What they don't tell you about electric cars

[The OG Jester]

TheDeuce said:

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

I don't have the M50, but it's little brother in the i4 eDrive40 which is regularly returning 240 - 270 miles each charge. Most of my charge has been free in the council area I live but that ends in a few weeks but most of my 6500 this past year have cost me nothing.

As you mention, £7 ish for 250 miles is crazy cheap, and the range being pretty decent I've not been inconvenienced at all owning a BEV. My wife is a complete convert too, I doubt she'll ever want to drive a manual ICE car again.

[TheDeuce]

The OG Jester said:

I don't have the M50, but it's little brother in the i4 eDrive40 which is regularly returning 240 - 270 miles each charge. Most of my charge has been free in the council area I live but that ends in a few weeks but most of my 6500 this past year have cost me nothing.

As you mention, £7 ish for 250 miles is crazy cheap, and the range being pretty decent I've not been inconvenienced at all owning a BEV. My wife is a complete convert too, I doubt she'll ever want to drive a manual ICE car again.

Mrs Deuce is adamant she won't have anything other than an electric car now.

I drive vans and ICE cars occasionally for work and I do find I view them as a step backward now, so I doubt I'll want anything other than electric in the future either. My mate has an X4M which I'm jealous of as it sounds gorgeous, but he has to put over £500 petrol in it each month to enjoy that sound.. It's a good sound but I just couldn't justify the cost and hassle of all those petrol station visits, I once could but I'm in no rush to return to those days.

[monkfish1]

GT9 said:

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.

Obvously a pop at me there.......

As i said before, even if we all rushed out tommorow and bought an EV, do you really think that the limits wont keep coming down? Answer that, honestly.

No government (of either colour) is remotely interested in any science when it comes to speed limits. If we are really lucky, they might stay the same, but go up, seriously, come back to planet earth. Labour are already saying they intend to adopt the welsh 20mph model in england if elected.

It cost £32million in wales. To save, by their own optimistic numbers, 6 lives a year. How many lives do you reckon 32million to the welsh NHS could have saved? It got NOTHING to do with science, or facts, as that excercise clearly showed.

Does anyone else think there is even the slightest possibility of speed limits going up? Anywhere. Even on one road?

Anyone?

Edited by monkfish1 on Monday 11th March 16:59

[GT9]

monkfish1 said:

Obvously a pop at me there.......

As i said before, even if we all rushed out tommorow and bought an EV, do you really think that the limits wont keep coming down? Answer that, honestly.

No government (of either colour) is remotely interested in any science when it comes to speed limits. If we are really lucky, they might stay the same, but go up, seriously, come back to planet earth. Labour are already saying they intend to adopt the welsh 20mph model in england if elected.

It cost £32million in wales. To save, by their own optimistic numbers, 6 lives a year. How many lives do you reckon 32million to the welsh NHS could have saved? It got NOTHING to do with science, or facts, as that excercise clearly showed.

Does anyone else think there is even the slightest possibility of speed limits going up? Anywhere. Even on one road?

Anyone?

Not a pop at you.
Just expressing my frustration with the myriad of posts in GG moaning about EVs.
EV specific speed limits are a thing though, in Austria for example.
So it's not an impossibility.
'Blaming the Government' for our woes is lazy IMO.
Voting for Labour (as an example) and then complaining about the outcome, I mean WTF.

[TheDeuce]

monkfish1 said:

Obvously a pop at me there.......

As i said before, even if we all rushed out tommorow and bought an EV, do you really think that the limits wont keep coming down? Answer that, honestly.

No government (of either colour) is remotely interested in any science when it comes to speed limits. If we are really lucky, they might stay the same, but go up, seriously, come back to planet earth. Labour are already saying they intend to adopt the welsh 20mph model in england if elected

Does anyone else think there is even the slightest possibility of speed limits going up? Anywhere. Even on one road?

Anyone?

It's not an easy question to answer as all speed limits that have been introduced or lowered have been for a reason and those reasons remain so obviously the speed limit remains unchanged. I can't think of an example of a speed limit that was introduced for a reason that no longer exists - so it may very well be the case that there is no default stance against raising speed limits where appropriate, but that a reason to make such a decision just doesn't occur.

I think if a section of motorway was reduced to 60mph solely due to pollution, if the pollution issue went away and there also hadn't been a recorded reduction in accidents for the time the lower speed limit was in force, than there is a reasonable chance it would be returned to 70mph. Who would benefit from a road being slower than it needs to be if there is no safety or environmental issue? it would just be a pointlessly inefficient road dragging down the local economy for no reason. Promising to raise the speed limit in such a circumstance could be tempting politically too, come election time.

We have never before been in a position to undermine the purpose of certain speed limits, this is new territory.

But one thing is certain, reducing pollution will weaken once argument for lowering speed limits in the first place. Take away the problem and the authorities are far less likely to start thinking about messing around with speed limits - there has to be a cause/trigger for anyone to bother changing something that works fine as it is.

In the case of 20mph in all present 30mph areas... I'm aware there is some good evidence it does improve safety quite significantly, but personally I think that reveals a need for people to be more switched on and alert, basically better educated, rather than a blanket speed limit that plainly slows down commerce and efficiency in those areas. However, the 20mph law could actually end up as the first massive increase is speed limits if recent reports are right that pollution could in fact be rising as a result. IE a car forced to travel at 20mph for will take 10 minutes to travel 3 miles across town, a car allowed to do 30mph will do it in 6 minutes - 4 minutes less engine running time. If that can be proven, come election time you can bet there will be promises to scrap the law.

[OutInTheShed]

TheDeuce said:

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.

I agree that lots of peole are locked into the idea of paying lots of money for sporty versions of cars, you see a lot of them about, but I also over take a lot of them cycling down the main road in rush hour. We still see cars as status.
THe majority of people buying new cars are older, and still have (in their heads) the 'car culture' of last century, even if the V8s they buy never see the second half of the rev counter any more.
Personally, I'm in the market for a fairly powerful car, compared to what I need, because a big engine being lazy on the motorway in a quality car is much nicer than using a small cheaply built car towards the top of its speed range.

There's also been a lot of people turning away from fast saloons to SUVs and 4x4s, not just powerful 4x4s either.
And sodding camper vans...
With bikes, there are still people buying ludicrously fast bikes, but most of them do about 1,000 miles a year wobbling to a coffee shop on Sundays.
AT is full of fast bikes with very low miles.

I disagree about non-urban B roads being left as NSL, whenever I go back to Somerset I notice more and more of the roads being 40 or 30, as the speed limits go around the outer limits of the villages or beyond, instead of just the main part of the village. Plus all the villages have grown, so the speed limits on A and B roads are almost continuous. Policing is sketchy, but there's so many law-abiding people trundling around in their 130mph cars at 32mph, it makes little difference. Much of Hampshire is similar.

Thing is, 95% of the population are doing 95% of their driving on the busy roads.
There are some enjoyable roads, away from Suburbia and the tourist magnets, but they are almost irrelevant to the general situation.
And many of them were more fun in the old days, where you had to be a better driver to 'make progress' with a lot less HP.

[monkfish1]

TheDeuce said:

monkfish1 said:

Obvously a pop at me there.......

As i said before, even if we all rushed out tommorow and bought an EV, do you really think that the limits wont keep coming down? Answer that, honestly.

No government (of either colour) is remotely interested in any science when it comes to speed limits. If we are really lucky, they might stay the same, but go up, seriously, come back to planet earth. Labour are already saying they intend to adopt the welsh 20mph model in england if elected

Does anyone else think there is even the slightest possibility of speed limits going up? Anywhere. Even on one road?

Anyone?

It's not an easy question to answer as all speed limits that have been introduced or lowered have been for a reason and those reasons remain so obviously the speed limit remains unchanged. I can't think of an example of a speed limit that was introduced for a reason that no longer exists - so it may very well be the case that there is no default stance against raising speed limits where appropriate, but that a reason to make such a decision just doesn't occur.

I think if a section of motorway was reduced to 60mph solely due to pollution, if the pollution issue went away and there also hadn't been a recorded reduction in accidents for the time the lower speed limit was in force, than there is a reasonable chance it would be returned to 70mph. Who would benefit from a road being slower than it needs to be if there is no safety or environmental issue? it would just be a pointlessly inefficient road dragging down the local economy for no reason. Promising to raise the speed limit in such a circumstance could be tempting politically too, come election time.

We have never before been in a position to undermine the purpose of certain speed limits, this is new territory.

But one thing is certain, reducing pollution will weaken once argument for lowering speed limits in the first place. Take away the problem and the authorities are far less likely to start thinking about messing around with speed limits - there has to be a cause/trigger for anyone to bother changing something that works fine as it is.

In the case of 20mph in all present 30mph areas... I'm aware there is some good evidence it does improve safety quite significantly, but personally I think that reveals a need for people to be more switched on and alert, basically better educated, rather than a blanket speed limit that plainly slows down commerce and efficiency in those areas. However, the 20mph law could actually end up as the first massive increase is speed limits if recent reports are right that pollution could in fact be rising as a result. IE a car forced to travel at 20mph for will take 10 minutes to travel 3 miles across town, a car allowed to do 30mph will do it in 6 minutes - 4 minutes less engine running time. If that can be proven, come election time you can bet there will be promises to scrap the law.

Simply not going to happen. Ever. You are applying logic and reason. Thats not how politics works.

The 20mph speed limit in wales, is political. It has no foundation in logic, reason or safety. The emmisions could be up by 10 times. (probably are up by some %) They will not change it back.

Id love to live in the world that you and GT9 inhabit. Must be great.

[TheDeuce]

monkfish1 said:

TheDeuce said:

monkfish1 said:

Obvously a pop at me there.......

As i said before, even if we all rushed out tommorow and bought an EV, do you really think that the limits wont keep coming down? Answer that, honestly.

No government (of either colour) is remotely interested in any science when it comes to speed limits. If we are really lucky, they might stay the same, but go up, seriously, come back to planet earth. Labour are already saying they intend to adopt the welsh 20mph model in england if elected

Does anyone else think there is even the slightest possibility of speed limits going up? Anywhere. Even on one road?

Anyone?

It's not an easy question to answer as all speed limits that have been introduced or lowered have been for a reason and those reasons remain so obviously the speed limit remains unchanged. I can't think of an example of a speed limit that was introduced for a reason that no longer exists - so it may very well be the case that there is no default stance against raising speed limits where appropriate, but that a reason to make such a decision just doesn't occur.

I think if a section of motorway was reduced to 60mph solely due to pollution, if the pollution issue went away and there also hadn't been a recorded reduction in accidents for the time the lower speed limit was in force, than there is a reasonable chance it would be returned to 70mph. Who would benefit from a road being slower than it needs to be if there is no safety or environmental issue? it would just be a pointlessly inefficient road dragging down the local economy for no reason. Promising to raise the speed limit in such a circumstance could be tempting politically too, come election time.

We have never before been in a position to undermine the purpose of certain speed limits, this is new territory.

But one thing is certain, reducing pollution will weaken once argument for lowering speed limits in the first place. Take away the problem and the authorities are far less likely to start thinking about messing around with speed limits - there has to be a cause/trigger for anyone to bother changing something that works fine as it is.

In the case of 20mph in all present 30mph areas... I'm aware there is some good evidence it does improve safety quite significantly, but personally I think that reveals a need for people to be more switched on and alert, basically better educated, rather than a blanket speed limit that plainly slows down commerce and efficiency in those areas. However, the 20mph law could actually end up as the first massive increase is speed limits if recent reports are right that pollution could in fact be rising as a result. IE a car forced to travel at 20mph for will take 10 minutes to travel 3 miles across town, a car allowed to do 30mph will do it in 6 minutes - 4 minutes less engine running time. If that can be proven, come election time you can bet there will be promises to scrap the law.

Simply not going to happen. Ever. You are applying logic and reason. Thats not how politics works.

The 20mph speed limit in wales, is political. It has no foundation in logic, reason or safety. The emmisions could be up by 10 times. (probably are up by some %) They will not change it back.

Id love to live in the world that you and GT9 inhabit. Must be great.

What exactly is the political advantage of the 20mph law?

There may not always be logic behind political decisions but there are always reasons.

[survivalist]

TheDeuce said:

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.

The main issue is that modern cars have either become very boring or stupidly fast - both are hard to enjoy on public roads. That applies to both EV and ICE.

People largely buy sporty cars to show off their wealth - I’d be willing to bet that very few performance cars get driven properly.

The good news, as you point out, is that the fun roads are rarely policed. Most roads, in fact.

I do have some vague hope that this dullness skips a generation. Took my son and 3 of his friends to a bowling party at the weekend - they were encouraging me to go faster at every opportunity.

[ChocolateFrog]

This and pretending to care about the environment covers 99% of the haters I reckon.

[TheDeuce]

ChocolateFrog said:

This and pretending to care about the environment covers 99% of the haters I reckon.

That and they all inexplicably have to tow a boat 5000 miles every week.

[VeeReihenmotor6]

I'm not an advocate for EVs and don't find them particularly exciting but I can see their uses as a family run around, if you have charging at home. With regard to the costs listed the same can be said for many modern ICE cars...just some examples:

- Many have DSG style gearboxes that could easily cost you £1500-3000
- Turbos could cost you a £1000
- Manual cars with Dual Mass flywheels could cost £1250-1500
- ICE cars also have complicated electrical systems rendering cars scrap if not fixed.

Tbh an EV probably has less to go "wrong" and worry about over a modern ICE.

However compared to ICE vehicles from 1990-2010 then EVs are far more expensive borkage potential, though in years to come those 1990-2010 era vehicles won't be the cars people use as daily modes of transport.

The main thing against EVs today is Range, Charging time and Obsolescence. Obsolescence is less of an issue as most of the country like new flashy things and it "keeps the economy going" but range and charge time is an issue for wider adoption but I am sure those will be improved upon in time.

[TheDeuce]

VeeReihenmotor6 said:

I'm not an advocate for EVs and don't find them particularly exciting but I can see their uses as a family run around, if you have charging at home. With regard to the costs listed the same can be said for many modern ICE cars...just some examples:

- Many have DSG style gearboxes that could easily cost you £1500-3000
- Turbos could cost you a £1000
- Manual cars with Dual Mass flywheels could cost £1250-1500
- ICE cars also have complicated electrical systems rendering cars scrap if not fixed.

Tbh an EV probably has less to go "wrong" and worry about over a modern ICE.

However compared to ICE vehicles from 1990-2010 then EVs are far more expensive borkage potential, though in years to come those 1990-2010 era vehicles won't be the cars people use as daily modes of transport.

The main thing against EVs today is Range, Charging time and Obsolescence. Obsolescence is less of an issue as most of the country like new flashy things and it "keeps the economy going" but range and charge time is an issue for wider adoption but I am sure those will be improved upon in time.

An often overlooked aspect in all of this is that the manufacturers and politicians have no interest in a car being 'cheap enough to fix' to make sense as a 20 year old shed. Of course, a fair few people are very used to that being possible and are bound to be frustrated by the days of shed running potentially coming to an end... But there is no motivation to do anything about that - the powers that be would frankly far rather people with only a budget of £800 and own one less car, or no cars, and get on a bus. I appreciate that's not a solution for everyone, but it is nonetheless fair to say that those calling the shots would rather have more public transport and less very old cars on the road. Ultimately, less cars full stop.

However, I'm not so sure if the 'old shed' will die out. A 20 twenty year old early year Model S Tesla is likely to be down to around 70% original range at that age, not great but probably good enough for someone that has a budget that is always going to require some compromise in their car choice. And a twenty year old Tesla will likely be entirely uneconomical to repair if anything even slightly expensive breaks - but if that's true then that will also make a 20 year old Tesla very cheap to begin with, because of the known risk.

So I do see a future where £1000 (or 2035 equivalent..) could still buy a low means family/individual personal transport. Perhaps they'll get stung and the car will be a worthless brick a week later, or perhaps they'll have it for 3 years before scrapping it. 9/10 I suspect it'll last at least long enough to justify the cost/risk.

[Mr Hoops]

Lower speeds save energy, whether that is in an ICE or BEV, it is simple physics of aerodynamics. If every NSL road was dropped to 60, or even 50, the country as a whole would consume less, and it wouldn't really take much longer to get there. 100 miles at 70 takes 85 mins, at 60 it's 15 more.

[Pica-Pica]

monkfish1 said:

TheDeuce said:

monkfish1 said:

Obvously a pop at me there.......

As i said before, even if we all rushed out tommorow and bought an EV, do you really think that the limits wont keep coming down? Answer that, honestly.

No government (of either colour) is remotely interested in any science when it comes to speed limits. If we are really lucky, they might stay the same, but go up, seriously, come back to planet earth. Labour are already saying they intend to adopt the welsh 20mph model in england if elected

Does anyone else think there is even the slightest possibility of speed limits going up? Anywhere. Even on one road?

Anyone?

It's not an easy question to answer as all speed limits that have been introduced or lowered have been for a reason and those reasons remain so obviously the speed limit remains unchanged. I can't think of an example of a speed limit that was introduced for a reason that no longer exists - so it may very well be the case that there is no default stance against raising speed limits where appropriate, but that a reason to make such a decision just doesn't occur.

I think if a section of motorway was reduced to 60mph solely due to pollution, if the pollution issue went away and there also hadn't been a recorded reduction in accidents for the time the lower speed limit was in force, than there is a reasonable chance it would be returned to 70mph. Who would benefit from a road being slower than it needs to be if there is no safety or environmental issue? it would just be a pointlessly inefficient road dragging down the local economy for no reason. Promising to raise the speed limit in such a circumstance could be tempting politically too, come election time.

We have never before been in a position to undermine the purpose of certain speed limits, this is new territory.

But one thing is certain, reducing pollution will weaken once argument for lowering speed limits in the first place. Take away the problem and the authorities are far less likely to start thinking about messing around with speed limits - there has to be a cause/trigger for anyone to bother changing something that works fine as it is.

In the case of 20mph in all present 30mph areas... I'm aware there is some good evidence it does improve safety quite significantly, but personally I think that reveals a need for people to be more switched on and alert, basically better educated, rather than a blanket speed limit that plainly slows down commerce and efficiency in those areas. However, the 20mph law could actually end up as the first massive increase is speed limits if recent reports are right that pollution could in fact be rising as a result. IE a car forced to travel at 20mph for will take 10 minutes to travel 3 miles across town, a car allowed to do 30mph will do it in 6 minutes - 4 minutes less engine running time. If that can be proven, come election time you can bet there will be promises to scrap the law.

Simply not going to happen. Ever. You are applying logic and reason. Thats not how politics works.

The 20mph speed limit in wales, is political. It has no foundation in logic, reason or safety. The emmisions could be up by 10 times. (probably are up by some %) They will not change it back.

Id love to live in the world that you and GT9 inhabit. Must be great.

Two things to challenge in the above comments:
1) speed limits did decrease in the 1970s, owing to a fuel crisis. They increased again after
2) with the increase in EVs (and hybrids), then increase in ICE pollution at lower speeds will become less of an issue.

[GT9]

Mr Hoops said:

Lower speeds save energy, whether that is in an ICE or BEV, it is simple physics of aerodynamics. If every NSL road was dropped to 60, or even 50, the country as a whole would consume less, and it wouldn't really take much longer to get there. 100 miles at 70 takes 85 mins, at 60 it's 15 more.

Or better still, use the most efficient propulsion device to push the car through the air.
A Tesla Model 3 at 70 mph uses less than a third of the energy that the most efficient ICE Golf hatch does as 60 mph.
Despite a kerb mass penalty of over half a ton...

[J__Wood]

VeeReihenmotor6 said:

With regard to the costs listed the same can be said for many modern ICE cars...just some examples:

- Many have DSG style gearboxes that could easily cost you £1500-3000
- Turbos could cost you a £1000
- Manual cars with Dual Mass flywheels could cost £1250-1500

Don't forget 'consumable' cam belts ~ £1400 for a genuine belt plus the obligatory new cover, sump, belts, water pump and a day's labour etc.
Transit 2.0 engines with wet belts...

[oop north]

monkfish1 said:

Obvously a pop at me there.......

As i said before, even if we all rushed out tommorow and bought an EV, do you really think that the limits wont keep coming down? Answer that, honestly.

No government (of either colour) is remotely interested in any science when it comes to speed limits. If we are really lucky, they might stay the same, but go up, seriously, come back to planet earth. Labour are already saying they intend to adopt the welsh 20mph model in england if elected.

It cost £32million in wales. To save, by their own optimistic numbers, 6 lives a year. How many lives do you reckon 32million to the welsh NHS could have saved? It got NOTHING to do with science, or facts, as that excercise clearly showed.

Does anyone else think there is even the slightest possibility of speed limits going up? Anywhere. Even on one road?

Anyone?

Edited by monkfish1 on Monday 11th March 16:59

Two speed reductions on the M6 (not sure where) and M1 (Sheffield) have recently been reversed on the basis that tailpipe emissions will sort out the issue

https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/...

[AKjr]

ChocolateFrog said:

This and pretending to care about the environment covers 99% of the haters I reckon.

I charge at work for free or home for buttons and I've a compressor in the garage which I can use for checking tyre pressure. Haven't been to a petrol station since October 23

[TheDeuce]

AKjr said:

I charge at work for free or home for buttons and I've a compressor in the garage which I can use for checking tyre pressure. Haven't been to a petrol station since October 23

Apart from a very occasional work hire van refuelling - which now feels like some sort of neanderthal task... I haven't been to a petrol station in my own car since Sept 2020!

It's blissful, I've been saved the bother of buying something that used to cost a fortune and now my car goes further and faster each year for peanuts.