EV general discussion

jpaul said:
surprised me too - but that wasn't what the video I linked showed ...
if you have any kind of non-straight road or undulations weight costs, for starters.

e: V I'll add my summary of what I think video says - you loose 1/3 of range with a tonne of sand in the back
Click to expand...

It’s bi directional energy. Afraid I’m not as educated on this as my YouTube skills are poor, I only have a degree in aerospace engineering.
 
Jonnycoupe said:
It’s bi directional energy.
Click to expand...
energy used going around corners, changing momentum of that payload isn't recoverable (even on the return journey - sorry)
banking an airplane to turn you need to accelerate.

e: afterthought : wltp calculation is based on a straight virtual road !
 
Last edited:
jpaul said:
energy used going around corners, changing momentum of that payload isn't recoverable (even on the return journey - sorry)
banking an airplane to turn you need to accelerate.

e: afterthought : wltp calculation is based on a straight virtual road !
Click to expand...

Yea momentum is the big difference. More weight means you need more energy to accelerate, stop and change direction. Weight is all bad when it comes to performance and efficiency really (and ride quality when it comes to cars).

OFC manufacturers always find a way to lie manipulate tests and results to get the on-paper stats they like, but that's another topic.
 
Last edited:
I’ll have to do a video of how easy it is, but they are boring videos?

Leicester Forest east is a disaster, proper error of planning.

jpaul said:
energy used going around corners, changing momentum of that payload isn't recoverable (even on the return journey - sorry)
banking an airplane to turn you need to accelerate.

e: afterthought : wltp calculation is based on a straight virtual road !
Click to expand...

No just heavier cars have more kinetic energy that you can recover with regen rather than heating up brake disks, it is recoverable!! Don’t get to carried away on the aerospace bit jpaul, maybe just the engineering…

1 tonne of sand would break the GVM of pretty much any car so range effect is the last of your worries.
 
It’s not really ‘the state of the U.K. charging network’ is it though. Leister Forest services is the exception, not the norm due to its location and national grids/their DNOs general incompetence of getting new power to the site at a reasonable cost.

They deliberately stop there all the time to get some content that people will click on. Those people clicking it are only doing so to reinforce their established anti EV views.

Just off the motorway at the next junction is instavolt, Sainsbury and Tesla with 27 CCS rapid chargers between them and the best part is you don’t have to go to a scabby welcome break service station.
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
It’s not really ‘the state of the U.K. charging network’ is it though. Leister Forest services is the exception, not the norm due to its location and national grids/their DNOs general incompetence of getting new power to the site at a reasonable cost.

They deliberately stop there all the time to get some content that people will click on. Those people clicking it are only doing so to reinforce their established anti EV views.

Just off the motorway at the next junction is instavolt, Sainsbury and Tesla with 27 CCS rapid chargers between them and the best part is you don’t have to go to a scabby welcome break service station.
Click to expand...
It's definitely content creators drumming up clicks

Not sure what can be done about it though, most people who actually have an EV don't really have many issues these days finding charging but the media narrative is skewed the other way
 
Nasher said:
Yea momentum is the big difference. More weight means you need more energy to accelerate, stop and change direction. Weight is all bad when it comes to performance and efficiency really (and ride quality when it comes to cars).

OFC manufacturers always find a way to lie manipulate tests and results to get the on-paper stats they like, but that's another topic.
Click to expand...
given (I think) 1l of petrol contains the equivalent of 9kwh of electricity

taking a somewhat like for like equivalent of a petrol golf GTi Vs a VW ID3, my money would be on the ID3 being more efficient in any mixed real world driving , even with any increased weight

my pre coffee morning hangover maths tells me the ID3 would be getting (being conservative) at least equivalent of 35miles (and I suspect ID3 owners would accuse me of being overly negative ) using the same energy as a l of petrol

I don't see a golf GTi coming close
 
Last edited:
chanjy said:
It's definitely content creators drumming up clicks

Not sure what can be done about it though, most people who actually have an EV don't really have many issues these days finding charging but the media narrative is skewed the other way
Click to expand...

Clicks is money, Harry metcalfe started a few months back on anti EV stuff. So there must be bloody good money to be made. I wouldn’t be surprised bad faith actors are sponsoring some of the social media misinformation.
 
Tinders said:
Clicks is money, Harry metcalfe started a few months back on anti EV stuff. So there must be bloody good money to be made. I wouldn’t be surprised bad faith actors are sponsoring some of the social media misinformation.
Click to expand...

Can’t remember last time Rypt posted here let alone this thread yet it’s just a link to a YouTube. No personal experience either way doesn’t really offer any value.
 
bigmike20vt said:
given (I think) 1l of petrol contains the equivalent of 9kwh of electricity

taking a somewhat like for like equivalent of a petrol golf GTi Vs a VW ID3, my money would be on the ID3 being more efficient in any mixed real world driving , even with any increased weight

my pre coffee morning hangover maths tells me the ID3 would be getting (being conservative) at least equivalent of 35miles (and I suspect ID3 owners would accuse me of being overly negative ) using the same energy as a l of petrol

I don't see a golf GTi coming close
Click to expand...
a ICE could also do 35miles on a litre if you put enough potential energy into it. (On a mountain) much like a load of energy goes into making a battery.

Real world, what matters is the cost of a kwh vs a litre.
 
Simon said:
a ICE could also do 35miles on a litre if you put enough potential energy into it. (On a mountain) much like a load of energy goes into making a battery.

Real world, what matters is the cost of a kwh vs a litre.
Click to expand...
I was suggesting a real world usage not sticking the ice car at the top of a mountain and letting it free wheel down.

cost per kWh of energy is certainly a financial consideration but if that was all that mattered there would not be any pressure to move away from fossil fuels.
 
bigmike20vt said:
I was suggesting a real world usage not sticking the ice car at the top of a mountain and letting it free wheel down.

cost per kWh of energy is certainly a financial consideration but if that was all that mattered there would not be any pressure to move away from fossil fuels.
Click to expand...
If the financial argument is compelling enough there would be no need for pressure at all.

Listening to a guy getting a grilling off his colleagues about his Tesla (or Telsa as one seemed to think it was called) because he'd driven them all to a conference but didn't have enough juice to get them back home. He'd planned to disappear during the Q&A session to get it charged up and they were all using this as a reason that EVs were no good.

He was outnumbered so was just laughing along but I did feel for the guy as he clearly was only trying to avoid them a stop on the way back home and the hotel (with no charging) was chosen by someone else.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom