An interesting time to be a car fan?

[TheDeuce]

LasseV said:

OutInTheShed said:

A 1000BHP 'car' is not the future of anything.

It might be zero tailpipe emission, but it's chronic overconsumption, lots of resources used to make something with very little function.

There might be some point to a dozen of them racing on a circuit, keeping lots of people entertained.

But on increasingly monitored public roads, I can see the market for these things shrinking to a point pretty soon.

This is future of the hypercars. FCEV powertrain can have best sides from both worlds: low weight, long range and fast refill of ICE vehichle compined with huge power and zero emission of EV.

X5 hydrogen model does same thing albeit in lesser form. It has 2kwh battery+125kw FC stack and 370hp. This is the future. Small battery is best for enviroment and fuel cell stack is 100% recyclable.

It's not the future though. Solid state cells are. At least double the energy density so they entirely solve the weight problem, and cleaner/greener than HFC. Simpler too.

Solo state could still be another decade off practical mass production and there are other issues to work out, but it'll happen.

I can't see HFC going mainstream and an infrastructure developing in less time than it takes to get solid state sorted. For one thing there's a good deal more money invested in trying to get the new cells to market than there is in HFC development/infrastructure.

[TheDeuce]

gmaz said:

If you look at the amount of gubbins in a Toyota Mirai in the cutaway diagrams below, and that only generates about 128kW from the fuel cell, I don't see how a lightweight hypercar will be able to produce 1000bhp (750kW?) unless it is for very brief periods only.

https://mag.toyota.co.uk/new-mirai-hydrogen-fuel-c...

It will only be for relatively brief periods. Which is actually not an issue really, where on earth (literally) can a thousand hp lightweight car deploy that level of power for more than a short period anyway? It's unlikely any owner is going to use enough power for long enough to fully deplete the battery.

The question is how brief is brief - and what level of power can the HFC provide on a continuous basis once the battery store is depleted.

[TheDeuce]

OutInTheShed said:

TheDeuce said:

gmaz said:

If you look at the amount of gubbins in a Toyota Mirai in the cutaway diagrams below, and that only generates about 128kW from the fuel cell, I don't see how a lightweight hypercar will be able to produce 1000bhp (750kW?) unless it is for very brief periods only.

https://mag.toyota.co.uk/new-mirai-hydrogen-fuel-c...

It will only be for relatively brief periods. Which is actually not an issue really, where on earth (literally) can a thousand hp lightweight car deploy that level of power for more than a short period anyway? It's unlikely any owner is going to use enough power for long enough to fully deplete the battery.

The question is how brief is brief - and what level of power can the HFC provide on a continuous basis once the battery store is depleted.

Indeed, there is a serious limit to how long you can use more than a couple of hundred BHP. Continuous 200BHP is probably a constant 200MPH or something. So you can only accelerate on a long straight and hold the speed for a few seconds. Even with plenty of aero downforce, how much power can you actually use on average? Don't F1 cars average something like 3-400 BHP through a race? So you'd have to be driving and braking pretty hard for a 128kW fuel cell not to keep up with the average?
Or towing a caravan.

Let's just say, on the public road I expect there would be twinkly blue lights following you before you managed to fully deplete the battery. Even deploying 1000hp on the straight bits, you'd get a chunk back when you inevitably have to brake. Over several miles of driving like a hooligan you'd struggle to burn through more than 2-3 kw I'd have thought.

And by the time plod has written the ticket, the battery will have topped itself up again.

[TheDeuce]

GT9 said:

TheDeuce said:

OutInTheShed said:

TheDeuce said:

gmaz said:

If you look at the amount of gubbins in a Toyota Mirai in the cutaway diagrams below, and that only generates about 128kW from the fuel cell, I don't see how a lightweight hypercar will be able to produce 1000bhp (750kW?) unless it is for very brief periods only.

https://mag.toyota.co.uk/new-mirai-hydrogen-fuel-c...

It will only be for relatively brief periods. Which is actually not an issue really, where on earth (literally) can a thousand hp lightweight car deploy that level of power for more than a short period anyway? It's unlikely any owner is going to use enough power for long enough to fully deplete the battery.

The question is how brief is brief - and what level of power can the HFC provide on a continuous basis once the battery store is depleted.

Indeed, there is a serious limit to how long you can use more than a couple of hundred BHP. Continuous 200BHP is probably a constant 200MPH or something. So you can only accelerate on a long straight and hold the speed for a few seconds. Even with plenty of aero downforce, how much power can you actually use on average? Don't F1 cars average something like 3-400 BHP through a race? So you'd have to be driving and braking pretty hard for a 128kW fuel cell not to keep up with the average?
Or towing a caravan.

Let's just say, on the public road I expect there would be twinkly blue lights following you before you managed to fully deplete the battery. Even deploying 1000hp on the straight bits, you'd get a chunk back when you inevitably have to brake. Over several miles of driving like a hooligan you'd struggle to burn through more than 2-3 kw I'd have thought.

And by the time plod has written the ticket, the battery will have topped itself up again.

I believe the Apricale has a pair of fuel cells producing 'several hundreds of kW' between them.

At 200 mph, the obvious energy consumer is drag, I'd estimate it to require 250 kW at the wheels just for drag. Add rolling resistance, losses in the motors and electronics plus auxilary loads, it would need 300 kW+ to sustain 200 mph, so that seems to tie up with a pair of 150 kW fuel cells.

I believe it has a single gear, so the instantaneous power available from the motors will vary with road speed. I don't know what the actual motor power curve looks like, but because the car is light, call it 1150 kg with 2 people on board, there is no need for the full 800 kW until you get to around 125 mph or more. Below that, you would be exceeding 1G acceleration if you could actually deploy it.

So it seems likely that this car will do the 0-125 mph sprint in sub 6 seconds like several other hyper cars. The energy needed to that is sub 1 kWh. A sprint to top speed will need a fair bit more, but probably not more than the 6 kWh battery can deliver, assuming it is fully charged.

What this seems to show is that there is merit in the hybrid approach for hypercars, where you only carry just enough battery energy to deliver the instantaneous performance you require and just enough hydrogen and fuel cell to deliver the range and average power you require.

That's a fair summary. If you want the lightest electric car with decent range and high peak power it works.

But the moment cell technology takes a leap, it becomes an overly complex dinosaur.

[TheDeuce]

LasseV said:

TheDeuce said:

That's a fair summary. If you want the lightest electric car with decent range and high peak power it works.

But the moment cell technology takes a leap, it becomes an overly complex dinosaur.

The thing is, it doesn't take that leap.

2x energy density of current cells and potential to reach 3x.

That's close enough to mitigate the need for an onboard HFC power plant. The only benefit of which is the possibility to quickly fill up - but the infrastructure is never going to exist to provide convenient refuelling points because it's just too niche. The vast majority can cope with present day BEV and charge at or close to home.

[TheDeuce]

LasseV said:

TheDeuce said:

2x energy density of current cells and potential to reach 3x.

That's close enough to mitigate the need for an onboard HFC power plant. The only benefit of which is the possibility to quickly fill up - but the infrastructure is never going to exist to provide convenient refuelling points because it's just too niche. The vast majority can cope with present day BEV and charge at or close to home.

I don't believe that it will happen. If you mean solid state batteries?

Yes, solid state.

Fair enough, believe what you wish.

[TheDeuce]

LasseV said:

Why do you have so high hopes for it? They will be a even more expensive than li-ion batteries. Basically everyone says so.

High price is not a problem for hypercar, but it is a huge problem for cheaper cars. If solid state battery does work, they will make FCEV powertrain even better. Cost is a smaller issue when battery is small.

Only manufacturer who could stomach such a high priced cars is Merc. Even BMW will need to find cheaper powertrains.

Btw, Apricale battery size is circa 6.5kwh.

The price will come down once the problems with mass production and cell stacking are solved. In the end they should be cheaper tha li-ion because they actually use less rare earth materials. They also have a practically unlimited lifespan in terms of charge cycles and degredation, so cost in that sense has to relative to the current cells. The stability and robustness of solid state cells would mean they have substantial retained value once taken from a retired EV.

I'm not suggesting commercially viable and affordable solid state cells we appear anytime soon, but I believe it will happen.

[TheDeuce]

cerb4.5lee said:

For me it is getting less and less interesting if you are a car fan. I can just imagine how boring it would be at a car show when every car is electric. No noise or emotion whatsoever.

Car magazines don't interest me as much anymore either, because most of the cars in the magazines are either hybrid or full electric, and those cars don't interest me. So being a car fan now is going downhill fast in my opinion.

I agree that a lot of what made interesting ICE cars interesting, is lost in the shift to EV. On the flip side, I find the capabilities of interesting EV's, interesting.

And at a car event, you're forevermore going to see interesting ICE cars doing their thing. You'll also see EV's destroy the hill climbs and drag races. A big part of EV interest is technology driven, less soulful perhaps, but the development and application of technologies is for many people quite interesting.

I did some work for JLR on the European motorshow circuit for several years up until 2019, and in that time it went from the odd EV on show to pretty much every manufacturer in attendance giving a press release about it's EV ambitions and unveiling the latest electric models. There was no less interest that I witnessed, just different sorts of people pouring over the cars and asking different questions on the stands. When we launched the iPace, the level of interest was at fever pitch. Only the new Defender attracted more interest but that is obviously an icon and was a very long time baking before it finally arrived! Even then every second question from both press and public seemed to be about when they would finally put out an EV Range Rover..

Actually on that last point, there is a huge group of people that love their large and luxurious SUV's but for the last 10+ years such cars have attracted a lot of criticism - especially when they're utilised for nothing other than the school run or to pootle around town. That's why for that group, there is a lot of interest in EV alternatives. Rolls Royce drivers and customers are also naturally keen to shed the excessive pollution problem and 'go green'(er), hence the interest in their upcoming Spectre car.

I don't think there is a shortage of interest overall.

[TheDeuce]

DMZ said:

TheDeuce said:

A big part of EV interest is technology driven, less soulful perhaps, but the development and application of technologies is for many people quite interesting.

The problem is that the technology done well cannot be appreciated. No driver has ever said oh wow the battery chemistry in this car is so amazing or oh wow isn't the drag really low. It's therefore also hard to charge a premium for it beyond a certain point.

Whereas in ICE with all the moving parts, you can really appreciate the clever engineering that goes into making all that work well and you can continuously marvel at it on a drive even if it's in a straight line.You can even feel what grade of fuel is in the car, so in ICE even the chemistry is noticeable.

Plenty of drivers have found other aspects of EV to be very exciting and fun. You don't have to be a geek to enjoy flat cornering and a perfect full power exit after the apex each time, or to marvel at the off the line pace.

If you view EV in direct comparison with ICE, you'll miss the point. Both have distinct advantages that any driver can enjoy.

[TheDeuce]

Lord Flashheart said:

I'm glad you started your post with the term 'car fan' and not petrol head. I think petrol head has always been an incorrect term, as the majority of them actually like most things involving vehicles, be it petrol powered, diesel or 2 stroke and now perhaps electric.
A short while back, I was happy to criticise EVs. I'd call them soul-less and boring, especially for the spectator at a motoring event. I stand by that part still to a point, but I also decided it was wrong to criticise without actually experiencing ownership; so I bought a new iPace. I love it. I'm a convert but not a preacher. It does everything I could wish, and it does it very quietly. That quietness I've found eerily fascinating. I found the howl of my R8 V10 a beautiful thing, but with the iPace I'm not craving my V10 again.
As a 'car fan', I've not even considered a new driving style to suit my EV world. I realise that a lot of owners rabbit on about their daily achievements in the world of efficiency and KW Hours etc. How today they have managed more range than ever by slipstreaming and sticking to 50 mph, blah, blah, blah. But I'm just not doing that. I'm almost 'hooning'. The acceleration is brutal and addictive, so that's how I'm driving. I haven't lost any of the fun of my R8 to be honest. Today I started off with 100% charge. I drove from Sevenoaks to Tonbridge, then onto Southborough, then down to Deal to hook up with some friends. I then drove back home again. All of this was done without any consideration whatsoever for efficiency or economy. When I got back to Sevenoaks I had 70 miles range left and batteries at 30%. No range anxiety at all.
I honestly believe that 'car fans' should try an EV before they criticise them. They are likely to find there's still motoring pleasure, it'll just be different to what they're used to.
Imagine if EVs had come first and electricity was the bad guy. We all would have been conditioned by that just as we have been with ICEs. Then the first ICE cars turn up to replace the evil EV. What would we all be saying? 'Have you seen these tts driving around in ICE cars?'. 'Can you believe the noise they're making!'. 'In what world do the government think we're all going to queue up at this thing they're calling a petrol station to pour this fluid into our cars'. 'I've heard that these new ICE cars have to have oil and water poured in them regularly and if you don't, you'll need a new engine'. You could go on and on about the differences. It's just that we've been conditioned for 100 years to associate noise and heat etc with speed and excitement. People need to step outside of their mindset. Be more open minded and embrace the future.

Glad you're still enjoying one of the best all round EV's there is

I may have got the thread title right but we're still stuck with a forum called 'piston' heads. That's not going to age well over the coming decade..

Anyway, yes, I agree. It's the basis of most of my posts - EV is different and enjoyable in different ways. You can't only look at what is lost from ICE, you have to also look at what is new or improved by EV.

Also as you say, they're best enjoyed by just driving them as any other car, and revelling in the on tap acceleration. Not just for the sake of driving fast, but it's a joy to have a car that reacts so instantly to input. ICE cars have chased that goal for decades with various tech improvements such as fuel injection, variable vane/twin turbos, higher rpm etc. All that effort in terms of input response is leap frogged by an electric motor. We haven't changed path at all, we've just changed powertrain.

[TheDeuce]

Olivera said:

TheDeuce said:

Plenty of drivers have found other aspects of EV to be very exciting and fun. You don't have to be a geek to enjoy flat cornering and a perfect full power exit after the apex each time, or to marvel at the off the line pace.

If you view EV in direct comparison with ICE, you'll miss the point. Both have distinct advantages that any driver can enjoy.

Yet EV driver interaction is (so far) close to non-existent other than twirling the EPAS steering wheel and mashing a couple of pedals, all of which are filtered through a huge stack of software. Perfectly fine for everyday, driving but thoroughly dreadful for the enthusiast.

Again I say... Stop comparing directly with ICE. It's different.

ICE = direct control (sometimes) of the process.

EV = a better process.

In any case, ICE pretty much all has power steering and fbw - at least going back as far as we've had EV. We can't judge EV by times before they existed. The only real difference is the powertrain, and the fact it's silent.

[TheDeuce]

SWoll said:

FarmyardPants said:

The lack of drama can also be a big advantage though. You can use more of an EV's performance more of the time without coming across as a lairy boy racer.

This applies inside the cabin as well as out. If I drop a cog in the TVR and give it the beans to overtake someone, my wife thinks I'm driving angry. Not so in the EV. A quick squirt of the throttle loud '+' pedal doesn't elicit the same 'slow down!' comments even though the speeds are similar.

Getting around cyclists is done in sweet serenity instead of scaring the st out of them.

Of course when driving for driving's sake, taking the ICE is the preferred option, but my EV replaced a 1.0L econobox for day to day stuff so it's a big upgrade .

Your EV obviously isn't fast enough. Tried the same trick numerous time in our Tesla and got told off every time after heads has met headrests at an alarming rate.

The quietness can also be an issue with cyclists as less likely to hear you coming, and I found one of the biggest challenges was that other road users just weren't calibrated to how quickly it could pick up speed so had to alter my driving style to suit as no sudden eruption of noise to warn them of what was about to happen.

Really do have to pick your moments, and in all honesty it was quite frustrating a lot of the time IME.

I actually find it helps deal with slow road users. You need a very small gap to safely get past! I accept they may be surprised/irritated... But I think if they pootle along in a 60 zone at 33mph then they're probably terrified of all life, I'm hardly adding to their fecklessness.

Anyone annoyed by Peugeot drivers being useless on back roads or whilst attempting to join a dual carriageway is well advised to get an EV and blast past them.

[TheDeuce]

SWoll said:

Around town and for everyday use silence is golden IME. Really do miss the sound of an interesting engine for a few trips though, especially if tunnels are involved.

In my old CRX vtec I don't think I ever went through a tunnel at less than 8000rpm and I always had the windows down

I must have looked and sounded a prat. I was in my early twenties though so...