eUKenGB

@C8RKH, you're treading on thin ice with your own brand of BullShit there. I didn't do my degree in chemistry to have no idea WTF I'm talking about. Sadly, many others clearly do have no idea. Let's get something straight here. I do NOT spread BS. I have only ever stated what are the facts. I also have opinions, as does everyone else, but I do NOT confuse the two. I cannot say the same about the many EV detractors. I am also not an ICE hater. I currently have about 50 ICE vehicles. Can you say the same or are you just trying to stir up controversy. Hydrogen is a terrible idea. Period. Yes it can be made to work, but it's not a good idea. However you produce the Hydrogen, it's a very energy inefficient way to move people around the planet. That is physics and not any sort of BS, but claiming the opposite is exactly that. In any case, why are people so obsessed with the idea of using Hydrogen. What are the supposed advantages that make it so desirable. I've yet to hear any Hydrogen zealot actually produce any valid reason why it's such a great idea. They're simply in love with the idea without understanding the whys and the why nots. So when they spout stuff about how great Hydrogen is, that is most definitely pure BS. As for "Zero emissions", it all depends on where you measure them and the full phrase is "zero emissions at the point of use" which is true for EVs and the many detractors who like to drop that last bit in order to pretend it is being claimed otherwise are simply spreading their own form of BS. Forcing everyone to get rid of their ICE and buy new EVs would not be a good idea, I agree. However, that's not exactly what is happening. Anyone who wants to keep their existing car can do so, but people will buy new cars anyway and the actual pressure is to get an EV when you do instead of yet another ICE. Overall, that shift IS good for the planet or do you insist on ignoring the massive impact the oil and gas industry have due to exploration, mining, extraction and refining their product - using cobalt to do so. Factors always ignored by the anti EV brigade when comparing the impact of EV vs ICE manufacture and lifetime usage. "There's not enough Lithium" is the oft heard cry of the anti EV mob (or plain ignorant). Except for 2 things. Firstly, there is (it's not rare) and secondly, batteries at their end-of-life contain all the Lithium (and other materials) they started with and so can be re-cycled. The elements do NOT get changed in chemistry. Only nuclear reactions do that and we're not at that stage of vehicular propulsion yet. So as more batteries are recycled at end-of-life, the less mining of new raw materials is required. How does that compare with burning oil in an ICE? Oh, that's right, burn it in the car and it's gone - forever (since several billion years is essentially the same thing). "EVs are burning death traps" is another. The media has created this frenzy when the FACTS are that in the US (no reason for other markets to differ greatly) an ICE vehicle is 61 times MORE likely to catch on fire than an EV. Those are the statistics based on the REAL figures of their National Fire Protection Agency. So who's bullshitting who about fire risks. Finally, what really pisses me off is that there are plenty of places I can go to read anti EV BS, but it is NOT appropriate here on this part of the forum. Lotus are making EVs and will soon be EV only. Get used to it or go and peddle your anti EV rhetoric somewhere else. Me, I've had enough of it, especially when you pointedly accuse me of something I have not done. This thread and others about the new breed of Lotus is about EVs. If you hate them so much, go somewhere else and leave the rest of us alone. Is that clear enough and BS free.

Well I beg to differ, but you're entitled to your opinion.

By the same token, I cannot help but point out the nonsense, falsehoods and many lies constantly spouted by the anti-EV brigade that are far more prolific. To be honest, I very rarely come across an EV promoter actually stating falsehoods, but that is massively prevalent from the aforementioned anti-EV crowd who are prone to distort the truth and even lie. So much so that there are groups who have got together specifically to try and correct all the misinformation being spread about EVs that is rife on the Internet, some out of sheer ignorance and a lot from those following their own financial and/or political agenda. One of my favourites was a claim (by an American) that oil is not a 'finite' resource as it is being constantly produced within the Earth, so basically we can never run out. He was quite serious about this, apparently ignorant of the several billion years out of sync his fantasy was. Whatever ones point of view regarding EVs, truth and the facts are all that's important (and towbars 😀). Everything else is just opinion.

Fair enough. I assumed you were simply taking your usual pop at EVs. 😀 My point is that range reduction, either ICE or EV is irrelevant when the distance involved is less than whatever that range is. Also, different people have very different usage requirements for towing. When I want to take a lot of garden rubbish to the tip in the trailer we use for that purpose, the 5 mile journey means ultimate range is utterly irrelevant. However whether the car can have a towbar fitted (the Taycan can't) is absolutely crucial. So I'm surprised and delighted that the Emeya can have the towbar. Effect on range is totally irrelevant.

Like an ICE vehicle, range is reduced, but depending on what one wants to tow and where, that may or may not be relevant. Don't assume everyone needing a towbar is wanting to go on a long distance caravan touring holiday. I have a number of trailers to carry e.g. motorcycles, garden rubbish and other items and none of that use involves any long distances. I've had a towbar on a car for probably 50 years - not the same car, obviously 😀. I want to maintain that facility and an EV can provide EXACTLY what I want in that regard. As long as it is capable of having a towbar fitted and nowadays that depends on how a car is homologated and not on whether a nearby towbar supplier can weld up something suitable. I fully understand that some people have no interest in any towing facility at all. That's their business. But don't assume your lack of interest defines what others should or should not be able to do with their car.

Surprisingly it can even have the retractable tow bar, like the Eletre. So whatever its towing capacity, it'll be more than that of a Taycan which even as the Cross Tourismo model has a tow capacity of, er, ZERO.

What launch. I was expecting an event, as for the Eletre. Instead they just posted a bunch of utterly worthless videos on the intensely annoying website, along with a few moody photos. It is a lovely looking car, but I still am no wiser about anything else that matters. Again it seems absurd to ask for deposits prior to releasing full details, nor even any actual cost information. Even more bonkers is people placing deposits. Clearly money is no object. Nice car, but at Eletre money? Nah. I don't think so. Emeya Cross Turismo? That might be. 😀

And what's wrong with that? I just don't get why for so many people a manufacturer is apparently supposed to make only the type of car they like and no other. Lotus haven't abandoned the sports car segment, but that is untenable without other types of cars, like SUVs, as Porsche realised some years ago. However, what's the problem if Porsche and Lotus do make other car types? The fact those sell well allows them to make the sports cars that everyone loves, but very few buy. Simple economics. Only problem is if such a sports car manufacturer totally abandons that segment for a popular type (like the SUV). Even then, I understand the reasons, but which manufacturer has done that? I have no interest in a Bugatti Veyron, or Lotus Eviya. They are simply pointless in my opinion, not just because I cannot afford them. They truly are pointless as a road vehicle. However, I don't hate on those manufacturers because I don't like those cars. Of more concern is manufacturers who do offer a car of a type I like, but then f**k it up. I think the Taycan Cross Turismo is a potentially a great car, but Porsche encumber it with their arrogance that they know best. "Thou shalt not use just one pedal to drive" and make many dumb decisions with their interior design which otherwise is delightful. These sort of things worry me about a company. But Bugatti offering their Veyron (other ridiculous hyper cars are available) bothers me not at all. So you don't like an SUV? No problem as Lotus will be releasing other model types that you will like. If you don't like anything Lotus offer, why are you on The Lotus Forum. None of the above is aimed at any individual.

Seems very little info is escaping about this model. Simply resizing an Eletre image is not terribly helpful. Again, I wish Lotus were not so secretive. Knowing what is in the pipeline can make a huge difference to one's buying decisions. As I've said before, keeping everything so secret is more likely to make people look elsewhere. Do we actually know ANYTHING about the 134? Will it be Macan sized? Smaller? Larger? Intended price point?

I was just watching an Eletre review video and it was stated that even on highest regen setting, it was still not 'one pedal driving'. Really? I had assumed that Lotus had NOT gone down the Porsche route of arrogantly deciding for themselves that their customers did not want it. 'One pedal driving' is one of the delights of driving a EV. Have Lotus really not provided that as an option? That would be huge turnoff for me. Anyone driven an Eletre yet and can comment?

Only just caught up here and I completely agree. An appalling and embarrassing gaff.

Ha, I was only just looking at that a few minutes ago and thinking it was a Lotus competitor. However, like Lotus, the "starting at about £80k" shows it as an attempt by another manufacturer to leapfrog into the supercar stratosphere with an overpriced EV. Regarding pricing and in relation to the Cyberster, why is that being priced as high as it is? It is after all based on the same platform as the MG4 - a car which can sell at £30k. Electronics and displays etc will cost no more, it costs no more to bend metal into one shape or another, so why the almost 100% hike in price? Because they can. How can cars sell in China for so much less than the same car over here? Because that's what the Chinese market will stand. Outside China there are too many fools prepared to spend vastly more and so the market keeps moving upward in price. Car costs the same to produce, so it is clear that the higher prices outside China are pure profit. Manufacturers justify their prices, complaining that EVs are so expensive to produce, then are strangely able to sell them at much lower prices in China. Who's pulling whose leg here? It is all about profit and the more expensive the car, the more profit there is in it for the manufacturer who simply tries to extort as much of it as possible from their customers. I understand the principle of supply and demand, but this just serves to increase the gap between the 'haves' and the 'have nots'. Carried to its logical conclusion, eventually there will be NO reasonably priced cars available, so 'having' or 'not' will then mean cars. Apart from that, I do really like the new Caterham. 😀

Indeed, I have been trying to ascertain more of the Cyberster's 'engineering', but nothing found yet. Importantly it is in the right price range. Sadly it seems almost all the existing manufacturers want to get into the £100k plus bracket and see electrification as the way to do that. Jaguar is saying exactly that. Realistically, the Cyberster will not be equivalent to a Lotus, with the latter's focus on driving performance, but to be honest, that doesn't bother me. Any car nowadays is faster than the roads, so no point in spending more for that top end performance that you will never be able to use. Unless on a track, but been there, done that, no longer interested. I see the Cyberster as more of a MB SL equivalent than any Lotus and that suits me fine. I loved my SL500. A fantastic car and exactly what I wanted, except it wasn't electric. So the Cyberster definitely appeals. Yes, so do the Lotus EVs, but the way their prices are creeping up, they are heading into the 'completely irrelevant' territory.

Well, let's be honest, that's entirely speculation. The Eletre is no heavier than any ICE SUV of the same size and I believe the Lotus EVs will be using the new QiLin battery from CATL which offers a greater kWh/kg energy density. Mind you, that is also part speculation, based on the fact that Zeekr are just releasing their first QiLin powered cars and prior to that, over 100kWh is unusual, which leads me to suspect that Lotus will be using the QiLin batteries. Personally I think the current parlous state of UK roads is of far greater importance than minor variations in weight, that may or may not give a vehicle yet more speed you cannot use. 😬

Only about 5% more than the Rivian and more than 10% less than the Hummer EV. It's a new world where 1,000hp and well over £100k price tags are the new normal.

So just over 2,000 kg towing capacity. Certainly decent if not stunning. I also would like to know more about the 134. I guess that'll be a long wait.

No I have not, but I do believe that a website should provide all the details and eliminate the need to contact the company to extract such fundamental information. With production due to start this month for the Fisker Ocean, they are still being remarkably secretive about technical info for the car. But they have stated the towing capacity. 😀 If you don't want to tow anything, then this lack of info is of no importance. However, Lotus clearly believe some will want to do that, or else they wouldn't make a tow-hitch available. Unfortunately, how useful that will be totally depends on its homologated towing capacity, so it's information that should be readily available and included in the published specs. for the car.

Since it is now being showcased around dealers, surely full specs must be available. So what's the towing capacity?

Damn auto correct. But mea culpa for not noticing. However, Autocar have no such excuse.

Lotus seem to be following the trend to make a website that's all flashy, but hard to actually extract any real information - and contains at least one error. Does the base Eletre have 'Hands Free tailgate'? It is stated in one location that it does, but elsewhere lists that only on the S and R. So which is it? Disappointing that the base model cannot be upgraded with some of the options to bring it closer to the S. I for example would like a better choice of colours for the base model, both inside and out. But certainly not worth the extra for an S just for that. The big question in my mind though is still about towing. Yes, they list the towbar as an option, but no mention that I could find about the towing capacity, which being legally regulated is kinda important to know. Oh and what about V2X, i.e. Vehicle to Home/Grid etc. Does it have any such facility. Another important factor for me, but again, I could find no mention of this whatsoever on the website.

How hard would it have been to actually get the module numbers correct.

Seems to have been fixed a couple of days ago. Took them a while though. 🤨

This is particularly relevant for anyone interested in perhaps converting a Lotus to EV, or indeed any other vehicle in the specified age range or even just because you believe DVLA should be doing the right (and legal) thing. Whether you believe the future is Battery Electric Vehicles, Hydrogen or synthetic fuels based or even if you don't really care, I'm sure you do care about DVLA acting in accordance with the law and not making their own interpretation to suit whatever nonsensical agenda they insist on following. So please take a look at this, follow the link below and sign the petition and hopefully we can make a difference. The issue is that DVLA are refusing to re-classify as ELECTRIC Taxation Class, cars aged 2001 to 2017 and now converted to electric. Insisting instead on continuing to charge VED (Road Tax) based on CO2 emissions the car no longer produces. This may not be huge for a small car, but as it becomes desirable for larger and more expensive cars to be converted, this is a BIG issue. However, this is not about escaping VED. It's about an EV being charged appropriately, i.e. as an EV, whatever that rate is. I have even chased this up, via my local MP, with the Office of the Chancellor of the Exchequer who rather dodged the question and claimed they were concerned about the safety of converted cars. A position somewhat in contradiction to pre 2001 cars being happily re-classified by DVLA to ELECTRIC after conversion. The problem is that DVLA are misinterpreting the current regulations that govern this, whether deliberately or simply due to stupidity is open to question. The net result however is that DVLA are not following the regulations and hence are actually breaking the law. For those who don't want to delve into the wording of the actual regulations in question. Here is a précis of them as they specify VED. Let's define 'X' as the overly complex rules determining applicable rate of VED, based on age, capacity, emissions and cost of the car. The regulation logic can then be distilled down to this:- • All cars shall be taxed at a rate determined by X • EXCEPT electrically propelled vehicles (pre 2017) which are EXEMPT. DVLA are interpreting that as meaning those cars first regd. between 2001 and 2017, normally VED rated according to X, but now converted to electric, must continue to be taxed according to X, ignoring the fact that the exemption is absolute and in the case of EVs, clearly X must be disregarded. I hope that clarifies what DVLA are doing and I implore you to sign this petition and help make DVLA abide by the law and stop making up their own:- https://chng.it/Qy92JTfkZB Please make the effort and sign this and also encourage others you know to sign. Please. The more names on the petition, the more chance we have of correcting DVLA.

Just looking again at Lotus' website and the configuration options they currently show. There is a yellow body colour, but it's more of a primrose than the deep yellow of the launch vehicle. Is it in fact supposed to be the same colour, or are they actually only offering something way less attractive? Anyone know?

Do we yet have ANY idea about price and/or towing capacity?