3pedals

Members
  • Content count

    4,520
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

3pedals last won the day on January 15

3pedals had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

720 Excellent

1 Follower

About 3pedals

  • Rank
    7th Gear
  • Birthday 10/28/1956

Previous Fields

  • Name
    William
  • Location
    Auckland
  • Car
    E36 328 5 Speed Manual
  • Mods List
    Selection of genuine M-Sport and M 3 bits
  • Car 2
    E53 X5 3.0D 6 Manual
  • Car 3
    BMW R1100 S

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Yachting, tramping, surfing, classical music , hifi and lots more.

Recent Profile Visitors

10,364 profile views
  1. Low quality obfuscating argument - checking out - have good day
  2. True, it is not the same car but it is the exact same size of tyre (on the front) and it is the same road and same conditions, plus I drive everything from a 200kg 90kW motorbike to an 18 tonne truck and the Saab has been "improved with stiffer sway bars, springs and Koni shocks so it is not your average slush mobile. Fair comment on the weight - that would definitely push you up to a 95 load rated tyre- I used to run 97's on the front of our E39 528 and 95 (load rated) on the rear and the 528 was the same weight as the Saab. going higher than 95 on the front of the Saab makes for a rather wooden feel , I suspect the same would be true with the Honda.
  3. and this is my reply: Primacy is a touring tyre with a higher load rating and designed to last longer - have them on my Saab, pretty good but can be provoked into loosing grip in the wet Pilot sport 4 is a performance tyre generally at lower load ratings and has a higher wear rate - have these on my 328 - very hard to get them to unhook in any condition. so I drive on both tyes every day /week - which is in line with your query - I was dismissing comments from others which do not address your query and who do not have direct experience 'flipping' between the two specific tyres. I'd put the PS 4's on the Saab over the primacy but they don't come in a 95 + load rating in a 215/45/17 I doubt that the Honda would feel very good on 98 load rated tyres - they have a stiffer case to manage the weight of lardy mercs and 5 series BMW's
  4. Close but not quite accurate - trimming 200 to 400kg out of vehicle is significant in terms of eficiency and drive dynamics - look at the i3. The combined system of the hydrogen tank and fuel cell still provides a much higher energy density per kg than the battery system and the overall weight is significantly lower in some cases (Tesla) comparable in other (330e) - so weight and performance are both better key benefits of hydrogen are: lower overall mass - better vehicle performance much shorter recharge time, lower infrastructure cost. I'd go battery today if I chose to run an EV today and it would be a 330e BUT instead I choose to wait until the hydrogen option is available in NZ
  5. The Tesla model S with a 75kW battery sitting outside the office tips the scales at just under 2200kg on our weighbridge a bit more than the 1961 you quote. The new composite hydrogen tanks are relatively light -and for the battery version E.V's you need also to consider all the charge control hardware as additional weight so whilst we haven't included all the weight for hydrogen Ev,s the same is also true for battery ones. The batteries biggest problem is the mass associated with decent energy output Energy from one kg of hydrogen - weight for weight it is the highest energy fuel giving an equivalent of over 33kW-hrs /kg so assuming a low 33% conversion rate in a fuel cell - that equates to nearly 10kW-hrs per kg compared to 0.166 kW-hrs / kg for a Tesla battery. For a lithium or other conventional battery you first have to produce the electrons, then put them into the battery chemistry before you can extract them. Generating them, putting them in and extracting them is the whole equation. Look at the Fuel cell as a direct conversion battery - you put hydrogen in, mix it with air (oxygen) and get a shitload of electrons out, plus a little bit of wateral in in real time .
  6. Several funadmental mis-understandings in your argument: Fast chargers are an oxymoron- It's all very nice for Mr Musk to say his car is fast charge capable (and it depends on what you call fast charge) BUT the supply network doesn't exist, secondly batteries don't cope with fast charging very well (it kills them). Maths / science is simple: if you have an empty 75kW-hr battery you have to put the equivalent energy back in i.e 75kW for an hour ( ignoring losses) - 150kW for 30 minutes and 300kW for 15 minutes or 600kW to match the refill time for hydrogen) and diesel / petrol). The faster you try to do this the higher the losses are and if they go to wireless charging the losses are ridiculously high. As for theludicrous 120kW version well you can do the maths. A 600kW supply is capable of supplying 120 to 200 houses so you actually need a scale of infrastructure at each charge station capable of powering a big subdivision or small village. Then you need the charge station hardware which is not cheap - and that is for ONE charge point - imagine a fuel station with1 pump But back to the facts : Our power is cheap to produce (we are overcharged for it) and 85% renewable - using it off peak to generate hydrogen which can then be easily reticulated /transported is viable - 5kg is all you need for 450km of travel in a fuel cell car and you only need a small battery to buffer the supply - that's lighter than the 50 to 90kg of diesel / petrol for the average car/SUV and way lighter than the 680kg of batteries a Tesla drags around all the time to get a similar (less) range. Hydrogen supply chain infrastructure exists, it is installed in Germany, France , Italy Japan and other countries - some has been operating since 2011 - it can be easily overlaid on major transport routes and located in cities easily for $ millions. Capacity required at each H station is 10% of what is required for diesel or petrol, Electrical Supply / capacity on the Transpower grid is not an issue in NZ, it is a major in other countries, Upgrading the Electricity network within regions IS a MAJOR issue - to provide sub 30 minute charging will require a complete re-build of all 29 regional networks in NZ and cost $billions. Those 3 pin plugs which "every where" as you say can't power a fast, medium or even slow charger- try 32 hours to charge a Tesla model S -75 from empty, Dragging around 5kg of hydrogen makes a lot more sense than 680kg of batteries.
  7. Really, How? NZ has cheap hydro power which can be used to sustainably produce hydrogen which then replaces fossil fuels no petroleum required.
  8. None because we are fixated with gas guzzlers- but working on it.
  9. No - all must be either run flats or something else - cannot have mixed carcasses on one vehicle see item 2 WOF rejection - entirely logical
  10. Actually not true both Germany and Japan have national hydrogen refueling network, others are building them - germany currently has 110 stations and is aiming for 400
  11. Current hydrogen production is primarily for combustion as an alternative for low grade fossil fuels - it reduces service costs and is less polluting- it does use the cheap and dirty hydrocarbon based process. Hydrogen from the electrolysis process can compete currently with medium grade / high grade fossil fuels in specific applications including transport.
  12. most appear to do it by fitting cheap chinese tyres however they only get half the deal - they find the edge but crash before learning to deal with it
  13. Decent contribution please - yes there are losses in the conversions but also consider the full hydrocarbon extraction/ distillation and consumption process in an internal combustion engine or industrial heating system - same with battery storage - where do you source the electrons to fill the battery / Hydrocarbon powered generation ? thats not efficient or renewable. Hydrogen is the emerging energy / tehnology that is superceding batteries ( unless you believe Musk the battery maker ) BTW the horse and cart is very viable - bio fuel in , about a horse power and some sh*t out - reasonable efficiency - 100% renewable
  14. More home work needed you guys are trotting out last decades' excuses for science, Hydrogen fuel cells are viable now, they are efficient and the hydrogen product costs are reasonable and facilities are scaleable. Fossil fuels are not batteries because the use combustion to produce energy (heat) - fuel cells use chemistry to produce electrons - vastly different
  15. Pretty low tech tyre discussion ?? Primacy is a touring tyre with a higher load rating and designed to last longer - have them on my Saab, pretty good but can be provoked into loosing grip in the wet Pilot sport 4 is a performance tyre generally at lower load ratings and has a higher wear rate - have these on my 328 - very hard to get them to unhook in any condition. I'd put the PS 4's on the Saab over the primacy but they don't come in a 95 + load rating in a 215/45/17 If you are not on the edge regularly how do you know where it is and how to deal with it??