EV cars, would you, wouldn't you?
Poll: EV cars, would you, wouldn't you?
Total Members Polled: 427
Discussion
ORD said:
Apart from the fact that almost all EVs are still glacially slow and built of cardboard. Early adopters really do feel the need to talk up something that remains half baked.
What utter rubbish!Have you ever driven a Leaf or Zoe?
Whilst not the fastest thing on the road they are more than capable of keeping up with the general flow of traffic and are pretty quick up to 30-40 mph.
When I had a Leaf on a 7 day test drive I was very impressed by the quality and solidity of it. It felt very well built, similar to the Volvos I've owned in the past and better than my wife's Avensis.
I used it for my 120 mile a day commute with absolutely no problems.
98elise said:
J4CKO said:
Just a quick question off topic if I may,
With the EV's like the Model S that was just shown destroying some big V8's, it does that with one gear doesnt it ?
Whats the physics behind this, I know its about torque from zero rpm and the number of revs but is the single gear ration a compromise, would there be any benefit to a gearbox and would it counter the tapering off in acceleration as speeds rise ?
A gearbox is actually needed to make up for the ICE limitations. It can't produce enough low down torque to move a car, and produce enough rpm to propel it to a decent speed. To do both it needs a gear box. In addition it needs a clutch because it can't pull from zero revs. There is also the issue of keeping the engine in a reasonably economic rpm range when at speed.With the EV's like the Model S that was just shown destroying some big V8's, it does that with one gear doesnt it ?
Whats the physics behind this, I know its about torque from zero rpm and the number of revs but is the single gear ration a compromise, would there be any benefit to a gearbox and would it counter the tapering off in acceleration as speeds rise ?
Electric motors can pull from zero with maximum torque, and can spin at much higher revs Losses are very little so the is no need to go up a gear unless you really need more top end speed. It wouldn't increase acceleration at all because you would be going up a gear, not down.
In short EV's don't really need them, so why fit one.
I may be wrong but my logic says if you give ANY engine a lower gear from rest it will find it easier to get the 1.5 tonnes or whatever moving, certainly until it is doing say 20mph?
Edited by CorvetteConvert on Friday 9th October 08:27
GreatGranny said:
ORD said:
Apart from the fact that almost all EVs are still glacially slow and built of cardboard. Early adopters really do feel the need to talk up something that remains half baked.
What utter rubbish!Have you ever driven a Leaf or Zoe?
Whilst not the fastest thing on the road they are more than capable of keeping up with the general flow of traffic and are pretty quick up to 30-40 mph.
When I had a Leaf on a 7 day test drive I was very impressed by the quality and solidity of it. It felt very well built, similar to the Volvos I've owned in the past and better than my wife's Avensis.
I used it for my 120 mile a day commute with absolutely no problems.
98elise said:
A gearbox is actually needed to make up for the ICE limitations. It can't produce enough low down torque to move a car, and produce enough rpm to propel it to a decent speed. To do both it needs a gear box. In addition it needs a clutch because it can't pull from zero revs. There is also the issue of keeping the engine in a reasonably economic rpm range when at speed.
Electric motors can pull from zero with maximum torque, and can spin at much higher revs Losses are very little so the is no need to go up a gear unless you really need more top end speed. It wouldn't increase acceleration at all because you would be going up a gear, not down.
In short EV's don't really need them, so why fit one.
Get a 3 speed in and you would see be improvements in range and performance.Electric motors can pull from zero with maximum torque, and can spin at much higher revs Losses are very little so the is no need to go up a gear unless you really need more top end speed. It wouldn't increase acceleration at all because you would be going up a gear, not down.
In short EV's don't really need them, so why fit one.
This is why the P85D Tesla improved range. It essentially has 2 gears now.
GreatGranny said:
ORD said:
Apart from the fact that almost all EVs are still glacially slow and built of cardboard. Early adopters really do feel the need to talk up something that remains half baked.
What utter rubbish!Have you ever driven a Leaf or Zoe?
Whilst not the fastest thing on the road they are more than capable of keeping up with the general flow of traffic and are pretty quick up to 30-40 mph.
When I had a Leaf on a 7 day test drive I was very impressed by the quality and solidity of it. It felt very well built, similar to the Volvos I've owned in the past and better than my wife's Avensis.
I used it for my 120 mile a day commute with absolutely no problems.
ORD said:
0-60mph in about 12 seconds. If that is not glacially slow, I do not know what is. Bearing in mind that it will doubtless have a good 0-20 time, its real world pace must be astonishingly bad.
12 seconds is slow compared to the Porsche in your garage, yes. Compared to a family car you'd see a lot of like a Fiesta 1.4 or Golf diesel, normal cars, its about the same.ajprice said:
ORD said:
0-60mph in about 12 seconds. If that is not glacially slow, I do not know what is. Bearing in mind that it will doubtless have a good 0-20 time, its real world pace must be astonishingly bad.
12 seconds is slow compared to the Porsche in your garage, yes. Compared to a family car you'd see a lot of like a Fiesta 1.4 or Golf diesel, normal cars, its about the same.As things improve in EV land, for the stuff that isnt a Tesla, performance will improve, I suspect the Zoe and Leaf could be tweaked to go faster but the manufacturers arent aiming at that market and they need to preserve range above all else.
I reckon that eventually it will be possibly for your average EV to do sixty in 4 or 5 seconds as it doesnt seem to introduce any penalties like it does with an IC car, or at least, not as many, whether they sell them like that, or peg them back for insurance reasons I dont know, is insurance and risk based on acceleration mainly, the capability to gain speed or the sporting pretensions, image and changes an IC car needs to go that quick ? is Doris in her Leaf a massive risk if it does 5 sec to sixty as opposed to 12 if she never goes above 50 and quick acceleration has her Poodle quivering (not a Euphemism by the way) ?
Will actual straight line acceleration performance become a bit separated from the Pistonheads type ideal ?
J4CKO said:
ajprice said:
ORD said:
0-60mph in about 12 seconds. If that is not glacially slow, I do not know what is. Bearing in mind that it will doubtless have a good 0-20 time, its real world pace must be astonishingly bad.
12 seconds is slow compared to the Porsche in your garage, yes. Compared to a family car you'd see a lot of like a Fiesta 1.4 or Golf diesel, normal cars, its about the same.As things improve in EV land, for the stuff that isnt a Tesla, performance will improve, I suspect the Zoe and Leaf could be tweaked to go faster but the manufacturers arent aiming at that market and they need to preserve range above all else.
I reckon that eventually it will be possibly for your average EV to do sixty in 4 or 5 seconds as it doesnt seem to introduce any penalties like it does with an IC car, or at least, not as many, whether they sell them like that, or peg them back for insurance reasons I dont know, is insurance and risk based on acceleration mainly, the capability to gain speed or the sporting pretensions, image and changes an IC car needs to go that quick ? is Doris in her Leaf a massive risk if it does 5 sec to sixty as opposed to 12 if she never goes above 50 and quick acceleration has her Poodle quivering (not a Euphemism by the way) ?
Will actual straight line acceleration performance become a bit separated from the Pistonheads type ideal ?
12 seconds is very slow. I have driven cars with that kind of performance a lot in recent years, and it is a genuine impediment to making normal progress. In my experience, 10 seconds is tolerable, but much slower than that means foot to the floor and no noticeable change in speed.
Formula E started last year with a 5 speed gearbox for all cars. This season the rules have been opened up and we will see cars racing with 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 speed gearboxes as well as single and twin motor set-ups.
All the cars will still have the same battery so IMHO it will be fascinating to see which offers the best balance of energy efficiency and performance.
All the cars will still have the same battery so IMHO it will be fascinating to see which offers the best balance of energy efficiency and performance.
ORD said:
I would think that the average driver (inattentive, emotional, lacking judgment) given a seriously rapid car requiring no gear changes, etc, would be a pretty dangerous thing! Doris will pretty quickly mow down some pedestrians if her little shopping box did 20-100mph in a few seconds of accidental WOT.
12 seconds is very slow. I have driven cars with that kind of performance a lot in recent years, and it is a genuine impediment to making normal progress. In my experience, 10 seconds is tolerable, but much slower than that means foot to the floor and no noticeable change in speed.
So the Tesla is too fast and the others are too slow? 12 seconds is very slow. I have driven cars with that kind of performance a lot in recent years, and it is a genuine impediment to making normal progress. In my experience, 10 seconds is tolerable, but much slower than that means foot to the floor and no noticeable change in speed.
TransverseTight said:
RossP said:
We have an i3 and an M4. Both utterly brilliant at what they do.
Have you drag raced them yet? I've read, but not seen demonstrated the i3 can beat an M4 across the lights if launch control is not enabled and you aren't sitting there at 4,000 sounding like a nob. Trouble is 2 seconds later the M4 will come screaming past. Still handy if you want to be first to the last free petrol pump in a Rex
If you haven't well, you need to get it done and post the results on you tube. With and without launch control please
My hunch is what 0-60 times dont include is add revs, release handbrake a bit, start to release clutch, add more revs and fully release handbrake. I.e. 90% of joe public will find 0-60 is just like MPG about 30% less in the real world.
Edited by TransverseTight on Thursday 8th October 17:16
The i3 remains unbeaten from the traffic light GP in 19 months of ownership. As you say other cars may be faster off the line but with the i3 there is no drama, just floor the accelerator and woosh!
No launch control on my M4 - its a manual. My i3 is a a battery only model.
ORD said:
I would think that the average driver (inattentive, emotional, lacking judgment) given a seriously rapid car requiring no gear changes, etc, would be a pretty dangerous thing! Doris will pretty quickly mow down some pedestrians if her little shopping box did 20-100mph in a few seconds of accidental WOT.
12 seconds is very slow. I have driven cars with that kind of performance a lot in recent years, and it is a genuine impediment to making normal progress. In my experience, 10 seconds is tolerable, but much slower than that means foot to the floor and no noticeable change in speed.
So every time you accelerate from a standstill you aim to reach 60 in less than 10 secs so the experience is tolerable?12 seconds is very slow. I have driven cars with that kind of performance a lot in recent years, and it is a genuine impediment to making normal progress. In my experience, 10 seconds is tolerable, but much slower than that means foot to the floor and no noticeable change in speed.
And I dread to think what 'normal' progress is to you if you think those cars are a genuine impediment.
My car does 0-60 in 11 secs so not quite 'very slow' but I've never thought over the last 75k miles that its stopped me from making normal progress.
Maybe I'm just a better driver than you :-)
One of my lottery-win fantasies is to build an electric Citroen DS.
It needn't be Tesla fast : 10 secs would be plenty quick enough.
I figure in 5 years time crashed EV's will start to be around as donors - I've done several engine / transmission transplants, but this would be a new challenge. I found two on the internet just now.
Legendary magic carpet ride & style, with a modern engine (always its most disappointing feature).
It needn't be Tesla fast : 10 secs would be plenty quick enough.
I figure in 5 years time crashed EV's will start to be around as donors - I've done several engine / transmission transplants, but this would be a new challenge. I found two on the internet just now.
Legendary magic carpet ride & style, with a modern engine (always its most disappointing feature).
GreatGranny said:
ORD said:
I would think that the average driver (inattentive, emotional, lacking judgment) given a seriously rapid car requiring no gear changes, etc, would be a pretty dangerous thing! Doris will pretty quickly mow down some pedestrians if her little shopping box did 20-100mph in a few seconds of accidental WOT.
12 seconds is very slow. I have driven cars with that kind of performance a lot in recent years, and it is a genuine impediment to making normal progress. In my experience, 10 seconds is tolerable, but much slower than that means foot to the floor and no noticeable change in speed.
So every time you accelerate from a standstill you aim to reach 60 in less than 10 secs so the experience is tolerable?12 seconds is very slow. I have driven cars with that kind of performance a lot in recent years, and it is a genuine impediment to making normal progress. In my experience, 10 seconds is tolerable, but much slower than that means foot to the floor and no noticeable change in speed.
And I dread to think what 'normal' progress is to you if you think those cars are a genuine impediment.
My car does 0-60 in 11 secs so not quite 'very slow' but I've never thought over the last 75k miles that its stopped me from making normal progress.
Maybe I'm just a better driver than you :-)
0-60 is used as a measure of acceleration more generally. As I noted above, 20-60 times and other increments are more illustrative of real world performance, but I do not have those figures for the Leaf and we all know that 0-60 times give a reasonable indication of real world pace. I have driven plenty of cars with 0-60 times of 10-12 seconds, and they will be faster in the real world than a Leaf (which has an advantage from a standing start). I found these cars glacially slow in normal conditions - accelerating at NSL signs, overtaking, motorway driving, etc.
ORD said:
GreatGranny said:
ORD said:
I would think that the average driver (inattentive, emotional, lacking judgment) given a seriously rapid car requiring no gear changes, etc, would be a pretty dangerous thing! Doris will pretty quickly mow down some pedestrians if her little shopping box did 20-100mph in a few seconds of accidental WOT.
12 seconds is very slow. I have driven cars with that kind of performance a lot in recent years, and it is a genuine impediment to making normal progress. In my experience, 10 seconds is tolerable, but much slower than that means foot to the floor and no noticeable change in speed.
So every time you accelerate from a standstill you aim to reach 60 in less than 10 secs so the experience is tolerable?12 seconds is very slow. I have driven cars with that kind of performance a lot in recent years, and it is a genuine impediment to making normal progress. In my experience, 10 seconds is tolerable, but much slower than that means foot to the floor and no noticeable change in speed.
And I dread to think what 'normal' progress is to you if you think those cars are a genuine impediment.
My car does 0-60 in 11 secs so not quite 'very slow' but I've never thought over the last 75k miles that its stopped me from making normal progress.
Maybe I'm just a better driver than you :-)
0-60 is used as a measure of acceleration more generally. As I noted above, 20-60 times and other increments are more illustrative of real world performance, but I do not have those figures for the Leaf and we all know that 0-60 times give a reasonable indication of real world pace. I have driven plenty of cars with 0-60 times of 10-12 seconds, and they will be faster in the real world than a Leaf (which has an advantage from a standing start). I found these cars glacially slow in normal conditions - accelerating at NSL signs, overtaking, motorway driving, etc.
The reckon it's you that would argue with a brick wall as in all cases it's horses for courses. The car hasn't been built yet that can do absolutely everything to perfection in all circumstances.
Glacially slow? Nissan Serena mk1 2.3 D 27.8 s to 100 kph. That's glacially slow. Why did they bother to measure the acceleration to one decimal point.
Now years of driving a type2 VW camper 65 flat out, can even overtake stuff.
Final line of Greater Granny post might have hit nail on head.
It's fun, isn't it, insulting people because they disagree with you?!
Back in the real world, a car that takes 12 seconds to accelerate to 60mph is a slow car, and it does not make me a bad driver for noticing that. I can make perfectly reasonable progress in a car that slow (given that it is not hard to choose the right gear and use WOT), but it is still going to be poor at overtaking and pretty useless on slow B roads.
Back in the real world, a car that takes 12 seconds to accelerate to 60mph is a slow car, and it does not make me a bad driver for noticing that. I can make perfectly reasonable progress in a car that slow (given that it is not hard to choose the right gear and use WOT), but it is still going to be poor at overtaking and pretty useless on slow B roads.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff