Vauxhall vs. K-series

[Alex Wong1697456877]

***** This thread has been moved to ChitChat ******

 

Please go there to continue.

 

I hope this unashamedly biased babble will spark off an interesting debate.

 

I really believe in the Vauxhall engined 7's. I know that people think they're front heavy and don't handle well. I know that they think a 7 should have a peaky revvy lightweight engine. So why prefer the Vx cars?

 

I drove a 1600k Supersport at Curborough not too long ago. It is a lovely car and did feel more agile around the slow corners. The 6-speed box was fantastic as well. However, it really didn't feel anywhere near as "drivable". With the Vx lump, you can really set the car up in a long fast corner like the first lefthander at Curborough. All that tourque makes it much easier to set up some serious four wheeled slip angles without feeling that it'll bite any minute. Handling is as much about engines and power delivery as it is about tyres and suspension. Coming out of the molehill is another example. With the K car, you floored it in 2nd then grabbed 3rd. It revs brilliantly and feels frantic, but on getting back into the Vx car, flooring it in second really slingshots the car out of the mole hill with a wallop of tourque tht the K car could never do. It's the difference between tourqing the car around corners and powering the car out of corners. I'm not really sure how to explain it but the feeling of the chassis trying to rein in all that tourque is much easier to understand and drive to than the feeling that the short bursts of power are doing their utmost to rip the tyres from the tarmac. I'm sure that in the best hands, the lightweight agile cars are quicker but explain this. At the last 2 L7CGB Curborough sprints, Vx cars featured 5 times in the top three places. The only k-car to break this was an R500. I know my car is slower than an SLR in a straight line because i ran it against one at Santa pod. I know it must have less outright grip as it's heavier and less tyred. I also know that I'm a novice driver and that I can much more easily make an HPC go quickly than I can an SLR.

 

I'm not having a go at the K cars but I do think that some people who go on about the Vx cars being poor handlers should think again. All you read may not be true. Try it for yourself. I've already converted one K devotee after he drove my car.

 

 

Alex Wong

alex.wong@lotus7club.co.uk

www.alexwong.net

Home : 44-(0)121-440 6972

Fax : 44-(0)121-440 4601

 

Edited by - Alex Wong on 30 Aug 2000 01:49:43

 

Edited by - Alex Wong on 30 Aug 2000 18:08:42

[Michael Peterson]

Dare I speek to a diety?...

 

I have to agree with your general ideas Alex. Tourque is certainly easier to apply to the wheels when you are "steering with the throttle", but not everyone likes that driving style. How would you rate the Ford Zetec in this light.

 

Michael

[StewartG]

Apparently the Zetec is almost as heavy as the Vx (within a few kilos I'm told) and its torque is nowhere as good either in quality or quantity.

[Rob Morris]

Zetec, Nice engine shame about the cost of getting high BHP figures. Vauxhall is so laid back in standard or mild tune that its almost horiontal. When tuned as per Roger Swift's 250 bhp example they are still running well after 25,000 miles. Lets see how much would that of cost in an R500 with engine re-fresh (£!!!!!)

 

K-Series handle a lot easier but I would'nt say that they handle that much better. sadly this is hard to prove as each generation of Caterham is heavily revised (i.e. wide track, carbon etc)

 

These comments should get the replies moving

[Steve W]

I've only had a quick blat in a 1.4K and never been in a Vx car. I would really like to compare how my Zetec feels in comparison. You say it has much less torque than the Vx but there is loads and loads of torque. As for the cost I'm told that a standard tune Zetec is good for about 170 ish Bhp and my brand new short engine from ford was only £550. I don't think that’s real expensive.

 

 

[deanteam]

A very interesting line of discussion, but I can only be an interested bystander, if you recall at LeSept, we run Lotus Twin Cams, 4-speeds and live axle cars in various states of tune. Sophistication such as Vx, DeDion and 6-speed we can only dream of.

But that is the point, the 7 development has had various twists and turns, and individuals have also taken the theme in personlised directions, that hopefully will continue so that discussions like this will continue.

I have only briefly driven ‘standard’ Vx and K engined cars and the understeer of the Vx was noticeable. The K series was a ‘softie’ Caterham and so with body-roll and no LSD had difficulties putting the power on the road. In other words both were different.

The equation is car+driver=performance and some drivers like using torque others perhaps favour peak power. Chassis settings are also done ‘to taste’. An out-of-context example is Berger/Alesi comments after taking over Schumacher’s Benetton as “Undrivableâ€. Not that I am a Schumacher fan, it is just an example that there is no perfect answer to the discussion.

How many engines have been fitted to the chassis, some of the weird ones I know of, Rover V8, Mazda ****el ( now, there is a light engine.) Turbo-Ford and Turbo-Vauxhall are a local specialty.

I personally believe that the spirit of the seven is the highest power for the lowest weight in a ‘relatively’ unsophisticated package (cost?).

So what about the Blackbird ?

 

 

Geoff

[Alex Wong1697456877]

****el

 

Just wanted to know if this was a bad word!

 

Alex Wong

alex.wong@lotus7club.co.uk

www.alexwong.net

Home : 44-(0)121-440 6972

Fax : 44-(0)121-440 4601

[deanteam]

Sorry about the four-letter syllable, I cannot help the German language. W.a.n.k.e.l?

[Alex Wong1697456877]

OK- This is in the wrong place so I've cut and pasted it to ChitChat. Please go there for further replies.