RE: All good things come to an end in 2035

[RobM77]

nickfrog said:

RobM77 said:

The key word in Andy's post is "unnecessary". If any given SUV was a normal car then it would weigh less, handle better, go and stop faster, be cheaper to run, and emit less CO2. The advantages of SUVs are confusing to many people, because they don't seem significant enough to warrant the downsides. An RS6 is about the last car I would want to own, but the advantages are tangible: the power it has help it accelerate better and hold a higher speed on derestricted Autobahns. Don't get me wrong, I'd rather be in an Elise than either car, but I was just trying to explain.

And failed. The huge advantages of my SUV warrant the downsides that you mention which count for either zero (acceleration, braking, handling) for mere road use or are non existent or negligeable compared to say a 5 series saloon (cheapness to run, CO2) that would be far less practical for my needs anyway.

How can anyone be the arbiter of what is necessary when one drives a RS6 or a 6 pot 5 series?

A SUV is as normal a car as those, particularly if he tangible benefits are of zero relevance. IME a 5 series drives like a barge without any of the advantages of a SUV. But I have no issues with anyone liking them.

Without wishing the derail the thread, that's just simply not true. The differences aren't zero - that would violate basic physics. Any car that is taller than the next will have less grip than if it was lower, which usually results in fatter tyres to offset this, which weigh more and cost more to replace. It'll also handle considerably worse - even a couple of centimetres in ride height is easy to detect, let alone 20 or 30. Furthermore, any car that is heavier than the next will be suffer the same fate, in addition to being more expensive to run, more polluting, and slower. Combine extra weight with height and these things get magnified. Compare the Yeti with the Fabia, X3 with 3 series, etc etc.

The 5 series saloon that I drive is, yes, another example of this Physics in action. Dynamically, it is inferior in every way to the 3 series I had beforehand, because it's considerably heavier - simple as that. The key difference to an SUV is that the extra weight and size comes with usable advantages, namely: carrying space now that I'm a Dad, refinement on my new longer commute, and a much higher towing capacity for my new Dad-compatible racing car (the 3 series was right on the limit for towing and to be honest, not that safe at speed). The 6cyl engine is necessary for towing - the 4cyl 2.0 is again right on the limit of what's possible with what I tow. I had the same dilemma between 3 and 1 series when buying my last two cars. What would jacking up the ride height by 30cm and fitting a heavy 4WD system achieve? That's the key issue here - not adding things to a car, but adding pointless things like ride height.

Edited by RobM77 on Tuesday 4th February 15:47

[BigGingerBob]

How long until they realise that all electric won't work.
Look at the lithium needed for the batteries of, say, a Tesla Model 3 and then look at the worlds estimated resources. They can only make a couple of million cars. And that's only using the lithium for cars.

Road to nowhere and this will be reversed in a few years when someone more intelligent than me can get us a hydrogen or similar powered car to market.

[cayman-black]

Bloody hell i,m fked i have a V12 , V8 and a Diesel. Still, i might be dead by then.

[Inky81]

Ed. said:

Do you often hear people telling you how cheap it is to keep a horse? It's an expensive hobby out of reach of many and that is with the links to the agricultural industry.

The profitability of current fuel production includes massive economies of scale which won't work for hobbyists. There will be other countries happy to ship it to us at a cost.

You're right Ed, it will likely get more expensive BUT only whilst we're using our ICE cars, which won't be every day. A horse requires the same cost of board/food/vet bills whether or not you ride it, a car is slightly different.

[ate one too]

Airline industry is aiming to use carbon neutral synthetic fuel.

[otolith]

lotuslover69 said:

Yea currently to offset the Pollution caused by the manufacture of both a tesla and its batteries as well as the pollution from coal burning power stations in the UK it will take 5 years of ownership. So in order to offset that cost you need to run the tesla for 5 years before you have made back the average cost of a typical family car. Now the average person in the uk keeps a car for 3 years and the life of a tesla battery is 8 years.

Citation needed.

[TyrannosauRoss Lex]

ate one too said:

Bolux to that ..... this one's for keep

Stunning piece of machinery

[TWPC]

hucumber said:

Edinburger said:

Bring it on, I say.

Weirdly, I kind of agree. Cars at the moment are getting bigger and bigger, easier and easier to drive fast, its all feeling a bit stagnant. Theres literally millions of cars out there that arent going to disappear, I'll be interested to see how all this pans out

Agree with hucumber and Edinburger. The industry needs some revolution. The trend to ever bigger, more complex cars and apparently endless diversification of model ranges (coupe SUVs??) is tedious. Tesla aren't perfect but IMHO are by far the most interesting American mass-producer of cars and are a product of the early stages of a big change.

I'm interested to see what's going to happen.

[monty quick]

Typical knee jerk; all or nothing legislation. Unless Hydrogen Fuel Cell cars are available soon, the UK will fail (again) in actually fixing a problem.
IMHO it is impossible to set up the necessary infrastructure to provide charging points for the 40million cars/vans/trucks in the UK. Even if battery technology improves and faster charging times are realised it will not be viable for every vehicle to be electric. Then don't get me started about how 'dirty' batteries are - they use rare earth materials which are 'dirty' to produce; they need a lot of energy to manufacture; most are made in the Far East so they have to be transported; they are 'dirty' to charge and they are 'dirty' to recycle. Finally their useful life is much, much shorter than any modern internal combustion engine.
Much easier to start by banning the very highest polluters; old trucks, old vans; 2tonne+ V6/V8 SUV's, etc.
Legislate to make all vehicles (including the 'tax fiddle' Hybrids) truly economical and 'clean'.
Then actually put some meaningful investment in developing Hydrogen Fuel Cell technology. Don't get me wrong, there are problems in producing Hydrogen but with some decent investment I am sure it will be a better solution than Lithium Ion batteries.

[Gooly]

Bring it on - people imagine replacing their prized ICE motors with "soulless electric cars" but the reality is 99% of the cars on the road today are soulless appliances powered by needlessly polluting petrol and diesel engines. Majority of cars are a-b appliances that are objectively worse to drive because of their ICE engines. A Golf, Quashqai or whatever else is far nicer to drive with an electric motor than it is with a clattery, drive by wire, over-flywheeled, overly assisted heavily regulated ICE motor. The guberment aren't going to take away your E46 M3 or GT3 911 or V8 Jag or whatever else - I'm personally looking forward to the day that the 320ds and TDI Golfs of today are replaced by quiet, smooth, quick and clean electric vehicles. I've driven a few E-Golfs now and anyone who thinks they aren't fun in their own way, or aren't as good as a TDI whatever are having a laugh.

As mentioned already, electric isn't perfect - but lamppost charging, renewable sources, battery recycling in the form of home power banks, 15 years of future tech development and the prospect of further regulation of already stifled ICE stuff means this is a no-brainer. Viva la revolution - I won't be getting rid of my E36 but I will happily chop my E39 in for an electric equivalent when the time comes.

Also - when it comes to range anxiety and what ifs, fact is vast majority of the public's car useage consists of journeys of 7 miles or under. The case study of someone who commutes 200 miles a day etc are both the minority and only really relevant today, in 2020 - it is inevitable that the changing nature of work and workplaces (flexi, work from home, offices outside of town centres etc) and 15 years of battery, charging and infrastructure development will help counteract that. It's also not your god given right to pollute the atmosphere so you can cling onto 2.0 diesel commuter cars...

Edited by Gooly on Tuesday 4th February 15:51

[Inky81]

Gooly said:

Bring it on - people imagine replacing their prized ICE motors with "soulless electric cars" but the reality is 99% of the cars on the road today are soulless appliances powered by needlessly polluting petrol and diesel engines. Majority of cars are a-b appliances that are objectively worse to drive because of their ICE engines. A Golf, Quashqai or whatever else is far nicer to drive with an electric motor than it is with a clattery, drive by wire, over-flywheeled, overly assisted heavily regulated ICE motor. The guberment aren't going to take away your E46 M3 or GT3 911 or V8 Jag or whatever else - I'm personally looking forward to the day that the 320ds and TDI Golfs of today are replaced by quiet, smooth, quick and clean electric vehicles. I've driven a few E-Golfs now and anyone who thinks they aren't fun in their own way, or aren't as good as a TDI whatever are having a laugh.

As mentioned already, electric isn't perfect - but lamppost charging, renewable sources, battery recycling in the form of home power banks, 15 years of future tech development and the prospect of further regulation of already stifled ICE stuff means this is a no-brainer. Viva la revolution - I won't be getting rid of my E36 but I will happily chop my E39 in for an electric equivalent when the time comes.

Horaah - some perspective.

[TWPC]

TyrannosauRoss Lex said:

ate one too said:

Bolux to that ..... this one's for keep

Stunning piece of machinery

Indeed...
Got to find myself a keeper, but I guess that's for a different thread.

[MikeM6]

So carbon neutral synthetic fuel isn't going to save the engine then?

https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-news/tech/synfue...

[nickfrog]

RobM77 said:

Without wishing the derail the thread, that's just simply not true. The differences aren't zero - that would violate basic physics. Any car that is taller than the next will have less grip than if it was lower, which usually results in fatter tyres to offset this, which weigh more and cost more to replace. It'll also handle considerably worse - even a couple of centimetres in ride height is easy to detect, let alone 20 or 30. Furthermore, any car that is heavier than the next will be suffer the same fate, in addition to being more expensive to run, more polluting, and slower. Combine extra weight with height and these things get magnified. Compare the Yeti with the Fabia, X3 with 3 series, etc etc.

The 5 series saloon that I drive is, yes, another example of this Physics in action. Dynamically, it is inferior in every way to the 3 series I had beforehand, because it's considerably heavier - simple as that. However, it avoids the plague of high ride height, which is the really bad problem. So, unlike an SUV it (along with the A6 you also mention) actually has advantages that I use regularly, namely: carrying space now that I'm a Dad, refinement on my new longer commute, and a much higher towing capacity for my new Dad-compatible racing car (the 3 series was right on the limit for towing and to be honest, not that safe at speed). What would jacking up the ride height by 30cm and fitting a heavy 4WD system achieve?

I repeat : they count for zero for me. I don't need the grip or the handling so physics don't come into it, violated or not, it's not necessary on the road for me and I have the Cup Megane for track days. I probably use 0.4g at the most to go to the shop in the SUV. They can probably pull 0.8g but I'll get the Vbox out to check . I don't have 4wd. The added clearance gets me places where an estate wouldn't, at least most weekends as traction is not the limiting factor, wheel travel is.
Surely you agree that someone asking for the ban of a 119g 1250kg car that is entirely necessary for a particular function while driving a 330g 1900kgs car that couldn't even achieve any of that function is, at best, an hypocrite and at worst not very bright. I am sure you don't want to be associated with that Rob, you're far too intelligent.
I find driving long distance a much nicer experience in a SUV than in a saloon. But I have nothing against saloons.

Edited by nickfrog on Tuesday 4th February 16:03

[otolith]

BigGingerBob said:

How long until they realise that all electric won't work.
Look at the lithium needed for the batteries of, say, a Tesla Model 3 and then look at the worlds estimated resources. They can only make a couple of million cars. And that's only using the lithium for cars.

Road to nowhere and this will be reversed in a few years when someone more intelligent than me can get us a hydrogen or similar powered car to market.

Wait until you look into H powered cars and realise that they rely on scarce mineral resources too.

Reality is that current lithium reserves and bringing on recycling will see us through long enough for alternative battery chemistries to become commercially viable.

[otolith]

monty quick said:

Then actually put some meaningful investment in developing Hydrogen Fuel Cell technology. Don't get me wrong, there are problems in producing Hydrogen but with some decent investment I am sure it will be a better solution than Lithium Ion batteries.

How are you going to get round it fundamentally needing three times as many power stations as batteries do?

[TWPC]

Gooly said:

... the reality is 99% of the cars on the road today are soulless appliances powered by needlessly polluting petrol and diesel engines. Majority of cars are a-b appliances that are objectively worse to drive because of their ICE engines. A Golf, Quashqai or whatever else is far nicer to drive with an electric motor than it is with a clattery, drive by wire, over-flywheeled, overly assisted heavily regulated ICE motor. The guberment aren't going to take away your E46 M3 or GT3 911 or V8 Jag or whatever else - ...

Exactly. You've hit the nail on the head.

[GTEYE]

321boost said:

Ok time to give up now, there’s no hope. Our hobby will be legislated out or marketed down. Petrol will be harder to get and the interesting petrol powered cars will be much more expensive. As an example have you seen the prices of things like the old XR fords? Petrol powered cars will still be available but very expensive to buy and run. I hope the environmentalists are happy now that they’ve restricted mobility and f**ked up our hobby. I hope this kind of thing comes and bites everyone of these fools in the arse.

Truly sad times.

For Greta Thunberg's children's generation, they won't be interested in ICE cars any more than we are in 1920's relics.

The old XR Fords are valued the way they are because the people that grew up with them are now nostalgic for the past, and have some disposable cash to spend. However, once this generation dies off I'd predict the values and interest will tail off and most become curios from the past.

Witness the number of MGB's or Beetles on the roads today compared to even the mid 90s, both are now pretty rare sights.

[Kenny Powers]

Gooly said:

Bring it on - people imagine replacing their prized ICE motors with "soulless electric cars" but the reality is 99% of the cars on the road today are soulless appliances powered by needlessly polluting petrol and diesel engines. Majority of cars are a-b appliances that are objectively worse to drive because of their ICE engines. A Golf, Quashqai or whatever else is far nicer to drive with an electric motor than it is with a clattery, drive by wire, over-flywheeled, overly assisted heavily regulated ICE motor. The guberment aren't going to take away your E46 M3 or GT3 911 or V8 Jag or whatever else - I'm personally looking forward to the day that the 320ds and TDI Golfs of today are replaced by quiet, smooth, quick and clean electric vehicles. I've driven a few E-Golfs now and anyone who thinks they aren't fun in their own way, or aren't as good as a TDI whatever are having a laugh.

As mentioned already, electric isn't perfect - but lamppost charging, renewable sources, battery recycling in the form of home power banks, 15 years of future tech development and the prospect of further regulation of already stifled ICE stuff means this is a no-brainer. Viva la revolution - I won't be getting rid of my E36 but I will happily chop my E39 in for an electric equivalent when the time comes.

Also - when it comes to range anxiety and what ifs, fact is vast majority of the public's car useage consists of journeys of 7 miles or under. The case study of someone who commutes 200 miles a day etc are both the minority and only really relevant today, in 2020 - it is inevitable that the changing nature of work and workplaces (flexi, work from home, offices outside of town centres etc) and 15 years of battery, charging and infrastructure development will help counteract that. It's also not your god given right to pollute the atmosphere so you can cling onto 2.0 diesel commuter cars...

Edited by Gooly on Tuesday 4th February 15:51

Interesting. Meanwhile, on Earth, what happens when you have nowhere to charge your car before you leave home, and nowhere to charge it when you get where you’re going?

[RobM77]

nickfrog said:

RobM77 said:

Without wishing the derail the thread, that's just simply not true. The differences aren't zero - that would violate basic physics. Any car that is taller than the next will have less grip than if it was lower, which usually results in fatter tyres to offset this, which weigh more and cost more to replace. It'll also handle considerably worse - even a couple of centimetres in ride height is easy to detect, let alone 20 or 30. Furthermore, any car that is heavier than the next will be suffer the same fate, in addition to being more expensive to run, more polluting, and slower. Combine extra weight with height and these things get magnified. Compare the Yeti with the Fabia, X3 with 3 series, etc etc.

The 5 series saloon that I drive is, yes, another example of this Physics in action. Dynamically, it is inferior in every way to the 3 series I had beforehand, because it's considerably heavier - simple as that. However, it avoids the plague of high ride height, which is the really bad problem. So, unlike an SUV it (along with the A6 you also mention) actually has advantages that I use regularly, namely: carrying space now that I'm a Dad, refinement on my new longer commute, and a much higher towing capacity for my new Dad-compatible racing car (the 3 series was right on the limit for towing and to be honest, not that safe at speed). What would jacking up the ride height by 30cm and fitting a heavy 4WD system achieve?

I repeat : they count for zero for me. I don't need the grip or the handling, it's not necessary on the road for me and I have the Cup Megane for track days. I probably use 0.4g at the most to go to the shop in the SUV. They can probably pull 0.8gbut I'll get the Vbox out to check . I don't have 4wd. The added clearance get me places where an estate wouldn't, at least most weekends as traction is not the limiting factor, wheel travel is.
Surely you agree that someone asking for the ban of a 119g 1250kg car that is entirely necessary for a particular function while driving a 330g 1900kgs car that couldn't even achieve any of that function is, at best, an hypocrite and at worst not very bright. I am sure you don't want to be associated with that Rob, you're far too intelligent.
I find driving long distance a much nicer experience in a SUV than in a saloon. But I have nothing against saloons.

You really are spectacularly missing the point here. Nobody's suggesting that anyone maxes out their car on the public road, whether its a Yeti or an M5. What I'm saying is that certain cars have tangible advantages when they upscale certain elements. With space for example, my 5 series is quieter than my old 3 series, I can also fit considerably more in it, more on it, and more towed behind it. The same is true of a 3 series vs a 1 series. A Golf R for example accelerates faster than a Golf 1.4TSi, something you can do legally most of the time if you're so inclined. Where does more ride height get you? Nowhere - that's the point being made.