The Lotus Cars Community banner

41 - 54 of 54 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,573 Posts
OK, I disagree a bit.

I want a manual transmission. Was bored by the paddle shifting in every car I drove.

Anyone willing can drive a stick.

Note that some foreign mfgrs are going with torque convertor autos for US sales. They say it's because we want that initial torque multiplied acceleration.

Supercharger, OK, but not a turbo. Too many are reported to have poor throttle response. My TT Supra didn't share that problem, but its turbos were sequential, i.e. not cheap. Throttle response is important.

Most power steering today is electric and few have done that well. Porsche did.

If I can avoid p/s, I'm happy.

Lotus can't make the car too heavy, CAFE standards and driver appeal. Add too much stuff and, combined with crash stds, it isn't light any longer.

Lotus also can't make the car too expensive; has to be well under Evora pricing.

We agree about the fixation with 0-60 times. 0 -100 is more important to me.

Last I looked, the Alfa is selling quite poorly.
 

·
***** lurker
Joined
·
732 Posts
OK, I disagree a bit.

I want a manual transmission. Was bored by the paddle shifting in every car I drove.

Anyone willing can drive a stick.
Not everyone is willing to learn though. Also, I think it would be nice to have the option of either paddels (for me) or a stick (for you) as is available for the Evora if I'm not mistaken.

Note that some foreign mfgrs are going with torque convertor autos for US sales. They say it's because we want that initial torque multiplied acceleration.

Supercharger, OK, but not a turbo. Too many are reported to have poor throttle response. My TT Supra didn't share that problem, but its turbos were sequential, i.e. not cheap. Throttle response is important.

Most power steering today is electric and few have done that well. Porsche did.

If I can avoid p/s, I'm happy.

Lotus can't make the car too heavy, CAFE standards and driver appeal. Add too much stuff and, combined with crash stds, it isn't light any longer.

Lotus also can't make the car too expensive; has to be well under Evora pricing.

We agree about the fixation with 0-60 times. 0 -100 is more important to me.

Last I looked, the Alfa is selling quite poorly.
I don't think the Alfa is selling well and that is why I have concern for the S4. Also, I think the turbo is more likely as most manufacturers are going that route for mileage and emissions reasons.

At this point it is all we can do is speculate and hope. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
456 Posts
Seriously, the idea of trying to shoehorn that between the rails and then actually working on it is plenty motivation alone to not try. I saw a Japanese guy had done it, but I guess he was either reallllly bored, sadistic, or both. Just imagine a routine spark plug change...
I said the flat 4 from Toyota/Subaru joint venture because of the engine lower center of gravity. It will make the Elise handle the corners better than ever. You cannot go wrong with a lightweight car with a low center of gravity engine. Not to mention, there are be plenty of aftermarket for getting more power from this engine. I used to own a Subaru STi and I can feel the different in cornering vs my Acura RSX type S. Btw, changing the sparkplug on my STi was a breeze and that car has a larger 2.5L turbo engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,907 Posts
I said the flat 4 from Toyota/Subaru joint venture because of the engine lower center of gravity. It will make the Elise handle the corners better than ever. You cannot go wrong with a lightweight car with a low center of gravity engine. Not to mention, there are be plenty of aftermarket for getting more power from this engine. I used to own a Subaru STi and I can feel the different in cornering vs my Acura RSX type S. Btw, changing the sparkplug on my STi was a breeze and that car has a larger 2.5L turbo engine.

The difference is both the boxster and the STi were designed specifically for a flat four. To adapt the Elise to it in a production-quality way would be a huge undertaking. The next Elise will need to borrow as much as it can while still feeling new in order to keep the costs down. To have a flat motor would require a new, wider rear subframe which would add weight, and realistically do so little for CG that it would be hard to justify. It would also stretch the wheelbase a bit since the I4 is sideways, so the extra wheelbase would dull the car a little.


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 

·
Less is Better
Joined
·
2,480 Posts
The difference is both the boxster and the STi were designed specifically for a flat four. To adapt the Elise to it in a production-quality way would be a huge undertaking. The next Elise will need to borrow as much as it can while still feeling new in order to keep the costs down. To have a flat motor would require a new, wider rear subframe which would add weight, and realistically do so little for CG that it would be hard to justify. It would also stretch the wheelbase a bit since the I4 is sideways, so the extra wheelbase would dull the car a little.


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
I'm sure Lotus will design the chassis for whatever engine they choose to put in the car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,907 Posts
I'm sure Lotus will design the chassis for whatever engine they choose to put in the car.

They won't need a redesign if they stick with the same architecture though, greatly simplifying things. I'd expect they aim to change as little as possible while trying to make it feel newer through refinement


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
 

·
Less is Better
Joined
·
2,480 Posts
They won't need a redesign if they stick with the same architecture though, greatly simplifying things. I'd expect they aim to change as little as possible while trying to make it feel newer through refinement


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App
The chassis will most certainly be getting a redesign to get back into the US.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,573 Posts
I didn't think the chassis had been a problem. Is it?
 

·
***** lurker
Joined
·
732 Posts
I didn't think the chassis had been a problem. Is it?
What would need to be redesigned is the rear sub-frame to carry whatever engine they select. The chassis itself will likely go untouched. Why spend money further developing what is probably the best part of the car when that money will go so much further in other areas? The front crash structure will need tweaking too I'm sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,723 Posts
Subaru is the company who actually builds the FRS/GT86/BRZ; Toyota just had a hand in development. Since Toyota doesn't have a production line set up for the flat 4s and will likely never engineer their own, it's kind of a moot point.

I do believe that JMG mentioned that the next chassis has to be wider to accommodate side airbags though.
 

·
Less is Better
Joined
·
2,480 Posts
I didn't think the chassis had been a problem. Is it?
Some may consider just the tub as the chassis. But the chassis is technically the tub, subframes, stiffening beams. Basically the things that everything hangs from is part of the cars chassis.



So while it is possible that the tub may not need to be changed (although I'd guess that they will be lowering the side sills at least) the chassis will certainly need to change to accommodate crash standards if not engine changes.
 

·
***** lurker
Joined
·
732 Posts
Some may consider just the tub as the
chassis. But the chassis is technically the tub, subframes, stiffening beams. Basically the things that everything hangs from is part of the cars chassis.



So while it is possible that the tub may not need to be changed (although I'd guess that they will be lowering the side sills at least) the chassis will certainly need to change to accommodate crash standards if not engine changes.
Hmmm... learn something everyday. Thank you.
 
41 - 54 of 54 Posts
Top