Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Honda is killing its EVs

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 919 posts

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#891

Post by devilbunny »

gambiting wrote: post #851
devilbunny wrote: post #846

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a 2023 Mercedes it is most assuredly not instantaneous. Maybe it's just their implementation that's unpredictable. But that's the car my wife owns, so it's the one I've tried it on. Still, keep using it if you like it. I don't hate that it exists. I hate that I can't turn it off and leave it off.

Yeah I'm just saying try it in a car where it works well. In my XC60 it's paired with an electric motor on the rear axle so even with the engine off the car accelerates from standstill like an EV - instantaneously and with plenty of torque.

> paired with an electric motor

Then you've changed the whole issue. I wouldn't have an issue with it in a hybrid at all, but in a pure ICE car, it's not always a good thing.

I suspect the hatred comes from the inability to leave it off. I don't have to turn my radio off every time I start the car. I don't have to turn off the climate control. I don't have to turn off the automatic wipers. If I turn them off, they stay off until I turn them back on.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#892

Post by skissane »

tialaramex wrote: post #871
skissane wrote: post #857

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That directive was implemented in the UK by The Motor Fuel (Composition and Content) Regulations 1999 (as amended) - https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/3107/made Part III makes it illegal to sell leaded petrol in the UK without a government permit No idea how many of these permits have been issued

Thanks. I too have no idea. I searched some FOIA sites but of course "lead" the element has the same spelling as "lead" the verb and noun, so e.g. in documents about fuel "Lead counsel" and "Lead role" aren't about the chemical additive. Maybe somebody asked but I didn't find it, and maybe nobody asked.

The permits are technically called "leaded petrol permits". Unlike "lead", I don't think "leaded" is commonly used with alternative meanings. Another useful search term is "tetraethyl" – the compound in leaded petrol is "tetraethyl lead" (also spelt "tetraethyllead" or "TEL") – while "tetraethyl" can occur in non-lead compounds, in practice the lead-based compound is mentioned much more frequently than other tetraethyl compounds such as tetraethylsilane.

If you read the regulations, they provide for the permits to be issued to members of the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs, since some classic cars have difficulty running on unleaded petrol. https://www.fbhvc.co.uk/fuels says "the Federation lobbied successfully to secure an EU concession for the sale of leaded petrol in the UK, a concession which survives to this day, although current sales outlets are few in number, and the uptake of the product is quite small. In part, the difficulty of setting up a satisfactory distribution for leaded petrol for the use of historic vehicles, is proof of the general truth that a good distribution system for specialised fuels for historic road vehicles is not a viable commercial proposition". It sounds like there may still be a small handful of isolated places where you can legally purchase small quantities of leaded petrol in the UK for use with classic cars – more likely the clubhouse of a classic car club, or a mechanic who specialises in such vehicles, than an ordinary petrol station.

The regulations also exempt military vehicles, but I'd be surprised if there was any remaining use of leaded petrol in the UK military.

The regulations apply to land transport vehicles, not avgas. Leaded avgas is still legally used in the UK for general aviation, despite repeated attempts to move away from it.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#893

Post by coryrc »

SR2Z wrote: post #411
coryrc wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with following motorcycle regulations?

Because owning a motorcycle is a huge pain in the ass on account of motorcycles costing a decent amount of money, weighing 300lbs, going on the highway. If a $1000 ebike can only hit 40mph and weighs less than 100lbs, why not let people just buy them and ride them with a normal drivers' license?

The ebike could meet motorcycle regulations easily and cheaply.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#894

Post by coryrc »

Spivak wrote: post #171
coryrc wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with following motorcycle regulations?

Because e-bikes have effectively done regulatory arbitrage and the sky didn't fall. You want more people using small electric vehicles where before they would have used a car, you lower the burden to get one on the road.

Head injuries are way up.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#895

Post by margalabargala »

Yizahi wrote: post #888
margalabargala wrote: post #847

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 1st gen Leafs are absolutely not useless. They have a specific use case, which they excel at. That use case is simply different from most cars, which are general use and can drive many hundreds of km. If your use case for a vehicle matches the 1st gen Leaf, it blows away anything else except a bicycle in terms of cost per distance. In the US, DC fast charging costs ~$0.50/kWh. A typical EV gets around 3.5mi/kWh,…

Theoretically there is a use case for 100km range car, I won't object that. But in practice such a use case is extremely unrealistic, if alternatives exist at all. 100km range car is city-only car cheap car, basically locked forever to a single location. But cheap car is not a cheap thing in general, it is still 10-20 thousand dollars and requires all the car things - insurance, changing, parking spot, yearly mainten…

> But cheap car is not a cheap thing in general, it is still 10-20 thousand dollars and requires all the car things - insurance, charging, parking spot, yearly maintenance etc

A used Gen 1 Leaf will cost you well under $10k for a car with 50k miles on it. The battery is so small, charging empty to full is $5 or less in most of the US and can be done overnight off a normal 120V outlet. There is essentially no maintenance except wiper fluid and blades. Minimal liability insurance on these vehicles is about $150 a year.

You make a great argument that they aren't a general purpose car for everyone. And you're right! I completely agree. They are not a general purpose car for everyone. But they absolutely have their place, and are far less expensive than you make them out to be.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#896

Post by Kirby64 »

phainopepla2 wrote: post #860
speedgoose wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see what you mean but some features are great. The ones that stops automatically to not run over cyclists and pedestrians for example. Also why manual transmissions for everyone ? It’s kinda slow and cumbersome. It’s fun to pretend play being a good pilot, but that’s obsolete.

My main argument for manual transmissions would be that because it requires both hands to be engaged it leaves less availability for the right hand to pick up their phone. The number of people I see holding and staring at their phone while driving down my residential street is shocking. I also think it just connects you to the act of driving more, which I'm convinced (without evidence, just a hunch) makes you a safer…

People have been distracted while driving manual transmissions for ages too. I remember my father telling me a story of drinking coffee out of a coffee cup, while smoking a cigarette, and driving his manual transmission in a blizzard.

How distracted a driver is with phones/etc is up to them; enabling them to be safer within their existing usage is only a benefit. Same reason things like the semi-autonomous driving are a net benefit. They substantially reduce the cognitive load of driving, which makes you more able to monitor the higher level driving tasks. The fatigue is noticeable for me, especially on longer drives.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#897

Post by pmontra »

torginus wrote: post #776
pmontra wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not only bug fixing. It's what happens to phones too: updates for a fixed number of years. I don't see the point to pay a premium for a new car (it's not a tool for my work) so I always buy second hand. My Citroën C3 from 2016 never upgraded to the new backward incompatible Android auto from the late 2010s. I bought it in 2020 and I wasn't able to connect to it with my phone from 2019 which came with the new And…

I don't understand how they can get away with this even. Imagine if they discover a root exploit in whatever old version of Android they're running. Now if there's no update, people can just hack your car via the internet or Bluetooth. While your infotainment can't access the ICU usually, they're connected via Canbus which has zero provisions for security, and taking over your whole car is usually quite easy from thi…

I think that parties can win elections by pointing fingers at what people do with their phones, but they can't create enough concern by pointing fingers at the Canbus and at hacking cars.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#898

Post by Vinnl »

Mawr wrote: post #825
Vinnl wrote: post #813

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The source is "I heard that somewhere", hence "AFAIK". It kinda matches my experience at least when I get closer to a highway, the noise I hear doesn't sound like engine noise anymore.

Yeah, but you probably don't walk along a highway every day to get your groceries, do you. The closer the traffic gets to where people live, the lower the speed limit, and the more relevant the loudness of an engine. Another factor is that an EV has a noise ceiling, whereas an ICE can get arbitrarily loud — think motorcycles, buses, trucks. ICEs also use all of their noise range all the time — revving, accelerating.…

Unfortunately the steady background noise of cars I do hear around my house (and thus where I get groceries) mostly comes from the highway. But you're right, in the city centre it's partially this quiet because it's about the farthest you can get from the highway.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#899

Post by robocat »

grumbelbart2 wrote: post #711
robocat wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> massive hydro energy resources That is irrelevant unless Norway has unused capacity. If a country adds electric cars using more electric power, then what really matters is how that extra power is generated. It gets weird in Europe because adding extra load in Norway could easily mean that Poland does more generation using coal. I'm in New Zealand where the government owned generators are preventing solar installati…

Going all electric with cars would add ~10-15% of electric demand. That's a bit, but not really a deal breaker, and something Norway would easily be able to offset by adding more wind turbines.

I tried to find info on whether Norway is adding green generation capacity. Closest answer I got is that they have stopped adding onshore wind and solar is still negligible.

Re: Honda is killing its EVs

#900

Post by kjkjadksj »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #633
globular-toast wrote: post #629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody said they generate more but simply that they generate some. Modern petrol engines output very little particulates so almost all the particulates are from tyres and brakes. Why would EVs produce any less?

While EVs are heavier—increasing tire wear—their regenerative braking significantly reduces brake dust, and they eliminate tailpipe exhaust entirely. Overall, EVs offer a net reduction in particulates.

Now compare that to a 2200lb civic with a 5 speed you can engine brake with.
Post reply on HN