The "miles to go" indicator on my petrol car is based on recent average fuel consumption. If I spend time in town with poor consumption, and switch to motorway driving with good consumption, the "miles to go" sometimes goes backwards.
The "miles to go" indicator on my petrol car is based on recent average fuel consumption. If I spend time in town with poor consumption, and switch to motorway driving with good consumption, the "miles to go" sometimes goes backwards.
Presume you mean "Range", never seen mine go backwards. It is changes depending on the type of driving as would be expected so can decrease when at lower speeds with lower gears but I would not call that "going backwards".
Lol the author shows their hand when they claim top gear have an extreme political agenda.
Fact is that the leafs range is pathetic, it doesn't matter that they stage things to make a point that is true, top gear humor works that way, things aren't always to be taken literally...else ford should sue clarkson for saying his former ford gt40 used so much gas it couldn't be driven to work and back because it only got 4mpg....@ 200mph!
What is true is the leaf is unreliable, turn on the heat or anything and the range drops through the floor, quick charge the thing and you turn that weak range battery into a 30% even weaker battery in just 3 years. In other words its just a very expensive look at me green badge car that deserves to have the mickey taken out of it.
I don't think it was wrong of them not to have a full charge...we don;t start every journey with a full tank unless we are going on a 'long journey' i.e. 300miles or so...a long journey for a Nissan Leaf is 109miles...assuming there is a charging point 109miles away...
Top Gear could have done the whole piece with a full charge...but start the journey further away from where they were hunting for a charging point. In which case Nissan may not have complained but Top Gear could have turned round and said...we are going on a 140mile journey in a car...and if there isn't a charging point in 109miles we will not be able to get there...so what's the point in having an electric car costing £24,000 when you can't drive it more than 50miles away from your home because you willnot be able to get back unless you have pre-arranged somewhere to recharge the battery.
It doesn;t say much for the Nissan car when they say 'well, the battery wasn't fully charged!' Well, having to have a fully charged car all the time doesn;t help either does it...and if you get a diversion due to road works or an accident you could be stuffed.
The worst part about it is that the government incentives to buy the car are tax money spent on well off folks to help buy their toys. Just not right.
Each one bought is another 5k out the door that the government can't afford.
Exactly. I doubt many normal folk are buying these cars. The Leaf costs almosts 3 times what the equivalent petrol car would cost, that's a hell of a lot of miles to do to get your money back.
Electric cars are a wonderful idea. They can be far more powerful and have much greater acceleration than any internal combustion engine powered car.
The problem they currently have is with there power source, which is what Top Gear were highlighing - which they did very well I think.
Diesel locomotives have always been driven by an electric motor, though the electric motors power source is a dirty great big diesel engine because we currently still have nothing else that can provide the required energy to drive the electric motor.
I guess we could always have overhead power lines on all roads
Electric cars are a wonderful idea. They can be far more powerful and have much greater acceleration than any internal combustion engine powered car.
The problem they currently have is with there power source, which is what Top Gear were highlighing - which they did very well I think.
Diesel locomotives have always been driven by an electric motor, though the electric motors power source is a dirty great big diesel engine because we currently still have nothing else that can provide the required energy to drive the electric motor.
I guess we could always have overhead power lines on all roads
They are not a wonderful idea as they are restricted to a few percent of the population and are hideously expensive.
If Top Gear is going to put people off buying electric cars by faking their range, then it's not surprising companies are not investing in providing more charging points.
If Top Gear is going to put people off buying electric cars by faking their range, then it's not surprising companies are not investing in providing more charging points.
They exaggerated it to prove how useless they are. For most of the population they are completely useless and/or unaffordable.
If Top Gear is going to put people off buying electric cars by faking their range, then it's not surprising companies are not investing in providing more charging points.
Except that they did not fake any range. And regardless of that, if the industry has faith in the product, the charging points would be provided anyway (even allowing for the car companies to have a bit more lobbying power than one single BBC programme).
TG is not anti electric cars. The James May report on the Honda Clarity was enthusiastic about it. However that was a fuel-cell/electric car, and didn't have the range problems - however it still needs a hydrogen refuelling point, and currently you need to work for British Oxygen (or similar company), or live in the San Francisco area to make use of those.
What they picked-on was something that even I can see is a major shortcoming of battery powered cars.
They didn't even dwell-on the recycling costs of the batteries that will need replacing every 3-4 years after premature failure because of fast charge.
It wasn't too many years ago that it was difficult to find "ordinary" garages selling diesel for cars. That changed.
When it comes to Electric car charging it will be different. They might start to appear at car parks near commuter railway stations, but that is all. Even "fast charges" take a lot more time than it takes to fill a tank with liquid fuel, and garages don't want cars hanging around for a long time (Have you ever been to the petrol station at Gatwick - they issue fines if you are there more than 20 minutes).
TG is not anti electric cars. The James May report on the Honda Clarity was enthusiastic about it. However that was a fuel-cell/electric car, and didn't have the range problems - however it still needs a hydrogen refuelling point, and currently you need to work for British Oxygen (or similar company), or live in the San Francisco area to make use of those.
What they picked-on was something that even I can see is a major shortcoming of battery powered cars.
They didn't even dwell-on the recycling costs of the batteries that will need replacing every 3-4 years after premature failure because of fast charge.
It wasn't too many years ago that it was difficult to find "ordinary" garages selling diesel for cars. That changed.
When it comes to Electric car charging it will be different. They might start to appear at car parks near commuter railway stations, but that is all. Even "fast charges" take a lot more time than it takes to fill a tank with liquid fuel, and garages don't want cars hanging around for a long time (Have you ever been to the petrol station at Gatwick - they issue fines if you are there more than 20 minutes).
There's no way electric cars will be the future, maybe in big cities,
But I live in an average sized town, and it would be completely impractical
It's just that they use a hydrogen fuel cell to generate the electricity to run the electric motor.
Electric cars are the future, it's the power source they need to develop to power them that is going to take time (which they haven't yet got right).
Yes, I know that, :mad:
But it's not an electric cars in the same way, as it is not direcly powered by electricity, as hydrogen is converted, as opposed to electricity being directly transferred.
The point I was getting was the reason the battery electric cars won't work is; small range, weak power, long refueling times.
Comments
Presume you mean "Range", never seen mine go backwards. It is changes depending on the type of driving as would be expected so can decrease when at lower speeds with lower gears but I would not call that "going backwards".
Fact is that the leafs range is pathetic, it doesn't matter that they stage things to make a point that is true, top gear humor works that way, things aren't always to be taken literally...else ford should sue clarkson for saying his former ford gt40 used so much gas it couldn't be driven to work and back because it only got 4mpg....@ 200mph!
What is true is the leaf is unreliable, turn on the heat or anything and the range drops through the floor, quick charge the thing and you turn that weak range battery into a 30% even weaker battery in just 3 years. In other words its just a very expensive look at me green badge car that deserves to have the mickey taken out of it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/aug/12/nissan-leaf-car-review-wollaston
Top Gear could have done the whole piece with a full charge...but start the journey further away from where they were hunting for a charging point. In which case Nissan may not have complained but Top Gear could have turned round and said...we are going on a 140mile journey in a car...and if there isn't a charging point in 109miles we will not be able to get there...so what's the point in having an electric car costing £24,000 when you can't drive it more than 50miles away from your home because you willnot be able to get back unless you have pre-arranged somewhere to recharge the battery.
It doesn;t say much for the Nissan car when they say 'well, the battery wasn't fully charged!' Well, having to have a fully charged car all the time doesn;t help either does it...and if you get a diversion due to road works or an accident you could be stuffed.
Each one bought is another 5k out the door that the government can't afford.
Exactly. I doubt many normal folk are buying these cars. The Leaf costs almosts 3 times what the equivalent petrol car would cost, that's a hell of a lot of miles to do to get your money back.
The problem they currently have is with there power source, which is what Top Gear were highlighing - which they did very well I think.
Diesel locomotives have always been driven by an electric motor, though the electric motors power source is a dirty great big diesel engine because we currently still have nothing else that can provide the required energy to drive the electric motor.
I guess we could always have overhead power lines on all roads
They are not a wonderful idea as they are restricted to a few percent of the population and are hideously expensive.
All they did was exaggerate the point that electric cars are sh*t
They exaggerated it to prove how useless they are. For most of the population they are completely useless and/or unaffordable.
But obviously the oil will run out and a replacement is needed,
But, I reckon hydrogen fuel cell cars (which they featured on top gear) would be much better with a few years development....
What they picked-on was something that even I can see is a major shortcoming of battery powered cars.
They didn't even dwell-on the recycling costs of the batteries that will need replacing every 3-4 years after premature failure because of fast charge.
It wasn't too many years ago that it was difficult to find "ordinary" garages selling diesel for cars. That changed.
When it comes to Electric car charging it will be different. They might start to appear at car parks near commuter railway stations, but that is all. Even "fast charges" take a lot more time than it takes to fill a tank with liquid fuel, and garages don't want cars hanging around for a long time (Have you ever been to the petrol station at Gatwick - they issue fines if you are there more than 20 minutes).
There's no way electric cars will be the future, maybe in big cities,
But I live in an average sized town, and it would be completely impractical
LOL
A hydrogen fuel cell car IS an electric car.
It's just that they use a hydrogen fuel cell to generate the electricity to run the electric motor.
Electric cars are the future, it's the power source they need to develop to power them that is going to take time (which they haven't yet got right).
Yes, I know that, :mad:
But it's not an electric cars in the same way, as it is not direcly powered by electricity, as hydrogen is converted, as opposed to electricity being directly transferred.
The point I was getting was the reason the battery electric cars won't work is; small range, weak power, long refueling times.
whereas petrol cars of the opposite of that
In the big cities lots of people live in houses with no off street parking, so even there they are impractical for large amounts of the population.