A mistake that could have been avoided

[supersix]

A mistake that could have been avoided

 

[TomE]

They said one was a show car and one was a dynamic prototype. They were intended to show the design intent. Every Lotus person you spoke to at every roadshow would tell you which aspects of each car were non-production and still being finalised or subject to approvals. Including the seats, ride height, exhaust sound, exposed shifter mesh cover.

Which bits do you think have been bait and switch?

 

[kratedisease]

Lotus was crystal clear that the two cars shown were prototypes only.

Crystal clear to everyone. No confusion.

Most people with deposits are only more excited as time has passed and as more solid finalized prototypes are shown, and more details released.

The only possible disappointment is due to delays in production that is out of Lotus hands due to Covid and supply chain

 

[GetawayDriving]

Maybe I’m in the minority, but it could have the ride height of a Subaru Outback as long as it handles like a better Evora I’m all in. I’ve always considered the looks of this car to be a bonus.

With that said, we have not seen production cars. I think everyone needs to take a deep breath and just wait for official info. I know many are frustrated about the pace of it, but I have to believe they have their reasons for waiting. I’m still on track to get it faster than 3 of the 4 other cars I’ve ordered in the past decade.

Lastly, if the car does get delivered with a bit of extra ride height, the aftermarket will certainly address it. I wouldn’t want to mess with Lotus’ suspension tuning personally but if you value looks over handling maybe your calculations are different.

“Bait and switch” feels pretty dramatic for a bit of extra ride height. I’d understand that sort of language if they backtracked and said automatic transmission only, deposits non-refundable. It’s not feasible to swap transmissions and that would totally change the experience.

 

[Eagle7]

It's going to be a mass-produced car. As any manufacturer does, they design and build it to their target goals, not to any one customer's. If it doesn't have exactly what you want, you either buy it and mod it to get it to where you want it to be, or you leave it as-is, or you don't buy one to begin with. Ride height is something you can adjust later with aftermarket parts.

I know some people want to take the position of "I shouldn't have to..." except it's not that kind of a deal. It's not a custom car. It's also not a targeted track car. It's a true sports car for the road. That means it needs to have ride height for suspension travel over a wide range of road conditions. If somebody wants to lower it so it looks like a track car, that's what modding is for, but don't expect that Lotus "should have" done this because that's not their target goal.

 

[xen]

I don’t agree that it’s a ‘big mistake’ but it is misleading.

I understand regarding the show car - fair enough but what’s the excuse for the configurator? - which lotus pointed us to in lieu of any actual pictures.

If it’s their intended design and benefits handling then they should own the design. Like I said, not a ‘big mistake’ or a bait and switch but a chance to be better…missed.

 

[Eagle7]

That's fine and dandy... they should have showed it that way from the beginning then. They advertised something never intended... that's my point.

They did. The drivable gray car that Jenson Button drove had a height that's more representative of a streetable road car. You got fixated on the non-running blue car which was a concept studio model. If you look at any concept show car, they always have that lowered look with big wheels because the designers like it, and they know people like it. Those things are just for the concept cars, they don't make it to production because regulations require certain things meet standards that concept cars don't meet.

In an unusual move, Lotus has managed to get the production car so close to the concept car, that visually they're almost identical. One of the few visible differences is the production car is going to have to have a higher ride height for normal street use.

 

[PaulP]

wait are we now assuming the suv height will be actual production?

 

[Elisesquared]

Maybe I’m in the minority, but it could have the ride height of a Subaru Outback as long as it handles like a better Evora I’m all in. I’ve always considered the looks of this car to be a bonus.

With that said, we have not seen production cars. I think everyone needs to take a deep breath and just wait for official info. I know many are frustrated about the pace of it, but I have to believe they have their reasons for waiting. I’m still on track to get it faster than 3 of the 4 other cars I’ve ordered in the past decade.

Lastly, if the car does get delivered with a bit of extra ride height, the aftermarket will certainly address it. I wouldn’t want to mess with Lotus’ suspension tuning personally but if you value looks over handling maybe your calculations are different.

“Bait and switch” feels pretty dramatic for a bit of extra ride height. I’d understand that sort of language if they backtracked and said automatic transmission only, deposits non-refundable. It’s not feasible to swap transmissions and that would totally change the experience.

Out of curiosity, why wouldn't you just get an Evora if looks are just a bonus? I'm almost certain the Evora GT is going to be the better "raw, driver's car" than the FE.

I was going to get the Evora GT, but then the Emira came out. I never liked the looks of the Evora. Since I really like how the Emira looks, I'm willing to trade about 5-10% of the driving dynamics for a much better looking car.

 

[Eagle7]

I'm fine with the grey roadshow car above... seen it in the flesh. I'm not fine with the latest round of preproduction cars floating around with three finger gap. Including the Melbourne Seneca car.

We don't know what the history of the car shown at Melbourne was. It looks like it just came off the line, so it may be sitting higher due to not settling in. The gray roadshow car had a lot of miles on it and plenty of time for it all to settle in. If Lotus had the car flown in, they would have set it up for transport which often includes putting spacers in the springs to keep the car from bottoming out on the suspension stops. If they forget to remove those, that makes the car sit higher than it's supposed to, but even if they remove them, the car still has to settle back in.

Matt said the ride height of the car at Melbourne wasn't right so it may be something they're either still working on, or the car hadn't settled in, which would cause it to sit a slight bit higher.

 

[kbhoz]

Well it is the latest/newest round of cars floating around.

The Lotus guys in Melbourne stated that it looks like a larger gap that is intended for production. I was under the impression that the SB car was built at least 8 weeks ago and production has moved on. So perhaps it will be lower when the final cars roll of the line. The SC Melbourne car (shown in pic) is going to be crushed.

 

[kratedisease]

The premise of this entire thread is a fraud.

 

[Pegasi]

Yeah… you guys are right. I think I’m more disappointed on the stance/suspension set up… that is where my bait and switch comment stems from. Configurator uses the imagery from the Seneca show car… which is lower and wider. No where near production. The show car looked exotic and it’s what sold many. Then the truth slowly leaks out. They should have never shown something they never intended to hit production.

Porsche doesn’t do this. What you see is what you get with them.

Thanks for clarifying your position. A few months ago someone suggested they should have given the suspension setups different names than Touring and Sport. I forgot what names were suggested but Sport & Dynamic, Sport & Track, Chill & Thrill, anything IMO would be better than Touring and Sport. This first thing Gavan does is describe Touring as still competent on the track. Well, then don't call it Touring. Touring sounds like a sports sedan or something.

Anyway, I don't mind a little wheel gap. Anyone else with me?

 

[xen]

Thanks for clarifying your position. A few months ago someone suggested they should have given the suspension setups different names than Touring and Sport. I forgot what names were suggested but Sport & Dynamic, Sport & Track, Chill & Thrill, anything IMO would be better than Touring and Sport. This first thing Gavan does is describe Touring as still competent on the track. Well, then don't call it Touring. Touring sounds like a sports sedan or something.

Anyway, I don't mind a little wheel gap. Anyone else with me?

We can blame Porsche for that I think.

 

[Eagle7]

They shouldn't have used the word "sport" to describe a mode. It's a sports car, of course it's sport. Touring sounds like granny mode. If they'd just labeled them Road and Track that would have done the job.

 

[Matthaus]

Meh could be worse.

Just ask anyone who put a deposit on the 4WD V12 Jaguar XJ220...

 

[GetawayDriving]

Out of curiosity, why wouldn't you just get an Evora if looks are just a bonus? I'm almost certain the Evora GT is going to be the better "raw, driver's car" than the FE.

I was going to get the Evora GT, but then the Emira came out. I never liked the looks of the Evora. Since I really like how the Emira looks, I'm willing to trade about 5-10% of the driving dynamics for a much better looking car.

Because I want the more refined interior, the better integrated tech, the better audio system, the cheaper top-end price, and the warranty. I’m assuming the sensations of rawness will be in the ballpark. If not, I consider the purchase low risk given Emira will be exclusive for a while, and could go Evora instead. Also while the looks are a bonus they’re still better than the Evora (wheel gap or not) although I have really warmed up to the latest versions of the Evora in skittles colors.

 

[emiraspain]

Ok, ok... bait and switch is harsh... more accurate would be misleading... and to be honest... if the preproduction ends up being the real deal and had I not had to place $15k blind not knowing... I would have been more hesitant. Coming from a 718 Spyder, the last round of cars photographed are comparable to SUV gap wise... and that's not a exaggeration.

Im not sure if I had a spyder I would trade up or more likely down to an Emira. You have one of the best engines ever made in the spyder, way better than the Toyota, freeish revving to 8500/9000 and a fantastic sound and a great looking car, with plenty of space for luggage, reliable to boot. The only downside to the 718 spyder is the 6 year old interior, but otherwise I think its a better car and if it wasnt for the interior and for the car being "british" and looking great, Id have gone with a spyder.
Im no expert, but I think the car looks awful with hardly any gap between the wheels and the arches. I also think they sit inside a little too much and should be more in line with the edge, but I have yet to see the car in person so hard to judge.
However, I am 100% +ve the final car will look great and handle at least as well as the evora.... if not, it will not succeed ...

 

[Daz]

I think the pictures of the Emira with the larger ride height are the actual production cars for the American market. Once the average 300lb American squeezes into the drivers side then I’m lead to believe the ride height will be 20-30mm lower……. But don’t quote me on that, or sue me

 

[R1272]

Can someone figure out how many mm per pound the car will drop with weights over 160lbs? I'm not going to want to mod it, so I'm just going to gain weight to make it look right when I'm driving it.