When you have to pay more to NOT get an aircondition

This is the Porsche Cayman R. It's a lighter and more powerful version of the Cayman S. To save weight, the Porsche Engineers got rid of the radio and the aircondition. They also got rid of some other comfort accessories and items. They increased power by 10 HP, which shouldn't cost them much more as it's probably chip tuning only. So, you get almost the same, but less and you pay a lot more for the package, Euro 7'300.- to be specific. Okay, the lighter wheels may be a bit more expensive, but honestly, why would you pay so much more to actually get less? True weight saving must start with the basic concept of the car, not by removing convenience.

New Lotus Esprit revealed

What Lotus did in Paris, came quite as a suprise to many. We all had expected the new Elite, but Lotus also presented a new mid engine Esprit a new Elan, a new Elise and the new 4 door saloon Eterne. Obviously they seem to share a lot, engines, drivetrain, etc. They also seem to talk the same design language. Now, having been an admirer for many of the old Lotus (Elite, 11, 23, 17, Elan, Europa, Esprit S2.2 and Elise/Exige), what do I think about this new model range? I honestly think that Lotus makes the same mistake as the others, Aston-Martin, Maserati and so on. More and more power, more and more weight and similar design patterns. This is, in my eyes, not what Lotus made great. So, having seen the lot now, I will continue to stick with the classics, once more.

It IS possible - Lamborghini Sesto Elemento with less than 1000 kg

Lamborghini presents the Sesto Elemento, a concept car, in Paris. It's sort of a next version Gallardo, built with (probably expensive) lightweight materials. The result though is staggering: 990 kg, 570 hp, 0-100 km/h in 2.5 seconds. Well my key take away: Even with a heavy drivetrain and big engine you can get the weight of the car below 1'000 kg. So with more sensibility (smaller engine, only rear wheel drive, etc.) you actually can build a modern car below 800 to 900 kg. So, engineers, go to your drawing boards and build these modern sportscars that take less and driver better!

Lotus reveals new Elite

So, finally, Lotus has revealed its new sportscar, called the Elite. It's a 2+2 coupé with an 8 cylinder engine and 500ish hp, 1650 kg heavy, with aluminum doors. It looks good, a bit like a mixture of Aston Martin and Honda.
So what's wrong? A lot!
It carries a famous name. The Lotus Elite was Lotus' first coupé, a revolutionary car with full fiberglass body (no chassis!) and 1200 ccm Climax engine. It was extremely handsome! It was successful in racing as well, winning the efficiency category in Le Mans for example. It was successful in the hand of many amateur racing driver of the late 50ies and early sixties. It's a legend! And now this. A car that is twice as heavy as the early Lotus Elise (MK1), almost as big as a 5-series BMW. For me, this is like another brand, i.e. Lotus (H) versus Lotus (L) - H standing for heavyweight, L standing for lightweight. It will be expensive as well, I fear. Not that I don't like the car as such, it would have been a good baby Aston or let's say a new baby Bristol. But for Lotus I would have wished something different, much lighter and more revolutionary. Too bad!

Lucra LC470 combines retro design and modern sportcar genes

You may think that retro design is not a good think, and partially I would agree. But if it brings up such cars like the Lucra LC470, then I also see some positive aspects. I truly like lightweight sportcars with no thrills and good design. And this one offers a lot of that. Up to more than 600 HP power a light chassis with a carbon fiber body. And it is road legal and even comes to Europe. For roughly 100'000 Euros you can own such a car with a bit less power and limited weather protection. Cool, isn't it?

Picture of the week - Porsche 911 Carrera 2.7 RS

Here's a car that is probably one of the most admired sportscars in the world. It wasn't much when it appeared and Porsche wasn't even sure they would be able to sell 400 of them. It's the Porsche 911 Carrera 2.7 RS. It basically was a homologation special with lightweight panels, a bigger engine, zero interior comfort and this funny spoiler on the back of the car. Many people put a similar spoiler on their "normal" 911 to make it look faster, so it created a trend. The car was good. Thanks to the low weight (less than 1'000 kg for the lightweight sports version) and the bigger engine with 210 hp it accelerated better than most other cars from that time, including most Ferraris. The car was so successful that Porsche had to build 1580 cars. The fact that the later cars got closer and closer to the normal 2.4 S model is another story.
I could have bought a good one for roughly 50k € a few years ago. Sadly enough I didn't go for it, as the same car today would probably fetch at least three times the money. And it's certainly entertaining to drive.

Lotus Elise - shouldn't all cars be like this?

The Lotus Elise was introduced 1995 and was an instant success. The concept was quite unusual combining an aluminum chassis and a fiberglass body. This made the car very light. First series Elise were around 700 kg. With this even a small engine like the Rover K with 122 HP could propel the car in less than 7 seconds from 0-100 km/h. Top speed wasn't impressive but who would care. The first cars even had aluminum disc brakes to save weight. Over the years the car got heavier and many electronics aids were introduced. In 2000 the series two with an altered design replaced the nimble series one, that had been sold almost 10'000 times.
Mine was an early 1997 S1 122 HP model with nothing but what was needed to drive fast. Even the windows were manually operated and the disc brakes were still aluminum. No ABS, no ESP, no nothing. The car was yellow and really fun to drive, especially when open. It even was very economical thanks to the low weight. The sound wasn't what you would dream of but okay. I had it for roughly two years and sold it to the next proud owner. From time to time I consider buying one again, maybe a series 2 to feel the difference.

Want to reduce weight of your Porsche? Here's how

I have been talking about lighter weight cars a lot. Less weight means better performance and fuel efficiency. Now here's a baby step to improve your car, at least if you are ordering a Porsche 911 GT3, GT3RS or the new Boxter Spyder. You can add the "upgrade" to a lithium-ion starter battery to your order, save 10 kilogramms (6 versus 16) and pay roughly 2'400 USD extra. I haven't said it's cheap to save weight, have I?

A true lightweight sportscar - Supasse V

Here's finally a new sportscar that actually is truly lightweight, the Supasse V, just recently announced by the vendor at the Tokyo motor show and going on sale in 2010.
It weighs roughly 850 kg and is powered by the Mazda 3 MPS engine with 265 HP. This should guarantee good performance and fun on the road. The price is supposed to be similar than the Lotus Exige, so below 90'000 USD. We'll give it a warm welcome despite the somewhat suboptimal design. And I am sure we can still do better, what about 800 kg and 300 HP? This should be possible, even with a small KERS module on board to add torque and lower fuel consumption. Try harder!

The Apline-Renault A110 1600S - a true lightweight car

The Alpine-Renault A110 1600S is one of the most famous rallye cars in history, winning the Monte-Carlo Rallye and the Rallye World Championship twice. The A110 was built between 1961 and 1976 and it is what I would call a truly light car.
The specification of the 1600 S reads:

Engine
Engine: Renault (R16), 1565 ccm, with 138 hp SAE (103 kW) gross (125 PS DIN (93 kW)) power output
Transmission
5-Speed Manual
Chassis/Body
Chassis: Steel backbone with fiberglass body panels

Dimensions and Weight
Weight: 620 kg
Length: 4.04 m
Width:1.50 m

The result is impressive. More than 210 km/h top speed (assuming the right gearing) and 0-100 km/h in less than 7 seconds.
Alpines were very successful in all kinds of events, including hillclimbs and slaloms, but also on the track. But most rememberable of course was their track record in rallyies. Rear wheel drive and an engine mounted in the back meant good traction and the low weight made it almost unbeatable in winter conditions.
Mine was an original Group 3 car with all the right bits and pieces. I probably shouldn't have sold it after all.
And, if you have read my blogpost on the Mazda MX5 Superlight, well, the Alpine A110 is what I would call a true lightweight car.

The Mazda MX 5 Superlight - lightweight?

Mazda has built a lightweight version of the MX5 to indicate how much sportscar is in each MX5. They took off the windscreen, lightened many bits and pieces and added quite a number of racing and tuning accessories. The result is the Mazda MX-5 Superlight version. It's a prototype, production isn't impossible though. The result: 980 kg, 0-100 km/h in less than 9 seconds and a truly open and sporty feel when you drive the car, I reckon. So far so good. I am disappointed though. What this experiment shows is that you can't take a modern car and make it REALLY light. 980 kg for a small simple car is still heavy. Let me compare it with some other small simple cars from the past, what about the Lotus Elite with less than 550 kg, Lotus Elan with roughly 650 kg, Austin-Healey Sprite Mark II with 696 kg, Fiat 850 Spider with 720 kg, Alfa-Romeo Giulia Sprint GTA with 845 kg, or even the more luxurious cars like the Fiat 124 Spider with 907 kg, Porsche 356 S90 with 920 kg or VW Porsche 914 with 940 kg? They all were lighter than the Superlight MX5. Now, of course modern safety regulations and crash tests impact the weight, but by that much? I strongly believe to be able to build a lightweight car you need to engineer and construct it to be one, not to take stuff away off from an existing (heavy) car. And the Mazda MX-5 Superlight version is a clear proof for this.

We need a new Yardstick for Supercars

For centuries the benchmark for Supercars was acceleration from 0-100 km/h or horsepower to weight ratio. Given today's problems with mother earth and more and more restrictions on public roads we probably should think about a new way to measure Supercars. Here's what I propose:
Let's take kg/PS (weight to horsepower) and CO2 g/km and build an index, called SCPI (supercar performance index) based on these two standard measures. Cars that score well, have both a low weight at high engine performance and low fuel consumption at the same time. It's no surprise that light cars do better. The winner here is the KTM X-Bow. I agree that this is a very "basic" car and probably not more than a toy. Number 2 is already more usable and can even be driven every day. The Artega brings everything you need for both track and traffic jam. And on place 4 we have a Porsche which seems to make sense too. None of the usual suspects in the supercar field though makes the top of the list. It's because these cars are way too heavy and therefore are quite inefficient in terms of fuel consumption.

Better power to weight ratio can actually be more fun

I know, I just made the point yesterday, that extra horse power doesn't straight away create more excitement. And I think it still holds true. But (yes, there's always a but ...) additional power output can bring more fun of course, especially when it's not coming with extra weight. The Lotus Exige Cup 260 delivers exactly to this promise combining an unladen vehicle mass of 890 kg with an engine power output of 260 HP. While 260 HP may sound like not a lot for a Porsche 997 driver, the power to weight ratio actually means serious track capabilities. Few cars can match the agility of an Exige and on race tracks with short straights and lots of curves you most likely will have the material to be the fastest even when competing against much more powerful cars. The Lotus Exige (and its slower sister Elise) are still following the idea that extra weight reduces fun. And even if the Lotus Elise added 200 kg weight over its many years (my Mk1 Elise with alluminium brakes and the 120 HP Rover K engine was around 725 kg) of production it's still a very light car. Let's hope they keep it that way when they present the successor.

Is the Mercedes SLS AMG a True Star?

One of the highlighted announcements at this year's international automobile exhibition (IAA) in Frankfurt is the so called Mercedes SLS AMG.
There have been talks about this car for quite a while and it certainly makes a presence with its gullwing doors and the fat open mouth.
But how modern and competitive is it really? Is this the car we expect from the company that brought us the mighty 300 SL Gullwing almost 50 years ago? I think it isn't. Yes, it's quite pretty (at least from the angle pictured here), it has those gorgeous butterfly doors. And yes, it's fast (enough) and shows probably all the virtues expected from a Mercedes. But don't they miss the point? How can mount an 6.3 (actually 6.2) liter engine into such a car? How can you end up with more than 1'600 kg? Wouldn't it have been much better to plant a 3 liter engine with some turbo charger and roughly 400-450 HP combined with a small supercaps based hybrid unit (KERS) to boost torque and lower fuel consumption. With this the car could have been named Mercedes 300 SLS, a name that would have been so much better for marketing purposes. And with some effort and the money safed on the enigine the weight probably could have been lowered to 1'400 kg and it certainly should be possible to end up with less than 10 liters gasoline per 100 km (comparable to a 997 Carrera). With all of this maybe even the price could be brought down to less than 120k Euro and the car could become a bestseller and directly compete with the R8. But maybe that's not what Mercedes wanted anyway. I am happy they had the guts to do such a car and maybe the version I have described above is still to come.

How much car do you really need?

When I spotted these two cars recently I really thought that's a very nice illustration of the question "how much car do you really need". The two cars couldn't be more different.
The Honda S800, built in the sixties, is really small (lemgth: 3.30m, width: 1.40m, height: 1.20m), light (735kg), but still accommodates two people and bit of luggage. Its 791 ccm engine delivers 70 HP at 8'000 RPM, enough to run 160 km/h. It is economical too, with some 6 to 9 liter per 100 km (travel mode). By the way, 8'000 RPM was really exciting in the 60ies, most cars didn't even rev up to 6'000 RPM at that time. There's a lot fo motocycle technology in this car.
The Bentley Arnage, built between 1998 and today (final series) is sort of the pure opposite. It
is large (length: 5.40m, width: 1.93m, height: 1.52m), heavy (2'585 kg) and yes, it seats 5 people and the ones sitting in the back will not be unhappy. Its fuel consumption is certainly not greenish with 19.5 liter per 100 km, or up to 28.8 liter in the city. With 6'752 ccm and more than 500 HP there's enough power in this former Rolls Royce engine with lots of tradition coming with it to accelerate the car in less than 6 seconds to 100 km/h and reach 288 km/h.
So, both cars can transport people from A) to B), both use the same basic engineering concepts (rear wheel drive, gasoline powered four stroke engine), but the way it's packaged and built couldn't be much more diverse. And none of the typical Bentley driver would ever look at the Honda, and none of the S800 aficionados would ever consider a Bentley as being fun to drive. Which means at the end, that everybody has to find HIS answer to the question of how much car he really needs.

The R8 Audi should build

The Audi R8 (V8) is a very good (and successful) car. It though suffers from two disadvantages, weight and bad fuel economy. Audi could fix both, here's how.
Take the V6 TFSI with 290 HP from the A6 and put it into the R8. Get rid of the heavy 4x4 concept and produce a rear drive car only (it has been done for the GT race car). Make the car lighter where possible with acceptable effort. Here you are. From 1'560 kg kerb weight you should be able to come down to something like 1'350 - 1'400 kg. And the fuel consumption will be reduced by at least 20%, CO2 per km below 200 gramm is quite realistic. The car wouldn't be much slower but certainly more competitive on a race track. So Audi, what are you waiting for?

Electrical cars don't need to be boring - look at the Green GT

When people think about electrical cars they think about box design city vehicles, slow cars and nothing to be excited about.
Have a look at Green GT, they are building race cars to compete in still to be defined future race series. What a looker! It's a future design what you are looking at but even the current model is quite appealing.
They just had their first roll out and did 20+ laps on a circuit, 18 of them with one battery cycle.
Go on guys, show us what is possible with electricity, lightweight architecture and spectacular design!