RE: Model X marks the spot

[J4CKO]

bodhi said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

Me too.

Tesla is IMO "the emperor's new clothes" of modern cars. Sooner or later people will realise it's a great deal of hype about overpriced cars.

Agreed. Not sure if I get the innovation aspect either, as the car itself is just a stload of laptop batteries hooked up to a couple of oversized Scalextric motors.

Er, isnt that just batteries and an electric motor, the electric motor being far superior in every way than an IC engine, the downside is purely the power storage medium, the IC engine would never have been developed if that was sorted, we love them because we have grown up (sort of) with them, but by every measure they are inferior to an electric motor.

More complex, the generate more heat, they generate more noise, they vibrate more, they pollute more, they are bigger, they require complex gearboxes and are nowhere near as efficient, 90 plus percent for an electric motor versus 30 odd for an IC engine.


The arguments for IC Engined cars, if you take out the efficiency remids me of how Jim Jefferies describes the argument for guns in America, the one valid argument the gun lobby has is "I fking love guns" and its like that with IC Engined cars, we love them, but by every measure an EV is better apart from it doesnt make you feel all manly and stuff with that gruff bark or low rumble that IC engines make, I am sure most arent really offended by the concept or worried about he power grids capability to charge the countries electric vehicles, its more a case of dont take my manly noise maker, nobody will hear me roar in an EV.

I am not immune, I see it, but I am sure we will still be allowed them for time to come, Clarkson will become Petrolheads NRA style Charlton Heston figure, lobbying for us to keep our V8's, thing is, as us old dinosaurs die out, EV's will take over, it is going to happen, they are becoming too good, too compelling to ignore, that stinking diesel that allegedly does 70 mpg but does 45, well these actually will do 80 plus mpg equivalent, quietly and smoothly.

Edited by J4CKO on Friday 2nd October 14:57

[ORD]

Dark85 said:

Sorry but how is 300miles a crap range?

Frankly if you're driving more than that you should be stopping for a break anyway, and if you can get access to a supercharger half an hour is a perfectly reasonable time to stop.

It is crap because:-

(1) 300 miles is a massive overestimate. Let's say 200 to be really generous.

(2) That means it needs a recharge during any long journey and always after a long journey.

(3) Re-charging takes bloody ages.

A stated range of 500 (real range therefore over 300) is probably about the minimum before you can stop worrying about range as a downside.

[deltashad]

I wish they didn't have those disgusting looking monitor screens dominating the dash.
I was in an 'S' in the summer time, the interior really looked and felt cheap.
The screen on the dash was like something bought out of Curry's and glued on.

I can see this taking off with the young generation, plenty of taxi drivers around here are doing it.

[J4CKO]

ORD said:

Dark85 said:

Sorry but how is 300miles a crap range?

Frankly if you're driving more than that you should be stopping for a break anyway, and if you can get access to a supercharger half an hour is a perfectly reasonable time to stop.

It is crap because:-

(1) 300 miles is a massive overestimate. Let's say 200 to be really generous.

(2) That means it needs a recharge during any long journey and always after a long journey.

(3) Re-charging takes bloody ages.

A stated range of 500 (real range therefore over 300) is probably about the minimum before you can stop worrying about range as a downside.

Its coming, there is a lot of development of alternatives to Lithium batteries, remember the IC engine and all its components have had decades of development and a bit of a cosy symbiosis between car manufacturers and the oil producers, most car manufacturers have just not bothered or paid lip service, they want fossil fuels to carry on, as do the oil companies.

Its all been a bit half arsed until recently, Tesla have arrived coming from a completely different paradigm and are shaking things up in terms of perception and exposure if not actual hordes of them on the road, VW have just blown their own foot off and the public are wondering why they are buying diesels.

Whoever manages to make that killer breakthrough in electricity storage and charging will be very, very rich, who would buy an IC car if there is a 500 mile range and it can be charged in 15 mins ?

There is now massive focus on this and when you look what humankind can actually do, I don't think storing electricity more densely is beyond the wit of man, might not be this year or next but it really can be far off.

[ORD]

J4CKO said:

Its coming, there is a lot of development of alternatives to Lithium batteries, remember the IC engine and all its components have had decades of development and a bit of a cosy symbiosis between car manufacturers and the oil producers, most car manufacturers have just not bothered or paid lip service, they want fossil fuels to carry on, as do the oil companies.

Its all been a bit half arsed until recently, Tesla have arrived coming from a completely different paradigm and are shaking things up in terms of perception and exposure if not actual hordes of them on the road, VW have just blown their own foot off and the public are wondering why they are buying diesels.

Whoever manages to make that killer breakthrough in electricity storage and charging will be very, very rich, who would buy an IC car if there is a 500 mile range and it can be charged in 15 mins ?

There is now massive focus on this and when you look what humankind can actually do, I don't think storing electricity more densely is beyond the wit of man, might not be this year or next but it really can be far off.

I certainly agree re Tesla having done a very good thing.

My own view is that we should all be driving EVs most of the time and saving petrol for fun cars I cannot see myself ever enjoying driving an EV enough to get up early on a Sunday, but it is equally bonkers to pop to the shops in something burning petrol or, even worse, diesel to make itself go.

I am less optimistic about battery tech. I think people are trying very hard and making fairly little progress.

[T1berious]

ORD said:

I think it makes more sense than the Model S (a car that I just do not understand - crap range so useless out of town; massive so useless in town).

It has a lot a lot of cool tech and has great packaging inside. To be honest, I think it's a very impressive vehicle.

Absurdly ugly, though, inside and out. It looks like it was just blown up 30% from sensible proportions (a bit like the S).

Er it's only 30 miles shy of my Zed range wise! And kills an E60 M5 dead on range (as a like for like performance car, power plants aside).

[budgie smuggler]

ORD said:

I certainly agree re Tesla having done a very good thing.

My own view is that we should all be driving EVs most of the time and saving petrol for fun cars I cannot see myself ever enjoying driving an EV enough to get up early on a Sunday, but it is equally bonkers to pop to the shops in something burning petrol or, even worse, diesel to make itself go.

I am less optimistic about battery tech. I think people are trying very hard and making fairly little progress.

Tesla have made pretty good progress. Something like halved their production costs and doubled their capacity.

Edit: found the article, they halved their battery costs and increased capacity by 60% since 2008
http://www.technologyreview.com/review/534866/why-...

[deltashad]

T1berious said:

ORD said:

I think it makes more sense than the Model S (a car that I just do not understand - crap range so useless out of town; massive so useless in town).

It has a lot a lot of cool tech and has great packaging inside. To be honest, I think it's a very impressive vehicle.

Absurdly ugly, though, inside and out. It looks like it was just blown up 30% from sensible proportions (a bit like the S).

Er it's only 30 miles shy of my Zed range wise! And kills an E60 M5 dead on range (as a like for like performance car, power plants aside).

How long does it take to fill an M5?

[bodhi]

J4CKO said:

Er, isnt that just batteries and an electric motor, the electric motor being far superior in every way than an IC engine, the downside is purely the power storage medium, the IC engine would never have been developed if that was sorted, we love them because we have grown up (sort of) with them, but by every measure they are inferior to an electric motor.

More complex, the generate more heat, they generate more noise, they vibrate more, they pollute more, they are bigger, they require complex gearboxes and are nowhere near as efficient, 90 plus percent for an electric motor versus 30 odd for an IC engine.


The arguments for IC Engined cars, if you take out the efficiency remids me of how Jim Jefferies describes the argument for guns in America, the one valid argument the gun lobby has is "I fking love guns" and its like that with IC Engined cars, we love them, but by every measure an EV is better apart from it doesnt make you feel all manly and stuff with that gruff bark or low rumble that IC engines make, I am sure most arent really offended by the concept or worried about he power grids capability to charge the countries electric vehicles, its more a case of dont take my manly noise maker, nobody will hear me roar in an EV.

I am not immune, I see it, but I am sure we will still be allowed them for time to come, Clarkson will become Petrolheads NRA style Charlton Heston figure, lobbying for us to keep our V8's, thing is, as us old dinosaurs die out, EV's will take over, it is going to happen, they are becoming too good, too compelling to ignore, that stinking diesel that allegedly does 70 mpg but does 45, well these actually will do 80 plus mpg equivalent, quietly and smoothly.

Edited by J4CKO on Friday 2nd October 14:57

Lol, as you said earlier you were becoming a bit of a fanboy, and it really is beginning to show.

I don't think the appeal of ICEs has anything to do with manliness (if you'd met me you'd know that's definitely not the case), i think it's more to do with the fact that they are a bloody versatile bit of kit, powering everything from bikes to cars, lorries to boats, can be made dirt cheaply, don't require any particularly rare metals in order to function, don't run out of acceleration at high speeds (thanks to those hyper complicated gearboxes you mentioned), and are at the end of the day, quite a lot of fun

[J4CKO]

ORD said:

J4CKO said:

Its coming, there is a lot of development of alternatives to Lithium batteries, remember the IC engine and all its components have had decades of development and a bit of a cosy symbiosis between car manufacturers and the oil producers, most car manufacturers have just not bothered or paid lip service, they want fossil fuels to carry on, as do the oil companies.

Its all been a bit half arsed until recently, Tesla have arrived coming from a completely different paradigm and are shaking things up in terms of perception and exposure if not actual hordes of them on the road, VW have just blown their own foot off and the public are wondering why they are buying diesels.

Whoever manages to make that killer breakthrough in electricity storage and charging will be very, very rich, who would buy an IC car if there is a 500 mile range and it can be charged in 15 mins ?

There is now massive focus on this and when you look what humankind can actually do, I don't think storing electricity more densely is beyond the wit of man, might not be this year or next but it really can be far off.

I certainly agree re Tesla having done a very good thing.

My own view is that we should all be driving EVs most of the time and saving petrol for fun cars I cannot see myself ever enjoying driving an EV enough to get up early on a Sunday, but it is equally bonkers to pop to the shops in something burning petrol or, even worse, diesel to make itself go.

I am less optimistic about battery tech. I think people are trying very hard and making fairly little progress.

But there is progress, it may not be a big bang, it may be small incremental improvements until the tipping point starts normal consumers, as opposed to greenies, tech fiends and early adopters moving into EV's

I think we will miss he noise and fury of a decent petrol engine, but we are petrolheads fairly well into our lifespans, this is much, much bigger than us, here and now, most people arent arsed about a "fun" car, its mainly down to utility, value for money to buy and run, not being annoying and showing off a bit if possible, they buy diesels ffs !

EV's have the inherent efficiency advantage on their side.

[deltashad]

I think the majority of us think this is a great idea.
Eventually all control will be taken from the driver and satellite controlled to destination.
But they wont be cheap to run, the government will tax them when they become popular.
Mass charging will become an issue.

Progression will come quickly with competition. By the time progression has reached an advanced stage the taxes will be on and the benefits of an electric vehicle will be minute.

[J4CKO]

bodhi said:

J4CKO said:

Er, isnt that just batteries and an electric motor, the electric motor being far superior in every way than an IC engine, the downside is purely the power storage medium, the IC engine would never have been developed if that was sorted, we love them because we have grown up (sort of) with them, but by every measure they are inferior to an electric motor.

More complex, the generate more heat, they generate more noise, they vibrate more, they pollute more, they are bigger, they require complex gearboxes and are nowhere near as efficient, 90 plus percent for an electric motor versus 30 odd for an IC engine.


The arguments for IC Engined cars, if you take out the efficiency remids me of how Jim Jefferies describes the argument for guns in America, the one valid argument the gun lobby has is "I fking love guns" and its like that with IC Engined cars, we love them, but by every measure an EV is better apart from it doesnt make you feel all manly and stuff with that gruff bark or low rumble that IC engines make, I am sure most arent really offended by the concept or worried about he power grids capability to charge the countries electric vehicles, its more a case of dont take my manly noise maker, nobody will hear me roar in an EV.

I am not immune, I see it, but I am sure we will still be allowed them for time to come, Clarkson will become Petrolheads NRA style Charlton Heston figure, lobbying for us to keep our V8's, thing is, as us old dinosaurs die out, EV's will take over, it is going to happen, they are becoming too good, too compelling to ignore, that stinking diesel that allegedly does 70 mpg but does 45, well these actually will do 80 plus mpg equivalent, quietly and smoothly.

Edited by J4CKO on Friday 2nd October 14:57

Lol, as you said earlier you were becoming a bit of a fanboy, and it really is beginning to show.

I don't think the appeal of ICEs has anything to do with manliness (if you'd met me you'd know that's definitely not the case), i think it's more to do with the fact that they are a bloody versatile bit of kit, powering everything from bikes to cars, lorries to boats, can be made dirt cheaply, don't require any particularly rare metals in order to function, don't run out of acceleration at high speeds (thanks to those hyper complicated gearboxes you mentioned), and are at the end of the day, quite a lot of fun

Must just be me on the manliness thing then

Yes, they are versatile, and power all sorts, but probably less than there are electric motors powering things, and I do believe that will change if (when) the power storage improves, what we need is pourable electricity

Electric motors dont require any rare metals, its only the batteries and that depends on the technology used.

Will totally agree on the fun, but that is only a tiny part of the equation for most people, am sure EV's can be fun in their own way.

Also, with regards to acceleration tapering, off, have noticed that in the Model S vs Lambo type races, if the EV had two or three gears to shift between would that make the difference ? I know some EV's have gears but generally the torque and rev range mean one isnt needed.

[Fittster]

J4CKO said:

Its coming, there is a lot of development of alternatives to Lithium batteries, remember the IC engine and all its components have had decades of development and a bit of a cosy symbiosis between car manufacturers and the oil producers, most car manufacturers have just not bothered or paid lip service, they want fossil fuels to carry on, as do the oil companies.

Batteries are hardly a new thing, they have been about since 1748. If after 250 years no one has developed one that's suitable to power a car I'm not sure its likely to happen in the next 20 years.

[bodhi]

J4CKO said:

Must just be me on the manliness thing then

Yes, they are versatile, and power all sorts, but probably less than there are electric motors powering things, and I do believe that will change if (when) the power storage improves, what we need is pourable electricity

Electric motors dont require any rare metals, its only the batteries and that depends on the technology used.

Will totally agree on the fun, but that is only a tiny part of the equation for most people, am sure EV's can be fun in their own way.

Also, with regards to acceleration tapering, off, have noticed that in the Model S vs Lambo type races, if the EV had two or three gears to shift between would that make the difference ? I know some EV's have gears but generally the torque and rev range mean one isnt needed.

I'm not entirely sure about that, as if you look at a Tesla P85D versus anything with an ICE, the Tesla's big advantage is traction off the line - hence it does very well against RWD machines initially, however in the videos against a Lambo or a GTR, it never really pulls ahead, then quickly gets mullered as the speed rises.

Electric motors require copper, which iirc there is a fairly limited supply of out there. Happy to be corrected however.

Putting the milk float banter to one side however, one of the things I am a huge fan of is choice - if people want EV's that is OK by me, as long as that choice isn't enforced. EV's may have great value for pottering around (my sister is more than happy with her Leaf, although I do have to correct her when she calls it a "real car"), but for those of us who enjoy a lovely straight 6 or go weak at the knees when a Lambo goes past, an EV isn't really going to cut it.

As long as that choice is there, I'm more than happy.

[ORD]

bodhi said:

I'm not entirely sure about that, as if you look at a Tesla P85D versus anything with an ICE, the Tesla's big advantage is traction off the line - hence it does very well against RWD machines initially, however in the videos against a Lambo or a GTR, it never really pulls ahead, then quickly gets mullered as the speed rises.

Electric motors require copper, which iirc there is a fairly limited supply of out there. Happy to be corrected however.

Putting the milk float banter to one side however, one of the things I am a huge fan of is choice - if people want EV's that is OK by me, as long as that choice isn't enforced. EV's may have great value for pottering around (my sister is more than happy with her Leaf, although I do have to correct her when she calls it a "real car"), but for those of us who enjoy a lovely straight 6 or go weak at the knees when a Lambo goes past, an EV isn't really going to cut it.

As long as that choice is there, I'm more than happy.

Agreed.

My ideal garage would definitely include a fastish, small and basic EV that is pointy, responsive and fun to drive at low speeds AND fast to charge. No such thing exists, yet, but when it does, you would be mad not to have one for town driving.

But the idea that any EV is going to come close to replacing my 911 is absurd. As long as I have an NA petrol flat 6 or V12 in one of my cars, the rest can be powered by fairy dust or kitten's purrs for all I car

[redroadster]

Not long before wi fi technology is used to charge he batteries once this is rolled out it will be possible to charge these cars so easy that distance won't be a problem with there range, the acceleration figure are incredible and will only get faster with each model pipe some v12 noise into cabin and super car is born ,prices will fall these cars are way forward no doubt about it ,goodbye Saudi Arabia no oil needed thanks.

[J4CKO]

Fittster said:

J4CKO said:

Its coming, there is a lot of development of alternatives to Lithium batteries, remember the IC engine and all its components have had decades of development and a bit of a cosy symbiosis between car manufacturers and the oil producers, most car manufacturers have just not bothered or paid lip service, they want fossil fuels to carry on, as do the oil companies.

Batteries are hardly a new thing, they have been about since 1748. If after 250 years no one has developed one that's suitable to power a car I'm not sure its likely to happen in the next 20 years.

That was my point, the IC stuff has been refined for decades and battery tech has just been around phones and generally doing what it needs, we were using Ni-cads in most applications until not long ago, with my tin foil hat on I can imagine a replacement already exists but has been stifled, probably not but dont underestimate the amount of interests in fossil fuel and IC engines, me included, I work for a predominantly Oil and Gas company,

[98elise]

ORD said:

Dark85 said:

Sorry but how is 300miles a crap range?

Frankly if you're driving more than that you should be stopping for a break anyway, and if you can get access to a supercharger half an hour is a perfectly reasonable time to stop.

It is crap because:-

(1) 300 miles is a massive overestimate. Let's say 200 to be really generous.

(2) That means it needs a recharge during any long journey and always after a long journey.

(3) Re-charging takes bloody ages.

A stated range of 500 (real range therefore over 300) is probably about the minimum before you can stop worrying about range as a downside.

1. The range is actually 260-270 in real world driving. 300 is achievable if you drive economically. 450 has been done, providing you're happy to drive at 26mph for nearly 20 hours

2. Normal driving means you need a recharge after about 5 hours of driving, and you can get to 80% in about 30 minutes at a supercharge station. Thats suitable for most people.

3. As above rechanging dosn't take ages.

EV's may not be for you but they will suit most people.

[bp1000]

ORD said:

It is crap because:-

(1) 300 miles is a massive overestimate. Let's say 200 to be really generous.

(2) That means it needs a recharge during any long journey and always after a long journey.

(3) Re-charging takes bloody ages.

A stated range of 500 (real range therefore over 300) is probably about the minimum before you can stop worrying about range as a downside.

It will do more than 200 so it isn't really being generous.

I struggle to see why a recharge on a journey is an issue. The range takes you over 3hrs driving. I stopped today at the Warrington supercharger, put 150 back in the battery by the time I went the toilet and had a drink.

It's fast to charge out and about, even at the "slower" motorway services I can get 50 miles in there whilst I get a coffee and stretch legs / toilet. All free electricity too.

And unless you are a traveling salesman you always wake up to a fully charged car with no requirement to charge day to day. I'm sure that's a fair saving at petrol station stops over time.

Bonus that I get free electricity whilst I park up at work.

But as said several things are happening. Batteries are improving yearly, tesla even allow you to swap to higher capacity packs. Also tesla are working on faster charger. Apparently they want supercharger times down to 5 mins, but I forget the range.

[ORD]

98elise said:

ORD said:

Dark85 said:

Sorry but how is 300miles a crap range?

Frankly if you're driving more than that you should be stopping for a break anyway, and if you can get access to a supercharger half an hour is a perfectly reasonable time to stop.

It is crap because:-

(1) 300 miles is a massive overestimate. Let's say 200 to be really generous.

(2) That means it needs a recharge during any long journey and always after a long journey.

(3) Re-charging takes bloody ages.

A stated range of 500 (real range therefore over 300) is probably about the minimum before you can stop worrying about range as a downside.

1. The range is actually 260-270 in real world driving. 300 is achievable if you drive economically. 450 has been done, providing you're happy to drive at 26mph for nearly 20 hours

2. Normal driving means you need a recharge after about 5 hours of driving, and you can get to 80% in about 30 minutes at a supercharge station. Thats suitable for most people.

3. As above rechanging dosn't take ages.

EV's may not be for you but they will suit most people.

Let's say 250, to be extremely generous. 80% of that is 200. So it takes 30 minutes of charging for 200 miles of range. That's not good enough, especially when there are not many superchargers around.

As I have said, EVs are currently only suitable as city cars or cars for people who dont mind hanging around at service stations for hours!