Will Electric Vehicles Be Viable? When?

[izzy]

THe problem with banning things that you don't like / see the point of, is that very quickly most things get banned. There's always something that someone doesn't like / see the point of. After all, there's no reason why you have to have the car type that you prefer: you could make use of a public bus...

SUV's are a low hanging fruit for EV makers as they're already heavy and have lots of space low down for batteries. but they're like guns: great for the individual, bad for the community. They're terrible for small cars to have accidents with, so they're kind of self breeding as mums know this and don't want their kids being squished.

So they spread and then gradually all the advantages of being able to see over other cars and have better accidents and bully them disappear and you're just left with cars in general being bigger and using more resources

so they ought to be banned, as they're just a bad idea collectively. They're only a great idea when you've got one and other people haven't

But what i'd do is change the safety crash test so instead of them all crashing into the same concrete block i'd make it car-to-car and have them each absorb their own energy, so if you make it heavier you have to add much more crush zone. And that'd really reward lighter batteries as well, and even up the playing field safety wise and make them even more obviously a bad idea

[Just_a_fan]

THe problem with banning things that you don't like / see the point of, is that very quickly most things get banned. There's always something that someone doesn't like / see the point of. After all, there's no reason why you have to have the car type that you prefer: you could make use of a public bus...

SUV's are a low hanging fruit for EV makers as they're already heavy and have lots of space low down for batteries. but they're like guns: great for the individual, bad for the community. They're terrible for small cars to have accidents with, so they're kind of self breeding as mums know this and don't want their kids being squished.

So they spread and then gradually all the advantages of being able to see over other cars and have better accidents and bully them disappear and you're just left with cars in general being bigger and using more resources

so they ought to be banned, as they're just a bad idea collectively. They're only a great idea when you've got one and other people haven't

Cars should be banned because they always win in a crash with pedestrians.

See where that argument heads?

Any argument levelled at SUVs can be levelled at cars in general.

[nzjrs]

THe problem with banning things that you don't like / see the point of, is that very quickly most things get banned. There's always something that someone doesn't like / see the point of. After all, there's no reason why you have to have the car type that you prefer: you could make use of a public bus...

SUV's are a low hanging fruit for EV makers as they're already heavy and have lots of space low down for batteries. but they're like guns: great for the individual, bad for the community. They're terrible for small cars to have accidents with, so they're kind of self breeding as mums know this and don't want their kids being squished.

So they spread and then gradually all the advantages of being able to see over other cars and have better accidents and bully them disappear and you're just left with cars in general being bigger and using more resources

so they ought to be banned, as they're just a bad idea collectively. They're only a great idea when you've got one and other people haven't

But what i'd do is change the safety crash test so instead of them all crashing into the same concrete block i'd make it car-to-car and have them each absorb their own energy, so if you make it heavier you have to add much more crush zone. And that'd really reward lighter batteries as well, and even up the playing field safety wise and make them even more obviously a bad idea

I'm also favour of going back to lighter F1 cars. I think the current safety standards add quite a bit of weight to all the cars and its maybe not necessary. The heavier the cars the stronger and larger the cars have to be, so it just kind of spreads. I don't really want to be responsible for making F1 cars less safe however, so I dont want to ban heavy F1 cars, but I think heavy cars are just a bad idea collectively.

Oh wait, wrong thread.

[Just_a_fan]

You can make cars lighter by making them slower. Slower means less energy to deal with in a crash. That's true of road cars and racing cars. However, as no car (be it road or race car) is crash tested at anything like a high speed, it's all a bit moot.

[Andres125sx]

Lower weight would reduce tyre wear and hence PM2.5 pollution.

And cars will be faster, with better maneuverability, will brake is less space, and will consume less energy.

But if we take this too seriously, then SUVs, at least those that cant go off-road wich are a vast majority, should be banned, as they weight and pollute too much for no reason

THe problem with banning things that you don't like / see the point of, is that very quickly most things get banned. There's always something that someone doesn't like / see the point of. After all, there's no reason why you have to have the car type that you prefer: you could make use of a public bus...

You missed my point, or probably I didn´t word it properly. What you say is exactly what I was trying to say when replying Henry post about weight of batteries causing more PM2.5 pollution. Yes they do, but there are other heavy vehicles in the roads like SUVs, with EVs at least that´s due to batteries that reduce pollution drastically, so if we´re going to look at vehicles weight that carefully, we should start with other vehicles like SUVs that are heavy, and also burn fossil fuels, so they increase PM2.5 pollution similar to EVs, but they also increase CO2 emissions, CO, NOx, cinder, etc., contrary to EVs

[Andres125sx]

THe problem with banning things that you don't like / see the point of, is that very quickly most things get banned. There's always something that someone doesn't like / see the point of. After all, there's no reason why you have to have the car type that you prefer: you could make use of a public bus...

SUV's are a low hanging fruit for EV makers as they're already heavy and have lots of space low down for batteries. but they're like guns: great for the individual, bad for the community. They're terrible for small cars to have accidents with, so they're kind of self breeding as mums know this and don't want their kids being squished.

So they spread and then gradually all the advantages of being able to see over other cars and have better accidents and bully them disappear and you're just left with cars in general being bigger and using more resources

so they ought to be banned, as they're just a bad idea collectively. They're only a great idea when you've got one and other people haven't

But what i'd do is change the safety crash test so instead of them all crashing into the same concrete block i'd make it car-to-car and have them each absorb their own energy, so if you make it heavier you have to add much more crush zone. And that'd really reward lighter batteries as well, and even up the playing field safety wise and make them even more obviously a bad idea

Great post, I´ve even considered a SUV sometimes just as a safety measure... against other SUVs I don´t want to crash with a SUV while on a small car as I usually drive into one

I specially liked last paragraph about crash tests for SUVs, that´s a good idea but I´d include damage to the other car into the equation, so a car very safe for its own passenger but wich causes more damage to other vehicles should not be considered very safe. If damage to pedestrians is considered for the test (wich is the reason front wings are not allowed for road cars), I think damage to other vehicles should be considered too

[Big Tea]

Maybe they should consider dropping the 'S' from the description?

Do you really need 'sport' performance from a vehicle for carrying kids to school?
To my mind all modern vehicles have far too much performance for 99% of their use, so reducing performance and the associated weight would have little practical effect most of the time.

[izzy]

Great post, I´ve even considered a SUV sometimes just as a safety measure... against other SUVs I don´t want to crash with a SUV while on a small car as I usually drive into one

I specially liked last paragraph about crash tests for SUVs, that´s a good idea but I´d include damage to the other car into the equation, so a car very safe for its own passenger but wich causes more damage to other vehicles should not be considered very safe. If damage to pedestrians is considered for the test (wich is the reason front wings are not allowed for road cars), I think damage to other vehicles should be considered too

yay thank you Yes i was trying to say what you say, that they should be responsible for the severity of the other vehicle's accident, and yes pedestrians are worse off too, they're not tipped over like with cars they're more instantly accelerated to the speed of the vehicle

[izzy]

Maybe they should consider dropping the 'S' from the description?

Do you really need 'sport' performance from a vehicle for carrying kids to school?
To my mind all modern vehicles have far too much performance for 99% of their use, so reducing performance and the associated weight would have little practical effect most of the time.

well you get better performance from a light vehicle of course, it's the weight and height of urban 4x4's that are basically licensed selfishness that in the end is bad for everyone. And yes with performance, with ICE you need a big one that guzzles more fuel all the time so you can be fast for 1% of the time as you say.

With EV it doesn't need a huge amount of extra weight to have the performance, the Model3 Performance only adds 117kg for the second motor for example, and then it's a matter of how fast you can discharge the battery, which someone (forgotten who) is doing with supercapacitors in conjunction with lithium-ion, so EV is pretty perfect for this scenario of needing amazing acceleration instantly, once in a while, and normal economy the rest of the time

[strad]

you know the first (and second) land speed records were set by electric vehicles,,, of course that was long ago and was the last time an electric vehicle held the LSR.

[Big Tea]

you know the first (and second) land speed records were set by electric vehicles,,, of course that was long ago and was the last time an electric vehicle held the LSR.

I am not questioning the ability of EV,s my point is the weight to meet a respectable crash test at 130mph must be far than that at 90 mph, so make them top out at 90 and fit appropriate tyres wheels disks etc for a max of 90 not 130.

[Just_a_fan]

Maybe they should consider dropping the 'S' from the description?

Do you really need 'sport' performance from a vehicle for carrying kids to school?
To my mind all modern vehicles have far too much performance for 99% of their use, so reducing performance and the associated weight would have little practical effect most of the time.

well you get better performance from a light vehicle of course, it's the weight and height of urban 4x4's that are basically licensed selfishness that in the end is bad for everyone. And yes with performance, with ICE you need a big one that guzzles more fuel all the time so you can be fast for 1% of the time as you say.

With EV it doesn't need a huge amount of extra weight to have the performance, the Model3 Performance only adds 117kg for the second motor for example, and then it's a matter of how fast you can discharge the battery, which someone (forgotten who) is doing with supercapacitors in conjunction with lithium-ion, so EV is pretty perfect for this scenario of needing amazing acceleration instantly, once in a while, and normal economy the rest of the time

"Only" adding that 117kg means that you have to lug that 117kg around all the time so it affects economy all the time, not just in use. Just as with a performance ICE.

And why should you be selfish and have a "performance EV"? You don't need to go faster than the speed limit so why do you need an EV to be silly-quick? If we're going to be crying foul against SUVs for being dangerous to other cars, then we must also cry foul against cars that go fast. Speed is the worst thing in any accident. You know the physics so I won't remind you. So all cars must be limited to no more than, say, 30mph (arbitrarily picking a figure just as SUVs are arbitrarily picked on). That's more than enough for anyone. Anymore is just being selfish.

I do wonder who will pull you up the hills when the weather is bad and all the SUVs are banned, however. Funny how people are very appreciative of SUVs that tow them up a snowy incline then...

Oh, and about towing. EVs just don't tow at the moment. Not enough to be useful, anyway. A caravan maybe, but not a horse trailer, for example.

[Big Tea]

Maybe they should consider dropping the 'S' from the description?

Do you really need 'sport' performance from a vehicle for carrying kids to school?
To my mind all modern vehicles have far too much performance for 99% of their use, so reducing performance and the associated weight would have little practical effect most of the time.

well you get better performance from a light vehicle of course, it's the weight and height of urban 4x4's that are basically licensed selfishness that in the end is bad for everyone. And yes with performance, with ICE you need a big one that guzzles more fuel all the time so you can be fast for 1% of the time as you say.

With EV it doesn't need a huge amount of extra weight to have the performance, the Model3 Performance only adds 117kg for the second motor for example, and then it's a matter of how fast you can discharge the battery, which someone (forgotten who) is doing with supercapacitors in conjunction with lithium-ion, so EV is pretty perfect for this scenario of needing amazing acceleration instantly, once in a while, and normal economy the rest of the time

"Only" adding that 117kg means that you have to lug that 117kg around all the time so it affects economy all the time, not just in use. Just as with a performance ICE.

And why should you be selfish and have a "performance EV"? You don't need to go faster than the speed limit so why do you need an EV to be silly-quick? If we're going to be crying foul against SUVs for being dangerous to other cars, then we must also cry foul against cars that go fast. Speed is the worst thing in any accident. You know the physics so I won't remind you. So all cars must be limited to no more than, say, 30mph (arbitrarily picking a figure just as SUVs are arbitrarily picked on). That's more than enough for anyone. Anymore is just being selfish.

I do wonder who will pull you up the hills when the weather is bad and all the SUVs are banned, however. Funny how people are very appreciative of SUVs that tow them up a snowy incline then...

Oh, and about towing. EVs just don't tow at the moment. Not enough to be useful, anyway. A caravan maybe, but not a horse trailer, for example.

Again, what does 'sport' performance have to do with towing up a snow hill? I expect it would be at 20- 30 mph not 120. A nice 4x4 is fine, why do they have to be as they are now to take the kids to school? you would be peeved if the wife did 120 on the school run with an 8 and 10 year old in the back and a baby seat in the front, would you not?

If yo want a superfast vehicle, that's fine, but do they all need the sport image or performance? One of my all time favourite was my Toyota Previa. it was quite quick enough off the mark, would pull the side off a house and was like a club room inside and would cruse at 80+ all day. that sort of thing is far more practical and useful than many I see on the road today that accelerate corner and stop like a F1 car of 30 years ago. performance is fine if thats what you want, but how many do. Get a 4x4 by all means but 'sport'?

[djos]

SUV was just a silly made-up term by some drug-addled marketing droid because the vast majority of 4x4 style vehicles are not actually 4 wheel drive - "Sport" is just there to sex up the acronym.

[izzy]

"Only" adding that 117kg means that you have to lug that 117kg around all the time so it affects economy all the time, not just in use. Just as with a performance ICE.

And why should you be selfish and have a "performance EV"? You don't need to go faster than the speed limit so why do you need an EV to be silly-quick? If we're going to be crying foul against SUVs for being dangerous to other cars, then we must also cry foul against cars that go fast. Speed is the worst thing in any accident. You know the physics so I won't remind you. So all cars must be limited to no more than, say, 30mph (arbitrarily picking a figure just as SUVs are arbitrarily picked on). That's more than enough for anyone. Anymore is just being selfish.

I do wonder who will pull you up the hills when the weather is bad and all the SUVs are banned, however. Funny how people are very appreciative of SUVs that tow them up a snowy incline then...

Oh, and about towing. EVs just don't tow at the moment. Not enough to be useful, anyway. A caravan maybe, but not a horse trailer, for example.

117 kg isn't huge, it's one big passenger so EV's are just inherently a much better compromise for a car that's super quick sometimes. And lol don't gimme this absurdum consistency argument, everything is relative and my point about SUV's is that (a) they tend to make everyone upsize and (b) once everyone has upsized the point of them is gone! The appeal is being bigger than the other cars

And the urban SUV's we're talking about aren't proper off-roaders, they run on wide road tyres that are like 4 skis on snow

Plus as for speed, like any self-respecting F1 fan i never fail to break the speed limit every time i go out!! But the best car for that is light and low, like a Lotus, McLaren, Ferrari etc etc and it would just get flattened by a 4x4

thinking about it, now you mention it, another good rule would be to make them run actual off-road tyres