RE: Chris Harris video: the Renault Twizy
Thursday 12th April 2012
Still can't believe how long a debate the Twizy first drive created the other week. I suppose it underlines the knowledge that whether we like electric power or no, it's something we can't ignore. And therefore we cannot simply dismiss it out of hand.
Twizy leaves Harris speechless shock!First off, I really tried to be irresponsible in this car. I tried to make it oversteer, largely so that I could call the video "Power oversteer in a Renault Twizy' and bag myself another 200,000 views. But the thing has so much grip, it was impossible. I even went off into the doobies on some dirt track, managed a little squiggle, but the rooster-tail of dust hid the moment. Gutted. Not as gutted as the poor bloke who had to clean all the dust out of the Twizy afterwards though. Apologies for that.
The more PH-friendly end of the Renault rangeThe solution appears to be inserting something interesting. Review the EV, impart some information and then, in this case, go mental in a Clio Renaultsport 200.
Chris Harris video: the Renault Twizy
If anyone can make an exciting video out of an electrically powered Renault Twizy Harris can ... or can he?
Twizy leaves Harris speechless shock!
Professionally, electric cars worry me. They are devices - white goods with a purpose and not much besides. Extracting engaging material from them, based on the findings of driving one around a Balearic island for a few hours, is going to be nigh-on impossible. The three boys on BBC2 will manage it because they're brilliant at making comedy out of cars. Your bottom-feeding car reviewer like myself is going to really struggle, because this emerging genre of internet car vids is all about the machine, the noise, the speed, the action. And EVs just don't have any of it.
The more PH-friendly end of the Renault range
I love the Clio. It's one of the best enthusiast cars on sale - for any money. A fitting counterpoint.
(Clio pic: Frozenspeed)
Discussion
I think the range is still a big drawback for a rental machine.
Kind of goes against having a bit of freedom on holiday.
Even on a small island in the med, I would pay much more for a proper car that so that I don't have to worry about going where and when I chose.
Edit: The 3.5 hour charge sounds a lot more reasonable actually, and semi-viable.
Kind of goes against having a bit of freedom on holiday.
Even on a small island in the med, I would pay much more for a proper car that so that I don't have to worry about going where and when I chose.
Edit: The 3.5 hour charge sounds a lot more reasonable actually, and semi-viable.
Edited by FisiP1 on Wednesday 11th April 19:55
The other thing about electric cars:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_Electric
Range of over 200 miles over 100 years ago, and almost nothing these days can manage to even match, let alone beat that.
Hasn't exactly moved on much has it? Despite all the flash launches and scooter-lightweight packaging.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_Electric
Range of over 200 miles over 100 years ago, and almost nothing these days can manage to even match, let alone beat that.
Hasn't exactly moved on much has it? Despite all the flash launches and scooter-lightweight packaging.
you have to remember that the range of these electric cars is limited by the size, complexity and therefore cost of the battery. You can't begin to compare them with ones from 100 years ago as they were probably massive and by the standards of the day, extremely high tech and expensive.
Basically what you are saying is akin to saying - "cars in the 60's had 300hp, so what is so special about X modern car?" when the older car probably required a huge and/or hugely complex engine that was expensive to produce and run.
It would not be a problem for renault to make an electric car capable of running for 500 or probably even 1000 miles, but the battery would probably only last a couple of charges and take ages to recharge, not to mention cost near to the £100,000 mark to produce. Then everyone would moan about the cost. There has to be a middle ground with production vehicles to produce cars that the most people want and can afford.
Hell, I think the twizy is a cracking idea, if it means commuters save petrol, it means we might have a few more years of the combustion engine yet before we all have to use electric/hydrogen etc
Basically what you are saying is akin to saying - "cars in the 60's had 300hp, so what is so special about X modern car?" when the older car probably required a huge and/or hugely complex engine that was expensive to produce and run.
It would not be a problem for renault to make an electric car capable of running for 500 or probably even 1000 miles, but the battery would probably only last a couple of charges and take ages to recharge, not to mention cost near to the £100,000 mark to produce. Then everyone would moan about the cost. There has to be a middle ground with production vehicles to produce cars that the most people want and can afford.
Hell, I think the twizy is a cracking idea, if it means commuters save petrol, it means we might have a few more years of the combustion engine yet before we all have to use electric/hydrogen etc
I can see these selling well to teenagers. Many kids seem to have missed out on enthusiasm for cars and just want mobility. They have grown up with smartphones and other gadgets that need charging every day. They are also used to the idea of a monthly service charge - I am sure that many will see £45 a month as being 'about the same as my iphone'. Parents will fall over themselves to finance the thing because the kid will threaten to blow their savings on a beaten up scooter.
I would certainly have one if it suited my commute and the 3.5 hour recharge time (from a standard 220v supply) is really quite reasonable.
I would certainly have one if it suited my commute and the 3.5 hour recharge time (from a standard 220v supply) is really quite reasonable.
Love Wednesday evenings.
I really like the way he's split the view on Renault - as in, they do do new-fangled EVs and they do do fantastic old-skool hot hatches... But, at the same time, I think it may be slightly unfair to compare something that has had decades to evolve (i.e. a N/A internal combustion hatch) with a first stab at an all-new technology and expect to get comparable levels of driver involvement. Clearly that's what this site (and Drive) are all about but EVs are surely trying to sing from a different hymn sheet? Or at least for now?
They (LEAF and Fluence in the main) seem to have got a bit of a kicking from most of the motoring media whereas, unless I've missed something, they're only ever going to be a viable option for a certain type of lifestyle for now (i.e. you have short commutes and a drive) and they're not pretending to be the perfect answer to the next thing on from visiting the petrol pumps? I don't suppose bullish manufacturer rhetoric has helped their cause in that respect but, again, I guess they don't have a choice on that front if they want to get noticed.
I really like the way he's split the view on Renault - as in, they do do new-fangled EVs and they do do fantastic old-skool hot hatches... But, at the same time, I think it may be slightly unfair to compare something that has had decades to evolve (i.e. a N/A internal combustion hatch) with a first stab at an all-new technology and expect to get comparable levels of driver involvement. Clearly that's what this site (and Drive) are all about but EVs are surely trying to sing from a different hymn sheet? Or at least for now?
They (LEAF and Fluence in the main) seem to have got a bit of a kicking from most of the motoring media whereas, unless I've missed something, they're only ever going to be a viable option for a certain type of lifestyle for now (i.e. you have short commutes and a drive) and they're not pretending to be the perfect answer to the next thing on from visiting the petrol pumps? I don't suppose bullish manufacturer rhetoric has helped their cause in that respect but, again, I guess they don't have a choice on that front if they want to get noticed.
Looks like they needed to restart the Twizy discuissions again for some odd reason. No idea why, I thought it was rumbling along pretty nicely from the first "review" by Mr Harris, posted only a week ago.
"Your bottom-feeding car reviewer like myself is going to really struggle. You said it Chris! Enjoyed the video and I got the ever so slight impression that you had to knock it a little more than necessary because you might just dent your street cred on reviewing "proper cars", so can understand why. You did let slip funky and fun so can't be all bad.
By the way it is 3.5 hrs to a full charge as you finally pointed out in the YouTube clip notes.
And I couldn't agree with Scholesy more: Hell, I think the Twizy is a cracking idea, if it means commuters save petrol, it means we might have a few more years of the combustion engine yet before we all have to use electric/hydrogen etc
"Your bottom-feeding car reviewer like myself is going to really struggle. You said it Chris! Enjoyed the video and I got the ever so slight impression that you had to knock it a little more than necessary because you might just dent your street cred on reviewing "proper cars", so can understand why. You did let slip funky and fun so can't be all bad.
By the way it is 3.5 hrs to a full charge as you finally pointed out in the YouTube clip notes.
And I couldn't agree with Scholesy more: Hell, I think the Twizy is a cracking idea, if it means commuters save petrol, it means we might have a few more years of the combustion engine yet before we all have to use electric/hydrogen etc
Edited by G4HKS on Wednesday 11th April 22:24
mattbvw said:
Love Wednesday evenings.
I really like the way he's split the view on Renault - as in, they do do new-fangled EVs and they do do fantastic old-skool hot hatches... But, at the same time, I think it may be slightly unfair to compare something that has had decades to evolve (i.e. a N/A internal combustion hatch) with a first stab at an all-new technology and expect to get comparable levels of driver involvement. Clearly that's what this site (and Drive) are all about but EVs are surely trying to sing from a different hymn sheet? Or at least for now?
They (LEAF and Fluence in the main) seem to have got a bit of a kicking from most of the motoring media whereas, unless I've missed something, they're only ever going to be a viable option for a certain type of lifestyle for now (i.e. you have short commutes and a drive) and they're not pretending to be the perfect answer to the next thing on from visiting the petrol pumps? I don't suppose bullish manufacturer rhetoric has helped their cause in that respect but, again, I guess they don't have a choice on that front if they want to get noticed.
Check the link I posted above if you think this kind of car is 'all-new technology'.I really like the way he's split the view on Renault - as in, they do do new-fangled EVs and they do do fantastic old-skool hot hatches... But, at the same time, I think it may be slightly unfair to compare something that has had decades to evolve (i.e. a N/A internal combustion hatch) with a first stab at an all-new technology and expect to get comparable levels of driver involvement. Clearly that's what this site (and Drive) are all about but EVs are surely trying to sing from a different hymn sheet? Or at least for now?
They (LEAF and Fluence in the main) seem to have got a bit of a kicking from most of the motoring media whereas, unless I've missed something, they're only ever going to be a viable option for a certain type of lifestyle for now (i.e. you have short commutes and a drive) and they're not pretending to be the perfect answer to the next thing on from visiting the petrol pumps? I don't suppose bullish manufacturer rhetoric has helped their cause in that respect but, again, I guess they don't have a choice on that front if they want to get noticed.
Electric has had more or less the same time to develop, only it hasn't.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff