GC996

Read between the lines with the marketing fluff.

The answer is 250 miles to the gallon using

(1) synthetic fuel to run the very powerful and efficient turbo 4 cylinder ICE engine which will
(2) charge the batteries to fuel the EV motor.

What would you rather have...

An electric car that's a pain in the *** to charge and get any distance out of, or one that you can fuel up once a quarter with synthetic fuel that gets over 3,000 miles on a tank of fuel?

What if you ran a transportation or shipping business?

Pure EV is an ineficient stepping stone to more efficient EV/ICE powered hybrid.

plpete84

This is a gem (Millennial Edition 911 pun), BTW -

philbert996

If true it will be interesting to see how that works with the countries (and states) that have legislated a ban on the sale of new ice vehicles.
Also the pushback from whoever has positioned themselves to profit from a switch to EVs.

philbert996

Is that who’s making you read and respond to post in the “OFF TOPIC” thread?
It’s amazing how I’m able to ignore inane posts about alcohol and barbecuing

peterp

This is exactly how the 2011 Chevy Volt operated -- the ICE engine (mostly) only charged the battery.

I promise you I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but where is this hyper-efficient 250-mpg synthetic fuel coming from? I've never heard of such a thing. If we had that type of fuel, we could just run ICE's off that fuel -- batteries and electric wouldn't even need to be in the equation.

Where are you getting this imagined pain and limited range from? If you are one of the 0.01% that drives cross-country constantly, then EV's are not for you. If you have anything less than a 200ish mile a day commute, EV's are far more convenient than ICE while saving you a ton on fuel costs. Talk to any modern EV owner and they will tell you the number one thing they love about the EV is (almost) never having to go to the gas station. Anybody with home charging finds it much more convenient than an ICE where they need to go to the gas station every week or so.

This would represent like 0.01% of the population. And even that 0.01% of the population is finding ways to move towards EV because of the massive cost savings.

The ICE engine charging the EV battery is generally a less efficient approach because there are energy losses in the generator. Those losses are typically minor -- in the 5% to 10% range because electric motors/generators are so efficient, but the car would normally be more efficient with the ICE just driving the wheels when the battery ran out. There's a reason the Chevy Volt approach never caught on. Don't get me wrong, it's definitely a viable option, and not significantly worse from an efficiency standpoint than the ICE just powering the drivetrain, but it doesn't provide any significant advantages either.

peterp

This is very well done!

TheChunkNorris

I was referring to the article directly and how freaking terrible it sounded especially now that Ferrari is about to release a SUV. So calm your ****.

GC996

All is it takes is a shift in frustration by the people, and they then vote the irrational greenies out and put in common sense greenies. Then legislation is changed. Watch what happens in Europe and the US over the next two years. Wouldn't be sunrises to see a change in plan.

philbert996

Just a knee jerk reaction from being called a troll in our last interaction.
I humbly apologize.

TheChunkNorris

No worries and I respect the kind gesture.

philbert996

True
But don’t discount the power of lobbyists from those who are going to cash in on EVs.
The new infrastructure law ( NEVI) has $5 billion over five years to help states create a network of EV charging stations.

They aren’t going to give that up without a fight.

philbert996

I’ll try this again the correct way

GC996

No question, everyone will fight for what they believe is right, until enough evidence comes along to not only prove they are right, but show that they can be even more right.

E-motors are right. But linked with a more efficient ICE motor to charge it that runs on synthetic fuel, they are even more right.

The argument isnt EV vs. ICE. It's how do I use ICE more efficiently to power EV.

peterp

??????

If a synthetic super-fuel existed, we would be using it in ICE cars already, no EV element is required.

Using an ICE, which is only 40-45% efficient, to drive a generator at a 5-10% loss to charge the battery, to then to have another 5 to 10% loss to drive the EV motor, is far less efficient than just using the ICE to drive the wheels directly.

Even if it existed, that ICE dedicated to charging the EV wouldn't be anything like the ICE's we know and love. You couldn't rev it through the gears, it would just turn on and drone when needed -- not really anything like the ICE experience, and the drone from the ICE engine noise would worsen the EV experience -- all while being less efficient than just using the ICE to drive the wheels.

Maybe you are thinking of hydrogen-powered ICE's? I don't know how efficient they are, but they are clean from a carbon standpoint. Toyota is working on a hydrogen ICE, but it is driving the wheels and not a generator, so it's exactly like the ICE's we love. The problem has always been the practicality of producing and handling hydrogen, but at least Toyota thinks it will can be made practical as a fuel.

Type65

Glenn can correct me if I'm wrong, but from my own research and having read his posts, I believe he is talking about the synthetic fuel that a company in South America (there are other companies too) that was bought (may only be partial ownership) by Porsche within the last year is trying to make. The end result is expected to be capable of running an ICE engine with zero carbon emissions, and I believe better mileage/efficiency, however the fuel is expected to be expensive even in the long run. So the target for some manufacturers is to develop a hyper efficient hybrid that's ICE runs on a fuel like this to get a combined 250 MPG with the EV component. He is not talking about a magic ICE/fuel that can get 250 MPG on it's own.

Also, as far as a majority of people that switched to electric liking them I think it would be really interesting to break that down and see where they live, if they have a second ICE vehicle, prior vehicles, primary reason for switching to electric, etc. Annecdotely, I obviously don't have any real evidence to back this up, I think electric cars are primarily bought by 3 groups of people - those hyper focused on efficiency from a price standpoint, those hyper focused on efficiency from an environmental standpoint (both of these groups were the Prius adopters), and wealthy individuals/techies buying for the novelty/cool factor. I think most EV owners currently intentionally sought them out and as such it would be logical they enjoy/are happy with them, but I think very few people have stumbled into EV ownership and the few I know who have have hated them. So I think once more people start stumbling into EV ownership or they start trying to push EVs on the majority of the population who doesn't want them the satisfaction rate for EVs will drop significantly. From a personal standpoint I think the innovation is kinda cool, but I have no desire to own one, especially at the price point and if I ever did it would just be for the hell of it and certainly wouldn't be my only vehicle.