The Official Top Gear Series 17 Thread....With Spoilers..
Discussion
thinfourth2 said:
E21_Ross said:
dugt said:
thinfourth2 said:
Rollcage said:
The Peugeotis really a Mitsibushi iMiev isn't it?
YepWhich is based on the I kei car
That £20,000 difference would pay for a lot of petrol.
It would buy alot of hay for a horse too
Kei car gets 70mpg real-world (petrol)
iOn gets 80 miles real world.
According to sources, the nissan costs about 2-10£ to fill up, depending on time and provider, so let's take £4 for 80mi
The Kei car does 70 miles for little over £5.
So recalculating that to, lets say 100 miles, gets about £5 vs £7.5 pounds for the petrol version.
To close the 20k gap would mean you'd need approx 800 000 miles.
Where did my maths fail me
ZesPak said:
I know we're going in circles here, but comparing the two (kei car vs peug ion).
Kei car gets 70mpg real-world (petrol)
iOn gets 80 miles real world.
According to sources, the nissan costs about 2-10£ to fill up, depending on time and provider, so let's take £4 for 80mi
The Kei car does 70 miles for little over £5.
So recalculating that to, lets say 100 miles, gets about £5 vs £7.5 pounds for the petrol version.
To close the 20k gap would mean you'd need approx 800 000 miles.
Where did my maths fail me
Apparently you can't compare the 2 cars because they aren't like for like. I will say though if using around town you won't get that mpg but even if you half the mpg its going to take a lot of miles to make up the cost difference. But people don't buy electric cars to save money apparently, they get them because they're nice to drive. Kei car gets 70mpg real-world (petrol)
iOn gets 80 miles real world.
According to sources, the nissan costs about 2-10£ to fill up, depending on time and provider, so let's take £4 for 80mi
The Kei car does 70 miles for little over £5.
So recalculating that to, lets say 100 miles, gets about £5 vs £7.5 pounds for the petrol version.
To close the 20k gap would mean you'd need approx 800 000 miles.
Where did my maths fail me
thinfourth2 said:
Yep but Clarkson can make some milage out of pointing out this issue effects EVs
Give it 3 months and it will be repeated as gospel by the educated ones.
The 5 year battery death is already 100% true
Points at this thread post nr 7Give it 3 months and it will be repeated as gospel by the educated ones.
The 5 year battery death is already 100% true
3 months? 3 days more like....
MGJohn said:
Max_Torque said:
When you consider that filling a normal car with hydrocarbon based fuels results in approx 70% of the money going as TAX to the government, surely when comparing "charging" an electric car, we need to also add a 70% inflator to the leccy bill, as you know that they are not going to let us get away with charging our cars for free!
(say i put £70 in my car, thats £49 to UK PLC and £21 to SHELL PLC. So say i use a tenners worth of leccy for my battery car, surely we are going to end up giving at least £25 in tax on that as well?? IN which case, the cost arguements get even further reduced do they not??)
Good point and one I've made before about cars with Zero or very low VED/Car Tax.(say i put £70 in my car, thats £49 to UK PLC and £21 to SHELL PLC. So say i use a tenners worth of leccy for my battery car, surely we are going to end up giving at least £25 in tax on that as well?? IN which case, the cost arguements get even further reduced do they not??)
What if all Brits decided to travel in low or zero rated VED cars? Where would they recover the Taxes shortfall? Give you three guess.... correction .... make that one.
..
What is most likely is fuel duty will go up to cover it being used less, this will probably suffice to 2030 at least and they will justify this by saying you can always go electric.
Once people go electric there is no effective way of taxing automotive electricity any more than they can stop illegal down loading. Given that fuel duty was always based on it being a sin tax I think it would be politically difficult to replace this with an equivalent road tax and the public have rejected widespread congestion charging.
I suspect that you will see a reduction of the tax take on motoring but this will be gradual from a 2030 onwards timeframe, this is plenty of time to readjust the tax system and is likely to coincide with the introduction of autonomous vehicles and the end of personal car ownership as we know it.
Talksteer said:
Even at optimistic rates of electric car take up you wouldn't see substantial quantities on the road before 2025. Cars last ten years so it takes a fair while to replace them.
What is most likely is fuel duty will go up to cover it being used less, this will probably suffice to 2030 at least and they will justify this by saying you can always go electric.
Once people go electric there is no effective way of taxing automotive electricity any more than they can stop illegal down loading. Given that fuel duty was always based on it being a sin tax I think it would be politically difficult to replace this with an equivalent road tax and the public have rejected widespread congestion charging.
I suspect that you will see a reduction of the tax take on motoring but this will be gradual from a 2030 onwards timeframe, this is plenty of time to readjust the tax system and is likely to coincide with the introduction of autonomous vehicles and the end of personal car ownership as we know it.
Cheers for that depressing post - still 2030 I'll be 66 so probably be thinking about car homesWhat is most likely is fuel duty will go up to cover it being used less, this will probably suffice to 2030 at least and they will justify this by saying you can always go electric.
Once people go electric there is no effective way of taxing automotive electricity any more than they can stop illegal down loading. Given that fuel duty was always based on it being a sin tax I think it would be politically difficult to replace this with an equivalent road tax and the public have rejected widespread congestion charging.
I suspect that you will see a reduction of the tax take on motoring but this will be gradual from a 2030 onwards timeframe, this is plenty of time to readjust the tax system and is likely to coincide with the introduction of autonomous vehicles and the end of personal car ownership as we know it.
Everybody knows that currently, electric cars don't make much sense for anything but short journeys.
Anybody buying one will be well aware of this, but won't mind, and will have the money to afford it (or are a local authority!)
Currently, they are expensive and not very good - such problems have faced early adopters of any new technology, and most were decried in similar ways as well.
It will be very interesting to see where we are with battery technology in ten years time, and whether current electric cars will be reverse compatible.
Anybody buying one will be well aware of this, but won't mind, and will have the money to afford it (or are a local authority!)
Currently, they are expensive and not very good - such problems have faced early adopters of any new technology, and most were decried in similar ways as well.
It will be very interesting to see where we are with battery technology in ten years time, and whether current electric cars will be reverse compatible.
Talksteer said:
Once people go electric there is no effective way of taxing automotive electricity any more than they can stop illegal down loading. Given that fuel duty was always based on it being a sin tax I think it would be politically difficult to replace this with an equivalent road tax and the public have rejected widespread congestion charging.
Was there not talk of specific meters being installed for your car-charging electricity - which could then be charged differently to your domestic electricity usage (which is quite dear enough already thank you)?Zwoelf said:
Talksteer said:
Once people go electric there is no effective way of taxing automotive electricity any more than they can stop illegal down loading. Given that fuel duty was always based on it being a sin tax I think it would be politically difficult to replace this with an equivalent road tax and the public have rejected widespread congestion charging.
Was there not talk of specific meters being installed for your car-charging electricity - which could then be charged differently to your domestic electricity usage (which is quite dear enough already thank you)?Plus if there is one rule in politics introducing a new tax is very difficult, which I'd why they like to mess around with old ones and are loath to get rid of ones that make very little sense.like stamp duty.
Talksteer said:
In which case you would plug it into your regular socket, to cheat any system would be so easy that most people would do it and it would be very difficult to prosecute anyone for it.
Like they do with red diesel? I'm sure they could come up with ways - i.e. unique sockets and plugs with transponders in that only means one socket will charge from a particular "home" terminal, but also be universally compatible with other sockets - that could be charged at a different rate maybe? Talksteer said:
Plus if there is one rule in politics introducing a new tax is very difficult, which I'd why they like to mess around with old ones and are loath to get rid of ones that make very little sense.like stamp duty.
So "fuel duty" could be "adapted" then? Ohh a EV debate.. Lock the doors.
There was a concept a while ago that I thought was great. A common platform, just like we have now within various brands. The batteries were in the floor, and the body simply bolted on. Potentially, what this could mean is, you have a normal everyday car, say your main body, more doors, big boot. Then at the weekend, pop down to the dealership (or as the case with many PHers would be, in your garage), have that body removed and switched over for something different. Maybe a pick up if you were moving house for example, or something a little more sporty.
Remember when the Nokia 3210 came out and had switchable covers? Yea, well, it was that, but applied to EVs.
There are still lots of issues with EVs, but we are in, and will be ever more so in a lesser of two evils situation. I think it comes down to compromise, as there is no long term solution available that is truly zero emission once production and battery life cycles have been factored in. Understandably, many people adopt a ignorance is bliss view, "they'll sort it out one day, some boffin in his basement" etc. But the truth is, a solution to this problem is not going to appear over night.
What really doesn't help is the way the media portray EVs, and vehicles fueled by alternative energy. They are very rarely given the time of day by average Joe. However Joe is going to be in for one hell of a shock in the years to come.
Rollcage said:
Everybody knows that currently, electric cars don't make much sense for anything but short journeys.
Anybody buying one will be well aware of this, but won't mind, and will have the money to afford it (or are a local authority!)
Currently, they are expensive and not very good - such problems have faced early adopters of any new technology, and most were decried in similar ways as well.
It will be very interesting to see where we are with battery technology in ten years time, and whether current electric cars will be reverse compatible.
All very fair points. What I will add, is that current battery technology is already way ahead of those found in current production EVs. Much lighter, more efficient and charging times lower than what it would take you to fuel up the average motor from empty. Sadly it will be some years before we see this tech in production EVs. Alas while new tech is still being adopted EVs will remain expensive from the outset, but we can rest assured that this isn't just blatant profiteering by the motor industry.Anybody buying one will be well aware of this, but won't mind, and will have the money to afford it (or are a local authority!)
Currently, they are expensive and not very good - such problems have faced early adopters of any new technology, and most were decried in similar ways as well.
It will be very interesting to see where we are with battery technology in ten years time, and whether current electric cars will be reverse compatible.
There was a concept a while ago that I thought was great. A common platform, just like we have now within various brands. The batteries were in the floor, and the body simply bolted on. Potentially, what this could mean is, you have a normal everyday car, say your main body, more doors, big boot. Then at the weekend, pop down to the dealership (or as the case with many PHers would be, in your garage), have that body removed and switched over for something different. Maybe a pick up if you were moving house for example, or something a little more sporty.
Remember when the Nokia 3210 came out and had switchable covers? Yea, well, it was that, but applied to EVs.
There are still lots of issues with EVs, but we are in, and will be ever more so in a lesser of two evils situation. I think it comes down to compromise, as there is no long term solution available that is truly zero emission once production and battery life cycles have been factored in. Understandably, many people adopt a ignorance is bliss view, "they'll sort it out one day, some boffin in his basement" etc. But the truth is, a solution to this problem is not going to appear over night.
What really doesn't help is the way the media portray EVs, and vehicles fueled by alternative energy. They are very rarely given the time of day by average Joe. However Joe is going to be in for one hell of a shock in the years to come.
8vFTW said:
What really doesn't help is the way the media portray EVs, and vehicles fueled by alternative energy.
How should they be portrayed? Their portrayal is a reflection of their shortcomings. They are a laughable proposition for everyone but a very small minority at the moment. Upwards of £30k for a car that can do 80 miles if you're lucky and then takes half a day to recharge? Sounds fairly ridiculous to me.In order for them to be accepted as a viable alternative, they have to be effectively interchangeable with current vehicles. That means they need to of similar or lesser cost, and they need to be as convenient to use as a petrol car. People would likely accept a slightly higher cost if there was no penalty (or an advantage) in usability, and they would accept a lower cost with reduced usability, but not many people will be happy with paying a substantial premium while also putting up with poor real world performance.
The important thing to bear in mind is that for many people cars are like white goods. They buy them to do a job, and aren't necessarily interested in what it sounds like or how fast it can go round the Nordschleife. Until EVs can fulfil that role they will always be a fringe product.
tank slapper said:
8vFTW said:
What really doesn't help is the way the media portray EVs, and vehicles fueled by alternative energy.
How should they be portrayed? Their portrayal is a reflection of their shortcomings. They are a laughable proposition for everyone but a very small minority at the moment. Upwards of £30k for a car that can do 80 miles if you're lucky and then takes half a day to recharge? Sounds fairly ridiculous to me.In order for them to be accepted as a viable alternative, they have to be effectively interchangeable with current vehicles. That means they need to of similar or lesser cost, and they need to be as convenient to use as a petrol car. People would likely accept a slightly higher cost if there was no penalty (or an advantage) in usability, and they would accept a lower cost with reduced usability, but not many people will be happy with paying a substantial premium while also putting up with poor real world performance.
The important thing to bear in mind is that for many people cars are like white goods. They buy them to do a job, and aren't necessarily interested in what it sounds like or how fast it can go round the Nordschleife. Until EVs can fulfil that role they will always be a fringe product.
I wonder how many people here do more than 80 miles a day in their commute?
Sadly, while the oil barons run the world, we won't get a real world petrol beater EV because they don't want us to have it. It's been that way since the 1900s. It's a sad state of affairs but this what capitalism leads to. More money in the hands of the few, and less in the majority. By god, turns out Lincoln was right.
Like I said previously, it's about compromise. Some time people will have to accept that unless they are particularly well off economically, personal transport in the future is a grim proposition compared to what we have now and have become accustomed to. Naturally, this is a very unpopular thought but often the truth can be difficult to accept.
8vFTW said:
...
I wonder how many people here do more than 80 miles a day in their commute? ...
I'll start off: the OH, me, and most of my friends.I wonder how many people here do more than 80 miles a day in their commute? ...
That said, 80 miles is a realistic number, but that means that you should really GO HOME when you... well, go home.
I wouldn't like the idea that if I'm at work, the only way to get somewhere after work is to first go home, wait for 10 hours and then go somewhere else.
Lots of people have a 30 mile (one way) commute, and even for them the EV's would seriously limit their mobility.
In that aspect, to me at least, they are more comparable to trains than any other mode of transport:
- go from A to B, do not stray from your route
- Fixed hours
ZesPak said:
In that aspect, to me at least, they are more comparable to trains than any other mode of transport:
exactly, cars are all about personal freedom, as soon as you reduce them to a fixed route/time/distance device, they have just failed as a car- go from A to B, do not stray from your route
- Fixed hours
MGJohn said:
RichB said:
That's sad news.Hmmm ... Gerry Built ... How about that Mr. Clarkson ... ( best written and read with a Black Country Accent ...
) If Swindon, Crewe and Doncaster were alive today ...... they'd die.... 
Tru-Brit skills... lost forever ...
.
What has to be remembered is this is a prototype , fully welded, boiler, not riveted in the traditional way. It seems the German manufacturers have been just as eager as the A1 Trust to get to the bottom of the issues and very quick to fix them. The issue is that a welded boiler has different operating practices than a traditional riveted boiler so it has been a steep learning curve. The known practices are from the service days of the original locomotives, when they didn't cool down very often. Things are a touch different with this locomotive.
Paddy_N_Murphy said:
Have been away for a few days and just watched it.
Must slap the wife - she obviously is slacking in my absence as the Dust in the lounge caused my eyes to play up in the last ten minutes.
Indeed mate, I had exactly the same problem. LOLMust slap the wife - she obviously is slacking in my absence as the Dust in the lounge caused my eyes to play up in the last ten minutes.
Unfortunately this thread has gone way off topic, focussing on something that has probably been discussed to death in various places on this forum, rather than focussing on what we PH'ers can do to help get that team to Dakkar.
I don't give a toss about EV's, at present they're rubbish and anyone stupid enough to buy one at £25k (after getting your £5k back from CMD) needs their heads examined
. But, it's amazing what people will do or buy to follow a trend, I bet they got loads of sales just because the Leaf on the programme was f
king white! 
over. 
The other thing I thought was perhaps they made economic sense if you had to go into London Congestion zone everyday, thus save the £10 or £9 per day as you'd set up autopay to get the discount.
Ignoring the fact that if I had to do this even I would still probably use pubic transport, assuming 45 working weeks then 9*5*45=2025. The figures STILL don't stack up.
As I pointed out on the other thread, for the amount the Leaf will depreciate in 3 years, you can buy a brand new top of the spec Nissan Note Tekna 1.6 auto, pay list price, drive it for 3 years, give it away, yes! GIVE it away, and it would still have cost you less capital than the depreciation on the Leaf.
Ignoring the fact that if I had to do this even I would still probably use pubic transport, assuming 45 working weeks then 9*5*45=2025. The figures STILL don't stack up.
As I pointed out on the other thread, for the amount the Leaf will depreciate in 3 years, you can buy a brand new top of the spec Nissan Note Tekna 1.6 auto, pay list price, drive it for 3 years, give it away, yes! GIVE it away, and it would still have cost you less capital than the depreciation on the Leaf.
AshVX220 said:
Unfortunately this thread has gone way off topic, focussing on something that has probably been discussed to death in various places on this forum, rather than focussing on what we PH'ers can do to help get that team to Dakkar.
Good point well made. This needs to be discussed more instead. Ideas people?Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff