JeffK
Well-Known Member
I want to give ICEs cars every chance they can get and then destroy them.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
That's the exact thing i was thinking.. we are just trying to give them a change of a fair game.
But it seems is impossible.
The only way they have to take a chance is for them to be at least 40% more powerfull, and this, maybe, could give them a fair chance..
Now, if we really want to give them an advantage we could point to something like 200km/h where having a gear box can give them a good point.. but then, we are outside the "normal" usage of a car so who care?
Now.. this is really useless.well that would all depend on your approach to this "race".
My A3 with ECU reflash can do 0-60 in the mid-4 second range, but staying flat-out on the pedal, I'd likely only get ~25mpg, meaning more stops for gas.
However....if I stay out of the throttle and keep the revs down around 2200 at cruising speed, I can get 35mpg (depending on wind, terrain, temp, etc....).
That's a range of close to 500 miles on a 14.5 gallon tank. I would pass the Tesla while it's charging at the ~280 mile mark, then it would pass me at 500, then I would pass it around 560....and we would just play leapfrog for however long the "race" is.
Come to think of it....the Audi would likely win every race over 280 miles. It would only take minutes to fill the tank and get back to 400-500 miles of range, where the Tesla would need ~45 minutes to get 80% SoC.
Clearly, we need faster Superchargers.
My seat ibiza in this game could probably beat a ferrari since we put in the equation the need to refill.
A ferrari going "normally" consume like 4 time my ibiza, and i've also the gpl tank, so i need to refill every about 900km or more
Right. I wasn't even kidding. Well maybe a little bit, but the metric holds for even the slowest ICE.
I mean, it was widely publicized that someone drove their Tesla for 24 hours and managed to cover 2424 km.
Big deal, the VW Lupo would have them beat in less than 24 hours.
So there you have your metric, many expensive super-duper Turbo ICE cars catch up after about 10 - 12 seconds (on the order of a 1/4 mile) and at the other end of the spectrum you have your snail-like 3L car, that takes about a dozen hours to catch up (the Tesla may have to pass a couple of times, before leaving the ICE behind for good).
Last edited:
ModelNforNerd
Active Member
Oh, at flat-out speed.....I'd probably catch back up just before 1/4 mile. I was overthinking it. LOL
I am sorry, but I fixed a confusing typo in my post - after you quoted it... :-(
I was referring to the higher end performance models, not the bread-and-butter mainstream vehicles which Tesla is explictly going after. Of course Tesla can't come remotely close to that level of performance at the moment, otherwise they'd be track testing. The performance metrics aren't subjective.
Performance and acceleration were in the same basket until Tesla came along and showed they could beat porsches and lambos at 0-60. Then the ICE crowd started to pretend it was not about 0-60 figures but top end and track performance.
It is just a matter of time till someone does a proper track EV. One thing I can say is it will not come from an existing performance ICE brand but a totally new company dedicated to EVs meant for tracks. Tesla will not bother with such a niche segment as their sole target is to achieve mass EV adoption. If Tesla wanted they could have done a track car like no other but they are probably just not bothered at this time. Perhaps when Model 3 production belt is running smoothly they might consider Roadster version 2. One thing is clear, the EV revolution has just started and has a great untapped and undiscovered potential for improvement while the ICE crowd is a bit old and worn out with very little potential left for improvement - they don't realize that their time is over. I bet when Model T came along there were horse riders who tried to pretend that horses were better as they could jump over barriers while Model Ts could not.
It is just a matter of time till someone does a proper track EV. One thing I can say is it will not come from an existing performance ICE brand but a totally new company dedicated to EVs meant for tracks. Tesla will not bother with such a niche segment as their sole target is to achieve mass EV adoption. If Tesla wanted they could have done a track car like no other but they are probably just not bothered at this time. Perhaps when Model 3 production belt is running smoothly they might consider Roadster version 2. One thing is clear, the EV revolution has just started and has a great untapped and undiscovered potential for improvement while the ICE crowd is a bit old and worn out with very little potential left for improvement - they don't realize that their time is over. I bet when Model T came along there were horse riders who tried to pretend that horses were better as they could jump over barriers while Model Ts could not.
Last edited:
Since EVs today all seem settled on 400vdc power and 3 phase 400 cycle induction motors it is interesting, but not surprising, to realise that inverters from one maker can be substituted in another brand of EV. They all have buss bars emerging 120 degrees apart at one end for direct electrical connection into the motors, thus they all basically can 'fit' each other. The controller circuitry between accelerator pedal and inverter likewise is identical, the only requirement really is that current (power) levels either be matched or else serve as a new limiting factor to performance.
So a Bolt inverter likely can run your M3 adequately and vice versa.
--
So a Bolt inverter likely can run your M3 adequately and vice versa.
--
JeffK
Well-Known Member
Garlan Garner
Banned
Hmmmm.... I really don't think so as I've watched Jack for the past year - explicitly speak of the Tesla subclip being vastly different than all other subclips....including inverters and motors.
Jack Rickard
Garlan Garner
Banned
I think its fair to state that acceleration is an integral part of performance. That's where the term 0-60 came from. Performance.
Garlan Garner
Banned
Completely agree and that was also exactly my point.Will Tesla do a full racing circuit without overheating - NO
Will Tesla do optimal range at 80MPH or above - NO
Will Tesla corner like a track car - NO
Will the above limitations matter to a majority of BMW and Audi buyers in everyday driving conditions - ABSOLUTELY NOT
Its as simple as that
But people are also absolutely kidding themselves about 1) the actual limitations of EV tech and 2) the willingness of a new car company to bother investing in the small-return performance market. For those wanting a short dragstrip champion, they have that though.
Acceleration (as measured from stop or at speed) contributes to overall performance and in some cases can make up shortcomings in cornering ability. Of course if that acceleration is only available for a few minutes, then you're completely non competitve.
Garlan Garner
Banned
I'm a drag race kind of guy. I only need 10 seconds or so of data. Anything beyond that is useless for me.
Personally I like sports cars, but also appreciate the acceleration ability of the Teslas. I'd gladly trade some of that accelerarion if it provided track competition and sheer driving fun in comparison to a performance car such as a BMW M3 or Audi RS or Mercedes AMG. I know enough about EVs to know that it probably won't happen for many years after the M3 is produced. Even the new roadster won't cut it.
wallet.dat
Member
Sorry, but it has never been about 0-60 stats, but now we're supposed to be accusing the ICE crowd of being dismissive of something they always were in the past? 0-60 has always been a marketing stat that has no use on any track that I'm aware of. And where else would you be doing racing than at the track?
Similar threads
