R&T Test - Exige S240, GTR, SRT10, LP560, GT2, R8, Z06, DBS, M3, EvoX

[def]

What's with the S240's having lots of body roll? I remember seeing a picture of Michael Sands' track pack'd S240 having LOTS of it at a local auto-x. It's adjustable, right?

They complained about not being able to tail brake in the exige. Seems like lack of driver skill hurt the Exige since it's a much harder car to drive


But they still seemed to like it a lot
"Overall, the Lotus is such a pure experience that it just feels faster."
Not that Steve didn't enjoy the 240-bhp mid-engine Lotus. "What a fun car! It's very, very tossable," enthused Millen. "Getting into a corner, there's quite a bit of understeer, but as soon as you get on the throttle and load the chassis, it becomes very balanced. You can drive it so hard, get in so deep, because it's just so light."

(Understeer, then on throttle and it's balanced????)

[liggy]

Lack of driver skill? Gary Thomason? I don't think so.

[def]

Oh Well, just seems like tailbraking should be possible and controllable,

Another bright spot? "Unlike the Lotus, it trail-brakes beautifully."

[Monsi]

Originally Posted by liggy

Lack of driver skill? Gary Thomason? I don't think so.

not the only driver

oh...

something to consider... if you were driving all those cars and then hopped in the lotus, your perceived limits would be way off... they even said the limits were really hard to find

[dumdumhead]

What's the point of a test like this? Let's face it, people who frequent the track at least do a few modifications to their cars, and considering the huge price difference between this group of cars, I think it would be much more interesting of a comparison to allow the less expensive cars at least a few changes.

I mean, they didn't even change the run-flats on the vette? What self respecting Z06 owner would take the car to the track with run-flats? Those things would have been shredded by the time the car was broken-in. Considering this was a big complaint of the testers, it just shows lack of preparation on their part to make a simple swap to some sticky rubber.

As for the Evo, have any of you ever seen a "stock" Evo? It's like a virgin college girl, all myth. The car is less than 1/4 the price of the upper-end exotics, so how about some wider wheels, turbo upgrades, and a few suspension upgrades? All of that plus the car would still be less than the cost of the next least expensive car.

I'd like to see how one of the turbo-exiges would have done in this company. A turbo Exige would still cost less than the Viper ACR.

I say next time, establish a budget ($200k?) and the cars that they want, and then let the tuners have at it, or not in the case of the Lambo and GT2, which already would push the budget's constraint stock.

Oh, and considering they had pro-drivers at their disposal, couldn't they have at least made an effort to tune the suspensions of the cars that were adjustable? Stop the whining and do something about it.

Chris

[def]

They do those types of tests too. Modded cars with price ranges.

Most people who read R&T have been no where near a track, and probably don't do major mods. I think testing stock is a fair way but at the same time, doesn't seem fair to not change adjustable suspension settings

[mopho]

Originally Posted by dumdumhead

What's the point of a test like this? Let's face it, people who frequent the track at least do a few modifications to their cars, and considering the huge price difference between this group of cars, I think it would be much more interesting of a comparison to allow the less expensive cars at least a few changes.

I mean, they didn't even change the run-flats on the vette? What self respecting Z06 owner would take the car to the track with run-flats? Those things would have been shredded by the time the car was broken-in. Considering this was a big complaint of the testers, it just shows lack of preparation on their part to make a simple swap to some sticky rubber.

As for the Evo, have any of you ever seen a "stock" Evo? It's like a virgin college girl, all myth. The car is less than 1/4 the price of the upper-end exotics, so how about some wider wheels, turbo upgrades, and a few suspension upgrades? All of that plus the car would still be less than the cost of the next least expensive car.

I'd like to see how one of the turbo-exiges would have done in this company. A turbo Exige would still cost less than the Viper ACR.

I say next time, establish a budget ($200k?) and the cars that they want, and then let the tuners have at it, or not in the case of the Lambo and GT2, which already would push the budget's constraint stock.

Oh, and considering they had pro-drivers at their disposal, couldn't they have at least made an effort to tune the suspensions of the cars that were adjustable? Stop the whining and do something about it.

Chris

Umm, because they test cars as they are delivered from the factory. Once in a while they do articles like that but overall it is not a tuner magazine.
Allowing tuners to have at would create all kinds of new debates about who did what and who can do it better, they should have used this guy etc.

[liggy]

Originally Posted by def

Oh Well, just seems like tailbraking should be possible and controllable,

Agreed. Thomason is very adept at making any car go fast 'round an auto-x course though. He's won Nationals multiple times in a pretty diverse set of cars.

[Bavarian Motorist]

Well, they allowed the suspension on the ACR to be adjusted and had nobody adjust the Porsche's....not fair, IMO.

[Monsi]

Originally Posted by Bavarian Motorist

Well, they allowed the suspension on the ACR to be adjusted and had nobody adjust the Porsche's....not fair, IMO.

well that just voided any credibility this article was clinging to
especially since an S240 with the track pack has a softer suspension from the factory than the non track pack suspension...

[dumdumhead]

Originally Posted by mopho

Umm, because they test cars as they are delivered from the factory. Once in a while they do articles like that but overall it is not a tuner magazine.
Allowing tuners to have at would create all kinds of new debates about who did what and who can do it better, they should have used this guy etc.

I guess the Viper technician is "as delivered from the factory"?

I mean, I do agree that adding tuners would cause tons of variables, but that's real life. When i go to the track, I hardly ever see any car that is stock, at least in the intermediate and advanced groups. I'd rather see what a car's potential is because the manufacturers don't always get it right 'as delivered'.

[MTribe]

Of course, we'd all like the see the Lotus do better, but the sole criteria here is lap times. I'm guessing that's not why most of us own a lotus. Would be fun to have those same drivers rate the car on visceral, engaging driving experience.

[Murix]

Too much complaining. This is one hell of a group of cars. Tuning blah blah. Blame Lotus for not tuning, not the magazine. As delivered means as delivered. So Dodge delivered a technician too. I doubt any amount of tuning on the Lotus would make it faster than the ACR Viper. That thing is a monster from the factory.

So is the GT-R, GT2, and all the others. I think this was a good real world test and people have their feelings hurts.

The Lotus certainly has it's benefits least we forget. I find my Elise to be fun, consistent, and able to deliver a great driving feeling at any speed. That time, technology, and money has trumped that in raw speed is nothing new.

Maybe Lotus knows this too with the Evora. Perhaps the Evora is the platform that will help Lotus dominate these type of tests as they release higher powered versions over time. As long as it maintains the feel and fun factor of the Elise, maybe it really is the way forward for Lotus.

[Murix]

And as for driver experience, I am pretty sure Steve Millen has that covered. I would hardly blame the driver.

[mopho]

Originally Posted by dumdumhead

I guess the Viper technician is "as delivered from the factory"?

I mean, I do agree that adding tuners would cause tons of variables, but that's real life. When i go to the track, I hardly ever see any car that is stock, at least in the intermediate and advanced groups. I'd rather see what a car's potential is because the manufacturers don't always get it right 'as delivered'.

In real life, when you go to a track day you are not racing each other either. In real life, the guy with fastest car or most "tuned" car is not necessarily the fastest around the track.

Like I said, the magazines do tuner shootouts every now and then, but that is not what this article is about

[Murix]

So the videos are pretty good information. Here is one of Steve Millen giving his impressions at Willow Springs, a track many of us know. He mentions the Exige is very stable but lacks power for the straights. He also says the GT-R is a bit boring in some ways.

Road&Track

[FLuXeXigeS]

agree with Murix...Lotus should have these cars pretty much dialed in during delivery, considering 99% of Elise Exige owners take their cars to tracks often

and i dont blame any driver for lack or experience or skill, but lack of experience or skill on a certain car is different IMO, so drivers no matter how good, will and does make a difference

not too disappointed at lotus performance tho...haha, how many lambo/dbs/gt2 owners actually drive their cars to the limit...at prices over $150K...not too many

my .02

[ZJChaser]

hmmm...Manly was 2 seconds faster around big willow in his stock NA elise than they were in these test with the S240. That might help give an idea. The same can probably be said about all the cars i nthe test though.

[Murix]

Originally Posted by ZJChaser

hmmm...Manly was 2 seconds faster around big willow in his stock NA elise than they were in these test with the S240. That might help give an idea. The same can probably be said about all the cars i nthe test though.

I am sure the aerodynamics of the Exigs S are not helping. While effective, they might not be needed. You have been on that track. My Elise never felt unstable there and I am on AD07's and standard suspension. All that drag must be hurting on the top end because that 240 is not getting much higher speeds on the straight than I am with my 190. Of course, my speedo sucks and is generous.

I think your point is it is not just about power, and I agree, but the Viper is almost 9 seconds faster than the 240. That is a lot to make up.

That leads to another questions. Anyone with an Exige S240 with lap times to compare at Willow Springs or Streets? Might be useful. What about a standard Exige S.

[FLuXeXigeS]

Originally Posted by ZJChaser

hmmm...Manly was 2 seconds faster around big willow in his stock NA elise than they were in these test with the S240. That might help give an idea. The same can probably be said about all the cars i nthe test though.

exactly my point when i made this post:

and i dont blame any driver for lack or experience or skill, but lack of experience or skill on a certain car is different IMO, so drivers no matter how good, will and does make a difference

an experienced Lotus driver can beat or at least be as fast as a PRO driver that barely had any seat time in one