Is clockwork better than electric?

Saw the first episode of a new sitcom last night.

Although it's really a spin-off from an older sitcom.

Motherland has spawned Amandaland.

According to the Guardian, it is aimed at "strung out middle-aged mums" so shouldn't be of any interest to me.

And it perpetuates two tropes about electric cars - one real, one bunkum.

The real one is that you don't have off-road parking, they are a bugger to charge up locally and cheaply.

The bunkum one is that they keep running out of charge.

Here is Amanda in her Tesla.

As it is, the bunkum one doesn't bother me in the slightest.

For two reasons...

• It was essential to the storyline - and it is a VERY FUNNY sitcom.
• It makes Teslas look bad.

I don't like Teslas partly because of their lack of switchgear but mostly because of their odious CEO who I seem to be obsessed with - old Elon.

And it looks like I am not alone.  Here are a couple of very interesting stories about sales plummeting in Europe and the States:

• The Independent
• Motor 1.com

And one about how the Chinese brands are taking sales from Tesla over there.

• CNBC

The Chinese angle is interesting because Musk's current pal Donald is imposing tariffs on Chinese goods coming in to America (maybe he's found someone in America now who can make his MAGA hats) so that will probably include Tesla Model Ys.  And China is putting on reciprocal tariffs which will affect sales of the US built Teslas.

The American angle is also interesting though because the Americans who are not fans of Trump will not want to buy Teslas now. And Trump is very pro-oil and anti-electric so I suspect the bromance won't last too long.

Apparently, only Toyota owners are more likely than Tesla owners to say they will buy the same brand when they come to change their vehicle.  Wonder how long Tesla will hang on to that Number 2 spot?

Now go and watch episode 1 of Amandaland and you may realise that this post should have been called "Is clockwork better than chocolate?"

Stop Shouting!

I knew that Audi was formed from four German car companies and that one of them was Auto Union so assumed that was why the first two letters of Audi are AU.

My assumption was incorrect and my knowledge was a bit incorrect.

The company name is based on the Latin translation of the surname of the founder, August Horch. Horch, meaning 'listen', becomes audi in Latin. The four rings of the Audi logo each represent one of four car companies that banded together to create Audi's predecessor company, Auto Union.

Thank you Wikipedia.

Audi have now teamed up with SAIC of China to produce a Chinese-only sub brand aimed at "younger, tech-oriented Chinese EV buyers." This sounds a little bit like what Toyota did in The States with Scion - that didn't really work out for them in the end.

Autocar have the Audi story here while Auto Express have an opinion piece on it here.

The Autocar piece has pictures of what looks like an attractive car:

Auto Express opinion pieces tend to be right-wing rants nowadays so maybe it explains why they have only had one response to their question in it, "What do you think Audi should have called its new Chinese sub brand?"

If you have read either of those articles you will now know that it is not to be Audisaic.

But it is to be AUDI.

Not to be confused with Audi - who have sold cars in China for many years now under the name of...

...Audi.

At least the new shouty version will tie in better with the image of your typical Audi driver.

The End of the World as we Know It?

No it isn't.

It's just Justin Rowlatt being mischievous.

He's written quite a piece for the BBC News site today about how cars will be done and dusted within a decade.

He tells us that the economics and planet-friendliness of electric cars will kill off the combustion engine.

And that driverless cars will make it unsafe for humans to drive cars amongst them.  So that will stop.

And that car ownership will cease due to readily available shared transit modules.

And we can expect this within ten years - about the same time it took for horses to become obsolete in New York City.

However, I don't think he is serious.

Nor do I think he wants this.

His last two sentences are:

"But seriously, I've deliberately put these arguments forcefully to prompt debate and we want to hear what you think.

You can comment below, or tweet me @BBCJustinR."

And this is the same Justin Rowlatt who was co-presenter of the ...On Four Wheels series that I happened to enjoy (and comment on) a while back.  I think he did too.

Anyway, as I type, he's achieved 2306 comments albeit mostly from the Gammons who usually comment on the BBC News Website.  Apparently, they don't like being called "Gammons" - they don't mind calling us "Libtards" and "Remoaners" but now we've got a good insult for them they get all precious.

A few good points are made - there is quite a theme about how it could work in cities but most of us don't live in cities.  Quite true - it may be OK for New York - but not New Brighton.

Also, all this electricity has to come from somewhere.  The amount needed will mean it's neither clean nor cheap.

Can you imagine the rest of the World buying in to this?  Even if you've got friends in high places (like Justin seems to have)

...I don't see China having a network of electric boxes moving people around that huge country in 2018.

 

But whatever happens, there will always be plenty of car people who wouldn't let this nightmare scenario occur.

 

Like me and Jeremy Clarkson.