This breakdown of Lotus into its three major components is probably the best way to evaluate what Lotus is all about, how to get about taking full advantage of the company and determine whether if any or all of the components are worth holding on to.
If we do not break down the company and have a clear understanding of the components, there is a very high likelihood that Lotus could be misconstrued a major drain on company resources and add nothing to Proton. I think Lotus is a wonderful asset but Proton and DRB need to take a fresh perspective as to what Lotus is.
 |
| The Esprit was the last Lotus supercar and it didn't really fly off the shelf because the brand simply could not support the prices at which the Exprit V8 were sold, at over STG70,000 |
In the beginning, Lotus cars, the racing team and the engineering consultancy were all one company, they were split up into three towards the end of Chapman's life in an effort to instil some business and financial discipline into them.
If I'm honest, the exercise was a lot less than successful.
The truth is, much like Ferrari in the days of Enzo, Lotus was essentially an extension of their founder's ego and passion for motor racing and in both cases, the sportscars were sold on Monday to give the racing team money to race on Sundays. As long as the bank balance allowed Enzo and Colin to go racing, they were not too bothered about making more money.
Lotus Cars were never really profitable, it had some bright days in the late 1960s and 1970s but for the last three decades they survived pretty much on the bank balance of passionate investors,
Secondly there is the automotive engineering consultancy, which is a respected name in the industry, having pioneered lightweight construction solutions, especially the use of specially designed aluminium extrusions and castings for chassis construction. (This is the de-facto method of building aluminium cars, even the Audi Space Frame is a development of this basic idea).
 |
| The Lotus Optical Research Engine allows engineers to study and record the combustion that takes place in an engine in real time to help them improve efficiency and design a better engine. In reality this kind of research is so prohibitively expensive that a small carmaker like Lotus probably cannot afford to make use of it themselves. |
With this in mind, I believe that Lotus Engineering Consultancy can remain a useful of not wildly profitable arm of Proton and could provide an added dimension of maturity and sophistication to the work being done in the company's main Research and Development centre in Shah Alam.
In a sense, Lotus Engineerig Consultancy can and should be viewed as a cost centre, a satellite R&D facility that provides third party objectivity to the work done by the company.
If this is the view of a single journalist, then perhaps it can be brushed aside as that of someone who has no direct experience running a car company but, luckily it is a view shared by former Proton Managing Director, Tan Sri Tengku Mahaleel.
We had a long conversation and he explained that the acquisition of Lotus allowed Proton to develop the Campro engine and the money saved on royalty for Mitsubishi engines has paid for the purchase price of Lotus three times over.
Some may say that the Campro engine is not really any good; breathless at low revs and only ever any good above 3,500rpm.
The reality is that Proton had specified for Lotus to design the most compact and lightweight four cylinder 1.6-litre engine possible and it certainly is that. Proton also wanted a sporty engine to match the company's ambitions, then, of producing driver oriented cars.
You see, Tengku Mahaleel was of the view that Proton is not a brand that is believable as a luxury marque because it is new and had no heritage in luxury but with the help of Lotus it could be a brand that pleases enthusiast drivers and emulate the success of BMW as the car of choice for those who fancy themselves as keen motorists.
I personally agree with this approach and thought it was an exciting route.
However, in the excitement of developing a sporty image, Proton may have specified too much sportiness into the engine and not enough drivability to suit the mundane needs of daily motoring and the result is an engine that is a joy to drive on track but rather lost when accelerating in gear at medium speed and positively lacking torque climbing a moderately steep hill at low to medium speeds.
And so we cannot blame Lotus entirely for the characteristics of the Campro engine, although one may argue that as the consultants they should have better advised their client and parent company.
 |
| Lotus APX was based on Proton's idea for a modular platform that could be pieced together like Lego to result in a front, rear or mid-engined layout for sedan, sportscar, MPV or SUV |
Lotus Engineering can also be a useful outlet for any new ideas that Proton may come up with but not suitable for a mass market manufacturer.
Remember the Lotus Modular Chassis concept that was shown at motor shows in the last couple of years? That was actually a Proton original idea but it was taken to market as a Lotus product after evaluation by the British firm.
We have to treat Lotus like a precision tool and Proton must quickly develop the skills to put Lotus to maximum use, otherwise it would be like using a RM10,000 sushi knife to chop vegetables.
Third and finally, there is the Lotus brand. I believe this is the part that Proton should never let go of.
 |
Colin Chapman made Lotus an iconic brand that is
instantly recognisable in the automotive world
and together with Ferrari, Mercedes-Benz, Maserati,
Porsche, BMW and Alfa Romeo it is inextricably
linked to motor racing and all the glamour
and excitement.
It would be a shame if Proton simply sold
off Lotus the car maker, engineering
consultant and brand
|
In conclusion, if I were making the call, the sportscar company is probably the most likely candidate for the chop but the engineering consultancy and brand would be kept in the family.
As it stands, even with the money on loan, I am not convinced that Lotus Cars can successfully launch five models in five years because the money is only enough to update the tired factory in Hethel and design and engineer one full model and have some spare to partly engineer the second model.
And this, despite the fact that the plan is quite clever as it relies on only two chassis, a front-engined platform and mid engined versions to as the basis of the five models.
If the first model flops then even the second model may not make it into production because there would not be any money to complete it, let alone the other four.
In the meantime, Danny Bahar has assembled a stellar cast of automotive experts, a designer pinched from Ferrari, and engine expert from AMG, production specialists from Porsche, another chap from Aston Martin and the list goes on.
Big stars have big salaries and from the outside it is certainly not a good way to develop cars on the shoestring that Lotus has in hand.
Perhaps a large and cash-rich Chinese carmaker may be interested in the sports car manufacturing outfit and with the right licensing agreement, it could be a win-win situation for all concerned
No comments:
Post a Comment