free hit
ads_green's Content - The Lotus Forums - Official Lotus Community Partner Jump to content


Basic Account
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by ads_green

  1. 43 minutes ago, JayEmm said:

    I guess the real question the Zenos needs to answer is "Does the car offer a tangible improvement in driving experience, to make the practical trade-offs necessary"

    An Elise is a car that COULD be daily driven. I never would, at least not mine, but I know plenty of people who do. However I think the Zenos is nowhere near being able to make that claim with the E10. They did have a coupe and convertible planned though...

    The E10 is the nearest thing I've driven to the feel of the original 1997 Elise but has many modern tweaks. Brakes feel better and the engine is less likely (fingers crossed) to have issues. All the drive train is lifted from standard Ford parts so no reason to suspect any issues.  

    I survived with an Elise as my only car for years - certainly no reason why it can't be used even in the harshest weather. However as good as the E10 is, I agree it's not an all-weather car. You can go out in thunderstorms (I have) and only get "moderately damp" but it's not ideal. And the lockable storage is really only big enough to store the steering wheel. I would say the E10 with a windscreen is best compared with the 340R. 

    For sure the E10 isn't an single car proposition but it is so much fun to drive - I don't miss my old 211, s2 190 or other elise cars at all. 

    On 19/12/2016 at 18:26, JayEmm said:

    Good shout, I might ask them. I would have to look and see what is the fairest comparison cost-wise to the Zenos.

    I think I will be getting an E 10 S for review, very possibly the exact same one Clarkson etc... just had. It's probably the most popular in the range as the E10R is faster but £50k+ when specced and that is a fair chunk of money for something without a roof

    Worth making sure that it has the revised brake setup which clears up criticism of a "wooden" brake pedal and the short shift. If it's a press car then no doubt it'll have the latest tweeks.

  2. The E11 is next (the coupe) and looks amazing. People won't be disappointed (and will have doors and windows and a boot).

    As any Lotus owner knows, doors and windows are hard to get right. So made sense to prove the chassis tech with the E10 as this was considerably easier (relatively) without having to consider doors. 

    The hard part is that whilst the E10 could survive as an IVA approved card the E11 will be (I believe) type approved... whole new level of complexity. 


  3. On 18/12/2016 at 22:05, Inkyfingers said:

    Look forward to that James.

    I quite like the look of these but the interior really puts me off. Some people might say that's not the point in a car like this, but even the basic Elise interior looks far superior.

    I think the interior works well (ok, probably biased!). The screens are great even in sunlight and the ergonomics are every bit as good as the elise. I don't think it's fair to compare with an elise though as easy to have a nicer interior if you want to add the best part of 200kgs!

    I never really liked the 211 interior as it wasn't even tweaked for screenless/roofless driving leaving a lot of exposed areas. 

    It has some nice touches... Things like lockable storage, access to battery/fuses/OBD. I can totally recommend the heated carbon seats - comfy even on a long journey and being heated really takes the edge off. I am still using my e10r even now which isn't something I'd have considered with the 211.

    Downsides? Well the electronic cut off is infront of the phone holder and it's *very* easy to hit it if you put your phone there. It is quite embarrassing to say the least! I got some small luggage nets and stuck to the central spine and it works much better. 

    On 19/12/2016 at 18:26, JayEmm said:

    Good shout, I might ask them. I would have to look and see what is the fairest comparison cost-wise to the Zenos.

    I think I will be getting an E 10 S for review, very possibly the exact same one Clarkson etc... just had. It's probably the most popular in the range as the E10R is faster but £50k+ when specced and that is a fair chunk of money for something without a roof

    I was fortunate to get my E10R finalised before the price increase and ticked a lot of option boxes for considerably under 50k. However I do like that Zenos have a fully supported upgrade path from the E10S to the E10R so you don't lose anything if later on you decide for more.

  4. Yeah I know about the "roof" - hence the quotation marks!

    I agree it could definitely use something to tension it as you can see on my pics it has a large unsupported area.

    I was tempted to use a fibreglass strut like what you find with modern camping tents to give it some tension and support. Just to take the floppiness out of the roof. As an added bonus it would help clear water that can pool in the middle of the roof.

  5. The chassis is every bit as stiff as the 211. All the suspension parts attach to the central spine which is incredibly strong. As an added bonus, this allows much longer front wishbones than you can fit in an elise. 

    I had some upgrade work on my car and was stunned to see that there wasn't any metal under the top edge of the body side panels (metal is there just far lower). When you get in and out you put your full weight on that part of the body work and given how solid it felt I was expect it to be supported. Nope, it's a few mm of carbon fibre and it doesn't deflect a bit. The main part of the carbon tub is much thicker and reinforced around a composite structure.

    Suspension is very similar in that they are adjustable dampers with adjustable roll bar. It is much easier tweaking the suspension on the Zenos as the dampers are mounted under the front access panel on top of the chassis spine.DSCF2545_(800x600).jpg


    "Roof" on




    • Like 1
  6. I got my e10r back in April (1st customer e10r).

    coming from a 211 I'm really really impressed. I think with the R they have applied a lot of updates that address the comments on the brakes and gearshift.

    I use mine as a daily driver which I'd never have considered with the 211.

    for the carbon tub, they use pieces but ones that are full length. So whilst being recycled it's not a patchwork quilt. They panels are bonded together. 

    • Like 2
  7. bit of a zombie thread but thought I'd comment.

    with aero its all balance. 

    the Audi TT had issues as it produced (like most cars) lift at the back (afterall cars in profile are essentially aeroplace wing shaped). However this wasnt balanced with the front so at high speed the loading of the tyres moves forwards as the rear lightens so provoking an oversteer situation. As the Exige in both forms produces front and rear downforce its not omparable.

    lots of aero downforce isnt always good. take the S1 elise - it had nearly 10 times the front and rear downforce of the S2 yet the S2 had much better high speed stability. The reason was the high downforce made the S1 very sensitive to wind changes during high speed corning.

    Now the Exige Coupe is designed with a front splitter and wing. for the wing to work it needs damn good airflow to it and the roof provides this. as such the aero is in balance and everything is happy. However, take the roof off and the turbulence dramatically reduces the quality of the air on the rear wing and as such its not as effective. This obviously doesnt affect the rear wing so as with the TT, the rear will get lighter relative to the front making a tendancy to oversteer.

    with the roadster, it doesnt have a rear spoiler to provide the majority of the downforce. similiary, it doesnt have the front splitter. the aero isnt anywhere near as vulnerable or dependant on airover the car. Its also softer sprung so able to absorb  road irregularities and less likely to have a bump destabilise the car.

    As above - plenty of s1 and s2 elises have been pushed above thr exige power levels without additional aero. plenty of normal cars fitted with silly power without any downforce to speak of. As long as the front a d rear remain balanced snd you are not looking to set lap records on bendy tracks then ive not encountered issues. Motorbikes seem to do pretty well hitting 200 without wings and things ;) 

  8. I'm no expert but this is news to me. Can you confirm which forms of motorsport have progressively outlawed them as every form of 4 wheel motorsport I spectate seem to use 4 point harnesses.



    From the lotus cup rules for example:

    1.3.2 All participants are required to have a minimum of four-point safety harnesses. A minimum of five point harnesses is required for all race group participants with non-expired FIA or SFI 16.5 certification.


    So 4 points with a current FIA certification will be valid however there is a definite move to phase them out.

  9. Following on from the Exige V6 thread I inadvertently high jacked:


    I find driving with harnesses great and generally would spec cars with them.

    However in my opinion I'm not doing it for safety reasons as a I believe harnesses have some serious gotchas:


    Racing harnesses are designed for high speed impacts usually encountered on track. The principle is simple - the car's occupants are safer if they stay in the main passenger cell of the car. Being ejected during a crash is usually "a bad thing". As such the harnesses are made from different material, much wider and importantly feature a very different thread construction. 


    All these things together result in a belt that is strong and doesn't stretch anywhere near as much in an impact. Good things when you want to keep the people in the car.

    The extra width of the material and the extra shoulder contact point do allow the energy to be spread over a larger area.


    Bad Points about a harness on the road though:

    - visibility.

    you simply can't move about to view the road especially at junctions. You can adapt but you always have to be aware of the limitations.


    - impact reduction

    Conventional belts stretch a huge amount during an impact (I've seen a few) where the idea is to increase the time the impact force is applied to the body. So the same change in velocity over a longer time will be felt as a softer impact. A good example is hitting a hammer on a desk then repeating with some test with thick piece of rubber between them. The total energy of the impact is the same but the rubber slows down the application making it much harder to do any damage to the table.

    This is important as a big and common complication of a vehicle crash is internal deceleration injuries (not from me - my wife is a trauma neurosurgeon so will take her word on it). As harnesses don't stretch as much the occupant will experience a faster deceleration than an inertia belt wearer. 


    There is a flip side to this though... Inertia belts (even with multi stage pre tensioners) are similar to airbags in that they are most effective on the first impact. If you are unfortunate enough to be involved with a multiple impact scenario then harnesses will hold together better.


    - head restraint

    Holding the torso in place is great however on the road very few wear HANS devices. Even without a crash helmet this can cause some neck injury in a front impact.


    - roll over

    If the car hasn't got a full cage then being held bolt upright with no opportunity to change position can be devastating in a roll over scenario. At least with modern Lotus based cars they have the rear roll bar but this isn't a full strength bar and will deform on impact.


    - side impact

    Whilst you are less likely to "fall sideways" out of a inertia belt similar things apply as with the roll over. if you side impact into say a tree then the tree will always win. Plenty of cases where the tree simply pushes its way through the passenger cell. One of my (very lucky) friends found this out when he crashed into a tree and was still in his seat but over on the passenger side. Being bolted to the chassis would prevent this movement but do nothing to stop the tree.


    - submarining.

    with 4 point belts (even the ASM variety) you can shoot under the lap belts and out of the harness. Inertia belts don't do this as the pre tensioner will pull the belt tight enough. 5/6 point belts obviously prevent this but are pain on the road. 4 point belts are being phased out of motorsport so they might as well be for the road too.


    - stupid owners

    Inertia belts are hard (still possible) to get wrong.I can't count the number of people I've seen put on harnesses in a way that makes me wince... The common ones being too loose or the buckle up near their belly button. It takes time to fit a harness properly and that breeds contempt.



    I guess there are plenty of accidents where people walk away from wearing no belts (just google "russian dashcams"!) and similarly for all manner of belts. I use harnesses and probably always will... But I do so knowing quite clearly the pro's and con's of each and accept the implications. 



  10. I'll take my chances with a 4 point harness any day thanks.


    I used to run 4 point harnesses but never again. There's a reason they are being progressively  outlawed in motorsport.


    I don't have issues with people using harnesses - just the blanket "they are safer". Yes they have advantages in a very select number of scenarios but come with their own baggage. 

  11. Consider a roll over scenario then. Harnesses without roll bar is way more dangerous as you are pinned to the seat bolt upright.

    Side impacts, again you are held in place. Not always good. Let's say you hit a tree side on - the tree will most likely enter the car quite a way and not bring bolted to the floor would be quite useful.

    Again, I'm not anti harnesses but they simply are not safer in all circumstances over three point belts. No need to be so dismissive of them as modern belts do a bloody good job for road cars.

    Track is a different matter but it's a fundamental different environment.

  12. 1. No airbags on the Cup. 4 point harnesses are much safer than an inertia reel seatbelt so there are some safety advantages with a Cup.


    This is a little misleading. At normal road speeds you are far likely to be injured with harnesses than inertia belts. By injured I mean bruising and broken collar bone type things. This is simply down to different design objectives of the two systems. At road speeds it's unlikely that the belt will fail so it's better to reduce impact by stretching. This is where the conventional belt is far better. Harnesses are designed for higher speeds where the objectives are to keep the occupants inside the car no matter what. The downside is that there is very little scope for slowling the impact.

    Don't get me wrong, I prefer harnesses but people need to consider all aspects as no safety system is without downsides.

  13. Chargecoolers are not required - plenty of applications where forced induction is used without a cooler however they do make alot of sense.

    It will not damage the engine - the ECU will adjust timing based on air charge temp and if it gets too hot it will back off and reduce power.

    Looking closer at the picture above there appears to be hoses going into the body - apart from crank case ventilation these could be coolant.

    there are superchargers with built in water charge coolers mounted between the charger and engine...

  14. I feels like a good fan or a magazine website than a corporate car sales one.

    Too much real estate taken up at the top with the rotating adverts.

    Also broadband only I see - the main image is 500k and the page weighs in at over 2mb. Thats a fair old chunk for your probable first home page with the user.

    To compare with the audi one, it comes in at 400k

    Oh for the love of... Bibs- tell them to turn on compression. They are using apache and it's a one liner config change. Why pay for stuff you don't have to use and make your pages load slower?

    I don't like the fact that the "cars" link on the top nav doesn't do anything (it's actually a link to the home page). Given the massive size of the main image you probably have to scroll down to see the cars. Even an named anchor tag would help here but would be better off going to "" (thats a better page - more focused and less going on).

    The fact the media link is the first tells you who it's aimed at ;-) Even worse that it takes you offsite.

    Not sure I like the split nav bars - the main one above the big image and a second context one below... The large main image on the home page even makes it look like a footer nav.

  15. The problem is

    - the standard fuel pump has a relatively small baffled section. The supercharged car can exhaust this very quickly.

    - the baffles in the tank are only half height and 211 cornering on slicks can generate enough load to cause overspill

    - the standard baffles have been known to come loose.

    The 70liter fuel cell supplied by lotus is made (indirectly) by Pro-Alloy.

    They make the primary aliminium tank section and ATP add the rubber sections and sell the final product.

    Unless you need the bag tank for racing regs, extra range or the extra safety aspect then I would go with a normal pro-alloy replacement tank. The cost of the bag tank is high and needs to be looked after and has a fixed lifespan (5-7 years) before it must be replaced.

    The normal ali tank is a like for like tank with an extra 10 litres of fuel capacity. Can be spec'd with or with safety foam which indirectly helps with fuel surge by slowing the movement down.

    The main differentiator from stock is that the pro alloy tank apart from being much lighter and bigger is that the baffles are full height. They also have one way valves that allow fuel to move close to the pump but then close under any left turn. There are small "mouse holes" to allow the fuel to stabilise slowly. This buggers up the fuel gauge and you'll need to be aware (both with the ali and bag tank) that the fuel gauge will read high when moving. Takes about 10 minutes to stabilise after a track session.

    However they've used this on racing elises pumping out 300-400 bhp and not had any starvation down to 3-4 litres.

    To me this is the best option as its a simple diy operation to swap the tank over if you're handy with spanners. Fitting a swirl pot can also be done and there are kits but I don't see the point of the extra complexity for no gain over the pro-alloy tank.

  16. This is the thing though - Chris is right in that Ferrari don't make a bad car.

    They don't need to lie and they don't need to be the best at everything. There will always be a better car somewhere down the line but it doesn't (or at least shouldn't) matter.

    It does somewhat concern me that we have the ex head of brand management from Ferrari now at the helm. I know Lotus have (like everybody else) been a little liberal with facts and figures in the past but I'd hate to get to the ferrari like stance.

  17. I guess you dont have kids? I've been looking at getting a new car. Id love a Exige but not an option for me right now. Id love an Evora but cant quite stretch that far just now. BUT if I could I think that 2 plus 2 would be great for me!


    I do have kids and tried for several hours to arrange the cars seats in a way that was

    1) safe

    2) comfortable for me

    3) comfortable for the kids

    I couldn't only get one out of three at any one time.

    It would work if you didn't have the large carseats as required nowdays or if kids are between 8-12 but thats it.

  • Create New...