A repair on a modern day diesel car easely undoes the cost saving due to slightly lower fuel prices. So far I have gotten way more mileage from the Ford Focus on gasoline than with any diesel car I have owned before (which all ended up having engine problems BTW).The modern diesel with EGR has seriously compromised longevity due to the excessive contaminates the lubrication system must deal with. Even with EGR capable oils the lubrication system is challenged let alone the engine itself having to recirculate all that exhaust muck. If your vehicle tests can't detect it I advise disabling EGR in some manner that won't throw a ECU fault.
Quite simple on older cars, not so much on never ones.
Yeah, one of the first things I did on my previous diesel car besides removing the catalythic converter (which was all clogged up by soot anyway). This resulted in a 5% lower fuel use as well but also a lot of extra NOx and CH output. Not very good for the environment. Nowadays you shouldn't be buying a diesel car.
Be aware that GPF (gasoline particulate filter) and EGR is coming to petrol engines too (not sure about petrol hybrids).
Yeah, one of the first things I did on my previous diesel car besides removing the catalythic converter (which was all clogged up by soot anyway). This resulted in a 5% lower fuel use as well but also a lot of extra NOx and CH output. Not very good for the environment. Nowadays you shouldn't be buying a diesel car.
Be aware that GPF (gasoline particulate filter) and EGR is coming to petrol engines too (not sure about petrol hybrids).
For instance, the VW up! GTI is fitted with a GPF, to meet emissions limits. I don't know if the filters are any better than the old DPF's which clog all the time if used for shorter journeys. A friend of mine had a rather interesting experience with a Suzuki diesel (Ignis, I think) which ran after it was parked. Apparently, a barely-documented feature where if it detects risk of clogging, it will run the engine despite ignition being off for about 15 minutes at reasonably high rpm to purge/regenerate the filter. You can stop it by turning the car on and then off again, but could be, err, "interesting" for people who park in garages who don't know about these features.
The learning curve concept has one other impact on this analysis. If legislative or social initiatives drive ICE sales down something similar to the learning curve works against them. Operating plants at far below their capacity is expensive, so ICE costs would likely go up substantially in this scenario, quite aside from any tax penalties. Something like the learning curve works in reverse as you reduce quantities. This side of the coin is somewhat terrifying to those whose use case is not well fitted to BEV.
We need more math in this thread.Yes and no.
1) There are large differences in situation, car use and electricity prices per country which highly influence cost per km and suitability of a BEV.
2) There are several seeking justification of their choice. I bought it, so it must be good. I can't be wrong. Please tell me I'm not an idiot! <-------------- ***
3) There is a group of people that don't really care about how much they spend on a car; it just should look good to show off to the neighbours
4) There are people for whom a car is just a tool and it should be cheap to buy & run.
If you apply math & logic, then you'll largely be catering point 4 and a little bit point 1.
As I've said a number of times I think that ICE is here for some time to stay but it won't be a common choice in vehicles. Maybe the 2030 date will be hit in the UK, it could be be pushed back, but probably only to 2035 or so. There are existential problems with ICE that cannot be solved like CO2 emissions, we are not going to solve the problem with synfuels or biofuels any time soon, not at the scale required to support the current fleet at least. So the best thing to do is retire new models and let the new technologies replace them.
And sure, ICE will definitely improve, I remember my dad talking about his old Mk2 Golf, it used to do "forty-to-a-gallon" (40mpg) on the motorway. Well that was an 800kg car, with 60-70 hp, cars are obviously heavier nowadays and have more power, yet the 1500kg 1.5 TSI model now does the same or better economy. So the improvement is pretty clear. An interesting one to watch is sparkless ignition, I think Mazda are now producing that in some numbers. And I'm sure a manufacturer or two is experimenting with microwave ignition of petrol.
Mazda have announced they will be making a rotary-range-extended EV. It appears to be using an 18kWh battery (smaller than the MX-30) with a rotary engine-generator setup. The engine never drives the wheels, so on fuel it will have a double conversion loss, unlike a typical PHEV where the engine is usually in parallel with the drive motor, but presumably the engine can run at the optimal power point all the time. I think it's a shame they didn't fit the 30kWh battery as used in the MX-30, 18kWh feels a bit too small. I wonder if they've fixed the rotary engine's reliability.
I strongly doubt that Atkinson cycle engines as found in many hybrids will need particulate filters because the Atkinson cycle runs much cleaner as part of the basic operating principle.
The learning curve concept has one other impact on this analysis. If legislative or social initiatives drive ICE sales down something similar to the learning curve works against them. Operating plants at far below their capacity is expensive, so ICE costs would likely go up substantially in this scenario, quite aside from any tax penalties. Something like the learning curve works in reverse as you reduce quantities. This side of the coin is somewhat terrifying to those whose use case is not well fitted to BEV.I doubt the latter. My assumption would be that at that point -if that ever happens- BEVs will be more versatile due to very improved batteries and charging infrastructure that can recharge a car to 600km to 800km of range in the same time and at equal costs like you can fill up a regular car with fuel nowadays.
Ofcourse there will always be people that have special needs that will be catered to. For example: Toyota still sells the Hilux with diesel engines but that is about their only model that is available with a diesel engine. It is THE standard for an offroad vehicle.
I would say that rather than ban gasoline powered cars altogether, have a minimum MPG requirement that increases over time. At some point, it would no longer be practical to meet the requirement, effectively making it a ban.
Let the marketplace decide what are the best suited to any particular task and manufacturers will adapt just as they have for the last 100 years.
This thread is the gift that keeps on giving by way of the fact of demonstrating how gullible people fall for lies again and again.
Enjoy your fossil fuel cars. They’ll be here for a few more decades yet. The more people have to fervently protest that their new things “are far better”, the more the complete opposite is clearly proven to be.
People are so easily led it’s quite embarrassing for them.
“Look how modern and cutting edge we are”
Schmucks.
Yeah, one of the first things I did on my previous diesel car besides removing the catalythic converter (which was all clogged up by soot anyway). This resulted in a 5% lower fuel use as well but also a lot of extra NOx and CH output. Not very good for the environment. Nowadays you shouldn't be buying a diesel car.
Be aware that GPF (gasoline particulate filter) and EGR is coming to petrol engines too (not sure about petrol hybrids).
For instance, the VW up! GTI is fitted with a GPF, to meet emissions limits. I don't know if the filters are any better than the old DPF's which clog all the time if used for shorter journeys. A friend of mine had a rather interesting experience with a Suzuki diesel (Ignis, I think) which ran after it was parked. Apparently, a barely-documented feature where if it detects risk of clogging, it will run the engine despite ignition being off for about 15 minutes at reasonably high rpm to purge/regenerate the filter. You can stop it by turning the car on and then off again, but could be, err, "interesting" for people who park in garages who don't know about these features.
Private transport is a highly regulated and taxed marketplace. That will continue to define private transport priorities into thd next several decades along with the general desire to decarbonise private motoring
I strongly doubt that Atkinson cycle engines as found in many hybrids will need particulate filters because the Atkinson cycle runs much cleaner as part of the basic operating principle.More and more cars are making use of Atkinson cycle engines to stay competitive.
I would say that rather than ban gasoline powered cars altogether, have a minimum MPG requirement that increases over time. At some point, it would no longer be practical to meet the requirement, effectively making it a ban.
The learning curve concept has one other impact on this analysis. If legislative or social initiatives drive ICE sales down something similar to the learning curve works against them. Operating plants at far below their capacity is expensive, so ICE costs would likely go up substantially in this scenario, quite aside from any tax penalties. Something like the learning curve works in reverse as you reduce quantities. This side of the coin is somewhat terrifying to those whose use case is not well fitted to BEV.I doubt the latter. My assumption would be that at that point -if that ever happens- BEVs will be more versatile due to very improved batteries and charging infrastructure that can recharge a car to 600km to 800km of range in the same time and at equal costs like you can fill up a regular car with fuel nowadays.
Ofcourse there will always be people that have special needs that will be catered to. For example: Toyota still sells the Hilux with diesel engines but that is about their only model that is available with a diesel engine. It is THE standard for an offroad vehicle.
I said those who BEV vehicles do not work for will pay higher costs as production of ICE drops. You disagreed, and then gave your reason why BEV will work for almost everyone. Then admitted that some will have special needs.
So what is it that you actually disagree with?
The learning curve concept has one other impact on this analysis. If legislative or social initiatives drive ICE sales down something similar to the learning curve works against them. Operating plants at far below their capacity is expensive, so ICE costs would likely go up substantially in this scenario, quite aside from any tax penalties. Something like the learning curve works in reverse as you reduce quantities. This side of the coin is somewhat terrifying to those whose use case is not well fitted to BEV.I doubt the latter. My assumption would be that at that point -if that ever happens- BEVs will be more versatile due to very improved batteries and charging infrastructure that can recharge a car to 600km to 800km of range in the same time and at equal costs like you can fill up a regular car with fuel nowadays.
Ofcourse there will always be people that have special needs that will be catered to. For example: Toyota still sells the Hilux with diesel engines but that is about their only model that is available with a diesel engine. It is THE standard for an offroad vehicle.
I said those who BEV vehicles do not work for will pay higher costs as production of ICE drops. You disagreed, and then gave your reason why BEV will work for almost everyone. Then admitted that some will have special needs.
So what is it that you actually disagree with?I don't really disagree. I just think that in the long run -if batteries and charging infrastructure improve a lot- there will be an extremely small number of people needing non-BEV vehicles. These people are likely to needing specialised vehicles anyway in their current situation.
The latter is exactly what the EU is doing! The 'nice' thing is that it is left to the market to come up with solutions rather than forcing a particular solution that may turn out not be a good fit after all.
Why penalise perfectly good vehicles perfectly suited to particular tasks ?
Sure a small % of the population might be using guzzlers but that is their and only their choice.
The latter is exactly what the EU is doing! The 'nice' thing is that it is left to the market to come up with solutions rather than forcing a particular solution that may turn out not be a good fit after all.
Yes - if hydrogen is the best solution or if some other solution as yet to be seen emerges it deserves to succeed.
Currently it doesn't look like the future will be anything other than mostly electric vehicles powered by batteries but it could change. There would have to be a significant change to make me consider using a hydrogen vehicle, like hydrogen becoming dirt cheap and the cars becoming a lot more accessible and widely used.