Gollum Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 ... No auto maker sees profitability in selling a striped down, race inspired car. ... This is why lotus sold more cars in the first year in america with the elise then they've sold cars world wide in thier history right? The elise proved that a stripped down car CAN sell, if it's got it where it counts. And now the exige is proving that people were more than eager to get more power in that wonderful chassis. In my opinion nissan would be selling more Zs if they had a halo car that was stripped down, more carbon, with 300hp. That Z could then sell more base model Z's, just how evos sell lancers (I know plenty of well commissioning salesmen to know this is 100% true in my area, I can't speak for the rest of america). Yes I understand they veyron is 100% both sports car and luxury, but I also don't think that market really exists. Have you ever met an idiot that though 40hp felt slow? And have you ever met a racer that wants a cup holder out on the track? They make different cars for different reasons, and most big buck weekend racers don't want to bring a 200+k ferrari to the track, let alone a million dollor veyron. This is who the elise appeals to mostly, poeple who look at it as a bargain because for 50k it feels better on the track than thier "exotics". It's the same philosophy that many of the people here have, they have one Z for track/fun use, and seperate daily driver. In my opinion is more fun and makes more sense to have multiple cars for different uses, then to have one car that does everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TeamNissan Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 I agree with gollum 90% lol. Automakers not seeing Profitability in selling stripped down race imspired cars is a rediculous statemtn, and he already explained why. What I dont agree with is that its all about bling. I dont believe they made the veyron luxurious because they wanted it flashy I think they did it because they blew so much money on r&d that they knew it was going to be a milliond dollar car regaurdless and there has already been a million dollar 90% race car... The mclaren. So I think they did it for apeal. A mill seems easier to spend when the 250mph car is more comfortable then most peoples houses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 A mill seems easier to spend when the 250mph car is more comfortable then most peoples houses. HAHAHAHA... all of the sudden the car makes a whole lot more sense when I think about it that way. ..I'd rather have the mclaren for the price though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TeamNissan Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 Ya me to, I like the whole sitting in the middle with 2 passengers in the back thing. Its like ok ladies here we go, hold onnnnnnn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HS30-H Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 This is why lotus sold more cars in the first year in america with the elise then they've sold cars world wide in thier history right?. Would you mind quoting the source of this 'fact'? Having visited Hethel several times, I'm having trouble believing that in one year Lotus Cars Ltd. could actually manage to produce a fraction of the cars that they have "sold world wide in their history". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TeamNissan Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 Try harder to believe it because its true lol. I just searched though for 20min to find the road and track page a read it in to no avail though . Maybe gollum can site something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
240ZR Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 that car is insane. bottom line. but i wonder what a million dollars in mods in a z would do. Space flight.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HS30-H Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 Try harder to believe it because its true lol. No, I don't need to try any harder. I think it is clearly untrue. From what I can see ( with very little digging ) a combined total of something less than four thousand Elises were registered in the USA in the period from USA market launch in 2004 through to the end of 2006 model year sales. If you really believe that Lotus has sold less than ( let's round it up a little here ) 5000 cars in a history spanning more than 55 years, then you are living in LaLa land. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TeamNissan Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 Ah you see we have a misunderstanding here lol. Atleast I believe so. I dont think Gollum is refering to the release of the elise compared to EVERY lotus ever built lol, that would be absurd. I mean there were something like over 10k esprites alone sold in lotus' history. He means they sold more elise's in thier release here then any of thier cars ever befor, anywhere in the same time span. I mean its to be asumed in one year to one year comparison. That is what I am agreeing to and that is what proves that automakers not seeing a market in stripped down track cars is not true. Hope that puts us on the same page HS . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 Would you mind quoting the source of this 'fact'? Having visited Hethel several times, I'm having trouble believing that in one year Lotus Cars Ltd. could actually manage to produce a fraction of the cars that they have "sold world wide in their history". I could have very well got my wording a little misplaced. I'll have to find the AUTOWEEK it came from I think it was pertaining to the elise itself, and it was worldwide sales, since that year lotus starting selling in many new countries, not just the USA. I think they might have also been talking about GROSS INCOME, wich might be the main thing I quote wrong. The point I was trying make though is that lotus has been doing damn well with the elise lately and it's high time that other companies took notice. I'll try to find the article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOTORHEAD427 Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 I don`t believe the $6M thing either. Maybe the first proto cost $6M and prototypes usually do cost that much. Fabricating the molds...etc etc. Manufacturing a car will never cost that much. I bet manufacturing an ABRAMS Tank doesn`t cost that much. Anyways. Does anybody here remember the 1988 Callaway Sledgehammer?... ..Yes, I know it was not stock. Still as fast as the Veyron...Maybe faster... ERIC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TeamNissan Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 The 6 million$ cost we are talking about is R&d and the whole nine devided by the number of cars sold. When you see that WELL over 100million dollars was spend on R&D alone then you factor in the rest and devide by the nimber of cars sold 6 mill is actualy a conservative number. I mean wether you want to crunch the number or not is up to you but the figures are true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 The only reason the 6 mil figure is plausible to me is because of the super low production numbers. They need to get some of that R&D into other cars quick, to get some of that money back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 I don't believe they spent $150M on R&D. The books are cooked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sorealsosurreal Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 dosnt work anymore... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TeamNissan Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 I don't believe they spent $150M on R&D. The books are cooked. Ya, I mean anything is possible both 150mill or cooked books. I'm just working with the info they are giving me lol. Look at some of the R&D figures for some passed supper cars like the mclaren or enzo even the f40/f50. They are all over 80mill so 150 for the veyron doesnt seem so raf fetched to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 ^^^ "...just working with the info they are giving me lol". Yeah that's all we can do... ^^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stony Posted February 13, 2007 Share Posted February 13, 2007 Thats badass i think i just found my next zcar engine swap project.... anyone have the dimensions on the engine???? i heard it':trippen: s not much bigger then an rb26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollum Posted February 13, 2007 Share Posted February 13, 2007 I've got a great pic of it for one of my desktops. The transmission is huge, and an intregal part of the engine it seems. From the pic I have no clue how the oiling system works... Note the ouputs. Side you can't see is where there's the output that goes to the front diff. To me it looks like the tranny is half of what keeps the bottom end together. Kinda odd looking (though I think the newer lambos are built the same way). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Some-Guy Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Base Price: € 1,127,210 (£757 359, $1,440,800) Engine type: quad-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 64-valve W-16, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injection Displacement: 7993 cm³ (488.8 in³) Performance ratings : Zero to 60 mph (97 km/h): 2.5 s Zero to 100 mph (161 km/h): 5.5 s Zero to 150 mph (241 km/h): 11.3 s Zero to 200 mph (322 km/h): 22.2 s Zero to 400 m : 10.8 s @ 225km/h (140mph) Zero to 250 mph (402 km/h): 55 s [4][5] Zero to 100 km/h: 2.5 s Zero to 200 km/h: 7.3 s Zero to 300 km/h: 16.7 s Zero to 400 km/h: 55 s [6][7] Top speed (Electronically Limited): 253 mph (407.5 km/h) Theoretical Top Speed: 257 mph (414 km/h) [8] Fuel economy: EPA city driving: 8 mpg U.S. (30 L/100 km) EPA highway driving: 15 mpg U.S. (16 L/100 km) Steady 253 mph (407.5 km/h): 2.1 mpg U.S. (115 L/100 km) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.