This could prove to be pretty cool: https://arstechnica.com/cars/2019/0...nopulses-could-boost-engine-efficiency-by-20/ For car makers it should be mostly a drop in upgrade for existing engine models. However, I would speculate that you won't be able to DIY your existing engine without a new engine management system. Which is a shame, since in theory it should otherwise work. Maybe the aftermarket will find solutions?
Ehh. Looks like we are seeing the end of internal combustion engine. What a bummer. Electric cars will never have the feeling of internal combustion engine. --- Post updated --- İ have a serious feeling that mk5 supra is more Bmw than bmw products themselves.
In fact, this Lightyear One thing does 0-100 kmh in 10 seconds, so no wonder it is so efficient. However, it's not like you need Tesla levels of acceleration on a public road (especially if they shorten your range) - they're just a marketing trick and a penis inflator. Actually, an efficiency-centered EV is a good idea (as long as we consider any EV a good idea). But this solar thing must be absolute BS, no way these tiny panels can power a car all year long (10K km is easily one year's driving) outside desert areas. Rear window removal is very wrong as well, although I've seen that coming - some modern cars' backlights are like 30 cm high, losing them is the next logical step. I think they want to substitute it with a backup camera, which would still be better than some shit on the market today (like last Auris) that basically lacks a backlight but has no camera as standard equipment. P.S. dat ass ugly af but the knowledge of making a beatiful car has been lost a decade ago
Would you say the same about all cars that can do 0-60 in less than 10 seconds? I would agree that rear windows are very much a nice thing to have on cars, however, in this case it probably doubles the solar capacity. The team behind this car are the winners of The World Solar race, which is a challenge where you have to build a car that can cross Australia using solar power alone. So efficiency is kinda their thing. The challenge is making that efficiency safe (crash structures etc), and packaging it in a way that is attractive to consumers. Tesla's are generally not massively efficient, and the jaguar I-Pace isn't that efficient either. Since that isn't the goal of those vehicles. They are intended to be luxury cars, hence they have wide tyres for maximum grip and stability, massive power figures etc. That isn't to say that they haven't put thought into efficiency ofc, both brands put a lot of effort into their drag coefficients along with other aspects of the vehicles. BMW however, has been going for efficiency with the BMW I3. Hence it has narrower tyres for lower rolling resistance etc. (and for the record, the I3 has a similar stopping distance to an Alfa Romeo 4C, the tyres don't make the car unsafe) Its exactly the same as the ICE, where you have cars designed for people who want the cheapest most efficient transport possible, then you have sportier, or more luxurious cars for people who want them.
Not kidding. Seen at least 4 of them back to front on roundabouts in the wet, along with youtube reviewers pointing out that being arse heavy, once the stability control kicks in, its already too late. Was telling boyfriend "Ive seen a few of those backwards", a few weeks later, he messages me on a rainy day, "just seen one of those weird cars with the bike tires spin out on the roundabout". Theyre hilariously unsafe. --- Post updated --- Though yeah for the efficiency thing. Sure, tesla and jaguar have market leading ranges, but they also have *massive* batteries. And when you then look at the range say a nissan leaf gets on a much much smaller battery, it really shows up the tesla inefficiency, though most of that is likely weight and tires, the motors themselves in a tesla are actually some of the most energy efficient to be designed, to the point that other companies are copying them (tesla patents are royalty free).
They do 0-60 in considerably less than 7 seconds, and the electric power train can give instant torque, all to the rear wheels. So I would imagine that probably has a lot to do with people who are not used to RWD finding out that if they hit the throttle, 250Nm of instant torque is enough to get the rear end loose. Then obviously, whatever happens after that point is down to driver skill and chassis forgiveness. If you were to do the same in a Lotus Elise for example you would also end up in a hedge row, since they have more weight at the rear, RWD, and a short wheel base. Making them difficult to catch if you push them beyond what the grip allows.
But also keep in mind, it's an electric, the traction control and stability control systems in electric vehicles are usually bonkers effective, the rwd Tesla's are not suffering the same fate with more torque, hell, more torque per mm of tire width. Fact is, they have massive weight over the rear and very very little traction. Hell, the default driving mode is power limited. They're outright dangerous vehicles. I'm all for EVs, but the i3 shouldn't be allowed on roads
This post has just lead me down quite the YouTube rabbit hole. But I am very happy it did xD (^ Probably stolen content from somewhere else, I can't find original source ^) But as you said the rear end certainly does seem to pendulum when driven in bad conditions. Not to say that the standard of driving on display here is amazing (although an average driver would be much worse ofc).
Ah so a car that is literally a danger to pedestrians and other road users in quite normal driving conditions without hooning and is therefore practically equivalent to a car exploding at any moments notice should be allowable. Sure, if it only endangered yourself, whatever, but it's not just a liability to itself. You want to watch your family get killed by a different road user spinning an i3 by it simply slowing down to turn into a junction?
Almost any car can be a danger if you handle it wrong. Some cars are much more difficult to drive than others, should we ban all of them? Cars aren't born equal and shouldn't be. To prevent accidents, educate people in driving schools, not issue bans left and right. If you don't understand that different cars handle different, you shouldn't be allowed to drive. Plus, I've never heard of an i3 causing an accident, let alone a fatal one. US muscle and pony cars with huge power and poor handling spin out and crash so often it has become a meme, should they be banned? Hoons crash German RWD sports sedans all the time, should they be banned? After all, even if it spins out at a slow speed before an intersection, no way it's going to be a fatal crash. Unless there's a hoon in an old BMW behind, going 120 kmh through the city, but that's already a disaster waiting to happen. Seems like you have an idee fixe, dude.
Either you don't know what that means, or are shouting hypocrisy. Even you must recognise that spinning out under normal safe driving conditions is completely different from a driver being a twat hooning where they shouldn't be. Just the same as someone endangering others lives with a firearm is different from someone using one in a controlled safe environment. I've *witnessed* i3s spinning. I've spoken to an owner who's experienced them spinning. You don't have to hoon it, you just have to slow down to turn into your driveway carefully. People break bones falling over kerbs, kids are killed in sub 2mph collisions. It does not take much speed to cause massive physical injury to an innocent bystander, it does not take much speed to cause massive property damage. Speed point is null and void
There are more than 7 billion people on this planet. It's overpopulated. The BMW i3 is natural selection at its finest.
Hypocrisy? Every car having its own limits is not hypocrisy, it's how life works. What's "normal safe driving conditions" for a sports sedan is not for a dump truck. If this BMW spins out at some point, it means it has surpassed its capabilities, which, again, every car has. If you surpass your car's capabilities, that's basically hooning. The driver has to learn to control their vehicle, not be like "my previous car with completely different specs did it so this one should too". You value your personal experience too much. Yes you've seen them spin out, but I've never had and I've never seen anyone bring this problem up, so that nullifies your personal experience point. Ban kerbs? If an offroad truck with a steel bumper and a massive winch hits a small child in the head? If you run over an expensive gadget? If you bump a supercar off a pier? Show me examples, or you're talking nonsense. Speed matters. Not even you can defy physics.
There is a difference between a car that handles unusually, and a car that has botched handling. It's one that is, for example, generated by the absence of a sway bar on a Corvair.
And different suspension, and stability control, and overall using half a century newer technologies. Corvair caused an outrage. The first time I've heard complaints about i3 was today from some random dude who never even drove it.
