RE: EU Kills 1.8-litre Lotuses
Discussion
footsoldier said:
ads_green said:
The problem is that The Toyota engine would probably pass the Euro 5 emmission regs if sombody stumped up the cash to do it.
Toyota have discontinued it from their current line up so they ain't going to pay it.
Lotus couldn't afford to.
Nobody else really uses the engine to warrant the cash to pass it.
This is the correct answer! The engine will not approved for use after end of this year because Toyota is not going to incur the cost of approval for an old engine. It is the same reason that 1.6 was replaced, and all cars with existing engine will have to be registered this year as they cannot be sold in 2010.Toyota have discontinued it from their current line up so they ain't going to pay it.
Lotus couldn't afford to.
Nobody else really uses the engine to warrant the cash to pass it.
They have the figures for it already, so if existing figures meet the Euro standard (which they do), then they can just keep using it surely without a re-approval?
jazzdevil said:
rypt said:
God damn EU regs 
+1The same regs have killed the RX8 too... so who/what is next on the hit-list?
47GT said:
aeropilot said:
petrolveins said:
My phyisics teacher is also what one could call a sceptic, and he really knows his stuff, also has some interesting ideas. One for instance is that all this global warming talk was started by Maggie in the 80s so she could try and build some nuclear power-stations and stop relying on coal.
Except, only one Nuclear Power Station was built under Maggie's leadership, and that was the last one to be built (Sizewell B) and in fact it was her Govt. that effectively put an end the building of anymore.And it was Harold Wilson's Govt that started the decline in the coal industry back in the 1960's after the discovery of north sea gas, and they embarked on the whole sale destruction of the coal sourced town-gas infrastructure in favour of this infinate supply
of this new 'clean' energy source.
However, our current petrolheads plight regarding politians fixation with C02 is indirectly related to the constant failure of Govts over the past 40-50 years to actually look beyond the lifetime of their own 4-5 year term of Govt....
rypt said:
footsoldier said:
ads_green said:
The problem is that The Toyota engine would probably pass the Euro 5 emmission regs if sombody stumped up the cash to do it.
Toyota have discontinued it from their current line up so they ain't going to pay it.
Lotus couldn't afford to.
Nobody else really uses the engine to warrant the cash to pass it.
This is the correct answer! The engine will not approved for use after end of this year because Toyota is not going to incur the cost of approval for an old engine. It is the same reason that 1.6 was replaced, and all cars with existing engine will have to be registered this year as they cannot be sold in 2010.Toyota have discontinued it from their current line up so they ain't going to pay it.
Lotus couldn't afford to.
Nobody else really uses the engine to warrant the cash to pass it.
They have the figures for it already, so if existing figures meet the Euro standard (which they do), then they can just keep using it surely without a re-approval?
I also think there is more to euro 5 than just the raw emission figures.
aeropilot said:
47GT said:
aeropilot said:
petrolveins said:
My phyisics teacher is also what one could call a sceptic, and he really knows his stuff, also has some interesting ideas. One for instance is that all this global warming talk was started by Maggie in the 80s so she could try and build some nuclear power-stations and stop relying on coal.
Except, only one Nuclear Power Station was built under Maggie's leadership, and that was the last one to be built (Sizewell B) and in fact it was her Govt. that effectively put an end the building of anymore.And it was Harold Wilson's Govt that started the decline in the coal industry back in the 1960's after the discovery of north sea gas, and they embarked on the whole sale destruction of the coal sourced town-gas infrastructure in favour of this infinate supply
of this new 'clean' energy source.However, our current petrolheads plight regarding politians fixation with C02 is indirectly related to the constant failure of Govts over the past 40-50 years to actually look beyond the lifetime of their own 4-5 year term of Govt....
RobM77 said:
B10 said:
Mr Gear said:
MSTRBKR said:
B10 said:
MSTRBKR said:
Methane is 20x more harmful to the environment than CO2, that's a fact.
Kill all the cows I say. Milk is disgusting anyway and bacon is a better form of meat. Win win situation.
Go vegan.Kill all the cows I say. Milk is disgusting anyway and bacon is a better form of meat. Win win situation.
Are you another person having a tantrum about CO2 in a thread that is about Euro emissions targets?
Edited by Mr Gear on Monday 21st June 13:28
subjecting sentient animals to cruelty, ie stop intensive farming. Cruelty is a mental disorder not kindness.
And how would reducing meat consumption reduce energy? Surely importing chillis and bananas across the Atlantic costs more than a few lorries delivering cows and ultimately British Beef up and down the M1 to my local butcher?
I'm not having a go, I just can't see the sense in your post.
I suggest that you read up about the subject. However I am sure that we are agreed about being Pistonheads!
V88Dicky said:
Fordo said:
is 199 g/km of CO2 really that much?
It is to our EU bureaucrats, who believe that the trace gas CO2, upon which all life on earth depends, is a 'pollutant'. 
B10 said:
Ever been round a piggery? Meat production is a very poor way of producing food, highly inefficient. Other vegetables and fruit are home grown by the way. Also we do import meat / live animals.
I suggest that you read up about the subject. However I am sure that we are agreed about being Pistonheads!
The route to sustainable food production is mixed agriculture - including raising animals for meat or dairy. Chasing "efficiency" leads to artificially fertilised monoculture. Veganism does not fit at all with small scale organic farming systems, nor with eating local in temperate climes.I suggest that you read up about the subject. However I am sure that we are agreed about being Pistonheads!
Didn't lotus have an very green Exige with 260BHP that ran on ethanol? Could this be the not to distant future?
Anyway, whats wrong with a little 1.6 engine used through out the range but in the faster models its either Supercharged or turbocharged and in the exige its compound charged.
Anyway, whats wrong with a little 1.6 engine used through out the range but in the faster models its either Supercharged or turbocharged and in the exige its compound charged.
B10 said:
RobM77 said:
B10 said:
Mr Gear said:
MSTRBKR said:
B10 said:
MSTRBKR said:
Methane is 20x more harmful to the environment than CO2, that's a fact.
Kill all the cows I say. Milk is disgusting anyway and bacon is a better form of meat. Win win situation.
Go vegan.Kill all the cows I say. Milk is disgusting anyway and bacon is a better form of meat. Win win situation.
Are you another person having a tantrum about CO2 in a thread that is about Euro emissions targets?
Edited by Mr Gear on Monday 21st June 13:28
subjecting sentient animals to cruelty, ie stop intensive farming. Cruelty is a mental disorder not kindness.
And how would reducing meat consumption reduce energy? Surely importing chillis and bananas across the Atlantic costs more than a few lorries delivering cows and ultimately British Beef up and down the M1 to my local butcher?
I'm not having a go, I just can't see the sense in your post.
I suggest that you read up about the subject. However I am sure that we are agreed about being Pistonheads!
Vegetables can be grown here, yes, but take a look at the label when you buy veg in the supermarket. I know that plenty of mine (most, in fact) comes from abroad by air freight, whereas all of my meat is from the UK. That's just what's on offer in my local supermarket.
I'm not trying to claim that either meat or veg is better for the environment, just trying to respond to the initial criticism of humans eating meat. We're designed to chew and digest the stuff, and the way we rear and kill animals for meat is far more humane than other carnivores. I suggest you read up on it ;-)
You can't simply use the previous figures as the emissions gear also needs to be certified for longevity. This is a new step in Euro 5 to make sure it will last a good length of time and won't fail prematurely. That is actually a good thing as a failed cat or whatever will cost you an arm and a leg and hammer the efficiency of the engine.
Bioethanol car is good in theory, although the tailpipe emissions can be worse. The advantage comes from the CO2 absorbed during the growth fo the plant used. The other advantage is it doesn't require as much crude oil, which people conveniently is a finite and dwindling resource. The big problem with all bio-fuels is the sustainability of the source and production. Many bio-diesels use Palm Oil which is being produced in Indonesia by clearing vast tracts of virgin rain forest. Similarly some bioethanol is produced from plants grown on ex-Rainforest land. Now no matter how blindly anti-environmental you are, you must realise that clearing rain forest is a very, very bad thing?
Bioethanol car is good in theory, although the tailpipe emissions can be worse. The advantage comes from the CO2 absorbed during the growth fo the plant used. The other advantage is it doesn't require as much crude oil, which people conveniently is a finite and dwindling resource. The big problem with all bio-fuels is the sustainability of the source and production. Many bio-diesels use Palm Oil which is being produced in Indonesia by clearing vast tracts of virgin rain forest. Similarly some bioethanol is produced from plants grown on ex-Rainforest land. Now no matter how blindly anti-environmental you are, you must realise that clearing rain forest is a very, very bad thing?
german tony said:
Damn & blast these treacherous EU bureucrats, how dare they make the place less messy with their evil regulations?
lol, cleaner air, yuk.FYI The new 1.6 has no conventional throttle, and uses valve timing to regulate aiflow. Its bloody clever and probably easier to SC, i imagine a SCed 1.6 will be very nice.
O/T I do hope the EU gets round to independently testing these CO2 figures, because they are currently b
ks-lies supplied by the manufacturers.PS my banana crop in northern europe and the plantation has economically failed. Im gutted.
fecking veggitibbles.They aren't lies supplied by the manufacturer and they are verifiable and independently tested. The test itself is rather unrealistic and many manufacturers have optimised their cars for the tests. There are all kinds of ways round the rules and one thing they could do with adressing is reducing the work arounds.
Mr Gear said:
bencollins said:
O/T I do hope the EU gets round to independently testing these CO2 figures, because they are currently bks-lies supplied by the manufacturers.
Are they really? Where's The Wookie when you need the big walking carpet...?ks-lies supplied by the manufacturers.Mr Darcy said:
Anyway, whats wrong with a little 1.6 engine used through out the range but in the faster models its either Supercharged or turbocharged and in the exige its compound charged.
Exactly. Who cares about the shape, size or technical details of the engine - it's the way a car drives which counts most!(.....unless you're one of those dreary pub bores)
bencollins said:
Mr Gear said:
bencollins said:
O/T I do hope the EU gets round to independently testing these CO2 figures, because they are currently bks-lies supplied by the manufacturers.
Are they really? Where's The Wookie when you need the big walking carpet...?ks-lies supplied by the manufacturers.What I would like to see is how well the EU test cycle figures correlate with what people actually get in day to day use of the cars - which would reveal to what extent manufacturers are indulging in cycle-beating measures which improve test performance without benefiting users.
Might be interesting to find the official CO2 figures for all the cars in the PH MPG wiki.
Might be interesting to find the official CO2 figures for all the cars in the PH MPG wiki.
Mr Gear said:
bencollins said:
Mr Gear said:
bencollins said:
O/T I do hope the EU gets round to independently testing these CO2 figures, because they are currently bks-lies supplied by the manufacturers.
Are they really? Where's The Wookie when you need the big walking carpet...?ks-lies supplied by the manufacturers. or prove a pointGassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff