Advertisement
Fairfield, New York, Craigslist, or go here if the ad disappears.
H/T to Bert Hoff for the hookup!
Help me out with NPOND. Hit me up at rob@jalopnik.com and send me a fixed-price tip. Remember to include your Kinja handle.
The way this thing builds speed is startling. Obviously the car is incredibly well tuned with a flat power delivery curve, not suffering from the big boost lag of old-school hillclimbers. The quickness with which this moves through the gears is another part that makes me sit back and just stare. Those upshifts, particularly from third to sixth come about as quick as you can count. The short ratio box is by design, but it’s still impressive.
I hope this car sticks around the international hillclimb scene for at least a few years, because I’d love the opportunity to see it in action someday. Maybe Signiore Gabrielli will bring the car over to tackle Pikes Peak. That would truly be a sight to see.
For GREAT deals on a new or used Nissan check out Nissan 112 TODAY!When BMW brought Mini back in the early 2000s, the taillights on Frank Stephenson’s original design were triangular. They later filled out and got a bit more squarish, and have remained so for about a decade — but that looks to change starting next year. The upper and lower inner chunks of the clusters have been chipped away, making sideways trapezoids.
The entire unit has been subdivided into what I could only describe as pixels, but like pixels from an old-school LCD display. If I squint, it seems like the bars that would comprise the Union Jack are a bit lighter than the rest, and I bet those light up in similar fashion as the current Mini’s taillights.
This would be a very smart move for Mini, because it’s getting so much attention over the flag lights from nerds like us. I’m willing to bet every person that directly follows a new Mini has noticed the design, and so long as they’ve ever seen 15 seconds of Austin Powers, they probably get the joke.
Advertisement
I have less to say about the rest of the upcoming Mini’s look. I mean, I’m still reminded of goatees or that one episode of The Powerpuff Girls when I study the front, and the headlights have these crossbars on their upper and lower portions that almost look like eyelids on a Family Guy character. I’m overflowing with cartoon character references.
There’s more to say about the interior, where Mini designers have seemingly ditched the small pill-shaped digital instrument cluster behind the steering wheel in favor of a heads-up display. The dash is entirely clad in what looks to be canvas, with a big old circular panel affixed to the center dash. It’s like the essence of a Mini interior stripped down to its most iconographic parts, and it’s kind of soulless. I don’t love it coming from the current Mini’s fun and lighthearted cabin.
Advertisement
Supposedly this new Mini Cooper will be available in internal combustion and battery electric forms. If the manufacturer can squeeze roughly 50 more miles out of the SE while keeping the price around where it sits today — and the driving dynamics on point — it’ll be a pretty compelling bargain EV.
For GREAT deals on a new or used Nissan check out Nissan of Sumter TODAY!
What I like about this test is that it presents a very good mix of everyday, normal driving situations in an environment with a good mix of traffic density, road complexity, lighting conditions, road markings, and more. In short, reality, the same sort of entropy-heavy reality all of us live in and where we expect our machines to work.
There’s a lot that FSD does that’s impressive when you consider that this is an inert mass of steel and rubber and silicon that’s effectively driving on its own through a crowded city. We’ve come a long way since Stanley the Toureg finished the DARPA Challenge back in 2006, and there’s so much to be impressed by.
At the same time, this FSD beta proves to be a pretty shitty driver, at least in this extensive test session.
G/O Media may get a commission
Anyone arguing that FSD in its latest state drives better than a human is either delusional, high from the fumes of their own raw ardor for Elon Musk or needs to find better-driving humans to hang out with.
FSD drives in a confusing, indecisive way, making all kinds of peculiar snap decisions and generally being hard to read and predict to other drivers around them. Which is a real problem.
Advertisement
Drivers expect a certain baseline of behaviors and reactions from the cars around them. That means there’s not much that’s more dangerous to surrounding traffic than an unpredictable driver, which this machine very much is.
And that’s when it’s driving at least somewhat legally; there are several occasions in this video where traffic laws were actually broken, including two instances of the car attempting to drive the wrong way down a street and into oncoming traffic.
Advertisement
Nope, not great.
In the comments, many people have criticized Kyle, the driver/supervisor, for allowing the car to make terrible driving decisions instead of intervening. The reasoning for this ranges from simple Tesla-fan-rage to the need for disengagements to help the system learn, to concern that by not correcting the mistakes, Kyle is potentially putting people in danger.
Advertisement
They’re also noting that the software is very clearly unfinished and in a beta state, which, is pretty clearly true as well.
These are all reasonable points. Well, the people just knee-jerk shielding Elon’s Works from any scrutiny aren’t reasonable, but the other points are, and they bring up bigger issues.
Advertisement
Specifically, there’s the fundamental question about whether or not it makes sense to test an unfinished self-driving system on public roads, surrounded by people, in or out of other vehicles, that did not agree to participate in any sort of beta testing of any kind.
You could argue that a student driver is a human equivalent of beta testing our brain’s driving software, though when this is done in any official capacity, there’s a professional driving instructor in the car, sometimes with an auxiliary brake pedal, and the car is often marked with a big STUDENT DRIVER warning.
Advertisement
I’ve proposed the idea of some kind of warning lamp for cars under machine control, and I still think that’s not a bad idea, especially during the transition era we find ourselves in.
Advertisement
Of course, in many states, you can teach your kid to drive on your own without any special permits. That context is quite similar to FSD beta drivers since they don’t have any special training beyond a regular driver’s license (and no, Tesla’s silly Safety Score does not count as special training).
In both cases, you’re dealing with an unsure driver who may not make good decisions, and you may need to take over at a moment’s notice. On an FSD-equipped Tesla (or really any L2-equipped car), taking over should be easy, in that your hands and other limbs should be in position on the car’s controls, ready to take over.
Advertisement
In the case of driving with a kid, this is less easy, though still possible. I know because I was once teaching a girlfriend of the time how to drive and had to take control of a manual old Beetle from the passenger seat. You can do it, but I don’t recommend it.
Of course, when you’re teaching an uncertain human, you’re always very, very aware of the situation and nothing about it would give you a sense of false confidence that could allow your attention to waver. This is a huge problem with Level 2 semi-automated systems, though, and one I’ve discussed at length before.
Advertisement
As far as whether or not the FSB beta needs driver intervention to “learn” about all the dumb things it did wrong, I’m not entirely sure this is true. Tesla has mentioned the ability to learn in “shadow mode” which would eliminate the need for FSD to be active to learn driving behaviors by example.
As far as Kyle’s willingness to let FSD beta make its bad decisions, sure, there are safety risks, but it’s also valuable to see what it does to give an accurate sense of just what the system is capable of. He always stepped in before things got too bad, but I absolutely get that this in no way represents safe driving.
Advertisement
At the same time, showing where the system fails helps users of FSD have a better sense of the capabilities of what they’re using so they can attempt to understand how vigilant they must be.
This is all really tricky, and I’m not sure yet of the best practice solution here.
Advertisement
This also brings up the question of whether Tesla’s goals make sense in regard to what’s known as their Operational Design Domain (ODD), which is just a fancy way of saying “where should I use this?”
Tesla has no restrictions on their ODD, as referenced in this tweet:
Advertisement
This raises a really good point: should Tesla define some sort of ODD?
I get that their end goal is Level 5 full, anywhere, anytime autonomy, a goal that I think is kind of absurd. Full Level 5 is decades and decades away. If Tesla freaks are going to accuse me of literally having blood on my hands for allegedly delaying, somehow, the progress of autonomous driving, then you’d think the smartest move would be to restrict the ODD to areas where the system is known to work better (highways, etc) to allow for more automated deployment sooner.
Advertisement
That would make the goal more Level 4 than 5, but the result would be, hopefully, safer automated vehicle operation, and, eventually, safer driving for everyone.
Trying to make an automated vehicle work everywhere in any condition is an absolutely monumental task, and there’s still so so much work to do. Level 5 systems are probably decades away, at best. Restricted ODD systems may be able to be deployed much sooner, and maybe Tesla should be considering doing that, just like many other AV companies (Waymo, Argo, and so on) are doing.
Advertisement
We’re still in a very early transition period on this path to autonomy, however that turns out. Videos like these, that show real-world behavior of such systems, problems and all, are very valuable, even if we’re still not sure on the ethics of making them.
All I know is that now is the time to question everything, so don’t get bullied by anyone.
Advertisement
Portland, Oregon, Craigslist, or go here if the ad disappears.
H/T to RevUnlimiter for the hookup!
Help me out with NPOND. Hit me up at rob@jalopnik.com and send me a fixed-price tip. Remember to include your Kinja handle.
I’m going to start out by saying right away that I cannot imagine this vehicle with the base-level engine; the Santa Cruz needed the turbocharged 2.5-liter engine. It had just the right amount of power and punch you’d want from your car, but it was exactly that: just right. To have anything less than what the turbo engine provides would likely feel sluggish and uninspired. The turbo isn’t giving you tons of extra pep like you’d get on something like the Mazda CX-5; it’s making your base level performance feel a little more exciting.
Adding to that, Hyundai did a solid job making the ride enjoyable. The cabin is nice and quiet, even on windy coastal roads. The low ride height makes the Santa Cruz feel steady, capable, and agile when on long straights or tight turns. I had the chance to try out the Santa Cruz on a little bit of everything, from well-paved highways to bumpy gravel roads, and it handled everything with ease. It’s not the kind of vehicle you want to take off-roading, but it’s also not something you’ll cringe at taking through that rutted dirt road.
And, unlike some pickup trucks, you’ll have a comfortable ride whether you’ve got the bed loaded or not. I will say, though, that we didn’t get a chance to put the Santa Cruz’s towing or payload powers to the test during our drive. That will remain to be seen.
Overall, we’re talking about a very comfortable vehicle, but not necessarily one that’s going to blow your mind in terms of the drive. It drives more like a commuter car than a performance machine — and that’s fine. Not everyone needs a car with an angry exhaust and an overwhelming amount of power. We’ll just keep our fingers crossed for an N or N-Line Santa Cruz, where we can kick things up a notch.
That said, I didn’t have a chance to drive the most affordable trims, so my observations aren’t going to translate.
Many of my favorite things about the Hyundai Santa Cruz were in the little, thoughtful details that put this vehicle a step above others — ones that you actually use every day.
One of my favorite things was the infotainment system. There’s not actually a menu that you have to use to navigate from; instead, integrated tabs line the bottom of the screen. Give it a touch, and you’re immediately moved to navigation. Another touch, and you’ll have music available. It doesn’t require a whole lot of searching to find what you need, which can be a serious detriment with many other infotainment systems. You also had the option to select an arrow on the right side of the screen that would split the screen to show you, say, navigation and your music selection at the same time. I was really impressed.
It really seems like Hyundai paid attention to design through and through. The horizontal LED taillights stretch the truck out to give it a commanding stance while the hidden LEDs on the front end prove that you can create a statement grille without needing to rely on polarizing half of your audience. Further, the sloping cabin definitely retains SUV vibes, but it integrates well into the bed rails, proving that you can absolutely blend design barriers if you’re so inclined.
And we can’t talk about the good without talking about the truck bed. Sure, it’s on the small side, but Hyundai worked hard to ensure that flexibility is key here. Adjustable rails, latches, and molded bed inserts mean that you can secure plenty of goodies inside. You can turn it into a two-tiered bed with some plywood, and you can lock your valuables up in the under-bed storage.
The tonneau cover, too, is standard, not an option. It’s water-resistant (not waterproof; you’ll likely get some leaks in a hard rainstorm), it locks, and it’s self-retracting. Just push up on the tonneau handle, and it’ll roll up for you. Reach in and pull it back, and it’ll close. Best of all, you don’t need tons of strength or height to manage it.
And let’s talk about that under-bed trunk. It’s waterproof, and it features two drain plugs. It fit my backpack with ease, and I could also see it functioning as a cooler on the go for those of you out there who dig your tailgating.
The Santa Cruz was one of the first times I’ve had a truck-like vehicle that actually felt friendly for someone short like me. I know some smaller ladies enjoy the power they feel by driving a truck much bigger than them, but I’m not the kind of person that digs having to pole vault into the truck bed or turn into a bodybuilder to lift myself into the truck. Best of all, the sight lines inside were incredible. Seeing the road — what a concept!
I’ll be honest — there wasn’t a lot that I didn’t like about this truck, but I’ll also admit that it’s not an easy vehicle to review because there’s nothing like it to compare it to. I’ll start with some of the concerns that folks asked about previously:
SE
SEL
SEL Activity
SEL Premium
Limited
I lost count of how many times Hyundai reminded our press group that the Santa Cruz isn’t designed to compete directly with the truck market before then comparing The Santa Cruz’s specs to those of the Ford Maverick. It makes sense; here are two small, affordable trucklets that are meant to be as comfortable in the city as they are on the dirt road heading to your favorite mountain trail. It makes sense that folks are cross-shopping these.
That said, I still think the Santa Cruz and the Maverick are competing for very different segments of the market, with the Santa Cruz appealing more to the SUV crowd and the Maverick aiming for a truck audience. Both have features that set them apart from the niche I think they’d most effectively appeal to — the Santa Cruz has a truck bed, the Maverick is electrified — which make both vehicles a bit of an outlier in their respective markets. But I don’t know that it’s ever occurred to me to compare these two on a one-to-one basis.
There’s no right or wrong answer as to which is better, since they’re both designed for different audiences. But let’s talk some general differences:
Santa Cruz
Maverick
Which is superior? That’s going to come down to your personal preferences and uses for the vehicle. Nothing more.
The 2022 Hyundai Santa Cruz is a great, flexible, and approachable vehicle that definitely has the chops to convince an American market that the ute can be a glorious thing — but I don’t think Hyundai quite knows what it wants the Santa Cruz to be yet. Its marketing push toward young, active professionals is a little bland because that’s the market every semi-flexible sedan, crossover, SUV, or truck is aiming toward these days. That angle isn’t fresh or exciting enough to convince people to opt for the result of a sordid love affair between a crossover and a small truck.
Revise that marketing push, and I think Hyundai has a banger of a product. Sell this to small families with kids who like to get muddy. Sell it to short women who want to feel like a badass driving their succulents home from the nursery without sacrificing their comfort. Sell it to eternally-messy guys who want a reasonably sized vehicle that won’t be a pain in the ass to clean out. Sell it to older folks who just can’t climb in and out of their tall work trucks anymore. Sell it to the in-between crowds who aren’t sure if they want a truck or an SUV. If I have to see one more ad showing a 20-something city slicker pulling off her office-wear as she hits the bike trail, I’m gonna snap.
That bland effort isn’t worthy of the Santa Cruz, which is ultimately a fun, peppy little vehicle that makes you smile when you drive it — and when you check your bank account before you think about financing it. It has potential lasting power that means we’ll not only see the Santa Cruz on the road in 10 years but that we’ll also see a fair share of its trucklet competitors. Hyundai just needs to find the in-between places where the Santa Cruz will shine.
A teen driver in Colorado likely learned a couple of good driving lessons on Thursday after they reversed an Infiniti G37xS into the deep end of a pool. The car may be a little wet, but the driver and their passenger are reported to be safe.
Advertisement
Police in Lakewood, Colorado, responded to a report of a car getting a deep clean at the bottom of a pool on Thursday.
Its driver, a teenager with a learner’s permit, accidentally put the car into reverse and sent it through a fence and into the pool, reports CBS 4 Denver.
Police cited the driver with careless driving but are happy to say that the teen and their adult occupant escaped the vehicle without injury.
G/O Media may get a commission
Of course, the police couldn’t help themselves and dropped a one liner that I feel so bad for giggling at:
Just FYI, the best line for this is “Check out our new Infiniti Pool”. Everyone else is battling for second place.
Advertisement
The responses on Twitter deliver even worse groaners.
Meanwhile, West Metro Fire Rescue posted a video of the extraction process for the car.
In it, the department shows its divers chaining up the Infiniti’s rear wheels to the winch and boom of a nearby wrecker. The car was then yanked out with the help of 2x4s.
Advertisement
It’s easy to roast the driver for the mistake, but we’ve all done a silly thing or two while learning how to drive, sometimes resulting in a crash. Hopefully, this teen isn’t deterred from getting behind the wheel again and now knows to make sure that they’re in the correct gear. They also likely learned the useful skill of how to escape a sinking car.
Despite what my recent colonic lab results suggest, I’m human. And, as a human, I make mistakes. Statistically, I suspect I make many more mistakes than an average human. One of these mistakes was taking a TikToker at their word regarding a Tesla they claimed to own. The TikToker in question is the one we wrote about last week, who claimed to be taking delivery of his new Tesla when the airbag came off in his hand. According to another video, it appears he did not own the car he sat in, and the cops told him to stay clear of the Tesla Store.
Advertisement
Here’s the video where the TikToker, bird owner, and hopeful Tesla owner, Rico Kimbrough, comes clean regarding ownership of the car:
And, for reference, here was the TikTok that started all of this mess in the first place:
G/O Media may get a commission
Somehow, I suspect Elon will be able to weather the financial fallout of this okay, despite Kimbrough’s concern. And, yes, to the Children of Elon—that angelic, pious group of noble humans who, for various curious reasons, have tied their personal identities to a for-profit company, I humbly and sincerely apologize for taking the word of a man who claimed to have just bought a new Tesla via a series of videos.
I did reach out to Kimbrough, and have continued to, so far to no avail. The original story was as much about the sensation the video caused as the event depicted, because, as we all know, Tesla is an automaker that commands an awful lot of public attention, as the original TikTok video going viral demonstrates.
Advertisement
In fact, I sort of addressed all of this in the original article:
Of course, Tesla is hardly the only carmaker to experience quality issues, but here’s the thing about Tesla: if you have a car people are so excited about that they post dozens of videos of the process, then when they incidentally document a glaring issue, you have to expect attention for that, too.
I’m saying this because I already know my social media is about to be clogged with quivering Tesla-stans ranting at me about my focus on Tesla’s failings and my cruel, miserable bias against Tesla and sweet, innocent Elon Musk, but the reality is that nothing’s free.
If there’s a car brand with so much popular culture clout and attention and positivity that—as happened to me just today—I get emails pitching stories about how Tesla owners do better on online dating sites, then you’ve got to accept the flip side of that valuable attention-coin, which is that if that brand fucks something up, that gets talked about, too.
Advertisement
I also did hedge regarding the possibility that Kimbrough might not be telling the truth in that earlier article:
And, even if, wildly improbably, Kimbrough isn’t really the owner, and he and his birds just staged an absurdly involved hoax to discredit Tesla for clicks or some other incomprehensible reason, and he was just sitting in a car he didn’t own with an airbag that comes off, I don’t see how that’s any better.
Advertisement
Clearly, I was very wrong about the “wildly” and “improbably” part, suggesting I’m quite naive about the motives and ethics of TikTokers.
Now, the real issue is none of this changes that the airbag came off in our less-than-forthright friend’s hand.
Advertisement
Of course, his admission that the car wasn’t his could mean there’s a whole greater level of nefarious activities going on here, activities that would require a lot more than getting in a car and shooting some videos.
I suppose it’s possible Kimbrough’s intent from the start was to specifically remove the airbag unit, an act that requires tools and at least a bit of research, all in an effort to cause Tesla to look bad.
Advertisement
I’m skeptical this was the goal, as all of Kimbrough’s videos prior to the airbag falling out were wildly pro-Tesla. The man certainly presents himself as a fan in a convincing manner, though he did also present himself as a new owner with some conviction as well.
So, yes, that’s possible. It’s also possible that this is a manufacturing defect, from a company with a rich, lavish history of defects, and even if the car was in Transport Mode (see previous article about why that should not affect whether or not an airbag was properly installed) a car making it to the lot with an improperly installed airbag is not great, no matter who owns the car or who’s lying about owning the car.
Advertisement
I’m positive no matter what, that airbag would have been sorted very early within the ownership of the car—likely before it left the lot—but there’s no reason not to call out such issues, especially when they generate as much attention as this one did, long before any of the many media outlets that covered it wrote about it.
So, to all of you Tesla-stans out there who remain very, very engaged with any and all interactions that involve Teslas, again, my apologies. I’m sorry. The TikToker did not own that car, and I dearly hope that his claims of ownership — and my amplification of those claims — did not cause you any harm, somehow.
Advertisement
But maybe still make sure your new Teslas have their airbags properly installed, and, yes, I still think that yoke sucks.
If I can get through to Kimbrough directly, I will update accordingly. He does seem to be a genuine Elon/Tesla fan, though, so I maybe shouldn’t get my hopes up that he’ll want to talk to me.
For GREAT deals on a new or used Nissan check out Mossy Nissan National City TODAY!
The simplest and most genius-brain solution to charging times and range with EVs isn’t one you’ll find in America. In China, though, it’s gaining ground. All that and more in The Morning Shift for June 2, 2021.
Advertisement
China is like the American car market in so many ways. It’s huge, for one, (the biggest in the world while we’re number two) and filled with people inexplicably buying sedans and not hatchbacks or wagons. It’s also the biggest market for electric cars in the world, and you see as many Teslas bopping around Shanghai as you do here in New York or Los Angeles.
But China also offers us a market where GM builds small, adorable, unbelievably popular EVs as opposed to 9,000-pound hulking Hummers for the rich. It feels like an alternate reality where everyone takes EVs as a given, not as a radical tech.
This is a long intro to the point that battery-swapping stations are taking off there, as noted in this overview story by Automotive News China:
Until 2019, state-owned BAIC Motor Co. and EV startup Nio were the only two automakers offering battery swap services for customers.
[…]
Competition from Tesla and Nio’s success in gaining customers with battery swap services have prompted other Chinese EV makers to take bold steps.
[…]
While Geely is constructing battery swap stations on its own, other Chinese automakers have opted to build facilities along with domestic companies to share costs.
In September, state-owned Changan Automobile Co. launched its first battery swap station in Chongqing along with a consortium of other major domestic companies.
The partner companies include CATL, China’s largest EV battery maker; Aulton New Energy Vehicle Technology Co., a Shanghai-based battery swap station operator; and State Grid, a state-owned power grid operator.
In March, SAIC Motor Corp., another major state-owned automaker, also teamed up with Aulton to kick off operation of the first battery swap station for its EVs.
Aiways, an EV startup, tapped Blue Part Smart Energy, an EV charging facility operator under BAIC, in April to offer battery swap services.
G/O Media may get a commission
This is all interesting to see from an American perspective, especially one based out of New York City. Around the turn of the century, NYC was home to the largest electric car company in the world, the Electric Vehicle Company, and it operated using battery-swapping stations right in the middle of Manhattan. The tech is basic. We could go down this route if we wanted to.
Some 6,000 Tesla Model 3 and Model Ys are getting recalled for loose brake caliper bolts, as Reuters reports:
Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) is recalling nearly 6,000 U.S. vehicles because brake caliper bolts could be loose, with the potential to cause a loss of tire pressure, documents made public on Wednesday show.
The recall covers certain 2019-2021 Model 3 vehicles and 2020-2021 Model Y vehicles. Tesla’s filing with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) said it had no reports of crashes or injuries related to the issue and that the company will inspect and tighten, or replace, the caliper bolts as necessary.
Tesla said that loose caliper bolts could allow the brake caliper to separate and contact the wheel rim, which could cause a loss of tire pressure in “very rare circumstances.” The company said that, in the “unlikely event” there is vehicle damage from a loose or missing fastener, it will arrange for a tow to the nearest service center for repair.
Advertisement
Hey, at least they got the bolts on there this time!
Another interesting Tesla story comes from Bloomberg, which has taken notice that everyone is not just copying Tesla’s plans to make attractive and desirable electric cars, but also how Tesla talks them up with ever-grander terminology. Per Bloomberg:
Many of the words speak to the sheer scale of Musk’s ambitions, which are always far grander than people realize initially. A battery factory isn’t just a battery factory, it’s a Gigafactory. (Giga comes from the Greek word “gigas,” or giant.)
A fast charging station for Tesla’s electric cars isn’t just a charging station, it’s a Supercharger. (Tesla has more than 25,000, giving them the largest network in the world.)
The battery packs that Tesla sells to utilities that promise “massive energy storage?” Megapacks.
There are no signs of him stopping. At Tesla’s “Battery Day” in September 2020, Musk talked about reaching “Terawatt-hour” scale battery production. “Tera is the new Giga,” Musk said on stage.
We’ve now reached the point where every battery factory — even those being made by competitors — is called a gigafactory, regardless of its physical size or planned output. “Nissan in advanced talks to build battery gigafactory in UK,” reported the Financial Times. “Stellantis discussing conditions with Rome to build gigafactory in Italy,” said Reuters.
Advertisement
Would Tesla be where it is if everyone just called gigafactories what they are? (They’re just regular factories.)
The Olympics in Japan seem to be still on somebody’s schedule, even if the people of Japan seem less than stoked on a global travel-fest in the midst of a still-ongoing global pandemic. Of course, this has huge implications for … high-profile industrial manufacturing that hopes to use the Olympics as a sales and marketing opportunity! Reuters has a broad report on it, and I’ll just take out this little section on Toyota:
For global sponsor Toyota Motor Corp., the Games were a chance to showcase its latest technology. It had planned to roll out about 3,700 vehicles, including 500 Mirai hydrogen fuel-cell sedans, to shuttle athletes and VIPs among venues.
It also planned to use self-driving pods to carry athletes around the Olympic village.
Such vehicles will still be used, but on a much smaller scale — a “far cry from what we had hoped and envisioned,” a Toyota source said. A full-scale Olympics, the source said, would have been a “grand moment for electric cars.”
A Toyota spokeswoman declined to comment on whether there were any changes to its marketing.
Advertisement
This is not a total win for climate, but it’s something, as the Financial Times reports:
The Biden administration has announced it will suspend the Arctic oil drilling rights sold in the last days of Donald Trump’s presidency, reversing a signature policy of the previous White House and handing a victory to environmentalists.
[…]
Tuesday’s decision marked a victory for environmentalists and activists, a pillar of Biden’s support in last year’s election, who have begun to grow impatient with some of the White House’s climate actions. The administration recently opted not to intervene to force the closure of the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline and has supported a major Alaska oil project approved during Trump’s term in office.
“In general the Biden administration is acting vigorously on climate change,” said Michael Gerrard, founder of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. “This action on ANWR is quite consistent with that. The actions on the other two projects do not seem so consistent.”
Advertisement
I’ll take anything I can get at this point!
Advertisement
My Bug refused to start the other day just as I had loaded the car up for a multi-day road trip. With rain coming down, it refused to start even when I flagged down a ‘90s Infiniti for a jump. I ran out and got a new battery and it did start, but was running like shit until I found a half-bare wire leading to the coil. Some electrical tape later and we were on the road, though I’m still finding the car getting hot and leaking oil around some seals I know I just replaced. Stopping after one mountain pass I saw vapor rising out of one of the two carburetors. Time for a tune-up!
For GREAT deals on a new or used Toyota check out Joseph Toyota of Cincinnati TODAY!
It’s that time of year again. You know, the part where we take the Formula One circus to the streets of Monaco and pray for an entertaining race despite the fact that the cars are about as long as the yachts parked out in the harbor. And, of course, that means it’s the time of year where we ask the same question over and over: why the hell are F1 cars so damn long?
Advertisement
It seems like the cars get bigger and bigger every year. Where the cars used to be bullets, they are now essentially longswords on wheels. And plenty of folks have had ideas about how to shrink the cars, like reintroducing refueling (which would create a smaller fuel tank) or using narrower tires. But there are legitimate reasons why the cars have grown longer—and why that won’t be changing any time soon.
Basically, F1 cars have been growing for decades. A deeper understanding of aerodynamics during the 1970s made a lot of team owners realize that a longer, thinner car provided a better distribution of air. You want something thin that can pierce the air, which means you need to redistribute weight laterally, not vertically. Safety saw drivers sitting lower in the cockpit to keep their heads tucked below a roll bar, to the point where they were almost laying on their backs. And changing regulations have resulted in very specific measurements being included in the rule books, so there’s not as much wiggle room as there used to be.
But cars started getting noticeably longer in the recent era for several reasons. First, the introduction of a hybrid power added a ton of more electrical components as opposed to a straight-up combustion engine, which requires teams to use extra space. The elimination of refueling saw the introduction of larger gas tanks. There are extra wires and electrical bits and bobs to power things like radios, in-car cameras, telemetry, and the data projected on the steering wheel. Once you start adding all this extra 21st century technology, you’re going to start running out of space unless you expand the car.
The FIA will generally take all these changes into account when it proposes a new set of rules, which means it comes up with mandatory weight and size limits to ensure that teams include everything without skimping but also without adding too much extra nonsense.
G/O Media may get a commission
And, of course, aerodynamics still play a role. You don’t want a wide car. You want something more arrow-like, that narrows to a sharp point and that keeps the sidepods slimmer and carved to redirect air more efficiently. So, if you keep adding more shit into your car, you’re going to need to put it somewhere, and no one wants to bulk up the sides of the car. Which means you get F1 cars that are as long as yachts.
If you’re not convinced, then consider this: for 2019, the FIA added five kilograms of allowable fuel capacity so teams wouldn’t have to scrimp and save fuel during the race. But even that relatively meager addition required an extension of the cars’ lengths because there just wasn’t space to cram all that extra fuel in. That was already the preferable route, anyway; Mercedes had opted for a longer wheelbase in 2018, which saw its extra body surfaces generate more downforce in corners that outweighed the fact that the extra length made for a heavier car. And you don’t need me to tell you that Mercedes was absurdly dominant in 2018.
Advertisement
There are, of course, other downsides to the longer car. It makes it more challenging for cars to pass each other, since it takes a greater amount of track space to do so. On thinner or twistier tracks, you’re not going to see as much overtaking because the sheer length of the car serves as an inherent blockade.
But we’re not likely to see many differences. Back in 2020, F1 technical consultant Rob Smedley told Motorsport Magazine that “there is no single magic bullet” to fix the length problem. You can’t just reintroduce refueling or mandate shorter cars when you’d end up compromising on safety or speed. There would need to be a wholesale rewriting of the rulebook to create shorter cars—and it’s probably just not going to happen in this day and age. You can go ahead and assume the longer cars are here to stay.
