The EV fact thread

[ChipChop]

I bet you’re absolutely gutted as I suspect you had your heart set on a brand new EV made in China, and had intended to make full use of the driver assistance technologies

Better surely to confine you musings to the BYD Atto 3's failings as identified by Euro NCAP? Maybe write them a strongly worded letter expressing your concern that they have the audacity to criticize a battery powered vehicle made in China.

 

[Petrol Pete]

Vehicle NOx emissions: The basics - International Council on Clean Transportation

Among the air pollutants gasoline and diesel engines emit are oxides of nitrogen—NO and NO2, generically abbreviated as NOx. Nitrogen oxides have harmful direct effects on human health, and indirect effects through the damage they do to agricultural crops and ecosystems. Vehicle NOx emissions...

theicct.org

Remember the VW CHEATING emissions debacle of a few years back-even the vehicle manufacturers are at it!

Yes they were . Trump sorted them out with a $14 Billion dollar fine and forced them to buy back every single cheat car. What did he threaten VW with ? A total ban on their products within the USA .....Including Porsche and Audi.

It worked.

 

[SpikyMikey]

Not Blue Efficency... thats mine with NO Adblue. It the BlueTEC models that have Adblue.

Yep. My 204 was a 'Bluefficiency' model. And that was a petrol.
'Bluefficiency' was a package that included drag and rolling resistance reduction and various engine management thingies (including stop/start and battery regen.)

 

[markjay]

You may want to avoid ever travelling in a BYD Atto 3 EV with the adaptive cruise control on then. A euro NCAP 5 star rated car despite having this issue. The assumption that more tech is always better is not necessarily true. See also Tesla's with no indicator stalks.

BYD Atto 3 given worst Euro NCAP driver-assistance score ever | Auto Express

Euro NCAP says it doesn’t recommend the BYD Atto 3’s adaptive cruise control system, given that it “effectively switches off” after periods of driver inactivity

www.autoexpress.co.uk

Understood, but how would a 30 years old Merc fair in a modern Euro NCAP test against a new BYD, I wonder? I doubt that it will beat it.

I don't disagree that there are safety concerns regarding some model of new cars or some types of modern tech, this all part and parcel of making progress, and this includes the DH Comet to the Boeing 737-800 Max - my only point was the newer cars are still safer than old ones, just as a modern Boeing or Airbus will still be overall far safer than any 1930's passenger plane.

As for the built-in GPS satnav on modern cars causing distractions and making driving less safe, my answer is: Compared to what? Compared to driving around town with the A-Z open on the passenger seat? Or compared to reducing your speed on the motorway to 40mph so that you can consult the road atlas and not miss your exit?

Of course, sone people will argue that they are very safe drivers and never did any of these things. If so, then great, they can equally ignore the car's satnav - problem solved.

But the reality is that very many drivers did look at the A-Z or road atlas while driving, and therefore, yes - the built-in map is safer.

As for the article..... have you actually read it? It says:

"Euro NCAP says the reason for the Atto 3’s incredibly low score was its system’s seeming inability to take control in the scenario of an unresponsive driver being met with a road obstacle. The experts state that “in this critical scenario, the system effectively switches off steering support after a prolonged period of inactivity whilst maintaining speed control – leaving an unresponsive driver to his or her fate.”"

Car to explain how a low-tech car fitted with a bog-standard old-fashion basic cruise control system is safer in this situation.....?

 

[markjay]

Yes they were . Trump sorted them out with a $14 Billion dollar fine and forced them to buy back every single cheat car. What did he threaten VW with ? A total ban on their products within the USA .....Including Porsche and Audi.

It worked.

I believe that the actual fines in the US were 'only' around $4bn, but the overall cost to VW was obviously much higher.

 

[190]

I have a hard time seeing all the latest electronic safety features as absolutely essential and would still drive an older car with a reputation for integrity such as a Mercedes, in fact I am driving a 15 year old one which doesn't have lane assist and lord knows what else. If I thought being wrapped up in cotton wool was absolutely essential then I'd have to give up motorcycling tomorrow because my bike has zero safety features except for the rider. Wait - cars have that same safety feature too.

 

[ALFAitalia]

Yep. My 204 was a 'Bluefficiency' model. And that was a petrol.
'Bluefficiency' was a package that included drag and rolling resistance reduction and various engine management thingies (including stop/start and battery regen.)

Mine is Blue Efficiency.....but no stop/start fitted.

 

[markjay]

I have a hard time seeing all the latest electronic safety features as absolutely essential and would still drive an older car with a reputation for integrity such as a Mercedes, in fact I am driving a 15 year old one which doesn't have lane assist and lord knows what else. If I thought being wrapped up in cotton wool was absolutely essential then I'd have to give up motorcycling tomorrow because my bike has zero safety features except for the rider. Wait - cars have that same safety feature too.

Driving a car with active safety systems may be of no use to you, because you are already an accomplished safe driver who is both experienced and always alert, and never distracted.

But did you consider the fact that having mandatory active safety systems on all new cars also means that they will stop those drivers who are not at the same level as yourself, which is most of them, from crashing into your car?

For example, the radar-based collision avoidance system will prevent a distracted driver from rear ending your old Merc while you're stopped at the traffic lights. Surely that's a good thing?

"Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB)

AEB is a collision avoidance feature using forward-facing cameras, RADARs and potentially other sensor technologies like LIDAR to prevent collisions.

It scans the forward path of the vehicle for potential impact targets and applies braking to avoid or mitigate a collision.

It applies to specific scenarios, such as car-to-car, car-to-pedestrian and car-to-cyclist in different orientations.

AEB has been shown in studies to reduce car-to-car rear end collisions by around 50% and car-to-pedestrian collisions by around 30%.

It also provides impact mitigation where a collision cannot be avoided, reducing the severity of injuries.

It causes no noticeable impact to drivers, operating in the background with an extremely low false event rate.

GSR2 Phase 2 mandates car-to-car rear and crossing pedestrian collision scenarios to be supported by every new vehicle.

Currently, 92% of new vehicles sold in the UK already possess this functionality, driven by consumer ratings such as Euro NCAP. "

(From: New EU vehicle safety regulation and what it means for UK drivers )

What's not to like?

 

[ChipChop]

Understood, but how would a 30 years old Merc fair in a modern Euro NCAP test against a new BYD, I wonder? I doubt that it will beat it.

I don't disagree that there are safety concerns regarding some model of new cars or some types of modern tech, this all part and parcel of making progress, and this includes the DH Comet to the Boeing 737-800 Max - my only point was the newer cars are still safer than old ones, just as a modern Boeing or Airbus will still be overall far safer than any 1930's passenger plane.

As for the built-in GPS satnav on modern cars causing distractions and making driving less safe, my answer is: Compared to what? Compared to driving around town with the A-Z open on the passenger seat? Or compared to reducing your speed on the motorway to 40mph so that you can consult the road atlas and not miss your exit?

Of course, sone people will argue that they are very safe drivers and never did any of these things. If so, then great, they can equally ignore the car's satnav - problem solved.

But the reality is that very many drivers did look at the A-Z or road atlas while driving, and therefore, yes - the built-in map is safer.

As for the article..... have you actually read it? It says:

"Euro NCAP says the reason for the Atto 3’s incredibly low score was its system’s seeming inability to take control in the scenario of an unresponsive driver being met with a road obstacle. The experts state that “in this critical scenario, the system effectively switches off steering support after a prolonged period of inactivity whilst maintaining speed control – leaving an unresponsive driver to his or her fate.”"

Car to explain how a low-tech car fitted with a bog-standard old-fashion basic cruise control system is safer in this situation.....?

30 year old cars could not be assessed by a modern Euro NCAP test. They do not have the systems to assess.

BYD consider the adaptive cruise in the Atto 3 to be less advanced, or low-tech using your vernacular. Subsequent BYD models employ "much more advanced technology". The problem is therefore the tech in the Atto 3. Fair to say BYD Atto 3 drivers are unpaid adaptive cruise beta testers. A 90's Mercedes with cruise does nothing more than allows the driver to rest their right leg.

 

[whitenemesis]

But did you consider the fact that having mandatory active safety systems on all new cars also means that they will stop those drivers who are not at the same level as yourself, which is most of them, from crashing into your car?

The 'problem' with all this safety tech is modern drivers rely on it, becoming more and more detached from the act of driving. As their perceived risk diminishes they take greater and greater chances. It's a natural human characteristic. Those who learnt to drive in the 60's and 70's can appreciate the help these systems give they don't take them for granted and don't rely on them. Modern systems designers have to constantly update and improve them as drivers lean more and more heavily on them. Any owner's handbook will always advise these are 'aides' and the driver should always remain attentive and in control. Lawyers would have a field day!

 

[SpikyMikey]

Mine is Blue Efficiency.....but no stop/start fitted.

Saves you having to switch it off as part of the startup routine

 

[markjay]

30 year old cars could not be assessed by a modern Euro NCAP test. They do not have the systems to assess.

BYD consider the adaptive cruise in the Atto 3 to be less advanced, or low-tech using your vernacular. Subsequent BYD models employ "much more advanced technology". The problem is therefore the tech in the Atto 3. Fair to say BYD Atto 3 drivers are unpaid adaptive cruise beta testers. A 90's Mercedes with cruise does nothing more than allows the driver to rest their right leg.

But how is the old Merc safer than the new BYD? That is my question.

And unresponsive driver - which is what the NCAP testers are complaining about, according to the article - will perish in the exact same way in a new BYD or in an old Merc. Actually, no, with multiple airbag the unresponsive driver actually has a better chance of survival in the BYD.

There are very many reasons to drive old Mercs... but safety just isn't one of them.

When someone says that they wouldn't want to have an old car as their daily transport due to safety concerns, we should respect that.

Other drivers may have other priorities - and bikers clearly prefer the very many benefits of the bike over the safer car - and that's fine.

But no biker in his right mind will claim that a bike is just as safe as a car in the event if a crash. Similarly, older cars - whether Mercs, or nor - are just not as safe as the new models.

 

[ChipChop]

But how is the old Merc safer than the new BYD? That is my question.

And unresponsive driver - which is what the NCAP testers are complaining about, according to the article - will perish in the exact same way in a new BYD or in an old Merc. Actually, no, with multiple airbag the unresponsive driver actually has a better chance of survival in the BYD.

There are very many reasons to drive old Mercs... but safety just isn't one of them.

When someone says that they wouldn't want to have an old car as their daily transport due to safety concerns, we should respect that.

Other drivers may have other priorities - and bikers clearly prefer the very many benefits of the bike over the safer car - and that's fine.

But no biker in his right mind will claim that a bike is just as safe as a car in the event if a crash. Similarly, older cars - whether Mercs, or nor - are just not as safe as the new models.

You are entitled to your opinion that newer is always better/ safer. The issue i highlighted was a Euro NCAP 5 star rated car can still have safety issues despite its high rating. Buyer beware. Bikers and cyclist maintain their safety on the roads by remaining aware at all times and riding defensively.

 

[BTB 500]

Bearing in mind that almost 50% of cars on the road now are 10+ years old (so definitely won't have the latest tech.), how many car occupants were killed in the UK in 2023 (last published stats)? Answer - 730. Given the enormous number of vehicles/occupants/miles covered that's an incredibly low figure - some of those will be 'self inflicted' too e.g. not wearing seatbelt, drink/drug driving, etc., and others will be freak occurrences that things like lane assist would have no effect on (objects falling onto car etc.).

Of course anything that helps avoid accidents is a 'good thing', but it certainly doesn't mean that cars more than a couple of years old are death traps.

 

[BIGDOG]

You are entitled to your opinion that newer is always better/ safer. The issue i highlighted was a Euro NCAP 5 star rated car can still have safety issues despite its high rating. Buyer beware. Bikers and cyclist maintain their safety on the roads by remaining aware at all times and riding defensively.

You are one of a small group of, maybe 3, posters who are so entrenched in their opinion that you cannot see any advantage of electric or even modern cars over old clunkers.
That’s your choice to make but it’s a bit necky of you to suggest that MJ of all people is of a closed mind.

 

[ChipChop]

You are one of a small group of, maybe 3, posters who are so entrenched in their opinion that you cannot see any advantage of electric or even modern cars over old clunkers.
That’s your choice to make but it’s a bit necky of you to suggest that MJ of all people is of a closed mind.

Play the ball and not the man.

 

[BIGDOG]

Play the ball and not the man.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Better surely to confine you musings to the BYD Atto 3's failings as identified by Euro NCAP? Maybe write them a strongly worded letter expressing your concern that they have the audacity to criticize a battery powered vehicle made in China.

I’m cool with it. Euro NCAP’s core observation relates to a very specific and very very unlikely (but possible) scenario that the driver is completely unresponsive, and does not react to warnings.

Euro NCAP reported that the Atto 3 doesn’t steer until the vehicle reaches a safe stop - it will slow down to a stop, but not steer to a potentially safe location. BYD never claimed that it did BTW.

The Atto 3 Adaptive Cruise Control is designed to follow the car in front, and disengages when the driver is determined to be unresponsive as it initiates the stop procedure (and so can’t follow).

The driver is safer than driving a car without any driver assistance systems, or even driving the same Atto 3 without the driver choosing to activate the Adaptive Cruise Control.

It’s not as safe as having ACC enabled in a car which can temporarily steer to a potentially safe location though. I wonder how many miles are driven with ACC on and off?

I wonder why EURO NCAP reported in 2024 when they performed tests in 2022?

 

[markjay]

I’m cool with it. Euro NCAP’s core observation relates to a very specific and very very unlikely (but possible) scenario that the driver is completely unresponsive, and does not react to warnings.

Euro NCAP reported that the Atto 3 doesn’t steer until the vehicle reaches a safe stop - it will slow down to a stop, but not steer to a potentially safe location. BYD never claimed that it did BTW.

The Atto 3 Adaptive Cruise Control is designed to follow the car in front, and disengages when the driver is determined to be unresponsive as it initiates the stop procedure (and so can’t follow).

The driver is safer than driving a car without any driver assistance systems, or even driving the same Atto 3 without the driver choosing to activate the Adaptive Cruise Control.

It’s not as safe as having ACC enabled in a car which can temporarily steer to a potentially safe location though. I wonder how many miles are driven with ACC on and off?

I wonder why EURO NCAP reported in 2024 when they performed tests in 2022?

You do get the feeling, at times, that people are quick to post links to articles with headlines that seems to show some sort of EV deficiency - without actually reading the article.............

 

[tode]

You do get the feeling, at times, that people are quick to post links to articles with headlines that seems to show some sort of EV deficiency - without actually reading the article.............

Noooo, surely that can't be right . . .