Forum menu
Sure, but your e-niro is about the same size as my c-max, which weighs 1.3 tonnes.
And your point is?
Like I said in my post "Seems to be a non-issue (for now anyway)"
So what should we do? Keep driving 1.3 tonne C-Max carbon dioxide generators?
I always use friction braking for my first slowdown of the day for just this reason. Scrub the surface of corrosion/contaminant and get a bit of heat into the pads.
I think my car does this anyway as the discs do get scrubbed clean of rust on every drive.
Doesn’t Daffy just mean they use the brake pedal to stop ?
No, because...
In most newer EV platforms launched over the last handful of years, using the brake pedal just requests regen from the motors. You have to properly stamp on it to get the friction brakes to start moving.
This, but from what I've read this has always been the case even from the first hybrids. On my 2006 Prius light braking was regenerative, and it transitioned to friction brakes when more force was required. Interestingly this happens at different braking force at different speeds, because the braking force available for regenration is dependent on the current you're generating which is dependent on speed. So at lower speeds there is much less regenerative braking available. On the Prius the friction brakes always came in about 7mph or less.
Yeah, that's the only one i could think of off the top of my head.
The friction brakes add deceleration over and above what the motor is producing at zero accelerator pedal. But, OTOH it's a 9 year old design now that's had virtually no updates other than bigger batteries since it was launched.
Regen is from lifting off the accelerator. Using the brake pedal activates the friction brakes.
Are you sure about this? It seems like a shockingly bad design.
A quick google leads to the bmw forum. I3 brake pedal gives regen first then friction brake when no more regen can be used.
Like other cars.
Yep - it’s how I thought most EVs worked. My current MG 5 has an Eco gauge instead of Rev counter, which shows whether you are using or regenerating. Hard braking pushes the needle deeper into the regen zone.
From the article abstract
The introduction of battery electric vehicles is concluded to have only a small effect on overall road traffic particle emissions
Seems to be a non-issue (for now anyway).
I don't think that says what you think it does, the way I read it there is an issue because the emissions that are supposed to be decreasing aren't.
So what should we do? Keep driving 1.3 tonne C-Max carbon dioxide generators?
A fair question, the answer being 'it depends'. Mostly on the carbon footprint of the EV and the power generated to power it. That's before you get into the sustainability of either system. Of course an eNiro or whatever isn't much bigger inside than a Fiesta so although it's the size of a C Max it has none of the utility.
Then again,as the power density of batteries improves weights should decrease. Improvements could already be made to drag coefficients but since everyone is wedded to the idea that EVs have to be that shape that ain't gonna happen (of course that's ignoring all those Tesla's and MG 5's).
Known as “particulate matter (PM) 2.5”,
Now check out the graph I posted on the previous page about what diesels now produce most of since filters were added. Stuff much finer than that. He fails because he's comparing the components in what's measured which doesn't include the finest particles. He's not finding most of the particles that diesels emit and then comparing with tyres which don't have a particle filter on any particle size at all and what they do produce fall in the range he is collecting.
Early EVs had brake pedal = friction brakes. Now, not so much.
Dunno what you mean by early but my 2016 (ie 6 year old) Zoe will regen on application of the brake pedal until you ask for either: more braking power than regen can provide, which is significant; or are below a speed that regen can operate, around 5mph ime.
Leafs are the same
Are you sure about this? It seems like a shockingly bad design.
It is.
Early Tesla Model S did it like that, a software update fixed it.
Dunno what you mean by early
Generally depends what generation and brand of brake controller they were using and how much they were willing to pay for updates!
The torque blending functions between motor and friction brakes were notoriously tricky. Especially around zero motor torque.
Now check out the graph I posted on the previous page about what diesels now produce most of since filters were added
It's an interesting graph sure.
So are the two papers it's contextual in. Worth a read.
And your point is?
That comparing apples with oranges led to you making an erroneous point.
So what should we do? Keep driving 1.3 tonne C-Max carbon dioxide generators?
Are you saying I should dispose of a perfectly good car just to go electric? For context, me and my wife share one car and do 6000 miles per year.
Of course an eNiro or whatever isn’t much bigger inside than a Fiesta
I test drove a Kona EV which I believe is the same platform as an eNiro and it was much bigger than a Fiesta, at least the one my parents had. Probably slightly a Golf in the front and a fair bit bigger in back.
dantsw13
Free MemberA quick google leads to the bmw forum. I3 brake pedal gives regen first then friction brake when no more regen can be used.
Nope - you completely misinterpreted it. It’s the act of stopping accelerating that triggers the regen. Once the little indicator on the dash which display throttle position moves beyond the 6oclock position, you’re no longer coasting or accelerating your decelerating using the motor. The longer you’re off the throttle, the more aggressive the deceleration becomes. If I keep my foot on the accelerator and tap the brakes, it triggers the friction brakes just like a normal car.
The i3 is driven like true 1 pedal driving. You never touch the brake pedal. You don’t need to unless it’s an emergency, which means when you touch the brake pedal without the accelerator pressed, you’ll get the decelerations from the accelerator position AND the friction brakes.
So after it’s been raining and the car has been sat, I can coast off the drive and use the regen which means I’ll arrive at my destination with slightly corroded discs or I can gently brake as I go down the hill to the end of my road and then use regen for the rest of the journey which means I’ll arrive with shiny brakes.
There’s no means of adjusting regen on an i3
Of course an eNiro or whatever isn’t much bigger inside than a Fiesta
The crap people post on this thread when 30sec Googling would tell them a Fiesta has 1093 litres with the rear seats down and an e-Niro has 1405 litres. Your definition of "isn't much bigger" is a little different from mine. How much bigger does it need to be before its considered significantly bigger?
Fair point, an e-Niro is actually between a Fiesta and C Max with the seats up. Which is the important metric really since hardly anyone drives around with the seats down all the time. I'd classify that as not much bigger, especially if you want to consider their respective boot opening heights.
I'm going with raw dimensions here, litres are just a salesmans trick as they are effectively meaningless unless you are carrying yoga balls filled with water or loose packing peanuts.
https://www.ridc.org.uk/features-reviews/out-and-about/choosing-car/car/fiesta-5dr-hatch-2019
(yes, I know it lists the e-Niro as a saloon but the Niro of the same shape was also listed that way, go figure)
That comparing apples with oranges led to you making an erroneous point.
The point I'm making is that my EV is probably generating less tyre particles than a heavier ICE vehicle, and its certainly generating much less brake dust.
Your C-Max is lighter than my vehicle but so what? By all means keep driving it until it expires but your post came across like we should keep driving ICE just because they might generate less tyre particulates than EVs. So do you agree we have to ditch the ICE or not?
The point I’m making is that my EV is probably generating less tyre particles than a heavier ICE vehicle, and its certainly generating much less brake dust.
The actual point is that your car generates more tyre particles than a conventional vehicle of similar size.
So do you agree we have to ditch the ICE or not?
Who's we? If you're asking me then no, I don't think there's much logic in replacing my car right now simply to move to an EV. Other use cases are available.
Fair point, an e-Niro is actually between a Fiesta and C Max with the seats up.
I had a good look at my friend's e-niro. It's about the same inside as my c-max but the boot is smaller.
@Daffy I still think that's a poor design. You have to decide whether or not you want to waste energy, according to your description; whereas in other cars you just drive as normal and it takes care of the energy management for you as well as the cleaning of the brakes.
In other cars that offer single pedal driving it is configurable, as far as I know so you can drive how you want rather than how the manufacturer wants you to.
I had a good look at my friend’s e-niro. It’s about the same inside as my c-max but the boot is smaller.
That's what I was trying to say but badly, I was comparing load spaces. Also realise that was never what I said in the first place so, er, yeah.
In my limited defence, if I actually had a decent viewable screen area without paying for the privilege I'd be able to keep track of what I'm writing better. Cest la vie.
I wouldn’t knock it until you’ve tried it - it’s a very intuitive system. My 10 year old can drive it around our field and had the knack of it in minutes.
I don’t see how it’s wasteful? Unless I specifically choose to, we’re recuperating for more than >99%. And in almost every circumstance, when you’re braking, you’re not accelerating, so by default, it’s recovering energy.
My youngest daughter is currently having her first driving lesson today- in a Kona Electric. With luck she'll never have to drive an ICE car if we can find her a cheapish Zoe, Leaf or i3. There's a new generation of drivers coming who will never drive an ICE.
That’s what I was trying to say but badly, I was comparing load spaces. Also realise that was never what I said in the first place so, er, yeah
I was a bit disappointed, the e-niro seemed like an ideal replacement when the time comes, but there's no way I can get all our camping gear/ family luggage in the boot.
I was a bit disappointed, the e-niro seemed like an ideal replacement when the time comes, but there’s no way I can get all our camping gear/ family luggage in the boot.
Don't know if makes a difference but when the e-Niro boot floor is removed there's a fair bit of extra storage but to be fair probably still not as much a a C-Max.
The actual point is that your car generates more tyre particles than a conventional vehicle of similar size.
My EV tyre wear after 1 year seems to be about the same as an ICE car but on average maybe an EV does produce more tyre particles but the argument is moot seeing ICE cars will be disappearing.
the argument is moot seeing ICE cars will be disappearing.
Time will tell, still a long way to go yet. I really hope they do but ICE will still be around for a while yet IMO, too many use cases for them.
There’s a new generation of drivers coming who will never drive an ICE.
Yes - the ones with rich parents.
More and more young folk just don't bother doing their test now.
Yes – the ones with rich parents.
Give it 10 years and there will be plenty of cheaper EVs on the secondhand market.
Also I don't think young people not learning to drive has anything to do with the cost of second hand EVs.
So, a question please. I’ll need to get a home charger installed in the next year. The Audi recommended one is a 7kW pod Point, which they quote as about £800 installed.
I guess there are many better alternatives ?
I used to have a Pod Point and it was absolutely fine. It was smart enough so you could set a charging schedule via the app and the app gave good info on electricity usage so you could easily separate electricity for the car from electricity for the home. I sold it and got a myenergi Zappi simply because I had in the meantime installed a solar array and the Zappi is able to automatically divert excess solar generation to charge the car which the Pod Point couldn't do . So if you have a solar array or intend to install one in the future I'd recommend a Zappi but if not the Pod Point will be fine.
Good to know, thanks
Also I don’t think young people not learning to drive has anything to do with the cost of second hand EVs.
Did I say it did ...
Cost of personal transport on the whole being prohibitive more like
I have an Ohme charger which is good. Lots of options for configuring charging, integrates with Octopus variable tariff and a fair few cars. Also has its own 4G rather than needing WiFi.
Ford have already said that the key battleground for electrification will be fought in the sub $25k market.
Just like with all other technologies, the price will come down once economies of scale kick in.
Ford have similarly highlighted that 40% less workstations and 20% less fasteners to build a typical EV once designed as a pure EV and so labour rates and tooling costs will drop.
Battery simulation technology through multiphysics simulation has just about been cracked which will allow modelling to alleviate build and test requirements, thus reducing the RnD cost and allowing manufacturers to extract more from the package.
Lucid have a plan for a sub £25k electric car with 240hp and 300mile range using a battery pack that's less than 50kWh, essentially achieving 6m/kWh from their efficient cells and motor in a lightweight package. They also believe sub £20k is possible using the same motor, but with a 30kWh pack which still gives around 180miles of range. With rapid charging, would you really need more? Perfect second/city/commute/occasional bib trip car.
Ford have already said that the key battleground for electrification will be fought in the sub $25k market.
Maybe, but before that the battleground will be who can secure the most battery production capacity. No point in being able to build a $25k car if you can't make batteries for it.
essentially achieving 6m/kWh from their efficient cells and motor in a lightweight package.
Mercedes EQXX concept can achieve 7 miles/kWh and a carefully driven Hyundai Ioniq Electric could nudge 6 miles/kWh.
Electirc drivetrain is now better than 95% efficient so difficult to improve on that. I think like you mentioned the biggest future advances in EV will be in battery chemistry and battery management.
Mercedes EQXX concept can achieve 7 miles/kWh and a carefully driven Hyundai Ioniq Electric could nudge 6 miles/kWh.
Both of those are extremes. The EQXX is using highly specialised and expensive equipment, the Ioniq 5s WLTP is 303 miles from a 77kWh pack with real range of around 260, so under 4m/kWh. Lucid are claiming real range on production equipment at prices under £25k. There’s a world of difference between what you posted and what I stated. IF it can be pulled off, you’d need less batteries, thus alleviating some of the production difficulties. It would be nice if we can get back to really efficient cars, not gargantuan things with enough performance to outrun an M3 and carrying the battery capacity to do a journey that only happens twice per year.
Electric motors are approaching 95% efficiency, Tesla have gone from 80>90>94%, but that’s not the only source of loss. Resistance in the pack and electronics are another as are thermal properties in different regions and efficiency losses at different speeds. There’s more to be had.
On the Tesla Model 3 the brake pedal just does... uh, brakes. Regen is on the accelerator pedal.
a carefully driven Hyundai Ioniq Electric could nudge 6 miles/kWh
Speaking from experience, it is possible to beat 6 but only on low speed open suburban runs and only in mild summer. On a long trip 5 is realistic, I've got 5.2 on a few long runs recently. But 6 - no chance, and I do pay attention to economy.
the Ioniq 5s WLTP is 303 miles from a 77kWh pack with real range of around 260, so under 4m/kWh.
He's talking about the Ioniq EV not the Ioniq 5 - completely different car with the same name. Well done Hyundai.
But 6 – no chance, and I do pay attention to economy.
Jesus I did say nudge it not achieve it. 5.6 miles per kWh is nudging it in my book. Honestly if I said Newcastle United played in black and white you'd say they played in white and black.
See below from an actual Ioniq Electric. Apparently it included a trip on the motorway too.
Jesus I did say nudge it not achieve it. 5.6 miles per kWh is nudging it in my book.
Just as an e-Niro is nudging the same size as a Fiesta 😉
Joking aside, 5.6 isn't really nudging anything. 5.85 is worth talking about. Still, at least someone else is designing car shaped cars.
Electric motors are approaching 95% efficiency, Tesla have gone from 80>90>94%, but that’s not the only source of loss. Resistance in the pack and electronics are another as are thermal properties in different regions and efficiency losses at different speeds. There’s more to be had.
Not much, you're starting to get into the realms of fighting physics which requires great expense for marginal gains. You could probably make it more efficient using exotic or well selected conponents but if its not affordable to build what's the point for maybe another percent? We're not sending folk to Mars here, don't let perfect get in the way of great.
See below from an actual Ioniq Electric. Apparently it included a trip on the motorway too.
How fast did it go on that motorway? I'm saying, from experience, that it's pretty difficult to get numbers like that on extended trips.
at least someone else is designing car shaped cars.
That's why I went for it. But I suspect that the SUV shape is still easier for packaging batteries. Hyundai make the Ioniq and the Kona, both available in ICE and EV form. The Kona is available with a small (38kWh) and large (68kWh) battery, however the Ioniq is only available with the smaller one.
ICEs, especially diesels are killing kids according to George Knox of Brimingham university. Google translate is your friend.
"Le monoxyde de carbone et le butadiène-1,3" rather than tyre rubber dust according to the article.