Electric vehicles (EVs), their emissions, and future viability

[German_1er_diesel]

Funny the double clutch auto from Ford was mentioned, as a dead Focus so-equipped was dropped off via tow truck overnight.
Those things are AWFUL. Shame, because the 3-pedal Focus, even with the lackluster gas engines we get stuck with, are not a horrible car really, and drive pretty decent.

Weird how the Focus got that dry-clutch dual clutch thing for America, where nobody cares for the fuel economy advantages, while Europe, where nearly everybody drives manuals, gets the torque converter.

 

[oilhammer]

Well you probably do not have many people opting for a 2.0L gas engine, or the optional 2.3L gas engine (our ONLY available engines) in them either. Plus, here, people think 25 MPG is "good".

I have a coworker here that is driving a 2.4L automatic Kia Forte... he thinks it is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Well, for him, maybe it is, since ALL of his previous vehicles were V8 trucks. But that Kia handily gulps down TWICE the fuel my Golf does. It is all relative. (he also spends about as much on cigarettes as I do on fuel, so.... )

 

[bhtooefr]

My guess is that it had to do with fleet averages.

Nobody goes for the automatic in Europe, so it could be less efficient without impacting the averages.

In America, everyone goes for it, and much of the reason the Focus existed in the US market (and the entire reason the Fiesta existed in the US market) was to help the fleet fuel economy averages, so the DCT had to be used. (Now, the torque converter automatics are more efficient, and the larger vehicles are more efficient, so they see both the DCTs and the Focus as unnecessary.)

As far as the large engines... there is something to be said for their improved durability and lower cost compared to undersized turbo engines, and wide-authority VVT and tall gearing can make up for the highway fuel economy difference. (In the real world, there is no city fuel economy difference, and the criteria emissions of the large engines can be significantly lower.)

 

[German_1er_diesel]

Well you probably do not have many people opting for a 2.0L gas engine, or the optional 2.3L gas engine (our ONLY available engines) in them either.

Our small-town Ford dealer has two Focus RS on the lot, so that's a 2.3 with some sort of fan base here... The Mk3 Focus never had the naturally aspirated 2.0 engine here, but there are plenty of STs here. The STs could be the diesel ST of course.
The wagon Focus is about twice as popular as the hatch here.
Good value in "almost new" too:
https://www.autoscout24.de/angebote...8bf5c7a-b2b6-4c3c-a3d2-7e8a109bd10c?cldtidx=1
(That's a diesel ST wagon)

 

[oilhammer]

We get a high performance turbo Focus, too, but it isn't super popular. We do not get the wagon.

BTW, this Focus here I just had the IDS hooked to it (the Ford scan tool software), the TCM has more codes than a German U-boat captain... but Ford has a warranty extension on these, so it'll get a new Continental control unit for its Getrag autobox on Ford's dime. It made it a whole 55k miles, though!

 

[German_1er_diesel]

It made it a whole 55k miles, though!

That's pretty embarassing.

How is the shift quality on those dry-clutch boxes when they age a bit? Smooth or jerky?

 

[bhtooefr]

Drunk 14 year old who's never driven a car levels of jerky.

As in, sometimes it doesn't even make it into a gear, and there's loud grinding noises. (Source: a friend's Fiesta with the Power****.)

 

[German_1er_diesel]

Drunk 14 year old who's never driven a car levels of jerky.
As in, sometimes it doesn't even make it into a gear, and there's loud grinding noises.

That's interesting.
I'm only shopping for automatics because my wife wants to try one, and I was extremely skeptical of the dual clutch Fords. (Well, there's the extended bumper-to-bumper warranty...)
So I tried both a 20,000 km Connect with the 1.5 and the 6DCT451 dual clutch and an older 100,000 km C-Max with the 2.0 diesel/6DCT450.
Both were buttery smooth with none of the launch shudder you often get from DSGs.
(and with none of the lightning-quick downshifts)

 

[oilhammer]

That's pretty embarassing.
How is the shift quality on those dry-clutch boxes when they age a bit? Smooth or jerky?

Buying a compact car that only gets 25 MPG is pretty embarrassing.

As far as shift quality, the only thing that is worse is the Smart. Although the ChryCo/Jeep/FCA CVTs, Subaru CVTs, and Mitsubishi CVTs are pretty abysmal, too.

 

[German_1er_diesel]

Buying a compact car that only gets 25 MPG is pretty embarrassing.

Nobody does that in most of the world.

As far as shift quality, the only thing that is worse is the Smart. Although the ChryCo/Jeep/FCA CVTs, Subaru CVTs, and Mitsubishi CVTs are pretty abysmal, too.

The manual in the 2014 and later Mk3 Smarts is pretty good, and the dual clutch is pretty ok as well.
I had the misfortune of spending almost two weeks in a rental Altima in 2016. (Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan)
Now that was a horrific drivetrain.

 

[251]

A friend of mine had a Lincoln LS - he loved everything about it except the 22 mpg and mandatory premium unleaded gas it's V8 required. This was in 2016. Wanted to get something that got better fuel economy so was going to get a Mazda 6 then decided a Focus fit the bill. I suggested he get an SE with the optional fuel economy package - IIRC it was supposed to get 42 mpg highway and he was going to start a 120-mile daily commute so would have fit the bill nicely. He chose the performance oriented ST which only comes with a 6-speed manual (an automatic is not an option on ST's) then for the next six months complained it would not break 29 mpg. He also did not like the small fuel tank - has to fill it up every three days. He uses regular unleaded gas (premium is recommended) which is okay to use but maximum performance is not available when using the lesser fuel grade. Still is driving it and it does get 30 mpg now. Says he still loves it as of a week ago.

Yes, I told him him to check out TDI's - especially one with a manual but the only VW's he considered were Golf GTI's. I just find all of this amusing with his criteria being fuel economy but he shopped performance compacts which are about the worst models when it comes to stellar fuel economy.

 

[Rob Mayercik]

The little turbo gas engine in the Equinox is working pretty hard, I agree. GM did a good job of masking the engine thrashing about, but they kind of negated that with a nice big tachometer staring you in the face. Although I suppose most Equinox buyers don't pay attention to that anyway. Heck, most cannot pay attention to the dipstick, which on these newer GDI engines, especially the turbocharged ones, is critical.

Not sure if it was a turbo model or not. Are all the gasser Equinoxes turbo?

I do not think it is necessarily the programming of the throttle response, it is just physics. You cannot have a 1.5L engine push a portly beast like an Equinox off the line through a slushbox without a turbo, and that turbo takes a second to get some boost building. I have never driven the 2.0L turbo gas Equinox (the other gasoline engine), but I suspect it is better in that regard.

I think you misunderstood me - I'd step on the gas to get moving, and there'd be a nearly 2-second dead time before it seemed to finally respond, at which point it would jump from around idle to something like 3K RPM. Best comparison I could make is that it felt like downshifting two gears at once, instead of just one. I just couldn't figure out how to smoothly get into the power on that thing. It was better once moving, though.

 

[oilhammer]

Not sure if it was a turbo model or not. Are all the gasser Equinoxes turbo?


Yes, they are. Three engine choices, 1.5L gasoline turbo, 2.0L gasoline turbo, 1.6L diesel turbo. FWD or AWD, and they are all bolted to an automatic. This is the "new" platform, the previous version was a lackluster 2.4L non-turbo DI 4 cyl, with an optional 3.6L DI V6.


I think you misunderstood me - I'd step on the gas to get moving, and there'd be a nearly 2-second dead time before it seemed to finally respond, at which point it would jump from around idle to something like 3K RPM. Best comparison I could make is that it felt like downshifting two gears at once, instead of just one. I just couldn't figure out how to smoothly get into the power on that thing. It was better once moving, though.

No misunderstaning, your description feels exactly like what I feel... massive turbo lag as the tiny engine's turbo builds boost. Sadly, the previous version's larger non-turbo I4 was not much better, but it did have better tip in thrust at least. The transmissions are rather slow acting on those, too.

To make matters worse, on the new ones, they also get cursed with that stupid start-stop crap, so in addition to the normal turbo lag, you also get an extra second of the engine having to restart when you take your foot off the brake at a stop. That alone would make me want to drive them into a tree.

 

[Rob Mayercik]

I didn't find the stop/start too intrusive (seemed like how I came to a top would have an influence on whether it actually did that), but yeah, I really didn't like the tip-in on the thing - felt too "binary".

 

[oilhammer]

Have to remember, GM is not building cars for the excitement crowd. They are building them for the sheeple, that have as much interest in things like that as I do in the mating rituals of sea slugs. Hum drum and boring, which is why they make such good rental cars.

I will give them a nod on the diesel option, though. At least it can make something boring also decent to drive (torque) and fuel efficient.

 

[Tin Man]

My daughter, who can drive a manual well, got a 2015 Fiesta Titanium with the DSG auto and it runs great, now at 28,000 miles in mostly city use with an occasional long trip.

Ford tweaked this transmission for 2015 to make it shift better. Most complaints I've read involve 2014 and earlier ones, and are likely from people expecting a torque-converter type shifting experience. My daughter expects a manual transmission shifting experience as I have observed how she drives the car.

Its a 6 speed unlike the manual that had a short-geared 5 speed for this car, except for the Fiesta ST that had a 6 speed manual. I thought the auto 6th gear would make long trips more tolerable and so far it has.

At any rate, the Ford dealer offered an extended warranty that is substantial for $250 so she grabbed it.

TM

 

[Tin Man]

Have to remember, GM is not building cars for the excitement crowd. They are building them for the sheeple, that have as much interest in things like that as I do in the mating rituals of sea slugs. Hum drum and boring, which is why they make such good rental cars.
I will give them a nod on the diesel option, though. At least it can make something boring also decent to drive (torque) and fuel efficient.

I am very disappointed in GM - remembering how much better they were in the 1960's compared to the competition. Now they don't seem to care, except perhaps the Corvette.

TM

 

[oilhammer]

GM in the '60s was run by engineers and car enthusiasts... now they are run by bean counters and those who must answer to the gov't for the bailout agreements.

Good news is, the cars they have now are by and large FAR better than the garbage they had in the '70s, '80s, '90s, and '00s. They may lack a little polish, but a 100k mile 2010 Malibu doesn't feel like it is going to fly apart at the seems like a 100k mile 1995 Corsica did. And the panel gaps, etc. actually look like there is some attention to making things fit. The downside is, the Corsica's standard pushrod 2.2L 4 cyl, while not very powerful, noisy, and pretty pathetic to drive, could take LOTS of abuse, neglect, and generally wouldn't have any issues running low on oil, using crappy oil, crappy filters, and having some Iffy Lube hack working on it. So it may not have gotten you anywhere in style, it at least got you there. The newer cars have no tolerance for neglect. You run these newer engines low on oil, and they use oil, or use crappy oil, crappy filters, etc.... guess what? You get to buy a new engine. We replace (or at least, come across) these newer GM cars that need engines quite frequently here. Almost weekly sometimes.

In some respects, this is not vastly different than a lot of other makes. But in these parts, GM products were pretty popular for a long time, so we have a lot of experience with them, even though they've slipped a lot in recent years as far as a percentage of our customer base. When I started here in '93, it was probably 1 Toyota product for every 10 GM products, now it is probably 8 to 2 Toyota to GM. Ironic thing is, I would wager the GM products now (if cared for) are better, and the Toyota products now (as compared to 1990s) are worse.

 

[Rob Mayercik]

Have to remember, GM is not building cars for the excitement crowd. They are building them for the sheeple, that have as much interest in things like that as I do in the mating rituals of sea slugs. Hum drum and boring, which is why they make such good rental cars.
I will give them a nod on the diesel option, though. At least it can make something boring also decent to drive (torque) and fuel efficient.

Ironic, considering that back in the 80s, the Pontiac division of GM used the motto "We Build Excitement"...

 

[TDIMeister]

Ironic, considering that back in the 80s, the Pontiac division of GM used the motto "We Build Excitement"...

Excitement to replace with another car?

Granted, being a child of the 80s, the Knight Rider Trans Am was a lustmobile of mine for many years.

I think GM/Pontiac's yawn-worthy years were the period from the 90s (remember the rebadged Daewoo Lemans and the Ass-tek?) until the bailout.

 

[oilhammer]

Ironic, considering that back in the 80s, the Pontiac division of GM used the motto "We Build Excitement"...

If you'd been in one of the many Iron Duke equipped Fieros that caught fire right behind you, you'd know exactly what they meant.

Been there. Done that. Got the [burnt] tee shirt.

 

[VeeDubTDI]

Let's get back to the EV discussion, please. We're starting to get pretty far off topic. If anyone wants to continue discussing dual clutch transmissions and turbo gas engines, I can split these posts out into a new thread.

 

[tikal]

It would seem to me that there is flawed logic in the purchase of a Volt if you can go a year or two without ever using the gasoline engine. Because you are just dragging around a useless lump of metal along with all the bits necessary to make it run. I'd pick an all electric car if that were the case. And let's face it, if you can stand some of the looks and driving characteristics of the Volt (I have not driven the newer one, but the previous one was nothing special), then you could probably stomach the Bolt. Actually the Bolt may drive a little better, even if it looks like some reject from a 1995 failed attempt at a live action reboot of the Jetzon's.

I would agree. If let's say, 90% of the time you are driving 100 miles or less in a day then an all electrical car would be a better option in my view. Some of the current EVs vehicles come off a three year lease with very affordable price.

 

[El Dobro]

I would agree. If let's say, 90% of the time you are driving 100 miles or less in a day then an all electrical car would be a better option in my view. Some of the current EVs vehicles come off a three year lease with very affordable price.

And for that 10% you would use?

 

[compu_85]

A rental? Another car in your fleet?

 

[tikal]

And for that 10% you would use?

It might be a little bit inconvenient but you can plan ahead and re-charge in your route.

 

[El Dobro]

Or, I can just keep going with the Volt.

 

[tikal]

Or, I can just keep going with the Volt.

Of course. If you already have it, keep driving it until the 'wheels fall off' or close to it

 

[bizzle]

I haven't put a full charge back in yet. There's not enough time from off-peak start at 11 pm to my departure at 5 ish at the 8 amp rate of 110 (using the extension cord from the former 750W frostheater). With a heavier gauge cord I could go 12 amp. I've also discovered that the 120VAC J1772 cordset I have is relatively easily converted ro 120/240 so I'll be performing that hack.

I have a 40A OpenEVSE that I would sell for the cost of building it if you're interested. My wife and I return the eGolf in October and we won't be leasing a new one for a while.

 

[car54]

I bought a 40 amp Bosch powermax on Ebay for $202, got it, found it was defective and got a full refund from the seller as he could not test it and didnt know. I still needed a charger so after talking to friends who know more about this than me, I bought a brand new Tesla wall connector off ebay from Quebec where the govt tax credit has driven people to buying, claiming, and reselling for profit. It set me back $300 and took an hour or so to swap in the Bosch J1772 connector and cable. I can probably recoup a good amount of the money by selling the tesla connector and 24' cordset which is new and perfect.

The only hiccup in the entire process was the Tesla connector has a thermistor to shut down charging if the connector overheats. The J1772 doesn't have this, so I ended up using a 10k ohm resistor to trick the Tesla box into allowing charging. Soldered it to the ground lug and connected it on the board where the thermistor used to connect. The charger works great, and it looks a lot cooler than most EVSE's out there on the market. I'm happy and the whole thing was $340 (US Customs hit me with $40 in duties)