Adventures in an all electric vehicle.

[m_c]

The reason modern cars are more powerful is that they are so flipping heavy!
Remember how big American cars used to be? Driving in Florida recently I realised European cars have more than caught up.
My first car was a Rover SD1 - it was huge for it's day and yet weighed 1300kg. A Vauxhall Insignia weighs 1700kg. A Discovery 4 weighs about 2700kg unladen

But the Insignia's passenger compartment won't crumple like a tin can in a crash.

Biggest driver of more weight is safety. The SD1 wouldn't have side impact protection in the doors, a safety bar behind the dash to stop the passenger compartment crumpling from side impacts, various steel panels to stop things piercing the driver/passengers, A/B/C pillars strong enough to stop the roof collapsing when rolled, front and rear crumple zones to absorb crash impacts to stop crash G-forces from ripping your organs apart inside you, seats that won't just fold you in half if something heavy is thrown around, and lots of other things that add weight but improve your chances of remaining alive.

 

[Agrismith]

But the Insignia's passenger compartment won't crumple like a tin can in a crash.

Biggest driver of more weight is safety. The SD1 wouldn't have side impact protection in the doors, a safety bar behind the dash to stop the passenger compartment crumpling from side impacts, various steel panels to stop things piercing the driver/passengers, A/B/C pillars strong enough to stop the roof collapsing when rolled, front and rear crumple zones to absorb crash impacts to stop crash G-forces from ripping your organs apart inside you, seats that won't just fold you in half if something heavy is thrown around, and lots of other things that add weight but improve your chances of remaining alive.

That's alway the excuse used but we still have super compacts with good crash safety. We still have hatch backs with good crash safety. The cars for sale are designed purely around consumerist economy.
The car manufacturers dictate what we want not the other way round.
And the manufacturers marketing divisions are very clever.
As said before in the thread how much of the stuff in modern cars is actually needed.
Other countries can survive with tuk-tuks. Do we really need such big tech filled vehicles to do the school run and so on.

 

[fizzy]

But the Insignia's passenger compartment won't crumple like a tin can in a crash.

Biggest driver of more weight is safety. The SD1 wouldn't have side impact protection in the doors, a safety bar behind the dash to stop the passenger compartment crumpling from side impacts, various steel panels to stop things piercing the driver/passengers, A/B/C pillars strong enough to stop the roof collapsing when rolled, front and rear crumple zones to absorb crash impacts to stop crash G-forces from ripping your organs apart inside you, seats that won't just fold you in half if something heavy is thrown around, and lots of other things that add weight but improve your chances of remaining alive.

My Sd1 saved me at 75mph off the M4. 30 foot embankment. No crash barrier. Worse thing was the nosedive into a concrete drainage ditch. Then flipped upside down. Car crumpled perfectly. Roof held. Central door locking released. Fuel pump shut off. Worse than Princess Diana's crash as I stopped from 75 to 0 in a fraction of a second.
Very very lucky. Straight 6 engine and a big gearbox connected to the back axle stopped the engine ending up in our laps.
Don't think many modern cars would survive so well except perhaps a Range Rover.

 

[redlig]

That's alway the excuse used but we still have super compacts with good crash safety. We still have hatch backs with good crash safety. The cars for sale are designed purely around consumerist economy.
The car manufacturers dictate what we want not the other way round.
And the manufacturers marketing divisions are very clever.
As said before in the thread how much of the stuff in modern cars is actually needed.
Other countries can survive with tuk-tuks. Do we really need such big tech filled vehicles to do the school run and so on.

More to the point how much tech in a modern car do the owners even know about let alone know how to use it . Bit like white goods with 20 options only 2 of which are used. Tech is there to either cheapen the manufacturing costs or hook the gullible .

 

[m_c]

That's alway the excuse used but we still have super compacts with good crash safety. We still have hatch backs with good crash safety. The cars for sale are designed purely around consumerist economy.
The car manufacturers dictate what we want not the other way round.
And the manufacturers marketing divisions are very clever.
As said before in the thread how much of the stuff in modern cars is actually needed.
Other countries can survive with tuk-tuks. Do we really need such big tech filled vehicles to do the school run and so on.

Good, not excellent.
How do those countries with Tuk-tuks compare in the crash and death statistics?

 

[m_c]

My Sd1 saved me at 75mph off the M4. 30 foot embankment. No crash barrier. Worse thing was the nosedive into a concrete drainage ditch. Then flipped upside down. Car crumpled perfectly. Roof held. Central door locking released. Fuel pump shut off. Worse than Princess Diana's crash as I stopped from 75 to 0 in a fraction of a second.
Very very lucky. Straight 6 engine and a big gearbox connected to the back axle stopped the engine ending up in our laps.
Don't think many modern cars would survive so well except perhaps a Range Rover.

If you really had gone from 75-0 in a fraction of a second, the chances of you surviving without serious injury is very slim.
The fact you said the car rolled, implies that the reduction in speed was a lot more gradual, probably spread over a couple seconds, so the forces involved would have been far less. It may have felt like a fraction of second, but the physics suggest otherwise.

 

[Agrismith]

Good, not excellent.
How do those countries with Tuk-tuks compare in the crash and death statistics?

They don't need the high speed crash safety due to the traffic. Something we are slowly getting on par with.
Also the way modern vehicles are insulated from the outside world inspire bad habits and driving. Old cars that felt every matchstick under the tyres served as a constant reminder of your vulnerability.

 

[optima21]

the daft thing is that is modern cars are so much safer than older cars, why do they keep bringing the speed limits down rather than increasing them. Im guessing that the modern car is safer but the driver of a modern car is more of a hazard.

 

[Agrismith]

the daft thing is that is modern cars are so much safer than older cars, why do they keep bringing the speed limits down rather than increasing them. Im guessing that the modern car is safer but the driver of a modern car is more of a hazard.

As said completely insulated from the real world. I find some of the pobole damage complaints on social media quite funny as I know for sure I wouldn't want to be driving some of these roads anywhere near fast enough for the big potholes to cause damage as the ride over the smaller potholes would be bone shaking

 

[fizzy]

If you really had gone from 75-0 in a fraction of a second, the chances of you surviving without serious injury is very slim.
The fact you said the car rolled, implies that the reduction in speed was a lot more gradual, probably spread over a couple seconds, so the forces involved would have been far less. It may have felt like a fraction of second, but the physics suggest otherwise.

The car did not roll. It stopped in an instant. Felt like being put in a vice and crushed. Seat belts actually broke but saved our lives. Car only flipped over last thing after the energy was spent.
They kept us in overnight. Amazed we had no ruptured internal organs. Being 18 stone and 21 helped a lot. No broken bones but I was so sore it was 3 months before I fully recovered. My mate was also OK but he blacked out I didn't.

 

[GRW]

I know we are all safety-obsessed now (well OK, it seems overall we are to a far, far greater degree than ever).... so I'm genuinely interested - how many on here buy a car, where their primary purchasing devision is on the safety features?

Myself - I confess it doesn't really cross my mind. My primary factors are general reliability of the model, followed by mileage/condition.
(I've always ridden motorbikes, snowboarder, mountain biked and plenty if other risky things besides, so the crash/safety score of driving a steel box just isn't/hasn't been on my radar).

I do highly rate ABS systems - IMO the single biggest road safety innovation ever by a distance.

(I do know though that my "banger" has driver & passenger airbags, & an NCAP4 rating. The best safety feature is to pay attention & anticipate other drivers to avoid placing ones vehicle where anothers error could result in an impact, not rely on the safety features built-in).

People generally don't realise that the car mfrs influence the buyer so much more than they realise. They create a feature, then promote it heavily as a Sales Tool - & in such a way that they convince the Average Joe punter that this feature isn't just something they WANT, but it's something they NEED. The vast majority of the time the feature offers nothing radical or essential, & no-one actually needs it... but the Marketing Dept has done its thing, helped hugely by an easily-led customer base.
Even my "banger" has features that don't objectively matter all that much (e.g. leccy windows & motorised mirrors).

 

[willie.macleod]

I wouldn’t worry, once enough people have ev then any incentives will soon evaporate

That's our local council have just tripled the electricity rates on their rapid chargers so the Leaf will be ~16p/mile energy costs charging on them.

The Mini is a little less than that at current petrol rates and the Discovery is a little above that at current diesel rates. The only good thing is that it will stop the local high end EV owners with massive batteries hogging them, it was galling to see locals with £80k motors sitting there when they could/should be charging them at home overnight on their own chargers and leaving the rapids for those who actually need them to use them as journey chargers.

 

[atomant48]

You could set up a poll to answer your question. It’d be interesting.

 

[GRW]

That's our local council have just tripled the electricity rates on their rapid chargers so the Leaf will be ~16p/mile energy costs charging on them.

The Mini is a little less than that at current petrol rates and the Discovery is a little above that at current diesel rates. The only good thing is that it will stop the local high end EV owners with massive batteries hogging them, it was galling to see locals with £80k motors sitting there when they could/should be charging them at home overnight on their own chargers and leaving the rapids for those who actually need them to use them as journey chargers.

Question. Can/Do EV owners (mis)use charge stations - I.e. use it as an all day Parking Space (plug in & say the car's charged in say 4-hours, but it's there all day while they are in the office)?

 

[atomant48]

Question. Can/Do EV owners (mis)use charge stations - I.e. use it as an all day Parking Space (plug in & say the car's charged in say 4-hours, but it's there all day while they are in the office)?

Tesla have “idle charges” for this very reason - to deter folk from doing this. But etiquette says you don’t do it …. In my offices we have about 10-12 EVs and we are all pretty good at sharing the love.

 

[fizzy]

People shouldn't focus on NCAP too much. A small car with a high rating can be a lot worse against a bigger car with a lower rating. A lorry would get 1 star in the tests but would demolish a small hatchback.

 

[Agrismith]

People shouldn't focus on NCAP too much. A small car with a high rating can be a lot worse against a bigger car with a lower rating. A lorry would get 1 star in the tests but would demolish a small hatchback.

Bit of a funny way of looking at it. Yes a lorry would crumple a small car but lorry v lorry is a hell of a mess. So if we all drove lorries noone would end up a any safer

 

[knighty]

For those wondering why EV's have such high power motors, it's all to do with getting enough torque to get them moving.
ICE vehicles have the benefit of multiple gears. EV vehicles only have a fixed gear.
You don't get 200hp from a 200hp motor at low RPM.

You could build an EV with a 50hp motor, but you'll either have to gear it so it can pull away on steep slopes with limited top speed, gear it for more top speed but not be able to get it moving on a slope, or fit a gearbox. However from a cost/reliability perspective, it's cheaper and more reliable to fit a bigger motor, than add the cost and complexity of a multi-speed gearbox.

I thought electric motors have maximum torque at low revs not high revs? (from a standing start)

 

[Seadog]

Series wound has maximum torque from zero. The old tube trains had mechanical selectors that slowly changed the motor configuration as speed was gathered, until they had a compound arrangement ( both series and parallel field windings) . That's what the tick-tick from a seat near you was all about

 

[willie.macleod]

Question. Can/Do EV owners (mis)use charge stations - I.e. use it as an all day Parking Space (plug in & say the car's charged in say 4-hours, but it's there all day while they are in the office)?

They started the overstay charges on the rapids here a few months ago but other than that paying for parking isn't really a thing here (we do have some pay&display but enough free options to easily avoid) so no real benefit for drivers leaving cars on the chargers.