1969 Lotus Elan on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Why all of this year's F1 noses are so ugly [w/video]

If you're a serious fan of Formula One, you already know all about The Great Nosecone Conundrum of 2014. Those given to parsing each year's F1 regulations predicted the strong possibility of the so-called "anteater" noses as far back as early December 2013. Highly suggestive visual evidence first came after Caterham's crash test in early January, with further proof coming as soon as Williams showed a rendering of the FW36 challenger for this year's championship. That car earned a name that wasn't nearly so kind as "anteater."
Casual followers of the sport - or anyone who gets the feed from this site - probably don't know what's happening, except to wonder why the current year's F1 cars are led by appendages that would make Cyrano de Bergerac feel a whole lot better about himself.
The short answer to the question of ugsome F1 noses is "FIA regulations and safety." The reason there are various kinds of ugsome noses is simpler: engineers. The same boffins who have given us advances including carbon fiber monocoques, six-wheeled cars, double diffusers and Drag Reduction Systems are bred to do everything in their power to exploit every possible freedom in the regulations to make the cars they're building go faster - the caveat being that those advances have to work within the overall philosophy of the whole car.

European commission investigating F1 finances and anti-competitive accusations

The Kingdom of Formula One reminds us of renaissance Florence - ruled by a singular chieftan behind a mask of representative involvement, rife with spectacularly convoluted machinations, awash in innovations that help define our world and far-flung, vindictive misery. If we found out Bernie Ecclestone's real last name was de Medici, well, it would explain a lot. Now after a bit of back-and-forth, the European Commission (EC) has taken aim at the kingdom, investigating whether F1 is anti-competitive and if the FIA has abused its antitrust agreement. The reason for EC scrutiny is that a British member of the European Parliament who represents an area in southwest England, Anneliese Dodds, has fielded complaints from engineering companies in her constituency that recent moves in F1 have put them out of business. She wrote to the EC to question why the FIA now has a stake in F1 when it signed an agreement in 2001 to be solely a governing body and abdicate any stakeholding in the sport. She also questioned the F1 Strategy Group, a group of the six top teams in F1 that makes decisions about the direction of the sport; she says that the Strategy Group not only appears to be a case of the F1 shirking its rule-making duty, it has resulted in unfair treatment of the small teams that aren't in the group. Dodds has a bit of a point. In 2001, the FIA sold F1's commercial rights to Ecclestone for 100 years for a sum of $313.7 million. That was done to placate European regulators who insisted that "the role of FIA will be limited to that of a sports regulator, with no commercial conflicts of interest." Although the rights are ultimately owned by the FIA and bring in a $10M fee every year from Formula One, those rights bring in $1.6 billion each year to Formula One Management (FOM), the company that owns F1. When Ecclestone was trying to get the new Concorde Agreement signed in 2013 that governs the running of the sport, the FIA wouldn't sign, saying it wanted F1 to share a larger slice of its revenue – the FIA has been losing money for years, see. To the get the FIA to sign, Ecclestone sold it a one-percent stake in F1 for $460,000 and gave the FIA a $5M signing 'bonus;' whenever F1 has its IPO, that stake is estimated to be worth about $120 million - not a bad return. Yet, according to the aforementioned 2001 agreement, the FIA can't have that equity stake.

A Lotus worthy of the legend | 2017 Lotus Evora 400 First Drive

Lotus is back, both literally and figuratively. After the British brand's two-year absence, the Evora 400 marks its return to the American market. It also shows what's in store as Lotus moves forward after a rough few years. We'll cut straight to the point: The Evora 400 is the best car Lotus has ever made. The heritage of the brand founded by Colin Chapman is centered around the holistic benefits of light weight and simplicity. But historically, light was a synonym for fragile. Heap on the old British build-quality stereotypes like leaking windows and intermittent electrics, and you have the Lotus reputation for brilliant but fickle cars. Owning a Lotus is a badge of honor, the car-culture equivalent of riding a fixed-gear bicycle. And while quality has improved, even modern Lotus models like the Elise, Exige, and previous Evora have a decidedly minimalist approach to comfort. That lack of modern amenities kept sales to a minimum before crash-test standards forced Lotus's hiatus from our shores. And by modern amenities we mean basics like functional air conditioning, a cabin you can climb into without pulling a muscle, and trim pieces that don't fall off from normal use. So when we say the Evora 400 is the best Lotus ever, we mean that in more than one way. It's of a material and build quality befitting the $93,785 starting price, and it retains the almost telepathic connection to the driver while increasing performance on all fronts. The 400 in the name stands for 400 horsepower. Power still comes from a Toyota-sourced 3.5-liter V6, but a new supercharger is now intercooled and delivers about 9 pounds per square inch of boost, up from 5.5 psi. It's a 55-hp jump, with a modest torque increase of 7 pound-feet, to 302. The numerical suffix, though, might suggest this is just a variant, like the Evora S was to the original Evora. Not so. Lotus says over two thirds of the parts are new, including front and rear body panels. The new Evora has a cleaner look, less like an inflated Elise and more like the mid-engine exotic that it is. View 29 Photos But the biggest change to the Evora is the interior. The door sill, perhaps the biggest hindrance to practicality, is now 2.2 inches lower and 1.7 inches narrower. The footwell is also 3.3 inches wider. Getting in and sitting now just feels like it does in most other cars, which, for Lotus, is a revelation. Hey, there's room for a dead pedal to the left of the clutch!