I’m prepared for people to dump on electrics because this is a forum based on a game centered around the history of the piston-driven ICE, but let’s not let that derail this thread.
Since the Electric car proponents figured out that Electric needed to be paired with Sexy in order for it to be a thing, and Sexy means sufficient portions of sleek and fast (the P85/95 etc. isn’t sleek, but it makes up for it with the fast bit), we’ve been seeing a surge in the sector. Most recently the Nio EP9:
It looks like a modern hypercar concept, and it boasts the figures of one (1341bhp, supposedly). And many are raving on about the 7:05 it posted at Nordschleife (also the 2:11 at CoTA, and 2:40 when driving autonomously).
This is where skeptics start complaining: “hey, if you were making a hypercar with an ICE or even hybrid then these figures wouldn’t add up!” or “If the 1:One hadn’t had an ABS failure it would have easily posted a 6:30 something!” and well, that’s actually true. And then there’s also: “what’s the big deal about computer guided car lapping 20% slower than a human driver on a race track?” (apart from the obvious this could be the start of something… new).
So what I’m trying to figure out is where the deficiencies are and whether (trillion dollar question) Electric can address them and revolutionise the auto market (but not in the way I want it to, just saying). While an odd starting point, we’re in a bit of an odd place in auto engineering right now, so the first question I have is: why is a so-called 1341bhp EV slower than an ICE-inclusive hypercar around the circuit?
conservative driving (maybe, but it’d have to be way more conservative than even the 918’s official run where they limited the speed on Dottinger Hohe to 290)
not enough focus on aero (this is either rubbish or NIO’s claims of their venturi system giving up to 2.45g lateral and 3.3g braking is bullshit)
chassis deficiencies (can’t imagine this being the case, to get “1300bhp” out of battery power still takes a lot of mass and this thing comes in at a bit over 1400kg which isn’t that much, considering NIO wants it to also offer a luxury cabin that lets you sleep in it…?)
the obvious electric bugbear: that power is only available from a fresh charge and the performance of the powerplant deteriorates throughout the lap
The practical issues of high performance in electric only vehicles was highlighted in the side-effect of the P85D’s “ludicrous” mode, in which customers complained that it was only good for Ludicrous acceleration with a full charge. I’m no electric engineer (even learning about EM in high school was my weakest point in Physics because unless one is being electrocuted the energy and its propogation is not tangible even if its effects are), so can somebody explain to me what the actual issue is? I mean, how does it work in, say, Formula E?
Obviously also feel free to bring up and discuss your own thoughts about electric performance cars.
Semi hybrid IMO offers the best of both worlds. LaFerrari’s system of KERS aiding the ICE helps make the best use out of both systems while only having the disadvantages of the ICE. It’s a shame no one really knows how competent LaFerrari can be, because the car doesn’t come with nor is it built for semi slicks.
I honestly think free valve tech + KERS is the way of the future. Full electric has it’s own set of problems. A mild hybrid while not offering the same level of efficiency as a full hybrid or full electric, can work very well with a free valve ICE that theoratically has far better efficiency. Since it’s not on full power boost mode in a road application unlike in LaFerrari, it could significantly reduce fuel consumption while not taking up the weight regular motors would have and not require overnight charging or even charging in general. Assuming the driver uses the ICE only for city driving to allow for the system to charge, it can result in incredible highway range. Mazda has a more primitive system called IE Loop used since 2011, but that only charges up the battery to power up the cars electric functions and not to propel the vehicle. Free valve well, you probably know more about than I do, but hey it seems like the only way the ICE can advance these days. Knowing Koenigsegg however, it might just remain vaporware.
Electric cars don’t have souls. They’re abominations. Burn them! Burn them all!
Now that I got that out of the way… I’ll try to rationalize my thoughts about this topic.
I view electric cars in a negative light for a multitude of reasons. I guess I’ll start with that.
User Inconveniences. Electric cars have significant ease-of-use deficiencies compared to ICE powered cars. They have a very limited range and endurance, and “re-fueling” is a very time consuming endeavour.
Cost. The buy-in cost is greater, and at least where I am, the running costs are higher as well. A gallon of gasoline/petrol would have to cost around $5 usd for it to break even with what I pay for electricity. ($1.32usd per litre). Currently fuel costs about half that for me.
Romantics. This is the big one for why I don’t believe that there is a large market for a “sexy electric car”. To me, a car needs to have much more than a pretty body and a decent lap time. I genuinely enjoy and love all of what makes an ICE. The sound, the vibration, the heat, and the feel of an engine. That’s what makes a car for me, along with good handling. Without that… a car is just a dead shell to me. This is partly why I don’t like most newer cars; they’ve gotten too soft, quiet and boring for my taste; even if they’re technically much faster than older cars.
The “Romantics” section is only valid for those of us who truly love engines. For me, ICE engines are my passion; whether they’re in cars, or trucks, or aircraft, or watercraft… and there is no replacement for them.
For those that don’t care about ICEs… then I suppose an electric car is a valid option for them… if they’re willing to fight with my first two bulletins. My question is… why would you?
The question of why a car has an X.XX lap time is always a very difficult one due to the multitude of factors involved. “Horsepower isn’t everything” is a good rule to follow though. I’ve noticed that a lot of 1,000+ hearsepower cars tend to do comparatively poorly on the track.
I guess one of my other major concerns lie in the current complexity and environmental harms in the manufacturing process which seem to be not cost-effective and a net loss for our planet for the sake of “zero emissions” for some, and “extra boost” for others.
Offtopic: I’m not intimately familiar with Koenigsegg’s engineering history. Can you list other examples in which other engineering innovations heralded by Koenigsegg never eventuated, or did you mean something else?
As you did say, I think this will be one of the most emotionally charged points of contention and thus at least for the sake of this thread I’d like to downplay it if possible. I mean I’ve made my “two sides of the coin” thoughts on ICE noise and smoke known elsewhere haha.
On the plus side, and this presumes a lot of premises about environmental protections, if we did move the entire auto industry towards quiet/silent, somewhat-sustainable technology that didn’t rely on fossil fuels (one can dream still), you could possibly argue that while this would destroy the relevance of the ICE to our every day life, their increasing rarity would elevate them to the historical status and reverence that you might deem appropriate, no?
[quote=“strop, post:4, topic:20965”]
As you did say, I think this will be one of the most emotionally charged points of contention and thus at least for the sake of this thread I’d like to downplay it if possible.
[/quote]Sure; I wasn’t stating that as a simple counter to all electric vehicles. I think that the emotional connection to ICE is especially pertinent for the electric sports car segment you were talking about. It is less vaild for city cars, for example.
While I see your point about elevating ICE engines to a new level of historical status… I feel that they’re already there with older cars. Driving a car just 10 years newer than my own was a shocking experience for me. A car just 10 years older than mine has already attained “on a pedestal” status for me.
That and what you suggested is kind of a backwards concept for me to be honest. It’s like… let’s go kill all the Capybara in the world so that we finally recognize how cute they are, lol.
ok, but, cars aren’t Capybara by any stretch of the imagination. Sure, they’re common, but nowhere near as common as cars and represent nowhere near the environmental cost of the entire automotive industry. If I were to actually apply your analogy to the extent of its logic, let’s replace Capybara with cows, and let’s expand the population of that equivalent to how many cars we have on this Earth (in this case, approximately 1 billion cars, and 1.5 billion cows). And let’s also remind ourselves of the premises I presumed wherein the sheer number of ICE automobiles being produced and used was tangibly contributing to depletion of world resources and emissions. Just like, how about that, the cattle industry is at the size such that the sheer amount of methane produced by cows accounts for close to 20% of Greenhouse gas effect on earth (which is actually probably more than cars produce, in terms of GHG alone, but that’s just one metric of environmental cost).
All of a sudden I’m getting dangerously close to making a tandem argument for environmental vegetarianism (ok not quite, but certainly the nature and extent of the meat industry is a parallel issue… and one I’m not touching on this forum).
Eh, the environmental cost is a complicated topic filled with questionable science and lies… well… much like any serious world-wide topic really… because money.
I’m not fully convinced that we’re actually digging a hole that we can’t get out of / cope with… and I’m certainly not convinced that modern-day automobiles are a significant contributor to said environmental problems. Supposedly lightning strikes produce more emissions than cars; for example.
I guess I like the viewpoint that we, as in humanity, own this planet, and we can do whatever we want on it; including damage it. I’d also like to think that we’ve technologically progressed to the point that “nature” isn’t a serious threat to humanity. Sure, she’ll always bone us here and there with earfquakes and tsunamis and such… but that isn’t going to kill us all… certainly less than we kill each other on our own accord.
Anyway… this is steering the topic way off from electric sports cars… but I had to post those Capybara. HAD TO.
Poke around with this statement enough and you’ll discover that it is both limitlessly profound and utterly useless. After several years of grappling with it you may yet wish to seek meaning elsewhere unless you’re gunning to become Camus’ absurd hero.
I’m going to roll with it for now because I started a thread about electric performance cars of all things, even noting how ironic it seems in the grand scheme.
So, anyone gonna explain more about the pitfalls of electric engines for performance applications?
While I see why a lot of people would find the Quokka more appealing because of that derpy smile… I still stand with the relaxed Capybara. If I ever own a ranch… there’s going to be Capybara. Wonder why they don’t make them into fur coats… seems suitable since they use beavers. Right, moving on.
Eh, that statement about us owning our planet may be my lethargy speaking for me… coupled with my all too common “I just don’t give a shit” attitude about world-topics… mostly because we can’t do a damn thing to change it. Depress-tec kicked in yo’.
Though in this case it’s mostly that I’m unwilling to change anything… because ICEs are a drug… assuming they’re a problem in the first place… which I don’t agree with.
Right, so pitfalls of electric engines. A major issue is the abysmal energy density of batteries. Currently, on a scale of 100 to 1 compared to gasoline/petrol. As in you’ll need 100kg of batteries to equal 1kg of gasoline/petrol. (All numbers are approximate).
I’d say that with newer EVs, it can be less inconvenient than a traditional ICE powered car. It takes all of 30 seconds between plugging in your car when you get home (or to a charging station) and unplugging your car, and you can do literally anything else while the car is charging. For an ICE powered car, you’d have to go out of your way to a gas station and sit there and wait for your car to fill up, which can take up as much as 15 minutes out of your normal routine; definitely a much larger time sink than you’d think. And while they don’t have anywhere near the same range as an ICE car, for most people in most situations, that doesn’t necessarily matter. You don’t buy an EV for range, you buy it for efficiency.[quote=“KA24DE, post:3, topic:20965”]
Cost. The buy-in cost is greater, and at least where I am, the running costs are higher as well. A gallon of gasoline/petrol would have to cost around $5 usd for it to break even with what I pay for electricity. ($1.32usd per litre). Currently fuel costs about half that for me.
[/quote]
While I do agree that upfront costs are a bit higher, maintenance and running costs are much lower (at least here in the US), which can make the cost of ownership less over the long-term than an ICE powered car.
EXAMPLE: Chevy Bolt EV has 240 mile range, and costs about $4-$6 of electricity to fill up, leading to about 1.5-2 cents per mile for energy. Toyota’s Prius ECO can get ~55 MPG Average on regular unleaded, which is about $2.40/gallon. That equates to ~4.5 cents per mile, almost triple the running costs in energy. PLUS, you don’t need to worry about oil changes, filter changes, etc., leading to a significant reduction in maintenance costs.
The thing is if I could right now afford an electric car for a multitude of reasons I’d get one
Since I don’t need a car for longer distances than 200km (that much rarely, although don’t most proper electric cars go further anyway) an electric car would be fine range wise (and if I need to go further I’d just borrow someone elses car) and personally I find it much nicer that you can just sort of charge your car at home instead of taking a part of my day for driving to get petrol.
Although I don’t need a car for long distances, I still drive a lot which means it would be nice getting to pay much, much much much less for what is powering my car. Electricity is really cheap. Petrol isn’t, neither is diesel.
But my main gripe with ICE cars is the maintenance. What’s annoying to me is that a thing like a car which to anyone but an enthusiast is supposed to be a convenience, a tool, a means of getting around, ends up being an inconvenience a few times, and a few times can be too much. There’s so much tlc that goes into keeping your engine and your gearbox from breaking themselves slowly and you have to be careful not to do this or that so that this and that don’t wear too fast etc, then you have to change this every so miles and that has to be checked for this and that.
(you can probably figure out I’m not one of those car enthusiasts that really care about the technical side)
And anyway in every day driving I find electric cars to just be fun because an electric motor feels agile.
It’s just a shame that most affordable electric cars are way overpriced because they’re made quick by manufacturers to cater to a certain market. (the i30 is the only exception to this as to an equivalent 1 series it’s only about 3000€ more expensive, while all others are at least 15.000€ more expensive than equivalents)
Please note that this is from a Finnish perspective so regarding electricity vs fuel prices etc.
I’m pretty sure the math here is incorrect. The range is irrelevant; you need to compare the MPGe. Take a look at this comparison from the US EPA:
Based on current average US fuel and electricity prices, electric cars only save about $100 in fuel cost per year compared to a hybrid. The Hyundai Ioniq Hybrid is actually cheaper to run than a Model S.
In the US, electricity currently costs ~$0.13 per kWh on average, which translates to a cost of $4.17 per gasoline gallon equivalent of energy. So electric cars can get more than twice the MPG(e) vs. a hybrid, but the cost of electricity is close to twice the cost of gasoline. Of course, this may change drastically in the future - an oil crisis will pull gas prices up obviously, but if electric cars become mainstream, then the cost of electricity would go up while gas would go down.
About the main topic, IIRC the ‘actual’ Nurburgring lap time for a Model S is around 10 minutes, because the battery overheats and stops delivering maximum power before the end of the lap. Presumably an electric hypercar like the EP9 or a Rimac would use more cooling, but I’m guessing that strop is correct in saying that performance deteriorates throughout the lap.
The US is a bit of an exception when it comes to EVs vs ICEs since your gas is so cheap, while your electricity isn’t that cheap.
I checked their calculations, and they seem to have used around .13$/kWh as their electricity prices.
If you pay less for your electricity, the prices get much lower. In Quebec for example we pay .07$/kWh, which results in fuel costs of around 260$/year.
And since fuel here is around 4$ per gallon, EVs end up being a lot more cheaper to run here compared to hybrids.
The big thing I’ve noticed with electric is the weight. Batteries weigh a lot, and while one could argue a full tank of gas and an engine weighs more, you burn off most of the weight in your gas while driving on the limit. So it comes down to, effectively, literal rocket science: your delta-V goes up. As you consume fuel, your car becomes lighter, but your power output stays the same. So you have a net gain in just how much velocity the car can achieve as it consumes the fuel supply.
Yes, I know, the gained speed when dealing with cars that powerful is almost imperceptible, but anyone who’s driven a shitbox on less than a quarter-tank of gas knows the feeling.
In an electric car, however, the ‘fuel’ consumed is virtually-massless, but the storage containers, the batteries, don’t get lighter as the ‘fuel’ is consumed. Instead, the available voltage and amperage start to drop, and the motor starts to spin down. Effectively like slowly turning off the garden hose while it’s turning a miniature water wheel.
So regardless of how much outright brute force the motor and engine can produce on the launch of Lap 1, with all things being perfectly equal to start with, the gasoline car will only get faster while the electric car will only get slower.
holy crap what’s with all these insanely cheap energy bills! In Victoria, we are currently paying about 28 cents (AUD) per kilowatt hour, which is about 21c (USD). Petrol is currently around $1.3AUD/L, which comes to about 5 bucks for the gallon, and that’s 91 octane. For 95RON it’d be an extra 40 cents on top of that, so 5.40.
Not a myth, Melbourne is one of the most expensive places to live in the world, on a daily basis. Don’t think we’d save much on either an EV or an ICE no matter which way we cut it
Aha, thanks, that’s what I was originally looking for. Basically the amount of potential energy available on tap drops because the charge is being used up? Or have I got it all wrong?
May I introduce you to this magical land called Norway where the average price of electricity is $0.04 per kWh. Except if you have an electric car, then the cost of recharging is free most of the time. And you don’t pay road tax. And you don’t pay as high a toll.
Leafs and Model Ses are handed out as company cars like they’re nothing. Even then, a base Leaf only costs ~£18500. A BMW i3 will set you back roughly £25k. A Mitsubishi iMIEV (ugh) is £14300 - GET A NISSAN LEAF
For comparison a litre of lowest grade petrol was £1.38 per litre… and I’ve seen it go as high as £1.6/litre. Petrol is expensive. Very. Diesel is cheaper but still expensive. I think you can see why EVs work here.
Yes, and I also happen to know, ironically for this forum Norway also happens to have some of the most stringent conditions for operating ICE vehicles, not just the petrol is expensive but don’t they also have some ghastly tariffs for displacement/output? I remember Puffster made a CSR round about attempting to be a motoring enthusiast in Norway…
That’s the part about road tax. It’s based on engine displacement AND emissions so conventional cars get fucked most of the time. As electric cars have neither of these (well, directly) they are exempt.
But coming round back to the point of this thread, I want to point out that EVs do have some limitation, even in Norway (aka an EV owners wet dream). The further north you go, the less you see them. Why is that? The operating conditions effectively make them too difficult or simply unsuitable. You go to Tromsø, midwinter. It’s icy, it’s snowy but most of all, it’s probably freaking cold. Batteries simply do not work in these conditions, or if they do, they’re not giving their best. The same applies at the other end of the spectrum, you’d have to be stupid to try to use an EV in the middle of the desert.
It’s just that Koenigsegg so far has promised plenty, but failed to show much. They have never done a full top speed run since the CCR, and the One:1’s lap record tours are done on tracks that aren’t commonly used as benchmarks, unlike that of the Viper ACR. So forgive my skepticism on the Regera’s claimed performance.
(which is actually probably more than cars produce, in terms of GHG alone, but that’s just one metric of environmental cost).
