I wonder what went wrong?

I know there will be all sorts of reasons, but when one compares what it costs to build a decent car with what one could buy for the same money, it makes me wonder why people still do it.

Not really, of course I know why people do it, it's a figure of speech, but it's still an interesting question.

Any opinions on this subject?

John

I know where your coming from John, but i still think
Se7ens are good value for money, even if you splash out and build a brand new top spec westie, or an entry level caterham, i can't think of a single production car (even secondhand) that will match the handling and pace, for similar money.
Fair enough you can buy a better all rounder, that you would probably use a lot more, so in that respect i agree with you.
I can't think of many high end kits i would bother building if i wanted a good fast road car. You may as well splash the cash on a secondhand
M3, 911, Elise, Evo, etc etc etc.

Al.

Well i think the standard of kit cars is so much higher these days - between expectations of what people want with a more professional product, and the introduction of higher standards brought about through SVA. For what you are actually getting i still think kit cars are pretty cheap. Having the ability to build a car using mostly new components that will leave a lot of £50k+ sportscars in their wake for the price of a basic Fiesta cant be too bad can it??

I'm sure a car could still be done really cheap using a donor and everything possible from it, but we all want twin carbs, shiny wheels and exhausts, new seats etc etc. Is that such a bad thing?? Did it really go wrong?? I dont think so myself!!!

That assumption is really only applies to those making use of a single donor to create another unusual car at a low cost and are not bothered about speed/handling.
Those wanting Ferrari acceleration at saloon car costs, don't make that camparison as all they want is speed and handling and they understand it will cost money.

Part of the reason I went for building a locost rather than a kit was the cost.
There are other reasons, though, other than getting a cheap car.
There is the obvious stuff about enjoying building something yourself, the creativity of it, and the gratification when it's a job well done - somthing that's even more so when building a car from scratch rather than a kit. One of the other big things I've always liked about kit and scratch build cars is the idea of taking an old banger (or two in the case of my build) and turning it into something shiney, fun and fast. Dosen't have to win any races, though - just put a smile on my face.
It's funny. It's clear a lot of people simply do it for the build, and not for the owning and driving afterwards. I see loads up for sale that have only just been completed and through an SVA.

[Edited on 22/3/09 by bilbo]

I have to agree with Mr Henderson on this - I'm regularly told that a Fury cost's at least £9000 to build , yet mine cost half that
I was looking at an interesting focus based kit at the Exeter show - starting at £7000 for the kit

I always thought the whole point of building a kit-car is to get your hands grubby and make as much as you can yourself - people just dont seem to do much of that these days

Building a higher cost car might also depend on your skill level and the preference for a reliable one.
Second hand parts can be rebuilt, but sometimes it is not worth the bother.
I've done both and experienced both situations.
The cost of my car was secondary to what I wanted it to do in terms of performance and a new REG number, but if I wanted one built for me, it would probably cost me double.
There are so many permutations of what people want, that there is no real set reason why they build their cars.

It does seem that Locost is a misnomer. My first 'kit' car build I did use as much as possible from the Cortina donor(2 Litre pinto with twin 40s) - but it was a lumpen thing really with a cost of a little over £2000.

My current locost home build is going to cost more, est £4-5K, but I have been harvesting parts, 95% second hand, for about 1 year and the build up is only starting now. I am sometimes dazzled by the new gleaming parts on some cars pictured on this site - but locost?

I'm English. I have a garage/shed. It was bound to happen

quote:

---

Originally posted by Benzine
I'm English. I have a garage/shed. It was bound to happen

---

I find a quick look at the caterham price list section in whatcar is always encouraging!

I still maintain though that anyone who does this to OWN a car is daft and will probably never finish. You need to do it for the fun and satisfaction of building it, or you're going to end up hating it. In my humble opinion at least.

Whilst I agree that the term Locost may no longer apply to all, in terms of performance, there is still little out there, bar bikes, that can touch a 7 for fun and pace if pedalled well. And certainly not for the correct side of £40K. Ok, they may not be the most practical of vehicles, but then they are generally a 2nd or 3rd car, and as such purely a toy. If I wanted a fast day to day car, then I wouldn't have brought a BEC, I would've gone for an old M3 or similar. But I didn't need or want 4 seats, a boot, a roof and windows. I wanted a toy car that can double as a track weapon and mate scarer. And my car, now I've learnt to drive it better, is doing a damn good of job of it too! If you can show me another car that can do 0-60 in 4.5 or less, be flat out at 125, has a 6 speed sequential box and can out corner a bike all for the £5K I paid I'll be quite surprised.

I think Mr Henderson is right, kit cars should allow you to build a car that is equivalent to, or better than a production car for less money than it would cost to buy one.

However, the economics just don't stack up for many kits other than 7's!

When I was trying to decide on a kit, I was seriously tempted by the Marlin 5Exi

http://www.marlinsportscars.co.uk/5exi/self-build/

But the big stumbling block was that with an estimated build cost of £9k, I realised I could buy a second hand Lotus Elise for around that money, or a VX220. Both of the production cars would probably be slightly more reliable and retain their value better.

I think it's all about balancing the holy trinity of kit car building, time, money, and quality / skill.

If you have loads of money, buy a full kit from Caterham, it will all go together perfectly, quickly and you will have a top quality product at the end of it.

If you have no money, you are going to need a lot of skill and time to make a comparable product.

Life is all about compromises. Your kit will be a result of the various combinations of compromises you have made.


Mike

Personally I, and I would guess I am not alone, built a kit car to build a car (Note: NOT make) rather than to build a cheap sportscar. The build has been a leisurely process that has given me something to do on the odd evenings and weekends. If I take off what I would have spent if I had spent the equivalent amount of time in the pub etc, it doesn't seem that bad a value that I have had from it so far.
I don't think that any kit is about a cheap alternative it's just about an alternative.

Brake pads... tyres... dents .. scratches.. stone chips.. easy engine n gearbox changes... hmmmm ...

Lets apply that to a BMW or other exotic car...

I cant afford to blow the engine.. or .. have you checked the price of parts for the exoctic car...

I think the locost is a very very very good idea if you have spanners and some paint

Its also about creativity. Even a full kit from one donor or with everything in the kit you need turns out different from another and has your character in it. Theres also the 'I did it myself' bit when someone asks where you got it from. Then the Cheshire Cat smile when you drive it for the first time. Pure magic.

About 10 yrs ago, I built my first kit, a Tiger6 with a 1600 crossflow and standard twinchoke carb, and parked it up in the pits at Brands Hatch, next to somebody I new through racing's Lamborghini Diablo, I would say 90% of the passers by looked allround the tiger and ignored the Lambo, this is a major reason to build these type of car!

Some historical perspective. Back when I built my Dutton (S2 Phaeton based on Mk2 3 litre Capri) I reckoned the overall build cost, not including the donor which I already had (worth maybe £500 at the time) I spent a total of about £2,500.

For that I got a car with a new registration (that was the rules at the time, 'Q' didn't exist) that was faster up to 100 than just about anything else on the road apart from another kit. If I had wanted to spend the money on a used production car instead, the only way I could have got a quick one for the same money was to buy a seriously rusty one.

I think that's the big difference between then and now, it's that the quality of the cars competing for our cash has gone up dramatically. I had a quick look at the Subarus on PH just now, and £5K will buy you a LOT of speed.

As a lot of you have said, kit cars are really about the building. The driving is great, but if anyone isn't really into the building side of it then kit cars are not for them

John

Locost's are still a good idea. Take mine for example, power to weight ration should be about 300hp/ton when its finished and its cost me less than a grand so far (still have shocks to buy though).
There arnt many tintops you can buy for that money that have the same or similar power to weight ratio and there arnt many cars, regardless of price that will handle the same.

i think i can some it up in one phrase,

'its a hobby that becomes a passion'

quote:

---

Originally posted by omega0684
i think i can some it up in one phrase,

'its a hobby that becomes a passion'

---

It is so very easy to shove money into these cars.

My take on it is that its my hobby and there is no such thing as a cheap hobby

quote:

---

Originally posted by big_wasa
It is so very easy to shove money into these cars.

My take on it is that its my hobby and there is no such thing as a cheap hobby

---

It's something you're either into or you're not.

Luckily, I'm into it, but my capacity for justifying kit cars stops around the 3 grand mark all in. It all makes little sense to me after that point.

Were it to be 7 grand or anywhere north of there I was spending, it would be a Boxster. No question about it. Those are criminally undervalued compared to 911s and if bought around the 7 grand mark cannot possibly lose much money short of playing extreme hugging with it.

Like it or not, cars like a boxster or an MX5 are the competition, for a used LSIS. Most people will check out the leather trim, CD player, roof and traction control and end the discussion right there. Kind of narrows the market right there.