Black Forest Power

We always bring our own cars and hire the race tracks through our car clubs exclusively for us for the whole day. The same we did with Spa-Francorchamps this week again.

Great experience on the race track Anneau du Rhin where Mario Ketterer a former race driver teached me on an Evora GT430 how to treat this beast properly - still a lot to learn for me. Huge thanks to Mario for this incredible tutorial and fun!

But what does it all mean?

Spending an ACF-50 winter treatment it is worth admiring the magic components ...

Prefer the original plastic diffuser a lot. It is much better integrated and serves the stealthy darkness of the rear. The later aluminum diffuser makes the rear restless with fragile Elise plate works.

In deed, the GT430 Sport/GT430 story is a very paradox one. Before ordering my GT430 Sport I went through all the same considerations as The Pits did. The beautiful line and elegancy (the air vents in the front wheelarch you can not get rid of with a GT430) and the way I use it made me decide on the Sport. My dealer and I, we realized that there will be only a very small time window for ordering this exotic from Lotus factory with personal specifications. Therefore, I ordered mine immediately at beginning of October 2017. The prediction was that all the GT430s will be sold out very quickly and instead of buying a GT430 Sport which was considered to be too expensive for its power etc. the better deal would have been a 400. But as it happens a lot with forecasts the same here: In Germany about 10 new GT430s were hanging around on offer on the internet during 2018 with prices coming down. Still, you can find 3 of them (mobile.de), one with only 32 km, another with only 50 km, and one with 1.200 km on the clock. Almost new cars after two years, but registered by dealers due to enhanced emission regulations in Germany from September 2018. Never a GT430 Sport I have seen on the free market in Germany, neither new nor used. The most grotesque thing is that my dealer could have sold two more GT430 Sport in 2018 to slowly woken up customers after production at Lotus had ended with the limited edition GT430. That’s how life goes! For me it was and still is the right choice independently of any market perceptions. It is a dream car for me and who ever owns a GT430 Sport, your are such a lucky guy! If you want one and get the very rare chance to get one - take it, you can’t do anything wrong with it.

Here is a collection of the super rare Evoras GT430 Sport as far as I could find and trace them

South France - FOR THE DRIVERS

Proposal to come out of the deadlock: 1. Make your Brexit with or without deal. 2. Get promise from EU that Mr. John Bercow will become President of the European Commission if you return. 3. Hold a referendum about a Breturn.

The discussion going on here made me remember of an article I read in a leading Swiss newspaper lately. Therefore, I translated it into English and I think it might be interesting within two active topics, that’s why I will post it twice. Comment by Roman Bucheli in Neue Zürcher Zeitung (NZZ) 19.12.2018 What the hell is going on with the men? Is the man a discontinued model? Or has he simply not yet made the leap into the modern age? His attachment to outdated self-images is a symptom of a prolonged crisis. Where is David Cameron? Where did he go? No former British Prime Minister has made himself as invisible as the one who left the British with the Brexit mess. He believed in a brilliant political move, gambled and resigned, happy as it seemed. After me the deluge. Since then he is bored, it is said, and he writes, for a considerable sum, his memoirs. Maybe Cameron also squats in the souffle box at the pitiful spectacle of the “braggarts” that the British just have to watch and endure for quite a while to their own grief. Because on and behind the stage are his old buddies and opponents, now united in the choir of squallers, from Boris Johnson to Jeremy Corbyn, who currently know only one script: Theresa May roar and deride. It cannot be a coincidence that in the summer of 2016, when Cameron resigned after his blatant defeat (not having to pay for the pickle he got the country into), two women were ready for election to the party’s presidency. Theresa May finally prevailed without a ballot among the party members. Previously, one men after the other did not gear up to start (George Osborne) or prematurely out of the race (Boris Johnson). They have guessed that the Brexit negotiations with the EU would not make them win a potted plant. Theresa May did not shrink from that. To the brutal screenplay of this tragedy (which one would like to call tragicomic, if it would not be that much severe for the Brits) now belongs that the woman who pulled the hot chestnuts out of the fire in Brussels, must let her tell under contempt and laughter that unfortunately these are the wrong chestnuts. For sure, you could bet that the men who are shouting loudest today would not have made a better deal. One would like to say: Theresa May fought like a man, if the stereotype was not that much wrong in a double sense. She fought like a lioness and above all: like no man would have done. Namely in a hopeless situation. Every man, from Boris Johnson to Nigel Farage, would have referred to Ernest Hemingway: "But man is not made for defeat." No, men are not made for defeat, they can only be destroyed, according to Hemingway. So much heroism has been getting ridiculous at Hemingway's times already. He has always been anachronistic. So much more unworthy is therefore the British drama (not only because it is performed at the expense of the people). It's also, in the days of #MeToo and Trump's ridiculously long ties, a striking example of a manhood that never gets tired from celebrating itself vigorously, but does not realize that thereby it reaches its level of shrinkage: the man is in crisis. He is threatened by becoming a phase-out model. Just over ten years ago, the American state theorist Harvey C. Mansfield made a brilliant debacle with his book "Manliness" (Yale University Press, 2006). In there one could read the memorable sentence: "Although it is obvious that women can be masculine, it is evident likewise that they cannot be that much masculine or not as often as men." The sentence manifests downright the crisis of a frozen thinking in contrast to what Mansfield pretended to write in his book. Half a century earlier, Mansfield's Harvard colleague, the historian Arthur Schlesinger, had stated soberly that maleness is perceived less and less as a fact, but rather as a problem. This would have resulted in two developments: on the one hand a widespread uncertainty of the male identity, on the other hand an increase in aggressively reproduced self-images. Of course, these symptoms did not occur just since the 20th century. They have always accompanied the imaginations of masculinity, where they were based on presumption and pre-emptive exercise of power. Since such self-images are unstable and always endangered. Therefore, they have to be defended all the more aggressively. Literature has also developed a special sensorium in this respect, unmasking virtuously the alleged strength of men as their true weakness. One of the finest examples of this is perhaps Fontane's novel "Effi Briest". This is the deconstruction of the male concept of honor, which must confirm itself in a self-defeating duel, along with the portrait of a woman who matures into a tragic personality at the moment she gets cast out. Fontane's novel shows drastically right there how masculinity is put up for negotiation and reaches a point of crisis without rescue when the man is better destroyed than defeated, according to Hemingway's motto. In turn, the British Parliament is currently offering the most bizarre visual instruction. If Jeremy Corbyn were the man he claims to be, and if he had the sense of responsibility that he claims to act on, he would have had to work with Theresa May or overthrow her, to do it better than she does. He did and does not, because he is afraid of nothing more than to fall on his face like May. Because the braggart is a moral coward. He puts the raison d'etat behind the party doctrine, the welfare of the people behind his own. He cannot get out of his own skin, say: he, like many men, does not come out of his Hemingwayness. He must fulfill the cliché under whose premise he has begun. Women too have been forced all the time to come to stay with their femininity in society. Because they had to break the role imposed on them. Early on, they realized that there would be no other way than to re-form this femininity over and over again and to manifold it in ever new images of femininity. What was man doing in the meantime? He kept on dreaming of Hemingway. That’s why by today a Scotsman looks ridiculous wearing a kilt. Men seem to have little reason and even less phantasy to rethink and transform their role model, rather than constantly re-creating the old stereotypes. The man gradually reduces himself to folklore. And where the stereotypes of masculinity are then opposed by alternative role models, it is significant that it is parody and travesty: but the shrill drag queens rather mock the masculinity than seriously broadening their spectrum. And even the so-called softies have to carry a dubious label, which hints at contempt and makes imitation not really advisable. So do we need less masculinity? Certainly not. But urgently required would be different ideas of masculinity, beyond cliché and caricature. But for that, the images of masculinity would have to be manifold. Less Hemingway, less James Dean, less John Wayne. The macho in all its forms - and I'm not talking about the bear hunter Putin or the tie wearing Trump - is, however, and unfortunately still the dominant reincarnation of masculinity, even in its tempered or camouflaged form towards gallantry. That has to change, and that will unfortunately take time. Although the man may be an obsolete model in his frozen role model, not are the attributes habitually associated with him. Courage, strength, determination - whatever has been said about men’s special abilities - they are not his genuine or exclusive domain. And the world will continue to depend on people, no matter if women or men, who act courageously, powerfully and decisively. But all these beautiful virtues will be of no use if they are not in the service of a reason greater than the ego of their representative. That, in turn, would mean: taking responsibility spiritedly and with moral courage irrespective of the risks involved, and regardless of the dangers that are coming along with. Masculinity, once understood this way, would simply mean: humanity. So maybe the masculinity would have to be re-thought from this side. And looking at the British House of Commons, where would you find these virtues? Not on the opposition bench, not on the backbenches of the Tories. But at the very front, where Theresa May is standing pretty lonely. Whatever one may think of her, one thing cannot be denied: that she fights for the affair of her country, even if she fights a losing battle. The honorable gentlemen must copy this first of all.

The discussion going on here made me remember of an article I read in a leading Swiss newspaper lately. Therefore, I translated it into English and I think it might be interesting within two active topics, that’s why I will post it twice. Comment by Roman Bucheli in Neue Zürcher Zeitung (NZZ) 19.12.2018 What the hell is going on with the men? Is the man a discontinued model? Or has he simply not yet made the leap into the modern age? His attachment to outdated self-images is a symptom of a prolonged crisis. Where is David Cameron? Where did he go? No former British Prime Minister has made himself as invisible as the one who left the British with the Brexit mess. He believed in a brilliant political move, gambled and resigned, happy as it seemed. After me the deluge. Since then he is bored, it is said, and he writes, for a considerable sum, his memoirs. Maybe Cameron also squats in the souffle box at the pitiful spectacle of the “braggarts” that the British just have to watch and endure for quite a while to their own grief. Because on and behind the stage are his old buddies and opponents, now united in the choir of squallers, from Boris Johnson to Jeremy Corbyn, who currently know only one script: Theresa May roar and deride. It cannot be a coincidence that in the summer of 2016, when Cameron resigned after his blatant defeat (not having to pay for the pickle he got the country into), two women were ready for election to the party’s presidency. Theresa May finally prevailed without a ballot among the party members. Previously, one men after the other did not gear up to start (George Osborne) or prematurely out of the race (Boris Johnson). They have guessed that the Brexit negotiations with the EU would not make them win a potted plant. Theresa May did not shrink from that. To the brutal screenplay of this tragedy (which one would like to call tragicomic, if it would not be that much severe for the Brits) now belongs that the woman who pulled the hot chestnuts out of the fire in Brussels, must let her tell under contempt and laughter that unfortunately these are the wrong chestnuts. For sure, you could bet that the men who are shouting loudest today would not have made a better deal. One would like to say: Theresa May fought like a man, if the stereotype was not that much wrong in a double sense. She fought like a lioness and above all: like no man would have done. Namely in a hopeless situation. Every man, from Boris Johnson to Nigel Farage, would have referred to Ernest Hemingway: "But man is not made for defeat." No, men are not made for defeat, they can only be destroyed, according to Hemingway. So much heroism has been getting ridiculous at Hemingway's times already. He has always been anachronistic. So much more unworthy is therefore the British drama (not only because it is performed at the expense of the people). It's also, in the days of #MeToo and Trump's ridiculously long ties, a striking example of a manhood that never gets tired from celebrating itself vigorously, but does not realize that thereby it reaches its level of shrinkage: the man is in crisis. He is threatened by becoming a phase-out model. Just over ten years ago, the American state theorist Harvey C. Mansfield made a brilliant debacle with his book "Manliness" (Yale University Press, 2006). In there one could read the memorable sentence: "Although it is obvious that women can be masculine, it is evident likewise that they cannot be that much masculine or not as often as men." The sentence manifests downright the crisis of a frozen thinking in contrast to what Mansfield pretended to write in his book. Half a century earlier, Mansfield's Harvard colleague, the historian Arthur Schlesinger, had stated soberly that maleness is perceived less and less as a fact, but rather as a problem. This would have resulted in two developments: on the one hand a widespread uncertainty of the male identity, on the other hand an increase in aggressively reproduced self-images. Of course, these symptoms did not occur just since the 20th century. They have always accompanied the imaginations of masculinity, where they were based on presumption and pre-emptive exercise of power. Since such self-images are unstable and always endangered. Therefore, they have to be defended all the more aggressively. Literature has also developed a special sensorium in this respect, unmasking virtuously the alleged strength of men as their true weakness. One of the finest examples of this is perhaps Fontane's novel "Effi Briest". This is the deconstruction of the male concept of honor, which must confirm itself in a self-defeating duel, along with the portrait of a woman who matures into a tragic personality at the moment she gets cast out. Fontane's novel shows drastically right there how masculinity is put up for negotiation and reaches a point of crisis without rescue when the man is better destroyed than defeated, according to Hemingway's motto. In turn, the British Parliament is currently offering the most bizarre visual instruction. If Jeremy Corbyn were the man he claims to be, and if he had the sense of responsibility that he claims to act on, he would have had to work with Theresa May or overthrow her, to do it better than she does. He did and does not, because he is afraid of nothing more than to fall on his face like May. Because the braggart is a moral coward. He puts the raison d'etat behind the party doctrine, the welfare of the people behind his own. He cannot get out of his own skin, say: he, like many men, does not come out of his Hemingwayness. He must fulfill the cliché under whose premise he has begun. Women too have been forced all the time to come to stay with their femininity in society. Because they had to break the role imposed on them. Early on, they realized that there would be no other way than to re-form this femininity over and over again and to manifold it in ever new images of femininity. What was man doing in the meantime? He kept on dreaming of Hemingway. That’s why by today a Scotsman looks ridiculous wearing a kilt. Men seem to have little reason and even less phantasy to rethink and transform their role model, rather than constantly re-creating the old stereotypes. The man gradually reduces himself to folklore. And where the stereotypes of masculinity are then opposed by alternative role models, it is significant that it is parody and travesty: but the shrill drag queens rather mock the masculinity than seriously broadening their spectrum. And even the so-called softies have to carry a dubious label, which hints at contempt and makes imitation not really advisable. So do we need less masculinity? Certainly not. But urgently required would be different ideas of masculinity, beyond cliché and caricature. But for that, the images of masculinity would have to be manifold. Less Hemingway, less James Dean, less John Wayne. The macho in all its forms - and I'm not talking about the bear hunter Putin or the tie wearing Trump - is, however, and unfortunately still the dominant reincarnation of masculinity, even in its tempered or camouflaged form towards gallantry. That has to change, and that will unfortunately take time. Although the man may be an obsolete model in his frozen role model, not are the attributes habitually associated with him. Courage, strength, determination - whatever has been said about men’s special abilities - they are not his genuine or exclusive domain. And the world will continue to depend on people, no matter if women or men, who act courageously, powerfully and decisively. But all these beautiful virtues will be of no use if they are not in the service of a reason greater than the ego of their representative. That, in turn, would mean: taking responsibility spiritedly and with moral courage irrespective of the risks involved, and regardless of the dangers that are coming along with. Masculinity, once understood this way, would simply mean: humanity. So maybe the masculinity would have to be re-thought from this side. And looking at the British House of Commons, where would you find these virtues? Not on the opposition bench, not on the backbenches of the Tories. But at the very front, where Theresa May is standing pretty lonely. Whatever one may think of her, one thing cannot be denied: that she fights for the affair of her country, even if she fights a losing battle. The honorable gentlemen must copy this first of all.

Monty Python is alive!

Well, it is like getting asked by your wife: Do you want to remain being married with me or do you want to leave? Sure, you can walk just out of the house but there were some treaties signed by both parties before. Usually both, at least one party, and for sure legislation wants to dissolve and terminate the marriage mostly in conjunction with a deal.

Completely I agree with you @C8RKH , our consumer preferences and criticism about modern cars are 100% congruent. However, I see the problem with old farts like you and me (sorry for taking you into kin liability) since not only the car models, we as a market are aging. If I were boss with Porsche twenty years ago I would have fired that guy and sent him to psychological treatment coming up with the idea to build that Cayenne SUV – see, I am the one who may need such a treatment. I think the up-to-date way is not ours but paved well with all your above mentioned ‘goodies’ we dislike. McLaren is a good example of successful niche development in quite a short while to be contemporary and desired. Last year during a track day there was a father with his twenty years old son, both driving around in an Elise and an Evora. The young chap likes Lotus a lot and knows what they are about but when I asked him what he would like to have differently he mentioned all this contemporary electric, touchy, comfort orchestra – not mine but well, I guess it’s time.

I still do demand EU, especially Mrs. Merkel, to provide you with an appropriate parachute which you must not leave behind, no matter what the outcome will be next week!