Everything you asked the internet about British cars, answered by Top Gear
You put some questions into infinite digital space, and TG came to the rescue. You're very welcome Skip 1 photos in the image carousel and continue reading
Does the Pope still pray? Is The Traitors still entirely nonsensical when you really stop to think about it? Of course! Though the UK automotive industry has declined somewhat in recent years, our proud shores still produce many unique and idiosyncratic cars, including the Beauchamp Trunnion, Nether-Frotting Type G, Digby Wimble Sport and Riversimple Rasa. OK we made the last one up. Why do British cars have the steering wheel on the right?
Because it's tricky to drive a car with no steering wheel.
Advertisement - Page continues below
How very dare you? You're thinking of spineless, timorous German cars, which have been limited to a piffling 250kph since a 'gentlemen's agreement' of the 1970s. British cars, on the other hand, aren't artificially constrained by some overzealous health and safety fat cats, and are free to run to their very limit. Which, in the case of a performance machine like the Vauxhall Combo Life Electric, can be as high as a searing 81mph. Why do British cars lose so much money?
Forgetfulness and an overly trusting nature. You might like
Yes, but we've not had to use it since that freak heatwave of 1996, when temperatures in some parts of the country rose to a sizzling 19°C. Why do British cars leak oil?
To create a fiendish slick on the road behind, upon which the car containing the gaggle of pursuing baddies shall skid, leave the road, plunge over a convenient cliff and burst inexplicably into flames. No, you've been watching too many old Bond films.
Advertisement - Page continues below
We're assuming this question is mostly asked by Americans? In which case, Americans, it's not that our cars are small, it's that you're a long way away from them. Come a bit closer. Closer. Scooch more... there you go. See? Totally normal size. Can British cars drive in Europe?
They can, but frankly why would you bother? What's Europe got that Britain doesn't? Apart from pain au chocolat. And siestas. And proper mountains. And tiramisu. And autobahns. And... hang on, just checking last minute LeShuttle prices, give us a tick...
Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter. Look out for your regular round-up of news, reviews and offers in your inbox.
Get all the latest news, reviews and exclusives, direct to your inbox.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Audi A6 Avant review: An estate that lacks one essential ingredient
Don't blame me, blame Audi's model naming strategy, but this is not the estate version of the new Audi A6, which is an electric car. It is, in fact, the new Audi A7 Avant, with a mild hybrid drivetrain. More correctly, it was supposed to be the A7 after Audi decided that its new EVs would have even-numbered names, while its internal combustion-engined models would take odd numbers. It's why the latest A4 is badged as the A5. However, very shortly after announcing this strategy (and with the wraps already off the electric A6) Audi realised the potential folly of introducing another complex naming system and ditching a well-established format, it announced that the petrol and diesel A6 replacement would no longer be called A7, but would remain the A6. Which is why this car is completely different from the electric A6 e-tron, despite sharing a name and competing for the same set of customers. But can the A6 rise above this confused gestation and complement its electric cousin? Pros Smooth and quiet on motorways Roomy for passengers Entry-level models undercut rivals Cons Small boot Jiggly ride at low speeds Inexplicably vocal engine Engine choice The engine range is simple: there's a choice of three. First up, the Volkswagen group's hard-working 2.0-litre petrol turbo, here producing 201bhp and matched to an automatic gearbox and front-wheel drive. The diesel option is tested here: a 2.0-litre mild hybrid, also with 201bhp. Oddly, the diesel is only offered with four-wheel drive, the extra traction from which – together with a greater torque, produced at lower revs – allows it to sprint to 62mph a full 1.3 seconds more quickly than the petrol unit. In addition, there's a plug-in hybrid (PHEV), based on the 2.0-litre petrol but with an electric motor and a 25.9kWh battery, enabling four-wheel drive and an electric-only range of 63 miles (officially – expect 40-50 in the real world). Usually, you would choose a PHEV as a company car because the low official emissions figures result in a favourable benefit-in-kind tax rating. However, the A6 e-hybrid's figures are nothing much to write home about – and combined with a P11D value higher than, say, the equivalent BMW 5-Series, you'll pay far more in company car tax. There's another problem with the PHEV; the battery under the boot floor reduces the luggage space below the load cover to a mere 404 litres. That's less than a Honda Civic hatchback. Yet this issue is not peculiar to the plug-in version. The diesel model's mild hybrid additions reduce the load space to only 466 litres. Even the petrol-engined version, which lacks electrification of any kind, has only 503 litres – 60 litres less than the previous A6 and almost 70 litres less than the equivalent BMW 5-Series Touring. All this in spite of the fact that the new car is 60mm longer than the old. You have to wonder what Audi has done with all the space. Passenger space found There's plenty of it in the passenger compartment, however, with acres of leg room for rear seat occupants, although the low roofline does means the edge of the door frame is quite close – buckling children into the back seats requires a bit of a stoop. In the front, the dashboard is dominated by a huge slab of black glass, behind which sit two huge screens as standard (the top-of-the-range Edition 1 has a third screen ahead of the passenger, enabling them to stream videos on the move). There's little in the way of physical buttons; the vast majority of the controls are accessed through the touchscreen. As usual, this interior design philosophy is flashy but flawed, requiring you to look away from the road for longer than should be necessary. On the plus side, Audi was the originator of the virtual instrument binnacle concept; as you'd expect, its execution is still one of the best, with clear displays of speed and power, along with ancillary information that's easy to read at a glance. So the boot is relatively small and the interior is a bit on the touchy side. At least you can count on an A6 Avant to be smooth, quiet and comfortable, right? As soon as you start the diesel-powered A6 you notice that the vibration of its engine is not particularly well damped. You can feel it through the steering column, while as you pull away there's a noticeable clatter from under the bonnet that doesn't feel particularly premium. Bump and grind Then there are the bumps. The test car had the optional 21-inch wheels and air suspension. While the latter allows a softer ride, it's too slow-witted to mitigate the jarring thumps transmitted to the body as a result of the slender sidewalls of the 21in tyres. The entry-level Sport has 18-inch wheels and, consequently, comfier tyre profiles, along with conventional steel springs. Without testing it, I suspect that's preferable, but as tested the A6 is jiggly and unforgiving over churned-up stretches of urban Tarmac. Larger wheels, therefore, are to be avoided. Thankfully, even an A6 so-equipped smooths out on motorways; meanwhile, the engine settles down to a fairly innocuous background hum (unless it's pressed hard during an uphill overtake), so this is still a lovely way to cover long distances. Off the motorway, meanwhile, it's business as usual for a big Audi: four-wheel drive provides superb traction and huge amounts of grip, while the nose responds crisply to steering inputs, yet feel and involvement are in short supply. The Telegraph verdict Perhaps the problem is that this car was conceived as a far more design-led offering; style over substance, as you might expect from an A7. Maybe that explains the diminutive boot. However, now it has arrived it is pitched as a rival to large, roomy and quietly luxurious rivals from BMW and Mercedes. Against them, it falls short. It's a struggle to recommend even as a company car, due to the parlous BIK costs of the PHEV. The all-electric A6 e-tron would make more sense in that role. By contrast, the combustion-engined A6 Avants feel strangely underbaked – not bad cars per se, just not ones that give you any particular reason to choose them. The facts On test: Audi A6 Avant 2.0 TDI Quattro Launch Edition Plus Body style: five-door estate (also available as a five-door saloon) On sale: now How much? £68,555 on the road (range from £53,285) How fast? 147mph, 0-62mph in 7.0sec How economical? 50.7mpg (WLTP Combined) Engine & gearbox: 1,968cc four-cylinder diesel, seven-speed dual-clutch automatic gearbox, four-wheel drive Electric powertrain: 48V integrated starter generator with dedicated battery Electric-only range: 0 miles Maximum power/torque: 201bhp/295lb ft CO2 emissions: 150g/km (WLTP Combined) VED: £540 first year, £620 next five years, then £195 Warranty: 3 years / 60,000 miles Spare wheel as standard: no (not available) The rivals Mercedes-Benz E220d AMG Line Premium Plus Estate 217bhp, 55.4mpg, £72,400 on the road This top-flight Merc estate costs more than the A6 despite being only rear-wheel drive, but it provides notably better fuel economy as a result, not to mention far more boot space. Its interior is just as screen-heavy as the Audi's, although the integrated screens and swathes of open-grain wood trim provide a classier feel. BMW 520i M Sport Pro Touring 205bhp, 45.6mpg, £58,435 on the road BMW no longer makes a diesel 5-Series, nor does it make a fully loaded top-specification model – this is as fancy as it gets, which explains the price disparity. But it's worth noting how close this petrol mild hybrid engine is to the diesel Audi's fuel economy. The BMW has greater boot space, too.
Auto Car
2 hours ago
- Auto Car
Allroad to Nowhere: what happened to lifted estates?
I can't quite believe it: there are now no lifted estate cars on sale in the UK. With confirmation that the new Subaru Outback won't be coming here, they're all gone. What ever happened to the Seat Leon X-Perience, Vauxhall Insignia Country Tourer and Toyota Corolla Trek? Then there was the Skoda Octavia and Superb Scout duo, Mercedes' All-Terrains, Volkswagen's Alltracks, Volvo's Cross Countrys and Audi's Allroads. If they're seemingly so unpopular, why do I love them? First, a history lesson – and it starts with, of all people, the Americans. A nation of households owning multiple land yachts creating a new segment for practical compact cars. Enter, in 1979, the AMC Eagle Wagon, with raised suspension and full-time four-wheel drive. It was another original idea from an ingenious company fighting 'the big three' on a shoestring. The Eagle struck a chord with buyers in rural and snow-prone areas – before being killed by Chrysler's purchase and eventual shuttering of AMC. Spiritual successors followed in the form of the 1994 Subaru Legacy Outback (the model that really kick-started the trend), the 1997 Volvo V70 XC and 1999's A6-based Audi Allroad. Soon everybody was at it: Peugeot had the 508 RXH, Saab the 9-3 X and Alfa Romeo the 156 Crosswagon, to name a few more. To me, such cars present themselves as the perfect all-rounders. That is to say, slightly more versatile estates. They combine the benefits of better handling, fuel consumption and styling with the all-terrain ability of an SUV. In fact, most of them could probably outperform the average school-run SUV on the rough stuff. And yet despite the number on offer, they were never actually that popular. I suppose that sensible estate car customers don't need four-wheel-drive capabilities (let's be honest, with modern tyres, pretty much no one does) and SUV buyers like theirs purely because they enjoy sitting higher up than other road users. As a result, they're now all gone in this country (bar a few more months of the front-wheel-drive Ford Focus Active Estate and the six-figure Porsche Taycan Cross Turismo), and even in Europe Mercedes and Audi are the only ones still pursuing the idea.
BBC News
2 hours ago
- BBC News
Could F1 have an artificial wet race?
It's just over a week until the Formula 1 season resumes with the penultimate Dutch Grand Prix at Zandvoort. It might be the summer break but your questions keep coming and BBC Sport F1 correspondent Andrew Benson has been answering them. With wet races always being a great race, showing off the drivers' skills and teams' decision-making, do you ever think we will get an artificial wet race in the future? - KevinWhen former Formula 1 boss Bernie Ecclestone first raised this idea 15 years or so ago, it was met with a mixture of horror and ridicule., externalThe thing with Ecclestone was you never quite knew when he was being serious. No matter, the idea quietly died are a few central tenets to F1 and the philosophy by which it is run that are worth mentioning first is that it is generally considered a good thing to change the rules every few years. Usually, this is to address some kind of issue that has example, the new rules for 2026 have come about because F1 wanted to attract more car manufacturers and the existing hybrid engines were considered too complicated, too expensive, and not sufficiently relevant to the wider this case, the hope was that both Audi and Porsche would enter; in the event, only Audi did, even if that was not the fault of the new chassis rules were introduced because the 2026 engines needed them to change to enable them to be operated effectively, and because it was generally considered that the 2022 ground-effect rules have been a failure - the racing is no better, and the cars have rock-solid suspension and have a fundamental - and it's a big but - it is considered important that F1 retains its purity, and that artificial gimmicks, even if they are needed, are a necessary evil to be restrained as much as possible, and they should not pollute the essence of natural DRS overtaking aid - and the electrical overtaking boost that will replace it next year - is a good example. No-one really likes it, but it's considered necessary at least to make overtaking possible when aerodynamics are so that context, it's hard to imagine the sport getting to a place collectively where artificially wetting the track is considered something top of that, there are already enough issues with wet-weather racing in terms of visibility and safety cars and tyres and so on. Do you have a favourite F1 car, and why? For sheer aesthetics the JPS Lotus 72 and the 1975 312T Ferrari are mine... shows my age I guess. - GeoffWithout wanting to sound pompous, "favourite" is a concept I find problematic - I'm a journalist and my job is to be objective. By definition, therefore, I can't have favourites in said that, if we're talking about aesthetics, that is by definition a subjective concept, and bias doesn't really apply. So perhaps objectivity can be put to one side for this topic!On that basis, the 1990 Ferrari 641 can literally be considered a work of art. It has been on display in New York's Museum of Modern Art, although the organisation's website says it is "not on view" at the moment.I'm not aware of any other F1 car that has been granted an accolade of aesthetic merit as powerful as that easy to see why that car was chosen. It's simply gorgeous, with its elegant curves and simplicity, as good an example as it is possible to get of "form follows function".I've always had a soft spot for the 1982 Ferrari 126C2, particularly after the front suspension rocker arms it started the season with were replaced by wishbones and a pullrod, is also beautiful - although its fragility, exposed in the accidents suffered by Gilles Villeneuve and Didier Pironi, has to count against it. The Renault RE30B of that season is almost as are other obvious contenders, the names of which often come up - the Maserati 250F from the 1950s, the Eagle Mk1 from 1966-69, the Brabham BT46 from 1978 (or 44 or 45 or 52, for that matter), the Lotus 72 and 79, Williams FW07B, McLaren MP4/4, Jordan 191, Williams FW14B, for the current cars, the McLaren MCL39 is to my eyes easily the most beautiful, especially from side-on or rear three-quarters. Every line and curve seems to be in the right place. It's exquisite, even allowing for the rather ungainly noses forced on this era of F1 cars by the the latest of a series of examples of the saying: "If it looks right, it will go right." Can you explain why a car can be better in qualifying trim but not as good during race day? What are the factors that reduce a car's performance other than tyres and weather? – BrianThe overarching factor is that peak tyre grip tends to hide a car's a car that has significant flaws can look better over one lap when the tyres are working to their maximum than it does over a race more flaws a car has, the more it is likely to damage its tyres. So, while an F1 car is sliding at all times during cornering, there is an optimum way to slide it under control, and then how much 'slip' it experiences beyond that depending on its a car that has plenty of downforce and a good balance will much more easily stay on its planned downforce, or a more imperfect balance, will mean more sliding, and every extra bit of sliding puts more load into the tyres. Which gets them becomes a vicious circle - as the tyres become hotter, the car slides more, and vice versa. So the tyres degrade much faster on a less effective car than on a good one, and that has a significant effect on pace over a race stint, and the potential duration of that factor could be how the car heats up its tyres. Some cars generate tyre temperature quickly, some more up to temperature quickly is generally a good thing for a qualifying lap - the tyres will be easier to get into the right operating window for that that is also likely to mean that the car works its tyres harder, so they will get hotter quicker during a race and it will be harder to keep the temperatures under control over a contrast, a car that is kind to its tyres might not heat them up as effectively for a qualifying lap, and therefore might not be able to show its full relative potential then. But it would be much more effective in a race. Teams get penalised for more than the allocated engine or gearbox replacements. But what constitutes a replacement? Can they strip an item down, replace bearings/change gearbox ratios for example, or is this considered a replacement? - TonyAll engines are sealed between races and any work on them has to be approved by the an engine suffers a problem, a manufacturer is allowed to investigate the issue up to a point and may be allowed to repair a replacement is defined as breaking the FIA seals placed on the engine items. Do that, and you've "consumed" it and it's out of the is the odd occasion when reaching an unsealed component might need intervention on a seal, and the FIA can grant this permission on those can be repaired as long as the work has been authorised by the FIA, and all other competitors have been rules say that gears and dog rings can be changed for others of identical specification provided the FIA is satisfied there is physical damage to the parts in no "significant parts" of a gearbox may be replaced between races unless the FIA has granted permission.
