ADVERTISEMENT

OT: Electric vehicles

I don't think they NEED it, but 600 miles will be well beyond the point where naysayers can bring up range, even in light of road trips and long en-route charging times. For me, 400 miles, across weather ranges, is the point where they'll get attractive. Or 300 with sub-10-minute 10 to 100 percent (not 80) charging.

And no, not readily scalable right now. The EQXX is really a test bed with bleeding edge tech that we won't start to see for at least another cycle or two.

For instance, the battery pack managed to weigh roughly half the weight of the EQS pack despite having nearly the same capacity (100 v 108 kWh, iirc). That was done using tech directly from Formula 1/ E and some type of greeny composite made from sugar Cane and carbon fiber. The active rear aero was derived from an earlier tail-extender concept car from Frankfurt Motor Show a few years back. EQXX CoD is a groundbreaking 0.17.

But it will be interesting to see those types of features become more prevalent moving forward. Just saw Ford talking about adding active aero to its next electric truck.
And that's the problem with prototypes. We're teased with amazing features and futuristic styling, only to be disappointed with the actual production vehicle. Mercedes just did this with the EQS. Interior and exterior changed significantly. There's also a laundry list of features in the prototype that the production version does not have. Seems like a waste of time and resources.

Prototype:
mercedes-benz-vision-eqs-2019.jpg

maxresdefault.jpg



Reality:
960x0.jpg

E6-Mercedes-Benz-EQS_A2_o.jpg
 
And that's the problem with prototypes. We're teased with amazing features and futuristic styling, only to be disappointed with the actual production vehicle. Mercedes just did this with the EQS. Interior and exterior changed significantly. There's also a laundry list of features in the prototype that the production version does not have. Seems like a waste of time and resources.

Prototype:
mercedes-benz-vision-eqs-2019.jpg

maxresdefault.jpg



Reality:
960x0.jpg

E6-Mercedes-Benz-EQS_A2_o.jpg
you mean like the cybertruck? waste of time and money.
 
Porsche and Audi (VW Group companies) are entering F1. This has relevance to EVs and future automotive tech in general because of how motorsport, and especially F1, tend to drive automotive innovation in all kinds of different ways, with that often trickling down into their road car divisions (and adopted by the rest of the automotive community).

There is already a Formula E series in which pure EVs race, modeled after F1's approach to motorsport. But F1's current engine specs are hybrid (w/bleeding edge regenerative tech) and their next engine spec (which is what has garnered interest from brands such as Porsche, Audi and BMW) will carry forward even more hybrid tech, increasing the electrical side of the spec, plus adding sustainable fuel tech, the research for which a number of automotive companies have been dumping money.

We'll see how things play out. But since the world's best and brightest automotive engineers often wind up working for F1 teams, and since F1 has a very strong financial motive to improve the sustainability of the sport through the use of electrification and clean, sustainable ICE fuels, this seems like a pretty positive development for the future.

This article provides some information about the situation. The URL is a little misleading as the article doesn't really get into the bidding war, which is old news, and mostly discusses how Porsche and Audi are entering F1.

 
And that's the problem with prototypes. We're teased with amazing features and futuristic styling, only to be disappointed with the actual production vehicle. Mercedes just did this with the EQS. Interior and exterior changed significantly. There's also a laundry list of features in the prototype that the production version does not have. Seems like a waste of time and resources.
There is no problem with prototypes. Once again you're showing the depth of your ignorance about the automotive industry, and about technology in general.

Prototypes are an indispensable part of the development process across many industries, including the automotive industry. They're a proving ground where companies can execute proofs of concept. Sometimes the concepts are merely visual designs. Sometimes they are functional designs. Sometimes both.

Sometimes they are a hint at some potential future product. But often they are not. There is no promise that a prototype will closely match any eventual product. But they can often provide good hints at what a particular company in any particular industry is thinking about for the near future.

What's ironic is is that, if the article was discussing a Tesla prototype instead of a Merc prototype, your response would be 100% positive instead of 100% negative.
 
Last edited:
And that's the problem with prototypes. We're teased with amazing features and futuristic styling, only to be disappointed with the actual production vehicle. Mercedes just did this with the EQS. Interior and exterior changed significantly. There's also a laundry list of features in the prototype that the production version does not have. Seems like a waste of time and resources.

Prototype:
mercedes-benz-vision-eqs-2019.jpg

maxresdefault.jpg



Reality:
960x0.jpg

E6-Mercedes-Benz-EQS_A2_o.jpg

True with many concept cars, but the interesting takeaway from the above news is that they that they actually verified that range in real world. Many of the range, power and performance figures you get with a pure concept car are useless. Often those cars don't even have powertrains in them and have to be rolled onto stage.

Prototype research is different from a show car and definitely not a waste of time or resources.
 
@Knight Shift , do you like this ?

This is too funny. They are really trying hard to get people to like the stupid cyber truck.
 
@Knight Shift , do you like this ?

LOL. That is one ridiculously stupid article. But at least the slurpfest on "teslarati" is occurring in the right place.
 
This is too funny. They are really trying hard to get people to like the stupid cyber truck.
It's a very dumb article. But to be fair, the cheerleading for tesla makes sense on that website where non-tesla fetishists can ignore it.
 
@Knight Shift , thought you might be interested in this. I would put it in the Non-Tesla hybrids and electrical vehicles thread, but once again, the new mod has deleted it.

 
@Knight Shift , do you like this ?

Not at all
 
This is too funny. They are really trying hard to get people to like the stupid cyber truck.
A futuristic, armored, personal carrier from a sci-fi movie might not be everyone's cup of tea. Once you get past the aesthetics, you'll see Tesla has changed the script on how to build a truck.

"Tesla adopted a new construction and a new alloy. Big trucks still feature the ancient body-on-frame architecture, which means that the drivetrain basically drags the body and the bed, which isn’t very efficient. So Tesla designed an exoskeleton, a fancier word for unibody layout, to move the stress from the frame to the outer skin of the vehicle.

By doing so, it obtained better capability in the same dimensions and weight as the Ford F-150, Chevrolet Silverado, and Ram 1500. In case you missed it, the Cybertruck has a towing capability of 14,000 pounds, more than any other truck in this segment, while payload is also superior at 3,500 pounds. At the same time, it’s quicker and faster."


https://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-n...xoskeleton-and-design-explained-ar187129.html
 
A futuristic, armored, personal carrier from a sci-fi movie might not be everyone's cup of tea. Once you get past the aesthetics, you'll see Tesla has changed the script on how to build a truck.

"Tesla adopted a new construction and a new alloy. Big trucks still feature the ancient body-on-frame architecture, which means that the drivetrain basically drags the body and the bed, which isn’t very efficient. So Tesla designed an exoskeleton, a fancier word for unibody layout, to move the stress from the frame to the outer skin of the vehicle.

By doing so, it obtained better capability in the same dimensions and weight as the Ford F-150, Chevrolet Silverado, and Ram 1500. In case you missed it, the Cybertruck has a towing capability of 14,000 pounds, more than any other truck in this segment, while payload is also superior at 3,500 pounds. At the same time, it’s quicker and faster."


https://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-n...xoskeleton-and-design-explained-ar187129.html
You've quoted some particularly silly marketing hyperbole.

Plenty of large vehicle makers have moved away from body-on-frame designs already, long before Tesla's Cybertruck was conceived. The Cybertruck has no towing capability at all, at the moment, seeing as how it doesn't actually exist as a saleable product yet.

And the last thing we need are quicker/faster large heavy vehicles. Especially if they're going to be driven by a software.

Any why would anybody want to pay that much just to have to "get past" the outrageously ugly aesthetics? I keep hoping that the actual production version has dropped the attention-seeking ugly design and adopted a more attractive and adult design that looks less like something a third grader with massive personality disorders would design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUevolution36
Although the Roadster prototype is actually quite beautiful, so at least there's that.
 
You've quoted some particularly silly marketing hyperbole.

Plenty of large vehicle makers have moved away from body-on-frame designs already, long before Tesla's Cybertruck was conceived. The Cybertruck has no towing capability at all, at the moment, seeing as how it doesn't actually exist as a saleable product yet.

And the last thing we need are quicker/faster large heavy vehicles. Especially if they're going to be driven by a software.

Any why would anybody want to pay that much just to have to "get past" the outrageously ugly aesthetics? I keep hoping that the actual production version has dropped the attention-seeking ugly design and adopted a more attractive and adult design that looks less like something a third grader with massive personality disorders would design.
Ford F150, Chevy Silverado, Ram 1500, Toyota Tacoma, and Nissan Titan still use body-on-frame. Since we're talking about pickups, and the listed vehicles are the best selling brands, you're first statement is completely false.
 
This is hilarious. Let's penalize those who've made an effort to reduce their carbon footprint.

How about legislate a carbon tax? Something that should have been done about 20 years ago. Implemented at an extremely low rate, and slowly, steadily rises over the years. It would encourage innovation for those industries that are the biggest offenders. Neither side of the aisle wants to touch it. Wonder why.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT