Lotus Carlton!!
25 July 2003, 09:33 PM
#95
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 3,828
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I remember rightly they had them up for something like £48k. Then unfortunately a recession hit and they could not shift them. The last few were put up at £25k!!!!! Now that is a bargain. I see one driving round town and it looks an absolute beast even today.
Made me laugh when they said they had to use a truck gearbox to handle the torque!!!!
Made me laugh when they said they had to use a truck gearbox to handle the torque!!!!
Couldnt agree more
26 July 2003, 01:12 PM
#98
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, even the M5 is quoted at nearly a second slower than the LC in Evo mag.
If you really want to compare standing start acceleration figures for cars, taking them from one publication is just misleading ... you should really take the fastest time you can find assuming that the road testers are not lying. There is too much variability in test results to make isolated single results comparable.
For the avoidance of doubt, the M3 has been tested 0-100 at just over 11 secs (Autocar) and the M5 has managed a sub-11 secs (Top Gear I believe) and a 4.6s 0-60. M3 in the US has also achieved a 0-60 in 4.6s.
For those who like to quote the very misleading M5 times from the original Autocar test, I suggest you read the actual article where they state that the clutch was knackered. Evo magazine seems to get relatively crap times, regardless of the car they test
Ian.
If you really want to compare standing start acceleration figures for cars, taking them from one publication is just misleading ... you should really take the fastest time you can find assuming that the road testers are not lying. There is too much variability in test results to make isolated single results comparable.
For the avoidance of doubt, the M3 has been tested 0-100 at just over 11 secs (Autocar) and the M5 has managed a sub-11 secs (Top Gear I believe) and a 4.6s 0-60. M3 in the US has also achieved a 0-60 in 4.6s.
For those who like to quote the very misleading M5 times from the original Autocar test, I suggest you read the actual article where they state that the clutch was knackered. Evo magazine seems to get relatively crap times, regardless of the car they test
Ian.
26 July 2003, 03:08 PM
#99
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats as maybe Droid, but regardless of timings, EVO trotted the LC out and nothing could beat it on the day, M5 the lot.
I suppose we could analyse this till the cows come home. Driver skill, weather, the pollen count in Brazil!
The LC was faster than the lot of them, its either a heart warming story, or a sad state of affairs.
Heartwarming - Because the LC still retains its magical aura.
Sad state of affairs - That the LC was made over ten years ago and only cars like the RS6 are beating it (and that is only just as well!)
I suppose we could analyse this till the cows come home. Driver skill, weather, the pollen count in Brazil!
The LC was faster than the lot of them, its either a heart warming story, or a sad state of affairs.
Heartwarming - Because the LC still retains its magical aura.
Sad state of affairs - That the LC was made over ten years ago and only cars like the RS6 are beating it (and that is only just as well!)
26 July 2003, 03:33 PM
#100
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In wrxshire
Posts: 6,725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cars are getting heavier (more crash protections, toys, bigger (small) cars) and less powerful (more mpg). How many RS6 do you see on the road. I have seen one, not a huge market for them. How many 106s, fiestas, corsas, oter mainstream etc do you see. Answer thousands because thats where 95+% market of the market is.
Its a big investment is designing and building a new car. So either it going to sell in big numbers or it will sell in small numbers but be very expensive. If you were to build a LC today it would cost at least as much as an RS6.
Its a big investment is designing and building a new car. So either it going to sell in big numbers or it will sell in small numbers but be very expensive. If you were to build a LC today it would cost at least as much as an RS6.
26 July 2003, 05:28 PM
#102
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We know full well we're not talking about mass produced cars here...
if anything the modern day super saloons...rs6...amg mercs et al are more in the supercar brackets...just cos they can fit 4 adults and a bootfull of luggage in comfort does this mean they are not????
and if we take the huge expense and running costs as being part of the supercar game then really they are mightily impressive machines...of course the actual uptake of these cars is going to be small cos how many ppl can actually afford the things in the first place ????
so introducing "more popular" mass market cars into the equation holds no salt whatsoever in this discussion....
by the way just as an aside every single LC made lost money...it was more of a publicity stunt than anything.
your quite right cars are getting heavier and have more gadgets and driver aids...but once again that sets the lc apart on a pedestal...its still as much fun to drive as any of these other cars AND it has no driver aids at all (well you can hardly call a LSD, ABS & PAS driver aids).
As for the M5 .... the next gen V10 model will most probably have the LC licked as do most AMG mercs now (which to be honest is as it should be being 12 years further down the line tech wise) but the current model doesnt...and never has....
Ed ..in answer to your naughty quip the LC corners very well for a big car...it has give you a smile handling and once you get it straight comin out of a corner (assumin you dont slide the back end into a wall
) the prodigious torque kicks in and pulls the big beast forward like a slingshot.
but i have to admit on the twisties your scoobie has it licked
if anything the modern day super saloons...rs6...amg mercs et al are more in the supercar brackets...just cos they can fit 4 adults and a bootfull of luggage in comfort does this mean they are not????
and if we take the huge expense and running costs as being part of the supercar game then really they are mightily impressive machines...of course the actual uptake of these cars is going to be small cos how many ppl can actually afford the things in the first place ????
so introducing "more popular" mass market cars into the equation holds no salt whatsoever in this discussion....
by the way just as an aside every single LC made lost money...it was more of a publicity stunt than anything.
your quite right cars are getting heavier and have more gadgets and driver aids...but once again that sets the lc apart on a pedestal...its still as much fun to drive as any of these other cars AND it has no driver aids at all (well you can hardly call a LSD, ABS & PAS driver aids).
As for the M5 .... the next gen V10 model will most probably have the LC licked as do most AMG mercs now (which to be honest is as it should be being 12 years further down the line tech wise) but the current model doesnt...and never has....
Ed ..in answer to your naughty quip the LC corners very well for a big car...it has give you a smile handling and once you get it straight comin out of a corner (assumin you dont slide the back end into a wall
) the prodigious torque kicks in and pulls the big beast forward like a slingshot.but i have to admit on the twisties your scoobie has it licked
26 July 2003, 08:00 PM
#103
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In wrxshire
Posts: 6,725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so introducing "more popular" mass market cars into the equation holds no salt whatsoever in this discussion....
by the way just as an aside every single LC made lost money...it was more of a publicity stunt than anything.
your quite right cars are getting heavier and have more gadgets and driver aids...but once again that sets the lc apart on a pedestal...its still as much fun to drive as any of these other cars AND it has no driver aids at all (well you can hardly call a LSD, ABS & PAS driver aids).
by the way just as an aside every single LC made lost money...it was more of a publicity stunt than anything.
your quite right cars are getting heavier and have more gadgets and driver aids...but once again that sets the lc apart on a pedestal...its still as much fun to drive as any of these other cars AND it has no driver aids at all (well you can hardly call a LSD, ABS & PAS driver aids).
Do you build one 60K car and make 2K on it or six 10K family hatches and make 1.5K on each plus servicing and parts and market share.
Do I think the LC is great car ? - yes
Has the market and customer priorities changed in 10 years ? - yes
As for the driver aids it sounds like you need to buy a TVR and I starting to think that way as well
.
26 July 2003, 08:05 PM
#104
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In wrxshire
Posts: 6,725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to add it does seem that manufacturers are coming around to the idea of a flagship/motorsport model.
Ford bringing back the RS models
VW bring out that W16
The M series BMWs
The AMG mercs
Vauxhall VX220 turbo
Subaru STis
EVO FQs
etc
etc
etc
Ford bringing back the RS models
VW bring out that W16
The M series BMWs
The AMG mercs
Vauxhall VX220 turbo
Subaru STis
EVO FQs
etc
etc
etc
26 July 2003, 08:37 PM
#105
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thats not true chrisp....
manufacturers have been producing low profit small yield flagship models since the LC came out...whilst its true there is only a small market there still is a market and companies find they need the prestige of a top end model such as these in order to compete for buyers affections in the marketplace...
so you could say they pay for themselves even just as marketing tools...
so i still say the whole point about mass produced cars is moot in the context of these cars.
besides what would the point of owning one be if every tom dick and harry could have a similarly awesome car (see dictionary references to common as muck motoring under " BMW M3")
manufacturers have been producing low profit small yield flagship models since the LC came out...whilst its true there is only a small market there still is a market and companies find they need the prestige of a top end model such as these in order to compete for buyers affections in the marketplace...
so you could say they pay for themselves even just as marketing tools...
so i still say the whole point about mass produced cars is moot in the context of these cars.
besides what would the point of owning one be if every tom dick and harry could have a similarly awesome car (see dictionary references to common as muck motoring under " BMW M3")
26 July 2003, 10:22 PM
#106
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats as maybe Droid, but regardless of timings, EVO trotted the LC out and nothing could beat it on the day, M5 the lot.
Unrelated to what I was posting about.
However, now you've mentioned that ... I'm always extremely sceptical of tests on pre-owned turbocharged cars and I do remember reading this article with particular scepticism.
The LC beating an M5 by such a margin just doesn't make any sense if the LC was truly standard. Mild tweaking of boost is just about undetectable, even on brand-new production press cars. Case in point being the "standard" Evo 6 that Autocar tested, which clearly wasn't standard.
So don't get me started on that particular point ...
Ian.
Unrelated to what I was posting about.
However, now you've mentioned that ... I'm always extremely sceptical of tests on pre-owned turbocharged cars and I do remember reading this article with particular scepticism.
The LC beating an M5 by such a margin just doesn't make any sense if the LC was truly standard. Mild tweaking of boost is just about undetectable, even on brand-new production press cars. Case in point being the "standard" Evo 6 that Autocar tested, which clearly wasn't standard.
So don't get me started on that particular point ...
Ian.
26 July 2003, 10:28 PM
#107
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That particular car which was tested for EVo is the Vauxhall Heritage Museum car from Luton...
I can assure you it is utterly standard.....
as I have said time and time again..... the LC's came out with differing HP figures froms standard... all push out 377 + but it isnt that figure that counts....
the torque figure of 419 lb/ft mated to the relatively light weight (when your talking about tonne and a half cars lightweight is a bit silly sounding..lol ) make it not just a match for the likes of the m5 but also to beat it!
the m5 cant match the torque...hell you'll find quite a few ferraris dont match it either.
i cant speak for roadtests in books i can speak from cold hard experience of knowing many LC owners. Face the fact that the M5 in its current configuration just can't top an LC . dont get me wrong..they are great cars but they aint at the top of the pedestal and for my money never have been (mind you i prefered the old straight 6 3.8 litre m5 )
I can assure you it is utterly standard.....
as I have said time and time again..... the LC's came out with differing HP figures froms standard... all push out 377 + but it isnt that figure that counts....
the torque figure of 419 lb/ft mated to the relatively light weight (when your talking about tonne and a half cars lightweight is a bit silly sounding..lol
) make it not just a match for the likes of the m5 but also to beat it!the m5 cant match the torque...hell you'll find quite a few ferraris dont match it either.
i cant speak for roadtests in books i can speak from cold hard experience of knowing many LC owners. Face the fact that the M5 in its current configuration just can't top an LC . dont get me wrong..they are great cars but they aint at the top of the pedestal and for my money never have been (mind you i prefered the old straight 6 3.8 litre m5
)
26 July 2003, 11:07 PM
#108
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the torque figure of 419 lb/ft mated to the relatively light weight (when your talking about tonne and a half cars lightweight is a bit silly sounding..lol ) make it not just a match for the likes of the m5 but also to beat it!
OK, let's separate the guff from the facts for just one second.
The M5 has more torque at the driven wheels than the LC. Why would that be then? The M5 has "only" 368lb/ft compared to the LC's 419lb/ft so that makes it around 8% shy of the LC at the flywheel. However, the M5's gearing is much lower than the LC's, so the torque at the driven wheels (which is the only thing that matters) is as follows:
Gear: M5, LC (all figures in lb-ft)
1st: 4903, 3874
2nd: 2932, 2602
3rd: 1936, 1865
4th: 1426, 1446
5th: 1159, 1084
6th: 962, 723
When we apply torque-to-weight ratio (at the wheels) we get:
Gear: M5, LC (all figures in lb-ft/kg)
1st: 2724, 2239
2nd: 1629, 1504
3rd: 1076, 1078
4th: 792, 835
5th: 644, 626
6th: 534, 417
So there you have it ... the M5 has more torque than the LC in every gear except 4th. Yes, the LC has 8% more torque than the M5 at the flywheel but it has between 10% and 34% (!!) longer gearing.
Apologies for the opening but sometimes people's ignorance about how torque should be applied to car performance just has to be corrected. Even respected motoring magazines remain under the delusion that the torque-at-the-flywheel-to-weight ratio is of any use at all.
So, if the LC really does have noticeably greater in-gear acceleration than the M5, it must obviously have more than 419lb/ft of torque. Draw your own conclusions ...
Ian.
[Edited by droid42 - 7/26/2003 11:09:02 PM]
OK, let's separate the guff from the facts for just one second.
The M5 has more torque at the driven wheels than the LC. Why would that be then? The M5 has "only" 368lb/ft compared to the LC's 419lb/ft so that makes it around 8% shy of the LC at the flywheel. However, the M5's gearing is much lower than the LC's, so the torque at the driven wheels (which is the only thing that matters) is as follows:
Gear: M5, LC (all figures in lb-ft)
1st: 4903, 3874
2nd: 2932, 2602
3rd: 1936, 1865
4th: 1426, 1446
5th: 1159, 1084
6th: 962, 723
When we apply torque-to-weight ratio (at the wheels) we get:
Gear: M5, LC (all figures in lb-ft/kg)
1st: 2724, 2239
2nd: 1629, 1504
3rd: 1076, 1078
4th: 792, 835
5th: 644, 626
6th: 534, 417
So there you have it ... the M5 has more torque than the LC in every gear except 4th. Yes, the LC has 8% more torque than the M5 at the flywheel but it has between 10% and 34% (!!) longer gearing.
Apologies for the opening but sometimes people's ignorance about how torque should be applied to car performance just has to be corrected. Even respected motoring magazines remain under the delusion that the torque-at-the-flywheel-to-weight ratio is of any use at all.
So, if the LC really does have noticeably greater in-gear acceleration than the M5, it must obviously have more than 419lb/ft of torque. Draw your own conclusions ...
Ian.
[Edited by droid42 - 7/26/2003 11:09:02 PM]
26 July 2003, 11:16 PM
#109
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldnt be surprised if it did....
every single LC I have been involved with or read about anywhere (and every single report cant be wrong can they) has the LC's outperforming all its rivals and outperforming all its own supposedly standard figures....
the truth is (and whether you believe this or not i dont care) that vauxhall understated ALL the figures for the LC...
being cagey over the figures just added to the marketing appeal and the fact the road safety groups and the police were gunning to have it banned.... they played on the conservative side of the truth.
in my opinion the m5 was a poor effort by bmw when they could have done so much more with such a fabulous chasis and engine...it could not and never has beaten the old Lotus .... and it wasnt a big enuff jump from the previous 3.8 six cylinder cars which were fabulous in their own right.
anytime you want a race i'll prove to you the truth.
every single LC I have been involved with or read about anywhere (and every single report cant be wrong can they) has the LC's outperforming all its rivals and outperforming all its own supposedly standard figures....
the truth is (and whether you believe this or not i dont care) that vauxhall understated ALL the figures for the LC...
being cagey over the figures just added to the marketing appeal and the fact the road safety groups and the police were gunning to have it banned.... they played on the conservative side of the truth.
in my opinion the m5 was a poor effort by bmw when they could have done so much more with such a fabulous chasis and engine...it could not and never has beaten the old Lotus .... and it wasnt a big enuff jump from the previous 3.8 six cylinder cars which were fabulous in their own right.
anytime you want a race i'll prove to you the truth.
26 July 2003, 11:25 PM
#110
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
in my opinion the m5 was a poor effort by bmw when they could have done so much more with such a fabulous chasis and engine...it could not and never has beaten the old Lotus ....
... assuming that all one cares about is straight line performance. The motoring press adores the M5 becuase it is, by most measures, a crushingly fast car and has the chassis to match.
Perhaps you'd like to refer me to all the comparison tests between the M5 and LC that explore slightly less shallow and (IMHO) pointless benchmarks than drag-racing ability. Or do you just consider the word "beat" to refer to straight-line oomph?
I'm glad we agree on the other point though. Hopefully everyone reading learnt a little more about torque and how it can often be safely ignored as an indicator of performance
Ian.
... assuming that all one cares about is straight line performance. The motoring press adores the M5 becuase it is, by most measures, a crushingly fast car and has the chassis to match.
Perhaps you'd like to refer me to all the comparison tests between the M5 and LC that explore slightly less shallow and (IMHO) pointless benchmarks than drag-racing ability. Or do you just consider the word "beat" to refer to straight-line oomph?
I'm glad we agree on the other point though. Hopefully everyone reading learnt a little more about torque and how it can often be safely ignored as an indicator of performance
Ian.
26 July 2003, 11:33 PM
#111
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
actually i dont consider it just about straight line ability...
i honestly and truthfully think its a better all round car.
i have driven both and for pure exhilaration the lotus wins hands down aswell..though that may have something to do with lack of driver aids (for scare yourself ****less see TVR).
Yes ian..atleast we can agree on the torque front....
roadtesters are forever going on about horsepower and seem to ignore or misrepresent torque figures..its something i have always found strange....
just as an aside..a freind of mine went on a rolling road on his standard lotus omega ...considering the age of the car came out with some impressive figures... 410bhp and 419 lb/ft torque...
shame its becoming difficult to repair them
i honestly and truthfully think its a better all round car.
i have driven both and for pure exhilaration the lotus wins hands down aswell..though that may have something to do with lack of driver aids (for scare yourself ****less see TVR).
Yes ian..atleast we can agree on the torque front....
roadtesters are forever going on about horsepower and seem to ignore or misrepresent torque figures..its something i have always found strange....
just as an aside..a freind of mine went on a rolling road on his standard lotus omega ...considering the age of the car came out with some impressive figures... 410bhp and 419 lb/ft torque...
shame its becoming difficult to repair them
26 July 2003, 11:56 PM
#112
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i have driven both and for pure exhilaration the lotus wins hands down aswell..though that may have something to do with lack of driver aids
Not entirely sure what you mean here ... the M5's drivers aids can be switched off so that the only ones left are exactly what the LC has anyway (LSD, ABS, PAS etc.). Or were you not told about that particular button before your test drive?
Ian.
Not entirely sure what you mean here ... the M5's drivers aids can be switched off so that the only ones left are exactly what the LC has anyway (LSD, ABS, PAS etc.). Or were you not told about that particular button before your test drive?
Ian.
27 July 2003, 01:32 AM
#113
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was told about it.... and i did try it...and felt it was best to leave them on....
i didnt feel as "safe" when they were off in that car.... maybe u get used to it in the lc cos they are never on in the first place..lol...
driven an rs6 now already and hopin to have a day long test drive before the year is out..i'll let u know what i think
i didnt feel as "safe" when they were off in that car.... maybe u get used to it in the lc cos they are never on in the first place..lol...
driven an rs6 now already and hopin to have a day long test drive before the year is out..i'll let u know what i think
27 July 2003, 08:50 AM
#114
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ignorance is bliss!!!!
As i have said befor after owning them all, the LC is still my fav car of the lot. As for M5`s......They took the latest M5 in the late 90`s to an autobahn to have a go at the LC. The theory was that the M5 would leave the LC from standstill so they made ot over a longer distance so the LC could catch up and a `fairer` trial could be declared, RESULT..........
within 1/4 mile the LC had puled out so much on the M5 that they didn`t bother to continue as the M5 has a limitd top speed and so was never going to beat it!! They tried the starts several times to confirm and the same thing happened.
As for what i drive now?? A GTR, the only thing to come close to the driving experience of the LC. Ok its modded and a lot quicker, handles ten times better etc but i will never forget climbing into the LC for the first time from a saphire cosworth which up until the LC launch was the car to be beaten. It was like taking a step forward in speed by about 10 yrs and i think that a lot of you scooby owners would do well to respect bader as the LC will kick any scooby into touch any day of the week, time after time without breaking.
I think the problem being that the scooby is such an accessable car to such a young market,that most of you have come from pretty crappy cars (lets be honest) to the scoob , so naturally you will have the same feling of awe that i had coming from cossie to LC. Dont start hankering on about twisties etc as the LC would be so far in front on any straight that you wouldn`t have to worry about it plus all the people slagging the handling have obviously no idea or are lotus crap at designing track equipment of course!!
So, sorry if i have upset anyone with my remarks or comments but its the truth, i would swap my car tomorrow for another minted or out of the box LC (and i mean a brand new one, wouldn`t trust a second hand one unless it was extremely well documented, same as all performace cars realy).
Mr M5 enthusiast, you sound just as annoyed and disillusioned as the Mpower factory when they first heard of this car and then as history will verify, tried every trick in the book to beat it!! I also think you will find that the 0-100 time was below 10 secs, as many a car programme or mag would testify, only the 911 turbo of the day could play with it in a straight line off the lights!!!9.7 for the 911 and 9.9 for the LC.
again, i`m sorry for upsetting anyone but its a car that still to this day get my utmost respect,perhaps if the 4 pot 200bhp buys (with around 75bhp transmission losses for AWD) were to try one, they would quickly keep very quiet about the Lc being an overrated dinosaur!!
Not winding people up or starting an argument, just facts!!!
jas
As i have said befor after owning them all, the LC is still my fav car of the lot. As for M5`s......They took the latest M5 in the late 90`s to an autobahn to have a go at the LC. The theory was that the M5 would leave the LC from standstill so they made ot over a longer distance so the LC could catch up and a `fairer` trial could be declared, RESULT..........
within 1/4 mile the LC had puled out so much on the M5 that they didn`t bother to continue as the M5 has a limitd top speed and so was never going to beat it!! They tried the starts several times to confirm and the same thing happened.
As for what i drive now?? A GTR, the only thing to come close to the driving experience of the LC. Ok its modded and a lot quicker, handles ten times better etc but i will never forget climbing into the LC for the first time from a saphire cosworth which up until the LC launch was the car to be beaten. It was like taking a step forward in speed by about 10 yrs and i think that a lot of you scooby owners would do well to respect bader as the LC will kick any scooby into touch any day of the week, time after time without breaking.
I think the problem being that the scooby is such an accessable car to such a young market,that most of you have come from pretty crappy cars (lets be honest) to the scoob , so naturally you will have the same feling of awe that i had coming from cossie to LC. Dont start hankering on about twisties etc as the LC would be so far in front on any straight that you wouldn`t have to worry about it plus all the people slagging the handling have obviously no idea or are lotus crap at designing track equipment of course!!
So, sorry if i have upset anyone with my remarks or comments but its the truth, i would swap my car tomorrow for another minted or out of the box LC (and i mean a brand new one, wouldn`t trust a second hand one unless it was extremely well documented, same as all performace cars realy).
Mr M5 enthusiast, you sound just as annoyed and disillusioned as the Mpower factory when they first heard of this car and then as history will verify, tried every trick in the book to beat it!! I also think you will find that the 0-100 time was below 10 secs, as many a car programme or mag would testify, only the 911 turbo of the day could play with it in a straight line off the lights!!!9.7 for the 911 and 9.9 for the LC.
again, i`m sorry for upsetting anyone but its a car that still to this day get my utmost respect,perhaps if the 4 pot 200bhp buys (with around 75bhp transmission losses for AWD) were to try one, they would quickly keep very quiet about the Lc being an overrated dinosaur!!
Not winding people up or starting an argument, just facts!!!
jas
27 July 2003, 09:12 AM
#116
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 1,800
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bader
i used to know charlie, bought a load of opel manta panels off him, got ripped off with some of the prices too
i remember him telling me that he had bought some lc engines, dont know if you know me, i used to have a red manta i240, used to be at billing a lot.
about lc's cornering, i did a track day at goodwood in the manta, there was a lc out the same time as me, surprised me how quick it was around the bends, did the same track the next year in a p1, reckon it would outpace the lc on the bends, do you know sean boucher ? from cwmbran, near newport
mark
i used to know charlie, bought a load of opel manta panels off him, got ripped off with some of the prices too
i remember him telling me that he had bought some lc engines, dont know if you know me, i used to have a red manta i240, used to be at billing a lot.
about lc's cornering, i did a track day at goodwood in the manta, there was a lc out the same time as me, surprised me how quick it was around the bends, did the same track the next year in a p1, reckon it would outpace the lc on the bends, do you know sean boucher ? from cwmbran, near newport
mark
27 July 2003, 09:25 AM
#117
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In wrxshire
Posts: 6,725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You will be telling us LC can destroy superbikes next LOL, close to 6 seconds to 100 and I may believe you .
BTW I doubt my scoob will be anywhere an LC on a straight but there is always a corner before and after a straight. It also rains quite regularly in the UK whih should make life interesting, to say the least .
Plus my scoob didnt cost 50K, 10 years ago and can do 100 in 12 seconds not bad for a little Japanese saloon car.
.BTW I doubt my scoob will be anywhere an LC on a straight but there is always a corner before and after a straight
. It also rains quite regularly in the UK whih should make life interesting, to say the least .Plus my scoob didnt cost 50K, 10 years ago and can do 100 in 12 seconds not bad for a little Japanese saloon car
.
27 July 2003, 10:43 AM
#118
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Chris,
thanks for basically suming up a few of my points!!! Compairing most cars to the LC is like chalk and cheese as the LC was built for one thing and one thing only........no comprimise.
nothing wrong with little jap racers as thats the path i have chosen to follow as 10 yrs can make a hell of a difference!!
Vauxhall keep threatening to release another lotus model but it never bears fruit and to be honest as has been stated , the LC was a complete bottomless pit of money for vauxhall but was built by enthusiasts rather than acountants.
Like you say there are twisties at the end of every straight but honestly, if you can get your mitts on one, try it. I have no doubts that it would leave any motoring buff grinning from ear to ear.You have to remember Chris that you would take a corner a few mph faster but on the straights with the LC acceleration, the car would easily be travelling about 50/60mph faster, the acceleration once the lump is going is just crazy!! All the way to the 180`s remember!! Although a straight drag with a bike would only produce one conclusion, i have beaten many a bike on the Dundee - Aberdeen road....pre camera days of course!! And yes they were trying as it was the only time i reached speeds over 165 in the car.
They are also very easily tunable with 510bhp being acheived through de-cat, `chips` /mapping etc and a decent breathing system (mine was!!!). Would love to have the old menace now as my freinds lovingly called it for TOTB. Not that i would come near to a win in the 1/4 but i`m sure it would gain respect from the younger generation for what it is.....a decade old , thug car!! Plus, most of the cars at TOTB are tuned beyond recognition of the model they represent...look at my own mark at the moment, the GTR. A couple of guys have just dyno`d a car 1015bhp, would that bare any resemblance to the GTR i have?? Not in a million years but hats off to the guys that built it as it truly is a magnificent acheivement.
The reason that the LC didn`t sell was because the release rather unfortunately coincided with the brittish insurance industries `attack` on anything GTI/RS/Turbo etc that of course and the price tag!!
Not knocking Scooby`s at all mate, fanatstic cars for what they are along with the Evo`s and Skylines but i still think that an Lc pulls a fair amount of attraction and respect whenever one turns up, a bit like the quattro`s which again, was the daddy or benchmark of all things nice to drive these days,
jas
thanks for basically suming up a few of my points!!! Compairing most cars to the LC is like chalk and cheese as the LC was built for one thing and one thing only........no comprimise.
nothing wrong with little jap racers as thats the path i have chosen to follow as 10 yrs can make a hell of a difference!!
Vauxhall keep threatening to release another lotus model but it never bears fruit and to be honest as has been stated , the LC was a complete bottomless pit of money for vauxhall but was built by enthusiasts rather than acountants.
Like you say there are twisties at the end of every straight but honestly, if you can get your mitts on one, try it. I have no doubts that it would leave any motoring buff grinning from ear to ear.You have to remember Chris that you would take a corner a few mph faster but on the straights with the LC acceleration, the car would easily be travelling about 50/60mph faster, the acceleration once the lump is going is just crazy!! All the way to the 180`s remember!! Although a straight drag with a bike would only produce one conclusion, i have beaten many a bike on the Dundee - Aberdeen road....pre camera days of course!! And yes they were trying as it was the only time i reached speeds over 165 in the car.
They are also very easily tunable with 510bhp being acheived through de-cat, `chips` /mapping etc and a decent breathing system (mine was!!!). Would love to have the old menace now as my freinds lovingly called it for TOTB. Not that i would come near to a win in the 1/4 but i`m sure it would gain respect from the younger generation for what it is.....a decade old , thug car!! Plus, most of the cars at TOTB are tuned beyond recognition of the model they represent...look at my own mark at the moment, the GTR. A couple of guys have just dyno`d a car 1015bhp, would that bare any resemblance to the GTR i have?? Not in a million years but hats off to the guys that built it as it truly is a magnificent acheivement.
The reason that the LC didn`t sell was because the release rather unfortunately coincided with the brittish insurance industries `attack` on anything GTI/RS/Turbo etc that of course and the price tag!!
Not knocking Scooby`s at all mate, fanatstic cars for what they are along with the Evo`s and Skylines but i still think that an Lc pulls a fair amount of attraction and respect whenever one turns up, a bit like the quattro`s which again, was the daddy or benchmark of all things nice to drive these days,
jas
27 July 2003, 12:26 PM
#119
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In wrxshire
Posts: 6,725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jas when they first brought out the LC/LO I was truely amazed that a mainstream manufacturer would dare take on the supercar establishment. When getting a company like Lotus involved in the project your know the car is going to be good.
Good on them, and I do believe cars should be built for driver enjoyment rather than to a set of budget figures. I always felt that manufacturers like Ferrari built the cars to be enjoyed and to pamper the driver.
I also agree we have lost some of the edge with the high tech driver aids. I can feel the diffs working on the scoob and just remembering a low powered hatch back I had 12 years ago where the slightest rain would spin the front wheels and now close on 300bhp and a fast pull off and not even a squeak from the tyres seems very strange.
As the scoob is my toy I dont have to be sensible with what I buy anymore so I am thinking of going to a RWD sportscar. Maybe a 911 or TVR. After seeing a friend of mines Tamora and the new T350C up close at the dealers this could be the way to go for me. Trouble these cars required a lot more skill than I have which could end up being embrassing.
Good on them, and I do believe cars should be built for driver enjoyment rather than to a set of budget figures. I always felt that manufacturers like Ferrari built the cars to be enjoyed and to pamper the driver.
I also agree we have lost some of the edge with the high tech driver aids. I can feel the diffs working on the scoob and just remembering a low powered hatch back I had 12 years ago where the slightest rain would spin the front wheels and now close on 300bhp and a fast pull off and not even a squeak from the tyres seems very strange.
As the scoob is my toy I dont have to be sensible with what I buy anymore so I am thinking of going to a RWD sportscar. Maybe a 911 or TVR. After seeing a friend of mines Tamora and the new T350C up close at the dealers this could be the way to go for me. Trouble these cars required a lot more skill than I have which could end up being embrassing
.
27 July 2003, 01:57 PM
#120
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr M5 enthusiast, you sound just as annoyed and disillusioned as the Mpower factory
Wow ... I wish I had such an active imagination that I could infer someone's emotions so well from a few typed comments on a discussion forum. Suggest you restrict the drug intake mate (it might inject some punctuation and spacing in your posts too)
Just to set the record straight ... I have immense respect for the LC and other uber-saloons (such as M5, RS4, RS6 etc.) I'll go further than that ... I think, throughout my 15-year car-owning career, the LC has had the honour of "dream car" for more years than most, especially during the time I owned a Cavalier Turbo and read an article about some nutter who'd shoved the LC engine in the same car The honour of "dream car" now goes to the McLaren F1 obviously (before you all start, it's quicker than the LC, OK )
Having owned 4WD turbo-nutters (Cav Turbo), powerful RWD saloons (3.8 E34 M5) and fast RWD coupes (E46 M3) I'm now perfectly happy with my current combination of cars ... Golf TDi for the road and my "fun" car, which would comprehensively whup anything we've been talking about here from 0-100 and it only has 80lb/ft of torque !!!
Ian.
Wow ... I wish I had such an active imagination that I could infer someone's emotions so well from a few typed comments on a discussion forum. Suggest you restrict the drug intake mate (it might inject some punctuation and spacing in your posts too)
Just to set the record straight ... I have immense respect for the LC and other uber-saloons (such as M5, RS4, RS6 etc.) I'll go further than that ... I think, throughout my 15-year car-owning career, the LC has had the honour of "dream car" for more years than most, especially during the time I owned a Cavalier Turbo and read an article about some nutter who'd shoved the LC engine in the same car
The honour of "dream car" now goes to the McLaren F1 obviously (before you all start, it's quicker than the LC, OK )Having owned 4WD turbo-nutters (Cav Turbo), powerful RWD saloons (3.8 E34 M5) and fast RWD coupes (E46 M3) I'm now perfectly happy with my current combination of cars ... Golf TDi for the road and my "fun" car, which would comprehensively whup anything we've been talking about here from 0-100 and it only has 80lb/ft of torque !!!
Ian.