When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Transistors doubling doesn't mean a direct relationship to performance. Moore's Law also used to say that the doubling happened every year, so they're simply moving the goalpost.
Moore predicted "a doubling of transistors every two years" in 1975. That's proven true within +/- 25% for four decades, and you're seriously giving the guy a hard time? Tough audience.
Moore predicted "a doubling of transistors every two years" in 1975. That's proven true within +/- 25% for four decades, and you're seriously giving the guy a hard time? Tough audience.
It's been true for four decades, but eventually physics wins, and Moore's law is soon to be no more.
I would argue that it depends on your local grid. There are quite a few areas that get their electricity from hydropower,
Not in CA.
True, for now. However, CA still has a relatively clean power grid with almost no coal fired plants and uses a mix of energy sources, some with very low levels of CO2 emissions. The largest single source is natural gas. Estimates are that a BEV using electricity from a grid powered by NG will achieve a lifetime CO2 reduction of 40% compared to a conventional ICE.
The point is that while not as clean as states that have a higher percentage of hydro power like Oregon and Washington, CA's grid isn't too bad and an EV owner looking to reduce emissions is largely achieving his or her goal in the state .
ROLMAO....exactly my thoughts...as have said here before, an electric car (es i have driven) is like coitus with a silent, motionless woman....it just doesnt do it for me
The 991 GT3 was a big step forward from the 997 GT3 in terms of technology, and elicited much skepticism at first, but it seems that the vast majority of drivers have come to view the gains as far outweighing the losses. PDK, PTV, RWS, etc. ... when well-integrated, this stuff works both in terms of performance and driver enjoyment.
Well, with a mix of doubt and hope, I test drove a Tesla P90D today and was floored. The acceleration is total muscle, and very linear because there's no shifting of gears. Despite a weight approaching 5,000 lbs, the handling was surprisingly good, in large part due to the low center of gravity. I drove the car pretty hard on some very demanding roads, then I drove my C63 on the same roads, and I felt that the Tesla was superior. The braking and brake feel were also excellent. Did I miss the combustion engine sound? Not really. The Tesla showed me that a car's kinesthetics are what I most enjoy a driver, and you don't need a loud engine for that. My summary review to the Tesla rep: "Holy ****".
So as far as the future of the GT3, the Tesla opened my mind, and I'm eager to see what technological advancements Porsche comes up with. It may sound like sacrilege, but I can see myself tracking an electric GT3 one day - and enjoying it!
The torque of a DC motor at 0RPM is well known. 0RPM torque is not the holly grail especially if it comes weighed down by a huge mass, no matter how low it may be positioned. There are plenty 1/4 mile torque monsters besides EVs and some of us pass them by.
Can an EV be a sports car? It all depends on what one is after regarding a sports car. For me a sports car should be light, agile and I should be able to drive it anywhere at any time. An electric car is none of the above - heavy, charge limited.
A sports car should also be reasonably affordable. The cost of an EV is heavily weighed by the battery cost, and the battery is an expensive wearable item, even more so if charged at high amperage often, i.e., at a Supercharger.
Cost to operate vs cost to build/own vs infrastructure cost
Originally Posted by tqevo
Transistors doubling doesn't mean a direct relationship to performance. Moore's Law also used to say that the doubling happened every year, so they're simply moving the goalpost.
So based on growth rates when can consumers expect a battery car that drives like the current GT3?
That last question addresses the fundamental question of if you want to buy a E-GT3 based on performance. Which I agree with. If it ever performs at the same level, I might buy one. I love F1 and love LMP. So not an E hater.
But what about the cost to operate/own and the larger issue to reformat the US infrastructure to support an all E car community? The infrastructure cost to deploy/replace mass petrol with mass E across the fruited plain still remains a significant cost barrier to broader E adoption for cars IMO, even if the cars are cheap to buy and can go longer distances due to battery advances. Just imagine the environmental beauty of 600 million E Car charging stations across America ( that would be just two per citizen, all us toy collectors would need 3-10 each). I know i cant wait to see all that concrete, wire and junkyards full of expired fuel cells. No green promoters ever want to address the environmental impact of expired batteries and fuel cells. Its not like they just disappear. Its so one sided to only talk about the emission side of this fossil fuel debate. This battery graveyard will be the crown jewel of US tourist attractions...maybe rename it Battery Park, not thats already in New York....
The comment that people buy solar panels to charge their car, thats not the average US citizen making $40K/year either who can afford that. Thats the wealthy with a green conscience largely. Solar panel technology is accelerating in terms of ROI, but still significantly short of levels needed to leverage out fossil fuels.I realize this will evolve, but how far? All things have limits right, like 500 HP and 9000 RPM from a 4 liter six??
What I would suggest from a pure macro economic level is that as long as fossil fuels stay near current price levels (even back up to $85/barrel) mass power production (including for things beyond cars) is a long way away in terms of the cost effectiveness measured in K-Joules/$ compared to petrol. Its king because its the cheapest, most efficient fuel today at the point of consumption, or the market would have already moved to E Cars. And this does not account for elasticity of price downward. If petro based energy companies begin to sense share loss, they can take price down when needed. Look at what Saudi did to the over-leveraged US frac companies. Se habla Goodrich Petroleum? Basic marketing. To say nothing of their lobby and influence.globally.
Perhaps Ford will release their new Ford "Cold" Fusion, Fords new LENR vehicle?
... The infrastructure cost to deploy/replace mass petrol with mass E across the fruited plain still remains a significant cost barrier to broader E adoption for cars IMO, even if the cars are cheap to buy and can go longer distances due to battery advances. Just imagine the environmental beauty of 600 million E Car charging stations across America ( that would be just two per citizen, all us toy collectors would need 3-10 each). I know i cant wait to see all that concrete, wire and junkyards full of expired fuel cells. No green promoters ever want to address the environmental impact of expired batteries and fuel cells. Its not like they just disappear. Its so one sided to only talk about the emission side of this fossil fuel debate. This battery graveyard will be the crown jewel of US tourist attractions...maybe rename it Battery Park, not thats already in New York....
As someone said - let's pay no attention to the wizard behind the curtain.
That last question addresses the fundamental question of if you want to buy a E-GT3 based on performance. Which I agree with. If it ever performs at the same level, I might buy one. I love F1 and love LMP. So not an E hater.
But what about the cost to operate/own and the larger issue to reformat the US infrastructure to support an all E car community? The infrastructure cost to deploy/replace mass petrol with mass E across the fruited plain still remains a significant cost barrier to broader E adoption for cars IMO, even if the cars are cheap to buy and can go longer distances due to battery advances. Just imagine the environmental beauty of 600 million E Car charging stations across America ( that would be just two per citizen, all us toy collectors would need 3-10 each). I know i cant wait to see all that concrete, wire and junkyards full of expired fuel cells. No green promoters ever want to address the environmental impact of expired batteries and fuel cells. Its not like they just disappear. Its so one sided to only talk about the emission side of this fossil fuel debate. This battery graveyard will be the crown jewel of US tourist attractions...maybe rename it Battery Park, not thats already in New York....
The comment that people buy solar panels to charge their car, thats not the average US citizen making $40K/year either who can afford that. Thats the wealthy with a green conscience largely. Solar panel technology is accelerating in terms of ROI, but still significantly short of levels needed to leverage out fossil fuels.I realize this will evolve, but how far? All things have limits right, like 500 HP and 9000 RPM from a 4 liter six??
What I would suggest from a pure macro economic level is that as long as fossil fuels stay near current price levels (even back up to $85/barrel) mass power production (including for things beyond cars) is a long way away in terms of the cost effectiveness measured in K-Joules/$ compared to petrol. Its king because its the cheapest, most efficient fuel today at the point of consumption, or the market would have already moved to E Cars. And this does not account for elasticity of price downward. If petro based energy companies begin to sense share loss, they can take price down when needed. Look at what Saudi did to the over-leveraged US frac companies. Se habla Goodrich Petroleum? Basic marketing. To say nothing of their lobby and influence.globally.
Perhaps Ford will release their new Ford "Cold" Fusion, Fords new LENR vehicle?
I don't see Tesla or other EVs replacing an ICE GT3. In fact, I think a perfect combo would be a P85 Tesla for daily driving, commuting, errands, rainy days etc, (85% of driving) and a regular ICE 991 GT3 for the track, canyon runs, and long trips.
I don't deny that more landfill space will be needed for the batteries, but that is a much easier problem to solve than global warming, smog, and dirty air affecting everyones health.
I don't deny that the Tesla tech isn't affordable yet to those making 45K a year, but they can still buy a Prius, while I enjoy my Tesla (with solar panel charger so that no fossil fuels are used to power the car), and we'll both be doing quite a bit to improve the environment.
The only difference is that my income level will allow me to actually enjoy driving my cars.
But what about the cost to operate/own and the larger issue to reformat the US infrastructure to support an all E car community? The infrastructure cost to deploy/replace mass petrol with mass E across the fruited plain still remains a significant cost barrier to broader E adoption for cars IMO, even if the cars are cheap to buy and can go longer distances due to battery advances. Just imagine the environmental beauty of 600 million E Car charging stations across America ( that would be just two per citizen, all us toy collectors would need 3-10 each). I know i cant wait to see all that concrete, wire and junkyards full of expired fuel cells. No green promoters ever want to address the environmental impact of expired batteries and fuel cells. Its not like they just disappear. Its so one sided to only talk about the emission side of this fossil fuel debate. This battery graveyard will be the crown jewel of US tourist attractions...maybe rename it Battery Park, not thats already in New York....
The comment that people buy solar panels to charge their car, thats not the average US citizen making $40K/year either who can afford that. Thats the wealthy with a green conscience largely. Solar panel technology is accelerating in terms of ROI, but still significantly short of levels needed to leverage out fossil fuels.I realize this will evolve, but how far? All things have limits right, like 500 HP and 9000 RPM from a 4 liter six??
I really don't want to get into a big debate about this. There are valid concerns on both sides of the argument. But let's look at a couple of points that you brought up, just for the sake of keeping it real.
It's true that additional charging infrastructure will need to be built out but much of it can be developed at existing public and commercial sites. And there won't need to be "600 million" of them. (You were joking about that part, right? ) Every EV won't be charging at the same time, and they don't need to be kept on charge constantly, so only a small fraction of that number would be required. I suspect most charging of EV's occurs at home anyway. My wife has a BMW i3 and we have a level 2 charger at the house. In over a year of ownership we've never charged it anywhere else. As the range of EV's continues to improve, the only people that will really require public charging will be people taking long trips. For those, we use one of our ICE vehicles.
EV batteries are considered expended when they reach approximately 80% of their rated capability which, in BMW's case, can be as many as 3000 full charge cycles. At that time they are replaced and find their way into applications as storage devices for the grid and in other industrial applications where they can be used for up to another 10 years. There are also plans to use them as power storage for home solar installations. When their life is truly over they can be recycled, and the infrastructure to accomplish this is being accelerated as more EV's begin to come on line. I'll wager that the real "Battery Park" in New York has nothing to worry about as a tourist attraction.
Finally, solar and batteries in EV's are just now becoming economically feasible. I think the technology has a long way to go and, unlike the NA GT3 engine, is no where near it's limits.
Last edited by Mike in CA; 10-02-2015 at 12:26 AM.
Reason: typo
Just thought this graphic was interesting in light of the discussion.
So all we need to do is develop a tiny diesel engine to power our iPhones and figure out how to deal with the noise, emissions, and waste heat. Brilliant!
Seriously, the amount of energy in a gallon of gasoline or diesel fuel is amazing.
So all we need to do is develop a tiny diesel engine to power our iPhones and figure out how to deal with the noise, emissions, and waste heat. Brilliant!
09-30-2015, 08:40 PM
) Every EV won't be charging at the same time, and they don't need to be kept on charge constantly, so only a small fraction of that number would be required. I suspect most charging of EV's occurs at home anyway. My wife has a BMW i3 and we have a level 2 charger at the house. In over a year of ownership we've never charged it anywhere else. As the range of EV's continues to improve, the only people that will really require public charging will be people taking long trips. For those, we use one of our ICE vehicles.
