When are you going fully electric?

Tenzo said:
Press points to a Q4 Quattro 50, with a 295bhp power train etc. Maybe it’s just not released yet
Click to expand...

The 299 PS is the Q4 50 e-tron. Just re-read press release.

b0rn2sk8 said:
I don’t think there are any AWD MEB platform cars out there yet. The etron Q4 is effectively an ID.4 in a different set of clothes. All the underpinnings are the same.
Click to expand...

Which is AWD.... The AWD uplift has allow axle gross mass for the ID3 to now have the 82kWH pack with 5 seats. _ it didnt at launch.

Th ID4 GTX is basically the Q4 etron.

Volkswagen-ID.4_GTX-2022-1280-0f.jpg
 
Last edited:
b0rn2sk8 said:
The etron Q4 is effectively an ID.4 in a different set of clothes. All the underpinnings are the same.
Click to expand...

yes that makes it a bit dissappointing with respect to power/weight/handling, although the premium seems less 42/44/48 Keuro id4/enyaq/q4;
even on the external looks I'm ambivolant id4/enyaq are more avant-garde - Audi could have used this as an opportunity for a brand, look shift.
had linked this before, but sticks in my mind - his reviewing style is less partisan than many (who never criticize too much - like the rate my takeaway guy)
The Volkswagen ID.4 Is A Disappointing Electric Car (For Now)

edit: sorry the q4 is the duckling
Audi Q4 e-tron vs Skoda Enyaq vs VW ID.4 | VW Group Electric SUVs Comparison
 
Last edited:
Jonnycoupe said:
Why would Audi need a "brand/look shift" though? Huge desirability to get one on the drive with current design language, why change?
Click to expand...

True, my wife’s all over the Q4 for looks and practicality. Certainly hits a target audience.

In general, if I ignore Power output and 0-60 times, what else is key in the EV world?

Battery (what’s good, what’s not?)
Range (pick out real world vs WLTP lies)
Charging speed (assume 270kw best but not widely available)

Anything else?
 
Jonnycoupe said:
Why would Audi need a "brand/look shift" though? Huge desirability to get one on the drive with current design language, why change?
Click to expand...
I suppose audi demographic are middle aged people, but if they want younger generation to aspire to them, it doesn't work for me - "Future is an attitude" lol
give me an old audi coupe b3/b4 anyday - mate had one.

edit: stupid me - didn't realise it was Giorgetto Giugiaro.
 
Last edited:
Tenzo said:
True, my wife’s all over the Q4 for looks and practicality. Certainly hits a target audience.

In general, if I ignore Power output and 0-60 times, what else is key in the EV world?

Battery (what’s good, what’s not?)
Range (pick out real world vs WLTP lies)
Charging speed (assume 270kw best but not widely available)

Anything else?
Click to expand...

Looks, cool tech, does it look like a VAN/SUV. :D
 
Yeah that's pretty mad, Hitachi Finance backing is something like £2bn before, so buying Electric Highway with the tired kit and Moto MSA isnt a huge amount on top of that I wouldn't of thought and gives a much clearer view of the revenue return.
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
Interesting, gridserve must have some decent backing behind them.
Click to expand...

Yep, and the are obviously very forward looking with the larger charging hubs as well, and the sustainable energy they are providing. It's a land grab though effectively, how long before BP and Shell etc bother to put chargers on their motorway forecourts? If Gridserve can make a big enough dent fast enough, then they'll be on the back foot, as the chargers at the forecourts will be then considered an inconvenience due to being too far away from the main buildings etc.
 
I know the batteries are proprietary and part of the IP of the vehicle manufacturers.

It's just a shame there couldn't have been a standard for batteries that could be made modular or to a certain size, so that you could go to a battery bank and just drop the batter out and put the new one in, and off you go, whilst the batteries are trickle charged over time. I realise this is not how this business model is designed, but to my very simple mind it could have been such a fantastic win, with no long waits at "charging" stations.
 
Freefaller said:
I know the batteries are proprietary and part of the IP of the vehicle manufacturers.

It's just a shame there couldn't have been a standard for batteries that could be made modular or to a certain size, so that you could go to a battery bank and just drop the batter out and put the new one in, and off you go, whilst the batteries are trickle charged over time. I realise this is not how this business model is designed, but to my very simple mind it could have been such a fantastic win, with no long waits at "charging" stations.
Click to expand...

This is a concept that seems a good idea on the face of it but once you really start to drill into the logistics and engineering of how you can safely and quickly swap a few hundred kilos of battery in and out of a car, the packaging requirements of the car to do so, the space required in swapping stations, the equipment required, the maintenance of that, the staffing of it etc. etc. it's easy to see why everybody pursued the charging idea. It's vastly easier to build an infrastructure if all people need to do is a stick a few chargers in the car park or the back of a petrol station, rather than install some monster battery swapper.
 
I think the engineering of it is quite simple for the moving of batteries, but it does have a big cost associated with it. I still think the biggest obstacle from what I've seen in the industry is still the proprietary nature of the batteries, charging, and power management capabilities. The batteries are so smart now and are at the core of the car and effectively the car has been built around the battery now.

However you also make a fair point, it's easier to connect a charger to a cable than a battery flowline below ground (or above ground). But just because it's easier doesn't mean it's the most sensible.

However, you're right of course, economically it's by far the most simple and cost effective way of doing it. I just feel that there was a chance at standardisation that was missed that would have made the adoption of battery powered vehicles much quicker.
 
Freefaller said:
I think the engineering of it is quite simple for the moving of batteries, but it does have a big cost associated with it. I still think the biggest obstacle from what I've seen in the industry is still the proprietary nature of the batteries, charging, and power management capabilities. The batteries are so smart now and are at the core of the car and effectively the car has been built around the battery now.

However you also make a fair point, it's easier to connect a charger to a cable than a battery flowline below ground (or above ground). But just because it's easier doesn't mean it's the most sensible.

However, you're right of course, economically it's by far the most simple and cost effective way of doing it. I just feel that there was a chance at standardisation that was missed that would have made the adoption of battery powered vehicles much quicker.
Click to expand...

This is where 'best engineering solution' comes face to face with 'most workable solution' and 'most affordable solution', a challenge that engineering of every discipline faces. On a scale such as this, something like chargers that can be incredibly easily and cheaply scaled from 'a few here and there' all the way up to 'thousands of them everywhere' with a largely decentralised responsibility for installing and expanding were always going to win over something bigger, more expensive etc. like a swapping station, simply because it was quicker and easier for everyone to be able to just get on with and start building them if nothing else. They're also less restrictive in the future if you decide to change something, as they'll be easier to modify with a plug adapter or new leads etc. compared to deciding we need to update the design of the modular battery in 10 years time.

It's a compromise we deal with all the time - does the client want a perfect solution that never gets built because it takes too long and too many people to agree what that actually is or do they want a compromised solution that actually gets built sometime soon? 50% of something is better than 100% of nothing. This I can only imagine is even more difficult to navigate when there isn't even an actual 'client' to decide what they want in this case.
 
Yeah I work in the engineering space (for InnovateUK actually), where we're really pushing to change the engineering scale from minimal viable product to minimal viable commitment - it's a big paradigm shift that needs to happen, and it's all about money ultimately and profitability rather than necessarily "the best thing to do".

I completely agree with what you'er saying - that's why as someone who works in shaping policy (I do sometimes miss doing pure engineering!) I'm pushing hard to change these behaviours, but politics, money and the right thing to do isn't always aligned!
 
There have been some automated battery swap station concepts reported to be in development on some EV websites.

The problem I see is that it appears to take 15-25 mins to swap a battery and the stations can only handle one car at a time. As EV’s get more popular these stations would be overwhelmed with queues forming. The cost to require land for more stations would be very prohibitive.

Also, public charging speeds are improving and 20mins is the time it takes for newer EV’s to charge from 10-80%.
 
Freefaller said:
Yeah I work in the engineering space (for InnovateUK actually), where we're really pushing to change the engineering scale from minimal viable product to minimal viable commitment - it's a big paradigm shift that needs to happen, and it's all about money ultimately and profitability rather than necessarily "the best thing to do".

I completely agree with what you'er saying - that's why as someone who works in shaping policy (I do sometimes miss doing pure engineering!) I'm pushing hard to change these behaviours, but politics, money and the right thing to do isn't always aligned!
Click to expand...

Engineering these days feels more like a game of navigating client politics than actually being able to get on with engineering stuff half the time :p
 
SDK^ said:
There have been some automated battery swap station concepts reported to be in development on some EV websites.

The problem I see is that it appears to take 15-25 mins to swap a battery and the stations can only handle one car at a time. As EV’s get more popular these stations would be overwhelmed with queues forming. The cost to require land for more stations would be very prohibitive.

Also, public charging speeds are improving and 20mins is the time it takes for newer EV’s to charge from 10-80%.
Click to expand...

True - but is there still these requirements for fast charging: power requirements, heat and longevity of batteries or is that now irrelevant for the lifespan of the car?

Kenai said:
Engineering these days feels more like a game of navigating client politics than actually being able to get on with engineering stuff half the time :p
Click to expand...

Ain't that the truth!
 
The standard batteries almost force standard vehicle proportions/widths, crash mechanism, charging profiles, standardised power electronics, stand power performance from the EDU, the cooling design etc etc. So take always a lot of the tuning for what the car needs to be or what attributes the OEM need.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom