Unpopular opinion, I only think that electric is the future as long as .GOV subsidies and tax incentives for both customer and manufacturer exist. We are going to have a very large problem with disposing of all of these large batteries in the near future.
Another hint at the future of Ford
- Thread starter MyRaptorLife
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
Probably not fair to compare to a street car but impressive none the less. This pissing contest between Fiat and Ford is entertaining. BTW. is GM still making vehicles? lol
richnot
Full Access Member
A lot of trains and large ships use diesel engines to power the generators for the electric source that they need to run the electric motors they use.
Here is a link to the electric Azipod which can rotate 360 degrees to give the ship incredible maneuverability and better fuel economy. One other thing it eliminates is the need for costly tugs to maneuver them around in port
https://new.abb.com/marine/systems-and-solutions/azipod
PlainJane
Full Access Member
Using your logic, going back to the V10 is better still.
The future is probably a hybrid 3 or 4 cylinder gas motor.
I would buy a Gen3 V6TT hybrid, that's what matters!
richnot
Full Access Member
I agree with you 100% that`s why their not for everybody, it would suck to call Triple A to come out with a 220v generator lol and I would be staring at the gauge constantly hoping I had enough juice to get back home for my expensive quick charger or have to wait 6 plus hours to use my ride again
I was unlucky enough to have a li-ion battery explode that was on a charge on my desk at home. Nobody was hurt but the smell and the dust which looked like graphite was everywhere, worse than when you sand Spackle on your wall. The battery was one AA size, after that I understood how a battery on a plane exploding could take it down
The electric vs ICE argument is multifaceted; the foreseeable future will no doubt consist of a combination of both, as each have their distinct benefits and weaknesses. One is not necessarily a replacement for the other.
EVs are ideal for low speed city use for fleets. Operations like USPS, Amazon, FedEx, UPS, etc. only need their vehicles to last for an 8 to 10 hour day and then charge overnight, when electricity demand is low. EVs offer a great solution for them. Their current ICE vehicles spend the majority of their day idling, which is inefficient.
The problem is there are financially motivated people and companies that don’t want a balance of energy sources; they want total EV domination. Con artists like Elon Muskrat want everything to be electric and make any non-EV out to be the devil that is ruining the planet. He’s a narcissist sociopath with a cult following; if it was up to him, ICE vehicles would be illegal and consumers would be forced into buying his overpriced, underperforming, unreliable junk.
The aspect that EV promoters forget is supply and demand. When gasoline cars first appeared in the early 1900’s, gasoline was a waste byproduct of kerosene production and was discarded. As demand build up and supply restrictions occurred over the years, gasoline went from being a waste product to an expensive commodity that drivers had to wait hours in line to get.
Our current electrical grid can barely handle our home A/C demands, never mind having millions of EVs plugged into it. The cost of upgrading that is in the tens of billions. Who’s subsiding that? As always it will fall on the tax payer, as execs like muskrat haul their billions to the bank. With the additional demand, the cost of electricity will go up, not down. In many cases, especially CA, electricity available at public charging stations is already more expensive than the gasoline equivalent to that level of energy.
I won’t even get into the environmental impact of batteries, but even with the limited number of EVs in production the demands for heavy metals are significant. And with a significant supply of batteries being manufactured in China, you can only imagine the environmental destruction that will occur given their track record.
As far as range, don’t believe anything Tesla publishes; they found the loophole in the system and exploit it to their full advantage:
https://www.caranddriver.com/featur...-factor-tesla-uses-for-big-epa-range-numbers/
EVs are ideal for low speed city use for fleets. Operations like USPS, Amazon, FedEx, UPS, etc. only need their vehicles to last for an 8 to 10 hour day and then charge overnight, when electricity demand is low. EVs offer a great solution for them. Their current ICE vehicles spend the majority of their day idling, which is inefficient.
The problem is there are financially motivated people and companies that don’t want a balance of energy sources; they want total EV domination. Con artists like Elon Muskrat want everything to be electric and make any non-EV out to be the devil that is ruining the planet. He’s a narcissist sociopath with a cult following; if it was up to him, ICE vehicles would be illegal and consumers would be forced into buying his overpriced, underperforming, unreliable junk.
The aspect that EV promoters forget is supply and demand. When gasoline cars first appeared in the early 1900’s, gasoline was a waste byproduct of kerosene production and was discarded. As demand build up and supply restrictions occurred over the years, gasoline went from being a waste product to an expensive commodity that drivers had to wait hours in line to get.
Our current electrical grid can barely handle our home A/C demands, never mind having millions of EVs plugged into it. The cost of upgrading that is in the tens of billions. Who’s subsiding that? As always it will fall on the tax payer, as execs like muskrat haul their billions to the bank. With the additional demand, the cost of electricity will go up, not down. In many cases, especially CA, electricity available at public charging stations is already more expensive than the gasoline equivalent to that level of energy.
I won’t even get into the environmental impact of batteries, but even with the limited number of EVs in production the demands for heavy metals are significant. And with a significant supply of batteries being manufactured in China, you can only imagine the environmental destruction that will occur given their track record.
As far as range, don’t believe anything Tesla publishes; they found the loophole in the system and exploit it to their full advantage:
https://www.caranddriver.com/featur...-factor-tesla-uses-for-big-epa-range-numbers/
richnot
Full Access Member
I would not discount a V6, considering a F-1 or Indy car motor pumps out roughly 750 hp and is Limited to 12,000 rpm. That is obviously not a production motor but it is a V6
They have even managed 700hp out of a Wankel rotary engine. Look at how a big block used to be the King of the hill, not so much anymore and who would have thought that back then?
Who know what the future holds for engines. I`m still impressed that you can buy a 3-D printer to make parts at home
It's almost a production engine. Not like they're building a bunch of these but 1.6l hybrid with 1000hp
https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/pictu...es-a-stunning-appearance-at-the-la-auto-show/
richnot
Full Access Member
That`s what I mean, as time and technology go on anything is possible. Evolution...
You’re confusing cylinder count with displacement. A 4.0L V8 will not make 33% more power than a 4.0 V6. You also fail to understand the concept of efficiency; if you can get the same desired power and torque out of a smaller engine, you improve efficiency and fuel economy under all operating conditions except maximum power output, which will be the same between both engines. No production engine will ever be at 100% of it’s power output capability, so the displacement argument is irrelevant.
You’re not taking engine design into account. In fact, I believe you were the one that made the ridiculous statement that “all V6s are the same”, which is comical at best. As engine displacement has decreased to improve efficiency, designs have become more robust to accommodate the additional power and torque output. The Ford Nano is a great example with it’s CGI block (same as 6.7 Powerstroke), engine block skirt stiffener, variable displacement oil pump, and oil cooler pistons.
You continue to confuse your opinion with the facts. Refer to above. By your reasoning, a soft cam 305 is “better” than a GNX 3.8 Turbo. Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? Not everything is black and white guy, you should really try being open to understanding new concepts instead of living in your own ignorance.
Similar threads
