RIP the internal combustion engine!

All things Rugby
Post Reply
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5108
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

My predictions from December 2006...
Within a decade from now, sales of fully electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles will have surpassed those of petrol and diesel driven vehicles. New car owners will be driving more kilometres on mains electricity than on petrol or diesel, and cities and towns will be passing regulations to prohibit or restrict the use of internal combustion engines within their boundaries. The noisy, dirty, polluting, complicated, high-maintenance internal combustion engine will be well on its way to the scrap-heap of history.

So will people continue to marvel and drool at the throaty roar of a powerful internal combustion engine at full throttle? No! Our grandchildren will shake their heads in wonder that we were stupid enough to put these monstrosities into our cars, to ship oil around the world to feed their insatiable thirst, and to wage war if those supply lines were threatened; not to mention killing hundreds of thousands with their localised pollution and messing up the entire planet with the greenhouse gases they emit.



So how's it looking? :D

Image
Image

Images: Tesla Model S (left top) and Roadster (right top); Tesla Model X (bottom) - http://www.teslamotors.com/ EDIT: refresh lost image
Last edited by slow wing on Tue May 14, 2013 12:31 am, edited 4 times in total.
User avatar
Richard D. James
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Richard D. James »

I can't wait for that Tesla S to be out. Such an amazing car.

The great thing is, it's not just a better electric car, it actually seems like a better car full stop. I would take it over any internal combustion.

And that touchscreen, oh god 8)

Elon Musk is an absolute champion, SpaceX, Tesla motors. I can almost forgive him for paypal
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5108
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Newcomer Tesla Motors has been at the forefront of this revolution, along with Nissan\Renault with the Nissan Leaf and Renault Fluence. The image above shows the Tesla Model S and Tesla Roadster.


BREAKING!!


“Utility Meets Performance”: Tesla Teases New Model X SUV

Written by: Jake Holmes G+ on January 31 2012 4:30 PM


Image

Electric carmaker Tesla Motors will soon launch a new SUV called the Model X. The company has released a dark teaser photo of the new car along with the tagline “Utility meets performance,” and promises the Model X will be revealed next Thursday, February 9, in California.

We don’t really know anything about the Model X, although lightening the teaser image with Photoshop reveals a curved hooded, sloping roofline, and oval front grille opening. The Model X’s lines are reminiscent of those found on the company’s forthcoming Model S large hatchback. Furthermore, Tesla CEO Elon Musk wrote on his Twitter feed that, “Most cars are pretty blah. This is not.”

As with the company’s Lotus-based Roadster and long-awaited Model S, we expect the Model X to use a proprietary all-electric powertrain developed by Tesla. This won’t be the first time Tesla has dabbled with building an SUV: the company previously partnered with Toyota to build an electrified RAV4.

Sources: Tesla, Twitter

Link: http://wot.motortrend.com/utility-meets-performance-tesla-teases-new-model-x-suv-163811.html


:thumbup: :thumbup:
User avatar
Richard D. James
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Richard D. James »

Can't wait for that, should be a cracking car.
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5108
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

It's exciting, isn't it! Tesla Roadster in production 2008-12, Model S deliveries from July of this year. The Model X cross-over is a smart move as the next step. Why? The cross-over shape is actually logical from a point of minimising drag and so maximising range. Fluid airflow is lost in a sedan as soon as the profile drops down for the rear window - the resulting turbulent air causes drag. So it is better to gradually slope down all the way to the back: the cross-over shape (presumably). You get more space than with a sedan and the drag is actually less!


Agree, Richard. Tesla CEO, Elon Musk is a genius!
User avatar
Geek
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:02 pm

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Geek »

slow wing wrote:So how's it looking? :D

Not very promising I'm afraid. Haven't noticed governments planning a massive series of new builds of power stations to provide all that extra electricity which would be required. I think electric vehicles will remain a tiny niche market for many years to come. Probably see increased competition from Hydrogen as well, though HCCI (improved IC) will be the biggest development over the next decade as regards increased efficiency and environmental impact.
User avatar
Rocketz
Posts: 4582
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: United States of Europe

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Rocketz »

Richard D. James wrote:I can't wait for that Tesla S to be out. Such an amazing car.

The great thing is, it's not just a better electric car, it actually seems like a better car full stop. I would take it over any internal combustion.

And that touchscreen, oh god 8)

Elon Musk is an absolute champion, SpaceX, Tesla motors. I can almost forgive him for paypal


AND HE IS SOUTH AFRICAN!
User avatar
freewheelan
Posts: 779
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by freewheelan »

slow wing, what's the difference between a car that uses electricity that is produced from burning coal and a regular car using petrol (assuming both are the same size and engine capacity), in terms of pollution?
User avatar
Geek
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:02 pm

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Geek »

One pollutes in the city (largely) while the other pollutes in the countryside? Also, the IC engine is more efficient and so burns less fuel per mile traveled..
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5108
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Right on the first part, Geek. Wrong way around on the second part.

Overall, drive efficiency of the Tesla Roadster is 88% - almost three times more efficient than an internal combustion powered vehicle.

http://www.teslamotors.com/goelectric/efficiency

Electricity generation from coal is the very worst case, Freewheelan. Even so, the electric car still comes out about even in energy efficiency. It comes out well ahead with combined cycle gas power plants, which are about one and a half times more efficient than coal. Also, CO2 emissions and local pollution are down. And then electric cars are wonderfully matched with wind power as they can charge overnight when the wind might be blowing but other electricity demand is down. And there is essentially no local or CO2 pollution during operation.

So the efficiency and cleanliness advantages of the electric car just get better as we clean up our electricity grid... :thumbup:
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5108
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Geek wrote:
slow wing wrote:So how's it looking? :D

Not very promising I'm afraid. Haven't noticed governments planning a massive series of new builds of power stations to provide all that extra electricity which would be required. I think electric vehicles will remain a tiny niche market for many years to come. Probably see increased competition from Hydrogen as well, though HCCI (improved IC) will be the biggest development over the next decade as regards increased efficiency and environmental impact.


"Highly Complicated Compression Ignition"?

These incremental gains in dinosaur car efficiency and pollution control are basically achieved by adding to their incredible complexity. Cars with 9 gears. Diesel exhaust systems that filter the carbon particles then light up the filters periodically in order to burn them off. Bells and whistles. Why add to the hundreds of moving parts when you can switch to an electric motor with one moving part: the rotor. :nod:
User avatar
freewheelan
Posts: 779
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by freewheelan »

slow wing wrote:Right on the first part, Geek. Wrong way around on the second part.

Overall, drive efficiency of the Tesla Roadster is 88% - almost three times more efficient than an internal combustion powered vehicle.

http://www.teslamotors.com/goelectric/efficiency

Electricity generation from coal is the very worst case, Freewheelan. Even so, the electric car still comes out about even in energy efficiency. It comes out well ahead with combined cycle gas power plants, which are about one and a half times more efficient than coal. Also, CO2 emissions and local pollution are down. And then electric cars are wonderfully matched with wind power as they can charge overnight when the wind might be blowing but other electricity demand is down. And there is essentially no local or CO2 pollution during operation.

So the efficiency and cleanliness advantages of the electric car just get better as we clean up our electricity grid... :thumbup:


Just wondering. Australia will be using coal for electricity for a long time to come and a lot of farmers don't like those wind mill gizmos because the cause cancer or something.
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5108
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Australia also has one of the world's best solar energy resources as well as some of the most efficient wind turbines. (Just ask Farva.) These can replace the coal for electricity generation. And you can't use coal in your cars, at least not without doing some ridiculous chemistry. Electric cars are good news for Australia imo.
User avatar
Fat Albert
Posts: 1218
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Trantor

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Fat Albert »

Vehicle sales in December 2011 in the Good ol US of A

Code: Select all

Ford F - Series       68,278
Chevrolet Silverado   47,787
Toyota Camry          33,506
Dodge Ram PU          26,013
Nissan Altima         25,976
Ford Escape           25,574
Ford Fusion           21,622
Honda CR-V            21,586
Toyota Corolla        21,009
Honda Civic           20,545   
Chevrolet Equinox     18,195
Honda Accord          17,667   
Jeep Grand Cherokee   17,346
Hyundai Sonata        17,340
Toyota Prius          17,004   
Chevrolet Cruze       16,675
GMC Sierra PU         16,495
Volkswagen Jetta      14,422
Ford Focus            14,281
Toyota RAV4           14,107
Linky

By contrast Nissan sold 672 Leafs in November 2011, Land Rover 4,743 4x4s

Just 4.5 years left Slowy, here's laughing at you for another 54 months
Bert Rutan wrote:You can tell the true environmentalist, he celebrates when climate data shows alarmist predictions of catastrophic warming might be wrong.

A denier disparages new data that shows the planet may be healthy after all.
User avatar
The Man Without Fear
Posts: 11126
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: The centre of The Horrendous Space Kablooie!

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by The Man Without Fear »

I wonder what the sales figures of automobiles were like in the 1900s compared to the sales figures of horses?

Why'd you cherry pick November, incidentally?
User avatar
Bill
Posts: 6408
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Bill »

Wait till electric car sales starts to hit government revenues - electric cars wont be so cheap then!

Not that they are now but you know what I mean
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5108
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Electric cars are getting cheaper. They have a much simpler motor, transmission etc. and everything in the batteries is inexpensive, including the relatively small amount of lithium.


FA, please try to stay focussed. Not sure why the climate change jibe on this thread. The Nissan Leaf in its first year sold more than the Toyota Prius did in its first year. Nissan Leaf sales have been constrained by supply rather than demand. They should double this year and then more than double in 2013.

Meanwhile, the world's best car is coming out this year and it is electric... :smug:
User avatar
Bill
Posts: 6408
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Bill »

Electric cars are getting cheaper. They have a much simpler motor, transmission etc. and everything in the batteries is inexpensive, including the relatively small amount of lithium.


Im not saying they aint, just that if we all switch over to electric cars the government will lose billions in revenue, I predict any cost saving made by the driver will be lost when said government ups taxes to compensate

Probably with a new pay as you go 10p a mile road charge - justified by saying its to save the planet/environment etc
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5108
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Your Government - as well as all right-thinking citizens - will be pleased to be moving towards home grown wind power for transport instead of imported oil.
User avatar
Leading Edge
Posts: 1125
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Leading Edge »

Look, I've actually driven an electric car. Technologically, you'd have to think than in the near future, starting now, that electrics would replace Victorian tech that makes use of a series of small, controlled explosions.

Having said that, the way forward, initially at least, is to build new, very efficient nuclear power stations. They are the only source of power that can ramp up and down rapidly for demand, and supply the inevitable massive increase in electricity consumtion this would bring.

Battery tech needs to have a big leap forward, with regards to capacity and affordability.
User avatar
Bill
Posts: 6408
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Bill »

slow wing wrote:Your Government - as well as all right-thinking citizens - will be pleased to be moving towards home grown wind power for transport instead of imported oil.



solar/nuclear/hydro yes - wind power no, it actually results in more emissions than virtually any other source of power generation


Id be investing massively in nuclear and introducing regulations for new buildings and refurbs that meant you had to incorporate all the latest tech available, especially heat pumps and u/floor heating
Last edited by Bill on Wed Feb 01, 2012 12:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Homer
Posts: 899
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Homer »

slow wing wrote:My predictions from December 2006...

Within a decade from now, sales of fully electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles will have surpassed those of petrol and diesel driven vehicles. New car owners will be driving more kilometres on mains electricity than on petrol or diesel, and cities and towns will be passing regulations to prohibit or restrict the use of internal combustion engines within their boundaries. The noisy, dirty, polluting, complicated, high-maintenance internal combustion engine will be well on its way to the scrap-heap of history.

So will people continue to marvel and drool at the throaty roar of a powerful internal combustion engine at full throttle? No! Our grandchildren will shake their heads in wonder that we were stupid enough to put these monstrosities into our cars, to ship oil around the world to feed their insatiable thirst, and to wage war if those supply lines were threatened; not to mention killing hundreds of thousands with their localised pollution and messing up the entire planet with the greenhouse gases they emit.



So how's it looking? :D


How's it looking?

Well your prediction is not looking too good. By 2016 volumes of BEVs and Plug-in Hybrids will be nowhere near those of conventional powertrains. IC engines are nowhere near the scrapheap yet, although they may be in 50 years time.

Most manufacturers are pursuing a range of technologies, because they realise that not all vehicles/powertrains suit all customers.

For your interest, over the last 2 days I have been driving a Focus Electric. It's very nice, but I accept that cost will be an issue for many, the range will be an issue for many and the luggage space is significantly compromised.
Homer
Posts: 899
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Homer »

slow wing wrote:It's exciting, isn't it! Tesla Roadster in production 2008-12, Model S deliveries from July of this year. The Model X cross-over is a smart move as the next step. Why? The cross-over shape is actually logical from a point of minimising drag and so maximising range. Fluid airflow is lost in a sedan as soon as the profile drops down for the rear window - the resulting turbulent air causes drag. So it is better to gradually slope down all the way to the back: the cross-over shape (presumably). You get more space than with a sedan and the drag is actually less!


Agree, Richard. Tesla CEO, Elon Musk is a genius!


A crossover is basically an SUV. They rarely have good drag coefficients and they tend to have large frontal areas.
User avatar
lilyw
Posts: 2790
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by lilyw »

slow wing wrote:Electric cars are getting cheaper. They have a much simpler motor, transmission etc. and everything in the batteries is inexpensive, including the relatively small amount of lithium.


FA, please try to stay focussed. Not sure why the climate change jibe on this thread. The Nissan Leaf in its first year sold more than the Toyota Prius did in its first year. Nissan Leaf sales have been constrained by supply rather than demand. They should double this year and then more than double in 2013.

Meanwhile, the world's best car is coming out this year and it is electric... :smug:


Much as I support the move towards non-oil based vehicles I'm not sure why you chose to bring back up your prediction about relative sales in 2016. Unless you have some information about secret factories there is no way that there is the capacity to produce in excess of 25m electric vehicles in 2016 (number of cars sold each year across the world is about 50m). The technology is getting better & better (though I remain to be convinced that electric will be the ultimate winner) but there is absolutely no way that the commercial switchover will happen within 4 years.
Homer
Posts: 899
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Homer »

slow wing wrote:
Geek wrote:
slow wing wrote:So how's it looking? :D

Not very promising I'm afraid. Haven't noticed governments planning a massive series of new builds of power stations to provide all that extra electricity which would be required. I think electric vehicles will remain a tiny niche market for many years to come. Probably see increased competition from Hydrogen as well, though HCCI (improved IC) will be the biggest development over the next decade as regards increased efficiency and environmental impact.


"Highly Complicated Compression Ignition"?

These incremental gains in dinosaur car efficiency and pollution control are basically achieved by adding to their incredible complexity. Cars with 9 gears. Diesel exhaust systems that filter the carbon particles then light up the filters periodically in order to burn them off. Bells and whistles. Why add to the hundreds of moving parts when you can switch to an electric motor with one moving part: the rotor. :nod:

Trust me, motor manufacturers would love to have a complete powertrain that is cheaper and more efficient. The cost of meeting new emissions legislation and corporate fuel economy targets is very high.

Unfortunately the technology is not there yet to provide a vehicle that is going to appeal to the mass market.
Homer
Posts: 899
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Homer »

Leading Edge wrote:Look, I've actually driven an electric car. Technologically, you'd have to think than in the near future, starting now, that electrics would replace Victorian tech that makes use of a series of small, controlled explosions.

I've driven quite a few over the years and they are definitely improving, although as a technology electric motors are just as Victorian as IC engines. :D

Having said that, the way forward, initially at least, is to build new, very efficient nuclear power stations. They are the only source of power that can ramp up and down rapidly for demand, and supply the inevitable massive increase in electricity consumtion this would bring.

Battery tech needs to have a big leap forward, with regards to capacity and affordability.

Many countries have not thought through their power generation needs. I see trouble ahead.

Battery technology is advancing pretty quickly, so we'll see what happens.
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5108
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Homer, great that you are getting to try the Ford Focus EV.

Wikipedia says the word "cross-over" is not well defined. It combines some features of SUVs and some of cars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossover_(automobile)
It seems they are getting more like cars...
Image
We will see very soon what Tesla Motors has in mind as they are making the Model X concept public on 9 February.

Lily, that graph above provides an example of rapid changes in car production on the scale of a decade. Make the blue curve ICE cars and the green curve BEVs and... :P
User avatar
Bill
Posts: 6408
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Bill »

Having driven electric buggies countless time around golf courses, Ive always thought they would be perfectly adequate for most of peoples driving needs involving pooping out to somewhere local

Ideal if you have a garage
Homer
Posts: 899
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Homer »

slow wing wrote:Homer, great that you are getting to try the Ford Focus EV.

Wikipedia says the word "cross-over" is not well defined. It combines some features of SUVs and some of cars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossover_(automobile)
It seems they are getting more like cars...
We will see very soon what Tesla Motors has in mind as they are making the Model X concept public on 9 February.

It's not well defined, but if you look at many of the vehicles defined as CUV (Crossover Utility Vehicles) they tend to be SUV's that are optimised for onroad driving or Estate cars with increased off-road ability. Neither of these design strategies are particularly good from an aerodyanmic viewpoint.

The broad spectrum of CUVs or crossovers includes:

Mini CUVs: e.g., Fiat Sedici, Honda HR-V, Nissan Juke, Mini Countryman
Compact CUVs: e.g., Audi Q5, BMW X1, BMW X3, Mahindra XUV500, Ford Escape/Mercury Mariner/Mazda Tribute, Mazda CX-5, Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV4, Nissan Rogue, Acura RDX, Volvo XC60, Hyundai Tucson/Kia Sportage, Suzuki Grand Vitara, Mitsubishi Outlander Sport, Land Rover Freelander, Infiniti EX, Skoda Yeti, Subaru Forester, SsangYong Korando, Mercedes-Benz GLK-Class, Volkswagen Tiguan, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque
Mid-sized CUVs: e.g., BMW X5/BMW X6, Chevy Equinox/GMC Terrain, Ford Edge/Lincoln MKX, Lexus RX, Mercedes-Benz M-Class, Nissan Murano, Cadillac SRX (2010-), Saab 9-4X, Mazda CX-7, Mitsubishi Outlander, Infiniti FX, Hyundai Santa Fe/Kia Sorento (2011-), Volkswagen Touareg/Porsche Cayenne, Toyota Highlander
Full-sized CUVs: e.g., Acura MDX, Audi Q7, Dodge Durango (2011 -), Ford Flex, Ford Explorer (2011-), Honda Pilot, Lincoln MKT, Mazda CX-9, Mercedes-Benz GL-Class, Mercedes-Benz R-Class (all of which offer three rows of seating for 7 or 8 passengers as standard)
Mid-sized sedan-derived CUVs: e.g., Honda Accord Crosstour, Acura ZDX, Toyota Venza, AMC Eagle, Audi A6 allroad quattro, Saab 9-3X, Subaru Outback, Volvo XC70 (the last five being directly based upon Station wagons)
Compact sedan-derived hatchback CUVs: e.g. Toyota Matrix/Pontiac Vibe[12], Subaru Impreza hatchback
Minivan-like CUVs: e.g., Dodge Journey, Tata Aria, Buick Enclave/Chevrolet Traverse/GMC Acadia/Saturn Outlook (defunct), Ford C-MAX, Mazda 5
Semi-offroaders: e.g. Fiat Palio Adventure, Ford Fiesta Trail, Nissan Livina X-Trail, Land Rover LR2, Jeep Compass, Jeep Grand Cherokee (2005-) Peugeot Escapade, etc.
User avatar
The Man Without Fear
Posts: 11126
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: The centre of The Horrendous Space Kablooie!

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by The Man Without Fear »

That's a very odd list in parts. I assume the Americans have no classification of MPV as the C-Max and Mazda 5 could not, in any way, be described as "crossovers". And you'd be laughed out of town if you described the Impreza hatchback as a crossover.
Homer
Posts: 899
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Homer »

Bill wrote:Having driven electric buggies countless time around golf courses, Ive always thought they would be perfectly adequate for most of peoples driving needs involving pooping out to somewhere local

Ideal if you have a garage

We have 'Think' electric cars here (left over from an unsuccessful enterprise) which we use between some manufacturing sites. They are excellent for short journeys. It helps that we have charging stations in the car parks.
User avatar
Fat Albert
Posts: 1218
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Trantor

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Fat Albert »

.
Hey Slowy, just read that Tesla had confirmed deposits for the entire 2012 production run of Model S by Oct 2011

All 6,500 cars :thumbup:, Musk confirms that production will ramp up to 20,000 a year for 2014

If they get there it will be a great achievement, especially given that Honda sold 20,545 Civics and Ford sold 68,238 F150 pick ups in December 2011 in the US market

Given that annualised sales in the US market based on December 2011 will reach 13,400,000 I can see how Tesla's 20,000 a year by 2014 are going to change the US Car market forever
User avatar
Doggyboy
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Doggyboy »

slow wing wrote:Your Government - as well as all right-thinking citizens - will be pleased to be moving towards home grown wind power for transport instead of imported oil.


I'm all for replacing the IC engine with something more sustainable and environmentally friendly, however I'm not easy with the highlighted statement. What next Slowy, re-education camps for dissenters?
Homer
Posts: 899
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Homer »

The Man Without Fear wrote:That's a very odd list in parts. I assume the Americans have no classification of MPV as the C-Max and Mazda 5 could not, in any way, be described as "crossovers".


Americans call MPVs 'Minivans' and I agree that C-Max and Mazda 5 are just that.

And you'd be laughed out of town if you described the Impreza hatchback as a crossover.

I tend to agree, although the old Impreza Estate did meet the criteria of being an estate car with some off-road ability.
User avatar
Bill
Posts: 6408
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Bill »

Homer wrote:
Bill wrote:Having driven electric buggies countless time around golf courses, Ive always thought they would be perfectly adequate for most of peoples driving needs involving pooping out to somewhere local

Ideal if you have a garage

We have 'Think' electric cars here (left over from an unsuccessful enterprise) which we use between some manufacturing sites. They are excellent for short journeys. It helps that we have charging stations in the car parks.



We have a second car and the avergae journey it makes must be no more than a mile, to local shps etc

An electric golf buggy type car would be ideal, hardly any maintenance required plug it in and go hard to any down side
User avatar
theo
Posts: 13023
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by theo »

Have a look here. These are wonderful if expensive...

http://www.lightningcarcompany.co.uk/Li ... tning.html

Image
User avatar
Geek
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:02 pm

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Geek »

slow wing wrote:Right on the first part, Geek. Wrong way around on the second part.

Overall, drive efficiency of the Tesla Roadster is 88% - almost three times more efficient than an internal combustion powered vehicle.


Yes, but the electricity has to be generated first - most likely from coal or gas. Efficiency of coal stations is lower than most IC engines and therefore the efficiency of using electricity and a motor to drive a car is lower at present than the more common alternative.
User avatar
The Man Without Fear
Posts: 11126
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: The centre of The Horrendous Space Kablooie!

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by The Man Without Fear »

Homer wrote:
The Man Without Fear wrote:That's a very odd list in parts. I assume the Americans have no classification of MPV as the C-Max and Mazda 5 could not, in any way, be described as "crossovers".


Americans call MPVs 'Minivans' and I agree that C-Max and Mazda 5 are just that.

And you'd be laughed out of town if you described the Impreza hatchback as a crossover.

I tend to agree, although the old Impreza Estate did meet the criteria of being an estate car with some off-road ability.


You'd probably say the Forester was more in the nature of a crossover, though. In fact, a crossover before the term was spawned given how long it's been around.
User avatar
Bill
Posts: 6408
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Bill »

theo wrote:Have a look here. These are wonderful if expensive...

http://www.lightningcarcompany.co.uk/Li ... tning.html

Image



I want one
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5108
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Geek wrote:
slow wing wrote:Right on the first part, Geek. Wrong way around on the second part.

Overall, drive efficiency of the Tesla Roadster is 88% - almost three times more efficient than an internal combustion powered vehicle.


Yes, but the electricity has to be generated first - most likely from coal or gas. Efficiency of coal stations is lower than most IC engines and therefore the efficiency of using electricity and a motor to drive a car is lower at present than the more common alternative.

Not familiar with you from the old bored but you appear to be some sort of troll. Why else would you snip off the rest of my post, which discusses power plant efficiencies, then 'point out' that the electricity needs to be generated first and give a slanted discussion on power plant efficiencies?

I may not be discussing much with you in the future.
Post Reply