Are noisy ICE cars becoming embarrassing?

[Stu08]

Lazermilk said:

including EV's!

This is where my slight issue is.

There seems to be some people on here who like EV's, but really dislike ICE cars. Some of them claim that ICE cars are poisonous / toxic etc. despite EV's also being poisonous and toxic in their own ways. If we all 100% cared about the environment, we'd all stop using any form of transport (including cycling as bikes are obviously manufactured) and walk everywhere.

There are also some posts where people who like EV's call others morons etc. because they question how environmentally friendly EV's really are. It truly does remind me of that South Park episode where hybrids begin to takeover.

I have no problems with EV's. I'd personally buy one in the future for day to day driving around town and commuting etc., as long as I have my old ICE car to enjoy for summer weekends and car shows etc.

As you have rightly said, this is a forum for people who are into cars. Nothing should really be embarrassing for us (we are seen as nerds outside our circle of enthusiasts). Doesn't matter if you like 0, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 etc. cylinder engines whether petrol or diesel, EV etc. It's actually a good thing we have different tastes in car powertrains etc. otherwise we'd all be driving the same cars, now that would be embarrassing (according to my wife who hates wearing the same top as a stranger she walks past)!

[otolith]

Stu08 said:

If we all 100% cared about the environment, we'd all stop using any form of transport (including cycling as bikes are obviously manufactured) and walk everywhere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good

[Stu08]

I use the 80/20 rule, best is the evil enemy of better etc. quotes in my daily job.

My post was slightly tongue in cheek....

[Baldchap]

Stu08 said:

Lazermilk said:

including EV's!

This is where my slight issue is.

There seems to be some people on here who like EV's, but really dislike ICE cars. Some of them claim that ICE cars are poisonous / toxic etc. despite EV's also being poisonous and toxic in their own ways. If we all 100% cared about the environment, we'd all stop using any form of transport (including cycling as bikes are obviously manufactured) and walk everywhere.

There are also some posts where people who like EV's call others morons etc. because they question how environmentally friendly EV's really are. It truly does remind me of that South Park episode where hybrids begin to takeover.

I have no problems with EV's. I'd personally buy one in the future for day to day driving around town and commuting etc., as long as I have my old ICE car to enjoy for summer weekends and car shows etc.

As you have rightly said, this is a forum for people who are into cars. Nothing should really be embarrassing for us (we are seen as nerds outside our circle of enthusiasts). Doesn't matter if you like 0, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 etc. cylinder engines whether petrol or diesel, EV etc. It's actually a good thing we have different tastes in car powertrains etc. otherwise we'd all be driving the same cars, now that would be embarrassing (according to my wife who hates wearing the same top as a stranger she walks past)!

Disclaimer: I'm not a battery, mining or anything else expert. However, I have read in many places, many times, that there's a great deal of nonsense been written and reported about how 'dirty' EVs are. The gist seems to be that the production of EV batteries is nowhere near as damaging as many reports will have us believe.

It makes some sense to me that there would be a great deal of misinformation put out by the countless billion dollar industries that EVs will potentially harm.

Like I said, I'm not qualified to call it either way. I've got several petrol vehicles and one EV; I buy what works for me and environment doesn't come into the decision, but I know it's a driver for many.

It would be interesting to have an EV discussion where only actual facts are involved and see how long or short that discussion is, because I'm confident there's nonsense on both sides (genuinely not pointing that comment at anyone, including those quoted above).

[Onehp]

Stu08 said:

If we all 100% cared about the environment, we'd all stop using any form of transport (including cycling as bikes are obviously manufactured) and walk everywhere.

Actually cycling is like 5x and at its very best 10x more efficient than walking per distance. Difference with cars is huge....
Also shoes wear relatively very quickly per mile, so barefoot is the only option if no manufacturing is allowed. From an energy perspective, cycling is very hard to beat. World record 24h distance is iirc 1222km with a power use of, in car terms, about 0,25hp... FYI.

In fact, I really should bike more (did a lot when younger), too much driving and I'm in poor physical shape. Sportscar is a misnomer

[Stu08]

Onehp said:

Actually cycling is like 5x and at its very best 10x more efficient than walking per distance. Difference with cars is huge....
Also shoes wear relatively very quickly per mile, so barefoot is the only option if no manufacturing is allowed. From an energy perspective, cycling is very hard to beat. World record 24h distance is iirc 1222km with a power use of, in car terms, about 0,25hp... FYI.

In fact, I really should bike more (did a lot when younger), too much driving and I'm in poor physical shape. Sportscar is a misnomer

However, we then have to take the production of food into account which is consumed by the cyclist and the impact that has on the environment too. I think eating grass and living in a stick hut would be ideal. Although...………….cutting down the trees...……..ah I give up.

[Stu08]

I'll quickly put this back on topic...…

No, not embarrassing.

[j_4m]

Nope.

I don't buy or drive my cars based on what other people think, I'll continue to enjoy a rotary engine on full scream with a 3" exhaust thank you.

[Lazermilk]

Stu08 said:

Onehp said:

Actually cycling is like 5x and at its very best 10x more efficient than walking per distance. Difference with cars is huge....
Also shoes wear relatively very quickly per mile, so barefoot is the only option if no manufacturing is allowed. From an energy perspective, cycling is very hard to beat. World record 24h distance is iirc 1222km with a power use of, in car terms, about 0,25hp... FYI.

In fact, I really should bike more (did a lot when younger), too much driving and I'm in poor physical shape. Sportscar is a misnomer

However, we then have to take the production of food into account which is consumed by the cyclist and the impact that has on the environment too. I think eating grass and living in a stick hut would be ideal. Although...………….cutting down the trees...……..ah I give up.

Dont forget all the farting cows...

[Onehp]

Stu08 said:

However, we then have to take the production of food into account which is consumed by the cyclist and the impact that has on the environment too. I think eating grass and living in a stick hut would be ideal. Although...………….cutting down the trees...……..ah I give up.

Most of us eat too much and fart/st it back out, so using that energy to move yourself is pure environmental profit On topic. Cycling makes very little noise

Even more on topic. (This thread hasn't been on topic for a while now). Lawenforcement has theoretically full possibility to fine and even revoke the MOT on vehicles with aftermarket exhaust that aren't approved as official spare parts, correct? . But this is never used? On the news last days, the Swiss want to go this way with on the road sound measurements...

[AC43]

Rich Boy Spanner said:

The point is that some poppy bangy cars simply sound juvenile and stupid to anyone with a level maturity over the age of 12, and they attract owners of that ilk.

Sums up what I think of them.

[j_4m]

Onehp said:

Most of us eat too much and fart/st it back out, so using that energy to move yourself is pure environmental profit On topic. Cycling makes very little noise

Even more on topic. (This thread hasn't been on topic for a while now). Lawenforcement has theoretically full possibility to fine and even revoke the MOT on vehicles with aftermarket exhaust that aren't approved as official spare parts, correct? . But this is never used? On the news last days, the Swiss want to go this way with on the road sound measurements...

The law is very, very grey. It doesn't specifically disallow aftermarket exhausts nor does it give a specific SPL for car exhausts.

[anonymous-user]

Lazermilk said:

Totally agree, this thread is like some kind of willy waving contest where anything less than 6/8 cylinders (aka inches) is to be laughed at

This thread has quickly become embarrassing for what is supposed to be a forum aimed at people who like all kinds of performance cars, including EV's!

EV’s are soulless.

/end

[soupdragon1]

yonex said:

Lazermilk said:

Totally agree, this thread is like some kind of willy waving contest where anything less than 6/8 cylinders (aka inches) is to be laughed at

This thread has quickly become embarrassing for what is supposed to be a forum aimed at people who like all kinds of performance cars, including EV's!

EV’s are soulless.

/end

Maybe, but once I patent my new artificial sound package for all EVs then the soul will be back.

Sound options to include:

Millennium falcon

The enterprise

Batmobile

Boeing 747

Hotpoint washing machine

Customers are going to love it. No engine noise, just the sound track of a vehicle from your favourite sci fi movie

[anonymous-user]

soupdragon1 said:

Maybe, but once I patent my new artificial sound package for all EVs then the soul will be back.

Sound options to include:

Millennium falcon

The enterprise

Batmobile

Boeing 747

Hotpoint washing machine

Customers are going to love it. No engine noise, just the sound track of a vehicle from your favourite sci fi movie

It’s funny that, I’ve associated some of my car’s with those icons.

NSX, sounds like Chewbacca
Atom, tie fighter
Griff, definitely aviation noises
SLR, metal on metal barking noises
E90M3, definitely more of an enterprise than a sprint



This is my issue with EV. As someone who spends their time with electric motors and inverters upwards of 800kW they just make these frequency noises. Nothing wrong with that but it’s no substitute (ever) for a few pistons, crank and valvetrain lashing around. As I said, soulless.

[SOL111]

soupdragon1 said:

Maybe, but once I patent my new artificial sound package for all EVs then the soul will be back.

Sound options to include:

Millennium falcon

The enterprise

Batmobile

Boeing 747

Hotpoint washing machine

Customers are going to love it. No engine noise, just the sound track of a vehicle from your favourite sci fi movie

Lol too late.

My i3 came with noise for speeds under 30mph. It sounds like all of the above mushed together!

I switch the bloody thing off though as I like spooking old people.

[Baldchap]

yonex said:

Lazermilk said:

Totally agree, this thread is like some kind of willy waving contest where anything less than 6/8 cylinders (aka inches) is to be laughed at

This thread has quickly become embarrassing for what is supposed to be a forum aimed at people who like all kinds of performance cars, including EV's!

EV’s are soulless.

/end

Top Gear magazine said the following this month when a Tesla Model 3 Performance lapped faster than a BMW M3...

TGMag said:

In the M3"when you floor it, the throttle response is glacial by comparison, and the accompanying racket isn’t quite as glorious as you remember — more of a distraction from listening to what the tyres are doing and getting on with the business of going fast.”

As people who drove cars for a living, you think they'd know what they're talking about.

Some Commentary on the TG article said:

"The very first iteration of an electric mid-sized sedan to have a performance option beating out the longstanding stalwart of fossil fueled sports sedans … does not bode well for the old tech. After all, the fossil technology has already benefited from over a century of refinements and improvements. If we look 5 or 10 years down the road, what refinements and improvements will EV technology gain, to further the performance lead over fossils?

We’ve already seen battery electrics beat out fossils at the Pikes Peak hill climb (outright record), on the Nürburgring Nordschleife (production cars record), and at other racetracks. In each case, these are just the first tentative generations of full electric sports cars, with huge scope for further improvements."

Can't argue with any of that really.

[Etypephil]

Baldchap said:

Etypephil said:

Baldchap said:

Etypephil said:

Baldchap said:

I drove a mate's 355 the other week. Sounded great and 9000rpm from a low-slung V8 is always going to be an event. But 0-60 takes longer than my Golf.

I'm sure we all agree a noisy Ferrari is OK, but a noisy Golf isn't. However, in this situation, the Golf is the faster car, so surely the Ferrari needs to pipe down and the Golf can speak up?

I'm playing Devil's advocate to a degree, but how does a noisy car qualify as being 'worthy'?

Your Golf can better 183 mph? Really? And the (rather irrelevant) 0-60 mph of 4.5 seconds? Is it one of those special high performance diesels we keep hearing about?

Where do I mention top speed?

0-62 on the 355 according to Ferrari is 4.7 seconds. That's longer than it takes a Golf R.

And neither is the actual point of my post, as you well know. What is the entry point (is it even about performance) where a noisy exhaust is acceptable?

Edited by Baldchap on Wednesday 24th April 07:47

You did say faster, without qualification; a Golf won't do more than 183 mph, even thrown off a cliff, you actually stated to 60 mph, not 62 mph, and Volkswagen claims a 0-62mph time of 5.1sec for the R. What it can actually do is a matter for conjecture, given VW's reputation for honesty. :-)

Your main point seemed to be that a shopping trolley is faster than an old Ferrari, which it isn't.

4.6 is the quoted time for the 7.5 DSG to 62. The DSG is the poppy bangy one we're discussing. So faster to 62.

I did state 0-60 (ok it's 62, but who cares), so that is clearly the measure I'm talking about.

But again, not my point. If I was playing top trumps I wouldn't pick my Golf. My point is 'what are the entry requirements for a noisy car to be acceptable', it clearly isn't 0-62. If we pick something that's limited to 155 it clearly isn't top speed. What is it?

My personal gut feel is that it's largely manufacturer providence and cylinder count. The first of which is certainly open to audience opinion.

Edited by Baldchap on Wednesday 24th April 12:47

The entry requirements for acceptable, even desirable, noise are more to do with individual perception of the quality of the sound, rather than manufacturer, cylinder count, or anything else, although it's true that some vehicles can get away with more noise than others. A couple of examples:
I find the rattle of a diesel (any diesel), highly offensive, but love the sound of a hard ridden bike, single, twin, or multi. The old Ford V4 engines sounded good imo, likewise VW flat four engines, and a mate's 6.6 litre (183 bhp!) Trans Am, so it's certainly not just about power, nor even the volume. To me, some turbocharged engines sound a bit naff, but I can't explain why.
I like the sound of my wife's XF:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbqQjbAQDVw
but equally find this old Frogeye nice:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOhYyiNcD6o
and in a quite different way, this Golf R (skip to about 3.12 to miss the boring waffle):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bewEuz86iVI&li...

[cerb4.5lee]

Baldchap said:

Top Gear magazine said the following this month when a Tesla Model 3 Performance lapped faster than a BMW M3...

TGMag said:

In the M3"when you floor it, the throttle response is glacial by comparison, and the accompanying racket isn’t quite as glorious as you remember — more of a distraction from listening to what the tyres are doing and getting on with the business of going fast.”

As people who drove cars for a living, you think they'd know what they're talking about.

Or they are paid to say what people want to hear. Electric cars(sadly imo) are the future and it wouldn't be in the car journalists interest to slag them off...even if they really wanted to.

[Rawwr]

cerb4.5lee said:

Or they are paid to say what people want to hear. Electric cars(sadly imo) are the future and it wouldn't be in the car journalists interest to slag them off...even if they really wanted to.

I'm not sure that makes logical sense.