RE: 2024 Hyundai Ioniq 5 N | PH Review
Discussion
CG2020UK said:
Then again you could look at it and say despite all those advantages and a higher power to weight (263 vs 233 bhp per U.K. ton) the Tesla just doesn’t handle as well.
It's not even a metric and is subjective.
I am pretty sure the CTR is far closer to a track set up than the Tesla.
But I agree it was a ridiculous comparison on so many levels.
Nomme de Plum said:
stanlow45 said:
Fast and practicable. Partner, children, dogs and shopping. Lovely car that it is, not in the Alpine.The future for EVs is very bright indeed.
Edited by Nomme de Plum on Tuesday 2nd April 16:55
I agree it's amazing how they've doubled power and torque yet it still gets beaten on the Nordschleife by a car with only 300bhp. Amazing.
CG2020UK said:
nickfrog said:
Handling is not particularly related to lap times.
Come on mate seriously…… at certain point you just have to give up I am not convinced you understand what "handling" means. I think you're very confused about car dynamics.
tupak798 said:
Practicality is your only argument? Very un-PH.
I agree it's amazing how they've doubled power and torque yet it still gets beaten on the Nordschleife by a car with only 300bhp. Amazing.
fI agree it's amazing how they've doubled power and torque yet it still gets beaten on the Nordschleife by a car with only 300bhp. Amazing.
k me, are we going to get the Laurel & Hardy double act on every thread now?Should be fun.
nickfrog said:
CG2020UK said:
nickfrog said:
Handling is not particularly related to lap times.
Come on mate seriously…… at certain point you just have to give up I am not convinced you understand what "handling" means. I think you're very confused about car dynamics.
Brave statement following that quote
CG2020UK said:
nickfrog said:
CG2020UK said:
nickfrog said:
Handling is not particularly related to lap times.
Come on mate seriously…… at certain point you just have to give up I am not convinced you understand what "handling" means. I think you're very confused about car dynamics.
Brave statement following that quote
Nothing brave, just based on my career in motorsport and in automotive industry.
I have owned and tracked plenty of road cars with fantastic handling that were quite slow, GT86, Boxsters and even M2 in the wet spring to mind and sadly a few that were extremely fast yet had bland handling, Golf R springs to mind. As I said, try and think in terms of wheel control, kinematics, response, balance, modulation when it comes to handling, not necessarily lap times.
I have never said that a car had better handling than another. The ONLY thing I said is that the inherent idiosyncratic features of EV cars (lower intrinsic/relative cog and PMOI) helped their handling. No less. No more. Your real world examples massively helped demonstrating that once your hypothesis was proved wrong. If you don't agree, I am fine with it.
Edited by nickfrog on Tuesday 2nd April 22:30
nickfrog said:
Nothing brave, just based on my career in motorsport and in automotive industry.
I have owned and tracked plenty of road cars with fantastic handling that were quite slow, GT86, Boxsters and even M2 in the wet spring to mind and sadly a few that were extremely fast yet had bland handling, Golf R springs to mind. As I said, try and think in terms of wheel control, kinematics, response, balance, modulation when it comes to handling, not necessarily lap times.
So basically those cars just had worse handling in the wet than the Golf R. The Golf R handles better because ultimately it does what you tell it to do better than the others.
In your career in motorsport and automotive if you tried two different setups of suspension but kept everything else the same how would you actually measure which handled better and which to use on the track? One big KPI certainly jumps out at me.
Edited by CG2020UK on Wednesday 3rd April 14:53
CG2020UK said:
Handling is how a vehicle responds to a drivers actions. You wouldn’t have bland handling you would have bland feel. Therefore handling has an output.
Read my post. I did say "response". Too sharp a response doesn't necessarily help lap time. It can hamper it, depending on the drivers experience. Particularly with a road car, which is still what we are talking about, right?CG2020UK said:
So basically those cars just had worse handling in the wet than the Golf R. The Golf R handles better because ultimately it does what you tell it to do better than the others.
It doesn't. It was the opposite, including in the wet. If you feel the Golf R handles well, it just proves how subjective handling is.CG2020UK said:
In your career in motorsport and automotive if you tried two different setups of suspension but kept everything else the same how would you actually measure which handled better and which to use on the track? One big KPI certainly jumps out at me.
Read my post. I did say "kinematics". And once again, the choice of set up for a road car, which is still what we are talking about here, is subjective: too sharp a set up and too sharp a response may well hamper performance. Roll in particular is a fundamental aspect of optimising the feel for traction, particularly for your average road driver. So, again, totally subjective. One man's quest for the ultimate response maybe the next man's nightmare in the traction zones with too stiff a set up. M2 I am looking at you.I am only scratching the surface here btw. It's a super simplistic reply. You might want me to go into sidewall stiffness for instance which can be even more counter intuitive. Not to mention damping or spring weight etc etc.
Once again, the salient point of this conversation remains that EVs' idiosyncratic attributes (lower relative CoG and PMOI) help their handling and offset for the extra mass compared to functionally similar ICE cars which tend to have higher CoG and have more mass overhanging past their axles unfortunately.
Which also was the key reason for the Boxster or the GT86 to a lesser extent being such better handling cars than the Golf R incidentally, but they remain rare OcE examples of those attributes for packaging reasons. Sharper turn in, less inertia, better balance.
EVs have no right to handle how they do if you only look at their mass. But when you look at where their mass is both in height and location within the wheel base, it suddenly makes sense that they do.
Edited by nickfrog on Wednesday 3rd April 23:18
nickfrog said:
CG2020UK said:
Handling is how a vehicle responds to a drivers actions. You wouldn’t have bland handling you would have bland feel. Therefore handling has an output.
Read my post. I did say "response". Too sharp a response doesn't necessarily help lap time. It can hamper it, depending on the drivers experience. Particularly with a road car, which is still what we are talking about, right?CG2020UK said:
So basically those cars just had worse handling in the wet than the Golf R. The Golf R handles better because ultimately it does what you tell it to do better than the others.
It doesn't. It was the opposite, including in the wet. If you feel the Golf R handles well, it just proves how subjective handling is.CG2020UK said:
In your career in motorsport and automotive if you tried two different setups of suspension but kept everything else the same how would you actually measure which handled better and which to use on the track? One big KPI certainly jumps out at me.
Read my post. I did say "kinematics". And once again, the choice of set up for a road car, which is still what we are talking about here, is subjective: too sharp a set up and too sharp a response may well hamper performance. Roll in particular is a fundamental aspect of optimising the feel for traction, particularly for your average road driver. So, again, totally subjective. One man's quest for the ultimate response maybe the next man's nightmare in the traction zones with too stiff a set up. M2 I am looking at you.I am only scratching the surface here btw. It's a super simplistic reply. You might want me to go into sidewall stiffness for instance which can be even more counter intuitive. Not to mention damping or spring weight etc etc.
Once again, the salient point of this conversation remains that EVs' idiosyncratic attributes (lower relative CoG and PMOI) help their handling and offset for the extra mass compared to functionally similar ICE cars which tend to have higher CoG and have more mass overhanging past their axles unfortunately.
Which also was the key reason for the Boxster or the GT86 to a lesser extent being such better handling cars than the Golf R incidentally, but they remain rare OcE examples of those attributes for packaging reasons. Sharper turn in, less inertia, better balance.
EVs have no right to handle how they do if you only look at their mass. But when you look at where their mass is both in height and location within the wheel base, it suddenly makes sense that they do.
Edited by nickfrog on Wednesday 3rd April 23:18
If you can't see how what you are waffling on about is just components that ultimately make up the handling of a car I can't help you.
It's like trying to convince a flat earther the world is round at some point you just have to call it quits.
Have a nice day. Peace and love.
CG2020UK said:
Ultimately mate if you don't believe for some reason handling has no impact on a lap time I just can't help you.
If you can't see how what you are waffling on about is just components that ultimately make up the handling of a car I can't help you.
It's like trying to convince a flat earther the world is round at some point you just have to call it quits.
Yes that's precisely how it feels. You don't understand the basic fundamentals, make ridiculous hypothesis that were proven wrong and now resort to ad hom and strawman arguments. Classic PH. Mate.If you can't see how what you are waffling on about is just components that ultimately make up the handling of a car I can't help you.
It's like trying to convince a flat earther the world is round at some point you just have to call it quits.
Edited by nickfrog on Thursday 4th April 16:03
nickfrog said:
CG2020UK said:
Ultimately mate if you don't believe for some reason handling has no impact on a lap time I just can't help you.
If you can't see how what you are waffling on about is just components that ultimately make up the handling of a car I can't help you.
It's like trying to convince a flat earther the world is round at some point you just have to call it quits.
Yes that's precisely how it feels. You don't understand the basic fundamentals, make ridiculous hypothesis that were proven wrong and now resort to ad hom and strawman arguments. Classic PH. Mate.If you can't see how what you are waffling on about is just components that ultimately make up the handling of a car I can't help you.
It's like trying to convince a flat earther the world is round at some point you just have to call it quits.
Edited by nickfrog on Thursday 4th April 16:03
Your conversation is pretty much drowning out discussion about the Hyundai Ioniq 5N, which is supposed to be the subject of this thread.
It's like you're blasting out Justin Bieber on a big stereo from next door while your neighbours are trying to have a pleasant chat over a barbecue and a couple of glasses of wine: You're so focused on yourself that I don't think you realise how irritating this is to your neighbours while somewhat ruining the vibe and thread of their conversation.
Much as Airpods exist for Justin Bieber lovers, the technology exists for you to enjoy yourself without bothering other people: you can start your own thread about the handling of EVs, and whether CTRs are significantly quicker than EVs around tracks. Now come on chaps, do the decent thing and move this conversation to another thread.
I'm impressed by this and particularly interested in a Hyundai Ioniq 3 or 4, when they emerge. Firstly, it'll be a little smaller (the Ioniq 5 is extremely wide, which would be tricky round some width restrictors near me), and secondly because I hope they'll have learned some lessons from real world feedback from this car to refine the concept of a performance EV.
Between this and the Alpine A290, there's hope for the future. I'll reserve some judgement til someone's tried it on real roads though.
Between this and the Alpine A290, there's hope for the future. I'll reserve some judgement til someone's tried it on real roads though.
nickfrog said:
Yes that's precisely how it feels. You don't understand the basic fundamentals, make ridiculous hypothesis that were proven wrong and now resort to ad hom and strawman arguments. Classic PH. Mate.
Remember this is PH where your and GT9's knowledge and expertise in the field of automotive design is top trumped by a posters vehemence.Edited by nickfrog on Thursday 4th April 16:03
Please don't stop though as your and GT9's contributions cutting through some of the dross posted by others are greatly appreciated by some us.
Nomme de Plum said:
Remember this is PH where your and GT9's knowledge and expertise continual stream of nonsense pro EV propaganda is top trumped
Pleasedon't stop though as your and GT9's contributions cutting through of dross would not be missed.
FTFY (especially as I know how EVers love selective quoting...) Please
stanlow45 said:
Nomme de Plum said:
Remember this is PH where your and GT9's knowledge and expertise continual stream of nonsense pro EV propaganda is top trumped
Pleasedon't stop though as your and GT9's contributions cutting through of dross would not be missed.
FTFY (especially as I know how EVers love selective quoting...) Please
I hope that riposte did not tax you too much.
Sigh... Could these arguments just sod off elsewhere?
I like the look of this, certainly appeals as a fun family car. Price is crazy, performance is insane, weight is too much (not taking handling into account, before you start....). Our roads are already terrible, these aren't helping! Surely there's some middle ground here?
If Solid State batteries can really help bring the weight down and range up, then we're onto a winner. The tech is still young, plenty of time for it to improve. For now, I'll continue to enjoy polluting the air in my petrol car.
I like the look of this, certainly appeals as a fun family car. Price is crazy, performance is insane, weight is too much (not taking handling into account, before you start....). Our roads are already terrible, these aren't helping! Surely there's some middle ground here?
If Solid State batteries can really help bring the weight down and range up, then we're onto a winner. The tech is still young, plenty of time for it to improve. For now, I'll continue to enjoy polluting the air in my petrol car.
Xenoous said:
Sigh... Could these arguments just sod off elsewhere?
I like the look of this, certainly appeals as a fun family car. Price is crazy, performance is insane, weight is too much (not taking handling into account, before you start....). Our roads are already terrible, these aren't helping! Surely there's some middle ground here?
If Solid State batteries can really help bring the weight down and range up, then we're onto a winner. The tech is still young, plenty of time for it to improve. For now, I'll continue to enjoy polluting the air in my petrol car.
Do you not see a contradiction here with your post?I like the look of this, certainly appeals as a fun family car. Price is crazy, performance is insane, weight is too much (not taking handling into account, before you start....). Our roads are already terrible, these aren't helping! Surely there's some middle ground here?
If Solid State batteries can really help bring the weight down and range up, then we're onto a winner. The tech is still young, plenty of time for it to improve. For now, I'll continue to enjoy polluting the air in my petrol car.
I trust you are not serious with your final point.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff