[Turbanator]

Originally Posted by Pontiac

Legal Speed when traffic is moving at a higher speed.

Even if a road has a speed limit, the law states if the traffic is moving at a higher speed, one needs to follow the speed of the traffic. I remember this as this is the only question, I got wrong on my Driver Ed questionnaire.

Sorry, but you need to take a test again. Nowhere in the world can you reason with cops with such arguments?

I don't live in the USA but Google tells me this

Many believe the myth that as long as we’re going with the flow of traffic, we’re not doing anything wrong. It makes sense– everyone else is going the same speed, so why shouldn’t you? There’s no way a cop could pull you over if you’re just going with the speed of traffic. Wrong.

https://www.antheminjurylaw.com/faqs...e-speed-limit/

Legal Speeds + tolerable delta.

Yes, usually 7-8 kmph/ mph over the legal limits on highways will be considered tolerable. But you are talking about super high illegal speeds.

Now coming to EV part of the question.

My car has a 600mile range and I stop to fill gas when the range left is 150-200miles

this is not possible as the maximum range of a Tesla model3 long range at 80MPH max speed is 260-280Miles. Imagine having to stop for charging when you have 100Miles left.

I see a lot of bias for engines, why is this 150-200 miles important? Is your trip always in such a way that there are no gas stations at least 150-200, and you fill just before that? I usually fill my car at the start of the journey and probably around midway if I cannot reach my destination with the fuel or at my destination.

Tesla app or web will tell you exactly where you have to stop and for how long. Can you plan one on the web and post the destination from your starting point that's not yet covered by Tesla? Will be interesting to find out.

Stopping for a charge point, sometimes, when we don't even need one, is a minor inconvenience. I will accept for not going to Petrol pumps on rest all other days. Remember, EVs have the ability to charge at home.

EV trying to mile slowing the entire traffic down when Semi trucks try to overtake these slow moving EVs. Worse when they occupy the passing lanes also.

Why will 2 EVs be crossing each other in a passing line at less than highway speeds?

[Pontiac]

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

This is another one of those unfounded EV takes I am being honest. The drop is nowhere near "exponential" - infact it is quite linear. If it is can you, please explain what the exponential function is or at least give us some data points?

Exponential because it’s a simple machine and in the absence of gearing, one tends to behave like one. One can argue based on the type of batteries it can tend to be linear but nevertheless, the point I was trying to make was the range reduces by speed in the absence of gearing. Gas vehicles also will do the same in the absence of gearing. Gearing is must if you want BEV’s to work like gas vehicles. Car makers will get there once their sales taper out with the current technology.

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

My experience with my own Model Y Performance is similar. The difference in consumption at 100 kmph vs 110 kmph (the max speed in my state) is not exponential.

Tesla is not a good test vehicle to understand the range vs speed curve as Tesla is known to project unrealistic range until the battery SOC is below 50%. Tesla’s projections do not factor external temperatures or wind resistance or any external factors and all it does is to keep reducing EPA estimate by the miles travelled. This is a trick they like to play as they understand many only run their vehicles above 50% SOC most of the time. There are companies that give real-time data and correct range based on the current parameters, but they cannot sell them because people get spooked.

Here is a feature from Reuters that recently came out about this.

Tesla years ago, began exaggerating its vehicles’ potential driving distance – by rigging their range-estimating software. The company decided about a decade ago, for marketing purposes, to write algorithms for its range meter that would show drivers “rosy” projections for the distance it could travel on a full battery, according to a person familiar with an early design of the software for its in-dash readouts.
Then, when the battery fell below 50% of its maximum charge, the algorithm would show drivers more realistic projections for their remaining driving range.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates...tteries-range/

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

Referring to Bjorn Nyland's, one of the most famous Youtuber who tests EV's, spreadsheet on range.

Tesla Model Y LR @ 90 kmph consumes 142 wh/km
Tesla Model Y LR @ 120 kmph consumes 195 wh/km

I tell my friends who considers the manufacturer’s advertised range as the sole factor in deciding which EV to buy. One should look for quantifiable metrics while deciding on a car like the battery capacity, features included, build quality that directly equates to money you pay. Rather than an arbitrary number that varies by a lot of factors. Once you have the battery capacity, it’s up to you to decide on how to use this. And let’s not a youtuber influence you in car buying. They are called influencers for a reason. Let’s use our own judgement.

Originally Posted by Turbanator

I see a lot of bias for engines, why is this 150-200 miles important? Is your trip always in such a way that there are no gas stations at least 150-200, and you fill just before that? I usually fill my car at the start of the journey and probably around midway if I cannot reach my destination with the fuel or at my destination.

The typical distance ranges from 600 to 800 miles. Even with a car with 600 miles, I need to make two stops keeping 150 miles in reserve. And yes, the gas stations are spread out and they are not many that has clean restrooms or have a good shop to re stock snacks. This is one of the gripe I felt since coming from Japan where you can just go and one can find as many rest areas with good restaurants.

Originally Posted by Turbanator

I will accept for not going to Petrol pumps on rest all other days.

I hear this a lot. I ask them, which of the below is more convenient?

1. Putting the car to charge every few days and constantly worry about the range before you go out.
2. Go to a super charger that will charge your car fully in 5 mins and let you drive for 600 miles without worrying about SOC?

I personally feel people are being cheated by car companies by passing off a product which is half worth but double the money but so projected to make them believe they are getting double worth for half the money.

[Turbanator]

Originally Posted by Pontiac

Gearing is must if you want BEV’s to work like gas vehicles. Car makers will get there once their sales taper out with the current technology.

So, how many gears do you think EVs can get in future? I know Taycan has 2, and ZF is also working (they have to remain in business), but why do we need gears when motors can handle the torque from the start? An increase in efficiency can be achieved by, say, 2 gears, but why complicate for a marginal increase?

The typical distance ranges from 600 to 800 miles. Even with a car with 600 miles, I need to make two stops keeping 150 miles in reserve. And yes, the gas stations are spread out and they are not many that has clean restrooms or have a good shop to re stock snacks.

Will be keen to know about the route. Though OT, but still interesting in the context. I think the longest we have here in Canada is 200-Km or about without a fuel pump (on normal highways)

Putting the car to charge every few days and constantly worry about the range before you go out.

What worry? I don't carry my Apple Mac charger ever on my day trips. Why do you need to think about SOC or the range when you are commuting in the city for 80-100 Km? And this is not hearsay; we have 3 EVs in the family, and no one thinks even once before starting the day. And we don't even charge the cars daily. Now, if someone is commuting 200-300 Km a day, perhaps he needs to charge daily, but we do it about 2 times a week at most.

Go to a super charger that will charge your car fully in 5 mins and let you drive for 600 miles without worrying about SOC?

My body needs more rest than my car, probably I need to stretch out for 10-15 minutes every 2-3 hours of driving these days. I am ok if the car takes 20-30 minutes to charge.

I personally feel people are being cheated by car companies by passing off a product which is half worth but double the money but so projected to make them believe they are getting double worth for half the money.

EVs are not VFM, and no one is buying these just because of the prices but because of conveniences which may work for some and can be simply inconveniences for others. Just like what is music to your ears, maybe noise for others. We have an LX and this car needs fuel every 400 Km or so in city traffic. That means going at least once a week to pump and in this cold, standing out and filling the fuel is a task. Since the time we got ourselves the Model Y, my wife just plugs the car when she is at home inside the garage, and that's about it.

[electric_eel]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

So, how many gears do you think EVs can get in future? I know Taycan has 2, and ZF is also working (they have to remain in business), but why do we need gears when motors can handle the torque from the start? An increase in efficiency can be achieved by, say, 2 gears, but why complicate for a marginal increase?

Good point. And these are about performance cars. For cars like the Nexons or Tiagos that an average Joe like me drives around, a single gear transmission is all that one needs.

Multiple gears do not add any efficiency if your drive train is powered by electric motors. If at all it only wastes energy due to frictional losses and loss while switching gears. It is required in an ICE vehicles only to mitigate the inherent inferiority of the heat engine based drive train w.r.t its torque-rpm and power-rpm characteristics. So in an EV better efficiency figures can be achieved by better aerodynamics (cutting down on air resistance), or by designing drive trains with higher operational voltages (cutting down on heat losses). The latter can also means faster DC charging.

[ALTIMAed]

Originally Posted by rapid_fire

In Indian context, ARAI milage for EVs is a joke. The real world milage is somewhere between 60-70% of ARAI milage.
Nexon EV max (LR according to new terminology) gives around 280-300 km real world mileage while ARAI milage is 454 km.
We should come up with something more realistic so that owners can make an informed decision and buy asper their needs.

My take on this - MG advertises the range of the Comet on a full charge is 230 kms. On 100% charge, my car shows a range of 200 kms. The lowest percentage that I have gone till is 14% wherein it was showing a range of 28 kms, which translates to a 2 kms travel in a drop of 1%. The drive mode is set at Normal and the KERS mode at Heavy. I have not been able to better the figures mentioned above in the 3478 kms that I have driven my car. I have been told, the car shall do more than 200 kms on a full charge, just that the remaining 30 kms may variate depending on the way the car has been driven. In order to compel the user to charge the vehicle immediately, they have purposefully programed the car in such a way. How true, I cannot comment, but as a practice, I make sure I charge my car when the percentage goes below 10%. The key action here is to know how far your destination is, hence I have become heavily dependent on gmaps / Map my India to know the distance to my destination.

[extreme_torque]

Originally Posted by Pontiac

Exponential because it’s a simple machine and in the absence of gearing, one tends to behave like one. One can argue based on the type of batteries it can tend to be linear but nevertheless, the point I was trying to make was the range reduces by speed in the absence of gearing. Gas vehicles also will do the same in the absence of gearing. Gearing is must if you want BEV’s to work like gas vehicles. Car makers will get there once their sales taper out with the current technology.

You could not be more wrong here. The total lack of understanding is obvious here. ICE engines cannot work without a gearbox because their peak power and efficiency are within certain ranges of rotational speeds called the power band. In real life however, a vehicle requires varying levels of torque and speed to operate effectively in different driving conditions, like starting from a stop, climbing hills, or cruising at high speeds.

EV's have no such limitation because they make their maximum torque from 0 rpm onwards and remain fairly consistent over a range of speeds and therefore do not need multiple gear reductions (tesla has a fixed one ratio reduction) like an ICE engine does. A gearbox in an EV is a terrible idea from an efficiency stand point because it will introduce additional frictional losses.

Originally Posted by Pontiac

Tesla is not a good test vehicle to understand the range vs speed curve as Tesla is known to project unrealistic range until the battery SOC is below 50%. Tesla’s projections do not factor external temperatures or wind resistance or any external factors and all it does is to keep reducing EPA estimate by the miles travelled. This is a trick they like to play as they understand many only run their vehicles above 50% SOC most of the time. There are companies that give real-time data and correct range based on the current parameters, but they cannot sell them because people get spooked.

Not only is the sheer lack of knowledge astounding, the conspiracy theories are absolutely wild. I am not sure where you heard that they project unrealistic range or running above 50% SOC. Tesla range estimates are the best in the industry. When you put a destination in the Tesla navigation, it estimates the battery percentage you would arrive at the destination and I almost always arrive at the same percentage. It is off very rarely and even if it is, it is by a percentage point. The cruising range takes into account the following factors
Wind speed and direction
Altitude/slope
Traffic speed
Average acceleration/deceleration
ambient temperature
Humidity and pressure
Solar load and cloud cover
Initial battery percentage
Initial battery temperature
Total vehicle weight
rolling resistance
aerodynamic drag coefficient
HVAC consumption
Vehicle-specific energy consumption (bike rack or similar)
Battery warm-up

This is different to the range estimate shown on the display when you havent entered a destination because a lot of these factors are not taken into account and it only estimates based on the energy consumption on your last drive and they cannot be either given how comprehensive the list is. *

Originally Posted by Pontiac

Here is a feature from Reuters that recently came out about this.
https://www.reuters.com/investigates...tteries-range/

This is an utter garbage article and has been refuted multiple times on youtube and reddit already. Tesla users do not agree with this either. I am not going to state everything that is wrong with this. It is just a google search away along with the recent article about "faulty suspension"

Originally Posted by Pontiac

I tell my friends who considers the manufacturer’s advertised range as the sole factor in deciding which EV to buy. One should look for quantifiable metrics while deciding on a car like the battery capacity, features included, build quality that directly equates to money you pay. Rather than an arbitrary number that varies by a lot of factors. Once you have the battery capacity, it’s up to you to decide on how to use this. And let’s not a Youtuber influence you in car buying. They are called influencers for a reason. Let’s use our own judgement.

The consumption i quoted is NOT Tesla advertised but tested in real world by Bjorn. I just referenced his excel that is available for anyone to see and has consumption testing for almost all EV's available. The consumption on my Tesla Model Y Performance is similar.

Originally Posted by Pontiac

I hear this a lot. I ask them, which of the below is more convenient?

1. Putting the car to charge every few days and constantly worry about the range before you go out.
2. Go to a super charger that will charge your car fully in 5 mins and let you drive for 600 miles without worrying about SOC?

Plugging the car in when you are at home must be very inconvenient. The car's app being able to manage the charging for you depending on time of use tariff for your electricity or excess solar production automagically must also be very inconvenient.

Not having a service schedule or regular consumables which need changing every few thousand kilometers would also be very inconvenient. And pollution - is it inconvenient? Or leaving high performance ICE cars for dead?

I havent even mentioned the other inconveniences like sentry mode or the built in dashcam or variety of other apps and features some useful some purely for amusement.
*

Originally Posted by Pontiac

I personally feel people are being cheated by car companies by passing off a product which is half worth but double the money but so projected to make them believe they are getting double worth for half the money.

It is a free market. People know what they are getting for their money. For me personally Model Y Performance was extreme VFM - the combination of performance, features, range, safety, technology at the price I paid for it is unbeatable. The nearest ICE car with the same performance, discounting all the other features, was twice the price.

[shankar.balan]

Wouldn’t these YouTube reviews have a reasonable bearing on this thread?
I think they would, hence sharing them here. I have recently opened my mind a little more to the EV concept. And having test driven a couple of the best ones recently, I am indeed beginning to warm up to and appreciate them more than before.

https://youtu.be/tCsht34BqmQ?si=8WyCwU1NsJPrpEoR

https://youtu.be/lS9HdhEZnOo?si=X895hiKGLLp_k2Pb

[Jeroen]

Just a few thoughts/comments on all of this:

Just for definition. I use the term drive train here including the petrol tank on an ICE and including battery on an EV.

Drivetrain efficiency, and torque do have some correlation to range but it is far from straightforward.

You also need to consider different elements in comparing an ICE car and an EV.

The efficiency of a drive train is the ratio between how much energy you put into it and how much energy you get at the driven wheels.

To go from drivetrain efficiency to range, you need to factor in a bunch of other factors too, terrain, tyre resistance, air resistance (drag) etc.

Whereas we know exactly how much energy goes from the fuel tank to the engine (there are no losses), it is different for an EV. Batteries have internal efficiencies too. So the amount of energy you put in is not the same as the amount of energy you can withdraw. The battery heats up whilst being charged and also when it is discharged. The latter is a loss that is relevant for drive train efficiency.

And to make it more complicated, the battery efficiency tends to be impacted by the discharge rate (how many amps you are drawing) and also by the actual state of the battery in terms of age (state of health), and state of charge. Also, each type of battery has different internal efficiency curves.

I have been looking for some more detailed information on this, but it is difficult to find any good solid data. By and large modern car batteries tend to have a pretty good internal efficiency it seems. Different batteries come with different properties, but also different weights.

In theory, a lead-acid battery has the best internal efficiency but is considerably larger and heavier than other types. Size and weight do matter on a car as it will impact range. So you can't use the technically most efficient battery in a car.

Efficiency is about how much energy do I put in versus how much energy I get out of it.

The range is about how far (distance) I get to travel on a given amount of energy. (i.e. a full tank of petrol or a fully charged battery)

I have been wondering about these gears on EVs. I am not convinced (yet) it is about range and efficiency. I think it is more about torque.

Just for reference: I can out-accelerate any Tesla on the German Autobahn going from 100-200 km/h/ Some models might be a fraction quicker initially, but once we hit 140-150 km/h I will out-accelerate anything with my trusted 4.0 L supercharged V8. All about torque.

At higher speeds, an electric drivetrain runs out of torque. Although manufacturers have become very good at keeping e motor torques flat, there is always a point (a given RPM) at which the torque starts to come down. It is likely that has also some impact on efficiency. You can measure this effect on a test bed. But I don't think it has any bearing on a real-life situation in a car.

Because if the drive train can't produce more torques, it will simply either slow down or accelerate less. So I don't think gears on electrical cars are there for efficiency or range. They are there because at the end of the torque/RPM curve the torque you need or want is not available. Hence a gear change. So you cant compare something that is not available to something that is, if you get my drift. So you can't say this is about efficiency (or even range).

Of course, our experience with all of this tends to be based on range and various speeds. And other factors such as ambient temperature, use of heating and AC. Which is all even more complex than what I just explained. Because you need to factor in a bunch of additional parameters as I mentioned earlier.

I would be interested into seeing some data about current draws, torque against motor RPM and also against speed. Because it should help us understand this very complex topic a little bit better.

Jeroen

[Pontiac]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

why do we need gears when motors can handle the torque from the start? An increase in efficiency can be achieved by, say, 2 gears, but why complicate for a marginal increase?

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

EV's have no such limitation because they make their maximum torque from 0 rpm onwards and remain consistent over a range of speeds and therefore do not need multiple gear reductions

Agree. But a conventional gearbox has two functions that is of interest here. A Low gear where peak torque is transferred at low speeds and an overdrive when just enough torque is used for high speeds. I am not referencing other ratios as it is irrelevant here. Agree that the low gear ratio is not needed in an EV but, the overdrive is of utmost importance and with the nature of high torque at a low RPM, this ratio is beneficial towards managing higher speeds with low RPM increasing the efficiency multiple times. EVs benefit from this feature, but it does not align with their business model of highest margin on low volume cars.

Originally Posted by Turbanator

That means going at least once a week to pump and in this cold, standing out and filling the fuel is a task.

Agree. If the car in comparison needs fueling once a week, then EV makes sense from a convenience standpoint. My Focus needs fuel once a week and EV might be more convenient if I compare an EV with the Focus. On the other hand, my Audi needs fueling once a month. So, the convenience factor changes when we compare it against different vehicles.

Originally Posted by Turbanator

EVs are not VFM, and no one is buying these just because of the prices but because of conveniences which may work for some and can be simply inconveniences for others.

Cannot agree more.

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

Not having a service schedule or regular consumables which need changing every few thousand kilometers would also be very inconvenient.

My friend’s model 3 is 16K and it already needed an air filter replacement, and a fresh set of tires as the tires wear out quickly as the car is heavy and runs on small tires.

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

And pollution - is it inconvenient? Or leaving high performance ICE cars for dead?

There are many studies on what the pollution benefit or lack is thereof when you are replacing your ICE car with an EV. One just must look for it.

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

For me personally Model Y Performance was extreme VFM - the combination of performance, features, range, safety, technology at the price I paid for it is unbeatable.

To each their own, I guess. I don't mean to be disrespectful, but to give an idea, take any hybrid car, slap on a bigger battery (80KW is $7K at the current market rate), put on a bigger motor, remove the ICE, remove the gearbox, replace leather seats with cheap stuff, pull out the dash, put the build quality to garbage, remove lidar and replace with cheaper camera, remove features such as car play or android auto, charge money for garage door openers, give lane guidance/auto steer terminologies from aircraft, remove safety features such as seatbelt pretensioner, or good brakes and replace it with baby brakes, double the price and one has their Tesla. One swears by the functionality of dashcam but forget that they don’t have the basic 360-degree camera that comes default in other cars.

It is common marketing technique to compare one’s product to a product that sells at a higher price like Apple compared the sales of their Apple watch to that of Rolex just to get people’s attention and make them believe they are getting a product comparable to one that sells for a higher price. Tesla comparing to a Porsche does not mean they are comparable. It is just a marketing technique for people to feel good about their choices.

[electric_eel]

Originally Posted by Pontiac

Agree. But a conventional gearbox has two functions that is of interest here. A Low gear where peak torque is transferred at low speeds and an overdrive when just enough torque is used for high speeds. I am not referencing other ratios as it is irrelevant here. Agree that the low gear ratio is not needed in an EV but, the overdrive is of utmost importance and with the nature of high torque at a low RPM, this ratio is beneficial towards managing higher speeds with low RPM increasing the efficiency multiple times. EVs benefit from this feature, but it does not align with their business model of highest margin on low volume cars.

Let us not even bother about teslas and tycans. The top operational rpm of new Nexons Gen2 motor is 16000. With a 16 in diameter wheel and 1:1 gear ratio I get a speed of 2 * π * (8 * 2.5 * 1/100) * 16000 meters per minute or above 1200+ km /hr. We are taking of super sonic speeds if we have an overdrive gear for the humble nexon EV. (May be I have got the calculation wrong but this is the figure that I am getting).

Moral of the story is that we do not need an overdrive gear. Even for performance cars we might at most need 2 gears (with gear ratios less than 1) and most importantly this has nothing to do with efficiency (energy used per km of running).

[SKC-auto]

Originally Posted by electric_eel

With a 16 in diameter wheel and 1:1 gear ratio I get a speed of 2 * π * (8 * 2.5 * 1/100) * 16000 meters per minute or above 1200+ km /hr. May be I have got the calculation wrong but this is the figure that I am getting

Offtopic: You did not include tyre height, I got ~1900kmph.

[electric_eel]

Originally Posted by SKC-auto

Offtopic: You did not include tyre height, I got ~1900kmph.

oops sorry but I guess the point is made even without the thickness . (Just imagining myself driving around a quite car and then I switch gears and sonic boom the entire town).