Battery Electric Vehicle News / Enjoying the Transportation Revolution

JKenH

Observations from someone who has tried the new Tesla without Low regen.



https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaLounge/comments/jj7igi/tesla_may_have_removed_the_option_to_select_regen/

Solarchaser

Martyn1981 said:

JKenH said:

Solarchaser said:

Erm no.
Firstly you are not generating heat, the engine becomes an air pump, since no fuel is being burned,  and so actually you cool everything down, including your coolant,  and because you are pumping air this cleans out the crankcase,  so that when you press the go pedal again, nice clean air goes into the engine, so you get a more efficient burn, and more energy per cycle.
Since you will be in a high gear, the biggest restriction to your speed will be friction of tyres on road and the air pressure building up in front of the car... faster car = more air resistance to overcome.

Talking about internal combustion engines here.

I mean, I like your theory and the thought you have put into it, but as someone who has spent a fair bit of time making my engine (and many others) as efficient at putting out two or three times their manufactured power as possible,  I assure you it doesn't work that way.

I realise this is taking the thread even further away from EV news but I do need to respond to that.

If, as you say, your engine is acting as an air pump, what is driving it? The kinetic energy of the car, of course, the turning of the wheels is turning the engine over. All that compressing of air inside the engine generates heat. It’s basic physics, compressing air requires an input of energy and produces heat. Just think of your bicycle pump, it gets hot as you use it. 

I realise we are not going to agree which is the most efficient approach but as it seems we can’t even agree on basic physics, perhaps we should leave it there.

It's not just the physics, it's also reality. Firstly all your claims are based on the ability to gain speed, so you have to be below the speed limit and the road conditions. But more importantly, have you driven a car the last 30yrs??? in an overgear (top gear) you don't get much engine braking, so I think you are applying extreme example theories to real life, and it simply ain't so.

Exactly. 
Your ice engine in normal mode runs 700-900c, if you think that pumping only air heats that up.... no!

I have exaust gas temperature (egt) on my own car. I can 100% assure you regardless of theory. Decel definitely cools, not heats

JKenH

Solarchaser said:

Martyn1981 said:

JKenH said:

Solarchaser said:

Erm no.
Firstly you are not generating heat, the engine becomes an air pump, since no fuel is being burned,  and so actually you cool everything down, including your coolant,  and because you are pumping air this cleans out the crankcase,  so that when you press the go pedal again, nice clean air goes into the engine, so you get a more efficient burn, and more energy per cycle.
Since you will be in a high gear, the biggest restriction to your speed will be friction of tyres on road and the air pressure building up in front of the car... faster car = more air resistance to overcome.

Talking about internal combustion engines here.

I mean, I like your theory and the thought you have put into it, but as someone who has spent a fair bit of time making my engine (and many others) as efficient at putting out two or three times their manufactured power as possible,  I assure you it doesn't work that way.

I realise this is taking the thread even further away from EV news but I do need to respond to that.

If, as you say, your engine is acting as an air pump, what is driving it? The kinetic energy of the car, of course, the turning of the wheels is turning the engine over. All that compressing of air inside the engine generates heat. It’s basic physics, compressing air requires an input of energy and produces heat. Just think of your bicycle pump, it gets hot as you use it. 

I realise we are not going to agree which is the most efficient approach but as it seems we can’t even agree on basic physics, perhaps we should leave it there.

It's not just the physics, it's also reality. Firstly all your claims are based on the ability to gain speed, so you have to be below the speed limit and the road conditions. But more importantly, have you driven a car the last 30yrs??? in an overgear (top gear) you don't get much engine braking, so I think you are applying extreme example theories to real life, and it simply ain't so.

Exactly. 
Your ice engine in normal mode runs 700-900c, if you think that pumping only air heats that up.... no!

I have exaust gas temperature (egt) on my own car. I can 100% assure you regardless of theory. Decel definitely cools, not heats

I think you may be referring to the temperature of the exhaust gases. A car engine is more likely to run at around 90*C. With a 1.3 bar radiator cap water will boil at 124*C. 

I’ll leave it at that.

Martyn1981

Solarchaser said:

Martyn1981 said:

JKenH said:

Solarchaser said:

Erm no.
Firstly you are not generating heat, the engine becomes an air pump, since no fuel is being burned,  and so actually you cool everything down, including your coolant,  and because you are pumping air this cleans out the crankcase,  so that when you press the go pedal again, nice clean air goes into the engine, so you get a more efficient burn, and more energy per cycle.
Since you will be in a high gear, the biggest restriction to your speed will be friction of tyres on road and the air pressure building up in front of the car... faster car = more air resistance to overcome.

Talking about internal combustion engines here.

I mean, I like your theory and the thought you have put into it, but as someone who has spent a fair bit of time making my engine (and many others) as efficient at putting out two or three times their manufactured power as possible,  I assure you it doesn't work that way.

I realise this is taking the thread even further away from EV news but I do need to respond to that.

If, as you say, your engine is acting as an air pump, what is driving it? The kinetic energy of the car, of course, the turning of the wheels is turning the engine over. All that compressing of air inside the engine generates heat. It’s basic physics, compressing air requires an input of energy and produces heat. Just think of your bicycle pump, it gets hot as you use it. 

I realise we are not going to agree which is the most efficient approach but as it seems we can’t even agree on basic physics, perhaps we should leave it there.

It's not just the physics, it's also reality. Firstly all your claims are based on the ability to gain speed, so you have to be below the speed limit and the road conditions. But more importantly, have you driven a car the last 30yrs??? in an overgear (top gear) you don't get much engine braking, so I think you are applying extreme example theories to real life, and it simply ain't so.

Exactly. 
Your ice engine in normal mode runs 700-900c, if you think that pumping only air heats that up.... no!

I have exaust gas temperature (egt) on my own car. I can 100% assure you regardless of theory. Decel definitely cools, not heats

But it is funny listening to these edge case theories instead of applying logic and reality. Then we have that post from Ken about the harshness of full regen, yes, as I said a while back, it will press you into the seat belt, it's brilliant to have that much regen if you need it, but ....... do I really need to point this out .......... you don't get the full regen on lift off till after the zero then low regen. So it's entirely the choice of the driver how much of full regen to 'deploy' when driving in 'standard' mode. If that driver is making his family ill, then it's entirely down to bad driving, the same as point, squirt, brake driving in an ICEV from light to lights will do.

This is possibly the silliest attempt to dig the deepest hole I've ever read on here (G&E), and that includes some of MR C's classics.

BTW, Wifey started off using low regen on her profile, but switched to standard after a few days. But she still drives in chill mode as she likes her eyeballs to stay where they are when she accelerates. 

JKenH

Martyn1981 said:

Solarchaser said:

Martyn1981 said:

JKenH said:

Solarchaser said:

Erm no.
Firstly you are not generating heat, the engine becomes an air pump, since no fuel is being burned,  and so actually you cool everything down, including your coolant,  and because you are pumping air this cleans out the crankcase,  so that when you press the go pedal again, nice clean air goes into the engine, so you get a more efficient burn, and more energy per cycle.
Since you will be in a high gear, the biggest restriction to your speed will be friction of tyres on road and the air pressure building up in front of the car... faster car = more air resistance to overcome.

Talking about internal combustion engines here.

I mean, I like your theory and the thought you have put into it, but as someone who has spent a fair bit of time making my engine (and many others) as efficient at putting out two or three times their manufactured power as possible,  I assure you it doesn't work that way.

I realise this is taking the thread even further away from EV news but I do need to respond to that.

If, as you say, your engine is acting as an air pump, what is driving it? The kinetic energy of the car, of course, the turning of the wheels is turning the engine over. All that compressing of air inside the engine generates heat. It’s basic physics, compressing air requires an input of energy and produces heat. Just think of your bicycle pump, it gets hot as you use it. 

I realise we are not going to agree which is the most efficient approach but as it seems we can’t even agree on basic physics, perhaps we should leave it there.

It's not just the physics, it's also reality. Firstly all your claims are based on the ability to gain speed, so you have to be below the speed limit and the road conditions. But more importantly, have you driven a car the last 30yrs??? in an overgear (top gear) you don't get much engine braking, so I think you are applying extreme example theories to real life, and it simply ain't so.

Exactly. 
Your ice engine in normal mode runs 700-900c, if you think that pumping only air heats that up.... no!

I have exaust gas temperature (egt) on my own car. I can 100% assure you regardless of theory. Decel definitely cools, not heats

But it is funny listening to these edge case theories instead of applying logic and reality. Then we have that post from Ken about the harshness of full regen, yes, as I said a while back, it will press you into the seat belt, it's brilliant to have that much regen if you need it, but ....... do I really need to point this out .......... you don't get the full regen on lift off till after the zero then low regen. So it's entirely the choice of the driver how much of full regen to 'deploy' when driving in 'standard' mode. If that driver is making his family ill, then it's entirely down to bad driving, the same as point, squirt, brake driving in an ICEV from light to lights will do.

This is possibly the silliest attempt to dig the deepest hole I've ever read on here (G&E), and that includes some of MR C's classics.

BTW, Wifey started off using low regen on her profile, but switched to standard after a few days. But she still drives in chill mode as she likes her eyeballs to stay where they are when she accelerates. 

This all does sound very much like Tesla fanboy stuff. Tesla remove an option from the car and the fanboys run around saying you didn’t need it anyway and it is an improvement (more efficient). 

Had anyone suggested that it might be a good idea previously? No. But apparently it now is. Tesla have been making cars for a decade and have just decided that no one need two levels of regen. No announcement, no explanation, it just disappears and that just happens to coincide with EPA range increases. 

You say “So a non story, other than Tesla almost certainly knowing better than us how to maximise efficiency of their cars.”

There are numerous reports of motion sickness induced by regen other than the one I quoted but your response is that it is entirely down to bad driving, i.e. totally dismissive. 

A lot depends on the way you drive and not everyone can be as good as you and @Solarchaser, always able to find that sweet spot, so the absence of a low regen option will lead to more jerky progress for many. Some people are more nervous and still drive the old fashioned way of lifting off the accelerator and covering the brake when they anticipate a hazard ahead, perhaps a pedestrian standing at a crossing. In that situation with standard regen it will, as you say above, press you into the seat belt. That does not make for smooth progress or a comfortable ride for passengers. Perhaps you regard these as edge cases but others may not.

For many people transitioning to an EV it could be quite a shock and not a great selling point. 

I am not saying it is the end of the world but I am surprised that you cannot see anything negative about it and feel the need to defend it so vigorously.  I suppose we can all be blinded by something we believe in. 

Martyn1981

JKenH said:

Martyn1981 said:

Solarchaser said:

Martyn1981 said:

JKenH said:

Solarchaser said:

Erm no.
Firstly you are not generating heat, the engine becomes an air pump, since no fuel is being burned,  and so actually you cool everything down, including your coolant,  and because you are pumping air this cleans out the crankcase,  so that when you press the go pedal again, nice clean air goes into the engine, so you get a more efficient burn, and more energy per cycle.
Since you will be in a high gear, the biggest restriction to your speed will be friction of tyres on road and the air pressure building up in front of the car... faster car = more air resistance to overcome.

Talking about internal combustion engines here.

I mean, I like your theory and the thought you have put into it, but as someone who has spent a fair bit of time making my engine (and many others) as efficient at putting out two or three times their manufactured power as possible,  I assure you it doesn't work that way.

I realise this is taking the thread even further away from EV news but I do need to respond to that.

If, as you say, your engine is acting as an air pump, what is driving it? The kinetic energy of the car, of course, the turning of the wheels is turning the engine over. All that compressing of air inside the engine generates heat. It’s basic physics, compressing air requires an input of energy and produces heat. Just think of your bicycle pump, it gets hot as you use it. 

I realise we are not going to agree which is the most efficient approach but as it seems we can’t even agree on basic physics, perhaps we should leave it there.

It's not just the physics, it's also reality. Firstly all your claims are based on the ability to gain speed, so you have to be below the speed limit and the road conditions. But more importantly, have you driven a car the last 30yrs??? in an overgear (top gear) you don't get much engine braking, so I think you are applying extreme example theories to real life, and it simply ain't so.

Exactly. 
Your ice engine in normal mode runs 700-900c, if you think that pumping only air heats that up.... no!

I have exaust gas temperature (egt) on my own car. I can 100% assure you regardless of theory. Decel definitely cools, not heats

But it is funny listening to these edge case theories instead of applying logic and reality. Then we have that post from Ken about the harshness of full regen, yes, as I said a while back, it will press you into the seat belt, it's brilliant to have that much regen if you need it, but ....... do I really need to point this out .......... you don't get the full regen on lift off till after the zero then low regen. So it's entirely the choice of the driver how much of full regen to 'deploy' when driving in 'standard' mode. If that driver is making his family ill, then it's entirely down to bad driving, the same as point, squirt, brake driving in an ICEV from light to lights will do.

This is possibly the silliest attempt to dig the deepest hole I've ever read on here (G&E), and that includes some of MR C's classics.

BTW, Wifey started off using low regen on her profile, but switched to standard after a few days. But she still drives in chill mode as she likes her eyeballs to stay where they are when she accelerates. 

This all does sound very much like Tesla fanboy stuff. Tesla remove an option from the car and the fanboys run around saying you didn’t need it anyway and it is an improvement (more efficient). 

Had anyone suggested that it might be a good idea previously? No. But apparently it now is. Tesla have been making cars for a decade and have just decided that no one need two levels of regen. No announcement, no explanation, it just disappears and that just happens to coincide with EPA range increases. 

You say “So a non story, other than Tesla almost certainly knowing better than us how to maximise efficiency of their cars.”

There are numerous reports of motion sickness induced by regen other than the one I quoted but your response is that it is entirely down to bad driving, i.e. totally dismissive. 

A lot depends on the way you drive and not everyone can be as good as you and @Solarchaser, always able to find that sweet spot, so the absence of a low regen option will lead to more jerky progress for many. Some people are more nervous and still drive the old fashioned way of lifting off the accelerator and covering the brake when they anticipate a hazard ahead, perhaps a pedestrian standing at a crossing. In that situation with standard regen it will, as you say above, press you into the seat belt. That does not make for smooth progress or a comfortable ride for passengers. Perhaps you regard these as edge cases but others may not.

For many people transitioning to an EV it could be quite a shock and not a great selling point. 

I am not saying it is the end of the world but I am surprised that you cannot see anything negative about it and feel the need to defend it so vigorously.  I suppose we can all be blinded by something we believe in. 

Ahh the fanboy argument again, you do like that one.
Do you campaign to have the power of car brakes reduced in case someone uses them too hard too.
BTW I'm not defending it vigorously, I'm simply laughing at your attempts to create something negative on this thread, like the others, and your fuel wasting tips for ICEV driving. In fact I'm doing almost nothing, just posting the odd comment, I'm certainly not trawling the internet trying to find negative examples to post like somebody.
Keep smiling, and remember not to brake too hard for no reason, naughty Brembo, naughty!

Edit - Perhaps I shouldn't just laugh at you as that may be seen as 'feeding'. So to address your point attempting to suggest myself (and Solarchaser) are, or think we are, better than average drivers, I would suggest you may have drawn the average line incorrectly. I thought what he said, and I have said reflects entirely normal driving.
You drive down a road, and from experience you have learnt what 30mph in an ICEV is, and after adjusting for the lack of gear changes and NVH in a BEV you quickly adjust to the new 30mph norm. If you are erratically speeding up and down, or switching directly from power to full regen, then I would suggest that you are not average, looking up to me (and others), but perhaps looking up to those of us who are simply average.

Your example of lifting off for a pedestrian is one of ICEV v's BEV. Once you drive a BEV you learn not to lift off fully and cover the brake, but to lift off partially removing power or beginning to add some regen. Your example requires creating a nonsensical extreme scenario, and is as silly as suggesting that an ICEV driver slams on the brakes unnecessarily. In those situations it is the nut behind the steering wheel that is the problem.

Lastly I note that you began this silliness by suggesting you knew better, and that the change would not be more efficient. But now you seem to have spiraled off on different tangents, just to maintain the disruption, when it became clear that your vehicular efficiency expertise was perhaps not ....... superior to Tesla's?

JKenH

Martyn1981 said:

JKenH said:

Martyn1981 said:

Solarchaser said:

Martyn1981 said:

JKenH said:

Solarchaser said:

Erm no.
Firstly you are not generating heat, the engine becomes an air pump, since no fuel is being burned,  and so actually you cool everything down, including your coolant,  and because you are pumping air this cleans out the crankcase,  so that when you press the go pedal again, nice clean air goes into the engine, so you get a more efficient burn, and more energy per cycle.
Since you will be in a high gear, the biggest restriction to your speed will be friction of tyres on road and the air pressure building up in front of the car... faster car = more air resistance to overcome.

Talking about internal combustion engines here.

I mean, I like your theory and the thought you have put into it, but as someone who has spent a fair bit of time making my engine (and many others) as efficient at putting out two or three times their manufactured power as possible,  I assure you it doesn't work that way.

I realise this is taking the thread even further away from EV news but I do need to respond to that.

If, as you say, your engine is acting as an air pump, what is driving it? The kinetic energy of the car, of course, the turning of the wheels is turning the engine over. All that compressing of air inside the engine generates heat. It’s basic physics, compressing air requires an input of energy and produces heat. Just think of your bicycle pump, it gets hot as you use it. 

I realise we are not going to agree which is the most efficient approach but as it seems we can’t even agree on basic physics, perhaps we should leave it there.

It's not just the physics, it's also reality. Firstly all your claims are based on the ability to gain speed, so you have to be below the speed limit and the road conditions. But more importantly, have you driven a car the last 30yrs??? in an overgear (top gear) you don't get much engine braking, so I think you are applying extreme example theories to real life, and it simply ain't so.

Exactly. 
Your ice engine in normal mode runs 700-900c, if you think that pumping only air heats that up.... no!

I have exaust gas temperature (egt) on my own car. I can 100% assure you regardless of theory. Decel definitely cools, not heats

But it is funny listening to these edge case theories instead of applying logic and reality. Then we have that post from Ken about the harshness of full regen, yes, as I said a while back, it will press you into the seat belt, it's brilliant to have that much regen if you need it, but ....... do I really need to point this out .......... you don't get the full regen on lift off till after the zero then low regen. So it's entirely the choice of the driver how much of full regen to 'deploy' when driving in 'standard' mode. If that driver is making his family ill, then it's entirely down to bad driving, the same as point, squirt, brake driving in an ICEV from light to lights will do.

This is possibly the silliest attempt to dig the deepest hole I've ever read on here (G&E), and that includes some of MR C's classics.

BTW, Wifey started off using low regen on her profile, but switched to standard after a few days. But she still drives in chill mode as she likes her eyeballs to stay where they are when she accelerates. 

This all does sound very much like Tesla fanboy stuff. Tesla remove an option from the car and the fanboys run around saying you didn’t need it anyway and it is an improvement (more efficient). 

Had anyone suggested that it might be a good idea previously? No. But apparently it now is. Tesla have been making cars for a decade and have just decided that no one need two levels of regen. No announcement, no explanation, it just disappears and that just happens to coincide with EPA range increases. 

You say “So a non story, other than Tesla almost certainly knowing better than us how to maximise efficiency of their cars.”

There are numerous reports of motion sickness induced by regen other than the one I quoted but your response is that it is entirely down to bad driving, i.e. totally dismissive. 

A lot depends on the way you drive and not everyone can be as good as you and @Solarchaser, always able to find that sweet spot, so the absence of a low regen option will lead to more jerky progress for many. Some people are more nervous and still drive the old fashioned way of lifting off the accelerator and covering the brake when they anticipate a hazard ahead, perhaps a pedestrian standing at a crossing. In that situation with standard regen it will, as you say above, press you into the seat belt. That does not make for smooth progress or a comfortable ride for passengers. Perhaps you regard these as edge cases but others may not.

For many people transitioning to an EV it could be quite a shock and not a great selling point. 

I am not saying it is the end of the world but I am surprised that you cannot see anything negative about it and feel the need to defend it so vigorously.  I suppose we can all be blinded by something we believe in. 

Ahh the fanboy argument again, you do like that one.
Do you campaign to have the power of car brakes reduced in case someone uses them too hard too.
BTW I'm not defending it vigorously, I'm simply laughing at your attempts to create something negative on this thread, like the others, and your fuel wasting tips for ICEV driving. In fact I'm doing almost nothing, just posting the odd comment, I'm certainly not trawling the internet trying to find negative examples to post like somebody.
Keep smiling, and remember not to brake too hard for no reason, naughty Brembo, naughty!

Edit - Perhaps I shouldn't just laugh at you as that may be seen as 'feeding'. So to address your point attempting to suggest myself (and Solarchaser) are, or think we are, better than average drivers, I would suggest you may have drawn the average line incorrectly. I thought what he said, and I have said reflects entirely normal driving.
You drive down a road, and from experience you have learnt what 30mph in an ICEV is, and after adjusting for the lack of gear changes and NVH in a BEV you quickly adjust to the new 30mph norm. If you are erratically speeding up and down, or switching directly from power to full regen, then I would suggest that you are not average, looking up to me (and others), but perhaps looking up to those of us who are simply average.

Your example of lifting off for a pedestrian is one of ICEV v's BEV. Once you drive a BEV you learn not to lift off fully and cover the brake, but to lift off partially removing power or beginning to add some regen. Your example requires creating a nonsensical extreme scenario, and is as silly as suggesting that an ICEV driver slams on the brakes unnecessarily. In those situations it is the nut behind the steering wheel that is the problem.

Lastly I note that you began this silliness by suggesting you knew better, and that the change would not be more efficient. But now you seem to have spiraled off on different tangents, just to maintain the disruption, when it became clear that your vehicular efficiency expertise was perhaps not ....... superior to Tesla's?

Mart, if you check back through all my other responses to you, you will find, despite lots of needling, I have ignored most of your jibes and misrepresentation of my comments. (I just don’t think it is a good idea to spend hours throwing insults at each other).This doesn’t seem to cut any ice with you. It just seems like another excuse for you to needle and misrepresent me a bit more until you provoke a reaction. Well you got one with the fanboy comment. So you decided to push a bit harder. 

So rather than ignore all your little digs I thought I would go through your last post point by point. Please excuse the formatting but I can’t be bothered to change the font for every comment so your comments and my response are separated by a -

Ahh the fanboy argument again, you do like that one. - Yes, because you are a Tesla fanboy.

Do you campaign to have the power of car brakes reduced in case someone uses them too hard too. - No, why would I, that would be silly?

BTW I'm not defending it vigorously, - Oh no? You’ve spent quite a bit of time arguing it is a good move and not one word against it. 

I'm simply laughing at your attempts to create something negative on this thread, like the others, - well, that’s because I think it is a bit negative to remove the choice of regen. Or are only positive comments about Tesla allowed?

and your fuel wasting tips for ICEV driving. - actually I have demonstrated the opposite to be the case. You are just in denial about the laws of physics.

In fact I'm doing almost nothing, just posting the odd comment, - more than the odd one, you have been battling with both me and @EricMears, and denying the science (physics), supporting @Solarchaser’s ridiculous arguments which defy the laws of physics and including a few jibes.

 I'm certainly not trawling the internet trying to find negative examples to post like somebody. - maybe you should as there are a lot about and it would have opened your eyes to how others see it. Opinion seems to be split between Tesla fanboys who think it is fine and other independent commentators who are a bit puzzled that Tesla should remove a useful option without any reason or explanation.

Keep smiling, and remember not to brake too hard for no reason, naughty Brembo, naughty! - no idea what that is about - just another childish jibe. My argument at all times is that the most efficient form of driving is to conserve kinetic energy and not waste it producing heat by braking or engine braking or using unnecessary regen.

Edit - Perhaps I shouldn't just laugh at you as that may be seen as 'feeding'. So to address your point attempting to suggest myself (and Solarchaser) are, or think we are, better than average drivers, I would suggest you may have drawn the average line incorrectly. I thought what he said, and I have said reflects entirely normal driving. - No, you and @Solarchaser are the ones portraying yourself as driving gods. I was just being sarcastic. I have to admit though on a downhill slope I can’t tell where the sweet spot is without looking at the power meter - so I am clearly inferior. 

You drive down a road, and from experience you have learnt what 30mph in an ICEV is, - there you go again, you just know what 30mph feels like as you see yourself as a good driver, I don’t as it entirely depends on reference points so I rely on my speedo.

and after adjusting for the lack of gear changes and NVH in a BEV you quickly adjust to the new 30mph norm - yes I check my Speedo.

If you are erratically speeding up and down, or switching directly from power to full regen, then I would suggest that you are not average, looking up to me (and others), but perhaps looking up to those of us who are simply average. - did I say I was erratically speeding up and down or switching from power to full regen? If I was then the change Tesla have implemented wouldn’t bother me, like it doesn’t bother you. Maybe that’s how you drive. I like to try and find the sweet spot.

Your example of lifting off for a pedestrian is one of ICEV v's BEV. Once you drive a BEV you learn not to lift off fully and cover the brake, but to lift off partially removing power or beginning to add some regen. - Yes but someone new to BEVs or someone nervous or cautious may lift off out of habit. 

Your example requires creating a nonsensical extreme scenario, - Not at all.  Someone new to BEVs or nervous does react by lifting off.

and is as silly as suggesting that an ICEV driver slams on the brakes unnecessarily. - No it is not. Covering the brake is what I was talking about and that in the Tesla will cause the driver and passenger to be pressed into the seatbelt and the dog to go flying off the back seat into the footwell, and the kids to spill their ice cream over mum’s best dress.

In those situations it is the nut behind the steering wheel that is the problem. - Ah, yes, the expert driver declaring the inferiority of anyone who happens to cause regen by lifting off as a precaution. 

Lastly I note that you began this silliness by suggesting you knew better, and that the change would not be more efficient. - I still am of that view and I doubt that I am the only one. Efficiency on an EPA rest is not the same as efficiency in the real world. Ask VW in case you are in any doubt.

But now you seem to have spiraled off on different tangents,- no I just quoted an analogy of coasting downhill in an ICE car and you (and @Solarchaser) decided to tell me I must be wrong as both of you and Jeremy Vine said so, without a basic understanding of the laws of thermodynamics. You persisted with your erroneous arguments and I put you right. 

just to maintain the disruption, - not at all but I thought you would have to throw in that old favourite of yours

when it became clear that your vehicular efficiency expertise was perhaps not ....... superior to Tesla's? - how did that become clear? It’s not possible🤣. Tesla have operated a dual level regen option for many years. Have they suddenly realised that they were wrong all the time and it wasn’t very efficient after all or did they just find that by deleting the low regen option they could score a higher mark in a lab test, just like VW did. 

Martyn1981

Potentially big increase in EV sales in the US, as choice expands, but still a shockingly percentage compared to other countries, especially Europe.

Forecast: 2021 US EV Sales To Increase 70% Year Over Year

Even with this potential 70% YOY jump in sales, the EV share of new vehicle sales will still only reach 3.55%. This 2021 growth would be a 54% increase in sales share over the 2.3% I’m projecting for 2020. My sales share calculation is based on overall light vehicle sales of 15 million in 2020 and 16.5 million in 2021. There has been no clear consensus among auto industry analysts on overall 2020 sales, with some forecasting sales of under 13 million a few months ago, but recently updating to the high 14 million range. So I’m taking an optimistic view and pegging sales around 15 million.

A potential boost would come from the changes Biden is proposing if he wins (note - I see after a week of rain, that the sun is expected to shine all day on the 4th of Nov in Cardiff, and at this point I'll take any omen I can get).
In the US they have an odd system where they give tax credits, at a reducing level, to car manufacturers customers until they have sold a total of 200,000. This weirdly penalises the companies, such as Tesla and GM for leading the charge and selling more EV's than the other companies. Biden plans to remove this company cap, and more.

Joseph Biden Aims To Improve US EV Tax Credit, Restore It For Tesla & GM

If elected president of the United States, Joseph R. Biden would do a few things for the electric vehicle industry. He has elsewhere talked about helping to get a massive number of EV charging stations around the country, but he also has some tax proposals on the wish list.

Martyn1981

This article suggests some naughty practices in Europe to slow down EV sales in 2020, but if true, it actually may make for good news for 2021 onwards if both demand and supply are higher. It may also shut me up about the coming disruption if we enter the disruption ...... or I'll just start to get all excited that we are in the disruption ...... hmmmm!

Why EU Car Manufacturers Are Actually “Slow-Walking” 2020 EV Sales

Full credit goes to Michael Liebreich, founder of what is now Bloomberg New Energy Finance*, for bringing this to my attention. Well, some credit should also go to the German journalists who mentioned this in a recent story, but here’s Michael’s summary highlight of one key part of the German article:

“Good article (in German) explaining why EU car manufacturers are slow-walking EV sales: 2020 will be taken as baseline for a 37.5% CO2 reduction by 2030. They don’t want to over-deliver this year and face a tougher target. Watch the numbers soar in 2021!”

Martyn1981

And lastly tonight, some Tesla news of course from this Tesla "Fan(old)boi".

Faster charging, is of course a benefit to every BEV manufacturer and customer, but also to the charging network as a whole, since faster charging (for a larger percentage of the battery) will mean a faster throughput, which is, in a way like increasing the number of chargers.

Tesla Model 3 With New LFP Battery Now Supercharges Even Faster?

Initial supercharging results suggest that the new lithium iron phosphate (LFP) battery powered Tesla Model 3 can supercharge even faster than the version with the nickel battery. This looks promising, and is not unexpected.

It’s obviously too early for any firm conclusions, but it certainly appears likely that the LFP Tesla Model 3 is capable of supercharging significantly faster than the older nickel-based variant, at least over some portion of the charging cycle.

As mentioned above, the clearest conclusion from the session photos is that the LFP variant added 41% to 99% charge (32 kWh) in 42 minutes, and the nickel variant added 40% to 99% charge (29 kWh) in 62 minutes.

Perhaps not surprising news, but nice to know:

Teardown Finds Tesla Is 6 Years (At Least) Ahead Of The Competition

Recently, Nikkei Business Publications commissioned a complete teardown of a Tesla Model 3. What they found astonished them and caused them to declare that Tesla is at least 6 years ahead of the competition. What’s more, other automakers may never be able to catch up without major disruptions to their supply chains. The reason? That would be the full self-driving computer — known as Hardware 3 — engineered and manufactured by Tesla. According to Asia Nikkei News, they shared their findings with an engineer employed by a major Japanese automaker who exclaimed, “We cannot do it!”

All other companies use multiple electronic control units — some have 20 or more. Tesla uses one. Automakers worry that computers like Tesla’s will make the supply chains they have cultivated over decades obsolete. Tesla is not shackled to outside suppliers and so it is free to pursue the best technologies available. Put another way, the supply chains that have helped today’s auto giants grow are now beginning to hamper their ability to innovate, Asia Nikkei says.