Lotus is well known for making sports cars but the company have not made any positive impact in the automotive industry. It has not developed any new technology nor has it been a top performer. It has been stuck as a niche market car maker that seems to be unsure of its future. Under the ownership of Proton it has been a vampire so to speak, it has been sucking money out of Proton to stay alive. It's development budget was cut when Proton got into financial trouble.
Now that 49% of Proton has been sold to Geely and Lotus is also under Geely ownership no one knows where it is headed. The company has a decent R&D department capable of developing good chassis. It's engineering side have been previously contracted to help develop chassis for several car makers. Lotus is falling short of it is potential but all of this is down to the lack of funds.
Proton could have turned Lotus into another Porsche when it was cash rich but the corruption within Proton killed everything. Under the previous CEO's helm (Danny Bahar), the company displayed prototypes of luxury sedans and a SUV which could have helped the company improve its cashflow and inject some excitement into the brand. Many loyal Lotus owners would consider buying a Lotus SUV. As proven by Porsche the Cayenne was the biggest cash cow for them. this could have easily been the same for Lotus.
Lotus needs to break away from just building sports cars. It needs a cash cow model which it can benefit from. From there Lotus can grow and potentially emulate Porsche. Under the Geely ownership it is possible since Geely managed to fully turn around Volvo and made it profitable again. With Geely steering the company Lotus will have access to the lucrative China market which it can really grow. The critical issue is that the sales of sports cars is low in china. The most important model will be a SUV or a luxury sedan. The chinese buyers like luxury SUVs and they would be willing to spend to buy a SUV made by Lotus.
Lotus was literally floundering when it was under Proton. It had a dream but it was never meant to be. The name Lotus is well known but it just never grew as one expected it to. It is the same for all other British car makers which ended up in the hands of foreigners. The lucky ones made a good transition and grew like Aston Martin.
Lotus needs to seen on the world stage as a current car company, not one that is forgotten.
Friday, 18 May 2018
Wednesday, 16 May 2018
centre console designs
With every new premium or luxury car that is introduced the usage of large LCDs is increasing. All this started with Tesla's Model S with its huge LCD display in the middle of the dashboard. This concept took the automotive industry by storm. Volvo followed quickly with an equally large LCD display in the centre console which controls everything from navigation functions to climate control settings.
The original idea for the LCD was to display navigation system maps and radio channels with RDS systems however with the evolution of the smart phone and mobile tablets the idea to integrate a large LCD system with multiple control started to make sense. Audi went one better by using a LCD display to replace the analog speedometer and tachometer. Having this has many advantages such as giving the flexibility to the driver to toggle various menus and also access multiple functions and also change the display to suit their preference.
The Tesla LCD houses a lot of functions within the system such as suspension setting, climate control settings, performance settings, radio / audio system, navigation and many other in-vehicle controls. There are of course pros and cons of integrating so many functions into the LCD display. For one, it is cumbersome to search the functions when you are in motion and if the system crashes it can render the car not drivable. For example in the Volvo, the climate control is set via the LCD which is troublesome you are driving. You would have to take your eyes off the road to look at the LCD to adjust the climate control settings.
Car makers like BMW, Mercedes, Lexus and Porsche have opted to separate the climate control settings from the LCD which makes it safer when adjusting while in motion. Tesla's LCD display have been known to crash and require a reboot periodically.
This trend is unlikely to stop since more and more car makers are going in this direction. The size of the LCD has growing significantly from the previous norm of 7" to now 12" to 22" depending on the car. BMW and Mercedes have kept the LCD size to between 12" to 18" depending on the model with Mercedes going one better by creating a one piece design for the A, E and S class that houses the instrument display and the multi function audio, navigation and climate control in one large panel that has partition in the middle.
Soon the car audio makers such as Alpine, Pioneer, Kenwood and etc will struggle to find a place in the car industry with the car makers doing away with traditional audio systems. They could possibly just end up supplying only the radio receiver component since all the other parts has to be integrated into the vehicle's computer system. DVDs are a thing of the past since most drivers use MP3 or other forms of media for audio file storage.
This evolution is here to stay and computers taking over the vehicle controls will become more integrated as time passes.
The original idea for the LCD was to display navigation system maps and radio channels with RDS systems however with the evolution of the smart phone and mobile tablets the idea to integrate a large LCD system with multiple control started to make sense. Audi went one better by using a LCD display to replace the analog speedometer and tachometer. Having this has many advantages such as giving the flexibility to the driver to toggle various menus and also access multiple functions and also change the display to suit their preference.
The Tesla LCD houses a lot of functions within the system such as suspension setting, climate control settings, performance settings, radio / audio system, navigation and many other in-vehicle controls. There are of course pros and cons of integrating so many functions into the LCD display. For one, it is cumbersome to search the functions when you are in motion and if the system crashes it can render the car not drivable. For example in the Volvo, the climate control is set via the LCD which is troublesome you are driving. You would have to take your eyes off the road to look at the LCD to adjust the climate control settings.
Car makers like BMW, Mercedes, Lexus and Porsche have opted to separate the climate control settings from the LCD which makes it safer when adjusting while in motion. Tesla's LCD display have been known to crash and require a reboot periodically.
This trend is unlikely to stop since more and more car makers are going in this direction. The size of the LCD has growing significantly from the previous norm of 7" to now 12" to 22" depending on the car. BMW and Mercedes have kept the LCD size to between 12" to 18" depending on the model with Mercedes going one better by creating a one piece design for the A, E and S class that houses the instrument display and the multi function audio, navigation and climate control in one large panel that has partition in the middle.
Soon the car audio makers such as Alpine, Pioneer, Kenwood and etc will struggle to find a place in the car industry with the car makers doing away with traditional audio systems. They could possibly just end up supplying only the radio receiver component since all the other parts has to be integrated into the vehicle's computer system. DVDs are a thing of the past since most drivers use MP3 or other forms of media for audio file storage.
This evolution is here to stay and computers taking over the vehicle controls will become more integrated as time passes.
Monday, 7 May 2018
Self Driving cars, are we ready for it?
More car companies are introducing self-driving technology into their cars. Tesla was the first to introduce it and it worked reasonably well until a spate of fatal accidents put the technology into bad light. The accidents were difficult to comprehend as the drivers were not fully in control. In the most recent case in America, the car veered into a barrier and killed the driver. During the investigation it was discovered that the low angle of the sun light gave incorrect data to the camera causing the car to interpret the signal as a potential obstacle forcing the car to veer. Had the driver placed his hands on the steering wheel during that moment he could have prevented the accident. The system is definitely not perfect and there will be many early teething problems. On the flip side Tesla has claimed and also proven on numerous occasions where the self driving system saved the driver by intervening when it predicted a potential accident. The public always remember on the accidents but do not give sufficient credit to how many times the self driving system saved drivers from accidents.
Mercedes and Lexus also introduced their self-driving technology and so did Volvo. The confidence is not quite there yet since it is likely to have many more accidents before the engineers can fix programming bugs out of the system. The only way for it to work is to have adequate field tests however it is still impossible to program out the biggest problem which is humans! So long as there are humans driving on the same roads as a self driving car the compute will not be able to predict 100% what a human will do. The human mind is an unpredictable factor which the computer cannot ever understand.
The safest way to have self driving cars is to have all the car on the road be self driving. The cars can communicate with one another on a network allowing each other to know each other's proximity, speed, direction and intended movements. With this in place the self driving cars will be far safer than humans driving the cars. I believe the accident rate will be far lower and the transport efficiency will be much greater than what it is now. The traffic problems will be reduced significantly. this kind of system will only be possible if all car companies work are willing to cooperate and work on the same network system. So far it looks like a dream because car companies have a difficulty agreeing on working same charging systems for electric cars. Working on an common network will be even more difficult since they all have their own ideas and agendas.
Self-driving cars are definitely the future, the human element must be taken out and also there must be sufficient trust in the system. I doubt this will happen in the near future since many people still enjoy driving and taking away the choice of driving will be like taking away a simple human right.
Mercedes and Lexus also introduced their self-driving technology and so did Volvo. The confidence is not quite there yet since it is likely to have many more accidents before the engineers can fix programming bugs out of the system. The only way for it to work is to have adequate field tests however it is still impossible to program out the biggest problem which is humans! So long as there are humans driving on the same roads as a self driving car the compute will not be able to predict 100% what a human will do. The human mind is an unpredictable factor which the computer cannot ever understand.
The safest way to have self driving cars is to have all the car on the road be self driving. The cars can communicate with one another on a network allowing each other to know each other's proximity, speed, direction and intended movements. With this in place the self driving cars will be far safer than humans driving the cars. I believe the accident rate will be far lower and the transport efficiency will be much greater than what it is now. The traffic problems will be reduced significantly. this kind of system will only be possible if all car companies work are willing to cooperate and work on the same network system. So far it looks like a dream because car companies have a difficulty agreeing on working same charging systems for electric cars. Working on an common network will be even more difficult since they all have their own ideas and agendas.
Self-driving cars are definitely the future, the human element must be taken out and also there must be sufficient trust in the system. I doubt this will happen in the near future since many people still enjoy driving and taking away the choice of driving will be like taking away a simple human right.
Tuesday, 24 April 2018
Tata EVision electric car
Tata recently displayed their concept luxury electric car. The name Tata and word luxury doesn't seem to gel because Tata traditionally have only made budget compact cars or trucks, however Tata owns Jaguar and Land Rover which they can easily borrow many technical knowledge from.
The EVision is a bold step forward and could make Tata a serious player in the electric car market. The Indian market itself is a lucrative for Tata but it could easily expand worldwide if this car is well accepted. The car looks impressive with some design cues from Jaguar and Land Rover for the car exterior as well as interior.
It cannot be said that India doesn't have the capacity to build good cars but India is not exactly at the forefront of automotive engineering. Saying this, technology can be obtained from other sources and it is highly possible for Tata to move forward with this. The EVision is undoubtedly impressive in its outlook and specifications. The car boasts a 1000km driving range on a single charge and a 10 years battery warranty which is an industry first. However, the wild claims of 1000km on a single charge is not accurate. From the marketing materials shown on several automotive websites the actual expected driving range is only 350-420km on a single charge. This is far more realistic based on current electric car technology.
It will be a good electric car for the masses considering the size of the car. It is not as small as a Nissan Leaf and is as big as a BMW 3 series. The performance is 7 seconds to 100km/h which isn't bad for this car but it is no Tesla Model S. It does look like India will be taking on China in the electric car market. With more companies entering the electric car market the consumers will soon be spoilt for choice.
Hopefully with so many new electric cars hitting the market the prices should drop making it more affordable for more people.
The EVision is a bold step forward and could make Tata a serious player in the electric car market. The Indian market itself is a lucrative for Tata but it could easily expand worldwide if this car is well accepted. The car looks impressive with some design cues from Jaguar and Land Rover for the car exterior as well as interior.
It cannot be said that India doesn't have the capacity to build good cars but India is not exactly at the forefront of automotive engineering. Saying this, technology can be obtained from other sources and it is highly possible for Tata to move forward with this. The EVision is undoubtedly impressive in its outlook and specifications. The car boasts a 1000km driving range on a single charge and a 10 years battery warranty which is an industry first. However, the wild claims of 1000km on a single charge is not accurate. From the marketing materials shown on several automotive websites the actual expected driving range is only 350-420km on a single charge. This is far more realistic based on current electric car technology.
It will be a good electric car for the masses considering the size of the car. It is not as small as a Nissan Leaf and is as big as a BMW 3 series. The performance is 7 seconds to 100km/h which isn't bad for this car but it is no Tesla Model S. It does look like India will be taking on China in the electric car market. With more companies entering the electric car market the consumers will soon be spoilt for choice.
Hopefully with so many new electric cars hitting the market the prices should drop making it more affordable for more people.
Monday, 19 February 2018
Struggles of the secondary car brands in Asia
In Asia the automotive market is relatively sterile with the usual few car companies dominating the top sales figures. Companies like Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Mercedes, BMW and Mazda do well but secondary brands that are quite prominent in other countries such as Kia, Hyundai, Renault, Ford, Citroen, Ssangyong, Peugeot, Volvo, Alfa Romeo and Fiat all struggle in Asia.
VW was omitted from the list because at one time it managed decent sales figures in Malaysia and Singapore but due to their poor reliability record their sales have taken a big beating and the consumer confidence have really eroded.
Brands like Kia, Hyundai, Renault, Citroen and Peugeot struggle to gain consumer confidence. The reasons vary for each car company. Kia struggled due to poor marketing and insufficient after sales support, Hyundai struggle due to outdated models that need urgent replacement. Citroen and Peugeot suffered from poor reliability image and this in turn also cause their resale value to drop tremendously. The distributor often do not stock sufficient spare parts which cause frustration with customers facing problems with their cars.
Ford's problem is the poor models selection. The main selling model is the Ranger pick up truck. The other models did not appeal to buyers and seem outdated in their design compared to the Japanese rivals. The Ford models appealed more to the Americans and didn't suit Asian buyers' tastes.
all of these brands have been in Asia for decades but cannot seem to grow their presence. Mazda at one time was in this predicament but with the models and aggressive pricing strategy Mazda managed to grow significantly over the years and have now created good customer base.
In order for secondary brands to do well in Asia they need to have a very solid foundation for sales and after sales support. The distributor needs to provide sufficient spare parts and create a customer buy back program to instil confidence that the car's value will not depreciate much more than Japanese rivals. With strong after sales support it will reduce the level of value depreciation and gradually new customers will be attracted to the brand.
In recent years Volvo have managed to turn around their business in Asia with their aggressive hybrid campaign which has been paying off. The new XC90 and the S90 models are gaining popularity and this has spurred more new buyers to consider Volvo. The dealership network has also expanded which helps with customer confidence.
Turning around the brand in Asia is not impossible but the distributors need to employ the right strategy to make it work for them. It also depends on how much the distributors are willing to invest to promote and market the brands.
VW was omitted from the list because at one time it managed decent sales figures in Malaysia and Singapore but due to their poor reliability record their sales have taken a big beating and the consumer confidence have really eroded.
Brands like Kia, Hyundai, Renault, Citroen and Peugeot struggle to gain consumer confidence. The reasons vary for each car company. Kia struggled due to poor marketing and insufficient after sales support, Hyundai struggle due to outdated models that need urgent replacement. Citroen and Peugeot suffered from poor reliability image and this in turn also cause their resale value to drop tremendously. The distributor often do not stock sufficient spare parts which cause frustration with customers facing problems with their cars.
Ford's problem is the poor models selection. The main selling model is the Ranger pick up truck. The other models did not appeal to buyers and seem outdated in their design compared to the Japanese rivals. The Ford models appealed more to the Americans and didn't suit Asian buyers' tastes.
all of these brands have been in Asia for decades but cannot seem to grow their presence. Mazda at one time was in this predicament but with the models and aggressive pricing strategy Mazda managed to grow significantly over the years and have now created good customer base.
In order for secondary brands to do well in Asia they need to have a very solid foundation for sales and after sales support. The distributor needs to provide sufficient spare parts and create a customer buy back program to instil confidence that the car's value will not depreciate much more than Japanese rivals. With strong after sales support it will reduce the level of value depreciation and gradually new customers will be attracted to the brand.
In recent years Volvo have managed to turn around their business in Asia with their aggressive hybrid campaign which has been paying off. The new XC90 and the S90 models are gaining popularity and this has spurred more new buyers to consider Volvo. The dealership network has also expanded which helps with customer confidence.
Turning around the brand in Asia is not impossible but the distributors need to employ the right strategy to make it work for them. It also depends on how much the distributors are willing to invest to promote and market the brands.
Tuesday, 13 February 2018
Malay dealers facing problems with Proton's new management
Ever since Geely took over Proton in 2017 there has been major shake-ups in the company's operations. Many useless staff have been terminated and vendors have been forced to cut prices or face losing their business to China parts suppliers. Now the turn has come to the dealers. The new management's aim to turn the company around is nothing short of drastic but these are necessary changes for the better of the company's future. The company has been plagued with mismanagement, corruption and poor quality control for decades. The new team from China is pushing through with these changes to improve the image of Proton.
The recent fiasco is about getting dealers to commit to open up 3S centres (Sales, service and Spare parts) or close their dealership. In many ways this is a better direction for the company. Previously there were hundreds of small dealers that only focused on sales and had no service centres. These dealers opened up a small shop and placed 2 cars on display and just sold cars. Now Proton wants to ensure that the customers are able to have access to good after-sales service. Converting a normal dealership to a 3S centre is no easy feat since the investment cost is very high but the 3S centre will provide good long term business for the dealer.
The problem now comes to the small Malay owned dealerships that previously enjoyed privileges from Proton which allowed them to buy cars on credit terms and then pay when it is sold, this is like doing business without using any capital. Proton's management now wants payment upfront for cars sold to dealers and eliminate the business credit concept altogether! Naturally this will be still work out for dealerships with sufficient capital to buy cars but small dealerships will end up closing. Most of the Malay owned dealerships are very small and do not have much working capital so all these dealers have ganged up to lodge an official complain to the Government on the grounds of having a racist policy. This naturally a lame attempt to try to gain back the business advantage but it is clear to see that this new policy is not racist in any way. It is only there to improve the business of the company. It is a coincidence that the new policy affects mostly the Malay owned dealerships.
Since Proton is no longer linked to the Government it is unlikely they will step in and intervene regarding this policy. The protesting group will have to suck it up and accept the fact that it is time they learned how to do business the right way. Having enjoyed the years of benefits from Proton one would think that these business owners would have amassed enough wealth to convert themselves into a 3S centre or expand the business. The key point in this is complacency. It has always been a problem with Malay owned businesses that were given financial support from the Government. This time the support has gone and it is time to wake up!
The recent fiasco is about getting dealers to commit to open up 3S centres (Sales, service and Spare parts) or close their dealership. In many ways this is a better direction for the company. Previously there were hundreds of small dealers that only focused on sales and had no service centres. These dealers opened up a small shop and placed 2 cars on display and just sold cars. Now Proton wants to ensure that the customers are able to have access to good after-sales service. Converting a normal dealership to a 3S centre is no easy feat since the investment cost is very high but the 3S centre will provide good long term business for the dealer.
The problem now comes to the small Malay owned dealerships that previously enjoyed privileges from Proton which allowed them to buy cars on credit terms and then pay when it is sold, this is like doing business without using any capital. Proton's management now wants payment upfront for cars sold to dealers and eliminate the business credit concept altogether! Naturally this will be still work out for dealerships with sufficient capital to buy cars but small dealerships will end up closing. Most of the Malay owned dealerships are very small and do not have much working capital so all these dealers have ganged up to lodge an official complain to the Government on the grounds of having a racist policy. This naturally a lame attempt to try to gain back the business advantage but it is clear to see that this new policy is not racist in any way. It is only there to improve the business of the company. It is a coincidence that the new policy affects mostly the Malay owned dealerships.
Since Proton is no longer linked to the Government it is unlikely they will step in and intervene regarding this policy. The protesting group will have to suck it up and accept the fact that it is time they learned how to do business the right way. Having enjoyed the years of benefits from Proton one would think that these business owners would have amassed enough wealth to convert themselves into a 3S centre or expand the business. The key point in this is complacency. It has always been a problem with Malay owned businesses that were given financial support from the Government. This time the support has gone and it is time to wake up!
Wednesday, 7 February 2018
poor battery life!
Many people who read my blog could naturally think that I am a European car fan but I would like to reinforce my points about the pros and cons of both European and Japanese cars. Japanese cars such as Toyota are known for their outstanding reliability which I believe is well deserved since it is rarely that you see a Toyota break down on the side of the road. The durability of the cars are second to none and it is also the reason why terrorists love it in the Middle East since the models such as the Hilux or the LandCruiser doesn't break down!!
Despite the amazing durability and the punishment Japanese cars can take the one thing that they fail miserably at is battery life! The average Japanese car battery life is between 12-18 months! Rarely do you find a Japanese car with a battery life that extends beyond 2 years. I know they usually fit a smaller battery to save weight and this small battery is good enough to power up the electronics in the car but it does nothing for durability. It is also very annoying to the car owner to have to change batteries every 12-18 months. In comparison the German car such as BMW, Mercedes or Porsche which have a much larger battery would easily last 5-7 years! If you work it backwards the cheaper and smaller battery in a Japanese cars that you change more often will end up costing you more than changing 1 large battery in a European car! this is not taking into account the down time you have to endure when the car's battery goes flat!
Till this day, Japanese car manufacturers have not designed a car that can have a long lasting battery or at least they need to rework the electrical system to be less battery hungry! Surely it cannot be that difficult!!
The other point I would like to bring to the readers' attention is the battery life of the second battery in any Mazda car with the Skyactiv engine. The Skyactiv models come with the engine start/stop function and the restart motor is powered by the second battery. This secondary is notoriously expensive and offer a ridiculous use life of 12-15 months! to make matters worse, if the owner of the car chooses not to replace this battery the car's start/stop (called iStop) function will not work!! the concept is so stupid because it is contradictory to Mazda's objective of saving fuel and saving cost! the cost of the replacing battery is more than the cost of fuel savings over the life of the battery. The car would be better off without the iStop function since it costs the owner more to run it than the fuel savings they can get! It defeats the purpose totally and renders the system useless. Mazda dealers have receive numerous complaints about it but nothing can be done about it. In my opinion, it is a very stupid concept. On one hand you want to promote fuel saving but on the other hand you are incurring more cost for the car owner to replace the stupid battery that costs more than the amount of money saved from fuel savings. It is obvious that not enough thought have been put into this before implementation.
Despite the amazing durability and the punishment Japanese cars can take the one thing that they fail miserably at is battery life! The average Japanese car battery life is between 12-18 months! Rarely do you find a Japanese car with a battery life that extends beyond 2 years. I know they usually fit a smaller battery to save weight and this small battery is good enough to power up the electronics in the car but it does nothing for durability. It is also very annoying to the car owner to have to change batteries every 12-18 months. In comparison the German car such as BMW, Mercedes or Porsche which have a much larger battery would easily last 5-7 years! If you work it backwards the cheaper and smaller battery in a Japanese cars that you change more often will end up costing you more than changing 1 large battery in a European car! this is not taking into account the down time you have to endure when the car's battery goes flat!
Till this day, Japanese car manufacturers have not designed a car that can have a long lasting battery or at least they need to rework the electrical system to be less battery hungry! Surely it cannot be that difficult!!
The other point I would like to bring to the readers' attention is the battery life of the second battery in any Mazda car with the Skyactiv engine. The Skyactiv models come with the engine start/stop function and the restart motor is powered by the second battery. This secondary is notoriously expensive and offer a ridiculous use life of 12-15 months! to make matters worse, if the owner of the car chooses not to replace this battery the car's start/stop (called iStop) function will not work!! the concept is so stupid because it is contradictory to Mazda's objective of saving fuel and saving cost! the cost of the replacing battery is more than the cost of fuel savings over the life of the battery. The car would be better off without the iStop function since it costs the owner more to run it than the fuel savings they can get! It defeats the purpose totally and renders the system useless. Mazda dealers have receive numerous complaints about it but nothing can be done about it. In my opinion, it is a very stupid concept. On one hand you want to promote fuel saving but on the other hand you are incurring more cost for the car owner to replace the stupid battery that costs more than the amount of money saved from fuel savings. It is obvious that not enough thought have been put into this before implementation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)