emajnthis Posted September 30, 2010 Posted September 30, 2010 Sad? How so? 1180 ft-lbs of torque. Lord, what fun that must be, to stomp on the accelerator and feel all that thrust kicking in! Remember, HP is a function of Torque--it's that 1180 ft-lbs that'll yank you back in the seat and probably make your face feel like it's peeling backwards... agreed, and since it's electric the torque curve should remain almost linear until a certain RPM (where it will drop off considerably), i'd like to see it in action, i imagine weight is what keeps its 0-60 time higher than it should be.
areaseven Posted September 30, 2010 Author Posted September 30, 2010 Yeah, but it can't be any heavier than the Bugatti Veyron, right? Also, The XJ220 is of older technology with a V6 that generates roughly half of what this concept does, yet it can go up to 217 mph. Something's just not right about the concept's numbers.
emajnthis Posted October 1, 2010 Posted October 1, 2010 you're also looking at two completely different technologies between this concept and a bugatti, the bugatti is using technology that's been tested and perfected over several decades at this scale, turbines are typically only used in larger or more specific applications and in this case has been scaled way down. the Jaguar is using turbine engines in conjunction with electric motors, electric motors are known well for having fantastic torque but they're not really HP crunchers and while turbine motors sounds cutting edge, in this application its probably not as performance minded as it sounds, mostly due to the nature of a turbine motor. Turbine motors are typically meant to run at a constant speed, they don't wind up and wind down very well like a typical otto cycle motor, which is why you see them on jet liners and generators, things that will have the motor running at a constant rpm for long periods of time. I'm not sure how they've balanced the efficiency of the electric motor with the turbines, but i'm sure it's far from perfect at a conceptual stage, so there's a lot of room for improvement in this type of design. In regards to weight, i'd be surprised if they kept it below 4000lbs, you have to consider the fact that there are six motors in this car not counting the batteries to power four of them, this thing has to weigh a lot regardless of space age materials.
David Hingtgen Posted October 1, 2010 Posted October 1, 2010 I suspect some people (especially the media) are confusing jet engines and turbines. When they say "turbine", in this context---think "hydroelectric dam"---they are generating electricity, little more. And like most electric motors---incredible torque at low speeds. Their true limit is often RPM/gearing. All in all, this seems most similar to a turbine-electric locomotive: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_turbine-electric_locomotive (car will likely have same issues, too---both steam and electric turbine locos have the same issues as all other turbines---best at long, high-speed runs) I figure it'll be almost submarine-like in actual operation---the electric motors will run off the batteries, the batteries will be charged by the turbines.
jenius Posted October 1, 2010 Posted October 1, 2010 They give the impression that the turbines are pushing the car forward by stating that the force from the air is pushed out against the rear venier to create downforce. That makes it seem to me like a lot of air must be getting pushed out.
David Hingtgen Posted October 1, 2010 Posted October 1, 2010 Of course---marketing. If the jet impulse is 0.4 ounces, they can say it adds force... And the drawings reinforce the masses' mental concept of a "jet car".
areaseven Posted October 3, 2010 Author Posted October 3, 2010 (edited) Lotus unveils its future lineup. 2013 Lotus Elan Approx. US$118,650 4-liter V6, 444 bhp, 343 lb-ft torque 2,855 lbs. 0-60 in 3.5 sec; top speed 193 mph 2013 Lotus Esprit Approx. US$174,000 5-liter V8, 612 bhp, 531 lb-ft torque 3,197 lbs. 0-60 in 3.4 sec 2014 Lotus Elite Approx. US$181,900 5-liter V8, 612 bhp, 531 lb-ft torque 3,638 lbs. 0-60 in 3.7 sec 2015 Lotus Elise Approx. US$55,370 2-liter inline-4 hybrid, 316 bhp, 243 lb-ft torque 2,414 lbs. 0-60 in 4.3 sec; top speed 168 mph 2015 Lotus Eterne Approx. US$189,840 5-liter V8, 612 bhp, 531 lb-ft torque 3,968 lbs. 0-60 in 4.0 sec; top speed 196 mph Edited October 6, 2010 by areaseven
kaiotheforsaken Posted October 3, 2010 Posted October 3, 2010 Those are some gorgeous new cars. Really love Lotus designs.
Hiriyu Posted October 4, 2010 Posted October 4, 2010 Those specifications on the various Lotus can't be right... I'm not impressed. Me-too wannabe Gallardo styling. Porky curb weights. Lotus has never been about muscle car appeal; it's completely anathema. Colin Chapman must be doing 7500 RPM in his grave.
jenius Posted October 4, 2010 Posted October 4, 2010 They are definitely Gallardo-like but you have to remember that ever increasing safety standards are leading to heavier cars. By comparison, some of those are fairly light. Lamborghini's newest test project weighted in at 2500LBs and they did everything they could to make that light.
kaiotheforsaken Posted October 4, 2010 Posted October 4, 2010 The front ends really remind me more of Audi's designs. Regardless, I really like the new Elise though I'm surprised at how different it looks from it's previous versions (though I like those a lot too).
Agent ONE Posted October 4, 2010 Posted October 4, 2010 Not so crazy about the Elise, mine is WAY cooler and unique looking. Thinking about putting down a deposit for the Elan though.
Hiriyu Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Not so crazy about the Elise, mine is WAY cooler and unique looking. Thinking about putting down a deposit for the Elan though. Have to admit, I was curious as to what your thoughts would be about these. I'm still pretty sure that the specs A7 posted can't be right though... let us know what you come up with.
areaseven Posted October 6, 2010 Author Posted October 6, 2010 I'm still pretty sure that the specs A7 posted can't be right though... let us know what you come up with. D'oh! I mixed up the engine specs of the Elise with the Eterne. Fixed.
ValkyrieFactory Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 (edited) Lotus unveils its future lineup. 2013 Lotus Elan Approx. US$118,650 4-liter V6, 444 bhp, 343 lb-ft torque 2,855 lbs. 0-60 in 3.5 sec; top speed 193 mph 2013 Lotus Esprit Approx. US$174,000 5-liter V8, 612 bhp, 531 lb-ft torque 3,197 lbs. 0-60 in 3.4 sec 2014 Lotus Elite Approx. US$181,900 5-liter V8, 612 bhp, 531 lb-ft torque 3,638 lbs. 0-60 in 3.7 sec 2015 Lotus Elise Approx. US$55,370 2-liter inline-4 hybrid, 316 bhp, 243 lb-ft torque 2,414 lbs. 0-60 in 4.3 sec; top speed 168 mph 2015 Lotus Eterne Approx. US$189,840 5-liter V8, 612 bhp, 531 lb-ft torque 3,968 lbs. 0-60 in 4.0 sec; top speed 196 mph I wish there were more distinct visual differences between the new Lotuses though. As they are right now, these cars look like they were just one car that was pushed and pulled in various dimensions. Edited October 6, 2010 by ValkyrieFactory
reddsun1 Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 This will certainly be looked back upon as a Golden Age for enthusiasts of the internal combustion engine, in terms of efficiency and power output [in general] for performance-oriented cars. But Christ--what absolutely DEPRESSING and BLAND times, aesthetically speaking. Everything seems to be getting more and more, homogeneous, for lack of a better word. "what color would you like your jellybean-on-wheels?" God, what I wouldn't give for a garage full of these, but with more modern drivetrains/suspension bits/brakes/rubber bolted up underneath... 250 California Spyder GT-40 Wyer/wide body Lambo Miura Pantera Group 4 Lola T-70 '70 Challenger '70 or '71 Road Runner '67 Chevelle (I've seen one of these, properly set up, run circles around turbo Porsches at a PCA event at Lime Rock before...) Torana A9X '78 XC Cobra
jenius Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 (edited) I've always been fond of the mid-60s Corvettes (and even the first few StingRays). Sometimes I still day dream about buying a big block 69 Corvette or, when I'm feeling a bit more tasteful, a 64ish. I think what has happened to the Corvette is one of the automobile industry's more sad stories (although they sell like hell so the world disagrees with me). I wish the Corvette was smaller and lighter and made some effort to get back to its original lines... to me that car looks like it's never fully recovered from its 1984 makeover. Full disclosure - I owned an 80s Vette in the 90s. Edited October 6, 2010 by jenius
reddsun1 Posted October 7, 2010 Posted October 7, 2010 Don't get me wrong, there's a fair share of newer cars that I lust after, too. Like the 550 Maranello; or the Aston Martin DBS, mmmmmm--that thing is sex on wheels. I happen to like that Lotus Elite as well (what can I say? I'm biased towards Coupes and traditional "GT"s), it's a rather nice design. But 3700 lbs? Retracting glass top? A Lotus badge is just out of place on it. I know I've taken to task the "Colin Chapman" theory of car design, but the irony is not lost on me that the majority of these new models seem the very antithesis of the founder's devotion to minimalist design philosophy, "Simplify and add lightness." I kinda like the C6 Vette. I like the design cues taken from the old Stingrays; thought it was a step in the right direction. GM's snake-killer...
Agent ONE Posted October 7, 2010 Posted October 7, 2010 Have to admit, I was curious as to what your thoughts would be about these. I'm still pretty sure that the specs A7 posted can't be right though... let us know what you come up with. It's the strangest car one can ever own. Like driving a go-kart to work every day. I really like the direction of the company, but most current lotus owners, and lotus forum members hate the direction. They are just pissed off because they can't afford the lotus they really want. I mean the new Elise looks great compared to other cars, but it's nothing next to the others.
jenius Posted October 7, 2010 Posted October 7, 2010 are the side view mirrors on all the Lotii cameras?
Agent ONE Posted October 7, 2010 Posted October 7, 2010 are the side view mirrors on all the Lotii cameras? Yes
areaseven Posted October 8, 2010 Author Posted October 8, 2010 The new Batmobile? (Quote-protected because Wanzerfan is still a dumbass.) 2011 Panoz Abruzzi
reddsun1 Posted October 8, 2010 Posted October 8, 2010 The new Batmobile? (Quote-protected because Wanzerfan is still a dumbass.) 2011 Panoz Abruzzi LOL, that was my first thought at seeing that pic. If they ever do a retro '40s era version of the dark knight, it'll defnitely fit the bill.
areaseven Posted October 12, 2010 Author Posted October 12, 2010 Top Gear pays tribute to their all-time favorite car company. Top Gear Loves Lancia
Chewie Posted October 12, 2010 Posted October 12, 2010 (edited) Do you want to travel at lightspeed? 2010 Bugatti Veyron 16.4 Super Sport Edited October 12, 2010 by Chewie
reddsun1 Posted October 13, 2010 Posted October 13, 2010 (edited) Do you want to travel at lightspeed? 2010 Bugatti Veyron 16.4 Super Sport Meh, still looks like a fuggin' dung beetle.... Ah, for the good ol' days--when supercars were sleek and sexy, and really looked the business... Not really a fan of the upcoming Mclaren supercar though--the name escapes me at the moment. Seriously, they should expect a lawsuit from Ascari or something... Edited October 13, 2010 by reddsun1
emajnthis Posted October 13, 2010 Posted October 13, 2010 Meh, still looks like a fuggin' dung beetle.... Ah, for the good ol' days--when supercars were sleek and sexy, and really looked the business... Not really a fan of the upcoming Mclaren supercar though--the name escapes me at the moment. Seriously, they should expect a lawsuit from Ascari or something... I agree with you on the first point, loved the McLaren F1, and also loved the Ferrari F40, supercars really hit a good age there in the late 80's through the late 90's.
Vifam7 Posted October 13, 2010 Posted October 13, 2010 (edited) Meh, still looks like a fuggin' dung beetle.... Ah, for the good ol' days--when supercars were sleek and sexy, and really looked the business... I personally like the aesthetics of this beetle-themed supercar than that of the Veyron. Edited October 13, 2010 by Vifam7
reddsun1 Posted October 14, 2010 Posted October 14, 2010 (edited) I personally like the aesthetics of this beetle-themed supercar than that of the Veyron. That looks vaguely familiar; probably had a Hot Wheels just like that once... Ooh, ooh--anybody else remember the Vector? F'ugly as all get-out, true. But for countless kids of the 80's, posters of these things probably competed with Countachs for wall-space. They just looked fast sitting still. Actually, they looked more like they should have been a prop on the set of a Buck Rogers episode... ed: LOL, here goes the practical side of me ruining things again. Can you imagine how stressful something as simple as washing that car would have been, being the poor ba**ard that had to try to clean the inside of that fuggin windshield? It's the little things like that that can make it or break it for a relationship with a car; if you find yourself always driving a vehicle with hazy, streaked windows you can never get clean, or dirt and stuff trapped in corners and crevices you can never seem to reach with the vacuum--I imagine stuff like that could make you eventually get to the point where you just look at your car when you come out in the driveway each day and go: "you know, I hate your mother fu**in a$$ [car]; I can't wait 'til I can get something else." Edited October 14, 2010 by reddsun1
Vifam7 Posted October 14, 2010 Posted October 14, 2010 That looks vaguely familiar; probably had a Hot Wheels just like that once... It's an Alfa Romeo Carabo. ed: LOL, here goes the practical side of me ruining things again. Can you imagine how stressful something as simple as washing that car would have been, being the poor ba**ard that had to try to clean the inside of that fuggin windshield? It's the little things like that that can make it or break it for a relationship with a car; if you find yourself always driving a vehicle with hazy, streaked windows you can never get clean, or dirt and stuff trapped in corners and crevices you can never seem to reach with the vacuum--I imagine stuff like that could make you eventually get to the point where you just look at your car when you come out in the driveway each day and go: "you know, I hate your mother fu**in a$$ [car]; I can't wait 'til I can get something else." Generally, if you're rich enough to own a supercar, you have someone else do all the annoying things in life for you.
David Hingtgen Posted October 14, 2010 Posted October 14, 2010 Vector W-8 (Countach rival) was ok, but I very much liked the Diablo-rival Vector W-12.
areaseven Posted October 15, 2010 Author Posted October 15, 2010 Vector W-8 (Countach rival) was ok, but I very much liked the Diablo-rival Vector W-12. The problem is that the M12 (not W-12, BTW) was not really a Vector at all, nor was it a Diablo rival. Rather, it was a Diablo with a lengthened chassis and a fiberglass body. Also, I don't remember which episode of old Top Gear it was, but Jeremy Clarkson said something like the M12 was the worst supercar ever made.
David Hingtgen Posted October 15, 2010 Posted October 15, 2010 It used the Diablo chassis, too? I thought it was just the drivetrain.
Recommended Posts