[95 imp]

Originally Posted by TXCSSU

Umm, does the future that you see something wrong with involve taking these old platforms that were built with transmissions, transaxles, engine intercoolers, etc. in mind when considering future products? I suspect that the hardware needed for getting the equivalent of 1980s HP numbers probably weighs in less than the hardware used in the 1980s. Just a V8 by itself weighs what, 500-800 lbs., at least?

About 575 for an iron SBC.

The Blazer-E has a transmission (4L75E) and transfer case, as well as heating/cooling for the battery. So, the hardware argument would be a wash.

You also have to figure in the weight of the electric motor which the article didn't include.

The telling fact is they had to beef up the suspension to carry the extra weight...

[TXCSSU]

Originally Posted by 95 imp

About 575 for an iron SBC.

The Blazer-E has a transmission (4L75E) and transfer case, as well as heating/cooling for the battery. So, the hardware argument would be a wash.

You also have to figure in the weight of the electric motor which the article didn't include.

The telling fact is they had to beef up the suspension to carry the extra weight...

I'm all for whatever technology is most efficient. The problem with having a discussion on both technologies is that there are a lot of external forces that are flooding the airwaves with misinformation. Seems to be how things are done these days.

[redcoats1976]

the next 10 years should be most interesting.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by 95 imp

About 575 for an iron SBC.

The Blazer-E has a transmission (4L75E) and transfer case, as well as heating/cooling for the battery. So, the hardware argument would be a wash.

You also have to figure in the weight of the electric motor which the article didn't include.

The telling fact is they had to beef up the suspension to carry the extra weight...

It’s not new news that batteries weigh a lot. For reference the “In Your Driveway” FC program overloaded the Equinox front suspension. If you put a V8 in a 4 cylinder Gen6 you’ll likely need new front springs as well.

If you hav an old Blazer and instead of a 185 HP small block here is a cool alternative. It’s only not a cool choice if you are so strongly anti EV that you won’t let yourself see it. And I believe you are in that camp, which is fine. But I think its pretty cool to now have that choice.

[95 imp]

Originally Posted by Number 3

It’s not new news that batteries weigh a lot. For reference the “In Your Driveway” FC program overloaded the Equinox front suspension. If you put a V8 in a 4 cylinder Gen6 you’ll likely need new front springs as well.

If you hav an old Blazer and instead of a 185 HP small block here is a cool alternative. It’s only not a cool choice if you are so strongly anti EV that you won’t let yourself see it. And I believe you are in that camp, which is fine. But I think its pretty cool to now have that choice.

I'm all for doing what you want. I'm not even slightly for "you must buy what we deem is good". Also, I strongly dislike this "everything will be unicorns and rainbows" sales pitch on EV's. Because it isn't, and it will never be.

The market rejected electric cars over 100 years ago (along with steam cars). And it STILL rejects them even with incentives. Therefore, it has been deemed MANDATORY that they be EV be the only source of propulsion.

And, if I pick up 15 hp over the SBC by going EV I have more than lost ground in the power to weight ratio department.

Oh, BTW, yes, I will have to put stiffer sprigs in to carry the weight in a 4 cyl. Camaro. If I put a ZL1 motor in with those springs, I'd be gaining over 2x the horsepower. That isn't happening with this Blazer. Like I said, it's going backwards in performance.

[95 imp]

Originally Posted by TXCSSU

I'm all for whatever technology is most efficient. The problem with having a discussion on both technologies is that there are a lot of external forces that are flooding the airwaves with misinformation. Seems to be how things are done these days.

I agree. And, sadly, everyone takes their version as gospel without digging deeper to understand. But, when someone tries to explain their reasoning, (or counter it) people shut down and refuse to even attempt to verify anything that was discussed.

Or, translated: "I don't want facts getting in the way of my opinions".

[fielderLS3]

EV and ICE each have their own advantages and disadvantages that makes one work better for some and the other work better for others. If we had actual free markets where both where allowed to coexist, everyone would get along.

But we don't because so many of the EV fans are zealots about it and can't handle the suggestion that there are any disadvantages at all, and more often than not are from the cancel culture camp that wants to eliminate all dissent and rule rather than have a discussion and let others live their lives. Meanwhile, ICE fans are very aware of the desire to see them cancelled, and get instinctively defensive more out of the prospect of their freedom of choice being taken away and of self preservation than out of dislike for the EVs themselves.

BTW, how did a Challenger thread turn into this?

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by 95 imp

I'm all for doing what you want. I'm not even slightly for "you must buy what we deem is good". Also, I strongly dislike this "everything will be unicorns and rainbows" sales pitch on EV's. Because it isn't, and it will never be.

The market rejected electric cars over 100 years ago (along with steam cars). And it STILL rejects them even with incentives. Therefore, it has been deemed MANDATORY that they be EV be the only source of propulsion.

And, if I pick up 15 hp over the SBC by going EV I have more than lost ground in the power to weight ratio department.

Oh, BTW, yes, I will have to put stiffer sprigs in to carry the weight in a 4 cyl. Camaro. If I put a ZL1 motor in with those springs, I'd be gaining over 2x the horsepower. That isn't happening with this Blazer. Like I said, it's going backwards in performance.

It was rejected because it wasn’t a mature technology and in many respects still isn’t. ICEs are at the end, however. The improvements are incremental and horribly expensive to try to achieve FE and emissions. But just as Hyundai/Kia (same company if you didn’t know) stooped ICE development, EVs have a ton of companies including eager start ups making huge improvements year over year.

The drawbacks are known and the profit potential for solving those engineering problems is huge, which with capitalism, gets them resolved.

[95 imp]

Originally Posted by Number 3

It was rejected because it wasn’t a mature technology and in many respects still isn’t. ICEs are at the end, however. The improvements are incremental and horribly expensive to try to achieve FE and emissions. But just as Hyundai/Kia (same company if you didn’t know) stooped ICE development, EVs have a ton of companies including eager start ups making huge improvements year over year.

The drawbacks are known and the profit potential for solving those engineering problems is huge, which with capitalism, gets them resolved.

Translation: ICE is at the end not because of the free market, but because of government mandates forcing it.

You stated the same thing I said in a different way....

Meanwhile, we are being sold on these magic cars that get charged dirt cheap, with "zero emissions". Anyone with half a brain knows this isn't accurate.

[95 imp]

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

EV and ICE each have their own advantages and disadvantages that makes one work better for some and the other work better for others. If we had actual free markets where both where allowed to coexist, everyone would get along.

But we don't because so many of the EV fans are zealots about it and can't handle the suggestion that there are any disadvantages at all, and more often than not are from the cancel culture camp that wants to eliminate all dissent and rule rather than have a discussion and let others live their lives. Meanwhile, ICE fans are very aware of the desire to see them cancelled, and get instinctively defensive more out of the prospect of their freedom of choice being taken away and of self preservation than out of dislike for the EVs themselves.

Way more diplomatic than I put it!

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

BTW, how did a Challenger thread turn into this?

Somehow, it always come back to politics....

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by 95 imp

Way more diplomatic than I put it!



Somehow, it always come back to politics....

LOL, EV discussion is only a political discussion if you are against them.

For me it's ALWAYS been a technology discussion.

[FarmerFran]

Originally Posted by Number 3

LOL, EV discussion is only a political discussion if you are against them.

For me it's ALWAYS been a technology discussion.

I would say this is true if it wasnt for the government pushing them so hard.


"It appears" to be more of a forced issue than a choice.


For the record, i am not anti EV, just saying.

[genxer]

What's the matter with a fun car with low FE and emisions where they've been?

[95 imp]

Originally Posted by Number 3

LOL, EV discussion is only a political discussion if you are against them.

For me it's ALWAYS been a technology discussion.

So, if people are for them, it means it isn't political or pushing their beliefs on others. It's the "right thing to do" and "you're an idiot for not going along".

If you're against them, it's automatically political in nature.

Sounds about right.... EVERY topic is framed this way now-a-days.