The Automobile Thread

On paper it seemed like a good proposition with a lot to like. Early reality seems to indicate anything but. Around the same track 1.5 seconds slower than a Civic Type R and 0.5 seconds slower than a GR86, both of which can be found for 10k+ cheaper
$ for $ it gets absolutely spanked by the Toyota A91 Supra, which also easily gaps it in a straight out drag race as well.

I realise the others aren't available in manual, some are fwd, etc etc but imo that's a hell of a lot of performance to give up for the money you are paying. (Ignoring that grossly inflated dealer pricing :eek:)

The fanbois will love it though and leap to its defense I'm sure :p
View attachment 84174

A much better review for the "new" Z vs. the Supra by Road & Track. Their winner was the Z. On the other hand, Car & Driver did not really like it. I am hardly a fanboy, but I do want it to be good. The Z will be one of the last affordable, traditional sports cars we will ever be able to buy, especially in California very soon (because too many of you vote Democrat. Jokes.). :Roflmao

https://www.roadandtrack.com/reviews/a40978570/2023-nissan-z-vs-2022-toyota-supra/

Just for shits & grins I took the Toyota 86, Supra, Civic Type R & Z to the Nordschleife (which is my best track by far) in Gran Turismo 7 for five laps each. It was Supra, Z, Civic Type R ...... and then the 86 very far behind, as expected. Nothing really between the Supra & Z, although the Supra in the game is obviously geared for auto. I know the Gran Turismo series is hardly a pure driving sim, but it has always been pretty close to the physics as far as the cars I have owned anyway.

I have a wheel, seat & pedal setup, although nothing super fancy. I drove all cars stock, with manual transmission and with no driving aids turned on other than ABS weak.

The 86 & Type-R are the easiest to drive, the Supra is a handful, and the Z is somewhere between the Supra & the other two, but more towards the Supra. :laugh:
 
No gasoline vehicles will be sold in California as of 2035. :Roflmao:Roflmao

300375420_462191392613743_5091046926309275981_n.jpg
 
No gasoline vehicles will be sold in California as of 2035. :Roflmao:Roflmao

View attachment 84197

70K miles and it already needs a new battery? Even if CA can pull off this pipe dream, there will be record numbers of gasoline powered vehicles sold in 2033 & 2034. The other issue (and I can think of many) but 98% of the infrastructure that will get built will be in SF, LA, OC and SD. What about all the smaller, out of the way towns like Downieville, Fort Bragg, Weed, etc....?
 
No gasoline vehicles will be sold in California as of 2035. :Roflmao:Roflmao

View attachment 84197


Pretty sure that Calif requires electric vehicles to have a 100k warranty on the battery. Sucks for them, they're in Florida.

Not sure how it's going to work on infrastructure as mtbmike mentions.
At this time of you don't have a home charger than an electric vehicle is an unrealistic option. That may change in the next 13 years though. But hey, I'll be old/er by then so it may not matter to me anyway.
 
70K miles and it already needs a new battery?

Lot of discussion about this invoice on the internet:

So many thing that flag for me as a fake estimate.
No dealership info
No customer info or plate number
VIN is invalid, and even if a few numbers are substituted to make it legit, it matches up to a 1999 Chevy sedan.
N0110 battery is a start battery, not the EV battery pack. So either wrong number, or both are being replaced, in which case, both batteries would be itemized.
Should still be under warranty
Battery replacement cost for a 2012 Volt is about 1/3 that price.

Probably just a fake to get people riled up. But who knows? Discontinued car. Discontinued car part. A dealership can quote anything it wants... particularly if it doesn't want to do the job.
 
Lot of discussion about this invoice on the internet:

So many thing that flag for me as a fake estimate.
No dealership info
No customer info or plate number
VIN is invalid, and even if a few numbers are substituted to make it legit, it matches up to a 1999 Chevy sedan.
N0110 battery is a start battery, not the EV battery pack. So either wrong number, or both are being replaced, in which case, both batteries would be itemized.
Should still be under warranty
Battery replacement cost for a 2012 Volt is about 1/3 that price.

Probably just a fake to get people riled up. But who knows? Discontinued car. Discontinued car part. A dealership can quote anything it wants... particularly if it doesn't want to do the job.

Well, I did find it on Facebook. So probably. :laugh:
 
The warranty is 8 years/100k miles, and it’s a federal requirement for battery packs. It might be a real quote, though I think the owner should shop around for a refurbished battery if he’s aged out of warranty. battery packs are now being made for around $100-200 per kWh, and they’re modular, so you should be able to beat this price by a lot.

if you’re unsure about EVs, watch these Weber State Automotive Tech videos. The class tears a 2018 Volt down to the cell level, then puts it back together and drives it off. I totally understand if you don’t want to take auto maintenance advice from {insert politician’s name here} but take it from a no-nonsense shop teacher…

 
Last edited:
The warranty is 8 years/100k miles, and it’s a federal requirement for battery packs. It might be a real quote, though I think the owner should shop around for a refurbished battery if he’s aged out of warranty. battery packs are now being made for around $100-200 per kWh, and they’re modular, so you should be able to beat this price by a lot.

Thanks for this link!! I went to their video channel and they have ton of more recent content dealing with newer generation tech! Very interesting!

I was looking at the reasons for why GM discontinued the Chevy Volt, and ultimately it came down to the fact that it was neither a true EV or a true ICE, shared components of both systems, and therefore wasn't able to fully take advantage of improvements that would benefit either dedicated platform. It was intended to be a middle step to move GM towards the EV... but got squashed the moment Tesla came out with the Model 3.

Interesting related news is Ford's decision to break the company into two separate operating groups. A legacy ICE group, and a dedicated EV group. Not many people know that Tesla originally planned to call the Model 3 the "Model E". (And therefore their first four car models would spell "SEXY") However Ford challenged the use of the name (due to their history with the original Model E) and rather than battle it out in court, Tesla changed the name. So now Ford's EV group is called "Model E". In financial circles some people believe Ford plans to spin off the Model E business as an independent direct-to-consumer business like Tesla, with corresponding eye-watering valuations. The Ford CEO will only say that it "doesn't make sense at this time".

Who would have thought, even ten years ago, that the automobile industry was about to become so interesting!
 
No gasoline vehicles will be sold in California as of 2035. :Roflmao:Roflmao
No new gasoline vehicles will be sold in California as of 2035.
Its a pretty brutal way of going about making an inefficient dinosaur industry change their ways but I think the reality is it has to be done. Can't keep going the way we currently are. The OEMs have over a decade to find solutions, thats plenty of time. One thing is for sure, BEV alone is not the answer, alternatives are going to have to be found.
If you want to see what the industry can do when pushed just look to Europe. The wave of low emissions vehicles coming out of there at the moment is impressive. When those OEMs were facing an emissions fine structure that had the potential to wipe them out almost overnight they stepped up to the plate and did something about it.
There were plans to do similar here, in 2012 they announced that by 2025 CAFE standards would be 54.5mpg. But that very foolishly (imo) got rolled back in 2020.
 
No new gasoline vehicles will be sold in California as of 2035.
Its a pretty brutal way of going about making an inefficient dinosaur industry change their ways but I think the reality is it has to be done. Can't keep going the way we currently are. The OEMs have over a decade to find solutions, thats plenty of time. One thing is for sure, BEV alone is not the answer, alternatives are going to have to be found.
If you want to see what the industry can do when pushed just look to Europe. The wave of low emissions vehicles coming out of there at the moment is impressive. When those OEMs were facing an emissions fine structure that had the potential to wipe them out almost overnight they stepped up to the plate and did something about it.
There were plans to do similar here, in 2012 they announced that by 2025 CAFE standards would be 54.5mpg. But that very foolishly (imo) got rolled back in 2020.
For what it’s worth, The rest of the world has mandates in place on similar timelines, so they’re already focusing R&D on EVs.

Not that I think the mandate matters: Given how quickly EVs are improving, I’m confident that nobody in the market for something like a RAV4 in 2035 would ever consider gasoline anyway. And 3/4 ton truck buyers will want the plug in hybrids, which will have all the power and range while towing but be cost effective to commute on electricity.
 
I was looking at the reasons for why GM discontinued the Chevy Volt, and ultimately it came down to the fact that it was neither a true EV or a true ICE, shared components of both systems, and therefore wasn't able to fully take advantage of improvements that would benefit either dedicated platform.

I’ve got two PHEVs, and the only advantage they have over full EV is range. For the Wrangler, or for a tow vehicle, PHEV will be the way to go until someone builds a Hydrogen truck. Otherwise they are so dang complex, and they aren’t as smooth once the gas engine kicks on.

now that I have a hydrogen station near my office I really want to try it. The Toyota Mirai is essentially a short wheelbase Lexus LS, which is nice but not really what I’m into. A Hydrogen Tundra would be awesome.
 
I’ve got two PHEVs, and the only advantage they have over full EV is range. For the Wrangler, or for a tow vehicle, PHEV will be the way to go until someone builds a Hydrogen truck. Otherwise they are so dang complex, and they aren’t as smooth once the gas engine kicks on.

now that I have a hydrogen station near my office I really want to try it. The Toyota Mirai is essentially a short wheelbase Lexus LS, which is nice but not really what I’m into. A Hydrogen Tundra would be awesome.

Partially Hydrogenated Electric Vehicles just don't do it for me. If I go down that road it will be a hybrid, because I don't just tootle around town. I have nothing against using electric for doing this, but it has to onboard recharge, because putting solar on my roof and a charger in my garage doesn't pencil out.

Even in the last couple months with the A/C running hot & heavy, my electricity did not exceed $200 for the month. Both months (I get electricity, water, sewer & trash on the same bill, every OTHER month). Over the course of a year it's an average 0f $110.

If it works for others, great. They need to go a long way toward price reduction to convince me to do it for me.
 
Partially Hydrogenated Electric Vehicles just don't do it for me. If I go down that road it will be a hybrid, because I don't just tootle around town. I have nothing against using electric for doing this, but it has to onboard recharge, because putting solar on my roof and a charger in my garage doesn't pencil out.

Even in the last couple months with the A/C running hot & heavy, my electricity did not exceed $200 for the month. Both months (I get electricity, water, sewer & trash on the same bill, every OTHER month). Over the course of a year it's an average 0f $110.

If it works for others, great. They need to go a long way toward price reduction to convince me to do it for me.
I’m not following: Why would you need to have solar, if your electric bill is so cheap? Wouldn’t that be an argument for adding some kWh to the bill?
 
Even in the last couple months with the A/C running hot & heavy, my electricity did not exceed $200 for the month.

I had to read this twice to make sure I wasn't seeing things. Then I remembered - Anaheim has their own electric utility.

If you have the pleasure of getting your electricity from San Diego Gas & Electric you will pay more than twice as much. Before we left California, we were paying on average more than $.50 per kWhr for our service. Our bill averaged $150 per month WITH a 9kW solar system and NO A/C use.

Here in North Carolina we pay 1/5 as much... so we are paying less than half the Anaheim rate.
 
I had to read this twice to make sure I wasn't seeing things. Then I remembered - Anaheim has their own electric utility.

If you have the pleasure of getting your electricity from San Diego Gas & Electric you will pay more than twice as much. Before we left California, we were paying on average more than $.50 per kWhr for our service. Our bill averaged $150 per month WITH a 9kW solar system and NO A/C use.

Here in North Carolina we pay 1/5 as much... so we are paying less than half the Anaheim rate.
That sucks. For reference, with SCE and 7 kw of solar I’m paying ~$35/month connection fees for the house and roughly 30 kWh per day of EV charging. I’m actually giving them about $800 per year more than I consume, but I’d have to go to a home battery to harvest that.

Is anyone here on Golden State Water? Those folks have a real beef. I’d probably start trucking my water from Orange to Cowan Heights to avoid that messed up situation.
 
I had to read this twice to make sure I wasn't seeing things. Then I remembered - Anaheim has their own electric utility.

If you have the pleasure of getting your electricity from San Diego Gas & Electric you will pay more than twice as much. Before we left California, we were paying on average more than $.50 per kWhr for our service. Our bill averaged $150 per month WITH a 9kW solar system and NO A/C use.

Here in North Carolina we pay 1/5 as much... so we are paying less than half the Anaheim rate.

SDG&E convinced you (or snookered you??) into going TOU (Time of Use rate, insanely high when you need the power the most)? I pay 12 cents per KWh for baseline, 19.74 cents for everthing over baseline. I will not go TOU because 3-9 pm is when the AC runs....
 
I’m not following: Why would you need to have solar, if your electric bill is so cheap? Wouldn’t that be an argument for adding some kWh to the bill?

I'm not following this - why would I want to incur more power usage than I absolutely need to? This would just cost me more, and there's no upside to it.
 
I had to read this twice to make sure I wasn't seeing things. Then I remembered - Anaheim has their own electric utility.

If you have the pleasure of getting your electricity from San Diego Gas & Electric you will pay more than twice as much. Before we left California, we were paying on average more than $.50 per kWhr for our service. Our bill averaged $150 per month WITH a 9kW solar system and NO A/C use.

Here in North Carolina we pay 1/5 as much... so we are paying less than half the Anaheim rate.

How much can you thank big coal for your low rates?
 
No new gas cars in California (and a ton of other states will follow) in 2035.

Gas cars last an easy 20 years these days. So I will potentially be turning in my license by the time I won't be able to keep a gas car running. Seems like a non issue for most people on this forum to worry about. My GF's daughter is driving a 90's Crown Vic, my ex still has her 20 year old F150. I drive a 1995 Econoline. Hell, that Powerstroke will probably be studied by future alien species.

Ton of time for the details to be cleaned up too. Also the likelihood that it will change to increase the percentage of hybrids from pure BEV's only.
 
Back
Top