UnstoppaUnstoppabble!le!How Ricardo helped turn Hummer’s military legend into amighty SUV for the civilian market

InterIntervieviewswsCarlos Ghosn, NissanMartin Leach, Ford

Winter 2002/2003003

SoftwSoftwarareeVersion 5 expands the WAVE envelope

Delphi diesel technology.More responsive to the driver.More responsible to the planet.

Delphi’s EUI and EUP products are sophisticated, electronically controlled high-pressure

systems that can help everyone breathe a little easier. By managing the precise timing and

fuel quantity required for each cylinder, these intelligent injection systems provide immediate

responsiveness for drivers while lowering emissions and helping improve fuel economy —

for all of us. Let’s work together to clear the air. Visit www.delphi.com.

Winter 2002/3 3Ricardo Quarterly Review

contentsWinter 2002/2003

NEWS

Industry update 4Detroit Show: Cadillac’s awesome V16; GMembraces hybrids for production; Fordcelebrates centenary with sustainablehydrogen concept, and Ricardo chiefexecutive Rodney Westhead salutesHummer in his welcome message

News from Ricardo 20Ricardo signs historic accord with Japan’sHoriba; i-MoGen scoops key technologyaward; Detroit Technology Campus opensfor business; Ricardo chairman Sir Noel Davies completes centenaryLondon-Brighton run in 100-year-old car

FEATURES

Hummer H2 8GM’s first application of the legendaryHummer name for civilian use had to matchthe military icon’s spectacular all-terrainability and beat today’s luxury SUVs forcomfort too – all within a record 16-monthtimescale. GM turned to Ricardo for chassis,driveline and vehicle engineering expertise –and Jeremy Burne tells the story of aspectacular success

Software update 14WAVE v5 is the most significant softwaredevelopment project ever carried out byRicardo, making it the most comprehensiveengine performance simulation package onoffer. Anthony Smith reports

Transforming transmissions 18The Ricardo transmissions business ispoised for rapid expansion, with high-profileclients and an ever-stronger presence intop-level motorsport

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

Nissan Motor Company:Carlos Ghosn 6Architect of one of the most spectacularrevivals ever witnessed in the autobusiness, Carlos Ghosn presides over whatis now the world’s most profitable volumecarmaker. Julian Rendell asks Nissan’scelebrated leader about the secrets of theturnaround, and what the future holds

Ford of Europe:Martin Leach 16One-time development engineer MartinLeach has raced through the Ford ranks tobecome European president and CEO –and is now responsible for bringing 45 newmodels to market in five years. Tony Lewin asked him about the dauntingchallenges that lie ahead

14 6

16

8

Ricardo enquiries: UK: +44 (0) 1273 455611USA: +1 (734) 397 6666Germany: +49 (0) 711 806082-20Czech Republic: +42 0296331150

Conceived and produced for Ricardo by TwoTone Media LtdEditor: Tony LewinContributors: Julian Rendell, Jeremy Burne,

Lucienne Brown, Anthony Smith

Business development: busdev@ricardo.comHead office: Ricardo plc, Bridge Works,

Shoreham-by-Sea, West Sussex BN43 5FG, United Kingdom

TwoTone Media Ltd contacts: Anthony Smith AVSmith@2tmedia.comTony Lewin tonylewin@2tmedia.com

4 INDUSTRY NEWS Winter 2002/3Ricardo Quarterly Review

● in brief

CAFÉ tightens on US lighttrucksThe White House has given thegreen light to long-awaitedproposals for tighter light-truckfuel consumption standards inthe US. Under the proposals,2005 models would have toaverage 21.0 mpg, comparedwith the 20.1 which has been inforce since 1996. 2006 modelswill have to achieve 21.6 mpg,and 2007 versions 22.2.

Driver-assist systems comecloserThe European market fordriver-assist systems such asnight vision and intelligentcruise control will be worth 1.4billion by 2010, according toFrost & Sullivan. Already, BMWhas shown details of itsConnectedDrive plan, whichincludes online parking spacereservation, programmedparking, active acceleratorpedal and alertness monitor.

Fuel cell car struggles withcost and weightGM’s pioneering fuel cellvehicle, the Hy-Wire, is facingformidable cost and weighthurdles, according to GM vicepresident for R&D, Larry Burns.Quoted in Automotive NewsEurope, Burns said the modelwas still too heavy, at 1900kg.Nevertheless, GM still believesthe 2010 volume build target tobe feasible.

MINI scoops US awardThe BMW-group MINI Cooperhas been voted Car of the Year2003 by a panel of Americanmotoring journalists at theDetroit auto show. This is thefirst time a British car or amodel from outside the US orJapan has taken the award.

France overhauls GermanyFrench auto plants have pulledahead of German factories inproductivity, according toMcKinsey & Co. France’s leadcame as a result of greater in-house component production,said the report, though bothnations still lagged Japan andthe US in overall efficiency.

Detroit split on hybridsNew technology programmesat January’s North AmericanInternational Auto Show revealsharply differing visions of howengine design will evolve in thenear future.

General Motors, in a majorchange of strategy, has optedfor gasoline-electric hybrids ina bid to improve fuel efficiency.President and CEO RickWagoner unveiled three hybridpowertrain families, raising thepossibility of one million salesby 2007.

Ford threw a morespeculative engine conceptinto the ring, with itssupercharged, hydrogen-fuelled Model U seen, likeGM’s hybrids, as a bridgebetween today’s piston-engined vehicles and the fuelcell models of the next decade.

DaimlerChrysler, for its part,declared its faith in the dieselengine as the most realisticand cost-effective route toreduced fuel consumption inthe North American market.Launching the diesel version ofthe Jeep Liberty (Cherokee inEurope), Chrysler group CEODieter Zetsche said that theextra cost and weight ofhybrids meant that they hadnot shown a strong, convincingbusiness case.

Last year, Chrysler cancelledplans for a hybrid version of

the Dodge Durango light truck.GM’s Rick Wagoner also

conceded that the extra cost ofhybrids would be “severalthousand dollars more thanconventional vehicles”. Thethree propulsion systemswould, he said, help explorethe market for the technology.

The first of the threesystems to be offered will bean integrated starter-generatoron large pickups from late2003 for fleet custiomers andfrom 2004 for retail buyers. In2005 the Saturn Vue willinclude the option of dual

electric motor assist to boostits composite fuel efficiency byup to 50 per cent, while forsmaller models from 2006 asingle, belt-driven assist motorwill combine with VTi trans-mission to reduce consumptionby nearly 15 per cent.

Toyota, currently the world’sleading producer of hybridvehicles, revealed gasoline-electric versions of its newHighlander and Lexus RX300luxury SUVs. The 4WDplatform is already used byToyota for its limited-run FCHVfuel cell vehicle.

Not to be outdone by itsEuropean super-luxurycompetitors BMW Rolls-Royceand DaimlerChrysler Maybachboasting powerful twelve-cylinder engines, GM’sprestige Cadillac divisionneatly combined companytradition with modern designwhen it unveiled the sleekSixteen limousine conceptpowered by a V16 engine.Displacing a mammoth 13.6litres, the aluminium engine isclaimed to give 1000

horsepower, morethan five timesthe power ofits 1930snamesake.Peak torque isstated at 1000lb.ft (1356 Nm), andGM claims the fully dressedmotor, at 311kg, weighs lessthan the group’s 8.1 litre V8.The giant unit is said to meetemissions requirements withease.While pushrod actuation is

used for the two valves servingeach cylinder, variable valvetiming and cylinderdeactivation help reduce fuelconsumption under cruiseconditions. GM says that theV16 would make close to 20US mpg (11.3 lit/100km) infour-cylinder mode.

Luxury boom sparks technology war

Rick Wagonerannounces GM’s hybridprogramme (above);Lexus Hybrid SynergyDrive is performanceoriented (right)

Cadillac V16:recalls firm’sheritage

Winter 2002/3 INDUSTRY NEWS 5Ricardo Quarterly Review

The Hummer brand hasdeveloped something of aniconic status throughout NorthAmerica in the past decade,with the first civilianderivative, the 1992 HummerH1, becoming both afavourite of the most extremeoff-road enthusiasts and a'must have' fashion accessoryof the super-rich. In the latterpart of 1999 Ricardo wasapproached by GM to assistin taking this brand forwardinto potentially much largermarkets through a completelynew and more compactvehicle: the Hummer H2.While many will be familiarwith the H2, only those closeto the programme will beaware of the scale of itsachievement: a completelynew, segment-definingvehicle developed in only 16months. As ever, we aregrateful to GM for granting itspermission to bring this storyto readers of RQ.

A messagefrom theChiefExecutive

Chrysler Group president andCEO Dieter Zetsche described as“a true melting pot of cultures” theDCX group’s plan to add a USproduction facility to its GlobalEngine Alliance programme.

Speaking at the Los AngelesAuto Show, Zetsche said that theplant would be co-managed byexecutives from all three of theparticipating companies –Mitsubishi Motors Corporation,Hyundai Motor Company and, inthe lead, the Chrysler Group.

The family of fuel and

emissions-efficient four cylinderaluminium engines are claimed tobe state of the art in their design.Annual output across the threefacilities in Korea, Japan and theUS will be in excess of 1.5 million,making the Word Enginepotentially the highest volume unitin production.

A decision on the US plant’slocation has yet to be taken, butthe facility is set to beginproduction in 2005. Hyundai’sKorean plant will be the first onstream in 2004.

World Engine adds US production site

A supercharged four-cylinderICE engine running onhydrogen may be the headlinetechnical innovation on Ford’sModel U concept, shown at theDetroit NAIAS show inJanuary, but the model’simportance extends wellbeyond this deliberate link withpost-2010 fuel cell power.

Celebrating both Ford’s100th anniversary and theModel T that made thecompany world famous, the UConcept seeks to mimic theModel T’s versatile, flexibleapproach, but with a 21st-century sustainability to thematerials and processes used.The U’s interior is fullyreconfigurable, allowingdifferent seating andequipment patterns, andpermitting regular upgrades asthe vehicle goes through itslife, or perhaps changes itsuse; the materials employedadvance a new ‘cradle tocradle’ approach tosustainability and do not movedown the value chain whenrecycled.

Ford claims to have solvedthe age-old problem ofinadequate power fromgasoline engines fed onhydrogen. Using a centrifugalsupercharger and a two stageintercooler, the 2.3 litre I-4engine gives 118 horsepower

at 4500 rev/min; this is alliedto the 25kW of the modularhybrid transmission system’sassist motor to give aconsumption of 45 miles(72km) per kilogram ofhydrogen – which Ford claimsis equivalent to 45 US mpg(5.0 lit/100km). The hydrogentank can store 7kg of fuel atup to 10,000 psi (690 bar)and, says Ford, thepowertrain’s efficiency is 25per cent greater than that of agasoline model. CO2

emissions are cut by 99 percent, giving compliance withPZEV standards.

Unusually, the second-stageinduction intercooling uses thevehicle’s air conditioningsystem to dissipate heat. Alsoinnovative are the wireless

gear shifter – it can be placedin a variety of locations,though the pedals are fixed –and the conversational speechinterface, which allows full-vocabulary natural (rather thanscripted) voice control of on-board systems.

Safety systems include pre-crash sensing, while adaptivelighting, active near-infrareddiode laser night vision andcameras mounted in the sidemirrors improve hazardperception for the driver underadverse conditions.

The fruit of high-levelcollaboration with 19 suppliers,the Model U’s technologiesare deliberately forward-looking and radical. Thevehicle is suitable for massproduction, says Ford.

Ford U signals change

One of the most outrageous concepts shown at Detroit was Dodge’s Tomahawk, described as a “four-wheel, single passenger vehicle; arolling sculpture.” Power comes from the Viper’s500 horsepower, 8-litre V10

‘Le cost-cutter’ deliversCarlos Ghosn surprised analysts with his bold 1999 Revival Strategy for Nissan afterRenault took control earlier the same year. Still more were amazed when Nissan achievedits ambitious targets a year ahead of schedule. Today, Ghosn’s Nissan enjoys the highestmargins of any volume carmaker and is poised for profitable growth in partnership withRenault. Julian Rendell spoke to the Nissan CEO as the first new-generation Micras rolledoff the Sunderland production line.

6 CARLOS GHOSN Winter 2002/3Ricardo Quarterly Review

How would you describe the new Nissancreated under your leadership?It’s a company with Japanese essence, butopening up and embracing globalmanagement practices. It will be the mostglobal Japanese company. Not in terms of thestyle of its cars, but in its management.

Nissan’s total production is close toHonda’s and growing. When will youovertake Honda?It’s not our objective. We never put ourobjective to be number one, two or three. Ourobjective is to be one of the most profitablecar companies ever. Ranking is aconsequence of this. If you start putting sizeas an objective, you start making the wrongdecisions.

What objectives do you have?Instead, we have some quality objectives.Such as being in the top three for quality. Andprofitability targets. We are very happy tohave the second largest market capitalisationin the car industry after Toyota. Three yearsago we were at about number ten. It meansthere now is a lot of shareholder trust.

If Nissan is gaining market share, is thisthrough aggressive sales practices?Our market share is going up in our mainmarkets. But we are not getting it by putting[out] the best deals in town. We are getting itby putting out some attractive products.

Nissan’s operating margin is 10.6 per cent,

one of the highest in the industry. Whenyou became CEO three years ago, did youexpect to achieve this so soon?Since 1999 you can see in all my statements Ihave always said the potential is huge; I’venever been shy about it. And the fact that it is10.6 per cent is very refreshing. But what ismore promising is that I think there is a lotmore potential.

Where will future growth come from?Certainly the US. Our product offensive hasn’treally started there. You’re going to have theG35 coupe, the Infiniti FX45 and Muranocrossovers, and the Maxima sedan. TheMaxima is part of the bread and butter ofNissan. Then there’s the new Quest minivan.Now we are not participating in the minivansegment in the US, worth 1.1m cars.

So what does this mean for profitability?All these cars are not entry-level models. I’mtalking about segments of the market that arevery profitable. But how much operatingmargin we will reach? I don’t know. Ourcommitment was to be at the top level ofprofitability. And we are there now. Whathappens next? It depends on the economicenvironment, obviously. But with Nissan 180[stage two of Ghosn’s restructuring plan] wewill be up there.

How is the progress with Nissan 180?Very good. We have the dynamic and themomentum from the Revival Plan [Ghosn’sinitial restructuring plan]. When I first talkedabout 180, it was May 2001. At that moment[the] operating profit of the company was 4.7per cent. Announcing an 8 per cent operating

margin was bold.

Maybe you should change the180 plan to take account of

your success?On the contrary, when Ishowed our financial resultsto the analysts at the end of

October, some of themasked: ‘Don’t you thinkyou’re going too fast.’ I

say you can’t change it. If you announce aplan, you have to stick with it.

The car industry is one of the mostregulated in the world. What are the nextbig legislative challenges?I think it depends on the country. It will be verydifferent between Europe, the US, Japan andChina. But I think the most difficult andchallenging is going to be about theenvironment.

How ready are you for this next step?It’s not something that shocks us. But youwant to make sure that the regulation on theenvironment is effective. When I say effective,I mean addressing the real issue. Forexample, from time to time there is aconfusion between the technology and theconsequence.

Can you explain that?We should be specific about the consequenceon the environment and not just specify thetechnology. I don’t know if the electric car orthe hybrid car or whatever is the answer. Ineed to know exactly what kind of emissionsare allowed and then I can select mytechnology. But I don’t want the regulator totell me what sort of technology I should use.The regulator doesn’t know the technology. Itis a tool, not an objective. The public doesn’tcare about the technology; the public caresabout the consequences.

Which direction do you think legislatorswill go?Frankly, one of the challenges we face is [that]there’s a lot of confusion between theconsequences and the technology. What is[the level of] CO2 emissions that isacceptable? What is the fuel efficiency? WhatNOx will be acceptable? And in terms ofregulation, there are going to be a lot ofdebates about this.

You have worked at both Renault andNissan. How would you rate the potentialof Nissan compared to Renault?Renault has a lot of potential, too. But the

Winter 2002/3 CARLOS GHOSN 7Ricardo Quarterly Review

point is that I don’t think Renault has everbeen mismanaged as Nissan was.

You have installed capacity for 500,000units at Sunderland. When will you reachthat figure?When we need it. With the Micra, Almera andPrimera we have planned 360,000 to 370,000units. So we negotiated with the unions tohave the possibility to have the organisationapproved by them in order to have the500,000. Essentially we can move from two tothree shifts.

Sunderland would need another product orderivative to reach 500,000. Is that going tohappen?We don’t talk that way. The plant is here toserve the product; not the other way around.So if we have a product we will do it. But we’renot going to fill Sunderland just to get to

500,000. The 500,000 capacity is much morea flexibility, an opportunity not an obligation.

What is the next big decision atSunderland?That will be the investment for the nextAlmera. We will make a decision this summer.

How will you decide?Obviously the issue of the Euro is veryimportant. Although we invested in the Micra inSunderland, we switched most of our partspurchasing to the Euro. We used to buy 20 percent of our parts in the Euro. Now we buy 70per cent. In some cases that meant sourcingon the Continent, but some UK-basedcompanies agreed to accept payment in Euros.

So what is the long-term implication ofBritain staying out of the Euro?It is not just our parts purchasing, but also

assembling. This is no secret. What isimportant is to have a proper debate. Put allthe stakes on the table. Anyway this is adecision that is going to be taken by the UKpeople. The government has been very clearabout that. So whatever the UK peopledecide, they carry the consequences.

What are your hopes for Nissan’s sales inEurope next year?Hopefully next year we will have our highestvolume of sales ever. Our previous highestwas 550,000. We should beat that. And thenew Micra will be an important part of that. We are replacing a car that is ten years old.

Are you worried about a possibleslowdown in the US market next year?I am not worried because I’m expecting it andit is already part of our plan. Anything between16m and 16.5m cars is expected and wouldbe OK. Now, below 16m everybody is going tosuffer, but I’m not seeing any sign of that. Forthe last four years, since I’ve been at thiscompany, everybody has been pessimisticabout the US. And each year the US becomesstronger than the year before.

Do you think Nissan’s 15 per cent cross-holding in Renault ought to change?FundamentalIy, I believe that if you want tocreate value, you have to respect identity. Ithink nothing should be done, one way oranother. I think a full merger will destroy value.And frankly, when I look around at fullmergers, I don’t see much competition withthis statement. Look at the shareholder valuewe have created compared to mergers.

Do you feel the pressure of mastermindingone of the car industry’s greatest-everturnarounds?Obviously I always feel the pressure. But it’snot outside pressure, it’s inside opportunity.We have the team, the leadership to go for it.And we’re going for it.

Julian Rendell is a senior car industry writer

Carlos Ghosn1976 Graduated from Ecole

Polytechnique, Paris1978 Graduated from Ecole des Mines,

Paris; joined Michelin1989 President and CEO, Michelin

North America1996 Joined Renault as executive vice

president1999 Joined Nissan as chief operating

officer2000 President of Nissan2001 President and CEO, Nissan2002 Appointed to Renault board; vice-

president of Renault-NissanAlliance board

Vehicle manufacturers are on a constantquest to maintain competitiveness.Among the associated challenges are

how to leverage brand identity, and how todesign and develop new “must-have”products and bring them to marketquicker. Equally vital is to know how tomake best use of resources and howto leverage supplier capabilities.

The Hummer H2 is a vehicle thathas taken on all these challenges.Of course, it took someunconventional approaches tomake it happen, but the endresult is a vehicle that, eventhough it is still young, is alreadybeing credited as a hugesuccess for General Motors. Ateam of engineers from Ricardobecame central to the projectat an early stage, and sharedin the experience of helpingGM achieve some significantindustry firsts as thisprogramme was brought tofruition.

The genesis of the H2 lies firmlyin the Hummer brand identity, andin General Motors’ recognition thatthe brand could be developed into the next-generation military spin-off for enthusiastic off-roading consumers. The Hummer brandbelonged to AM General, a contractor with along history of building military vehicles,

includingthe High MobilityMulti-Purpose WheeledVehicle (HMMWV) commonly know asthe “Humvee”. This vehicle spawned theconsumer version Hummer (now known as theH1) in 1992 – a favourite for hard-core off-roaders that was glamorised by celebritiessuch as Arnold Schwarzenegger.

It seemed a good idea to GM’s productplanners to try to develop a less intimidatinglyvast – and thus more practical – model thatmarried Hummer ruggedness and off-roadauthenticity with the comfort and utility oftoday’s ubiquitous sport utility vehicles. After all,DaimlerChrysler had successfully co-opted themilitary heritage of the Jeep into a modernbrand icon, so why shouldn’t the samepossibilities exist with the Hummer brand?

GM quickly saw a market niche andinitiated negotiations with AM General. At firstGM wanted to license the brand only, but AMGeneral had determined that it would like toexpand its manufacturing business. Amemorandum of understanding was signed inJune 1999, and a final agreement between thetwo companies was reached six months later.GM would design what was to become the H2,while AM General would manufacture it onGM’s behalf on a fee basis.

In many ways, that was the easy part. The

The tough get going

● Best-in-class off-road performance

● Climbs 16-inch (400mm) verticalwall

● Fords 20-inch (500mm) river● Scales 60 per cent slope● Traverses 40 per cent slope● Seats 6/7● Range 567km● No direct competitor

Vehicle performance

8 HUMMER H2 Winter 2002/3Ricardo Quarterly Review

The only thing tougher than the Hummer H2 was its design brief. GM’s first application of the legendary Hummer name for mainstream use had to match the extreme rock-crawling,river-wading indestructibility of the military icon, yet provide the on-highway luxury expected by affluent SUV customers – all from a clean sheet of paper, and in a record 16 months.Jeremy Burne recounts how GM chose Ricardo as a pivotal partner in this mighty success

principals at GM and AM General had setthemselves some tough challenges that wouldneed to be overcome in bringing their sharedvision to reality. These were some of theabsolute essentials in the H2 equation:

● Brand integrity: it was paramount that theH2 embody the rugged mobility of the Hummerbrand. It needed to excel in the most extremeoff-road conditions. It would have to prove tothe automotive media and consumers that theH2 was not just a badge-engineered sportsutility. The HMMWV gained massive exposurefrom the Gulf War – the H2’s military ancestryis the basis for its brand heritage.

● Driveability: The H2 needed to be acomfortable and pleasant drive on the highwayand around town.

● Manufacturing: Production of the H2 wouldnecessitate a brand new greenfieldmanufacturing plant dedicated to the product,with an all-new workforce.

● Marketability: it needed some rugged sexappeal to reach its intended customer base.GM could not afford the exterior design to beanything but totally authentic. Furthermore, GMhad been promoting an aggressive strategy of

introducing a barrage of “must-have” newproducts with innovative design, of which theH2 was one of the first tantalizing offerings.Bringing in Bob Lutz as vice chairmanunderscored the company’s desire to fulfill thispromise. GM’s reputation was at stake.

● Speed to market: GM had wanted to reduceits vehicle development programme times from48 to 24 months. The H2 was to go evenfurther – 16 months from design freeze to“Start of System Fill” – when production partsfirst arrive at the plant. This wasunprecedented for a GM vehicle.

● Leveraging resources: GM needed toleverage both outside suppliers and existingtruck platforms to reduce the cost base and tomeet the demanding schedule of deadlines.

Tackling these challenges head-on wasfurther complicated by the lack of internalresources that faced both GM and AMGeneral. Neither company could contributesufficient staff to complete the project internally,so it was imperative that outside expertise bebrought in to become part of the team andmove the process along.

It rapidly became clear that the only wayto achieve the objectives

was through a dedicated team ofprofessionals from all disciplines, drawn

from GM, AM General and suppliers. Thewhole team needed to share the vision, sharethe work and share the urgency that wasrequired to meet these challenges.

Jumping in at the deep endWhile there were many who contributed to thesuccessful H2 programme, every teamrequires a leader.

When you have multiple teams, you needa diplomatic leader. GM appointed BillKnapp, a long-time GM employee with a

career’s worth of experience intrucks, and made him programmeengineering manager for the H2. Herecalls getting the offer to take onthe task: “I was approached by theboss who asked me ‘would you liketo be the leader of this project – oh –and other than [the fact that] it’sgoing to be a new Hummer – you areon your own!’

“That’s quite some challenge,”remarks Knapp. “It’s got to be a Hummer,

look like a Hummer and act like a Hummer– oh, and by the way we want you to do it

faster than any other programme we haveever done at GM! Not only that, but you haveto work with a partner, AM General, with whomwe’ve never worked before, and we are goingto build a brand new plant in a greenfieldsomewhere!

“So I said, ‘sure – I’ll give it a shot!’ It is aonce-in-a-lifetime opportunity for anyone in theautomotive industry to work with a greenfieldplant, an exciting new brand, and a brand newproduct. You can either walk away and think itwould drive you crazy or you can take it on andsee what you can do.

“The first thing we had to do was nail downexactly what we wanted this product to be,”continues Knapp. “I did not have a backgroundin off-road vehicles. From a technicalperspective I had to do some learning on my

Winter 2002/3 HUMMER H2 9Ricardo Quarterly Review

● 16 month programme from stylingfreeze to Job 1. Usual GM processis 36 to 48 months

● Unique programme processes andrapid tasking through existing GM ITand component release systems.

● Brand new truck in a new brandportfolio for GM

● Ricardo engineering team assembled within two months fromthe UK and US

● Ricardo team did all chassis andpowertrain engineering, design,analysis, validation sign-off

● Set performance requirements suitable for broad ability spectrum ofthe truck

● Full portfolio of corporate & federaltesting and validation

● Addressed all resulting engineeringrequirements in less than 12months

● Testing of mule vehicles in mountains and deserts

● Located suppliers who could reactto timing and integration performance requirements

● Production launch engineering andproduction support

Programme performance

10 HUMMER H2 Winter 2002/3Ricardo Quarterly Review

own as to what it means to build an off-roadvehicle. You have a wide range of what peoplethink off-roading is, from a dirt two-trackcottage lane to some of the most extreme trailsthat we put this vehicle through during thedevelopment process.”

Bill Knapp and his small team of GMcolleagues assigned to the programme set upoffice in Pontiac. There they began the first keyprocess of finding the partners needed toprovide the manpower and engineeringexpertise for the project.

“This programme was put together reallyfast – when you go back in time from a GMresource perspective this was a project createdin a hurry. When we looked around we had alot of other things going on at the time: fromthe truck business side of it we had the GMT-800 product still in the development stage andwe were just one year into the GMT 360 line –so from a resource and technical perspectivewe were tapped out.

“We didn’t have the design-releaseengineers, we didn’t have the developmentengineers to pull this project off.”

Building the H2 team “At the time [autumn/winter 1999],” remembersKnapp, “we only had a half dozen technicalpeople we could assign to it – and that’s wherethe second part of the marriage came into itwith Ricardo and EDAG. The target was set inDecember ‘99 – we wanted a vehicle inproduction by the first quarter of 2002. So Itook as much liberty as I could and set a startof production date as March 29, 2002.

“That meant we had two years to gather upa team, design and develop a vehicle, andsupport the building of a greenfield plant, while

Beyond traction control: the H2’s seven clever transmission modes

Electronic management of the H2’s four wheeldrive transmission, its transfer gearbox, enginethrottle control and ABS braking system allowexceptional on and off-highway performance,even under extreme conditions.

The system’s intelligence allows it todistinguish between different types of surfaceto select the appropriate parameters for thedrive and braking system, while five driver-selected transmission modes cater foreverything from highway driving to deep mudand sand or climbing over logs and boulders.Selecting low ratio puts the engine’s drive-by-wire throttle onto a different map, with adeliberately more gradual response to thepedal. There is even a special throttle responsesetting designed to optimise towingperformance, while an additional tractioncontrol mode, TC2, allows what experiencedoff-road drivers already know – that a certaindegree of deliberate wheelspin is useful ingetting through loose or deformable surfacessuch as sand.

Driving conditions Mode What the system does

4HI

4HI-LOCKED

4LO-LOCKED

4LO-LOCKED+TC2

4LO-LOCKED+REAR DIFFLOCKED

4LO-LOCKED+REAR DIFF

LOCKED+TC2

NEUTRAL

Permanent four wheel drive, high ratio

For semi-slippery areas, eg boat launch ramp.Locks front and rear outputs at same speed

Low-ratio crawler gear for tricky conditions; moretorque, more measured throttle response curve;maximum power to all four wheels

TC2 traction control map allows extra wheelspinto drive through loose surfaces

Optimises rear traction for optimum slow-speedclimbing performance over tricky obstacles

As above, but with additional tractive effort forloose surfaces

Allows H2 to be towed with all four wheels onthe road

Street and highway, moderate off-road

On and off-road, snow,sand, wet surfaces

Severe off-road use;negotiating logs, rocks

Deep sand or mud

Off-road, long, steepgrades, rocks

Deep sand or mud

When H2 is being towed

Winter 2002/3 HUMMER H2 11Ricardo Quarterly Review

working with an outside source that we’d neverworked with before – not only the designengineers but AM General: we had neverworked with them before, either. They were inthe same boat in that they had hired a wholenew workforce too.

“I had experience with many of thecompanies who bid for the project, such asMagna, MSX, Hawtal-Whiting. I hadexperience with everyone except EDAG andRicardo,” continues Knapp. “I had heard ofRicardo but had never personally worked withthem in the past. So I did what anyone woulddo when they put their career on hold for threeyears – I made a few phone calls. I calledsome people I know in GM Europe and somepeople in the Detroit area, and discoveredRicardo had been doing work in the engineside of the business with GM but not so muchin the chassis end of it. All I got was positivefeedback, so within a week we made thedecision that this was the team to go with.”

With an engineering group manager and amulti-disciplinary team of chassis, powertrainand CAE engineers drawn from three separateRicardo offices, the Ricardo team was chargedwith designing and integrating all of the chassisand powertrain systems, including thecompletely new front and rear axles, transfercase and driveline, traction control system,suspensions, chassis frame, induction, exhaustand fuel systems.

The decision to appoint the Ricardo teamwas clearly one that Knapp does not regret.

“From a GM perspective there was never aproject that was developed, designed, releasedand brought to fruition as quickly as this project– and that’s a first for General Motors.”

The United Nations of H2GM’s choices for partners led to aninternational team of dedicated engineers thatbecame jokingly known as the “UnitedNations”. The team was comprised ofAmericans, Germans, British, Irish, Czechs,Polish and Japanese. Ricardo sent in TomReedy, its engineering group manager for GM,to team up with Bill Knapp – and AM General’sdirector of engineering, John Smreker, wasbusy with building the new plant and themanufacturing engineering issues. He

remembers the challenge of working withpeople from such a variety of countries:

“It was almost comical at times – theJapanese guys trying to speak to theHungarian guys in English: sometimes it got alittle weird. Many of the people hadn’t workedin the GM system before and the idea was forTom Reedy and his colleagues at Ricardo tocome in and function as GM engineers. Theproduct was released into the GM engineeringsystem, they created the bill of materials, GMfound and contracted all the suppliers and thenthe parts were sent on consignment to AMGeneral – we would build the vehicle and thensend it back to them. We never took ownershipof the parts, which all belonged to GM. So theonly function AM General were providing at thispoint was the vehicle assembly. We had totrain all these people from diversebackgrounds to work in the GM system and toperform all the GM quality checks, engineeringand management functions. And of course onthe AM General side we didn’t know anythingabout those processes either!”

Bill Knapp also recalls the early days in theprogramme: “The main struggle during the firstfour to five months was to find a commonlanguage and culture. In the early days I hadpeople speaking Japanese in one corner,German in another corner and the Englishguys in another corner and sometimes I didn’tunderstand any of them! The positive thatcame out was that we got back to basics – westarted calling things what people really callthem, we didn’t start making acronyms – wecalled a fender a fender, not an outer bodypanel. Basic language.”

To gain early hands-on experience of thedemands that would be placed on the vehicle,the team of engineers from GM, Ricardo andAM General decided to do some testing.Taking a small fleet of Hummer H1s and arange of North American trucks, the team wentoff-roading in Kentucky. John Smreker recallsthe immediate impressions after testing:

“At the end of the day, all the H1s wereparked in one area and the regular trucks inanother. The AM General technicians simplygot out the garden hose to wash off the H1s toget back on the road and drive back.Meanwhile the GM technicians were beating

fenders out of wheel wells and trying to makedoors open again and so forth. We had awrap-up meeting to discuss what we hadlearned and to determine the key productcharacteristics that had to be carried over intothe H2. The H1s had been off-road all day andthey were ready to go home after a good wash– nothing else required. That’s where wewanted the H2 to be. As an H2 customer youshould be able to go out and do whatever youwant to do all day long and the only thing youneed to do to get ready to drive home or tochurch is wash the truck. And so that wasalways kind of a focus for the performance ofthe vehicle.”

Process violations permitted!Bill Knapp knew early on that in order to bringthis programme to fruition, it would meanbreaking a few rules. “I told Bob Lutz that toget this done I would probably end up in GMjail because I was breaking every process rulein GM that’s documented. He laughed and saidif you can pull this off, that’s the kind of peopleI want working here. So he took his businesscard and signed on the back “Process ViolationPermit – Bob Lutz” and he told me ‘anytimeanyone gives you a hard time about breaking arule on the project, you have them give me acall and we’ll talk about it.’ Fortunately I didn’thave to use this card for anything, because Iwas given the green light to do whatever it tookto get this project done.”

John Smreker and the team not only had tolearn the GM system, but how to get around it.“GM has various vehicle-building templates.When we got there they had typically done a48-month programme. They were executingsome 24-month programmes that were notcompleted yet, so they didn’t know if that was

Hummer H2 and H1 compared

Hummer H2 Hummer H1Engine V8 gasoline V8 turbo dieselHorsepower @ rpm 316 @ 5200 195 @ 3400Torque @ rpm 488 Nm@ 4000 583 Nm@1800Length 4821mm 4674mmWheelbase 3119mm 3302mmWidth 2062mm 2197mmVertical wall climb 406mm 559mmWading depth 500mm 750mmIncline climb angle 60% 60%Incline traverse angle 40% 40%Approach angle 40.8 deg 72.0 degDeparture angle 41.8 deg 37.7 degBreakover angle 27.5 deg 35.0 degGround clearance 272mm 406mmFuel tank 32 US gal 25+17 US galKerb weight 2909 kg 3252 kgTrailer weight 3182 kg 2955 kgPrice from $49,190 $117,500

Source: Hummer, GM. H2 figures include optional air suspension; H1 figures are for wagon version

“From a GM perspectivethere was never a projectthat was developed,designed, released andbrought to fruition asquickly as this – Bill Knapp, GM

really going to work. They had a template for18 and they wanted us to do the 18.

“We found out later if you read theassumptions that it says ‘Thou shalt never builda new plant on a 24-month schedule.’ Well, wewent to the 18-month schedule and built a newplant with a new workforce, so we were evenmore aggressive than that. And then one daythe design manager at GM said he had beendoing a little arithmetic and that this 18-monthprogramme is actually a 16-month programmewhen you go back and start counting.

“I was the only on-site AM General person atPontiac so I would get all the calls. My taskthere was to look after the design of the vehicle– and to participate as a consultant on themanufacturing issues. But early on I spent a lotof time just trying to unravel the GM system forour guys back in South Bend. It was kind oflike reading a mystery novel.

“Bill Knapp knows the GM systems insideout; he wrote some of the procedures. But for alot of us this was the first experience, so wewould be bouncing along thinking we were inpretty good shape and then Bill Knapp wouldcome along and ask if we were prepared for a‘Quality Valve’ meeting next week. ‘What’s theQuality Valve, Bill?’ It’s actually a meetingwhere you decide whether or not to go forwardwith the project. GM does that on all itsprojects. So we’d have to scurry off and figureout what that was and what we had to do toprepare for it. Then we’d get by that hurdle andit would be “How many guys do you want foryour FE event? Then we would have to go offand learn about that!

Chassis designGetting through the GM system was, of course,only one of the hurdles. The engineering teamhad to meet the significant chassis designchallenge. Bill Knapp and the team from AMGeneral and Ricardo started to look at whatparts from existing platforms could be utilised inthe H2, and what needed to be developed fromscratch. While the H2 was a “clean sheet”design, it made commercial sense to integrateexisting parts from GM’s family of trucks wherepossible – this would help reduce developmenttime and costs. However, while there were

many components on the H2 that were alreadyproven in GM vehicles, most required someform of modification.

“The first critical step was rough packaging.The first rule in building an off-road car is youget the biggest tyres you can, then get evenbigger ones, and essentially we started outfrom a ground-up philosophy. Then we startedon the chassis, which is where Ricardo comesin, while the designers set to making it look likea Hummer.” Tom Reedy knew that Ricardowould have a significant technical challenge inengineering and integrating the complex GMClass II controlled chassis and powertrainsystems, given the H2’s performance targets:“The H2 is coming into the marketplace withsome unique selling points which give it what Iwould describe as a new, previouslyunexplored market niche. These are that it’s avery broadly capable SUV because it performslike a Cadillac Escalade on the freeway –drives very smoothly, very competently andhandles beautifully around city roads and intraffic – while off-road it is enormouslycompetent. We engineered the H2 to performwell on Class I to Class V trails in the US. Thistypically spans a sand-gravel desert trackwhere you can exceed speeds of 85mph overbumps, potholes and washboard features – toa two-day rocker-bar-grinding crawl over the8.5 mile Rubicon Trail with huge boulders, 100per cent grades, desperate side slopes,eighteen inch multiple steps and deep holes.Our first Rubicon and Moab test trucks had the

12 HUMMER H2 Winter 2002/3Ricardo Quarterly Review

A key part of the H2’s chassis is itsrocker protection, essential for extremeoff-road applications. Ricardo waschallenged to find the optimumconfiguration for the rocker tubes:

Knapp: “On the chassis we knew thatthe rocker panels on our trucks gotdamaged in extreme use from pivotingaround rocks, and needed to bestrengthened. We had about three orfour iterations of the tubes along theside of the truck.”

Smreker: “There are two tubes thatare mounted into the frame verysecurely – we tried it on the body, andthe body is itself extremely robust; wetried various configurations and itturned out it needed to be mounted onthe frame. We went through a numberof iterations to make it strong enough tosurvive.”

Reedy: “The rocker protection isunusually strong. It’s really part of anextreme off-road protection package forthe truck, which not only protects thechassis frame and the drivelinecomponents but also the bodywork,since it sticks out either side of thechassis frame. It took a phenomenalamount of design resource. It may bejust a tube, but it’s a phenomenallystrong tube.

We used a significant amount ofdesign analysis to model this as astructural system as part of the chassisframe. You can actually jack the truckup off the ground at any point along thisrocker bar without the bar deforming or bending. You can hinge the truckaround rocks and boulders by skidding the rocker tube along rocksand boulders – and that’s what it’s there for.”

Rocker tubes to support the wholevehicle weight

Structural analysis was used todesign rocker tubes strongenough to support the whole vehicle weight without damage

“The H1s had been off-roadall day and they were readyto go home after a goodwash. That’s where wewanted the H2to be.”

– John Smreker, AM General

Winter 2002/3 HUMMER H2 13Ricardo Quarterly Review

standard H2 9000 pound winches fitted and wenever needed to use them.”

To achieve that mix of performance in avehicle means that you have to consider andintegrate particular technologies in the chassisand drivetrain system which may not be on avehicle that, for instance, is more highway-biased, such as a Toyota Sequoia, RangeRover, Ford Explorer or Lincoln Navigator.

“The mule vehicles, the first ones we everbuilt, started off with orthodox truck suspensionbut we rapidly found that we needed to dosome tuning work,” says Reedy. “So we usedADAMS analysis.”

ADAMS is a tool Ricardo uses to modelchassis and powertrain mounting systems todetermine compliance, loading and modalperformance. It enables engineers to optimisepowertrain mountings for refinement andstructural performance and tweak suspensionsystems for vehicle dynamics.

Tom Reedy and his team from Ricardo setup a full-vehicle ADAMS model – starting withfront and rear suspension models, which wereeventually joined together as a completevehicle system. Ricardo did a significantamount of ADAMS work to design thegeometry of the suspension, which wascompletely re-thought at the rear and tweakedat the front.

“Of all the design analysis work we did earlyon, probably about 70 per cent of our time andeffort went into designing the chassis frame –and wherever possible we strove to lead thedesign with the analysis. For example, wewould look at a basic package layout of abracket and its requirement for performancestiffness and mobility, we’d analyse it, we’d lookat the weak points on that bracket and we’dredesign it and start committing to soft tools,then go off to test the vehicle with the soft toolpart on it. Because we led the design withanalysis and because we had defined what thetruck had to do from the start, we could get alot of things right first time.

“We took some of the very expensive partsfrom the GMT-800, where it made sense froma performance point of view, and used them onthe H2. That’s basically the hydroformings, thebent parts of the chassis. We built the rest of

the frame around thosehydroformings. We made theframe extremely stiff so that thesuspension can be tuned to theultimate performance withoutworrying about the framemoving around. That’s crucialfor both on-road refinement andoff-road performance andmobility.” Some of the moreintricate chassis challengeswere the chassis andunderbody protection shields,rocker bars and general off-road protection.

The H2 deliversIn the end, the team from GM, AM General,EDAG and Ricardo is rightfully proud of itsaccomplishments. The H2 has been wellreceived by the media and consumers alike,and looks set to meet all expectations.

For Ricardo Vehicle Engineering managingdirector Dr Clive Hickman, the Hummer H2programme was a key success, not only on atechnical level but also in terms of rapid-response integration with a major customer’ssystems and procedures. “The Ricardoengineering team was assembled within twomonths from the US and the UK to work withinthe GM system to deliver this new product,”says Hickman. “The targets were immenselytough in what was an exceptionally wide-ranging challenge, perhaps, but one whichRicardo, with its extensive vehicle engineering

programme experience, was confident to takeon board.”

Bill Knapp also credits this highly flexible andintegrated approach as a success factor. “Oneof the good things was that Ricardo wasextremely responsive to the need for people. Ifwe got to a pinch point in the programmewhere somebody was overloaded, they werevery good at bringing someone in to get theprogramme back on track.

“Ricardo provided a great team of engineers,they worked extremely hard and they had agreat attitude.

“As the manager of the programme,” addedKnapp, “I found that extremely helpful to meand it’s one of the things I learned that I tookback to GM – that if you can bring people inand out in a timely manner as needed, you canreally move things along.”

The suspension system presented severalengineering challenges. To achieveoptimum integration of the axle Ricardo dida significant amount of advanced ADAMSpre-analysis work. Ricardo specialistsanalysed the elastic and kinematicperformance of the suspension, changed allthe bush rates and all the jounce (bumpstop) and rebound stop rates, and madethe brackets as stiff as possible. They alsohad to accommodate an air suspensionoption.

John Smreker: “One of the hallmarks ofthe Hummer is that it’s ‘overbuilt’ and

offers extreme cargo-carrying capacity. Soa decision was made relatively early on tomake this about an 8600lb (3900kg) GVWtruck.

Tom Reedy: “The decision to use thefive-link suspension in the 2500configuration was made in advance. Butthe rear-beam axle was a fundamentalclean sheet redesign that we did fromscratch – all we had was the ring andpinion to start with – it’s a brand new rearaxle. We also then took the existing linksand fundamentally re-engineered thegeometry of the rear axle – where the linksmount on to the axle, where they mountonto the chassis frame, the angle ofinclination, to give us this full articulationability on the axle.”

Full articulation:suspension designfor extremes

Rear axle: cleansheet design

“It’s a very broadly capableSUV because it performslike a Cadillac Escalade onthe freeway – handlesbeautifully around cityroads and in traffic – whileoff-road it is enormouslycompetent.”

– Tom Reedy, Ricardo

14 WAVE v5 Winter 2002/3Ricardo Quarterly Review

It’s approaching midday on November 20thand about 40 Ricardo CAE staff atShoreham are awaiting the start of an

internal briefing by Ricardo Software. Thetiming represents a compromise between theworking day needs of Greenwich Mean, USEastern Standard and Central European Timezones as the presentation is beingsimultaneously webcast over a secure internetlink to Ricardo technical centres throughoutEurope and North America. The subject of thebriefing and the reason for this level of interestis the latest – and potentially the mostsignificant ever – release of Ricardo’s market-leading WAVE engine performance simulationpackage.

Ricardo Software President Dr. RichardJohns introduces the briefing by announcingthat WAVE v5 has been the largest software

development project ever undertaken byRicardo and that the new product will bereleased to customers on November 26.Achieved in the space of only 18 months, thisdevelopment has been a tightly co-ordinatedeffort by a team of 25 multi-skilled softwareengineers based at the Chicago, Shorehamand Prague technical centres. The result hasbeen the most significant root and branchdevelopment of the product since its firstlaunch in the late 1980s.

Co-ordinated roll-outThe launch of WAVE v5 is being supported bya programme of user seminars in Europe,North America and Japan based on similarmaterial to this internal briefing, backed up by anumber of individual in-company sessions. Theaim of all of these sessions is to bring usersquickly up to speed on the new featuresavailable to them in WAVE v5. In addition, arange of training options are offered and acomprehensive WAVE v5 web site has beenlaunched at www.ricardo.com/WAVE5providing details of new features, applications,training courses and a range of other essentialinformation for users.

Commercial ChangesApart from the many technical enhancements,WAVE v5 signals some significant commercialchanges in approach for Ricardo Software.Previous versions of WAVE have been offeredwith a range of optional modules from whichthe customer could select – and pay for – justthose which would be of use to each individuallicensed seat. This led to some very confusinglicence structures for both customers andRicardo. Moreover, from a marketing stand-point, prospective customers would sometimestend to add the cost of all the modules together– even those that they would never use – andwould be put off by what Johns terms “stickershock”. In a bold move which matches thesignificant technical enhancements, Ricardohas decided to bundle the complete WAVE v5product as a single package (excepting the

highly specialised diesel combustion CFDsolver) at a price comparable with that of atypical current installation. Johns believes thatthis puts the complete WAVE v5 installation ina very competitive market position and, as heputs it, “with the capabilities available in WAVEv5, the product offers an unprecedented levelof functionality at a modest price.” And forexisting licensees, too, there will be somepleasant surprises as they receiveimprovements both in the functionality of themodules they already license, together withaccess to the remainder of the package acrossthe whole of their installed user base.

Competitive strategyBut what is the competitive strategy for WAVEin the marketplace? Johns is bullish aboutfuture prospects, identifying two distinct areas.Firstly, he is clear in his determination tosupport the existing user base: “We have manylong standing and loyal customers and our firstresponsibility is to provide them with thecapabilities and level of support that they needto maintain their products at the leading edge.”Secondly, he wants to extend the market bothinto new areas of application and to penetrategeographical territories not previously servedwell by commercial simulation products (thedistribution agreement with SumishoElectronics Co Ltd of Japan is just one elementin this strategy).

On technology strategy, Johns feels that henow has an infrastructure in WAVE which isopen to development in a far more flexiblemanner than ever before. He also claims tohave achieved the optimal balance betweenoperating a market-focused software companywhile benefiting from its positioning within aleading edge engineering services business.“We are able to review all of the research anddevelopment work going on throughoutRicardo and can pick which areas we want toincorporate within WAVE, where necessarydrawing upon the expert assistance ofspecialists from those areas to support ourdevelopment team.” With this approach, Johns

The new WAVEWAVE v5 is possibly the most significant software developmentproject ever carried out by Ricardo, dramatically upgrading themarket-leading engine performance simulation package.Anthony Smith attended an internal company briefing on thenew product and afterwards, spoke with Ricardo SoftwarePresident, Dr. Richard Johns, about WAVE v5 and his plans forfuture development

New features in WAVE v5

Pre-processing:● CAD mesher from STL import● Component design and database● Graphical turbocharger maps

preprocessor● Model auto-calibration and design space

explorations using built-in DoE● Intelligent defaults for input parameters● Auto-calculation of junction geometric

data● Parametric design ● Input fields formulae evaluation● 3D component modeller and automatic

mesher● XML input file format

Physical models:● 3-Way catalyst● Diesel 3D (built-in CFD solver)● Improved driveline modelling● New gasoline hydrocarbon emission

model● Variable Geometry Compressor (VGC)

model● Variable Valve Timing (VVT)

enhancements● Load-compensating heat transfer model

Post-processing:● WAVEPOST - completely integrated with

WAVE output● Integrated design space optimization● Animated network dynamic plots● Turbine and compressor operating point

visualisation● Exporting engine model networks to

image formats including JPG and PNG

Winter 2002/3 WAVE v5 15Ricardo Quarterly Review

claims that he is able to leverage a massiveknowledge base from within the global Ricardoorganisation and integrate new developmentsinto WAVE that would be impossible withoutthe strengths of the Ricardo engineeringbusiness.

WAVE v5 also contains functionality that isfound in other third party products, such asCFD and optimization. “We’re not trying toreplicate commercial general purpose productfunctionality,” says Johns, “but aim to embedwithin WAVE an integrated and easy-to-uselevel of functionality that is required by mostusers in order to make the process of analysisand optimisation as straightforward, effectiveand efficient as possible.”

But where does WAVE go from here? Johnsviews development as a continual process ofcommunicating with customers, understandingtheir needs – present and future – anddelivering against them. The new version ofWAVE is a significant step forward in themarket for engine performance simulation, butit’s not the end of the story. There is little doubt

that there will be further enhancements toWAVE as signposted by the features such asthe beta release of the WAVEBUILD 3Dmodule. Clearly Johns believes that he nowhas the correct mix of skills and technology athis disposal in order to keep WAVE ahead ofthe game. As competitors vie to emulate theinnovations in WAVE v5, Ricardo Software willno doubt be busy keeping the enhancementscoming – and staying ahead of the game.

The one undeniable truth is that in adynamic market place where the customer canonly benefit, WAVE v5 has significantly raisedthe bar for the future efforts of both RicardoSoftware and its competitors alike.

WAVE v5 innovations

There are far too many technicalimprovements to cover in the spaceavailable in this magazine. The following istherefore a brief overview of the mainpoints. As ever, full details are available onthe website www.ricardo.com/wave5.

Pre-processingSome of the most immediate improvementscertain to be noticed by WAVE v5 users arein the pre-processing options. The CADmesh generator allows geometry to bedirectly input using the industry standardSTL format. Once the CAD data isimported, the user defines how the majorgeometric sections are to be broken up andthe mesher generates the WAVE networkdata. A second level of 3D pre-processing isalso available in the automatic 3D meshgenerator WAVEBUILD 3D, released inbeta form in WAVE v5 and ultimatelyplanned to replace the pioneering but noweight-year old KADOS system.

Component-based data is a major themeof WAVE v5, with the ability to manage data

in the component design database. Thisincludes the ability to store and crossreference model data using information,such as part numbers, not required in theanalysis but nonetheless extremely usefulto design teams.

For optimisation studies, WAVE v5contains an integrated Design ofExperiments (DoE) and Optimiser module,enabling users to either auto-calibratemodels to known or target data or tooptimise the design. The pre-processor willautomatically set up and manage the runsneeded to populate the design space withdata and the user can then perform “what if”experiments in the post-processor.

Of less immediate impact but of greatbenefit to all users, is the incorporation of‘intelligent defaults’ for input parameters.Here the user is offered a range of hardand soft variable limits which provide traffic-light style visual warnings of theappropriateness of the values chosen bythe analyst. Given the workloads that CAEstaff typically work under these days, andthe cost of getting it wrong, this simpleenhancement offers real benefits to hard-pressed users.

Physical modelsLike all CAE analysis packages, WAVE isessentially a mathematical idealisation of aphysical system, of which the quality,accuracy and usability of its physicalmodels are its ultimate measure. WAVE v5is not short on innovations in this area. A new 3-way catalyst model has beenimplemented, based on the results ofresearch work carried out by the Ricardotechnology research team. This model willenable a much wider range of detailedinvestigations to be carried out on catalystsystems including, for example, warmupand the evaluation of the effects of catalystpoisoning or degradation. For theincreasing use of WAVE for drive cycleevaluation, an improved driveline model isincluded in which the vehicle is able tofollow a defined mission profile.

Post-processing A single graphical post-processing utilityhas now been implemented in WAVEPOST.This incorporates the functionality of theprevious RPLOT, TCMAP and, in version5.1, WAPP into a single user-friendlyenvironment.

Above (left-right): The new CADmesher, 3-way catalyst model andintake/exhaust noise results. Right(middle-bottom): Spray structure andcombustion in the diesel CFD model

Team value managerMartin Leach, 45, became president and chief operating officer of Ford of Europe in August2002. He devised Ford’s revival programme for 45 new models in five years and is respon-sible for over 40 per cent of Ford’s worldwide output and half of all planned growth indeveloping markets. Tony Lewin spoke to him for RQ

16 MARTIN LEACH Winter 2002/3Ricardo Quarterly Review

How have Ford’s relationships withsuppliers changed since the start of therevival programme?I would say first that the relationships areslightly different on either side of theAtlantic. Our relationship with oursuppliers in Europe is cordial andconstructive. There is a huge mutuality inhaving a successful Ford and we areworking with them to eliminate waste: wehave a deep-seated feeling that there is nomileage in us trying to make a grab forsupplier profitability. We need them to beviable and profitable to be with us for the long term.

Is supplier viability one of your keyprinciples?We are trying to manage our relationship withthe suppliers with that as an overridingprinciple — but that’s not to say we are notfocused on value. We have done a lot ofbenchmarking since we started down the roadof our European Transformation Strategy, andwe launched at the end of last year a newapproach to value management in Europe. Wecall it TVM – Team Value Management – andwe get the purchasing people, the engineers,the suppliers and the cost estimators workingtogether to truly understand the value chainand to eliminate waste. It is yielding significantsavings opportunities – way beyond the thingswe have seen previously.

Could this be perceived as a pressure onthe suppliers?I think it is a pressure of doing business, but itis not the OEM putting pressure on thesuppliers. It is looking at the value chain andwhatever part of the business we are lookingat, and understanding how do we optimise thatand make it work for everybody who has apiece of the action in between.

Do you think that Ford has perhaps askedthe suppliers to do too much and to put toomuch technological and innovation powerin their hands?Ford in Europe was the leading manufacturerin terms of a move towards full-service supplytype relationships. I think there is a commonunderstanding between Ford and the suppliersthat there were a number of growing pains as

a result of that. We were definitely pushing theboundaries and in some cases we’ve had tolook at our experiences and ask ourselveswhether we can now see a better way. So weare now fine-tuning that strategy the wholetime and it will result ultimately in Ford bringingsome work back inside the OEM; in otherareas it will involve more work going to thesuppliers. I think what we have learned is thatthere isn’t a ‘one size fits all’ relationship.

What might be taken back inside – are wetalking anything major?We are looking at a number of things – thoseareas where at the total vehicle integrationlevel it is necessary to really control thecompetencies. One example might be in thearea of suspensions. We are very proud of theway our vehicles drive and that is a leadershipattribute for us. So we are looking at makingsure we have competence right through all ofthe components and systems that get us todriving quality.

What happens at the moment?On suspensions, on some products we havemoved to a full-service supply relationship witha full modularity, where the suspensions aresourced as a module. Maybe what we need todo is break that down. It’s driven by practicality,not necessarily by business per se – and I’llgive you a fairly simple example. Vehicledynamics are important for Ford, and a keyattribute of the vehicle dynamics could be therear wheel toe compliance. [Let’s say] we havea situation where the toe compliance is outsideof our target range. How do we address that?Well, we could address that in the bush, in thearm, in the body structure. If all of thosesystems are managed within different supply

relationships, that becomes a nightmare to co-ordinate. So where things are important fortotal vehicle integration it makes sense tocontrol that within the vehicle integrationfunction as opposed to having to manage itacross supplier relationships and commercialrelationships as well.

Is there much more cost to take out ofbusiness?You mean is there the opportunity to take costout? There is, and this team valuemanagement approach is proving veryeffective in doing that. We’ve taken over 1.2billion dollars of net cost out of our businesssince we started in 2000, and that is asignificant amount. I think we will continue atthat pace as we look to the future.

How far have you moved on flexibility interms of introducing new products andspeed to market? In 2000 when we first announced 45 in 5 [45models in five years], we were under an awfullot of pressure and people did not have a goodword to say about Ford and particularly aboutFord’s product. We were being criticised for notbeing bold, nimble and quick enough. I thinkthe StreetKa is a clear example of how that isnot a valid criticism now. This is because there

“A lot of people when theyfirst saw the StreetKaconcept questioned

whether Ford would ever do the car”

Winter 2002/3 MARTIN LEACH 17Ricardo Quarterly Review

was a concept, we were very nimble andflexible in establishing a business equation, apartnering arrangement with Pininfarina, andgot on with the programme. It’s not even twoyears later and we are in the production launchphase of the StreetKa. I think thatdemonstrates that a number of things havechanged at Ford. One is that we had theboldness and drive to do it: a lot of peoplewhen they first saw the StreetKa conceptquestioned whether Ford would ever do the car.

With C-Max we’ve trailed the way of wherewe are going in the segment, and I’m verypleased with the result. It is based upon ourplans for the future as opposed to looking backinto the past.

Will it be built in Saarlouis? On the sameline as the regular Focus?When we introduce the production level vehiclewe start the process of changing Saarlouisover to our fully flexible manufacturing concept.It’s basically the same concept as Cologne,fully interchangeable, and that’s what we willchange over at that time.

How are you going to arrest Ford’s declinein the D-sector?I think it is important to understand a little bitabout the dynamics behind what is going on inthat sector, particularly in the UK. A couple ofthings have really happened this year. We, asa matter of policy, decided to heavily restrictthe number of Mondeos that went to the rentalcompanies. As a result of that we’re almostentirely responsible for the decline in thesegment, so you have to ask yourself whatcomes first. If you look at that segment in theUK it is still a larger share of the market than ismore usual on the continent of Europe, and Ithink that is still tied in with the company carculture in the UK. With the change in companycar taxation at the beginning of the year, wedid see a dramatic strengthening of dieseldemand, which we are very well positioned for.I think over time it is not unreasonable toexpect that the UK market structure will moreclosely resemble the market structure on thecontinent as we see more people becominguser-choosers.

Is that not more threatening in a sense thatpeople are buying increasingly on brand,however good the Mondeo might be?I do think that some of the premium brandshave got a bit of a problem with ubiquity. Forme, you can’t resist the market dynamics: ifyou try to resist them, you fail. I think what youhave to do is adapt and evolve. With thecompact minivan segment you see a lot ofpeople trading out of the D segment, so we areoptimistic that with C-Max we would pick up anumber of customers.

Do you expect the sub-B segment to gain

in importance?Yes I do. We’ve seen a significantstrengthening of Ka this year and Ka issegment leader. As we get more and moretraffic congestion and inner cityrestrictions, I think that there is a naturalpressure on small cars from thatdimension. Unfortunately that slightlyconflicts with the other majormarket trend, which is a trend tomore space in vehicles — andthat trend is a global trend. Ihave my ownhypothesis: I think thatspace is the ultimateluxury these days,because the cost ofspace appears to goup, whether it ishousing or whatever.

So what you are sayingis that in future carswill have to be cleverer,but low in price and bigon space?I think they will. They willalways have to deliver value at the consumerlevel and I think you’re right they will have to becleverer. I think you’ll be seeing a trend towardflexibility, adaptability and ease of use.

Are you also saying that the present Ka isperhaps too small?No: it’s interesting, we did extensive research withKa buyers. They are so in love with their Ka thatthey say don’t change it, keep it the way it is and Iwill buy new ones. I will be very happy!

But you will have a replacement for thatmodel?I always say that it has become an icon for us.

And aren’t icons notoriously difficult tofollow up?Yes they are: I agree with that, but we willcontinue to worry about that segment andcontinue to nurture Ka.

Will this be a European product or will youannounce some input from othercontinents on it? Will it be a derivative of

the Fiesta platform?I think it’s too early to say anything on that.Rest assured that whatever it is, we think it willbe successful.

Returning to cost, taking out $600 millionper year. How long can you continue that?Is it declared policy to take out that muchfor the foreseeable future?I think for the foreseeable future, yes. For twoto three years we’ll continue to target net costdown.

Are you competitive in terms of cost pervehicle, say with GM in Europe?I believe we are, but we are [still] not satisfied.We anticipate the market pressures willcontinue. It is a market of winners and losers,[no longer] a historical growth market whereeverybody who’s playing is winning. Webelieve there is still enough opportunity outthere for the best competitors to have a verygood solid business.A version of this interview was publishedpreviously in Automotive Sourcing.

“With C-Max we’ve trailedthe way of where we aregoing in the segment. Itis based upon ourplans for the future asopposed to lookingback into the past”

Martin Leach1979 Joined Ford as body engineer1982 Analyst, Ford of Europe Car Product Planning group1985 Product specialist, Ford of Europe Marketing and Sales1988 Member of Jaguar transition team1993 Director of Sales and Marketing for Commercial Vehicles10/94 Business director, Ford Light Truck Vehicle Center, Dearborn07/96 Director, cycle planning, Mazda Motor Corporation07/97 Managing Director, product planning and design programs,

Mazda01/00 Vice president, product development, Ford of Europe08/02 President and CEO, Ford of Europe

18 TRANSMISSIONS Winter 2002/3Ricardo Quarterly Review

The Midlands Technical Centre has been aspectacular success for Ricardo. Since opening inlate 1998 it has provided a secure base for the

formation and development of two new divisions, hasbecome central to the company’s well publicised work onthe MINI programme, and is now the focus of arguablythe world’s leading independent transmissionstechnology business.

It has always been well known and respected for itswork in the area of motorsports but, as managingdirector Gerald Andrews explains, the Ricardo Drivelineand Transmissions Systems (RDTS) division is aboutmuch more than this. “In RDTS our mission is to providean extremely high-quality design and developmentservice together with a turnkey and niche productioncapability relating to all driveline and transmissionsapplication areas. Naturally, people know us best formotorsport,” he continues, “and that is significant for us –but it’s far from being our only core business area.”

To illustrate the strength of the RDTS design andresearch capability, for example, he points out that thecompany has registered approximately 30 patents in thepast two years alone.

Rationale for Gemini acquisition So what was the logic behind the acquisition of theBrackley-based Gemini Transmissions business in July2002? Was it to reinforce the motorsports presence withnew product lines, to strengthen the technology andskills base, or to add additional manufacturing capacity?

According to Andrews it was all of these things – andmuch more besides. “What we have achieved in a veryshort space of time is the complete integration of the twobusinesses into a much more powerful, flexible and wellequipped entity.”

He goes on to claim that it would have been an all-too-easy option to continue running Gemini as a successfulbut separate offshoot. This, he says, would have missedthe real opportunity of restructuring to gain the maximumoperating efficiency for the merged business. “We nowhave a single, integrated and highly efficientmanufacturing capability spread over our two sites,” hesays, “Brackley handles most of the pre-heat treatmentactivity and MTC concentrates on finishing operations.”

This separation of activities has involved the relocationof equipment and people between the two sites, but theirrelative proximity has undoubtedly helped in thetransitional period. Summing up the overall benefits ofthe acquisition, Andrews cites “a stronger presence inthe motorsports sector, increased capacity for majormotorsports design and manufacturing programmes upto and including F1, and a world class prototypingcapability” as its most significant impacts.

Now in its fifth year at the Midlands Technical Centreand less than six months since its acquisition of theoperations of Gemini Transmissions, the RicardoDriveline and Transmissions business is in extremelygood shape for growth. Anthony Smith spoke tomanaging director Gerald Andrews about the rapiddevelopment of the business and high profileprogrammes such as the Bugatti Veyron (right)

Mitsubishi Pajero Evolution

On its rally raid debut in the United ArabEmirates Desert Challenge in November2002, the Mitsubishi Pajero Evolution, drivenby Frenchman Stéphane Peterhansel, ledfrom start to finish, winning by a staggering 42minutes. In what is one of the mostdemanding forms of motorsport this was nomean feat – and it is an achievement that washelped by a transmission system designedand manufactured by Ricardo. The unit is a six-speed sequential or optionalfive-speed sequential with high/low rangeconfiguration. Commenting on the design of the unit, MarkBarge, director of motorsport transmissions,said: “We at Ricardo were asked to becomeinvolved in this project on the strength of ourreputation for bringing high technology to

motorsport drivelines and transmissions. Witha completely new car in an increasinglycompetitive field, the Mitsubishi Motorsportsteam wanted to be sure they had the bestand most reliable technology at its disposal.”

Following its phenomenally successful debutin the UAE, the car will see action in January2003 in the most arduous event in the rallyraid calendar – the famous Dakar rally acrossthe deserts of North Africa.

Transforming transmissions

Winter 2002/3 TRANSMISSIONS 19Ricardo Quarterly Review

Spectacular growthThe physical evidence of business development isclearly apparent in the new test facilities and the capacitydelivered through the acquisition of Gemini. “We’vemanaged to grow this business in terms of headcount byover 50 per cent since 2000 alone” says Andrews, “andwe have charted a sustainable growth path.”

But even if RDTS is now possibly the largestindependent provider of driveline and transmissiontechnology, does this imply a steadying of the growthcurve, or is the market still developing? Andrews remainsbullish as to future prospects. “It’s arguable that there isstill considerable market development potential in thearea of driveline and transmissions.

“We are extremely fortunate in having been able todevelop a large and stable presence in this market intime to benefit from this growth potential,” he continues.But does he see this as a matter of luck, goodjudgement, or a mixture of the two? “Clearly there was alot of careful planning and foresight in our developmentof this business and I’d love to say that it was all down to

our own efforts, but infairness we’ve had ourshare of good fortune also.There is little doubt in mymind that the availability ofthe MTC site gave usexactly the right location atjust the right time.”

And it seems that theMTC site is to be the focusof future development. “Wehave an agreed substantialcapital investment planwhich will provide for a newheat treatment facility, anew gear grinding machineand a host of othermanufacturing and testequipment early in 2003,”says Andrews.

While this will representvery much the technicalcentre of gravity of the division, increasing numbers ofstaff will operate from the other Ricardo technical centresin Europe and the USA. “We feel strongly that we nowhave the right mix of products and services, animmensely strong technology base, and an infrastructurewhich will enable us to continue to grow at a significantand sustainable rate”, says Andrews. On the basis of thedevelopments of the last four years, an impressive list ofhigh profile projects and a dominant position inmotorsports, he may well be proven right.

“Naturally, people knowus best for motorsport –but it’s far from beingour only core businessarea”Gerald Andrews, Ricardo

Bugatti Veyron

Ricardo was chosen by Bugatti as itsengineering partner for the completetransmission and driveline system forits prestigious new Veyron supercar.The company’s involvement in thisproject goes back to 2000 with thedevelopment of initial concepts,including the building of a technologydemonstrator. In addition to themechanical system design, Ricardo isalso responsible for the design anddevelopment of the complexmechatronic system. This controls theseven-speed Dual ClutchTransmission as well as all the active4WD driveline units, including all newalgorithm and software developmentand a new control unit design.

20 RICARDO NEWS Winter 2002/3 Ricardo Quarterly Review

The Ricardo i-MoGen mild hybridvehicle has scooped a top-levelengineering award from the

prestigious Royal Automobile Club inLondon. The coveted Dewar Trophy forinnovation in automobile developmentwas presented to Neville Jackson,Ricardo Technology Director, at aceremony in London.

The RAC felt the innovation met theTrophy's strict judging criteria of being'the most outstanding British technicalachievement in the automotive field' in2002.The Club’s judges singled out i-MoGen's ability to achieve fuelconsumption of less than 4.0 l/100km(70 UK mpg) whilst retaining thecapability to achieve exhaustemissions 50 per cent lower thanproposed Euro IV levels. These, thejudges said, were particularly relevantto the changing face of motoring byconserving energy and reducingenvironmental impact.

The Club's Motoring TechnicalCommittee judged the award using fivekey criteria of technical achievement,innovation and uniqueness, relevanceand significance, value and cost savingand practicality and applicability. Aftershort-listing the 14 entries, thetechnical committee visited the threetop candidates to investigate theirsubmissions in more detail.

"The Dewar Trophy has been acelebration of British technologicalachievement since it was first awardedin 1906 and this year Ricardo hasshown that it is already well on the wayto accommodating the needs oftomorrow's motorists," explainedStephen Hammerton, chairman of theRoyal Automobile Club's MotoringCommittee.

"To develop a powertrain thatcombines such excellent fuel economyand low emissions that can be installedin Europe's most popular size of vehicleand comfortably accelerate to 100km/hin 12 seconds is an impressive feat. Wealso commended the fact that it can bemanufactured at a cost level that makesfull scale production a real possibilityrather than just a dream," he added.

i-MoGen wins technology award

Ricardo and the topJapanese testingequipment specialist

Horiba have signed anexclusive agreement of co-operation. The two companieswill work together to build animproved automotiveconsultancy service to theJapanese car makers andrelated industries.

This agreement means that,as appropriate, Ricardo will useHoriba resources in Japan inthe form of staff, regional officesand test facilities.

Horiba and Ricardo bothpride themselves asindependent companies and are

well placed to serve theJapanese auto industryobjectively and confidentially.

Horiba and Ricardo will act,as usual, under conditions ofutmost secrecy in all businessmatters with Japanesecustomers. The two companiesare confident that this newcooperation will greatly benefitcustomers in Japan byproviding improvedcommunications andresources.

Ricardo Software sales andsupport are unaffected by thisagreement, this activitycontinuing on behalf of Ricardothrough Sumisho Electronics.

Ricardo signs historicaccord with Japan’s Horiba

Neville Jackson (right) of Ricardo receives the Dewar Trophy from Stephen Hammerton ofthe RAC

Text of the announcement of the co-operation agreement

Winter 2002/3 RICARDO NEWS 21Ricardo Quarterly Review

With effect from January 1, 2003, twonew directors, Clive Hickman and

Gerald Andrews, were appointed to themain board of Ricardo plc. Respectivelythe managing directors of the RicardoVehicle Engineering and Ricardo Drivelineand Transmissions Systems divisions,they will continue with the responsibilitiesof their existing roles in addition to thoseof their new plc board appointments.

Clive Hickman is a mechanical engineerwith wide ranging experience in

powertrain and vehicle engineering. Hejoined Ricardo in 1997, having formerlyheld senior positions with Rover andsubsequently MIRA where he wasengineering director.

Gerald Andrews is a specialist intransmission systems engineering.Having held senior positions within theformer FFD group, he has led the drivelineand transmissions business since theacquisition of FFD by Ricardo.

On the main board they will be joined by

Stephen Parker, who was appointed inAugust 2002.

Stephen Parker has been tasked withthe development of the consultancyservice offered by Ricardo to encompassstrategic issues of critical interest to itsOEM and Tier 1 customers.

He is well known and respected in thearea of strategic consulting, and beforejoining Ricardo served as principal of theAT Kearney automotive practice inLondon.

New appointments to Ricardo board

Marking a major step in thedevelopment of its NorthAmerican business,

Ricardo announced the openingon January 2 of the DetroitTechnology Campus. With thecompletion of the new 77,000 sq ft(7150 m2) two-storey office andengineering facility, the total buildarea of the site has increased bynearly 100 per cent and theexpanded 11 acre (44,500m2)campus provides useful capacityfor future growth.

“This significant investmentdemonstrates the confidenceRicardo places in the futuresuccess of its growing NorthAmerican business,” said JeremyW. Holt, president of Ricardo, Inc.“Our expanded Detroit TechnologyCampus will help us takeautomotive technology to the nextlevel and meet the growingdemand for globally competitivetechnical expertise in such areasas advanced powertrain development,vehicle and systems integration as well asdiesel and hybrid technology.”

Ricardo, Inc. has grown steadily bothorganically and through targetedacquisitions since 1989 and currentlyemploys 350 people. It expects continuedgrowth over the next three to five years asautomakers embrace strategic productdevelopment outsourcing. According toHolt, this expansion builds the criticalmass necessary for the company tomaximize its operational efficiency as it

works on major customer programmesand shares its knowledge and technologyamong engineering teams.

The new building will be used fordesign, computer-aided engineering,thermo-fluids, vehicle refinement, controlsand calibration engineering teams. Thisspace also includes conference rooms,project offices, a technical library and anarea for the company’s administrative andsupport staff. The high-bay area andvehicle workshop occupies more than23,000 square feet of additional space

and includes secure and confidentialvehicle evaluation and assembly areas tomeet specific project demands.

The building is designed to complement the extensive powertraintesting operations that will become thefocus of the original facility within thecampus. With the development of theDetroit Technology Campus the company has been permitted by the local authority of Wayne County to rename the main entrance road to thecampus ‘Ricardo Drive’.

Detroit Technology Campus opens for business

22 RICARDO NEWS Winter 2002/3Ricardo Quarterly Review

For Ricardo chairman SirNoel Davies, SundayNovember 3rd was a

cold English winter’s day thatwould be special for morethan just its unseasonallybright and clear sunshine. Notonly was the immaculatemaroon machine in fine shapefor its hundredth birthday andits 68th running of the 59 mileLondon to Brighton course,but Sir Noel would also be re-living his student days almosthalf a century earlier when hehimself drove the car,nicknamed Boanerges, or Bo,to Brighton.

“I had done the run twice asdriver or co-driver,” said SirNoel, “and I have a specialattachment to the car – itneeds a lot of maintenanceand once as a student I spentmost of the summer vacationrebuilding the engine andtransmission.”

Alarmingly, according to SirNoel, Bo has two gearboxes –one for first and third, theother for second and fourth.“It’s operated by twin leversand it is possible to get twogears at once,” he

commented, with more than ahint that this was perhaps thereason behind his gearboxrebuild.

Other controls are relativelyconventional, but the handthrottle and ignition controlsdemand frequent attention,often from the passenger –making it seem as if twopeople are driving.

For the 2002 run Sir Noeltravelled as an honorarypassenger, rather than driver.As chairman of Ricardo andan alumnus of ImperialCollege, London, he had beeninvited by the students of theCity and Guilds College atImperial to participate in thecentenary run for Boanerges,who – the students insist ontreating the car as a person –has been owned andmaintained by the Imperialstudents ever since ‘he’ was

bought for the princely sum of£40 in 1934.

Sir Noel was also given thehonour of taking a goodwillmessage from the Lord Mayorof London to the Mayor ofBrighton. Before the earlymorning start he said: “Thejourney will be a reminder ofmy happy years at Imperialduring the 1950s. I’mdelighted to see how well Bohas been maintained over thelast 50 years.”

As for the run itself, the carran smoothly and withoutmajor hitches all the way,successfully coming through aheavy rainstorm half way. “Itrained again in Brighton, justas we were taking the Mayorfor a ride,” added Sir Noel.

Boanerges, whose namecomes from the NewTestament and means “Sonsof Thunder,” is the only

survivor of two built by theJames and Browne companyof Hammersmith in 1902. It ispowered by an underfloor-mounted 2500cc twin cylinderengine developing around 9horsepower and consumingfuel at the nowadaysunfashionable rate of about 12mpg or 23 litres per 100km.

Maximum speed, as SirNoel testifies, depends heavilyon the terrain: “Up Pyecombehill everyone has to get outand push: it bounces a bit butit’s fine at 20 mph if you arevery careful – especially withthe brakes, which are almostnon-existent.”

100-year-old carcompletes historic run

This one-of-a-kind 1902 James andBrowne has driven the famous London-Brighton run countless times – but the2002 event was unusually special

SAFE SORRY

Check One.

We’ve chosen to focus on a driver’s safety whenever they get behind the wheel. As a global leader in integrated active

and passive safety systems, TRW Automotive is constantly looking out for their well-being. Which is why we’ll

continue to pioneer work in areas like vehicle stability control, electric steering, smart restraints and driver-assist

systems. Because we know that, given the choice, safe is preferred over sorry.