Ariel Atom 500 V8

Don't be silly. The Caterham, to me anyway, looks better hands down.

caterham_007o.jpg


Not too much "really old fashioned 1940s" about that, is there? ;)

The lights are on stalks like they had in the olden days. The grill looks like a 50s F-1 car. And it looks like a frog. Modern cars have the lights incorperated into the body panels.

As for the power to weight ratio of this monster Atom, it is 2/3rds that of a Formula 1 machine.
 
These two cars make absolutely no sense to me. Both Caterham and Ariel build cars that are marketed as "pure driving machines," (if there is such a thing) and their big draw is there is nothing separating the driver from the car. But now they both will have traction and launch control to help the driver put the power to the ground. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of these cars?

Also no one has mentioned with RWD and wheel bases this short for both of these cars they will be more than a handful, damn near uncontrollable for mere mortals. Remember that the CSR still produces lift at speed even with the aero updates, and I am not too sure how much that new front spliter will help. Hopefully those electronic gysmos sort everything out.

Now with being said, I want both :D

BTW, just because Jezza can't handle the Caparo at low speeds doesn't mean its a poor handling car, just means the mere mortals can't control it. Its a fucking racing car with LPM2 performance for christ sake.
 
You're right. It's not much of a contest...the Caparo will dominate. :p

But seriously, why does the Caparo handle so crappy at low speeds.....no downforce, right? And why might that be? Ultra-light weight coupled to ultra-high powered motor.

Now, isn't the Atom basically the same thing? It's very light, and very powerful. Granted, they did add a huge wing in the back and some other aero mods to the body...but what...exactly, will make the atom handle so much "better" than the Caparo at "low speed" cornering....? Both cars claim over 1000hp/tonne. And with that high of a power to weight ratio, I think all three of these (caterham, atom, caparo) will handle more or less in a similar fashion with the caterham and the atom being more forgiving than the caparo, of course.

But I'm having a hard time trying to wrap my brain around the idea that the Atom/Caterham would somehow magically handle alot better than the Caparo.

Hell, if anything, get a proper driver (aka the Stig, not Clarkson lol) behind the Caparo and drive that properly and then it's truly no contest! :cool:


*Ack*...I hate to nag, but did you even read all of my explanation?

Basically, power-to-weight ratio only PARTLY affects handling. I mean, look at the Veyron: its 2 tonnes, (granted, over 500 bhp/tonne), but it can still give an F1 car a run for its money handling-wise because it has a GOOD CHASSIS

Once again, if you look at the TG tests of the Caparo and the Atom, you see that the Caparo is EXTREMELY stiff since it has an all-composite chassis. This is alright on one side, because it means that the weight doesn't shift around as much and ruin the aerodynamics, thereby giving it a VERY high top speed of 200+ mph with a relatively weak engine (575 hp or so).

Moving on to the Atom 300. Yes it has a lower power-to-weight ratio, but lets just look at the handling. The Atom has a MUCH more flexible chassis (steel vs. carbon fiber). Given that both cars are of similar weight (weight ONLY), I'm thinking that they'll approach a corner at similar speeds. NOW, power only comes into play coming out of the corner, so lets go through this step by step, car by car.

Ok, Caparo first. It approaches a left-hand corner and turns in. Now the little weight it has is shifted to the front and right, meaning the most grip is on the front-right tire. HOWEVER, since it has such a stiff chassis, the whole car acts as a big lever, and the other three wheels are going to nearly lift off the ground. The little weight they had on them normally is now partially transferred to the front-right wheel, so they're gonna slip. You could mash the throttle on the way out to shift weight back and regain grip, but NOW the power-to-weight stuff comes into play. There's very little weight shifted to the front wheels and there's too much power at the back wheels. So, you've got turn in, lose grip at back wheels, and some at the front left wheel (making understeer), then power out and lose all grip at the back AND front and spin out.

Now for the Atom. Given the more flexible chassis, when it turns in, its still gonna retain some grip on the back and right tires, because instead of acting like a lever, it acts like a big spring trying to keep the tires one the road. This means it will turn in very nicely. On the way OUT, the same thing is going to happen as with the Caparo, but it won't be as twitchy, because once again, you're working with a damping mechanism (aka, spring :p), so you just get a nice, controlled bit of tail-out action, and not as much chance of spin-out.

Ok, as for whether or not the Atom will beat the Caparo's time (which doesn't even count cause it can't get over that damned sleeping policeman :D), that is definetly debateable, since the Caparo is lighter and more powerful and will probably make it up in spades on the straights.

However, as to which is a better car? No question it's the Atom, because it provides nearly as many straight-line thrills, better cornering chills, at most likely a better price, and most important of all....it can actually be driven properly by us mere mortals EVERYDAY. True, it may be a blast to try the Caparo out to hone your driving skills, but which one would you really ENJOY driving? I guess thats your choice really, but I'm gonna say that most people here would probably choose the Atom. I know I would :mrgreen:
 
*Ack*...I hate to nag, but did you even read all of my explanation?

Basically, power-to-weight ratio only PARTLY affects handling. I mean, look at the Veyron: its 2 tonnes, (granted, over 500 bhp/tonne), but it can still give an F1 car a run for its money handling-wise because it has a GOOD CHASSIS

Once again, if you look at the TG tests of the Caparo and the Atom, you see that the Caparo is EXTREMELY stiff since it has an all-composite chassis. This is alright on one side, because it means that the weight doesn't shift around as much and ruin the aerodynamics, thereby giving it a VERY high top speed of 200+ mph with a relatively weak engine (575 hp or so).

Moving on to the Atom 300. Yes it has a lower power-to-weight ratio, but lets just look at the handling. The Atom has a MUCH more flexible chassis (steel vs. carbon fiber). Given that both cars are of similar weight (weight ONLY), I'm thinking that they'll approach a corner at similar speeds. NOW, power only comes into play coming out of the corner, so lets go through this step by step, car by car.

Ok, Caparo first. It approaches a left-hand corner and turns in. Now the little weight it has is shifted to the front and right, meaning the most grip is on the front-right tire. HOWEVER, since it has such a stiff chassis, the whole car acts as a big lever, and the other three wheels are going to nearly lift off the ground. The little weight they had on them normally is now partially transferred to the front-right wheel, so they're gonna slip. You could mash the throttle on the way out to shift weight back and regain grip, but NOW the power-to-weight stuff comes into play. There's very little weight shifted to the front wheels and there's too much power at the back wheels. So, you've got turn in, lose grip at back wheels, and some at the front left wheel (making understeer), then power out and lose all grip at the back AND front and spin out.

Now for the Atom. Given the more flexible chassis, when it turns in, its still gonna retain some grip on the back and right tires, because instead of acting like a lever, it acts like a big spring trying to keep the tires one the road. This means it will turn in very nicely. On the way OUT, the same thing is going to happen as with the Caparo, but it won't be as twitchy, because once again, you're working with a damping mechanism (aka, spring :p), so you just get a nice, controlled bit of tail-out action, and not as much chance of spin-out.

Ok, as for whether or not the Atom will beat the Caparo's time (which doesn't even count cause it can't get over that damned sleeping policeman :D), that is definetly debateable, since the Caparo is lighter and more powerful and will probably make it up in spades on the straights.

However, as to which is a better car? No question it's the Atom, because it provides nearly as many straight-line thrills, better cornering chills, at most likely a better price, and most important of all....it can actually be driven properly by us mere mortals EVERYDAY. True, it may be a blast to try the Caparo out to hone your driving skills, but which one would you really ENJOY driving? I guess thats your choice really, but I'm gonna say that most people here would probably choose the Atom. I know I would :mrgreen:

Ah. I see. Indeed. Well, I can be an automotive retard as times and blurt out crap based on generalizations and stereotypes so forgive my stupidity. :p But that does make sense. Thanks for taking the time to explain things out. Now I see where you are coming from. And in the end, for us mere mortals, the Atom 500 would be the 'better' choice in terms of a good balance of fun and performance and even practicality.

Now, that scenario that you described, I'm assuming, is at mid to low speed cornering. (which is why Clarkson and us mere mortals would find car to be very "skittish" even at the speeds up to which we would attack a bend)

What if we took a driver with titanium balls and massive amounts of skill/experience, such as Stig, who is willing to go crazy and actually take the corner at 150 where there will be enough downforce generated by the aerodynamics of the Caparo?

I mean I guess when we are talking about balls to the wall, professional driving, absolute max cornering, the Caparo would probably be the faster one....no?
 
Ah. I see. Indeed. Well, I can be an automotive retard as times and blurt out crap based on generalizations and stereotypes so forgive my stupidity. :p But that does make sense. Thanks for taking the time to explain things out. Now I see where you are coming from. And in the end, for us mere mortals, the Atom 500 would be the 'better' choice in terms of a good balance of fun and performance and even practicality.

Now, that scenario that you described, I'm assuming, is at mid to low speed cornering. (which is why Clarkson and us mere mortals would find car to be very "skittish" even at the speeds up to which we would attack a bend)

What if we took a driver with titanium balls and massive amounts of skill/experience, such as Stig, who is willing to go crazy and actually take the corner at 150 where there will be enough downforce generated by the aerodynamics of the Caparo?

I mean I guess when we are talking about balls to the wall, professional driving, absolute max cornering, the Caparo would probably be the faster one....no?



EXACTLY...thats my exact point. Thanks for understanding :D
 
EXACTLY...thats my exact point. Thanks for understanding :D

No, thank you for taking the time to explain your point and debate in a civil manner.

I was quite afraid of another flaming fest (as I've witnessed on a few other forums when people are debating over Atom vs Caterham vs Caparo) but when everyone talks and actually debate (instead of argue) in a civil manner, everyone wins. :cool:

Okay, group hug time! :p

Nah, just kidding. :D
 
jackernapes you are so wrong about everything you said

I was actually kind of embarrassed FOR you when you said a veyron can give an F1 car a run for its money. Maybe a 60s f1 car.....modern F1s pull well over 3gs in corners.

Chassis flexibility NEVER wins. Any amount of chassis flex is wasted energy that could have been used to plant the tires better. Maybe you were thinking about suspension flex? In fact on an F1 car the chassis and suspension are so stiff the tires account for the majority of movement from the entire car.

The only corner an Atom MIGHT be able to navigate faster is perhaps an extremely tight low speed corner (im talking about 5-15mph) since the atom is capable of having its suspension set very soft to get the maximum mechanical grip....that would be great on track that was all u-turns.

JC is a retard when its comes to race cars which the caparo is. Hes old and has about 1% of the skill needed to drive the caparo anywhere near its limit. No shit the aero doesnt mean much at low speeds, but when you can pull 2g+ in a fast sweeper that doesnt really matter? Last I recall they didnt take all the wings off F1 cars when they raced Monaco.

Just look at what the caparo did in the hands of a racing driver around the TG test track. Made the Atom look like a wagon. The caparo has been built from the ground up with aero in mind while its merely an afterthought on the atom. Hell the caparo uses aero devices that were banned from F1 because they made cornering forces to great.

ok sorry but I had to set some things straight
 
the DPcars.net guy has been running around with a Brammo-Hartley bike derived V8 in his atom for about 6 moths now he has nothing but great things to say about it
 
jackernapes you are so wrong about everything you said

I was actually kind of embarrassed FOR you when you said a veyron can give an F1 car a run for its money. Maybe a 60s f1 car.....modern F1s pull well over 3gs in corners.

Chassis flexibility NEVER wins. Any amount of chassis flex is wasted energy that could have been used to plant the tires better. Maybe you were thinking about suspension flex? In fact on an F1 car the chassis and suspension are so stiff the tires account for the majority of movement from the entire car.

That is only done because of all the aerodynamics, not because having no suspension movement at all is actually good.
 
I remember having had a talk with someone who worked in suspension with rally some years ago, and asking about that whole "chassis flex = good" issue.

The basic of what I understood is that the stiffer the chassis, the more the suspension can get to work in putting the tires on the road. Some people might say flex is a good thing, but in reality it is a less controllable variable than working with the damper's compression and rebound settings, or spring rates.

Just my .02
 
I just hit this thread.

Whilst I appreciate jacknapes explanation, unfortunately, it's entirely wrong.

You absolutely want the stiffest chassis possible. Ideally, it shouldn't flex at all. That said, a current F1 chassis takes about 30,000 pounds of force to flex one degree. Designers are looking to get to the 50,000 pound/degree mark in the near future.

As far as the Caparo handling, what was seen on TV was an anomaly of Clarkson's driving. Notice Plato didn't cite the same issues.

The reason is simple -- the Caparo is a very aero-dependent car for handling. And downforce increases as a square of velocity, whilst tire grip (fighting lateral force) is a purely linear increase.

That's a long way of encapsulating the old adage:

"you can go through a corner at 80mph on mechanical (tyre) grip, and at 100mph on aero and mechanical, but at 90mph you are off in the gravel"

Rather than do a bunch of math, let me pick some example numbers to explain:

weight of car = 1,000 pounds.
maximum mechanical grip = 1,000 pounds
80mph in a given corner = 1G of lateral load.

In this scenario, it's simple. At 80mph you are pulling 1 lateral G, and so you have just enough mechanical grip to go through the corner.

Going into the corner at 90mph, you generate roughly 1,150 pounds of lateral force, and you go off into the gravel.

Now, in the Caparo (or any aero-car) you might be getting an additional 100 pounds of downforce at 90mph, so it would increase "grip" to 1,100 pounds. So still, at 90mph, off you go!

But at 100mph, things change. The lateral load is up to 1,300 pounds, but downforce, as the wings really begin to "bite" the downforce is up to 400 pounds. So suddenly, at 100mph, you have 1,400 pounds of grip but only 1,300 pounds of lateral load, and voila! you make it through the turn no problem!

It takes a massive leap of faith to make that very large step upwards in speed and just know logically it will work. It's entirely different from the "just go a little faster each lap" philosophy we fundamentally grow up with and are used to in non-downforce cars, and clearly Clarkson was having troubles making that jump (and let's face it, the Caparo wasn't exactly confidence inspiring in so many, many ways).

Anyway, that's the long way of saying the Caparo driven at the limit will be a very, very fast car.

Steve
 
The world needs more lightweight and smaller cars.

The end.
 
The world needs more lightweight and smaller cars.

The end.

Damned straight, that's what Caparo are all about. Lighter cars are more fuel efficient and more maneuverable. Win win.

Here's a question: if aero dependant cars are so different to drive fast, who was in the white suit for the test? When the F1 car did a power lap Heikki was driving. Though all the names I know of that have been linked to the white suit have some formula racing experience, you never know.
 
do-want-dowantdowantdowant.jpg
 
Top