Not really because that hunk of metal doesn't compress, it just goes straight through your knees. It just moves the 'pole' or whatever else you've hit closer to your legs.
EVs are easier to design safely.
EV are they worth it?
- Thread starter ericmark
- Start date
EVs are easier to design safely.
Not with you there? It's not supposed to compress! It's not an energy-absorbing structure, it's a barrier to intrusion. For half a century, car manufacturers have been building ICE vehicles with transverse driveline layouts and they're pretty much on top of that now. I don't think you'll find any of those EuroNCP tests on ICE vehicles where the engine comes through the bulkhead and takes out your knees! Sure, you'll see EuroNCAP tests where there are knee injuries, but they're usually caused by the diver's knee hitting some bit of steering column or dashboard mounting bracket in the knee impact zone. That's an area where ICEVs and EVs are actually pretty similar in their design.
When it comes to pedestrian safety, I think EV's might have a bit of an advantage, because they can get a lower bonnet line whilst still leaving enough of a gap between the underside of the bonnet and the top of what would have been an ICE engine, but they still have the same front suspension strut tops as the highest point under the bonnet. In side and rear impacts, EVs have the disadvantage of having the battery taking up a lot more space than a conventional fuel tank, so they can tolerate less intrusion before the battery gets clobbered. In rollover accidents, they have a massively heavy battery pressing down on the pillars and roof.
I think (comparing like-for-like vehicles, in terms of size and price), there's not much to choose between the two?
That's not how any of it works.
The engine reduces the effective crumple zone and can be forced back. NCAP limits the test environment to a realm that ICEs can manage. Just 50kp/h.
In terms of rollover EVs don't roll as they have such a low center of gravity. The Model X has the lowest roll probability of any SUV that was around when it was tested. They're very stable.
In term of roof strength the Model S broke the test machine.
USA TODAY
Electric Model S scored five stars in federal tests, updated with NHTSA comment.
eu.usatoday.com
That's exactly how it works. Take it from someone who has spent more than a fair share of his career in crash labs! It's one of the big attractions of that kind of drivetrain layout to a car manufacturer.That's not how any of it works.
The engine reduces the effective crumple zone and can be forced back. NCAP limits the test environment to a realm that ICEs can manage. Just 50kp/h.
In terms of rollover EVs don't roll as they have such a low center of gravity. The Model X has the lowest roll probability of any SUV that was around when it was tested. They're very stable.
In term of roof strength the Model S broke the test machine.
Tesla's have fallen off cliffs, ended up with cars on top of it, survived big trees and laughed at it all.USA TODAY
Electric Model S scored five stars in federal tests, updated with NHTSA comment.
And no, the current set of tests aren't "limited" to what an ICE vehicle can achieve any more than any other kind of vehicle. The requirements are performance standards that set out injury criteria for occupants, and really don't care whether they're in EVs, ICE or steam-powered cars! In fact, due to the specific issues around electric vehicle batteries, NEW regulations have been introduced to cover crashworthiness of batteries.
LOL! Don't fall for all the Tesla hype! Andre Citroën was throwing cars off cliffs and photographing the remains as some kind of pseudo-science testament to how crashworthy they were, back in the 1930s!
I'm not saying Teslas are bad cars - far from it, but they're nothing special in terms of crashworthiness. For what it's worth, I "broke" a seat belt anchorage test rig, trying to rip the belt anchorages out of an old scrap Alfa 164. It just means the cars were a bit over-engineered in that area...
Momentum is stored in the springs and rubbers that deform and reform. During the reforming phase some of the momentum is returned.
Momentum is M x v where M is the mass and v is the velocity. If the car has stopped, v = 0. Anything multiplied by 0 = 0.
The car was most likely an auto - they're more common in America and some of the Far East. The most likely explanation, is that the driver got their feet mixed up and pressed the throttle instead of the brakes, smashing through the wall. Lots of online clips of people doing just that in autos.
If you are buying an older EV, be aware as batteries are not as good as the newer cars that have improved battery and charging speeds and capacity.
Also be aware that the gov is bigging this up just like they did with diesel cars and tax and diesel was cheaper look at the price of diesel now
Watch out for the electric prices may cost more than diesel/petrol plus you pay loads more for the car.
Hybred is possibly the way forward IMHO
Also be aware that the gov is bigging this up just like they did with diesel cars and tax and diesel was cheaper look at the price of diesel now
Watch out for the electric prices may cost more than diesel/petrol plus you pay loads more for the car.
Hybred is possibly the way forward IMHO
- Joined
- 26 Nov 2017
- Messages
- 100
- Reaction score
- 10
- Country
Absolutely this. Also, the claimed green credentials of EV's for its full life cycle are far from proven. There is also a very obvious problem with raw materials and the tiny little issue of access to charging points, people who live in terraced housing with no parking, flats, range, battery recycling, elon musks nasal hair...the list is endless.
I do have an EV as a second car because it's convenient with home charging and OK for local journeys. For longer journeys, the technology isn't there unless you want to spend £80k on a model S or whatever. I'd never actually buy an EV as I don't think they are a very good ownership proposition. I only got into EV's as there was a very good leasing rate for the Mini Electric at the end of last year and after quite a bit of back and forth, we were able to get a build date pretty much immediately, rather than in 2023, which is what we were told two weeks after ordering. Perhaps a lot of people cancelled due to loss of charging point grant. Claimed range of mini is 140 miles. In reality, 110 in warm weather with everything off. Very limiting.
Hybrid is the way that vehicle manufacturers can continue selling petrol engines for a few more years.
For everything else it's a total bust.
I favour the "cockup" over the "conspiracy" view. Politicians seem to be quite simple creatures when it comes to "techie" stuff. Global warming was all the rage back then, and CO2 was public enemy No. 1. They pushed diesel for no reason other than they were good on CO2, and we, the public, largely went along with it because they were also good on fuel.
However, in doing so, politicians took their eyes off the ball on air quality. The result being that we now have a massive air quality problem, exacerbated by people modifying their cars to delete EGR valves, cats, DPFs, etc.
So now, they're back on air quality, and diesels are the spawn of Satan himself, once more!
However, in doing so, politicians took their eyes off the ball on air quality. The result being that we now have a massive air quality problem, exacerbated by people modifying their cars to delete EGR valves, cats, DPFs, etc.
So now, they're back on air quality, and diesels are the spawn of Satan himself, once more!
EVs are less likely to catch fire than ICEs, and both are less likely than Hybrids.
insideevs.com
The stats are from an insurance company, they have the best statisticians around for obvious reasons. Given they're based on the legacy EV fleet, which didn't include the much more safe LFP batteries the future is bright, and not on fire.
Study: Hybrids, ICE Cars Far More Likely Than EVs To Catch Fire
The data says hybrids are the most prone to catching fire, while EVs are the least prone, although when they do catch fire, they are harder to put out.
insideevs.com
The stats are from an insurance company, they have the best statisticians around for obvious reasons. Given they're based on the legacy EV fleet, which didn't include the much more safe LFP batteries the future is bright, and not on fire.
Fires per 100,00 miles travelled would give a more accurate indication of the potential to catch fire.EVs are less likely to catch fire than ICEs, and both are less likely than Hybrids.
Study: Hybrids, ICE Cars Far More Likely Than EVs To Catch Fire
The data says hybrids are the most prone to catching fire, while EVs are the least prone, although when they do catch fire, they are harder to put out.
The stats are from an insurance company, they have the best statisticians around for obvious reasons. Given they're based on the legacy EV fleet, which didn't include the much more safe LFP batteries the future is bright, and not on fire.
Owners of fully electrical cars may be driving far less miles per year than owners of hybrids and ICE.
To burn petrol, diesel or gas requires oxygen from the atmosphere and these fires can be extinguished by smothering with foam or other means that prevent oxygen reaching the fuel.
Lithium batteries do not require oxygen from the atmosphere to release their stored energy as heat. Putting small batteries into water is often effective in dissipating that heat and reducing the number of cells that overheat and go into thermal runaway,
Fire brigades called to an burning EV battery will very often concentrate on protecting adjacent property from spread of fire.
Study: EV driver average mileage higher than ICE motorists - Aftermarketonline
EV drivers are travelling 370 miles further per year than internal combustion engine (ICE) motorists according to a new research from Nissan, ahead of World Environment Day on Saturday (5 June).The carmaker’s study showed that EV drivers are totting up an average of 8,800 miles annually...
www.aftermarketonline.net
New car mileage based on analysis of MOT data
The newest cars in Great Britain do an average of 10,377 miles in each of the first three years after they are registered. That’s the equivalent of 28 miles p
www.racfoundation.org
There's various studies that find the same thing. EVs get used more than the equivalent ICEs.
Plus the difference is never going to be that big. EVs don't drive 30x less than ICEs or 50x less than hybrids. In any sensible difference you can think of the milage has to be a small factor compared to others. It would be interesting though.
Really we should look at Norway and see if their automotive fire rate has risen or fallen. They're now mostly buying EVs and plugins, so that should start to show in national statistics.
Last edited:
Given the relative infancy of the technology, I expect the problems in dealing with EV first will be overcome. Already there are various solutions emerging, like just dunking them in a big tank of water.
cfpa-e.eu
arstechnica.com
Container puts out inextinguishable fires in electric cars - CFPA Europe
The lithium-ion batteries in electric and hybrid cars present a challenge […]
cfpa-e.eu
New firefighting tool delivers water directly to blazing EV batteries
Technique uses less water to bring battery temps down to normal.
arstechnica.com