The online racing simulator
500BHP / 500KG car = 4tw
1
(40 posts, started )
500BHP / 500KG car = 4tw
Caterhams are already the sex but this IS THE SEX.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/n ... news/217812/caterham.html

"With a power to weight ratio of over 1,000bhp per tonne, the six-speed Caterham sprints from 0-60mph in less than three seconds and on to a top speed electronically limited to 150mph."

150mph, ghey, I am sure you could remove that somehow.

Anyway, this car is a dream car, apparently its a limited edition, only 8 will be made and at a cost of £115K its a stretch (bigggggggg) anyway.
Quote :£115K

wow that is cheap
ill get one! ^^
What is 4tw?

I'd imagine that the car is slightly less fun than a 'normal' Caterham that can be relatively exploited with it's low power and decent torque.

Thr 150mph limiter is almost certainly there for aerodynamic reasons, and you don't want to experience major front end lift in something as bendy as a Caterham.

At £115 it does seem like a bargain though. Put me down for 6.
Quote from tristancliffe :What is 4tw?

I'd imagine that the car is slightly less fun than a 'normal' Caterham that can be relatively exploited with it's low power and decent torque.

Thr 150mph limiter is almost certainly there for aerodynamic reasons, and you don't want to experience major front end lift in something as bendy as a Caterham.

At £115 it does seem like a bargain though. Put me down for 6.

4tw = for the win.

Yea the 150mph limit will have its reasons, but I always wondered how far a Caterham could fly

But yea the slower, heavier Caterhams would be more fun. This will obviously be a car that strictly relies on downforce and therefore obviously needing a good driver, but just look at it, damn sexy.
#5 - nihil
Fugly... No wonder they had to turn the lights out.
Fugly indeed. The sort of car that attracts morons at car shows. Like the Veyron.

And, FYI, for the win is usually shortened to FTW. 4 the win isn't English. I'm sure I won't be the only person around here who can't speak "Text Retard", so try not to replace letters with numbers unless you really have to.
Didn't we have a thread about this sci-fi like caterham before?
Don't like the lights, but holy crap that'll move like the proverbial smelly stuff of the proverbial wooden object. It says 0-60 in under 3 seconds, but I bet if you could fight the wheelspin it'd make it in about 2. Scary.

There's your LX8 guys
Quote from tristancliffe :Fugly indeed. The sort of car that attracts morons at car shows. Like the Veyron.

And, FYI, for the win is usually shortened to FTW. 4 the win isn't English. I'm sure I won't be the only person around here who can't speak "Text Retard", so try not to replace letters with numbers unless you really have to.

So because I like the look of that car, I get implicated as a moron.
And because I used "4tw" instead of FTW, I am a "Text Retard".

I see you are a quite a regular poster but cut the attitude and grammar policing, I come on here to share this news of a beautiful looking car and discuss, If I'd have known I would have been called a moron for expressing opinion and a retard for petty incorrect grammar I wouldn't have bothered.
very fugly from inside of course that car would be nice to drive but i dont like the wiev u get when ur in cocpit
yh lx8 indeed lol
No, I didn't implicate you as a moron. And I didn't say you were a text retard but that lots of people, by replacing letters with numbers speak text retard. There is a difference.

And it's hardly beautiful. A Miura is beautiful. A DB5 is beatiful. Caterhams are functional (which is a very different form of beauty).
Quote from tristancliffe :No, I didn't implicate you as a moron. And I didn't say you were a text retard but that lots of people, by replacing letters with numbers speak text retard. There is a difference.

And it's hardly beautiful. A Miura is beautiful. A DB5 is beatiful. Caterhams are functional (which is a very different form of beauty).

Well I agree sort of, the Miura and DB5 are definately beautiful.

The reasons I see this new Caterham as beautiful is because it looks dark and curvaceous. It has very agressive looks even if its design took tail end on the priority list.
Well they kinda went overboard with the "LOOK! IT'S CARBON FIBRE!!!" design aspect and I thought the whole point of a Caterham was a budget-priced club racing, sort of fun car that's got the basics and is fun mostly due to weight distribution.
It's quite repuslive, but then I was never really into the whole Caterham-look. The numbers are quite impressive though, but even those numbers are probably limited somewhat by the shape of the car.
Classic big-spot-light Caterham = brilliant.
This = something that looks like another tasteless 3rd party modification "just because they can", and just because a few other manufacturers have hit the headline making 1000bhp/ton.
don't see ANYTHING attractive about this caterham
way too much power to have fun, way too ugly, and it actually will make you look like a man with a midlife crisis comparing to other caterham owners.
I don't know what you are all complaining about. Who said you'd have to floor it all the time?

I'd take one!
With the right gearing, it could hit 180mph+ without the speed limiter. Pointless power though, considering how quick the R500Evo already is. By the time you'd really feel the extra power, you'll be well beyond the speed limit anyway.
Quote from Bob Smith :By the time you'd really feel the extra power, you'll be well beyond the speed limit anyway.

beyond the what?
According to Wikipedia, the 2006 F1 cars had roughly 1'250hp per tonne. I guess that was just useless ammounts of power... basically just to show off (since too much power is useless, right?)?
Way to go for completely stupid comparisons.



One sale now: How to look silly by using professional racing as a sensible comparison to a kit car firm's product.
Thanks for calling me silly and stupid... no wonder people are getting annoyed of your attitude all the time.
1

500BHP / 500KG car = 4tw
(40 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG