Anyone read anything about this little beasty?

Kinda like an MRT5 on steroids. Road legal aspect is interesting too.

So... it's a bike on 4 wheels. Why not just get a bike.

I think it was at the Autosport show. Looked nice but ugly at the same time. No wheel arches, which will make it look a lot different too.

As for why not get a bike - because this'll destroy any bike in the corners. In an ideal world, get this (or similar) AND a bike

Saw it at Autosport looked nicely made but I think if form shouldn't follow function in a road car, it is not a racing car it looks to be a far more usable road car than many exotica, mainly because of good ground clearance and no aerodynamic grip.

Forbin - you can't fall off a car (as easily). Plus I only have a car license...

ajp71 - the car may not have wings but the website says it produces moderate downforce by ground effect.

Quote from Bob Smith :

ajp71 - the car may not have wings but the website says it produces moderate downforce by ground effect.

Not going to produce any real ground effect with 70mm ground clearance, which is a good thing seeing as any car that produces ground effects on a bumpy surface with the risk of bottoming out will be a handful to say the least (Group C at the 'ring, need I say more?)

Quote from tristancliffe :

As for why not get a bike - because this'll destroy any bike in the corners. In an ideal world, get this (or similar) AND a bike

I'll give you that. There's only so much grip you can get out of a contact patch the size of your palm. But, IMO, a bike is a lot more fun. Nothing quite like leaning way over and dragging a knee in a corner.

Quote from Forbin :

I'll give you that. There's only so much grip you can get out of a contact patch the size of your palm. But, IMO, a bike is a lot more fun. Nothing quite like leaning way over and dragging a knee in a corner.

I can't argue with that! Get your knee down in a car and you know you've got problems!

Quote from ajp71 :

Saw it at Autosport looked nicely made but I think if form shouldn't follow function in a road car, it is not a racing car it looks to be a far more usable road car than many exotica, mainly because of good ground clearance and no aerodynamic grip.

how about a roof ... its a car for the british market after all

thats a cool thing, but they won't sell a single piece of these with that kind of promotion video:
http://www.roadrazer.co.uk/RR1web-CD.mov

it is so boring, they do not show anything... and in the end that guy driving looks like he is falling asleep...

could be much more action then that....


allthough: 3.6 sek. 0-100km/h

Video was crap honestly the best way to advertise a car like that without spending anything on it is to strap a camera to it and bomb it round a one way derestricted toll road

Still seen no shots of it with headlights/mudcards/number plates etc. Bet it will look worse once those have been added and they'll all add weight.

It says 2 seats, im interested i where the 2nd one is? illepall

behind the front one, like a fighter plane..

Looks very simular to the ariel atom accept I think the atom looks alot nicer...

http://www.arielmotor.co.uk/

Reminds me of the Ariel Atom- both seem fantastic.

I saw the Atom bombing round the Haynes museum track in August and it is a fantastic car. I'd recommend you UK people go there in the summer as the guy who owns it gives people rides round the track. However, I chose a drift ride in an M3-engined BMW 3 series over the Atom ride. Who doesn't want to go sideways?

Quote from TiJay :

Reminds me of the Ariel Atom- both seem fantastic.

I saw the Atom bombing round the Haynes museum track in August and it is a fantastic car. I'd recommend you UK people go there in the summer as the guy who owns it gives people rides round the track. However, I chose a drift ride in an M3-engined BMW 3 series over the Atom ride. Who doesn't want to go sideways?

I'd choose the Atom anyday To the point though the Atom is a completely different product. It's mad but actually a real road car unlike the Razer because it doesn't choose function over form.

It choose fat bendy chassis tubes when thinner, lighter straight pipes would make the Atom even quicker. As much as I admire, like and want an Atom, the curved chassis pipes put me off so much - on a purist car they ignore a purist design element.

I also appreciate that 99% of people, and probably 50% of 'engineers' won't agree with it. But why make a car like an atom heavier simply for the sake of looks. Grrr!

At least Caterham et al have the decency to cover the RHS tubing (another engineering purist no-no) with GRP.

Quote from tristancliffe :

RHS tubing (another engineering purist no-no)

shouldnt that (theoretically) not make any difference whatsoever ?

Quote from tristancliffe :

It choose fat bendy chassis tubes when thinner, lighter straight pipes would make the Atom even quicker. As much as I admire, like and want an Atom, the curved chassis pipes put me off so much - on a purist car they ignore a purist design element.

May seem odd but I really don't think the Atom is designed to be as fast as possible. If that's your priority it would end up with a conventional covered spaceframe with a bike engine. The Atom is about being an awesome and fun track/road car which it does without doubt, in the end of the day the 1.6 Zetec Caterham will end up being more usable on the road without too much danger to your license than an R500/Atom/Radical/Razor.

how much would one of these cost?

If you're talking about the roadrazer - IIRC, £19k for the kit or £35k built for you. I think that's also without the 'extras' to make it road legal.

The one pictured won't be road legal in the UK unless you fit mudguards, then it'll look pretty daft.