Car buyers should have 'long, hard think' about diesel

[DK602]

VED for any vehicle with a list price over £40,000 attracts a 5 year VED additional charge of £350 PA. This effectively halves the Govt grant on a £40k Tesla model 3.

As far as regularly driving > 200 miles, this year I have made at least 10 trips towing a 1700kg caravan ........

.............and what does your partner drive and how many trips over 200 miles have they completed this year towing a caravan?

 

[DK602]

Once a suitable EV becomes available they will be far superior for towing as they produce maximum torque as soon as they turn

Not like an ICE that needs gears!

 

[wyx087]

Prior to supercharging Tesla relied on the public charger network already in place. Did they invest in that. The Focus Electric may have got rapid charging capability in 2017, but it was also withdrawn from sale in the UK in 2017. So why would they invest in a rapid charge network that their vehicles weren't going to be using yet? As you well know they have already invested in a charging network across Europe with several other car manufacturers. Why haven't you questioned why the other companies haven't previously invested in a network.

Yes, Ford has been singled out because you keep bringing up the Focus EV. You claim there's no demand using the horribly engineered Focus EV as example.
I shall not mention Focus EV if you no longer talk about this poor product that has short range, doesn't rapid charge and didn't receive any PR effort.

Ford is in an alliance with other companies behind the Ionity network. We do not know whether Ford have actually invested in charging network yet. Unless you can provide evidence to say otherwise?

More pronounced means more noticeable. The only way the braking force can be more noticeable is if the braking force is more than something else. In this case, according to you, more than dropping 2 or 3 gears.

So you have finally understood where you were wrong. You finally understood I was in agreement with that post: EV regen braking can mostly replace energy-wasting frictional brake. Well done, we finally got there.

VED for any vehicle with a list price over £40,000 attracts a 5 year VED additional charge of £350 PA. This effectively halves the Govt grant on a £40k Tesla model 3.

As far as regularly driving > 200 miles, this year I have made at least 10 trips towing a 1700kg caravan ........

Good point. Model 3 costs £37,340, plus £350 * 5 yr => £39,090 total. Still under £40k as opposed to @MatBin's claim

This is what I've been saying. People tend to buy for their highest requirement: range, size, towing, etc. Then carry around the extra feature unused majority of the time. It's perfectly reasonable if it's the only car in your household. But with a lot of households have multiple cars, why not specialise cars? One EV for regular commute (irregular commute is a bit difficult for current EV's), one larger PHEV for school runs, load hauling and long drives, until charging infrastructure is ready.
The idea is to get majority of miles (the commute, school run) into electric, it's not only cheaper, energy comes from the ever improving national grid.

 

[nilagin]

Yes, Ford has been singled out because you keep bringing up the Focus EV. You claim there's no demand using the horribly engineered Focus EV as example.
I shall not mention Focus EV if you no longer talk about this poor product that has short range, doesn't rapid charge and didn't receive any PR effort.

Ford is in an alliance with other companies behind the Ionity network. We do not know whether Ford have actually invested in charging network yet. Unless you can provide evidence to say otherwise?


So you have finally understood where you were wrong. You finally understood I was in agreement with that post: EV regen braking can mostly replace energy-wasting frictional brake. Well done, we finally got there.

You really are dumb. You are the one that keeps bringing up the lack of a Ford EV. I only mention the Focus as a response.

When the Focus EV hit the UK market, the UK government EV subsidy had been active 2.75 years and only around 4.5k EV had been sold in the UK during that period. That is a lack of interest.
I even put it in context for you with total monthly car sales at the time. The figures for August 2013 was approximately 65k cars. August is traditionally a low month for car sales because of the new registration for September.


You have made no sense at all about the braking force from an EV when regenerative braking. First you say the braking force is like dropping 2-3 gears in an ICE. Then when I questioned it another member interjected by saying the braking force was nowhere severe. You liked his post meaning you agreed with him. Agreeing with him meant you were in disagreement with your own original post. Then you change your mind again and say it is more pronounced than your original statement of dropping 2-3 gears in an ICE. Being more pronounced means more noticeable. To be more noticeable, it would have to be even more severe.
So why don't you just make your mind up? You have obviously confused yourself.
Come back when you can make some actual sense. Perhaps then you'll be able to make a post then which isn't full of dumb b******t.

 

[nilagin]

Yes, Ford has been singled out because you keep bringing up the Focus EV. You claim there's no demand using the horribly engineered Focus EV as example.
I shall not mention Focus EV if you no longer talk about this poor product that has short range, doesn't rapid charge and didn't receive any PR effort.

Ford is in an alliance with other companies behind the Ionity network. We do not know whether Ford have actually invested in charging network yet. Unless you can provide evidence to say otherwise?


So you have finally understood where you were wrong. You finally understood I was in agreement with that post: EV regen braking can mostly replace energy-wasting frictional brake. Well done, we finally got there.


Good point. Model 3 costs £37,340, plus £350 * 5 yr => £39,090 total. Still under £40k as opposed to @MatBin's claim

If it wasn't a £40k car, it wouldn't be liable for the tax loading.
His reference to it being £40k was to differentiate it from the more expensive models.

 

[dod]

Sorry Neil but you've misread/misunderstood the statement. onomatopoeia was agreeing that regen braking is far more pronounced than ICE engine braking.

It isn't. Regen braking in an EV is much more pronounced then engine braking, even on something like my race car that has a 12.5:1 compression ratio, so its engine braking is more noticeable than in most conventional combustion engined cars with lower comp ratios. On an EV releasing the throttle is like applying a medium braking effort on an ICE vehicle, at least in my experience of driving an i3.

If you let an EV roll up to a junction with no throttle like you might an ICE vehicle (ICE vehicle in gear with no throttle in this example), you'll find the EV stops a long way before the junction because regen braking is so effective. Also a long way before an ICE would stop if you changed the ICE into the lowest gear it would take without buzzing the rev limiter.

You have made no sense at all about the braking force from an EV when regenerative braking. First you say the braking force is like dropping 2-3 gears in an ICE. Then when I questioned it another member interjected by saying the braking force was nowhere severe. You liked his post meaning you agreed with him. Agreeing with him meant you were in disagreement with your own original post. Then you change your mind again and say it is more pronounced than your original statement of dropping 2-3 gears in an ICE. Being more pronounced means more noticeable. To be more noticeable, it would have to be even more severe.
.

 

[nilagin]

Sorry Neil but you've misread/misunderstood the statement. onomatopoeia was agreeing that regen braking is far more pronounced than ICE engine braking.

No, he was stating it was more severe than ice engine braking but not as severe as the claim it was like changing down 2-3 gears in an ICE. Now we are being told it is even more severe than dropping 2-3 gears. wuyanxu just can't make his mind up.

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...g-hard-think-about-diesel.648283/post-8490602

 

[wyx087]

You really are dumb. You are the one that keeps bringing up the lack of a Ford EV. I only mention the Focus as a response.

When the Focus EV hit the UK market, the UK government EV subsidy had been active 2.75 years and only around 4.5k EV had been sold in the UK during that period. That is a lack of interest.
I even put it in context for you with total monthly car sales at the time. The figures for August 2013 was approximately 65k cars. August is traditionally a low month for car sales because of the new registration for September.

Stop acting like your association with Ford is constantly under attack.
No, when I replied a different comment of yours regarding difference between modern EV and 1800's EV, you bought up Focus EV as a possible competitor to Nissan Leaf back in 2011:
(before that post in page 102, 101 and 100 did not mention Focus EV)

The 2011 Leaf actually had a marginally shorter range than the 2011 Focus Electric

The Focus EV is a very bad product compared to Leaf from same year. Bad product, that very little people knew about, didn't sell well is to be expected.
Just compared to same year Nissan Leaf:
Focus EV cannot rapid charge, making it completely useless beyond its short range.
Focus EV did not get promotional deals like Focus ICE cars and Nissan Leaf.

So, you can say there is a total lack of interest in the bad product. But saying there was a lack of interest for this category over a particular period, basing solely on a bad product, is plain ignorance.

No, he was stating it was more severe than ice engine braking but not as severe as the claim it was like changing down 2-3 gears in an ICE. Now we are being told it is even more severe than dropping 2-3 gears. wuyanxu just can't make his mind up

More twist and turns. In true spin doctor fashion.

You know as well as anyone that different ICE car changing down gears give different braking feel.
I have always said EV is very configurable, different EV have different level of regen braking power. Early Leaf have 40kW of regen braking power. Audi E-tron have 150kW of regen braking power. Korean cars regen is configurable via the flappy paddles. BMW i3 obviously has more regen braking power than Leaf.
So, to say it's "like changing down 2-3 gears in an ICE" is correct as a generalisation.

Everyone else understood it from my statement, and everyone else understood how energy transformation works. Only you found it hard to understand and tried to put spin on this.

 

[MatBin]

Good point. Model 3 costs £37,340, plus £350 * 5 yr => £39,090 total. Still under £40k as opposed to @MatBin's claim

FFS!
I think you will find the list price is £36490 after the Govt allowance of £3500, so in reality the list price is £39,990 , however it has obviously been priced to get it under the £40K "luxury" tax bracket, for which I commend them, so long as they can continue to hold it there and of course it does mean you cannot add any extras as that would take it over £40K list price. So, it squeezes in at just under "luxury" for the basic no-frills model, hardly a good deal and I suspect most prospective buyers would want some of the extras available. Different paint and internal colour are extra, larger wheels are extra. There isn't much in the extras list though.

I went through the order process and to be fair the price was available straight away BUT the base price is exactly that, a price for a base model and tbh at nearly £40K it didn't feel like I would get something to rival the interior/exterior quality of a 3 series BM, which is what it's supposed to rival.

 

[wyx087]

FFS!
I think you will find the list price is £36490 after the Govt allowance of £3500, so in reality the list price is £39,990 , however it has obviously been priced to get it under the £40K "luxury" tax bracket, for which I commend them, so long as they can continue to hold it there and of course it does mean you cannot add any extras as that would take it over £40K list price. So, it squeezes in at just under "luxury" for the basic no-frills model, hardly a good deal and I suspect most prospective buyers would want some of the extras available. Different paint and internal colour are extra, larger wheels are extra. There isn't much in the extras list though.

I went through the order process and to be fair the price was available straight away BUT the base price is exactly that, a price for a base model and tbh at nearly £40K it didn't feel like I would get something to rival the interior/exterior quality of a 3 series BM, which is what it's supposed to rival.

Currently, unfortunately the OTR price is just over £40k. The list price is £39,990, then the price considered by the luxury tax price (list price + handling fee) is £39,990 + £850 => £40,840. The luxury tax current applies to all Model 3's.
But my point was, even with luxury car tax over 5 years, thanks to the gov grant, the price is essentially £39k.

For Model 3 basic no-frills trim, you get an awful lot of stuff. Stuff that is sometimes optional extra on other brands, for example:
- adaptive cruise control
- active lane keep assist
- full size touch screen (no huge bezel to remind you that you've cheap'd out)
- heated seats
- telemetrics and remote control

For me personally, I would be more than happy with basic no-frills Model 3. Metallic pearl white paint looks great. Interior is good. Infotainment system contains all the stuff I'd ever need. All the tech I'd want in my car (ACC, lane assist, park camera, keyless, traffic sign recognition). Best of all, I don't have to buy second hand top-spec trim to get the tech but get huge alloys, I want smallest wheels for cheap tyre change and better ride comfort.

 

[nilagin]

Stop acting like your association with Ford is constantly under attack.
No, when I replied a different comment of yours regarding difference between modern EV and 1800's EV, you bought up Focus EV as a possible competitor to Nissan Leaf back in 2011:
(before that post in page 102, 101 and 100 did not mention Focus EV)


The Focus EV is a very bad product compared to Leaf from same year. Bad product, that very little people knew about, didn't sell well is to be expected.
Just compared to same year Nissan Leaf:
Focus EV cannot rapid charge, making it completely useless beyond its short range.
Focus EV did not get promotional deals like Focus ICE cars and Nissan Leaf.

So, you can say there is a total lack of interest in the bad product. But saying there was a lack of interest for this category over a particular period, basing solely on a bad product, is plain ignorance.


More twist and turns. In true spin doctor fashion.

You know as well as anyone that different ICE car changing down gears give different braking feel.
I have always said EV is very configurable, different EV have different level of regen braking power. Early Leaf have 40kW of regen braking power. Audi E-tron have 150kW of regen braking power. Korean cars regen is configurable via the flappy paddles. BMW i3 obviously has more regen braking power than Leaf.
So, to say it's "like changing down 2-3 gears in an ICE" is correct as a generalisation.

Everyone else understood it from my statement, and everyone else understood how energy transformation works. Only you found it hard to understand and tried to put spin on this.

The only ignorance is your unwillingness to accept the cold hard facts. 4.5k Ev's were registered in the UK from January 2011 up to September 2013. That has nothing to do with the Focus Electric as it wasn't even on sale during that period. There was very little interest end of. Nothing to do with how bad you rate the car as. Early on in your EV over ICE crusade you said the majority of people only make short journeys to and from work every week or to the supermarket. An EV is perfect for that, no having to make special journeys out of your way to fill up with fuel. You don't even have to get your hands dirty, you can just pop it on charge when you get home and your EV will be fully charged and good to go again in the morning. Now you are saying a car capable of doing all that is a bad product.
What ever the engine braking capability of an ICE, dropping 2 or 3 gears is a severe braking force. You sould only drop 2-3 gears to scrub off alot of speed, it is a hell of a lot more than just engine braking. I have locked the back wheels up on a car before now by dropping just 2 gears, let alone 3. You said regenerative braking was configurable it was like dropping 2 or 3 gears in an ICE vehicle. That gives the impression the braking force is configurable by dropping 2 gears or 3 gears. We are then told it isn't that severe, it is akin to moderate braking in an ICE vehicle, which you then agreed with by liking the post. Now not only have you gone back on that, you have gone further andcnow claim it is even more pronounced than dropping 2 or 3 gears.

The only spin, is you on your head with your inconsistent statements. You can no longer tell which way is up, down, left, right, forward or back, you have totally lost it.

 

[broc]

.............and what does your partner drive and how many trips over 200 miles have they completed this year towing a caravan?

We have a BMW X3 Diesel for towing & a petrol Mini Cooper S convertible for 'fun'. We are both relatively low mileage drivers these days so the fuel costs are not a major concern for us. I am open to the idea of an EV or hydrogen fuel cell powered car when someone makes one that meets my requirements.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

I am open to the idea of an EV or hydrogen fuel cell powered car when someone makes one that meets my requirements.

I doubt we'll ever get one or the other. I reckon that when the cars we currently have wear out we'll just stick to the bus or take a taxi. (asuming whatever guvmint we get hasn't bankrupted us all)

 

[wyx087]

Early on in your EV over ICE crusade you said the majority of people only make short journeys to and from work every week or to the supermarket. An EV is perfect for that, no having to make special journeys out of your way to fill up with fuel. You don't even have to get your hands dirty, you can just pop it on charge when you get home and your EV will be fully charged and good to go again in the morning. Now you are saying a car capable of doing all that is a bad product.

The Focus EV and Mercedes B class EV will not be able to rapid charge. Meaning, IF you were needed for errant during the evening, after depleting the battery during your commute, your cars are completely useless. I've had to do this a few times, both times were not a problem in Nissan Leaf, where I could rapid charge along the way for 5min.

This is the flexibility of EV charging, majority of the time you don't need to think about refuelling, but when you do, quick charging needs to be available. It is also why today's EV is much improved and totally different to 1800's EV, petrol won back then because of weak grid infrastructure and lack of rapid charging capability.

What ever the engine braking capability of an ICE, dropping 2 or 3 gears is a severe braking force. You sould only drop 2-3 gears to scrub off alot of speed, it is a hell of a lot more than just engine braking. I have locked the back wheels up on a car before now by dropping just 2 gears, let alone 3. You said regenerative braking was configurable it was like dropping 2 or 3 gears in an ICE vehicle. That gives the impression the braking force is configurable by dropping 2 gears or 3 gears. We are then told it isn't that severe, it is akin to moderate braking in an ICE vehicle, which you then agreed with by liking the post. Now not only have you gone back on that, you have gone further andcnow claim it is even more pronounced than dropping 2 or 3 gears.

The only spin, is you on your head with your inconsistent statements. You can no longer tell which way is up, down, left, right, forward or back, you have totally lost it.

Oh dear. You have totally lost it. You are now not making any sense and decided to completely ignore original discussion on engine braking, looks like you've twist and turned to talk about the feel when lifting clutch after changing down 2 gears.

Lock up the back wheels by changing down 2 gears? Lock up means not turning, I think your engine must have stalled, otherwise how do you lock up wheels by forcing it to turn at a slower rate? Loose traction, yes; lock up, no. (another advantage of EV: total control of wheels 100% of the time)
You are also forgetting to rev matching. I'm no expert in this area as I've not driven a manual for many years, but if you rev match when downshifting (like most automatic will do), you won't feel a sudden unpleasant change in speed. Then the lower-gear noisy high-rev engine braking feel is quite mild, compared to some EV's regen braking.

Drop down 2-3 gears (maximum computer allowed at the time) in my DSG 2.0l diesel Skoda, engine braking is less than regen in my Nissan Leaf. I believe BMW i3 regen is more pronounced than the Nissan Leaf.

I doubt we'll ever get one or the other. I reckon that when the cars we currently have wear out we'll just stick to the bus or take a taxi. (asuming whatever guvmint we get hasn't bankrupted us all)

Robo taxi?

 

[nilagin]

The Focus EV and Mercedes B class EV will not be able to rapid charge. Meaning, IF you were needed for errant during the evening, after depleting the battery during your commute, your cars are completely useless. I've had to do this a few times, both times were not a problem in Nissan Leaf, where I could rapid charge along the way for 5min.

This is the flexibility of EV charging, majority of the time you don't need to think about refuelling, but when you do, quick charging needs to be available. It is also why today's EV is much improved and totally different to 1800's EV, petrol won back then because of weak grid infrastructure and lack of rapid charging capability.


Oh dear. You have totally lost it. You are now not making any sense and decided to completely ignore original discussion on engine braking, looks like you've twist and turned to talk about the feel when lifting clutch after changing down 2 gears.

Lock up the back wheels by changing down 2 gears? Lock up means not turning, I think your engine must have stalled, otherwise how do you lock up wheels by forcing it to turn at a slower rate? Loose traction, yes; lock up, no. (another advantage of EV: total control of wheels 100% of the time)
You are also forgetting to rev matching. I'm no expert in this area as I've not driven a manual for many years, but if you rev match when downshifting (like most automatic will do), you won't feel a sudden unpleasant change in speed. Then the lower-gear noisy high-rev engine braking feel is quite mild, compared to some EV's regen braking.

You keep telling us how simple and easy it is to charge at home, just plug in and leave. Do that every day even when you don't need to and you will have enough charge to run the odd errand as and when you should need to.
Early EV was most prolific in America, they didn't need rapid charging, they just changed the battery.

The only thing not making sense regarding braking force during engine braking is your changing statements. Which is what I have been trying to point out all along.

I wasn't ignoring the discussion on engine / regenerative braking at all, it is just hard to hold an actual discussion on it when you make a b******t comment, agree with another member when they point out your comment is wrong and then decide it is actually more pronounced (severe) than your original comment.

As pointed out in the post where your original b******t was corrected,

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...g-hard-think-about-diesel.648283/post-8490602

Because the EV regen braking force is more severe than ICE engine braking if both an ICE and EV started the process at the same time, the EV would stop short of where the ICE vehicle would, you would need to get back on the power (burning fuel) earlier in the EV than the ICE. Or you could regen brake later in the EV but that would just mean you will be burning the power for longer burning fuel.
Regardless of whether you match engine speed or not when dropping 2-3 gears to drop that many gears you are doing so, to scrub off a lot of speed over a short distance, 20-30mph at the least. That is a long distance you can cover in an ICE just by lifting your foot off the accelerator, cease burning fuel and slow gently.

 

[Deleted sulking member 63079]

You keep telling us how simple and easy it is to charge at home, just plug in and leave. Do that every day even when you don't need to and you will have enough charge to run the odd errand as and when you should need to.
Early EV was most prolific in America, they didn't need rapid charging, they just changed the battery.

The only thing not making sense regarding braking force during engine braking is your changing statements. Which is what I have been trying to point out all along.

I wasn't ignoring the discussion on engine / regenerative braking at all, it is just hard to hold an actual discussion on it when you make a b******t comment, agree with another member when they point out your comment is wrong and then decide it is actually more pronounced (severe) than your original comment.

As pointed out in the post where your original b******t was corrected,

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...g-hard-think-about-diesel.648283/post-8490602

Because the EV regen braking force is more severe than ICE engine braking if both an ICE and EV started the process at the same time, the EV would stop short of where the ICE vehicle would, you would need to get back on the power (burning fuel) earlier in the EV than the ICE. Or you could regen brake later in the EV but that would just mean you will be burning the power for longer burning fuel.
Regardless of whether you match engine speed or not when dropping 2-3 gears to drop that many gears you are doing so, to scrub off a lot of speed over a short distance, 20-30mph at the least. That is a long distance you can cover in an ICE just by lifting your foot off the accelerator, cease burning fuel and slow gently.

Which is all true, if you ignore the fact that the accelorator isn't an on/off switch and the regen breaking on newer EV's isn't just on or off. You can lift your foot some, but not all the way and reduce speed down to what you want.

I still don't really get the point of the argument anyway though.

The important thing is how much energy the car is using over all. So the real figure to look at is the "MPGe" which is calculated based on the energy density of standard petrol, giving a good way of comparing efficiencies.

The Tesla Model 3 has an MPGe of 134MPGe while the Ioniq has 136MPGe.

So doesn't really matter if you get on the pedal seconds earlier in an EV, the overall efficiency still beats an ICE hands down no matter how you really look at it.

 

[wyx087]

I do wonder if rest of your view on EV's is as twisty and one sided. Grasping at all possible straws just to get a bad word in.

The only thing not making sense regarding braking force during engine braking is your changing statements. Which is what I have been trying to point out all along.

I wasn't ignoring the discussion on engine / regenerative braking at all, it is just hard to hold an actual discussion on it when you make a b******t comment, agree with another member when they point out your comment is wrong and then decide it is actually more pronounced (severe) than your original comment.

As pointed out in the post where your original b******t was corrected,

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...g-hard-think-about-diesel.648283/post-8490602

Because the EV regen braking force is more severe than ICE engine braking if both an ICE and EV started the process at the same time, the EV would stop short of where the ICE vehicle would, you would need to get back on the power (burning fuel) earlier in the EV than the ICE. Or you could regen brake later in the EV but that would just mean you will be burning the power for longer burning fuel.
Regardless of whether you match engine speed or not when dropping 2-3 gears to drop that many gears you are doing so, to scrub off a lot of speed over a short distance, 20-30mph at the least. That is a long distance you can cover in an ICE just by lifting your foot off the accelerator, cease burning fuel and slow gently.

Oh dear. Why are you digging a hole for yourself.
You call people's statement BS, yet it is you who cannot read:

First, you state your understanding of the previous post is: regen braking is more moderate than dropping 2 gears.

You said regenerative braking in an EV is configurable and can be akin to dropping 2 or 3 gears in an ICE vehicle. He said it wasn't even similar to dropping 2 gears, it was more moderate. You "liked" his post which means you are now disagreeing with your own statement.

Now, you say regen braking is more servere. Very crafty of you.

agree with another member when they point out your comment is wrong and then decide it is actually more pronounced (severe) than your original comment.

For what it's worth. My statement never changed. EV regen braking is to akin to similar braking force as changing down 2-3 gears the moment you lift off throttle:

I'll just say 2 thing:
- EV Regenerative braking that gains you energy rather than vast majority is burnt away as heat in pure ICE cars is much better.
- EV regenerative braking is very configurable. To the point where you can lift off throttle and gain same amount of braking force as changing down 2/3 gears instantly.

You are bringing up your old perception how EV will stop sooner than ICE cars. Pretending the throttle pedal is an on-off switch. This absurd view has already been pointed out by other people many pages ago:

In that scenario in the Leaf you wouldn't be doing full regen braking as you are not coming to a complete stop. Like any other car/driver you will be feathering the throttle to maintain transition between speed limits

 

[Baz777]

3 months ago my petrol car was taken out by an oncoming driver on my side of the road. I live in a village with no bus service to speak of so had to find a car quick and local.

Got myself a Mercades A class 2.0 deisel manual. Very please with the car and getting 50 mpg combined.

Me being old and farting a lot more these days is probably killing the planet quicker than my car!

 

[nilagin]

Which is all true, if you ignore the fact that the accelorator isn't an on/off switch and the regen breaking on newer EV's isn't just on or off. You can lift your foot some, but not all the way and reduce speed down to what you want.

I still don't really get the point of the argument anyway though.

The important thing is how much energy the car is using over all. So the real figure to look at is the "MPGe" which is calculated based on the energy density of standard petrol, giving a good way of comparing efficiencies.

The Tesla Model 3 has an MPGe of 134MPGe while the Ioniq has 136MPGe.

So doesn't really matter if you get on the pedal seconds earlier in an EV, the overall efficiency still beats an ICE hands down no matter how you really look at it.

There is no standard energy density for fossil fuels. It may be within certain tolerances, but their is variation, so comparison figures can't be written in stone.

ICE gets more efficient as the tank empties and car gets lighter. An EV doesn't get any more efficient as it still weighs the same regardless of whether it is fully charged or almost completely flat.

 

[nilagin]

I do wonder if rest of your view on EV's is as twisty and one sided. Grasping at all possible straws just to get a bad word in.


Oh dear. Why are you digging a hole for yourself.
You call people's statement BS, yet it is you who cannot read:

First, you state your understanding of the previous post is: regen braking is more moderate than dropping 2 gears.


Now, you say regen braking is more servere. Very crafty of you.


For what it's worth. My statement never changed. EV regen braking is to akin to similar braking force as changing down 2-3 gears the moment you lift off throttle:


You are bringing up your old perception how EV will stop sooner than ICE cars. Pretending the throttle pedal is an on-off switch. This absurd view has already been pointed out by other people many pages ago:

You have totally lost it. You are constantly disagreeing and arguing with your own statements and then think it's me.
I didn't bring up the perception that EV would stop sooner, it was done for us in the post I quoted above that was correcting your b******t. You even liked the post which means you agreed with what was said. Then later you decided it was actuary more pronounced than you originally wrote.
If you are going to spout s***, at least keep it consistent, instead of disagreeing with yourself all the time.

 

[Deleted sulking member 63079]

There is no standard energy density for fossil fuels. It may be within certain tolerances, but their is variation, so comparison figures can't be written in stone.

ICE gets more efficient as the tank empties and car gets lighter. An EV doesn't get any more efficient as it still weighs the same regardless of whether it is fully charged or almost completely flat.

It's not plus or minus 100% though is it.. yes of course it will vary, but I imagine not by very much, a couple of percent maybe.

Technically an EV does get lighter as it burns energy, just not very much

I realise that an ICE car is more efficient when it's lighter, but that efficiency still doesn't match an EV though does it?

 

[wyx087]

You have totally lost it. You are constantly disagreeing and arguing with your own statements and then think it's me.
I didn't bring up the perception that EV would stop sooner, it was done for us in the post I quoted above that was correcting your b******t. You even liked the post which means you agreed with what was said. Then later you decided it was actuary more pronounced than you originally wrote.
If you are going to spout s***, at least keep it consistent, instead of disagreeing with yourself all the time.

Please quote bits you feel I was inconsistent. Keeping in mind, just like ICE cars, different EV have different characteristics.

I have quoted direct contradiction in your posts, where you are wiggling out of your original BS statement and attempt to sound like my statements were wrong. Now you have ran out of things to say so you lash out but without any supporting evidence. Your post is empty and worthless, it's just your desperate attempt at devaluing my logical and factual statements.

You should have stopped talking about regen braking many many pages ago.

ICE gets more efficient as the tank empties and car gets lighter. An EV doesn't get any more efficient as it still weighs the same regardless of whether it is fully charged or almost completely flat.

How much does fuel weigh? Let's say 50kg for 50l?
How much does a car weigh? Let's say 1400kg
How much percentage is fuel weight difference relative to a car? 3.5%
How much percentage does the weight of the car affect fuel efficiency? Certainly not 100%.

So, you are saying ICE car gets more efficient by less than 3.5% as the tank empties. Normally ICE are around 20-30mpgUS. EPA have rated Model 3 and Ioniq to be ~134 MPGe. Do you think your 3.5% will get ICE cars close to EV efficiency?


You really are grasping at all possible straws just to get a bad word in on EV's.

 

[nilagin]

Please quote bits you feel I was inconsistent. Keeping in mind, just like ICE cars, different EV have different characteristics.

I have quoted direct contradiction in your posts, where you are wiggling out of your original BS statement and attempt to sound like my statements were wrong. Now you have ran out of things to say so you lash out but without any supporting evidence. Your post is empty and worthless, it's just your desperate attempt at devaluing my logical and factual statements.

You should have stopped talking about regen braking many many pages ago.


How much does fuel weigh? Let's say 50kg for 50l?
How much does a car weigh? Let's say 1400kg
How much percentage is fuel weight difference relative to a car? 3.5%
How much percentage does the weight of the car affect fuel efficiency? Certainly not 100%.

So, you are saying ICE car gets more efficient by less than 3.5% as the tank empties. Normally ICE are around 20-30mpgUS. EPA have rated Model 3 and Ioniq to be ~134 MPGe. Do you think your 3.5% will get ICE cars close to EV efficiency?


You really are grasping at all possible straws just to get a bad word in on EV's.

I have already provided proof of your inconsistent statements.
How can your statements be logical and factual when you can't even make a consistent statement. You say it is one thing, someone disagrees with you, you agree with them and then later you disagree with them and yourself and come up with something else again. I haven't done anything to devalue your statements, as you are doing such a fantastic job of it yourself.
It doesn't matter how much more efficient an ICE gets as the weight of the vehicle reduces. The fact is still does it.
Charging degrades the battery, rapid charging more so. As the years go on the range decreases. It doesn't matter how often you refill a fuel tank or how quickly, the range capability of the fuel tank won't decrease, only poor maintenance will reduce the capability of the engine.

 

[Nod]

A fiesta has a 42 litre tank so a full tank weighs around 33 kg - a small person. Not a huge amount of weight.

 

[Deleted sulking member 63079]

I have already provided proof of your inconsistent statements.
How can your statements be logical and factual when you can't even make a consistent statement. You say it is one thing, someone disagrees with you, you agree with them and then later you disagree with them and yourself and come up with something else again. I haven't done anything to devalue your statements, as you are doing such a fantastic job of it yourself.
It doesn't matter how much more efficient an ICE gets as the weight of the vehicle reduces. The fact is still does it.
Charging degrades the battery, rapid charging more so. As the years go on the range decreases. It doesn't matter how often you refill a fuel tank or how quickly, the range capability of the fuel tank won't decrease, only poor maintenance will reduce the capability of the engine.

So if it "doesn't matter how much more efficient an ICE gets as the weight reduces" then you have to say the same about EV, so the EV will get more economical as weight decreases. Even though the weight decrease by discharging the battery will be about the weight of a grain of sand

Even with the degradation in range, it'll still be getting 100MPGe. How many ICE cars can get anywhere near that efficiency?

 

[nilagin]

Tesla Model 3 from £21500.
Only drawback you will have to move to South Korea.
https://www.express.co.uk/life-styl...del-3-on-sale-south-Korea-cash-incentives/amp

If you don't mind a lhd car, I wonder if you could go to South Korea, register it there with the incentives, then export it to the UK yourself. Probably wouldn't add more than a few grand to the cost of buying the car.

 

[MatBin]

Normally ICE are around 20-30mpgUS.

And Neil is clutching at straws???
I haven't had a car return that figure since about 1978 and that was when it was doing 70mph
My heavy 2.0 litre turbo Diesel gets 60mpg on the way to work EVERY day at an average of 60mph, OK not as "good" as an EV perhaps but a long way north of your quoted figure.
60mpg UK = 72mpg US

 

[nilagin]

Even with the degradation in range, it'll still be getting 100MPGe. How many ICE cars can get anywhere near that efficiency?

Probably more than you actually think.
There was a 1 gallon challenge held around Brands Hatch Indy Circuit in 2010 using identical 1.4 petrol (Not diesel, which would have been more economical) naturally aspirated engines. Not even a more efficient and economical direct injection turbo charged engine with variable cam timing. Brands Hatch Indy Circuit is by no means flat where a lot of the time you will actually be driving up hill. The climb up to Druids bend being particularly steep. The car that won the challenge recorded 82mpg. Engines are more fuel efficient now and for the most part cars are lighter

 

[broc]

I think there's a lot of pseudoscience in this thread, & find it mostly a distraction .......

The reality is many of us will be too old to drive/dead by the time the Governments plan to get rid of ICE powered road vehicles is realised. What we do in the UK to curb emissions and pollution will have little impact on the planet unless much bigger & more polluting countries get their acts together too.

As someone who enjoys driving & car ownership, I tend to change cars every 2-3 years. I am interested in cars & how they look, handle and how well they are put together.
I will be honest, I don't like the look of the Tesla range & many of the features such as self-driving, great big tablets on the dashboard & integration of entertainment services leave me cold. It would be a sad world if we all liked the same thing, I recognise that for some Tesla is the bees knees as far as cars are concerned.

Meanwhile, none of the 'science' quoted in this thread has so far convinced me that I should rush out and buy an EV even if there were any that I liked; as I have said before, there simply aren't the vehicles available for my needs. I don't see any in the pipeline anytime soon either. I suspect for many others, this applies too.

 

[MatBin]

as I have said before, there simply aren't the vehicles available for my needs. I don't see any in the pipeline anytime soon either. I suspect for many others, this applies too.

Oh that's all this thread needs, someone with a biased opinion

 

[broc]

Oh that's all this thread needs, someone with a biased opinion

Of course I am biased, it's MY opinion ........

 

[nilagin]

I will be honest, I don't like the look of the Tesla range & many of the features such as self-driving, great big tablets on the dashboard & integration of entertainment services leave me cold.

That for me is the problem with the Tesla, everything is geared towards automated driving. I have no interest in that. I want to drive a car for myself. I enjoy the experience. I dislike being a passenger. Anyone looking forward to automated driving doesn't need a car, just book a cab. True you could still drive the car yourself, but everything is on that Tablet in a Tesla and it is positioned in the wrong place. Certain things need to be on view right in front of the driver.
I have an 8" screen in the middle of my dash but it only features the entertainment, the sat nav, phone if linked and also the rear camera view. The fuel gauge, Speedo and rev counter are still directly in front of me where they should be. If I am using the sat nav there is also a simplified screen between the gauges also letting me know how far the next turn is so I don't even need to look across to the sat nav main screen or even listen to it.

 

[wyx087]

I have already provided proof of your inconsistent statements.
How can your statements be logical and factual when you can't even make a consistent statement. You say it is one thing, someone disagrees with you, you agree with them and then later you disagree with them and yourself and come up with something else again. I haven't done anything to devalue your statements, as you are doing such a fantastic job of it yourself.

Okay. Do link to this post of yours. Don't post any more of your pointless wriggling unless you can provide quoted evidences.
I say it is one thing, someone say the same thing in a different way, I give a like. You just can't read.

And Neil is clutching at straws???
I haven't had a car return that figure since about 1978 and that was when it was doing 70mph
My heavy 2.0 litre turbo Diesel gets 60mpg on the way to work EVERY day at an average of 60mph, OK not as "good" as an EV perhaps but a long way north of your quoted figure.
60mpg UK = 72mpg US

Are you sure you did the UK to US mpg conversion correctly?
According to EPA, BMW 330i only gets 30mpg, Ford F150 gets 21mpg.
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=41416&id=41157&id=40609&id=41022

Probably more than you actually think.
There was a 1 gallon challenge held around Brands Hatch Indy Circuit in 2010 using identical 1.4 petrol (Not diesel, which would have been more economical) naturally aspirated engines. Not even a more efficient and economical direct injection turbo charged engine with variable cam timing. Brands Hatch Indy Circuit is by no means flat where a lot of the time you will actually be driving up hill. The climb up to Druids bend being particularly steep. The car that won the challenge recorded 82mpg. Engines are more fuel efficient now and for the most part cars are lighter

If you are talking about specifically driving for efficiency. This Model S has gotten 670 miles on one charge. https://insideevs.com/news/332631/t...record-of-1078-km-670-miles-on-single-charge/
2017 Model S 100D gets 102 MPGe according to EPA, normal range of 335 miles. https://insideevs.com/news/333814/b...ets-record-shattering-epa-range-of-335-miles/
So a big heavy car got 204 MPGe efficiency in 2017. The same battery and car now has improved motor+inverter, 370 miles rated range.

Charging degrades the battery, rapid charging more so. As the years go on the range decreases. It doesn't matter how often you refill a fuel tank or how quickly, the range capability of the fuel tank won't decrease, only poor maintenance will reduce the capability of the engine.

Actually, charging does not degrade the battery. I believe age has a bigger effect on battery capacity. I've seen high mileage and low mileage Leaf have similar battery degradation throughout the years.

For example. "Recently, one company racked up 300,000 miles on their Tesla in just two years, putting their Model X to the ultimate test. After two years of what can only be described as ultimate overutilization, the battery pack of that particular vehicle lost only 12.6% of its original capacity. "
Let's be conservative and say 250 miles range, that's 1200 charge cycles on the cells, only 12.6% degradation.
https://insideevs.com/news/339110/highest-mileage-tesla-now-has-over-420000-miles/

Yet, over the 300k miles, the electric powertrain did not require as significant powertrain maintenance as ICE.
Whereas a well looked after Skoda Octavia, with 400k+ on the clock, has lost power. Contrary to what you've claimed.
(disclaimer: psudoscience. unfortunately this is needed to combat baseless claims)

Dyno run:

View: https://youtu.be/DZQ969a-IQ8?t=208

Rebuild, showing engine was well looked after. Published before Dyno run:

View: https://youtu.be/Wk-isKUjWBQ

 

[broc]

1 Imperial gallon = 1.2 US gallons, or 1 US gallon = 0.833 Imperial gallons so a car which achieves 30mpg (US) would achieve 36mpg (Imperial)

Also, in the UK the 330i is rated at 40.4-41.5 mpg (Imperial). Using US vehicle data is misleading........

 

[nilagin]

Whereas a well looked after Skoda Octavia, with 400k+ on the clock, has lost power. Contrary to what you've claimed.
(disclaimer: psudoscience. unfortunately this is needed to combat baseless claims)

Dyno run:

View: https://youtu.be/DZQ969a-IQ8?t=208

Rebuild, showing engine was well looked after. Published before Dyno run:

View: https://youtu.be/Wk-isKUjWBQ

For your point to be of any relevance, where's the video or proof of the engine output when the vehicle was manufactured. Where is the calibration for their dyno to prove it is actually operating within tolerance to give a true reading.
For your information when engines are homologated so performance figures can be officially released, they have to fall within 5% of the target figure. 3bhp falls within that tolerance. That engine may well have lost nothing at all in 9yrs and 400k+ miles. Those figures could be exactly the same as the day it was built.
When engines are developed on dynos they see a lot more abuse than a well cared for 400k+ engine ever will.
I have tested a 1.0 3cyl petrol engine for over 180,000 miles it will have done multiple 4-6hr long tests at wide open throttle from 1000rpm through to 6500rpm the engine screaming, the turbo glowing red hot, the exhaust glowing red all the way down to the end of the tail pipe. Sometimes the engine would have run for 24hrs solid. All it would receive was It's scheduled oil, filter and spark plug changes and the occasional oil top up. Before the engine was removed from the dyno it was still producing the same figures all the way through It's power and torque curves as it did after its running in period. Leak down tests were conducted after the run in period and after the 180k+ miles testing to check for burnt valves. Compression checks also carried out at the same time and the figures were identical.

 

[MatBin]

1 Imperial gallon = 1.2 US gallons, or 1 US gallon = 0.833 Imperial gallons so a car which achieves 30mpg (US) would achieve 36mpg (Imperial)

Also, in the UK the 330i is rated at 40.4-41.5 mpg (Imperial). Using US vehicle data is misleading........

Absolutely. Furthermore those figures are probably combined all type driving, and if EV are allowed to quote best condition range i.e. a nice warm, not hot or the AC would be draining power, summer's day shouldnt ICE cars be allowed to quote best conditions i.e. cruising down a motorway. In addition why use a BM 330 which is more performance focused than a 320d for comparison, thereby twisting the figures clearly in favour of the EV. Smoke and mirrors again.

 

[nilagin]

Okay. Do link to this post of yours. Don't post any more of your pointless wriggling unless you can provide quoted evidences.
I say it is one thing, someone say the same thing in a different way, I give a like. You just can't read.


Are you sure you did the UK to US mpg conversion correctly?
According to EPA, BMW 330i only gets 30mpg, Ford F150 gets 21mpg.
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=41416&id=41157&id=40609&id=41022


If you are talking about specifically driving for efficiency. This Model S has gotten 670 miles on one charge. https://insideevs.com/news/332631/t...record-of-1078-km-670-miles-on-single-charge/
2017 Model S 100D gets 102 MPGe according to EPA, normal range of 335 miles. https://insideevs.com/news/333814/b...ets-record-shattering-epa-range-of-335-miles/
So a big heavy car got 204 MPGe efficiency in 2017. The same battery and car now has improved motor+inverter, 370 miles rated range.


Actually, charging does not degrade the battery. I believe age has a bigger effect on battery capacity. I've seen high mileage and low mileage Leaf have similar battery degradation throughout the years.

For example. "Recently, one company racked up 300,000 miles on their Tesla in just two years, putting their Model X to the ultimate test. After two years of what can only be described as ultimate overutilization, the battery pack of that particular vehicle lost only 12.6% of its original capacity. "
Let's be conservative and say 250 miles range, that's 1200 charge cycles on the cells, only 12.6% degradation.
https://insideevs.com/news/339110/highest-mileage-tesla-now-has-over-420000-miles/

Yet, over the 300k miles, the electric powertrain did not require as significant powertrain maintenance as ICE.
Whereas a well looked after Skoda Octavia, with 400k+ on the clock, has lost power. Contrary to what you've claimed.
(disclaimer: psudoscience. unfortunately this is needed to combat baseless claims)

Dyno run:

View: https://youtu.be/DZQ969a-IQ8?t=208

Rebuild, showing engine was well looked after. Published before Dyno run:

View: https://youtu.be/Wk-isKUjWBQ

This is the reply i got when i questioned regen braking being like dropping a couple of gears.
https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...g-hard-think-about-diesel.648283/post-8490602
Notice the bit where he said regenerative feels like moderate braking in an ICE car. Dropping 2-3 gears a lot closer to heavy braking in an ICE car, it is a lot more severe than moderate braking. You liked that comment meaning you agreed with it, you made no attempt to disagree with his correction of your statement.

I can't be bothered to trawl through all your posts to find the one where you changed your mind yet again and said that regenerative braking was more pronounced than dropping 2 or 3 gears but it is amongst all your s*** somewhere over the past week or so.

And to top it all today you go back to it being akin to dropping 2 or 3 gears.

Let me help you out a bit if you can stop your head from spinning.
^ is Up, the opposite direction is down.
< is left
> is right.
You can try and work out forward and back for yourself.

EDIT
More help for you, I have found your post where you wrote that regen braking feels more pronounced than dropping gears in an ICE vehicle.
https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...g-hard-think-about-diesel.648283/post-8498918
I will also repeat the definition of "more pronounced" for you as you claimed I didn't know the meaning, when in fact it is you that is obviously struggling with it.
More pronounced - more noticeable.

The only way something can feel more noticeable (pronounced) is if it is actually more pronounced or noticeable.

You can thank me for my kind help later.

 

[DK602]

For your point to be of any relevance, where's the video or proof of the engine output when the vehicle was manufactured. Where is the calibration for their dyno to prove it is actually operating within tolerance to give a true reading.
For your information when engines are homologated so performance figures can be officially released, they have to fall within 5% of the target figure. 3bhp falls within that tolerance. That engine may well have lost nothing at all in 9yrs and 400k+ miles. Those figures could be exactly the same as the day it was built.
When engines are developed on dynos they see a lot more abuse than a well cared for 400k+ engine ever will.
I have tested a 1.0 3cyl petrol engine for over 180,000 miles it will have done multiple 4-6hr long tests at wide open throttle from 1000rpm through to 6500rpm the engine screaming, the turbo glowing red hot, the exhaust glowing red all the way down to the end of the tail pipe. Sometimes the engine would have run for 24hrs solid. All it would receive was It's scheduled oil, filter and spark plug changes and the occasional oil top up. Before the engine was removed from the dyno it was still producing the same figures all the way through It's power and torque curves as it did after its running in period. Leak down tests were conducted after the run in period and after the 180k+ miles testing to check for burnt valves. Compression checks also carried out at the same time and the figures were identical.

Trouble is you've already shown you don't understand what you are looking at

 

[nilagin]

Absolutely. Furthermore those figures are probably combined all type driving, and if EV are allowed to quote best condition range i.e. a nice warm, not hot or the AC would be draining power, summer's day shouldnt ICE cars be allowed to quote best conditions i.e. cruising down a motorway. In addition why use a BM 330 which is more performance focused than a 320d for comparison, thereby twisting the figures clearly in favour of the EV. Smoke and mirrors again.

I also wonder if all Tesla Model S have had to have the software update that has reduced the range of the cars. As I suspected, the software update is what Tesla have rolled out as a battery management fix after the recent fire in China. There are now a lot of owners signing up to a class action because Tesla have reduced the capacity to which the battery would normally charge instead of recalling the vehicles and replacing any damaged cells. The software update was only supposed to improve the battery temperature management. Tesla have just reintroduced the free supercharged on the Model S. I wonder if that is to compensate if new cars have also suffered the drop in battery capacity as a result of having to have the update.

 

[nilagin]

Trouble is you've already shown you don't understand what you are looking at

No you just think I don't.
You do realise when a number has a - (minus) in front of it, it actually means negative.
Also all the data is recorded elsewhere and published in the testing reports by engineers so I know it's real.
Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.