5 ms·

This seems like a fairly common point as well in car reviews. Super fast cars of any type are only fun in a very limited set of circumstances, most of them not

This seems like a fairly common point as well in car reviews. Super fast cars of any type are only fun in a very limited set of circumstances, most of them not on a normal road. In contrast, even your daily commute can be made more fun with a car that's lightweight or has good handling or an engaging manual shifter or whatever. It's basically the entire premise of the Mazda Miata. It's an unfortunate trend with EVs too (thanks in large part to Tesla IMO). You can get a ton of acceleration with big electric motors and batteries, but the car will otherwise drive like ass because it's so heavy and so little attention has been paid to anything besides speed.

pornel 3y ago
Instant torque makes lots of people grin. Most BEVs also have low center of gravity and even mass distribution, so they’re not as bad as a heavy ICE car. On public roads, 0-30mph acceleration is probably most fun you can have within realm of legal and sensible driving. Handling is not an issue at speed limits of public roads.
- caconym_ 3y ago
  Limiting EV torque off the line is probably one of the lowest-hanging emissions reduction fruits out there, given that (by estimates I've seen) tire wear for current EVs is in aggregate 20-50% faster than ICE vehicles.
  - pornel 3y ago
    The tire thing you've heard has been started by one article that misleadingly bundled tire and breakpad particles with all other emissions summed up by weight. This was extremely misleading breakdown, because it discounted all of the ICE gases that are toxic, but weigh almost nothing, and lighter combustion particles that stay in the air, versus tire particles that are typically heavier and stay on the ground. Of course worn tires aren't environmentally neutral, but that framing was used as a regressive "gotcha" in EVs vs ICE, without daring to mention any real solutions like reversing heavy macho-pickup-truck and SUV fashion created by a workaround for emissions regulation, or moving freight from trucks to rail.
    - caconym_ 3y ago
      Is it or is it not true that EVs shed tire rubber particles at a significantly higher rate than like-for-like ICE vehicles? I said it was low-hanging fruit because it's my understanding that it is: since EVs (again, correct me if I'm wrong) generate more tire rubber particles because of their comparatively high torque output, it's literally a software fix (limiting torque) to cut those emissions to ICE levels or, potentially, even lower. The only reason not to do it is that many people view their personal vehicles as large, expensive toys, and they will be less fun toys if their acceleration performance is curtailed. I don't see this as a "gotcha" for EV technology, because it has such a trivial solution, and it was not my intent to suggest that ICE cars are less (or more, for that matter) damaging to the environment. I'm honestly not sure why you would read my comment that way. --- As for the harm done by microplastics like tire rubber particles, it's my understanding that they don't simply stay on the ground, but rather that drainage carries them into the ground, waterways, and ultimately oceans, where they remain intact for some indefinite period and cause largely unquantified disruptions to local organisms and ecologies. It's not obvious to me that they won't ultimately be more of a problem than airborne pollutants, since they may be much more persistent and difficult to remove.
      - DennisP 3y ago
        There's the perfect solution in an ideal world, and there's what actually works given people's actual behavior. For the latter, you have to consider that if you make EVs less compelling, more people might just stick with their ICE vehicles, which are worse overall when you take all pollutants into account. After the EV transition is complete, though, that'd be a good time to start limiting torque. Unless most people are just riding self-driving taxis by then, which probably won't be doing fast acceleration anyway.
        caconym_ 3y ago
        Alternatively: the time to limit torque is now, while consumers are still getting to know EVs and the other substantial benefits they present. Those other benefits ought to be enough to drive adoption, and the longer we indulge the most harmful excesses, the harder it will be to reverse them in the future when the trap has sprung. I don't really think either of these arguments is obviously correct, so I lean toward the option that immediately limits harm. But I'm also under no illusion that anything other than short to medium term profits are driving automakers' decisions, so in practice we will surely get the worst of both worlds.
- acdha 3y ago
  Handling is nice for freeway merges but it’s definitely not at high speed. Where I used to live in San Diego there were a couple of ramps where I’d see the SUV drivers wallowing around the curves, tires squealing, visibly struggling to stay in the lane, and it was just like “you do this every day, why?”
- kbos87 3y ago
  This. Who cares about top end speed when I can reliably pull ahead of any other vehicle on the road in my Model Y? I use that capability regularly. I'd literally never go 100+mph - that's a novelty.
- mvdtnz 3y ago
  What are you even talking about? Maybe if you're driving around the grid of a city. Most driving enthusiasts know where to find roads that are fun at legal speeds.
gambiting 3y ago
I keep saying this to people and they literally don't believe me - my 86bhp volkswagen e-Up is more fun to drive than my 400bhp Mercedes-AMG ever was. Seriously, I haven't been hit in the head. The AMG was fun for a total of 4 seconds, which is exactly how long it took you to get to the legal speed limit, then you just sort of pootled along, unable to push hard and enjoy it. Yes it had grip, yes it had the noise, but I'd say out of the 4 years I owned it, I had "fun" in maybe a total 5% of those 4 years. In the e-Up? I can push it hard all the time. You can get on some countryside roads, keep the pedal flat, and chuck it around, and it takes ages to get to any kinds of illegal speeds. And it's electric so the torque is always there, there's no waiting for the dual clutch gearbox to finally decide what it wants to do, you press the throttle and you go, it's absolutely beautiful how you can thread this car out of a corner. My enjoyment of hard driving this car is probably 10x that of the AMG, partially because you can actually do it for longer, and partially because I'm far less likely to kill myself or land in jail doing so. And it's only 1200kg so it's not like an oil tanker in turns, despite having wheels from a lawnmower.
- giraffe_lady 3y ago
  Yeah kinda surprisingly I think the enjoyability of accessible cars peaked with the 90s/2000s enthusiast tuning scene ie "ricers." A 2500lb civic si or corolla xrs with a cold air intake was more fun than anything made since and they were like $22k.

pornel 3y ago

Instant torque makes lots of people grin. Most BEVs also have low center of gravity and even mass distribution, so they’re not as bad as a heavy ICE car. On public roads, 0-30mph acceleration is probably most fun you can have within realm of legal and sensible driving. Handling is not an issue at speed limits of public roads.

caconym_ 3y ago
Limiting EV torque off the line is probably one of the lowest-hanging emissions reduction fruits out there, given that (by estimates I've seen) tire wear for current EVs is in aggregate 20-50% faster than ICE vehicles.
- pornel 3y ago
  The tire thing you've heard has been started by one article that misleadingly bundled tire and breakpad particles with all other emissions summed up by weight. This was extremely misleading breakdown, because it discounted all of the ICE gases that are toxic, but weigh almost nothing, and lighter combustion particles that stay in the air, versus tire particles that are typically heavier and stay on the ground. Of course worn tires aren't environmentally neutral, but that framing was used as a regressive "gotcha" in EVs vs ICE, without daring to mention any real solutions like reversing heavy macho-pickup-truck and SUV fashion created by a workaround for emissions regulation, or moving freight from trucks to rail.
  - caconym_ 3y ago
    Is it or is it not true that EVs shed tire rubber particles at a significantly higher rate than like-for-like ICE vehicles? I said it was low-hanging fruit because it's my understanding that it is: since EVs (again, correct me if I'm wrong) generate more tire rubber particles because of their comparatively high torque output, it's literally a software fix (limiting torque) to cut those emissions to ICE levels or, potentially, even lower. The only reason not to do it is that many people view their personal vehicles as large, expensive toys, and they will be less fun toys if their acceleration performance is curtailed. I don't see this as a "gotcha" for EV technology, because it has such a trivial solution, and it was not my intent to suggest that ICE cars are less (or more, for that matter) damaging to the environment. I'm honestly not sure why you would read my comment that way. --- As for the harm done by microplastics like tire rubber particles, it's my understanding that they don't simply stay on the ground, but rather that drainage carries them into the ground, waterways, and ultimately oceans, where they remain intact for some indefinite period and cause largely unquantified disruptions to local organisms and ecologies. It's not obvious to me that they won't ultimately be more of a problem than airborne pollutants, since they may be much more persistent and difficult to remove.
    - DennisP 3y ago
      There's the perfect solution in an ideal world, and there's what actually works given people's actual behavior. For the latter, you have to consider that if you make EVs less compelling, more people might just stick with their ICE vehicles, which are worse overall when you take all pollutants into account. After the EV transition is complete, though, that'd be a good time to start limiting torque. Unless most people are just riding self-driving taxis by then, which probably won't be doing fast acceleration anyway.
      - caconym_ 3y ago
        Alternatively: the time to limit torque is now, while consumers are still getting to know EVs and the other substantial benefits they present. Those other benefits ought to be enough to drive adoption, and the longer we indulge the most harmful excesses, the harder it will be to reverse them in the future when the trap has sprung. I don't really think either of these arguments is obviously correct, so I lean toward the option that immediately limits harm. But I'm also under no illusion that anything other than short to medium term profits are driving automakers' decisions, so in practice we will surely get the worst of both worlds.
acdha 3y ago
Handling is nice for freeway merges but it’s definitely not at high speed. Where I used to live in San Diego there were a couple of ramps where I’d see the SUV drivers wallowing around the curves, tires squealing, visibly struggling to stay in the lane, and it was just like “you do this every day, why?”
kbos87 3y ago
This. Who cares about top end speed when I can reliably pull ahead of any other vehicle on the road in my Model Y? I use that capability regularly. I'd literally never go 100+mph - that's a novelty.
mvdtnz 3y ago
What are you even talking about? Maybe if you're driving around the grid of a city. Most driving enthusiasts know where to find roads that are fun at legal speeds.

gambiting 3y ago

I keep saying this to people and they literally don't believe me - my 86bhp volkswagen e-Up is more fun to drive than my 400bhp Mercedes-AMG ever was. Seriously, I haven't been hit in the head. The AMG was fun for a total of 4 seconds, which is exactly how long it took you to get to the legal speed limit, then you just sort of pootled along, unable to push hard and enjoy it. Yes it had grip, yes it had the noise, but I'd say out of the 4 years I owned it, I had "fun" in maybe a total 5% of those 4 years. In the e-Up? I can push it hard all the time. You can get on some countryside roads, keep the pedal flat, and chuck it around, and it takes ages to get to any kinds of illegal speeds. And it's electric so the torque is always there, there's no waiting for the dual clutch gearbox to finally decide what it wants to do, you press the throttle and you go, it's absolutely beautiful how you can thread this car out of a corner. My enjoyment of hard driving this car is probably 10x that of the AMG, partially because you can actually do it for longer, and partially because I'm far less likely to kill myself or land in jail doing so. And it's only 1200kg so it's not like an oil tanker in turns, despite having wheels from a lawnmower.

giraffe_lady 3y ago
Yeah kinda surprisingly I think the enjoyability of accessible cars peaked with the 90s/2000s enthusiast tuning scene ie "ricers." A 2500lb civic si or corolla xrs with a cold air intake was more fun than anything made since and they were like $22k.