eUKenGB

I don't understand this need to champion Hydrogen as an alternative/better power source for cars. There are massive problems with trying to use Hydrogen. I used to think it was THE answer, but then I looked into it more it was obvious how impractical it actually is. Expensive to produce, really hard to store in quantity, cannot be simply piped around like natural gas, just what is its supposed 'advantage'? Range? No doubt convinces many, but what is currently being touted will soon be surpassed by batteries and more to come with further battery development. How will the range of Hydrogen cars increase beyond what is now offered? Bigger tanks? Better Hydrogen? Ha. Re-fuelling speed? With the latest BEVs and 800v charging, capable of 80% charge in under 20 minutes, is that really a problem? Especially when the majority of cars will only ever need to be charged at home, overnight and never actually take advantage of any rapid charging ability of their car. Easier to find somewhere to refill with Hydrogen than recharge? You're having a laugh or haven't done the maths. There are already more re-charging points in the UK than petrol pumps. They're so easy to implement everyone can have one in their home and commence every journey with the equivalent of a full tank. How many homes will have their own personal Hydrogen production plant? I think we all know the answer to that. Better for the environment? Nope. So the car doesn't use power directly from the grid, but where do you think the energy to produce the hydrogen comes from? Hydrogen production is not a simple or efficient process. It requires a lot of energy and from where is that going to come? So it really comes down to what seems to be an irrational hatred of batteries. Well, as I've said before, Hydrogen cars also have batteries so you're not avoiding them anyway. Admittedly, fewer batteries than a BEV, but with batteries being re-cycled it'll make little to no difference. Does a hydrogen car provide the same aural thrill as an ICE? Nope. They're exactly the same to drive and listen to as a BEV (although to be as fast means more batteries). So I say again, just what is driving this desire for hydrogen (with battery) power rather than just batteries.

Completely agree. I am a firm believer in cutting pollution (of all sorts) and switching to electric powered vehicles is a good way to help with that (whatever some may say), but Climate Change? Nah.

Well I don't know about the basic Thruxton, but the Thruxton R (as pictured above) is incredibly light handling and certainly does not require "a bit of effort to get it round the corners". It is admittedly not a lightweight bike, but that is completely at odds with how light it feels to actually ride. What! Only 2 bikes? 😀

Good choice. Had mine for over 4 years now. Reminds me of when I first got into bikes and built a couple of Tritons. Only this is MUCH better.

I always like the Arthur C. Clarke quote:- "Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"

I actually think the best potential new tech. is from QuantumScape, a Bill Gates-backed startup developing next-generation batteries for EVs. They've found a way to use no actual anode but Lithium is deposited there during charging and completely removed when discharging, so each cycle puts the battery back to its initial state with no possibility of build up of contamination and/or dendrite growth that over time kills a traditional Li-ion battery. Effectively the anode is created afresh during each charge. Obviously a way to go before we see it outside the lab, but it certainly looks promising and Bill Gates is not known for backing duds.

That's just the stock market isn't it. I agree, utter madness.

Yes agreed. There is a tendency to gloss over potential future problems, just because it suits the zeitgeist. Completely agree. It's a difficult matter to address as most people seem unable to think objectively about a problem. I may think that electric vehicles are our best route forward, but as you so succinctly put it, what we need is less humans. No argument there.

Whoah there Andy, it's a bit of a stretch to compare old batteries with nuclear waste. There's no reason why batteries cannot be completely re-cycled, whereas nuclear reactive waste is what it is and will only change according to the half-life of the isotopes involved and again, laws of physics come into play and there's nothing we can do about that. So not really comparable at all. C'mon. I realise we're not there yet, but ultimately we need to re-cycle everything. Just using up anything that cannot be replaced is a short term solution and by short term I don't mean a few years. I mean in relation to the future of the human race which we hope will continue as long as the universe can support such life. Or do we simply shrug our shoulders and say 'not my problem'? Needless to say, it's all driven by money, but there's no physical reason why we cannot fully re-cycle battery constituents into new batteries. The fact we are not yet doing this 100% does not negate the validity of using batteries at all. I don't see the grid infrastructure being such a big problem. It was recently calculated that if every car in the US was transformed into electric power, it would require an additional 30% of electricity production. That's not insurmountable and I don't see why it should be a bigger problem here. Not only that, but with increasing home generation, the actual overall additional requirement is reduced, so less extra needs to be produced and easing the amount that has to be carried by the grid. We all know that the manufacture of even EVs involves emissions we need to reduce and even eliminate, but production of those emissions is centralised and hence easier to deal with and clean up, compared to every ICE vehicle on the planet simply chucking it all into the atmosphere. We've obviously improved that massively, but decentralised emissions, just spewing from every vehicle will always be harder to control. I long thought Hydrogen would be the answer (although hating the demise of the ICE in any case), but despite being a massive climate change sceptic, I do see the need to reduce our pollution of the planet and having experienced the thrill of driving a good EV, I can't wait to get shot of the ICE in my cars. However, I came to realise the shortcomings of the Hydrogen solution. Real 'laws of physics' problems, whereas battery tech is improving to the point it is a real viable alternative for almost everyone now and still with plenty of improvements yet to come. Surely a car with e.g. 600 mile range, full charge in less than half an hour, easily recyclable batteries and costs no more to purchase than the ICE equivalent answers all the technical objections? That is all achievable within the near future. Not next year for sure, but it's not that far away. Making Hydrogen storable in liquid form at room temperature and pressure? No way, never, not in this universe. I wish it were different, I still love my original concept for a closed loop production system with microwave stations in orbit, collecting the sun's energy and beaming it to earth to electrolyse water into Hydrogen and Oxygen, on a massive scale. But the reality is that dealing with that Hydrogen is too problematic to be viable for personal transportation. Not when batteries are proving to be the better option. Auto manufacturers have no hidden agenda here. They have no reason to use batteries rather than Hydrogen Fuel Cell (also with batteries of course), apart from the fact that they are proving to be the better solution. Hence they've all dumped their Fuel Cell plans. I'm a realist. EVs are coming, no more ICE from 2030 looks like. So rather than complain and object about it all, prepare for it by rejoicing in the advantages of a good EV and look forward to it. They are not necessarily boring. Is the Evija going to be boring? I doubt it.

Yes Andy, you're right on all that. Don't get me started on smart meters. Ours is so smart it cannot even connect to any network here so totally fails to communicate any information. So we have to do the meter reading and that's an appallingly badly designed process. They really thought that through didn't they. Damn, I said don't get me started… As for all these claims about showing how much you've saved. As you say, BS. Our Smart heating system constantly tells us how wonderful it is and how much it's saved us, but since they have NO idea how much we would be using had we not installed their system, there is no possible way they can calculate any savings or otherwise. In any case, any savings we might be making will be more than offset by the cost of the batteries (damned batteries again 😀) in each thermostat that require such frequent replacement. So yes, totally agree, the green agenda is full of BS and downright lies. I love technology. And I hate technology. I don't see any resolution to that.

Yes, I used to claim I would never get an automatic. But I never thought I would get old either. Turns out I was wrong on both counts. Driving a car in the UK now is not as much fun as when I was growing up and first getting into cars and motorcycles. Way fewer cars and automatics were for dummies who couldn't drive. But as time passed with more and more draconian speed limits and the roads became more crowded, I found the best way to enjoy a blast was on a motorcycle, on which other road users simply become a moving chicane to make the ride more interesting. Riding my FireBlade down the A4 to Wales on a regular basis was sheer joy. Whereas using the NSX (my car at the time) was simply purgatory and just consisted of very brief spurts between each slow moving car, every few hundred yards. That car was so fantastic it was the most aggravating vehicle I ever owned, simply because I couldn't drive it the way it wanted to be driven and being a manual made that all the worse. Having an automatic it is easier to 'go with the flow' and arrive more relaxed at my destination. I've never had a manual since and do not miss it one bit. Just find driving my wife's manual Mini Cooper S kindof annoying. So while I understand the theory of a manual being so much fun etc, I found I grew out of that and driving was more than just proving mastery over the irascible ICE. Just like with motorcycles where I can no longer be bothered to wrap myself around the petrol tank to reach the handlebars. I now only ride more upright naked bikes that don't encourage me to ride so fast, yet provide so much more enjoyment at a lower speed. I've been shifting perfectly without the clutch for as long as I can remember, but I like the modern Quickshifter systems that make it, well, even simpler and comfort is the most important aspect when designing my motorcycle projects. Much as I like the Evora, I wouldn't contemplate a manual. A whole load of faff for (IMO) no reward. In fact as I've said before, an electric Evora would be even better than auto ICE. Changing gears and all that clutch work? Nah, can't be arsed with all that any more. I can go just as fast and as much in control without all that. Having said that, if a clutch and manual transmission is what you must have, nothing stopping you from having that in an EV. In fact one of my electric projects may well still have a gearbox. But you don't of course need to use the clutch when stationary. Best of both worlds maybe?

That is however 2 years ago and I think you'll find Japan has now moved away from Hydrogen use in personal transportation. I cannot overstate the problems of using Hydrogen due to the storage and transportation requirements. You must not glibly assume you can simply turn over the fuel oil infrastructure to the delivery and storage of hydrogen instead. Not only physical requirements, but the energy requirements to cool and pressurise are huge, making it impractical on the small scale. Also another point I feel has been forgotten, hydrogen fuel cells are quite good at dribbling out electricity at a constant rate, but no good in a vehicle that requires sudden bursts of acceleration. So Hydrogen Fuel Cell EVs still need BATTERIES. So as an argument against BEVs, it doesn't really hold water (or Hydrogen very well either 😀) As I said, I do still see a potential for Hydrogen use in aircraft and maybe commercial transportation, but I maintain we will not see it adopted as the main replacement for the ICE in personal transportation.

Lithium Ion batteries don't simply deteriorate to that extent in that period of time. Down to 80% in twice that time is more realistic and maybe not even that far. Degradation also tails off rather than a linear line down to useless. Old batteries can then be used for household storage which has no need for the extreme energy density as originally in the vehicle. Hugely extends the usable lifetime of the battery. Then when no good for anything, recycle all the materials for new batteries. Anything you burn in an ICE is 100% NON recyclable. Sceptics always like to make claims based on current technology. But batteries will improve to extend range, reduce charging times and for much less cost. These factors have all improved massively over the last few years and most recently the new Tesla cell was announced that succeeds on all those counts. The ICE was a much derided power source 100 years ago with many claiming it would never replace the horse and look where we are now. Battery tech certainly is there now as many thousands are proving by using EVs daily. Currently it requires more planning for a long journey, but less for short commute type journeys as every time you leave the house you have a full 'tank' and never need to charge anywhere else. Bear in mind that the average car journey in the UK is just 20 miles, with 99% of journeys less than 100 miles. So for most of the population, current battery tech does suffice and anyway is improving. For those who don't fit the above parameters, well, tough. You'll have to wait for improvements in the technology. But doesn't sound like that will be a problem for the diehards anyway.

Yes, degradation of lithium-ion batteries is well known and documented. That's why there's a huge amount of research into alternative chemistries that avoid this particular problem. Even the recently announced new Tesla cell is a significant improvement and there's way more to come with alternative chemistries yet to make it out of the lab. There are already battery technologies that do NOT degrade - ever. But difficult to scale and package into a vehicle. It's just a question of research into better ways to achieve what we need, store as much as possible, for as long as possible in as little weight as possible. It's not down to laws of physics, it's just modifying the materials used and they're getting better all the time Unlike hydrogen which as I've explained here before suffers very badly from the laws of physics and will never be a viable solution for personal transportation, hence no car manufacturers are continuing to pursue this technology. For large scale commercial transportation where the scale makes production and storage of the hydrogen more possible, maybe. But households will never have their own hydrogen generating station, whereas they can generate their own electricity. I'm sorry but whatever you would like to believe, storage and transportation of hydrogen over a global distribution network is simply not viable due to the immense pressures and or low temperatures required. All of which makes hydrogen production very energy expensive, so the overall gain from its use is much reduced or even eliminated. In fact currently I believe it's negative. Takes more to produce and store the hydrogen than you get back in the vehicle. Not great for global energy usage is it. As for nitrogen power? So unlikely I don't even see it worth considering. Similar problems to the storage and transportation of hydrogen (albeit less extreme) and of course takes a lot of energy to liquify and maintain in that state, reducing its usefulness. I think any possible use of this is simply wishful thinking. What real auto/engine maker is even seriously considering this? I suspect none. Batteries are not yet perfect, sure. But they are getting better and will improve to the point that they are no longer seen as any obstacle to EV use. That's all it takes. Improve our method of electric storage. Being powered by an electric motor is awesome, driving is simply way better than ICE. I realise many of you will resist that, but stop clinging to the anachronisms of those parts of the driving methodology solely implemented to counter how bad the ICE is, i.e. gearbox and clutch. They're not sacrosanct and in reality add nothing to the driving experience. Whatever, let's be realistic. Hydrogen and/or nitrogen will not be making it to your personal transport vehicle(s). So forget all this whimsy. EV is where it IS going, like it or not. Let's just concentrate on improving our electric production and storage processes and learning to recycle everything 100%. We need a solution that is INFINITELY SUSTAINABLE and one thing we can all be 100% sure of, that ain't fossil fuel.

Agreed. It has been many years since the speed at which I ride or drive has been determined by the performance of the vehicle as they have all been capable of far in excess of what is actually possible on a public road. I've had FireBlades and similar that so easily nip up to 120 without you even noticing and that can get you sent to jail these days, where I really, really do NOT want to be going. My current FireBlade is naked (I took off all the plastics) to increase comfort and the feeling of speed. That way it's more fun at lower speed. I want to keep riding and driving which means I want to keep my licence and preferably keep it clean. I can ride fast, raced very successfully some years ago, but I cannot ride like that on the road. That would be stupid. I still want a vehicle that is capable of a lot more than I need to use as that makes it all easy. Less effort than having to try hard to make it go at that speed. But I rarely make use of a fraction of a modern vehicle's capability. Licence preservation and just not having the same urge to dash about everywhere and every time, like I used to in my younger days. To me it makes a mockery of a 2m car that can actually be used no faster than the cars we love here. In truth, even an Evora is slightly overkill, but within the bounds of acceptability. And I think looks far nicer than the McLaren in the photos above.

By which do you mean a Taycan? I think Lotus have the ability to do it (e.g. the Evija), but I'm not sure the £1-2m car market is the one they should be aiming for. Certainly doesn't suit me. 😂

Yes, certainly interesting. I think over the next few years we will see some real improvements in battery tech. Quantum leaps rather than incremental. It makes no sense to me that Lotus are still planning new ICE cars. At least that was the last announcement I saw. Just produce an EVora. Fabulous looking car already, with terrific real world performance. Just make an electric version. That's what I want anyway.

I wouldn't give two hoots about the lack of service history. A modern car could simply shrug that off even if nothing had been done at all, whereas in all likelihood it has been serviced, just not by a Lotus dealer. Who cares. Oil is oil whoever puts it in the car. Bear in mind that manufacturers have for years been designing cars and oils that can survive huge mileages, yet all the while pretending to their customers this all needs to be checked and/or changed every year, even if the car's not been used. This is quite frankly balderdash. Borders on fraud really and unnecessarily creates huge waste that certainly doesn't help the ecology of our planet. The manufacturers design their cars to be as reliable as possible as that helps to sell them, but they also need their dealers to be profitable in order to stay in business to sell the cars. It's something of a rock and a hard place conundrum which they neatly avoid by fooling their customers into thinking all this work has to be done or the car will fall apart which is utter nonsense. Contact breakers, carburettors etc did often need to be checked, but servicing a modern car is oil and filter and truth be told, not much else of any importance, unless you consider changing a good as new cabin air filter to be vital to the long term integrity and reliability of your car. The only issue this gap raises is the future resale value due to the aforementioned potential customers mistakenly terrified of any missed scheduled services. if all car owners understood the reality of the situation, this would no longer be an issue. And yes, I once worked for a motor manufacturer.

My SP-2 is not entirely standard. First off, the exhaust is actually a Harris and not Akrapovic (who never made a high level system like that). I obtained it used with those stickers on and just thought they looked good, so left them on there. I knew Steve Harris a bit and he made some interesting observations about exhausts on that V twin. It was really hard to get more power than standard with just slip-ons. They found the complex conical link pipes were the only way, but a PIA to manufacture. Sadly the jigs to make those were stolen some years later so no chance of any more. 😭 The forks are special hybrids that I made to accept the radial front callipers and it also has 3 spoke FireBlade wheels. When I first became obsessed with bikes, Triumph and Norton ruled and a Triton was THE bike. So I built a couple, trying to follow the image in my mind of what I wanted (but never managed) and what Triumph have now achieved with the Thruxton R. Needless to say, the old bikes were actually terrible (vibration like a pneumatic drill), but my Thruxton R now provides everything I actually wanted then - and WAY more. Nostalgia tinted with modern technology, although SO much heavier than my FireFighter. Mind you, that has a fair bit of Ti on it, but that cannot account for all the difference. Still, both great bikes. If anyone's interested, I also did a similar naked conversion to a VFR1200:- Yes, that IS an Akrapovic (from a ZX-10R and which fit rather nicely). Some links in the above to other photos of these bikes. Lots more projects, but not so complete. 🙂

Aha, another SP-2 owner:- Although I don't ride it much now as it's too uncomfortable. I use my FireFighter instead:- or maybe my nod to nostalgia (and great bike in fact) :- The answer is "N + 1" Now what's the question?

Passed a very dark, probably black Evora Series 1 which was leaving Old Woking (Surrey) this morning. Unfortunately I didn't catch the regn. mark as I was so surprised to see an Evora on the road. Just thought I'd mention it in case it was anyone on here?

It seems to me this is symptomatic of the prevalent mindset, i.e. EVs as uninspiring utility vehicles. Whilst I am well aware of their benefits in that realm, my interest is firmly in the concept of stunning cars even more thrilling to drive than an ICE equivalent. The above just reminds me that so many are still missing the point of what an EV can be. Let me be frank. I want an electric Evora. That to me would typify what EVs are all about.

I can't disagree with you there. ☹️

Does anyone know the whereabouts of the car pictured here:- https://www.thelotusforums.com/forums/topic/33785-evora-picture-video-thread/?page=24&tab=comments#comment-491909 It seems to have been owned by Lotus and loaned by them to Ross (Frimley111R) while his car was being being worked on. It is likely it now has a private plate on it so hard to track down, unless anyone happens to know of it? It is of interest to me as I'm trying to find a N/A IPS in black with tan interior that would hopefully be available for sale. Anyone?

I think the provision of charging points will be more of an issue than KAS obviously thinks, but it is not insurmountable and I do agree with his points above. I don't think HS2 is a good comparison, but the installation of Cable TV is a much better analogy. Let's consider that. Cable TV is an entirely Inessential service. No-one needs more TV. But much of Britain has been dug up, just to lay cables to provide such a trivial benefit. However, the upgrade of our national grid to supply sufficient charging points IS essential. Not only that, it's just an upgrade to what is already there. Previously there was NO Cable TV cable, so that was starting entirely from scratch. What is needed now is just the expansion of capacity and reach of the national grid and there's already a pretty good starting point. It was recently calculated that if all ICE vehicles in the US were instantly changed to EV, there would need to be a 30% increase in electricity production to cope with the extra demand. Not insignificant, but not insurmountable either and as I've said before, with an increase in local/home generation, much of that extra requirement will not be coming from the grid, which reduces by how much the grid would need to be expanded. Look back over the last hundred + years. The Internal combustion engine was invented and largely dismissed as irrelevant because horses were seen as a far better alternative and anyway, where would anyone be able to find this new stuff called 'petrol'. I doubt anyone could have imagined what we have now (and have had for many, many years) with petrol available pretty much on every street corner. The work involved in developing such an infrastructure way surpasses what is required now just to make the national grids, 'a bit better'. It has to be done. We can do it.