You can help Porsche in its fight

[hawk20]

Thanks for the comment Hawk20, good to see you haven't lost your will to insult people that disagree with you.

The global markets are shifting towards lower emission vehicles and there is an EU mandate that average emissions from a manufacturers range should fall below 170g/km (?) within the next few years for vehicles sold within the EU.

Sure the German Luxo-barge manufacturers are going to face a problem and have petitioned their PM to support their case, but they are in the main doing something about it as well. Well all except Porsche, that is.

Ken didn't dream up the 226g/km band, it is a UK Government banding and classifes those vehicles as Band G, also referred to as gross polluters.
Ken is simply enforcing the will of the EU in a way in which he and the TFL see fit.

I was very gently pulling your leg. Your enthusiasm for the cause does you credit.

But Ken is not doing the EU's work and nor is it his job to do so. The 226 band has nothing to do with the EU. And given what they are imposing there is no real need for Ken to impose parochial standards. It will be a complete nightmare for car makers if every Tom, Dich and Harry running a Council can impose arbitrary and different limits. We really need central govts to agree on the way forward and the speed of getting there. And let's hope no more retrospective changes.

 

[Robbo]

Forgive me for not reading through the entire thread, but I thought this was an interesting article.

 

[hawk20]

Forgive me for not reading through the entire thread, but I thought this was an interesting article.

The level of his argument can be gauged from this sentence IMO: -
"Wouldn't it be great if the British Airways Web site told you to get the train from London to Paris rather than flying? "

What a pillock!

 

[Robbo]

You are obviously in a bad mood.

what about the main thrust of the article about the dangers of the likes of Porsche becoming a pariah company with the general public (a bit like big tobacco), if it doesn't at least make an effort to become more green?

 

[MBManInKen]

As opinion pieces go, it was pretty rubbish. Just another journo jumping on a bandwagon IMHO.

 

[verytalldave]

The level of his argument can be gauged from this sentence IMO: -
"Wouldn't it be great if the British Airways Web site told you to get the train from London to Paris rather than flying? "

What a pillock!

My exact same thought.

That statement just undermined the whole article.

There was NOTHING new. All rehashed material thats been spewed out by countless journalists before. No doubt not the last time either.
I dont NEED to be told what is good and bad in this world. I already know. Most of it is common sense and most of the remainder is an educated guess.

 

[Alfie]

This isn't directed at you Alfie but each one of these posts contains referrences to members opposing the Porsche challenge being in some way either misled or in some way sub normal without substatntiating the reasoning behind the comments.
The first one actually refers to Ken as opposed to a member here.

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=501094&postcount=2

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=501484&postcount=14

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=502940&postcount=24

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=503147&postcount=46

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=503706&postcount=72

I've read all those and there is no evidence whatsoever of any bullying at all.

There are some light hearted references to sections of the general populous having been mislead but nothing that slags off any member here. These are opinions to which anyone/everyone is entitled to. If you or anyone else is offended by these then I respectfully suggest that you are being a bit over sensitive. If I have offended you then I am sorry. That was not my intention at all.

I know there are many references to Mr Livingston but as he is a controversial political public figure he will certainly understand that he will get criticism and a lot of slagging off.

 

[prprandall51]

Forgive me for not reading through the entire thread, but I thought this was an interesting article.

The article was interesting (thank you for the link - I like to read all opinions) but deeply flawed. Like many people on this thread, the writer seems to be under the impression that anyone who opposes Ken Livingstone's proposals is obviously all in favour of living a a grid-locked fug of pollutants. Well, we aren't. Whether we believe that humans are resposible for global warming or not, we oppose this legistlation because it is deeply flawed actually appears to be politically motivated.

As I and many others keep saying, if this proposed legislation was designed with a reasonable and realistic framework, then there would not be such vocal opposition, however, it is.......

Nope. Sorry, Rory, you will just have to read the whole thread - hopefully youy will then be able to see why it is that this charge is so offensive.

Philip

 

[navin]

New reaserach released today shows that since it implentation the congestion charge has improved the quality of air us Londeners breathe. In fact over a 10year span we can expect to live for 16............hours longer.

What a joke! Relieve this monkey of his power.

 

[verytalldave]

New reaserach released today shows that since it implentation the congestion charge has improved the quality of air us Londeners breathe. In fact over a 10year span we can expect to live for 16............hours longer.

What a joke! Relieve this monkey of his power.

I am sure the woman that was killed a few weeks back by one of Kens bendy buses would disagree with that statement. If she could.

 

[jeremytaylor]

As an alternative, buy a 9 seater Land Rover and register it as a bus. Get yourself a PSV licence and Kens your uncle.
I think that loophole will be closed very shortly.

Or a 9-seat Viano?? That will comply with LEZ rules.

 

[hawk20]

You are obviously in a bad mood.

what about the main thrust of the article about the dangers of the likes of Porsche becoming a pariah company with the general public (a bit like big tobacco), if it doesn't at least make an effort to become more green?

All car makers have become more green and have not been appreciated for what has been achieved. The problem is the emissions controls seriously affect cars. When catalysts were first fitted you could buy the big Volvo with and without for a while. The with version 'lost' 15 bhp.

Then we took the lead out of petrol.

Then, and for years now, the crash tests have got stricter and stricter, and largely as a result the current VW Golf is 50% heavier than the original roadburner.

Yet with all the extra weight we are carrying (a bit is due to bigger cars as the average European is getting bigger and bigger), and with all the emissions controls, most cars are doing more miles per gallon -not less- and giving more performance too.

And the progress in diesels has been mind blowing. Try the new 3 litre V6 Mercedes. Would anyone from 10 years ago believe it was a diesel?

My big gripe is the arms race which is leading to bigger and bigger engines. An E class does not need 6 litres. The 2.8 size is ample. Fools confuse luxury with performance and there are plenty of them. So Audi feels it must go as fast as BMW and Mercedes. So then they must go bigger and faster. Even Golf do a 200mph version. And on it goes because they all want to do luxury cars as there is more profit there.

My solution: car makers should agree to fit limiters at some sensible maximum that is reasonably green
Limit engine capacity to something sensible before we move on to a 10 litre V20 Titanium SL
Voluntarily agree a max CO2 emissions figure from 5 years hence. Say 225.

I'll go and hide.

 

[C240Sport97]

Porsche is making an effort to go green .. the revised Cayenne has more power, and less CO2 due to Direct Fuel Injection (DFI).

The facelift 911 due Summer 08 will have DFI and emissions will reduce. Same again for the Boxster facelift due in Spring 09 or thereabouts.

what about the main thrust of the article about the dangers of the likes of Porsche becoming a pariah company with the general public (a bit like big tobacco), if it doesn't at least make an effort to become more green?

 

[jeremytaylor]

One thing has struck me about high emission cars having to pay £25/day whether or not they are used.

The enforcement works on ANPR, so what if you remove your number plates when parked, whilst still displaying RFL. Still legal, surely? But the cameras can't 'identify' the car?

 

[big x]

I suspect it might have something to do with the fact that you cant make affordable seriously fast petrol fuelled sports & supercars that emit less than 226g/CO2/km with todays technology. And thats the marketplace that Porsche are in. And Ferrari. And Maserati. And Lamborghini. And a few others as well. Its not just Porsche.
Its not too difficult to make a fast car dip under the 226g barrier, but to make a VERY fast car do that is another thing. And people buy Porsches precisely because they ARE seriously fast. Not because they just fast.
How many buy the entry level 2.7 engined version of the Caymen/Boxster?
I rest my case.

The only Porsches under 226g are indeed the 2.7 Caymen/Boxster however all of the performance BMW 3 series models are apart from the M3. For example the 335i twin turbo has 306 BHP and has a massive 295 lb/ft of torque from only 1200 rpm and O-60 5.4 secs. All this performance for only 231 Co2. With the updates due shortly it will have even better MPG which will put it under 226g.
The 335D twin turbo is already there with 282 BHP, even more torque, 6.1 0-60 and 200 Co2 g/km.In other words a performance car that is economical.I expect the Boxster 3.4 will shortly be down to 225g.
What Porsche are worried about is their range falls foul of the mandatory manufacturers range mpg requirements that are forthcoming in places like the USA. They don't have more economical models like BMW and MB do to offset the hotrods.

adam

 

[Kam]

This argument has gone quite deep.
I would like to add my thoughts before any one bites my head off.
Well done Porsche and please may Ken Livingstone not be voted back in he is and always will be against the motor vechile.
The back of him sooner rather than later........................

 

[C240Sport97]

Since Porsche now effectively controls VW, it can lower its average by grouping its emissions count with VW .. I read this somewhere, not sure how true it is.

What Porsche are worried about is their range falls foul of the mandatory manufacturers range mpg requirements that are forthcoming in places like the USA. They don't have more economical models like BMW and MB do to offset the hotrods.

adam

 

[recycled]

considering that mrsa is killing 2000 people a year and cdiff is killing 7000, twice more than RTA or global warming there would be more outcry towards this.
Ahh anyway no money to be made and hopitals have no plate numbers.

 

[recycled]

One thing has struck me about high emission cars having to pay £25/day whether or not they are used.

The enforcement works on ANPR, so what if you remove your number plates when parked, whilst still displaying RFL. Still legal, surely? But the cameras can't 'identify' the car?

Is it not illegal to have a car on a public road without displaying reg plates?

 

[hawk20]

Since Porsche now effectively controls VW, it can lower its average by grouping its emissions count with VW .. I read this somewhere, not sure how true it is.

I think they own 25% of VW shares. Sensible link up in some ways but sad if these things are forced by poorly thought out legislation.

Still the Cayenne is mainly from the VW parts bin isn't it? Toerag by any other name?