Page 8 of 15
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 21:00
by Peter
Lotus-e-Clan wrote:Peter wrote:Yeah agree with the above, If lotus had fitted a rover v8 to the car as standard it would have been better IMO
You have posed, for me at least, an interesting question!
- "Would I have actually bought my Elite in 1981 if it had a Rover V8 fitted as standard?"
Well, probably not.
In 1981 I had a 2 seat car which regularly saw 9 - 10000 rpm - and I needed a four seater (due to new baby). And just like the present day with the K-series Mk1/11 Elise (and to a lesser extent the Toyota Elise), I would not have been attracted to a Lotus that did not have an engine substantially designed by Lotus, and certainly NOT a hydraulically controlled low revving 8 valve engine made by BL/Rover! The engine for me is the heart of the car, and it needed to be "cammy" and rev freely. It also helped (my decision) that the 900 series had been used successfully as a competition engine during that time (70's /80's), and that it was one of the first production cars to have
a 16 valve engine fitted as standard. Basically, as a young dude in my 20's I couldn't live without a revvy engine.
I dare say, despite the lack of torque of the early 900 series, the Elite/Eclat had a definite appeal at the time because of it's advanced engine design! IMO had Lotus fitted a V8 it would have had to have 32 Valves - so the Rover V8 would not have "cut it" considering the "market expectations" of Lotus (and high performance engines) at the time.
Times and attitudes have changed - and folk today are attracted to low reving diesels for a whole host or reasons not even on the radar at the time of the birth of the Elite/Eclat/Esprit! So bear in mind when judging marketing decisions made in the past that (your) tastes are coloured by today's values and expectations.
I'd say an inline 4 is far cheaper than a v8, whatever way you look at it, so i dont think it would have hurt market expectations at all, the engine was based on a USA V8 buick i think and there's nothing wrong with a simple design, fact is it could easily have been made more powerful
The 912 is not that great, mine feels pretty rough compared to modern engines, were as an old BMW 6 still feels nice and smooth, if Lotus had stuck another 2 cylinders on it would have been perfect
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 21:03
by 257spring
I think the first thing to do is change the head gasket, then hopefully the tappy noise will go away, I think there linked. Then it needs a proper look at sort out by someone who knows and can find out why it's not performing right. I'm sure it could be a great car. Can't believe there's no original air box out there for it, with all these hotted up car you would think someone would have the old airbox stored away somewhere..
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 21:28
by AndyC
Peter wrote:Lotus-e-Clan wrote:Peter wrote:Yeah agree with the above, If lotus had fitted a rover v8 to the car as standard it would have been better IMO
You have posed, for me at least, an interesting question!
- "Would I have actually bought my Elite in 1981 if it had a Rover V8 fitted as standard?"
Well, probably not.
In 1981 I had a 2 seat car which regularly saw 9 - 10000 rpm - and I needed a four seater (due to new baby). And just like the present day with the K-series Mk1/11 Elise (and to a lesser extent the Toyota Elise), I would not have been attracted to a Lotus that did not have an engine substantially designed by Lotus, and certainly NOT a hydraulically controlled low revving 8 valve engine made by BL/Rover! The engine for me is the heart of the car, and it needed to be "cammy" and rev freely. It also helped (my decision) that the 900 series had been used successfully as a competition engine during that time (70's /80's), and that it was one of the first production cars to have
a 16 valve engine fitted as standard. Basically, as a young dude in my 20's I couldn't live without a revvy engine.
I dare say, despite the lack of torque of the early 900 series, the Elite/Eclat had a definite appeal at the time because of it's advanced engine design! IMO had Lotus fitted a V8 it would have had to have 32 Valves - so the Rover V8 would not have "cut it" considering the "market expectations" of Lotus (and high performance engines) at the time.
Times and attitudes have changed - and folk today are attracted to low reving diesels for a whole host or reasons not even on the radar at the time of the birth of the Elite/Eclat/Esprit! So bear in mind when judging marketing decisions made in the past that (your) tastes are coloured by today's values and expectations.
I'd say an inline 4 is far cheaper than a v8, whatever way you look at it, so i dont think it would have hurt market expectations at all, the engine was based on a USA V8 buick i think and there's nothing wrong with a simple design, fact is it could easily have been made more powerful
The 912 is not that great, mine feels pretty rough compared to modern engines, were as an old BMW 6 still feels nice and smooth, if Lotus had stuck another 2 cylinders on it would have been perfect
They went further than that, they stuck another 4 on it, effectively sticking two 907 engines together. Apparently it had a fair bit of power and a LOT of torque low down such that you'd not really need to use the gearbox much, just pop it in a gear and accelerate from tickover.
There was also the V8 used in the Esprit, really didn't achieve much there as the rest of the drive train couldn't handle too much more power reliably and so it actually just gave another 50BHP over the 4 pot, but did give the added sales advantage for those who thought the Esprit would be slow because it only had 4 cylinders.
That said, keep in mind the 907 engine is a child of the 60s not of the 80s / 90s so it may / does seem rough compared to mass-market cars' engines of the 70s/ 80s (which the BMW straight six is). I don't think they could have put another 2 cylinders on without a radical change (beyond just lengthening things such as crank and block) as it would have meant starting form scratch and having issues fitting it under the bonnets of cars with low noses such as the Elite/ Eclat and who back then would have wanted a sports car to not look like a wedge?
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 22:52
by Lotus-e-Clan
Yes Andy. You are indeed in tune with the rationale behind the spec and British/European market as it was then . And I agree that the four pot turbo 900 series Esprits are a more desirable drivers cars than the V8 by all accounts, and Lotus' head test driver thought so too.
Peter you seem to be more in tune with the then American markets love for V8s (each to their own
) - and to be fair 6 pots are inherently smooth so not a fair comparison - and they woulnt fit the conformation of the design. I don't think my 912 SE is rough sounding or feeling either - mine is quite sweet and revs freely.
And it wasn't long before the yanks put a V8 into an Elite - I seem to recall a contemporary road test of a V8 conversion by a US mag - Once they swapped out the 900 series it was no longer a Lotus in my mind ... but then I'm someone who'd never buy, drive, or even
sit-in, a Wickens badged car either so what do I know!!
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 23:06
by Pete Boole
I think the oil crisis in the early seveties also had a lot to do with Lotus dropping the V8 project - that's when the USA introduced a blanket 55mph speed limit on their gas-guzzlers!
Pete
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 00:15
by Lotus-e-Clan
Pete Boole wrote:I think the oil crisis in the early seveties also had a lot to do with Lotus dropping the V8 project - that's when the USA introduced a blanket 55mph speed limit on their gas-guzzlers!
Pete
Thank God diesel engines were largely confined to tractors back then!
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:48
by Pete Boole
Lotus-e-Clan wrote:
Thank God diesel engines were largely confined to tractors back then!
They should be now!!
Pete
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 14:05
by 257spring
I think the best thing to do is change the head gasket, I think that will deal with the tapping noise, sure there's a link there. Then someone who knows about these cars could check it over and get it running right! That's the way forward,
Can't believe there's no airboxs around, with all these hotted up car surly there are some stored away somewhere??
Which toyota engine's would bolt strait onto that gearbox?
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 18:09
by Pete Boole
257spring wrote:
Which toyota engine's would bolt strait onto that gearbox?
I don't think any (that you'd want to use) bolt straight on - see Mat's posts above - you need a bellhousing/clutch from Australia, but great combo!
Pete
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 19:16
by 257spring
Pete Boole wrote:257spring wrote:
Which toyota engine's would bolt strait onto that gearbox?
I don't think any (that you'd want to use) bolt straight on - see Mat's posts above - you need a bellhousing/clutch from Australia, but great combo!
Pete
Tar
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 00:39
by mat grant
Why is Chris de Burgh laying carpet in the pit carage behind the blue elise?
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 01:15
by dunc
I suspect he hardly knows, there is beauty by his side......
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 03:36
by dunc
Peter wrote: NOT a hydraulically controlled low revving 8 valve engine made by BL/Rover! The engine for me is the heart of the car, and it needed to be "cammy" and rev freely. It also helped (my decision) that the 900 series had been used successfully as a competition engine during that time (70's /80's), and that it was one of the first production cars to have a 16 valve engine fitted as standard.
(please excuse the good humored pedantry...)
most rover v8s are 16 valvers as standard!
and as far as competition pedigree goes.... that low revving v8 has a MUCH better competition pedigree than the 904/907/911/912 variants in Motorsport:
World Rally Championship
British Touring Car
World Touring Car
Paris-Dakar rally raid
TransAm
IMSA GT
Can-Am
Indy500
Le Mans
Formula 1! (if you count the Repco V8 - x2 F1 world championship titles for Repco/Brabham)
in truth it is hard to think of an engine that has a better motorsport competition history.
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 09:09
by Lotus-e-Clan
^^^ and if you keep the
full context of my post
...who AT the TIME would want a low-revving hydraulically-controlled 8 valve V8 ROVER engine versus a
16 valve LOTUS designed engine installed in a LOTUS production car? Well maybe fat, slow-witted Europeans might have preffered a Rover V8 and, of course, pretty much most of the American market ...
most rover v8s are 16 valvers as standard!
NOT during the 60's /70's/80's!
Lotus were looking FORWARD with the Elite /Esprit during the seventies ...see how many 16 valve production cars there are today ...and see how many are taking styling cues from the Elite!
(all to be taken in good humour)
Re: Alternative Engine's (V8) for the Excel
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:36
by dunc
all taken in good humour...
(8 cylinders with two valves each = 16 valves. So all Rover V8's are 16valvers...)
I know what you meant - I'm just poking fun!
I guess I'm just an overweight slow witted European:"
'cos der ain't no sub-stitoot for cubic inches bhoy...."