When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Carbon build up is not as bad on NA engine, but it still happens, and Honda DI engines are still relatively new. All the turbocharged european engines suffer from it and pretty much require walnut blasting as a part of regular maintenance. The procedure is $3-6k at an independent shop. Honda's latest engines also suffer from bad oil consumption and oil/gas dilution. Even if a modern engine runs past 100k, it will have lost a lot of power and efficiency.
BMW I6's still suffer from carbon buildup? I thought that was solved with the B58, I have not heard about that with the B58, I heard about it on the N54 and to a lesser extent the N55. Would Toyota really use a BMW engine in one of their cars that had carbon fouling issues. I have not heard of it with new Mercedes engines, nor newer Audi engines. Older Audi engines had issues too, I think there were lawsuits from it and extended warranties.
Honda 1.6t and smaller disp engines had some issues from oil consumption and oil/gas dilution, the 2.0t is stout from what I have read and does not have the issue. I have never experienced engines with over 100K miles losing power and efficiency as long as they are properly serviced, I never heard it is a new trend with newer engines either, they often get a little quicker with age once they are broken in.
, I never heard it is a new trend with newer engines either, they often get a little quicker with age once they are broken in.
That's always been true. Broken in motors perform better in every way, usually.
I think the reason, or a good part at least I am getting (good, for this) 18.5MPG (rated 17 hwy) in my LX going 80-90MPH is because the engine is broken in so well. Previous owner treated this thing like a child.
If you read Car and Driver's long term road tests where they retest after 40k miles, the majority of the time the vehicles are faster.
That's always been true. Broken in motors perform better in every way, usually.
I think the reason, or a good part at least I am getting (good, for this) 18.5MPG (rated 17 hwy) in my LX going 80-90MPH is because the engine is broken in so well. Previous owner treated this thing like a child.
If you read Car and Driver's long term road tests where they retest after 40k miles, the majority of the time the vehicles are faster.
Yes but after 100-150k miles, the engines get weaker with wear. I typically keep my cars for 100k miles and I feel like they don't perform as well when it gets into that high mileage. BEVs are different in that the motor won't wear anywhere near 100k miles (more like a million miles) but the battery will have lost capacity. The batteries will probably get down to about 70-75% of the capacity by 300k miles but the the motors will always feel strong.
Interesting article from Jalopnik discussing how installing fast chargers can be very expensive, and take a very long time. Something that I've been arguing in many threads.
Interesting article from Jalopnik discussing how installing fast chargers can be very expensive, and take a very long time. Something that I've been arguing in many threads.
This article is such a hit piece its kinda laughable. Most Chargepoint L3 fast chargers are between 24-48kw because that will charge a Tesla in about 90 min and be sufficient for dealerships. My work has a couple of these and they are actually littered throughout the city at dealerships and places of work and public parking spots. The 150-300kw chargers are very high voltage and meant for high traffic areas and interstates enabling EVs to go long-distances. If the dealer wants to put in 150-300kw chargers, its like a dealer wanting to put in an entire gas station on his lot and the accompanying infrastructure.
Why does a dealer want to charge an EV in 20 minutes? Is the dealer charging for this? I think the dealer just didn't know **** about charging infrastructure and ordered badly. Most reasonable dealers install chargers that their current infrastructure can support. EA and Tesla actually have very expensive installations where they dig up streets because they are an energy supply business and expect a long-term ROI for this. Ever go to a V3 Tesla charging station which can supply 250kw? There are a minimum of 8 stalls and sometimes go up to 50 stalls as it requires great scale at those voltages to make it worthwhile.
This article is such a hit piece its kinda laughable. Most Chargepoint L3 fast chargers are between 24-48kw because that will charge a Tesla in about 90 min and be sufficient for dealerships. My work has a couple of these and they are actually littered throughout the city at dealerships and places of work and public parking spots. The 150-300kw chargers are very high voltage and meant for high traffic areas and interstates enabling EVs to go long-distances. If the dealer wants to put in 150-300kw chargers, its like a dealer wanting to put in an entire gas station on his lot and the accompanying infrastructure.
Why does a dealer want to charge an EV in 20 minutes? Is the dealer charging for this? I think the dealer just didn't know **** about charging infrastructure and ordered badly. Most reasonable dealers install chargers that their current infrastructure can support. EA and Tesla actually have very expensive installations where they dig up streets because they are an energy supply business and expect a long-term ROI for this. Ever go to a V3 Tesla charging station which can supply 250kw? There are a minimum of 8 stalls and sometimes go up to 50 stalls as it requires great scale at those voltages to make it worthwhile.
Typical Jalopnik garbage.
Read the article, the manufacturers are requiring dealers to install these, one of the reasons could be to provide service to customers, and test fast charging functionality whenever they service it. And so when they are required to install it, they have to absorb the costs, but moreover it can take a very long time, which is the norm whenever it comes to any sort of service upgrades. Just the permits alone can take months.
Interesting article from Jalopnik discussing how installing fast chargers can be very expensive, and take a very long time. Something that I've been arguing in many threads.
definitely an interesting article. 150-350kW is a ton of power. it's made me realize that electric utility companies are going to get very rich from EVs because most people will not have full solar at their homes and even if they do they'll still use chargers on a trip or at work, etc.
and the electricity those chargers are providing largely comes from fossil fuels... oh the irony.
definitely an interesting article. 150-350kW is a ton of power. it's made me realize that electric utility companies are going to get very rich from EVs because most people will not have full solar at their homes and even if they do they'll still use chargers on a trip or at work, etc.
and the electricity those chargers are providing largely comes from fossil fuels... oh the irony.
Utility companies are semi-government, heavily unionized, and work with the efficiency and speed akin of the DMV.
Read the article, the manufacturers are requiring dealers to install these, one of the reasons could be to provide service to customers, and test fast charging functionality whenever they service it. And so when they are required to install it, they have to absorb the costs, but moreover it can take a very long time, which is the norm whenever it comes to any sort of service upgrades. Just the permits alone can take months.
Read the article again, the dealer was being proactive in installing these chargers for fear of getting less cars from Hyundai. We don't know what the requirements asked of the dealers. I highly doubt its to install 150-300kw fast charging stations meant for long-distance charging on interstates. I've been to 5 Hyundai dealers here in so-cal which is the heart of EVs and none of them have those installed. They are all less than 50kw Chargepoints. Again, the article is nonsense.
Large high voltage stations will cost $200k+ because its meant to service a large number of cars and provide a potential high return in the future when EVs become prevalent. Tesla has the most charging stalls with the highest average voltage across the nation and they are making money hand over fist as a company. The costs aren't prohibitively expensive as you wanted to point out. Its actually reasonable given the type of station being built.
Why does a dealer want to charge an EV in 20 minutes?
well duh, they have cars going for test drives all day that need to be recharged. they need the ability to add some charge quickly so as not to keep customers waiting.
It's not just dealers, its just to demonstrate what it takes to install a charging station, cost and time wise. Expect it to only get worse with increased demand, especially with the shortage of qualified labor.
well duh, they have cars going for test drives all day that need to be recharged. they need the ability to add some charge quickly so as not to keep customers waiting.
A test drive will use up 5-10% of the battery. That's 15 min charge on a 24-48kw fast charger without infra upgrades. You don't need 300kw chargers on a dealership. It's stupid.