LocostUSA.com

Learning how to build Lotus Seven replicas...together!
It is currently March 29, 2024, 1:08 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: December 30, 2013, 3:44 am 
Offline

Joined: October 19, 2009, 9:36 pm
Posts: 2199
Location: meadview arizona
so if i had a top of the line caterham and took it apart, copying everythink in my shed, mixed the parts up and reassembled both cars, would the salesman know which was which?

i think if i had $20,000.00 i could build a better caterham than caterham!!!!

and i'm not the only one here capable of doing it either.

_________________
this story shall the good man teach his son,
and chrispin chrispian shall ne'er go by,
from this day to the end of the world.
but we in it shall be remembered.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: December 30, 2013, 9:28 am 
Offline

Joined: September 8, 2012, 9:49 pm
Posts: 28
Location: Humphrey, NE
The "planning" part of SM should read do I really have the time from work and family, and money from work and family to do it. :cheers:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: December 30, 2013, 1:23 pm 
Offline
Mid-Engined Maniac

Joined: April 23, 2006, 8:26 pm
Posts: 6410
Location: SoCal
They're two different vehicles, with different suspension, different engines, one built in a factory, and one not. If it's about which is "better", that's impossible to define since everyone's definition is different. If it's about which is faster on-track, the garage builder can always install a bigger engine, stickier tires, and install an ace driver. If it's about who can build a better car for a given price, that's pointless as well since one party is running a business and the other simply has a hobby - huge difference.

It's as if we're trying to convince ourselves that we made the right choice by building one instead of buying it. Really, are we that insecure? This thread comes across as another "fanboi" thread where a bunch of owners of Brand X discuss how superior their car is to Brand Y. Or, we could just be happy with what we have and get on with things. For me, building the car IS the fun part. If I win or lose to a factory-build car, shrug.

_________________
Midlana book: Build this mid-engine Locost!, http://midlana.com/stuff/book/
Kimini book: Designing mid-engine cars using FWD drivetrains
Both available from https://www.lulu.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: December 30, 2013, 8:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: June 24, 2007, 6:04 pm
Posts: 1521
I will say that mine is every bit as as fast as any Caterham, at least at the gas pump, the local coffee shop, the mall and any number of places crowds can be found.
Why, they can't tell the difference so I am credited with having the a very fast car, even if it is not.
Why spend 60 grand for what I can have for 10 grand, the masses can't tell the difference.
Ah Nerva, gotta love it.
This seems like question with no value, there is always going to be somebody that can build something faster, just look at Lingenfelter Corvettes, faster, believe it, but better than factory, well???

Al

_________________
Super Seven 3.4


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: December 31, 2013, 1:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: October 19, 2009, 9:36 pm
Posts: 2199
Location: meadview arizona
to expand on my previous statement, that i could build a better Caterham than Caterham and i'm not the only one here who could.

if a selection of us home builders here were to ever find ourselves in one place for a significant time with sufficient funds, i'm sure we could produce a production vehicle that was superior to a Caterham or almost any similar vehicle.

just think how easy it would be if we had jigs for the chassis, the car 9 is in my opinion a superior chassis and in one form or another we have designed and built every concievable component and used parts from almost every reasonable donor.

some cars built here are strickly book design or derivatives there of, but some are seriously out of the box, if we had the finances and the media exposure that Caterham has, then i would say that the locost would win in any measure of the two types hands down.

as i see it, there are two basic locosts, powerful ones and not so powerful ones, here in the states the most common powerful ones are using a GM LS type power plant, a suitable transmission and a T-Bird/Mustang rear end, this engine is certified for use in hotrods in California which may be a critical factor in the not to distant future, all of the work to run modern engine management has been done.

the less powerful ones are using the miata running gear, again this is fully documented and on this web site there is all and i mean all the information needed to build a miata based car, the only problem is that they are now becomming old technology,and sooner or later will require a replacement, there are not many options manufactured for rear wheel drive applications as of the 2014 model year and if a suitable power plant can be found in transverse config, the transmission is going to need some creative thought as well as the rear end.

therefore, i believe that for a small engined car there is only one alternative, this may be a vehicle similar to the Midlana project, as it utilizes front wheel drive transverse located engine and drive train components from almost any manufacturer.

the only think missing in my opinion, and it is missing in the Caterham as well, is all weather drivability, this is achievable, look at a Donk and ease of entry and egress due to the somewhat high sides of the drivers compartment, so we have to ask ourselves, "do we need a lift off hard top with attached doors and windshield?" and if there is a fully intigrated roll structure, " do the sides of the chassis need to be as high as they are now?"

this may be the wrong time and place to discuss these points but as this thread is of limited usefulness, i thought i might take the liberty of opening a discussion.

note to Marcus, i think you need to get back to your modeling with the above midi in mind.

_________________
this story shall the good man teach his son,
and chrispin chrispian shall ne'er go by,
from this day to the end of the world.
but we in it shall be remembered.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: January 1, 2014, 11:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: September 8, 2012, 9:49 pm
Posts: 28
Location: Humphrey, NE
With regard to the hardtop and usefulness of a locost. First off one could say that in their traditional form, that this is how they "should be", I'm of the opinion that unique and modified cars are more interesting (just my opinion no need for controversy on this point). That said, the donks are the best looking commercial sevens built. The body lines are great and follow the golden rectangle formula with respect to the proportion. All the other hard tops just do not look correct and have a toy-ish appearance.

I agree that as time goes by the cars and components we choose will change, along with the laws that govern how we are regulated but the spirit will remain. I will admit that the 12 year old in me believes that I can build a car cooler, faster, and more exciting than anything else out there. Even if this car just gets driven on rare occasion, I built it and that is what this is all about.

Sorry about the rambling, just a few thoughts .... maybe we should re- title it to the random catch all thread.

I'm happy to change the direction of this thread as I had a friend read this thread and explained how my question in the original post was not only vague but could have been taken many different ways.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: April 21, 2014, 6:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: September 16, 2005, 1:55 pm
Posts: 196
Around Talladega Grand Prix Raceway (SCCA TTs):

Locost 7 (turbo) 1:02.0 (2011)
Caterham R300 1:05.3 (2013)
Ar-i-el At-om 1:05.9 (2014)
Locost 7 1:06.4 (2007 - before new curbing, track is likely faster now)
Lotus 7 series 4 1:07.9 (2014)
Westfield Megabusa 1:10.3 (2014, first time at this track)


Last edited by Grintch on April 22, 2014, 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: April 21, 2014, 9:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: January 13, 2008, 9:07 pm
Posts: 1390
Location: Glendale AZ
Grintch wrote:
Around Talladega Grand Prix Raceway (SCCA TTs):

Caterham R300 1:05.3 (2013)
Ar-i-el At-om 1:05.9 (2014)
Locost 7 1:06.4 (2008 - before new curbing, track is likely faster now)
Lotus 7 series 4 1:07.9 (2014)
Westfield Megabusa 1:10.3 (2014, first time at this track)


So what is a very good time at that track ?
Randy :cheers:

_________________
American 7 5.0 T5
Lotus 15 ish?
914/H6


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: April 21, 2014, 10:56 pm 
Offline
Mid-Engined Maniac

Joined: April 23, 2006, 8:26 pm
Posts: 6410
Location: SoCal
Grintch wrote:
Around Talladega Grand Prix Raceway (SCCA TTs):

Caterham R300 1:05.3 (2013)
Ar-i-el At-om 1:05.9 (2014)
Locost 7 1:06.4 (2008 - before new curbing, track is likely faster now)
Lotus 7 series 4 1:07.9 (2014)
Westfield Megabusa 1:10.3 (2014, first time at this track)

So put Lewis Hamilton into the Locost and suddenly it's faster, which proves nothing except making Locost builders happy... :roll:

_________________
Midlana book: Build this mid-engine Locost!, http://midlana.com/stuff/book/
Kimini book: Designing mid-engine cars using FWD drivetrains
Both available from https://www.lulu.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: April 22, 2014, 3:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: November 12, 2008, 6:29 am
Posts: 3567
Grintch wrote:
Around Talladega Grand Prix Raceway (SCCA TTs):

Caterham R300 1:05.3 (2013)
Ar-i-el At-om 1:05.9 (2014)
Locost 7 1:06.4 (2008 - before new curbing, track is likely faster now)
Lotus 7 series 4 1:07.9 (2014)
Westfield Megabusa 1:10.3 (2014, first time at this track)



For that to have any meaning we would need the specs on the Locost.

Might have been a $50K build (relative to cost of comparable new components being used and labour involved).


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: April 22, 2014, 8:10 am 
Offline
We are Slotus!
User avatar

Joined: October 6, 2009, 9:29 am
Posts: 7651
Location: Tallahassee, FL (The Center of the Known Universe)
B85 wrote:
So what is a very good time at that track ?
Randy :cheers:


Hi Randy- Take a look here for comparisons: http://www.trackpedia.com/wiki/Talladega_Gran_Prix_Raceway
It appears the Locosts were running laps times comparable to the Elise, Boxter, GTR's. Pretty racy company for home-built cars...
:cheers:

_________________
JD, father of Quinn, Son of a... Build Log
Quinn the Slotus:Ford 302 Powered, Mallock-Inspired, Tube Frame, Hillclimb Special
"Gonzo and friends: Last night must have been quite a night. Camelot moments, mechanical marvels, Rustoleum launches, flying squirrels, fru-fru tea cuppers, V8 envy, Ensure catch cans -- and it wasn't even a full moon." -- SeattleTom


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: April 22, 2014, 2:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: September 16, 2005, 1:55 pm
Posts: 196
cheapracer wrote:
Grintch wrote:
Around Talladega Grand Prix Raceway (SCCA TTs):

Locost 7 (turbo) 1:02.0 (2011)
Caterham R300 1:05.3 (2013)
Ar-i-el At-om 1:05.9 (2014)
Locost 7 1:06.4 (2007 - before new curbing, track is likely faster now, I am 1.5 sec faster now in my SRF vs 2009)
Lotus 7 series 4 1:07.9 (2014)
Westfield Megabusa 1:10.3 (2014, first time at this track)



For that to have any meaning we would need the specs on the Locost.

Might have been a $50K build (relative to cost of comparable new components being used and labour involved).



Define good time? Lap record in a Spec Racer Ford is 1:09.0, Formula Ford 1:03.5. The 1:06 I ran in the Locost in 2007 put me mid pack with the Formula Fords (and yes, I was in their run group).

Both Locosts were CMC chasis. The turbo Miata based (see revised post above), one Rx-7 based (with rather crappy standard CMC suspension geometry).

My power estimates:
Locost 7 turbo - 250? (1.8L Miata turbo - Heikkie Rinta-Koski if you remember him and his car)
At-om - 230 (K24? - he was running the At-om wing package but I didn't see a Supercharger)
Caterham 300R - 200 (Zetec or Duratec)
Westfield Megabusa - 190 (Hayabusa)
Locost 7 - 180 (13B rotary)
Lotus 7 series 4 - 150 (kent engine, muti carb)

The At-om was running a full size windscreen (none of the 7's were) and started out on "street" BFG Rivals. But he shaved a lot of time the second day, maybe because he switched to R coumpounds.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 2, 2014, 10:42 am 
Offline

Joined: July 17, 2007, 12:09 am
Posts: 687
There are two caterhams locally here that run at the track and my times are faster than both. So "can" someone build a locost to be faster.....sure, but that doesn't really mean much. Both of the caterhams are the 2.0L motors n/a, and my car is a fire breathing 503 wheel monster. My times are only faster because of how fast I am in the straights. I would bet those cars would SMOKE ME in the corners. My locost is just under developed in that area, and all of my expertise is in making power, so I did what I know best and built a car with a killer power/weight ratio.

In the end if I was grouped into a class I would be put with open wheel cars and formula ford cars and would be DEAD LAST in any "real" race I ever entered the locost in.

J. R.

_________________
Attention TURBO LOVERS, Great book -----> How to turbocharge and Tune your Engine
Sold: GT30/71R My00 S2k
My Car: Custom Build Lotus Super 7


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 2, 2014, 12:19 pm 
Offline
Mid-Engined Maniac

Joined: April 23, 2006, 8:26 pm
Posts: 6410
Location: SoCal
The single huge variable that isn't being accounted for is driver skill... and daring. Put a really good driver in any Locost and it'll go faster. So what changed? Tire compound? Camber curves? Power to weight? CG location? No - nothing that defines a Locost has changed, yet it goes faster. The point is, any This vs That thread is useless other than bragging about how awesome one car is, focusing on its successes and ignoring failures. Unless it's backed up with the two cars at the same track, on the same day, with the same tires, the same engine, and driven by the same driver, it's pointless. Saying that a 400 hp-powered Locost is faster than the entry-level Caterham means what exactly? Nothing. Like Junior points out, it's easy for Locost builders to drop in a bad-ass engine, sufficient to beat any Caterham in a straight line, but that slides right back into what happens in the turns. How many turns? How long are the straightaways? What tire compounds are being used? And once again, what is the driver skill in the equation? The answer is that it's ignored when the Locost wins...

Pretty much every X vs. Y thread I've ever seen is completely pointless for coming to any sort of conclusion. If someone says that Car X is faster, then Car Y owners will simply change the rules, saying that it's only because of the money, or the driver, or the tires... and on and on.

_________________
Midlana book: Build this mid-engine Locost!, http://midlana.com/stuff/book/
Kimini book: Designing mid-engine cars using FWD drivetrains
Both available from https://www.lulu.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 2, 2014, 1:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: November 6, 2013, 8:17 am
Posts: 88
Location: Cuba MO
KB58 wrote:
The single huge variable that isn't being accounted for is driver skill... and daring. Put a really good driver in any Locost and it'll go faster. So what changed? Tire compound? Camber curves? Power to weight? CG location? No - nothing that defines a Locost has changed, yet it goes faster. The point is, any This vs That thread is useless other than bragging about how awesome one car is, focusing on its successes and ignoring failures. Unless it's backed up with the two cars at the same track, on the same day, with the same tires, the same engine, and driven by the same driver, it's pointless. Saying that a 400 hp-powered Locost is faster than the entry-level Caterham means what exactly? Nothing. Like Junior points out, it's easy for Locost builders to drop in a bad-ass engine, sufficient to beat any Caterham in a straight line, but that slides right back into what happens in the turns. How many turns? How long are the straightaways? What tire compounds are being used? And once again, what is the driver skill in the equation? The answer is that it's ignored when the Locost wins...

Pretty much every X vs. Y thread I've ever seen is completely pointless for coming to any sort of conclusion. If someone says that Car X is faster, then Car Y owners will simply change the rules, saying that it's only because of the money, or the driver, or the tires... and on and on.



Which is why you need a tame racing driver. I would like to see Top Gear do an episode on home built sevens. I know there are plenty in europe they could get their hands on.

_________________
Chris
"Start by doing what’s necessary; then do what’s possible; and suddenly you are doing the impossible." - St. Francis of Assisi
Building Miata Based +221 Sevenesque Roadster


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
POWERED_BY