For some it would appear Electric Vehicles - EVs - are as charming as Cilla Black belting out her signature number.
While others, equally, consider them as grating as Cilla belting out said tune. Just as Cilla, and Alfie - both the Michael Caine original of 1966, and the 2004 Jude Law remake - can amuse or annoy in equal measure, so it is with EVs.
Engineering-marvels created to save the plane or "green lie" V8 killers? Consider their close cousin the PHEV being the "Plugin Hybrid Electric Vehicle" which is as closely related to a modern F1 car as anything else on the road. At least that is what marketing from across the automotive world will scream at you.
Disclaimer. Our household has run an EV for a touch over two years. It is a delightful town car (never to be confused with that land yacht that is the Lincoln Town Car), and being a modestly premium EV it is fast, around 4.6 seconds 0-100Kph.
Open the wallet, empty the piggy bank and obtain a Porsche Taycan Turbo GT Weissach edition and one can rocket from 0 to 60 mph in 1.9 seconds. Yup. A sub two second dash from a road going EV. Which compares rather favourably with the 1.8 second dash of a current F1 car. Fast. You can have F1 acceleration along with a roof and indicators on your local roads. Top speed? The Porsche has been verified at 304 kph (190mph), and F1 cars top out at a touch over 300kph. So again similar performance.
The Ferrari F40? 4.7 seconds. So 0.1 seconds slower than our family EV. Yes folks. The mighty F40 is slower than our child-seat friendly EV. While the McLaren Senna achieves 0-100kph in 2.8 seconds. Making the McLaren around a second slower than both the 2025 F1 car and the Porsche Taycan. The Senna passes the standing quarter mile in 9.9 seconds, while the Taycan manages a 9.3. So the EV is 0.6 seconds faster on this test.
So raw performance cannot be the issue with EVs. No. They are fast and the best handle better than most ICE vehicles. Sadly the Pitpass petty cash box (the one next to the tea caddy) does not extend to your scribe performing back-to-back road and track testing of a Taycan and a Senna. I've driven many ICE cars, a number of go-karts, a couple of track cars and a growing number of EVs. Sadly not a Taycan or a Senna.
I steamed through some glorious roundabouts in a friend's Lotus years ago. It was not supercar fast, but it stuck to the road and you simply didn't need to brake for corners. Flick left, flick right, flick left again, and exit roundabout at the same speed you were doing on the straights. Fun. Fast. Nimble. Hello EVs. Faster on the straights. Slower through the corners. A feeling of "I ate too many donuts" at every point. And no sound track.
Let's consider the 1965 Championship winning Lotus 33 piloted by Jim Clark. 1500cc Climax engine. ZF five speed manual gear box. It was an aluminium monocoque notably stiffer than it's Lotus 25 predecessor. The climax was a V8 which constantly evolved from the mid-1950's to the mid-1960's. In 1964 a 2.4L variant was rebadged as a Repco engine as both the Tasman and Australian National Formula took off. By 1964 the mark 4 version of the 1.5L F1 engine produced in the region of 200 bhp (149KW).
The rules for 1965 required the cars to weigh a minimum of 450 Kg, without fuel or driver. Honda and Ferrari ran cars that year claimed to be around 490 Kg. This gives a power to weight ratio in the region of 0.33KW/Kg.
Fast forward to 2025. We have around 1,000 bhp from a 1.6L V6 turbo with energy recovery. In a car weighing 800Kg. Bit more maths... 1,000 bhp is 746KW. Leading to a power to weight ratio around 0.93KW/Kg. So modern F1 cars have triple the power to weight ratio of a 1965 F1 car. But their weight is nearly double. That loads suspension. That has to abide by the Laws of Miss Physics at the apex of every corner. That makes for slow handling and response.
Yet what the 1965 car has over the 2025 car is a naturally aspirated small cylinder screaming V8. Each of those eight cylinders was a mere 187.5 cc. That's a mere 0.33 of a pint! A third of a pint glass! And they could rev close to 10,000 rpm.
For comparison each cylinder on a 2025 1.6L V6 is 267 cc, being 0.47 of a pint. We've nearly made the half-pint mark readers! With revs capped at 15,000 rpm for this season.
Now those 1965 F1 cars could hit around 170 mph (274kph) on tracks like Spa. So yes, slower than today's cars but still remarkably fast. EVs are fast. Next year's F1 formula will be fast. So why are fans still misty eyed for racing from yesteryear and in particular right now the last days (2005) of the screaming V10 formula?
Top speed? Acceleration? Fuel efficiency? No. Absolute handling ability? No. Peak apex speed? No.
Fans are chasing two specific things. Close racing, and an emotional connection you can feel in the stands.
I had the pleasure of watching a pre-1940's Bugatti race car scream around a temporary track in Perth some years back (back when we held a round of the World Rally Championship). To this day it remains the loudest car I have ever heard! Not the fastest. Not the best. But the loudest. Each of my internal organs was shaking at a different frequency. It was spiritual and animal at the same time. The entire crowd felt the same way. As it howled from the arena a hush of reverence fell. We knew we had just been blessed to witness greatness. It was intoxicating. It was addictive. We wanted more. Instead what we got was a rally-prepped Toyota Celica GT4 that blitzed the course in less than half the time and had the crowd looking to make toilet breaks or buy a beer. We didn't care.
It's not about EVs. It's about hero drivers willing to take a risk (V. Max I'm looking at you) and for those standing trackside it is about the emotional connection to the motion. And that dear reader comes for the most part from the roar of the engines.
Manage the cradle to grave life cycle of an EV and it is far greener than an ICE car. Buy a premium EV and it will bury 99% of ICE cars, including the iconic F40. They handle acceptably. They are quiet and comfortable. They are about as emotional as a new stainless steel fridge. For every day use not such a problem. For a racing series? It's a problem.
If we have manic late dives and insane overtakes around the outside from the drivers then the EV thing is not such an issue. Except that's not what we get. Everyone is managing tyres, driving to lap times and optimising pit stops. That {i]is racing today. It matters not the power plant because each team is a corporate money maximiser seeking safe returns and undamaged cars. Not insane racing.
Which leaves engine noise. There is a reason Imperial Star Destroyers make a noise in Star Wars movies. Watching those beasts slide past in total silence is what Miss Physics demands. Same for TIE-fighters and X-wings. Should be total silence. Where is the emotion in that? Gone, that's where. Miss Physics would make unemotional movies, which is why it's good she has reality to keep her busy.
So what's it all about EV? Not bhp. Not apex speed. Not smooth handling. No. It is about that emotional connection. Us fans would take 250kph with a banshee howl over 300kph in silence any day. The problem being the mythical "road relevance" of racing would finally be proven as total bunk. Screaming, soul shattering V10's on green liquid fuel that race on Sunday, yet can be beaten down the road by a road-going EV Monday do not a happy marketing department make.
What's it all about EV? Get Cilla front of house, hit the high notes, and whatever you do, don't mention engine wars and sing us out in style Cilla!
Max Noble
Editor's note: I'm sure it was not intentional but it doesn't take too much to work out my nickname at school, when the song Max refers to was forever sung at me... and still haunts me. Additionally, one of the Northern Hemisphere felines just happens to be called Evie.
Learn more about Max and check out his previous features, here
sign in