It is ridiculous. But brings to mind a middle class dilemma - I have a colleague with a five year old i3 at the end of its hp agreement with a knackered battery (gets about 30 miles on a charge) and range extender going for a song as a result which does qualify for no congestion charge as a result
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
The BMW i3 let the market down with its short battery life compared to other e-cars. BMW set the performance far too high for its original battery, unnecessarily stressing it. And the range extender engine with it's far too small petrol tank and tendency to overheat made matters worse. That it's so incredibly ugly a small car doesn't help.
It baffles me how they let it get off the drawing board.
.
I don't completely agree with you there.
If you have a long queue of traffic, a hybrid is likely to chuck out far less than a pure ICE.
Even with engine stop-start - the hybrid egine can run for a while, fully charge the battery and switch off for a relatively long time. An ICE would have to start up every single time it needs to move. As the worst pollution and fuel consumption usually occurs when engines start...
No it is not ridiculous at all. The ICE is most efficient when running at a fixed speed into a optimal load with air flows optimised. . It is running it into a load which is varying and at varying speeds which is wasteful and requires a complex gearbox, clutch etc. ..all of which add weight.
The electrical motor is much more adaptable in torque ,speed . Using a small rechargeable battery as an intermediary store , and reservoir which can absorb the kinetic energy which otherwise would be heating brakes or engine oil . As a petrol head, you will have seen the lengths the racing fraternity have gone to recycle this energy with air compressors etc.
The unavoidable fact is that a hydrocarbon rich fuel contains more energy per unit mass than any lithium compound. If it can be extracted efficiently, it creates less pollution . Now a fuel cell is the most efficient way to extract that energy , but a fixed speed fixed load ICE is not a bad intermediate step.
We could potentially see very high rotation speed jet engines , driving tiny generators feeding the battery pack!.
If your argument was correct, which it isn't, hybrids would be more efficient than ICE at steady state operating. They aren't. Your simplistic explanation is as usual pure academy and fails to take into account practicalities like expense, dual usage of resources,space, weight of vehicle etc etc.
Simple fact is that for environmental benefit Hybrid is a none starter. A good, efficient ICE with a range of ideal efficiency operating speeds (which variable inlet tract lengths, variable valve timing and other adjustable parameters) is more efficient than the system you suggest. (as MPG figures show, and as Oyster has just eluded to)
My Jag can easily achieve 65 MPG, hasn't used valuable resources for batteries or emotors, costs £30 a year to tax and even around town can manage 45 mpg and its a big car with no space used up with heavy batteries emotors and the likes.
Hybrids are and always were a con,a tick box exercise for environment.. Giving rise to stupidly fast cars (ie Porsche and VW taking advantage) and for people to think they were helping environment when actually they were not, quite the reverse actually.
Indeed, enough were to the extent they voted for Brexit
Although I agree with your post Danidl, it's no longer relevant to how the market is operating these days.
People buying ICE cars are rarely choosing between a ICE car and a hybrid, they just buy ICE. It's people considering an e-car who are choosing between an e-car and a plug in hybrid and that is where plug in hybrid is ridiculous when all factors are considered:
Far higher capital cost, in my case £9000 more for the nearest plug in hybrid.
Often worse environmental credentials for all trips over 20 or so miles on most models.
Far higher plug-in hybrid running costs than e-cars
Much higher plug-in hybrid servicing cost than e-cars.
Much higher plug-in hybrid servicing frequency.
Far more to go wrong eventually on plug-in hybrids, so higher long term running costs.
A dying market, so large depreciation for plug-in hybrids.
All adding up to a plug in hybrid being a very poor buy compared with today's e-cars for the great majority of people, and a poor buy against an ICE car for the majority who do low mileages.
.
And now Cummings is your hero??? I, ve always questioned his place in Government, his latest ramblings only go to show him exactly for what he is. Bordering on insane?
Nope .. and you call yourself car buff?. The current and earlier hybrids use a complex gearbox arrangement to feed the ICE power into the wheels and also electric motor power into the wheels,and also the ICE energy into a battery. So in so far as it is heavy, it is, inefficient yes ..but even with those built in inefficiencies, the Prius was still competitive.
Fleccs argument is more compelling . Having multiple technologies in the car is added weight and cost. If lithium battery technology evolves so that a 5 minute fill is feasible , and range increased to 800km , without the battery lifetime compromised, then it is game over. If on the other had, battery prices escalate, that leaves room for hybrids using either a ICE or fuel cell.
Last edited:
If Danidl's supposition that some ICE could be found that is way more efficient at a particular rpm then the argument could make sense but fact is modern ICE are so developed they already operate at almost maximum of Carnot Cycle efficiency rate at quite a broad range, totally negating usage of an electrical system to provide torque accross a range of rpm.(and negating requirement for emotors/batteries)
The ICE has become a victim of its own development.
Modern diesel engines are incredibly efficient (relative to their ancestors) at speeds from just above tick over, to just under max rpm)
Against what?
You are completely missing the point. If the ICE can be made so efficient that efficiency can be exploited much more cheaply, much easier and with less use of rare metals than using an electric drive train. It's actually obvious. No matter how efficient the electric system used, it introduces extra complexity, extra weight, and extra resources and uses up extra space. Hence why either pure ICE or pure electric is the only realistic choice. A combination of both doesn't get full benefits of either but gets both downsides.. Unless you are searching f or something else... As Porsche were. Incredible performance (using both), apparent good efficiency using only one and ability to con everyone saying the Porsche 718 is environmentaly friendly. It is no such thing. It's a lie. You, ve bought into the BS.
The efficiency of any hybrid is limited to the efficiency of its ICE providing motive power, introducing unnecessary systems merely detracts from that efficiency and eats up space, resources and energy... No matter how good it is.
If you really want an efficient Hybrid.. Bin all the electric side.
Or bin the ICE and charge the damned thing.
If you want a stupid fast thing with pretentious of acceptability... Build a hybrid.
Last edited:
In market terms the game for the Prius and it's kin is over though, just look at the retreat. First they gave it a plug in option to extend its life, now they've launched pure battery electric, hiding it under their Lexus name to avoid it looking like defeat, and the hybrids will be banned in many markets shortly.
No to the five minutes and 800 km, that's just the ICE mentality thinking that. You have to forget all you knew about ICE to get your e-car thinking right. For example:
E-cars leave home with a full tank from the home charger, ICE the opposite, often depleted and needing to fill soon. Therefore an e-car driver in today's new models will drive for 200 or 300 miles depending on model bought before needing to top up. By then on our lousy roads they will be more than ready for a break, so 15 minutes over a coffee is fine.
And 15 minutes is enough with the new generation cars and chargers to add at least 100 to 150 miles, depending on car model chosen. In fact those being launched now have charge rates at of at least 100kW with many at 200 kW and 350 kW capability chargers being installed already. Now consider that 4 miles per kW/h is routine already in my 15 foot long e-car and you'll understand why range and charging times are not a problem.
And there's another way in which all ICE thinking needs to be abandoned.
Forget the traditional filling stations, I predict their total demise. E-car charging is progressing on a totally different route:
1) Pre-charging at home.
2) Charging incorporated into one's life. This is the most dramatic development and change, with all sorts of outlets we use signing up in a rush to have very rapid charging points. Fast food drive throughs and some static units of McDonalds, Kentucky Fried, Burgher King, Starbucks, Costa Coffee. Gyms like David Lloyd leisure centres. Even some restaurants with car parking are signing up and even national parks. After early tries with slow chargers the supermarkets have renewed interest now as they see the potential, with Tesco leading the charge (sic) into rapid chargers. A lot of those are already there, including IKEA and others where you can have free charging as a "loss leader" to gain custom.
I trust you can see the implications. Charging will no longer be an event like filling up so no time needs to be spent on it. Charging will just be something that happens in the normal course of living as we do now, while sleeping at home or in hotels, shopping, picking up fast food, visiting a gym, having a restaurant meal etc.
3) Motorway and trunk route large ultra-rapid charging stations for topping up on long runs not covered by the above.
.
Last edited:
True, but of course it's all over for ICE now in our home and many other western markets. Climate change and pollution are unavoidable brick walls.
.
Compared to who? Grayling? Gove? Cummings was not only boris' frontal lobes. He was also relatively normal.
Edit - and you voted for the lot of them
BTW a fuel cell ev is not a hybrid.. FCEV is way forward... As of today's technology.. But they will use a lot of hydrogen. (currently around 28 miles per lb of hydrogen) And at current prices (14 dollar per lb in states, around 5 euros per lb in Germany, who are installing Hydrogen infrastructure and developing ways of reducing price, hence cheaper rate than US, not sure where UK is, we are too busy listening to raving loony Cummings..
I, m afraid I now agree Flecc. Many manufactures have pulled plug on ICE development. I do think transport is going to become much more expensive for masses.
The days of cheap, utilitarian stuff, like 2cvs,Honda 90s, Ford Ka etc are over...
Can you really see either FCEV or BEV getting down in size/cost for a KA.
Time will tell.
I think out of all those, as Tom Cruise's adviser said, I, d choose Boris every day and twice on Sunday. You want Gove.. Good grief man, he stands for everything you hate, which is a lot. IDS is sat quietly waiting for this lot to implode. You want him?
Listening to Cummings I think he, s certifiable.. He's insane.
Not really comparable to a Ford Ka though for all round use, though ok for the supermarket run.
.