|
The Lotus and the Corvette are both fiberglass. The chassis are alloy vs. steel. Are we arguing the benefits of Elise vs. Corvette or talking about why there's the weight difference? I thought it was the latter. I'm a Lotus fan, but the C6 with a comparable driver would probably walk all over the Elise at anything but the most tight road course (check their respective Nurburgring times). Max power/weight and published acceleration numbers aren't the whole story (though the C6 still wins). The Corvette's larger, flatter torque curve make it a far faster car in practice. The Toyota engine in the Lotus is known for being torque deficient. on an auto-X track, on the other hand...
The cars are built for different customers and the market for what the Elise is is smaller than that for the Corvette. I might not mind minimalism (the trike I'm building will be about the same as the Lotus inside), but I'm a minority. Most people (Americans at least, accustomed to the lazy bottom end power of a V8) judge the power of a car by how much it throws them back when they tap the gas. And many people expect a performance car to deliver that, not to have to cane it to get it to move (a problem many people also have with the Honda S2000, another car I love, and the one I'm taking the drivetrain from for the trike). Lotus also has to innovate to survive (their engineering division traditionally makes more than their car manufacturing), since they can't compete on a mainstream basis. The mainstream cars, on the other hand, appealing to a larger audience, also have to play it more conservatively.
I think the Corvette is remarkable for what it is. Check the mileage of the Ferrari F430 with comparable performance and far greater price tag. And serviceability costs?
|