2010 Lotus Evora on 2040-cars

Auto blog

In hindsight, Musk wouldn't use Lotus for Tesla Roadster

The world will be a different place after Elon Musk builds a time traveling device (don't ask us how we know that will happen). For one thing, the Tesla Roadster of the rewritten future will not have been built using the chassis of the Lotus Elise. Also, verb tenses will be becoming even more confusing and, possibly, awkward. "We ended up changing most of the damn car" – Elon Musk We know about the not-using-the-Lotus thing because the Tesla Motors CEO said as much yesterday at the World Energy Innovation Forum at the Tesla Factory in Fremont. The two-day event, which also offers Model S test rides and a factory tour for attendees, featured a fireside chat with the electric automaker's CEO and Ira Ehrenpreis. During the discussion, Musk revealed that if he had to do it over again, he would have built the Roadster from the ground up instead of using the Lotus Elise chassis. "We ended up changing most of the damn car, so we thought later, why did we do that," he said. Another problem with the original idea for the car was the drivetrain. At first, Tesla had meant to use the motor and other propulsive bits from AC Propulsion, only to find that powertrain didn't work well in a commercial application. Instead Tesla only licensed the reductive charging patent, which allowed some integration of the inverter and charger. Besides knocking Tesla's own early efforts, the outspoken entrepreneur took a couple swings at other technologies with quotable quotes such as: "The internal combustion engine is a ridiculous thing!" and "Current lithium ion technology is better than theoretical fuel cell limits. So, game over. Why bother with fuel cells?" Looks like there are some things Musk is not interested in going back in time and changing.

Lotus Evija shown in John Player Special livery at Goodwood SpeedWeek

Goodwood SpeedWeek is here, and Lotus is using the event to highlight the upcoming Evija electric hypercar. Lotus is calling this the car’s “public dynamic debut,” which is relatively true, though the lack of a public audience at Goodwood does put a bit of a damper on the idea. Regardless, the livery used to wrap the Evija is what truly caught our attention. For those familiar with Lotus racing liveries of the past, youÂ’ll immediately recognize it as a modern take on the John Player Special livery. Lotus even photographed the Evija in this livery sitting next to a few old Formula 1 cars wearing the original John Player Special digs. Black and gold just looks proper on a Lotus racecar, and it looks absolutely superb on the Evija, too. Since this is technically a dynamic debut, Lotus also gave us a short video that you can check out below. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. The most intriguing part is the audio. Those electric motors are loud. It canÂ’t come close to matching the yowl of a high output gasoline engine, but the Evija is clearly going to make its own dramatic, electric noise. ThatÂ’s all well and proper, because extra theater is what electric cars typically lack. In an adjacent news brief, Lotus detailed some of the things it did to save weight. Lotus believes that “Colin Chapman would agree the Evija is 100% a true Lotus.” To make it so, Lotus says the carbon fiber monocoque is extremely light, weighing in at just 284 pounds, contributing to making it the lightest electric hypercar when it comes out (not as though thereÂ’s much competition).  Using holes and free space contributed to the lightweighting efforts, too. The venturi tunnels through each rear haunch both save weight and produce downforce. The center console design and floating dashboard leave tons of empty space behind where weight would accumulate otherwise. LotusÂ’ crossbeam design for the dash helps it serve as a structural member and also houses the interior ventilation system, combining two elements into one and saving weight. Lotus says youÂ’ll be able to see the Evija attack the Supercar Run on SpeedWeek, where it will attempt to set a fast lap time against many other new supercars and hypercars. Related Video:

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.