5 ms·

It's well worth watching Doug Demuro's review of both the BMW i3 and the Tesla model 3. It will give you a quick understanding of why BMW is behind the 8 ball r

It's well worth watching Doug Demuro's review of both the BMW i3 and the Tesla model 3. It will give you a quick understanding of why BMW is behind the 8 ball right now with regard to EVs.

teachrdan 7y ago
Can someone who knows cars tell me how valuable Doug Demuro's analysis is? I appreciate him as an entertainer but have no way to determine if what he's saying about the cars he reviews is accurate and/or useful.
- iagovar 7y ago
  Not really much value. You don't have to be an expert, he's not definitely from the field and his analysis are not really much deep. That doesn't mean that he's a cool entertainer and his info is also useful.
  - turbo_fart_box 7y ago
    What are your qualifications that allow you to justify a clear dismissal of someone whose job is reviewing and understanding cars?
- manigandham 7y ago
  His videos are more about the "quirks and features" as he describes, rather than an in-depth analysis of the model history, its driving dynamics, and the overall engineering. He's not a race or performance driver and doesn't have the same track experience, and only spends a short time with the car (often just a day or two) so doesn't really have a long-term perspective on it. The videos are a great and fun overview of all the little details that you might not know unless you're an owner, but it serves better as an addon to a more thorough review elsewhere of the actual driving technology and experience. SavageGeese, Remove Before Race, Carfection are good channels to follow.
  - majormajor 7y ago
    To be fair: quirks and features are way more relevant to the typical car owner than driving dynamics and track performance.
    - manigandham 7y ago
      In some ways sure, but I think that depends entirely on the car, and I think driving experience is definitely still important to consider, especially for sports cars or electric vehicles. It's more to say he doesn't spend a month living with a car so it's usually surface level details like a weird UI rather than explaining how the transmission affects the fuel and comfort in daily commutes.
- rootusrootus 7y ago
  Doug Demuro is a car guy. He's not an idiot and he does know what he's talking about. Of course he tries to make it entertaining, but he's not pulling anything out of his ass. I would be more interested in Randy Pobst's opinion on handling and performance, but Doug is certainly equal to any other bog-standard auto journalist.
- milkytron 7y ago
  His analyses are generally pretty good for things you notice and interact with everyday (like another user mentioned, the quirks and features). He knows when he sees bad quality, mistakes, and oversights in a car's UI/UX and design. However, his opinion is usually based on a few days of driving and using the car, and does not reflect how ownership of the car will actually pan out. He attempts to take this into account with his "daily doug score". But by no means is this entirely accurate, and is more so a reasonable estimate based on the manufacturers history, that model, and consumer reviews. I generally take his analyses as "This is what I thought after driving the car for a few days" and is based on his opinion, his preferences, and his thoughts. I would take his opinion into account for a rental car, but not so much when it comes to owning a car for its lifetime. He generally owns luxury cars or sports cars that are out of reach for most people, and I'm sure he has spent a lot of money on them (although it may be worth it if they appreciate in value). He has a different need in cars than I, and probably than most people.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
LifeLiverTransp 7y ago
My brother works at bmw, the problem is not that they dont see electric as the future, the problem is, that they see batterys as a dead end for cars. They are a ecological disaster to manufacture, have a limited life-time and are very slowly improving and have overall just taken off, because other industries basically carried that market. If they could make the economics of scale happen, they would rather prefer something like lohc as energy carrier. http://www.framatome.com/customer/liblocal/docs/KUNDENPORTAL/PRODUKTBROSCHUEREN/Brosch%C3%BCren%20nach%20Nummer/PS-G-003-ENG-201804-COV-LOHC%20Systems.pdf http://www.framatome.com/customer/liblocal/docs/KUNDENPORTAL... Its storageable hydrogen, so its the natural product of decentralized renewable energy production. It has not recharge time, no battery decay. Only problem is- there is nothing but the car-industry who wants this.
- drcross 7y ago
  This is such a blatant lie. As if the petroleum and car industry really care about the ecological impact of battery manufacture, when there are multiple solutions currently proposed- Tesla revealed they currently recycle the packs. Use packs can be repurposed as house batteries for grid stability. The data shows the battery lifespan far exceeds initial forecasted length.
- cr0sh 7y ago
  That sounded interesting - until I saw in the paper that: 1 litre of LOHC => 2 kWh Cool? Except: 1 litre of Petrol => 9.7 kWh (according to this: https://greennav.wordpress.com/2008/03/03/how-much-energy-in%E2%80%A6-cars/ https://greennav.wordpress.com/2008/03/03/how-much-energy-in...) I don't know about the accuracy of it, but I found this: https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/fuel_comparison_chart.pdf https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/fuel_comparison_chart.pdf ...and it says that 33.70 kWh of electricity is the equivalent of 1 gallon of gasoline; since 1 litre is about 0.26 gallons - that's close to the other number (off somewhat though; 8.76 kWh instead of 9.7 kWh). Regardless - it all seems to point to that either the tanks in a car would need to be 4-6 times larger - or the engines have to change in some manner to deliver the same level of performance with less energy - or something like that. Probably a combination of both. I'm making the assumption that the LOHC would be carried on-board the vehicle, as that seems (?) like it would be safer and easier than carrying around compressed hydrogen (embrittlement issues, migration issues, consumer aversion perhaps). I don't know, though, if LOHC is more or less dangerous for consumers to handle like gasoline, or if the dehydrogenation process can be done on-board a vehicle; the paper doesn't go into such detail. It does safe it is safe to store and transport via normal methods, so it sounds like it might be ok in that regard for consumers.
whyenot 7y ago
Alex on Autos and others are better for a thorough review, but where Doug Demuro shines is his emphasis on quirks and features.

It's well worth watching Doug Demuro's review of both the BMW i3 and the Tesla model 3. It will give you a quick understanding of why BMW is behind the 8 ball right now with regard to EVs.

teachrdan 7y ago

Can someone who knows cars tell me how valuable Doug Demuro's analysis is? I appreciate him as an entertainer but have no way to determine if what he's saying about the cars he reviews is accurate and/or useful.

iagovar 7y ago
Not really much value. You don't have to be an expert, he's not definitely from the field and his analysis are not really much deep. That doesn't mean that he's a cool entertainer and his info is also useful.
- turbo_fart_box 7y ago
  What are your qualifications that allow you to justify a clear dismissal of someone whose job is reviewing and understanding cars?
manigandham 7y ago
His videos are more about the "quirks and features" as he describes, rather than an in-depth analysis of the model history, its driving dynamics, and the overall engineering. He's not a race or performance driver and doesn't have the same track experience, and only spends a short time with the car (often just a day or two) so doesn't really have a long-term perspective on it. The videos are a great and fun overview of all the little details that you might not know unless you're an owner, but it serves better as an addon to a more thorough review elsewhere of the actual driving technology and experience. SavageGeese, Remove Before Race, Carfection are good channels to follow.
- majormajor 7y ago
  To be fair: quirks and features are way more relevant to the typical car owner than driving dynamics and track performance.
  - manigandham 7y ago
    In some ways sure, but I think that depends entirely on the car, and I think driving experience is definitely still important to consider, especially for sports cars or electric vehicles. It's more to say he doesn't spend a month living with a car so it's usually surface level details like a weird UI rather than explaining how the transmission affects the fuel and comfort in daily commutes.
rootusrootus 7y ago
Doug Demuro is a car guy. He's not an idiot and he does know what he's talking about. Of course he tries to make it entertaining, but he's not pulling anything out of his ass. I would be more interested in Randy Pobst's opinion on handling and performance, but Doug is certainly equal to any other bog-standard auto journalist.
milkytron 7y ago
His analyses are generally pretty good for things you notice and interact with everyday (like another user mentioned, the quirks and features). He knows when he sees bad quality, mistakes, and oversights in a car's UI/UX and design. However, his opinion is usually based on a few days of driving and using the car, and does not reflect how ownership of the car will actually pan out. He attempts to take this into account with his "daily doug score". But by no means is this entirely accurate, and is more so a reasonable estimate based on the manufacturers history, that model, and consumer reviews. I generally take his analyses as "This is what I thought after driving the car for a few days" and is based on his opinion, his preferences, and his thoughts. I would take his opinion into account for a rental car, but not so much when it comes to owning a car for its lifetime. He generally owns luxury cars or sports cars that are out of reach for most people, and I'm sure he has spent a lot of money on them (although it may be worth it if they appreciate in value). He has a different need in cars than I, and probably than most people.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

LifeLiverTransp 7y ago

My brother works at bmw, the problem is not that they dont see electric as the future, the problem is, that they see batterys as a dead end for cars. They are a ecological disaster to manufacture, have a limited life-time and are very slowly improving and have overall just taken off, because other industries basically carried that market. If they could make the economics of scale happen, they would rather prefer something like lohc as energy carrier. http://www.framatome.com/customer/liblocal/docs/KUNDENPORTAL/PRODUKTBROSCHUEREN/Brosch%C3%BCren%20nach%20Nummer/PS-G-003-ENG-201804-COV-LOHC%20Systems.pdf http://www.framatome.com/customer/liblocal/docs/KUNDENPORTAL... Its storageable hydrogen, so its the natural product of decentralized renewable energy production. It has not recharge time, no battery decay. Only problem is- there is nothing but the car-industry who wants this.

drcross 7y ago
This is such a blatant lie. As if the petroleum and car industry really care about the ecological impact of battery manufacture, when there are multiple solutions currently proposed- Tesla revealed they currently recycle the packs. Use packs can be repurposed as house batteries for grid stability. The data shows the battery lifespan far exceeds initial forecasted length.
cr0sh 7y ago
That sounded interesting - until I saw in the paper that: 1 litre of LOHC => 2 kWh Cool? Except: 1 litre of Petrol => 9.7 kWh (according to this: https://greennav.wordpress.com/2008/03/03/how-much-energy-in%E2%80%A6-cars/ https://greennav.wordpress.com/2008/03/03/how-much-energy-in...) I don't know about the accuracy of it, but I found this: https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/fuel_comparison_chart.pdf https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/fuel_comparison_chart.pdf ...and it says that 33.70 kWh of electricity is the equivalent of 1 gallon of gasoline; since 1 litre is about 0.26 gallons - that's close to the other number (off somewhat though; 8.76 kWh instead of 9.7 kWh). Regardless - it all seems to point to that either the tanks in a car would need to be 4-6 times larger - or the engines have to change in some manner to deliver the same level of performance with less energy - or something like that. Probably a combination of both. I'm making the assumption that the LOHC would be carried on-board the vehicle, as that seems (?) like it would be safer and easier than carrying around compressed hydrogen (embrittlement issues, migration issues, consumer aversion perhaps). I don't know, though, if LOHC is more or less dangerous for consumers to handle like gasoline, or if the dehydrogenation process can be done on-board a vehicle; the paper doesn't go into such detail. It does safe it is safe to store and transport via normal methods, so it sounds like it might be ok in that regard for consumers.

whyenot 7y ago

Alex on Autos and others are better for a thorough review, but where Doug Demuro shines is his emphasis on quirks and features.