Can an electric car beat a gas powered car?

[randay]

Its nice to have your own personal troll sometimes. Reminds me of that guy who couldn't figure out how to use the search function. Man what a couple of idiots.

 

[LordMorpheus]

put it next to a top fuel dragster. With today's tech, fuel is faster than electrics.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: randay
Its nice to have your own personal troll sometimes. Reminds me of that guy who couldn't figure out how to use the search function. Man what a couple of idiots.

It does feel pretty good.

PS- I don't owe you anything, do I?

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: DukeN
www.teslamotors.com

'Nuff said.

Damn! thats hot. how much will it cost?

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: DukeN
www.teslamotors.com

'Nuff said.

Damn! thats hot. how much will it cost?

Price: $100,000 (excluding taxes, title, etc.)

 

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: goku
able to get away with it without sacrificing perfomance or creating a toll on the environment....

Unless you need to drive more than 100 miles in a day, haul even a modicum of luggage, want accident protection, want the ability to drive in the rain and aren't somehow plugging it into a magical outlet that isn't connected to an electricity plant that just makes the pollution somewhere else and not at the car.

Electric cars are not "zero emissions" despite what people claim. Electric vehicles are "remote emissions" vehicles. They cause additional emissions from the power plants.

What this test really proved was that a small, purpose-built car that is only marginally more practical in everyday use than a motorcycle (actually less practical in this instance since you absolutely cannot drive a car with slicks in the rain) beat cars that, while fast, are also almost infinitely more practical.

ZV

Want the ability to drive in the drain? Accident protection? WTF are you talking about, what are you implying? The vehicle themseleves are infact Zero emissions, they themselves emit zero pollutants, the difference is that how they get their power from, you do realize that if we had solar power plants that the cars would be 'green' right? The cars themselves are 0 emission vehicles, it's where they get their power source is on what can vary pollution wise.

Anyways an electric car overall uses less power than a petrol or diesel based vehicle, period. Agian what is with this 'you can't drive it in the rain' type crap you're talking about????

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: goku
able to get away with it without sacrificing perfomance or creating a toll on the environment....

Unless you need to drive more than 100 miles in a day, haul even a modicum of luggage, want accident protection, want the ability to drive in the rain and aren't somehow plugging it into a magical outlet that isn't connected to an electricity plant that just makes the pollution somewhere else and not at the car.

Electric cars are not "zero emissions" despite what people claim. Electric vehicles are "remote emissions" vehicles. They cause additional emissions from the power plants.

What this test really proved was that a small, purpose-built car that is only marginally more practical in everyday use than a motorcycle (actually less practical in this instance since you absolutely cannot drive a car with slicks in the rain) beat cars that, while fast, are also almost infinitely more practical.

ZV

Want the ability to drive in the drain? Accident protection? WTF are you talking about, what are you implying? The vehicle themseleves are infact Zero emissions, they themselves emit zero pollutants, the difference is that how they get their power from, you do realize that if we had solar power plants that the cars would be 'green' right? The cars themselves are 0 emission vehicles, it's where they get their power source is on what can vary pollution wise.

Anyways an electric car overall uses less power than a petrol or diesel based vehicle, period. Agian what is with this 'you can't drive it in the rain' type crap you're talking about????

He's saying that they're not practical, and he's right. Gasoline/diesel/fuel oil has an extremely high energy density that lets you go farther and go faster. It's also very easy to distribute and dispense. I can fill up my car in 5 minutes and drive 400 miles. Let's see an electric car do that. Besides, what's the point in letting the power plant burn your oil, and then transferring it to a battery (with a very low energy density) in an electric car? The power plant is still polluting, and the car is not very practical.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: goku
what is with this 'you can't drive it in the rain' type crap you're talking about????

You want to drive that car, the one with no roof and racing slicks, in the rain? You think that car, the one with no rollover protection and no real accident protection, will be safe if you get hit? You think that car, the one with no trunk or other luggage space, is practical in everyday driving? You think that car, with a range around 100 miles is practical for a vacation?

When an electric car the size of my Mustang and with the same amount of passenger and cargo volume has the same range and the same acceleration, and can recharge in the same amount of time it takes me to fill the tank of my car, then I'll consider it practical. But the little one-trick pony that is shown in the video is simply an incredibly impractical toy.

ZV

 

[skyking]

Regardless of the singular focus and impracticality of that car, it was an impressive show. It definitely smashed the common preconceptions of electric powered vehicles.
Back on the practical side, it is the ongoing problem of dealing with the old batteries that turns me off.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: goku
I just think it's funny people are trying to justify why the electric car won, not ****** it won, not ****** it doesn't have a tranny, no ****** it's lighter, whats your ****** point? Point is, the car beat the other one and is not only lighter but is able to get away with it without sacrificing perfomance or creating a toll on the environment....

it didn't really beat anything considering if you gave the porsche another 100 ft it would have ate up that overpriced electric toy car.

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
That's because the people who staged the race stacked it from the beginning.

enough said in this one sentence

 

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: goku
what is with this 'you can't drive it in the rain' type crap you're talking about????

You want to drive that car, the one with no roof and racing slicks, in the rain? You think that car, the one with no rollover protection and no real accident protection, will be safe if you get hit? You think that car, the one with no trunk or other luggage space, is practical in everyday driving? You think that car, with a range around 100 miles is practical for a vacation?

When an electric car the size of my Mustang and with the same amount of passenger and cargo volume has the same range and the same acceleration, and can recharge in the same amount of time it takes me to fill the tank of my car, then I'll consider it practical. But the little one-trick pony that is shown in the video is simply an incredibly impractical toy.

ZV

They had one, back in '96 it was called the EV1. It has wicked fast accleration and was plenty practical.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: goku
what is with this 'you can't drive it in the rain' type crap you're talking about????

You want to drive that car, the one with no roof and racing slicks, in the rain? You think that car, the one with no rollover protection and no real accident protection, will be safe if you get hit? You think that car, the one with no trunk or other luggage space, is practical in everyday driving? You think that car, with a range around 100 miles is practical for a vacation?

When an electric car the size of my Mustang and with the same amount of passenger and cargo volume has the same range and the same acceleration, and can recharge in the same amount of time it takes me to fill the tank of my car, then I'll consider it practical. But the little one-trick pony that is shown in the video is simply an incredibly impractical toy.

ZV

They had one, back in '96 it was called the EV1. It has wicked fast accleration and was plenty practical.

Yeah, that 8-second 0-60 was really "wicked fast"; it's right up there in SUV territory. It's only 3.1 seconds slower than my Mustang (and 1 second slower than my old Lincoln). The Mustang has a back seat (EV-1 was two-seat only). The Mustang's trunk is larger than the EV-1's trunk, and, unlike the EV-1, the Mustang's rear bulkhead (rear seatbacks since it has a back seat) folds down to fit more cargo. The 75-150 mile range is surely comparable to the 300-350 mile range of the Mustang, and if that 150 mile range isn't enough, why it only takes 5 hours and 55 minutes longer to "refuel" than the Mustang's 5 minute re-fueling time. And then there's the added "bonus" of the range decreasing as the batteries age.

The range and the re-fueling time kill electric vehicles. Until you can refuel one in under 15 minutes, they just won't be accepted.

ZV

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: goku
They had one, back in '96 it was called the EV1. It has wicked fast accleration and was plenty practical.

Yeah, that 8-second 0-60 was really "wicked fast"; it's right up there in SUV territory. It's only 3.1 seconds slower than my Mustang (and 1 second slower than my old Lincoln).

ZV

LOL

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: goku

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: goku
what is with this 'you can't drive it in the rain' type crap you're talking about????

You want to drive that car, the one with no roof and racing slicks, in the rain? You think that car, the one with no rollover protection and no real accident protection, will be safe if you get hit? You think that car, the one with no trunk or other luggage space, is practical in everyday driving? You think that car, with a range around 100 miles is practical for a vacation?

When an electric car the size of my Mustang and with the same amount of passenger and cargo volume has the same range and the same acceleration, and can recharge in the same amount of time it takes me to fill the tank of my car, then I'll consider it practical. But the little one-trick pony that is shown in the video is simply an incredibly impractical toy.

ZV

They had one, back in '96 it was called the EV1. It has wicked fast accleration and was plenty practical.

Yeah, that 8-second 0-60 was really "wicked fast"; it's right up there in SUV territory. It's only 3.1 seconds slower than my Mustang (and 1 second slower than my old Lincoln). The Mustang has a back seat (EV-1 was two-seat only). The Mustang's trunk is larger than the EV-1's trunk, and, unlike the EV-1, the Mustang's rear bulkhead (rear seatbacks since it has a back seat) folds down to fit more cargo. The 75-150 mile range is surely comparable to the 300-350 mile range of the Mustang, and if that 150 mile range isn't enough, why it only takes 5 hours and 55 minutes longer to "refuel" than the Mustang's 5 minute re-fueling time. And then there's the added "bonus" of the range decreasing as the batteries age.

The range and the re-fueling time kill electric vehicles. Until you can refuel one in under 15 minutes, they just won't be accepted.

ZV

n/m the actual cost of the thing was probably rather nasty, with batteries one would have to replace after a few years. plus, it was a 2 seater, make it bigger and the range would suffer.