Electric vs petrol cars

[Doogie]

But again. This has nothing at all to do with fires, or EV danger. It has to do with cold war bullshit that China and the US have had going for a long time.

I already made that point. You don't have to be so nice about it

On the subject of chinese espionage, I assume u know the new ASIO HO story? Had to laugh my ass off at how fckng easy it was.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

I already made that point. You don't have to be so nice about it

On the subject of chinese espionage, I assume u know the new ASIO HO story? Had to laugh my ass off at how fckng easy it was.

Sadly there's so many of those stories. When someone asks me how to prevent an attack, my general response is, "pray they're too stupid to know what they're doing"

Security is all about deterrent. You scare people enough that they won't test your system. 'cause it they do, they'll figure out that security is shit.

There is ways to put effective security in with immediate response, but no one accepts that, because it costs more money. So everyone takes the cheap option. And if they get robbed, they claim it on insurance.

A while back I carried out security audits for the RTA (now RMS). I walked through their offices pretending to be a contractor. I asked one of the IT guys for access to the comms room (without mentioning who I was), he opened the comms room for me and asked if I need him to log into the main frame. Keep in mind that these servers had all the personal data for every person in Australia that holds any kind of government issued license.

I love dealing with government affiliated companies. It's always entertaining.

 

[Doogie]

Sadly there's so many of those stories. When someone asks me how to prevent an attack, my general response is, "pray they're too stupid to know what they're doing"

Security is all about deterrent. You scare people enough that they won't test your system. 'cause it they do, they'll figure out that security is shit.

There is ways to put effective security in with immediate response, but no one accepts that, because it costs more money. So everyone takes the cheap option. And if they get robbed, they claim it on insurance.

A while back I carried out security audits for the RTA (now RMS). I walked through their offices pretending to be a contractor. I asked one of the IT guys for access to the comms room (without mentioning who I was), he opened the comms room for me and asked if I need him to log into the main frame. Keep in mind that these servers had all the personal data for every person in Australia that holds any kind of government issued license.

I love dealing with government affiliated companies. It's always entertaining.

Well, we're good. You get into our systems you probably want one of two things, some of our documents or access to our SCADA. If our staff cannot find documents in our document management system reckon we're good there. And our SCADA system? Remote access is broken 95% of the time and you're lucky if you can get data 50% of the time.

No idea why engineers think they can put systems designed for closed environments into natural systems. Actually I do know. They're fckng idiots.

Maybe thats the trick. Have an IT system that when you finally get to the good stuff on a customer says, aisle 3, row 12, box 1236544798. Foolproof....

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Well, we're good. You get into our systems you probably want one of two things, some of our documents or access to our SCADA. If our staff cannot find documents in our document management system reckon we're good there. And our SCADA system? Remote access is broken 95% of the time and you're lucky if you can get data 50% of the time.

No idea why engineers think they can put systems designed for closed environments into natural systems. Actually I do know. They're fckng idiots.

Maybe thats the trick. Have an IT system that when you finally get to the good stuff on a customer says, aisle 3, row 12, box 1236544798. Foolproof....

At one stage I consulted the NSW crime commission. Those guys knew how to handle it. They basically said, "we need your most secure system that's entirely off line. No outside connection at all"

 

[Doogie]

At one stage I consulted the NSW crime commission. Those guys knew how to handle it. They basically said, "we need your most secure system that's entirely off line. No outside connection at all"

Believe the US feds have the same system. Completely secure, only risk is a deranged ex-President takes the docs and reads them in the toilet.

But thats a bit OT.

 

[Blue_boost]

But again. This has nothing at all to do with fires, or EV danger. It has to do with cold war bullshit that China and the US have had going for a long time.

it really don’t matter why they are banned but they are.. if it’s about data security espionage well that’s another reason EV is rubbish.. they are also a fire hazard.

 

[Blue_boost]

I was watching a YouTube video and some guy was talking about a Hyundai Elantra vs a Tesla. He said he was getting amazing fuel economy from his Elantra and had to do heaps of km for work.. he enjoyed how he could do 400miles range on a 2 minute petrol fill up.. then said he would have to wait hours for a Tesla for a 200 mile range. Plus the Elantra was half the buy in price. It was another TKO win for the petrol car.

people of all shapes and sizes are coming to the same conclusion, for their own different reasons, the EV makes no sense

when I sit in traffic and see an EV I shake my head in disgust and think people are so dumb

 

[sideswip]

Why do electric cars not charge themselves whilst driving? , by the way i drive a hybrid F150

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Why do electric cars not charge themselves whilst driving? , by the way i drive a hybrid F150

They do. But regenerative braking isn't enough to charge the batteries much. It just extends the range a little.

 

[Blue_boost]

As I said I drove a performance electric car and in 5-10 mins of hard driving I knocked off 70km off its range. Did about 3-4km

I dont think that car even at full charge would do one hot lap of the Nurburgring… not sure if the heat would get it first or the battery die.

 

[sideswip]

They do. But regenerative braking isn't enough to charge the batteries much. It just extends the range a little.

Yes but why not fit a Generator off the wheels , drive shaft etc or something simple like that to keep the battery charged ?

 

[TwinTurbo]

Yes but why not fit a Generator off the wheels , drive shaft etc or something simple like that to keep the battery charged ?

That's what regenerative braking is, using the generator to slow the car.

The problem is efficiency, there are losses, which is mostly heat, so not all the energy used to slow the car goes into recharging the battery. From memory it's something like 60%. Which means if we use 100 units of energy to accelerate then we only recover 60 units in braking. Plus the electric motor used to accelerate is only ~85% efficient, 15% or so of the energy is lost in heat.

Always a Bulldog

 

[bricktamland]

Electric cars are inept and gay , software issues, engineering , cold weather. Slow charging, not enough thought put into place regarding charging, limited range. Imagine you’re running late and forgot to charge and have to sit there charging,costing you your job etcwhen you can just race to a fuel station and load up. Also with a future that’s programable I don’t want the government knowing where and what I did or drove to. Seen videos of people not being able to even access their car due to an upgrade and the cost of replacing a battery. Plus it’s been noted you’re replacing your tyres a lot more then a normal vehicle due to the weight of the electric car.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Yes but why not fit a Generator off the wheels , drive shaft etc or something simple like that to keep the battery charged ?

Thermodynamics. You can't make energy from nothing. If you fit a generator to the wheels, drive shaft, or anything like that, then it would take more energy to drive the wheels. Basically using more fuel. Battery charging can only be done from otherwise wasted energy (braking)

The only other alternative is to use an actual engine fueled by something else. Like a petrol generator engine. There's several hybrids that operate that way including the Nissan X-Trail E Power. While ones like the Rav4 use the petrol engine in tandem with the electric engine. Others like the X-Trail run the wheels entirely off the electric engine, and the petrol engine acts as a generator for the electric engine.

 

[Kung fu man]

https://1drv.ms/v/s!ArSDh5JMDF91mQLaSHla9zvWNaVM

 

[Cook]

Is the main reason consumers purchase EVs, environmental or planned savings due to petrol prices, over life of car. I’ve read somewhere, not sure how true, that EVs are actually worse for the environment than petrol cars.

 

[TwinTurbo]

Is the main reason consumers purchase EVs, environmental or planned savings due to petrol prices, over life of car. I’ve read somewhere, not sure how true, that EVs are actually worse for the environment than petrol cars.

I have 2 neighbours with EV’s and neither of them own EV’s for environmental reasons or planned savings. One owns an EV, his 3rd Leaf, as he uses it to power his weekend tree change shack. The other, she has a Tesla Y as it suites her usage pattern, short local trips, 2 days a week for work, transport the kids to school and sport. She tells me her favourite thing is that she never has to go to the service station, just plugs it in to recharge when she parks it in the garage.

Nether of them have ever mentioned environment or savings to me.

Always a Bulldog

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Is the main reason consumers purchase EVs, environmental or planned savings due to petrol prices, over life of car. I’ve read somewhere, not sure how true, that EVs are actually worse for the environment than petrol cars.

It's a bit of both, depending who's buying it. Early adopters were environmental people. Modern adopters are probably more about savings.

On the latter part, that's a bit of a myth. There's a myth that goes around that EVs are worse for the environment. They aren't, but there is some nuance. EVs take a lot more CO2 to make. If you only drove a car for a year, then a petrol vehicle would be better for the environment. But after 1-2 years the EVs CO2 reduction has countered it's large CO2 build cost. But that all depends on how you're charging it and so forth.

There's also the issue of charging an EV from a grid that's run on fossil fuels. So it would seem logical that there's no real saving there. But in reality, most countries have a large amount of their energy now coming from renewables. And coal powered stations have much better filtration than you get from your car. So even if the entire grid is based on fossil fuels, EVs still create less CO2 per Km.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

The interesting one is Hybrids. The service industry has boosted their sales more than EVs. Every second Taxi or Uber is now a Hybrid Camry due to the low fuel use. Many other services buy up all the Rav 4 Hybrids. Hence why the current wait for a Rav4 hybrid is 12-18 months. That's all based on savings. If you get paid by the Km and your options are a vehicle that uses 9L per 100km or a vehicle that uses 4.5L per 100km, the choice seems obvious.

I'm currently looking for a new car myself. Probably a medium SUV. My choice is narrowed down to Hyundai Tucson (Diesel), Rav4 (Hybrid), Haval H6 (Hybrid), and Mitsubishi Outlander (Plug-in Hybrid)

I drive a lot so I'm leaning toward a Hybrid or Diesel as a second option. When you compare the actual fuel use per 100km, the Outlander seems obvious (Tucson = 7.5L, Rav4 = 5.1L, Haval H6 = 6.5L, Outlander = 1.8L). But the Outlander is a lot more expensive and has other issues that hold it back for me. Plus it's a plug-in hybrid while the others don't need to plug in. If I had a decent solar setup, the Outlander would be best. And I probably will get a decent solar setup and one stage. But I'm planning to buy a new house in the next few years, so I won't bother until then. And by that time I will probably be selling this car and looking for a better one. Probably a full EV. Just to piss off Boosty.

 

[Trinfly]

The interesting one is Hybrids. The service industry has boosted their sales more than EVs. Every second Taxi or Uber is now a Hybrid Camry due to the low fuel use. Many other services buy up all the Rav 4 Hybrids. Hence why the current wait for a Rav4 hybrid is 12-18 months. That's all based on savings. If you get paid by the Km and your options are a vehicle that uses 9L per 100km or a vehicle that uses 4.5L per 100km, the choice seems obvious.

I'm currently looking for a new car myself. Probably a medium SUV. My choice is narrowed down to Hyundai Tucson (Diesel), Rav4 (Hybrid), Haval H6 (Hybrid), and Mitsubishi Outlander (Plug-in Hybrid)

I drive a lot so I'm leaning toward a Hybrid or Diesel as a second option. When you compare the actual fuel use per 100km, the Outlander seems obvious (Tucson = 7.5L, Rav4 = 5.1L, Haval H6 = 6.5L, Outlander = 1.8L). But the Outlander is a lot more expensive and has other issues that hold it back for me. Plus it's a plug-in hybrid while the others don't need to plug in. If I had a decent solar setup, the Outlander would be best. And I probably will get a decent solar setup and one stage. But I'm planning to buy a new house in the next few years, so I won't bother until then. And by that time I will probably be selling this car and looking for a better one. Probably a full EV. Just to piss off Boosty.

From your short list Rav 4 would be the safest bet Haval would be risky choice no enough real world family testing.