gavia1

200HP is considerably higher than the average power output of most European cars.

Most small hatchbacks will be producing somewhere between 90HP and 170HP. Estates and wagons from 190HP to 250HP and SUVs somewhere similar.

I am not disagreeing with electric cars at all, I think it is important.

But the carbon footprint created within the West is just a small amount of the carbon footprint that the West contributes to. We can't just reduce our own carbon footprint if it simply pushes that carbon footprint onto other, less developed countries.

I think it will be very unlikely that we will continue to live with the same luxuries that we enjoy today while still aggressively reducing climate change. It won't be a case of "we have electric transport, but I can still buy a new iPhone once a year". It will be a case of aggressively cutting back everywhere and and ultimately growth and our economy will suffer in the short-term for long-term sustainability.

The big issue with the small displacement turbo-charged engines is that, at normal autobahn speed, the engine is almost always on boost and therefore burning a lot of fuel to:

1. Reduce intake temperatures/prevent pre-ignition

2. Produce enough power to sustain a constant speed of 120KPH or whatever

This means that they are far less efficient than they should be, and in some cases get more or less the same efficiency as larger displacement high capacity engines.

I think you are missing the forest from the trees. If we want to truly reduce climate change we should start by reducing international shipping, consumerism, and non-essential air travel for both pleasure and business.

A 300MPH speed run in an ultra low production Bugatti car is more or less insignificant in the fight against climate change.

You could get close just with turbocharging which will lower the torque curve such that max torque is somewhere around 1500 to 2000RPM.

[deleted]

[deleted]

That's bad luck! But... if you'll never buy from a manufacturer because one of their models had a corrosion issue or drivetrain issue you'd never be able to buy a car ever again?

Huge disclaimer required here.

FR (front-engine, rear whe drive) cars do have less traction in snow because there is less weight over the rear wheels. This is correct.

But there is nothing unsafe about FR. It has been around since the dawn of the automobile and continues to be the layout of choice outside of econoboxes and mid-engine sports cars.

Mercedes-Benz also manufacture front wheel drive cars too, so feel free to purchase those instead.

Please provide some non-anecdotal evidence to this claim?

This surprises me as a male who suffers from anxiety and exhibits none of these symptoms.

To be more specific my anxiety manifests as a feeling of unease, sometimes fear; and at times blends in with OCD where I become unsure of my short term memory and whether or not something did or did not happen.

$35,000 is a lot of cash for a new transmission.

But if the car is 5 years out of warranty why not take it to a specialist who would charge much less?

What was the fault? It must had been a severe gearbox failure to warrant a complete replacement rather than a rebuild.

O.K, then how is it possible you did only 55 miles in 5 years of ownership? If you meant to write 55,000 miles then that's a different conversation!

You bought a 5 year old car with less than 55 miles on the odometer? Has it been sat up in a lot for 5 years?

The coil whine drives me nuts too! I have an XPS 13

It probably reaches saturation at that time of day where it can no longer absorb anymore heat.

Absolutely. If you so wish you can take the train at noon and get off at 12:30 where any temperature difference due to the sun should be minimal.

London is regularly 3-4° warmer than the towns and village that border the M25 ring road. You can genuinely feel the difference when you take a train into the city and vice versa.

I agree, but it's largely academic in the real world. People drive to work in bad conditions because they fear if they don't they'll lose their job. People drive in bad conditions because someone they know has fallen ill and they need to get to the hospital.

Most people drive to their limits, or their comfort. Some people do stupid things and drive beyond what is safe, but dependent on where you live this may or may not be in the minority.

What fascinates me is that we are not giving drivers the skills they need to be able to avoid accidents should the worst happen. Instead we say you shouldn't drive at speed X or in condition Y.

My argument is that we should be teaching drivers these skills not only so they can correct their mistakes, because at the end of the day we are all human and make mistakes, but if we also show drivers how easy it is to lose control of a vehicle they may just respect the road a little more than they do already.

Sure, that is the same here too.

The unfortunate truth is that people are human and humans make mistakes. You could drive to work on the same back road every day. Except one day it's particularly cold and you don't see the ice patch on the sharp right hand corner you've taken 100s of times before. The rear of the car steps out, but you don't know what to do as you have never encountered this before. You panic, naturally stamping on the brakes and end up off the road in a ditch.

The alternative: drivers must complete separate examinations for front wheel drive and rear driven cars, like how automatic and manual are separate licenses.

As part of that drivers must learn how the drivetrain affects how the car breaks traction both under power and under non-power conditions (i.e. coasting), and the appropriate corrections for both.

Let's come back to our scenario. We can assume the driver is operating a front wheel drive vehicle. Instead of slamming on the brakes, the driver has experience of lift off oversteer from their test. They apply 1/4 turn of opposite lock, then unwind the lock. The driver then applies power to the front wheels to straighten the rear.

Thanks to good training and examination driver has successfully avoided ending up the ditch.

Well for example, in the U.K, neither understeer nor oversteer is taught when learning to drive. Whose fault is that? The 30 million drivers who have never heard of it or practised it, but have otherwise satisfied the legal requirement to drive; or the legislation that mandates the procedures that must be taken to pass a driving test?

I think the parent was referring to the mining and manufacturing of lithion ion and other components that go into a car.

What do you mean by "full control"? The average driver does not have the experience nor the training to maintain full control at all times.

For example, consider a situation where the driver has to correct understeer, or lift-off oversteer, both relatively easy to achieve in cold, wet conditions.

TSI standards for turbocharged stratified injection, not twin.

Neither the 1.0 EA211 or the 1.2 EA111 are twin-charged. The 2005 1.4 EA111 was however twin-charged and was replaced in 2012 with the newer 1.4 EA211 turbocharged engine. This has now become the 1.5 EA211.

Minor nit; turbocharged, not supercharged.

The idea is that by designing a new platform you can create one which has a 10-20 year lifespan. These platforms tend to be designed for both electric and hybrid cars, can have variable wheelspans, tracks, and widths while retaining a common set of drivetrains. The MQB and MLB platforms from VW are two examples of this.

Monkey patching an old platform might get you another model generation, but ultimately it will end up being more expensive and less flexible in the long run.

I don't understand why or who is downvoting you. I wish they would say why by replying. Nothing you have said is inaccurate in my opinion.

If you mean warming up your car by idling before you drive off then yes, that advice is rather stale.

First, by idling you only warm up the engine, oil and coolant. By the time you drive off your gearbox oil is still cold, as are the driveshafts, CV joints, differential, and your brake fluid.

Lots of new cars have something called a cold start where for the first minute or two they run very rich, burning excess fuel to get the catalytic converter and exhaust up to temperature as quickly as possible for emissions reasons.

The e-Golf is a compromise. It is very difficult to add electrification to a vehicle platform built for traditional ICE cars.

There is almost no space under the floors for the cells, and you can't put them up front either because the additional weight over an engine and ancillaries would create a car with a 70:30 weight distribution. This would make the car handle terribly, cause excessive tire wear and fishtailing under braking.

It costs billions of USD to design a new platform. VW spent $60 billion USD on their MQB platform [1].

1. https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/vw-could-sell-50...