Volvo EX30 Dual motor ER or RAV4 PHEV GR Sport?

[Nick72]

On 6/21/2023 at 8:58 PM, Cyker said:

Agreed - I've been saying from the beginning 300-miles real-world range in a normal-sized car is the tipping point; If they can get 400, 500, 600 miles then there will be more than enough utility that they will be able to compete with ICE cars purely on merit and not just their dubious environmental claims.

And it's not just about range - Having 500-600 miles of range means you don't have to be afraid to use the heater or AC, like a lot of EV owners currently seem to fear as it has such a big impact on the range!

 

That's a good point actually - Do EVs and chargers not perform active power factor correction to fix that?

This was a big deal in the PC world - All ATX PSUs were required to support active power factor correction, after it was found old PSUs were pulling more power than was being measured. Now it's even a marketing thing, with high-end PSUs boasting higher levels of power factor correction!

 

I have seen a lot of Tesla drivers in winter in the inside lane on the motorway doing 65mph wearing a thick coat whilst obviously hyper-miling as I've cruised past in the R4P. 😂 That definitely gets a nope from me so I do need a good mileage buffer.

Honestly not sure how the load is managed or corrected from the home chargers. According to my consultant mate the grid folks were worried a few years back. I'd need to get my notes out on transmission line theory and more 🤣

[ernieb]

I’m happy about driving in ECO mode that’s as much about driving style as just energy saving however, I draw the line at turning the heating/AC off, why go to expense of having it fitted if your going to have to carry the weight of it all and not use it. So sad really, but agree I’d be looking for around the 300 miles in comfort during the winter months.

[Flatcoat]

On 6/21/2023 at 9:05 PM, Cyker said:

No worries  

My views tend to be a bit weird as I really want an EV but I'm massively EV skeptical  

 

That's why for all their faults, I have to give props to Tesla as they were literally the only manufacturer with any brains on what the best initial target audience for an EV is - Not the masses, but rich people.

By making their cars essentially executive luxury performance vehicles, they targeted the sort of person who doesn't really care about cost, but wants something luxurious, exclusive, with bragging rights and shedloads of performance, and they fulfilled that brief almost perfectly.

Making cars for the masses will be a lot harder  because the base-cost of an EV is so much higher than ICE - We still want the utility and at least some performance, but not for the cost!

 

 

I agree - I love the idea of electric propulsion but the current solutions are rich men’s toys. If cars are priced out of the reach of ordinary buyers there will be massive implications. Starting with factory closures and job losses all the way through the supply chains. That will be followed by social unrest and political instability. 

[Nick72]

3 hours ago, Flatcoat said:

I agree - I love the idea of electric propulsion but the current solutions are rich men’s toys. If cars are priced out of the reach of ordinary buyers there will be massive implications. Starting with factory closures and job losses all the way through the supply chains. That will be followed by social unrest and political instability. 

Slightly perverse incentives for company car drivers means that the new Volvo or the new Polestar would cost me less per month than the R4P cost me. And cost me less to run for personal mileage on average.

[Nick72]

Here's one of the latest very high power density electric motors. 330hp for short bursts c. 10 sec (when you're accelerating). About the size of your head c. 30kg depending on installation mass. No exotic materials. Just redesigned and improved manufacturing techniques.  

 

 

[ernieb]

45 minutes ago, Nick72 said:

Here's one of the latest very high power density electric motors. 330hp for short bursts c. 10 sec (when you're accelerating). About the size of your head c. 30kg depending on installation mass. No exotic materials. Just redesigned and improved manufacturing techniques.  

 

 

Are you suggesting my head weighs 30kg? 😇

 

looks interesting, incremental development works well in any business.

[Cyker]

I do wonder what the downside of axial flux motors are, as nobody talks about it, just extols how they're better than radial flux to the point it reads like a sales brochure.

If it had such big advantages they would be more in use industrially, but the vast majority of electric motors are radial flux in every application, so what's the catch??

[Nick72]

42 minutes ago, Cyker said:

I do wonder what the downside of axial flux motors are, as nobody talks about it, just extols how they're better than radial flux to the point it reads like a sales brochure.

If it had such big advantages they would be more in use industrially, but the vast majority of electric motors are radial flux in every application, so what's the catch??

Catch is they're more expensive to produce and solutions like this one are fairly recent. Start of what is known as the technology 'S' curve. As more volumes are produced they get cheaper and mass adoption occurs. There are several overlapping S curves at any one time.

[Cyker]

Well, this is not new technology by a long shot - It fell out of use because, I assumed, radial flux was better for everything we use electric motors for, which is why I find it weird it's making a comeback.

It'll only be expensive now because it hasn't been as developed as radial-flux motors, but why is that? What is the disadvantage that made industry favour radial flux and concentrate on that?

With all the advantages touted - stronger torque, more compactness etc., I don't get why this didn't become dominant. The catch can't just be development costs as both would have had that problem in the beginning, and production cost is just a factor of scale of production, so there must have been something that nobody pushing the tech mentions. From what I've seen of it so far, I suspect it will struggle at higher RPM and have much higher rotating mass, but I really don't know much about it to know for sure, and the lack of any information makes me suspicious...

[Nick72]

On 7/1/2023 at 5:55 PM, Cyker said:

Well, this is not new technology by a long shot - It fell out of use because, I assumed, radial flux was better for everything we use electric motors for, which is why I find it weird it's making a comeback.

It'll only be expensive now because it hasn't been as developed as radial-flux motors, but why is that? What is the disadvantage that made industry favour radial flux and concentrate on that?

With all the advantages touted - stronger torque, more compactness etc., I don't get why this didn't become dominant. The catch can't just be development costs as both would have had that problem in the beginning, and production cost is just a factor of scale of production, so there must have been something that nobody pushing the tech mentions. From what I've seen of it so far, I suspect it will struggle at higher RPM and have much higher rotating mass, but I really don't know much about it to know for sure, and the lack of any information makes me suspicious...

I think that's my point. Nothing new or exotic required to see the 3 fold power density increase overv10 years mentioned.

Just design, development and production improvements.

Manufacturing complexity drives cost. Robotic manufacturing is now much more affordable, is more flexible, greater precision and accuracy. You don't need very large volumes over which to amortise the costs.

It's not just one trend we must watch it's all of them relevant to the lifecycle of a thing. 

[Strangely Brown]

You may find this interesting...
 

 

[Cyker]

I saw that - I want to know how the heck they've managed 7-10+miles/kWh when, 'til now, the best I've seen is 5 miles/kWh, with newer cars getting worse and worse, dropping into the abysmal 2miles/kWh zone!

Very impressive stuff, esp. as they kept it in that zone even at speed - I really hope it filters down to us!!

I may yet see my 300+ mile@70mph Yaris if they can!

[Nick72]

21 hours ago, Cyker said:

I saw that - I want to know how the heck they've managed 7-10+miles/kWh when, 'til now, the best I've seen is 5 miles/kWh, with newer cars getting worse and worse, dropping into the abysmal 2miles/kWh zone!

Very impressive stuff, esp. as they kept it in that zone even at speed - I really hope it filters down to us!!

I may yet see my 300+ mile@70mph Yaris if they can!

I've had about 5 miles per kWh on the R4P but only if I'm cruising with no stop start at about 50mph. Usually it's 3 to 3.6. 

[Strangely Brown]

22 hours ago, Cyker said:

I saw that - I want to know how the heck they've managed 7-10+miles/kWh when, 'til now, the best I've seen is 5 miles/kWh, with newer cars getting worse and worse, dropping into the abysmal 2miles/kWh zone!

Very impressive stuff, esp. as they kept it in that zone even at speed - I really hope it filters down to us!!

I may yet see my 300+ mile@70mph Yaris if they can!

The problem with that car, for all of its impressive capabilities, is that it still takes the same amount of time to charge it. Even if the Battery can be charged really really quickly (Toyota solid state claims) there is only so much energy that you can transfer from the charger to the Battery in a given time, and that's if you can get the energy to the charger in the first place. I just do not see how this can scale to nationwide adoption.
 

[TonyFR]

Yesterday's Financial Times article well worth reading:

"Toyota says solid-state Battery breakthrough can halve cost and size"

Unfortunately it's behind the FT paywall and copyright protected but here's a taster:
"....on Tuesday, Kaita said the company discovered ways to address the durability problems from about three years ago and now had enough confidence to mass-produce solid-state batteries in EVs by 2027 or 2028. Toyota claimed it had made a “technological breakthrough” to resolve durability issues and “a solution for materials” that would allow an EV powered by a solid-state Battery to have a range of 1,200km and charging time of 10 minutes or less."

[Strangely Brown]

15 minutes ago, TonyFR said:

Yesterday's Financial Times article well worth reading:

"Toyota says solid-state battery breakthrough can halve cost and size"

Unfortunately it's behind the FT paywall and copyright protected but here's a taster:
"....on Tuesday, Kaita said the company discovered ways to address the durability problems from about three years ago and now had enough confidence to mass-produce solid-state batteries in EVs by 2027 or 2028. Toyota claimed it had made a “technological breakthrough” to resolve durability issues and “a solution for materials” that would allow an EV powered by a solid-state battery to have a range of 1,200km and charging time of 10 minutes or less."

Yes, but getting 100kW of energy into a Battery in 10 minutes requires a charge of 600kWh. The problem is not the Battery, it's the charging infrastructure and the supply from - and to - the grid. I don't see how it can scale nationwide for 40 million vehicles.

 There are 40million private cars in the UK and new car sales (all types) in 2022 was 1.6million. Even if every new car sold was BEV and displaced 1 ICE that is 25 years to replace the lot.

ICE are going to be around for a while yet. 🙂

[Nick72]

On 7/5/2023 at 10:05 PM, Strangely Brown said:

Yes, but getting 100kW of energy into a battery in 10 minutes requires a charge of 600kWh. The problem is not the battery, it's the charging infrastructure and the supply from - and to - the grid. I don't see how it can scale nationwide for 40 million vehicles.

 There are 40million private cars in the UK and new car sales (all types) in 2022 was 1.6million. Even if every new car sold was BEV and displaced 1 ICE that is 25 years to replace the lot.

ICE are going to be around for a while yet. 🙂

So a 150kWh (which is energy not power) Battery will get you about 450 miles (probably 300 in mid winter at 70mph). That's probably 90% of folk covered for round trips not requiring an infrastructure charge lottery ticket. 

7.4kW (power) home wallbox like the one I've got is going to take circa 21hrs to charge from empty to full. 

I don't think that is a big deal for most folk unless you don't have home charging access or are a frequent (daily) long range business traveller. So in most cases folks are probably not charging from empty but probably from about half full. So the impending long business trip the following day is just a case of plugging in early evening and you're full up by early morning.

 

I think it works for the vast majority.

 

[Strangely Brown]

38 minutes ago, Nick72 said:

So a 150kWh (which is energy not power) battery will get you about 450 miles (probably 300 in mid winter at 70mph). That's probably 90% of folk covered for round trips not requiring an infrastructure charge lottery ticket. 

7.4kW (power) home wallbox like the one I've got is going to take circa 21hrs to charge from empty to full. 

I don't think that is a big deal for most folk unless you don't have home charging access or are a frequent (daily) long range business traveller. So in most cases folks are probably not charging from empty but probably from about half full. So the impending long business trip the following day is just a case of plugging in early evening and you're full up by early morning.

 

I think it works for the vast majority.

 

There are some words missing from your last sentence.

"I think it works for the vast majority of people that have the ability to charge at home."

That is far from the vast majority of people that are envisaged to be driving BEVs in the future. I stand by comment, even with the missing 'h' typo. 🙂

[Nick72]

4 hours ago, Strangely Brown said:

There are some words missing from your last sentence.

"I think it works for the vast majority of people that have the ability to charge at home."

That is far from the vast majority of people that are envisaged to be driving BEVs in the future. I stand by comment, even with the missing 'h' typo. 🙂

Only time will tell. 🙂

[Cyker]

That's one reason I'm hoping that 7-10mile/kWh efficiency is real and not a trick - It's no different to ICE cars in the sense that, if your car is more efficient, you need less energy.

This means you won't need to put as much charge back in, and so you won't need a super high charger or to charge for long vs the stupid 2mile/kWh land boats they're currently peddling.

If they can bring the efficiency in mass market EVs up enough that 22-50kW charging is enough for the vast majority, and the handful of 600+kW chargers are just for special occasions, e.g. road trips and long distance holidays, then it'd make it all work much better.

If it stays like it is, we'd likely need 600kW+ chargers everywhere which, as we've discussed before, is likely untenable as the grid just can't handle it without a lot of extremely expensive and disruptive upgrades across the country.

It took Toyota 20 years to evolve their hybrid tech to the point my Mk4 can actually do 70-80mpg in the real world with little effort, so I think it will take a long time for such high efficiencies to filter down, esp. since they're currently headed in the other direction!

[Rhymes with Paris]

Cyker's post above got me thinking about chargers in public places.

Right around the corner from here they installed 2 chargers in the co-op car park on Friday,a few months ago 2 in the local McDonald's car park.

Given that both car parks are "managed" by these rip off private parking companies, and have 90 minute limits,how long does it take to charge on these,if longer than the limits, then who would use them?

Assuming of course that anyone would want to spend that amount of time in such depressing places in the first place.

[TonyHSD]

So, the Volvo or the rav4?
What is the final verdict and toward which car there is a higher possibility of buying it. 

 

[Nick72]

21 minutes ago, TonyHSD said:

So, the Volvo or the rav4?
What is the final verdict and toward which car there is a higher possibility of buying it. 

 

Looks great. Dual motor would work. Would prefer speedometer in direct line of sight. I worry looking off forward regularly is a safety risk. Love the HUD on the RAV.

Main issue seems to be Battery range. It's looking to be about 50 to 60% short for me.

Bargain at under 40k.

[lightboxcar]

3 hours ago, Nick72 said:

Love the HUD on the RAV.

Had our new RAV4 PHEV for about six weeks now, so able to compare the the bZ4X we previosuly owned.

For us the RAV4 wins in every single department, we absolutely love it over thebZ4X

Of course everyone will have different use case scenarios, so what works for us may not for others and vice versa

[lightboxcar]

PS : Just one example, our collie dog would not fit into the Volvo EX30

We need to keep the dog in a secure metal crate which is quite large, as the dog previously ate the rear seatbelts when it was free to move around in the car, and that was very expensive to have fixed by the dealer.

If you do not have a dog, or have a non-seatbelt eating dog, then of course this is not a concern.