Electric cars

1173174176178179439

Comments

  • AdrianC
    AdrianC Posts: 42,189
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post
    Forumite
    almillar wrote: »
    Again, I think you live in a 'high mileage' bubble, that your driving pattern is very a-typical of driving in the UK.
    I know very few people who won't do 250+ mile days periodically. Even my 80yo mother does.

    almillar wrote: »
    Hyundai can't keep up with demand for the pure EV, or don't want to build as many as people want to buy.
    There are 160 EV Ioniqs registered in the UK - and about 5k hybrid and PHEV.
  • almillar
    almillar Posts: 8,621
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    Forumite
    I know very few people who won't do 250+ mile days periodically. Even my 80yo mother does.


    I repeat, you're in a bubble full of people EVs don't currently suit. There's half a nation out there that it does.

    There are 160 EV Ioniqs registered in the UK - and about 5k hybrid and PHEV.


    Sounds about right, I see more PHEVs than EVs, and I don't particularly like the nose of the EVs. But go ahead and find a dealership that can sell and service the EV (very few), then order one and see how long it'll take.
  • zeupater
    zeupater Posts: 5,353
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    edited 11 July 2018 at 12:33PM
    almillar wrote: »
    I know very few people who won't do 250+ mile days periodically. Even my 80yo mother does.

    I repeat, you're in a bubble full of people EVs don't currently suit. There's half a nation out there that it does ...
    Hi

    I honestly can't remember the last time we did 250+ miles in a day in this country in any of our cars but it must be at least 10 years, realistically even a 150 mile round trip is rare so I tend to agree.

    Regarding 'half a nation' - that probably highly underestimates the effect of high mileage motorists on the national average mileage ... it would be very interesting to remove the (say) upper decile mileage motorists from the calculation to see what effect it has on the annual mileage average ... anyway it's pretty much a moot point as there are regular long-distance/high mileage EV drivers saying that it's currently no real problem for them, and that's before range increase by ~50% as the recent range of larger battery capacity models become available!

    Talk about moving goalposts, the next anti-EV excuse will be "If it can't drive to the moon on one charge ..." - people need to get real, if they don't want an EV then they simply don't have have one (yet) and it's likely that before (/if!) they become compulsory, the very effort & expense of running ICEs on a high mileage basis will become an extremely inconvenient & expensive personal choice ... and of course, for balance, an ICE vehicle couldn't drive to the moon either! ... ;)

    HTH
    Z
    "We are what we repeatedly do, excellence then is not an act, but a habit. " ...... Aristotle
    B)
  • Gloomendoom
    Gloomendoom Posts: 16,550
    First Post First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    zeupater wrote: »
    and of course, for balance, an ICE vehicle couldn't drive to the moon either! ... ;)

    They could and have.

    There and back without refuelling...

    saturnv-3_0.jpg
  • zeupater
    zeupater Posts: 5,353
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    edited 11 July 2018 at 1:48PM
    They could and have.

    There and back without refuelling...

    saturnv-3_0.jpg
    Hi


    However, that's an example of a using a Reaction Engine where combustion provides thrust as opposed to an Internal Combustion Engine where the combustion process is used to produce mechanical energy .... anyway, if you really want one, then go and buy one, but be warned, when accelerating, they don't do many miles to the gallon!


    Anyway, whilst thinking about it, I find it extremely apt that the only manned vehicles to be drive on the moon to date have been EVs!


    HTH
    Z


    # Note : Looking at the picture I've just noticed the missing launch escape mechanism, so the rocket in question didn't go anywhere near the moon, let alone come back, it was simply delivering a payload to earth orbit!
    "We are what we repeatedly do, excellence then is not an act, but a habit. " ...... Aristotle
    B)
  • Martyn1981
    Martyn1981 Posts: 14,713
    Name Dropper Photogenic First Anniversary First Post
    Forumite
    zeupater wrote: »
    Anyway, whilst thinking about it, I find it extremely apt that the only manned vehicles to be drive on the moon to date have been EVs!

    The Lunar Rover only traveled 36Km and could only carry 490kg of payload. They won't catch on till they can do a 250 mile round trip without stopping at the services for a recharge and can tow a caravan. ;)
    Mart. Cardiff. 5.58 kWp PV systems (3.58 ESE & 2.0 WNW)

    For general PV advice please see the PV FAQ thread on the Green & Ethical Board.
  • Gloomendoom
    Gloomendoom Posts: 16,550
    First Post First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    zeupater wrote: »
    Hi


    However, that's an example of a using a Reaction Engine where combustion provides thrust as opposed to an Internal Combustion Engine where the combustion process is used to produce mechanical energy .... anyway, if you really want one, then go and buy one, but be warned, when accelerating, they don't do many miles to the gallon!

    It was a tongue in cheek post. However, the rocket motors used on the Saturn 5 moon rockets are classed as internal combustion engines.

    I hope that helps.
  • zeupater
    zeupater Posts: 5,353
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    It was a tongue in cheek post. However, the rocket motors used on the Saturn 5 moon rockets are classed as internal combustion engines.

    I hope that helps.
    Hi

    Care to take a little time & supply pointers to a couple of dozen technical references to substantiate that statement which would stand up to a couple of thousand from various engineering & scientific sources that would explain the differences in levels of detail ranging from basic classification to great detail ?

    Although there's a combustion chamber in both, the difference between what is classified and accepted as a Reaction Engine (ie Rocket Motor) & an Internal Combustion Engine is, apart from yourself & maybe a few others looking to create argument, "almost" universally accepted .... :wall:

    Anyway, jovial & technical distraction aside, it's good to see that the rumoured H2 announcement of Tesla building a plant in Asia has been confirmed although we're only just into H2 (which is interesting in itself!)... that's the kind of good news I like - the kind that makes the both the vocal anti-EV lobby and the legacy vehicle manufacturers' executives that practice a general 'resistance-to-change' choke a little whilst eating their breakfast!

    HTH
    Z
    "We are what we repeatedly do, excellence then is not an act, but a habit. " ...... Aristotle
    B)
  • Gloomendoom
    Gloomendoom Posts: 16,550
    First Post First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    zeupater wrote: »
    Hi

    Care to take a little time & supply pointers to a couple of dozen technical references to substantiate that statement which would stand up to a couple of thousand from various engineering & scientific sources that would explain the differences in levels of detail ranging from basic classification to great detail ?

    Although there's a combustion chamber in both, the difference between what is classified and accepted as a Reaction Engine (ie Rocket Motor) & an Internal Combustion Engine is, apart from yourself & maybe a few others looking to create argument, "almost" universally accepted .... :wall:

    Oh dear! Mind your head on that wall. :p:

    Care to find me an engineering or scientific source that states that a liquid fuel rocket motor is not an internal combustion engine?

    Just one will do.
  • zeupater
    zeupater Posts: 5,353
    First Anniversary Name Dropper First Post Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    edited 11 July 2018 at 5:53PM
    Oh dear! Mind your head on that wall. :p:

    Care to find me an engineering or scientific source that states that a liquid fuel rocket motor is not an internal combustion engine?

    Just one will do.
    Hi

    Absolutely not, if you have access to google then I suggest you use it as I'm not playing your puerile games & you're certainly not going to access a couple of shelves in my bookcase containing relevant sources! ... there are plenty of definitions and explanations of what comprises an 'Internal Combustion Engine' in terms of what we're discussing (ie contained combustion to mechanical power) and what comprises a 'Reaction Engine' (ie combustion providing direct & directional thrust, including contained external combustion), how they work in engineering terms, their components and the way that they can convert energy into motion .... as for papers - there's plenty available!

    I certainly hope that we shouldn't consider your signature as being made by someone needing to take a good long look deep into the mirror as I'm not particularly minded to be dragged down & I'd guess that most others would be either ... now how about a little research - effectively, put up your evidence or ... how does the rest go ? Ah, I remember! ...

    Z
    "We are what we repeatedly do, excellence then is not an act, but a habit. " ...... Aristotle
    B)
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards