28 minutes ago, Ootohere said:

People really need to realise that the battery segregation thing is well documented and the issues with ones as recent as less than a decade old.  And that is why cheap as chips.  Now a new generation on the go and evolving. 

Did you mean “degradation” ?

I wonder:

Today you can buy an ICE car built in the 20's that wont have lost any range and probably performs as well as it did when new.

Wonder if people in 100 years will be able to day the same of EVs?

1 hour ago, EnterName said:

You really need to look more at data and less at shrieking headlines.

https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/china

Graph selectively presented can really tell a story isn't it.

 

You've selected change over time, with baseline being almost 0, of course today's number decided by almost 0 will be huge.

 

This is the default display for per capita CO2. Adding UK per capita gives this.

 

 

Of course, it's ever increasing and that is not good.

But UK has had worse emission for far longer time period, total emission (area under the graph) is far higher. From 1900 (start of industrial revolution) to 2100, over that 200 year time period, you can bet total per-capita emission (area under the graph) of China will be lower than UK.

 

Technology is ever improving, we in UK have the capital to invest in low carbon and we can be the innovators.

 

 

Graphs like what you've presented is often pushed across by rich western countries to say how well they are doing. But the reality is that the developed countries have polluted far worse and are trying to push developing countries to stop emission. From economic point of view this is indirect imperialism and oppression, stopping developing countries from establishing industries.

 

 

Edited 19 October, 20241 yr by wyx087

@Winston_Woof Thanks, typing on a phone without glasses on.

 

So a Euro 5 460,000 miles 2015 2.0 TDI DSG that dodged having SCR.

 

DQ250 serviced 11 times maybe, & possible a rebuild.

22 Oil & Filter changes and whatever as far as brakes, suspension parts etc. 

Euro 5 so not LEZ compliant.

 

Early TESLA builds can be questionable, servicing / maintenance / inspections is just common sense.

If you got Free TESLA Super Charging then you might well be laughing. 

 

Now newer Superbs TDI / SCR, DQ381 DSG,s, well that is a lottery, build quality and software and bits and pieces are causing grief for some.

We will see in 2043 just how the 2023/24 models are doing. 

14 hours ago, lol-lol said:

Customers were astonished to see their supposed 150 hp car was only producing 80 or 90 hp at the back wheels.

Even when brand new a car with a 150bhp engine won't have produced much more than 110bhp at the wheels, since power is quoted as measured on an engine dynamometer not a vehicle dynamometer so you need to take account of the 25% average transmission losses.

 

So 80-90bhp is only a 20% loss over the years.

 

Shows how little knowledge most people have of how ICE vehicles are specified.

Also of course, the actual range never decreases, if anything it will increase as the car gets run in. My car will do on motorways around 900miles to a tank and the car has already done 160,000 miles. 

3 hours ago, Winston_Woof said:

Losing BHP isn't the same though as the fuel tank capacity shrinking, which is the point that was being made

 

 

EVs and ICE change over their lifetime and newer EVs don't appear to degrade as with early, particularly air cooled ones, but that is a thing of the past and what is being seen now is EVs of the last 8 or 9 years racking up 200k miles quite easily and seeing batteries only degrading by 10% or so, but the performance ie acceleration pretty much being very close to when brand new.

 

Compared to ICE which may well be losing close to half their horse power, which does not affect the range that much but does cripple acceleration which gives us EV drivers even more fun at the lights etc as not only does the ICE power not even maximise until 30 mph or over whereas the EV still has masses of acceleration torque from 5 mph or so. 

 

Even if the EV battery has degraded 5 or 10% over 50, 100, 150k miles the range does not have to be proportional effected.  As aero resistance is a cube ratio just slow down by a couple of percent and one will regain almost 10% of range. But these issues have already been addressed by EV makers.  Unlike an ICE car I have an 8 year warranty on the battery, even better than Hyundai/Kia warranty, that the battery will retain the at least three quarters of its charge and the fix to a cell block going down has now been addresses as cell packs are no longer one homogenous block but modular and if a cell block is poorly performing it can be swapped out a dozens of battery centres.

 

Another area of concern, which was being highlighted pre pandemic, was that much of the emission control tech does not actually work in the real world.  Get that ICE car in a cold late autumn, winter, early spring day, in traffic, rain water splashing all around, high humidity, and the Cat converters does not work properly, the emissions are not within the legal limits they are maybe 5 or six times the prescribed.  Sooner we get pure ICE off the roads the better, scrappage scheme or however.  Full hybrids with decent sized traction batteries ie 10, 20 kwh plus, which rarely need the dirty ICE to kick in so that city pollution is further reduced is needed to reduce its life shortening effects.    

 

Even the EV fire aspect has been addressed with inlet to flood battery compartment to douse fire.....

Renault_Scenic_E-Tech_Hatchback_2023_5d_Electric_EN.pdfRenault_Scenic_E-Tech_Hatchback_2023_5d_Electric_EN.pdfRenault_Scenic_E-Tech_Hatchback_2023_5d_Electric_EN.pdf

 

ICE owners need to let go the past and look to getting onboard to the new cleaner future.

 

5 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

Also of course, the actual range never decreases, if anything it will increase as the car gets run in. My car will do on motorways around 900miles to a tank and the car has already done 160,000 miles. 

 

Polluting as it goes probably worse than it was when it was new.

Hopefully a heafty lump of excise duty coming in for petrol in the budget, and at least inflationary rise on diesel too.

A control mechanism of excise duty to keep the price of diesel and petrol at about £1.50 a litre at the pumps to prompt the transition to EVs.

 

Edited 19 October, 20241 yr by lol-lol

6 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

 

EVs and ICE change over their lifetime and newer EVs don't appear to degrade as with early, particularly air cooled ones, but that is a thing of the past and what is being seen now is EVs of the last 8 or 9 years racking up 200k miles quite easily and seeing batteries only degrading by 10% or so, but the performance ie acceleration pretty much being very close to when brand new.

 

Compared to ICE which may well be losing close to half their horse power, which does not affect the range that much but does cripple acceleration which gives us EV drivers even more fun at the lights etc as not only does the ICE power not even maximise until 30 mph or over whereas the EV still has masses of acceleration torque from 5 mph or so. 

 

Even if the EV battery has degraded 5 or 10% over 50, 100, 150k miles the range does not have to be proportional effected.  As aero resistance is a cube ratio just slow down by a couple of percent and one will regain almost 10% of range. But these issues have already been addressed by EV makers.  Unlike an ICE car I have an 8 year warranty on the battery, even better than Hyundai/Kia warranty, that the battery will retain the at least three quarters of its charge and the fix to a cell block going down has now been addresses as cell packs are no longer one homogenous block but modular and if a cell block is poorly performing it can be swapped out a dozens of battery centres.

 

Another area of concern, which was being highlighted pre pandemic, was that much of the emission control tech does not actually work in the real world.  Get that ICE car in a cold late autumn, winter, early spring day, in traffic, rain water splashing all around, high humidity, and the Cat converters does not work properly, the emissions are not within the legal limits they are maybe 5 or six times the prescribed.  Sooner we get pure ICE off the roads the better, scrappage scheme or however.  Full hybrids with decent sized traction batteries ie 10, 20 kwh plus, which rarely need the dirty ICE to kick in so that city pollution is further reduced is needed to reduce its life shortening effects.    

 

Even the EV fire aspect has been addressed with inlet to flood battery compartment to douse fire.....

Renault_Scenic_E-Tech_Hatchback_2023_5d_Electric_EN.pdfRenault_Scenic_E-Tech_Hatchback_2023_5d_Electric_EN.pdfRenault_Scenic_E-Tech_Hatchback_2023_5d_Electric_EN.pdf 1.15 MB · 0 downloads

 

ICE owners need to let go the past and look to getting onboard to the new cleaner future.

 

Again BHP loss is *not* the same as a fuel tanks capacity reducing with age and usage. 
 

A 10 gallon tank is a 10 gallon tank for the lifetime of a vehicle. 
 

A battery that degrades by x% loses x% of it capacity

Edited 19 October, 20241 yr by Winston_Woof

3 minutes ago, Winston_Woof said:

Again BHO loss is *not* the same as a fuel tanks capacity reducing with age and usage.    A 10 gallon tank is a 10 gallon tank for the lifetime of a vehicle. 

 

And two thirds of that 10 gallons goes as waste heat to heat mother earth...

Range 300 miles from an EV or a ridiculous, unnecessary 800 miles for some ICE cars. (Some ICE struggle to do 300 miles, recall a trip in a Jaag XK which needed filling twice in a day). 

Sort of makes sense when your refill station is 1 or 5 whatever miles away rather than on your drive, or on the journey, or at your work or car park and of course if there is some world political situation, or budget, that somehow massively ramps up the price of fuel, at least you might have a week or 3 before the car becomes the most expensive oversized music player taking up 5 metres of drive or road space.

I can fill my EVs from lecky made from a fusion reactor in the nearest star ie Sol, from wind in the North Sea, from pump storage from Dinorwig at at less than a fiver to give it those 300 miles.  I have worked out which tech is better for mankind, the next generation and it is not burning stuff in an ICE vehicle.      

https://www.aaa.com/autorepair/articles/how-efficient-is-your-cars-engine

Got it.  What you put in as far as diesel, petrol or LPG is what you put in, litres, we do not buy in gallons anymore.

The Diesel & Petrol pretty much stays as is, hygroscopic more or less depends on the formulation for the season produced.

Ethanol Content / Bio can vary, but it is what it is, even if many have no idea other than they buy and run it.

You might get condensation in the tank, and maybe storage tanks with mould, and Unleaded goes off.

 

That is Internal Combustion Engines fuels.    You get what you buy and you use what you use.

Unlike BEV,s batteries of various types.     They have losses.

 

Can we get more truths about Electric Vehicles and forget now that a ICE Fuel Tank holds what it holds unless it leaks of the fuel is stolen? 

 

PS

If a EV,s battery losses the capacity it had when new and you do not need the full capacity anyway then why give a ****.

If you are not getting one, then you need not give it a 2nd though, and if you get a lease vehicle for work or pleasure / transport then it is not really worth bothering you pretty little head!

Edited 19 October, 20241 yr by Ootohere

INTERNAL CAPACITY ENGINES are very superior in absolutely every way for lots and lots of people, so they really should enjoy driving vehicles with them while they can.

Possibly decades and decades in the UK and in other world regions. 

 

 

From @4 minutes 40 might be of interest.

 

 

 

Edited 19 October, 20241 yr by Ootohere

5 minutes ago, Ootohere said:

INTERNAL CAPACITY ENGINES are very superior in absolutely every way for lots and lots of people, so they really should enjoy driving vehicles with them while they can.

Possibly decades and decades in the UK and in other world regions. 

 

Yes and the UK is much less than 1% of the world population and in the massively populated countries of Asia, half the world's population they are getting rid of ICE vehicle at a pace faster than us Westerns.

 

To many Asia countries fuel is relatively more expensive as their income is often well under 1000 dollars a month so running an EV saves massively over ICE.

 

The majority of EVs are 2 or 3 wheel rather than 4 but theacquiring of EVs is in the hundreds of million rather than the few millions in the West.

Being able to run their EVs for a few dollars a month, rather than using that Russian oil which is currently supplying China, India and many other SE Asian countries, helping finance their Ukraine war, is saving families in Asia a huge chunk of their family budget.

 

The West tinkers while Asia transforms. 

38 minutes ago, lol-lol said:

 

And two thirds of that 10 gallons goes as waste heat to heat mother earth...

Range 300 miles from an EV or a ridiculous, unnecessary 800 miles for some ICE cars. (Some ICE struggle to do 300 miles, recall a trip in a Jaag XK which needed filling twice in a day). 

Sort of makes sense when your refill station is 1 or 5 whatever miles away rather than on your drive, or on the journey, or at your work or car park and of course if there is some world political situation, or budget, that somehow massively ramps up the price of fuel, at least you might have a week or 3 before the car becomes the most expensive oversized music player taking up 5 metres of drive or road space.

I can fill my EVs from lecky made from a fusion reactor in the nearest star ie Sol, from wind in the North Sea, from pump storage from Dinorwig at at less than a fiver to give it those 300 miles.  I have worked out which tech is better for mankind, the next generation and it is not burning stuff in an ICE vehicle.      

https://www.aaa.com/autorepair/articles/how-efficient-is-your-cars-engine

Do you accept that  an ICE vehicle with a 10 gallon (yes I know its not sold in gallons any more but makes maths easier as we measure in Miles Per Gallon even though it's sold in litres) tank and that gets 40mpg will in X years still have (presuming regular maintenance etc) a 400 mile theoretical range whereas  an EV which when new has a theoretical range of 400 miles (again made up numbers)  with 50% battery degradation will likely only have a theoretical range of 200 miles?

Not botheed about whether the performance changes or BHP is lost or how much is wasted as heat, the cost of the fuel or any of the other deflection techniques being employed, do you accept the above premise?

Agreed. 

  *But we do not drive theory miles in EV,s, You drive and know what you get, Real World, your world. only those without a EV have the theories, and no miles travelled on a battery charge.*

 

Now look in the Fabia Mk3 section and other sections.

Every damn year, my petrol cars economy is now crap.     Well service and maintain, plugs (might be a diesel, no spark plugs) and filter and tyre pressures, and tell us about your trip lengths, cold starts, etc, and think about the fuel, the cost and tell us actually how many miles to the litres are you getting?

 

 

 

Edited 19 October, 20241 yr by Ootohere

48 minutes ago, Winston_Woof said:

Do you accept that  an ICE vehicle with a 10 gallon (yes I know its not sold in gallons any more but makes maths easier as we measure in Miles Per Gallon even though it's sold in litres) tank and that gets 40mpg will in X years still have (presuming regular maintenance etc) a 400 mile theoretical range whereas  an EV which when new has a theoretical range of 400 miles (again made up numbers)  with 50% battery degradation will likely only have a theoretical range of 200 miles?

Not botheed about whether the performance changes or BHP is lost or how much is wasted as heat, the cost of the fuel or any of the other deflection techniques being employed, do you accept the above premise?

Same theory can be applied to ICE, if the ICE no longer gets 40 mpg, let's say 20 mpg, how much range degradation do you get?

 

I know 40 decrease to 20 mpg is unrealistic. So is your 50% battery degradation example.

OK guys, let's cool it down a bit can we, we all know that ICE is not as efficent as electric in converting an energy source into movement, we also, or at least we are told that the overall pollution of of EV is way less than it's ICE equivelent. 

 

All that is being claimed here is that, which started this heated discussion is that a 12 year old EV which had a new range of approx 140 miles, now only can do approx 30+ miles, whereas you can take a ICE car of similar age or even older, brim it and it will still do the same miles that it did when it was new. 

 

There is no need for the EV guys to attempt to demonised ICE cars on the amount of BHP lost or the amount of pollution they create. Just because someone has pointed out a fact that you don't like, you don't have to go into full on attack and defend your EVs. I have to say that it is no wonder that you are called evangelists 🙄. 

 

Fact that what has been claimed ICE is a fact. What some of you are claiming about in the future has yet to be proven, which I say that I have seen all kinds of claims by experts and politicians alike before about the filthy dirty diesels, and history may well be repeating in the not so distant future. 

 

So please can we all remember that we need to keep it in perspective here? 👍

Edited 19 October, 20241 yr by Graham Butcher

Meanwhile on the flip side (and more likely to get approval  from certain quarters of the participants of this thread) another " truth about electric cars" is that for off roaders they have many benefits over ICE off roaders , which is nice  the flip side .

There I can be balanced ;o)


 

 

@Graham Butcher   Was it only 30+ miles that car can do? 

Could it be 30 miles plus 20 miles?

20 kWh x 2.5 miles.        There is in the Review Videos about the cars that had Warranty Issues just being bought back and no new battery fitted. 

 

Now what it is is a car years before the WLTP had Renault or some people saying  22 kWh battery could take the car 140 miles.

Like they say a 32.6 kWh battery can take an Electric MINI that far.  (28.9 kWh usable, no idea what the Renault is usable.

 

So a figure plucked out of the air and testers saying 100 miles more like, and as low as 50 mph in winter. 

 

There is a video on here and do we know actually how far the 12 plate Renault can go?

Odd that is was doing so badly at slow speeds.   

No idea how his regenning was.  There was a comment on having to brake.  Well some are better with brakes and not just regen braking. 

 

It would be good for another video of the actual distance the car can go on 60 mph NSL roads. 

 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CeYSxXDW7xc   115 miles, to maybe 50 miles. Talking about a new car.

 

3 hours on a 3 pin cable even getting 2.1 kWh is 6.3 kWh, and 25 miles divided by 6.3 is near 4 miles a kWh.

So he must know that if there is 20 kWh usable that is a 100 miles range car.

If 25% of the battery capacity is lost then 75 miles getting 4 miles a kWh. 

Edited 19 October, 20241 yr by Ootohere

Pinch of salt obviously on WLTP and New BEV,s. 

But the crap continues of the figures being given. 

All they should do is say to a CEO, lets go for a nice long drive in your latest cars.

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Ootohere said:

Agreed. 

  *But we do not drive theory miles in EV,s, You drive and know what you get, Real World, your world. only those without a EV have the theories, and no miles travelled on a battery charge.*

 

Now look in the Fabia Mk3 section and other sections.

Every damn year, my petrol cars economy is now crap.     Well service and maintain, plugs (might be a diesel, no spark plugs) and filter and tyre pressures, and tell us about your trip lengths, cold starts, etc, and think about the fuel, the cost and tell us actually how many miles to the litres are you getting?

 

 

 

Assuming car is maintained and no binding brakes then the only thing to affect mpg is your right foot in the main assuming same terrain. 

5 hours ago, lol-lol said:

 

EVs and ICE change over their lifetime and newer EVs don't appear to degrade as with early, particularly air cooled ones, but that is a thing of the past and what is being seen now is EVs of the last 8 or 9 years racking up 200k miles quite easily and seeing batteries only degrading by 10% or so, but the performance ie acceleration pretty much being very close to when brand new.

 

Compared to ICE which may well be losing close to half their horse power, which does not affect the range that much but does cripple acceleration which gives us EV drivers even more fun at the lights etc as not only does the ICE power not even maximise until 30 mph or over whereas the EV still has masses of acceleration torque from 5 mph or so. 

 

Even if the EV battery has degraded 5 or 10% over 50, 100, 150k miles the range does not have to be proportional effected.  As aero resistance is a cube ratio just slow down by a couple of percent and one will regain almost 10% of range. But these issues have already been addressed by EV makers.  Unlike an ICE car I have an 8 year warranty on the battery, even better than Hyundai/Kia warranty, that the battery will retain the at least three quarters of its charge and the fix to a cell block going down has now been addresses as cell packs are no longer one homogenous block but modular and if a cell block is poorly performing it can be swapped out a dozens of battery centres.

 

Another area of concern, which was being highlighted pre pandemic, was that much of the emission control tech does not actually work in the real world.  Get that ICE car in a cold late autumn, winter, early spring day, in traffic, rain water splashing all around, high humidity, and the Cat converters does not work properly, the emissions are not within the legal limits they are maybe 5 or six times the prescribed.  Sooner we get pure ICE off the roads the better, scrappage scheme or however.  Full hybrids with decent sized traction batteries ie 10, 20 kwh plus, which rarely need the dirty ICE to kick in so that city pollution is further reduced is needed to reduce its life shortening effects.    

 

Even the EV fire aspect has been addressed with inlet to flood battery compartment to douse fire.....

Renault_Scenic_E-Tech_Hatchback_2023_5d_Electric_EN.pdfRenault_Scenic_E-Tech_Hatchback_2023_5d_Electric_EN.pdfRenault_Scenic_E-Tech_Hatchback_2023_5d_Electric_EN.pdf 1.15 MB · 0 downloads

 

ICE owners need to let go the past and look to getting onboard to the new cleaner future.

 

There is again so much wrong with the above claims but I'm not even going to attempt to address them and prolong this frankly stupid exchange of words except to say the inlet does not do anything to douse the flames as the batteries will still burn under water and if the battery is already on fire (notice the word IF) then the fire brigades will not be able to get water into the inlet as fire and or a deadly mix gases will be emitted through the said inlet preventing access. If the battery is not on fire, then sending hundreds of gallons of water coursing around the battery will rapidly cool the battery and hopefully prevent them from being part of the fire, but would also write the battery off because corrosion will set in which will ultimatly cause a battery fire later on.

 

As to ICE owners needing to let go of the past and getting on board to the new cleaner future, as I said in an earlier post , lets park that that claim for now because I fully expect that will be fully debunked in the fullness of time. I 100% accept that the future will be cleaner at the point of where the car is being used, but far from it at the point of mining, shipping, and end of life as we are not being told the whole truth here.

 

I'll also say that I'm extremelly surprised to see you responding in the massive defence of EV's to extent of trying to rubbish what was a factual claim and statement about ICE v EV, I've always thought of you and @Ootohere as the more sane EV owners / drivers.

Edited 19 October, 20241 yr by Graham Butcher

I cannot dispute that at a local level at point of use EVs are both better for air quality and also offer less noise pollution. 
 

At the probable expense of moving problems elsewhere  in the supply chain

3 minutes ago, Winston_Woof said:

I cannot dispute that at a local level at point of use EVs are both better for air quality and also offer less noise pollution. 
 

At the probable expense of moving problems elsewhere  in the supply chain

 

 

Rare earth metals are increasingly rare in EVs as most have moved on to using common materials.

 

4 hours ago, Ootohere said:

Agreed. 

  *But we do not drive theory miles in EV,s, You drive and know what you get, Real World, your world. only those without a EV have the theories, and no miles travelled on a battery charge.*

 

Now look in the Fabia Mk3 section and other sections.

Every damn year, my petrol cars economy is now crap.     Well service and maintain, plugs (might be a diesel, no spark plugs) and filter and tyre pressures, and tell us about your trip lengths, cold starts, etc, and think about the fuel, the cost and tell us actually how many miles to the litres are you getting?

 

 

 

How can they claim 300 ultra rapid stations when he says that they have 10 bays and 4 long wheelbase bays and only at 150kW? What am I missing here?