audio-talk

Nick wrote: ↑Tue Jul 13, 2021 3:36 pm I guess you could answer your own question. How often do you think your car needs to accelerate faster?

I know my answer Nick.

Very rarely do I need the full performance, mainly due to traffic conditions. Although the horsepower and torque were improved when the ECU was modified, the main benefits are drivability (more torque) and improved fuel consumption.

If I had a car (that was not predominantly a "daily driver") with a 750BHP supercharged 6.2 litre Chevrolet V8 I might think differently.

So if Greg gave that answer what you you know that you didn’t before?

I only ask as I have a car that in theory does 168 but I don't expect to use it, but its nice to know its a possibility. Likewise if I want all the power it needs taking over 6k, not something to do on the roads that often (motorway on ramp maybe). Though I need to get into the habit of revving it a bit more to keep it happy.

And even if Greg answered the first part of your question, he couldn't answer the second any better than you if he hasn't got a car that isn't a Tesla 3.

I think the performance of EV's is as much a sign of the efficiency of their internal systems and battery management as much as outright performance, so if I had a EV that didn't do that I would wonder why not and what other effects those choices in design would have.

I don't think it's an unreasonable question, but it really depends on how far the new breed are going to be slugged.
I remember the first time I drove my mondeo durawotsit...it replaced a peugeot 406 and I was shocked the way it leaped to attention. It was only 130 bhp but after a day or two I really felt safe pulling away and overtaking. chalk and cheese to the peugeot.

I now have a 115bhp vauxhall bean can and I'm so much more reluctant to overtake...and I don't feel half as safe...but the equiv of 130bhp in a reasonable EV should surely be adequate...having said that I've no idea what the equiv bhp of a Tesla is or what the intended slugged EV bhp equates to.

Remember BEV's tend to be heavier than the equivalent ICE.

I’ve floored it only once, showing off to my son. I bottled it hitting 90 in such a short time and distance on a damp road, it frightened me!
Spec for the Tesla Model 3 Dual Motor Long Range is 0-62 in 4.4secs, top speed 145mph, power 324kW/434hp which calculates as 428bhp.
No, I never use all the power although I like the ‘head room’ because the power is instantaneous (no gear or power band to be considered) which is useful (for a recently used instance) to overtake caravans on the winding roads of Somerset and Dorset. The sum of the car is much more than just the acceleration and speed. I stick to speed limits. Apart from the legality, I prefer to arrive at my destination feeling relaxed which hard driving doesn’t allow. Most EV’s on the market at present will offer the new owner enhanced performance over what they were previously familiar with, so it’s a win win whether it’s a Tesla or an electric Mini or even the new electric Fiat 500 which my good lady rather likes the look of.

Nick wrote: ↑Tue Jul 13, 2021 6:38 pm Remember BEV's tend to be heavier than the equivalent ICE.

good point... I just went googling

the Tesla 3 weighs an average of 3600 lbs
the mondeo 2.0l diesel 130 weighs 1556 lbs

but the Tesla goes to 60 in about 4 secs
the mondeo goes to 60 in about 10 secs

there must be some wiggle room in the middle

Nick wrote: ↑Tue Jul 13, 2021 4:21 pm So if Greg gave that answer what you you know that you didn’t before?

I only ask as I have a car that in theory does 168 but I don't expect to use it, but its nice to know its a possibility. Likewise if I want all the power it needs taking over 6k, not something to do on the roads that often (motorway on ramp maybe). Though I need to get into the habit of revving it a bit more to keep it happy.

And even if Greg answered the first part of your question, he couldn't answer the second any better than you if he hasn't got a car that isn't a Tesla 3.

I think the performance of EV's is as much a sign of the efficiency of their internal systems and battery management as much as outright performance, so if I had a EV that didn't do that I would wonder why not and what other effects those choices in design would have.

Yep, an occasional Italian tune up is a good thing.

ed wrote: ↑Tue Jul 13, 2021 6:50 pm good point... I just went googling

the Tesla 3 weighs an average of 3600 lbs
the mondeo 2.0l diesel 130 weighs 1556 lbs

That must be the new Lotus re-engineered Mondeo, Ed !
I'm seeing 1505kg or 3318 lbs for the Mondeo.

IslandPink wrote: ↑Thu Jul 15, 2021 2:13 pm

ed wrote: ↑Tue Jul 13, 2021 6:50 pm good point... I just went googling

the Tesla 3 weighs an average of 3600 lbs
the mondeo 2.0l diesel 130 weighs 1556 lbs

That must be the new Lotus re-engineered Mondeo, Ed !
I'm seeing 1505kg or 3318 lbs for the Mondeo.

my bad Mark, all I can find by googling today is the figure you mention.....
I can't be sure but the figure I quoted yesterday must have been from an article that used lbs instead of kgs..mistakenly?

This looks interesting-

Formula 1 boss Ross Brawn says hydrogen could be future fuel.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/57842205

Hydrogen is all very exciting.

Still worries me, having a tank of either highly pressurised or even liquid (20K-33K!!!) hydrogen on the vehicle.

If I was a first responder, I'd be wearing my extra absorbent re-enforced, triple-knit underwear (*) when approaching a crashed hydrogen-powered vehicle...

(*) probably two pairs actually... and maybe some moderate PPE... obviously, hands aren't important

Yep 350barr is not to be messed with

An interesting technology story - not entirely unrelated...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57747128

I have colleagues working on the electric plane.. it’s a marketing stunt. Could have its place in “flying cars” in the future. The real prize is to use electric motors to manage the turbo machinery instead of bleeding compressed air. Need efficient generators which is the challenge, a few % of losses here and there makes it a challenge At the cutting end of technology we are trying to put a 99.9% efficient 356MW gearbox into an engine, just think what the 0.1% efficiency penalty means in heat and noise.