5 minutes ago, Ootohere said:

I know the price of everything because i pay and no one is helping pay for charging and i am not driving as a commercial / business user.

Funnily they should know as there are Accountants / HMRS involved. 

I know the price too which is why I tend to stick to Ionity or Tesla as theyare cheapest. Even as a business driver because we now only get 20p per mile I hunt down the cheapest fuel sources because the mileage rate doesn't cover the full cost any more and you have to remember to fill out a form at the end of the year to get the tax back from HMRC. But that also involves working out how many business miles you did. I spent an hour of my employer's time yesterday compiling this. They have saved 25p per mile on what they pay me but then it cost them an hour of my time which is worth more than they saved. Go figure. 

I have BP Subscription so cheaper. still expensive, as is 73 pence @ MFG. 

As is 59 pence at Stirling, or South Ayrshire a minimum £5 charge.   

 

Tesla up in price but to save paying the Stirling Tariff i am topping up @ Tesla Perth and then charging in Kilmarknock but staying to get £5,s worth. 

Tesla making the difference for me for Aberdeen going north, and Aviemore or Perth going South. 

 

Edited 9 October, 20241 yr by Ootohere

48 minutes ago, Ootohere said:

 Maybe not for you.

Or anyone else either.

You will only get close to the WLTP official range by doing well below the motorway speed limit.

16 hours ago, Graham Butcher said:

That is precisely what I said 🙄, the ICE out number the electric cars on the road today, so obviously, you will see more ICE fires than you see EV fires and you are far more likely to see a HEV or PHEV fire than you are a BEV fire simply because they not only have a greater number, but are also far more complicated so there is more to go wrong. 

 

I simply cannot understand why this even being discussed, when it is so blatantly obvious that the balance of probability of a fire between the types is heavily biased to the ICE, but only because there are more of them, but also because more of them are older than the EVs and thus ageing has taken its toll and also poor maintenance plays a major part as well.

 

Why cannot anyone get past this point, it is sadly a real sticking point with so many EV owners/drivers and an accepted fact of life with ICE owners/drivers.

 

I'll say once again, I'm not an EV bashing Luddite, I'm an electrical engineer for crying out loud, so of course I'm going to be highly interested in electric cars, and at the same time I can see drawbacks to them which is in the main part the batteries.

 

 

 

that's not how probability works. You could have double the number of EVs as petrol cars on the roads and the probability of an ICE car spontaneoulsy combusting would still be greater. The proportion of ICE cars versus EVs catching fire has nothing to do with the relative number of each type on the road. 

@Dieselgate  Actually you can do Motorway in the UK speed and in the right ambient temp get close to the WLTP figure of some EV,s.

So as much as many might not be able to then fair enough.

As far as AC on or which driving mode selected or regen levels, or CC used, that is what makes big differences. 

6 minutes ago, Ootohere said:

I have BP Subscription so cheaper. still expensive, as is 73 pence @ MFG. 

As is 59 pence at Stirling, or South Ayrshire a minimum £5 charge.   

 

Tesla up in price but to save paying the Stirling Tariff i am topping up @ Tesla Perth and then charging in Kilmarknock but staying to get £5,s worth. 

Tesla making the difference for me for Aberdeen going north, and Aviemore or Perth going South. 

 

 

 

the cost of EV charging has not been helped by the Government increasing VAT from 5 to 20% on electricity supplied away from home.  Nor the 100% increase in frid connection charges ober the last 12 months. Tesla can cross subsisidise from car sales, BP and Shell could do that too but for obvious reasons would prefer to keep selling expensive liquid fuels instead so not in their interests to make it more attractive.  

 

 

Again discussed on Wake Up to Money Radio 5 from 5am.

I was listening while charging. 

http://bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0023pt8

 

Edited 9 October, 20241 yr by Ootohere

8 minutes ago, Dieselgate said:

Or anyone else either.

You will only get close to the WLTP official range by doing well below the motorway speed limit.

 

 

I drive as fast as the limits and the traffic conditions permit. I always have comfortably more range than I can manage. I never achieved WLTP in any of my petrol cars and my diesel also gets nowhere near its WLTP figures. That;s not what WLTP is meant for. It is meant to allwo you to make like for like comparisons when choosing a vehicle. I tend to drive all my vehicles in the same way and on the same routes. I don't drive like they do in the WLTP tests but I know that car A will do X and Car B will do Y in the test then I know how they will compare when I drive them in my way on my routes.  WLTP ain't an EV thing. 

1 hour ago, Dieselgate said:

Only problem is you wouldn't get close to that range at motorway speeds.

5 hours * 70 mph = 350 miles. Easily done with Model 3 LR RWD rated at 436 miles WLTP.

 

32 minutes ago, Dieselgate said:

You will only get close to the WLTP official range by doing well below the motorway speed limit.

WLTP is 436 miles.

That is well over 6 hours on the motorway. I have built in 20% decrease in expected range from my real world experience on a bigger, older, less aero same brand car.

 

It is an old myth that EV burns through battery on motorway. It was true for likes of Nissan Leaf because its battery is small and has horrible aero. Model 3 are known to achieve well over 4 mi/kWh on motorway at questionable legal speeds. It is the most efficient mass market EV on the market.

 

 

Data from 2023 M3 LR RWD, before 2024 facelift aero improvements. It got 4.33 mi/kWh, post claims average 69 mph for whole 4000 miles trip.

https://www.speakev.com/threads/model-3-long-range-rwd-436-miles-wltp-available.187523/?post_id=3672392#post-3672392

Edited 9 October, 20241 yr by wyx087

2 hours ago, Ootohere said:

But how many read an OWNERS MANUAL in a Fleet car, hire car, courtesy car or even their daily driver.

 

So Fuel / Charging flap stickers with the Pressures for car load and tyre sixes or B-Pillar is so much more 'Simply Clever'  or GOOGLE the pressures on your phone is easy.

Or as on many Premium Cars or even non premium with Screens and TPMS you just look up  MENU,  Status, Tyre Pressures and you get the choice of tyre size, summer or winter and then it tells you the recommended pressures.

?

Does TESLA have that on the System?   

 

EDIT. Yes...

 

 

The Simply Clever brand has screens and TPMS, but it does not display the pressure in each tyre, it will alert you that a tyre has dropped pressure and then relies on you to pump it upto the correct pressure as defined in the handbook or on the filler cover, and then you have to press a button to tell the system that the tyres are at the correct pressure and cancel the alert.

 

So with that particular system, I assume that I could over or under inflate and once that button has been pressed, the alert will be cancelled and only activate if the pressure drops from the stored level and the correct pressure for my car is 30 psi for the fronts and 33 psi for the rears.

1 hour ago, wyx087 said:

Data from 2023 M3 LR RWD, before 2024 facelift aero improvements. It got 4.33 mi/kWh, post claims average 69 mph for whole 4000 miles trip.

OK very good, looks like some progress is being made! 

With the 2014 Octavia I had, it worked by measuring rotations. If wheel rotation is different between 2 wheels across the same axle it will alert. There is no actual TPMS sensor in the wheels. That is why it can accept "wrong" pressure and must be reset manually.

 

Tesla (and 2014 Nissan Leaf) has TPMS sensors, Tesla uses BLE sensors. Leaf uses 433 Mhz sensor (I'm pretty sure, but not 100%).

 

I've found Tesla has a very dumb algorithm:

if <38, then show alert.

if >40, then cancel alert.

So if I set cold tyre pressure to be 40 psi in summer, as temperature drops, I'd get warning in cold mornings and have to top up to at least 40 to remove the alert message. Car screen says recommend 42 psi cold. I try to run them at 40 psi for slightly less jiggly ride.

25 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

The Simply Clever brand has screens and TPMS, but it does not display the pressure in each tyre, it will alert you that a tyre has dropped pressure and then relies on you to pump it upto the correct pressure as defined in the handbook or on the filler cover, and then you have to press a button to tell the system that the tyres are at the correct pressure and cancel the alert.

 

So with that particular system, I assume that I could over or under inflate and once that button has been pressed, the alert will be cancelled and only activate if the pressure drops from the stored level and the correct pressure for my car is 30 psi for the fronts and 33 psi for the rears.

 

The system actually works by comparing numbers of rotation over a fixed time period, not actual tyre pressures. It is a cheap alternative to actual pressure reading reporting valves.

 

Changing a tyre, worn or new, can report wrong tyre pressure when it is just different circumference.

 

@Graham Butcher Skoda were they just went with the simple system that really came about to warn idiots with run flat tyres that they had a puncture & never went Sensors Valves.

Fair enough, that is what happened with the budget brand even with their HALO models.

 

You can set your pressures to anything you like, 4 different pressures / circumferences and it could not care less really other than the likes of a Superb with haldex and where is disables functions like the ACC.  Or ends up putting the brakes on because too small a circumference tyre is on even though the TPMS was reset.

 

But then you get a guide to pressures & an Ice Scraper in the Fuel Filler flap that is known to freeze closed, 

& an Umbrella to shelter under as you change the spare, possibly or usually of a different size.

 

 

VW Group can do efficiency & Hyundai did with the Ioniq so really for 2025 both of them should be able to have small cars that do not use much electricity snd at low purchase prices.

Maybe not the £17,000 that VW where going on about a few years ago for the Fabia, Polo, A1 sized EV,s that would on sale.

Never happened other than the MI Electric they were already doing or a Citigo iV.

 

Now it is 2027 that they can predict how the world will be and costs of materials and production which i assume was or is to be in China.

 

 

The 28kW battery Ioniq is even more efficient than the 38kw.

 

 

 

Edited 9 October, 20241 yr by Ootohere

1 hour ago, domhnall said:

wipe the fact that I can charge at home?  If we're going to start chaning the facts we can get any outcome you like. If I wipe the fact that there are filling stations then I can conclude that ICE cars are hopeless and will not go anywhere, or you could wipe the fact that public chargers exist  and then conclude EVs can't venture more than half their estimated range from home base. That's just stupid.

 

In your first post dated 30th September, you said the following :-

 

"I have a diesel as well as an EV. I rarely use the diesel on long trips as it means as extra stops are needed (we need the usual comfort breaks and food stops but in the diesel we need to make fuel stops on top). Last week I took the diesel on a trip down South and I had to fuel up. From the point where I leftthe Edinburgh bpyass, got to costco (the first filling station I passed) filled up and got back on the bypass it was 25 minutes. This idea that you take 5 minutes is for the birds"

 

So I ask you where in the above statement did you give a starting location or final location, so I had to make assumptions and is it not a reasonable therefore to assume that you got to the Edinburgh bypass and thought that you needed to get some fuel in order to complete your drive? Equally I have shown that you had driven past earlier PFS along the bypass, and as you have since explained that you departed Livingston (precise location unknown to me) I have also shown that there were no fewer than 12 PFS in Livingston, and it is possible that many were in fact close to your point of departure.

 

So I suggest that what you think is me changing the facts, is actually me trying to explain the logic in my thinking which you are not accepting, and it is you who is now changing the facts by giving further information, such as you were going from Livingston to Otterburn along the A68 and that the 1st PFS on the A68 was at Jedburgh, some 42 miles from the bypass (that is a long distance I grant you without a PFS on a A class road). But this information was not known by anybody until you divulged it on the 4th Oct, some 5 days later.

 

Further research shows me that West Lothian is in the South East of Scotland, and just west of Edinburgh, and that Livingston is the largest town in the county, so I take it now that is where you live.

 

My diesel car can do around 865 miles on a long run, so I can in theory on a good day assuming not to many hills etc, leave my house with a full tank, and drive upto Muir Road, on the Houstoun Industrial Estate in the North East of Livingston, a distance of 445 miles door to door and almost back again without refuelling. Livingston to Otterburn is some 90 miles!

 

 

 

 

8 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

In your first post dated 30th September, you said the following :-

 

"I have a diesel as well as an EV. I rarely use the diesel on long trips as it means as extra stops are needed (we need the usual comfort breaks and food stops but in the diesel we need to make fuel stops on top). Last week I took the diesel on a trip down South and I had to fuel up. From the point where I leftthe Edinburgh bpyass, got to costco (the first filling station I passed) filled up and got back on the bypass it was 25 minutes. This idea that you take 5 minutes is for the birds"

 

So I ask you where in the above statement did you give a starting location or final location, so I had to make assumptions and is it not a reasonable therefore to assume that you got to the Edinburgh bypass and thought that you needed to get some fuel in order to complete your drive? Equally I have shown that you had driven past earlier PFS along the bypass, and as you have since explained that you departed Livingston (precise location unknown to me) I have also shown that there were no fewer than 12 PFS in Livingston, and it is possible that many were in fact close to your point of departure.

 

So I suggest that what you think is me changing the facts, is actually me trying to explain the logic in my thinking which you are not accepting, and it is you who is now changing the facts by giving further information, such as you were going from Livingston to Otterburn along the A68 and that the 1st PFS on the A68 was at Jedburgh, some 42 miles from the bypass (that is a long distance I grant you without a PFS on a A class road). But this information was not known by anybody until you divulged it on the 4th Oct, some 5 days later.

 

Further research shows me that West Lothian is in the South East of Scotland, and just west of Edinburgh, and that Livingston is the largest town in the county, so I take it now that is where you live.

 

My diesel car can do around 865 miles on a long run, so I can in theory on a good day assuming not to many hills etc, leave my house with a full tank, and drive upto Muir Road, on the Houstoun Industrial Estate in the North East of Livingston, a distance of 445 miles door to door and almost back again without refuelling. Livingston to Otterburn is some 90 miles!

 

 

 

 

 

my diesel manages around 390 miles. Which is about 60 miles more than my EV

17 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

So I ask you where in the above statement did you give a starting location or final location, so I had to make assumptions and is it not a reasonable therefore to assume that you got to the Edinburgh bypass and thought that you needed to get some fuel in order to complete your drive? Equally I have shown that you had driven past earlier PFS along the bypass, and as you have since explained that you departed Livingston (precise location unknown to me) I have also shown that there were no fewer than 12 PFS in Livingston, and it is possible that many were in fact close to your point of departure.

 

So I suggest that what you think is me changing the facts, is actually me trying to explain the logic in my thinking which you are not accepting, and it is you who is now changing the facts by giving further information, such as you were going from Livingston to Otterburn along the A68 and that the 1st PFS on the A68 was at Jedburgh, some 42 miles from the bypass (that is a long distance I grant you without a PFS on a A class road). But this information was not known by anybody until you divulged it on the 4th Oct, some 5 days later.

Providing more information that happens to be different to your assumptions can in no way shape or form be, under any circumstance be considered "changing the fact".

 

3 hours ago, domhnall said:

unless you're on Octopus in which cae it is 73p. I wouldn't use them any more than I would buy Shell or BP diesel as it is too expensive. I was just makign the point that charger hubs are't hidden out of the way as @Graham Butcher was saying they often are. Like here at Alnwick, just off the A1 and right beside a BP station. Funnily enough charger hubs go right where filling stations are because that's where they are needed. This one has an excellent gastro pub and McDonalds right beside it so covers lots of dietary tastes. 

 

 

Also funnily enough, I personally would not call that a hub when it only has 6 chargers, which could at peak periods involve queueing, to my mind a hub is somewhere where many type of EV can be catered for and with many more chargers so there is less chance of queueing and also very close to a National Grid connection so that the chargers could all be used at the same time, delivering their rated output without a large drop of output, thus prolonging the time it takes to recharge your car, like this one at Braintree has no fewer than 36 chargers.

 

Many PFS have upto 6 chargers tucked away at the side somewhere, but are incapable of handling maximum output when all are in use.

 

GRIDSERVE Electric Forecourt® Braintree | Fast and Reliable EV Charging

Edited 9 October, 20241 yr by Graham Butcher

26 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

Also funnily enough, I personally would not call that a hub when it only has 6 chargers, which could at peak periods involve queueing, to my mind a hub is somewhere where many type of EV can be catered for and with many more chargers so there is less chance of queueing and also very close to a National Grid connection so that the chargers could all be used at the same time, delivering their rated output without a large drop of output, thus prolonging the time it takes to recharge your car, like this one at Braintree has no fewer than 36 chargers.

 

Many PFS have upto 6 chargers tucked away at the side somewhere, but are incapable of handling maximum output when all are in use.

 

GRIDSERVE Electric Forecourt® Braintree | Fast and Reliable EV Charging

well I do cal it a hub.

In 7 years I have yet to encounter a queue because you can see before you get  there whether there are available chargers so queuing is for people too lazy or stupid to check or who have an old EV with no option due to very short range. 

Here's another hub https://www.drivedundeeelectric.co.uk/princes-street though you will disagree with the description. What you prefer? "Hublet"? 

 

Edited 9 October, 20241 yr by domhnall

I call it a charging hub or station even if 1 rapid and 1 fast chargers.

Stirling park and ride with 60 chargers has only 4 Rapids & those are 50 kW.

Edinburgh  Airport Park and ride 6 rapids, Aberdeen Airport Park & Ride 3 with only 2 working. 

1 hour ago, domhnall said:

well I do cal it a hub.

In 7 years I have yet to encounter a queue because you can see before you get  there whether there are available chargers so queuing is for people too lazy or stupid to check or who have an old EV with no option due to very short range. 

Here's another hub https://www.drivedundeeelectric.co.uk/princes-street though you will disagree with the description. What you prefer? "Hublet"? 

 

No, I call that a hub because you have 18 chargers, nowhere near enough for when most cars will be electric in the future but no doubt extra sites will come online,

Swing it around to PFS, how many pumps do most of them have compared with the 16 at that Costco? Here that figure is 6 or 8 at stations run by Shell, Asda, Esso, BP, Harvest, Texaco. Then we have Sainsbury 16, Tesco who have 16. But all the PFS on the main trunk routes A414, A130, A12 etc are also 6 or 8 pumps. Sainsbury and Tesco are right by their large stores with huge carparks where people go and do their weekly shopping and on their way out, nip onto their forecourts and top their tanks, just like the Costco at Loanhead.

Edited 9 October, 20241 yr by Graham Butcher

31 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

No, I call that a hub because you have 18 chargers, nowhere near enough for when most cars will be electric in the future but no doubt extra sites will come online,

Swing it around to PFS, how many pumps do most of them have compared with the 16 at that Costco? Here that figure is 6 or 8 at stations run by Shell, Asda, Esso, BP, Harvest, Texaco. Then we have Sainsbury 16, Tesco who have 16. But all the PFS on the main trunk routes A414, A130, A12 etc are also 6 or 8 pumps. Sainsbury and Tesco are right by their large stores with huge carparks where people go and do their weekly shopping and on their way out, nip onto their forecourts and top their tanks, just like the Costco at Loanhead.

three years ago one or two chargers was enough, lots of the hubs have been expanded and will continue to be expanded. But each charger costs 6 figures, keeping it connected even if no one uses it costs £1k every year and most of the operators are loss making, so askign them to build well ahead of demand is just hopelessly naive. It will not happen. Especially right now when most EV owners charge at home other than maybe a couple of times a year. (and yes I know,  flat dwellers etc etc but the majority of EV charging is done at home).

10 minutes ago, domhnall said:

 askign them to build well ahead of demand is just hopelessly naive. It will not happen.

BUt one of the reasons given by potential EV buyers for NOT buying an EV is the limited public charging network causing them "range anxiety", some people have even traded in the EV they had bought due to lack of charging infrastructure.

 

Seems we're in a chicken and egg situation - where the public charging network won't be expanded until there is increased demand but there won't be increased demand because of the perception of limited public charging network.

 

Someone needs to break this vicious circle...

16 minutes ago, domhnall said:

three years ago one or two chargers was enough, lots of the hubs have been expanded and will continue to be expanded. But each charger costs 6 figures, keeping it connected even if no one uses it costs £1k every year and most of the operators are loss making, so askign them to build well ahead of demand is just hopelessly naive. It will not happen. Especially right now when most EV owners charge at home other than maybe a couple of times a year. (and yes I know,  flat dwellers etc etc but the majority of EV charging is done at home).

All very true, maybe its about time they changed tack then came and up with a system where the chargers were owned and operated by the power networks themselves and each car or a RFID card etc, would allow the chargers to add the charge directly back to the persons home account and gets added to their Lecky bill? Similarly to a credit or debit card where it identifies the user and charges the purchase back to their account?

25 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

All very true, maybe its about time they changed tack then came and up with a system where the chargers were owned and operated by the power networks themselves and each car or a RFID card etc, would allow the chargers to add the charge directly back to the persons home account and gets added to their Lecky bill? Similarly to a credit or debit card where it identifies the user and charges the purchase back to their account?

https://electroverse.octopus.energy/

Quote

You’ll have the option to link your home energy & public charging bills for the ultimate simplicity

 

 

 

It has been a chicken and egg problem from 2017 when I started experiencing EV's.

 

End of the day, it's just about getting the right tool for the right job. Getting 100 miles range EV and regularly drive beyond its range is only someone mad would do (😘 toot)  Rapid charger infrastructure need to be built sufficiently so that it can keep up with majority of holiday demand.

Building more is wasted resource. Building less stifles adoption.

Savvy drivers are flexible and charge up at less busy locations by looking at utilisation before coming off their route.

 

From my personal experience, I can say Tesla at very least seems to have done well and I experienced zero queuing during end of May bank holiday.