EV general discussion

Jonnycoupe said:
Are you a sheep? Can’t see you as a new car buyer regardless, let along describing the error state of two cars you haven’t actually driven or owned.
Click to expand...
no one has driven an MMA or a 3-series neu-klasse saloon (just read descriptions of architectures)
model3 efficiency isn't uncorrelated with its saloon height , cd/frontal-area, lower weight from reduced structural steel, either.

If the government started discriminating between low and high efficiency bev via the VED that would further promote saloons, to the prols.
 
Wild. Haven’t ever seen washer fluid used like this before :P

imgur.com

imgur.com

Discover the magic of the internet at Imgur, a community powered entertainment destination. Lift your spirits with funny jokes, trending memes, entertaining gifs, inspiring stories, viral videos, and so much more from users.
imgur.com imgur.com
 
Last edited:
jpaul said:
no one has driven an MMA or a 3-series neu-klasse saloon (just read descriptions of architectures)
model3 efficiency isn't uncorrelated with its saloon height , cd/frontal-area, lower weight from reduced structural steel, either.

If the government started discriminating between low and high efficiency bev via the VED that would further promote saloons, to the prols.
Click to expand...

No one wanted saloons before. I was talking about a6 and i5 that YOU referenced before. No idea what point you are trying to make. Look at the A6 it looks daft trying to be something it’s not.
 
I dont think i would ever own a saloon. they are just not practical enough for me.. my parents had a sierra sapphire and compared to the hatchback it was rubbish on that front.. I HAVE owned a few coupes over the years and they are not practical either........... but at least they look nice (for my taste at least).

would be nice to see more low slung hatchbacks and estate cars however rather than SUVs, tho i accept the SUV style and being higher up makes it easier to stuff in the battery.

also SUVs are really popular... so from a designers point of view, its popular and easier to get the battery in.... so i guess why would you migrate from the SUV blue print?

I used to buy into the notion that SUVs were unaerodynamic however the tesla model Y does kind of put an end to that one. its massive and efficient, which for the family wagon is quite compelling. again from my subjective view the new face lift visually is a big step up as well.

As for taxing "inefficient" EVs higher than efficient ones. Sure i could get behind that however on the condition that given even a terribly inefficient EV is still a hell of a lot cleaner than any ICE, then even the worst EV on the road should still be paying less tax than any ICE vehicle. if they do that then fine but if not then no dice from me
 
Last edited:
Can't over come physics. What ever you do to an SUV to make it drive, handle or be efficient will always work better on a saloon. Suv has other advantages but those aren't any of them.
 
bigmike20vt said:
As for taxing "inefficient" EVs higher than efficient ones. Sure i could get behind that however on the condition that given even a terribly inefficient EV is still a hell of a lot cleaner than any ICE, then even the worst EV on the road should still be paying less tax than any ICE vehicle. if they do that then fine but if not then no dice from me
Click to expand...
many of the big suv ev they consciously try to over-size them to get the perverse bigger usa >6000lb tax break , and europe then suffers the fallout from that,
that weight comes at the price of rolling resistance and reduced efficiency, the increasing air resistance too, you end up needing more expensive/heavy acoustic glass and noise insulation (a vicious circle)
- so I think europe could apply ved type taxes to redress that.
saying that paris and some cities have higher parking costs on heavy cars so that indirectly starts to address the problem.

carbon cost of manufacture could be incorporated in the taxing regime too for both ice & ev - agree ICE dirtiness shouldn't be forgotten via fuel tax.

...

thought this next-gen article insightful

What’s Wrong with the Mercedes Electric Strategy Compared with BMW?​

so merc with MMA inefficiently addressing low cost lfp & li-on batteries options, and bmw, also avoiding 2-speedgearbox with higher speed in-house motors.
 
Nah sub 6000lb and 5500 is a key target for EPA homolgated range for the 'sticker ' numbers, each time you break through the threhold the EPA rating drops. NO idea where you have got that idea from that higher mass is targetted- US isnt even a target market for most European OEMS. Extra metal for the sake of it just drives up material cost aswell.

You are just sticking words together hoping it reads as a sentence, it doesnt. Carbon has massive end of life inplications too, so it doesnt even fit what ever sustainablility story you are trying to decribe. Mercedes may have a motor speed issue or choice where they prefer to multispeed the gearbox rather than develop higher speed motors and hence tolerate a lower 'burst speed' (clue here, Plaid and its carbon wrapped rotor). Its a choice to a solution; you need to stop playing Top Trumps with stuff as you are the only one holding any sort of cards in that game.

Im not gonna read ANYTHING from yet another link when you even yourself said no body has driven both! So what give the author authority to lecture within article that must be conjecture only at best, clickbait likely? The mind boggles you swallow this stuff, let alone regurgitate. jpaul the cow EV, he has 4 stomachs too.
 
OspreyO said:
Can't over come physics. What ever you do to an SUV to make it drive, handle or be efficient will always work better on a saloon. Suv has other advantages but those aren't any of them.
Click to expand...
yes, accepted a model 3 of the same generation will be more slippery than a model Y.... but the gap is fairly slight, its not like the SUV is some brick and the saloon an arrow.

a 10% advantage towards a saloon may sound a lot (number plucked out of the air but my money is on the difference being not larger than that) , but if you are talking for instance about 4 miles per kwh vs 4.4miles per kwh in practice does it really matter that much, esp if charged from renewable energy and also when you add in the extra practicality.

imo the design of the car is more important than the body type.

(and yes... my car is never gonna win an award for most efficient EV - tho funnily enough it is a lot lower than many other cars of similar size)
 
Last edited:
Certain irony to that considering the retractable door handles that freeze shut in winter or no physical buttons.

So 10% not a big deal ...

"....After 3.5 million sales in five years, Tesla gave the Model Y a significant update in early 2025. One of the biggest changes was the sharper suit, which helps see its drag coefficient reduced from 0.23Cd to 0.22Cd..."

It's all about the 1% until it isn't.

group.mercedes-benz.com

VISION EQXX – the most efficient Mercedes-Benz ever | Mercedes-Benz Group

The software-defined research prototype is the most efficient vehicle the brand has ever built. It is a statement that underscores not only the innovative strength of Mercedes-Benz, but also its stated aim to “Lead in Electric” and “Lead in Car Software”.
group.mercedes-benz.com group.mercedes-benz.com
 
I do accept that there are other considerations than efficiency. I loved our MPV basically a box with lots of seats. Such a versatile vehicle. It's was worth the aerodynamics of a brick.
 
OspreyO said:
Certain irony to that considering the retractable door handles that freeze shut in winter or no physical buttons.

So 10% not a big deal ...

"....After 3.5 million sales in five years, Tesla gave the Model Y a significant update in early 2025. One of the biggest changes was the sharper suit, which helps see its drag coefficient reduced from 0.23Cd to 0.22Cd..."

It's all about the 1% until it isn't.

group.mercedes-benz.com

VISION EQXX – the most efficient Mercedes-Benz ever | Mercedes-Benz Group

The software-defined research prototype is the most efficient vehicle the brand has ever built. It is a statement that underscores not only the innovative strength of Mercedes-Benz, but also its stated aim to “Lead in Electric” and “Lead in Car Software”.
group.mercedes-benz.com group.mercedes-benz.com
Click to expand...
not sure if you are deliberately missing the point or i was just not clear? yes it makes sense for designers to make a car with a certain practicality more efficient than previous models. its a good selling point even if ultimately it only adds another 5miles to the range. (but forgetting that imo the new model Y just looks better anyway, so any improvement in efficiency is just the icing on the cake)

but as a consumer, if given a choice of being able to fit all the family and holiday crap in the car but at the expense of 10% of the range of a smaller less practical car, then the 10% is a small price to pay imo.

but surely you are not suggesting that 0.22Cd (or 0.23Cd) is poor? its certainly not the dynamics of a brick!.

but all of that is ignoring the fact that, brick or not, even if we were to agree the model Y is inefficient (I dont but what ever............) ... show me an ICE vehicle capable of getting from A to B in a cleaner way than the tesla.... therefore imo all EVs should be taxed at a lower rate than any ICE vehicles.
 
Last edited:
I'm suggesting your theorical 10% would be a massive difference in context of efficiencies.

I already showed you a more efficient saloon that Merc. Theres a reason that's the shape they picked and not the profile of a Hummer.

If you're going to start sacrificing things so you can move a piano at the weekend or stick bikes on the roof. That's got nothing to with a SUV shape. Many SUVs have very poor interior space relative to the exterior dimensions. Some are good, some are poor. It's as much about fashion as practicalities.
 
Cd means nothing without frontal area and the Merc isn’t for sale anyway. It’s quite a compromised interior package by all accounts! Pretty much an irrelevant low value post to be perfectly honest.

10% would be… 10%
 
OspreyO said:
I'm suggesting your theorical 10% would be a massive difference in context of efficiencies.

I already showed you a more efficient saloon that Merc. Theres a reason that's the shape they picked and not the profile of a Hummer.

If you're going to start sacrificing things so you can move a piano at the weekend or stick bikes on the roof. That's got nothing to with a SUV shape. Many SUVs have very poor interior space relative to the exterior dimensions. Some are good, some are poor. It's as much about fashion as practicalities.
Click to expand...
i never said saloons were not more efficient, although picking that merc is some massive cherry picking..... I was suggesting that (counter to what i used to believe) SUVs are not inherently inefficient. (but i accept there is a small penalty but just not one which makes them worth the hate a lot of people give them imo)

and no i am not trying to move a piano what is it with the dishonesty? but as a practical family vehicle for going on a holiday to the seaside with the kids that merc would be pretty rubbish just going on that image...... i agree some SUVs are bought for fashion statements. i doubt that many brand new range rovers you see in london do much work on the farm..... but i doubt anyone buys a 2020 kia niro as a fashion statement!. (that era of e niro is a great vehicle but is fugly imo and trust me when i say there was nothing about fashion when it came to trading in my nissan 350z for a 1.5 diesel 2012 nissan QQ but all about needing something pracitcal, with easy access for getting a baby in and out of the rear without putting your back out, an SUV shape was perfect for that)

hatchbacks and esp estate cars are far more practical than saloons and i do wish there was a better selection of decent sized electric estates (iirc some are coming). I did very nearly buy a brand new MG5 back in the day (due to a ludicrous key worker discount MG offered during covid) but in actual fact it was not as practical as i had hoped. SUVs make it easier to hide a decent sized battery and if designed with efficiency in mind do not make too much of a sacrifice on range .
 
Last edited:
I think modern tech and engines are masking the compromise of a SUV body. Then they stick in some massive engine that will pull a van through the sound barrier or some oil burner that can cross the Sahara on a tankful, while laying down a smokescreen worthly of the Hood at Jutland.

My old Primera GT had a larger and stiffer rear bulkhead and they double weld the seams on racing or rally cars. Which suggests to me the 3 box saloon is an inherently stiffer body shell than a hatchback.

That said no one cares. The Saloon is yesterdays jam.
 
Last edited:
Saloons aren't popular because they're not considered as versatile as hatchbacks, however I prefer them any day over a ev suv resembling a bus.
 
Last edited:
cuke2u said:
Saloons aren't popular because they're not considered as versatile as hatchbacks, however I prefer them any day over a ev suv resembling a bus.
Click to expand...

Shame really. All these EV SUVs are extremely cookie cutter. Even more so than the ones with engines.

It's like just slap some batteries, a motor, a dashboard wide mobile phone and fake leather seats in a box. There we go, 70 grand please. Handles like a shed, but hopefully customers will be saved from death by the ECU.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom