mind up......
There is an interesting discussion on the V8 :
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=142838&f=30&h=0
some posts suggest it is too heavy, others that it is light enough if positioned far enough back...
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=142838&f=30&h=0
some posts suggest it is too heavy, others that it is light enough if positioned far enough back...
[quote=mungo]The V8 is too heavy for that kind of car and it completely ruins the turn in and handling dynamics of a 7 type car which defeats the object of having one...
So, the ightweight aluminium Rover V8 ( the one thats lighter than a Ford Pinto) is too heavy is it ?
I remember a review I read in Top Gear Magazine a few years ago of the Westfield Seight came out with exactly the same guff. We all know that mainstream journalists know nothing about kits, there's no need for us to start printing the same misconceptions here is there ?
So, the ightweight aluminium Rover V8 ( the one thats lighter than a Ford Pinto) is too heavy is it ?
I remember a review I read in Top Gear Magazine a few years ago of the Westfield Seight came out with exactly the same guff. We all know that mainstream journalists know nothing about kits, there's no need for us to start printing the same misconceptions here is there ?
Anything with 160+bhp in a 7 will give lots of wheelspin if you want it, especially if you use skinny tyres designed for a heavy tin top.
The 1.4 or 1.6 K series will be nice and revvy, sound nice and give you plenty of grunt for normal road use, providing you don't want to experience serious speed.
The V8 will sound fantastic, very loud and give even more grunt, but you won't need to work it anywhere near so hard as the K. The K will need to be revved and have an annual head gasket change (somebody got my coat ready . . .
) whereas the V8 will just waffle on for ages hardly noticing that it's pulling a car.
I currently have a Hayabusa engined 7 and it suits me 100% but I can appreciate the appeal of a V8, I might have one later on.
The 1.4 or 1.6 K series will be nice and revvy, sound nice and give you plenty of grunt for normal road use, providing you don't want to experience serious speed.
The V8 will sound fantastic, very loud and give even more grunt, but you won't need to work it anywhere near so hard as the K. The K will need to be revved and have an annual head gasket change (somebody got my coat ready . . .
) whereas the V8 will just waffle on for ages hardly noticing that it's pulling a car. I currently have a Hayabusa engined 7 and it suits me 100% but I can appreciate the appeal of a V8, I might have one later on.
mungo said:
So, the ightweight aluminium Rover V8 ( the one thats lighter than a Ford Pinto) is too heavy is it ?
Yes. Especially compared with a K-series... lets not forget the R500 Caterham, the fastest accelerating production car has a 1.8 K series and a SEight won't get anywhere near it straight line OR round the corners
you need to use the phrase "one of" in there....
I always love these rover V8 debates as I think there are a lot of people who don't compare apples with apples.... there were a few engines that could fall into a "ford Pinto" category, steel head, alloy head...
However the ford Pinto is hardly a lightweight engine and you'd end up with a pinto or rover V8 engined caterfield being around 650kgs... wereas a R500 is sub 500kgs.
And for me the most impressive thing about lightweight 7's (particularly the R500) is the brakes.
Maybe you need to look at it from another angle.
If you are a die-hard racer, a lighter car like the Caterham 1.6 K series supersport (R500 is way out of budget) might be the better choice. There is a lot of skill needed to be quick in such a car.
If you are a “normal” bloke that plans to do the odd track days, you will be quicker with the RV8.
The torque of the engine will make it almost impossible to have the wrong gear.
And it is an easy traffic cruiser as well. And last but not least go at a track day venue and just listen. If there is a decent RV8 in the field, it will make up your mind for you.
Once you heard that V8 sound you are hooked.
So in my view, if you are not big into competition and racing, the RV8 engine version of a seven is the better choice.
If you are a die-hard racer, a lighter car like the Caterham 1.6 K series supersport (R500 is way out of budget) might be the better choice. There is a lot of skill needed to be quick in such a car.
If you are a “normal” bloke that plans to do the odd track days, you will be quicker with the RV8.
The torque of the engine will make it almost impossible to have the wrong gear.
And it is an easy traffic cruiser as well. And last but not least go at a track day venue and just listen. If there is a decent RV8 in the field, it will make up your mind for you.
Once you heard that V8 sound you are hooked.
So in my view, if you are not big into competition and racing, the RV8 engine version of a seven is the better choice.
mungo said:Much as I'm a fan of the K series, I think the R500 Evo, the latest Caterham to take a 0-100-0 victory actually uses a 2.0 K series costing about 15K for the engine alone!
Yes. Especially compared with a K-series... lets not forget the R500 Caterham, the fastest accelerating production car has a 1.8 K series and a SEight won't get anywhere near it straight line OR round the corners
LexSport said:
Much as I'm a fan of the K series, I think the R500 Evo, the latest Caterham to take a 0-100-0 victory actually uses a 2.0 K series costing about 15K for the engine alone!
I thought it was £25k for the engine and it needs a rebuild every 6000 miles or so ? Might be wrong. More of a pure race engine than something you'd want to use on the road.
I also believe the R500 Evo is not a production car, certainly the one that was timed by Autocar 0-100-0 wasn't what you would describe as a standard production car.
R500 is 1.8 230bhp, its all in the weight so the 500 means 500bhp per ton.
Caterham were developing a car powered by a 2.0 K series engine for there next evo the R600, thats probably the engine with minimal life!
www.minister-power.com/ are the people who supply caterham there engines.
And as for the argument, my vote is for a screaming 4 pot bike engine i dont like lazy power i want the feeling of thrashing it to an inch of its life
Mike
Caterham were developing a car powered by a 2.0 K series engine for there next evo the R600, thats probably the engine with minimal life!
www.minister-power.com/ are the people who supply caterham there engines.
And as for the argument, my vote is for a screaming 4 pot bike engine
i dont like lazy power i want the feeling of thrashing it to an inch of its life Mike
Go and drive some /have a ride with an experienced driver and make up your own mind.You will always get a lot more westfield for your money .And there are plenty of other engine choices with varying degrees of power depending on what you are going to use it for.How about Tiger/Dax ?If you save some money on your purchase you will be able to go and do plenty of track days and exploit your cars full potential
JenkinsComp said:
But any engine in a Caterham is infinately better than any engine in a W#stfield.
You are a brave man sir. How do you justify this wisdom?
As far as I am concerned, there are a lot of good manufactures out there.
And Westfield is certainly one of them. Enfant provocateur?
pitsnow said:
But any engine in a Caterham is infinately better than any engine in a W#stfield.
You are a brave man sir. How do you justify this wisdom?
As far as I am concerned, there are a lot of good manufactures out there.
And Westfield is certainly one of them. Enfant provocateur?
I'll take my tongue out my cheek this time and refrain from the wind up!
I've owned kit cars for over 10 years now, and currently own and race a Sylva and have raced Caterhams too. Sylva have been supremely successful in the kit car championship and you cannot fail to be impressed with the reliable, well developed, quality state of a Caterham, if not their price tag.
However, since both a Westfield and a Caterham are good fun to drive, it comes down to the cost/hassle of ownership. Buy a good used Caterham (particularly with a K series rather than an X Flow) and so long as it's kept in good condition it will hold it's value far better than a Westfield (or a Sylva, or indeed most production cars - Caterhams have a solid resale value and flat depreciation curve).
Thats why I think the Caterham is the better choice.
JenkinsComp said:
JenkinsComp said:
But any engine in a Caterham is infinately better than any engine in a W#stfield.
You are a brave man sir. How do you justify this wisdom?
As far as I am concerned, there are a lot of good manufactures out there.
And Westfield is certainly one of them. Enfant provocateur?
I'll take my tongue out my cheek this time and refrain from the wind up!
I've owned kit cars for over 10 years now, and currently own and race a Sylva and have raced Caterhams too. Sylva have been supremely successful in the kit car championship and you cannot fail to be impressed with the reliable, well developed, quality state of a Caterham, if not their price tag.
However, since both a Westfield and a Caterham are good fun to drive, it comes down to the cost/hassle of ownership. Buy a good used Caterham (particularly with a K series rather than an X Flow) and so long as it's kept in good condition it will hold it's value far better than a Westfield (or a Sylva, or indeed most production cars - Caterhams have a solid resale value and flat depreciation curve).
Thats why I think the Caterham is the better choice.
Not particularly representative to compare a x-flow engined Westfield to a K series Caterham
Don't really understand the starting point......If you want a V8, then its gotta be a V8 IMHO!!
They're both great cars, will give you very similar driving experience/sensations.
You can get into Westfield ownership cheaper, in general terms.
Sorry, don't subscribe to the depreciation argument favouring Caterhams.
If you build, or own, a Westy from new, then you will lose a packet. If you buy a used one for approx. £10k, it will not lose much - but don't expect to get back the cost of any upgrades, just treat them as for your own enjoyment.
A Caterham will cost more, comparatively, but will hold on to its value in much the same way, in this price bracket....
Personally, I can't understand anyone spending more than £15k on a "7" unless they want to race it.
All of the above IMHO of course!
Me? I bought a 95 Westy with 2.0litre Zetec for £5,500. Had 2 1/2 years of fun. Sold it for £7,000.
If I do as well as that with my Tiv I'll be chuffed!!!!
They're both great cars, will give you very similar driving experience/sensations.
You can get into Westfield ownership cheaper, in general terms.
Sorry, don't subscribe to the depreciation argument favouring Caterhams.
If you build, or own, a Westy from new, then you will lose a packet. If you buy a used one for approx. £10k, it will not lose much - but don't expect to get back the cost of any upgrades, just treat them as for your own enjoyment.
A Caterham will cost more, comparatively, but will hold on to its value in much the same way, in this price bracket....
Personally, I can't understand anyone spending more than £15k on a "7" unless they want to race it.
All of the above IMHO of course!
Me? I bought a 95 Westy with 2.0litre Zetec for £5,500. Had 2 1/2 years of fun. Sold it for £7,000.
If I do as well as that with my Tiv I'll be chuffed!!!!
Gassing Station | Kit Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff