georgerobinson

> However unlike a traditional ICE, an EV has 100% torque with almost zero latency.

Insignificant I'm afraid. A good track driver never has the engine outside the power band, even on the slowest corners. In race mode almost all automatic gearboxes do this for you. However, some auto gearboxes shift down on full throttle, even in manual mode, which is frustrating if not infuriating, so direct-drive is a welcome change.

> And the overheating problem is negated by virtue of the fact that it's an EV and can take advantage of regenerative braking.

If you're using regenerative braking on track then you're most probably losing time, unless it can capture the kinetic-to-heat transfer from the pads and discs. You should be maximum throttle right up until the braking zone, by which point you're mostly using full pedal travel to get the car down to the ideal entry speed and maybe even trail braking into the corner to improve rotation.

However, now that I think about it, regenerative braking makes a lot more sense on tracks such as the Nordschleife where for some corners you don't have braking zones as such, but minor taps of the pedal to set up the weight distribution of the car for the corner to improve turn in. This could be a valid use case of regenerative braking.

You're right, that is indeed correct. I'm not sure why I thought it was a cable.

I have a 197/200, and before than owned a couple of turbo cars. I'd take the 197 - it's so much more rewarding to drive with that extra 1000RPM and that noise that comes on when the cams switch on VVT.

> Without providing a specific use case or criteria then it's impossible to say.

The use case for me is for a fun weekend car with occasional track use. It must be fun to drive both at sensible, safe road speeds but also come alive when pushed on track. It shouldn't cost too much (I paid £10,000 for the car I just purchased that has both these characteristics), be affordable to insurance, run and fix when required. It should also be possible to upgrade and have a well supported aftermarket.

I understand what you're saying, but your generalizations aren't fair.

What you're talking about are wealthy people who like to show off and do so by driving supercars fast around cities and other densely populated areas. Take supercars away from them and they will simply find other ways to show off. Take away the supercar and what will fill their place? Perhaps Tesla Roadsters and P100Ds doing launch controls at the traffic lights? I too get frustrated at noisy EK3 Civics with fart can exhausts, who are just trying to show off too, but without the supercar.

For every loser revving their car through densely populated areas and disturbing residents or driving dangerously, there are hundreds of enthusiasts who are respectful and courteous. These people are rebuilding their engines in their garages, taking their cars to the track, or to some of the best driving roads in the world. NOT through Knightsbridge or Avenues of Americas.

I'm sorry you have to put up with that crap, but is it fair to deprive people who are responsible and take their pride and joy somewhere where they don't upset lots of people just because a minority ruin it for the rest of us?

Sure!

So an example is the old Renault Sport Clios. These had the 2.0 NA F4R 830 motor with cable actuated throttles. The combination of this and no turbo means the throttle response is immediate, much better than newer turbo cars with drive-by-wire throttles. In fact it's so much better than I went out and purchased one.

Power has no real correlation with throttle response. Auto boxes often make throttle response worse - in fact even the latest ZF8 gearboxes tend to have noticeable lag between applying throttle and the power to the wheels. If you want to experience this for yourself I would recommend driving a manual M235i and an auto M235i back to back.

Sure there is! The performance is just one feature of the engine. It has immense character, sound and response - possibly one of the best engines ever made. You don't need to drive it fast or irresponsibly on the road to enjoy it. It's like cycling with a carbon fiber race bicycle on the road. Just because you're not exploiting it to it's full potential on a velodrome doesn't mean you can't enjoy it sensibly in other situations.

Ferrari have built their brand on road cars with high revving, naturally aspirated V8 and V12s - primarily designed as Gran Tourers rather than track cars.

More evidence of this can be seen in the consumer demand for 911 Speedster, of which only 1948 cars will be built - and is looking to be one of the best Gran Tourers ever made.

That is more or less correct, look at the Aston Martin Vulcan, Ferrari 599XX, P1 GTR, or just about any street-legal car someone has turned into a non street legal race car.

There is an argument to be made whether a feature should be banned from the road or not. I'm not sure having an EV that can accelerate from 0-60mph in 3 seconds is good for road safety either. How are these two any different?

I agree! I have no issue with better safety regulations, stricter emissions regulations, drive by wire, crash zones, etc - to make cars better for people to use everyday.

What is frustrating is that we are now unable to offer features in high performance vehicles that we were previously able to because they're considered too bad for the environment. A perfect example is the 4.0 engine in the 911 GT3. It's likely that this engine will never be offered again, despite itself being a masterpiece of engineering, sound and character; produced in such few numbers and driven so infrequently to have an insignificant effect on pollution when you consider all cars on the road.

I'm curious where you got the 23KG figure? I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just interested to see what kind of cars they looked at. If you consider a Golf GTI from 1980 to a Golf GTI of 2019 then you'll find that in 30 years the car has gained over 500KG. If we continue this trend then by 2050 the expected average weight for a hatchback should be somewhere around 2000KG.

I agree with the cheap, 1980s/90s sports car - and did something like that just a couple months ago. But, if we are no longer capable of manufacturing cheap, light-weight cars in 2020 and onwards because of regulations, then these cars will have no choice but to die out leaving track days and motorsport inaccessible to everyone but the rich, like air travel in the 1950 and 60s.

I live in the U.K, I pay $1.75 per litre.

I would quite like to own an EV, but are still too expensive for me! I also read that the batteries do not like repeated full-throttle accelerations as it causes excessive heat build-up and accelerated degradation on the cells. To reduce this the car will often enter limp-mode before then, so it might not even be appropriate for sports/track use.

Yes and no. Cars are less responsive than ever as manufacturers insert artificial latency into electric throttle-by-wire to reduce emissions.

However, at the same time cars continue to become heavier and heavier with each new model or generation. This in itself is poor for environment because heavier vehicles must burn more fuel to accelerate at the same rate, more fuel to maintain the same speed, use more pad material to brake (and thus release more particulates) while also having increased tire wear.

But for some reason the latter issue is ignored while the former is front and center.

It doesn't make sense to me

I think one of the issues is that the Prius starts from $30,000 here - which is quite a lot - and a lot of cheaper, but still economical cars are available for much less.

Toyota Prius do not exist in Western Europe outside Uber. They are synonymous with Uber driver and rarely ever bought for private use.

Yes. I'm not saying that people in the market for a Ford Fiesta are instead going out and buying a 3 series. People who want a hatchback and going out and buying hatchbacks.

But people who want saloons and estate cars are largely buying from the three Germans, and not Japanese or Korean.