@Graham Butcher You are constantly having a field day with it.

Do not get a BEV and stay well away from them. 

Edited 30 May, 20242 yr by Ootohere

26 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

 

Also remember, no one is stating that the battery started the fires, only that the  involvement of them in the fire made fighting it almost impossible to do. 

and that is probably where my confusion about the state of charge being relevant kicks in.

Surely it makes no difference if the battery pack is charged to 20% or 80%  the amount of chemicals in it that can contribute to a conflagration remain the same

1 hour ago, Winston_Woof said:

and that is probably where my confusion about the state of charge being relevant kicks in.

Surely it makes no difference if the battery pack is charged to 20% or 80%  the amount of chemicals in it that can contribute to a conflagration remain the same

Correct, the amount of chemicals remains the same, but the energy stored in the battery is the concern and that energy has to go somewhere, after all an explosion is just a release of energy. 

Holy crap, just imagine the difference of the explosion between a 30 kWh battery at 100% and a Hummer with a 212 kWh battery.

 

Best keep the Hummers away from military bases unless being used as a trojan horse to get in their and do lots of damage. 

Edited 30 May, 20242 yr by Ootohere

2 hours ago, Ootohere said:

@Graham Butcher You are constantly having a field day with it.

Do not get a BEV and stay well away from them. 

There are always 2 sides at least to things, I like to learn about those sides, the pros and cons. I don't do blind faith and follow the pied piper blindly. 🙄

1 hour ago, Graham Butcher said:

Correct, the amount of chemicals remains the same, but the energy stored in the battery is the concern and that energy has to go somewhere, after all an explosion is just a release of energy. 

ah this makes sense (ofk this is all in relation to air transport but......)


These changes have been adopted by ICAO into the 2025-2026 edition of the Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (Technical Instructions). The objective of these changes is to reduce the potential risk posed by lithium ion batteries in air transport. It has been demonstrated that reducing the state of charge in a lithium ion cell or battery reduces the potential for a lithium ion cell to go into thermal runaway.

https://www.iata.org/contentassets/05e6d8742b0047259bf3a700bc9d42b9/lithium-battery-guidance-document.pdf

What do y'all have to say on LFP based batteries ?

32 minutes ago, olddog said:

What do y'all have to say on LFP based batteries ?

Here you go.

 

Pros and Cons of LFP Batteries

LFP batteries have been making waves in the world of energy storage due to their unique properties and attributes. Like any technology, there are also some pros and cons associated with the use of this type of battery.

Pros

Safety: Unlike other lithium-ion batteries, LFP batteries are less likely to overheat or catch fire and can withstand overcharging and mechanical stress. This is because LFP batteries have a more stable structure than conventional lithium-ion batteries.

Longevity: LFP batteries can last up to 10 years, while traditional lead-acid batteries only last about 3-5 years on average. This makes LFP batteries an excellent investment for those looking for a reliable, long-term power source.

High Power Density: This means that LFP batteries can deliver a lot of power in a small package, making them an excellent choice for portable devices that require high levels of energy.

Compatible with Solar Charging: This means that not only do LFP batteries store energy effectively, they can also be charged through renewable sources.

Cons

Higher Initial Costs: LFP batteries are made from high-quality components and require specialized manufacturing processes, which can drive up the price. For organizations or individuals operating on a tight budget, this can be a major drawback.

Lower Voltage: Compared to other types of batteries, LFP batteries have a nominal voltage of 3.2 volts per cell, which can create compatibility issues with many electronic devices that require a higher voltage to function properly.

Lower Efficiency at Extreme Temperatures: If the temperature drops below a certain point or rises too high, the battery's ability to hold a charge will decrease significantly. This can be a major issue in certain contexts, such as in the use of electric vehicles in cold climates or in applications that are exposed to extreme heat. While there are ways to mitigate this problem, such as using specialized cooling or heating systems, these can add significant cost and complexity to the overall system.

This is very interesting, I thought, but YMMV.

 

 

Strictly speaking this is about full hybrids rather than EVs and many, like my lad, went for a full hybrid rater than an EV, but price etc being a factor and stated manufacturers MPG a draw.

 

Hybrids cost £500 more per year to fuel than manufacturers claim (gbnews.com)

 

 

The research found that the UK's top 10 best-selling hybrid vehicles cost, on average, £500 more to fuel each year than the manufacturers claim. Major car brands claim that owners of hybrid vehicles will save their owners an average of £1,092 a year in fuel costs compared to equivalent petrol cars, with real average savings of just £593 a year.  In comparison, plug-in hybrid vehicles are £672 a year higher than their electric counterparts - showing a dramatic difference in savings for motorists.  Switching from a petrol vehicle to an equivalent electric vehicle will save drivers £1,264 on average, more than doubling their savings.

  

My lad gets close to the 66 mpg claimed for the Clio etech in the warmer months but much less in the colder months when the engine has to act as a cabin space warmer, very inefficient.

Clearly these cars need heat pumps as all EVs and hybrids should have.  It continues....

 

he study calculated how much electricity the hybrids would be likely to consume from the grid driving the distance, allowing the ECIU to calculate a total, real-life fuel cost.  The report - the real-life costs of fuelling a PHEV - claimed that an analysis of 600,000 cars found that plug-in hybrids burn 350 per cent more fuel on average than what their manufacturers claim.

 

350% !!! Your having a laugh ( or going by the CO2 figure and equating to fuel used, numpties !

 

Daughter No 2 Clio, Mk 4 rather than Mk 5 but very similar,  also does 60 mpg plus on its 900 cc triple cylinder TCE but is not as nice to drive as the 1.6 etech.

If you really try one can get 80 mpg with the etech but it is not fun but saves loads of money.  looking forward to getting rid of my Arkana and Zoe and replacing with the COTY Scenic, but which battery, 60 or 87 kWh I need to decide.  

Edited 31 May, 20242 yr by lol-lol

31 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

Strictly speaking this is about full hybrids rather than EVs and many, like my lad, went for a full hybrid rater than an EV, but price etc being a factor and stated manufacturers MPG a draw.

 

Hybrids cost £500 more per year to fuel than manufacturers claim (gbnews.com)

 

 

The research found that the UK's top 10 best-selling hybrid vehicles cost, on average, £500 more to fuel each year than the manufacturers claim. Major car brands claim that owners of hybrid vehicles will save their owners an average of £1,092 a year in fuel costs compared to equivalent petrol cars, with real average savings of just £593 a year.  In comparison, plug-in hybrid vehicles are £672 a year higher than their electric counterparts - showing a dramatic difference in savings for motorists.  Switching from a petrol vehicle to an equivalent electric vehicle will save drivers £1,264 on average, more than doubling their savings.

  

My lad gets close to the 66 mpg claimed for the Clio etech in the warmer months but much less in the colder months when the engine has to act as a cabin space warmer, very inefficient.

Clearly these cars need heat pumps as all EVs and hybrids should have.  It continues....

 

he study calculated how much electricity the hybrids would be likely to consume from the grid driving the distance, allowing the ECIU to calculate a total, real-life fuel cost.  The report - the real-life costs of fuelling a PHEV - claimed that an analysis of 600,000 cars found that plug-in hybrids burn 350 per cent more fuel on average than what their manufacturers claim.

 

350% !!! Your having a laugh ( or going by the CO2 figure and equating to fuel used, numpties !

 

Daughter No 2 Clio, Mk 4 rather than Mk 5 but very similar,  also does 60 mpg plus on its 900 cc triple cylinder TCE but is not as nice to drive as the 1.6 etech.

If you really try one can get 80 mpg with the etech but it is not fun but saves loads of money.  looking forward to getting rid of my Arkana and Zoe and replacing with the COTY Scenic, but which battery, 60 or 87 kWh I need to decide.  

The Ioniq 5N is not a hybrid but a full BEV with 84kwh battery. 

Edited 31 May, 20242 yr by Graham Butcher

^^^ I have got my young lad interested enough in the Ioniq 5N to arrange a test drive of one. 

On the Wolfsburg tour I asked a guide why they only put 5 litres of fuel in a Golf 3 (it was a while back) instead of filling it up to say 50 litres. He said “haf du seen ze price of gas? 45 litres more per car uber 5 million cars a year ist big Deutschmark”, as I said, it was a while back but take that to the modern day 2022 production of 8.72 million and a guesstimate of 60 litres more fuel per vehicle on average across the range at a discount rate of say €1.7 a litre so circa 89 million Euros, yeh it’s a few bob; about one tenth of VW Germanys total debt  🤑
 

So perhaps they are shipped with low charge to save money?

 

It is the same with fastener head size, why drop from, for example, 17mm SW for an M10 to 16mm SW? Say that is on average a gram per fastener and there are circa 1000 fasteners per car, that is 1 kilo of high grade steel per car times 8.72 million at €700 per tonne, you do the math as a yank would say.

Skoda did not sell many Mk2 Fabia vRS hatches new in the UK, under 3,000 of them and not many world wide.

 

But the Hatch is 9 3/4 inches shorter than the Estate, would have had better performance times and efficiency than the Estate or the Polo GTI 3 or 5 door or the Ibiza Cupra, and the same VED band as the more expensive sister cars.

 

VW cunning stunt and Skoda,s is to design, test and manufacture 25kG of Ballast weights and bolt them to the rear crash bar.

Result being the Kerb Weight is given as 5 kG more than the estate, the car goes light under acceleration and there is more wheel spin on the narrower tyres the sister cars have.

The Polo got the battery in the boot, the sister cars spare wheel was an option, so that is 19kg less for the test cars for the official Kerb Weights.  (Which were later revised because they were false.  

The sister cars can have a tow bar and tow, the Skoda Twinchargers can not.

 

While others 'Add lightness',  VW sand bag the car rather than just fit appropriate springs and dampers.

Vorsprung Durch Technik. 

Save a few grams, and add many Kg and materials to be sure the lighter and faster car which is cheaper is that no longer.

I was once told by someone involved in shipping cars that it is standard practice to put just 5 litres of fuel in cars as they only need to drive them off the production line, into the car park, then onto a transporter lorry, for delivery to the docks and then driven up the loading ramp to the ship and parked for the transit. Then get loaded onto another lorry to the dealer and that's it.

 

That enables them to clear the production lines quicker without causing hold-ups, saves them a load of money in fuel costs, and also the amount of storage costs, also of course enhanced safety when on board the ship, less fuel to burn should there be a problem.

Many people say that very same thing.

Reason it is not only 5 litres though is they do not come off the Transporter at the Dealership with the reserve light on. 

So more like 8-10 litres is put in. 

Good point.

this is about as "daft" as vegetarian sausages, burgers and sunday joints ;o)
 

 

If it gets people interested in getting one, then its a good thing surely, as long as its not an expensive gimmick, should make the transition easier and more palatable for some.

 

6 hours ago, Winston_Woof said:

this is about as daft as vegetarian...

..."meat".

 

I know vegetarians who dislike "vegetarian meat", at least in part because they dislike the texture of meat rather than on any ethical grounds. I actually agree with them and will ignore vegetarian "burgers" and "sausages" on a menu as "not food" but will happily order something like, say, mushroom chilli, cheese sauce pasta...

 

In the same vein, I would dislike an electric car with "simulated ICE engine sounds" (and dislike ICE cars with simulated engine sounds too).

The thing is @KenONeill/ AKA @Paws4Thot you can turn off the sounds. 

As for being where others are making the noises you can stick your fingers in your ears, that is just much like 'Blocking members'. 

This is not quite an electric car, but nonetheless it is fully electric and could well become a familiar sight around the UK soon.

 

 

 

Because if people can they will