free hit
MPx's Content - The Lotus Forums Jump to content


Full Forum Member (FFM)
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by MPx

  1. Well I've not measured it but at 6 feet tall, I have to duck just a bit to get under the platform at the height I leave it. And the Esprit is supposed to be 44 inches high. So I'm guessing 10 foot would be the minimum and anything more a bonus. I suppose I could leave less clearance above the lower car, but that would just be a pain to use and move around.
  2. In the barn You need to put a four poster or two in your garage Andy. Can double up the toys that way.
  3. Its excessive... ...but you know that already and if its what you want to do then good luck to you, its your life to enjoy as you see fit.
  4. Not sure what you're asking re: "sensors". I've had/fitted several Chamberlain door openers over the years and they've always worked and outlasted my (or my folks) tenure at the property. Probably about 10 years longest ownership. In the early ones the bulbs blew very quickly - probably due to vibration - and in the end I stopped replacing them and managed well enough with the other lights in the garage. Otherwise all good.
  5. I know they aren't the last word in speed, but my '85 RS Turbo would have easily gotten away from any cyclist including the real mc Hoy so you must have done some impressive pedal work there Sparkles. No wonder he wanted you to work on the cars!
  6. The controversy in your statement revolves around "it all". "It all" in your context is (I'm guessing) sorting out post ICE personal transport? Or wider transport issues? Or air quality and pollution? Or electricity generation? Or the charging infrastructure? Or however much of the introduction of EVs you're including. But that's actually a very narrow focus for the words "it all". In practice, every generation makes its contributions (did you not get the example of the Victorians?). "My" generation has given us the internet amongst many many other things. Most generations also do stuff which is pretty appalling when looked at with hindsight. But subsequent generations building on the positives of what has come before generally make progress on what was previously achieved and seek to address its more dire consequences. Stuff always gets done. I'm not placing any bets on dates. I've already agreed that the ICE ban may happen by 2035 or even earlier. However that will occur if it captures the imagination of the public and they get behind the concepts making it demand lead. Nothing that any Government of 2020 decree will happen in 2035 will actually happen in 2035 because they said so. I cant think of any long term Government infrastructure initiative that has been delivered on anything like the original schedule - so my bet, if I made one, would be for longer date rather than shorter, but I accept that "the general public" may move quicker...
  7. To that question ... basically yes. I'd part justify it by looking back through history and what we think of previous generations. Pick any period. EG: Coal is a finite resource you know - those Victorians really painted us into a corner with all that dependency on coal. Lucky their offspring came up with some alternatives or we'd have been in a right fix - the b*****ds. What did the Victorians ever do for us? In practice I believe that we humans are incredibly clever and adaptable when we have to be. As it becomes necessary some people in the future will come up with new stuff that we cant even imagine today, and using what we do know to force things too early will look strangely quaint to those who come later and actually solve the problem. Some of that ingenuity will be used to magically distill some mystery liquid fuel from something in small but adequate quantities to allow the occasional firing up of a Rolls Royce Merlin engine - just for fun. Imagine in the '70s when they wrote Star Trek. They had hand held intercoms with pictures on and everything. Who'd have thought we'd ever see that for real. I'm not making proposals. I do point out some of the flawed logic in some of the proposals I read. I do it to add what I see as balance to stuff that creeps towards the evangelical - I don't mean it to just be negative so if that's how it seemed I apologise. My proposals, if I were to make them would be much more radical and entirely based around the "iceburg" and not "rearranging the deckchairs". My views would only be acceptable to a tiny minority and I'd just get flamed so its not worth the time typing them up. Needless to say the issue for me is all about Mankind, our belief in the sanctity of (human) life and its lengthening and expansion at any cost. On current population expansion trends we will overpopulate this planet and simply run out of ways of feeding ourselves if we don't pollute ourselves to death, or go to war for religious or maybe water resource reasons in the meantime. That could easily happen in the next 100 years, long before the oil runs out or global warming wreaks its havoc.
  8. Lots to agree with here, but you keep stressing the "NO MORE OIL" point and I'm one of the doubters about that being relevant to the time scales being discussed. Throughout my near 50 year driving life there have been periodic predictions about just a few more years left of oil. Pre-lockdown use of oil went inexorably up, but we didn't actually run out by any of the end of the world dates predicted. What actually happens is when they're starting to run low the major producers look harder to find more reserves. And also as the price has gone up, its become cost effective to extract oil from places where cost was once prohibitive. So I totally agree that the actual amount of oil is finite and so it will eventually run out. But I don't agree that it will run out in the next 15 years, or indeed in the next few generations...maybe not even in 150 years. I also don't buy the 2035 mantra as a firm date of "what IS going to happen". It might be done then. If BEVs or similar reach a tipping point in adoption in the next 10 years it could even be brought forward, but no government commitment made today to any date in the far future will get served much more than lip service by any government of tomorrow. If people haven't bought enough BEVs or, more likely, the Gov haven't actually gotten around to building the necessary charging infrastructure by then (and as Andy points out there's no strong track record of them doing such things to any published schedule - excepting of course all the Nightingale Hospitals that weren't needed) then it wont be practical and the date will be changed. Meantime I'll continue to enjoy our i3 and keep an open mind as to the "best" car to fulfill the roles that other cars have in our household.
  9. I'm sure we'll never know Neal, but I'm guessing: You were going for it and it was on its original brakes and you needed to stamp on the anchors to slow it down. Unfortunately, unless in pristine just serviced condition, the fronts aren't up to it and the balance bias might well have allowed too much pressure at the back locking up the rears. Hard to think how else you'd loose the back end on an M100. With a reasonable front caliper/disk upgrade which enables you to actually lock the fronts, such a thing is much less likely. Although you can cock the balance back up by over-upgrading the rears too!
  10. Hard to be sure with limited experience of different models, and also what criteria to use: Europa (twin cam special JPS over oatmeal) was the car that made me a Lotus fan, but I was only 18 and have never driven one. Did drive the later Europa at the factory and liked that , but too small. Turbo Esprit on my wall since uni and determined to have one. Finally got one in 1990 - awesome machine, everything I'd hoped for - hence still have it. Lotus Carlton - got real respect from those in the know - followed/stalked/pictured when in use. In big demand for charity rides and the odd wedding etc. Amazingly quick for a bus, but a barge on track. Much enjoyed for a decade. Elise S1 - a complete giggle on track, but too small for me - quickly moved on. M100 Elan S2. Amazing A to B car on A and B roads. Super easy to drive very quickly safely after the least amount of getting used to it. Needed brakes/exhaust/chip upgrades to deliver the performance its capable of, but having had that its another keeper (17 years so far). Factory drives of the Evora LE and S - very capable but not yet tempted enough to shell out. but for me, the winner is: Talbot Sunbeam Lotus S1 - embassy black, silver stripes, grey cloth. Simply a forgotten game changer. It preceded but still out hot hatched most of the hot hatches that followed (I've had/driven most eg: Golf/XR/RS Turbo/205 GTI/etc.) All the same characteristics of practical performance so an ideal road car but also great fun on track. But probably what swings it is that it got just as much respect as the Carlton, but from a much wider audience, not just the few petrolheads in the know. From classic car events to petrol stations to the local dump queue everyone seemed to have some memory of the car and/or had always wanted one and were keen to talk about it. No one was nasty just a constant positive vibe - (other than they rust to b****ry for a pasttime!). Had mine from 2002-2005 and still miss it.
  11. Well I can see where the cynical views have effectively been endorsed by that podcast, and the personnel (at least in that environment) weren't very charismatic - just corporate. Russell Carr did much better at the Evija launch, although that was probably easier. But overall my impression was much more favourable than is being expressed by Andy and Jonny. They did stick to the script about what a car "for the drivers" means at Lotus - light, fast and above all great handling. That alone should marginalise some of the fears of dilution by an SUV producer .... They did report increased sales and a profit! They did well in trying to be inclusive of clubs asking (IMO very poor) self interested niche questions instead of wider questions about the cars/futures/timetables/marketing - stuff important to Lotus that they may have engaged with, with a bit more enthusiasm. I was encouraged that they see the issue with NLA spares and gave at least lip service to not allowing that to happen so much in the future (presumably for current and future models) - plus offering further help with after market initiatives for the older stuff. If they want to grow volume they seem to know that they need to concentrate their fire in N America and China - however bad that is for us in the UK, the UK market for Lotus doesn't offer so much potential growth as those others. They've made progress completing additional production facilities at Hethel The bits I'm less up beat about They've made no progress in marketing and the only new idea put out - offering a few days driving on roads - is (IMO) an avenue to 10s of more sales not 10000s. Although Sports cars are very aspirational for the young and it will be good long term to raise awareness there, I suspect the reality of volume sales to actual buyers are much more likely to be middle aged or worse who have more disposable income. They didn't say/weren't asked about what channels they're using to get to those people. They were a bit behind the curve with the opportunity for classic "continuation" models that seems to have been a reasonable earner for others - plus another marketing opportunity. There's still very little to show for 2 years and as much investment as you could imagine. I'm surprised their adopted corporate style and training hasn't led to a much clearer roadmap with many tangible deliverables along the way that they would be keen to trumpet and not keep in confidence.
  12. Some interesting points there, many I agree with, but several opinions were presented as "facts" that actually aren't facts. Take the VED point - its clearly nowhere near their biggest single income. It will be dwarfed by what the gov makes from Duty+VAT on fuel let alone other areas outside transport. But you're right they will have to come up with things to maintain their tax take when VED / Fuel Duty etc no longer deliver.
  13. My understanding of the strategy is that the Gov are only trying to slow the spread not stop it. So they want a continuous stream of cases but at a low level that hospitals can cope with. If the Fkwits self select at a low enough level then they'll form the steady stream of cases and the restrictions wont have to get more draconian, but if they've interbred too much and the numbers are too high then more restrictions will follow. Not sure how they're calculating infection rates since they aren't testing and there seems to be a three week lag to deaths but they must be basing it on some sort of assumptions. The odd part seems to be that as the measures work and the numbers drop they will ease some restrictions to put a few more of us in harms way, since ultimately the assumption seems to be that nearly all of us will have to get it. Then as the rate ramps up again the restrictions will come back to slow it again. And repeat til the end of the year or whenever we get working drugs/vaccine. I'm persuaded this is a good strategy to save the most lives, but I'm not convinced saving the most lives at any cost is the best strategy...
  14. Well we like funny too...and this made me laugh out loud today. An insta from our niece today - one of the thousands of hard pressed GPs "You wont believe this but the surgery has taken some calls from people phoning in to ask for the number of the 111 service..." Yes really!
  15. I agree that EVs are currently a more expensive proposition than petrol cars but assume that will change when the manufacturers need to sell to more than 5% of the population - I think getting rid of the grant would "reduce their price" by £3500 overnight, much as it did with when they stopped the bribes for Solar PV . I'm not even sure that the environmental case is all that strong, other than city air quality. But IMO they still have a place and can be great fun...
  16. Going back to the prognosis for the outbreak.... I understood the rationale saying that none of us have any immunity to it, so 80+% of us are likely to get it before sufficient immunity builds up and transmission rates slow to nearer 0. But there have been a series of new viruses over the millennia that none of us have any immunity to, and although some have been quite widespread and fairly deadly, I'm not aware of any getting to an 80%+ coverage before subsiding. Also, the most recent oft quoted on the TV seem to be Sars, Australian Flu, Birdflu, etc and all of those have failed to get anywhere near their projected worst case infection levels. Why is this one different?
  17. Of course we would all like to avoid the virus, but if Greg's post above has any basis in fact, he suggests that ... ~85% of us will have to get it at some stage unless the onset can be delayed long enough for a vaccine to be developed which at a predicted 18 months (15 more?) seems unlikely. So given that we will be getting it... I'm hoping to be in the 99.x who will survive it and ideally the 80% where the symptoms are officially deemed "mild". Timing is all that the Gov policy seems to be trying to affect, I don't think that they are saying that it can be avoided. Maybe those of us lucky enough to be otherwise healthy should fall on our swords early to try to get to the 85% immunity level quicker??
  18. When I got my Esprit in 1990 it was my only car and therefore my daily. Worked brilliantly but its got an old school service schedule. A B A C every 6 months or 6000 miles. For my use that meant three services a year and the expensive C service with belts came around all too often. After 2 years I bought another car to split the miles up a bit and then a motor bike to commute on, and then another car, and then another car ...and now 30 years later I find I'm doing about 1000 miles a year and am more concerned about reliability than I ever was when using it daily. Another potential issue - while most stuff should be fine, there are a few bits of unicorn in most of the models and if that breaks it could be off the road for a while....
  19. Another negative.... Late Turbo Esprit Jan 96 reg, Mid Dec 95 build. Obviously no trouble to pop out to the barn, get the ladders out, cover off, organise lighting, empty the glovebox, take pics, reverse previous actions. The things we do for love eh?
  20. Having spent a day or so removing the three bolts holding on the old header tank I was able to send it off as a pattern for a nice new shiny one that came a week or so ago. So that just meant summoning up the patience to get the three new bolts back in for the new tank. And it only took all day! Yeaaaaaaa! Simply impossible to get at. If it needs doing again I'll leave it to Sparky! But very happy its done for now...
  21. This is a good point Ant that I've not heard being addressed anywhere. I have 6 diesel engines and 8 petrol engines in various bits of groundcare kit (and 1 electric for the sprayer). If they can produce electric lorries/buses (which I have seen) then presumably they "could" produce electric other stuff, but the point is, as far as I know, no one is developing such kit. Given the ridiculous costs of current groundcare/agricultural kit (multiples of typical car money) its hard to understand how the Ag industry is going to be able to afford a wholesale changeover to new kit even if it does become available. My latest compact tractor is 11 years old and cost £20k... Hopefully rural supplies of red diesel and petrol will continue long after the new car ban.
  22. Interesting stuff well argued, but some flaws in my view. On the science/density argument I'm sure he's done the maths, but the reality isn't as he implies so there is something else going on that he fails to address - maybe the efficiency of electric versus ICE motors? - I dont know. Clearly electric cars actually go much further, much faster than ICE cars on 33kWHrs of energy. No mainstream ICE will do much on 1 gallon of petrol, ALL electric cars will do more on 33kWHrs. In terms of Volume, the Evija shows what can be achieved by not having all the stuff associated with ICE - the Evija is not 20 times the size of other hypercars. Also on the charging infrastructure/convenience points - absolutely agree with him and Harry...but again not necessarily an issue for a significant market share. As I said above I've never yet needed to use the half baked public charging infrastructure. Its simply not relevant. And plugging in overnight at home every few days is way simpler and more convenient than stopping at a petrol station. Its a bit like saying no-one will buy an Exige until its got 4 seats. Obviously its no good for someone that needs four seats but there's plenty out there that don't. And those that need 4 seats or load space only sometimes (rarely?) have the option to hire a 4 seater or van and we don't deride their choice because it doesn't do everything they might ever need.
  23. Fascinating thanks Andy....lots of good reasons there for me to avoid a Model S and stick with RangeRover - phew! However there's lots there about charging. The Tesla charging infrastructure is held up in EV circles as exemplary - and certainly beats the madness of the separate and uncoordinated networks of different standards that the rest of us in the EV community have to put up with. I have used various public chargers just to see if I could and it is very much hit and miss if its going to be available and work when you get somewhere. Nowhere near a practical proposition for the non-warriors at the moment. But for our use of the i3 we've never yet HAD to get a charge away from home, so none of those points impact... I think the Lithium batteries chemical issue you talk about has also been marginalised by BMW (and some others) in their charging software. The usable capacity is displayed on the dash going from 100% to 0%, but that isn't really what the battery sees. By only displaying from (I'm guessing) 10% to 90% in absolute terms much of the bad stuff is avoided - it never fully Discharges and similarly isn't "topped up". Also the charge rate drops dramatically when over 80% full (indicated) and loads of time then put into "cell balancing". Again aimed at battery longevity. As is a relatively slow max charge rate of 11kW. Clearly building these margins into the battery charge cycle will give less headline "range" and slower charge times. These are very bad points in terms of increasing the number of people the car will suit...but for those of us that charge slowly overnight on Economy 7 it simply doesn't impact. Certainly from all I've read in the i3 community such an approach seems to be paying dividends in terms of battery health. And the car being online to BMW also has some upsides. I got a notice of a charging cable recall on screen when driving to get the fish and chips tonight - all very down with the kids.. Nothing about my car ownership is about saving on running costs or being Eco. I like having whatever car I want which I think is the right car for what I want to do. The i3 replaced a Jimny we enjoyed for 10 years. The i3 is fun to drive (yes really! - but that's in context, within 50 miles of home with little motorway use and mostly round trips to the nearest town), narrow for the lanes, good for the two of us as we have the back seats folded which gives a large load area (shops and dump). It was ridiculously expensive to buy compared with other similar sized hatchbacks, but has been (so far) ridiculously cheap to run. I reckon once you've got used to one pedal driving your wife's EV you'll find yourself borrowing it more often than you'll admit to...
  24. Where are you getting your prompts for these thoughts Andy? We've run an i3 for nearly 2 years and as a result I spend some time on the SpeakEV forum (which is a bit painful I admit) and these sorts of rumours are regularly flamed there. Its certainly not true that the batteries in the i3 react badly to small journeys and frequent recharging. That is exactly how we use ours and have had absolutely no degradation in 2 years, which is still only 10k miles. There are many reporting i3s from as early as 2014 with no battery degradation and there have been no battery swaps so far under the "80% of capacity in 8 years or a free swap" BMW warranty. Some cars reported coming up to 200k miles now. (This good news is for the BEV version - the version with the Range Extender motor has a bit of a - petrol engine - reliability reputation and was dropped by BMW last year) I've been looking at Tesla as a poss replacement for my 5.0SC RangeRover. I've seen that depreciation on them is actually slightly less than on the Rangey. Both £100k+ new for a top spec so otherwise comparable financially. I tend to buy at 4/5 years old and the Teslas I've looked at appear to have sold - or at least moved on from the dealers where I've seen them. They are however not a patch on the Rangey as a place I'd like to spend a lot of time. I'm not clued up on the Zoe, Leaf, and low end stuff so maybe that's where all the dud batteries are, but I doubt it. I think the industry generally has been pleasantly surprised by how well batteries have maintained performance over their life (predicted as 8+ years), so while there will no doubt be some stories, I shall be very surprised if its many. It is also true that batteries are improving all the time (the current i3 has about a 30% battery improvement over ours - which is itself 50% better than the original i3 of 2014-2016) so our view of the early cars may be that their batteries are useless, whereas they may in practice still be performing as they originally did.
  • Create New...