driving discussion

An Insignificant Truth

2008-05-25T17:01:00.000-07:00

There are 37 million Americans living below the poverty line, representing 12.7% of the population, which is the highest figure in the developing world. America is also home to 269 billionaires, which is more than any other country.

The USA is also widely acknowledged to have the world’s largest carbon dioxide emissions, producing more than 6 billion tonnes per year – around 20 tonnes per person. In comparison, the UK produces less than 600 million tonnes per year – equating to about 10 tonnes per person.

We are inevitably witnessing climate change to some degree, particularly global warming, the only sensible argument to be having is how much of an impact this change will have and whether or not it’s worth doing anything about it.

Despite the dubious honour of being the largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, and thus global warming, car buying in the USA remains dedicated to the pickup, with the Ford F-Series having occupied the country’s best-selling slot for more than two decades.

These cars typify the pursuit of ‘the Dream’ in the USA, which holds that hard work will bring success and prosperity. In the way that the horse is the icon of the Wild West of old, the pickup is the modern day stallion of the American lifestyle. It is a symbol of strength and power in a country that is increasingly obsessed by both.

Indeed, together with the Chevrolet Silverado and Dodge Ram, sales make up 46% of the top ten best-selling cars in the USA – almost 1.8 million vehicles – with all three models coming no lower than fourth in the list – joined only by the Toyota Camry.

So, although the combined production figures for the top ten best-selling cars in the USA is a mere 6.5% higher than in the UK, combined carbon dioxide emissions – based on 10,000 miles per year – are 35% greater and the cars guzzle 93% more fuel. Even a straight comparison on distance driven reveals a significant difference, but in reality, Americans are estimated to drive up to a third further than their counterparts worldwide.

There are more than 680 million passenger vehicles worldwide and Americans drive over 200 million of them, which in turn churn out almost half of all tailpipe emissions. Whilst most vehicle manufacturers have been busying themselves improving the fuel economy of their products, the fuel economy of American cars has been steadily declining since the 1980s.

In comparison, despite the number of cars in the UK increasing by millions since the mid-1990s, carbon emissions have remained largely unchanged thanks to advancements in greener technologies. However, emissions from light and heavy goods vehicles have increased over the same period, in line with changing consumer trends such as reduction in personal travel in favour of online shopping.

Nevertheless, according to the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, road transport accounts for around 22% of carbon dioxide emissions, whilst a staggering 40% is attributable to the energy supply sector.

I’d consider myself a proponent of ‘green’ vehicles, but have often found it difficult to sell the benefits of such vehicles. I’ve believed for a long time that American car buying behaviour must change, but that’s difficult to justify when statistics show that even removing an entire year’s worth of new cars from America’s roads would only reduce carbon emissions by about 0.2%.

If climate change is something we really want to take on, we’re going to have to do more than simply buy hybrids and turn down our thermostats.

To speed or not to speed...

2008-05-24T18:31:00.000-07:00

Between 1865 and 1896 in the United Kingdom, the speed limit for locomotives on the highway was 2pm in cities, towns and villages and 4pm elsewhere, and they also had to be preceded by a pedestrian carrying a red flag. This was then increased to 14mph and to 20mph in 1903.

Between 1930 and 1965, speed limits for cars and motorcycles were abolished, although a 30mph speed limit for built-up areas was introduced in 1934, which is still pretty much the case today. In 1965, a series of motorway accidents led to the trialling of a 70mph speed limit, whilst a 60mph limit on single carriageways was introduced in 1977.

Vehicle safety and driving training has come a long way since the 1930s and even the 1960s, so is it time that these age-old limits were reviewed?

In 2005, the AA did just that by controversially recommending the national speed limit increased to 80mph in controlled areas, such as the M25 variable speed limit zone. This statement was met with fierce opposition from road safety groups, including RoadPeace, a motoring charity, which affirmed that "any raising of the limit would make the roads more dangerous".

The Chief Executive of road safety charity, Brake – Mary Williams OBE – stated that "The proposal to raise the limit on motorways is irresponsible and flies in the face of road safety advice". The concerns stem chiefly from evidence from the USA and Germany, where higher or unrestricted speed limits seem to relate to higher casualty rates.

Indeed, Britain has one of the world’s best road safety records. A report produced by the Department for Transport in 2004 showed that UK experiences 6 road deaths per 100,000 of its population, whilst Germany, Italy and France suffer 8.3, 11.7 and 12.9 respectively.

Strange then, that within the same report, it was found that 58% of car drivers exceed the 30mph speed limit, whilst 57% confessed to breaking the 70mph national speed limit. How, you may think, can our roads be some of the world’s safest when more than half of all drivers are speeding?

In 2005, the Department for Transport published an analysis of road accidents, which stated that in 35% of accidents, the main contributory factors was loss of control; followed by going too fast for conditions and failing to look properly, both at 17%; and poor manoeuvring and excessive speed at 12%. Exceeding the speed limit contributed to 28% of all fatal road accidents.

Nevertheless, enforcement of speed limits seems to remain the top priority for government initiatives to reduce road accidents. This may be due to bodies such as the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety combining the factors of excessive and inappropriate speed and thereby concluding that speeding is the ‘number one cause’ of road deaths in the UK.

In reality, this is a fallacy. Excessive speed equates to breaking the law. Inappropriate speed, or going too fast for the conditions, equates to poor driving discipline. The key difference here is between speed and speeding. Clearly a vehicle that is stationary is fairly unlikely to do anyone any harm – it’s generally when cars get moving that they represent any sort of danger.

Indeed, the first ever fatality of a motor vehicle accident was Bridget Driscoll, who, in August 1896, was hit by Arthur Edsell’s 1895 Peugeot, as an almost pedestrian 4mph. The vehicle was driving at twice the speed limit. Whilst motorists’ groups and road safety campaigners alike attempt to distinguish between ‘safe’ and ‘unsafe’ speeds, in reality there is no safe speed.

The distinction is compromised further by the Association of Chief Police Officers’ guidelines, which recommend a tolerance level of the speed limit of ‘+10% +2 mph’. This means that the national speed limit is virtually extended to 79mph. Officials state inaccurate speedometer readings as the reason for this tolerance, but any way you cut it, 9mph is a pretty significant inaccuracy.

Then you have the environmental implications of speed reduction. The AA, again somewhat controversially, stated that reducing the speed limit from 30mph to 20mph in urban areas could result in an increase in carbon dioxide emissions of 10%, whilst adding speed bumps can increase fuel consumption by 50%; despite the Department for Transport’s claims that both can reduce accident frequency by 60%.

Targeting excessive speed may seem like the most obvious approach to reducing road accidents, but it’s not the ultimate response. Between 2000 and 2006, Britain reduced its road death rate by 0.4 per 100,000 people. In the same period, the Netherlands and Sweden experienced reductions of 2.5 and 1.8 per 100,000 respectively. The methods they employed were not just focussed on speed, but also on road design and provision for pedestrians and cyclists.

However, I would certainly not advocate Ian Roberts’ view, taken from the Royal Society of Medicine’s journal in August 2007, which states that “Reclaiming the streets for walking and cycling is the future of sustainable transport.” Pedestrians have pavements; cyclists have cycle paths; motor vehicles have roads. Pedestrianising the M25 isn’t going to do anything...except perhaps bring the economy to a standstill.

Speeding undoubtedly contributes to road accidents, but simply trying to stop speeding isn’t going to bring an end to these accidents. If we really want to do something about road accidents, then we need to realise that Britain needs better drivers.

The Association of British Insurers believes new drivers should take a ‘year of lessons’ and I’m half way to agreeing with them. I passed my test first time after eight months of lessons and I’ve not had an accident in the four years since. I’m concerned by intensive, ‘pass-first-time-or-your-money-back’ courses that give learner drivers no real experience of seasonal conditions and I’m envious of my Scandinavian friends who have skid-pan practice built into their driving tests.

The good news is that the Institute of Advanced Motorists runs a ‘Skill for Life’ advanced driving test that costs just £99. My only question is why it’s not compulsory.

Jaguar XJ 4.2 V8 LWB Sovereign

2008-05-24T10:50:00.000-07:00

Having driven its competitors from Japan and Germany, I was anxious about my first encounter with a Jaguar XJ. I’ve long admired the sleek lines and endless charisma of the Jaguar brand and one has always been present on my ‘What I’ll Buy If I Win The Lottery’ list.

The XJ 4.2 V8 LWB Sovereign was arguably not the best choice for my first drive in a Jaguar, but if you’re going to get behind the wheel, it might as well be in the best that money can buy. On arrival, I made the error of hopping in the drivers’ seat first, without a proper look behind. Once I realised my mistake, I opened one of the vast rear doors to find what appeared to be acres of leg room – so much that I wouldn’t have known where to put my feet had I not been driving.

Then there was the equipment. Whilst nestling amongst swathes of cream leather, deep pile carpets and burr walnut, passengers in the electronically adjustable rear seats get individual climate control to keep them as warm or as cool as they like and enjoy television or film on the multimedia screens, buried within the front headrests.

Behind the wheel, the XJ doesn’t fail to impress. The V8 churns out 300bhp and provides 310lb/ft of torque at just over 4000rpm. It will get to 60mph from standstill in a little over six seconds and is flat out at 155mph. Despite notable performance statistics, the XJ will still return a combined 25mpg – although kicks out a predictable 269g/km CO2 and therefore qualifies for Ken Livingstone’s ‘gas guzzler’ £25 per day London congestion charge. If you’re looking for a ‘greener’ alternative, it’d be worth your while checking out the 2.7 TDVi also available in the XJ.

However, the main issue with the long wheelbase derivative is its size. At just under two metres wide, it’s not the easiest car to thread through tight gaps – although you are warned of almost every passing object by the over-sensitive parking sensors – and coming in at 5.2 metres in length means that it won’t fit in most regular parking bays. Nevertheless, that alone shouldn’t be enough to put off most potential buyers.

The person responsible for the interior design of the XJ did a fantastic job, with all the necessary kit within stretching distance and engineered to be wonderfully tactile – including the button that opens the passenger glovebox, which has almost been turned into a feature of the dashboard. The controls are mostly intuitive and mean that everything from changing the distance for the adaptive cruise control to answering the phone can be done without removing your hands from the wheel.

The XJ as tested came in at £59,892, but comes with a premium sound system, voice command, Bluetooth connectivity, 16-way electric front seats and a rear multimedia system. Under the body, Jaguar’s Computer Active Technology Suspension (CATS) helps maintain impeccable ride comfort, carefully balancing between responsive handling and steadfast traction.

I have had length discussions about competitors and why I think I would rather have an XJ over an S-Class or even a Lexus LS600h – which is outstanding – and I worry that my logic may be flawed. Nevertheless, when I saw the XJ being driven away to its next lucky tester, I felt a strange sense of attachment, and then I realised why. The XJ has something few of its competitors and indeed other cars could hope to replicate – personality.

Jaguar XJ 2.7 TDVi

2008-05-24T10:40:00.001-07:00

For me, the XJ has always been epitomised what a Jaguar should be – beautiful on the outside, sumptuous on the inside, cosseting ride quality, but with a bit of necessary imperfection – including the old-age gripe of an inadequate boot. The XJ is also a car I automatically associate with smooth V-configuration petrol engines, with between six and twelve cylinders – until now.

Somehow managing to avoid ‘Two Jags’ being inserted between my first and surname, I was fortunate enough to drive a 2008 model XJ 2.7 V6 TDVi back-to-back with a 4.2 V8 LWB – the former being in Executive and the latter in Sovereign specification, coming in at £45,542 and £59,892 respectively.

Jaguar first put the twin-turbocharged diesel in the XJ back in 2006 and it has proved a remarkable hit and, having driven it, it’s no wonder why. The engine, which was co-developed by Ford and PSA Peugeot Citroen, can be found in a multitude of models across both manufacturers’ product ranges.

The motor, which generates 204bhp and 321lb/ft of torque at low revs, is both smooth and quiet and when pushed interrupts with nothing more than a slightly unexpected growl from beneath the bonnet. Compared with the equivalent, albeit larger, petrol engine, the TDVi performs almost identically, achieving 0-60mph in 7.8 seconds and pressing on to a limited top speed of 141mph.

The big difference is the fuel economy, with the diesel derivative returning a combined figure of 35mpg versus 27mpg for the 3.0-litre petrol V6 – significant given that most XJs will cover a lot of ground. Some testers have seen up to 53mpg and one XJ covered over 1000 miles on one tank back in 2006.

The power is delivered smoothly to the rear wheels via a six-speed automatic transmission, in which the shifts can be delayed by engaging ‘Sport’ mode for a less pampering, but more purposeful ride. Despite its size and considerable luxury, the TDVi only emits 214g/km CO2, making it stand out from its competitors and, importantly, means that owners avoid the ‘gas guzzler’ London congestion charge of £25 per day.

On a return journey from Warwickshire to Luton Airport, the TDVi provided me with nothing other than a relaxing, but enjoyable experience and an inescapable sense of satisfaction as I passed countless numbers of the XJ’s dull and unoriginal German competitors. I was safe in the knowledge that as I continued towards the horizon, their drivers would inevitably be overcome by a feeling of envy that they were in a car that wasn’t as stylish, that cost more, and that wouldn’t get them as far. Shame.

Toyota Prius

2007-12-24T09:33:00.001-08:00

I first drove a Prius back in 2006 at the British Motor Show and since then, I have driven four more, including a modified ‘plug-in’ Prius. Whilst the Prius has had its fair share of cynical criticism, it remains the world’s best-selling hybrid with more than 500,000 examples on the road.

The Prius utilises a 1.5-litre petrol engine in conjunction with an electric motor, which produce 76bhp and 67bhp respectively. The combined power isn’t cumulative, but actually around 112bhp and the torque figure can be well in excess of 400Nm at low speeds thanks to the electric motor.

The hybrid is clearly not designed to be a performance car, but it can deliver a respectable 0-60mph time of 10.6 seconds and a top speed of 106mph. However, it’s in the emissions figures where the Prius really comes into its own. Whilst cynics have commented that the incredibly low 104 g/km carbon dioxide figure and 60mpg economy can be matched or bettered by small diesel cars, this argument misses the point that the Prius is a spacious family-sized hatchback with room to seat five adults in comfort.

Alongside the carbon dioxide emissions figure, which comes in below the equivalent petrol, diesel and bio-ethanol Ford Focus for example, the Prius also shows reductions in other tailpipe emissions. It is important that such emissions are not ignored, as improvements in air quality should be considered equal to improvements in carbon emission reductions. The Energy Saving Trust estimates that poor air quality results in 24,000 deaths every year.

Carbon monoxide is a product of incomplete combustion and reduces the body’s ability to carry oxygen. The carbon monoxide emissions for the Prius stand at 0.18 g/km, whereas the figure for the bio-ethanol Ford Focus Flexi-Fuel Vehicle is at least twice this amount.

Hydrocarbons are toxic emissions that contribute to the formation of urban smog and can cause liver damage and cancer and the 0.02 g/km figure for the Prius is significantly below the figures of 0.071 g/km and 0.081 g/km for the petrol and bio-ethanol-fuelled Ford Focus models, respectively.

The last emissions worth considering are nitrous oxides (NOx), which contribute to the formation of urban smog, acid rain and can cause respiratory problems. The Prius kicks out 0.01 g/km NOx, compared with 0.034 g/km from the bio-ethanol Focus and 0.06 g/km from the petrol version of the Focus.

In addition, the clever clutchless electronically controlled continuously variable transmission means that the petrol engine can completely shut down when not required rather than idle pointlessly, for example whilst stopped in traffic. The engine also operates only when more power is required, which is also where it is more efficient. At lower crawling speeds the electric motor takes over. The final trick this enables is regenerative braking, meaning that the car uses downhill momentum to recharge the on-board battery, further improving efficiency.

Indeed, rather than a car with a built-in computer, the Prius can feel more like a computer with wheels. Despite this aspect of the vehicle leading to some critics labelling the experience as entirely disconnected from the driver, I have taken the Prius out on enough b-road blasts to prove otherwise. It is again critical to acknowledge the car’s key function, which is not as a driver’s car, but as a fuel-efficient hybrid.

Besides the technological wizardry that is going on behind the scenes, the Prius provides an extremely relaxing atmosphere in which to waft you along effortlessly. The conventional instrumentation panel is replaced by a swooping dash with a large touch screen display, as well as a digital speedometer positioned deep within the dashboard.

After you insert the key into its slot to the right of the steering wheel and press the ‘Power’ button, the car comes to life and the computers fire up. However, rather than having to then start the engine, you can simply release the electronic parking brake and, if applied, the foot brake and silently move off. It’s an amazing party trick that never fails to bemuse bystanders.

As you build up speed, the engine cuts in seamlessly to provide the extra oomph as you slice through the surrounding air with ease thanks to the incredibly drag coefficient of just 0.26. For comparison, the drag coefficient of the Porsche 911 Turbo is 0.27 and in the lower it is, the better. The engine and electric motor work in harmony to provide the best power balance for whatever you’re doing with the car. So, if you put pedal to the metal, the motor will kick in with its 400Nm torque to aid acceleration.

The Prius is also incredibly well equipped. The base T3 model offers a 7-inch information display, eight airbags, electronic brake distribution and traction control. The intermediate T4 derivative offers a CD changer, cruise control and upgraded audio system and the top-of-the-range T Spirit adds satellite navigation and a Bluetooth telephone interface. Prices start at £17,777 for the T3, going up to £18,577 for the T4 and £20,777 for the T Spirit. It seems like a lot of money compared to the average car of an equivalent, but the Prius is far from your average car.

The Prius is a living concept and represents a realisable idea about how we can move forward with fuel technologies. Bio-ethanol is drawing attention away from hybrid technologies, but it’s also decreasing land available for crop production and increasing the price of a loaf of bread. If the world’s largest car manufacturer – in terms of revenue and net worth – is putting all its eggs and more than $1 billion investment into the proverbial hybrid basket, shouldn’t we be paying more attention?

Ferrari F355 Challenge

2007-12-23T19:00:00.000-08:00

Back in April 2005, I took a trip up to Bruntingthorpe Proving Ground in Leicester where a race-prepped Ferrari F355 Challenge was waiting for me.

To the more uninitiated, the Challenge is essentially a modified F355 Berlinetta, with a stripped-down interior featuring a full roll cage, racing wheel, Sparco bucket seats and safety harnesses in place of standard seat belts. On the outside, the Challenge also gets bigger brakes – 14-inch Brembos to be precise, which nestle inside 18-inch Speedline alloys wearing Pirelli slicks. Underneath, the Challenge has an upgraded lightweight exhaust system and a competition clutch. The weight saving over the standard car is around 100kg. It’s all a bit serious.

The 380bhp mid-engined V8 supercar dispenses with 60mph in under five seconds and goes on to a top speed of 186mph. The Pininfarina styling is timeless – the car still looks fantastic from every angle more than a decade after its launch. The Challenge, with its rear wing and graphics-laden exterior is not as elegant as the Berlinetta, but the best features remain and, most importantly of all, it is definitively a Ferrari.

As it was the first supercar I’d driven, I took a naturally cautious approach when moving away for the first lap. One of the most unforgettable qualities of the 355 is the symphony it produces. In my mind, it’s one of the most recognisable exhaust notes of any car. I couldn’t help myself from prodding the throttle as the car sat in neutral just to hear the V8 pipe up.

I pulled away and worked my way up through the six speed ‘box. The first corner is a very gentle left-hander as you pass a decommissioned Boeing 747 sat in the midst of the former airstrip. The second is a sharper 90-degree right-hander, but the track is incredibly wide and it’s possible to take it at some serious speed.

As I was using the short circuit, rather than progressing on to the top of the two-mile back straight, I took the relatively open chicane that lead through to about half of the main airstrip and pressed my right foot firmly down. The acceleration was brutal and would have been uninterrupted for almost a mile had it not been for the obstruction of a temporary chicane mid-straight, which made speeds over 130mph unobtainable. Approaching the end of the airstrip, it’s possible to take the final two corners at a decent pace and then lay down a lot of power coming out into the straight and onwards to the first corner once again.

I spent less than half-an-hour with the Challenge, but it seemed like much more. For a 19-year-old male, not much can beat thrashing a Ferrari around a disused airstrip at more than 120mph. Bruntingthorpe is a great place to drive a supercar for the first time – there aren’t really enough corners to make it exciting, but when you just want to see the scenery vanish in the rear view mirror, other facilities don’t come close.

Lexus RX400h and GS450h

2007-12-22T19:15:00.000-08:00

LEXUS HAS BEEN producing luxury cars for twenty years now and the Japanese brand is frequently found at the top of reliability and customer satisfaction surveys around the world. However, the company is now adding to its already established and respected reputation by becoming a world-leader in the production of hybrid vehicles.

Much of its achievements in this respect are a result of the investment in research and development by parent company, Toyota, which has sold more than 1,000,000 of its own hybrid models, including the Prius. However, in an age where image is becoming evermore important and the level of disposable income is constantly increasing, Lexus is making 'going green' a choice that you can make with your heart, as well as your head.

The luxury subsidiary currently produces three hybrid models: the RX, GS and LS. The RX400h is a derivative of the V6-powered RX300 luxury four-wheel drive, originally based on the Toyota Harrier. The GS450h is a mid-size executive saloon, designed to be a competitor of the BMW 5-Series and Mercedes E-Class. The LS600h is the latest addition to the hybrid range and produces a total of 440bhp, which makes it the most powerful vehicle in the Lexus fleet.

Whilst the model name may make you inclined to believe that a 4.0-litre engine nestles beneath the bonnet of the RX400h, the 3.3-litre V6 from its more conventional sibling remains, but the difference is that it is coupled to two electric motors. The first generates the equivalent of 165bhp, sent to the front wheels and the second produces 66bhp, which it sends to the rear. With the former providing 340Nm torque alone between 0 and 2000rpm, the two-tonne RX is able to sprint from 0-60mph in a little over 7 seconds.

It’s a similar story with the GS450h, which utilises a 3.5-litre V6 and an electric motor, which combine to deliver total of 340bhp through the rear wheels. Despite its bigger brother, the GS460, being powered by a significantly larger 4.6-litre V8 engine, the hybrid GS can reach 60mph from standstill in 5.2 seconds compared to the V8’s 5.4 seconds.

The power is released smoothly and the acceleration is seamless thanks to an electronically controlled Continuously Variable Transmission. Under normal throttle pressure, the acceleration is fairly subdued, but if you kick down you see where the electric motors are most effective in unleashing an enormous amount of low-range torque to propel the hybrids along.

Lexus hasn’t just given attention to under the bonnet, but also the superbly appointed interiors. The entry level GS450h comes complete with smart entry, and a touch screen display. The SE adds the now acclaimed Mark Levinson sound system, as well as satellite navigation and intelligent park assist with sensors at front and rear. The top-spec SE-L model is more of the same.

For the RX400h, it’s a similar story. The base spec model has climate and cruise control, with the SE model adding a nifty powered boot door and a sunroof. In SE-L guise, the RX features rain-sensing wipers, a Mark Levinson sound system and satellite navigation.

Prices for the GS450h range between £37,125 and £46,335 for the SE-L variant. The RX is available from £35,550, with the SE-L coming in at £44,415. The newest model in the Lexus hybrid range – the LS600h – is significantly more expensive, starting at £80,535 and going up to £87,135. Whilst pricier than some competitors – notably the Mercedes S-Class – the options list is likely to be fairly short, with almost everything coming as standard.

My test cars were both the high-spec SE-L variants, with superbly appointed interiors, which included a multimedia package in the RX with a DVD player and screens in the headrests.

Both models drove as smoothly as anything I’ve ever driven and most of the time were eerily quiet. I took the RX400h on a steady 50-mile round trip to The Bullring and it performed as expected, returning a solid 30 mpg. The GS450h was equally impressive, but Lexus stress that the GS is a performance saloon first and an environmentally conscious car second – and it shows.

The GS went on a Sunday blast down to Warwick, involving a quick digression onto the A46 and a definite pedal-to-the-metal moment. More than 300 horsepower urged the GS past almost everything else on the road. The additional torque from the electric motors under acceleration is notable and makes a tangible difference over the standard model.

Neither of these cars is going to save the planet. However, they are at the very least a step in the right direction and at most technological masterpieces. Every Lexus hybrid has obtained Super Ultra Low Emission Vehicle (SULEV) status from the United States’ Environmental Protection Agency, which puts them in the lowest polluter category available.

It’s easy to mock these Lexus hybrids, which take on the challenge of ‘no compromise’ when it comes to being environmentally friendly. But it’s far better to see them as examples of what can be done when technology is applied thoughtfully and efficiently.

Thanks to Lee Moore at Lexus Coventry for the loan of both the GS450h and the RX400h.

Noble M400

2007-12-22T08:00:00.000-08:00

(Photo: Lee Brimble)

WINNING THE SIR William Lyons award in 2005 was incredible, particularly the prospect of the opportunities it could bring. Having interviewed Lee Noble to win the award, I was offered the chance to drive Noble’s M400 demonstrator at Bruntingthorpe Proving Ground. It took me almost a year, but in 2006 I finally got myself up to the firm’s headquarters in Barwell to face the 425bhp beast.

Peter Boutwood, Noble’s test driver, met me in the reception area and ushered me to the gleaming M400 parked outside. I hopped into the passenger seat and we drove off to the track, via Leicestershire’s maze of B-roads. The journey there was an experience in itself – I swear we caught air coming off a humpback bridge at one point.

We got talking about the rest of the supercar market. “Lee and I have just got back from the States where we were driving a Porsche Carrera GT, a Ferrari F40, an F50, an Enzo and a Ford GT”, said Peter. “What did you think of them?” I asked. He replied nonchalantly “Well, the Enzo was OK…I suppose.”

Once we got to Bruntingthorpe, I was given a quick reminder of the circuit – I took a Ferrari 355 Challenge around it in 2005 – and a flying lap to show me what the M400 was capable of before it was my turn. After a few laps, Peter said “Pull in over there and I’ll get out so you can go around on your own. Having me in the car probably cramps your style a bit.” I did a couple of solo laps and headed for the track’s magnificent two-mile stretch of runway.

Coming around the last corner before the back straight, I lined the car up with the horizon before me…and then planted my foot to the floor. The acceleration was mind-blowing. The car seared on at a terrifying rate, as everything to my left and right became an instant blur.

The fourth and fifth gears were over and done with in a matter of seconds as I shifted into sixth, speeding past 140mph. The rough tarmac began to send vibrations through the M400’s chassis, but I wasn’t ready to lift off the power just yet. I went past 150 and 160mph, but rapidly running out of airstrip with the needle at a hairsbreadth under 170, I decided enough was enough and came off the throttle.

The experience was nothing short of life-defining and is no doubt something I won’t be doing again for a long time.

Formula 1: Yes or No?

2007-12-22T07:56:00.000-08:00

This article formed part of my winning submission for the Guild of Motoring Writers' Sir William Lyons Award in 2005.

MICHAEL SCHUMACHER'S VICTORY in the 2005 Indianapolis Grand Prix is unlikely to be remembered for his personal performance. Prior to the race, Michelin announced that the fourteen cars it supplies rubber for had unsafe tyres, which would last at best ten laps of the circuit. As a result, seven teams pulled out, leaving only the six cars running on Bridgestones to begin the race. It was hardly surprising to see a Ferrari passing the chequered flag first. Admittedly, this is the first time in recent memory that such a fiasco has beset a Formula 1 race, but it nevertheless raises important concerns about the current state of the sport.

The finger pointing that followed was the most absurd thing of all. The seven teams who felt compelled to pull out of the Grand Prix blamed Michelin. Max Mosley, the president of the FIA, blamed Michelin. Even Michelin blamed Michelin. The only people who seemed to blame the teams were those sitting on the World Motor Sport Council. From the outside, it appeared a very simple situation. Michelin underestimated the forces placed on the tyres in one of the high-speed corners and supplied the teams with equipment that would have been inadequate and dangerous. However, thanks to the regulatory web that seems to suffocate Formula 1, it was the teams who were held principally accountable.

Still, it must be said that many guidelines brought in by Formula 1’s ruling body are intended to make the sport as safe as possible for the drivers. Since the Formula 1 World Championship began in 1950, it has experienced the death of at least one driver in every decade since the series began, with one exception – the decade we are living in now. The most recent fatality came in 1994, when Ayrton Senna suffered a high-speed impact at the Imola circuit in San Marino. It is a credit to the manufacturers that drivers in today’s championship have been kept safe, despite the cars becoming even faster.

The FIA have also tried to bring more excitement back to the sport. Most driver aids, as well as the two-way telemetry systems used to reconfigure the cars during the race have been banned. There are also much stricter regulations limiting the replacement of engines and tyres. With engines having to last longer, tyres having to survive the duration of the race and refuelling prohibited between final qualifying and the race itself, teams have been forced to reconsider their strategies. I love cars, I love speed; I should love Formula 1. Until now, I simply haven’t. However, the effect of these recent changes in the sport’s rules is all too evident to its spectators. We are beginning to see a greater array of drivers on the podium and there is now a resemblance of a real contest. It’s exciting again. The FIA must be careful though, not to compromise driver safety. For example, the suggestion of banning traction control could be seen as negligent, as it could mean less control for drivers when their cars are at the limit.

There has been a shift in Formula 1 towards business and bureaucracy. It is arguably much more professional than it once was and it is certainly more money-orientated. Nevertheless, I don’t think increasing commercialism is the underlying reason behind much of the frustration with the sport. I think it’s much simpler than that. I think it’s Michael Schumacher. He has dominated Formula 1 for a decade, but whereas some view this as consistency, others see it as monotony. Michael Schumacher is in the same domain as Tiger Woods or the now-retired Pete Sampras. They are all champions, but at the same time they have all dominated their sports to such an extent that the most exciting element of competition has been removed – the uncertainty. They have all been the ‘safe bet’. Besides seven World Championships under his belt, Schumacher also holds the records for the most wins, the most points and the most podiums in the series. We are not bored by prominence, but by longevity. We love champions. But if there’s something we love more than a champion, it’s a rising star; a challenger; a new champion. Enter, Fernando Alonso.

Having said that, we shouldn’t underestimate the importance of the commercial aspect of Formula 1. Sponsorship from the tobacco industry alone is estimated to be worth in excess of £150 million a year to the sport, but will vanish completely when new laws come into place banning its association with the racing series. Besides sponsorship worries, Formula 1 is fighting for its very existence. Discontent with the current series has resulted in the creation of a proposed alternative competition, known as the GPWC, or Grand Prix World Championship. Formed by Ferrari, Mercedes, BMW and Renault, the GPWC group is unhappy with the revenue currently allocated to teams – believed to be less than a quarter of Formula 1’s estimated £500 million profits. Yet it seems to have been little more than a bargaining position for Ferrari at least, which has recently signed up for Formula 1 beyond 2008 and received around £57 million from Bernie Ecclestone in the process.

So what should we make of Formula 1? On the one hand, we have an excessively expensive sport that can easily be steeped in controversy, confusion and commercialism; regulations that force teams to adopt more precise strategies and a champion we have become bored with. On the other, we have a unique racing series that offers its audience an unbeatably high-octane atmosphere, pitching a handful of the world’s best drivers head-to-head at 200mph. It is very difficult to dismiss. Formula 1 is becoming more competitive and more exciting, but in order to survive, it must retain its appeal to all parties involved – the drivers, the teams, the manufacturers and the fans – balancing all of their needs. The mere fact that several teams are even thinking about an alternative championship shows that this balance has not yet been struck.

The Noble Gentleman

2007-12-22T07:43:00.000-08:00

In September 2005, I met with Lee Noble, the director, chief designer and engineer of Noble Automotive. The interview was to form part of my winning submission for the Guild of Motoring Writers' Sir William Lyons Award.

NOBLE HAS GROWN considerably in the last decade. From producing the V6-powered M10 roadster, its first production car, it has evolved into a far more established and highly regarded sports car manufacturer, winning an array of motor industry awards. Lee Noble, the company director, designer and chief engineer, was the man with the original vision. “I just thought it was time to do it. We’d been building all these others cars for years and got lots of experience. It was time to build a brand out of it – a British sports car brand.”

“I love driving nice cars and you get a thrill out of making something yourself. A lot of people see what’s on the market and just say ‘I could do better than that’, but I’m one of those people who likes to prove the point.” It seems his point has already been proven, with Noble’s numerous awards, some of which hang modestly in the reception area of their Barwell facility near Leicester. One of the most recent is for the M400, which was proclaimed by Autocar as their best drivers’ car in 2004.

Although the business and design is handled in Britain, the majority of Noble’s production is completed at their plant in South Africa. “There’s no incentive to be a British car company manufacturing in Britain,” says Lee, “There’s no help for anybody, especially from the government.” South Africa may seem a strange choice, but Noble isn’t the only firm that has realised the benefits of producing there. Mercedes, Volkswagen and Ford also all have facilities there, and with good reason. “There are a lot of people there who are passionate about cars” Lee explains, “and you don’t just profit from their ability and their labour rates; you get passion with it. They’re proud of building motor cars.”

It’s obvious that Lee sees pride as an important element of Noble’s ethos. “I’ve always been proud to be British and I’m proud that our cars are too. They are all designed from a passionate British standpoint, but we realised early on that we couldn’t make them in this country, because we couldn’t get the staff. The problem is that people have lost the passion of being British. It’s down to the workforce as well. You can’t find enough people who actually give a damn.” Commenting on other British brands, he remarks, “Some of them try to do too much with the car and miss the point.” Noble appears to be far more focussed. “We’re a niche brand and I’d rather stay where we are, because it’s safer.”

Lee currently juggles his engineer, designer and director roles, but if the company grew or decided to expand it’s workforce, he concedes he would delegate more responsibility. “I’d stand back from the business, but I wouldn’t stand back from the design, because it’s the creative aspect that I enjoy the most.” I ask him what, if anything, would stop him making cars. He replies simply, “Ill health…or old age!”

Practise What You Preach

2007-12-18T18:02:00.000-08:00

IT'S NO SURPRISE that the people at the top of the world's biggest automotive firms drive some fairly expensive and environmentally reprehensible vehicles.

But perhaps the last place you would expect to see this sort of purchasing behaviour would be the companies' hybrid divisions.

Whilst for some manufacturers, there are no real surprises - Shinichi Abe, hybrid guru at Toyota drives a Lexus RX400h (hybrid) - for others, the findings are almost embarrassing.

Some are more forgivable than others. For example, Wolfgang Epple, Vice-President of hybrid technology at BMW, drives a BMW X5 and General Motors' hybrid chief, Larry Nitz, drives a Cadillac SRX - although this is hardly mother nature's favourite creature.

However, the two worst offenders have to be Andreas Truckenbrodt of DaimlerChrysler and Nancy Gioia of Ford. Whilst the head of the DaimlerChrysler development centre drives around in a massively uneconomical HEMI-powered Dodge Magnum, the head honcho of hybrids at Ford has opted for a V8-engined Thunderbird (at least she's showing brand loyalty) and a somewhat gargantuan Lincoln Navigator - maybe she needs it for load lugging, or perhaps some dogs...

A pleasant surprise was to learn that whilst Akira Fujimura, Honda's senior researcher, appears to have two cars to his name, one is a Fit (essentially a Honda Jazz) and the other is a similarly compact Honda SM-X.

Meanwhile, there's plenty of celebrity-bashing about hybrids, particularly in the USA. Like having the latest Louis Vuitton handbag, it seems like if you don't rock-up to your latest film premier in a Toyota Prius, you should probably get the chauffeur to turn around and drive you home.

Nevertheless, there are a few stand-out exceptions. The actress, Alexandra Paul, drives an electric Toyota RAV4 and is passionate about electric vehicles generally, as she proved by blockading an impound full of General Motors' EV1 electric car, at the time when the company was attempting to crush all of them. For more on that story, it's worth seeing the recent film: 'Who Killed The Electric Car?'.

Leonardo DiCaprio professes to only drive a Prius rather than owning one simply as a token occasional motor that can be mentioned in magazine interviews. In addition, he has produced films on the environment and genuinely appears not only to be concerned about the issues, but also seems to be willing to do something about them.

Conversely, celebrity campaigner Ewan McGregor, who admittedly has done some outstanding work for a number of excellent causes, has a hybrid that shares a garage with a fairly thirsty 1965 Ford Mustang. Britain's very own proponent of all things organic, Prince Charles, who has apparently committed to offset all his carbon emissions is also the proud owner of an Audi RS6. Royal hypocrisy if ever I've seen it...