Scottish Elises

Having just bought a Golf R32 I was sniffing around Youtube for some videos.....

Was pretty suprised to see these being shoe-horned into an Elise

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPKbnpgDh84

Interesting, it looks even wilder on the road http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf__x2X1 ... re=related

Any idea what the R32 engine weighs as that's the same output we're looking at from the Toyota 2GR lump with a set of custom manifolds.

It'll be the R32 box as well i would imagine. Need to find out the total weight.

With 300bhp and only ~800-850kg's, should it not be passing those GT3's?

It did sound awesome. Must be torquey too.

OlberJ wrote:It'll be the R32 box as well i would imagine. Need to find out the total weight.

With 300bhp and only ~800-850kg's, should it not be passing those GT3's?

With an additional 80kg (bet its actually more taking g/box into account) sitting well to the rear and pretty high, I'd think it'd more be an issue of the rear wheels passing the front or the fronts having so little weight on them it just understeers everywhere!

We went into this in some detail in another thread about a fortnight ago, but I can't see any reason for sticking a horribly heavy engine in the bay that only gives the power of a mildly breathed on VAG 1.8T - even that's a little heavy.

It's not about kerb weight, it's about weight bias - the weight in a standard Elise is already a bit too far back...

It's not all about power though, mid range torque should make it a better drive than a turbo job.

It's about 60/40 standard weight bias isn't it? a GT3 will be similar. (Only comparing them because they were on the video)

Agree with what you're saying about a heavy engine, it can hamper the handling but i'd be very interested to do a back to back test and see just what difference it makes.

I'll go have a look but you got the link to the thread there perchance?

EDIT - Found it. Again, will be interesting to actually see how they compare, other than just speculate but agree with the points in that thread.

Any engine conversion is going to add weight to a greater or lesser degree. The reason that Lotus used the K series was due in part to how light it was compared to every other motor available at the time. Engine transplants in order are Honda +20kg, Audi 1.8 +30kg not sure about the Duratec which uses the original PG-1, but as far as I can tell neither the Honda nor Audi numbers take the gearbox into account which is significantly heavier for both.

Weight and handling aside - The sound it makes is luuuverly

Mikie711 wrote:Any engine conversion is going to add weight to a greater or lesser degree. The reason that Lotus used the K series was due in part to how light it was compared to every other motor available at the time. Engine transplants in order are Honda +20kg, Audi 1.8 +30kg not sure about the Duratec which uses the original PG-1, but as far as I can tell neither the Honda nor Audi numbers take the gearbox into account which is significantly heavier for both.

Lets not get too rose-tinted about it Mike. The fact that Rover would sell them at a cost that Lotus could pay was also a very large consideration In fact, IIRC, the project started off as a joint effort between Lotus and Rover, which Rover pulled out of early on, but maintained the engine supply deal at knockdown prices. It's a light engine with good characteristics at the time, but was already well into it's life cycle - I'm sure there were other options on the table that were strong options, cost not withstanding. Gotta remember, it's a bored and stroked Metro engine, with associated weaknesses introduced by oversizing it so much - bore/stroke ratio isn't great so piston speeds and rod angles are shocking and with the best will in the world, it is fragile...

OlberJ wrote:It's not all about power though, mid range torque should make it a better drive than a turbo job.

It's about 60/40 standard weight bias isn't it? a GT3 will be similar. (Only comparing them because they were on the video)

Agree with what you're saying about a heavy engine, it can hamper the handling but i'd be very interested to do a back to back test and see just what difference it makes.

True - but a GT3 has a little more in the wheelbase and about 40 years of development to tame the engineered in disadvantage The Elise gets away with the weight being too far back and too high, simply as there's not a lot of it in total, so it's catchable. Add to it and you gotta stiffen up the back considerably, which would make the fairly wide, friendly line between slip and grip at the back a knife edge.

Minimum quoted weight change in this case is 80KG (I bet the gearbox would add a little, so I'd be veering towards 100kg) Plus it steals any space for the boot. So basically, the engine's COG must be further back. So, it's like sticking a chunky bloke in the boot and going for a drive - you'd have to say that'll affect things! Sure, you could get away on an early S1 with it ending up weighing 850kg, which is the weight of a 111R, give or take. But the added weight in these is distributed throughout the car and the rear suspension geometry is different to tame some of the roll oversteer the S1 had.

That's my take on it, but agree that some back-to-backs would be very interesting.

j2 lot wrote:Weight and handling aside - The sound it makes is luuuverly

Add a supercharger OR bi-turbo for serious thrills !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dgi5f7tx_zU

bonkers eh ?