Recent content by Fogey

Thing is, with ICE, you have to be in attendance at the pump whilst adding fuel - then you have to move the car to a car park in order for your comfort break. With an EV you just roll up to a charger, plug in, and saunter over to wherever at your leisure. Much easier, and potentially faster.

Exactly! That's what happens with ICE cars. It means that the pee/refuel stop takes longer than a fast top-up charge, in practice! And is more hassle.

I thought they were only optional extras on BMWs?

From earlier (much earlier) comments on this thread, my bet is still on the combination of driveshaft angle and use of tripod-type CV joints (something which is conjecture on my part, but fits the facts).

Don't forget that an EV is a lot more efficient than a diesel engine (in the context of normal automotive use) - by a factor of 2-3. So the equivalence is with a diesel car with a 14-21 litre fuel tank.

The Polestar 2 Mk2 version apparently went from front-wheel drive to rear-wheel, on the grounds of efficiency!

Deleted.

"how much we pay to STOP the wind turbines turning" Surely that's easily done by feathering the rotor blades?

It's not the cabling or the granny charger - it's the plugs and sockets (excluding the granny charger's own 13A plug, which has thermal protection). They're not protected against thermal runaway, which can occur at any time when there are contacting metal surfaces. As I've said. You have also...

I should mention that a plug/socket combination can go into unexpected thermal runaway :mad: :eek: at any time. Keep a watchful eye (and nose). You have been warned! :)

It's not the extension lead itself, as I said, it's the plug at the end - which doesn't have a temperature sensor that is coupled to the charger.

The key thing about use of an extension lead is the wall-socket/13A-plug interface. This can overheat - whether due to an imperfect fuse connection in the plug or just poor contact. The granny charger's 13A plug will have a temperature sensor to guard against overheating (and possible meltdown...

Seems reasonable!

It probably is on the more realistic (for many users) WLTP spec. The CLTC spec favours smaller, lighter cars where aero drag at higher speeds has less effect. Just compare with the (real world and WLTP) range figures for some of the smaller cars coming from Renault and Stellantis etc. which...

Yes, the safety point of view. I'm not sure where I might have read it, so the possibility of the ER having achieved the extra range by using a higher nickel formula may well be wrong - it's just that it seemed to be a not too unreasonable conclusion. If it is NCM 5.2.3, then it would be a...