When asking for something from J.Sampson for the H4, if it was not on
the shelf he did not want to know.
I needed the bonnet light covers. - the reply i got was "we don't have
any left and wont be producing any more".
What a way to treat 'the marque' - there was talk of the lens moulds
being about somewhere at lodiswell and a willing manufacturer if the
moulds were about, to supply quantum at reasonable rates. The trail
went cold due to this uninterest.
I had Ian cummings a former owner take the 1 i had left and a spare my
dad has for his H4 so he could mould some rudimentary ones for me and
fine tune the process so others can benefit.
The were several interested owners recently so I feel we have helped the
world of Q last that little bit longer.
A genuine ford catalyst was cheaper from quantum as i could pick it up
as i am local. so parts maybe cheaper if arranged to pick up at a show
but postage would probably stall other sales.
I have thought there maybe mileage in a single chassis vehicle with
different bodies like the extreme / napier. tho more based on the coupe
theme. It would keep costs down with the customer being able to choose.
It is encouraging to find the early cars could have the roof chopped off
no problem. so you could make one monocoque different fronts, rear roof
lines, tailgates etc. inspiration from all manufacturers 'facelift'
motors.
I still wish all the best for New Q and you owners, which is why I am
still chipping in although i am Qless.
Gary
On 11/10/2010 21:05, Bob Craig wrote:
To be honest I fear for the future of both Quantum companies - the
Xtreme is decent car but too heavy. it's the monocoque that makes it
different form other 7 style cars but also makes it a lot heavier, I
don't think it will ever be a race car in any great numbers unless the
weight can be reduced and agree with Syuarts comments below.
Quantum Heritage have made no announcements on what they plan to do
with the 2+2 and sunrunner (only that they plan to develop them). The
sunrunner is a very niche market, so the 2+2 would seem to be future
but it's already an expensive kit to buy and there are other more
modern cars at comparible prices (Marlin 5exi springs to mind). I 'd
be surprised if they had sold more tha a handful in the past few years
as they were focusing on the Xtreme and and some of their 2+2 parts
(as opposed to the Ford parts) were unavailable. When I was rebuilding
my car I was told on several occasions that parts were no longer
stocked and were not planned for production. Does anyone buy Ford
spares from them? i suspect only a few.
I have spoken to John Sampson a couple of years ago and found him to
be uninterested as soon as I said I was a 2+2 owner. This may not be
the case but it was the impression he gave and if he is reading this
then sorry John but thats how it seemed and I know others feel the
same. I think they have a lot of work to do with both the product and
their customer relations if they are to continue trading.
Would be interested to hear other peoples views or indeed an update
from the Sampsons that would make me change my view.
Bob Craig
On 11 Oct, 18:11, Carvey<[email protected]> wrote:
Just thought I would also add my 2p worth.
The majority of kits that are bought at the moment fit into two
categories, either a replica or a track/Occasional use fast road
car.
Quantum has never been a replica company so I think they should keep
away from this.
Therefore i think you have to look at the past and current models to
see which direction Quantum should go in.
This is just my opinion and i might be wrong but I don't think that
the Xtreme will ever complete with Westfield and Caterham just because
of the kudos of these names. I also don't think that it will compete
with the smaller lotus 7 type cars on the track due to its extra
weight. Its all down to power to weight ratio and therefore the
Xtremes sales pitch of being more spacious is missing the point with
the majority of the people who are buying 7's at the moment.
Hopefully the new owner can change this. I also think they need to
catch up on the bike engine scene too. However if i had to buy a
Lotus 7 type car as a daily or summer car i would buy an Xtreme as I
think its the best option for this use.
The Napier is never going to compete with the pure track cars for the
same reasons as above name and way to heavy!
Therefore i think this rules out the pure track/ fast road design!
The Sunrunner was out of date before it started you can tell this from
the slow decline of buggy replicas in the industry. The lack of sales
also point to this.
Therefore no buggy!
The Saloon was successful because it was so multi use. I built one age
17 because it was an ideal first car with the bonus of cheap
insurance. Other people would have bought one because it had four
seats, it had no metal parts, it had a massive boot, it could be
diesel, 1.0L to RS Turbo powered. It therefore appealed to a massive
market.
The 2+2 was the same as the saloon but maybe slightly more niche due
to the convertible roof. However it was around to compete at the
right time with the mx5, mgf's etc. Also the Zetec introduction
helped.
The H4 was i guess was supposed to be a compromise between the saloon
and the 2+2, but had some rather questionable design floors with
regards to water getting in, water getting out and it also didn't
build on the success of the monocoque in the saloon. It was however
successful due to the modern donor vehicle and engine options
So I see it as two success stories, two nearly and two failures.
Now there are two more things that need to be taken into account that
are true for the saloon, 2+2, H4 and Xtreme and also to every other
kit car sold.
Everyone who buys a kit car wants something that does was a standard
production car does but also that is different to the norm.
Every person who bought a 2+2 and H4 could have bought a MX5 or MGF
and got the same blue print. Everyone who bought a saloon could have
bought a Ford Escort and got the same basic idea of a car. They
didn't because they wanted something away from the norm.
The final reason was the price. Building a 2+2, H4 or saloon was
comparable in price when the car was first introduced to buying the
equivalent previous model tin top second hand.
So finally to answer the question...
The MX5 is still selling like hot cakes so update the styling of the
2+2 probably down the same direction as the H4 with more curves and
space for bigger wheels. Inside go down the same route as GTM and
produce a 2+2 specific dash/ interior that doesn't give the car a
date. Finally update the running gear to a current car that is not
only available on the road but also there are so many on the road that
they should be found in every scrap yard. I would therefore go focus
on this. I would also get away from using donor parts that let people
know what it really is. So no focus rear lights etc.
The success of the focus also shows that the standard four seater is
still needed today. Instead of appealing to a smaller market with the
saloon with estates etc aim for multi function again. If a saloon
style car could be built that appeals as a family car but also has the
engine options to compete with the quick Audi/ BMWs i would think it
would sell well. It would need to have a modern smooth design again
using very modern available mechanics. I would therefore go with the
focus or the Mondeo with this. Again keeping away from donor
identifying parts.
Final thoughts,
Other successful blue prints that the kit car industry is yet to tap
into are the light weight, many miles out of one tank smart car idea.
Which with a fibreglass monocoque this should be easy!
Finally the off road town car like the X5's where the introduction of
a fibreglass monocoque could take tons of the weight and therefore
reduce the need to have 3.8L engines and massive petrol bills.
Like I said just my opinions
Stuart
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Quantum
Owners Group" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/quantumowners?hl=en
IMPORTANT NOTE: All information presented herewith is provided on an "As Is"
basis, without warranty or the implication thereof. Neither the Quantum Owners Club nor
the individuals associated with the Quantum Owners Club or in the preparation of the
above information shall have any liability to any person or entity with respect to
liability, loss, or damage caused or alleged to be caused directly or indirectly by the
instructions contained within this or related message(s).
