spitfires
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Lotus Elise

To: "Eric Kieboom" <ekieboom@xs4all.nl>,
Subject: Re: Lotus Elise
From: "Laura G." <savercool@email.msn.com>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 17:59:05 -0700
But, who needs A/C and all that other garbage! <G>

Laura G. and Nigel
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Kieboom <ekieboom@xs4all.nl>
To: Simmons, Reid W <reid.w.simmons@intel.com>; Craig Smith
<CraigS@iewc.com>; spitfires@autox.team.net <spitfires@autox.team.net>
Date: Thursday, May 13, 1999 3:50 PM
Subject: RE: Lotus Elise


>
>At 11:50 13-05-1999 -0700, Simmons, Reid W wrote:
>>
>>WOW!  That's far less than my '97 Camaro Z-28 would have cost if I had
been
>>"stupid" enough to pay list price!  (Got it at fleet cost or about 20-25%
>>off of sticker.)
>
>Sure, but the Lotus only weighs about a quarter of the Camaro and comes
>*without* A/C, any sound deadening whatsoever, carpets, power anything (not
>even brakes), sound system, decent luggage space, spare tyre, airbags,
>heated rear screen and a host of other things you like in your Z-28.
>
>But it does have rock-'ard, non-adjustable seats, bare aluminium floor
>(thin rubber mats are extra), an optional radio fitting kit, an aerosol can
>in case you get a flat, a 'build-it-yourself-top', just like on a MkI/II
>Spit (but worse), inaccessible engine, and 'wind'em-yourself-windows' with
>wobbly plastic winders that drop off in sharp corners.
>
>Oh, and it also comes with an unbelievable grin factor, caused mainly by
>its terrific power-to-weight ratio, amazing roadholding and general
>nippyness. And most of it doesn't rust. Ever.
>
>Even if Lotus hadn't done something about the initial iffy build quality, I
>would *still* prefer a Lotus Elise over a Camaro. Or pretty much any other
>car for that matter.
>
>Eric Kieboom
>The Netherlands
>1976 Spit 1500 - original Java Green
>




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>