Atom Smasher

  • Thread starter Thread starter Speedster502
  • 58 comments
  • 4,036 views
Don't they also use a 2.4 Liter Ecotec for the 205 horsepower version here? The same engine from the Cobalt SS? I don't think we have the 2.0 Honda here... :(

Also, since you can buy this as a kit with no engine or transmission, you would be able to drive this under that particular law!

EDIT: Treed
 
Poverty
Isnt the atom a one seater?

Whats the most powerful atoms come? One thing for definte about the x bow is that its easily tuneable.
Click to expand...

But then, a Honda unit is often easily tuned as well.
 
speedster502
No it has two seats look here is a picture. It also was the fastest accelerating car in 2005 it was 0-100 in 10.8 seconds, it has had an award in design, been voted the best track day car for two years running and now has the record for the quickest indoor road car as done by Autocar at the NEC Birmingham. They even have a racing team run by Honda. So the KTM has a lot to live up to. The most powerful a Atom can come stock is 220BHP. Source


Source of info is Ariel official web site
Click to expand...

Atom has 220/245hp for the non-supercharged model and 300hp for the supercharged one. They've built two twincharged (turbo and supercharged), 400hp ones too. Factory standard.

And yes, they're two seater. And insane.
 
...I wonder where the Derona F400 will fit into all this when completed?

8936-104323-1.jpg
 
speedster502
It also was the fastest accelerating car in 2005 it was 0-100 in 10.8 seconds,
Click to expand...
Nope, wrong! 0-100-0 in 10.8 seconds. So to be clear: from zero to 100 km/h back to zero in 10.8 seconds.

Atom all the way!
 
kikie
Nope, wrong! 0-100-0 in 10.8 seconds. So to be clear: from zero to 100 km/h back to zero in 10.8 seconds.

Atom all the way!
Click to expand...

10.88 seconds to be exact and its 100mph not km/h 👍 (Autocar 2005)....


...but Autocar did the same run in a Veyron in 9.9 seconds last year.

Regards

Scaff
 
Famine
Atom has 220/245hp for the non-supercharged model and 300hp for the supercharged one. They've built two twincharged (turbo and supercharged), 400hp ones too. Factory standard.
Click to expand...

Just to play devil's advocate...I'm sure VAG tuner HPA will get your X-bow well over 500HP.

I wouldn't trust a 400hp Honda I-4 anyway...
 
Tuner cars != Standard cars.

There's no sense comparing them.

(not to mention that 500hp/700kg is 714hp/tonne and the standard twincharged Atom still whomps it with 877hp/tonne)


It's worth a note that it's generally acknowledged that the 245 and 300 versions of the Atom are nearly indistinguishable on the public roads - the 245 perhaps even having the slight edge - because it's just too much power on not enough weight.
 
Matthew Keller
Don't they also use a 2.4 Liter Ecotec for the 205 horsepower version here? The same engine from the Cobalt SS? I don't think we have the 2.0 Honda here... :(
Click to expand...

Its actually a 2.0L S/C LSJ I4, however you were correct that it is from the Cobalt SS, but the "SS Supercharged" is the official title. Basic models come with the same 205 BHP rating, the last Atom that Car and Driver had I believe was boosted to 230, and there are some variants that are scratching at 300 BHP. Considering how handily the Atom whipped the M400 and the Z06 with "just" 230 BHP, I can't imagine what an extra 70 BHP would do to the car...

TheCracker
Weighing 650+kgs more than the Atom, it's hardly a lightweight is it?
Click to expand...

I'm going to be honest and say that it really wouldn't matter to me. It is still impeccably fast for a design that old, and although it certainly won't handle or grip as well as the Atom, it would hold its own against most modern sports cars if the suspension is dialed in right.

...The best part is that you can build them yourself, and if you're feeling crazy, go ahead and throw a 450+ BHP 427ci Ford Racing V8 under the hood...
 
exigeracer
Any sensible racer. Weight always wins.
Click to expand...

Yes, and even with the "heavy" 5.0L 4-barrel V8, it is still lighter than most performance oriented vehicles. Differences of taste and opinion I suppose when going for the older style cars with which I prefer in some cases, and even so, when built right they can perform rather well.

Build your own in some cases, and you can get a lot out of the car. Back when the Elise first hit the streets, C/D brought in a Factory Five MKII racer that used mostly '88 Mustang LX 5.0 bits and pieces, and with some work and modification managed to crank 350 BHP, 3.6 seconds 0-60, the quarter in 12.3, and pull 1.0g on the skidpad... Pretty impressive for a Frankenstein mobile that you could build in your garage for far-less money that any of these modern racers would require.
 
Scaff
10.88 seconds to be exact and its 100mph not km/h 👍 (Autocar 2005)....


...but Autocar did the same run in a Veyron in 9.9 seconds last year.

Regards

Scaff
Click to expand...
Sorry Scaff but you're wrong as well and I have the proof.

It's 0-100 mph in 6.8 seconds. From 0-100 back to 0 in 10.88 seconds, like I said!

One thing you're right though, it is mph not km/h. So that makes it even more impressive.

Read right above the first photo and look at the clip.

http://www.arielmotor.co.uk/04/press.htm

wikipedia
The Supercharged Ariel Atom 1 won the 2005 0-100-0 mph test by a clear margin, reaching 100 mph and then stopping in 10.88 seconds
Click to expand...
proof: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariel_Atom: scroll down to the acceleration part!

wikipedia
The following year, they won Autocar's 0-100 mph challenge with the new Ariel Atom 2 300 bhp Supercharged edition achieving a time of 6.86 seconds, and then stopping from 100 in 3.8 seconds.
Click to expand...
proof: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariel_Atom: scroll down to the acceleration part!

Also my regards

Kikie
 
kikie
Sorry Scaff but you're wrong as well and I have the proof.

It's 0-100 mph in 6.8 seconds. From 0-100 back to 0 in 10.88 seconds, like I said!

One thing you're right though, it is mph not km/h. So that makes it even more impressive.
Click to expand...

The last part is all that Scaff said - he was correcting your 0-100-0km/h to 0-100-0mph.

Given that he posted the scans of the Autocar article on this site...
 
kikie
Sorry Scaff but you're wrong as well and I have the proof.
Click to expand...

Wrong about what?

I never said that the time was to 100mph, I said that the correct time was 10.88 seconds, not 10.8; I did not specify for what. I then clarified that it was MPH not km/h.

As Famine said I have posted scans of every Autocar 0-100-0 test from 2002 to the present date, so I would hardly try and claim it was 0-100 at all.

Look me posting the info up.
Autocar 0 - 100 - 0 test 2002

Autocar 0 - 100 - 0 test 2003

Autocar 0 - 100 - 0 test 2004

Autocar 0 - 100 - 0 test 2005

Autocar 0 - 100 - 0 test 2006

BTW 2005 is the one youwant for the 10.88 time from the Atom


Regards

Scaff
 
yep I was wrong and you were right. And Famine, I already admitted in my previous post that I was wrong about the km/h and mph, you don't have to repeat that just to make a post or defend someone. I already said that Scaff was right...

:)
 
kikie
yep I was wrong and you were right. And Famine, I already admitted in my previous post that I was wrong about the km/h and mph, you don't have to repeat that just to make a post or defend someone. I already said that Scaff was right...

:)
Click to expand...

Eh?

Jim Prower
I'd like to see an Ariel get more than 150 on the Mulsanne. or anywhere.
Click to expand...

In theory the 300 can reach 155mph.

In practice...
 
Atom 220: 165lbft (362lbft/tonne)
KTM 220: 211lbft (301lbft/tonne)
 
As much as I wanted this car to succeed, it looks to be headed down the drain. Even without the failing economy, the thing just wasn't quite there yet. I guess it'll be just another track day special that had good intentions, but just didn't add up in the end. No reviews were exceptionally positive, quoting hazy response and detached feel.

There's a promise to return to build the remaining half of them though. On the positive, I'm presuming KTM's motorcycle brand is still thriving, so the company and its ideas will live. Maybe they'll take what they learned with the X-Bow and come back with something in the future. It had such an awesome design, pulling off purposeful but still having a style sense, but that wasn't its downfall. It weighed a few hundred kilos more than the Atom, which had the engineering and power to lay down. Considering even the Atom has been having troubles stateside, it's no wonder the Austrian couldn't break into the American market, despite several claims, promises and reports.

Source

Jalopnik
With 80 unsold units in stock and only 420 of the once-expected 1,000 units being produced, KTM's announced plans to halt production of the X-bow superlight sports car, at least temporarily. The Carpocalypse claims another victim.
Click to expand...
 
exigeracer
As much as I wanted this car to succeed, it looks to be headed down the drain. Even without the failing economy, the thing just wasn't quite there yet. I guess it'll be just another track day special that had good intentions, but just didn't add up in the end. No reviews were exceptionally positive, quoting hazy response and detached feel.
Click to expand...

I could never see why the X-Bow weighed so much, even taking into account the Atom's skeletal design. I was never crazy about the looks, either, so I won't miss it like I would the Atom. I'm sure it'll be back soon enough.
 
harrytuttle
I could never see why the X-Bow weighed so much, even taking into account the Atom's skeletal design. I was never crazy about the looks, either, so I won't miss it like I would the Atom. I'm sure it'll be back soon enough.
Click to expand...

I agree.. it was ugly and heavy. Good riddance I say.
 
You aren't the only one. I'd have bought one, given the money, and I'd spend the time on a track so I could be better than the boring people with Caterhams, and the weird people in the Atoms.
 
I much prefer the look of the xbow, but if I was in the market for a track day car I think I'd still go for the Atom, it just seems more focused, less of the fancy bodywork etc.

(and the new V8 version is simply awesome!)
 
I think the X-Bow looked fantastic. I saw my first on the road the other week but unfortunately couldn't get a photo as I was driving. Had white panels so it stood out pretty well!

Not surprised it didn't sell though. It's quite expensive and despite the KTM name, less well established than the Atom. And I get the impression that track-day goers like their cars to sound as good as they go - I read in many reports that the KTM was essentially pretty quiet and civilised compared to the Atom et al.
 
It could be even lighter. If I had one forced on my hand I would remove all the orange plastic. Then it starts to look less like a go-kart, and more like a purpose built open wheel racer.
 

Latest Posts

Back