Sport Pack, Touring Pack, Traction Control, Hardtop on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Lotus bows out of Paris Motor Show

The plan put forth by former Lotus CEO Dany Bahar was to explode the British brand into the high-dollar sports car segment and directly challenge its marquee names. The first explosion came with the surprise introduction of five concepts at the 2010 Paris Motor Show. What has continued to surprise, though, is that the explosions haven't stopped: parent company Proton has had troubles leading to a reworking of its Formula One involvement, its IndyCar effort has had a rough ride, Proton's sale to Malaysian conglomerate DRB Hicom led to a production stoppage, and while the company was reassured that it wouldn't be sold, Bahar was shown the door - along with four of those Paris concepts, as far as we can tell. Yet the company is still making highly regarded cars and going racing.
So it shouldn't be all that surprising that, according to a report in Car and Driver, Lotus won't be attending this year's Paris Motor Show at all. Lotus didn't have much to show off at the Geneva Motor Show or the New York Show as all development was halted for two months, and the new corporate owner and new CEO installed by that owner are still working through the details of its niche English property. We will hope this is nothing more than a step in the reorganization, and look forward to seeing the Hethel firm again in Los Angeles or Detroit.

European commission investigating F1 finances and anti-competitive accusations

The Kingdom of Formula One reminds us of renaissance Florence - ruled by a singular chieftan behind a mask of representative involvement, rife with spectacularly convoluted machinations, awash in innovations that help define our world and far-flung, vindictive misery. If we found out Bernie Ecclestone's real last name was de Medici, well, it would explain a lot. Now after a bit of back-and-forth, the European Commission (EC) has taken aim at the kingdom, investigating whether F1 is anti-competitive and if the FIA has abused its antitrust agreement. The reason for EC scrutiny is that a British member of the European Parliament who represents an area in southwest England, Anneliese Dodds, has fielded complaints from engineering companies in her constituency that recent moves in F1 have put them out of business. She wrote to the EC to question why the FIA now has a stake in F1 when it signed an agreement in 2001 to be solely a governing body and abdicate any stakeholding in the sport. She also questioned the F1 Strategy Group, a group of the six top teams in F1 that makes decisions about the direction of the sport; she says that the Strategy Group not only appears to be a case of the F1 shirking its rule-making duty, it has resulted in unfair treatment of the small teams that aren't in the group. Dodds has a bit of a point. In 2001, the FIA sold F1's commercial rights to Ecclestone for 100 years for a sum of $313.7 million. That was done to placate European regulators who insisted that "the role of FIA will be limited to that of a sports regulator, with no commercial conflicts of interest." Although the rights are ultimately owned by the FIA and bring in a $10M fee every year from Formula One, those rights bring in $1.6 billion each year to Formula One Management (FOM), the company that owns F1. When Ecclestone was trying to get the new Concorde Agreement signed in 2013 that governs the running of the sport, the FIA wouldn't sign, saying it wanted F1 to share a larger slice of its revenue – the FIA has been losing money for years, see. To the get the FIA to sign, Ecclestone sold it a one-percent stake in F1 for $460,000 and gave the FIA a $5M signing 'bonus;' whenever F1 has its IPO, that stake is estimated to be worth about $120 million - not a bad return. Yet, according to the aforementioned 2001 agreement, the FIA can't have that equity stake.

Leaked patent images show forthcoming Lotus SUV

Upon discovering leaked patent images of a Lotus SUV, the proper response is, "It's about time." Not because we've been insomniac with anticipation of a people-hauler from Hethel, but because we've had at least three years to prepare. Make that ten years if you start the clock from when Lotus blitzed the 2006 Paris Motor Show with the seven-seat APX concept in 2006. The APX first brandished the company's Versatile Vehicle Architecture (VVA). An evolution of that VVA - which can withstand a 3,520-pound curb weight - still supports the Evora. In 2015, when Malaysian carmaker Proton owned Lotus, Lotus CEO Mark Gales announced an SUV already in development that would be "the fastest and most agile" of its kind, and target the Porsche Macan. Now, with a new owner, better sales, and much bigger profits, we get a clearer view of what this slow-cooked, swoopy Lotus van might bring. The front clip, center roof channel, what look like bulging rear wheel arches, and the taillight treatment establish Lotus ties. The side view stands as notable for its rear window treatment and high-altitude fuel filler cap, both design elements echoing the 1974 Lotus Elite and foreshadowed by Gales two years ago. Tech rumors posit a Toyota-sourced four-cylinder engine and a 1,600-kilogram curb weight objective. That's 3,520 pounds in US speak, yet with a new car range in the works and more Geely-funded tools to choose from, the SUV won't use the aged Versatile Vehicle Architecture. If Lotus succeeds at the scales, the SUV would subtract roughly 1,000 pounds from a Porsche Macan. As Gales told Top Gear earlier this month, "[W]hat an Evora is to a 911 our SUV needs to be to a Cayenne." Intended for global export, Lotus plans to manufacture the SUV in China, and we're likely four years away from an on-sale date. Although we're promised the family offering will handle "like nothing else," it won't be a sports car, and only Lotus sports cars are welcome at Hethel. Related Video: