britishtrident
|
| posted on 19/2/11 at 11:11 AM |
|
|
Robin Hood Lovely description on Pistonheads
I found this quote on Pistonheads on the subject of Robin Hood 2b --- much better than i could ever express it.
Quote
Mr2Mike said:
ArtVandelay said:
Recently, a Robin Hood 2B has caught my eye, however, being a complete novice to kit cars, I don't know what to look for. This is the car in
question:
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/2018672.htm
Now, hideous wheels aside
I can't put such abortions aside, I need to go and bleach my eyes now!
The 2B is a loose collection of bent exhaust pipe and bits of stainless steel sheet and GRP. It should win an award as the car with the smallest
amount of actual engineering applied to a design. The quality of the finished item varies from utterly terrible to superficially good depending on the
amount of time and skill the builder had, but ultimately they are (IMO) the worst designed 7 styled car you can still buy.
If it was extremely cheap and you only wanted to trundle around country roads at the weekend it may be sufficient. If you are buying a 7 for
it's original attributes (i.e. lightness and handling) then look elsewhere.
;-)
Full thread is at http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=1&t=899651&mid=0&nmt=Robin%20Hood%202B%20-%20How%20good%20are%20they?
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
|
|
Dusty
|
| posted on 19/2/11 at 01:37 PM |
|
|
The 2b was just a cheap sevenesque tourer. Never intended to be a trackday car. For 3000 quid they will out perform most production cars, give
considerable fun to the driver, allow him/her to dream and often go on to build something better.
No doubting most current sevenesque cars outperform the 2b but at greater cost and not without some valid criticisms of their design or on occasion
the manufacturers business practices.
The 2b is not a current GBS model.
I fail to understand the purpose of your post. 2b owners who are members of this forum will be feeling various things on reading your post, none of
them nice. I can't believe that was what you intended. Perhaps you could enlighten me.
|
|
|
StrikerChris
|
| posted on 19/2/11 at 01:53 PM |
|
|
I doubt it was intended to offend.made me chuckle,and i'd of still chuckled if it was written about a striker!
|
|
|
eddie99
|
| posted on 19/2/11 at 01:58 PM |
|
|
Made me chuckle too but im not a RH owner  
http://www.elitemotorsporteng.co.uk/
Twitter: @Elitemotoreng
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Elite-Motorsport-Engineering/153409081394323
|
NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
|
A1
|
| posted on 19/2/11 at 02:23 PM |
|
|
made me laugh cause its definitely true with the RH S7s... theyre unbelievable
|
|
|
mcerd1
|
| posted on 19/2/11 at 02:28 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by A1
made me laugh cause its definitely true with the RH S7s... theyre unbelievable
I'm with you on that - I had a good look at that S7 and I still can't beleve how badly made the chassis was 
-
|
|
|
mrwibble
|
| posted on 19/2/11 at 02:32 PM |
|
|
poor rh owners. i'm sure they're more fun than my ford focus
|
|
|
Dingz
|
| posted on 19/2/11 at 07:41 PM |
|
|
I am amazed at times by the occasional ill informed prejudice of some on this site. which by its own admission is for Locost cars. Ok its a jokey
description but perhaps if some of those respondents had a ride in Dustys I think they will have a rather different impression.
Sorry for the rant, no not really.
Phoned the local ramblers club today, but the bloke who answered just
went on and on.
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 19/2/11 at 08:32 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dingz
I am amazed at times by the occasional ill informed prejudice of some on this site. which by its own admission is for Locost cars. Ok its a jokey
description but perhaps if some of those respondents had a ride in Dustys I think they will have a rather different impression.
Sorry for the rant, no not really.
If I had my way I would crush all RH for being unfit for purpose, that is my considered opinion as long experienced and high qualified mechanical
engine.
I can remember looking at the very first Triumph 1500 RWD/ Toledo/Dolomite based Robin Hoods and being aghast at the spring loads being put through
the puny lower ball joint that was never designed to carry pull out loads and had a history of wear problems on donor car. After that they went
through a myriad of front suspension designs none of which worked. Then of course there was the infamous build advice to wobble a drill about to
make a tapered hole for the highly critical ball joint taper.
Another way to look at is the whole Locost movement would never have got off the ground if the Robin Hood had been a better car.
|
|
|
Dusty
|
| posted on 20/2/11 at 07:07 AM |
|
|
I'm sorry for miss-understanding you, britishtrident. You did mean all 2b's are rubbish.
I don't have a 2b. Mines a 'New 111' mono robinhood. No it doesn't have the sophistication of a Caterham, MNR or Birkin but
it's much modified and is still faster than I am so I will stick with it for the time being.
I do understand many of the limitations of earlier robinhood cars having driven or been driven in several. I would consider myself fairly well
informed about them. I have also been in some locosts with aparently less ability than my RH as well as some which were much better. I didn't
get out and tell him his car was great or rubbish. Seems kinder to offer thanks and compliment car and driver which perhaps makes me a two faced lying
git.
Whatever, I still don't want to accept without challenge the impersonal acts of meanness on the internet that one would not accept when face to
face.
|
|
|
40inches
|
| posted on 20/2/11 at 11:20 AM |
|
|
My first build was a 2B. I found it a challenge to build, and loved it, anyone buying a 2B should look very carefully at the build quality,
irrespective of the advice given in the build videos, it was down to the skill of the individual how the finished product turned out, just like a
Locost.
There are good ones and bad ones, so saying that they should all be crushed is a *rant deleted*
There are good and bad Locosts, should they all be crushed too?
[Edited on 20-2-11 by 40inches]
|
|
|
mcerd1
|
| posted on 20/2/11 at 11:24 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dusty
Mines a 'New 111' mono robinhood
not seen one of them up close so I'll reseve judgment
but the 2B's chassis scared me 
and the S7 I had a good look at had the holes burn't out with a plasma/gas torch instead of drilling (among other things)
not saying you couldn't make them quick - just that I wouldn't want to be in them having seen what holds them together....
[Edited on 20/2/2011 by mcerd1]
-
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 20/2/11 at 11:24 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
I found this quote on Pistonheads on the subject of Robin Hood 2b --- much better than i could ever express it.
Oops, these things always come back to haunt you don't they
|
|
|
lotusmadandy
|
| posted on 20/2/11 at 11:48 AM |
|
|
I helped a very good friend of mine to build a 2B and it was
a challenge. as already said some holes had been burnt out instead of drilled,suspension brackets have
to be drilled and bolted to the chassis,stainless panels have to be neatly folded
And the biggest problem is the lack of a steering column mount,i had to make
and weld on a substantial mounting to pass sva.
All this aside as well as the extra care and attention needed while building,it has turned out
to be a decent budget kit but it's not to my taste though.
With a 1600 pinto it's not what you would call fast either but will show a modern saloon
a clean rear end but is most definately a cruiser not a racer.
I think what i am trying to say is,that with a lot of extra work it can be made
into a reasonable but quite heavy seven.
Non of this is meant to upset or offend any 2B owners,you must understand.
Just my two penarth worth.
Andy
|
|
|
charliemouse
|
| posted on 21/2/11 at 07:38 PM |
|
|
Robin Hoods... all of them
Felt the need to add my 2 peneth.
Ive built 6 Seven type cars from scratch - Tiger, Westfield and Striker. I have owned another dozen. I have been involved in the purchase and sale of
50 more, and worked on maybe another 100 - from Caterham to Locost. I've had my cars on 2 of the above manufactureres stands, and represented
them at shows. I race a Locost and Hillclimb a 300hp Striker. What I'm saying is - I think I have some experience of what I think we legally
should call "Lotus Seven inspired roadsters". (Ok - enough - a few people know who I am now 
The first post made me chuckle - which I think was the intention. It also happens to be pretty much on the money.
Robin Hood have in my opinion NEVER engineered a nice car. Add to this the fact that much is left up to the (usually inexperienced, as if he
wasn't he WOULD be building something else) builder, and you have a recipe for a horrible LSIR.
Tiger aren't a lot better in my experience. My Cat was only 50% Tiger, many parts being thrown in the scrap pile and something better bought or
fabricated. Very little good design here too. Just look at the pedal box "design" thats gone into the pendulum pedal version. And the 4
(yes FOUR) little bumps on a bonnet to clear badly placed components. This is the bonnet that is too short to actually reach the sides... JUST MAKE
ANOTHER MOULD THAT FITS!
Ok. That's the Tiger owners offended now.
Lets face it, a clever guy can build a nice seven out of scrap and workshop sweepings...
Just don't tell me the fact that the kits sold to kits registered ratio of Robin Hoods being something like 4:1 is any shock.
CM
[Edited on 21/2/11 by charliemouse]
|
|
|
gdc
|
| posted on 24/2/11 at 08:50 PM |
|
|
robin hood
ok guys so i have read the replies
the rhsc way was never the best , i think we accept that , however there are many
hundreds of seven owners who would not have been
seven owners unless rhsc had made sevens .
they were cheap , they needed a lot of input from the builder and thus created a bond with other owners .
rhocar is the only answer to build an rhsc car .
what about the zero ?
i have built and svad 2 lightweights 2 2bs and re built several others .
latest is a new zero with st 170 engine .
i have been in the demo car and it is awsome.
rhsc is was the only way many of us could get into the seven build .
so dont diss rhsc too much the cars wernt great i know , but the oppertunity
to build your own car for under 2 grand was very appealing .
graham
|
|
|
charliemouse
|
| posted on 24/2/11 at 09:43 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by gdc
ok guys so i have read the replies
the rhsc way was never the best , i think we accept that , however there are many
hundreds of seven owners who would not have been
seven owners unless rhsc had made sevens .
they were cheap , they needed a lot of input from the builder and thus created a bond with other owners .
rhocar is the only answer to build an rhsc car .
what about the zero ?
i have built and svad 2 lightweights 2 2bs and re built several others .
latest is a new zero with st 170 engine .
i have been in the demo car and it is awsome.
rhsc is was the only way many of us could get into the seven build .
so dont diss rhsc too much the cars wernt great i know , but the oppertunity
to build your own car for under 2 grand was very appealing .
graham
Ok Graham - hundreds of seven owners who would not have been.
I was just asking about the THOUSANDS of P'd off individuals who bought a started kit and never finished it - all those lost to kit building
because of a horrible experience. They say a happy customer tells his best friend, and an unhappy one everybody he meets. Not a good advert for an
industry and passtime I love.
Has a Robin Hood (any model) ever won anything competitive on any track anyhwhere in the world? I'm guessing no - but I like to learn!
|
|
|
DarrenW
|
| posted on 24/2/11 at 10:27 PM |
|
|
I bet Robin Hoods have won countless one make series.
I dont see the need for this post. If you like RH's - buy one. If you dont - then dont buy one. Simple.
|
|
|
gdc
|
| posted on 24/2/11 at 11:11 PM |
|
|
so i am prob one of thoes .
having been the guy to get the lightweight to the road and through sva .
my point is and will be , if richard stewart hadnt created rhsc then hundreds of us could not have afforderd
sevens .no way i could have .
granted hundreds or poss many more rhsc cars are still under construction.
they are a difficult build . but many hundred are on the road , good or bad .
more are still in garages , i accept that , because the build is hard and involved .
the car is a cheap seven you cant deny that .
but its hard to build , the rhocar web site assists the build .
apart from tvr we have the greatest partisitance at shows we lost it one year to tvr. at newark
a challenge , field 200 mk s or tigers or any thing you can think of at a major show .
it ant going to happen , but there will be a huge contingent of rhsc cars .
good or bad they will be there .
its a great comunity and we all help each other if there is a prob we will find an answer .
dont forget a lot of you visit our site for info so you can build your cars.
graham
|
|
|
Neville Jones
|
| posted on 26/2/11 at 11:32 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
....., that is my considered opinion as long experienced and high qualified mechanical engine.
Impersonating a professional can get you put in jail. You know as well as I do, that you are not a professional engineer, chartered or otherwise!
Can't spell either.
That little gem aside, if you are so great at designing 7esque cars, maybe you will put copies of YOUR design on here, for the benefit
of the multitude.
Cheers,
Nev.
|
|
|
Alfa145
|
| posted on 26/2/11 at 01:42 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
If I had my way I would crush all RH for being unfit for purpose, that is my considered opinion as long experienced and high qualified mechanical
engine.
Well obviously you are far more experienced and higher qualified than the multitude of people at VOSA who do the IVA/SVA then, as they obviously think
RHs are fit for purpose or they wouldn't pass any RH's for use on the road. I'll take VOSA's opinion over someone who's
a high qualified mechanical engine!
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 26/2/11 at 01:54 PM |
|
|
Well scratch my eyes out ;-)
I spent a great deal of my life in engineering of many kinds both at the dirty end and theoretical end. When I started out the various engineer
institutions had a
seriously bad reputation because for full chartered membership all that was required was to be proposed and seconded by anybody who was already a full
member as result I never felt the need to join and have never regretted it. Now retired from engineering I have no intention of listing my
qualifications, training and experience, but lets just say I learned more in my apprenticeship as a seagoing engineer than in gathering my fairly
thick pile of university and college qualifications in different engineering disciplines.
[Edited on 26/2/11 by britishtrident]
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 26/2/11 at 02:18 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alfa145
quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
If I had my way I would crush all RH for being unfit for purpose, that is my considered opinion as long experienced and high qualified mechanical
engine.
Well obviously you are far more experienced and higher qualified than the multitude of people at VOSA who do the IVA/SVA then, as they obviously think
RHs are fit for purpose or they wouldn't pass any RH's for use on the road. I'll take VOSA's opinion over someone who's
a high qualified mechanical engine!
Actually VOSA don't think much of Robin Hood
This snip is a quote from an old thread ( http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/viewthread.php?tid=28308&page=2 )
Jon Bradbury posted
" Yes, it was, on the infamous "sliding pillar" (or sliding pillock as they're affectionately known on the RHOCaR forum) front
suspension setup. Word on the street is that they now fail SVA by decree from VOSA Central automatically unless the builder demonstrates that the
taper was properly machined. "
As far as I am aware Robin Hood is the only kit manufacturer that VOSA has issued specific instructions for such extraordinary inspection
measures.
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
Neville Jones
|
| posted on 26/2/11 at 05:15 PM |
|
|
I wouldn't say that the Robin Hoods are any less, or more, suitable for their purpose than a lot of the 7 style kits on the market.
I've seen some diabolical misfits on Cateringvans, because I've been asked to provide a solution!
Then there's the couple of cars from differing makers starting with M&&&&&....
One of the M cars was so warped and twisted, from the factory, that the front balljoints were near to fully wound in on one side, and fully out on the
other, just to get the cambers close, and they were still a way off being equal. At mid range, the cambers were so different as to look like a Nascar
setup!
Then there was the brand new M car, where the (unadjustable) Sierra based rear end was so out of skew, that the back wheels pointed to the right by
4" each. How do you fix that? Tear the back apart, reweld the wishbone mounts and supporting tubes, then put in a set of custom adjustable
wishbones. Cost? More than a new chassis with correct and proper mounts would have cost.
Then there was the M car........
So, based on that EXPERIENCE, the robin Hood is no better of worse than most, including the so-called, 'better' kits.
The ali and stainless chassis RH's failed on seat belt mount integrity, and suspension point integrity. And when presented for IVA today, still
will fail unless backing plates and added reinforcing is in evidence. They are not failed 'as a matter of course', as I've seen an
RH that has been suitably reengineered pass IVA, with positive comments from the testing officer.
As with all kits, it's what YOU, the builder, do with them. None are good, none are bad, some are just easier to get right first time, than
others. Price and reputation is not necessarily a contending factor.
Cheers,
Nev
[Edited on 26/2/11 by Neville Jones]
|
|
|
gdc
|
| posted on 26/2/11 at 07:33 PM |
|
|
thanks nev its nice to see a ballanced approach,
its the build that determins the result at iva / sva .
rhsc cars are hard to complete to a standard that will satisy the vosa man .
i have seen badly built kits that should never be hard to build ,and not hoods.
an rhsc will never look like another ,unlike a lot of the other kits thats part of the appeal
the cars design ant great but we know that , a row of the same colour westies will look the same
hoods wont .
we like being different , i have just completed a zero with st 170 and the body vinyl wrapped .
why !cos its different , with a hood you learn how to think out of the box .why cos you have to.
they are cheap and they are a challenge , thats to me what its about .
westie in a box built in 2 weeks , no chalenge .
graham
ps please come and visit us at rhocar . org
|
|
|
