Author Topic: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”  (Read 43931 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #175 on: November 16, 2021, 06:27:06 pm »
Truth most modern engines need new piston rings at about 100,000 miles
And head gasket failure is in most cases a consequence of failure in the cooling system

Both are easy to repair and parts are cheap, but takes about a day or two of service work what can be an issue and not many services do this kind of work today. They do just the easy repairs  ::)

But also there is plenty of ICE that fail to metallurgy fatigue at about 150,000-200,000
As they are engineered this way to make them cheaper while most owners do not use cars this long
ICE can be easily built to last 1,000,000 km but it does not make much economic sense as it makes it more expensive to manufacture and might slightly increase fuel consumption plus people do not like to ride in 20,30,... years old car

I find that surprising. I don't think I have ever owned a car with under 100,000 miles on it and I've never had to replace the piston rings in any of them. My daily driver has almost 270k on it and doesn't burn oil although I need to fix a leak in the rear main seal. My previous car had 330k miles on it when I was rear ended and totaled it, the engine still ran well and didn't burn oil. I would be really upset if a well maintained engine suffered a major failure at under 250k.
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #176 on: November 16, 2021, 06:38:11 pm »
Doesn't matter how or when a BEV gets charged from public chargers. Just take a piece of paper and start adding the cost for the charging infrastructure. You'll see the costs are massive and there needs to be a ROI on top at some point.

OMG, stop, just stop! I'm sorry but you are so full of shit, every one of these threads you come in and start making these absolutely absurd arguments, completely un-encumbered by reality. Most of what you keep saying is simply not true, you're making mountains out of problems that were solved years ago, claiming things can't be done that are already being done by millions of people, inventing new problems that never existed and it's just getting ridiculous. You don't like EVs, we get it, that has been made abundantly clear, so don't buy one and that problem is solved. Meanwhile the rest of the world is getting on with things, and large numbers of people are finding them perfectly suitable, enough so that some of the best selling cars in the world are EVs. Yet you continue to argue endlessly from some alternate reality where none of this has happened yet, continuously inventing problems that don't exist or making up data that is wildly exaggerated. It's just ridiculous.
 
The following users thanked this post: tom66

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28429
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #177 on: November 16, 2021, 06:43:12 pm »
Doesn't matter how or when a BEV gets charged from public chargers. Just take a piece of paper and start adding the cost for the charging infrastructure. You'll see the costs are massive and there needs to be a ROI on top at some point.

Do you know how much a car parking space costs?

A flat tarmacked space in a standard car park is about 8000 EUR.
A multi-storey car park is close to 40,000 EUR/space.
But those aren't in front of your home  :palm: On top of that such commercial parking spaces devaluate at a much slower pace (more likely in the order of 20 to 30 years) with revenue coming from many cars parked in that space for a short period of time.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2021, 06:53:21 pm by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28429
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #178 on: November 16, 2021, 06:46:59 pm »
Doesn't matter how or when a BEV gets charged from public chargers. Just take a piece of paper and start adding the cost for the charging infrastructure. You'll see the costs are massive and there needs to be a ROI on top at some point.

OMG, stop, just stop! I'm sorry but you are so full of shit, every one of these threads you come in and start making these absolutely absurd arguments, completely un-encumbered by reality. Most of what you keep saying is simply not true, you're making mountains out of problems that were solved years ago, claiming things can't be done that are already being done by millions of people, inventing new problems that never existed and it's just getting ridiculous. You don't like EVs, we get it, that has been made abundantly clear, so don't buy one and that problem is solved. Meanwhile the rest of the world is getting on with things, and large numbers of people are finding them perfectly suitable, enough so that some of the best selling cars in the world are EVs. Yet you continue to argue endlessly from some alternate reality where none of this has happened yet, continuously inventing problems that don't exist or making up data that is wildly exaggerated. It's just ridiculous.
No, you just keep living the pipe dream. In an older thread I brought up the fact that putting an extension cord over the side walk is not a good idea because of liability issues due to tripping danger and likely to be banned. I was the forum's idiot for even bringing it up. Fast forward to today: in the city I live in you get a fine of 259 euro if you charge your EV using an extension cord over the sidewalk. The reason behind it --drum roll-- : liability due to tripping danger.

Sure it is easy to solve all the problems in the world sitting from an comfy armchair but the reality is much thougher than you like to think.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline ogden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3731
  • Country: lv
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #179 on: November 16, 2021, 06:48:06 pm »
I find that surprising. I don't think I have ever owned a car with under 100,000 miles on it and I've never had to replace the piston rings in any of them. My daily driver has almost 270k on it and doesn't burn oil although I need to fix a leak in the rear main seal. My previous car had 330k miles on it when I was rear ended and totaled it, the engine still ran well and didn't burn oil. I would be really upset if a well maintained engine suffered a major failure at under 250k.

What is your 270k mile daily driver that does not burn oil? I bet it is not equipped with "modern" petrol 1500cc turbo engine.
 

Offline SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15797
  • Country: fr
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #180 on: November 16, 2021, 06:52:09 pm »
We may or may not agree on the minute details, but one thing I'm almost sure of is that EVs are not going to be as scalable a solution as ICEVs anytime soon. And I do not think this is the intent either, as it looks like general politics tend to get us towards a world with a lot LESS private transportation anyway. Just saying. So if someone is ever dreaming, it's probably mainly about that point: EVs replacing ICEVs exactly, by similar numbers and use cases. Yeah right. :)
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #181 on: November 16, 2021, 06:53:45 pm »
What is your 270k mile daily driver that does not burn oil? I bet it is not equipped with "modern" petrol 1500cc turbo engine.

It's a Volvo 740, 2.3L SOHC turbocharged 4 cylinder gasoline engine. It's over 30 years old so not really "modern" I guess but it's not ancient either. The one I had with 330k on it was another 740 with the same engine.

We also have a slightly more modern 2002 Toyota Prius, it only has 140k on it but shows no signs of engine wear. I don't know if they're still using those but Microsoft had a whole fleet of Prius shuttles back when I last worked there, they had some with over 300k on them.
 

Offline MadScientist

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 439
  • Country: 00
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #182 on: November 16, 2021, 06:59:09 pm »
Doesn't matter how or when a BEV gets charged from public chargers. Just take a piece of paper and start adding the cost for the charging infrastructure. You'll see the costs are massive and there needs to be a ROI on top at some point.

OMG, stop, just stop! I'm sorry but you are so full of shit, every one of these threads you come in and start making these absolutely absurd arguments, completely un-encumbered by reality. Most of what you keep saying is simply not true, you're making mountains out of problems that were solved years ago, claiming things can't be done that are already being done by millions of people, inventing new problems that never existed and it's just getting ridiculous. You don't like EVs, we get it, that has been made abundantly clear, so don't buy one and that problem is solved. Meanwhile the rest of the world is getting on with things, and large numbers of people are finding them perfectly suitable, enough so that some of the best selling cars in the world are EVs. Yet you continue to argue endlessly from some alternate reality where none of this has happened yet, continuously inventing problems that don't exist or making up data that is wildly exaggerated. It's just ridiculous.
No, you just keep living the pipe dream. In an older thread I brought up the fact that putting an extension cord over the side walk is not a good idea because of liability issues due to tripping danger and likely to be banned. I was the forum's idiot for even bringing it up. Fast forward to today: in the city I live in you get a fine of 259 euro if you charge your EV using an extension cord over the sidewalk. The reason behind it --drum roll-- : liability due to tripping danger.

Sure it is easy to solve all the problems in the world sitting from an comfy armchair but the reality is much thougher than you like to think.

There is no requirement to charge outside your home. Most cars will soon deliver 500 km or more this is more then most people drive in a week. They’ll charge at  commercial
 fast chargers as and when they require. House charger is a temporary thing , BEV batteries will soon be bigger then the capacity of a house feed to charge then in a reasonable time.
EE's: We use silicon to make things  smaller!
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #183 on: November 16, 2021, 07:07:28 pm »
That makes no sense at all. House charging is the single biggest benefit of an EV, you just plug it in at home and trickle charge overnight, you never have to go looking for fuel, it's just full every morning. Charging stations are for people who cannot charge at home but still want an EV, and to alleviate range anxiety and allow for the occasional longer trip. Even Tesla has stated that their intent is for most charging to occur at home, that's the whole plan. I get that not everyone can charge at home, my dad was in that category and he made use of Superchargers and destination charging to charge his Tesla but everyone I currently know who has one plugs it in at home. Home charging is an absolutely huge feature, it's fantastic, it's something that every EV owner I know loves about their car.

Seriously, I love my old gas car, but if it were possible for me to trickle fuel into it overnight in my driveway or garage and have a full tank every time I go out somewhere, I would gladly give up the ability to fill up quickly at a gas station. I absolutely hate having to go get gas, it's always some inopportune time when I realize I need it, seems like it's always either cold and windy or roasting hot out, it's always out of my way, I hate the smell of gas stations, it's probably my least favorite aspect of car ownership.
 

Offline Miyuki

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 908
  • Country: cz
    • Me on youtube
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #184 on: November 16, 2021, 07:12:30 pm »
What is your 270k mile daily driver that does not burn oil? I bet it is not equipped with "modern" petrol 1500cc turbo engine.

It's a Volvo 740, 2.3L SOHC turbocharged 4 cylinder gasoline engine. It's over 30 years old so not really "modern" I guess but it's not ancient either. The one I had with 330k on it was another 740 with the same engine.

We also have a slightly more modern 2002 Toyota Prius, it only has 140k on it but shows no signs of engine wear. I don't know if they're still using those but Microsoft had a whole fleet of Prius shuttles back when I last worked there, they had some with over 300k on them.
Today is common to have a 1.0 turbo with an even higher power, in the car this size
Plus oil change interval is set mostly for 40,000km (25,000 miles) to lower maintenance, it is proven to damage engine, but fleet customers want it as they don't keep cars that long and for example, in Europe, it is a big part of the market, a big portion of people here have the car as an employment benefit
 

Online tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7334
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #185 on: November 16, 2021, 07:14:38 pm »
But those aren't in front of your home  :palm: On top of that such commercial parking spaces devaluate at a much slower pace (more likely in the order of 20 to 30 years) with revenue coming from many cars parked in that space for a short period of time.

Great.  Charge 5 euro-cents per kWh above the wholesale cost of electricity and the charger will be paid for after a few years, if EVs are in abundance the cost of maintenance for the charger really won't be significant.

Assuming 33% utilisation (~8 hours in use per day) a 7kW point dispenses 56kWh of electricity per day.  At 5 cents/kWh margin it makes 1,000 EUR/year. 

That's more than enough to pay for the cost of maintenance of the charging point, and amortises its install cost after a few years.

Did you know, petrol stations would be really unprofitable if only one person visited them every day?!
 

Offline ogden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3731
  • Country: lv
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #186 on: November 16, 2021, 07:52:36 pm »
It's a Volvo 740, 2.3L SOHC turbocharged 4 cylinder gasoline engine. It's over 30 years old so not really "modern" I guess but it's not ancient either.
Oh, I see :) Those have good reliability records indeed. I asked because modern engines built for strict emission rules are burning oil straight out of the factory - because high better fuel efficiency means lower engine friction that has it's price. In short - modern, "efficient" small engines needs piston ring overhaul much sooner than old gas guzzlers.

Quote
We also have a slightly more modern 2002 Toyota Prius, it only has 140k on it but shows no signs of engine wear.
It's because oldskool ICE engine runs as soon as you are moving, hybrid - not always. Hybrid engines are detuned (Atkinson cycle), they run engine preferably at max efficiency mode which means mediocre RPM unless you floor it, and what's more important - "engine hours" versus "movement hours" is somewhere around 50..80% obviously depending on driving style and city/highway cycles. Hint: don't buy hybrid for long range hi-speed commute, its is waste of money. So, your 140k mile hybrid "city cycle" engine can have wear similar to engine of 70k mile generic ICE car.
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #187 on: November 17, 2021, 04:46:36 am »
Today is common to have a 1.0 turbo with an even higher power, in the car this size
Plus oil change interval is set mostly for 40,000km (25,000 miles) to lower maintenance, it is proven to damage engine, but fleet customers want it as they don't keep cars that long and for example, in Europe, it is a big part of the market, a big portion of people here have the car as an employment benefit

That's crazy, I change my oil pretty religiously at 5,000 miles and have always run full synthetic in my turbo cars. Even at today's prices oil is cheap when compared to the price of an engine rebuild or new car.
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #188 on: November 17, 2021, 04:50:27 am »
It's because oldskool ICE engine runs as soon as you are moving, hybrid - not always. Hybrid engines are detuned (Atkinson cycle), they run engine preferably at max efficiency mode which means mediocre RPM unless you floor it, and what's more important - "engine hours" versus "movement hours" is somewhere around 50..80% obviously depending on driving style and city/highway cycles. Hint: don't buy hybrid for long range hi-speed commute, its is waste of money. So, your 140k mile hybrid "city cycle" engine can have wear similar to engine of 70k mile generic ICE car.

It does 40-45 mpg cruising on the highway so it's still quite good compared to other cars of the era. I don't remember what kind of mileage it gets around town but I think it's actually similar. It's the most boring car I can ever recall driving, but it has been amazingly reliable as a transportation appliance, and it was not very expensive. I think she paid $5k for it after the virtually identical 2001 model she had got rear ended. We recently had the original 19 year old battery replaced, that cost about $2k but it drives like new now.
 

Offline Miyuki

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 908
  • Country: cz
    • Me on youtube
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #189 on: November 17, 2021, 09:02:47 am »
Today is common to have a 1.0 turbo with an even higher power, in the car this size
Plus oil change interval is set mostly for 40,000km (25,000 miles) to lower maintenance, it is proven to damage engine, but fleet customers want it as they don't keep cars that long and for example, in Europe, it is a big part of the market, a big portion of people here have the car as an employment benefit

That's crazy, I change my oil pretty religiously at 5,000 miles and have always run full synthetic in my turbo cars. Even at today's prices oil is cheap when compared to the price of an engine rebuild or new car.
It is the same as a "lifetime" transmission fluid
The life of those transmissions aren't long then  ::)
 

Online tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7334
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #190 on: November 17, 2021, 09:13:35 am »
It's because oldskool ICE engine runs as soon as you are moving, hybrid - not always. Hybrid engines are detuned (Atkinson cycle), they run engine preferably at max efficiency mode which means mediocre RPM unless you floor it, and what's more important - "engine hours" versus "movement hours" is somewhere around 50..80% obviously depending on driving style and city/highway cycles. Hint: don't buy hybrid for long range hi-speed commute, its is waste of money. So, your 140k mile hybrid "city cycle" engine can have wear similar to engine of 70k mile generic ICE car.

Slight understated advantage of a hybrid here is that it allows a smaller powertrain to run closer to maximum power point, with the electric motor providing boost.

So my Golf GTE has a 140 hp engine and in hybrid mode the E-motor adds 50 hp.  This means the acceleration of the car is reasonable (0-60 in 6.8s) but the economy at cruise is quite good (because you don't need an under-loaded 2 litre engine to achieve that acceleration figure.)

This is despite the fact that the GTE is only a parallel hybrid, not something more sophisticated like the series-parallel planetary gearbox in the Prius.  And it isn't an Atkinson cycle; the engine is only slightly modified from the standard 1.4 TSI.

I think the ideal PHEV would be a 1.0L - 1.2L petrol engine coupled to a 100 hp electric drivetrain.  I think Mazda are/were working on that.  My suspicion is that the inflection point for BEVs has happened already though.  The VW Golf eHybrid - the modern version of my car - and the VW ID3 are practically identical in price.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2021, 09:15:24 am by tom66 »
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #191 on: November 17, 2021, 06:59:22 pm »
So my Golf GTE has a 140 hp engine and in hybrid mode the E-motor adds 50 hp.  This means the acceleration of the car is reasonable (0-60 in 6.8s) but the economy at cruise is quite good (because you don't need an under-loaded 2 litre engine to achieve that acceleration figure.)

It's funny that 0-60 in 6.8s is "reasonable", back in the 60s-70s that would have been firmly in muscle car territory and quicker than the vast majority of cars on the road.
 

Offline Miyuki

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 908
  • Country: cz
    • Me on youtube
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #192 on: November 17, 2021, 08:25:53 pm »
So my Golf GTE has a 140 hp engine and in hybrid mode the E-motor adds 50 hp.  This means the acceleration of the car is reasonable (0-60 in 6.8s) but the economy at cruise is quite good (because you don't need an under-loaded 2 litre engine to achieve that acceleration figure.)

It's funny that 0-60 in 6.8s is "reasonable", back in the 60s-70s that would have been firmly in muscle car territory and quicker than the vast majority of cars on the road.
Yeh cars under 10s tend to be considered "fast"
I have a wagon with old 97 hp diesel with 4-speed auto that is a rocket, I can feel like and race driver, half the way on full throttle  >:D
But it gets over 1000km on a full tank
They used to be consedered green back then because of so low fuel consumption
 

Offline SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15797
  • Country: fr
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #193 on: November 17, 2021, 09:11:39 pm »
So my Golf GTE has a 140 hp engine and in hybrid mode the E-motor adds 50 hp.  This means the acceleration of the car is reasonable (0-60 in 6.8s) but the economy at cruise is quite good (because you don't need an under-loaded 2 litre engine to achieve that acceleration figure.)

It's funny that 0-60 in 6.8s is "reasonable", back in the 60s-70s that would have been firmly in muscle car territory and quicker than the vast majority of cars on the road.

Someone owning a Golf GTE probably has some requirements in terms of performance that your average Joe does not.
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #194 on: November 17, 2021, 09:13:42 pm »
Yeh cars under 10s tend to be considered "fast"
I have a wagon with old 97 hp diesel with 4-speed auto that is a rocket, I can feel like and race driver, half the way on full throttle  >:D
But it gets over 1000km on a full tank
They used to be consedered green back then because of so low fuel consumption

My friend had an old VW Golf diesel I drove a few times, I think it was a 1983, no turbo, I remember the gas pedal was pretty much binary, you either were sat at a stop and not touching it at all, or you had it held to the floor and were waiting patiently for it to get up to speed before having to stop at the next light. I'm still a fan of diesels overall, the low fuel consumption and high torque of a turbo diesel is a winning combination. We never got many of them in cars here though.
 

Offline Miyuki

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 908
  • Country: cz
    • Me on youtube
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #195 on: November 18, 2021, 05:34:58 am »
Yeh cars under 10s tend to be considered "fast"
I have a wagon with old 97 hp diesel with 4-speed auto that is a rocket, I can feel like and race driver, half the way on full throttle  >:D
But it gets over 1000km on a full tank
They used to be consedered green back then because of so low fuel consumption

My friend had an old VW Golf diesel I drove a few times, I think it was a 1983, no turbo, I remember the gas pedal was pretty much binary, you either were sat at a stop and not touching it at all, or you had it held to the floor and were waiting patiently for it to get up to speed before having to stop at the next light. I'm still a fan of diesels overall, the low fuel consumption and high torque of a turbo diesel is a winning combination. We never got many of them in cars here though.
Wikipedia says they used to put 1.6 non-turbo diesel with whopping 52 hp  :-DD
That must be something
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #196 on: November 18, 2021, 06:43:37 am »
Wikipedia says they used to put 1.6 non-turbo diesel with whopping 52 hp  :-DD
That must be something

That sounds about right. They were certainly not sports cars, although they were very light compared to modern cars so they weren't *quite* as slow as 52hp sounds, but they were still slow. They got great fuel economy for the era too.
 

Online tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7334
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #197 on: November 18, 2021, 09:34:38 am »
Someone owning a Golf GTE probably has some requirements in terms of performance that your average Joe does not.

Fastest car I ever owned, but it was a present to myself once I finally was able to afford a "reasonable" used car.  Used to drive a 206 2.0 HDi diesel (~90 hp turbodiesel), not a bad car as a student, but the accelerator on that was more like advice to the ECU that at some point in the next 10 seconds you wouldn't mind if you could go a bit faster, please.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2021, 09:36:57 am by tom66 »
 

Online ejeffrey

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4034
  • Country: us
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #198 on: November 18, 2021, 04:38:53 pm »
Today is common to have a 1.0 turbo with an even higher power, in the car this size
Plus oil change interval is set mostly for 40,000km (25,000 miles) to lower maintenance, it is proven to damage engine, but fleet customers want it as they don't keep cars that long and for example, in Europe, it is a big part of the market, a big portion of people here have the car as an employment benefit

That's crazy, I change my oil pretty religiously at 5,000 miles and have always run full synthetic in my turbo cars. Even at today's prices oil is cheap when compared to the price of an engine rebuild or new car.

My understanding is that 20000 mi is actually probably fine for full synthetic oil in most engines and 5000 mi is total overkill (at least after the break in service).  The main problem is the oil filter not the oil itself which can break down over time depending on conditions.  If you go to a shop it makes sense to change both but if you just do it yourself changing out the oil filter and topping up the oil is fine, only draining the oil much less often.


That said, even with long oil change intervals I have never heard of claims that engines, even small turbo engines generically require piston ring replacement on any time table.
 Head gasket failures are also not normal.  Certain models and brands may be known for pattern failures in either.  I think at one point Audi was saying that consuming 500 ml of oil every 3000 miles was "acceptable." As a whole however it isn't a standard thing.   Most modern car engines will go hundreds of thousands of miles without any service requiring removing the cylinder head. 
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28429
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: “Battery EV” vs “Hydrogen Fuel cell EV”
« Reply #199 on: November 18, 2021, 06:12:08 pm »
Today is common to have a 1.0 turbo with an even higher power, in the car this size
Plus oil change interval is set mostly for 40,000km (25,000 miles) to lower maintenance, it is proven to damage engine, but fleet customers want it as they don't keep cars that long and for example, in Europe, it is a big part of the market, a big portion of people here have the car as an employment benefit

That's crazy, I change my oil pretty religiously at 5,000 miles and have always run full synthetic in my turbo cars. Even at today's prices oil is cheap when compared to the price of an engine rebuild or new car.

My understanding is that 20000 mi is actually probably fine for full synthetic oil in most engines and 5000 mi is total overkill (at least after the break in service).  The main problem is the oil filter not the oil itself which can break down over time depending on conditions.  If you go to a shop it makes sense to change both but if you just do it yourself changing out the oil filter and topping up the oil is fine, only draining the oil much less often.


That said, even with long oil change intervals I have never heard of claims that engines, even small turbo engines generically require piston ring replacement on any time table.
From what I understand the main cause of piston rings getting stuck resulting in oil use is not letting the engine work enough (*). Direct injection gasoline engines seem to be specifically prone to this problem. I have driven several cars over 320k km / 200k miles but never had to have an engine rebuild or experienced excessive oil use. Far from it. But then again, I do my homework before buying a car in order to avoid cars with expensive problems. And I let the engine work every now and then.

* From several mechanics I've read that replacing the rings isn't necessary in many cases, just fill the cylinders with diesel and let it soak for a day or so to dissolve the dirt and then flush for a final clean.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2021, 06:16:55 pm by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf