RE: Rimac Nevera unveiled as 258mph sensation
Discussion
I'm just watching the Late Brake Show video and this thing is otherworldly; an amazing thing.
However, it takes the sheen off it when you have some guy popping up in each EV thread droning on about ICE being 'dinoasurs', 'finished' etc like he's some kind of early adopter, innovator or Christopher Columbus of the automotive world. Boring divisive chat.
However, it takes the sheen off it when you have some guy popping up in each EV thread droning on about ICE being 'dinoasurs', 'finished' etc like he's some kind of early adopter, innovator or Christopher Columbus of the automotive world. Boring divisive chat.
Will be interesting to see how the Evija compares. The Evija if the figures are correct is 400kgs lighter than the Rimac and has more bhp. Also the Evija is shown being tested on track, the dimensions of the car are no larger than a 911 and the batteries have been position to replicate a mid engined configuration in a typical supercar. All we have of the Rimac is it going fast on a drag strip and the old one skidding off the road and bursting into flames.
Lotus has never built a bad road car in their entire history. Rimac hasnt even built 7 cars in total. Also for a company that is supposed to specialise in EV developments why on earth did they position the charging point for the Nevera behind the 3/4glass? the only way a charging cable at a charging point is goin to reach is if you park across 2 bays sideways. If you do manage to get it to reach by backing up to a charging terminal you going to have a great big cable rubbing all over half the car.
Lotus has never built a bad road car in their entire history. Rimac hasnt even built 7 cars in total. Also for a company that is supposed to specialise in EV developments why on earth did they position the charging point for the Nevera behind the 3/4glass? the only way a charging cable at a charging point is goin to reach is if you park across 2 bays sideways. If you do manage to get it to reach by backing up to a charging terminal you going to have a great big cable rubbing all over half the car.
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
It isn't the device per se, but more the fact that our speed limits are based on cars which were far poorer in terms of safety, braking and cornering ability. Doing an emergency stop from 70mph in the pouring rain or snow in a 1970s Ford vs a 2020 McLaren on a summer's day will yield very different results. Yet both would be limited to the same speed.
But speed limits are not for the benefit or detriment of the motorist, they are to limit the damage that can be done to others by the driver.Unfortunately many drivers have proven that they cannot be trusted with a car capable of high speeds, hence the need to limit the top speed.
And don't forget that the ISA system will also include a data logger, and later will be integrated into the V2X system as well.
Scroll to page 10 for an eyeopener on the possible future for motoring.
https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/no/pdf/2020/1...
lotuslover69 said:
Also for a company that is supposed to specialise in EV developments why on earth did they position the charging point for the Nevera behind the 3/4glass? the only way a charging cable at a charging point is goin to reach is if you park across 2 bays sideways. If you do manage to get it to reach by backing up to a charging terminal you going to have a great big cable rubbing all over half the car.
I’m willing to bet that no Rimac owner will ever have to worry about dangling a charging cable over their pride and joy because of the constraints of the EV spaces in Morrison’s car park…otolith said:
You would if you were the kind of person who buys £2m toys. Yes, it's pointlessly quick. So are loads of things.
Just because some Russian oligarch or oil-rich despot (or their offspring) will buy the Rimac doesn’t mean it is good. Someone thought this house was a good idea:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7cl78Knsvp0
Most people buying very expensive cars do so for the image and top trump bragging rights, not because they can or do use much of the potential. There are some that do and they post on PH but they are in the minority.
Esceptico said:
Most people buying very expensive cars do so for the image and top trump bragging rights, not because they can or do use much of the potential. There are some that do and they post on PH but they are in the minority.
I don't believe you are in any way qualified to know why 'most people' buy expensive cars. Esceptico said:
otolith said:
You would if you were the kind of person who buys £2m toys. Yes, it's pointlessly quick. So are loads of things.
Just because some Russian oligarch or oil-rich despot (or their offspring) will buy the Rimac doesn’t mean it is good. Someone thought this house was a good idea:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7cl78Knsvp0
Most people buying very expensive cars do so for the image and top trump bragging rights, not because they can or do use much of the potential. There are some that do and they post on PH but they are in the minority.
Kawasicki said:
I know the Tuono is an amazing bike. Despite it being way heavier than something like an rs125.
Maybe the Rimac is a better road car than something weighing 600 kg less. I haven’t driven it. Have you?
And, by the way, I‘m not sure what my statement about not being the best rider has to do with anything. Not sure why you brought that up?
I haven’t driven the Rimac, obviously. However I’ve owned and driven a lot of cars over the years, ranging from hot hatches to Ferraris. I’ve ridden a lot of bikes too. Maybe the Rimac is a better road car than something weighing 600 kg less. I haven’t driven it. Have you?
And, by the way, I‘m not sure what my statement about not being the best rider has to do with anything. Not sure why you brought that up?
The Rimac has a lot more power than anything I’ve driven but in the real world I found that on the road the law of diminishing returns applies. The jump from 100 to 200 bhp (like for like) is massive and much more noticeable than 200 to 300 and again from 300 to 400. I already found with the 458 that there was much more power than could be usefully deployed. So what would I do with another 1400 bhp?
I am not saying that the Rimac will be bad to drive but owing to its weight, size and big tyres it just can’t be as nice to drive on good driving roads as something like an Elise. People will buy the Rimac because of the headline figures but that doesn’t make it better.
Many years back I was going to buy a 993 Turbo. Was looking at one from the Porsche dealer in Bern. Took it out for an extended test drive and found some good country lanes. What I found was that although it had great acceleration, it was actually not as fun to drive hard as a base 993. So I bought one of those instead.
Looking back at my post it does seem like I was being rude about your riding abilities. Sorry for that. Wasn’t intended. I’m not a track god myself. Was just trying to point out that our opinion on the matter of bikes might not be the last word but those on BB who do seem to be really good riders would likely not agree with you on the “RS125 would out handle a Tuono.”
JD said:
Why is this in the Advanced driving forum?
My thought exactly. I had to use the search function for the first time in years because I couldn't believe the launch hadn't made GG or the Supercar sections.As for the car. The Matt Watson video is just jaw-dropping. To see it destroy the ludicrously fast Ferrari is almost beyond comprehension.
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
How could you possibly know that they buy cars for bragging rights and not because they actually like the thing?
Calm down. I didn’t list all the possible reasons for buying a new Ferrari or equivalents. However, exploiting the ability to do sub 8 min laps of the ring isn’t the main reason for most. Perhaps it is because PH is an echo chamber and there are quite a few driving enthusiasts (as opposed to car enthusiasts), that people don’t realise how few driving enthusiasts there are ie people that go on driving holidays, do track days or just get up at 6 on a Sunday to find some quite roads for a blast. The subset of people that are both obsessed with driving fast and able to afford new Ferraris is likely to be fairly small.
Same as most Range Rovers don’t go further off-road than mounting the kerb, most sports cars and hypercars never get stretched.
Esceptico said:
Technically very impressive but struggling to see the relevance of all that power.
I currently have a superbike rather than a hypercar but theoretical performance is pretty stunning. Just over 10 seconds for a quarter mile and 170 ish top speed. I ride reasonably enthusiastically but don’t come close to scratching the performance potential. Not really possible on the road - or rather pointless - I’ve got some great roads to ride near me but safe corner speeds are limited by many factors. Yes I could use full acceleration out of corners but even with much less power than this Rimac it would be easy to hit 150 mph on anything other than a very short straight. Apart from the obvious dangers of doing so, that would put me in danger of incarceration/deportation. So I don’t.
However fast the Rimac is, I doubt it would be more fun on track than a dedicated track car costing a fraction. Personally - and I know this is just me - it would be less fun than a £5k track slag bike and also less fun than a £25k Caterham. Each to own though.
Yet you still have a superbike when you could have bought a 250 for a fraction of the price. Point is you don't need a superbike, you wanted it, you can afford it so you bought it. Happy days! Same applies to the people who buy a car like this; anyone dropping this kind of money on a ridiculous toy has, or has access to all kinds of exotic track machines if that's what floats their boat.I currently have a superbike rather than a hypercar but theoretical performance is pretty stunning. Just over 10 seconds for a quarter mile and 170 ish top speed. I ride reasonably enthusiastically but don’t come close to scratching the performance potential. Not really possible on the road - or rather pointless - I’ve got some great roads to ride near me but safe corner speeds are limited by many factors. Yes I could use full acceleration out of corners but even with much less power than this Rimac it would be easy to hit 150 mph on anything other than a very short straight. Apart from the obvious dangers of doing so, that would put me in danger of incarceration/deportation. So I don’t.
However fast the Rimac is, I doubt it would be more fun on track than a dedicated track car costing a fraction. Personally - and I know this is just me - it would be less fun than a £5k track slag bike and also less fun than a £25k Caterham. Each to own though.
Esceptico said:
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
How could you possibly know that they buy cars for bragging rights and not because they actually like the thing?
Calm down. I didn’t list all the possible reasons for buying a new Ferrari or equivalents. However, exploiting the ability to do sub 8 min laps of the ring isn’t the main reason for most. Perhaps it is because PH is an echo chamber and there are quite a few driving enthusiasts (as opposed to car enthusiasts), that people don’t realise how few driving enthusiasts there are ie people that go on driving holidays, do track days or just get up at 6 on a Sunday to find some quite roads for a blast. The subset of people that are both obsessed with driving fast and able to afford new Ferraris is likely to be fairly small.
Same as most Range Rovers don’t go further off-road than mounting the kerb, most sports cars and hypercars never get stretched.
So what if a RR doesn't go off road? It's still a very good road car and fits the bill of a great daily driver with load lugging capabilities to suit the needs of many people.
Your post smacks of jealously or a dislike that people buy things for reasons you don't necessarily agree with and you appear to contort those reasonings.
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
You changed your words a lot there. Earlier you clearly stayed "most" buy the car for bragging rights etc.
So what if a RR doesn't go off road? It's still a very good road car and fits the bill of a great daily driver with load lugging capabilities to suit the needs of many people.
Your post smacks of jealously or a dislike that people buy things for reasons you don't necessarily agree with and you appear to contort those reasonings.
Whether the RR is a good car is not the point. Land Rover invest a lot of time and money to make the RR work off-road whilst not compromising its on road ability too much and they use that ability heavily in the marketing, yet few customers use that capability. So what if a RR doesn't go off road? It's still a very good road car and fits the bill of a great daily driver with load lugging capabilities to suit the needs of many people.
Your post smacks of jealously or a dislike that people buy things for reasons you don't necessarily agree with and you appear to contort those reasonings.
As soon as someone dares to criticise an expensive car they get accused of jealousy. Why would I be jealous?
Esceptico said:
in the marketing, yet few customers use that capability.
As soon as someone dares to criticise an expensive car they get accused of jealousy. Why would I be jealous?
But you were criticising the car, you were making assumptions on the owners of expensive cars based upon nothing. You stated that "most" buyers of those cars only buy them for bragging rights. I simply asked how on earth you could know that. You haven't actually explained how you know that. You'd need to ask over 50% of owners of extremely expensive cars to know that, and I doubt you have. As soon as someone dares to criticise an expensive car they get accused of jealousy. Why would I be jealous?
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff