Category: Drive Time

Eye Of

Beauty, Drive Time, Gratuitous Chick Pics

Beauty of the visual kind is always subjective and as such, therefore, there will always be differing opinions on the various kinds of beauty.  I, for one, find the voluptuous Kelly Brook and Salma Hayek to be exquisite:

 

…whereas others may refute that, and prefer the more-slender silhouettes of Charlotte Hawkins and Nicole Kidman:

It’s not that I find the latter pair unattractive — not in the slightest — it’s just my preference is for the body shapes of Mlles  Brook and Hayek.

In similar fashion, therefore, do I regard Insty’s comment about the Lamborghini Miura interesting:

“I think the Lamborghini Miura was the most beautiful car of its time, but a spoiler doesn’t make it prettier.”

(He’s talking about Liberty Walk’s version of the Miura, by the way, which I think is quite beautiful for a modern car despite the spoiler.)

But the Miura was made between 1966 and 1973, and in terms of beauty, it had some stiff competition in the beauty department during those seven years.  Here’s the “traditional” Miura:

…which I agree is an absolute stunner.  The 4-liter V-12 engine didn’t hurt, either.

Then again, if we’re looking at the 1966-1973 years, there’s my personal favorite, the Dino 246 GT:

…and also from that period, the Bizzarrini Strada / Spyder:

…not to mention the incomparable Jaguar E-type:

Okay, as far as I’m concerned that whole decade (1963 – 1972) was the golden age of automotive body design, and there is scarcely a car made back then that I wouldn’t take in a heartbeat.

All more beautiful than anything made so far in the 21st century — in my opinion.

But you all knew that already.

A Tale Of Two Viewpoints

Drive Time

So:  the Ferrari Purosangue (“thoroughbred”) FUV  [sic].

First, you have Chris Harris’s take — the usual obeisance to the Wonder Of Scuderia Ferrari;  and then there’s Richard Hammond’s rather sour puncturing of the said Wonder.  (His analysis of the badge alone is worth the price of admission.)

I wouldn’t get one, even with a large lottery win, but then I’m more of the Hammond mindset than in the Harris one.  Even if it is quite beautiful…


…for an SUV.

Blown Away

Drive Time

You have to know that if you can impress Iain Tyrell with a 1970s-era car, you’ve achieved something.  As always with Mr. Tyrell, his history and styling/engineering overviews alone are worth the price of admission.  Go ahead and watch the video now.

And if after seeing Iain’s reaction to driving it you want to look at the Pantera for yourself, feel free to browse the market…

I’ve always loved them, but I have to say that I doubt whether I’d be able to fit inside one.  Man, they are tiny.

But still… who cares about stuff like personal comfort when you’re driving pure power and self-indulgence?

About Those Duracell Cars

Drive Time, Eco-Crap, Gummint

Seems like every day there’s something new to post about this nonsense.  Here’s the first:

Labour will bow to pressure from car manufacturers and rethink strict rules on the sales of electric vehicles.  Downing Street today confirmed ministers will launch a consultation on current plans following intense lobbying by firms.

Under an existing Government mandate, at least 22 per cent of new cars sold by every manufacturer in the UK this year must be zero-emission vehicles (ZEV).  The mandate is set to increase to 28 per cent next year and will rise each year over the next decade – reaching 80 per cent in 2030 and 100 per cent in 2035.  This is when there will be a ban on the sale of all new non-zero-emission cars as part of the Government’s Net Zero commitments. 

Carmakers are set to be fined £15,000 per polluting car sold above the limits.

But firms have been warning ministers that the ZEV mandate is putting jobs and investment at risk in the UK.

Government mandate, meet market reality.  Mind you, not that any kind of reality has ever been part of governmental wishful thinking (e.g. gun regulation).

And then there’s this:

Germany has joined a growing backlash against fining car makers who miss net zero targets – suggesting the firms should be allowed to keep the money to invest in cutting emissions.  Chancellor Olaf Scholz has hit out at the European Union’s zero emission vehicle plans, which require manufacturers to reduce the emissions from their new cars and vans by 15 per cent compared to 2021 levels by next year.

The quickest way for firms to do this is to reduce the production of petrol and diesel cars and encourage people to swap to electric vehicles – but firms say motorists aren’t biting and warn jobs could be at risk if UK and EU mandates aren’t eased.

However, it will be the car firms that face penalties if they fail to shift enough battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) to hit the 15 per cent target.

This grows to a 55 per cent reduction in car emissions and 50 per cent vans by 2030. EU autocrats then want a 100 per cent reduction – i.e. no purely fossil fuelled cars and vans sold at all – by 2035.

Germany has a vested interest in protecting car firms from fines: its car industry is solely responsible for an estimated five per cent of GDP, and is home to huge names including Audi, BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes-Benz.

Yeah, rules and fines are all very well, as long as there’s no economic damage — or so one would think.  Except, of course, that governments of the Leftist ilk seldom seem to care about consequences, because as we all know, Leftism requires only that policy is based on good intentions, and the consequences thereof are irrelevant.

At some point — and in this regard, for once, the U.S. seems to have tumbled to this before the others — voters are going to cry “Enough!” to this insanity.  And nowhere is this becoming more evident than in the auto industry.

Times are becoming more and more interesting, nicht wahr?