3 ms·

>It's not zero, but the times where acceleration is the safest option in response to a danger are very much in the minority. It's not the actual acceleration t

>It's not zero, but the times where acceleration is the safest option in response to a danger are very much in the minority. It's not the actual acceleration though, it's the time it takes for the acceleration to begin that's the key for me. The car reacts to what I want at once. It doesn't matter if the car takes 10 seconds to get to 60 mph, what I like about it is that I immediately notice that it starts trying to get to 60. The safety of it comes perhaps more from the reliability. EV's accelerate the same way every time, while with a fossil car it varies - maybe you're in the wrong gear, maybe you're at the wrong RPM, and suddenly the car reacts half as quickly as you're used to. I also think it's one of those things you don't notice at first but miss when it's gone. I feel like I have less complete control of the car when I drive a fossil now after a few years in an EV, but I didn't notice it as much in the beginning. There are other things that contribute to the feeling as well, like how an EV decelerates quickly immediately when you let your foot off the gas pedal, how they start instantly from a button press (or in some models, when you enter the car), how the gear change from forward to reverse is a flick of the wrist and so on. It all adds up to a snappy experience.

FireBeyond 3y ago
I think you make some very valid points. The last Model 3 I spent significant time in did have that general responsiveness to acceleration that you mention, except off the line. I would put my foot to the floor and it would take at least half a second to start moving. I will add the caveat that this was a Hertz rental, so provenance and history unknown. And I will admit my ICE experience recently is with higher performance cars (my daily driver is an RS 5, which is very much designed to be street and track), where the transmission is absolutely responsive (I think the clutch time was in the 90ms range?). And it seems most ICE CVTs (which I thought would be free from this issue) are optimized for economy rather than response. > how the gear change from forward to reverse is a flick of the wrist and so on This is pretty common in performance ICEs. In my car, the gearstick sits in a "neutral" position, and you poke it forward (it returns to neutral) to go into reverse, and pull it momentarily back to go into drive (if you're actually wanting to change gears manually you push it momentarily to the side, and then it functions as a sequential shifter, or of course you have the flappy paddles). I do appreciate your insights, different perspectives are always good!

FireBeyond 3y ago

I think you make some very valid points. The last Model 3 I spent significant time in did have that general responsiveness to acceleration that you mention, except off the line. I would put my foot to the floor and it would take at least half a second to start moving. I will add the caveat that this was a Hertz rental, so provenance and history unknown. And I will admit my ICE experience recently is with higher performance cars (my daily driver is an RS 5, which is very much designed to be street and track), where the transmission is absolutely responsive (I think the clutch time was in the 90ms range?). And it seems most ICE CVTs (which I thought would be free from this issue) are optimized for economy rather than response. > how the gear change from forward to reverse is a flick of the wrist and so on This is pretty common in performance ICEs. In my car, the gearstick sits in a "neutral" position, and you poke it forward (it returns to neutral) to go into reverse, and pull it momentarily back to go into drive (if you're actually wanting to change gears manually you push it momentarily to the side, and then it functions as a sequential shifter, or of course you have the flappy paddles). I do appreciate your insights, different perspectives are always good!