jps
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 11:43 AM |
|
|
Locosts - what's the difference?
Perhaps a simple question, perhaps more complex than I imagine. What makes a Locost a Locost, is it just shorthand for 'Lotus 7 replica',
and what is the REAL difference between all the different types?
I am wondering because i've just started a Haynes Roadster build and to my novice eye the chassis looks very similar to the original Lotus 7
plans i've seen online.
I know there's the live axle/fully independent difference and a host of engine/gearbox/donor parts combinations. But that aside, what's
the real difference between, say: a Robin Hood, a Tiger, a Caterham and my Haynes Roadster...?
[Edited on 31/7/12 by jps]
|
|
|
|
|
chillis
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 12:12 PM |
|
|
Originally Locost simply meant low cost as in cheap. Was popularised as the nick name for the Ron Champion 'how to build a sports cars for
£250' variant based on the lotus 7 design.
In general it seems to have become the name for a generic cheap to build lotus 7 style car.
There are dozens of different variations on the lotus 7 theme, Robin Hood, a Tiger, a Caterham as well as Haynes Roadster
all slightly different to suit pretty much almost any budget and anything you want as long as it looks similar to a lotus 7.
As for this forum it still adheres fairly well to the idea of any car that is cheap to build using many of the principles in the books like the haynes
(main principle being, its cheapest if you do as much as you can yourself)
[Edited on 31/7/12 by chillis]
|
|
|
Westy1994
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 12:20 PM |
|
|
This is a thread that could go on and on, and possibly cause heated debate .
To answer your question correctly, you would need to read the history of the Lotus 7 and what Mr Chapman's mantra was for designing / building
it.
In concept they are all the same, but in reality they are very much different. The concept being of course to have a very small two seater sports car
with a space framed chassis, lightweight bodywork and a relatively small capacity engine.
The reality is in the way those components are designed and built.
Some folks prefer one flavour of 7 over another one because of a particular attribute, some dismiss all cars that are not actually a Lotus ( note I
say Lotus), some prefer them because they are cheaper than a Lotus and do the same job.
Speaking personally, all cars after the Lotus 7 were replicas ( since every car after those did not have a Lotus badge on it's nose) and are
still being produced in kit form, which was the concept that Mr Chapman set out from the start.
If you were to post this question on lets say for instance the Lotus 7 forum, I wonder what the response would be.......
|
|
|
loggyboy
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 12:28 PM |
|
|
In my eyes a Locost, is a chassis built to the original Ron Champion book, as competes in the 750mc Locost series.
In itself the Locost is a Lotus 7 replica, as are all the other brands (Raw Striker, MNR, MK Indy, Tiger, Haynes Roadster etc, and of course Caterham
and Westfield)
Some may argue the caterham isnt a replica beacuse they have the 'rights' to the original lotus, but its still a replica in my mind as its
not a Lotus!
[Edited on 31-7-12 by loggyboy]
Mistral Motorsport
|
|
|
jps
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 12:32 PM |
|
|
Hmm - as I suspected it could be contentious!!!
I suppose one of the reasons i'm asking is because the Haynes Roadster, which I guess is just an evolved Champion, seems considerably cheaper
than, say, a Caterham. I'm trying to work out if that's because it's fundamentally less good somehow - or it's just the case
that i'll do all the building that Catherham do for you?!
[Edited on 31/7/12 by jps]
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 01:01 PM |
|
|
It is fundamentally less good in many areas due to it's budget restraints. e.g. using Sierra suspension components means some geometry is
immediately per-determined and can not be changed to suit a lightweight car. The chassis is heavier and less aesthetically pleasing than the works of
art that Caterham use. Fit and finish will probably not be up to Caterham standards (with the exception of some very skilled Locost builders on
here).
That said most of the replicas still retains the essential aspects of a 7 style car, including the most important one - fun to drive.
|
|
|
Slimy38
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 01:09 PM |
|
|
I was about to say that a Locost is anything that isn't mass produced, so that excludes the likes of Caterham and Westfield. Then again, you
can't describe Caterham as being a mass produced car, and conversely there are people who 'mass produce' (for want of a better
description) locost chassis'.
You can't even set a budget constraint as some 'locosts' can cost more than a decent Westfield!!
Perhaps 'in the spirit of Ron Champions book' could work?
|
|
|
D Beddows
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 01:13 PM |
|
|
It is entirely possible to build a car as good as a Caterham from scratch and in your garage/shed. However it isn't possible to do it following
the plans from any Haynes book for the reasons mentioned above mostly - what you can achieve though with a bit of care and thought is a car that will
be more fun that you probably thought possible, that will almost certainly be better than you are as a driver and cost a fair bit less than a Caterham
|
|
|
jps
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 01:16 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
It is fundamentally less good in many areas due to it's budget restraints. e.g. using Sierra suspension components means some geometry is
immediately per-determined and can not be changed to suit a lightweight car. The chassis is heavier and less aesthetically pleasing than the works of
art that Caterham use. Fit and finish will probably not be up to Caterham standards (with the exception of some very skilled Locost builders on
here).
That said most of the replicas still retains the essential aspects of a 7 style car, including the most important one - fun to drive.
Yeah - I can imagine that, as my car ownership history to date reads: Ford Ka (2003-2011) and Ford Sierra - donor in waiting (2012-....) I will be in
for a treat even if the Haynes design isn't as good as a Caterham :-D
On the fit and finish side of things, I have been inside a Lotus Elise, and reckon I can do a better job than that :-D
|
|
|
Westy1994
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 01:18 PM |
|
|
As with all things in this world, and one that is not necessarily correct, but you are paying for the badge when buying a Caterham, if you can afford
that badge then go for it.
I purposely left out the word Caterham in my first post as the vast majority of those owners look down on all those that don't have the
badge........ It's an odd world, but there you go.....
I see absolutely no reason why any other brand of 7 can not match or even exceed the build of an original Lotus, actually with today's
technologies it's quite easy really.
Again, as with most things today, the secret is in how all the parts fit together and the way it performs.
The question you need to ask yourself, is that at the end of the day are you building the car for you, or for other people to judge you by?. If it
does what you want it to do, what does it matter what badge it has on it....
|
|
|
Surrey Dave
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 05:15 PM |
|
|
Locost
My car is a 'Locost' built from the Ron Champion book, it cost more than £250 and took 14months, you can buy my car today for £4500 and
save yourself the trouble.
It is my belief that the basis of the book is a Pre-Litigation Westfield, alledgedly and stuff like that, only my opinion?!!
|
|
|
Westy1994
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 05:34 PM |
|
|
Some suggest
" The Ron Champion book locost was a copy of the later live axle SE Westfield."
as taken from this thread from PH, in which the OP asked the same as he did on this thread almost.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&t=640010
I don't actually know what the Champion book was based on , but looking at a few of them, there is a visible link to Westfield I admit, but then
they would, the Westy was a copy of the Lotus from which it came....
|
|
|
RK
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 06:58 PM |
|
|
They are all the same to the untrained eye. Underneath the skins, there are huge differences. I am sure the biggest determinant to performance is
going to be the engine and the suspension components and setup. Maybe I am off base, but I've seen good drivers wring great times out of
"slow" cars, and me doing so-so times in a fast car on good tires, so whatever you build, I am sure it will be a performer in the right
hands.
|
|
|
phelpsa
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 07:35 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by RK
They are all the same to the untrained eye. Underneath the skins, there are huge differences. I am sure the biggest determinant to performance is
going to be the engine and the suspension components and setup. Maybe I am off base, but I've seen good drivers wring great times out of
"slow" cars, and me doing so-so times in a fast car on good tires, so whatever you build, I am sure it will be a performer in the right
hands.
The differences aren't huge, the three things that make the most difference (weight, size and driven axle) are reasonably similar across all
sevens. The things that distinguish between sevens are power and tyres. Everything else is driver preference.
|
|
|
Confused but excited.
|
| posted on 31/7/12 at 08:28 PM |
|
|
As I see it, a 'Locost' is one that you build the chassis and body panels, wishbones, suspension arms yourself or buy fom like minded
folk, rather than buy components as a kit/turn key car from a brand manufacturer. Simples.
Tell them about the bent treacle edges!
|
|
|
RK
|
| posted on 2/8/12 at 04:44 AM |
|
|
And be assured nobody knows what you are talking about when you try to describe your efforts to "normal" people.
|
|
|
paulix
|
| posted on 6/8/12 at 09:59 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by RK
And be assured nobody knows what you are talking about when you try to describe your efforts to "normal" people.
with you on this
one. mine was all my own construction, and as you like minded shed\garage\under a tarp in the garden dwellers all know that odd glazed over
expression becomes very familiar. as for the locost question i'd say a locost has to be a car built using the book, at least as a guide. surely
everything else has its own name tag, and if its your own design of the type put your name on it. i also would agree that they are all lotus 7
replicas (even the caterham), and like the original, if you keep it simple and build it well it'll be the purist most locked in driving
experience you'll ever have. P.S. sorry if i've gone a bit off thread!
|
|
|
steve m
|
| posted on 7/8/12 at 07:52 AM |
|
|
My car is also a "Locost" as its built from the original book 1 "Build a sports car for £250"
I dont feel the locost lable is detrimental to any car built this way,
the good point on building one, is that, you will end up with exactly the car you desired, hence my car is a Lotus 7 replicar
Would i do it again, NO!
And my car is better that Surrey Daves one, but mines not for sale 
|
|
|
designer
|
| posted on 7/8/12 at 08:05 AM |
|
|
A 'Locost' is any home built '7' type car.
|
|
|
locost47
|
| posted on 7/8/12 at 09:29 PM |
|
|
locost chassis
built mine from scratch managed to get rookie of the year 2011 , every time out change stuff to make it faster , but probably only one that actually
was built to original ethos , scrap yards & ebay 
|
|
|
