Hi all,

 

Had a bit of a look but couldn't find much info on the engine options for this gorgeous new car. All they seemed to have mentioned was that it was gonna be a mild hybrid.

Is there gonna be a 2.0 TDi hybrid? 🧐

scroll to about 18mins

 

Should be the same combo of 1.4TSi plus electric motor found in Golf GTE and Passat GTE models but uprated to give a combined power output of 242bhp if the rumours are to be believed with low co2 and electric only range between 30-40 miles hopefully. Same as face lift Mk3 Superb about to feature as well.

2 minutes ago, skoda2019 said:

scroll to about 18mins

 

Thanks for the video. So essentially only the smaller (7DSG) petrols will be hybrid, nothing else. Bit of a shame really, was looking forward to a 100mpg diesel 😂

Rightly or wrongly diesel is dead on its ar*e. Absolutely no danger of there being a diesel hybrid.

A better question would be why on earth is there no pure electric version from launch, VAG already have the tech there, surely it would just be plug and play as is every other drive train option in the line up... 

Edited 11 November, 20196 yr by Gmac983

Just now, Gmac983 said:

Diesel is dead on its ar*e. Absolutely no danger of there being a diesel hybrid.

A better question would be why on earth is there no pure electric version from launch, VAG already have the tech there, surely it would just be plug and play as every other drive train option in the line up... 

They said a few years back that this generation of ICEs will be their last, so I'd expect it fully electric stuff coming out within 5 or so years. Hopefully they realize that electric cars are a joke before then.

1 minute ago, Gmac983 said:

Diesel is dead on its ar*e. Absolutely no danger of there being a diesel hybrid.

A better question would be why on earth is there no pure electric version from launch, VAG already have the tech there, surely it would just be plug and play as every other drive train option in the line up... 

 

I guess this chassis isn't quite 100% electric ready yet. The ID.3 chasssis on the other hand is designed from the bottom up with the batteries in the floor.

2 minutes ago, Tyr2016 said:

 

I guess this chassis isn't quite 100% electric ready yet. The ID.3 chasssis on the other hand is designed from the bottom up with the batteries in the floor.

That's probably the best answer. 

3 minutes ago, marfrohun said:

Hopefully they realize that electric cars are a joke before then.

 

Joke or not, whatever your view, that's the way the tech and more critically the legislation is going.

Personally I would have liked to have seen a bigger push on hydrogen fuel cells. 

15 minutes ago, Tyr2016 said:

I guess this chassis isn't quite 100% electric ready yet. The ID.3 chasssis on the other hand is designed from the bottom up with the batteries in the floor

 

Whilst dynamically its way better to have the batteries stashed away under the floor, better in terms of practically, better for lower centre of gravity and better weight distribution. 

Many manufacturers have already adapted their existing vehicles to be hybrid or full electric, for example the e-golf. 

Edited 11 November, 20196 yr by Gmac983

10 minutes ago, Gmac983 said:

 

Joke or not, whatever your view, that's the way the tech and more critically the legislation is going.

Personally I would have liked to have seen a bigger push on hydrogen fuel cells. 

I agree with you on that one, hydrogen is the only thing that could convince me to switch.

Frankly hydrogen fuel cells, with a small battery for a short plug in range (like current ICE hybrids) are the way forward.

 

If they were available with hydrogen at fuel stations I would run one right now. I bet most of the other long distance work drivers would do the same.

 

this would immediately clean up local air quality with much smaller infrastructure change costs.

 

batteries are super nasty to mine lithium for, to create and to try and recycle. Never mind the difficulties with dealing with battery fires.

 

then add pathetic range before a 1hour recharge as opposed to a 3 minute recharge....

 

we have no infrastructure to charge all the required cars to make a difference.

2 minutes ago, cheezemonkhai said:

Frankly hydrogen fuel cells, with a small battery for a short plug in range (like current ICE hybrids) are the way forward.

 

If they were available with hydrogen at fuel stations I would run one right now. I bet most of the other long distance work drivers would do the same.

 

this would immediately clean up local air quality with much smaller infrastructure change costs.

 

batteries are super nasty to mine lithium for, to create and to try and recycle. Never mind the difficulties with dealing with battery fires.

 

then add pathetic range before a 1hour recharge as opposed to a 3 minute recharge....

 

we have no infrastructure to charge all the required cars to make a difference.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Despite it's current limitations, hydrogen is the logical step forward.

I'd run one if it was Hydrogen, its only waste product is air and water, the water, although small amounts produced could be stored and used to make, wait for it, more Hydrogen, so not only are they clean but make their own fuel.

 

The infrastructure is ready and waiting it's the big oil companys and goverments that is stopping it all.

Only Toyota and Hyundai trying to develop Hydrogen fuelled vehicles at the moment and even after grants they are too expensive to purchase.

Honda have one too.

 

Audi/vw are working on it.

Daimler (Merc) have one, it’s used in place of diesel generators in some data centres.

 

it is old and proven tech.

 

agree prices are high, but so were the first electric cars. Remember the gWizz and first Tesla.

 

they would rapidly come down with scale.

Edited 11 November, 20196 yr by cheezemonkhai

Petrol : 1 litre, 1.5 (manuals) and 2 litre 4x4 DSG

Mild hybrid (48v starter) 1.0 and 1.5 DSG

CNG

plug in hybrid

diesel (2 litres) with assortment of power outputs

 

The new diesels look unhappy with WLTP tests, for CO2 one is showing as 98 under NEDC and 141 under WLTP 

https://www.skoda-storyboard.com/en/press-kits/skoda-octavia-press-kit/engines-great-choice-of-alternative-powertrains/

 

Petrol capacity 45 litre (40 litre in Plug in), 9 litre in CNG

 

Edited 11 November, 20196 yr by SurreyJohn

That’s the dsg more than the engine I think.

On 11/11/2019 at 22:38, SurreyJohn said:

Petrol : 1 litre, 1.5 (manuals) and 2 litre 4x4 DSG

Mild hybrid (48v starter) 1.0 and 1.5 DSG

CNG

plug in hybrid

diesel (2 litres) with assortment of power outputs

 

The new diesels look unhappy with WLTP tests, for CO2 one is showing as 98 under NEDC and 141 under WLTP 

https://www.skoda-storyboard.com/en/press-kits/skoda-octavia-press-kit/engines-great-choice-of-alternative-powertrains/

 

Petrol capacity 45 litre (40 litre in Plug in), 9 litre in CNG

 

 

 

If the 1.0 and 1.5 petrol units are "Evo" does that mean they get the 12V belt driven hybrid tech?

On 11/11/2019 at 21:13, marfrohun said:

Couldn't have said it better myself. Despite it's current limitations, hydrogen is the logical step forward.

 

From a convenience point of view, maybe, but how do you overcome the fact that hydrogen is a highly inefficient way of storing energy? Don't forget you can't just dig it out of the ground.

 

If one is promoting hydrogen as being "greener" than fossil fuels, you have to assume that you are using renewably-generated electricity to make it.* This would be fine if you could do this with 100% efficiency, but even producing hydrogen efficiently (and then compressing it for use in vehicles) using electricity the overall process is only 60% efficient. That also assumes that you can produce it where the vehicle is filled rather than transporting it there which would further reduce efficiency.**

 

Once you have the energy source stored in the car, whether hydrogen or electricity stored in batteries, there are further sources of inefficiency but some are exactly the same for both sources of energy, such as efficiency of the electric motors and frictional losses in the drivetrain. There is an additional efficiency loss for hydrogen fuel cells, however, as they are only 80% efficient at extracting the energy from the hydrogen. This ends up producing an overall comparative efficiency of 48% (60% x 80%) when compared with using electricity stored in batteries, which is about 90% efficient.

 

Unless I have forgotten something in the comparison, using hydrogen as the energy storage medium ends up being approximately 53% (48/90) of the efficiency of using electricity stored in batteries. That means that hydrogen will be almost twice as expensive as electricity per unit of energy used in propelling the vehicle. Are people going to want to pay that penalty?

 

* If one generates electricity using more conventional emissions-generating forms of fuel the comparison if more complicated, but what's the point of considering that since if there's no need to be emissions-free then we will just stick with fossil fuels used directly in vehicles.

 

** In reality producing it at filling stations is highly problematic from a safety point of view, but for the sake of not complicating things let's forget about that!

10 hours ago, nickcoll said:

Unless I have forgotten something in the comparison, using hydrogen as the energy storage medium ends up being approximately 53% (48/90) of the efficiency of using electricity stored in batteries.

But how efficient is getting the energy stored into batteries, typically to fully charge a 1000Ah battery you need to put in 1400Ah - which makes a battery 71% efficient at storing energy.

 

So the efficiency difference isn't as great as 53% to 100%...

40 minutes ago, PetrolDave said:

But how efficient is getting the energy stored into batteries, typically to fully charge a 1000Ah battery you need to put in 1400Ah - which makes a battery 71% efficient at storing energy.

 

So the efficiency difference isn't as great as 53% to 100%...

 

The figure I have found for the energy efficiency of batteries in car applications is 90%, as I quoted in my post and used in my calculations.

 

Even if it was 71% that would still mean that hydrogen is only 2/3 as efficient (48/71) as electricity used directly.

 

Or to put it another way, 50% more expensive.

 

If it's the overall efficiency figure I understand it to be (53% as efficient), hydrogen would be nearly twice as expensive as electricity used directly.

Edited 22 November, 20196 yr by nickcoll

22 minutes ago, nickcoll said:

The figure I have found for the energy efficiency of batteries in car applications is 90%, as I quoted in my post and used in my calculations.

Found on the internet?

 

I have spent most of the last 20 years working on battery systems, and despite what battery manufacturers may say in practice the charging efficiency  was always much closer to 71% whatever the battery type (the variation between types was less than 5%).

 

So your twice as expensive doesn't agree with my practical real world experience - we may have to agree to disagree?

15 minutes ago, PetrolDave said:

Found on the internet?

 

I have spent most of the last 20 years working on battery systems, and despite what battery manufacturers may say in practice the charging efficiency  was always much closer to 71% whatever the battery type (the variation between types was less than 5%).

 

So your twice as expensive doesn't agree with my practical real world experience - we may have to agree to disagree?

 

Well, as I said in my last post, assuming we use your 71% figure hydrogen would still be 50% more expensive. Whether twice as expensive or 50% more (or somewhere in between), that is still a very big penalty.

 

One other factor I did not mention is the opportunity to pretty easily recover energy wasted during braking with an electric vehicle. That will further increase the relative efficiency of an EV.

2 hours ago, nickcoll said:

One other factor I did not mention is the opportunity to pretty easily recover energy wasted during braking with an electric vehicle. That will further increase the relative efficiency of an EV.

Until we start talking about the distribution system losses in getting the electricity from the point of generation to the point of charging the EV... and the lack of sufficient generating capacity when most vehicles are EVs.

 

There is no single answer to the replacement of fossil fuel transport, EVs have a part to play and I think there is evidence that hydrogen fuel cells do to.

 

But we've got a long way off topic...

 

Given the current engine options for the Octavia IV I would certainly have the 1.5 hybrid as my #1 choice.