• Dem Bosain@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    10 months ago

    Cars are designed for fuel efficiency (well, it should at least be considered.) To make an IC engine efficient, it has to be able to rev higher, and reach higher speeds. So while it can technically reach 100 mph, it’s most efficient at 55.

    If you make an engine with a top speed of 65mph, and run it at 65mph all the time, it’s going to guzzle fuel like an alcoholic going through an angry divorce.

    • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Plus what if the car is loaded down with 5 people instead of just 1? Or something on the roof like a roof box? Now your 65mph top speed is 50. And what about hills?

    • ares35@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      that may have been the case during the carter administration, but the efficiency curve of a modern car tops out a fair bit higher than 55.

      • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        Most cars still do drastically drop off in efficiency past 55mph, wind resistance is still the same as it was in 1975.

        Modern cars are more efficient at 70mph than older ones, but they’re still less efficient than they were at 55.

      • Dem Bosain@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Okay, but that’s only because the top speed is much higher to bring the RPMs down into the efficiency sweet spot.

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      …and EVs are just as terrible for the environment as ICEs in respect to the fact that they’re not public transit. They produce more microplastic/microrubber waste from tires because they’re heavier than ICE vehicles. More tires on the road, more microplastics.

      EVs don’t reduce traffic and while there is an energy savings, it would be a lot bigger if we were dumping all those EV batteries into trains and buses, both of which reduce traffic. (and reduce tires on the road)

      Beyond this, every EV is a luxury item. I’ll start giving a shit about EVs when I can get one with roll-down windows, no AC, no sensors, no rear-view camera, no stereo other than an FM radio, because then you’ll see some fucking energy savings over time. Every EV has a bunch of extra shit drawing power in them.

      I’m pro-EV, but not for individual consumers. Cars have broken society. It’s time to return to public transit.

      Especially in places like Seattle, because the promise of “going wherever you want, whenever you want” by owning your own car is a fucking joke its impossible to get anywhere in a reasonable amount of time with so much traffic. Buses and trains reduce traffic.

      If it’s energy savings we’re actually going for, EVs as they are aren’t the answer.

      • You999@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        If it’s energy savings we’re actually going for, EVs as they are aren’t the answer.

        If we take the real awnser of public transportation out of the picture then moving to EVs as a replacement for SOVs does in fact conserve our energy.

        An internal combination engine are Only 35-40% efficient as a lot of heat is generated and lost. A gas turbine on the other hand can be as as high as 80% efficient .

        It’s more efficient for us to burn fuels to generate electricity to power EVs including transmission losses and charging losses than to burn them in ICE vehicles. Again though public transportation is the better solution overall.