I'd rather gouge my own eyes out with a spoon than.........
Discussion
be confronted with this monstrosity on my drive every day!
Seriously - why is is that most of these Chinese SUVs and many similar just look a bit awkward and s
t?
And why is is that all of all the magazine reviews that exist of the Dolphin Surf none of them mention how bloody hideous it looks?
Seriously - why is is that most of these Chinese SUVs and many similar just look a bit awkward and s
t?And why is is that all of all the magazine reviews that exist of the Dolphin Surf none of them mention how bloody hideous it looks?
I was following what turned out to be a new Audi A5 the other day that I had thought was a BYD.
They're no more or less ugly than any of the other two box crossover/SUV things everyone else is making, without the badges it's almost impossible to know what most of them are. Not that I can see why anyone would be very inclined to care in any case.
They're no more or less ugly than any of the other two box crossover/SUV things everyone else is making, without the badges it's almost impossible to know what most of them are. Not that I can see why anyone would be very inclined to care in any case.
FFS, it’s a fairly nondescript family Electric crossover isn’t it ? And you are going on about gouging your own eyes out.
Cars are all metal boxes in various colours, chapels and sizes, some are more aesthetically pleasing, interesting and desirable than others.
Being a drama queen about it like this just sounds idiotic, it’s just not that offensive.
It’s more some kind of subtext where folk have to tell us how much more valid and tasteful their personal choices are, maybe looking for solidarity and affirmation from the group, but sorry, it’s not setting my pulse racing but it’s alright for that kind of car.
If I am not that keen on something or how it looks, get this, I don’t buy it as a rule, but sometimes fate intervenes and you have certain criteria that dictates your choice of vehicle.
A car doesn’t have to be beautiful to do a good job, we had a Sharan, then a Galaxy for family duties, they were to do a job, not as an object of lust.
Cars are all metal boxes in various colours, chapels and sizes, some are more aesthetically pleasing, interesting and desirable than others.
Being a drama queen about it like this just sounds idiotic, it’s just not that offensive.
It’s more some kind of subtext where folk have to tell us how much more valid and tasteful their personal choices are, maybe looking for solidarity and affirmation from the group, but sorry, it’s not setting my pulse racing but it’s alright for that kind of car.
If I am not that keen on something or how it looks, get this, I don’t buy it as a rule, but sometimes fate intervenes and you have certain criteria that dictates your choice of vehicle.
A car doesn’t have to be beautiful to do a good job, we had a Sharan, then a Galaxy for family duties, they were to do a job, not as an object of lust.
To my eye,it's an artistic masterpiece compared to the other Chinese embarrassment,the " Jerko o**".
All these cars are designed to destroy what is left of any truly democratic countries car industry,in my humble opinion.
Allegedly, there are historical precedents in other markets? Where a very cheap product is flooded into it to create a totally dominant position in the market,where all or at least most of the other market players are destroyed.
Then once market control or near monopoly is created,the price is gradually ratcheted up,for the punters who have no other options. This is so easily achieved with governmental support in a totalian regime which has worldwide clout .
It's even easier when the product is only half bad,or even pretty good ,and of course very very cheap. It did not work in the former soviet union, where even east German cars from the 70s and 80s were as technically advanced as UK cars from the 1940s and 50s.Heralding the Austin Maxi or Allegro as technically advanced in comparison to a 2 stroke Warburg ,for example.
This process has been used in loads of markets in the past, allegedly Tobacco and other harmful drugs for example.
With the UK population arguably addicted to cheap consumerism by choice and to some extent by our falling living standards,compounded by the highest tax take in history!
It's a perfect environment for the takeover?
I promised myself decades ago that I would only support the UK or commonwealth car industry .
Sticking with products as diverse as Reliant and Holden Monaro.
More recently I've stretched this to include EU vehicles, because they make some really great cars and they are produced in democracies.
This year I've gone further and bought a South Korean car.It seems very well made ,so far etc etc.
Our wonderful Government,who are terrified of loosing China as a market for Jaguar Land Rover etc Have made it even easier for the Chinese,by borrowing money to give handouts to new purchasers of electric cars,no matter where they are made .
As usual our politicians who have not one gram of commonsense or scientific acumen among have made some very very stupid decisions.In theory this is on the back of the Green lobby .I do wonder though whether any proper serious educated Environment scientist agree with them?
We in the UK must achieve net zero!
First of all,we are so small and insignificant as a co2 producer in a world wide sense, that whatever we do is irrelevant.Unless you believe that because we are Great Britain and so (self) important,our example will change the whole world? Leaders who are Dictators, megalomaniacs and malignant narcissists?
Secondly, by having all our products ,like steel manufacture ,car manufacture and literally any other high energy user eg CO2 manufacturing for the food industry made abroad, we ourselves can easily achieve net zero! This includes buying our oil and gas from the Norwegians,rather than harvesting it ourselves.
But for the planet,the amount of green house gas produced actually goes up, because of fuel used to transport the goods .
The present and previous governments have and are continuing to use money that they are borrowing in our names ( currently around 100k per adult of total money borrowed and going up with every handout,I believe) to essentially bribe UK citizens to buy an electric car.
These cars are very largely made in china, as MI5 has said,China are a "significant threat", to this country as a whole .
It's surely time to " wake up and smell the coffee?"
No wonder Burnham wants to rejoin the EU, it allows us to shelter behind any car tariffs against China introduced by the EU block,rather than leaving us exposed to their full force alone.
The downside is that our massive EU rebate ,achieved by Thatcher and half given back by Blair, the rest lost on our departure from the EU by the chancer Johnson; will never be given back.
All these cars are designed to destroy what is left of any truly democratic countries car industry,in my humble opinion.
Allegedly, there are historical precedents in other markets? Where a very cheap product is flooded into it to create a totally dominant position in the market,where all or at least most of the other market players are destroyed.
Then once market control or near monopoly is created,the price is gradually ratcheted up,for the punters who have no other options. This is so easily achieved with governmental support in a totalian regime which has worldwide clout .
It's even easier when the product is only half bad,or even pretty good ,and of course very very cheap. It did not work in the former soviet union, where even east German cars from the 70s and 80s were as technically advanced as UK cars from the 1940s and 50s.Heralding the Austin Maxi or Allegro as technically advanced in comparison to a 2 stroke Warburg ,for example.
This process has been used in loads of markets in the past, allegedly Tobacco and other harmful drugs for example.
With the UK population arguably addicted to cheap consumerism by choice and to some extent by our falling living standards,compounded by the highest tax take in history!
It's a perfect environment for the takeover?
I promised myself decades ago that I would only support the UK or commonwealth car industry .
Sticking with products as diverse as Reliant and Holden Monaro.
More recently I've stretched this to include EU vehicles, because they make some really great cars and they are produced in democracies.
This year I've gone further and bought a South Korean car.It seems very well made ,so far etc etc.
Our wonderful Government,who are terrified of loosing China as a market for Jaguar Land Rover etc Have made it even easier for the Chinese,by borrowing money to give handouts to new purchasers of electric cars,no matter where they are made .
As usual our politicians who have not one gram of commonsense or scientific acumen among have made some very very stupid decisions.In theory this is on the back of the Green lobby .I do wonder though whether any proper serious educated Environment scientist agree with them?
We in the UK must achieve net zero!
First of all,we are so small and insignificant as a co2 producer in a world wide sense, that whatever we do is irrelevant.Unless you believe that because we are Great Britain and so (self) important,our example will change the whole world? Leaders who are Dictators, megalomaniacs and malignant narcissists?
Secondly, by having all our products ,like steel manufacture ,car manufacture and literally any other high energy user eg CO2 manufacturing for the food industry made abroad, we ourselves can easily achieve net zero! This includes buying our oil and gas from the Norwegians,rather than harvesting it ourselves.
But for the planet,the amount of green house gas produced actually goes up, because of fuel used to transport the goods .
The present and previous governments have and are continuing to use money that they are borrowing in our names ( currently around 100k per adult of total money borrowed and going up with every handout,I believe) to essentially bribe UK citizens to buy an electric car.
These cars are very largely made in china, as MI5 has said,China are a "significant threat", to this country as a whole .
It's surely time to " wake up and smell the coffee?"
No wonder Burnham wants to rejoin the EU, it allows us to shelter behind any car tariffs against China introduced by the EU block,rather than leaving us exposed to their full force alone.
The downside is that our massive EU rebate ,achieved by Thatcher and half given back by Blair, the rest lost on our departure from the EU by the chancer Johnson; will never be given back.
@ Astonman.
China can produce ICE cars just as easily as they can EVs, in fact is only this year where EVs have exceeded ICE exports. 'Sticking with ICE' doesn't save the legacy manufacturers, it just delays the inevitable. The inevitable being that any sane UK (or European) government would ultimately choose a fully electrified fleet over ICE for multiple reasons beyond CO2 footprint.
Firstly, and most importantly, the total sector demand for energy greatly reduces by a factor of 2 or 3 AND, crucially, allows that energy to be sourced renewably in-country. For such a large consumer of energy, it's simply not possible to overlook such a huge disparity combined with the opportunity to reduce the continued geopolitical risk we face by having to import vast quantities of fossil fuels to keep people on the move.
Transport is the country's largest energy consumer and passenger cars are the largest sub-sector within that. To put some perspective on it, the total UK passenger car fleet as ICEs requires around 250 TWh of energy annually, whereas for a totally electrified fleet of the same size this drops to below 100 TWh. Compare that to the total annual electricity consumption which is hovering at around the 300 TWh mark or just below.
The endgame cost saving for this energy difference is too large to ignore, as is of course the vastly reduced lifetime CO2 footprint, which is around 4 times lower in the two endgame scenarios, including the vehicle manufacturing phase.
Many people love to hate on net zero, but ultimately it's a number game and fossil fuels cannot compete on pure numbers with direct electrification, it's just too energy intensive and wasteful as the way forward. There is no other comparable technology waiting in the wings compared to EV, so the die is already cast and any government that drags it feet in transitioning from fossil fuels for transport is being demonstrably blinkered.
I do agree that the term' net zero' is not entirely helpful, but what is unavoidable is that, ultimately, continuing to burn fossil fuel unabated is a mug's game. The economic cost of both the fuel and the resultant carbon production can never be mitigated in future. The longer we keep doing it the more it will cost, so the sooner we stop the burn, the sooner we stop the haemorrhaging. Strategic decarbonisation would be a far better way to describe what is required, rather than net zero. Does anybody really think the 'cost of living crisis' is a temporary thing? The cost of petrol is only going one way from here on in and diesel is essentially fked as a passenger car fuel, other than for the dwindling fleet of used diesels.
Let's also not forget the positive impact on urban and roadside air quality that electrification brings. Note that neither the distance driven by an EV powered by renewables nor the speed at which you drive have a meaningful impact on either the car's lifetime carbon footprint or its production of noxious tailpipe emissions. Read that twice and think about the potential relaxation of government policy implications that has for the future of the car in urban environments and speed limits on both urban roads and motorways. The same can obviously not be said for either petrol or diesel. Especially diesel, where both speed and mileage greatly impacts NOx output. So from a 'scientific acumen' perspective there is a real and meaningful benefit of moving to renewably-powered EVs which shifts the entire carbon footprint to the manufacturing phase of the car. Nothing the end user can do (think dpf delete, poor maintenance, high speeds, lots of miles) impacts the environmental footprint. An absolute godsend for government policy-makers.
As for the manufacturing phase, sure, offshoring the production of cars and their batteries puts the onus on the country of origin. What can be said that's positive though is that an EV battery's production carbon footprint is highly dependent on both the source of energy used, and the degree of recyclability that is ultimately achieved. On both those fronts, there is good news, EV battery production is both heavily weighted towards electricity consumption and the recyclability has already been demonstrated at over 95%.
So as the grid in the country of origin greens and the passage of time increases the degree of recycling, so the carbon footprint keeps dropping. Note that it is either already (or will shortly be) legally mandated in the UK and EU to not dispose of EV batteries. Given the value of the minerals in an end-of-life battery, it would be a dumb idea to throw them away anyway.
One final point, the impact of shipping from the other side of the world on a product's total lifetime carbon footprint, especially a car, is a lot lower than I think you are suggesting it is, equal to only a few thousand miles of driving in an ICE car, or a small % of the total lifetime footprint.
China can produce ICE cars just as easily as they can EVs, in fact is only this year where EVs have exceeded ICE exports. 'Sticking with ICE' doesn't save the legacy manufacturers, it just delays the inevitable. The inevitable being that any sane UK (or European) government would ultimately choose a fully electrified fleet over ICE for multiple reasons beyond CO2 footprint.
Firstly, and most importantly, the total sector demand for energy greatly reduces by a factor of 2 or 3 AND, crucially, allows that energy to be sourced renewably in-country. For such a large consumer of energy, it's simply not possible to overlook such a huge disparity combined with the opportunity to reduce the continued geopolitical risk we face by having to import vast quantities of fossil fuels to keep people on the move.
Transport is the country's largest energy consumer and passenger cars are the largest sub-sector within that. To put some perspective on it, the total UK passenger car fleet as ICEs requires around 250 TWh of energy annually, whereas for a totally electrified fleet of the same size this drops to below 100 TWh. Compare that to the total annual electricity consumption which is hovering at around the 300 TWh mark or just below.
The endgame cost saving for this energy difference is too large to ignore, as is of course the vastly reduced lifetime CO2 footprint, which is around 4 times lower in the two endgame scenarios, including the vehicle manufacturing phase.
Many people love to hate on net zero, but ultimately it's a number game and fossil fuels cannot compete on pure numbers with direct electrification, it's just too energy intensive and wasteful as the way forward. There is no other comparable technology waiting in the wings compared to EV, so the die is already cast and any government that drags it feet in transitioning from fossil fuels for transport is being demonstrably blinkered.
I do agree that the term' net zero' is not entirely helpful, but what is unavoidable is that, ultimately, continuing to burn fossil fuel unabated is a mug's game. The economic cost of both the fuel and the resultant carbon production can never be mitigated in future. The longer we keep doing it the more it will cost, so the sooner we stop the burn, the sooner we stop the haemorrhaging. Strategic decarbonisation would be a far better way to describe what is required, rather than net zero. Does anybody really think the 'cost of living crisis' is a temporary thing? The cost of petrol is only going one way from here on in and diesel is essentially f
ked as a passenger car fuel, other than for the dwindling fleet of used diesels.Let's also not forget the positive impact on urban and roadside air quality that electrification brings. Note that neither the distance driven by an EV powered by renewables nor the speed at which you drive have a meaningful impact on either the car's lifetime carbon footprint or its production of noxious tailpipe emissions. Read that twice and think about the potential relaxation of government policy implications that has for the future of the car in urban environments and speed limits on both urban roads and motorways. The same can obviously not be said for either petrol or diesel. Especially diesel, where both speed and mileage greatly impacts NOx output. So from a 'scientific acumen' perspective there is a real and meaningful benefit of moving to renewably-powered EVs which shifts the entire carbon footprint to the manufacturing phase of the car. Nothing the end user can do (think dpf delete, poor maintenance, high speeds, lots of miles) impacts the environmental footprint. An absolute godsend for government policy-makers.
As for the manufacturing phase, sure, offshoring the production of cars and their batteries puts the onus on the country of origin. What can be said that's positive though is that an EV battery's production carbon footprint is highly dependent on both the source of energy used, and the degree of recyclability that is ultimately achieved. On both those fronts, there is good news, EV battery production is both heavily weighted towards electricity consumption and the recyclability has already been demonstrated at over 95%.
So as the grid in the country of origin greens and the passage of time increases the degree of recycling, so the carbon footprint keeps dropping. Note that it is either already (or will shortly be) legally mandated in the UK and EU to not dispose of EV batteries. Given the value of the minerals in an end-of-life battery, it would be a dumb idea to throw them away anyway.
One final point, the impact of shipping from the other side of the world on a product's total lifetime carbon footprint, especially a car, is a lot lower than I think you are suggesting it is, equal to only a few thousand miles of driving in an ICE car, or a small % of the total lifetime footprint.
I think you are perhaps missing the point,that we are all going to be subservient to china,with these policies,which are driving up unsustainable borrowing.
Also,doing significantly lower annual mileage in an older petrol car ,is better than any ev from just about any perspective. I do believe dense urban areas do need to be entirely diesel free though especially public transport.
Also,doing significantly lower annual mileage in an older petrol car ,is better than any ev from just about any perspective. I do believe dense urban areas do need to be entirely diesel free though especially public transport.
astonman said:
I think you are perhaps missing the point,that we are all going to be subservient to china,with these policies,which are driving up unsustainable borrowing.
Also,doing significantly lower annual mileage in an older petrol car ,is better than any ev from just about any perspective. I do believe dense urban areas do need to be entirely diesel free though especially public transport.
il admit that both yours and gt9s post were difficult to follow it didnt help that you didnt seem to mention ice v ev but gt9 was more of an ice v ev thing and the doom of legacy car makers, where I got the just of what you meant.Also,doing significantly lower annual mileage in an older petrol car ,is better than any ev from just about any perspective. I do believe dense urban areas do need to be entirely diesel free though especially public transport.
I do agree with you tho. We are all missing the point, such a big effort to get everyone into EV's and the more you use them the better the argument is against the manufactured emissions and against older petrol cars that have are already been made, how is that the right thing?
How about we all use cars we have, less. Walk run and cycle more, might help with the biggest strain on the NHS as well (diabetes).
There are heaps of these in Australian cities. What you've pictured is a more recent model. They don't have so much of the Jabba the Hutt look.
If you like that look, you'll love the Huawei Aito M9:
This cars recent claim to fame is that a fellow failed to take a bend at an intersection and collided with a pole, part of a traffic sign. The car was in flames in 2.5 seconds. The driver was incinerated. Traffic surveillance video of it found its way onto chinese social media. Authorities said that the driver was driving recklessly and hit the pole at 139kmh. Chinese Internet sleuths soon analysed the video and calculated the impact speed at closer to 30kmh. Chinese vloggers soon found the pole, went to vlog it and noticed that it had some scorch marks from the fire but didn't have any mechanical damage to speak of. So the government painted the pole. Vloggers started vlogging about that. The government erected walls around the pole so the vloggers couldn't get near it.....
But yeah, the Aito M9 is a luxury vehicle of sorts. Unfortunately it misses out on the passenger seat toilet or the foot bath for rear seat passengers like a couple of its competitors.
If you like that look, you'll love the Huawei Aito M9:
This cars recent claim to fame is that a fellow failed to take a bend at an intersection and collided with a pole, part of a traffic sign. The car was in flames in 2.5 seconds. The driver was incinerated. Traffic surveillance video of it found its way onto chinese social media. Authorities said that the driver was driving recklessly and hit the pole at 139kmh. Chinese Internet sleuths soon analysed the video and calculated the impact speed at closer to 30kmh. Chinese vloggers soon found the pole, went to vlog it and noticed that it had some scorch marks from the fire but didn't have any mechanical damage to speak of. So the government painted the pole. Vloggers started vlogging about that. The government erected walls around the pole so the vloggers couldn't get near it.....
But yeah, the Aito M9 is a luxury vehicle of sorts. Unfortunately it misses out on the passenger seat toilet or the foot bath for rear seat passengers like a couple of its competitors.
theoperative said:
fttm said:
normalbloke said:
Beats walking..
Nope , can say with total honesty and commitment that I will never own a Chinese vehicle let alone a Chinese EV . All Chinese owned brands now
I used to think this about Chinese cars.
Then I spent some time in one (as a passenger) and started to understand what the appeal is. The one I was in (a Chery) was loaded with tech, very comfortable, fairly spritely and absolutely huge inside. Ideal for a family of 4 or 5.
Then I started looking at the costs. You can get a Jaecoo, or an Omoda, or a Chery (etc) for literally peanuts. Less that half the cost of what it would be to own a generic, more palatable premium brand (BMW, Volvo, Audo etc).
Once you get over the image of them, and factor in that many many people are being crushed on every side by tax rises, fuel costs, higher bills and mortgages, I can fully understand that people who previously cared about what they drove may start to gravitate towards the mindset that it is, at the end of the day, just a car. If it gets you to work and back, or meets the demands of every day family life, and means you can afford the mortgage for another 12 months, then why not!
Then I spent some time in one (as a passenger) and started to understand what the appeal is. The one I was in (a Chery) was loaded with tech, very comfortable, fairly spritely and absolutely huge inside. Ideal for a family of 4 or 5.
Then I started looking at the costs. You can get a Jaecoo, or an Omoda, or a Chery (etc) for literally peanuts. Less that half the cost of what it would be to own a generic, more palatable premium brand (BMW, Volvo, Audo etc).
Once you get over the image of them, and factor in that many many people are being crushed on every side by tax rises, fuel costs, higher bills and mortgages, I can fully understand that people who previously cared about what they drove may start to gravitate towards the mindset that it is, at the end of the day, just a car. If it gets you to work and back, or meets the demands of every day family life, and means you can afford the mortgage for another 12 months, then why not!
I look at Chinese cars and struggle to tell the difference between them, other than is they are a copy of a European brand. On the whole they are underwheeled and bodies overhang wheelarches creating an awkward undertyred look.
Chinese tastes in styling are different to ours. Remember the abominations that Hyundai used to churn out and how smart their cars are now - The Koreans out-Japanese Japanese cars.
Chinese tastes in styling are different to ours. Remember the abominations that Hyundai used to churn out and how smart their cars are now - The Koreans out-Japanese Japanese cars.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff