old man emu Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 58 minutes ago, facthunter said: FORD just put a new EV around Bathurst, . Nev But what style of EV was it? I wouldn't be interested if it was some hulking great things weighing over two and a half tones- in other words not a "light" vehicle. I would be interested if it was a vehicle that met the practical needs for transportation in metropolitan areas. The Mitsubishi ek X EV measures up at 3.4m long and 1.5 wide, weighs in at 1080kg and powers the front wheels via a 47kW/195Nm e-motor. Its zero emissions would also potentially help Mitsubishi comply with a forthcoming CO2 standard, depending on how that is structured. On the flipside, the tiny kei car would not currently meet the protocols to achieve a maximum five-star ANCAP result. It meets Japanese safety requirements; the problem is, it doesn’t meet ANCAP requirements and the problem the cost of making that car a five-star car pushes the price to the point where it would hardly become an entry-level car anymore. But the ANCAP requires bells and whistles that do not directly improve the crashworthiness of the vehicle. Most people are only concerned with how well the vehicle will protect themselves as the victims of a collision. They are indifferent to the damage they might cause to others and ways to avoid that because they don't think they would ever create a situation that caused the collision. That's not being critical, it's just a conclusion drawn from the fact that most people will claim they are good drivers. And let's not forget that ANCAP ( Australasian New Car Assessment Program) is not a regulatory body. They have no more authority to regulate vehicle quality than does the CHOICE organisation have to regulate the safety of household goods. ANCAP crash tests cars and conduct performance assessments on safety features and technologies then publishes a simple star rating to indicate relative safety performance. (Relative to what Standard?). These independent safety ratings are used to compare the relative safety between vehicles of similar size and have become a critical factor in vehicle selection for private consumers and fleet buyers. A critical factor because fleet owners - such as the mining companies - can be held liable in WH&S litigation if they provide vehicles which litigants claim aren't 5-Star. You must remember that the "relative safety performance" standards can change from time to time. That is why the Mitsu vehicle's tests a year or two ago said it was 5-Star, but ANCAP now requires bells and whistles for a vehicle to meet their new criteria. 19 minutes ago, onetrack said: Cadogans presentation leaves vast amounts to be desired. He's abrasive, arrogant, supercilious, and smart-arse all rolled up into one. I can't actually stand listening to him. The problem is, he thinks he's really clever, but his style rapidly becomes obnoxious. I agree with that comment. However, I will put up with it while he is saying sensible things. I wasn't going to watch that video when it first came up (I do subscribe to his channel) because I thought it was going to be another anti-EV diatribe. However my interest was gained when he started praising the Misu vehicle. Then he said why this vehicle would not reach the Australian market because of the influence of ANCAP's ratings on vehicle purchasers. Maybe ANCAP has awarded the anti-EVers a 50 metre penalty right in front of the sticks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacesailor Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 (edited) " in metropolitan areas " . why , is there not enough " public Transport " in the city areas already. A four tonner in the rural environment, would be a godsend for a ' long distance ' delivery van/Truck. Or, even a camper van/mobile home . spacesailor Edited March 3 by spacesailor It ' A I ' changed my spelling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 It's a special based on the Latest small Transit Custom. Beat every "closed wheel" vehicle speed times ever.. To even set it up to handle that good so quickly is remarkable. . Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 Nissan have an "e-power" version of the Nissan X-trail SUV with its own unique hybrid system. Read a review here. I know nothing about electric/hybrid vehicles, so make no personal comment. Our Men's Shed owns an ICE X-trail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 Electricity provider Ausgrid is introducing a fleet of electric trucks. Apparently able to be recharged in one hour while the driver is having lunch. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 48 minutes ago, red750 said: Electricity provider Ausgrid is introducing a fleet of electric trucks. What I got from the story on the News tonight was that they seem to have one truck being trialed. It is supposed to have a range of about 250 kms, which should let it handle the normal daily work. It was said that if it did a lot of running around, say repairing storm damage, the range might have to be more closely monitored that day. I can see this type of light carrier vehicle being well suited for getting around to a lot of little jobs in a day. In fact, most of these service vehicles only do "out and back" trips and sit idle while the workers do their thing. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onetrack Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 The Ausgrid workers will flatten the battery over lunchtime, keeping the A/C on in the truck, while they have lunch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomadpete Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 20 hours ago, onetrack said: Cadogans presentation leaves vast amounts to be desired. He's abrasive, arrogant, supercilious, and smart-arse all rolled up into one. I can't actually stand listening to him. The problem is, he thinks he's really clever, but his style rapidly becomes obnoxious. Which is why I prefer not to click on any of his youtube vids. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 You're NOT wrong. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 1 hour ago, nomadpete said: Which is why I prefer not to click on any of his youtube vids. At times there is wheat amongst the chaff. But there is also a lot of trash seed as well. His best videos are his workshop ones which are metal fabrication tips 'n ' tricks which some people might not know or have forgotten. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 This was reported in relation to a Tesla, but no doubt applies to many more makes. Among the wizzbang gadgetry available in cars these days, are the cameras, sold on the basis that they will make you a safer driver, which monitor everything you do in the car. It haas been reported that your activity is recorded and forwarded to your insurance company, possibly affecting your ability to claim. There was a report of dealer employees sharing photos and videos of people in revealing attire. Your car MAY BE spying on you. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 The insurance is a worry, but I can't imagine any dealer employees sharing pics of my hairy legs, revealing attire or not. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 It appears that Ford has just patented a method for recovering unburnt hydrocarbons from the crankcase of an ICE and adding them to the fresh fuel. It's a bit complicated to explain here, but the result is a reduction in emissions, plus getting the most energy from the fuel supply. Of course, you'll still get CO2, but maybe a few moor hundred metres travel from a litre of fuel, and the complex hydrocarbons will not escape into the atmosphere. This patent is no doubt the product of research that was commenced many years ago, before EV mania. Whether it is ever applied to ICEs will depend on the uptake of EVs leading to a lower demand for ICEs, but it is in indication that in the future motive power will come from both electrons and hydrocarbons. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 A factory in Noble Park Victoria is producing hydrogen powered prime movers. Details here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onetrack Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 (edited) The Ford system for reducing emissions is exceptionally complicated and is unlikely to reach commercial viability. One of the factors that is starting to impact IC-engine design and production is that in the future, the production levels of IC engines will be seriously crimped, as IC engines struggle to keep up their dominance of the automotive industry. No longer will they be able to work on selling tens of millions of one particular engine, it will be a half or a third of what they could plan on, before the EV era. Edited March 14 by onetrack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 3 hours ago, onetrack said: The Ford system for reducing emissions is exceptionally complicated and is unlikely to reach commercial viability. Does the complexity of an idea translate into the monetary value of a product? The theory behind a process might be complex, but once you have done the design work to make an item, and created the tooling (physical and digital) to make it, then the cost per unit is the product of (R&D costs + Blueprint creation + Tooling costs + raw materials cost)÷ number of units produced. Back in the 70's Honda introduced CVCC, or Compound Vortex Controlled Combustion to its carbureted engines as a means of reducing emissions. This technology allowed Honda's cars to meet Japanese and American emissions standards in the 1970s without the need for a catalytic converter. It passed into history with the introduction of fuel injection, but in its day was a useful, economical means of getting a more complete burn of the fuel/air mixture. Technology has advanced since the 70's, but who is to say that Ford's system is not the next step forward? 3 hours ago, onetrack said: tens of millions of one particular engine, it will be a half or a third That's still millions of engines, which could still keep ICEs as an economical alternative. As for a liquid fuel, why not use known technology to make liquid fuels from the coal of which we have an abundance. Synthetic fuel plant capacity is approximately 0.24% of the 100 million barrel per day crude oil refining capacity worldwide, mainly because in order to be economically viable, projects must do much better than just being competitive head-to-head with oil. They must also generate a sufficient return on investment to justify the capital investment in the project. A central consideration for the development of synthetic fuel is the security factor of securing domestic fuel supply from domestic biomass and coal. Nations that are rich in biomass and coal can use synthetic fuel to offset their use of petroleum derived fuels and foreign oil. That's Australia, isn't it? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 Referring to my post, six pots above, here is a slideshop report on the secret spying by systems in your car. LexisNexis report. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgwilson Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 On 03/03/2024 at 11:59 PM, onetrack said: The Ausgrid workers will flatten the battery over lunchtime, keeping the A/C on in the truck, while they have lunch! Airconditioning uses a tiny amount of battery power, typically 2% or less. It runs from the 12 volt battery system as do all of the other ancilliary systems in an EV (computers, lighting, infotainment, etc). I leave the A/C running when at a shopping centre & return to a cool car. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 Heat pumps are efficient. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red750 Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 That's completely irrelevant as a comparison. Acceleration can be measured. Cooking is complex chemistry. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 I'm angry with a current ad that I've seen on TV for some make of car. The add claims 100 to zero in 2.8 seconds. Stopping that fast is a physical impossibility. If I get a moment tonight I'll calculate the G-Force that such a deceleration would impose on the body. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacesailor Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 (edited) OME. PLEASE DO As I feel that technology, is dangerous to the occupants. In it's like losing the chance of doing anthing else to avoid damage to the vehicle . ( kangaroos coming from the left , while on an empty road ) spacesailor Edited March 21 by spacesailor A little more ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 Almost 3 seconds to stop from 100? I don't feel that's excessive. I'd rather stop in 2.8 seconds than in 0.1. I can't do the math for a braking calculation (I assume it's not a straight line graph) - but at 100km, in 2.8 seconds your car has gone 78m. So more than 1.5 times the length of an Olympic swimming pool. I can't see why that's so incredible that a vehicle should be able to come to a stop in that time. After all - the tyres would break grip and skid under too much deceleration, before you got any more than perhaps a mild bruise from the seat belt. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Vegemite Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 1 hour ago, Marty_d said: Almost 3 seconds to stop from 100? I don't feel that's excessive. Neither do I after doing a Google........ https://fastestlaps.com/lists/top-quickest-stoppers-60mph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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