Lotus Elise Club Racer

[gtsmashbros]

http://bit.ly/fnFggD

What do you guys think?

 

[homeforsummer]

A car I'd very much like to own, but it needs to depreciate by about £20k first!

 

[noisiaturismo]

It looks like a normal Elise. But still good.

 

[J-PaP]

It is another somewhat useless special edition. Lighter weight, fancy seats (that actually properly support a harness) and the special colours are a plus (same as the previous model club racer).

For what is meant to be a more track focused car it came with the wrong engine. Should have included the 2zz.

Lotus though has run out of those so they are saving what they have for the exige and sc models.

 

[homeforsummer]

It is another somewhat useless special edition. Lighter weight, fancy seats (that actually properly support a harness) and the special colours are a plus (same as the previous model club racer).

For what is meant to be a more track focused car it came with the wrong engine. Should have included the 2zz.

I disagree. It's supposed to be the lightest and simplest Elise out there. It fulfils that brief, and it's also the cheapest. There are plenty of track-focused Elises with more power out there (and more weight and expense). A simple one seems perfect to me.

 

[J-PaP]

It is the lightest current model. But still heavier than an 04 111r, 130kg heavier than an a 111s and about 200kg heavier than the original elise.

Simplest.. Well it still has everything a normal Elise has

To my knowledge not the cheapest either. They are asking a premium over the Elise S in Australia at least.

It isn't even the most track focused as the Cup 260 would be that pick.

The problem is with this car is that for what they claim to be a club racer it only ticked one box (seats that accept a harness) out of about 3 I'd say it requires to be more racey than a normal elise.

1. harness bar or ideally a cage (though that might be going too far)
2. Exige wheels (Cup 260 ones for example as the stock ones on the elise S and CR are ridiculously thin up front)
3. 2zz engine. The current elise s and cr are the slowest accelerating Elise's to date. The 2zz lacks some torque down low in N/A form but I'd say it feels exactly like the 1zz did but the 2zz has the extra rpm and cam change. I've never driven the current 1.6 but from what I understand it is worse than the 1zz and shorter gearing is what has kept its performance on par with the 1zz models.

That is what I think anyway. Just don't see how anybody would consider buying this when anybody with a bit of research can see that an earlier model will be cheaper and faster.

 

[exigeracer]

The 2ZZ has been discontinued for quite some time. It is no longer an option for Lotus to use in the Elise.

 

[homeforsummer]

To my knowledge not the cheapest either. They are asking a premium over the Elise S in Australia at least.

It's the cheapest model in the UK (because it has less equipment), followed by the normal 1.6 and then everything else above that.

It isn't even the most track focused as the Cup 260 would be that pick.

But it's cheaper. The clue for it's purpose is in the name: Club Racer. It may just be a fancy title but the emphasis is on cheaper performance.

3. 2zz engine. The current elise s and cr are the slowest accelerating Elise's to date. The 2zz lacks some torque down low in N/A form but I'd say it feels exactly like the 1zz did but the 2zz has the extra rpm and cam change. I've never driven the current 1.6 but from what I understand it is worse than the 1zz and shorter gearing is what has kept its performance on par with the 1zz models.

You're right in saying the 1.6 is the slowest yet, but we're talking literally a few tenths over the previous 1.8 Elise S and I reckon you'd be hard pressed to feel the difference even if you tested both back to back.

I've also never quite understood why a relative lack of torque (I say relative because it's still a lightweight car with a respectable engine so it doesn't need that much) is such a problem in a car that's designed to be driven hard rather than bumbled about in high gears.

Saying it's "worse" is complete supposition. In the UK at least I've not yet found a magazine which prefers any of the greater performing Elises, or even the Exige, to a base 1.6 S. Without fail the 1.6 is decreed the purest, and therefore the best as it's truest to the original S1. The same applied to the previous 1.8 S too.

That is what I think anyway. Just don't see how anybody would consider buying this when anybody with a bit of research can see that an earlier model will be cheaper and faster.

I don't quite understand this arguement either. Why would you buy a Porsche 997 Carrera when you can get a cheaper and faster second-hand 996 GT3? Maybe because people like to buy brand new cars?

 

[Dan_]

A even lighter Elise with a small but gnarly engine.

Bahar's ambitions to move the Lotus brand upmarket might potentially kill cars like this one, I just hope that this isn't a last hurrah or a final hommage to the original S1 though.

Nevertheless, it is Elise at it's very own essence. What's not to like about it?

 

[J-PaP]

It's the cheapest model in the UK (because it has less equipment), followed by the normal 1.6 and then everything else above that.

Here it is the S, CR is a few grand more. R is about $25k more than an S and Exige is about $10k more than the R. We get the same cars as the UK and the CR didn't lack anything the S has here.

You're right in saying the 1.6 is the slowest yet, but we're talking literally a few tenths over the previous 1.8 Elise S and I reckon you'd be hard pressed to feel the difference even if you tested both back to back.

No idea. Based my comments on opinions from guys at the Elise forum's who have taken the 1.6 for a spin. I've only driven an s and r.

I've also never quite understood why a relative lack of torque (I say relative because it's still a lightweight car with a respectable engine so it doesn't need that much) is such a problem in a car that's designed to be driven hard rather than bumbled about in high gears.

I personally don't have a problem with the torque down low. There is just a lack in torque compared to what you get post cam change. The 2zz has a massive kick to it. If the cam change was at lower rpm in the 2zz it would feel a bit better. I've read lots of times people praise the Exige SC because it addresses the lack of torque.

Saying it's "worse" is complete supposition. In the UK at least I've not yet found a magazine which prefers any of the greater performing Elises, or even the Exige, to a base 1.6 S. Without fail the 1.6 is decreed the purest, and therefore the best as it's truest to the original S1. The same applied to the previous 1.8 S too.

Every review I've read usually picks either the Exige or Elise S. The R is ignored as it costs $25k more than the S for an engine/gearbox. And the Exige is only about $10k more and at least includes some suspension upgrades, hard top, etc. So it is usually a value for money argument in the end. I don't know how an S/1.6 is any purer than an R given bar engine/gearbox they are identical in every way. Again the CR doesn't have anything less than the S feature wise so I don't see how it would be any more pure either.

I don't quite understand this arguement either. Why would you buy a Porsche 997 Carrera when you can get a cheaper and faster second-hand 996 GT3? Maybe because people like to buy brand new cars?

A 997 and 996 are significantly different in looks, performance, features, one being luxurious while the other track focused. If someone is after a club racer then they would be looking for a car more capable on a track. Not one with a stereo and leather seats.

For the Elise, the cars have been much more similar. Engine changes and weight are the main differences across the years. I know when I shopped for mine I looked for what would be quickest and the purest (with some exemptions). The 111s was the purest given it was the lightest and lacked all features. I didn't want a rover engined one though and wanted at least air con. Didn't want a new S either as the interior had too much plastic and for the same price in the used market I could get a 111r with 40 more kw and less weight. Most elises have less than 30k mileage anyway so they are fairly new.

 

[homeforsummer]

I personally don't have a problem with the torque down low. There is just a lack in torque compared to what you get post cam change. The 2zz has a massive kick to it. If the cam change was at lower rpm in the 2zz it would feel a bit better. I've read lots of times people praise the Exige SC because it addresses the lack of torque.

I think the lack of a cam change in the 1zz is one of the things people like about the engine - it's much more linear, so even though there's less power, you get a more consistent feel when you're driving.

Obviously, some people like the buzz of having an extra kick at certain revs. I've not personally driven a car with variable cam timing though I've passengered in two (DC2 Type R and Accord Type R) and though they were both great cars with great engines, I can take or leave the "kick". I understand the benefits it gives, but in many ways I prefer cars that are always "on cam".

Every review I've read usually picks either the Exige or Elise S. The R is ignored as it costs $25k more than the S for an engine/gearbox. And the Exige is only about $10k more and at least includes some suspension upgrades, hard top, etc. So it is usually a value for money argument in the end. I don't know how an S/1.6 is any purer than an R given bar engine/gearbox they are identical in every way. Again the CR doesn't have anything less than the S feature wise so I don't see how it would be any more pure either.

Value for money is part of it I expect, and given that even the basic Elise S is now a £27k car in the UK it's quite an expensive beast and I'd presume that adding several thousand more doesn't increase fun by the same magnitude.

I'd personally say the 1.6 is purer because it's the simplest car. It may share equipment with the R but it has the simpler and smaller engine, which is usually enough. Given that the Club Racer then sheds some equipment from the S, I'd then say that it's now the purest, and the truest to the original concept of the Elise.

I completely understand that people hanker for more power, but when it doesn't significantly improve the experience (which in an Elise is all about the handling and having enough power) then anything you "add" to the car slightly dilutes its purity. The basic, 118bhp K-Series engined, 720kg S1 was as bare-bones as you could get (I think even a radio was only optional at first), so it's by definition the purest (IMO). They made a 111S, a Sport 135, a Sport 190, all of which gave it more power or made it more focused, and probably better on track, but they were all more complicated and less of a flowing road car as a result.

A 997 and 996 are significantly different in looks, performance, features, one being luxurious while the other track focused. If someone is after a club racer then they would be looking for a car more capable on a track. Not one with a stereo and leather seats.

I'm slightly confused.

You said you can't understand why someone would get a CR when an earlier model is cheaper and faster. That was all you gave me, so I replied with a like-for-like example. A 996 GT3 is cheaper and faster than a bog-standard 997.

If you want more of an equipment/ethos parity, I could have said 997 GT3 and 996 Turbo. The latter is cheaper and faster, as well as being better equipped (just as an old 111R is compared to a 1.6 CR, for instance).

 

[J-PaP]

I'd personally say the 1.6 is purer because it's the simplest car. It may share equipment with the R but it has the simpler and smaller engine, which is usually enough. Given that the Club Racer then sheds some equipment from the S, I'd then say that it's now the purest, and the truest to the original concept of the Elise.

The CR doesn't shed any equipment though. You've mentioned this a few times now but I can't find anything further than it sheds 24-26kg. No mention of any equipment missing. The previous CR was the same. Claimed to be lower in weight but still had every feature the S and R does. The CR may have TC but I'm not sure on that one. Stock S and R's don't. So then how is the CR any purer or more of a racer than an S? Because of its seats? This is what I've been saying all along. The CR doesn't enhance or change anything compared to a normal Elise.

I completely understand that people hanker for more power, but when it doesn't significantly improve the experience (which in an Elise is all about the handling and having enough power) then anything you "add" to the car slightly dilutes its purity. The basic, 118bhp K-Series engined, 720kg S1 was as bare-bones as you could get (I think even a radio was only optional at first), so it's by definition the purest (IMO). They made a 111S, a Sport 135, a Sport 190, all of which gave it more power or made it more focused, and probably better on track, but they were all more complicated and less of a flowing road car as a result.

Complicated how? Not like you had to drive them differently or have any more complex levers or buttons to operate the car. Servicing may have been more complex but what has that got to do with driving the car? The car just had more power. Maybe the powerband was different but just because it has more power doesn't mean it was more complex to drive.

I'm slightly confused.

You said you can't understand why someone would get a CR when an earlier model is cheaper and faster. That was all you gave me, so I replied with a like-for-like example. A 996 GT3 is cheaper and faster than a bog-standard 997.

If you want more of an equipment/ethos parity, I could have said 997 GT3 and 996 Turbo. The latter is cheaper and faster, as well as being better equipped (just as an old 111R is compared to a 1.6 CR, for instance).

I don't get why someone would get a CR when it doesn't offer anything over an S that would make it more of a "club racer". Again if someone is after a club racer above all else. Would you not be looking at the most pure/simple model of the elise. The current model is clearly not the purest or simplest. You said it before, the first of the s2 elises were the purest. No airbags, radio, power windows, lightest and an engine even more simple than the 1.6 given the leaner emission restrictions, no dbw, etc.

In my books every Lotus elise/exige variant sold appeals to the exact same consumer. The main difference is in what a consumer's budget is and how much power they want. Outside of that they all deliver the same thing. So claiming the CR as being more suited to track days yet not offering anything useful for a track day (bar seats) is pointless.

When you try to compare a GT3 to a turbo or a carrera they are cars that are made to appeal to different consumers. Bottom line, the differences in elise models are small compared to that offered by a Porsche. So the Porsche example isn't at all useful in this discussion.

 

[mPWRD]

Looks like a great car with which to learn the art of cornering. They should build a more powerful version for more experienced drivers.