I know. I get that.

 

Model 3 with track option software quite easily follows Porsche Taycan . To my view the Porsche looks like it struggles to hold tight corners. I did like the serenity of quiet level music, the driver having a casual chat with the passenger. No need for intercoms.

https://www.carscoops.com/2020/09/te...e-nurburgring/

Talking of track and events, the Tesla model 3 was rebuilt just in time to race the full Pike's peak event. Not a fully satisfactory run with cooling issues.
I had a quick look and a VW EV holds the pike's peak record. ICE cant cope with the rarified air higher up

 

Both the Taycan and model 3 use pretty much the same front suspension...ZF corner units...same design as found on Jags, E/S class Mercs, monocoque Range Rovers, 5/6/7 series BMWs etc. The exception is Audi/Bentley, as they hold the patent for the double upper arm/ball-joint arrangement - oddly Porsche haven’t borrowed it this time like they did with the Macan.

What is pertinent is the weight; The model 3 is 450kg lighter than the Taycan, that’s a lot of weight to hustle around on the same front suspension, also Porsche have struggled a bit recently with the ESP especially on the Macan along with other VAG group cars (although I presume it’s ok on the Taycan).

Its getting rather boring that all cars are using the same off-the-shelf ZF design. Designed that way to provide multi link suspensions thats ‘like’ double wishbone but with over-shortened upper arms with widely angled lower arms to save space and a huge curved hub carrier to give clearance for massive wheels. It’s a compromised design with a large unsprung mass (not that it matters with a 20+” cast wheel (why not forge? ) and a disc/caliper heavier than a boat anchor on each corner. Especially in terms of NVH as it’s mostly done by the wishbone bushes that have to deal with all that mass; make them soft makes it smooth but geometry flaps about on poor roads, make it stiff and vibration intrudes into the cabin. Tyre noise is also a big issue, hence now cars like Tesla (along with Range Rover, Bentley etc.) have to fit noise insulation INSIDE the tyre.

Its akin to the Mc pherson strut on the majority of hatches, basically 90% of cars have either the above or Mcpherson, so handling/comfort is more to do with weight, spring/damper/ARB rates, choice of mounting bushes and cabin foams (can have up to 4” of foam along the floor of a modern mid-class hatch or saloon).

Oh for a car with a true double wishbone front end. Then we’d be cooking with gas

 

It would be wasted on 99% of drivers to have double wishbones. Everything has a compromise, suspension is adequate for most.

Wasn't there an engine tuner in here who went to great lengths to modify a subaru for racing with all-round double wishbones? Can't remember who it was, long long time ago, when Subaru was popular

 

It is wasted on most. At cost of handling and NVH as well as diversity between manufacturers.

Even the last bastion of RWD has succumbed...the latest 1series is now just another FWD 4cylinder hatch, no different to any other hatch. Worse still the boot is no bigger (reserved for AWD and EV battery space) NVH is no different and it’s no lighter either. You may as well have a Seat Leon or a Kia Ceed.

When we had off the top of my head:

Citroen/Rolls for pressurised hydraulic (Not to forget mid 80’s mercs, 7series and early XJ40).
Land Rover for air springs
Austin for axle linked hydraulic and rubber springs (Don’t laugh)
Jag with floating subframes
Honda/Rover for double wishbones and multi links on Civics/Integra/200/45
Nissan for multilink front suspension (p11 Primera)
And of course Peugeot with torsion spring rear beams (erm, maybe not the best of ideas on a 1.9GTi )

Now it’s generally just two designs for front end (ignoring Audi), and three for the rear (multilink, beam and swing..the latter generally just found on small vans).


Most road cars adpated for proper racing generally have all the suspension and subframes ditched for tubular frames and rose joint wishbones with spherical bearings instead of rubber bushes. Ace for track, raw for the road as there is no rubber isolation. This is what was put underneath the body of many BTCC cars regardless of manufacturer;




But we can mix a bit of rubber in say on subframe mountings whilst retaining solid bush pivots (pre 2000 jaguar; Probably the best handling vs NVH setup of its era ). Or go for a body with separate chassis (LR Discovery 3/4/RRS), which gave weight/height-defying handling whilst retaining good NVH.

 

Folks turning to good old ICE in a Crisis


https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/mobil.../idUSKBN25V1GG

 

Still loads of Renault 4s on the road in Spain. Damn things will probably outlast their owners

 

Edited for accuracy.

Walking, cycling would go a long way to help reduce pollution, instead of turning to old non compliant vehicles

 

DPB likes to quote the Independent

Here you go

The vast majority of NO2 comes from road travel, according to the UK’s Air Pollution

https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/air-pollution-england-defra-labour-who-nitrogen-dioxide-luke-pollard-b404484.html

 

How does anybody cope with a virtually non existent boot. ( Tesla 3 )

 

Is that it? You've scrabbled around to find something that the Tesla isn't class leading in.
Oh dear me

 

Just happen to be parked next to one service station , looked as though rear seats were where the boot should be !

 

It has a fair size along with a front storage, where the engine would have been in a traditional ICE.

Rear legroom is plenty for most

 

Whats the carbon foot print of these batteries Andy , how many environmental damaging processes do they go through ?

 

I know they take a fair bit of CO2 to build. But so do all items of the modern lifestyle. What zero emissions vehicles do is, they don't emit pollution when driving.

Am article I posted earlier highlights 60% of the English population is living in air heavily polluted. Million plus children too. The vast majority of NO2 is made by vehicle transport. Then there is the particulates from older die-sels.

EV whether battery or any other non polluting powered source is an imperative step our children need us to take.

 

Not yet

 

The basics of this of this argument are null and void as the sea going super container ships carrying battery parts are using the dregs of the barrel to power them its the sludge from the bottom of the well , its so bad it will make your hair curl, in fact it needs to be heated into a liquid before it goes to combustion by gas or diesel powered boilers.
I read tonight 1 super tanker = 50 million cars . I dont know how true that is but i do know how rough the fuel is for these big container ships .

 

We could have wind powered super tankers , but Andy would complain his cheap chinese goods taking longer....

 

Agreed hes down that river in north africa de-nile.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWX5...ature=youtu.be

 

Good enough reason not to buy one amongst others

 

Today I drove from Ashford (4:30am start ) to the outskirts of Bilboa (spain), that’s 770miles of driving in 11hours 40minutes plus 20mins for a quick bite and top-off of diesel and driver swaps (IIRC I can get just over 500miles from a 55litre tank).

Why? Well, because I can. But the point being 20min recharge time of an EV doesn’t make this possible unless it can do over 770miles on one charge with a 20min top up. And then be able to be charged overnight ready for another 400mile slog the next day. I’m not even sure petrol is a realistic alternative given the cost of petrol vs economy, unless it’s a 1.0litre shoebox.

 

I would have driven, stopped at a nice hotel, charged overnight. travelled down, had a nice long lunch stops at some pretty locations.

Why, because I can


Or I could drive for 11+ hours Charge twice for 45, 15 mins, risk being so tired whilst driving, having an accident- totally unnecessary risk.


​​​​​​Plus side, money saved not buying fossil fuels, I can have nice meals, enjoy the trip

Each to their own

 

Youve spent double what you need to for decent car - where's the saving ??

 

This is where I am at present:

No charging points and car park too far for a extension lead...



Virus plan is on minimising stops and to avoid stopping in France...one less country to declare for self quarantine etc. Could have gone without refuelling if I took an 10litre jerry can. So drive far and when I do stop, stop somewhere where it’s nice; Money saved from less stop overs funds one nicer stop over; I don’t do Ibis/F1 etc.

 

Its a decent car, some folk spend money on hypercars with similar performance in fossil ICE. I spent my cash on an EV hypercar

The money on the fuelling, I'd spent the rest enjoying myself..
Folk have forgotten traveling is supposed to be enjoyable, not a chore
​​​​
Id arrive within the same day around 13 hours, but again below.

I wouldn't be travelling anywhere outside the UK for the foreseeable.


As I said, each to their own.

 

That looks nice! Enjoy your stay!

 

Thanks, its the first long trip without the dog, so a bit emotional to be honest but we’ll try and focus on the positive things.

In other news talks about hydrogen powered trains...now that would be very beneficial in replacing all those diesel trains chugging along non-electrified lines. I wonder what the implementation cost would be vs. cost of electrification of existing lines?

 

Short term it's probably much cheaper as electrification normally needs a ton of new bridges being built to give the clearance for electric lines and if you have tunnels to deal with, then the costs will be even higher. Long term however, electrification would probably be cheaper, but governments rarely have such long term budgets that they would consider the long term savings.

They are currently electrifying my local line here in Germany from Friedrichshafen to Ulm and also building a high speed connection from Ulm to Stuttgart (Stuttgart 21). Should save 30 minutes on the trip to Ulm and 1 1/2 hours to Stuttgart as it will no longer be necessary to change trains in Ulm. Finally it will be quicker to travel by train rather than car. At the moment though, its replacement bus services taking 30 minutes longer! There are no plans to electrify the line towards Zürich though, but I believe they have been looking into Hydrogen trains for that route.

 

This is one area where I think people who stick to the "until EV can do 600 miles" really do make themselves look daft. More than 90% of 90% people's journeys are short, and well within the range of even the cheapest EVs, and even for most long journeys, you are not going to drive more than about 3 hours in a stint without needing toilet, food or even just stretching your legs. A bit of planning, and it's virtually the same as taking an ICE car, and cheaper.

I'm sure we had the same tired arguments when ICE came along "yes, but can you tie up your motor car and let it grass to refuel if one of those fangled new petroleum spirit emporiums are not available"............