Ford B-MAX

The Ford B-MAX is a good-looking car I think, with an ingenious system for the doors. I think the inclusion of the B pillars in the doors is a great idea, and something I think more cars should have, for easier access
For those of you who may not know, the B-MAX has no B pillar,  and  it is instead incorporated into the drivers/passenger front doors and sliding rear doors.

"Easy-access" door system.

This is an idea that I'm surprised hasn't caught on, because (As I said before) it is a great idea, and it allows much easier access into the front and back, without the fear from drivers of their kids bashing the back doors when they're getting in and out. I was amazed at how easily the back doors slid, as they can be a bit awkward to open, and then how easy it was to close them again. No more awkward twisting around: Ford has had the insight to put handles on the integrated B-pillars. The front seatbelts have been subtly included into the backs of the front seats ( since there is no pillar to mount them on) with the elegance of a BMW cabrio. Another thing that surprised me was the sheer amount of space inside. My dad could put the front seat right back, and I would still have plenty room in the back. (I'm 6")

New car, Dated interior.

Although there were a lot of good things about the car, there was a couple of little niggles that I spotted. the first one was the positioning of the rear window switches. In a normal car, they're in the door armrests or by the inner door-releases. In the B-MAX they're situated on the door, but they're so far forward that a front seat passenger would have an  easier time reaching them. It also has large plastic wings (I can't really describe them better) by the rear seats , to stop people falling out, I think. They're in just the right place for when you want to sleep in the back seat, but they stick out fairly far,  which means that you have to get into the car and move backwards to sit in the seat. The final t=niggle is the radio. It looks so old fashioned, with buttons and a (non-touch) screen. I think this is something that Ford really needs to improve, as it makes their cars look dated, even the brand-new ones (I can't talk for some of the more upmarket cars, but I assume they're the same)

To summarise then, the B-MAX is a great car, and it has an ingenious door situation and tons of space inside, but is let down by a few small things, things that you'd probably get used to while using the car. Another shorter Post for you lot today, and I apologise for the lack of posts at the weekend, I was on the boat and on the beach.

Discovery

I assume you know of the Land Rover Discovery? One of the best selling 4X4s, bought by everyone from farmers to inner-city dwellers who don't want a Range Rover. It has gone through several bodystyles, the most recent ones being very minor changes, and a brand-new one has just been announced. I saw it in TopGear magazine earlier today, and I was surprised to say the least.

First of all, the radical new design. It is taller than it is wide, with a (quite obvious) step at the windowline, the sweeping C-pillars (I think they're the C-pillars) and the fact that it gets skinnier at the boot. These all contribute to a horrid looking car, in my opinion. Whilst it looks meh alright from the 3/4 view, seeing it from any other angle just makes it look weird. The rear wheelarches stick out wider than the rest of the body at the back, and it's obvious how LR have tried, unsuccessfully, to subtly copy some of the RRs features (Lights, crease along the side and massive wheels (22in!)) There is also the pointless step up to the LR badge where the number plate goes, which makes the car look uneven (I have OCD, can you tell?) and I don't like the features that make the car look taller, like the vertical air intakes, Tailpipes and skininess. 

New Disco. Ugly car, good tech.

Although the new Disco is utterly terrible, it does have some redeeming features. Take the clever windows and glass roof: They can tint on demand, and the roof can show a pretty pattern. The seat-mounted screens are a cool feature too, along with the HUD (Head-Up-Display). JLR have recently previewed some new tech to do with the HUDs in their SUVs. It has cameras under the engine and bumper, which allow the car to see what is going on underneath it, and it can project these images up to the HUD, which then makes the driver able to look through the bonnet and engine block, to see exactly what's under his(or her) car: the wheel position, where rocks and ruts are, the lot. 

Overall then, a terrible SUV, with some good features that I would like to see on a lot of other cars in the near future. As I read in TG magazine, someone at JLR said that these next 15 years will see cars advance like we've never seen them do before. Personally, I sincerely hope this is true, as I think some of thee new innovations are amazing. It leaves me sitting here, at 5 to 10 wondering what cars will be like in 20 years time, when I think this tech will be available in the mass market. Anyways, leave me a comment saying what you think, and what I should look at next time.

Car quality

Bit of a tedious link for the title here, but one I feel is applicable nonetheless. Car quality these days has gone uphill, vastly. With more of the cheaper brands wanting to make themselves seem more upmarket, and the upmarket brands making themselves seem more upmarket.

Cheaper cars, like the Ford Fiesta, used to be a fairly basic, cheap family car. Now, it's quite different. The latest generation Fiesta is crammed full of creature comforts (which can be a good or bad thing, see an older blog post on automation) and the price has gone  up to match, all the while staying as Ford's cheap car. A lot of similar cars have done similar things, to try and persuade more people to buy their cars, but it comes to a point. Cars nowadays are so complex that you can't change a lightbulb in them without specialist tools, and when the car goes wrong, it can only be fixed by the manufacturer.

Take my dads CC for example. During the Easter break a few weeks ago, his car developed an electrical fault with the boot. When the boot opened more than about 2/3rds of the way, the boot light went out and the tow hook release stopped working, and if the boot has been remotely opened then the car would lock itself, causing the alarm to go off when the boot was shut. This should have been something he could stop short term by pulling a fuse, for example, but he has no access to his fuse box. This meant that whenever we needed to release the tow hook, which was a lot that week, we had to close the boot partway in order to do it. Not too bad, you might think, but when you're in a hurry and forget about it, then it can be quite frustrating.

Now I admit that might have been a bit tame, so I have another example. On the marina that the boat is kept, there's a new boat manufacturer (English harbour yachts, Oundle. Give them a Google). The boss of that company has a BMW 5-series, with the electric tailgate, and they used that car to lower the boats into the water. This was a great idea until the boot flooded, rendering the bootlid useless, as the electrics had shorted. This could have been avoided if BMW hadn't tried to be upmarket and fitted an electric bootlid, and had stuck with the manual one with an electric option. Now I know that the car wasn't designed to be putting boats in the water, but back in the day you could have used any car which had a high enough exhaust, without any problems

What I'm trying to say is that cars are trying to be too comfortable and easy to use, which means more electrical stuff is put in. This means that there is more to go wrong, and the car would then have to be sent in to the garage to have it fixed, at cost to the owner.

No pictures today because Opera was being weird, and kept crashing

Hybrids/Alternate-fuels

The Internal Combustion Engine is a complex, amazing machine. In perfect concert, valves open, spark plugs ignite, pistons move, and the crankshaft turns. Every fourth cycle an air-fuel mix explodes and a piston is forced down. The crankshaft converts the linear motion of the piston and connecting rod to rotational motion that eventually propels the vehicle. (Tesla Motors) 

Tesla model S

Most people say that conventional engines can't be beaten; they're tried, tested and reliable. But these people don't realise that, in theory, an electric car is better for several reasons.
1) More space. Due to the fact that an engine isn't needed, an electric car can have two boots (one where the boot should be, and one where the engine should be) and the batteries can go where the petrol tank, undersides of the car and bottom of the engine should be, to keep an even weight distribution,
2) More torques. Electric motors generally have more torque because they just do. A lot of normal engines only get peak torque nearer the top of their rev range, whereas an electric motor can give 100% of its torque instantly. This means that electric cars are quicker off the line than their petrol counterparts, hence why some top-of-the-range supercars are electric (Tesla Roadster, McLaren P1 and Porsche 918)
3) Instant horsepower. Again, because the motors can deliver 100% of the torque at once, they can do the same with the power. (read above) 
4) Very little/no road tax. Electric cars tend to have such cheap road tax because they don't push out any emissions, except for the few that have a small petrol engine to charge the motors (Vauxhall Ampera) This means that the UK government won't charge you to use the roads (theoretically).

Although there are a few good points to electric cars, there are some down points too, such as

Vauxhall Ampera

1) Limited range. Usually about 100 miles or so, a pure electric car can't go that far on one charge. Some cars are improving this by putting a small petrol generator in the car to keep the batteries topped up, but getting the range of a normal car is still a long way off
2) High costs. A hybrid will cost a LOT of money to initially buy, even with the government grant. A base model Vauxhall Ampera is £30,000 (£25,000 after the grant) which is a lot of money for the car, the equivalent petrol model is a lot cheaper. 

Typical LPG conversion

LPG powered cars are another viable alternative to conventional petrol cars. These use Liquid Propane Gas instead of petrol to power the car. It works by having 2 tanks in the car, one for petrol in the normal place, and one for LPG which is usually situated in the spare wheel well. The Car starts up and runs for a few minutes on petrol before seamlessly switching to LPG, and running just like a petrol car would whilst using it. If you then run out of LPG, the car can seamlessly switch back to petrol again, and give you a warning that you need to refill your LPG. I think LPG is a good idea, mostly because the price of it is almost half that of petrol, and second-hand LPG cars can be just as good as ones with brand-new conversions (LPG is an aftermarket modification) without paying the near £1000 cost for the conversion. 

Thinking about these points then, why don't car manufacturers make petrol-electric hybrids in the style of the Vauxhall Ampera that also have LPG conversions. A tiny petrol tank (I'm talking motorbike sized) just to get the engine stared and up to temperature when it is needed, and an LPG tank to run the engine on. The motorist will have to pay virtually nothing for the LPG, charging of the batteries and would still get the range that these hybrids are offering. Even using the £5000 government grant after buying a hybrid to convert it to LPG can't be too hard, and it is essentially being done for free. Quite frankly, I'm amazed I don't see more of this happening.

Muscle cars

As you may have already learnt, I have a passion for muscle cars. Classic American muscle cars are, in my opinion, the best. The classic 1960's Mustang, and the Charger of the same year. Beautiful cars, and they can be immensely fast when done right. 

My uncle has a 1970 Dodge Dart Swinger, one of the rarer muscle cars. Originally designed a a little brother to the Charger, The Dart went through several body shapes and engine changes, until the Challenger came along in 1970. It was then that the convertible option was stopped, along with the more powerful 6.3l V8. In that year, all the 2-door Darts were named 'Swinger' for seemingly no apparent reason. The car continued on until '76, when poor sales stopped production in North America. 

1970 Dart Swinger

I don't know how my uncle got hold of his car, but it was a replacement for a similar age Chevy Impala. I never got to see the Impala, but I was told it was an absolute dog. Apparently the engine had no grunt, and the interior was so tatty it looked like a bear had got in there. His Dart, however, is a completely different story. When I first went in it, about a year after he bought it, we were on a trip from Bicester to Santa-pod. I remember driving through Olney and seeing all these other Muscle cars parked up on the side of the road. Not so the road was full of them, but there were enough to be noticed. When we had left the sandwich shop and started the car, the alarms of the two cars on either side of us went off. We then carried on with the cruise, getting admirable looks from all the young kids in the cars we passed, along with their parents. When we arrived at Santa-pod, I couldn't believe the amount of muscle cars I could see. There was a Charger here, a Challenger there, a lot of Vipers and Camaros, all of different ages. We then arrived at out encampment. there were 5 tents that I could see, each one situated next to the cars they arrived in. We had a Plymouth Roadrunner (complete with wacky spoiler) two Chargers, a modern Camaro dressed up to look like an American police cruiser and an Impala. We unpacked our tent and went to enjoy our weekend. In short, it was amazing.

Enough of my story though, I want to explain my passion for these cars. I see them as classic versions of the "RS" versions of cars, the original fast family cars. If it wasn't for these cars, we wouldn't have modern muscle cars, such as the E63 AMG, or the more conventional Camaro

Modern Camaro

and Challenger. These classic muscle cars also seem to find a special place in other peoples hearts, as they are willing to spend tens of thousands of pounds on restoring them, after they have been neglected by their original owners, but also having been subtley upgraded, with new big block V8s, and power steering and brakes to help improve the driving dynamics of the car. In short, they look and sound great, and I'm told they drive great too.

Now, onto modern day Muscle cars. simply put, they aren't as good. The V8s don't have such a deep, throaty roar, and I doubt that they'll be remembered as classics in 40 years time. Even then, the classic Americana that I love will still probably be the cars that every muscle-car enthusiast wants. The modern day interpretations are too focused on creature comforts. Would the original challenger have had a touchscreen infotainment system? No. Heated, electronically adjustable seats? Tyre pressure monitoring? Bang&Olufsen stereo? No no no and no. My point here is that powerful, driver focused cars these days are even more cushy than their grandads, which were family cars.

To conclude then, I think car manufacturers that made classic muscle cars (Ford, Dodge, Chevy to name a few) should just go back to basics with their muscle cars; they should make them as they would have been made 40-50 years ago, and see how much the muscle car fan-base would love them for it. Also, a quick side note, I have a couple weeks of exams now, so my blog posts may not be so large or regular. I ask you to bear with me whilst I have my exams, and I'll get back to normal in a couple of weeks.

Boyracers

We all know what boyracers are: "its easy to see what a boy racer is. They're those w****rs that screech round the roads in their alloy-wheeled, big bore exhausted and lowered scrapheap cars and piss the rest of us drivers off" Generally teenage lads, new drivers, who go out and buy their new car, normally a 1.0l Citroen Saxo or equivalent, and then modify it to make it  look 'cool'. Newsflash, you don't. your car  looks tasteless, and the mods will more than likely make your car illegal, or uninsured.

Typical Boyracer car

Normal new drivers will buy these cars, add stupid bumpers on, drop the suspension and add new wider wheels. What these lads don't realise is that without telling their insurance company about these mods (and face getting a huge price hike) they just drive them around. Not telling the insurance company will render their cars uninsured, so they wouldn't be covered if they got into a crash, something which a lot of boyracers seem to do. Secondly, the stupid suspension and wheel upgrades these cars get. I see a lot of boyracers with their cars literally on the floor, with the wheel arches cut out to give them enough clearance for the wheels to turn in. Doing this must make the cars ride so hard, I'm amazed we don't hear about more people with shattered spines. Along with these suspension 'upgrades', boyracers put new wheels on their cars, generally larger ones. What these people don't realise is that changing your wheels can affect the accuracy of a cars speedo, and it will say the car is going slower than it is, again something that can land boyracers in a lot of trouble. Thirdly, these new bigger wheels are generally wider than the stock ones, so they stick out further than the furthest parts of the wheel arches, something which is illegal here in the UK. Along with these wider wheels, a car should get wider tyres, again something teenagers don't seem to understand. They prefer to stretch their tyres to fit the wheels, something which not only looks stupid, but can cause uneven tyre wear, and make their cars dangerous on the road. Finally, the massive exhausts that all these cars have. These exhausts can restrict a cars performance more than help it, because the boyracer doesn't upgrade the rest of the exhaust system along with their exhaust. The loudness of these exhausts can also be a problem, with some of the louder ones being louder than what UK laws permit at certain times of day.

Another thing is the quite ridiculous 'cruises' these boyracers have. They all meet in a convenient car park, and go for a cruise around the town, getting stuck in traffic caused by their fellow boyracers, discussing how 'mint' and 'sick' eachothers cars are. I was on a proper cruise last year in an old Dodge Dart (1970's, and it belongs to my uncle. It has about 1000BHP I think.) and a host of other similarly powerful muscle cars. We went from Santa-Pod to Wellingborough and back, a yearly cruise that happens as part of the Mopar Euronationals. We turned up in a car park outside Homebase, across the road from a Halfords, where there was a large group of boyracers, who had just come back from a 'cruise'. As we turned up, they all turned silent. We parked up and went to the KFC next door, and by the time we were back they had all left with their wussy cars. More on my Santa-Pod stories in a later post anyway.

Similar Dart to my uncle's

To conclude then, boyracers drive stupid cars, which they think are cool, to try and impress girls. What they don't realise is that a girl would much rather go out with a normal guy, rather than the spotty apes that boyracers tend to be. I think. Stupid, illegal cars that have no insurance. Avoid at all costs I suggest. Go to http://www.boyracerguide.co.uk for a bit of a laugh at boyracers' expense.

Limited edition cars

Limited edition cars are a good way for car companies to charge a premium for a car because it has a couple of features on it that makes it 'unique', but I think that what they do is right, to an extent. When it's a limited run of 500 cars, then there's nothing wrong, but when a car company keeps making the same car over and over again re-branding it as different special editions, then it's wrong. Also, if a company makes a limited edition car because of an occasion in the company, it's fine. If they just make the cars for money, then it's not.

For example, my mum's partner has a Ford Ranger as his personal car, which is one of 500  (I think) made to celebrate Colin McRae's WRC win in 2001/2 with Martini.

Ford Ranger Martini

The car has a special white and blue paint with the Martini rally stickers, upgraded wheels and tyres, upgraded suspension, a limited edition registration plate and chrome roll bars at the back of the cab. It looks a lot like a support truck, and with a set of orange flashing lights on top and in the bumpers, it turns heads. As this was a small run of cars to celebrate a victory in the company, I agree with Ford's motives in making the car

Supercar manufacturers, however, don't have the same rational thought process when thinking about special edition cars. Like Bugatti. Famous for the Veyron, they also make the Veyron GrandSport (Convertible) The SuperSport (that goes 270MPH) and a whole host of special edition cars, just to prolong the life of the Veyron.  They are also known to make one-off cars for their wealthiest customers (Like a lot of high-end car manufacturers do. Ferrari SP12 EC anyone?)

Ferrari SP12EC

What annoys me is that these special editions only look different to the original, all the Veyron Special editions have the same 16.4 W16, and no mechanical tweaks. At the moment, they make 5 special editions: The 'Pur Sang' has a carbon-fibre bit in the middle, with the rest of the car in Aluminium, the 'Hermes' has a brown bit in the middle, with "H"s in the wheels, and a Hermes-Designed interior. The 'sang-noir' which is just painted black. There is also two centenary versions, one in blue and one in any of the 4 original bugatti colours. As I said earlier, these cars have no mechanical tweaks compared to the original, and are just a way of making Bugatti more money.

The Veyron L'edition Centenaire family

To conclude, I think that limited edition models are good things, as long as the car companies have a legit reason for making them, and don't just make them to make more money.