RE: Lotus: The perils of a hands-on CEO

[DanielSan]

aelord said:

sounds about right for 102 on the A11. I got 28 days and £1k fine back in 2010 for 103mph on the contiguous A14 near Newmarket.

I’m impressed you managed to speed on the A14 it’s usually fked!

[anonymous-user]

Nanook said:

I don't think I've seen a single person on this thread state that 102mph on this quiet piece of road was particularly unsafe.

The main argument of people that think the police officer was in the wrong here was "It's not unsafe, you brake reading, crappy driver snowflakes."

That's frankly, fking retarded. What he did was stupid, because it's illegal, and he has a bunch of points. I'm not saying the speed limits are fair, but we all know what they are. You exceed them, you stand a chance of being caught, and punished for it. That's what's happened here.

Sounds like you're expecting people to actually read the thread and consider the comments before replying. Frankly, that's a bit optimistic

[suffolk009]

dandarez said:

102 mph with the boss at the wheel?

Made me smile and recount something many years ago when Ginetta were building their G10.

All Ginettas back then had their early development carried out on the then newly-built Witham by-pass near their factory.

Re the G10, it had debuted at the Racing Car Show in road car guise. The model was also down to debut race at Brands Hatch.
The race car was not drastically different from the road car, but fitted a variant of Ginetta's magnesium F3 wheels shod with racing tyres. The engine - a 4.7-litre 271hp Ford Mustang imported from the States. Ginetta themselves uprated it to 350hp using parts from FAV in Slough where the GT40s were built, with 4 twin-choke Webers, matching manifold, hotter cams and stronger con-rod bolts. Weighing in at around 900kg it should have been very quick, but the Walklett brothers who ran Ginetta were not happy with its performance.
Hurrying to complete the car it had carb trumpets protruding through the bonnet and at speed the front body shape created a low pressure area, causing atomised fuel to be drawn from the carbs to a height of about a couple of inches and starving the engine of fuel and air. The bonnet aperture was then closed and performance was then restored and (in Ivor Walklett's words):
'We then easily topped 150mph on the Witham by-pass!'
Who was at the wheel? Which Walklett? Was it the 'boss' Bob? Highly likely not! Ivor Walklett? Or was it Chris Meek? It's history now.

If you think that's a bit over the top, Chris Meek then took the wheel of this prototype G10 where it not only wiped the floor with the opposition and scored a debut win at Brands Hatch Redex Trophy for GT Cars in November 1965, Meek started on pole in the G10 winning easily in the end, beating Robbie Gordon in no less than the famous ex-Dick Protheroe low-drag competition Jag E-type. The G10 had comfortably beat what was categorically the GT racing car of that period.

102 mph by the Loti boss. Hardly moving compared to the old days.

Great story. Thank you.

[RoverP6B]

mainaman said:

...i havent heard about any tragic accidents,involving the test cars.

There was an incident a few years ago where a Lexus LF-A collided with an E90 3-series just outside the Nürburgring, with fatal consequences for the BMW employees in the E90. I think the Lexus test driver was OK, thanks to the carbonfibre monocoque.

[Rick101]

Didn't Chapman test his F1 cars around the streets of Soho...

[Thorburn]

RoverP6B said:

There was an incident a few years ago where a Lexus LF-A collided with an E90 3-series just outside the Nürburgring, with fatal consequences for the BMW employees in the E90. I think the Lexus test driver was OK, thanks to the carbonfibre monocoque.

Wrong way round, lead Toyota test driver was killed, occupants of the BMW survived.

[RoverP6B]

I stand corrected. Should have Googled it before posting from faulty memory. Sounds like Hiromu Naruse was a real legend, too, had been a Toyota test driver since 1963, helped develop the 2000GT etc.

Personally, I am of the opinion that 102mph in a well-sorted sports car is not remotely dangerous and that the police officer could have used his discretion to at least knock it down to 99, if not letting Gales go. Perhaps Gales was being silly, but then which of us has never decided it might be opportune to exceed a speed limit by a substantial margin? I know I've seen 140 indicated on the A3 (southbound from Hook to Esher Common) and M40 (northbound to Oxford, coming downhill from Beaconsfield), including a sustained 100+ from the M25 junction to the Oxford turn-off, not so many years ago. I wasn't even slightly horribly killed to ghastly gory bloody death on either occasion. Neither resulted in me receiving so much as a letter in the post. There is definitely a need to review speed limits and enforcement thereof.

[RemarkLima]

Cold said:

Every new model during the final stages of its development. Not every new vehicle from the production line. But you knew that.

That's what I'd assumed, not every single customer car - that would be madness!

[Heaveho]

Nanook said:

hondansx said:

Guybrush said:

Heaveho said:

What a fking place this has become. 102 mph! And the handwringers come on here, of all places, to twist about it. Go somewhere you're wanted, if you think a modern performance car on a straight road can't travel safely at that speed, you're living a world away from reality. Seriously, just go away, and let this be the car forum it's meant to be.

Very well said. Thank you.

Yes! Glad it isn't just me.

I don't think I've seen a single person on this thread state that 102mph on this quiet piece of road was particularly unsafe.

The main argument of people that think the police officer was in the wrong here was "It's not unsafe, you brake reading, crappy driver snowflakes."

That's frankly, fking retarded. What he did was stupid, because it's illegal, and he has a bunch of points. I'm not saying the speed limits are fair, but we all know what they are. You exceed them, you stand a chance of being caught, and punished for it. That's what's happened here.

So he did something that's only affected him then. Because what he did wasn't unsafe. I'd agree with that. So why does anyone need to have a negative opinion about it, given that what he's done seems only to have had a detrimental affect on himself?

The main thrust of my op was to point out the general negativity displayed on here on a regular basis when the subject of speeding comes up......if he's been doing 102 in a 30, fair enough, hang him, but a ton on a quiet dual carriageway or motorway doesn't merit a comment, at least it didn't on my daily commute between Southampton and Wimbledon when I lived and worked down there not so long ago. It was such a regular morning occurrence for so many commuters before 7am, it seemed more unusual to be doing less than that on the A3!

[DonkeyApple]

Heaveho said:

So he did something that's only affected him then. Because what he did wasn't unsafe. I'd agree with that. So why does anyone need to have a negative opinion about it, given that what he's done seems only to have had a detrimental affect on himself?

The main thrust of my op was to point out the general negativity displayed on here on a regular basis when the subject of speeding comes up......if he's been doing 102 in a 30, fair enough, hang him, but a ton on a quiet dual carriageway or motorway doesn't merit a comment, at least it didn't on my daily commute between Southampton and Wimbledon when I lived and worked down there not so long ago. It was such a regular morning occurrence for so many commuters before 7am, it seemed more unusual to be doing less than that on the A3!

And I suspect that many people happily drive this way also. The M40 is essentially a 100mph link road between the Cotswolds and the City.

But, should you get caught breaking the law whose fault is it?

We all know what the law is, we are all adults, we all make the deliberate descision to break that law and we all know the risks and where speed vans tend to be, what police cars look like and that the police have some unmarked cars. So who is to blame when someone gets caught breaking the speed limit by a considerable margin?

[vernz]

I find myself agreeing with the general dismay at the negativity towards breaking the speed limit, particularly on a site predominantly occupied by petrol heads and enthusiasts.

Clearly when crossing from 70mph to 71mph, the world doesn't fall apart or does it become instantly unsafe and I've felt for a long while that the 70 mph limit is there becuase they expect people to go 80 mph and if they raised it to 80 then everyone would drive at 90 mph!

On the M1 in the heavy rain yesterday 60 mph was probably unsafe but on a clear dry day on empty roads, 100 mph is often not an issue. In my view, speed doesn't kill, it's just the timing and application of speed that's relevant, in the same way that the person doing 30 in a 60 can often cause an accident as other road users feel forced to overtake.

Clearly the 70 mph speed limit and braking distances from the highway code are from another era and don't relate to modern cars with tyre and brake tech as it currently is.

I'm sorry to also use the unrestricted Autobahn example.....but it's relevant in that clearly in certain circumstances, in a civilised country in Europe, you can drive safely at speeds well in excess of 70mph.

The speed limit in this country is 70 mph and I get that. if you exceed it and get caught it's your fault and no one elses. Speed limits usually in 30 mph and some 40 mph zones are no brainers and shouldn't be exceeded in any circumstances, but I think we need to limit the 'string them up' mentality just because someone exceeds the UK draconian national speed limit.

[Heaveho]

DonkeyApple said:

But, should you get caught breaking the law whose fault is it?

We all know what the law is, we are all adults, we all make the deliberate descision to break that law and we all know the risks and where speed vans tend to be, what police cars look like and that the police have some unmarked cars. So who is to blame when someone gets caught breaking the speed limit by a considerable margin?

Yes, I don't disagree with any of that. However, that wasn't the point I was making.....it's for exactly all those reasons that I wouldn't be on here asking for advice if I were to be caught being indiscreet. However, many people come on here to seek advice for exactly the scenario the subject of this thread found himself in, and wish they hadn't bothered after being subjected to the usual barrage of sanctimonious, and, I suspect, hypocritical bks from the same old faces. I bet not one of them is wholly innocent, yet they still wade in at every opportunity.

The attitude toward it on here would be laughable for a car forum if it weren't so depressing. Most of the time, a lot of the responses tend to read like the people making them are guilty of fake outrage. Little life syndrome! It doesn't help, which is surely the whole point of someone creating the thread and asking for it. If people want to respond, why can't they just limit it to stating the outcome of similar experiences they've had, or pointing the op in the direction of agtlaw, rather than going full Daily Mail.

[Heaveho]

Nanook said:

If I went outside and ran headfirst into a wall, it’s not going to negatively impact your life in any way. But you’d probably form an opinion of me for doing so.

I'd only know about it if you posted about it on here........and much like the reason for this thread, I'd think it a bit of a non-event, tbh!

[DonkeyApple]

Heaveho said:

DonkeyApple said:

But, should you get caught breaking the law whose fault is it?

We all know what the law is, we are all adults, we all make the deliberate descision to break that law and we all know the risks and where speed vans tend to be, what police cars look like and that the police have some unmarked cars. So who is to blame when someone gets caught breaking the speed limit by a considerable margin?

Yes, I don't disagree with any of that. However, that wasn't the point I was making.....it's for exactly all those reasons that I wouldn't be on here asking for advice if I were to be caught being indiscreet. However, many people come on here to seek advice for exactly the scenario the subject of this thread found himself in, and wish they hadn't bothered after being subjected to the usual barrage of sanctimonious, and, I suspect, hypocritical bks from the same old faces. I bet not one of them is wholly innocent, yet they still wade in at every opportunity.

The attitude toward it on here would be laughable for a car forum if it weren't so depressing. Most of the time, a lot of the responses tend to read like the people making them are guilty of fake outrage. Little life syndrome! It doesn't help, which is surely the whole point of someone creating the thread and asking for it. If people want to respond, why can't they just limit it to stating the outcome of similar experiences they've had, or pointing the op in the direction of agtlaw, rather than going full Daily Mail.

I’m inclined to agree. I’m not seeing why some are taking the rather council ‘fk da POlice’ perspective and trying to lay blame on anyone other than Gales for his personal bad luck.

Re the general outrage on PH regarding speed, I wonder just how much is down to people who know that they also speed at times but have the need to put up a public face that stands against it? I think as a society we’ve learnt the habit of what we say in public being what we expect the public want to hear and that this often doesn’t correlate with what we believe. As per all the high street polling errors etc. On strong social subjects people when in public will say what is expected of them?

I’d wager that if you unknowingly blackboxed everyone on PH who was vociferous against speeding you would collect data that did not match with what was being said.

[CABC]

if you black boxed me you'll find I'm goody two shoes in built up areas. Mostly from fear of cameras, but also through genuine belief that 30 and 40 around town are correct, even well judged 20s. It's in the hills I like to have fun. And the reduction from nsl to 60 or even lower is often illogical, even cynical.

We, as enthusiasts, should be careful not to be as hysterical as some of the anti-speed brigade. In built-up areas speed does need limiting and policing. Out of town we should be vocal in questioning the reasoning and justification.
It's worth reminding everyone that the recent deaths in towns haven't been through cars driving at around or just above the limit but from young guys racing. Brake however will be spinning these events to their own twisted purpose.

[anonymous-user]

The issue is that the law is two faced (due in the main with the failure to update the limits as technology has moved on).

it basically says "yeah, that 70mph, limit, don't worry, you can exceed that limit no worries, in fact, do 85, that'll be just fine" and then wonders why people speed in a 30mph (where an extra 5mph DOES make a difference) For the average motorist, who is not skilled and attentive enough, they mostly "follow the car ahead" sheeping along. So the guy a head does 40 though that 30 and so does everyone behind him.

So shouting "SPEED KILLS" but then immediately shouting "YOU CAN DO 85 ON THE MOTORWAY" is completely counter productive....

[Heaveho]

I'm in complete agreement with condemning anyone who won't respect the lower limits, I think they should be adhered to religiously. The irony being that you're often made to feel like you're holding up others who would break them if you weren't "in the way", but then criticise you for a ton on a straight, safe motorway, while they do the whole trip in the middle lane at 60!

People are thick as mince when it comes to common sense issues.

[Heaveho]

DonkeyApple said:

I’m inclined to agree. I’m not seeing why some are taking the rather council ‘fk da POlice’ perspective and trying to lay blame on anyone other than Gales for his personal bad luck.

Re the general outrage on PH regarding speed, I wonder just how much is down to people who know that they also speed at times but have the need to put up a public face that stands against it? I think as a society we’ve learnt the habit of what we say in public being what we expect the public want to hear and that this often doesn’t correlate with what we believe. As per all the high street polling errors etc. On strong social subjects people when in public will say what is expected of them?

I’d wager that if you unknowingly blackboxed everyone on PH who was vociferous against speeding you would collect data that did not match with what was being said.

Yes, that's a good post. Probably more truth in that than people care to admit.

[cramorra]

RoverP6B said:

mainaman said:

...i havent heard about any tragic accidents,involving the test cars.

There was an incident a few years ago where a Lexus LF-A collided with an E90 3-series just outside the Nürburgring, with fatal consequences for the BMW employees in the E90. I think the Lexus test driver was OK, thanks to the carbonfibre monocoque.

Several years ago a mother and her kid(s) where killed in a supermini outside a mercedes testdrive facility by two mercedes test cars road racing
The drivers were initially let of lightly which caused outrage and led to a revised sentence

There are several cases which mb has been criticised for with at least 3 innocent deaths since 2000
Yes I love MB and I am a petrolhead but some testdrivers need grounding
https://www.welt.de/vermischtes/article7331063/Toe...

Edited by cramorra on Wednesday 31st January 06:55

[bordseye]

The lesson that Gales should have learned from his speeding conviction is that rearward visibity from an Evora simply isnt good enough.

I didnt like the sound of " "For brand building Lotus needs something above the Evora," he agreed. "It needs a poster car again." With the Evora already in 911 territory price wise, I dont see any room for a more expensive Lotus. Lotus isnt Ferrari and never will, be so Ferrari type prices arent feasible particularly using someone elses engine and technology.