News

China Goes to Le Mans—and It’s About Time

For more than a century, the 24 Hours of Le Mans has been motorsport’s ultimate proving ground: a rolling laboratory where reputations are built, shattered, and occasionally resurrected at 200 mph. Porsche has made it a religion. Ferrari treats it like sacred art. Audi weaponized it. Toyota conquered it through sheer persistence. And yet, through more than 100 editions of the race, one massive corner of the global auto industry has remained conspicuously absent.

Until now.

Chery has signed a five-year agreement with the ACO to compete at Le Mans under its premium Exeed brand, marking the first time a Chinese manufacturer will take on the world’s most famous endurance race. It’s a milestone not just for Chery, but for China’s entire automotive industry—and a signal that the country’s ambitions now extend far beyond showrooms and sales charts.

Because if you want to be taken seriously as a carmaker, there’s no better place to earn your scars than motorsport. And there’s no harsher judge than Le Mans.

Motorsport: The Last Unclaimed Territory

Chinese manufacturers have spent the last two decades mastering volume, electrification, and global expansion. What they’ve largely avoided is racing—the messy, expensive, ego-bruising business of pushing machines past the edge in public. Motorsport has always been more than spectacle; it’s a marketing platform, a technical incubator, and a cultural statement rolled into one. And until now, China has sat that one out.

That’s why Exeed’s Le Mans entry matters. In a race that has hosted everyone from Jaguar and Bentley to Cadillac and Lamborghini, the absence of a Chinese badge has been glaring. Le Mans is where brands prove not just speed, but durability, engineering discipline, and institutional confidence. Showing up means you believe your engineers belong in the same conversation as the world’s best.

Chery clearly believes that now.

The Big Question: What’s Under the Bodywork?

Le Mans isn’t kind to newcomers, and it’s especially unforgiving to half-baked powertrains. Exeed’s current road-car lineup—SUVs and sedans with no GT sports cars in sight—offers little hint of what kind of race car will emerge. What we do know is that an entirely new machine will have to be developed, complete with an internal combustion engine capable of surviving 24 hours of flat-out abuse.

That’s where things get interesting.

Chery, like most Chinese manufacturers, has limited experience beyond four-cylinder engines. Six- and eight-cylinder powerplants are rare exceptions in China’s domestic market, making a Le Mans effort feel almost absurd on paper. Hybridization seems likely—both as a nod to modern endurance racing and a way to leverage China’s strength in electrification—but even that doesn’t solve the core issue: someone still has to build a serious combustion engine.

The smart money says Chery won’t do it alone. Outsourcing the engine to a specialized engineering firm would shortcut years of development pain and reduce the inevitable “childhood illnesses” that plague first-time race programs. It wouldn’t be unprecedented either—plenty of manufacturers have leaned on external expertise before claiming victories as their own.

Impossible Missions Have Precedent

If this all sounds unrealistic, history says otherwise. In the 1960s, Ford’s decision to take on Ferrari at Le Mans seemed laughable. Detroit muscle versus Italian racing aristocracy? We know how that turned out.

Exeed’s challenge may be even steeper. This isn’t just a new team—it’s a new motorsport culture learning endurance racing from scratch. But that’s exactly why the project feels significant. Le Mans has never been about comfort zones. It rewards obsession, resources, and the willingness to fail publicly until you don’t.

And Chery has resources in abundance.

Money, Scale, and a Replica of La Sarthe

Chery sold more than 2.5 million vehicles last year and remains China’s largest auto exporter. This isn’t a vanity startup throwing a logo on a race car—it’s a global manufacturing giant with the financial muscle to play the long game. That matters, because Le Mans success isn’t bought with a single check; it’s earned through years of testing, iteration, and heartbreak.

To underline its seriousness, the ACO agreement reportedly includes French consultants helping Chery build a Le Mans–style test track in Wuhu, where the company is headquartered. A replica of Circuit de la Sarthe on Chinese soil isn’t just symbolic—it’s a declaration of intent. Engineers and drivers training 365 days a year on a homegrown endurance circuit? That’s how racing programs mature.

More Than a Race Entry

Exeed’s Le Mans debut isn’t about trophies—at least not yet. It’s about credibility. About proving that Chinese manufacturers aren’t just fast learners in electrification and manufacturing scale, but capable of mastering the most unforgiving discipline in motorsport.

Le Mans doesn’t care how many cars you sell. It doesn’t care about market share or export numbers. It cares whether your machine can survive the night, the rain, and the relentless punishment of 5,000 kilometers at full tilt.

For the first time, China is ready to find out.

And whether Exeed finishes first or last, just showing up changes the conversation forever.

Source: Chery

News

Winter Exposes the Real Gap Between EVs and ICE Cars

Winter has a way of cutting through marketing claims like road salt through sheetmetal. Range estimates, charging promises, efficiency bragging rights—none of it is immune once temperatures drop and heaters switch on. A recent Green NCAP study puts that reality into sharp focus, comparing how electric vehicles and gasoline-powered cars cope when the weather turns unfriendly. The results aren’t shocking, but they are clarifying.

The test lined up two EVs—the BYD Sealion 7 and the Cupra Born—against two familiar internal-combustion benchmarks, the BMW 5 Series and BMW X2. Same cold conditions, same real-world scrutiny. Different outcomes.

Big Battery, Smaller Losses

The BYD Sealion 7 Comfort entered the test with the usual EV disadvantages: size, weight, and a lot of mass to keep warm. At 2,225 kilograms and packing an 82.5-kWh battery, it’s no lightweight. Yet it handled winter better than expected.

In warm conditions, the Sealion 7 manages around 400 kilometers of range. In the cold, that figure dropped to 337 kilometers—a loss of roughly 16 percent. Green NCAP calls that “relatively moderate,” and in EV terms, that’s practically a compliment. Credit goes to effective thermal insulation and the ability to preheat the cabin before driving, reducing the battery drain once underway.

Charging, however, tells a less flattering story. BYD promises a 10-to-80 percent fast charge in 32 minutes. Reality added about eight more minutes, enough to earn a “poor” rating in this category. Still, the Sealion 7 walked away with a four-star sustainability score and 73 percent overall—solid numbers for a large electric SUV.

Smaller EV, Bigger Winter Penalty

The Cupra Born didn’t fare as well. Lighter at 1,839 kilograms and running a smaller 60-kWh battery, the Born should have had an efficiency edge. Instead, winter hit it harder.

From a warm-weather range of 328 kilometers, the Born dropped to just 221 kilometers in cold conditions—a 33 percent reduction. That’s the kind of number that turns a casual road trip into a charging strategy session.

There was a bright spot. Green NCAP praised the accuracy of Cupra’s energy-consumption readings. Drivers see what the car is actually using, not an optimistic guess. BYD, by contrast, showed discrepancies in its consumption data, prompting a recommendation for a software update to deliver clearer, more reliable information.

Gas Cars: Predictable, Not Perfect

On the gasoline side, the BMW 5 Series and X2 behaved exactly as you’d expect. Fuel consumption went up in winter, but not dramatically—and certainly not catastrophically.

The 5 Series increased from 6.8 to 8.1 l/100 km, while the X2 rose from 7.1 to 8.0 l/100 km. The reason is simple: internal-combustion engines generate waste heat, which conveniently warms the cabin. Efficiency suffers a bit, but range anxiety never enters the conversation.

Green NCAP notes that these increases are modest and predictable, giving gasoline cars an edge in real-world confidence when temperatures plunge.

The Real Takeaway

From an environmental standpoint, the EVs still score well. The Sealion 7 and Cupra Born remain attractive options, especially for drivers who mostly stick to shorter trips. But winter exposes the weak points: range loss, longer charging times, and the added complication of a fast-charging network that still isn’t where it needs to be.

Long journeys in an EV during cold weather demand planning, patience, and a willingness to accept that official figures are more suggestion than guarantee.

Green NCAP’s message is clear. Electric-car manufacturers need better thermal management systems and greater transparency about cold-weather performance. Because nothing kills enthusiasm faster than a buyer who feels misled—especially when the temperature drops, the range shrinks, and the real-world numbers suddenly have very little to do with what was promised on paper.

Source: Green NCAP; Photo: Shutterstock

News

Why Your Old Car Might Have Been More Efficient Than the New One

There was a time—not that long ago—when buying a car meant getting more kilometers out of every liter of fuel for less money. Call it the golden age of efficiency, roughly a decade back. Today, many drivers are scratching their heads, wondering how it’s possible that their older cars sipped fuel more politely than today’s newer, more advanced machines.

Fuel consumption still matters. A lot. Whether you’re shopping for diesel or gasoline, efficiency remains one of the top criteria for buyers. And yes, diesel still carries the reputation of being the sensible, frugal choice. But here’s the uncomfortable truth: year after year, drivers are discovering that new cars—packed with technology and engineering buzzwords—don’t always burn less fuel. In some cases, they burn more.

So what changed?

The Cost of Being Clean

Modern engines are designed under far stricter emissions regulations than those from 10 years ago. On paper, that’s good news for the environment. In reality, meeting those standards often comes at the expense of fuel efficiency.

Today’s engines are surrounded by layers of emissions hardware that simply didn’t exist before. Diesel particulate filters (DPF), complex catalytic converters, AdBlue tanks and pumps, additional sensors, plumbing, and control units—all of it adds restriction, complexity, and weight. Even the most advanced fuel-injection systems can’t fully compensate for engines that are, in effect, being forced to breathe through a tighter mask.

The result? Engines that work harder to meet emissions targets, sometimes consuming more fuel than their simpler predecessors.

Technology Adds Weight—Lots of It

Not all modern engines are less efficient. Electrified powertrains, especially in urban driving, can be impressively economical. But even they carry a hidden cost: mass. Electric motors, batteries, inverters, wiring—none of it is weightless.

And electrification is just one part of the story. Modern cars are loaded with features that were once optional or nonexistent. Advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS) now come standard, bringing with them cameras, radars, sensors, control modules, and even mandatory “black box” data recorders. Safety has improved dramatically, but physics still sends the bill.

Then there’s comfort and convenience. Larger wheels, thicker sound insulation, power everything, and automatic transmissions that are now the norm rather than the exception. Luxury sells—but it also weighs.

The Golf Test: Numbers Don’t Lie

Let’s put some numbers to it. Take the Volkswagen Golf, a benchmark for sensible engineering, in its popular 2.0 TDI DSG form:

  • Golf 6: 1,297 kg
  • Golf 7: 1,316 kg
  • Golf 8: 1,369 kg

And that’s before ticking the boxes for extra equipment. Add panoramic roofs, bigger wheels, electric seats, and advanced driver aids, and the scale keeps climbing. More mass requires more energy, and no amount of clever software can rewrite that basic law of physics.

Smaller Engines, Bigger Burden

At the same time, manufacturers—under regulatory pressure—have been downsizing engines. Smaller displacement, higher output, more stress. While the exterior dimensions of cars haven’t shrunk, the engines pulling them have.

Combine a heavier vehicle, a more restrictive exhaust system, and an engine extracting more power from less volume, and the outcome is predictable: higher real-world fuel consumption. It’s one reason why modern diesel cars are becoming less financially attractive, pushing manufacturers to quietly phase them out.

The Human Factor Still Matters

What many drivers overlook is that technology—old or new—can only do so much. Short trips, stop-and-go traffic, and aggressive driving styles can destroy efficiency faster than any emissions system. Cold starts, traffic jams, and heavy right feet punish modern engines just as much as older ones.

We can’t turn back the clock to the era of simpler, lighter, ultra-efficient engines. What we can do is adapt. Smoother acceleration, fewer short trips, and avoiding congestion where possible remain the most effective tools for saving fuel—no software update required.

Progress has made cars safer, cleaner, and more comfortable than ever. But when it comes to fuel economy, sometimes the past really did have the advantage.

Photo: Shutterstock

Cars and catalogues