New petrol and diesel car sales will be 'banned from 2030'

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
The re-gen level is configurable by the driver and was set to maximum when I was in the car.
Cruise control will have it covered. One of the remarkable things about EVs (and that one in particular) is that when summoned they are necking snapping animals and when driven more sedately that are as a quiet as a mouse and super smooth and civilised.
Thanks for the insight. Lets hope there are not too many dry circuits to re solder in 20 years time so the 3rd and 4th owners can get some use out of these machines.
 
Doesn't sound like a Tesla racing toward the next recharge is doing much toward the fanciful theory of saving planet.

But at least the profits enable some pointless space exploration.

EVs do a fantastic job in removing harmful carbon emissions away from city centres, which is where most people live and work.

That said, it is only a very small piece in a very big puzzle.
 
Interesting that you think there is actually a solution to this 'issue'. In reality like everything it is all to do with money. Those with the wearwithal will naturally continue to drive (electric or classic) and not use public transport.

The solution therefore is to force everyone to be on the same page. Collectivism, socialism, communism.

No thanks.

So having an affordable and efficient public transport network is.... Communism?

Not sure how to argue with that one.
 
The re-gen level is configurable by the driver and was set to maximum when I was in the car.
Cruise control will have it covered. One of the remarkable things about EVs (and that one in particular) is that when summoned they are necking snapping animals and when driven more sedately that are as a quiet as a mouse and super smooth and civilised.

Spot-on.
 
If memory serves I'm now reading some from converts.

The EV thing is supposedly going to save us from self destruction, while still allowing mobility.
Nowt new in my cynical points.
Scrap good, make new, and call it carbon neutral cos you planted a tree.
Produce new tech and tell everyone it's an improvement.

While there may be some advantage I do have issue with seeing the overall advantage, and most certainly don't trust the those that will gain financially while pushing / legislating this at us.

But more specifically. The Tesla's as recently mentioned are contradictory. They 'are' EV's, but if they are to save us from ourselves why develop these to accelerate like a drag racer? Why continue development so they can do this even faster?
They leave rubber on the roads and in the atmosphere, they must recharge sooner.
Both are negative toward and contradict the save the planet statements. But it is seemingly acceptable, even desirable.

Tesla are after all the pioneers in all of this but are merely changing petrol heads into lithium heads.
 
He does have a point. On my EV, in one-pedal mode, when lifting the foot off the accelerator it comes to a complete halt very very quickly, thanks to the electric motor's regen braking.

That said, it works fine in day to day driving, but the regen braking wouldn't be sufficient for the track, I don't think.
This is perhaps where the 4WD, more powerful motors and batteries play to their strengths. For road use there's huge retardation to be had. My 'race track' reference was a nod to how F1 uses re-gen braking (along with discs) to massively improve fuel efficiency.
 
So having an affordable and efficient public transport network is.... Communism?

Not sure how to argue with that one.
BEV's are not public transport. They are unaffordable personal transport and not an alternative to current affordable used ICE. Which leaves the masses on foot / on under invested public transport and the good party members in their BEV's.
 
If memory serves I'm now reading some from converts.

The EV thing is supposedly going to save us from self destruction, while still allowing mobility.
Nowt new in my cynical points.
Scrap good, make new, and call it carbon neutral cos you planted a tree.
Produce new tech and tell everyone it's an improvement.
EVs to a degree are a distraction from the argument that leads us to consider lower material consumption and better usage of what we already have.

While there may be some advantage I do have issue with seeing the overall advantage, and most certainly don't trust the those that will gain financially while pushing / legislating this at us.
There are enough signs ( or lack of signs of willingness to change) that can be interpreted as a corporate stitch up all the way to the bank's front door.
But more specifically. The Tesla's as recently mentioned are contradictory. They 'are' EV's, but if they are to save us from ourselves why develop these to accelerate like a drag racer? Why continue development so they can do this even faster?
They leave rubber on the roads and in the atmosphere, they must recharge sooner.
Both are negative toward and contradict the save the planet statements. But it is seemingly acceptable, even desirable.

Tesla are after all the pioneers in all of this but are merely changing petrol heads into lithium heads.
Not as contradictory as first appears - or there is at least a precedent.
Turbocharging is the holy grail of ICE efficiency gains but before it was mainstream it was a niche performance thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: m80
Thanks for the insight. Lets hope there are not too many dry circuits to re solder in 20 years time so the 3rd and 4th owners can get some use out of these machines.

This is true, but not a new problem.

We scrap cars in the UK that would still be good for another 20 years of driving in India or Africa etc.

The 'value' of second hand cars goes-down very quickly because people in Western countries earn well and can afford to buy newer cars, so the old ones becomes unwanted very quickly.

Then garage labour rates are high due to a combination of emplyee wages and benefits, as well as various regulatory costs (even before mentioning owners' profits). Parts are expensive thanks to 20% VAT and consumer rights (that translate to an indirect cost for the parts retailer).

How many old bangers get scrapped due to the high cost of repairing a failing head gasket, for example? In the developing world the cost to fix it would be a fraction of what it is in the UK.

There's no way around it, the West is a consumeristic and wasteful society, and EVs are just one more example of it.

Reduce, Recycle, Reuse, is the only long term solution. EVs are great, but we won't be able to drive our way out of an ecological disaster, regardless of the mode of transport.
 
BEV's are not public transport. They are unaffordable personal transport and not an alternative to current affordable used ICE. Which leaves the masses on foot / on under invested public transport and the good party members in their BEV's.

Agreed. See my post #1162 above.
 
BEV's are not public transport. They are unaffordable personal transport and not an alternative to current affordable used ICE. Which leaves the masses on foot / on under invested public transport and the good party members in their BEV's.
I think what we are witnessing is an acceptance that in cities not much will change. The wealthiest will buy whatever they want/is required, the poorest will use public transport - as before. Those between these extremes will either move towards public transport or the bank to finance electrification. The numbers required to change are relatively small.
Outwith cities however, the poorest are more or less compelled to have their own car and thus much more will be affected by ICE disappearance.

edit PS. For city dwellers in the middle, a possible solution might be a low cost low power alternative such as Citroen's Ami. But with such low power and 30mph top speed - city use only. So again, no easy solutions for those outwith cities.
 
Outwith cities however, the poorest are more or less compelled to have their own car and thus much more will be affected by ICE disappearance.
I think it will be ok. ICE cars have a good 20 years 'sunset period' in which they will still be around. By then I feel certain that EVs will have moved on a couple of generations and be accessible to all. Your post #1170 comment on turbocharging moving from niche to mainstream is very apposite.
 
The Cities are outlawing older vehicles, diesel more so.
But elsewhere there is an increasing recognition that, say pre July 2008, diesels are more simple in their engine design, and can still give good economy, while having a greater tolerance at MOT.

The effort to keep these running becomes more worth while, until the Gov't drones are going to target them.

I see possibility of their value increasing.

These cars giving another 5 / 10 years life will have greater benefit to the environment than new EV's.
Well ok, be less detrimental.
 
And they have now an even faster car with an additional motor?
Yes indeedy, the even faster Tesla is the Model S "Plaid" (?), apparently with one front motor and two rear, allowing lots of very clever traction management trickery.

Here's Shmee150 seeing off a 1000hp Mustang in it:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

I guess this stuff sells Tesla cars in the USA (300,000 last year) by giving the brand a halo effect.
 
and EVs are just one more example of it.

So ban them ;)

The solution is perhaps down regulation.

I think things may get worse with EVs because manufacturers will have more control over the parts and interfaces and software. Tesla's post sale control over their vehicles is .... inteersting.

So as an example if you have a late 90s or 2000s aging MB what do you most fear - a transmssion issue, an engine issue, or an ECU or SBC issue?

I would suggest the latter, and the reason is that these are not generic components so the prices tend to be disproportionately high for what they are.

So my view is that if we want things to last then we need common standards and interchangeable parts and less in the way of restrictive controls over IPR.

As an example - OBD interfaces have been a 'good thing' in standardising diagnostics. ECUs and other critical controllers should be standard - with published APIs/interfaces. Manufacturers will bleat that they need specialist electronics or black boxes or connectors. I don't think that they actually do. The firmware or software would stll be bespoke - but I would argue that if a customer buys a vehicle then they get the right to reinstall the firmware or software on to replacement generic components.
 
I think what we are witnessing is an acceptance that in cities not much will change. The wealthiest will buy whatever they want/is required, the poorest will use public transport - as before. Those between these extremes will either move towards public transport or the bank to finance electrification. The numbers required to change are relatively small.
Outwith cities however, the poorest are more or less compelled to have their own car and thus much more will be affected by ICE disappearance.

edit PS. For city dwellers in the middle, a possible solution might be a low cost low power alternative such as Citroen's Ami. But with such low power and 30mph top speed - city use only. So again, no easy solutions for those outwith cities.

Baning private cars from city centres will affect the poor an rich alike.

OK, so the rich will probably use Uber VIP, but that's about the only advantage they'll get.

So are we good to go...?
 
The Cities are outlawing older vehicles, diesel more so.
But elsewhere there is an increasing recognition that, say pre July 2008, diesels are more simple in their engine design, and can still give good economy, while having a greater tolerance at MOT.

The effort to keep these running becomes more worth while, until the Gov't drones are going to target them.

I see possibility of their value increasing.

These cars giving another 5 / 10 years life will have greater benefit to the environment than new EV's.
Well ok, be less detrimental.

Running a pre-2008 Diesel car may have its attraction, but owners need to recognise that they're sitting on a melting ice cube... not really a long term proposition.
 
I think it will be ok. ICE cars have a good 20 years 'sunset period' in which they will still be around. By then I feel certain that EVs will have moved on a couple of generations and be accessible to all.
Very probable but battery life seems to be pegged to ten years which means a lot of batteries made and disposed of over that 20 years while an ICE car with good maintenance will easily last 20 years with a significantly lower production carbon footprint.
Deferring EV rollout until its technology has improved (to circumvent the above) strikes me as being a valid proposition while pursuing other avenues of carbon reduction - eg, diet change and thus the possibility of growing (ICE compatible) bio-fuels.
Your post #1170 comment on turbocharging moving from niche to mainstream is very apposite.
More accurate I think than the 'lap top' model bandied.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom