Apple have spent many years looking down their noses at alternative brands. Fanbois should stop their moaning that they're getting some crap thrown back.
And where's my fekkin coffee?
360 publicly visible posts • joined 13 Apr 2007
Torybear is an individual blogger. A bit of a pillock to be honest, but a citizen and not someone who holds public office.
David Wright is a Minister of the Crown; a person who was elected to his position and is expected to follow the highest standards of propriety. The comments of others does not legitimise his behaviour.
But then, David Wright is an MP who voted against full disclosure of expense claims made. He also accepted £16k from the landlord of his flat in return for no longer paying low rent, and then moved out. Oh, and he was paid for his moving expenses too.
This nasty little man has form.
.... for the sheep posting round here.
The luddite community round here never ceases to amaze me. Incapable of thinking around a problem, just shout it out and feel all smug. FFS.
Swappable power packs have been suggested for quite a while now, but to answer the one half-decent question about potential wear and exposure to damage from siting a pack on the underside of a vehicle. The fundamental problem here is that manufacturers are still insisting on developing vehicles that remain resolutely stuck with old design practices and tacking on the electric systems. The power pack should ideally be housed within a double floor arrangement; think of it as the filler in a sandwich. This will provide better protection from damage and facilitate a better swap-out procedure as the pack would then be accessed from the side, removing the potential for accident and injury from someone driving up a ramp with a whacking great hole in it. It also means no need for a guard plate to protect the pack, and as the unit would have to fit within a defined space, it can be guided in from the outset, reducing the risk of damage to the power pack connections mating to the vehicle.
Now, try thinking about the other apparently insurmountable problems that posters on here deludedly believe make such technology impossible, and you'll realise that they're not actually so significant after all. Go on, off you go.
As markp1 said above, it's the right step forward after some shamefully rubbish offerings by other manufacturers. However, it's not a particularly brilliant piece of work.
Component-wise nothing in the break-down is particularly innovative. They've made a good stab at the weight but, again, they could have done a whole lot better - and the inclusion of safety features is a poor excuse.
Consider this: Back in 1982 a car was unveiled that would reach 115mph, 133MPG at a steady 30 and weighed just 664Kg. It contained a 3-cylinder 1100cc petrol-engine developing 70bhp and used a CVT transmission (an aside to SirTainleyBarking; manual transmissions do not weigh less or give better fuel consumption that a decent CVT system). It was a saloon that was 2 feet shorter than a Ford Sierra, yet had far greater interior space. And it didn't have some fancy range of exotic materials in its construction either, but a simple, strong aluminium bodyframe on which plastic panels were hung. In other words, a car that comprehensively trumped Volkswagen's new idea 27 years ago and influenced manufacturers to this day.
This was no styling clinic wet dream either. It was a fully built and tested engineering study which was handed to journalists to drive. And after continued development it was dropped for no other reason than business interests moving off in fatefully the wrong direction.
So, take a bow, the ECV3 from Austin Rover. Yep, that union-ruined, political football of an organisation. A shame when you know there was a company with the technical brilliance to run rings round the competiton, yet was doomed to failure by idiots.
Every time this sort of article appears the mentally challenged bang their keyboards. It's depressing to see so many people display such contempt for others who have the capacity to think creatively and make a stage for new ideas.
The only sentiment I would agree with is the continuing use of wheels. But then, reading the sheer blinkered hatred towards any alternative means of propulsion that exists both within here and elsewhere, one wonders if the hard work put in by some people to move us on from the last hundred years of obsession about the car is wasted on the dulled, myopic and fearful halfwits such as those above.
Just every biker under 50 has had a go on one of these things, probably thrashed it like a ginger stepchild and then walked away with a bit of a grin. It's an iconic machine, a testament to the vision of helping people to get from A to B cheaply and reliably. And it's utilitarian, designed to work, not look pretty.
Personally I would prefer the stylists to think a bit harder but if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Price this properly and it has the potential to sell by the shipload. I would certainly be interested in one.
back in the late 80s North wales Police had a Mini 1000 saloon panda to patrol Deeside. Lovely and cute as it was it was a poor choice of motor for the area.
This motor reminds me far too much of that. Bt good to see that WMP will have it. The lying scum will have less opportunity to conduct their summary justice in those.
This would not give you motion sickness. Dear lord where do some people get these ideas from?
And the nonsense about potholes. Deary me. And as for 'skinny tyres' - there is more to life than fitting a set of 10" Pirellis to a car in order to make it stick tot he road. Christ alive..........
I would definitely love to give it a whirl, if only to compare the experience with my Ducatis.
I find it a little hard to swallow the idea that this so-called affordable car will be feature cuting-edge technology and world-class quality yet also be made in the US. Such an idea will mean either Stateside components manufacturers are going to have to achieve the impossible, or there will be a major contribution from Japan. For the good of the company I would hope it is the latter.
Styling-wise it is possible that the company could come up with something brave, beautiful and new; sadly these are three words you could never use to describe the previous offerings of such limited talent so evidently displayed by their CEO. He may like to think he is in the same mould as Sir William Lyons, but in reality he is a long, long way from reaching such elevated heights.
And as said above by Will, £24k cannnot be described as affordable per se. But when you consider the amount of money they are receiving from the State and their desperate need to build a proper business (their press blurb says they intend to export a significant amount of their ambitious volume target of 100,000 units a year so Vic Doolan will be a busy man) as well as the model range then they don't have much choice but go go after as much for each unit as possible. So the suggested windscreen price is pretty unsurprising.
It also means that we will have to wait for someone else to come up with a car that is truly affordable to the masses, so there's still plenty of time for seomeone to corner the market.
copied that blog down to softpaper for future reference; I have a feeling this story might return next year for some reason.
Musk was only half right in correcting the idea that Eberhard was trying to protray himself as the all-innocent inventor versus the evil rich businessman. The pair of them are no more than chancers who have to date spent a lot of money to create little more than a small box of air.
this is yet another another epic fail.
The vehicle was apparently created to gain an understanding of the battery and motor systems. Of course it couldn't be done using an A3 base. Wouldn't get anything like the column inches. So it's another bit of media whoring, showcasing a laughably overweight product wrapped in incredibly dull styling. Which Audi fanciers will love anyway as they do like dullness. They think it means understated or cool. Idiots.
It's just another lashed together offering and is a waste of time.
Ten years from now anyone using these products will be feeling pretty aggrieved at being conned by the makers. That's if they last ten years before being stripped and recycled of course. To be fooled into having what is so obviously a car originally designed and styled for a combustion engine only demonstrates the timidity of the manufacturers and the gullible nature of consumers.
"I think you'll find that electric vehicles don't consume any power when stationary. It is one of the key advantages when compared with combustion engines."
The comment was a sarcastic remark to reflect the overwhelemed streets in urban areas from cars being used when the person could have opted for public transport or just plain old walked instead. Looks like that one flew way over your head.
Is it really too far for fat townie cockwombles to just walk to the local Starbucks for their skinny jizzfroth and freetrade carrot muffin after a hard night's cottaging?
Oh I forgot. "It's sooooo esential to have a car for shopping." Bollocks.
Anyway, back to this useless waste of resources that will no doubt be accompanied by a gratingly smug telly advert. It has 4 seats. Bit pointless as townies are incapable of speaking to each other let alone have friends (if you exclude their cottaging crowd of course) but predictable nonetheless.
It claims to have a range of about 80 miles. They really should start quoting the usage in hours as these things will spend moer time sitting in a queue than actually going anywhere.
It's 800mm too long and far too heavy; the kerbweight is nothing to be proud of at all, and the rubbish packaging, fashionable glazing for the roof and tailgate with needlessly large lights only demonstrate VW's failure to offer something remotely relevant to the real problems facing personal transport. But it will come in a really stupid colour to remind you that you're saving the planet. Just the thing to impress Crispin and Tabitha.
if a bit inconsistent in the results; brave styling but appalling packaging (Twizy), rather pretty (Zoe) a bit bland (Effluent - sorry, Fluence) and twee (Kanpoo). The Twizy should have 4WS to make it really effective in the town while the Zoe is something I can see going down quite well in a fashion accessory / lifestyle positioning effort.
Despite never being much of a fan of Renault these are not bad pieces of work at all. They just need a decent small and light engine in them. oops.....
It's another toddler's step by another auto firm, using largely off-the-shelf components while the more radical stuff is on the CAD station. I'll use the word radical a bit advisedly here though; any car firm could introduce a hybrid that is far more newsworthy if they dared to really think hard enough. But as effecting such a sea change can potentially damage existing sales then I can understand - if not wholely agree - with small movements such as this.
This is a good bit of work by the company, although a few questions remain. While not incredible, it presents a good overall weight figure - but it looks like more could be shaved off with more extensive use of plastics and perhaps take a second look at using air cooling instead of liquid; less parts, less weight, better packaging, emmisions and noise will be obstacles but seeing as the company has a lot of IP in noise reduction then there is one area they could combine with the engine to make it even more attractive.
It doesn't appear to be using AVT either, which would be a pity.
It's pretty reasonable for the company to ask that testers live in a specific area close to their main office in Bracknell as well as making it easy for them to have one deal with a utility company to do the power hook up.
What is not reasonable is for the company to charge people for the honour of road testing a car.
The only stunning thing about this is the utter blandness of it. The styling brings nothing new to the party whatsoever, and it looks particularly tired when placed next to the new XJ.
Performance and range hardly tear up any rule books either.
A con. An expensive con too. The Yanks can keep it.
Actually Daniel, the only thing worse than someone who doesn't read Wiki before replying is someone who reads it and take it as gospel ;-)
Anyway, back to business. The concept looks like it took all of a week to render and throw out some half-baked engineering drawing. As a chassis it's childish bilge; first, make it a monocoque and second make the power pack semi structural to help curb weight. When that's done, for heaven's sake stop including a wacking great bonnet that you don't need and start thinking about using your road footprint more effectively.
Sometimes these stylists really tick me off. Especially with lazy shite like this.
It's a bit of a fun idea to present new solutions in the future, published during the silly season. Button yer hawking.
Thinking for a second, if the recycled rubber idea from the previous story was mixed with this then they could have a one-piece sealed monocoque that would be better suited to withstanding the corrosive elements of seawater and winger roads covered in grit. Also, the controls could be connected via a wireless link to reduce the number of holes on the passenger cell to just frame links and door seals. And, you could have the fuel cell contained in a detacahable pod to speed up the recharge process. Lock and load, so to speak, which makes me wonder on the military uses of such a vehicle. Quiet, multi terrain and robust. Range would be a major hindrance though, but that will get better in time.
The suspension looks like it could be a challenge though. The varying behaviour of the tyres panels will mean some adjustment would be required, and the tuning will be very different. Now if they were really clever then they could utilise the wheel spokes as part of the suspension. But you knwo what the big problem will be? Having adjustable huggers over each wheel. I'd have one though. In matt black for stealth to avoid customs when zipping back from France with a questionable quantity of rum. Ho me hearties!
Oh, and AL fazed, it's gunwales, not gunnels.
......not about this thing being released but I am about something else.
The pics have been around for days now, it's even been on the telly, but nothing, not even a squeak on here about the forthcoming Ferrari 458 Italia.
Obviously it has absolutely nothing to do with alternative energy sources. But I assumed one feature about it would have earned column pixels on this site.
It looks dirty.
As ever, some tripe replies to a story concerning the ongoing trend of this Government failing to do what it bores everyone to tears about; the need to invest in the future.
Consider this: When you have a company that has contributed untold tens of millions to the Exchequer in taxes and is a major employer and exporter, then is helping them with loan guarantees really such a big deal?
When a company wishes to invest in THIS country to make vehicles, of which a percentage will similarly be exported, employing people (and so taking them out of the social payments circuit) then is providing a grant such a huge problem?
Well, is it?
FO indeed. Jesus.
And this will perfect for them.
Fast, super-quiet so they can zoom round without plod hearing them and enough range to get round their patch.
You can of course also add very questionable styling underneath the disguise - just the thing to get them excited and selling more 'product' to their 'customers'.
Avon Barksdale wannabe's form an orderly queue behind the sign please. No weapons in the showroom, thanks.
I feel a bit of a traitor to my biking roots for saying this but it's the original was a damned good little bit of kit, and a battery powered version could go down well. The range is decent for once and performance should be absolutely fine too, top whack is more than enough for a scooter even if it does have a windscreen and a seatbelt.
My sources say it wil be a single seater though. I think that's a mistake, but it's also lighter than the original and the centre of gravity is lower too; the old versions were a bit tippy at low speed. So you win some and lose some too.
Please let it be priced reasonably. It may have a chance then.
We've been down this road before.
The term was coined by Sir Humphrey Davy who had a couple of stabs at naming it, including calling it aluminum for a short while, before aluminium was settled upon. This was used by chemists globally, including the US, and then what is commonly thought of as an American word (which as you can now see wasn't) began to be used predominantly towards the end of the nineteenth century. Why? Lord knows.
So Alex, if anyone's aim is off it yours. Rather like the US military some might say, but I wouldn't be so churlish, oh no.
For it is here! Fresh, stylish and unbelievably sexy. Three words you could never apply to rivals from Germany or Japan. To recycle the brief line from MG's ads a few years back: Bought a BMW 7-Series recently? Kept the receipt?
However, a small tug backwards on your coat Alun. The main reason why the heritage card was being played so heavily at the launch was down to the leap (tenuous pun, sorry) forwards in the styling and how this is very much hauling Jaguar back to three of the four principles of the company; beautiful styling, opulent luxury, rakish performance and outrageous value for money. At a starting price North of £50k it's easy to see which USP they're ignoring, if only for the moment. But if you consider that the XF and XJ are the first completely new design direction in 34 years then you can understand the determination of the management to not let people think that Billy Lyons has been forgotten.
Right, onto the hybrid stuff with the bleeding obvious to begin with. They certainly won't be first. Let Fisker with his shamelessly plagiarised concepts do the spade work of gaining initial public acceptance. The market won't develop until the major players do some unveiling, and that won't happen unitl they've got the models closer towards customer expectations. But the company should not be afraid of buyers wanting hybrids. Such commercial timidity caused far too much dithering at Whitley until they finally shoved a diesel out the door - which promptly sold very well indeed.
Lastly, and I doubt I will be first with this remark, but is the second picture in your article a McPherson strut?
Dear oh dear........
I'm glad that there are people out there prepared to think for longer than 2 seconds about what the future of private transport may look like and serve as. Because, judging from the pathetic comments from the utter cretins above, we would still be sitting in nothing more advanced than a 1900 Daimler. Clueless luddites. The world turns round the sun you know. It's not flat either. And there are no witches beyond Hereford too.
When you've stopped picking at the scabs of your knuckles from where they've been scraping the ground, just try and think for a moment. Consider the stress and risk placed on you and other people when you mindlessly travel from point to point, demonstrating to the world your substandard abilities behind the wheel. Try and think about the fact that driving for pleasure went sailing out the window in most countries many years ago. Consider that all those hours you waste being bored, annoyed and embarrassed could be spent doing something productive in work, family or social perspectives. Now you may begin to understand that vehicles in the future will change. Not necessarily into this Utopian greyboxmobile (emotive needs of owners will be pandered to, which sadly means we will be suffering the delicate egos of BMW owners for some time to come for example), but as a carriage to take you to another place in safety while allowing you to get on with other tasks at the same time.
So before you embark yet again with your parrot squawkings on software/crashes/fugly/ (what is this abomination of the language? Grow up for heaven's sake!) I-have-no-brain-and-so-will-compare-to-my-1997-Mondeo, do try to understand the wider context of personal transport. Or better still, have a go at creating a vision yourself with the crayons your mummy gave you yesterday.
Rant over? I haven't even started sunshine.
If you're going to sit in pedants corner Andy then you should at least know that the Pug 908 Hdi-FAP and Audi R15 are LMP1 class, and so the Green GT machine will not be competing with them. In fact the regs for LMP2 are quite deliberately designed to prevent them winning races - even if they did make a bit of a hash of things a couple of years back.
There's a sort of two camps thing going on here. I'm concerned that the curent system sounds so old hat and vulnerable to something as simple as a breaker switch tripping and the lights going out, but any new project involving such an explostion of new technology really should be looked at cautiously. IT for IT's sake is never the answer. Being able to cope with a major disaster does not mean having lots of beige boxes. It means having the processes in place for people to make decisions quickly and decisively. It sounds more and more like Government has fallen for some patter about the wonders of computers and databases again.
Maybe it's me, but the centralisation of the control centres sounds a bit flawed and personally I see no real advantage over keeping them on a 'local' basis. Why not retain them with a digital upgrade to ensure all can work together and support each other?
Of course, the FBU will jhave a vested interest to protect the people who are its members, although sometimes I do wish they (and other unions) were a little more honest about this. But a comment towards the end got me very worried:
"staffing is down to the local-authority controlled companies that will run the RCCs."
Now the idea of privatising the control of emergency services is something I really don't like the idea of. Saving lives should not be done for profit, it is a public service. Shame on this Government for such an idea.
A reply for the demonstrably retarded person who couldn't even think up a name and chose to hide behind an AC.
1 - the reported rumour is concerned with an entry-level sports car. Now, perhaps you can explain where your 100k figure comes from as I recall example competitors to be about a third of your finger-up your-own-arse sum.
2 - The now incredibly tedious subject of emissions at source (where the power is generated in simple fektard terms for you) has been done to death round here and you've added nothing to the debate. It's national courtesy week, so quite frankly, STFU please.
3 - Don't buy a car from a company looking to produce cleaner vehicles across the entire range. What a particularly pathetic suggestion, and an apt way to end a comment consistent in incredible ignorance.
Right, moving on.
Whether the original concept would become an entry level sports car remains to be seen but I wouldn't put money on it; Ian Callum has developed a far more modern (and superb) look for the company and this concept car - now 10 years old remember - was from a different time. Ironically the concept was kicked off under the direction of by Geoff Lawson, who was also responsible for the original S-TYPE & X-TYPE. So in a way Adam Foxton, yes you can believe the same company came out with those designs. And all three were wrong too in their heavy retrospective styling.
It's a first step, and a good one too. Perhaps instead of the usual droning on about how realitvely poor the performance of the machines may appear to be, how about some congratulatory noises to the TT organisers in providing the platform for the leccy bikes to have a go in the first place. Hopefully we will see this become a regular feature now and watch development of the technology on the track take shape.
On a similar point the team and particularly Cedric Lynch deserve some applause too for their efforts. The power source, its' weight and recharge cycle may still be significant obstacles to overcome, but these are not impossible barriers.
Driving it looks like a bit of a hoot. The width and passenger placement makes a lot of sense too - a slim design gives more parking and traffic movement options.
I suppose the usual dreary crap will surface about it possibly being dangerous in a side-impact accident. Shut up and stop being so miserable people, this is a valid and quite well considered little package. A vehicle like this would be perfect for younger drivers and the ignorant selfish cretins who strut the highways consumed by a feeling of indestructability.
If only the price wasn't so ridiculous. Sigh.......
I've got a great invention. When drivers feel tired then pull over somewhere safe to do so and rest. Gosh it's so simple you wonder why Toshiba came up with such a cretinous idea.
It really is about time such inventions were banned from even being thought of, let alone tested. This is the sort of mindless stupidity that irresponsible, self-obsessed drivers will delight in, relying heavily on technology instead of their own common sense that if they are feeling drowsy to stop driving.
People who so wilfully shirk their responsibilities and would like such an invention in their car should be summarily banned from taking the wheel again and restricted to technical marvels like the paperclip.
Lexus issued a recall last year for faulty welding causing the fuel line to leak. In the engine bay.
Renault also issued one for bonnets flying up due to poor locking and BMW have historically had a problem with 3 Series firing airbags for no reason. Why do I mention this? All motor manufacturers issue product recalls, and it's irritating to see Tesla seemingly singled out for this news story without showing some balance.
The childish comments about Lotus being an acronym are similarly irritating - obviously the fat bloke in the pub gobbing off has far too many friends. I will point out to Arnold Layne however that his failed water pump during 10 years of Lotus motoring was not made by Rover, but a component supplier so do try to be a bit more accurate please. A pity they went backwards from the K to the heavier Toyota and Vauxhall lumps incidentally, but then again Lotus were never an engine company.
It's quite interesting to read the stuff written here. Partly to see the polar opposite opinions of people, both sides bunkered down as they verbally cannon each other, and partly to discover, amongst rhetoric some fairly useful stats. but it would be a good idea to put a little stop to the commonly held view that a British race doesn't exist as actually it did and continues to do so.
It's a theory undoes itself very easily when you stop and think for a moment about where the tribes and culures themselves that created a British race came from, and think where those came from, and so on until you eventually come to some scrubland in Africa. It means that eventually you do arrive at a racial purity, probably not the type the BNP and others would be happy to acknowledge of course, but I digress. The point is that to say that one type of person is a misnomer (ie British), but that others are credible (ie Anglo-Saxon, Celts, Picts etc) is wrong.
Anyway, back to the present. The majority of people who wish to live in the UK do so for economic reasons, which has gone on since the dawn of humanity. We migrate to where living is easier and food more plentiful. So to blame anyone for coming to this country is as unpleasant as the false accusations to them of being feckless law breakers and parasites on our public services. Yet we continue to do little to help these people through measurable economic aid beyond throwing some sacks of maze out the back of a Hercules. Sadly, until someone wakes up and changes the way in which we help other nations then people will go on living in conditions no-one should have to tolerate, and want to move to where they can have a better life.