Musk endeavours

[Mike4]

So will the Porshe Taycan sports car get an upgrade now?

It can do 0-60 in 2.4 seconds:

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a3 ... ero-to-60/

whereas the model s saloon can do 0-60 in less than 2 seconds.

A saloon car that is faster than a sports car!

Regards,

I've never seen a viable explanation of why they fit such unnecessarily powerful motors in electric cars.

Is there one?

[odysseus2000]

Mike4

I've never seen a viable explanation of why they fit such unnecessarily powerful motors in electric cars.

Is there one?

If you have to ask, then you probably won't get it, but here goes.

Retailing autos is about pitching to the various demographics in the population.

The new Model S, Model X are pitched at folk for whom the entry price is a very small fraction of their net worth. This demographic can buy anything that any auto maker puts out and all the automakers have expensive cars to sell to these rich folk.

The predominant question for the engineering teams is how to get a rich person to buy your car and not one from another maker. One way to do this is to present your car as the best car that can be bought in terms of performance, hence the extremely quick 0-60 times etc.

One can ask why even bother aiming at this demographic when there are many more potential buyers who can only afford a less expensive car. There are several answers to this: Top of the range cars, don't cost that much more to make and thence have better margins. Also by creating such a fast car you are demonstrating the prowess of your engineering teams and implying that a less powerful and more affordable machine will still be designed by some of the best auto engineers in the business, adding status and cred to your less powerful offerings.

Regards,

[dspp]

So will the Porshe Taycan sports car get an upgrade now?

It can do 0-60 in 2.4 seconds:

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a3 ... ero-to-60/

whereas the model s saloon can do 0-60 in less than 2 seconds.

A saloon car that is faster than a sports car!

Regards,

I've never seen a viable explanation of why they fit such unnecessarily powerful motors in electric cars.

Is there one?

1. An electric motor has a different torque/rpm characteristic than a dino-juice (ICE) engine. It is a big topic, but that is a very simplified engineering fact.
2. To get the good performance in the mid range speeds, an electric motor gives you, for free, bonus excellent acceleration at the low speeds.
3. The actual electric motors often aren't that high powered compared with the corresponding dino-juice car, but they do give better low end acceleration.
4. It would be possible to electronically restrict the acceleration, but since dino-juice manufacturers advertise performance, so too do BEV manufacturers.
5. If you look carefully at the latest Tesla S Plaid you'll see that it, just like it's dino-juice competitors, puts a 200mph speed limiter on the whole thing - there is some sort of manufacturer agreement to speed limit all road cars at the 200mph point. The Tesla motors in that thing are indeed quite powerful, but no more so than the corresponding dino-juice motors (and they are a darn sight more efficient, plus better for the environment).

6 .. plus, as Ody says, SEX sells in all its various guises .........

regards, dspp

[odysseus2000]

Mike4
I've never seen a viable explanation of why they fit such unnecessarily powerful motors in electric cars.

Is there one?

The other factor to consider is historical.

Prior to Tesla most people's experience with electric vehicles was the milk float, ultra slow, operating over night so as to not get in the way.

Legacy auto thought that electric cars would come as bottom up tech, i.e. slow cars that were only of interest to the least prosperous but which would in the by and by would become more popular.

GM launched the EV1 which was aimed at this market share and to GM's surprise, the buyers loved it and GM got nervous fearing this might hurt gasoline car sales, got a legal recal notice and with sheriffs forcibly took all the EV1 back and crushed them.

Tesla came along and decided on a top down approach, i.e. sell cars to the richest folk and to do that they were helped by the characteristics of electric motors, efficiency over 80% and much better torque than ICE engines and so Tesla started to sell a roadster that had better performance than ICE equivalents and then the S, X and only when these had sold well did they begin lower cost cars for less affluent people, 3, Y and coming 2.

The latest S & X are just continuations of their policy, sell to the richest folk and let that aura come down to lower cost cars leading to renewable fuelled transport, an end to being dependent on hydrocarbon from political unstable parts of the world and much cleaner air for everyone to breathe.

There is nothing new about all the advantages of BEV. It was repeatedly pointed out to Henry Ford and in the early 20th century there were many electric car makers, but the lead acid batteries let them down.

Once Dr. Goodenough developed the lithium-ion battery, electric cars became far better than ICE cars in all respects, but legacy auto ignored them and in many cases such as GM actively tried to stop them, this gave Tesla the opportunity to move into the market and in the by and by Elon Musk became the richest person on the planet by giving folk the opportunity to buy clean cars with much better performance than ICE. The idea to develop fast electric cars was perhaps the most brilliant move in automobiles since Ford choose to build gas cars as they had much better performance than the battery cars of his time.

Regards,

[dealtn]

Once Dr. Goodenough developed the lithium-ion battery, electric cars became far better than ICE cars in all respects ...

You do know what the word "all" means, don't you?

[odysseus2000]

Once Dr. Goodenough developed the lithium-ion battery, electric cars became far better than ICE cars in all respects ...

You do know what the word "all" means, don't you?

Yes.

Can you make a case for an ICE car being better than a BEV car in any respect?

You do know what the work "no" means don't you?

Regards,

[JamesMuenchen]

Can you make a case for an ICE car being better than a BEV car in any respect?

Range
Ease of refueling
Lifetime of the motor
Choice
Build Quality (in practice)

[odysseus2000]

Range
Ease of refueling
Lifetime of the motor
Choice
Build Quality (in practice)

ICE range is about 30% of the available energy in the hydrocarbon, BEV range is 80%+ of the energy in the battery.

With superchargers the ease of refuelling is similar to ICE

BEV motors which are essentially induction motors with no touching parts go far further than ICE engines before needing any maintenance

Most of the major legacy motors and Tesla now offer BEV in all equivalent to ICE models.

Build quality, no difference between ICE and BEV.

Regards,

[TUK020]

Range
Ease of refueling
Lifetime of the motor
Choice
Build Quality (in practice)

Wide selection of second hand models already mostly depreciated, and yet still with plenty of life to them.

[odysseus2000]

Range
Ease of refueling
Lifetime of the motor
Choice
Build Quality (in practice)

Wide selection of second hand models already mostly depreciated, and yet still with plenty of life to them.

Ha Ha, good one, but more of a length of available market time than a technology advantage.

Regards,

[BobbyD]

Ha Ha, good one, but more of a length of available market time than a technology advantage.

Regards,

All respects include non-technical respects.

Denying ICE still has some advantages is inane.


Video: Recycling an MEB battery pack

https://uploads.volkswagen-newsroom.com/system/production/media_videos/5534/video_file_de/ecf30fbda7fd3bebffcea4acaecd067479f54895/V2021NR0005_720p.webm?1611323419

[dealtn]

Once Dr. Goodenough developed the lithium-ion battery, electric cars became far better than ICE cars in all respects ...

You do know what the word "all" means, don't you?

Yes.

Can you make a case for an ICE car being better than a BEV car in any respect?

You do know what the work "no" means don't you?

Regards,

So to satisfy your condition "in any respect" just requires 1 thing.

On Saturday I had to drive over 600 miles.

That wouldn't have been feasible with a BEV. I needed refuelling, the range on my ICE is about 500 miles for those conditions. That refuelling took about 2 minutes. (The choice of refuelling options was in the hundreds).

[JamesMuenchen]

ICE range is about 30% of the available energy in the hydrocarbon, BEV range is 80%+ of the energy in the battery.

Which just suggests that ICE range has substantial room for improvement. Nevertheless it is still significantly better than BEV.
Plus, you can use (very nearly) the whole tank without reducing the engine life.

With superchargers the ease of refuelling is similar to ICE

If you can find one. There are only about 2000 stations worldwide and half of them are in the USA.

And if you don't mind reducing the life of your motor.

And if you have 20 minutes or so to spare.

BEV can provide OK range, life and refueling. But you can only pick one. And even then it will be inferior to ICE as things stand today.

Most of the major legacy motors and Tesla now offer BEV in all equivalent to ICE models.

That sentence is quite hard to understand.

Legacy manufacturers still provide a very limited choice of BEV's and anyway, you argue that they're all rubbish except Tesla.

Build quality, no difference between ICE and BEV.

There doesn't need to be, but at the moment there clearly is as things are being rushed out. Especally for your flagship Tesla.

[dspp]

ICE range is about 30% of the available energy in the hydrocarbon, BEV range is 80%+ of the energy in the battery.

Which just suggests that ICE range has substantial room for improvement.

That's a good one. Which law of nature are you proposing to alter.

Plus, you can use (very nearly) the whole tank without reducing the engine life.

Er BEV charging does not reduce engine life, nor for that matter does it damage the battery to any significant extent provided it is done correctly.

With superchargers the ease of refuelling is similar to ICE

If you can find one. There are only about 2000 stations worldwide and half of them are in the USA.

There is a charging station at every 13A socket in the world. Clue, that is far more than there are petrol dispensers.
What is more the Tesla Supercharger network is currently perfectly adequate for all markets in which teslas are sold, and the contention ratio happens to be improving right now.

regards, dspp

[odysseus2000]

dealtn
So to satisfy your condition "in any respect" just requires 1 thing.

On Saturday I had to drive over 600 miles.

That wouldn't have been feasible with a BEV. I needed refuelling, the range on my ICE is about 500 miles for those conditions. That refuelling took about 2 minutes. (The choice of refuelling options was in the hundreds).

It is possible to drive over 600 miles with a BEV, you would have to stop and charge once or twice depending upon the range of the BEV you were driving.

If e.g. you were averaging 70 mph with a 3 that would likely mean about 2 stops every 3 hours, charge, comfort stop etc. With an S, likely one stop to recharge.

Sure the super charger would take more than 2 minutes, but many drivers would stop for a break on a 600 mile journey and these could be combined with super charging.

In a BEV the fuel costs would be lower and you would have the warm and comfortable feeling that you were not hurting the planet, whereas with an ICE you would be supporting a declining industry in fuel sales and putting carbon dioxide and other pollutants into the air to the detriment of other citizens. Most of us have contributed to pollution from ICE, but now we have a choice. In my case I mostly don't need to drive much anymore as I can conduct most of my business on-line, if I was doing a lot of driving I could get a BEV and that would be especially useful if I was driving into cities with various regimes for charging ICE vehicles.

Regards,

[dealtn]

dealtn
So to satisfy your condition "in any respect" just requires 1 thing.

On Saturday I had to drive over 600 miles.

That wouldn't have been feasible with a BEV. I needed refuelling, the range on my ICE is about 500 miles for those conditions. That refuelling took about 2 minutes. (The choice of refuelling options was in the hundreds).

It is possible to drive over 600 miles with a BEV, you would have to stop and charge once or twice depending upon the range of the BEV you were driving.

If e.g. you were averaging 70 mph with a 3 that would likely mean about 2 stops every 3 hours, charge, comfort stop etc. With an S, likely one stop to recharge.

Sure the super charger would take more than 2 minutes, but many drivers would stop for a break on a 600 mile journey and these could be combined with super charging.

In a BEV the fuel costs would be lower and you would have the warm and comfortable feeling that you were not hurting the planet, whereas with an ICE you would be supporting a declining industry in fuel sales and putting carbon dioxide and other pollutants into the air to the detriment of other citizens. Most of us have contributed to pollution from ICE, but now we have a choice. In my case I mostly don't need to drive much anymore as I can conduct most of my business on-line, if I was doing a lot of driving I could get a BEV and that would be especially useful if I was driving into cities with various regimes for charging ICE vehicles.

Regards,

So rather than concede I have found 1 thing you say I should be doing things differently?

So I should take an unnecessary, and time consuming break (or two) on my journey (there and back)? And if I did would that not mean the BEV was slower than the ICE alternative, and therefore that was "1 thing"?

I have no interest in my refuelling cost, nor do I care about any "warm and comfortable feeling" with respect to hurting the planet. I am not bothered about supporting a declining industry.

If you were doing my job, and time was important, then you (or anyone) wouldn't be buying/using a BEV.

You made a claim that BEV was better on "all" fronts. Maybe you should have the humility to accept that sometimes your claims are not always right, and that there might even be a single case when you are incorrect.

[JamesMuenchen]

Plus, you can use (very nearly) the whole tank without reducing the engine life.

Er BEV charging does not reduce engine life, nor for that matter does it damage the battery to any significant extent provided it is done correctly.

Er why did you ignore that we were clearly talking about Supercharging?

Is Supercharging "done correctly" or does it reduce life? Upthread it was reported that it reduces life.

EDIT: also upthread it was mentioned not to charge or discharge the battery outside the 20%-80% range (from memory). That was my point about being able to use the full tank.

With superchargers the ease of refuelling is similar to ICE

If you can find one. There are only about 2000 stations worldwide and half of them are in the USA.

There is a charging station at every 13A socket in the world. Clue, that is far more than there are petrol dispensers.

Why did you ignore that we were clearly talking about Supercharging?

There are about 500 Supercharging stations in Europe.
There are < 25000 Supercharger Connectors worldwide.

Clue, that is far less than there are hydrocarbon dispensers.

What is more the Tesla Supercharger network is currently perfectly adequate for all markets in which teslas are sold, and the contention ratio happens to be improving right now.

Not "what is more" - we were talking about Supercharging all along since Ody introduced it.

Inside Munich, there are only Destination Chargers.
The nearest Superchargers are a 30 minute drive North or South.

I don't call that perfectly adequate. Even if there are hardly any users.

Luckily my investment case doesn't rest on any of this.

[GoSeigen]

You made a claim that BEV was better on "all" fronts. Maybe you should have the humility to accept that sometimes your claims are not always right, and that there might even be a single case when you are incorrect.

Might be worth remembering this is odysseus2000 and he has a PhD.



GS

[odysseus2000]

dealtn
So rather than concede I have found 1 thing you say I should be doing things differently?

So I should take an unnecessary, and time consuming break (or two) on my journey (there and back)? And if I did would that not mean the BEV was slower than the ICE alternative, and therefore that was "1 thing"?

I have no interest in my refuelling cost, nor do I care about any "warm and comfortable feeling" with respect to hurting the planet. I am not bothered about supporting a declining industry.

If you were doing my job, and time was important, then you (or anyone) wouldn't be buying/using a BEV.

You made a claim that BEV was better on "all" fronts. Maybe you should have the humility to accept that sometimes your claims are not always right, and that there might even be a single case when you are incorrect.

Things change.

What was considered good can become bad in the future.

In your case you are happy to be a polluter because this is convenient to you, but is this modus operandi something that you can be proud of?

This in essence is the argument. Should we as a species continue to abuse the planet, our young people's future and each others health or should we try and raise our game and make things better.

In terms of making things better and the greater good of all humans I can not find any way in which ICE are better than BEV.

Regards,

[odysseus2000]

Might be worth remembering this is odysseus2000 and he has a PhD.



GS

Great comment, brought a happy smile!

Regards,