RE: Lotus Emeya finishes testing, looks great doing it

[Nomme de Plum]

biggbn said:

100%, my point was not to criticise him but to point out to those who deify him that he was better known as a fly man who'd do anything for a shilling....so, a businessman

We've seen it with the likes of Ecclestone and Ron Dennis was not beyond reproach. Anyway I hope this turns out to be a success for Lotus, They certainly need it.

[biggbn]

Nomme de Plum said:

biggbn said:

100%, my point was not to criticise him but to point out to those who deify him that he was better known as a fly man who'd do anything for a shilling....so, a businessman

We've seen it with the likes of Ecclestone and Ron Dennis was not beyond reproach. Anyway I hope this turns out to be a success for Lotus, They certainly need it.

Think Chappers was in a different league, so much so that conspiracy theorists thought he'd faked his death to escape inevitable jail time....

[blueg33]

Silvanus said:

blueg33 said:

Silvanus said:

blueg33 said:

RacerMike said:

The biggest shame of all is the fact that the only thing that makes it a Lotus is the badge. It’s designed, engineered and manufactured in China and developed in Europe by a a German engineering consultancy with only about 2 days of sign off done by the Lotus people.

I get that Lotus as a company making Elise’s and Evora’s wasn’t working, but to go quite so far the other way seems a bit of a shame.

My bold - Gavan Kershaw says he has been working on the handling development for several years, is he a liar?

Where does it say he personally has been working on the handling for 2 years?

PH article says

“ Speaking of which, Lotus’s tame racing driver (and legendary development hand) Gavan Kershaw has never been far from the Emeya’s wheel in the past three years. He said of the new car: “A Lotus should be engaging and desirable, but also safe and predictable. That doesn’t mean boring – in fact, just the opposite! Drivers need to know they can trust their car so they can maximise the dynamic performance, and with the development work that’s gone into Emeya, they really can.”

So basically he's tested the handling of a car that the Chinese in Wuhan and a few Germans in Raunheim have developed. Not gonna argue with that.

I would suggest that he has done more than test it

[Nomme de Plum]

biggbn said:

Nomme de Plum said:

biggbn said:

100%, my point was not to criticise him but to point out to those who deify him that he was better known as a fly man who'd do anything for a shilling....so, a businessman

We've seen it with the likes of Ecclestone and Ron Dennis was not beyond reproach. Anyway I hope this turns out to be a success for Lotus, They certainly need it.

Think Chappers was in a different league, so much so that conspiracy theorists thought he'd faked his death to escape inevitable jail time....

As an owner of S1 Elan in 1974 he certainly had my admiration. Back then, actually a bit before, they sold the Elan as a kit car and it saved the purchase tax. When I was 16 in 1970 our next door neighbour had one delivered in bits. Dad helped him assemble it with me looking on. I had a Berkeley T60 at the time.

[blistacompact]

GT9 said:

Actually, it's a relatively fair comparison for the UK.
Why, because it doesn't include the 5000 litres equivalent of fossil fuel also required to refine the 17,000 litres.
Which happens to be about the same fossil fuel consumption that contributes to the electricity to charge the comparable EV for the same distance.
What about all the wind turbines you cry.
Well...the partial mass of a wind turbine that is required per 1 EV is about 100 kg.
The carbon footprint of producing, operating and decommissioning that partial mass contributes just 200 kg of CO2 over the life of the car.
Compared to the ICE's 40,000 kg of lifetime tailpipe output....
Most probably, you will refuse to believe the disparity between those two numbers.
Regardless, that's what they are.
All of which is why it was left off the graphic, because ultimately the only footprint comparison that matters is the ICE tailpipe one vs the battery production one.
Still polarized?

You know that the refining topic is a difficult one because in the process they're many byproducts we can't live without, not just gas or diesel.

Wind power is good when there's wind... And it does not blow all the time. yesterday in uk they made 22% of their potential max ouptut. So the rest has to made using natural gas, nuclear, biomass (forests in canada?), you're certainly aware of that. UK has still an advantage here because wind power potential is huge but that's not the case everywhere.
The problem is that we don't know how to store very massive amount of renewable energy.
In theory we could use all the batteries installed in the EV cars to do it because I imagine owners would not be happy to have their battery cells used and worn...

If wind power was that good, germany (and uk) electricy would be much cleaner that it's right now.
The european wind power sector is actually facing a crisis right now and there are worries about chinese manufacturers taking over the market.

Electric cars maintain the illusion we're going to be able to maintain our lifestyle with a techno-solutionism approach. But it won't be the case.
A lotus emeya is not a clean/green car, a 2,5 tons mix of steel, aluminium, copper will never be, even if it's powered by renewables energy only.

[Nomme de Plum]

blistacompact said:

You know that the refining topic is a difficult one because in the process they're many byproducts we can't live without, not just gas or diesel.

Wind power is good when there's wind... And it does not blow all the time. yesterday in uk they made 22% of their potential max ouptut. So the rest has to made using natural gas, nuclear, biomass (forests in canada?), you're certainly aware of that. UK has still an advantage here because wind power potential is huge but that's not the case everywhere.
The problem is that we don't know how to store very massive amount of renewable energy.
In theory we could use all the batteries installed in the EV cars to do it because I imagine owners would not be happy to have their battery cells used and worn...

If wind power was that good, germany (and uk) electricy would be much cleaner that it's right now.
The european wind power sector is actually facing a crisis right now and there are worries about chinese manufacturers taking over the market.

Electric cars maintain the illusion we're going to be able to maintain our lifestyle with a techno-solutionism approach. But it won't be the case.
A lotus emeya is not a clean/green car, a 2,5 tons mix of steel, aluminium, copper will never be, even if it's powered by renewables energy only.

I do not want to divert the thread but wind power is complicated. East coast is by far the least expensive and least challenging environment however West coast could produce similar if not more output. The engineering challenges are much higher this cost. This is where we need to be though along with masses more onshore.

Unfortunately you let yourself down with the last paragraph. Fossil fuels are not recycled when burnt they just add to entropy. We will need to find alternatives to FF produced oils or minimise their use. I used to work for BS Corp Chemical Ltd. back in the 70s producing coke and oils. Based in Orgreave. I suspect you like all of us never appreciated the pollution we caused. Fortunately we learn.

Edited by Nomme de Plum on Sunday 11th February 16:40

[911Spanker]

Wind can power the cars of the future. Much like it powers this forum.

[GT9]

blistacompact said:

You know that the refining topic is a difficult one because in the process they're many byproducts we can't live without, not just gas or diesel.

Wind power is good when there's wind... And it does not blow all the time. yesterday in uk they made 22% of their potential max ouptut. So the rest has to made using natural gas, nuclear, biomass (forests in canada?), you're certainly aware of that. UK has still an advantage here because wind power potential is huge but that's not the case everywhere.
The problem is that we don't know how to store very massive amount of renewable energy.
In theory we could use all the batteries installed in the EV cars to do it because I imagine owners would not be happy to have their battery cells used and worn...

If wind power was that good, germany (and uk) electricy would be much cleaner that it's right now.
The european wind power sector is actually facing a crisis right now and there are worries about chinese manufacturers taking over the market.

Electric cars maintain the illusion we're going to be able to maintain our lifestyle with a techno-solutionism approach. But it won't be the case.
A lotus emeya is not a clean/green car, a 2,5 tons mix of steel, aluminium, copper will never be, even if it's powered by renewables energy only.

Renewably powering UK cars from offshore wind is an absolute given.
If it isn't wind, then it it isn't going to be a renewably powered car, simple as that.
Hydrogen is a fail, either because it has to come from natural gas to make it anywhere cheap enough, or because we simply won't have enough green hydrogen to touch the sides.
Green hydrogen requires a massive amount of currently non-existent infrastructure to generate the electricity and then convert it to hydrogen.
Not only would you need 3 times as many wind turbines as is required for EV, but you also need the same rated power of electrolysis plant to go with it.
Three times as much electrolysis in terms of total power rating vs the vehicle chargers required for EV.
And even if by some miracle we can get hold of enough green hydrogen, we have another fundamental problem with the cars themselves, each one requires up to 100 kg of non-recyclable carbon-composite hydrogen storage tanks.
The ability to manufacture these tanks in their millions globally each year is just about possible, yet we are looking to produce tens and eventually hundreds of millions of non-ICE cars.
The global capacity to build fuel cell cars is orders of magnitude lower than EV, and if you read my post earlier today, you'll see I've detailed the dismal state of play with hydrogen cars and the really minimal role they are going to play globally.
Yes, there will be hot-spots for their use in the Far East.
The UK , forget it.
Only those who are desperate or foolish would choose the hydrogen pathway.
We are hopefully neither.
E-fuel just ups the stakes to 6 to 8 times as many wind turbines, 6 to 8 times as much electrolysis, an impossibly large amount of atmospheric carbon capture plus processing and blending for the long-chain hydrocarbon product.
Now we are well and truly into the stratosphere in terms of infrastructure costs per vehicle, the same goes for operating costs because of the appalling bad end-to-end energy efficiency.
Only 10% of the electricity you start with for an e-fuelled car makes it to the wheels.
This is not a renewable solution for anybody but the very niche-est, wealthiest consumers.
EV is the last man standing.
The carbon intensity of our grid is at a 150g/kWh today, giving an EV usage-phase carbon footprint of about 30 g/km.
By 2050 it drops to single figures, and as low as just one measly gram.
It going to makes zero meaningful difference to the usage phase footprint how much the car weighs.
It's a total red herring that everybody who grew up with ICEs thinks is the be-all and end-all for 'cars'.
What they don't understand or accept is that electric propulsion rewrites the rules.
I know this because I've been designing these powertrains for decades.
All of them, not just EV.
If I have a bias, it's a bias towards engineering excellence and designing the right tool for the job.
If decarbonisation is the target, then nothing else exists, or will exist in the timeframe available, to make a dent in the UK's passenger car sector global footprint.
I don't think a single person who looks at an ICE ever thinks, 'this car might weigh 1500 kg, but it's going to consume something like the same weight of fuel every year that I drive it'.
It's perfectly hidden in plain sight, and is why we are where we are.
A weekly trickle that we totally ignore that eventually ends up being 10 times the weight of the car.
That is the mammoth-sized elephant in the room that nobody can see.
It's where nearly all of an ICE car's carbon footprint comes from.
So I'll say it again, if the the objective is to decarbonise the solution is really, really, really simple.
STOP BURNING STUFF!

Edited by GT9 on Sunday 11th February 17:24

[Dombilano]

GT9 said:

blistacompact said:

You know that the refining topic is a difficult one because in the process they're many byproducts we can't live without, not just gas or diesel.

Wind power is good when there's wind... And it does not blow all the time. yesterday in uk they made 22% of their potential max ouptut. So the rest has to made using natural gas, nuclear, biomass (forests in canada?), you're certainly aware of that. UK has still an advantage here because wind power potential is huge but that's not the case everywhere.
The problem is that we don't know how to store very massive amount of renewable energy.
In theory we could use all the batteries installed in the EV cars to do it because I imagine owners would not be happy to have their battery cells used and worn...

If wind power was that good, germany (and uk) electricy would be much cleaner that it's right now.
The european wind power sector is actually facing a crisis right now and there are worries about chinese manufacturers taking over the market.

Electric cars maintain the illusion we're going to be able to maintain our lifestyle with a techno-solutionism approach. But it won't be the case.
A lotus emeya is not a clean/green car, a 2,5 tons mix of steel, aluminium, copper will never be, even if it's powered by renewables energy only.

Renewably powering UK cars from offshore wind is an absolute given.
If it isn't wind, then it it isn't going to be a renewably powered car, simple as that.
Hydrogen is a fail, either because it has to come from natural gas to make it anywhere cheap enough, or because we simply won't have enough green hydrogen to touch the sides.
Green hydrogen requires a massive amount of currently non-existent infrastructure to generate the electricity and then convert it to hydrogen.
Not only would you need 3 times as many wind turbines as is required for EV, but you also need the same rated power of electrolysis plant to go with it.
Three times as much electrolysis in terms of total power rating vs the vehicle chargers required for EV.
And even if by some miracle we can get hold of enough green hydrogen, we have another fundamental problem with the cars themselves, each one requires up to 100 kg of non-recyclable carbon-composite hydrogen storage tanks.
The ability to manufacture these tanks in their millions globally each year is just about possible, yet we are looking to produce tens and eventually hundreds of millions of non-ICE cars.
The global capacity to build fuel cell cars is orders of magnitude lower than EV, and if you read my post earlier today, you'll see I've detailed the dismal state of play with hydrogen cars and the really minimal role they are going to play globally.
Yes, there will be hot-spots for their use in the Far East.
The UK , forget it.
Only those who are desperate or foolish would choose the hydrogen pathway.
We are hopefully neither.
E-fuel just ups the stakes to 6 to 8 times as many wind turbines, 6 to 8 times as much electrolysis, an impossibly large amount of atmospheric carbon capture plus processing and blending for the long-chain hydrocarbon product.
Now we are well and truly into the stratosphere in terms of infrastructure costs per vehicle, the same goes for operating costs because of the appalling bad end-to-end energy efficiency.
Only 10% of the electricity you start with for an e-fuelled car makes it to the wheels.
This is not a renewable solution for anybody but the very niche-est, wealthiest consumers.
EV is the last man standing.
The carbon intensity of our grid is at a 150g/kWh today, giving an EV usage-phase carbon footprint of about 30 g/km.
By 2050 it drops to single figures, and as low as just one measly gram.
It going to makes zero meaningful difference to the usage phase footprint how much the car weighs.
It's a total red herring that everybody who grew up with ICEs thinks is the be-all and end-all for 'cars'.
What they don't understand or accept is that electric propulsion rewrites the rules.
I know this because I've been designing these powertrains for decades.
All of them, not just EV.
If I have a bias, it's a bias towards engineering excellence and designing the right tool for the job.
If decarbonisation is the target, then nothing else exists, or will exist in the timeframe available, to make a dent in the UK's passenger car sector global footprint.
I don't think a single person who looks at an ICE ever thinks, 'this car might weigh 1500 kg, but it's going to consume something like the same weight of fuel every year that I drive it'.
It's perfectly hidden in plain sight, and is why we are where we are.
A weekly trickle that we totally ignore that eventually ends up being 10 times the weight of the car.
That is the mammoth-sized elephant in the room that nobody can see.
It's where nearly all of an ICE car's carbon footprint comes from.
So I'll say it again, if the the objective is to decarbonise the solution is really, really, really simple.
STOP BURNING STUFF!

Edited by GT9 on Sunday 11th February 17:24

No

[ajap1979]

Dombilano said:

GT9 said:

blistacompact said:

You know that the refining topic is a difficult one because in the process they're many byproducts we can't live without, not just gas or diesel.

Wind power is good when there's wind... And it does not blow all the time. yesterday in uk they made 22% of their potential max ouptut. So the rest has to made using natural gas, nuclear, biomass (forests in canada?), you're certainly aware of that. UK has still an advantage here because wind power potential is huge but that's not the case everywhere.
The problem is that we don't know how to store very massive amount of renewable energy.
In theory we could use all the batteries installed in the EV cars to do it because I imagine owners would not be happy to have their battery cells used and worn...

If wind power was that good, germany (and uk) electricy would be much cleaner that it's right now.
The european wind power sector is actually facing a crisis right now and there are worries about chinese manufacturers taking over the market.

Electric cars maintain the illusion we're going to be able to maintain our lifestyle with a techno-solutionism approach. But it won't be the case.
A lotus emeya is not a clean/green car, a 2,5 tons mix of steel, aluminium, copper will never be, even if it's powered by renewables energy only.

Renewably powering UK cars from offshore wind is an absolute given.
If it isn't wind, then it it isn't going to be a renewably powered car, simple as that.
Hydrogen is a fail, either because it has to come from natural gas to make it anywhere cheap enough, or because we simply won't have enough green hydrogen to touch the sides.
Green hydrogen requires a massive amount of currently non-existent infrastructure to generate the electricity and then convert it to hydrogen.
Not only would you need 3 times as many wind turbines as is required for EV, but you also need the same rated power of electrolysis plant to go with it.
Three times as much electrolysis in terms of total power rating vs the vehicle chargers required for EV.
And even if by some miracle we can get hold of enough green hydrogen, we have another fundamental problem with the cars themselves, each one requires up to 100 kg of non-recyclable carbon-composite hydrogen storage tanks.
The ability to manufacture these tanks in their millions globally each year is just about possible, yet we are looking to produce tens and eventually hundreds of millions of non-ICE cars.
The global capacity to build fuel cell cars is orders of magnitude lower than EV, and if you read my post earlier today, you'll see I've detailed the dismal state of play with hydrogen cars and the really minimal role they are going to play globally.
Yes, there will be hot-spots for their use in the Far East.
The UK , forget it.
Only those who are desperate or foolish would choose the hydrogen pathway.
We are hopefully neither.
E-fuel just ups the stakes to 6 to 8 times as many wind turbines, 6 to 8 times as much electrolysis, an impossibly large amount of atmospheric carbon capture plus processing and blending for the long-chain hydrocarbon product.
Now we are well and truly into the stratosphere in terms of infrastructure costs per vehicle, the same goes for operating costs because of the appalling bad end-to-end energy efficiency.
Only 10% of the electricity you start with for an e-fuelled car makes it to the wheels.
This is not a renewable solution for anybody but the very niche-est, wealthiest consumers.
EV is the last man standing.
The carbon intensity of our grid is at a 150g/kWh today, giving an EV usage-phase carbon footprint of about 30 g/km.
By 2050 it drops to single figures, and as low as just one measly gram.
It going to makes zero meaningful difference to the usage phase footprint how much the car weighs.
It's a total red herring that everybody who grew up with ICEs thinks is the be-all and end-all for 'cars'.
What they don't understand or accept is that electric propulsion rewrites the rules.
I know this because I've been designing these powertrains for decades.
All of them, not just EV.
If I have a bias, it's a bias towards engineering excellence and designing the right tool for the job.
If decarbonisation is the target, then nothing else exists, or will exist in the timeframe available, to make a dent in the UK's passenger car sector global footprint.
I don't think a single person who looks at an ICE ever thinks, 'this car might weigh 1500 kg, but it's going to consume something like the same weight of fuel every year that I drive it'.
It's perfectly hidden in plain sight, and is why we are where we are.
A weekly trickle that we totally ignore that eventually ends up being 10 times the weight of the car.
That is the mammoth-sized elephant in the room that nobody can see.
It's where nearly all of an ICE car's carbon footprint comes from.
So I'll say it again, if the the objective is to decarbonise the solution is really, really, really simple.
STOP BURNING STUFF!

Edited by GT9 on Sunday 11th February 17:24

No

To be fair, you don’t really have to, but none of this is about you, it’s about future generations, your children, my children, their children.

[GT9]

Dombilano said:

No

Fair enough, I think it's time though we all be honest that this is not about whether an extra couple of hundred kilos on the car's kerb mass turns it into an environmental disaster or not.
It's about not wanting give up the desire to burn stuff and the whinging about EVs is just guff to try to avoid owning up to that.

[Dombilano]

GT9 said:

Dombilano said:

No

Fair enough, I think it's time though we all be honest that this is not about whether an extra couple of hundred kilos on the car's kerb mass turns it into an environmental disaster or not.
It's about not wanting give up the desire to burn stuff and the whinging about EVs is just guff to try to avoid owning up to that.

It's about the government making poor decisions, here's my though process....

Is man made climate change real, yes
Is it being exploited by government, yes
Is it the end of humanity, no
Do I like being told what's good for me, no
Is the average person easily manipulated, yes
Do I believe in conspiracies, no
Do I like well engineered solutions including ICE, yes
Do I like EVs, no (present format, supercapacitors may change that)
Do I think replacing all cars will make any difference to global CO2 emissions, no
Should heavy industries adapt and change, yes
Do I wanna keep burning stuff, yeahhhh sod it, until as a species we stop blowing each other up in the name of gods or territory, may as well.

[GT9]

Dombilano said:

It's about the government making poor decisions, here's my though process....

Is man made climate change real, yes
Is it being exploited by government, yes
Is it the end of humanity, no
Do I like being told what's good for me, no
Is the average person easily manipulated, yes
Do I believe in conspiracies, no
Do I like well engineered solutions including ICE, yes
Do I like EVs, no (present format, supercapacitors may change that)
Do I think replacing all cars will make any difference to global CO2 emissions, no
Should heavy industries adapt and change, yes
Do I wanna keep burning stuff, yeahhhh sod it, until as a species we stop blowing each other up in the name of gods or territory, may as well.

Funny thing is, my thought process is not so far removed from that.
As I posted earlier, if we can't see the value in decarbonisation, then petrol is the pathway.
Anything based on burning or consuming a flammable substance whilst at the same time hoping for a worthwhile reduction in carbon
is just asking for exploitation, the very thing anti-EVs are trying to avoid.
The end result being we pay significantly more for something that might as well have been petrol.
Hydrogen fuel cell cars have silent electric propulsion, hydrogen ICE cars are far less efficient and will thus be severely hampered by available range between refills (or a full size car with 2 seats only) and even higher costs to operate.
Almost nothing of value to enthusiasts comes from the hydrogen pathway.
'E-fuel for everyone' is asking for three concurrent miracles: free energy, free infrastructure and the invention of an anti-aging potion so anyone older than 50 can still be alive to experience it.
I do think that we are over-reacting to being 'told what to do'.
Well-engineered ICE cars are quite a mature product, there are tens of millions of them on the UK roads already and many millions still to arrive.
Enough for anybody who does care for them, in my opinion.
I can't go and buy a new house with character these days, if I want that, I need to settle for a used one.
I don't see why we can't manage the same way with cars, when the time comes to do so.

[lord trumpton]

Looks ace and just the type of car Lotus need to be making to remain buoyant

[Terminator X]

GT9 said:

Dombilano said:

No

Fair enough, I think it's time though we all be honest that this is not about whether an extra couple of hundred kilos on the car's kerb mass turns it into an environmental disaster or not.
It's about not wanting give up the desire to burn stuff and the whinging about EVs is just guff to try to avoid owning up to that.

The real answer is to stop rampant consumerism however that will never happen of course + 8bn people all consuming and third world countries coming up etc. EV though, worth the pain.

TX.

[ImFeelingSaucy]

blueg33 said:

My bold - Gavan Kershaw says he has been working on the handling development for several years, is he a liar?

No Gavin has been developing it - all be it within fairly limited parameters.

I spent some time at Hethel shortly after the Geeley buy out. Make no mistake, they do as they are told.
New models were literally referred to as ‘gifts’ from Geeley.
Geeley had total control of product planning. They told them what they were building, what it should look like, where it was being built and how much they should charge for it.
Lotus was in no position to argue.
I saw and heard it for myself.

Gavins job was to try and make it feel like a Lotus - something he is very good at.

Does that make the final car a Lotus?
Up to you to decide.

[blueg33]

ImFeelingSaucy said:

blueg33 said:

My bold - Gavan Kershaw says he has been working on the handling development for several years, is he a liar?

No Gavin has been developing it - all be it within fairly limited parameters.

I spent some time at Hethel shortly after the Geeley buy out. Make no mistake, they do as they are told.
New models were literally referred to as ‘gifts’ from Geeley.
Geeley had total control of product planning. They told them what they were building, what it should look like, where it was being built and how much they should charge for it.
Lotus was in no position to argue.
I saw and heard it for myself.

Gavins job was to try and make it feel like a Lotus - something he is very good at.

Does that make the final car a Lotus?
Up to you to decide.

I suspect Geely have that level of control because it’s the difference between profit and loss. The latter being the Lotus default position for years. Something that needed to change.

All cars are a bunch of components made in different places by different companies and assembled and refined by the car company to match its requirements and ethos.

If being a Lotus is about exceptional handling and balance and they have taken that collection of components and achieved the aim, then IMO it’s a Lotus. Similarly a Taycan, Cayenne, Macan etc is a Porsche despite the majority of the components being VW.

[RacerMike]

blueg33 said:

ImFeelingSaucy said:

blueg33 said:

My bold - Gavan Kershaw says he has been working on the handling development for several years, is he a liar?

No Gavin has been developing it - all be it within fairly limited parameters.

I spent some time at Hethel shortly after the Geeley buy out. Make no mistake, they do as they are told.
New models were literally referred to as ‘gifts’ from Geeley.
Geeley had total control of product planning. They told them what they were building, what it should look like, where it was being built and how much they should charge for it.
Lotus was in no position to argue.
I saw and heard it for myself.

Gavins job was to try and make it feel like a Lotus - something he is very good at.

Does that make the final car a Lotus?
Up to you to decide.

I suspect Geely have that level of control because it’s the difference between profit and loss. The latter being the Lotus default position for years. Something that needed to change.

All cars are a bunch of components made in different places by different companies and assembled and refined by the car company to match its requirements and ethos.

If being a Lotus is about exceptional handling and balance and they have taken that collection of components and achieved the aim, then IMO it’s a Lotus. Similarly a Taycan, Cayenne, Macan etc is a Porsche despite the majority of the components being VW.

Difference though is that Porsche ground up engineer a Porsche from VW platform components, whereas Lotus in it's current iteration just about get to sprinkle a few hundreds and thousands on a Geely.

Clearly Lotus wasn't working and wouldn't have worked as it would. It's going to be a test of the customer base (if it even exists anymore) as to whether they actually buy the latest Geely vehicles because they have a Lotus badge on when they have such little Lotus DNA in. Why, for example, would you pay the premium for a Lotus Geely over something like a BYD or a Zeekr when they're basically the same...

[otolith]

RacerMike said:

Difference though is that Porsche ground up engineer a Porsche from VW platform components, whereas Lotus in it's current iteration just about get to sprinkle a few hundreds and thousands on a Geely.

Clearly Lotus wasn't working and wouldn't have worked as it would. It's going to be a test of the customer base (if it even exists anymore) as to whether they actually buy the latest Geely vehicles because they have a Lotus badge on when they have such little Lotus DNA in. Why, for example, would you pay the premium for a Lotus Geely over something like a BYD or a Zeekr when they're basically the same...

That seems to me like a preconception - what are you basing it on?

[RacerMike]

otolith said:

RacerMike said:

Difference though is that Porsche ground up engineer a Porsche from VW platform components, whereas Lotus in it's current iteration just about get to sprinkle a few hundreds and thousands on a Geely.

Clearly Lotus wasn't working and wouldn't have worked as it would. It's going to be a test of the customer base (if it even exists anymore) as to whether they actually buy the latest Geely vehicles because they have a Lotus badge on when they have such little Lotus DNA in. Why, for example, would you pay the premium for a Lotus Geely over something like a BYD or a Zeekr when they're basically the same...

That seems to me like a preconception - what are you basing it on?

I work in the car industry with a lot of ex Lotus dynamics engineers.