[SFV1LE]

Originally Posted by Dan82679

For sure Tesla's are nice comfortable and fast in it's current novelty phase.

I don't understand what this means? Implies the fact that Teslas are very comfortable and already the FASTEST accelerating mass production cars ever are characteristics that will go away when electric vehicles fail and the "novelty phase" ends.

Do you think innovation with ICE vehicles will achieve new levels of gasoline fueled power and efficiency that surpass electric vehicles? Seems like engineers are only making incremental gains with McLarens, Ferraris, GMA etc. All great cars, I love the T.50.

The next gen of electric supercars will likely have 2000 HP/TQ, accelerate to 60 in 1.5 seconds, and 400+ mile range. Trucks with 0-60 under 3 seconds. Eventually the price of this performance will fall under $100k, there is no stopping this.

[cooldawg]

I hope everyone loves it because the ICE coupe will go extinct.

The grid in most locations is barely capable of fulfilling needs now, but somehow it’s going to be capable of supporting a gradual crossover from ICE to EVs in passenger cars? With all the climate alarmists resisting further development in nuclear, clean coal or NG based power generation?

The laws of physics always apply- there is no free lunch like battery powered cars running on themselves thanks to a magic lossless alternator. This all seems like a slow boil of the frogs to me. The weak, unicorn fart inspired grid will be partitioned accordingly. Spirited driving will be strongly discouraged via taxes and regulation. It will be reserved for the elites.

No thanks on the Camaro sedan EV. With a nod to Rush, I need to secure and stash my ‘Red Barchetta’ hopefully in the form of a bright yellow 1SS 1LE…

[minn19]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

That’s gonna have to be a hard pass.

^This, how the hell does every conversation no matter the subject end up going first political, then conspiracy theories and then we are all screwed by “they.”

It’s a freaking car forum, can we have one place where we aren’t bombarded by this crap constantly?

If you don’t like it, you don’t like it, no need to go down these rabbit holes.

Thanks Jim and others for bringing some sanity into this conversation.

[minn19]

Originally Posted by SFV1LE

I don't understand what this means? Implies the fact that Teslas are very comfortable and already the FASTEST accelerating mass production cars ever are characteristics that will go away when electric vehicles fail and the "novelty phase" ends.

Do you think innovation with ICE vehicles will achieve new levels of gasoline fueled power and efficiency that surpass electric vehicles? Seems like engineers are only making incremental gains with McLarens, Ferraris, GMA etc. All great cars, I love the T.50.

The next gen of electric supercars will likely have 2000 HP/TQ, accelerate to 60 in 1.5 seconds, and 400+ mile range. Trucks with 0-60 under 3 seconds. Eventually the price of this performance will fall under $100k, there is no stopping this.

Also this^. I’m not currently a big fan of electric cars, but there is no denying where this is headed.

In the beginning of cars there was no gas station infrastructure etc for them. Funny how it was built and the same will happen for electric cars. Crazy how a large section of our population thinks we can’t build, improve or innovate in this country anymore.

[Z OH 6]

Originally Posted by minn19

Also this^. I’m not currently a big fan of electric cars, but there is no denying where this is headed.

In the beginning of cars there was no gas station infrastructure etc for them. Funny how it was built and the same will happen for electric cars. Crazy how a large section of our population thinks we can’t build, improve or innovate in this country anymore.

And let me just add to that, if this was not already happening and already researched, the big auto manufacturers wouldn't be investing so much in EV's right now. You can bet your bottom dollar, they have done extensive analysis on this to determine how feasible it is to move forward with EV adoption.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by SFV1LE

I don't understand what this means? Implies the fact that Teslas are very comfortable and already the FASTEST accelerating mass production cars ever are characteristics that will go away when electric vehicles fail and the "novelty phase" ends.

Do you think innovation with ICE vehicles will achieve new levels of gasoline fueled power and efficiency that surpass electric vehicles? Seems like engineers are only making incremental gains with McLarens, Ferraris, GMA etc. All great cars, I love the T.50.

The next gen of electric supercars will likely have 2000 HP/TQ, accelerate to 60 in 1.5 seconds, and 400+ mile range. Trucks with 0-60 under 3 seconds. Eventually the price of this performance will fall under $100k, there is no stopping this.

I was having an interesting conversation with a fellow gearhead friend last week. The first car I paid money for was a ‘74 Mustang 2.3L. My most current car (MR2 notwithstanding) is a slightly modified 2017 Camaro SS Vert. Here’s some spec comparisons.

Displacement: Mustang 2.3L. Camaro 6.2L (almost triple)
Output: Mustang 88 hp Camaro 500+ (more than 5x)
Mass: Mustang 2,700. Camaro 3,800-ish
Fuel econ: Mustang 25 hwy Camaro 23 hwy (E85) to 27 (93)

So 43 years of progress delivers similar fuel economy in a significantly heavier vehicle, with 5 times the output.

And EVs start there and continue to improve.

[SFV1LE]

Originally Posted by Z OH 6

And let me just add to that, if this was not already happening and already researched, the big auto manufacturers wouldn't be investing so much in EV's right now. You can bet your bottom dollar, they have done extensive analysis on this to determine how feasible it is to move forward with EV adoption.

Have they really done extensive analysis or do these "well educated" engineers, statisticians and financial analysts just think they did, were they all fooled by the global deep state cabal?

[rlarsen462]

All the discussion about grid capacity, efficiency of EV's, etc. is completely moot, we simply don't have the base generation capacity in the first place to support hundreds of millions of EV's globally, and the fastest current way to ramp that up would be with fossil fuel generation (coal & NG). Coupled with massive investments in nuclear projects (which take many years).

And when all these clowns talk about is wind and solar and no mention of going full in on nuclear power base load generation, it reveals what a farce of government overreach and coercion this is trying to force the market to make an adoption much faster than it would otherwise on pure value proposition.

Try to remember that not one person in power, politician, billionaire, etc. gives ONE **** about you or your family and whether you live, suffer, or die. Not one. So follow the money and follow the motives and you can probably makes sense of things for yourself and decide if what you are being told is really going to improve your quality of life, or reduce it.

[CW3SF]

Originally Posted by rlarsen462

All the discussion about grid capacity, efficiency of EV's, etc. is completely moot, we simply don't have the base generation capacity in the first place to support hundreds of millions of EV's globally, and the fastest current way to ramp that up would be with fossil fuel generation (coal & NG). Coupled with massive investments in nuclear projects (which take many years).

……

^This.

I’m glad someone else here knows what’s really happening in power generation. I tried to explain this in a previous thread and it was like spitting into the wind. Expanding the grid doesn’t mean building more towers and transformers. It means more generation capacity. And wind/solar isn’t going to fill that need.

[radz28]

How environmentally friendly is it to string more of whatever it will take to string electric chargers all over the country? I'm not suggesting gas stations don't leak and pollute, and everything else, but does there need to be a realistic analysis and serious conversation about that infrastructure? I know it's already happening, but if it's truly about being green, is this even a talking point?

[raptor5244]

Originally Posted by rlarsen462

All the discussion about grid capacity, efficiency of EV's, etc. is completely moot, we simply don't have the base generation capacity in the first place to support hundreds of millions of EV's globally, and the fastest current way to ramp that up would be with fossil fuel generation (coal & NG). Coupled with massive investments in nuclear projects (which take many years).

And when all these clowns talk about is wind and solar and no mention of going full in on nuclear power base load generation, it reveals what a farce of government overreach and coercion this is trying to force the market to make an adoption much faster than it would otherwise on pure value proposition.

Try to remember that not one person in power, politician, billionaire, etc. gives ONE **** about you or your family and whether you live, suffer, or die. Not one. So follow the money and follow the motives and you can probably makes sense of things for yourself and decide if what you are being told is really going to improve your quality of life, or reduce it.

The strange thing is companies like GM are now "all-in" on EVs now. At least Ford is dividing their company into two divisions, EV and ICE. I find GMs approach to be pretty extreme.

https://www.ford.com/ford-blue-ford-model-e/

[Z OH 6]

Originally Posted by raptor5244

The strange thing is companies like GM are now "all-in" on EVs now. At least Ford is dividing their company into two divisions, EV and ICE. I find GMs approach to be pretty extreme.

https://www.ford.com/ford-blue-ford-model-e/

Ford is going the safer route and probably the smarter route. I'm sure they understand that it will takes decades for EV's to ever get near ICE adoption rates so why go all in now. Leave that to the Tesla's to to all the groundbreaking research. You can rest assured all of these companies are learning from each other on how to make their products better as its always been.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by raptor5244

The strange thing is companies like GM are now "all-in" on EVs now. At least Ford is dividing their company into two divisions, EV and ICE. I find GMs approach to be pretty extreme.

https://www.ford.com/ford-blue-ford-model-e/

And as of last week, laying of 8,000 people from the ICE side of the house.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by rlarsen462

All the discussion about grid capacity, efficiency of EV's, etc. is completely moot, we simply don't have the base generation capacity in the first place to support hundreds of millions of EV's globally, and the fastest current way to ramp that up would be with fossil fuel generation (coal & NG). Coupled with massive investments in nuclear projects (which take many years).

And when all these clowns talk about is wind and solar and no mention of going full in on nuclear power base load generation, it reveals what a farce of government overreach and coercion this is trying to force the market to make an adoption much faster than it would otherwise on pure value proposition.

Try to remember that not one person in power, politician, billionaire, etc. gives ONE **** about you or your family and whether you live, suffer, or die. Not one. So follow the money and follow the motives and you can probably makes sense of things for yourself and decide if what you are being told is really going to improve your quality of life, or reduce it.

Originally Posted by CW3SF

^This.

I’m glad someone else here knows what’s really happening in power generation. I tried to explain this in a previous thread and it was like spitting into the wind. Expanding the grid doesn’t mean building more towers and transformers. It means more generation capacity. And wind/solar isn’t going to fill that need.

The thing is, grid expansion will be a portfolio optimization exercise, not a destroy and replace scenario. Coal will be dramatically reduced. Natural gas, hydro, solar, wind, and yes maybe even nuclear will be added / expanded / optimized. Probably more likely to see solar than hydro in Arizona. And more likely to see hydro than coal in western New York (Niagara Falls). Rinse repeat for other regions.