Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,744
- Location
- Shakespeare’s County
Don’t understand that word. Please don’t get the impression I work in a dealership or something either.Stop simping for your employer lol
Don’t understand that word. Please don’t get the impression I work in a dealership or something either.Stop simping for your employer lol
Like I said. When was jpaul or journey an authority on anything engineering.I think folk are just dubious at the outlandish claims
You seem like the guy that is high maintenance on a night out.You seem to be the kind of guy in the pub that one day would be sound and chatty, the next day you’d get a punch in the face.![]()
On aerodynamics, despite the constraint of a ICE platform mercedes have managed competive cd and drag factors versus m3 with its 0.23cd and small frontal area.
The tesla S versus merc CLA250 had 14hp vs 16p @70mph to comabt drag so merc was only 14% worse, which should be indicative of range difference on m3 vs eqc too
Well it is the second time you've made some weird comment about resorting to physical violence because you've got triggered by my post; so you are absolutely right - I wouldn't come near you.You wouldn’t get that far![]()
well I was thinking of earlier aero posts - tesla S using 150W/mile against drag @70 which takes some 250W from the battery,
do I see drag factor and frontal on a Range Rover bettering those, even with a taycan type gearbox & excellent regen, strewamlined body.
(WLTP cycle average is much slower on average, but it's extra urban that counts ?)
Well it is the second time you've made some weird comment about resorting to physical violence because you've got triggered by my post; so you are absolutely right - I wouldn't come near you.
Alright internet hard man (y)Stop simping for being a simp.
Just stop second guessing stuff with statements that actually end with question marks, I can’t really understand what the above quote is really saying. Would make for more valued conversation rather than fact outbursts we tend to see.
jpaul said:
DGX I'm a cybernetic organism: living tissue over a metal endoskeleton.
So much math fail. At 70mph you are covering a mile in 51 seconds. So 150W/mile would be 150/0.85 =176Wm from the battery.well I was thinking of earlier aero posts - tesla S using 150W/mile against drag @70 which takes some 250W from the battery,
do I see drag factor and frontal on a Range Rover bettering those, even with a taycan type gearbox & excellent regen, strewamlined body.
(WLTP cycle average is much slower on average, but it's extra urban that counts ?)
a 4.5m/kwh SUV would be awesome
when you put the 150 in the context of other losses though eg VThat’s terrible road load efficiency if 250W only 150kW gets to the wheels. Taycan gearbox as nothing to do with normal efficiency either, it’s just extra mass.
I think you are missing the point TBH. lots of people pay 80k on a new car. not something I would ever do, but I am glad people do as someone has to take that 1st 3 year new car tax so people like myself can get a more affordable car.Oh aye lad. You'll save about 200 quid a year if you buy this £80k car.