The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

Battery electric vehicles (BEVs) dominate the landscape of zero emission motoring.

 

Government, manufacturers and suppliers are spending billions of pounds to develop and introduce the technology, with more BEVs being launched and more charge points being installed on a weekly basis.

 

However, BEVs aren’t the only zero-emission option – and, for some, they aren’t even the best option either.

 

Hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) have been sitting in the background for many years. Hyundai brought the first commercially available model – the ix35 – to market in 2013. But the manufacturer has been developing FCEV systems since 1998 when it opened a dedicated R&D centre.

 

While the technology is lagging far behind BEVs in terms of vehicle availability and infrastructure, analysts such as KPMG believe they have a significant role to play in the future of road transport.

 

Like BEVs, the technology produces zero tailpipe emissions but also offers much faster refuelling times: a hydrogen station can deliver around 300 miles of range in five minutes, while it would take a 150kW rapid charger one hour to do the same.

 

The general opinion among transport industry experts is that FCEV technology works better in larger vehicles, such as lorries and buses, while BEVs will suit the majority of passenger car users.

 

Current market trends support this. There are just two FCEVs currently available to buy in the UK – the Toyota Mirai and Hyundai Nexo – while the Go Ultra Low campaign says there are 30 BEVs, with this number set to expand rapidly.

 

Nevertheless, the FCEV’s potential has attracted the attention of the Government as it looks to reduce transport emissions: the Office for Low Emission Vehicles has a £23 million fund to accelerate the take-up of hydrogen vehicles and the roll-out of infrastructure.

 

One beneficiary is the Liverpool City Region combined authority, which was awarded £6.4m earlier this year for a bus project which will see a new hydrogen refuelling station and potentially up to 25 hydrogen buses on the area’s roads.

 

Meanwhile, London has placed an order for 20 FCEV buses due to start work next year.

 

‘The larger the vehicle, the more hydrogen makes sense’

 

“The larger the vehicle, the more hydrogen makes sense,” says Callum Smith, business development officer at ITM Power, which operates seven hydrogen refuelling stations in the UK, with a further six under construction.

 

“You can fill up a hydrogen bus in roughly 10 minutes. In a battery electric bus you can use almost half of the battery on the heater alone, while there’s no distance compromise with the fuel cell. These will get 250 miles while you are looking at a 100-mile range with the battery electric bus.”

 

While examples such as this show why it is clear hydrogen is suited to larger vehicles, it may be less obvious why the fuel is relevant for passenger cars.

 

“I think hydrogen will be really important in heavier vehicles and non-automotive applications, such as shipping,” says Tom Callow, director of communication and strategy at BP Chargemaster.

 

“What I can’t quite get my head around is how a hydrogen passenger car will end up being a more compelling proposition that a pure EV, other than as a real niche – a 3% type niche – product. The EV charging infrastructure, battery capacity and everything else is accelerating at such a pace I can’t see it stacking up economically.”

 

However, the argument is not that FCEV should replace BEV in all applications, but should complement it, dependent on user requirements.

 

“For smaller vehicles and lower distances travelled, BEVs are perfect,” says Paul Marchment, senior business manager at leasing company Arval, which has carried out a series of hydrogen roadshows to raise awareness of the technology.

 

“You plug them in, drive to the office, and as most people only do 20 miles a day, electric cars will suit them. For the occasional longer trip, they might consider a plug-in hybrid.

 

“When you get to the drive cycles that demand a lot of distance and a lot of time, that’s where hydrogen works because it’s so easy to fill up.

 

“I can fill my Toyota Mirai from empty in about four minutes, that 4.5kg of hydrogen gets me about 300 miles and the only emission is water, so what’s not to like?”

 

Obvious answers are the current lack of availability and cost of FCEVs and the limited refuelling infrastructure.

 

However, both scenarios will change in the future, according to Jon Hunt, manager alternative fuel at Toyota.

 

“By 2025, you will start to see all the main carmakers having a fuel cell in the market,” he says. “Between 2025 and 2030 is when you will start to see an acceleration. Again, it won’t be commonplace everywhere but in certain areas: California has mandates, but also the desire, to change and so do markets like the UK.

 

“Post 2030 is when you will start to see that real push, and that will be driven not only by the adoption of new cars, but simply because you won’t be able to achieve the average emission requirements with any other solution.”

 

Toyota and Hyundai lead the way

 

Toyota and Hyundai are leading the development of FCEVs, while Honda also has experience of the technology with its FCX Clarity.

 

BMW is expected to launch an FCEV in 2022, while Hyundai last year entered a cross-licensing agreement with Audi for fuel cell technology, with the German manufacturer announcing it would intensify its development of hydrogen fuel cell technology by re-establishing its h-tron programme.

 

It says a limited-volume Audi FCEV could be offered as part of a lease programme by 2021, with volume production of models during the second half of the next decade.

 

Audi cited concerns over the sourcing of natural resources for battery production and doubts over electric cars being able to deliver on ever-more-demanding customer expectations to explain why it was investing in hydrogen technology.

 

Renault will launch FCEV versions of its Kangoo ZE and Master ZE battery electric vans next year, providing up to three times the range of the BEV models while taking a fraction of the time to refuel.

 

The technology will see the Master ZE’s range increase from 75 miles to 218 miles in the Master ZE Hydrogen, with the Kangoo ZE Hydrogen offering 230 miles, a rise of 87 miles.

 

“These vehicles provide professionals with all the range they require for their long-distance journeys as well as record charging times,” says Denis Le Vot, Alliance SVP of the Renault-Nissan LCV Business Unit.

 

Vehicle costs will also fall. The two FCEVs available in the UK retail at almost £70,000, but it will not be long until the price of hydrogen cars falls more in line with conventional vehicles.

 

“It’s difficult to forecast because it is dependent on volumes, but we pretty clearly indicated that around the mid-2020s, you will have price parity with conventional cars,” says Hunt.

 

This is because the cost of the components is no more than the material cost for a conventional car. FCEVs don’t require the same emissions control systems, the amount of platinum in the fuel stack is not much different than in a diesel catalyst, and there are no oils.

 

“Overall, at scale you could achieve a lower price point – but it’s that scale you need,” Hunt says.

 

“We do get a bit too hung up, generally, on the purchase price. In the fleet market, the cost of ownership is more important and the vehicle’s residual value (RV) is the biggest part of that.

 

“The interesting thing with fuel cells is that your operational costs can be low because in the fuel cell system there is just one maintenance part which is a de-ionising filter like you have at home on your hot water system, which needs replacing every 30,000 miles.

 

“So, when you look at the maintenance and you consider your RV, the fuel cell system will hold an intrinsic value because the components in the fuel stack itself are designed not to wear out and will still do the same job as it did when made.

 

“You can put it in another powertrain, you can use it for stationary power, you can recycle 100% of it, so you’ve got a value in the component which is maintained and that means your RV has a bottom because it always has a market.

 

“You will dispose of your internal combustion engine car when it becomes too expensive to maintain the engine, transmission or other components; you will do the same with a BEV when the battery degrades to a point when it is not usable.

 

“This simply won’t happen with an FCEV.”

 

While future launches will increase the number of FCEVs in the UK, the number is currently tiny – combined, 150 Mirai, Nexo and Hyundai ix35 hydrogen-powered cars, and a handful of buses.

 

Chicken and egg situation

 

This creates a chicken and egg situation when it comes to providing and expanding the refuelling infrastructure, says Smith. At the moment there are just 17 publically-accessible refuelling stations.

 

Phil Killingley, deputy head of the Office for Low Emission Vehicles, adds: “You can take different approaches to the roll-out of hydrogen refuelling stations. You can scatter the country and hope the vehicles come along, or, given that the vehicle supply is relatively limited, you can seek to achieve high utilisation of stations with captive fleets and it is the latter approach we have gone for in the UK.”

 

Hydrogen has the advantage that stations can use renewable energy on site to create hydrogen through electrolysis, meaning that as well as the process being eco-friendly, they do not have to be connected to a wider refuelling network or grid.

 

However, the infrastructure will never be able to match that of BEVs, with home and work-based charging accounting for a large proportion of its refill requirements.

 

Alternatively, hydrogen can be created through industrial processes and transported to the stations.

 

Five of ITM’s stations are in the London area and are used by fleets including private hire firm Green Tomato Cars (see case study, page 30), which is operating around 50 Mirai models, and the Metropolitan Police which has 21.

 

“Our stations are based on who has got a fleet that wants them,” says Smith. “For example, there is a gap in the network between Sheffield and Aberdeen and we could easily put a station in there, but if there is not a fleet to use it, then it wouldn’t be a project we would go ahead with.”

 

Smith says a great example of how it can roll-out hydrogen refuelling stations is its Birmingham bus project, which will open in Q1 next year to provide fuel for 20 hydrogen buses.

 

“The reason our project in Birmingham is so key is that it concentrates on that fleet of buses, and we can then say let’s put a public refuelling station on it as well,” he adds.

 

“That’s how I think the refuelling infrastructure will initially be expanded.”

 

How safe are fuel cell vehicles?

 

“A lot of people say ‘hydrogen, it’s going to explode’ and hydrogen does have a high energy density, but if you manage it safely then it does a good job and is super safe,” says Sylvie Childs, senior product manager at Hyundai.

 

Its Nexo was the first FCEV crash-tested by Euro NCAP and achieved the maximum five-star safety rating.

 

“Its rating should dispel concerns around how hydrogen fuel cell powered vehicles perform in a crash,” says Matthew Avery, director of research at Thatcham Research.

 

“With the Nexo, Hyundai has successfully demonstrated that alternative fuelled vehicles need not

pose a risk to car safety.”

 

Toyota has taken a similarly thorough approach to safety for Mirai: each of the materials chosen for its hydrogen tank has been selected to contain the fuel safely. Its carbon fibre-wrapped polymer-lined tanks absorb five times the crash energy of steel.

 

In a collision, the hydrogen system shuts off to prevent the gas from travelling to potentially damaged systems outside of the tank. By Graham Hill Thanks To Fleet News

Thousands of cars left unused over the holiday period are in danger of not starting when the majority of fleet drivers return to work, says the RAC.

 

This year the RAC is expecting to be called out to around 12,000 breakdowns on Monday 6 January with nearly a third of those call-outs likely to be flat batteries, it said.

 

on Monday 7 January 2019, RAC patrols dealt with 3,600 battery-related breakdowns, which represented 31% of all its call-outs that day. Wednesday 2nd January 2019 was also busy a day for flat batteries with 2,422, or 26% of all RAC breakdowns.

 

New research carried out with 3,480 members of the RAC Opinion Panel shows 6% of drivers have suffered a post-Christmas flat battery. Of those, 58% say it was due to the vehicle not being used for several days and 13% claim to have fallen victim twice.

 

As many as 40% who have suffered this problem say the last time it happened they were on the way to work, and 17% say it “caused a big problem for them”.

 

The RAC has published a list of tips to minimise the chance of battery-related issues:

 

• Park your vehicle in a garage whenever possible
• Ensure everything is switched off when you finish your journey including lights, heater, fan, heated rear windscreen, and the radio. Sat-navs and other devices can also drain the battery if left connected
• Check the battery connections, ensuring that they are tight and free from any corrosion
• It’s worth getting your battery tested, particularly if it is over four years old
• Take your vehicle for a decent drive to get your battery well charged, and get the engine to its proper operating temperature, before you really need it – ideally several days before. Don’t just check that it starts as this is likely to drain the battery more

 

By Graham Hill Thanks To Fleet News

Only one in 10 new car sales could be diesel in as little as five years, says a leading academic.

 

Currently, one-in-four of new cars sold is powered by the fuel, a dramatic decline from the parity with petrol it enjoyed just a few years ago.

 

Its popularity is also on the wane in the company car market, where it has traditionally dominated thanks to its tax-friendly CO2 performance.

 

New figures show that the proportion of diesel cars on the FN50 fleet – the UK’s top 50 leasing companies by risk fleet size – fell from almost two-thirds (63.4%) to close to half (50.5%) over the past 12 months.

 

In terms of vehicles they had ordered in the past year, the flight from diesel was still more pronounced. Almost half of the cars ordered in 2019 were petrol (47.6%), while only two-fifths (38.8%) were diesel.

 

David Bailey, Professor of Business Economics at the Birmingham Business School, said: “There seems to be no end to the decline in diesels.”

 

Overall, diesel new car sales are down by more than a fifth in the past year. Some 515,000 units have been sold year-to-date, compared with 650,000 during the previous 12 months, data from the UK automotive trade body, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), shows.

 

Forecasters say that, with the sharp falls seen in the sale of new diesel cars since 2017, it could lead to an undersupply of used vehicles in 2020 and 2021, which would help sustain residual values. However, it’s unclear whether the decline in new diesel car sales will be mirrored in the used car market. The most recent figures from the SMMT show that demand for used diesels grew by 1.4% in the third quarter, with some 858,442 changing hands.

 

“A big shift away from diesel is still taking place,” said Bailey. “In late 2015, diesel accounted for more than 50% of the market, by March last year it was down to 32% and it has fallen further since then.”

 

The UK is not alone in turning its back on the fuel; its decline is being seen across Europe. In the key market of Germany, diesel’s share has fallen below 30% from having accounted for half the market and to a similar level in France, where three-quarters of new car sales were once diesel.

 

Bailey said: “We are seeing this continuing decline and, while I originally thought the market share for diesel by 2025 would be down to 15%, I now think that’s quite optimistic – it may be as low as 10%.”

 

Despite its popularity in Europe, diesel has not enjoyed similar market penetration in other countries. “It’s negligible in North America, it’s only 4% at best in China and virtually insignificant elsewhere,” he said.

 

“If you go back to the turn of the century, diesel as a share of the market in Europe was only 10-15%. We then gave (the fuel) loads of tax breaks, because we thought it was good for the environment.”

 

Dieselgate followed however, and concerns over the fuel’s impact on air quality has put its market share on a downward trajectory.

 

Bailey told delegates at a recent Vehicle Remarketing Association (VRA) seminar the trouble is “people are completely freaked out over diesels”.

 

He said: “They are concerned about falling resale values, they are worried about tighter regulations in cities, higher taxes and its impact on the environment.”

 

He says Government policy has not helped either, labelling it a “complete shambles”.

 

“One part of Government has been saying ‘clean diesels are good’, while another part whacks a load of tax on them.”

 

Government has, however, introduced tax breaks for diesel company cars, which meet strict emissions limits defined by the RDE2 standard.

 

Company car drivers are exempt from the 4% benefit-in-kind (BIK) diesel surcharge, while fleets benefit from not having to pay the higher first-year rate of VED on new diesel cars.

 

The NOx limit for the RDE2 standard, which is measured on the road, is up to 1.43 times the Euro 6 lab limit of 80mg/km for diesel and 60mg/km for petrol. Cars achieving this limit are labelled Euro 6d.

 

Cars achieving RDE1, which allows for a margin of error two times the actual limit, are classified as Euro 6d-temp.

 

RDE2 will apply to all new registrations from January 1, 2021, before the margin for error – the conformity factor – is removed by 2023.

 

Peter Golding, managing director at FleetCheck, believes that 2020 could turn out to be a make or break year for diesel, with the success of Euro 6d cars key. However, he acknowledges the outlook is not promising when Bristol’s proposed diesel city centre car ban will not apply to older petrol vehicles, with potentially worse emissions than the latest RDE2 diesels.

 

“RDE2, effectively, puts diesel on a roughly equal footing with petrol from an emissions point of view,” he said. “The question is whether everyone from legislators to the general public are willing or able to make that distinction.”  By Graham Hill Thanks To Fleet News

One in four drivers have had their car damaged by a speedhump or pothole, according to new research by Insurethegap.com.

 

In urban areas the damage rate was even higher, with one in three of those surveyed stating that their car had suffered damage.

 

Ben Wooltorton, COO at InsuretheGap.com, said, “Damage to cars caused by speedhumps and potholes, in particular, is becoming a big problem as councils struggle with the cost of repairing them. This cold snap will see more potholes and, as we can see from the research, repairs can run into hundreds of pounds. It really is worth avoiding them if possible, and going a different way if the road is particularly bad.”

 

More than a quarter (26%) said the average cost of repairing the damage ranged from £51 to £100. A third (35%) paid between £101 and £250 to rectify damage and 8% said it cost more than £250.

 

Two fifths (39%) of affected drivers complained to the council about the potholes or speedhumps and more than half of them (55%) said their compliant was ignored, but 39% said action was taken as a result. One in ten (10%) went so far as to send their bill to the council.

 

A fifth (21%) said they had considered complaining “but didn’t see the point as nothing would change”, and 12% complained to Highways England/Transport Scotland/Traffic Wales or the Northern Ireland Department for Infrastructure.

 

Instead of complaining, one in six (17%) now take a longer route to avoid potholes.

 

In 2017 – 2019, more than 905,000 potholes were reported on UK roads according to Confused.com.

 

The Transport Select Committee’s latest report, Local roads funding and maintenance: filling the gap, addresses ‘the extreme state of disrepair of the English local road network’. It identifies a drop in local government revenue funding of around 25% since 2010, resulting in funds for local roads no longer being ring-fenced. As a result ‘cash-strapped authorities have diverted their highways and transport budgets to fund core services’.

 

The findings state that a deteriorating local road network undermines local economic performance, results in direct costs to taxpayers, damages vehicles and causes injuries to passengers, ‘particularly those with existing medical conditions’. By Graham Hill Thanks To Fleet News

If you’re in search of an SUV type vehicle, then a decision has to be made – Do you need two-wheel drive or all-wheel drive?

 

The short answer to this question is as simple as it gets – if you have the luxury to think about 2WD and AWD, realistically, you do not need an AWD system. At all. AWD is one of those things that when you need it, you just know you need it, and you know why you need it.

 

You would not be thinking of 2WD in the first place. Nevertheless, manufacturers seem to throw a lot of money into promoting AWD systems for their SUVs. This has become a feature that translated from something one may consider a driving aid to a mere entry on an options list you could mark. With the help of various reports from the UK and US I will list five things to think about before opting for AWD.

 

Do you need AWD?

 

It all comes down to a simple question of need. If you live in a mostly dry area with no or very soft winters and do not actually use your car for off-roading, honestly, an AWD system would be close to throwing money down the drain. It is that simple.

 

Consider this – if you used a 2WD car previously without any major problems with traction, and you do not intend to change your driving style, then a 2WD SUV will do the job exactly as your old 2WD car did.

 

But why am I saying this? Isn’t an all-wheel-drive system a preferable solution over a 2WD system regardless of your needs? No! It’s not.

 

Reason 1. AWD Is More Expensive Than 2WD

Have you ever read through the new car for sale or used car for sale listings or my lease deal listings? If you did, you might have noticed that cars with AWD are usually more expensive compared with 2WD machines.

 

According to various sources, the difference between 2WD and AWD versions of the same car ranges from £1,500 to £4,000. When talking about unibody SUVs, which are all the rage today, that difference is usually between £1500 and £2500. Either way, you will have to pay more for something you may never use.

 

AWD systems employed by manufacturers for use on SUVs, cars, or MPVs, aren’t the same as the 4WD systems used by proper off-road vehicles. Most of the time they are part-time systems with torque being sent to the normally-neutral axle only when a loss of traction is felt. Most systems are also front-wheel biased, leaving you with a FWD (Front Wheel Drive) vehicle most of the time.

 

Reason 2. AWD Does Not Have To Work All Of The Time

 

Usually, what you get for a couple of thousand pounds more is the so-called, on-demand AWD system which actually serves as a two-wheel-drive system 99.9 percent of the time.

 

According to some Australian and European researchers, 0.1 percent of the time is exactly how long AWD capability will be engaged. Think about it this way – if you cover 10,000 miles, the AWD system which powers all four wheels will be engaged for ten miles.

 

And, this is not because the on-demand AWD systems aren’t good, but because you actually do not have any use for them. Follow this analogy with your hypothetical previous 2WD car, and you can see that an additional AWD system may be just an unnecessary added cost for you. You drove that 2WD car everywhere, didn’t you?

 

Now, it is true that AWD systems do provide better traction in slippery conditions. Usually, they work something like this – when a computer senses slipping of the wheels that usually power the car, the AWD drive kicks in (via viscous coupling, transfer case, added differential, or some other means) and sends some torque to the other pair of wheels in hopes that they have more traction.

 

If they do, they push the car out, and the AWD disengages. That can last for a second, or for prolonged periods of time. After that, it is back to your usual 2WD business. This all sounds perfectly rational, but considering that a majority of cars on the roads are actually 2WD units, and they go about their business without any problems, I think that an AWD option may not be as necessary as some would like to believe.

 

Reason 3. AWD Doesn’t Improve Your Braking.

 

Right off the bat, AWD systems are created to use all potentially available traction when slippage of the wheels under power is detected. Thus, they transfer some (or all) of the power to the other set of wheels via the driveline components.

 

Newer systems, with smarter electronic control units and torque distribution hardware, can, in fact, affect handling in certain conditions. They do it by sending power to the wheels with more traction, but usually, with AWD systems available for some SUVs, these options are limited.

 

The most common question seems to be about braking. Under false assumptions, some consider AWD vehicles to be more in control under heavy braking. This is simply not the case, as the AWD system does not have anything to do with braking or slowing down.

 

As stated before, in normal conditions, cars with AWD systems are actually just 2WD vehicles that have the capability to engage the drive on the other axle if needed. Heavy braking, or any braking for that matter, does not have anything to do with it.

 

So while AWD may increase safety for cars travelling on slippery roads (mud, snow, ice, etc.), it’s basically a completely unnecessary addition if you rarely traverse slippery conditions.

 

Reason 4. Higher Fuel Consumption

 

Adding an AWD system to the vehicle unequivocally increases its weight. Depending on the system, the car has to gain a transfer case, axles for the second pair of wheels, a new differential, and a plenty of supporting gear. All of this adds weight (75kg+ on average,) which is a killer for fuel consumption.

 

According to a research, the fuel penalty for owning an AWD car instead of a 2WD car is between 1 and 2 mpg (and that is for on-demand electronically controlled AWD systems.) It’s not a lot, is it? Well, with one 15 gallon tank of fuel, you’d cover 30 miles less.

 

It all adds up.

 

Reason 5. Higher Maintenance Costs

 

Years ago when electric windows were an option my dad refused to have a car with electric windows on the basis that it was just another thing to go wrong.

 

Using the same theory, adding an AWD system adds yet another complexity to a car. A complexity that one has to maintain. Although modern systems do not need constant maintenance, any damage done to the AWD system is met with the most expensive repair bill.

 

Furthermore, AWD cars, due to their weight, and consequently more load on the brakes, do tend to wear the tyres down a bit faster than 2WD cars. Yet, it must be said that with the newest AWD systems (like 4Motion from Volkswagen, or Active Drive systems by Jeep) aren’t as hard on the components as some older systems.

 

Making the most out of a 2WD Car

 

So, instead of spending extra cash on an AWD system, you can do a thing or two to improve the 2WD system of an SUV. Installing high-end tyres definitely is the most important step when it comes to improving 2WD SUV traction.

 

Michelin actually tested a 2WD car on winter tyres and an AWD car on summer tyres travelling over slippery conditions, and it was obvious that the 2WD car with winter tyres achieved dramatically better results.

 

This only proves that 2WD will be more than enough in most cases. Apart from that, the traction control systems on newer vehicles are optimized to use as much traction the two wheels can provide. Braking one wheel thus transferring the power to the other has become a sort of a norm. Couple this with good tyres and you probably won’t need AWD anywhere that has relatively mild weather.

 

As always, choose your car according to your needs. Buying an AWD SUV in areas with light snow, occasional rain, and mostly straight roads does not have any justification. On the opposite side, if you suffer with heavy snow and ice, heavy rain and windy, hilly roads then AWD is probably preferable.

 

I hope this helps but these are just mine and a few journalist views. If you are seriously thinking of an SUV type vehicle but unsure about 2WD, FWD, AWD or 4WD seek the advice of the dealer and carry out your own research to make sure that the car truly fits your needs.

 

Oh and as one commentator said, SUV’s with whatever drive are not amphibious vehicles so don’t assume that you can drive through deep water without a thought! They are just as likely to break down or leak as any other car. By Graham Hill

A class action representing more than 90,000 UK Volkswagen owners will aim to determine whether its emissions-reducing defeat device software was designed to defeat clean air laws.

 

The Volkswagen Group is denying that the software it used was an illegal defeat device but a preliminary High Court hearing will today (December 2) focus on whether software fitted to 1.2 million vehicles was designed to cheat clean air laws in the UK.

 

If the biggest class action of its kind in the UK is successful in the two-week preliminary hearing starting today, a full trial is expected to take place in 2020.

 

A spokesman for Slater Gordon, which is representing the majority of the UK customers, said that Mr Justice Waksman will be asked to rule on whether the software installed in the cars was a ‘defeat device’ under EU regulations.

 

He will also be asked to determine whether the High Court is bound by The German Federal Motor Transport Authority’s finding that the software installed by VW was a defeat device.

 

VW admitted to manipulating 11 million vehicles worldwide to fool emissions tests back in September 2015.

 

In the US the OEM paid out $4.3 billion in civil and criminal penalties after pleading guilty to criminal charges and total costs for VW are estimated to have reached $21bn.

 

VW will also pay between $87m and $127m in compensation to customers in Australia, despite having made no admission of liability.

 

The OEM maintains that its engine software did not breach the law and said in a statement that “there has never been a defeat device installed in any of its vehicles in the UK”.

 

Commenting on the proceedings at the High Court this week, a Volkswagen spokesman said: “The purpose of the hearing is to determine two specific questions of law, namely whether the English & Welsh High Court is bound by the findings of the German Federal Motor Transport Authority (KBA) or the British Vehicle Certification Agency (VCA), and whether the legal definition under Article 3 (10) of Regulation 717/2007/EC of a defeat device is met if certain factors are fulfilled. Volkswagen says the answer to both questions is no.”

 

He added: “Volkswagen Group continues to defend robustly its position in the High Court in London. It remains Volkswagen Group’s case that the claimants did not suffer any loss at all and that the affected vehicles did not contain a prohibited defeat device. The decision today does not affect any questions of liability or loss.”

 

Quoted in The Guardian newspaper, Gareth Pope, head of group litigation at Slater Gordon, said: “VW has had plenty of opportunity to come clean, make amends and move on from this highly damaging episode.

 

“But instead it’s chosen to spend millions of pounds denying the claims our clients have been forced to bring against it rather than paying that to their own customers in compensation.”

 

Back in September the Volkswagen Group branded allegations that chief executive Herbert Deiss and chairman Dieter Poetsch were guilty of market manipulation in connection to the dieselgate scandal as “groundless”.

 

The German carmaker’s senior executives were formally charged with market manipulation in Brunswick, Lower Saxony, Germany, on September 24, over allegations that they intentionally failed to inform investors early enough about the diesel emissions scandal.

 

Former Group chief executive Martin Winterkorn was also charged. By Graham Hill Thanks To Fleet News

Providers and policymakers are being warned that a fragmented charge point network is slowing the take-up of electric vehicles (EVs).

 

There are currently 28,000-plus charge points in the UK and 15 major network providers, said Zap-Map.

 

Fleet body ACFO said the accessibility of charge points is a concern for drivers, as they consider whether to choose a plug-in company car.

 

ACFO chair Caroline Sandall said: “Electric vehicle ‘charge point anxiety’ is replacing ‘range anxiety’ as the big issue for drivers.”

 

Carmakers’ enhancements to batteries, she says, have improved the range of EVs so significantly that drivers’ fears of running out of charge, before reaching their destination, are quickly being eroded.

 

However, she warned: “Range anxiety is now being replaced by charge point anxiety due to a number of concerns, including different vehicles requiring different connectors to enable charging to take place; and no standard payment system across all charge point providers.”

 

The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Electric Vehicles has urged large public charge point operators to make their units interoperable.

 

In a letter to operators last month, it said the “fragmented” system for charge point transactions, involving multiple cards, apps and accounts, is “putting off” fleet operators from adopting EVs.

 

It says there is now an urgent need for industry-led collaboration to simplify this experience.

 

Even the most evangelical of EV advocates recognises that this is a major stumbling block.

 

Simon King, procurement director at Mitie, which has pledged to convert 20% of its car and small van fleet to EV by the end of 2020, said: “I’ve got between 10 and 15 apps for different charge point providers on my phone; a driver in a diesel van will have an Allstar card they can use at pretty much any filling station. That’s our biggest issue.”

 

And Catherine Hutt, innovation lead at Addison Lee, said: “Charging has been an issue for our drivers. The day I had to say ‘you are going to have to download about six different apps’, my heart sank. We cannot let this carry on – it’s not sustainable.”

 

A group of charge point providers has signed a roaming agreement to open up networks for EV drivers in the UK by the end of 2019.

 

Allego, Charge4Europe, Chargemap, ChargePoint, Engenie, EVBox, Franklin Energy, NewMotion and Travelcard will only require a single subscription to access any of their public charging stations.

 

They have also agreed to share charging station information so EV drivers can see where and if a charge point is available and what a charging session will cost them.

 

Matt Western, chair of the all-party parliamentary group, said: “This announcement from the collaborating parties in e-mobility is absolutely a step in the right direction.”

 

The agreement struck between the charge point operators is based on the Open Charge Point Interface, a standardised and open-source protocol commonly used in Europe.

 

The all-party parliamentary group says interoperability agreements in markets such as the Netherlands, France and Germany have helped fuel the switch to EVs.

 

Sytse Zuidema, CEO of New-Motion, says its wider experience in Europe also shows that making charging more “accessible and easy helps encourage EV adoption”.

 

The Government announced in the summer that it wanted all new EV rapid charge points to allow debit or credit card payments by spring 2020.

 

BP Chargemaster supported the move and said its Polar network will offer contactless bank or credit card payments on all new 50kW and 150kW ultra-fast chargers. It will also retrofit all existing 50kW Ultracharge units.

 

“Rapid chargers are contactless tap and pay – you turn up and get your bank card out,” said Tom Callow, BP director of communication and strategy.

 

Customers have always been able to access the Polar network, which operates 7,000 charge points in the UK, on a pay-as-you-go basis or via a subscription (membership).

 

Polar subscribers pay a monthly fee of £7.85 and, in turn, have cheaper charging rates.

 

Sandall says “total uniformity” is required in terms of payment and type of plug/charging point.

 

“Charge point providers and motor manufacturers need to unite in terms of the type of system and there needs to be complete uniformity in terms of payment – one card, one system,” she said. By Graham Hill Thanks To Fleet News

It’s fair to say that the idea of switching to winter tyres hasn’t caught on in the UK to the extent that tyre manufacturers had hoped. But increasing the grip at the tyre contact patch is the best way to maintain the best possible traction and steering on slippery or what engineers call a ‘low-mu’ surface. (The Greek letter µ, pronounced mu, represents the coefficient of friction.)

 

It might seem that four-wheel drive is a better idea, but it isn’t necessarily. A 4×4 will make the most of the traction available from the four contact patches. It may also help prevent the balance of the car being upset by a clumsy driver stabbing at the throttle.

 

But if there’s no grip available, the tyres still can’t gain forward traction, stop the car sliding anywhere it wants, or stop it quickly enough under braking, if at all. Four-wheel drive alone can’t prevent any of those things happening and the only thing that can is the grip of the tyres on the road.

 

In snow, there’s something else to consider: the width of the rubber. Watch any rally video of cars competing in snow and they all have one thing in common: skinny tyres. In snow, whatever the type of tyre, it will get more grip if it can bite down into the surface. Wide tyres, while good for cornering grip in the dry, are likely to fare worse in the snow.

 

You can probably see where this is heading. A small, front-wheel-drive hatchback with 185-section winter tyres will be more effective in snow than a big 4×4 SUV on fat summer tyres. The winter tyres grip better in snow because they’re designed to, the weight of the engine is directly over the driven wheels even if there are only two, and the tyres are skinny.

 

It’s not just about snow. Winter tyres have a softer compound that keeps the tread soft and supple in low temperatures, giving more grip on cold, damp or wet Tarmac at anything below 7deg C. That’s due to the chemistry of the compound and the fact that it contains more natural rubber than a summer tyre. Some high-end performance tyres don’t contain any natural rubber at all and can deteriorate and crack over time in extreme low temperatures.

 

The solid centre band on a high-performance summer tyre designed to give sharp steering response is missing on a winter tyre and there are normally fewer grooves around the circumference than on a summer tyre – depending on the make. However, there are a lot more of those tiny slits in the tread, called sipes. They create more sharp edges to grip the surface as the blocks they define deform in use. In snowy conditions, they also trap the snow, which grips better than wet rubber.

 

The downside of a winter tyre is that wider fitments especially are likely to be noisier than a summer equivalent, the rolling resistance is higher and the steering response and handling of a performance car in the dry won’t be as good. On a family car with modest performance, though, there’s no reason not to leave them on all year round, dodging the cost and hassle of two sets of tyres and giving much more safety and convenience in the worst winter weather.

 

The pressure to perform

 

Why does fuel consumption rise if tyres are not inflated properly? Hysteresis. As the tyre rotates and meets the road surface, it deforms, consuming energy. As it turns away from the surface, elasticity returns it to its original shape, but not all of the energy is recovered and the rest is lost as heat. By Graham Hill Thanks To Autocar Magazine.

As leasing companies and manufacturers try to increase take up of all EV’s the bigger premium cars are suffering massive drops when used according to a report by Fleet News. The question is how can it be addressed?

 

Residual values for used electric vehicles (EVs) are progressing at different rates with prices for cheaper models strengthening in the last 24 months.

 

Values for models under £17,000 at one year and 10,000 miles have seen an uplift while those for premium EVs are weaker.

 

Data from Cap HPI shows that models including the Citroen C-Zero and Peugeot iON have seen residual values improve in the last two years. In November 2017, a one-year-old and 10,000 mile Citroen C-Zero was worth around £6,000 and today a similar example is valued at more than £11,000.

 

Premium EVs remain a challenge due to the high cost new, which translates to the vehicle looking expensive when entering the used market. Models such as Jaguar I-Pace, Audi E-Tron and Tesla Model X have all seen values reduce in the past few months.

 

Chris Plumb, senior valuations editor at Cap HPI, said: “It’s clear that there is a growing market for a used BEV at a particular price point perhaps for use as a second car for city commutes. We expect to see demand continue to increase as clean air zones are rolled out across the country and the range of product widens.

 

“The premium models represent a different proposition, often with longer ranges and more features, the high purchase price at new is yet to translate in the used sector.”

 

A BMW i8 coupe is worth around £20,000 less at one year old and 10,000 miles than it was two years ago. Equally the Jaguar iPace has seen values drop by around £10,000 in the last 12 months.

 

As volumes of EVs increase in the market some mainstream models have seen pressure and values drop. The VW eGolf and Nissan Leaf have seen values decline following an increase in volumes of two-year-old product, in particular, models with a smaller battery.

 

“Over time, used values have stabilised and now perform against the same market pressures as their petrol counterparts,” Plumb said.

 

“As supply and demand shift we see pressure on some models and, in some cases, values appreciate on others. We expect dozens of new models in 2020 and it will only bring more choice to the used buyer.”

Breathalysers must be able to be fitted into all new cars from 2022 following a landmark decision by the European Council.

 

The technology, that could prevent drink-drivers from starting their engines, was approved in March but has only just been rubber-stamped by European officials last week.

 

The UK’s position is yet to be confirmed, but the current Government has previously said it will mirror European road safety rules post-Brexit.

 

Cars made before 2022 will have to comply with the new rules by 2024. Road safety charity Brake has labelled the move the “biggest leap forward for road safety this century”.

 

The recent approval also covers the mandatory installing of speed limiter software.

 

Timo Harakka of the European Council, said: “These new rules will help us to reduce significantly the number of fatalities and severe injuries.”

 

The European Transport Safety Council (ETSC) said the measures could cut collisions by 30% and save 25,000 lives across Europe over the next 15 years.

 

Details on how car breathalyser protocol will play out remain deliberately vague. Some systems require repeat breath tests at random intervals to prevent drunk drivers to ask a sober friend to start their car.

 

Neil Greig, director of policy and research at IAM RoadSmart, said: “Although all new cars from 2022 will be enabled to have an alcolock, it will be up to the UK Government to decide how they are used.”

 

Speed limiters – or intelligent speed assistance (ISA) software – are already fitted on many cars and can be overridden by pressing hard on the accelerator.

 

The ETSC has suggested drivers should be able to deactivate ISA software.

 

Joshua Harris, director of campaigns at Brake, said: “Drink-driving and speeding are a scourge on our roads and the cause of devastating crashes every day.

 

“On the eve of Road Safety Week, it’s fantastic to hear that alcohol interlock compatibility and speed limiting technology will soon be mandatory.”

 

Mr Greig said: “We see them (in-car breathalysers) as a useful tool for repeat drink drive offenders to get them back to safe driving after a ban.

 

“It is very unlikely that the vast majority of the law-abiding public will ever have to blow in a tube to start their car.”

 

RAC road safety spokesman Simon Williams said: “Improving road safety is vital as too many lives are lost or ruined every year as a result of accidents on our roads.

 

“As we progress on the journey to self-driving cars it is important to take advantage of all the associated technological developments to take safety to the next level, particularly as road casualty statistics appear to have stopped falling in recent years.

 

“Features such as lane keep assistance, autonomous emergency braking and driver-drowsiness warning systems have the potential to have a very positive effect on the number of accidents.

 

“Speed limiting equipment while sounding somewhat Big Brother-like could also play a role in reducing road casualties. It’s important to realise, that as it stands, the technology could be overridden in certain situations – for example by pressing hard on the accelerator to complete an overtaking manoeuvre.

 

“In addition, vehicles will not brake automatically when going from a faster to a slower speed limit, meaning it will still be down to the driver to brake appropriately.

 

“As the limiters can be overridden it naturally begs the question whether some drivers will do this regularly to bypass the system, potentially undermining some of the system’s benefits.

 

“But just because a vehicle’s speed is limited doesn’t mean that drivers can accelerate as fast as they like up to the limit they are in. We should always drive at the right speed for the conditions, whether that’s due to traffic, bad weather or other hazards.”

 

Hunter Abbott, member of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety and managing director of AlcoSense Laboratories comments:  “New cars manufactured after 2022 will have a ‘breathalyser interface’ fitted, which is essentially a universal port to enable the ‘plug and play’ installation of a breathalyser that can stop the vehicle from starting, if required.

 

This will make it easier for fleet operators to implement the safety technology and, potentially in future, for the mandatory installation of an in-car breathalyser for convicted drink drivers.” By Graham Hill Thanks To RAC