Nubo said:
Lots of good points and certainly in terms of ultimate capability, there are lots of ICE cars that will outperform in every way.
BUT, this is also a good illustration of the differences, and some might say advantages of the EV.
Thank you for understanding my point. As Drivesolo has stated, it is difficult to take a contrary view in a forum filled with fans of EVs who are understandably antagonistic to ICE cars (and rightfully so, due to their obvious economic, environmental and political/social shortcomings--a position with which I am in agreement). But it is impossible to ignore the entrenched advantage ICE vehicles enjoy due to their widespread acceptance, lengthy social history, and the amazing aggregation of automotive engineering advances over the years, many of which have also contributed to the appearance of the modern production EV. The Leaf was not born out of a vacuum, and owes a great deal of its form and content to what has come before it in the automotive world. As much as it is a "revolutionary magic carpet ride" due to its unique drivetrain and fuel source, it is also simply an evolution of current automotive technology with a new twist, and will inevitably invite comparison with its ICE brethren. While it does many things better, the current shortcomings are obvious to anyone who looks honestly at the bigger picture. Range and cost are the obvious issues, and hopefully future technological advances in batteries and charging infrastructure will address these, at least partially. High performance is another, and I am not speaking of the "generic" form of the word performance, as evnow seems to prefer. I am speaking of the specific parameters of vehicle dynamics embedded in our car-centric culture for many decades and embodied in the sport of auto racing, a social institution ranked closely behind football, baseball and basketball as both a spectator and participatory sport. As Henry Ford is purported to have said, "Auto racing was born shortly after the production of the second motor vehicle."
You describe what automotive enthusiasts have come to regard as admirable skills and people enjoy practicing them. But how much of it is innately enjoyable vs. an adaptation to Victorian-era mechanical quirks?
I have participated in motorsports for many years now, and do find it "innately enjoyable." It does involve "adaptation to mechanical quirks," but they are hardly "Victorian era" anymore, although their roots may lie in those times (as do those of the EV as well). As different as it is, the EV does not ride on a magical cushion of air, is not guided by telepathic commands and motivated by unknown physical forces. It is a machine fashioned from thousands of manufactured parts (many of them shared by their ICE brethren), it is connected to the ground with tires, has a steering wheel, and an electric motor w/ reduction gearing. It is subject to the same laws of physics as any other dynamic object, and has its own peculiar limitations.
[snipped lengthy and humorous description of the complexity of an ICE car dragstrip launch]
Meanwhile, the LEAF driver sits barely using energy, and no efforts, until the light changes, and then proceeds smartly if the mood or circumstances suit it, by engaging the magic carpet.
The same description could be applied to any modern ICE vehicle equipped with the same computerized launch control system as the Leaf, and they do indeed exist, as you must be aware. It is precisely the engineering development of integrated ABS, traction and stability controls, and electronic engine management systems that were developed for ICE cars that allowed the rapid development and production of the Leaf's integrated controls. Launch control software removes the human element (and propensity for driver error) by controlling acceleration based on engine specifications to make the car accelerate smoothly and as fast as possible, avoiding spinning of the drive wheels, engine failure due to over-revving, and clutch and gearbox problems. The Nissan GT-R comes so equipped, predating the Leaf, and I'm sure that some of the Leaf's systems owe a debt to that engineering, since without it, the instant application of 100% of the torque available from the Leaf's electric motor would render it undrivable and dangerous for ordinary people, resulting in smoking, sliding front tires instead of smooth acceleration.
Now, it might be interesting to think of making the choice between these two models, had it been presented to us, lets say, 150 years ago.
Would I have opted for the finicky, complex, and wasteful ICE vehicle with it's performance advantages if operated superbly, or would I have been more interested in the car that just worked, without all the noise and palaver? I think it's a good question. The EV of 1913 did "die", but today's EV are a whole new ballgame.
I would say that the development of production EVs is not a "new ballgame" at all, but entirely dependent on the ICE automotive development that took place previously (especially in the electronics sphere), with only the integration of a new motive system as a major innovation. It may be innovative, but it still has its own set of inherent limitations and faces the uphill battle of overcoming deeply enculturated habits and preferences. Your description of the complexity of a manual transmission launch of an ICE vehicle is also patently unfair, as it is "apples and oranges"--the Leaf would have to be compared to a modern ICE w/ launch control system and auto transmission to be legitimate, and the result would be much different. The ICE would be just as effortless to launch, just as fast with comparable power, and at 95 mph the Leaf would peak out and plateau, due to its single-speed reduction gear, while the ICE car would continue to shift gears and achieve speeds well beyond 100 mph. (Isn't it quite ironic, also, that the extreme complexity of a manual transmission ICE launch contained in your description can still be accomplished consistently by a skilled driver with none of the damage or drama you imply and beat the Leaf off the line to 60' every time? I can probably do it easily myself with a 45-year old Porsche 911, as antiquated a machine as it might be.)
I can hear the complaints already: "But who needs to go that fast--it is not practical and unsafe! The speed limit on most roads is less than 95MPH." This is patently absurd within the context of high performance motorsports, of which I am speaking. The entire context of racing is based on speed and going faster (and also safer). This has been the driving force behind most automotive engineering advances over the last century, and is also the source of the "inherent enjoyment" of motorsports discussed earlier. As foolish and "macho" as it may be in terms of survival, it is precisely the element of danger, of facing and overcoming fear, that constitutes the major attraction and enjoyment of the sport. As Ernest Hemingway famously said, "Auto racing, bull fighting, and mountain climbing are the only real sports…all the others are games." Human beings are drawn to exploring the limits of life, and in that exploration lies much of our advancement as a species, as well as our enjoyment and satisfaction in living. Without challenges, life would be boring. We are indeed fortunate in our modern life to have the opportunity to explore frivolous areas of endeavor beyond merely hunting and gathering constantly for subsistence.
And, keep in mind that the ultimate performance of EVs will continue to improve.
Yes, because the technology is still in its infancy, and has nowhere to go but up. But it cannot yet compete with the overall performance available from ICE cars, and will not for quite some time. It may not even have to, and possibly should not at all. Witness the fact that only 2% of the people responding to the poll which is the basis of this thread selected "performance" as their main reason for buying a Leaf, even though it specified only "some perf parameters."
ICE vehicle technology has had over 100 years and trillions of dollars of R&D to evolve to where it is.
And has contributed to, even made possible, the development of modern production EVs, as I have argued.
Ultimately, EVs, I believe, will be unquestionably superior in performance in almost every way. Many will miss the Thunder, but there will still be a place for skill. But the skill will be directed towards driving, and not the management of rambunctious mechanicals.
"Unquestionably superior in performance in almost every way" :?: :?: :?: When will this happen, exactly? Looking at the state of EV motorsports currently I can only say that it is anemic, at best. The energy density and efficiency solutions necessary for it to compete on a level basis are a long way off, I'm afraid, and will not come in my lifetime, but I am just an old curmudgeon who likes to play with cars and will be lucky to have another decade or two to witness such advancements, and far fewer years as an active driver. I have looked into it seriously over the last three years since becoming acquainted with and being dutifully impressed by the Leaf, but the logistics of fueling and power/weight ratio are currently insurmountable, and require improvements of several orders of magnitude to be competitive with ICE cars on an equal footing. These will not come cheaply or quickly, I'm afraid, and one set of "rambunctious mechanicals" will simply be replaced by another. There is nothing magically simple or "unmechanical" about EVs. They are complex systems, just as ICE cars are, and depend on the same physical principles, with a bias towards "electro-mechanical" propulsion.
TT
