Blatman Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 Sorry mate. *Shuffles over* Better? Here, have a beer Quote
steveb Posted August 16, 2005 Author Posted August 16, 2005 So really it is just a history thing, Caterham have the rights to the 7 so charge more, essentially however the cars not got a lot in it, Caterhams have aluminium panels and westfield fiberglass, Caterhams use K series engines Westfields what you want but mainlyy Ford / vauxhall are the only major differences. Quote
Mark B Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 It's maybe not the full story, but that's it in a nutshell..... Some say one handles better than the other, others prefer the trim quality of one against the other, but they are both along the same lines but with a different price tag.... Quote
oioi Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 in answer to your question and cos everybody else around here has a fence post shuffed up theyre all se7ens are great, be they locost, cateringvan, westfield, dax, striker or any of the other multitude of makes. each has a several pros and cons. key differences (westie vs. cateringvan) - cost! vans are skinned in aluminium and come with k-series engines as standard (except csr's). they are generally lighter because of this (except bec) westfield have adopted the bec principle and this is offered as a factory option, not so with a van. if you were interested in a bec i would advice against a cateringvan as it will be more of a one off. k-series engines are generally referred to as cheese cos they have some unreliability issues that dont appear until you start tuning. these can be overcome, but at a significant cost. a zetec to the same power output and reliability as a k-series will ALWAYS be cheaper, but heavier i think the vans on the whole are a little bit prettier. westies have a lot more variety in terms of spec and engine choice a van will be a more consistant car when looking at up to 5 yr old compared to a westie (less tinkering). however you will get a much higher spec car for your money if your looking at something 2nd hand and 5 yr old with a westie, just buy carefully. similarities both depreciate similarly both can be made to handle just as well as the other - and in both cases it will take time and money but theyre is a vast improvement to be had on standard spec. both have strong and well supported clubs both clubs have a percentage of nobs (some might argue higher in the van club, but i wouldnt like to comment ) Hopefully i have said at least one controversial thing in the above so those with fence posts in theyre arses can remove them. OiOi Quote
Blatman Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 So really it is just a history thing, Caterham have the rights to the 7 so charge more, essentially however the cars not got a lot in it, Caterhams have aluminium panels and westfield fiberglass, Caterhams use K series engines Westfields what you want but mainlyy Ford / vauxhall are the only major differences. No, there is far more to it than that. But this is a thread that will all to easily get out of hand, and there will be no conclusions worth drawing once our C******m driving friends get here to add their opinions. I really think there is plenty to be found on the here, and on Blatchat for you to be able to research the question without us typing it all over again.. again... As has been said, if you are considering both marques, drive both, talk to both sets of owners. Remember though that each will be partisan, just like the web sites, so it really is down to what you think you want and which one you feel drives best and offers you the best in support or value or heritage or whatever... Just don't expect to get anyone here saying C******m's are best, and don't expect anyone on Blatchat to wholeheartedly reccomend a Westfield... Edit. OiOi seems to have summed it up quite well... Quote
steppenwolf Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 Gadrego, is it just me or are these crisps stale? Quote
Blatman Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 Gadrego, is it just me or are these crisps stale? Here, try these Quavers... Mmmm cheesy... Quote
Mark B Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 To add, If you're considering either, I looked at both a few years ago & my conclusions were- Caterham... Most 2nd hand cars are the narrow bodied versions, I can't fit in them being 6'3", the later SV cars are fine size wise though but are very expensive. Most have the light but ****e K series rover engine which has a hunger for head gaskets. The power coating isn't as good & have seen many with serious corrosion problems. The club isn't as friendly! Westfields... I can fit in the wide body no probs & there are loads available, could get into a narrow body with the right seat & a couple of adjustments. You get alot more for your money. Wider choice of engines & generally bulletproof motors fitted. Good chassis & coating generally. Good club, good factory backup & service. That's why I chose a westfield, I like both but always wanted a westy, plus there are more advantages for me than the caterham or most other sevens. HTH, Cheers, Mark. Quote
steppenwolf Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 Time to get off the fence and out of the settee:- IMHO :- 1. Both are fantastic cars 2. Caterham 'looks' insignificant alongside Westfield 3. Caterham has a better designed location for the front wishbones resulting in a slightly more solidly planted front end 4. Westfield is generally bigger than a Caterham 5. You pay a lot for the so called 'heritage' of the Caterham which doesn't make the car go any better 6. Caterham has more aluminium than a Westfield 7. Westfield has more glass fibre than a Caterham 8. You need to drive both to decide which one you prefer 9. On balance I much prefer the Westfield which is why I bought one Quote
steppenwolf Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 Here, try these Quavers... Mmmm cheesy... Just got back to the settee from posting a reply and these are cheesy ... thanks Quote
gadrego Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 Gadrego, is it just me or are these crisps stale? Don't know, still struggling to get this post out me a**e. Quote
Mark B Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 At least yours doesn't still have a nail in it, ouchhhhhh.. Quote
gadrego Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 And to be just a little more helpful. This is a useful site for explaining the key differences. Julian Thompson's site Quote
Blatman Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 Just got back to the settee from posting a reply and these are cheesy ... thanks 'Nother beer, or shall I crack open this 99 Rioja I've been saving? Quote
KerryS Posted August 16, 2005 Posted August 16, 2005 So I make it that's 6 on the couch with Stella, crisps and Quavers, one at work and one looking over the wall. Good fun this thread Kerry S Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.