Pristine 2012 Slk 250 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Mercedes spent ˆ250 million to win Formula One titles last year

Success in Formula One requires skill, diligence, commitment and ingenuity. It also takes truckloads of money. In the case of Mercedes in last year's world championship, in which it took both the drivers' and constructors' titles in dominant style, those truckloads came to ˆ250 million last season alone – equivalent to over $285m in dead presidents. A report from Germany's own Auto Motor und Sport details the staggering investment that Mercedes made in order to get to the winner's circle last season. After 15 seasons with McLaren netting one constructors' and three drivers' titles, Mercedes motorsport chief Norbert Haug convinced the Daimler board late in 2009 to take over the Brawn GP team that had just won the championship. Because the team would be getting a large payout from Bernie Ecclestone as the returning champions the following year, and with sponsors lined up, Daimler only had to pony up a small portion of a smaller budget: in 2010 (its first season under the Mercedes banner), the team ran on a budget of "only" ˆ153 million ($175m). Over the course of the following seasons, though, the team's share of the TV revenues from Formula One Management went down as Mercedes struggled to climb back up the standings, but successive advocates (including Haug, Ross Brawn and Niki Lauda) successfully convinced the bean-counters in Stuttgart to ratchet up the payments. By 2012, the budget was expanded to ˆ200 million, and further climbed to ˆ250 million in 2013 and 2014. Fortunately for Daimler, the investment was starting to pay off by then as the team finished second in the constructors' standings in 2013, bringing ˆ74 million in from Ecclestone's coffers to cover roughly a third of the budget. With Malaysian oil giant Petronas alone kicking in upwards of another ˆ30 million per season as title sponsor (as of 2009 when it signed on), and untold millions more coming in from other partners, it looks like the actual cost to Daimler for securing both world titles and a winning reputation was actually more like hundred million or so.

Recharge Wrap-up: Shift to offer Teslas for Hire, Model S P85D beats Ferrari in drag race

A company called Shift plans to provide bikes and EVs for hire. Based in Las Vegas, NV, Shift will provide chauffeured ride services like Uber, but will also include a car- and bike-sharing service that delivers the desired wheels to the customer. Shift's fleet will include EVs like the Smart Fortwo Electric Drive and the Tesla Model S. Shift also promises that you will, "Be on your way within five minutes," which is a pretty tall order. Shift is scheduled to be available to members beginning this fall. Read more at The Car Connection. Nissan UK has confirmed the price of replacement batteries for the Leaf. UK drivers will be able to buy new batteries for 4,920 pounds (or about $7,738). That's considerably more than the price of $5,499 for US customers. Customers get 1,000 pounds back when they exchange their old battery. The original battery is covered under a five-year, 60,000-mile warranty, and most owners will never need to replace it. According to Nissan, only three replacement batteries have been sold out of 30,000 Leafs sold in Europe. Read more at Autocar. The Tesla Model S P85D walloped a Ferrari in an impromptu drag race video. The Ferrari driver pulls up alongside the Tesla and asks, "What you got in there?" before challenging him to a race. The Ferrari gets a head start, but the Tesla pulls out ahead quickly. The video also gets the reactions of some passengers to the car's mighty acceleration. See the video below and read the account of a drag race against a Lamborghini Aventador at Car Throttle. Australian website Drive has chosen their Cars of the Year in various categories. The Tesla Model S was a carryover winner for Luxury Car Over $80,000, but the Mercedes-Benz C200 narrowly overtook it to be crowned the overall winner. Regarding the Model S, one judge says, "This makes every other EV look at least a generation behind." The main thing that held the Tesla back from winning outright was the near-term lack of charging infrastructure. The judges did note Tesla's plans to build a network of Superchargers in Australia, but also pointed out that those plans exclude much of the country so far. See the video below and read more at Drive. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

Why it's difficult to accurately test the efficiency of a plug-in car

When it comes to electric vehicles and plug-ins in general, the Environmental Protection Agency-certified range is a hugely important number. While actual range anxiety is largely psychological, the magic number does provide a point of comparison of buyers considering one EV over another. The driving distance is also often touted by automakers when marketing their models. Unfortunately, as Green Car Reports finds in a recent deep dive, the way the EPA calculates the figure is a convoluted mess, and discovering the reasons why is definitely worth the read. The issue isn't about bad science but instead comes down to vague wording. The EPA's accepted range test is sourced from an evaluation called J-1634 from the Society of Automotive Engineers, and it seems to provide balanced results for vehicles that automatically reach a single state of charge when plugged in. However for models with multiple charge settings, the situation gets complicated very quickly. Of course, these modes are often created in the software, meaning that a car's certified driving distance can change with just a few taps of the keyboard without the real world results owners might experience actually changing. By showing the test's effects on the certified range for the Tesla Model S, Nissan Leaf and Mercedes-Benz B-Class Electric Drive over the last few years, Green Car Reports makes a compelling argument that it's the evaluation that needs to change. Thankfully, it appears that the solution is a very simple one. Get the details here.