[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by raptor5244

Keep in mind that certain Tesla Models are very capable cars and they make it even easier for the novice driver to go fast, even around a corner. Here is a comparison of Tesla Model 3 and Camaro SS, notice the Tesla still weighs a bit more as well.

Attachment 1068123

Attachment 1068124

Attachment 1068125

As JinX mentioned already, it's not just about the numbers. You can read about those - appreciate them even - from seeing them in a magazine article without going anywhere near either of the cars. Either way, to focus solely on the numbers is to miss the point. It's a step too far away from doing the actual driving and being satisfied with your part in it.

I'm really against the idea of making cars so easy to drive hard that even a novice driver can easily drive faster than his inherent skill level can support without help. That amounts to taking even more of the driving away from the driver, while letting said driver fool himself into thinking he's better (much better?) than he really is. Wrong answer.


Norm

[Hops]

Originally Posted by raptor5244

Keep in mind that certain Tesla Models are very capable cars and they make it even easier for the novice driver to go fast, even around a corner. Here is a comparison of Tesla Model 3 and Camaro SS, notice the Tesla still weighs a bit more as well.

did you sell your gen 6 Camaro?

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

I'm really against the idea of making cars so easy to drive hard that even a novice driver can easily drive faster than his inherent skill level can support without help.

I'd still like to see 15-16 year old kids be forced to take their driver's exam on a big old truck with no power steering, manual drum brakes, and a 4 speed non-synchro transmission.

[cellsafemode]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

I'd still like to see 15-16 year old kids be forced to take their driver's exam on a big old truck with no power steering, manual drum brakes, and a 4 speed non-synchro transmission.

instead of something irrelevant like that, it would be nice to just force people to be tested on the car they're going to actually be driving to be allowed to drive it. Though enforcement would probably be more of an after-the-fact kind of thing relying on cameras.

Using the car they wish to be licensed to drive - they would have to prove the ability to handle driving in wet conditions, icy conditions, snow conditions, dry conditions, merging onto and exiting highways in light and heavy traffic, up and down steep gradiants and the other normal things in the current test.

and perhaps limiting drivers who haven't been certified to be able to drive at 80mph or their cars aren't capable of doing 80 safely (except big rigs and busses) from entering any highways.

yea... that sounds about right.

Also - unrelated to the quote, a stable solid state lithium battery formula has been found to be both viable across 10,000 recharge cycles and retain capacity to 85% after that with no negative side-effects. That means recharging in 10 minutes (if you can supply the current), lighter - stronger batteries for the same capacity and voltage as current lion batteries. That's full recharges twice a day for 14 years off the same battery pack with only a 15% decrease in range after 14 years.

Cool things are coming in terms of battery tech. Should be a mostly drop-in replacement for current packs in cars since the charging tech would be the same ...minus the need to upgrade the max allowed charging current. Fun stuff.

will also make retro-fitting existing cars using the e-crate setup a lot safer and viable.

edit: and the license they get would only be good for that car class - the class being set by the vehicle power range and size and number of wheels. So there would be different subclasses each with a highway allowance rating or not.

[Devstrike]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

It goes far beyond numbers, though.

It's really not different from telling manual fans automatics shift faster and use less gas. Yes, we get that, but we still like driving a stick. Same tired old argument with EV here, really.

Now, I personally can possibly make an exception for exotic supercars with their sexy-sounding engines when it comes to manual trans, but a 4-door blobby sedan? Nah. Don't care how fast it is. It's an ugly blob and it cannot replace the manual-driving experience, just like paddle shifters on an auto trans can't.

And if you are really a numbers person, M3P costs quite a bit more than an SS w/o 1LE. Looking at the price, it's more comparable to ZL1. While Tesla's fixed price prevents you from paying above MSRP, it also eliminates the chance of you negotiating a good price, which realistically can happen with a lot of Chevy's(perhaps not right now). Given how close M3P is to the SS, I think it will have a hard time even against an SS 1LE, let alone a ZL1, save for the old low-speed acceleration due to grip limitations.

Well said. You can prop EVs all you want but there is no way you can compare it to rowing your own gears. If I can ever be in a position to recover enough to where I can drive a manual again you bet your arse I will be in a manual again. It's funny because there are times when I start my car or if I manually shift the 10 speed my left leg hits the imaginary clutch.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

instead of something irrelevant like that, it would be nice to just force people to be tested on the car they're going to actually be driving to be allowed to drive it. Though enforcement would probably be more of an after-the-fact kind of thing relying on cameras.

Using the car they wish to be licensed to drive - they would have to prove the ability to handle driving in wet conditions, icy conditions, snow conditions, dry conditions, merging onto and exiting highways in light and heavy traffic, up and down steep gradiants and the other normal things in the current test.

and perhaps limiting drivers who haven't been certified to be able to drive at 80mph or their cars aren't capable of doing 80 safely (except big rigs and busses) from entering any highways.

yea... that sounds about right.

Also - unrelated to the quote, a stable solid state lithium battery formula has been found to be both viable across 10,000 recharge cycles and retain capacity to 85% after that with no negative side-effects. That means recharging in 10 minutes (if you can supply the current), lighter - stronger batteries for the same capacity and voltage as current lion batteries. That's full recharges twice a day for 14 years off the same battery pack with only a 15% decrease in range after 14 years.

Cool things are coming in terms of battery tech. Should be a mostly drop-in replacement for current packs in cars since the charging tech would be the same ...minus the need to upgrade the max allowed charging current. Fun stuff.

will also make retro-fitting existing cars using the e-crate setup a lot safer and viable.

I can agree that test is too irrelevant, though it would be entertaining for some to watch for sure.

And I don't know, I personally took my driving tests in driving school's CVT Corolla for Novice and 5-speed Civic for Full. I know people who passed driving tests in powerful cars, like a buddy who did it in a 392 Charger he had at the time(now has a Hellcat Charger), but I am always afraid of the fact that the examiner will have some bias against loud sports cars, where they think I am driving the car aggressively just because how loud the car can be and just how different it feels from your average family sedans while in reality, I am really only accelerating lightly and following the rules.

In Australia, they have limitations on what cars you can drive with a novice license, which I can agree isn't a bad idea, though I think some car dealers will not be thrilled about rich kids not being able to drive their more expensive cars.

And what's the cost on those batteries? Also, are we talking about 85% retained capacity after constant full cycles? As in, discharge from 100% to, say 5%?

To give an idea, discharging from 100% to 0% once and discharging from 80% to 60% 5 times both count as a single discharge cycle, but there is a big difference in wear between these two different processes even though both technically count as a cycle.

If it does retain 85% after 10,000 100% to 5% discharge(and associated charge) cycles, it's leaning very close to the "too good to be true" territory for me.

And as I said, forget about retrofitting for Average Joe's. It's just not economically viable. Please look at how much engine swaps cost before thinking about this idea further. And since I didn't mention it in the previous reply regarding swaps, those don't always include A/C, power steering, ABS or traction control. Those all can cost extra.

[raptor5244]

Originally Posted by Hops

did you sell your gen 6 Camaro?

I did sell it for a 2019 C7 Grand Sport M7 Vert. Then I sold the C7 for the Tesla M3P.

I also have a Miata ND with a manual transmission now, which I find to be the most fun car on the street. 2300lbs, top down, feels like a go-kart.

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

instead of something irrelevant like that, it would be nice to just force people to be tested on the car they're going to actually be driving to be allowed to drive it. Though enforcement would probably be more of an after-the-fact kind of thing relying on cameras.

Using the car they wish to be licensed to drive - they would have to prove the ability to handle driving in wet conditions, icy conditions, snow conditions, dry conditions, merging onto and exiting highways in light and heavy traffic, up and down steep gradiants and the other normal things in the current test.

and perhaps limiting drivers who haven't been certified to be able to drive at 80mph or their cars aren't capable of doing 80 safely (except big rigs and busses) from entering any highways.

yea... that sounds about right.

Also - unrelated to the quote, a stable solid state lithium battery formula has been found to be both viable across 10,000 recharge cycles and retain capacity to 85% after that with no negative side-effects. That means recharging in 10 minutes (if you can supply the current), lighter - stronger batteries for the same capacity and voltage as current lion batteries. That's full recharges twice a day for 14 years off the same battery pack with only a 15% decrease in range after 14 years.

Cool things are coming in terms of battery tech. Should be a mostly drop-in replacement for current packs in cars since the charging tech would be the same ...minus the need to upgrade the max allowed charging current. Fun stuff.

will also make retro-fitting existing cars using the e-crate setup a lot safer and viable.

edit: and the license they get would only be good for that car class - the class being set by the vehicle power range and size and number of wheels. So there would be different subclasses each with a highway allowance rating or not.

Speaking of irrelevant mumbo-jumbo......

You know, you still need to pass your drivers exam on a manual transmission in Europe right?

[raptor5244]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

It goes far beyond numbers, though.

It's really not different from telling manual fans automatics shift faster and use less gas. Yes, we get that, but we still like driving a stick. Same tired old argument with EV here, really.

Now, I personally can possibly make an exception for exotic supercars with their sexy-sounding engines when it comes to manual trans, but a 4-door blobby sedan? Nah. Don't care how fast it is. It's an ugly blob and it cannot replace the manual-driving experience, just like paddle shifters on an auto trans can't.

And if you are really a numbers person, M3P costs quite a bit more than an SS w/o 1LE. Looking at the price, it's more comparable to ZL1. While Tesla's fixed price prevents you from paying above MSRP, it also eliminates the chance of you negotiating a good price, which realistically can happen with a lot of Chevy's(perhaps not right now). Given how close M3P is to the SS, I think it will have a hard time even against an SS 1LE, let alone a ZL1, save for the old low-speed acceleration due to grip limitations.

Agreed, we are comparing a heavy 4 door sedan to a Camaro. I think the main point of this thread is to speculate what an EV Camaro could be like. At this point there is not much to compare to except Tesla.

The SS-1LE and ZL1 will be faster around a track. The ZL1 with 10 speed vs. the M3P makes for a great 1/4 mile race. The M3P is obviously more consistent with mid 11s and anyone can do it, just mash the pedal as quick as you can.

I do find the Tesla has more usable power on the street while being super efficient. You don't realize how inefficient it seems to be idling 650hp at a traffic light until you are in a performance EV and can tear away with no drama. We may not like that there is no noise, no tire spin, no vibration, exhaust note, etc. but you can't deny how effortless and smooth the power is.

[cellsafemode]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

Speaking of irrelevant mumbo-jumbo......

You know, you still need to pass your drivers exam on a manual transmission in Europe right?

so? that doesn't make it any less dumb that they require being tested in something you'll never use.

Acknowledging that vehicles are not created equal and that there's as huge of a difference in how cars behave as there are in different kinds of say...air planes that exist ...suggests that our licenses should follow how those work more than how they currently are given out as a one-size fits all unless you're dealing with commercial/tractor trailer vehicles.


it would make far more sense for people to have to be certified to drive any given car class they're trying to drive ...involving a test using that particular car (or at least car class) at the performance capable by the vehicle. You wouldn't have to test as a pro racing driver in each vehicle, but you should be able to show proficiency in using the vehicle across the range of conditions normally experienced across the us (or whatever country you're in).

I'd much rather know someone in a 2020 porsche knows how to drive it in the rain vs their ability to shift gears when i know the last car they got tested in was likely an econo-box - much less something from 20-30+ years ago for older drivers.

edit: likewise, someone driving a big F250 or larger pulling a car trailer/rv/etc trailer over a mountain should be licensed to do so ..and not just be assumed to be able to do so because they were able to change lanes properly in a 1998 civic.

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

so? that doesn't make it any less dumb that they require being tested in something you'll never use.

Acknowledging that vehicles are not created equal and that there's as huge of a difference in how cars behave as there are in different kinds of say...air planes that exist ...suggests that our licenses should follow how those work more than how they currently are given out as a one-size fits all unless you're dealing with commercial/tractor trailer vehicles.


it would make far more sense for people to have to be certified to drive any given car class they're trying to drive ...involving a test using that particular car (or at least car class) at the performance capable by the vehicle. You wouldn't have to test as a pro racing driver in each vehicle, but you should be able to show proficiency in using the vehicle across the range of conditions normally experienced across the us (or whatever country you're in).

I'd much rather know someone in a 2020 porsche knows how to drive it in the rain vs their ability to shift gears when i know the last car they got tested in was likely an econo-box - much less something from 20-30+ years ago for older drivers.

Yeah you completely miss the point. I figured you would.

[cellsafemode]

Originally Posted by raptor5244

Agreed, we are comparing a heavy 4 door sedan to a Camaro. I think the main point of this thread is to speculate what an EV Camaro could be like. At this point there is not much to compare to except Tesla.

The SS-1LE and ZL1 will be faster around a track. The ZL1 with 10 speed vs. the M3P makes for a great 1/4 mile race. The M3P is obviously more consistent with mid 11s and anyone can do it, just mash the pedal as quick as you can.

I do find the Tesla has more usable power on the street while being super efficient. You don't realize how inefficient it seems to be idling 650hp at a traffic light until you are in a performance EV and can tear away with no drama. We may not like that there is no noise, no tire spin, no vibration, exhaust note, etc. but you can't deny how effortless and smooth the power is.

we do have the ev camaro that used the e-crate motor ....then extrapolate out a non-drag-race battery pack .... and that should give you decent idea of what one could be with little purpose-built design consideration.

A purpose built one though, would probably be closer to a high perf version of the model 3 than the bigger model S.

imagine the same basic weight, but more camaro-esque suspension choices and body obviously. Assuming the gm platform is nearly as good as tesla's.

[cellsafemode]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

Yeah you completely miss the point. I figured you would.

if your point has anything to do with trying to suggest drivers should know how to drive a manual transmission when they will never drive a manual transmission then yea...because that seemed to be the gist of your statement.

Bringing up europe doing it as some kind of justification just makes no sense ...i never said we should copy europe or that europe had a better system. Saying US's is stupid doesn't mean europe's is not also stupid for other reasons (maybe they use the manual car they use to normalize what vehicle everyone gets tested in as some lowest common denominator for what avg drivers will use without excluding the poorest population)

non power steering / manual / etc type requirements are irrelevant requirements for the vast majority of drivers. Having that requirement would do nothing to improve driving for almost any driver. It's only there to make people who do know how to drive with those handicaps feel better about a skill that is all but obsolete.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

Speaking of irrelevant mumbo-jumbo......

You know, you still need to pass your drivers exam on a manual transmission in Europe right?

It's more like you get separate licenses for manual(and auto) and auto-only. Around my neck of woods, you can still do the test in a manual trans, you just don't get a separate license. I have heard some areas in the US have stopped people doing tests in a manual, though.

Originally Posted by raptor5244

I do find the Tesla has more usable power on the street while being super efficient. You don't realize how inefficient it seems to be idling 650hp at a traffic light until you are in a performance EV and can tear away with no drama. We may not like that there is no noise, no tire spin, no vibration, exhaust note, etc. but you can't deny how effortless and smooth the power is.

If you are making a replacement argument, then the efficiency argument can work. However, I wouldn't replace my Camaro with any EV, so that's irrelevant. And really, for a car like this, it's about smiles per gallon.

For me, the extra insurance cost in my area would kill the possibility of a second car. It's dumb that we don't have discounts for extra cars, but that's what happens when auto insurance is run by a government monopoly. But I digress, perhaps it could be worth it for some people in the very long run.

Personally, my alternative would be just cycling. As long as the weather cooperates and it's not too far away, it's easier and cheaper to park, I can go places car can't go and be closer to my destination, and I don't need to pay for insurance, gas or electricity.

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

so? that doesn't make it any less dumb that they require being tested in something you'll never use.

Acknowledging that vehicles are not created equal and that there's as huge of a difference in how cars behave as there are in different kinds of say...air planes that exist ...suggests that our licenses should follow how those work more than how they currently are given out as a one-size fits all unless you're dealing with commercial/tractor trailer vehicles.


it would make far more sense for people to have to be certified to drive any given car class they're trying to drive ...involving a test using that particular car (or at least car class) at the performance capable by the vehicle. You wouldn't have to test as a pro racing driver in each vehicle, but you should be able to show proficiency in using the vehicle across the range of conditions normally experienced across the us (or whatever country you're in).

I'd much rather know someone in a 2020 porsche knows how to drive it in the rain vs their ability to shift gears when i know the last car they got tested in was likely an econo-box - much less something from 20-30+ years ago for older drivers.

edit: likewise, someone driving a big F250 or larger pulling a car trailer/rv/etc trailer over a mountain should be licensed to do so ..and not just be assumed to be able to do so because they were able to change lanes properly in a 1998 civic.

In theory, I see where you are coming from, but in reality, it's pretty hard to enforce. We have already established that it's hard to revamp the current licensing system.

You also have to consider that no one drives their cars daily as they do in a driving test. I wouldn't want to be failed in a Camaro SS 1LE because the examiner thinks I am driving aggressively because the exhaust is loud. When I was doing a pre-exam driving class for my full license, my driving instructor specifically told me to keep the RPM low and he said it may be better to lug the engine a bit(driving school car, so IDC if it dies an earlier demise) than be failed for revving it too high for a proper downshift, and that's in a Civic. If there is a safe route to pass the test, of course people will be using that safe route over having personal bias play into it.

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

we do have the ev camaro that used the e-crate motor ....then extrapolate out a non-drag-race battery pack .... and that should give you decent idea of what one could be with little purpose-built design consideration.

A purpose built one though, would probably be closer to a high perf version of the model 3 than the bigger model S.

imagine the same basic weight, but more camaro-esque suspension choices and body obviously. Assuming the gm platform is nearly as good as tesla's.

And how much does that cost? And you want to eat into Camaro's already small-ish trunk space for extra batteries?

If it's like Chevy's existing crate engines(or really, any manufacturer's crate engines), you get the engine/motor, control units, and transmission, and that's it. It's up to you to figure out how to mount everything, and that's where a lot of the money goes. Lots of mounting points have to be modified with many custom fabricated parts. If the eCrate is comprehensive with the completed mounting, then the price is going to be through the roof when you toss labour cost in there.

One last thing: at least for some performance vehicles, you can sell your old engine and transmission to recoup some cost. Other people would love an LT4, LT1 or maybe even LGX, but for a family sedan, yeah you aren't getting crap for that 4-pot.

Again, swaps never make economical sense. If you want to do it for performance, that's cool, but it's not gonna be viable for average folks.