vrwl
Well-known member
cwerdna said:We seem to be getting off topic.
+1 Thank you
cwerdna said:We seem to be getting off topic.
Actually, my real world commute for the past 13 years has been on a bicycle, after I chose to move to where I could do that (and do all my normal errands on foot). And for someone who admits to planning a trip at 140 mph and actually doing 120, is it really wise to be flinging rocks around, given the extensive glazing in your own residence?donald said:You're setting up your own windmills there. I don't see any such disagreement. You seem so keen to want to argue about something, you're imagining your own arguments now.GRA said:You were the one disagreeing with my earlier post re the necessary ranges required for real-world use, so I was replying to that.
In any case, driving to work is a real-world use of a vehicle. I have no problem driving to work in my EV. It directly replaces a diesel car which has clocked up 80,000 commuting miles in the last 8 years and I have no reason to doubt this could do the same, and with a fuel saving of 75%, lower road tax, lower insurance (funnily enough) and expected-to-be lower maintenance. That's pretty 'real-world'.
Oh, yeah - it's also a much more sublime, cosseting driving experience too, and I get to work better prepared and back home less tired. I guess you get to work in a sweaty buzz of adrenalin from your high-speed antics, and then promptly droop from the stress.
Your 'real-world' may consist of racing every other car down the longest highway you can find, like some demented dog on heat. I don't live in that world.
I'll just answer, if I may, although it is a little off the topic now so this is the last: Actually I aim for 52mph. This is because in Europe trucks are speed limited to 90kph (56mph). Drive slower than 50 and they catch you up too quick and you risk them hammering you in the back. The vast majority don't seem to mind cars at 50ish+ as long as they get by. At <50 you really start p!55ing them off. Drive faster and you limit their capacity to overtake you cleanly and quickly, unless to jump into the 60's to keep ahead of them, at which point you've made a significant move to a higher energy consumption. There is no safe alternative for me to get to work other than use a motorway, which cycles cannot use, or fast narrow lanes mortally dangerous to cyclists and an extra several miles. I would happily move closer to work, but houses cost twice as much as where I am living. There is no chance of that unless I win the lottery. Pragmatism therefore takes me towards the lowest-cost motorway-capable car. At < 3p/mile energy cost for my EV, there is no cheaper alternative I am aware of. If the mass market wants to carry on at > 20p/mile burning fossil fuels just for the sake of the half dozen times a year, or less, they actually want or need to drive 100's of miles, that's 'the mass market's' choice.GRA said:As to your commute speeds, why is 55 a magic number? If you wish to save the planet, shouldn't you be driving 40, or 25 or even the LEAF's best efficiency speed, 12 miles/hour? And why are you using a car, for heaven's sake (and commuting solo, I assume)? Transporting yourself in a vehicle that weighs 10-30 times what you do can only be considered efficient in relative terms - in absolute terms there's nothing efficient about it. How can you live with yourself, you profligate waster of resources? Enough of that.
In short, you have made a decision based on your local circumstances as to what's acceptable to you, balancing economic, time, convenience, safety and environmental issues. Fine. Everyone else does exactly the same thing, for their particular circumstances. There will always be someone greener, and someone less green. Whenever one of my green friends or I start believing or acting as if our most appropriate headgear would be a halo, one of us is sure to remind the other(s) of the quote by the classic comic strip character Pogo: "We have met the enemy, and he is us." (Used on a poster for the first Earth Day):donald said:I'll just answer, if I may, although it is a little off the topic now so this is the last: Actually I aim for 52mph. This is because in Europe trucks are speed limited to 90kph (56mph). Drive slower than 50 and they catch you up too quick and you risk them hammering you in the back. The vast majority don't seem to mind cars at 50ish+ as long as they get by. At <50 you really start p!55ing them off. Drive faster and you limit their capacity to overtake you cleanly and quickly, unless to jump into the 60's to keep ahead of them, at which point you've made a significant move to a higher energy consumption. There is no safe alternative for me to get to work other than use a motorway, which cycles cannot use, or fast narrow lanes mortally dangerous to cyclists and an extra several miles. I would happily move closer to work, but houses cost twice as much as where I am living. There is no chance of that unless I win the lottery. Pragmatism therefore takes me towards the lowest-cost motorway-capable car. At < 3p/mile energy cost for my EV, there is no cheaper alternative I am aware of. If the mass market wants to carry on at > 20p/mile burning fossil fuels just for the sake of the half dozen times a year, or less, they actually want or need to drive 100's of miles, that's 'the mass market's' choice.GRA said:As to your commute speeds, why is 55 a magic number? If you wish to save the planet, shouldn't you be driving 40, or 25 or even the LEAF's best efficiency speed, 12 miles/hour? And why are you using a car, for heaven's sake (and commuting solo, I assume)? Transporting yourself in a vehicle that weighs 10-30 times what you do can only be considered efficient in relative terms - in absolute terms there's nothing efficient about it. How can you live with yourself, you profligate waster of resources? Enough of that.
I haven't conveyed anything against EVs (although you're not the first to accuse me of being anti-EV). They're tools, they have real capabilities and limitations, and I want them to be sold based on accurate information rather than the cloud of misinformation (wilful or otherwise), hopes and dreams that is still too often the case, so that customers aren't disappointed. Instead of the current case, when their real capabilities are far too often overstated leading to ill-will and backlash. Which is what this thread is about.donald said:I don't really understand any of the arguments or dismissals that you [GRA] have attempted to convey against EVs. Sorry.
I have owned a gasoline car over 20 years now, and I have to stop to recharge every 250 miles or so. I've never had a problem finding a station for that task & don't see why a battery car would be any different. Someday there will be as many BEV stations as gasoline stations (perhaps colocated at the same establishment).donald said:En-route charging is a short term solution whilst the actual number of BEVs is low.
Wow.So don't be surprised if lower speed limits kick in again, whilst speed merchants like you want to peg it down the highways at speeds that increase the physical end environmental dangers to everyone else..... You should carry on only thinking only of yourself and the essential requirement you have to feel like you are driving fast. What would your life be about, if you could not burn down the highways zooming past slower traffic? That's really important, because other people's safety, security of energy supplies, efficient use of dwindling resources, all of this is insignificant compared with your need to feel like your not driving too slow.
Because of the time it takes to take on a recharge. In a petrol powered car you fill up and move on after, say, 5 minutes, and the next guy comes in behind to fill up to. If instead you took an hour to fill up 250 miles worth then you need 'filling' stations with 12 times as many fill-up points.theaveng said:I have owned a gasoline car over 20 years now, and I have to stop to recharge every 250 miles or so. I've never had a problem finding a station for that task & don't see why a battery car would be any different.donald said:En-route charging is a short term solution whilst the actual number of BEVs is low.
Are we talkin' new traction pack? ..... or one with 36,000 + miles.drees said:There, fixed that for ya. But I would probably accept/consider 65 mph and VLBW.cwerdna said:Until the Leaf can do 100 miles on a 100% charge to LBW at 70 mph w/both moderate AC and moderate heater usage, I think it's a very bad idea to tell ICEV owners its range is 100 miles.
Exactly. I was hoping to get 5 years out of the Leaf for my 30 mi commute, but at the current rate of degradation, I'm not sure I'll make through this winter (and I haven't even lost the 1st bar yet, and have only 16k miles). Around here the winter range @ 80% chg with wall preheat at one end is only about 40 miles if above 10 F, worse if colder, or with an aged pack.hill said:Are we talkin' new traction pack? ..... or one with 36,000 + miles.
.
There is no reason whatsoever to not charge to "100%" if you need the extra range. Thirty miles in Boulder in winter should be easy even with a battery pack that is down 15-20%. And the battery degradation should stop completely during winter IME.zowland said:Exactly. I was hoping to get 5 years out of the Leaf for my 30 mi commute, but at the current rate of degradation, I'm not sure I'll make through this winter (and I haven't even lost the 1st bar yet, and have only 16k miles). Around here the winter range @ 80% chg with wall preheat at one end is only about 40 miles if above 10 F, worse if colder, or with an aged pack.
TomT said:I have a real world example of how this can backfire... A friend of an acquaintance bought a 2013 Leaf (unfortunately, he didn't talk to me or anyone else who owned one before making the purchase)... He has a 75 mile round-trip commute, mostly freeway with elevation changes, and no charging at work. The dealer assured him that it would be "no problem whatsoever." Needless to say, he did not make it the first day. He ultimately dumped the Leaf and bought a regular Prius... Guess what he now tells anyone who will listen what he thinks of the Leaf and BEVs...
Walser | Nissan Wayzata
Walser Nissan
Michael,
Hi! Yes, our lifetime powertrain warranty applies to the Leafs drivetrain. It only applies to our customer who purchase a vehicle from us. Doesn't apply on a lease. I can ran a lease payment when leafs arrive at the dealership, and we can shipped it to you for an additional cost.
I spoke with my new car manager and he mention that the tax credit its a federal tax credit which means you will have to filled it yourself when you do your taxes. If you lease and then buy you won't be able to take advantage of the tax credit. The tax credit only applies for buyers.
Enter your email address to join: