onetrack Posted July 28 Posted July 28 Octave, he should sell that little crawler to the Ukrainians, fitted with a remote control, so they can get their explosives or cameras right up close to the Russians. 1
nomadpete Posted July 29 Posted July 29 5 hours ago, facthunter said: Trump likes little crawlers. Nev Does the Cat execs agree? 1
red750 Posted July 31 Posted July 31 https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/gwm-becomes-a-permanent-resident-at-former-gm-holden-proving-ground/ar-AA1JBYDg?ocid=winp2fptaskbarhover&cvid=8998bb021acf440ea38d5f0f979cb6f2&ei=130
red750 Posted August 6 Posted August 6 According to a report on the TV this morning, the BYD Atto 3 and Tesla Model 3 fell short of their quoted range by 23%. Other brands and models also fell short, but by smaller percentages. 1
facthunter Posted August 6 Posted August 6 Depends a lot on how they are driven. Which TV channel and Paid ads make profit. Can It be relied on? Nev 1
octave Posted August 7 Posted August 7 1 hour ago, red750 said: According to a report on the TV this morning, the BYD Atto 3 and Tesla Model 3 fell short of their quoted range by 23%. Other brands and models also fell short, but by smaller percentages. Red it would be good if you could post a link or give a clue as to where these figures were published. I am not questioning these figures, but it would be useful to know whether these are Australian sales figures or world sales figures 1
red750 Posted August 7 Posted August 7 Simply announced during a couple of half hourly news reports on Sunrise and The Morning Show. I don't know the source. 1
red750 Posted August 7 Posted August 7 I Googled EV range shortfall and came up with these: https://thedriven.io/2025/08/06/tesla-byd-kia-and-smart-evs-all-fall-short-in-australian-real-world-range-tests/ https://autotalk.com.au/industry-news/aaa-tests-show-evs-fall-short-of-advertised-range-in-real-world-conditions https://www.afr.com/companies/transport/buyer-beware-this-ev-doesn-t-do-what-it-says-on-the-tin-20250805-p5mkgo https://www.pressreader.com/australia/the-guardian-australia/20250807/281522232158061 https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/electriccars/article-13186995/How-far-electric-cars-fall-short-advertised-range-does-vehicle-rank.html There were others behind paywalls, like The Australian and Daily Telegraph. 1 1
spacesailor Posted August 7 Posted August 7 But , did you see the apparatus hanging off the cars being tested . It would wipe out any " streamlining " . That the cars rely on to achieve their economy . spacesailor 1
facthunter Posted August 7 Posted August 7 Instead I've looked up the OWNERS of SEVEN and all their Folios are Mining and gas associated. Nothing at all to do with any renewables. Kerry Stokes as well. Diesel equipment. Caterpillar Looking after their own interests like Most anti electric peddlers are. Australian is Murdoch totally against climate change action- Telegraph acknowledged as Murdochs Most extreme RW RAG. The "TERRORGRAPH.". It's BS Red. 1 1
octave Posted August 7 Posted August 7 I think the frustrating thing is that the anti-EV crowd scour the media for anything negative about EVs or, indeed, anything that can have a negative spin put on it. I read an article from Sky News that used terms like EVs were no good for Australia, and it invoked the "wide brown land" stereotype as if the average Australian drives through the outback on a daily basis. You can just imagine a group of journos looking for anything negative and ignoring anything positive. So often, there will be a story about an EV fire, and the comments posted will be along the lines of, "these EVs are dangerous". When it turns out that the vehicle was not an EV, suddenly these people move on, "nothing to see here" The Luton airport carpark fire is a prime example. I don't dispute that quoted ranges often are not achieved in the real world. Indeed, my petrol car no longer gets its stated mileage as it ages. One problem is that people's anxieties about range are exploited by those who, for whatever reason, want to halt EV adoption. Many criticisms may have had some validity a few years ago, but things have moved on since then, and the doubters never seem to update their knowledge. Range continues to increase, prices continue to fall, and infrastructure continues to improve. The doubters really are fighting a losing battle. Electrically driven vehicles are not going away because they are simply a more efficient way to turn wheels. How those motors are powered could be by battery or some other method; only time will tell. 3
facthunter Posted August 7 Posted August 7 MS Media is not there to inform you. It's there to make Money or pass on Propaganda Feed Fear and hate to hold your attention. IF YOU want to know what's REALLY GOING ON , WELL, That's getting more and more difficult, these days and UNLIKELY to get better. . The GOLDEN RULE is "Those with all the GOLD make ALL the rules". Nev 1
octave Posted August 7 Posted August 7 Whilst it is early days for this technology, it does show enormous potential in many areas. World’s first metal-free electric motor boosts conductivity by 133%, cuts weight 80% Researchers in South Korea have developed the world’s first fully functional electric motor constructed entirely without metal components. This advancement, utilizing carbon nanotubes (CNTs) instead of traditional copper coils, represents a significant step toward ultra-lightweight transportation systems. The motor exhibits a 133% improvement in electrical conductivity and is 80% lighter than conventional designs. 2
facthunter Posted August 7 Posted August 7 Reciprocating ICE engines have had their day. Too much heat and internal always changing forces. Stress and fatigue. Electricity offers more simplicity, reliability and efficiency than was hitherto thought Possible. No transmissions needed and hardly any brake wear. It will only get Better too. " It's ONLY just Begun". Nev 1 1
onetrack Posted August 7 Posted August 7 I'd have to say EV's range must be dependent on how they're driven and over what terrain - the same as IC-engined vehicles. IC-engine cars are notorious for never reaching their manufacturers claimed fuel economy. I read an article recently where the battery developers were stunned to find that EV batteries behaved in the exact opposite manner to what they believed, as regards lifespan. It was formerly thought that steady current drawdown was best for long battery life, but AI computing found that batteries last longer with a wide range of usage and recharging styles. The AI-computing research found that dynamic cycling and ultra-fast charging can lead to much longer battery life than previously calculated. It took only a small modification to battery manufacture to allow the ultra-fast charging. 1
facthunter Posted August 7 Posted August 7 I consistently get Better mileage than my wife does without going any slower. I use less brake and pass without using as much Power. ( pick better times to do it,). Let idiots get past and out of the way. Cruise control uses more fuel than when YOU do the throttling but it helps to not get caught for speeding. Nev 1
octave Posted August 7 Posted August 7 Some electric cars fall short of claimed range by up to 23%, Australian motoring group finds Here are a few relevant points from this article A government-funded program to test the true performance of vehicles has found the driving range of five popular electric cars is between 5% and 23% lower than results from laboratory testing. The Australian Automobile Association tested vehicles from Tesla, BYD, Kia and Smart – the first EVs to be put through its four-year, federally funded Real World Testing Program to give consumers more accurate information on vehicle performance. The extended range variant of the BYD Atto3 had the largest discrepancy, according to the AAA, with a real-world range of 369km, 23% lower than the 480km achieved in laboratory testing. The Smart #3 had the lowest, with only a 5% difference. The Tesla Model 3 had a real-world range 14% lower than the lab test. Tesla’s Model Y and the Kia EV6 both had a real world range 8% lower. Is this just an EV thing? No The results come after the AAA released a summary last month of tests on 114 petrol, diesel and hybrid vehicles that showed 77% used more fuel than advertised. One in five also broke noxious emissions that were advertised from lab tests. 2 2
facthunter Posted August 8 Posted August 8 If the emissions control devices fail You can be up for a few dollars in more ways than one. Seen a couple of vehicles making smoke lately (unusual) One time it would be about 1/4 of them. (In the early 50's). Nev
spacesailor Posted August 8 Posted August 8 The video I saw , must have been the " Knox " checking for IC car's . spacesailor
onetrack Posted August 8 Posted August 8 The modern vehicles making smoke are usually doing a DPF burn. 1
facthunter Posted August 8 Posted August 8 Yes but Not at the Level I've been witnessing and the DPF cleaning usually happens when you stir it along a bit and it's usually a light blue haze that doesn't last long. Don't do a lot of just short runs in a DPF Car. Nev 1
octave Posted August 8 Posted August 8 We use SkyBus around 8 times a year, and it gets the job done, but very noisy. I look forward to travelling electric to the airport. SkyBus to go electric in Melbourne 1 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now