Monkhai

The issue I have is that in winter 6 hours of driving might not become 6 to 7, but more like 8+. That would be a killer. Also @lol-lol the Kia battery is 800V, so 200kW is not actually any worse than a much lower speed on a 400v architecture. TBH it’s not the 200 I need, but I need to know it can average around 100 even in winter.

The car ordered stated the feature already existed and made no mention at all of subject to conditions (which are almost impossible to achieve in UK) in the brochure. Less than 50% nearly always would be beyond poor. Cost to walk away, less than one month rental and probably nothing.

I also thought that and I'm waiting for confirmation in writing that the fast charging will come as an update or not. The car can in theory charge up to 200+ kW, but if the weather isn't right. I had a look at the polestar 2 and have to say it's poor, but also the only polestar dealer is nearly 200 miles away. The ioniq 6 looks interesting, but once bitten... Everything else I have looked at is at least £200 more per month and at least a 9 month, although many with a 12 month+ estimated lead time. The complication is that the diesel has a home to go to already, as a family member needs to replace their car. The usage isn't regular currently and at the moment it's more like 1 trip a week every few weeks, but that was regular and I imagine that it will return to 2-3 days of travel a week. Hoping to convince the office to go up to 32A chargers, but there's no certainty on that.

I have an opinion, but I wanted to get some others here. The EV6 appears to being built a lot earlier than expected, so would be a MY22, rather than MY23. Most of the changes are very minor and include: Optimised seats on the base spec (This doesn't affect us) A bit of carpet in the jumbo box equivalent to quieten it down (Easy to fix) Over the air updates ( I think only for NAV). Battery pre-conditioning when en-route to a rapid charger (Via in built NAV) So the OTA, I don't care about and I am pretty certain it will come via a dealer update to enable it anyway, as the hardware is there. The seat changes wouldn't effect our car and the carpet in the jumbo box is something trivial to add, potentially even by buying the OEM part and applying it. The battery pre-conditioning for rapid charging however is a bit of a bummer and by the looks of things can really make a huge difference to charging speeds for the first 15 minutes in the cold. At the moment online sources suggest there may be an update to enable this, as the car has a heater, but it's not a given and is showing as a new feature on the MY23. Without this, you have to turn off climate control, increase regen and hope the battery is warming up before you get to the charger, as otherwise the charging rate could start as low as 30kW and average 80-100kW. Once the battery is up to 25 degrees, then it can do the full 220kW, so the summer should be fine. Options are: 1) Walk away 2) Take the car and live with it 3) Cancel the order and order an MY23. If we do the latter, then there appears to be a significant price increase (£200 per month) Thought on how much you think it would affect your choices. Driving tends to be mostly short journeys or very long round trips (500-600 miles in a day) The latter depends on the job as to how frequent they are, but typically it's 2-3 days a week with no destination charging or a shorter 400 mile round trip with an office stop of 4-6 hours with destination charging at 3.6Kw for 3-5 daysa week All of these are doable on a single tank of diesel and a 20 minute bathroom break each way is no issue at all. 30 minutes is a push, but not a huge hardship, however even if you assume an average of 50kW charge, then you're looking at 60-80 minutes to get a 75% charge. Obviously this ignores charging will warm the battery so it might speed up, but it's a big concern. If the firmware update is real, then that's great, but if not then it's a vastly different car. What is anyone experience with charging rates in the real world on other cars?

I think I said before, but a small range extender engine, like a generator, with a 5L fuel tank or a LPG/CNG generator and 10KG capacity tank would be enough to get you where you need to be. Most hybrids are carrying a full engine, transmission and 40+ litre fuel tank, such that the engine can drive the wheels. If you're adding 50kg to a car, but saving 150+kg of batteries, meaning you can do 150 real miles easily, and RE up another 75-100 miles, then I've no issue with that. Sadly that' s not the direction most manufactuers are in and the octavia iV is adding nearly 300kg to the equivalent car.

Edit... I should have added, the CR140 is one of the engines affected by dieselgate (You'll have to check if it's all model of the engine), but as such I'd expect a large discount on these and personally I wouldn't touch one. Having run a PD140 for a lot of miles, I liked it a lot, but make sure the Dual Mass Flywheel is not noisy when you test drive them. If it is it's a decent bill to replace and you might as well do the clutch whilst it's all out. If it's a higher mile car at a decent price, that may not be an issue, but just something to be aware of.

I’d suggest a short subscription to ekta and printing out the parts list of areas you’re interested in for the 4x4 and the vrs. The differing part numbers will reveal all 👍 FWIW the 4x4 has higher suspension than a vrs and I think the vrs got upgraded brakes but the 4x4 didn’t.

I imagine some research around a series of layers which might slow a halo riding car but also have a suitable effect on a car on their tyres would be a good thing. Perhaps a first tyre wall close to the circuit and then gravel then a lattery tyre wall and strong last gasp fence. Either way, it's something that will need looking into by those with the equipment to do so.

Good advice to avoid the plonkers has already been given. Just remember no test drive ever has any obligation to then buy the car, becuase you might not like it. Time wise my general thoughts are to decide what you're predominantly use the car for, town/country or motorway. If you're unsure on the car you want and doing initial looks, then do your research and sit in the cars in a showroom and narrow it down to maybe 5-10 you like the cabin/room etc of. Once you have a list of say 5-10 cars then a 30 minute test drive is totally reasonable. When you're down to 2-3 cars then you work out how long it would take you to get to your required road type (town, country or motorway), factor that into the time and add 30 minutes on to the time to get to it. Typically an hour. If you are serious then few companies will refuse you a good length test drive when you can name the 2 or 3 other cars you are thinking of. Of course there is always the exception, such as an certain dealer that refused to let me drive a car because I clearly couldnt' afford it. (I'd come in wearing jeans and a t-shirt)

The outlander was the worst but the data was from the whole fleet and included a number of hybrids. At the end of the day they looked at their data and as the company was paying for fuel made their choices.

If you’d seen the bill for batteries…. Also don’t forget there have been years of fuel card data for hybrids and PHEV, so it’s clear to them the increased fuel spends per mile drive vs pure ice.

The outlander was the vehicle that had them banned from fleet. No range, terrible MPG and charges to replace never charged battery on return. They got VAT relief at a higher rate I believe and hybrids no longer qualify.

kia EV6 GT is not so heavy for an SUV, but definitely not light either. 0-60 of 3.something seconds and beats most super cars in a drag (a Mclaren came back the others didn’t). That did it with the same motors and battery as an AWD ev6 and a few handling upgrades plus a motor inverter upgrade Bently will be fine, because frankly EV are so quick anyway. I imagine they way they will get to 1.5s would be to strip weight as 300-400hp per tonne is already here. I guess time will tell 👍

In a 2 car household I completely understand one EV and one ICE. The issue with the hybrid is the poor MPG vs an equivalent ice on longer journeys. I totally get your point about range anxiety though so yes it’s an issue that needs better infrastructure. On the chargers, few destinations have rapids and a PHEV can be full on even a 7kW very quickly so don’t need to take up the EV dedicated bays all day. Also a good number of rapids have a 22/50kW AC port and I’ve seen plenty of hybrids in the bay sat there for a long time. There are 7kW free next door. Again it comes down to education and a combination of penalties such as idle charging. I’d quite like to see a charge for cars charging at 7kW or less on anything in a dedicated rapid bay. On a phev plus side, they’re far less annoying than an EV/phev/self charging car parked in EV bays and not plugged in 😡

Hybrids are bad, because they tow around a lot of weight when for many journeys they are not taking advantage of the weight. 300kg extra on batteries that affects range from power, on ICE it affects range/MPG on both it affects performance. Charging wise, they are bad when they are sat at a charger bay for hours, idle. A 15 minute charge, or plugging them in when every parking bay has a 10-32Amp charge point is a different matter. Right now they are harming EV adoption, because the infrastructure isn't there and the stuff that is around is very often blocked off by them. The second point is more related to the fact that they shouldn't be sat idle or in charging bays for hours and hours, which they often are here. That is a bonus and the plan here, but not being able to get home, because you can't charge your EV because a hybrid has blocked the charger bay (Even though they were full in less than an hour). Again it's really down to poor infrastructure for electrification. I think the price of batteries may change the course of electrification, but current hybrids are just ICE cars with a load of weight and parts to get a little distance on electric, which as mentioned elsewhere isn't always green. I can respect a 1.5 choice, I can respect somebody going EV, the hybrid route makes no sense to me. At least the plugin hybrids have some plus points, the self charging ones are a joke. I understand it and I've not got a problem with it. I think hearing how great a PHEV is reminds me very much of when I worked with somebody who owned one of the early prius. They were all sanctamonius about how great his MPG was and how the car was amazing. The talk was about how they could get 45-50MPG on a good run, whilst at the same time we were all seeing way over that in the diesels even on a bad run. Fundamentally the advantage of a PHEV is really with the car manufacturer. They charge more, use a smaller engine and a battery, which gives a lower official (But rarely real world) emissions figure. This helps them avoid EU fines and allows them to get higher performance from a smaller engine. It's good, but it's not green. Nothing is zero emissions. My argument is that if people are doing low enough PHEV miles to always be on battery, they should have just gone EV and hired ICE when they needed to go over 250-300 miles. If they're regularly doing longer journeys, then the weight penalty is always there and after the first 20-30 miles your MPG suffers for it. At which point a TDI or TSI is a better bet. The hybrid might be a nice idea, but in reality having both engine and transmission as well as battery and motor is a huge weight penalty. In reality you would better off doing a range extender (i3 Rx) so the engine never drives the wheels, which would save loads of weight in transmission and a smaller engine as a generator only. You could also swap petrol for CNG or Autogas etc and have a less heavy generator. Really as above, I think the current and previous generation of PHEV, bar a small number (i3 Rx) are greenwashing. The choice is fine, but the PHEV shouldn't receive tax breaks for being green.

Plan.. doubt many in gov would know what one was if it hit them

You are indeed correct, especially on the islands. The vehicle fueling infrastructure is pretty weak however, as even if you can fill the truck and deliver the goods, getting back again is the problem because there isn't enough infrastructure elsewhere. The same chicken and egg problem. If the governments came up with a plan for hydrogen at lorry stops on the motorways, then suddently fuel cell trucks would be much more viable. It's probably make a bigger dent in emissions too, just like fitting similar to the diesel electric trains they just purchased so they don't have to electrify the rail lines all the way.

Just to answer the above as to why I chose the 1.5TSI... With the battery charged yes it might be quick It's using both in the video. 0-100 in 6.5 with batteries is great, but it's not available unless you're using both power sources, which isn't there most of the time. From the skoda data I posted above. 1.5TSI max speed = 139 mph and acceleration if 8.4s IV max speed = 137 mph and acceleration is 7.8s That's pretty comparible.

I think a fair few of the EV were the early ones, as deliveries are a bit sporadic. I read the MY23 change is happening about now, so I imagine they made a MY22 batch or few, then shut the lines down to move to MY23 production with a few fixes/improvements in it. Charging wise, 7kW for 40 minutes and the always be charging is a good policy, although probably harder for those taking 50%+ out of the batteries in a single stint. I really think the UK government and devolved administrations as a whole needs to spend some time and money planning and creating destination charging planning requirements, rapid charging on the motorways, possibly toll charging (to replace fuel tax) and also hydrogen infrastructure for freight etc. It would create work and growth at a time when we will probably need both. And that is a d**k move, which goes to re-inforce that we will need a combination of education of charger types and idle charges. Why buy a fast car, stick it on a 50 and leave it there for hours, when even at only 50 it would be full from empty in 2 hours.

There is nothing wrong with electric as a means of propulsion, but yes current battery technologies are questionable in terms of how they are produced and recycled. The problems with battery production etc still apply to hybrids as do the problems with the source of electric generation. Did they take in the emissions of servicing and replacement parts on ICE engines? I don't think batteries are great, it's what we have and personally prefer to see hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, but that requires green hydrogen generation and distribution to be put in place, which sadly are not there in this country. As for TED talks, I'm not one for them. They don't appear to require rigerous evidence (not that there is for all of this subject) nor do they appear to require a declaration of vested interests. Many presenters on many subjects seem to have a vested interest, so using a TED talk as fact isn't something I would do. The chap giving the talk you linked to works for this company, who don't have a lot of detail around what they actually do, but are texas based and consult for many industries. As such I'll take it with a pinch of salt. https://www.swri.org/who-we-are/history#slideshow-2 According to the guys profile they consult for the auto industry (OK so who paid for the research which was used as the basis of data for the talk?) https://tedxsanantonio.com/2019-fall-speakers/graham-conway/ What's funny to me is the inconsistancies. On one graph electric is lower emissions when you exclude electric CO2, but much higher when you include generation CO2, however hybrid is lower when you add in the same electric (Which is not consistent if electric is bad). The hybrid requires more CO2 to create (not shown on the latter graph) and yet the generation is so bad that the EV is eeeevil, but not the hybrid, where electric improves things. This is also based on burning coal, gas and oil to generate electric (which just doesn't happen elsewhere to the same extent). If you look at his profile he states that 64% of the fuel comes from fossil fuel in the US. So where are the data souces and what percentages would be replaced if for example you looked at other countries that are not hitched to coal/oil for electric. I mean if you look at this data from the UK from 2016 it was only around 50% then, and most of that was gas, which is far cleaner than coal and oil. https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/our-work/generation/electricity-generation.html The UK has improved it's mix since 2016 then and even a drop from 64-54% would drastically change the graphs. https://www.edie.net/renewable-generation-overtakes-fossil-fuels-in-uk-electricity-for-first-time/ So now we're at around 40% and dropping, which again changes the graphs. But what about people who use home solar and the chargers with solar on the roof? Again that's going to change the mix. Just looking at the talk and the profiles, which don't match. For example from the profile.... But the graph during that talk shows something else in terms of the miles needed to break even, pretty much double and then some. So which is wrong? I do agree emissions of manufacturing is a big deal, but at least for EV production it's come down a lot very quickly as people are using solar to power plants. That of course can apply to any manufacturing, but I know EV makers are doing this. Again power generation mix is a big deal too, but using the US, where the supreme court just ruled the EPA can't make states reduce emissions as it would affect the states and the power, coal and oil companies in those states shows it's a bad example. As renewables and other low CO2 generation goes up and where people generate their own electric, it's going to be much better. In terms of ICE vehicles, did they include the embedded costs of surveying and locating oil, simulation of the wells, extraction, refining, transport of the fuel or just the CO2 from burning it? They don't actually say, which is where my issue comes. If you're going to make points at a public talk, provide data so it can be peer reviewed.

Sounds to me like those 50kW chargers can't deal with the 800V system in some way. I wonder if they were not built to deliver 50kW for the entire charge, but as the 800V systems do some clever thigns when 400 is delivered they can suck 50kW for the full charge. Be interesting to find out what causes that issue and if it's a hardware trip during charge or a software lock out post charge.

That is exactly what I am saying yes. keep them on chargers that are 7kW or less because they can’t charge faster than that. My peeve is when they park up and leave a car all day when it’ll be full in an hour. If a hybrid uses a rapid charger as it has a ccs port, then there should be a massive surcharge and another charger after a certain time. The resources are not there to move to BEV for charging, so using a public fast/rapid charger to gain some cheap miles is not acceptable in my book. when every parking bay has 3.6/7kW and rapid chargers are a couple per floor then it’s different. FWIW I drive a diesel, have an EV on order and am put off when all the chargers are taken all day by hybrids. I’m considering cancelling and buying a new diesel. If that goes for lots of people you will never replace ice. Also the report I linked to in the auto express on emissions by an independent group makes for interesting reading.

Up front, hybrid drivers using the limited public chargers is a pet peeve as they block cars that need a charge to get home. I’m also sick of certain brands greenwashing hybrids as the answer to everything. Fleet wise most people I knew never charged them, and even those that did ran out of juice in 15 miles on full electric mode. To do 60 miles in a PHEV, there is no way to do that in a single stint on pure electric. I don’t think I’m missing something here but I may be. BIK wise, our company said they lost the tax relief on it and that new cars were no longer permitted. Personal BIK lower until 2025 is good to have. Is it still at 2%?

But it is nothing like a 2.0 for most of the time. No electrical power and it’s a 1.4 pulling an extra 300kg, which is most of the time. Even with electric it is no 2.0 as it’s about 20% heavier. My point it they are not green. If the OP is happy with the car so be it and I am genuinely pleased they are. A phev however is not a solution that is good for the environment.

That’s fine, but an Enyaq, EV6, ID4, ID3, and many EV would all do the 120 miles there and back without needing a charge (Nearly all EV could do it with a top up at the other end). Comparing a cars mpg to an SUV mpg isn’t reflecting that gain from hybrid, but far more from the aero/mass side of it. You moving from an SUV to a car was a great move for reducing fuel costs and your carbon emissions (not Inc making the car) I understand your reasoning, I’m just saying that from an environmental point of view a hybrid makes almost zero sense. Poor MPG vs the same car without the battery, higher costs, the disadvantages of ice (fuel, servicing, road tax) and only very limited advantages of battery, but with the weight penalty. An iV is approx £32k a number of 200+ mile EV are close to that and plenty under £40k. Comparison of octavia SEL in 1.5 petrol and IV trim (petrol on left IV on right) You can see a big price jump of approx £7k and approx 300kg weight gain. £7k pays for about 35000miles of fuel even at £2/litre. The WLTP figures for the hybrid are of course fiction in the real world.