I can't see petrol being the answer though with electric so close
I don't think they are close.
They are nowhere near close. Show me a charging point. Never seen a single one any where, ever. Although I imagine there might be a couple in central London to charge those dinky Gwiz things.
Only way for me to even charge one at home is to dangle a 3 phase cable 4 stories down from my bedroom balcony, with 6 people fighting over the 3 parking spaces.
In the meantime, I'm sticking with a car plus 10 years worth of 98 octane for less money than a hybrid.
I do wonder how people drive diesels when they complain about narrow power bands and noise. I find petrols have a narrow power band and are noisy - I keep having to downshift to make the car move in my Dad's Focus, and the engine drone at motorway speeds is really annoying.
My ford dumps all of its power in about 1,500 rpm then just gets noisey. Nothing much seems to happen. The other car (330) is much nicer to drive....the power keeps building as the revs rise, it sounds nice when you but equally sits at just over 2,500rpm at 75 on the motorway. It also doesn't stink to high heaven when it starts or take ages to get warm in the winter.
Some people love diesels, but I hate the things and can't wait to go back to a quieter, smoother petrol engine next year.
I don't think electric is the answer either because the elephant in the room is the power station. Once we're using more renewable sources then fine, but as we still burn a lot of coal....
I have a diesel. It costs me £20 a year road tax because the government declare it low emission, I get 55 mpg and when fossil fuels run out I can fill it up at the chippy. 3 years ago diesel was the saviour.
But now in some Orwellian u-turn they never said that, nope, not us gov. Now they have no chance of actually hitting their EU enforced carbon emission targets they're hood-winking is into believing a different version of fact.
Will I go back to petrol? Nope. Diesel is still cheaper overall, especially if the goverents new story is lowering the value. And arguing over petrol versus diesel vs electric is the wrong argument to make. We should question why we need to travel in the first place. Doesn't matter what you're filling up with its all far from ideal. How many jobs are now within walking distance of your front door compared to 40 years ago?
[quote=molgrips ]Ah yes but for the electric car to be a real success it has to be capable of long trips as well, I think.
The thing is, people buy small city cars now because they are cheap. Electric cars aren't - so if you want people to pony up £25k then it needs to be a proper nice all round car.
Maybe we just need to change the way people think. If they spend all week driving around town with just them in the car and just go on long trips with the family at the weekend, it doesn't seem all that efficient to lug the weight required for the weekend trips around town all week.
(of course the best answer is probably to get people out of their cars in town, but there are other possible solutions to that conundrum)
[quote=richmtb ]As for low down torque, modern petrol turbos have plenty. 350Nm from 2100 rpm in mine
Remind us again what ridiculously overpowered car you have to get that, and explain what the relevance of it is to a discussion on improving efficiency of cars.
But now in some Orwellian u-turn they never said that, nope, not us gov. Now they have no chance of actually hitting their EU enforced carbon emission targets they're hood-winking is into believing a different version of fact.
What? Orwellian?
I don't think the government has changed a thing, have they? This is simply people talking - prompted by the breaking of EU *air quality* targets (not CO2).
How many jobs are now within walking distance of your front door compared to 40 years ago?
Got any ideas for how to create jobs near my front door?
it doesn't seem all that efficient to lug the weight required for the weekend trips around town all week.
Mmm yes but then you're talking about having two cars, which might well cost a lot more energy than simply having one less efficient one.
It also doesn't stink to high heaven when it starts or take ages to get warm in the winter.
Mine has an electric heater so it warms up fast, and it only stinks if you start it with the garage door open then go in the garage. Oh and that lovely heat your 330 creates for the interior - that's waste heat that's not being used to power the car.
I don't think electric is the answer either because the elephant in the room is the power station.
Not really the elephant in the room - someone brings it up every single time we have this disucssion. The point is that even with the current energy mix it's still (a bit) more efficient to generate the power in a power station because it's more efficient there, and using it in a car is more efficient - especially in town which is really what these cars are currently for.
Yes, Orwellian. George Orwell, author of 1984 and Animal Farm. Literature on the politics of communism.
And yes the government has changed. They've changed their political stance on the issue of air pollution and the targets they see as the cause of it.
As for creating jobs near your front door. Well wouldn't it be nice if investment in infrastructure was more fairly distributed across the nation and not disproportionately towards London and the South East?
I have a diesel. It costs me £20 a year road tax because the government declare it low emission, I get 55 mpg and when fossil fuels run out I can fill it up at the chippy. 3 years ago diesel was the saviour.But now in some Orwellian u-turn they never said that, nope, not us gov. Now they have no chance of actually hitting their EU enforced carbon emission targets they're hood-winking is into believing a different version of fact.
Will I go back to petrol? Nope. Diesel is still cheaper overall, especially if the goverents new story is lowering the value. And arguing over petrol versus diesel vs electric is the wrong argument to make. We should question why we need to travel in the first place. Doesn't matter what you're filling up with its all far from ideal. How many jobs are now within walking distance of your front door compared to 40 years ago?
Something described as they "tyranny of un-design" [url= http://99percentinvisible.org/transcript-11-99-undesigned/ ]Theres a great programme by Roman Mars[/url] that starts with the comparison between an old coal engined tug boat with its sleek timber hull and and modern diesel engined boat with a hull like a skip. The coal powered boat was built to be as sleek as possible because coal is expensive in terms of effort to handle and feed the engine with. The diesel was like a brick because the fuel is cheap and you just pour it in and the boat goes.
Cheap [i]easy[/i] fuel is why we've all swapped homes close to work to the biggest house our money will buy - but more particularly the biggest house that we can afford the time to commute from.
" The whole process of selling mortages and selling houses over the last fifteen years or so is based on this concept of drive til you qualify. So you drove as far out into the countryside as you could stand, to the place where you could get a decent rate on a mortage and a house with a low enough down payment that you could make that payment and at the same time you would get more square footage in your house. And what supported that was that you were going to drive further to get into the city to do your job."
Because we've made that commitment and built our travel infrastructure around it the elephant in the room isn't 'power stations' the elephant in the room is 'people'. People have backed the wrong horse and now live in the wrong place and the error we're making with alternative fuel sources for transport is we're trying to devise a solution that can be packaged and sold to those people, so that that the people who live in the wrong place don't have to change anything. This is why 'milage anxiety' is throttling the adoption of electric cars. The real solution is to devise a fuel and distribution for that fuel that works the way it works best and people will just have to change their lives to fit it.
Yes, Orwellian. George Orwell, author of 1984 and Animal Farm. Literature on the politics of communism.
I know who he was, and I've even read a couple of his books but I've still got no idea why on earth you mentioned his name.
They've changed their political stance on the issue of air pollution and the targets they see as the cause of it.
I might've missed this - was there an actual government policy change? Anyone have a link?
In any case - politicians should be changing policy according to scientific knowledge. That's a good thing. They just have to do it in such a way that it doesn't cause problems for people.
Cheap easy fuel is why we've all swapped homes close to work to the biggest house our money will buy - but more particularly the biggest house that we can afford the time to commute from.
Hmm.. I don't think that's entirely fair.
People are travelling to get better jobs, not just a fancy house. A better job means a lot to my quality of life, personally speaking. There's far more to it than simple greed.
There is a proposed change to ban diesel cars from london and French cities. This is a change of political stance.
And I refer you to Orwell's thought police for the analogy.
And what has changed about our scientific knowledge over recent months to bring about this discussion? Knowledge they didn't have 3 years ago?
Hmm.. I don't think that's entirely fair.
I'm talking on a population level - every individual will have made fair and reasoned choices about where they live and where they work. But in many cases those choices are shaped because of cheap and easy fuel.
If for the past 30 years we'd all been using wood gas to fuel our cars then there are a whole raft of decisions about home, life and career that you might have made differently and an infrastructure around you that would have been built differently also - even though you'd still be the same fair and reasoned person.
Tax innit.
[img] 
[/img]
They're combining the Co2 BiK figures for petrol and diesel, petrol cars won't get near the diesel figures, if anything, there's less incentive for petrol next year.
Anyone living on a hill near the bus station in Brighton can attest that diesel is an awful fuel to use in cities. Air quality inside some houses in the area is a disgrace.
Diesel is fine out on the motorway, I'm all for banning it in cities, buses are a total air quality menace.
If only there was a cheap, fast non polluting urban transport vehicle that was so simple to operate and posed so little risk to others that anybody even a child of 6 could use it to travel about in. Even better what if the user actually improved their health as they used it.
dooge - Member... or use crappy fuel (has a lot to answer for)...
Ah yes, that old chestnut.
And where would one buy "crappy fuel" in the 1st world then?
If for the past 30 years we'd all been using wood gas to fuel our cars then there are a whole raft of decisions about home, life and career that you might have made differently and an infrastructure around you that would have been built differently also
Yes but many lives might've been poorer. Many would probably have been richer too, mind.
There is a proposed change to ban diesel cars from london and French cities. This is a change of political stance.
Is there? The only thing I can find is the Paris mayor giving his personal opinion. Is there actual proposed legislation in the UK?
And what has changed about our scientific knowledge over recent months to bring about this discussion? Knowledge they didn't have 3 years ago?
The information has been gathered over previous years, and the story has now broken in the press. That's how these things work - some scientists gather data, then they release it, the press reports it. In this case it was the missing of air quality targets.
And I refer you to Orwell's thought police for the analogy.
Did you read the same 1984 as me? Cos I still have no idea why you're trying to link environmental legislation with policing of personal thoughts.
If only there was a cheap, fast non polluting urban transport vehicle that was so simple to operate and posed so little risk to others that anybody even a child of 6 could use it to travel about in. Even better what if the user actually improved their health as they used it.
Crazy idea. We must attach an electric motor, quickly.
What's that you say, they already are?
richmtb » As for low down torque, modern petrol turbos have plenty. 350Nm from 2100 rpm in mine
Aracer >> Remind us again what ridiculously overpowered car you have to get that, and explain what the relevance of it is to a discussion on improving efficiency of cars.
Oh do untwist your knickers. You've dragged that quote from the previous page where we were discussing the difference in driving feel of petrols and diesels.
Would you also like to cut an paste the bit where I admitted diesels were more efficient.
It takes some serious yoghurt knitting to describe a 2.0L SEAT as ridiculously overpowered
[quote=molgrips ]Mmm yes but then you're talking about having two cars, which might well cost a lot more energy than simply having one less efficient one.
I certainly wasn't talking about that - it's your narrow mind ( 😉 ) which can only see that solution
it's your narrow mind which can only see that solution
Don't be silly.
and there goes the thread. 🙄
To attempt to put it back on track, here's a thought or question.
Crude oil contains a certain amount of diesel, doesn't it? So in the name of resource efficiency we'd need to burn at least some of it.
Perhaps diesel/electric hybrids would work if busses/lorries had enough battery to power themselves entirely on battery when in towns. You could have an 'electric' zone in built up areas.
Sorry molgrips, was taking the piss as you're one of the few who do think things through properly, hence the smiley. But there are other solutions apart from owning two cars. As I said it requires a complete change in thinking.
[quote=richmtb ]It takes some serious yoghurt knitting to describe a 2.0L SEAT as ridiculously overpowered
Oh don't be coy. It's a Leon Cupra isn't it? The slightly higher tuned version of which has done <8 minutes around the Ring. No, not at all overpowered.
The point is it takes a somewhat less than ordinary petrol car to have the sort of torque delivery you get from a standard diesel.
Ah yes well in that case you are quite correct 🙂 But I was talking about the commonly held opinions of people.
Of course the real answer is public transport or cycling. People are too lazy to cycle - the easiest thing would be publicly run public transport that's prepared to run at a loss when it needs to....
My suggestion would be tax breaks for companies for remote working.
The point is it takes a somewhat less than ordinary petrol car to have the sort of torque delivery you get from a standard diesel.
The point is we were all having a nice chat about engine technology.
The point I was making is that modern direct injection turbo charged petrol engines get really close to diesel for low down torque (one of diesels advantages) and they are narrowing the gap in terms of efficiency too (the other BIG diesel advantage). They are certainly less polluting if you stop focusing purely on CO2 and start looking at all emissions.
Standalone petrol engines probably won't ever reach the headline economy figures of a diesel but combined cycles will start getting very close.
Petrol-Electric hybrids have the potential to beat diesels on economy and driveability in the next few years, the main hurdle at the moment is cost.
Ok so.. how about having a v6 engine with one bank petrol and one bank diesel? 🙂
They are certainly less polluting if you stop focusing purely on CO2 and start looking at all emissions.
Given the way diesel is made currently, due to demand, they may not even be better on CO2 either.
Petrol-Electric hybrids have the potential to beat diesels on economy and driveability
Having driven two different systems, I can say that the Toyota one is fantastically driveable if you want comfort and smoothness, but not if you want sportiness. The Honda one feels just like a normal car.
Simple comparisons between the petrol/diesel/Hybrid/grid Elect enabled vehicles is pointless for example the embodied Carbon in Petrol is circa 22% higher per litre than for diesel.
making decisions based upon what come out of an exhuast in a dishonest lab test provide by manufaturers is a waste of time. a comprehensive range of issues need to be considered based upon the cradle to grave Life of the transport system + the fuel supply chain. These would need to include all forms of pollution wether embodied in the system or emitted during the O&M phase
the embodied Carbon in Petrol is circa 22% higher per litre than for diesel.
What do you mean? The energy cost of making it?
Maybe we need to bring these back?!
[img] 
[/img]
Petrol-Electric hybrids have the potential to beat diesels on economy and driveability in the next few years, the main hurdle at the moment is cost.
I'm not sure that cost will ever be reduced that much on a hybrid. You are after all essentially building a car with two engines. Although as molgrips pointed out, it might be fundamentally cheaper to own one car, one that is basically electric for round town and runs petrol for distance, rather than two separate cars.
the embodied Carbon in Petrol is circa 22% higher per litre than for diesel.
[What do you mean? The energy cost of making it?]
the embodied Carbon within say 1 litre of Petrol delivered at the forecourt contains circa 22% more carbon than Diesel due to the differences in the production processes from extraction to Point of sale/delivery
Is there? The only thing I can find is the Paris mayor giving his personal opinion. Is there actual proposed legislation in the UK?
yes, here you go since you like a linky... [url= https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1OPRB_enGB567GB567&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=boris%20johnson%20diesel%20tax ]linky_link[/url]
The information has been gathered over previous years, and the story has now broken in the press. That's how these things work - some scientists gather data, then they release it, the press reports it. In this case it was the missing of air quality targets.
so what you're saying is that government sets policy based on what the press reports, rather than scientific knowledge?
Did you read the same 1984 as me? Cos I still have no idea why you're trying to link environmental legislation with policing of personal thoughts.
I'm not. I'm linking the current governments messaging in regards to this issue over the last 6 months to the governmental practices of that novel.
You are after all essentially building a car with two engines.
I dunno. In mine there are two electric motors that are about the size of wheelchair motors permamently fixed to the drivetrain. Then there's an inverter and some computers, and a battery. I suspect that R&D is the biggest cost they are having to recover, with the battery a second.
Cheapest diesel Yaris seems to be £15,595 and the cheapest Hybrid is the same.
yes, here you go since you like a linky... linky_link
That's just Boris asking for diesel scrappage. That's not a government proposal is it?
so what you're saying is that government sets policy based on what the press reports, rather than scientific knowledge?
I've no idea, but I suspect they get their information from adivsers, and then probably ignore most of it.
Someone said it earlier in the thread, but I had seriously considered buying an Ampera after a test drive, but was heavily put off by the fact they do not offer an estate version.
There's an estate Auris hybrid 🙂
I dunno. In mine there are two electric motors that are about the size of wheelchair motors permamently fixed to the drivetrain. Then there's an inverter and some computers, and a battery.
Or in other words, you've got an electric power source + energy store + controller, and a fossil power source + energy store + controller. Plus some control widgets to make them work together.
Granted, large parts of the drivetrain are shared. But it's still two engines.
But you make it sound like it's double the complexity - it really isn't. The electric motors have no lambda sensors, camshaft position sensors, timing belts, injection pumps, maf sensors etc etc etc etc. They don't even have servicing requirements.
The Yaris does make a very compelling argument for Hybrids, its a usable size, reasonably priced and the stats are good, perhaps because its light. 🙂
Long term i still can't see past, buses / trams for regular local or urban trips, trains for long journeys and lightweight electric cars to fill gaps with hopefully a bit of cycling in there for good measure.
I suppose it will have to be transitional but my brain just says why bother with the middle stage(hybrid) go straight to leccy.
That's just Boris asking for diesel scrappage. That's not a government proposal is it?
Boris is an elected mayor in charge of the UK's economic centre and therefore is within the definition of "government". And Boris is not asking for diesel scrappage, he's suggesting increasing the levies on diesel vehicles from whatever angle he can - one of which is the congestion charge.
He's in local government, but he's not THE government. And since it's the UK government that put CO2 based VED in place, and it's local government calling for changes to the congestion charge, I don't see this as a government u-turn.
I suppose it will have to be transitional but my brain just says why bother with the middle stage(hybrid) go straight to leccy
You'll be waiting a long time. Pure electric cars won't be a long distance solution for decades, if ever. IMO we've got more chance of reforming our transport habits than inventing mega batteries that would be good enough.
I reckon the series hybrid (Ampera, i3) will be a much better option than the parallel kind in Toyotas. But then again, Toyota can in theory be either parallel or series.
molgrips - MemberBut you make it sound like it's double the complexity - it really isn't. The electric motors have no lambda sensors, camshaft position sensors, timing belts, injection pumps, maf sensors etc etc etc etc. They don't even have servicing requirements.
Mol,
If there's is one person NOT to argue with about anything automotive related it's Max.
He knows better than you. And me. I've spent 25 years working in the industry for manufactures in technical roles.
EDIT
That's weird, my PC initially showed that as a post by MAXTORQUE
There a lots a ways to skin a cat though when it comes to hybrids.
At one end you have range extenders like the BMW i3 which are essentially electric vehicles with a petrol generator to charge the battery. At the other end you have cars like the Mercedes E-Class hybrid which is just using its electric motor to help the car get off the line.
All hybrid systems benefit economy though. IC engines just can't compare to an electric motor's instant torque for getting a car moving again once its stopped!
If there's is one person NOT to argue with about anything automotive related it's Max.
This is discussing. I'm not contradicting his technical knowledge, I'm disagreeing with the implications. There might be technically 2 motors in a Prius (actually three) but it's not 2x the cost, complexity and servicing, nor is it half the reliability. So it's a moot point, [i]in my opinion[/i].
EDIT whoever he is 🙂
Just checked, the i3 is £25k or £28k with the generator. Ouch!
