'That ones the best, then that one, then that one'
So there you go, it must be possible to put those 4 chassis manufacturers in order of which ones best. Best at what is the next question. The best at grating cheese?
Really do you know which chassis is considered to be best under which conditions, what are the advantages/disadvantages of them?
CAT/WEST = CATERHAM / WESTFIELD
A bit general question but still an interesting topic i think.
All experiences would be nice to be shared.
Piece of string.... how long.... discuss....
Reminds me of a few years back I (accidentally) wandered into the hifi section of Currys. Was just looking at the stereos when a spotty little oink
(staff) appeared behind me and said, and I quote.
'That ones the best, then that one, then that one'
So there you go, it must be possible to put those 4 chassis manufacturers in order of which ones best. Best at what is the next question. The best at
grating cheese?
Go post this question on the blatchat and wscc forums 
Don't be unkind! It's a valid question, worthy of a looooong debate...
Might be better moved to the "Anything else car related" section though...
Why are Caterham and Westfield treated as the same, they are as different from each other as the Dax IMO, indeed Caterham do a lot of subtly different
chassis for their various models. Don't know about the Donky as I've never seen a photo of a bare chassis.
But as a starter Caterham are the best when the questions are:
Best for retaining value
Best at being a dimensionally accurate Lotus 7 copy
I believe they are probably also best for quality of construction and going around corners quickly but there are flame wars in there that aren't
worth the effort.
I know which one The Stig would pick
I'd have a Caterham tomorrow, if I wasn't a fat ba$tard and I had money.
quote:
Originally posted by balidey
Best at what is the next question. The best at grating cheese?
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
quote:
Originally posted by balidey
Best at what is the next question. The best at grating cheese?
That'll be the Robin Hood Lightweight
quote:
Originally posted by mangogrooveworkshop
The car that is the closest to the original is not the caterham......
Its the Birkin ....and thats the truth. Birkin copied the original and never diverted from the original ingredients as they had a local fomco still making rear wheel drive cars long after the rest of the developed world went front wheel drive.
, while true today the original Caterham chassis were Lotus 7 S3 chassis still made by Arch Motors in the original
jigs. They've updated a lot since then as you so rightly say.
I'd expect they each have their strengths and weaknesses. My guess would be the Caterham is the most developed of the bunch.
Personally, the Donky does it for me everytime just on looks.....
Caterhams look the best without a doubt..... at any kitcar show I've been to once you've looked at the Caterham stand 90% of everything else
you look at seems distinctly agricultural 
having said that properly race prepped Westfields are good looking cars too so....... I'd say a
Procomp LA Gold Chassis with Westfield bodywork would be something I'd be happy to take into battle against a Caterham - all engines being equal
obviously
quote:
Originally posted by D Beddows
Caterhams look the best without a doubt.....
quote:
Originally posted by mcerd1
quote:
Originally posted by D Beddows
Caterhams look the best without a doubt.....
I'd say its between the dax and the Donky - but maybe thats just me
so no idea how well made the chassis is.
quote:
Originally posted by iank
We're talking about chassis here, not bodywork/car - never seen a naked Donky
lotus(caterham) was the the original,everyone else just copies.
quote:
Originally posted by gjs
lotus(caterham) was the the original,everyone else just copies.
quote:
Originally posted by gjs
lotus(caterham) was the the original,everyone else just copies.
quote:
Originally posted by mcerd1
quote:
Originally posted by iank
We're talking about chassis here, not bodywork/car - never seen a naked Donky
ok, but I still vote for the dax
(just ignore the state of the garage)
I've not seen a naked Donky either (as anyone ?)
Here you go: donky:
britishtrident - 23/3/10 at 02:01 PMBirkin by a very large margin
Alan B - 23/3/10 at 04:17 PMquote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
Birkin by a very large margin
True.
From what I understand the Birkin is more Lotus than the Caterham is in terms of bloodline.
Neville Jones - 23/3/10 at 07:13 PMNone of them pass the Aus torsion and beam test, without some essential tubes added. That includes the latest Cateringvan and Westfields.
Cheers,
Nev.
t.j. - 23/3/10 at 07:58 PMquote:
Originally posted by Neville Jones
None of them pass the Aus torsion and beam test, without some essential tubes added. That includes the latest Cateringvan and Westfields.
Cheers,
Nev.
That's funny, production-cars don't need a torsion-test....., so what are the values they need to score?
Eternal - 24/3/10 at 07:48 AMafter loads of digging found this...
I just like how they have no rear strut brace but use the roll bar loop instead.
TimC - 24/3/10 at 09:27 AMIf I were you, I'd go for the Mercury Motorsport Paradigm. But it will cost you a lot of money to obtain such a rare specimen.
You could write a big book on this topic.
Neville Jones - 24/3/10 at 10:26 AMquote:
Originally posted by t.j.
quote:
Originally posted by Neville Jones
None of them pass the Aus torsion and beam test, without some essential tubes added. That includes the latest Cateringvan and Westfields.
Cheers,
Nev.
so what are the values they need to score?
Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?
Production cars are assumed to be compliant (and that they are in more ways than the obvious). ICV's and things like stretched limos need a torsion and beam test.
Beam test----Max average deflection of 1.25mm difference between loaded and unloaded, with load of 136kg's in each seat position.
Torsion test----Four cylinder/rotary engined vehicle under 1000kg tare mass, 4Nm/degree for each kg tare mass minimum. More than 4 cylinders, 6000Nm/degree minimum. (no weight adjustment/multiplier like the 4 cyls.)
Now you know.
Cheers,
Nev.
iti_uk - 24/3/10 at 02:03 PMquote:
Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?
Production cars are assumed to be compliant (and that they are in more ways than the obvious). ICV's and things like stretched limos need a torsion and beam test.
Beam test----Max average deflection of 1.25mm difference between loaded and unloaded, with load of 136kg's in each seat position.
Torsion test----Four cylinder/rotary engined vehicle under 1000kg tare mass, 4Nm/degree for each kg tare mass minimum. More than 4 cylinders, 6000Nm/degree minimum. (no weight adjustment/multiplier like the 4 cyls.)
Now you know.
Cheers,
Nev.
To reiterate with correct units;
4 cyl;
4kNm/deg
5+cyl;
6kNm/deg
From my own experience, I know these cars tend to struggle to manage more than 2kNm/deg torsional stiffness. No wonder they don't pass that test. It's all down to their geometry and scale - these cars are so lightweight they don't need the stiffness a 1-tonne car requires to control it's chassis, but target figures are target figures, so they fail. Ah well.
Chris
[Edited on 24/3/2010 by iti_uk]
Liam - 24/3/10 at 02:52 PMquote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
Birkin by a very large margin
What's your criteria, though? Closeness to an original lotus, then yes, though doesn't that mean it's made from thin gauge steel and has a number of tubes 'missing' over more modern designs which at best means it's a bit wobbly, and at worst prone to failure with modern tyres and engines? (Or was the S3 that the Birkin reproduces already beefed up?).
For strength and stiffness I reckon a lot of the modern offerings easily beat the more traditional designs. Dax and Donker look good in some areas, but both compromise the engine bay bracing to allow flexibility of engine fitments. MNR's top spec is another one I really like.
For me it comes back round to Caterham, not for their traditional design, but the CSR which has the best 'seven' chassis I've seen...
[Edited on 24/3/10 by Liam]
Rescued attachment CSR.jpg
Neville Jones - 25/3/10 at 10:25 AMquote:
Originally posted by iti_uk
quote:
Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?
Production cars are assumed to be compliant (and that they are in more ways than the obvious). ICV's and things like stretched limos need a torsion and beam test.
Beam test----Max average deflection of 1.25mm difference between loaded and unloaded, with load of 136kg's in each seat position.
Torsion test----Four cylinder/rotary engined vehicle under 1000kg tare mass, 4Nm/degree for each kg tare mass minimum. More than 4 cylinders, 6000Nm/degree minimum. (no weight adjustment/multiplier like the 4 cyls.)
Now you know.
Cheers,
Nev.
To reiterate with correct units;
4 cyl;
4kNm/deg
5+cyl;
6kNm/deg
From my own experience, I know these cars tend to struggle to manage more than 2kNm/deg torsional stiffness. No wonder they don't pass that test. It's all down to their geometry and scale - these cars are so lightweight they don't need the stiffness a 1-tonne car requires to control it's chassis, but target figures are target figures, so they fail. Ah well.
Chris
[Edited on 24/3/2010 by iti_uk]
To reiterate with correct figures,
Four cylinder/rotary engined vehicle under 1000kg tare mass, 4Nm/degree for each kg tare mass minimum. That's about 2600Nm/degree for the average locost. Or 2.6kNm/degree for picky pedantic smartarses like the above.
4k Nm/degree is multitudes more than any racecar can achieve, yet alone a locost!
The rest is verbatim from the govt literature. Take it up with them!
Cheers,
Nev.
Neville Jones - 27/3/10 at 12:34 PM4k Nm/degree is multitudes more than any racecar can achieve, yet alone a locost!
Where's the edit button gone?
That above should read, 4kNm/degree/kg, is multitudes more
