I found this interesting, regarding the cold...........

[demarpaint]

Here's why these kinds of comparisons are not really as meaningful as you'd think.

Traction is a direct function of vehicle weight and coefficient of friction (CoF).
While it is true that the EV does best going up in this video, it has little to do with the EV drive system itself. It excels because of the weight advantage.
Furthermore, these cars don't have the same tires on them; so the available traction is also altered by tire choice. And the surface isn't being kept consistent.

It's an apples to tangerines comparison.

As the video stands, the test has five variables (driver, tire, weight, drive system, surface). This is no different than all the other YT videos that use junk science to lead viewers to an illogical conclusion. This is the PF effect strewn across the 'net. Want a fair way to assess the EV AWD drive vs. ICE AWD drive?
- make the car weights the same
- put the same brand/model/size tire on the cars
- use the same driver for all tests
- run the test in undisturbed surface area (this is big; see why below)
That set of conditions would allow you to assess the drive system as the sole variable.

As for the surface of the test track, the first car up in that tight off-camber corner was the EV. Then the RS6, then RS3. If you noticed, the EV slipped it's tires a bit (not much). When that happens, it removes some of the surface snow, and reveals a slicker surface. So when the RS6 hits that same area, the surface is not the same. And the RS6 further spins its tires and slicks the surface, pretty much down to the ice underneath. By the time the RS3 gets its chance, that corner is mostly ice and very little snow. You should never run subsequent trials in the same area because the surface is modified each time a tire slips on that surface. What would have happened if the RS6 went up that off-camber trial first, then the RS3, and then left that corner for the EV to try last? I doubt the results would have been the same.

This video is a good real-world example of how non-scientific experiments lead gullible people into making illogical conclusions.

The EV did well; I'm not taking that away from it. It's impressive. But it also did well because of weight, tires and going first in the most demanding part of the test.

I take everything I see on the web with a grain of salt. Without wasting a minute more of my time to check this video it begs the question who ran the test, an EV proponent, or ICE proponent? Then a saying from way back in the day used here on Bitog, pay for the test, get the results you're looking for. IMO Subaru still has the AWD system many car makers wish they had.

 

[whiplash473]

Since no two vehicles can travel the same patch of ice or snow, this can never be proven.

I agree. On that note, if the testing needs to be that precise, does it really matter?

Let's say the EV beats the ICE car up a snow-covered hill by a foot (assuming the test is done with the weight, tires, etc all accounted for) in three inches of snow, does that really matter in the real world? What about if there is one inch of hard, icy snow? What about is it five inches of powder? Unless one beats the other by an astounding amount it's just silly.

I had a '00 Civic that a Fast&Furious-ified some years back that I used for a winter beater. I made it through multiple winters with that by having Blizzak tires on all four corners and using caution whilst driving. Driving through some nasty lake-effect IL winters. Not nasty by pickup truck standards but truly awful by car standards. Passing people in ditches sitting in AWD cars.

I think if someone took a slammed '00 Civic and made a video comparing the traction to an AWD EV it would end horribly for the Civic. Yet, anecdotally, I did just fine in it.

 

[UncleDave]

The point is from the late 1800's to now, EV's have appeared time and time again on the car market. They had some appeal. But that appeal was quickly lost, and the masses returned to ICE vehicles. And for good reason.

Today the oil industry is worldwide, and bigger than ever. They're not going to sit idly by, and watch their product, that brings in trillions of dollars every year, (and will for several decades more), vanish because of false claims, and stupid "green politics" that are as foolish as they are lacking any solid, proven fact.

Right now the fact is EV's are no threat to ICE. And I don't care what the liberal politicians say or promise. They simply can't deliver. They don't have the money, let alone the technology to make it all happen.

Forcing all Americans into EV's with government mandates, in such a short period of time, would be an unmitigated disaster.

Lithium Ion batteries cannot be made in enough quantity worldwide, without mining the Earth into a 10 times bigger ecological mess, than emissions from modern ICE vehicles ever could hope to.

This thread proves yet again that EV's are not sustainable, or reliable in frigid climates. Problems abound in cold weather. And that encompasses a very large geographical percentage of this nation.

Much the same could be said about wind power during the Texas Winter storm of 2021. It failed just as spectacularly. All this crap has to work all the time. Not just when you can wear polo shirts and cargo shorts.

Some of this is true, some of it hyperbole and opinion.

It doest "prove" EV's are unreliable in the cold any more than is "proves" the diesel fuel trucks failing at OHare stranding thousands are unreliable.

It's evidence that you can have an issue with both in the cold if you are unprepared.

 

[Vercingetorix]

Just can't compete with an EV for traction. Technology is always moving forward.


Audi RS6 is arguably the best AWD system on the planet....for a non-EV.

This only proves that the Porsche designed EV chassis is superior to the Audi designed chassis in the snow .

 

[whiplash473]

Some of this is true, some of it hyperbole and opinion.

It doest "prove" EV's are unreliable in the cold any more than is "proves" the diesel fuel trucks failing at OHare stranding thousands are unreliable.

It's evidence that you can have an issue with both in the cold if you are unprepared.

Something that occurred to me when thinking about your first O'Hare post, since I live like thirty miles from there - I wonder if they have kept up on the maintenance on those airport vehicles. Myself and a few buddy's, all with diesel trucks that are well-maintained, have had no problem starting our trucks over the last week. However, my one friend, who has a '99 7.3 Powerstroke that I know for a fact needs glow plugs and he's too cheap and lazy to buy and install them, couldn't get his truck started and has buzzed around in his wife's car for the last four days.

EDIT: Maintenance including something as simple as good quality anti-gelling fuel additives.

 

[Ws6]

The point is from the late 1800's to now, EV's have appeared time and time again on the car market. They had some appeal. But that appeal was quickly lost, and the masses returned to ICE vehicles. And for good reason.

Today the oil industry is worldwide, and bigger than ever. They're not going to sit idly by, and watch their product, that brings in trillions of dollars every year, (and will for several decades more), vanish because of false claims, and stupid "green politics" that are as foolish as they are lacking any solid, proven fact.

Right now the fact is EV's are no threat to ICE. And I don't care what the liberal politicians say or promise. They simply can't deliver. They don't have the money, let alone the technology to make it all happen.

Forcing all Americans into EV's with government mandates, in such a short period of time, would be an unmitigated disaster.

Lithium Ion batteries cannot be made in enough quantity worldwide, without mining the Earth into a 10 times bigger ecological mess, than emissions from modern ICE vehicles ever could hope to.

This thread proves yet again that EV's are not sustainable, or reliable in frigid climates. Problems abound in cold weather. And that encompasses a very large geographical percentage of this nation.

Much the same could be said about wind power during the Texas Winter storm of 2021. It failed just as spectacularly. All this crap has to work all the time. Not just when you can wear polo shirts and cargo shorts.

1) They returned to ICE for cost reasons.

2) No they aren't, they are busy pushing disinformation campaigns all over the internet. Ever wonder why EV and ICE is such a divisive thing? Also ever notice how people who buy EV's and have the infrastructure to support them love them to death, and people who hate EV's literally have never driven one, quite often? Propaganda.

3) I don't think EV's are meant to be "a threat" to anything.

4) Income status will keep it from happening. The cross section of affordability vs. disposable income will manage this and the mandates will be pushed back to accommodate.

5) Maybe, maybe not. I don't really care, because people will continue to breed until they destroy the planet one way or another. Humans are a parasite. They WILL kill the host.

6) Texas has a trash infrastructure regarding its power grid. This isn't a wind turbine issue, it's a Texas issue, and it was covered in depth previously. Why do you think wind turbines work just fine in Kansas?

 

[Ws6]

This only proves that the Porsche designed EV chassis is superior to the Audi designed chassis in the snow .

This post proves that you're not familiar with VAG, or tone is lost on the internet and you made a funny, lol!

 

[Vercingetorix]

This post proves that you're not familiar with VAG, or tone is lost on the internet and you made a funny, lol!

In what way? You’re saying the GT chassis is not designed by Porsche?

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Also something to note is the change in words used for these things. It was "global warming" and now it's "climate change". It was "going green", then it changed to "zero emissions" (which was even a badge on the Nissan's, if I remember correctly), now it's simply "electric".

A quote from either Jordan Peterson or Chris Williamson's podcast: Control the language and you control the ideas.

Well if you don't understand or are simply unaware of the context behind these words then I'm not surprised by your conclusion.

 

[whiplash473]

Well if you don't understand or are simply unaware of the context behind these words then I'm not surprised by your conclusion.

I am aware that they were used for a different context but I thought it could be applied here as well. That comment sparked my interest - would you explain further?

By the way, love the sig quote.

 

[Ws6]

I agree. On that note, if the testing needs to be that precise, does it really matter?

Let's say the EV beats the ICE car up a snow-covered hill by a foot (assuming the test is done with the weight, tires, etc all accounted for) in three inches of snow, does that really matter in the real world? What about if there is one inch of hard, icy snow? What about is it five inches of powder? Unless one beats the other by an astounding amount it's just silly.

I had a '00 Civic that a Fast&Furious-ified some years back that I used for a winter beater. I made it through multiple winters with that by having Blizzak tires on all four corners and using caution whilst driving. Driving through some nasty lake-effect IL winters. Not nasty by pickup truck standards but truly awful by car standards. Passing people in ditches sitting in AWD cars.

I think if someone took a slammed '00 Civic and made a video comparing the traction to an AWD EV it would end horribly for the Civic. Yet, anecdotally, I did just fine in it.

It really does matter in my experience, because if I can't leave my house to get to work, it's going to go badly. Sometimes you just need that fractional bit more traction. It's not about being a bit faster, it's about breaking the tires loose and sliding back down my driveway vs. climbing it. YMMV for your uses.

 

[Ws6]

I take everything I see on the web with a grain of salt. Without wasting a minute more of my time to check this video it begs the question who ran the test, an EV proponent, or ICE proponent? Then a saying from way back in the day used here on Bitog, pay for the test, get the results you're looking for. IMO Subaru still has the AWD system many car makers wish they had.

Nothing about Subaru's AWD system is impressive in the slightest. They're coasting on reputation from the 80's, lol!

 

[demarpaint]

Nothing about Subaru's AWD system is impressive in the slightest. They're coasting on reputation from the 80's, lol!

More YT, what ever you say. lol!

 

[whiplash473]

It really does matter in my experience, because if I can't leave my house to get to work, it's going to go badly. Sometimes you just need that fractional bit more traction. It's not about being a bit faster, it's about breaking the tires loose and sliding back down my driveway vs. climbing it. YMMV for your uses.

Understood and agreed. Sometimes that little bit can make the difference between getting to where you need to be or not. It's that I think head-to-head testing on such a matter has too many variables that cannot be accounted for to deem a clear winner.

 

[Ws6]

More YT, what ever you say. lol!

Why do you think their AWD is special? What about it impresses you? Tell us in mechanical terms how it's better than a proper torque vectoring system? The only system Scooby had like that was the WRX Sti, which they killed, and I don't believe even that could shuffle left or right like better AWD systems do.

 

[Ws6]

Understood and agreed. Sometimes that little bit can make the difference between getting to where you need to be or not. It's that I think head-to-head testing on such a matter has too many variables that cannot be accounted for to deem a clear winner.

It may be hard to put on paper, but having driven both, it's not hard to experience, if that makes sense.

 

[demarpaint]

Why do you think their AWD is special? What about it impresses you? Tell us in mechanical terms how it's better than a proper torque vectoring system? The only system Scooby had like that was the WRX Sti, which they killed, and I don't believe even that could shuffle left or right like better AWD systems do.

I've driven them, since the 70's in fact, right up until my father passed two years ago. They work extremely well, and that's coming from a person who will probably never own one. Mechanical terms, try Google, or maybe YT, you seem to gather a lot of info from there.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

I am aware that they were used for a different context but I thought it could be applied here as well. That comment sparked my interest - would you explain further?

By the way, love the sig quote.

Well for starters GW is the same as Climate Change. The term Climate Change takes the next step as it attempts to describe the potential climatic changes caused by a warming planet.

 

[Ws6]

I've driven them, since the 70's in fact, right up until my father passed two years ago. They work extremely well, and that's coming from a person who will probably never own one. Mechanical terms, try Google, or maybe YT, you seem to gather a lot of info from there.

They aren't a BAD system, but mechanically, they are inferior to many others. Have you driven a SH-AWD in a modern Acura? What about a SQ5? How about a Stelvio or Guilia QV?

 

[demarpaint]

They aren't a BAD system, but mechanically, they are inferior to many others. Have you driven a SH-AWD in a modern Acura? What about a SQ5? How about a Stelvio or Guilia QV?

Yes, the Acura, sorry not a fan. It does have a better ride quality than a Subaru I'll give you that. Truth be told I'm not a Subaru fan either, but they do handle snow very well. Maybe when I see some real world non-biased testing my opinion will change. Those links you posted are interesting, but as @dnewton3 pointed out, they prove nothing.