Exige Carbon Fiber bodywork...

General General Lotus Talk
61

Ok Brendan, so there are some leaking Exiges out there. I guess I’m just lucky ! [image]http://www.exiges.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/grin.gif[/image]Matt,I don’t understand, you have installed the (smaller) Sports 200 body in your Exige? I thought you had the exact Exige CF body replica. [image]http://www.exiges.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/confused.gif[/image]Uldis[This message has been edited by Uldis (edited 12 March 2003).]

62

I sent CF info and pics of Matt’s car to a number of people who enquired. Some bounced back due to the file size. Is there anybody still wanting info?

63

Yes, Me, please !Uldis

64

Hi Uldis,I just saw your posting to Matt. The Motorsport 200 body is the same size as the Exige. The key differences are:The rear clam is not one piece (as on the Exige) but has two seperate quarter panels. The rear engine lid is the louvered one rather than the see through one. The roof is different in detail and has a k\larger air intake. We also make a CF roof to throttle body ram air intake.Also the front splitter is much deeper and the rear wing is CF and adjustable. The downforce of the Motorsport 200 is significantly greater than the Exige.I think it is about 60kgs @ 100kph. You need heavier duty springs with this set up but the grip through corners is unbelievable!So the Motorsport 200 body will fit all MK1 Elises with appropriate skill required for fixing. CheersPeter.

65

Peter,please sent me the details.thanksNicolas

66

Thanks Peter,but Matt mentioned on one of his replies that the Sports 200 has a smaller rear clam, and I seem to remember to have seen a picture of a Motosports one with a tail that looks slightly shorter. Is that right then? or are they exactly the same size?All the rest is clear, thanks (sounds great!)I’d really like to see the pics, especially the Ram air intake and ducting. Cheers,Uldis [image]http://www.exiges.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/grin.gif[/image][This message has been edited by Uldis (edited 12 March 2003).]

67

Hi Uldis,I have sent you pics and info by email. The first Exige was made by Lotus some 12 months after the first Motorsport 200 in response to public demand for a road version. The Exige rear clam simply is a one piece mould and the Sport 200 is three pieces ie rear clam and one quarter panel each side. The sum total of these three panels is exactly the same as the Exige clam. Absolutely no difference. Therefore, there are no chassis mods at all. The way the rear wing is fixed on the Sport 200 is very different to the Exige and provides support for the rear Sport 200 clam. The rear wing on the Exige is mostly for looks rather than effect, whereas on the Sport 200, it is a serious bit of kit. ie significant downforce as previously mentioned. The front clam, doors, front bonnet are identical to the Exige.So in summary, as mentioned, the Sport 200 panels will fix to any MK1 chassis with the “right” fixings.RegardsPeter.

68

PS.If there is sufficient interest we can make Exige CF rear clams and roof sections and then you could do an exact copy of the Exige. However, IMHO the Sport 200 looks better, plus the downforce factor, plus the ease of removing the rear clam (takes about 30 mins max) are big plusses in favour of the Sport 200 body. Also the WOW factor on the road is much bigger.Re the ram airbox, I will take some pics. Forgive my ignorance but is there a simple way to post pics on this chat site? This ram air box will give about 6hp on the straight.

69

Thanks Peter, got your mail.Impressive, that’s all I can say.I noticed your suspension and brakes. Nice and sturdy, and the fact that you developed those there… very nice!.I noticed though that you have all the vents in the rear clam opened (engine bay cooling) but didn’t open the brake vents in the front.Since I keep on overheating my brakes (maybe I’m a very late braker or I should just change the whole brake system) and would have thought that those vents would be opened, specially because (I guess) the weather is fairly hot down under. No need?By the way, to post pics, you’ll have to upload them onto another website (I use bookatrack for example) and then edit your message and type in the link to the pictures. They will then appear below the message.Cheers,Uldis

70

I am keen on info of both sets of body panels - filesize is not a problem for me - send 70MB if want! OK, maybe not 70…

71

Hi Uldis,Pete is correct. By smaller clam, I meant that “small Sport 200 clam” = “Exige clam” - “quater panels”. There were no changes to the chassis. Maybe it looks smaller because the wing is bigger?Also I have no brake problems over the past 12 months racing, with standard exige disks, pagid RS 14 pads, braided lines and Castrol racing fluid. Everyone should have this setup! I did have “soft pedal” problems before the braided line upgrade. Although now I have just upgraded to Sport 200 brakes…

72

Angelo/Peter…It would interested in know how you bored the engine to 1.9L. The standard bore and stroke of 80mm x 89.3mm gives you 1795.483ccWith the standard liner thickness of 2.15 mm boring this by 1mm would only give you 1840.650cc but leave it dangerously thin and weak.I was wondering if the block was bored out and larger liners inserted as this is the only way i can see how it could be done.ThanksPhil

73

To Uldis,Matt’s advice is spot on. There must be a problem with your brake set up because no one racing over here has had any problem with brakes overheating, even in very hot weather. That is why we do not open up the brake duct.To Phil, yes we bore the block and make our own liners. We also do a heavy duty head stud conversion and special alloy base plate to keep everything nicely sandwiched together. This technique is also being used by some engine builders in the UK. As big horsepower is developed, the standard liners tend to fret and the block can also flex and so it is necessary to reengineer all this. The K series was basically supposed to be a “throw away” motor and started life as 1400cc and so to get to 2000cc reliably is a major engineering nightmare and very costly. Even certain people at Lotus have admitted to me that putting the K series in the Elise/Exige was a mistake (in retrospect). However at the time it was cost effective and light weight. How good could the car have been with a Honda motor (see Joe McCarthy’s site) or another Japanese twin cam??Unfortunately, for racing we all have to stick with the original motor to be eligible.

74

Being stuck with the Rover K in racing is becoming a thing of the past. The BRDC has already opened the door by allowing Marc Charlton’s Honda K20A Powered Sport Elise in the Cup Class of the British GT Championship this season, and I’m hoping more will follow suit. Procar denied Mark Williamson’s request a couple of months ago for using a Turbo K20A in Nation’s Cup racing, but considering their recent difficulties, they may soon change their minds. We’ll see!