GTP Cool Wall: Series 1 Lotus Elise. Voting Closed

[LSX]

Uncool, I'm not a Lotus fan at all.

Except for the few, which designations I can't recall without searching for, I've never felt anything for a Lotus. But I suppose the ones I'm talking about are like the "Motorsport Elise" in GT4 or 111R(or S??)

Speaking from plenty of owners' stories, the layperson thinks it is worth 250,000$. Car people appreciate it. The only people who need explaining is the muscle car crowd who don't see it as anything more than a 30,000$ go-kart.

Oh yeah, sub-zero.

I can't help it, I just never thought they were cool cars. I'm not just a Muscle car fan either, I like all kinds of imports. I think the Atom is an overpriced go-kart, it just happens to be stupidly cool, I don't feel that for this lotus.

 

[SRinc.]

Cool car, I can not go as far as 'Sub-Zero' though .

 

[Worst_Driver]

Why uncool on the road? Just interested. If anything, it's equally as good on the road as it is on the track - low weight means they haven't had to give it ridiculously stiff suspension and feel-robbing power steering so it both rides and steers beautifully, so it definitely has driving licked - and it'll get you more glances on the street than anything else this side of a Ferrari. That makes it a pretty cool road car in my books 👍

I just wanted to say that it doesn't look very practical.

 

[Dragonistic]

I think, yet again, we're getting the whole good car, cool car thing confused. Good doesn't neccessarily mean cool, and vice versa. I think this car just needed a little more cool to go with the good, personally, I think they made major steps forward in design with the newer Elise models. The big round backside of the original just doesn't look good to me, and similarly, the tiny cutesey front lights didn't help either. It didn't look awful, but I've seen plenty and never taken a second glance except to see the age of the driver (but I won't knock the car down because of the driver). Either way though, I stand by my decision of uncool.

 

[homeforsummer]

I just wanted to say that it doesn't look very practical.

Well, it's not quite a station wagon but the aforementioned friend managed to squeeze his RAF kit in the boot without too much trouble and even managed to find enough room for his girlfriend's stuff when they went on long weekends together too!

That said, I don't personally use practicality as one of my defining "cool" characteristics...

Good doesn't neccessarily mean cool, and vice versa.

I know, and I voted with this in mind. I never vote without it in mind.

 

[bin0]

I'm gonna have to go with uncool on that one, I usually like the Lotus's but I don't really think that one's appealing to me.

 

[CarBastard]

That said, I don't personally use practicality as one of my defining "cool" characteristics...

Amen! 👍

 

[Dragonistic]

I know, and I voted with this in mind. I never vote without it in mind.

I wasn't referring to you specifically, but we're talking about practicality on a car which clearly isn't trying to be a car for the weekly family shop. It's a sports car, so the things that make it cool are styling, noise, and performance to some extent (basically if it isn't a slow car, in the real world you will likely never use the cars full potential, certainly not legally). There are of course other factors involved, but many of which such as the actual driving experience, are only known to the driver, not to the rest of the world.

Edit: Just saw your comment HFS about not taking practicality into account when deciding, which just reinforces that I wasn't aiming at you.

 

[homeforsummer]

I wasn't referring to you specifically, but we're talking about practicality on a car which clearly isn't trying to be a car for the weekly family shop. It's a sports car, so the things that make it cool are styling, noise, and performance to some extent (basically if it isn't a slow car, in the real world you will likely never use the cars full potential, certainly not legally). There are of course other factors involved, but many of which such as the actual driving experience, are only known to the driver, not to the rest of the world.

I'd suspect that even the general public aren't stupid enough not to realise that a small, sporty, open top car will be great fun to drive. Which again in my opinion, is something that makes it cool - if you don't even have to have driven one to know that it'd be great fun. It's the sort of car that people stuck in their mundane, characterless repmobiles wish they could be driving.

If anything, the problem with the public is that they'd assume cars like the Beetle Convertible or even worse something like the Chrysler Sebring Cabrio will be "sporty" and "fun to drive" just because they're open-top cars.

As far as useability of performance goes, I'd rather something like an Elise to pretty much anything over 200bhp because at that level of performance you're starting to take your licence into your hands. Anything more than a couple of seconds of acceleration in something with that power leads you well into licence-losing territory. And who only wants a couple of seconds of acceleration? Everyone loves the sensation of flooring it in every gear right to the red line but the more powerful you go the less that becomes possible.

Not to mention that low and open-topped cars feel and sound much faster than they're actually going. Fun on the roads at legal speeds is cool 👍

Edit: Just saw your comment HFS about not taking practicality into account when deciding, which just reinforces that I wasn't aiming at you.

👍

 

[mPWRD]

Sub-zero. Similar to the original Mustang in that it's not brilliant in itself, but it spawned the archetype of a certain type of car.

 

[Nicksfix]

Lotus Elise = SUB-ZERO

Thats all there is to say.

 

[Eric Demory]

Sub-Zero, 90%

 

[Irons]

Never liked the Elise, the styling was bad, and it occurs to me as overrated. I remember back to GT2 when this car was in the "A" class. This car is not of that magnitude. Compared to other sports cars, it's weak. The only saving grace is that it weighs as much as a Snickers bar and a 2 liter bottle of Pepsi. However the GT1 version is actually pretty decent because there's quite a bit of power on that one compared to this little Euro-toy.

UNCOOL

 

[Giancarlo]

No AC and to add to that sun-visors were an extra (no-cost IIRC) and the windows has manual winders, the sole reason for all of those can be summed up in one word.......weight.

Oh of course, but this is a production car. I mean come on what's another, what, 500 pounds? I don't even know how much a whole system would weigh.

 

[CarBastard]

Oh of course, but this is a production car. I mean come on what's another, what, 500 pounds? I don't even know how much a whole system would weigh.

What's with another extra 500 pounds (although i think an A/C doesnt weights this much)? That's 500 pounds MORE the engine has to move, which means less speed, and its 500 pounds MORE over the chassis and the suspenssion which means (most of the time) worse handling. Less speed+Worse handling=Less performance and exitement. "Performance" and "Exitement", Lotus Elise keywords.

Simplify and add lightness.

That's the Lotus mantra, that's how Lotus should build their cars, that's how this car was built. You want it to be practical? Go get a Volvo, but that wouldn't be cool.

 

[GT Pro]

Sorry, but the 1st-gen Elise just is Sub-Zero. The original was pure and simple, harsh but built ground-up from Chapman's most admirable philosophy "Simplify and add lightness."

 

[exigeracer]

What's with another extra 500 pounds (although i think an A/C weights this much)?

I know it's not your point, but the A/C system as a whole weighs roughly 40lbs.

Lotus Elise lightweight trivia: the electric window mechanism weighs less than the mechanical crank set-up.

 

[CarBastard]

I know it's not your point, but the A/C system as a whole weighs roughly 40lbs.

Lotus Elise lightweight trivia: the electric window mechanism weighs less than the mechanical crank set-up.

I'm such a . What i actually wanted to say was "(Although i think an A/C doesnt weights this much)?". Thanks for noticing that goof 👍.

 

[niky]

Weight is everything in a small car with a small engine. I've got a car that only weighs 300-400 pounds more than a friend's ride. We've got similar power numbers (in fact, I have more), but below 60 mph, his car is definitely faster than mine.

If the extra weight is for body rigidity... that's fine... but if it's for things like AC, window motors, sound-proofing, and the like, it's just dead weight.

I nearly laughed when I got into a brand new MX-5 last year... the windshield visors were truly awful, even compared to the old one. But still, compared to other, similar sized cars with the same engine size and power, it went like stink... and it cornered very well, despite the relatively soft suspension. To get cornering like that in say... a Honda Civic, you'd have to tune the suspension so hard it'd break your spine over a pebble.

Fails the girlfriend test, it has to be explained to anyone whos not a car person, finally it looses most of its awesomeness as soon as you get it off the track (as as ive mentioned before I dont find track cars cool)

Non-car persons love two-door sportscars. No matter what they are. It's certain kinds of enthusiasts and their obsession with big power numbers who don't get the Elise... of course, obsessing with big numbers is never cool. Which is why the 9ff bears the distinction of landing in the cool wall graveyard.

Sub-zero. Similar to the original Mustang in that it's not brilliant in itself, but it spawned the archetype of a certain type of car.

I'ts actually quite brilliant, in and of itself. It's just not very fast in a straight line.

-

I didn't even need to think about this one. Looked at title: Elise. That's it. End argument. Nothing else Miatas.

 

[Boffin]

🤬 yeah .

S-Z

 

[JCE]

Cool. Because it doesn't try to be anything that it isn't. It handles like a rollercoaster.

 

[Scaff]

Lotus Elise lightweight trivia: the electric window mechanism weighs less than the mechanical crank set-up.

Not on the early S1s, back then Lotus couldn't source electric units that weighed less than a mechanical system, so they went with the mechanical system. It wasn't until electric window mechanisms became the lighter of the two options that they went with them.

People ask about the AC unit and how much it weighs and that it wouldn't make that much different, think about the sun-visors, they are a no-cost addition (as it they don't come as standard) because a lot of Elise owners know that sunglasses weigh even less (and so don't want them).



Regards

Scaff

 

[senamic]

In the freezer! Unreliable, questionable when released, adored years later, pure beauty to look at, in it goes!

 

[TheCracker]

Fails the girlfriend test, it has to be explained to anyone whos not a car person, finally it looses most of its awesomeness as soon as you get it off the track (as as ive mentioned before I dont find track cars cool)
Looks are a bit so so, and inertia build is awful.

My wife, like most women, isn't a car person. In the 16 years i've known her i can recall 3 occasions where she's seen a car and actually commented on how fantastic it looks. One was the new Fiat 500, no real surprise there. Another was just the other week when we passed a Nissan GTR, that one was really surprising. The third one was not long after we met and she actually phoned me (pre-mobile/cell days) to tell me she'd seen this fantastic looking car and tried to explain it to me. I couldn't figure out what it was after quizzing her over it, and only found out what it was when one passed us a few months latter. It was an Elise S1.

I base most of my Cool Wall conclusions on what i think someone like my wife would think of a car, not what a car person would think.

For those here who've never seen one IRL, they're one of those cars that look sooo much better in the flesh than they ever do in photos. In photos they look very cute and rounded, not unsimilar to a beach buggy, but when you actually see one, they're much lower, wider and aggressive looking. Not in a macho way, but certainly more than an MX-5 or third gen MR-S/MR2.

 

[homeforsummer]

Compared to other sports cars, it's weak... little Euro-toy...

What other sports cars would you be referring to? Perhaps the Porsche Boxter, but the proper 2.7 one rather than the 2.5 the car started as? Well, that's over half a second slower to 60mph even though it has almost double the power and cost around twice as much. In fact, you would have had to buy the 3.2 "S" version to match the Lotus on acceleration. Though the trouble is then that you'd pay even more, and be using a third more fuel. Which is a bit embarassing when the Boxter can't even outhandle the Lotus either.

Perhaps then something a little more hardcore? An S2000? Same story I'm afraid - more expensive, and slower off the line until you're up into treble figures. And early S2Ks aren't exactly handlers either according to most reviews. I'd say that's another scalp for the Lotus.

Perhaps something American? Maybe a Camaro, or a Mustang from the same period? Erm, well without spending a significant amount of money on either, neither would see which way an Elise went on anything but a freeway or a very open race track. And even then they'd struggle on the track.

I'm failing to see which sports cars an Elise would be weak against without having to pay significantly over twice as much? Or something that'd be more fun without having to pay even more than that?...

Oh, and I probably forgot to mention, but I'm still referring to the very base S1 Elise here. Every single other Elise model is quicker and more advanced, and would make any of the above look even sillier on the roads that matter.

Little Euro toy? I'll take a dozen, please.

 

[exigeracer]

Not on the early S1s, back then Lotus couldn't source electric units that weighed less than a mechanical system, so they went with the mechanical system. It wasn't until electric window mechanisms became the lighter of the two options that they went with them.

People ask about the AC unit and how much it weighs and that it wouldn't make that much different, think about the sun-visors, they are a no-cost addition (as it they don't come as standard) because a lot of Elise owners know that sunglasses weigh even less (and so don't want them).



Regards

Scaff

You could be right, I was getting the window numbers from Federalized S2 guys.

The sun-visors used to be standard on US cars. If they aren't anymore, I wouldn't think it's because of weight (they're a mere few ounces). It's the first thing most owners peel off because they're pretty much redundant on a topless car and look just weird when the hardtop isn't on.

 

[Giancarlo]

So 40 pounds for an A/C system and they don't include it? That's pretty obnoxious and really sullies my view of the car. It still weighs just over 1500 pounds, so 40 more is not going to do anything. You might as well not put your own fat ass in it if you're that concerned about weight!

 

[TheCracker]

So 40 pounds for an A/C system and they don't include it? That's pretty obnoxious and really sullies my view of the car. It still weighs just over 1500 pounds, so 40 more is not going to do anything. You might as well not put your own fat ass in it if you're that concerned about weight!

It's an open top sports car, why do you need aircon? Especially when it saps power from the little 118bhp engine.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

It's an open top sports car, why do you need aircon? Especially when it saps power from the little 118bhp engine.

In case you're stuck in traffic on a hot and humid summer day.

 

[TheCracker]

In case you're stuck in traffic on a hot and humid summer day.

a) What are you doing driving on busy trunk roads.
b) This is England.