What they don't tell you about electric cars

[M4cruiser]

With the raised awareness of battery fire risk, perhaps it's time the manufacturers came up with a solution, i.e. the self-extinguishing battery.
The concept isn't new, it happens with building materials already. For example, generating CO2 when it catches fire.
I recognise it's not an easy solution to build in, given the amount of heat generated, but a better balance of risk vs cost is needed before something even more disastrous happens.
https://www.bravarooftile.com/homeowners/fire-safe...

[otolith]

We haven't considered that necessary to deal with petrol fire risk, which on the evidence we have so far is greater, why would we need to do it for batteries?

[TheDeuce]

M4cruiser said:

With the raised awareness of battery fire risk, perhaps it's time the manufacturers came up with a solution, i.e. the self-extinguishing battery.
The concept isn't new, it happens with building materials already. For example, generating CO2 when it catches fire.
I recognise it's not an easy solution to build in, given the amount of heat generated, but a better balance of risk vs cost is needed before something even more disastrous happens.
https://www.bravarooftile.com/homeowners/fire-safe...

M4 takes another dip into the 'reasons EV is terrible' selection box.

[Zero Fuchs]

TheDeuce said:

M4cruiser said:

With the raised awareness of battery fire risk, perhaps it's time the manufacturers came up with a solution, i.e. the self-extinguishing battery.
The concept isn't new, it happens with building materials already. For example, generating CO2 when it catches fire.
I recognise it's not an easy solution to build in, given the amount of heat generated, but a better balance of risk vs cost is needed before something even more disastrous happens.
https://www.bravarooftile.com/homeowners/fire-safe...

M4 takes another dip into the 'reasons EV is terrible' selection box.

A selection box as tired as Cadbury's Dairy Milk

[Michael_B]

Zero Fuchs said:

A selection box as tired as Cadbury's Dairy Milk

There are certainly no more Heroes.

I blame The Stranglers

[Nomme de Plum]

Zero Fuchs said:

TheDeuce said:

M4cruiser said:

With the raised awareness of battery fire risk, perhaps it's time the manufacturers came up with a solution, i.e. the self-extinguishing battery.
The concept isn't new, it happens with building materials already. For example, generating CO2 when it catches fire.
I recognise it's not an easy solution to build in, given the amount of heat generated, but a better balance of risk vs cost is needed before something even more disastrous happens.
https://www.bravarooftile.com/homeowners/fire-safe...

M4 takes another dip into the 'reasons EV is terrible' selection box.

A selection box as tired as Cadbury's Dairy Milk

When a topic like EV battery fires has been widely discussed previously and evidenced balance of risk also clarified when does a post become out and out trolling?

[TheDeuce]

Nomme de Plum said:

Zero Fuchs said:

TheDeuce said:

M4cruiser said:

With the raised awareness of battery fire risk, perhaps it's time the manufacturers came up with a solution, i.e. the self-extinguishing battery.
The concept isn't new, it happens with building materials already. For example, generating CO2 when it catches fire.
I recognise it's not an easy solution to build in, given the amount of heat generated, but a better balance of risk vs cost is needed before something even more disastrous happens.
https://www.bravarooftile.com/homeowners/fire-safe...

M4 takes another dip into the 'reasons EV is terrible' selection box.

A selection box as tired as Cadbury's Dairy Milk

When a topic like EV battery fires has been widely discussed previously and evidenced balance of risk also clarified when does a post become out and out trolling?

It's definitely out and out trolling. Just flinging some other random anti EV tripe into the thread in an inane attempt to shift discussion away from the last 'reason' EV's are terrible that was easily debunked.

[Seasonal Hero]

otolith said:

We haven't considered that necessary to deal with petrol fire risk, which on the evidence we have so far is greater, why would we need to do it for batteries?

Because EV

[Zero Fuchs]

Michael_B said:

Zero Fuchs said:

A selection box as tired as Cadbury's Dairy Milk

There are certainly no more Heroes.

I blame The Stranglers

[Megaflow]

Monkeylegend said:

That sometimes the brakes don't work.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/terrified-mo...

Calling bullst on that. Notice the lack of damage to the front of the car? So something managed to stop it without hitting the police car. I bet the brakes were fine and it was a driver error, same as these stories all turn out to be.

otolith said:

It's worth pointing out that the UK has not mandated any particular technology for 2035 onward new cars - the mandate is not for battery cars, they can be powered by hydrogen, clockwork, or unicorn spunk, they just can't be powered by ICEs.

Correct me if I am wrong, but it doesn't even limit the use of ICE, doesn't it actually say zero emission at point of use, or words to that effect. The manufacturers have decided, and decided a long time ago, that the cheapest and easiest was to achieve that is BEV.

Edited by Megaflow on Sunday 10th March 14:08

[plfrench]

Megaflow said:

Monkeylegend said:

That sometimes the brakes don't work.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/terrified-mo...

Calling bullst on that. Notice the lack of damage to the front of the car? So something managed to stop it without hitting the police car. I bet the brakes were fine and it was a driver error, same as these stories all turn out to be.

otolith said:

It's worth pointing out that the UK has not mandated any particular technology for 2035 onward new cars - the mandate is not for battery cars, they can be powered by hydrogen, clockwork, or unicorn spunk, they just can't be powered by ICEs.

Correct me if I am wrong, but it doesn't even limit the use of ICE, doesn't it actually say zero emission at point of use, or words to that effect. The manufacturers have decided, and decided a long time ago, that the cheapest and easiest was to achieve that is BEV.

Edited by Megaflow on Sunday 10th March 14:08

ZEV Mandate defines compliant cars as having a WLTP result of 0 g CO2/km. This precludes ICE or hybrid from being allowed, but doesn’t say it has to be EV.

[bad company]

WonkeyDonkey said:

I don't own an EV but all the anti ev stuff is nauseating.

Many fotoshop fake pictures of ev’s on fire of on the back of a diesel breakdown truck on Facebook. Laughable.

I also don’t own an ev by the way.

[TheDeuce]

bad company said:

WonkeyDonkey said:

I don't own an EV but all the anti ev stuff is nauseating.

Many fotoshop fake pictures of ev’s on fire of on the back of a diesel breakdown truck on Facebook. Laughable.

I also don’t own an ev by the way.

The daft thing is, it's just the next logical step in the evolution of the car. Everyone runs around in hysterics because it's a bit of an upset.. but in reality it's plain common sense - obviously a simple electric motor makes more sense than several thousand explosions per minute when it comes to the optimum way to move a car down the road. This isn't a difficult thing for anyone to comprehend. The only reason it's taken until now is range, and we now have range that is sufficient for most people.

Those that need more range... Wait.

[bad company]

TheDeuce said:

The daft thing is, it's just the next logical step in the evolution of the car. Everyone runs around in hysterics because it's a bit of an upset.. but in reality it's plain common sense - obviously a simple electric motor makes more sense than several thousand explosions per minute when it comes to the optimum way to move a car down the road. This isn't a difficult thing for anyone to comprehend. The only reason it's taken until now is range, and we now have range that is sufficient for most people.

Those that need more range... Wait.

From memory you bought a BMW i4 M50? I tried and loved that car but decided moving to an ev wasn’t right for me at this time. How do you like it?

I take delivery of M440 Grand Coupe in a couple of weeks.

[TheDeuce]

bad company said:

TheDeuce said:

The daft thing is, it's just the next logical step in the evolution of the car. Everyone runs around in hysterics because it's a bit of an upset.. but in reality it's plain common sense - obviously a simple electric motor makes more sense than several thousand explosions per minute when it comes to the optimum way to move a car down the road. This isn't a difficult thing for anyone to comprehend. The only reason it's taken until now is range, and we now have range that is sufficient for most people.

Those that need more range... Wait.

From memory you bought a BMW i4 M50? I tried and loved that car but decided moving to an ev wasn’t right for me at this time. How do you like it?

I take delivery of M440 Grand Coupe in a couple of weeks.

Honestly, I think as a day to day drivers car Jag made a better job of the iPace I used to have!

The M50 feels like more of a GT car, it doesn't disguise it's weight that well - which is saying something when I'm comparing it to a 2.3 tonne SUV...

But if you ignore the feel of the weight and give it a good poking, the actual limit of grip and control is astonishing. It actually is an 'M' car, it just doesn't feel like it wants to be one..!

As a real life ownership proposition, it's stupidly good. It'll do 250 miles for about £7, or, if you choose to enjoy the power often, it'll do 250 miles for about £10. It's laughably cheaper than any other such car I've owned.

I came from an ICE 430 with a chip so I've got a pretty solid base for comparison. I miss the gear paddles, I used to love a downshift into a corner, keeping the revs high to power back out. I've been driving since I was 12, I get it. But truth be told, the electric car is unbeatable when it punches back out of a corner.

I could happily take either - but the electric one will cost about £3000 less a year to run. So I get "more go's" at being daft and enjoying the car.

Edited by TheDeuce on Monday 11th March 00:47

Edited by TheDeuce on Monday 11th March 00:49

[GT9]

TheDeuce said:

bad company said:

WonkeyDonkey said:

I don't own an EV but all the anti ev stuff is nauseating.

Many fotoshop fake pictures of ev’s on fire of on the back of a diesel breakdown truck on Facebook. Laughable.

I also don’t own an ev by the way.

The daft thing is, it's just the next logical step in the evolution of the car. Everyone runs around in hysterics because it's a bit of an upset.. but in reality it's plain common sense - obviously a simple electric motor makes more sense than several thousand explosions per minute when it comes to the optimum way to move a car down the road. This isn't a difficult thing for anyone to comprehend. The only reason it's taken until now is range, and we now have range that is sufficient for most people.

Those that need more range... Wait.

Sadly, I think we are screwed in the UK.
We are just too anti-progress.
How many times do we see people posting about Colin Chapman, 1980s hot hatches, 1966, 1945, the list is fking endless.
It seems to me that there are too many car owners and enthusiasts firmly stuck in the past and unwilling to embrace the opportunities that electric propulsion offer.
Take the thread I just posted on about speed limit reductions due to air quality.
We are seemingly resigned to the fact that the government would never increase speed limits if the science supported it.
The thing people don't seem to get is that the government isn't to blame for an inward-looking, backward-looking population.
That's on us.
Car enthusiasts have a choice, embrace change and make the best of that situation or try to stand in the way of progress.
The latter has a guaranteed outcome of lower speed limits, increased access restrictions, increased noise restrictions, more expensive running costs.
It's basically a death spiral.
Turkeys voting for Christmas comes to mind.

[JonnyVTEC]

M4cruiser said:

With the raised awareness of battery fire risk, perhaps it's time the manufacturers came up with a solution, i.e. the self-extinguishing battery.
The concept isn't new, it happens with building materials already. For example, generating CO2 when it catches fire.
I recognise it's not an easy solution to build in, given the amount of heat generated, but a better balance of risk vs cost is needed before something even more disastrous happens.
https://www.bravarooftile.com/homeowners/fire-safe...

Battery makes its own oxygen, nothing like a housefire. Case in point the film backdraft.

[Megaflow]

plfrench said:

Megaflow said:

Monkeylegend said:

That sometimes the brakes don't work.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/terrified-mo...

Calling bullst on that. Notice the lack of damage to the front of the car? So something managed to stop it without hitting the police car. I bet the brakes were fine and it was a driver error, same as these stories all turn out to be.

otolith said:

It's worth pointing out that the UK has not mandated any particular technology for 2035 onward new cars - the mandate is not for battery cars, they can be powered by hydrogen, clockwork, or unicorn spunk, they just can't be powered by ICEs.

Correct me if I am wrong, but it doesn't even limit the use of ICE, doesn't it actually say zero emission at point of use, or words to that effect. The manufacturers have decided, and decided a long time ago, that the cheapest and easiest was to achieve that is BEV.

Edited by Megaflow on Sunday 10th March 14:08

ZEV Mandate defines compliant cars as having a WLTP result of 0 g CO2/km. This precludes ICE or hybrid from being allowed, but doesn’t say it has to be EV.

Not necessarily, as the hydrogen fans continually point out, you could use a hydrogen ICE. But there are several good reasons why manufacturers aren't doing that.

[OutInTheShed]

GT9 said:

Sadly, I think we are screwed in the UK.
We are just too anti-progress.
How many times do we see people posting about Colin Chapman, 1980s hot hatches, 1966, 1945, the list is fking endless.
It seems to me that there are too many car owners and enthusiasts firmly stuck in the past and unwilling to embrace the opportunities that electric propulsion offer.
Take the thread I just posted on about speed limit reductions due to air quality.
We are seemingly resigned to the fact that the government would never increase speed limits if the science supported it.
The thing people don't seem to get is that the government isn't to blame for an inward-looking, backward-looking population.
That's on us.
Car enthusiasts have a choice, embrace change and make the best of that situation or try to stand in the way of progress.
The latter has a guaranteed outcome of lower speed limits, increased access restrictions, increased noise restrictions, more expensive running costs.
It's basically a death spiral.
Turkeys voting for Christmas comes to mind.

Some people are living in the past, not accepting that enjoying yourself on a public road, taking risks, is not accepted any more.
It's not just old people like me calming down, it's younger people thinking differently from how we did in the 80s.
There's still a minority of young lads wanting to go fast, but it's a much smaller minority than in the old days.

Culture has changed. There's more choice of 'adrenaline sports' that don't involve risking killing yourself on a Honda 900.

Driving on the roads is 99% 'just transport' now.
Half of what was 'the open road' in the early 80s is now suburban 40 limit.
Mostly it doesn't matter what modern car you have, you're in same queue, just sat in different furniture.
This is why so many people enthuse about antiques like 70s cars.
Talking flannel about 'drivers' cars' to go down a camera enforced dual carriageway, then queue through town is looking increasingly silly.

I think motorsport is trapped in the past. I don't follow it much, but it doesn't seem to have embraced EVs very well and made things more about the driver than the engineering. So more people turn to things like cycling?

[TheDeuce]

OutInTheShed said:

Some people are living in the past, not accepting that enjoying yourself on a public road, taking risks, is not accepted any more.
It's not just old people like me calming down, it's younger people thinking differently from how we did in the 80s.
There's still a minority of young lads wanting to go fast, but it's a much smaller minority than in the old days.

Culture has changed. There's more choice of 'adrenaline sports' that don't involve risking killing yourself on a Honda 900.

Driving on the roads is 99% 'just transport' now.
Half of what was 'the open road' in the early 80s is now suburban 40 limit.
Mostly it doesn't matter what modern car you have, you're in same queue, just sat in different furniture.
This is why so many people enthuse about antiques like 70s cars.
Talking flannel about 'drivers' cars' to go down a camera enforced dual carriageway, then queue through town is looking increasingly silly.

I think motorsport is trapped in the past. I don't follow it much, but it doesn't seem to have embraced EVs very well and made things more about the driver than the engineering. So more people turn to things like cycling?

There's a lot in there to agree with. Most people probably do frown upon the idea of driving sportily for fun on the public road. Speed limits have reduced. cars themselves have had to put safety over and above flamboyancy. I can confirm first hand that lads cocking about in modified cars has declined heavily too - I was one of them and saw the decline..

And yet, the number of sporty cars sold seems only to have increased. At around the turn of the century most people had fairly standard cars, a 1.6 Focus, a 1.8 Cavalier and so on. Cars with a focus on performance such as an M3 or RS Turbo were quite rare really. But now, a couple of decades later, it seems it's almost impossible to drive down any street and not see at least one properly powerful car. Clearly, despite the evidence that it's seen as a bit silly these days, speed does still sell cars.

I'm also not convinced that fun roads have really reduced to a meaningful extent. They definitely have in and around more urban areas, but out in the sticks (99% of the UK) speed limits tend only to exist around know accident black spots, which is fair enough - quite useful actually, if you don't wish to kill yourself! But for the most part, b-roads are left as NSL and enforcement of speeding is minimal. I've always had fast cars and enjoy 'making use' of them quite often, the only roads that tend to have speed limits and cameras are the roads I would be quite restrained on anyway.