Alfa Romeo Forums banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
781 - 800 of 883 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
The very pretty Alfa GT was the last model to use the Busso V6, in 24 valve 3.2 litre form. Succeeded by a somewhat pedestrian GM worldwide C6 of the same displacement but generally inferior as an enthusiast's engine. The ZF 6 spd automatic was introduced in 2000. Before that the automatic transmission was notably inferior for enthusiast drivers.

Therefore, the last great manual transmission Alfa was the 2010 GT built with a then five year old "brand new engine" and manual gearbox. But it was only FWD.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
So, what happens if you drive one for 400 km at a stretch like many of us do in Australia? Does the overheating only happen if you drive flat out?
Yes, but don't worry about that because flat out a Tesla runs out of power long before you travel 400 km.
Another falsehood. The Tesla 3 is available with up to 513km of range. No, it’s not an ideal road trip car, but I’m usually going to fly for trips longer than 500km.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,840 Posts
Another falsehood. The Tesla 3 is available with up to 513km of range. No, it’s not an ideal road trip car, but I’m usually going to fly for trips longer than 500km.
A bit of mix up here:

OZ the car runs 530 km on a charge so 400km is no problem.

nealric: We dont really know how far the car would go flat out, but certainly not 530 km or even 400 km. Either the batteries would run empty or overheat before that. Somebody has to try that on an oval track and see. That said possibly most fossile fuel cars would have problems running flat out a whole tank. So what is the argument?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,417 Posts
Now, lol, we have wandered off the primary topic. Well, on to other things I guess, since we are "stuck" with the old manual shifting Alfas we own, alas, heh, heh.

BTW, have seen a Model 3 up close, and I'm old fashioned enough, that having nothing in front of me in the dash, except for that tv screen over in the center/middle, sort of like an old Mini, bugs me no end. Not for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
Another falsehood. The Tesla 3 is available with up to 513km of range. No, it’s not an ideal road trip car, but I’m usually going to fly for trips longer than 500km.
A bit of mix up here:

OZ the car runs 530 km on a charge so 400km is no problem.

nealric: We dont really know how far the car would go flat out, but certainly not 530 km or even 400 km. Either the batteries would run empty or overheat before that. Somebody has to try that on an oval track and see. That said possibly most fossile fuel cars would have problems running flat out a whole tank. So what is the argument?
I wasn’t suggesting it would do 400km flat out! Just that a normal 400km drive would be no problem.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
I wasn’t suggesting it would do 400km flat out! Just that a normal 400km drive would be no problem.
That may be but the question was about range when operating flat out. Which I answered. And we do know a Tesla cannot run to anything like its maximum range when travelling flat out.

It is true that neither can a fossil fuelled car but the range penalty driving flat out in a gasoline powered car is nowhere near the range penalty in an electric car.

And gasoline powered cars can easily empty their tank while being driven flat out, and repeatedly. Many car makers have demonstrated these endurance runs. SAAB did so in the first generation 9000 turbo at Talladega decades ago (1988) . 100,000 km continuous running except for refuelling stops. 32 days of continuous high speed driving (at over 220 km/ hr in US full emission controlled trim, a top speed capability I can personally vouch for, btw) Piece of cake.*

Tesla type EV with no transmission are also seriously speed limited for flat out driving due to the nature of electric motors. All electric motors are also generators. There is an rpm limit for any electric motor when the internal voltage generated by the rotation of the motor acts against the voltage applied by the power source. At that point rpm ceases to rise limiting top speed unless there's a second gear ratio available. It is extremely doubtful that a tesla could run flat out for an entire charge due yo heat dussioatiin problems. Bottom line? If you want to drive very fast over long distances don't buy an EV.

* and yes they were all 5 spd manuals, the automatic version was a tad slower. SAAB did it again in 1996 after Mercedes and VW tried an upstage at Nardo in Italy in the intervening period. Mercedes used their high performance 190 2.3 16 valvers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
I wasn’t suggesting it would do 400km flat out! Just that a normal 400km drive would be no problem.
That may be but the question was about range when operating flat out. Which I answered. And we do know a Tesla cannot run to anything like its maximum range when travelling flat out.

It is true that neither can a fossil fuelled car but the range penalty driving flat out in a gasoline powered car is nowhere near the range penalty in an electric car.

And gasoline powered cars can easily empty their tank while being driven flat out, and repeatedly. Many car makers have demonstrated these endurance runs. SAAB did so in the first generation 9000 turbo at Talladega decades ago. 100,000 km continuous running except for refuelling stops. 32 days of continuous high speed driving (at over 220 km/ hr in US full emission controlled trim, a top speed capability I can personally vouch for, btw) Piece of cake.*

Tesla type EV with no transmission are also seriously speed limited for flat out driving due to the nature of electric motors. All electric motors are also generators. There is an rpm limit for any electric motor when the internal voltage generated by the rotation of the motor acts against the voltage applied by the power source. At that point rpm ceases to rise limiting top speed unless there's a second gear ratio available. It is extremely doubtful that a tesla could run flat out for an entire charge due yo heat dussioatiin problems. Bottom line? If you want to drive very fast over long distances don't buy an EV.

* and yes they were all 5 spd manuals, the automatic version was a tad slower.
I was responding to a different poster who seemed concerned that a Tesla would overheat driving 400km. Anyhow, the Tesla 3 performance has a top speed of 162mph- quite a bit faster than that Saab 9000 driven flat out I suspect. Top speed isn’t an issue unless you are headed to Bonneville or driving an oval circuit- it won’t limit you on any road course I know of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
I was responding to a different poster who seemed concerned that a Tesla would overheat driving 400km. Anyhow, the Tesla 3 performance has a top speed of 162mph- quite a bit faster than that Saab 9000 driven flat out I suspect. Top speed isn’t an issue unless you are headed to Bonneville or driving an oval circuit- it won’t limit you on any road course I know of.
Not yet it won't. And my 1997 SAAB 9000 Aero would beat the Tesla 3 and that's 20 years ago.

You cannot drive a Tesla at top speed for very long, fortunately.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
Not yet it won't. And my 1997 SAAB 9000 Aero would beat the Tesla 3 and that's 20 years ago.

You cannot drive a Tesla at top speed for very long, fortunately.
The Saab 9000 Aero was only good for 149, so it wouldn't beat a Tesla 3 performance. It also only had around 225hp- around half the Tesla (and a much narrower powerband). But top speed is a rather silly metric of performance these days. Fastest I've ever been on a track is around 145, and that was in a car with well over 400hp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,840 Posts
* and yes they were all 5 spd manuals, the automatic version was a tad slower. SAAB did it again in 1996 after Mercedes and VW tried an upstage at Nardo in Italy in the intervening period. Mercedes used their high performance 190 2.3 16 valvers.
Factory arranged tests and real life could be two different thing!

In Germany I heard there was a special place coming from Kiel in the North driving to the South. It was named meeting place for Swedes, and why. Because their cars broke down that place after driving hard on the Autobahn. After 1 hour of hard driving they had to be rescued by ADAC because of breakdown. My personal rule was also that if the car could make 1 hour hard driving on the Autobahn without problems it would last the whole trip of 4-5000km! My Alfas never let me down, but the swedes were reported to have lot of problems(petrol cars).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
The Saab 9000 Aero was only good for 149, so it wouldn't beat a Tesla 3 performance. It also only had around 225hp- around half the Tesla (and a much narrower powerband). But top speed is a rather silly metric of performance these days. Fastest I've ever been on a track is around 145, and that was in a car with well over 400hp.
1997 SAAB 9000 Aero 5 spd was good for 155 mph (250 km/hr). According to the factory. In reality they were generally faster than the official figures, especially with an old well run in engine and platinum or iridium plugs. Mine would routinely overboost to fuel cut off in second gear due to the knock suppression character of iridium tipped plugs.

But the real drawback to EV at the moment is the staggering cost and weight of the battery pack. $15,000.00 to load the chassis with tonne of deadweight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,840 Posts
And gasoline powered cars can easily empty their tank while being driven flat out, and repeatedly. Many car makers have demonstrated these endurance runs. SAAB did so in the first generation 9000 turbo at Talladega decades ago (1988) . 100,000 km continuous running except for refuelling stops. 32 days of continuous high speed driving (at over 220 km/ hr in US full emission controlled trim, a top speed capability I can personally vouch for, btw) Piece of cake.*

QUOTE]

History is not quite like you remember, because after 15 days of running all 3 cars had to change cylinder heads because of burned exhaust valves! Allways problems when doing such stunts!

https://www.hemmings.com/blog/article/run-for-the-record-saab-9000-and-900/

You should also know that the Saab 900 turbo was in the eighties a direct competitor of the Alfa GTV6 2,5. Alfa GTV6 beat the turbo and after that it was marketed in the SAABs homeland Sweden as the Turbo Dödaren(Turbo killer)

With regards to price of the lithium battery pack in a car, well we know its expensive, but its included in the price of a car. The battery has 5-8 years guarantee if something happens. Degrading to 75-80% capacity is very slow, like 8 years or so. Also the battery pack is segmented so degraded segments can be replaced without changing the whole pack. Generally car manufacturers expect the batteries to survive their cars, to be reused as stationary battery supply.

Also the car industry is waiting for a new solid state battery of which production is started in China and soon in Japan and US. Efficiency of these batteries is twice the lithium batteries, so battery weight will decrease and also they are talking of 1 minute charging time! We will see! Cars with these batteries are expected a few years from now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
The problem was Talladega, not the engines. The cars ran so fast on the banked track that the fuel in the tank was obstructed from reaching the fuel pump by the unforeseen vertical g forces. Once this phenomenon was identified the engines suffered no further problem. The later test in 1996 did not experience this problem because precautions were taken to prevent it.

Just by the way, the Tesla's acceleration ability is an accident. (Apart from it also being an accident waiting to happen since the chassis isn't really safe to handle the performance). To get the range Tesla has to fit big heavy batteries to the car. To get decent performance the motor(s) then have to be very big. You can't build a small, light EV that also accelerates like a Tesla. You also cannot easily build a slower Tesla of the size needed to go that far.

EV are a dead end technology without a future just as they were when they first tried to compete with gasoline. Without light vehicles powered by ICE there is no other use for all that gasoline coming out of every barrel of oil we refine to get the other stuff we use.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
Just by the way, the Tesla's acceleration ability is an accident. (Apart from it also being an accident waiting to happen since the chassis isn't really safe to handle the performance). To get the range Tesla has to fit big heavy batteries to the car. To get decent performance the motor(s) then have to be very big. You can't build a small, light EV that also accelerates like a Tesla. You also cannot easily build a slower Tesla of the size needed to go that far.

EV are a dead end technology without a future just as they were when they first tried to compete with gasoline. Without light vehicles powered by ICE there is no other use for all that gasoline coming out of every barrel of oil we refine to get the other stuff we use.
Wrong again. The Bolt EV is considerably slower than a base model Tesla Model 3 (~1.5 seconds slower to 60) but has more range. The performance comes from Teslas being fit with more powerful motors and optimizing the software controlling the battery and motor for acceleration. They made a very deliberate choice to make the Model S and Model 3 quick, although the EV technology meant they could do so without as much work as it would have taken for an internal combustion powered car. Like gasoline motors, electric motors come in all sorts of power outputs. The size of the battery pack just controls how long it can put out its power. Thus, you could build a very/small light EV that accelerates quite quickly. For example, this Volkswagen Beetle was turned into an EV that can do 9 second quarter miles:

https://www2.greencarreports.com/news/1061309_exclusive-black-current-iii-electric-drag-champion--whats-really-under-the-hood


Your point on safety is rather silly. Short of having a full roll cage (which no production car does) any car that can pull 10 second quarter miles could be considered "unsafe" to handle the performance per the NHRA rules. Nothing to do with Tesla itself really. I will say that the Tesla chassis is very planted even during maximum acceleration. While it hits you hard, it's a lot less dramatic than in similarly quick internal combustion engine powered cars- there's almost no tire squeal and no fishtailing or looseness whatsoever. It's probably a lot safer than a Dodge Hellcat pulling the same acceleration (and no heavier, I might add).

Your point about gasoline (or similar products) as a necesary byproduct of refining is one reason why I don't foresee internal combustion vehicles becoming permanently extinct. However, refining processes can be optimized to get as much of one specific product or another. None of that means EVs are "dead end."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,840 Posts
Despite intense claims that Electric cars will flop, these cars sell more and more, and the Tesla Model 3 is a real hit!

https://thedriven.io/2019/04/15/tesla-model-3-becomes-all-time-best-selling-electric-car-in-us/

However electric cars have not been developed over 100 years, but only quite recently, so the technical envelope has to be developed. As I mentioned earlier the battery could overheat in track conditions, something that has to be handled by better cooling etc. However race conditions are really not relevant for people who buy a car for everyday use!

Here an expert trying a race prepared Tesla on track in hot condition. Alas short trip.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
Facts are that EV sales are close to zero unless heavily subsidized. This is very easy to prove.

Fact is the Tesla is not very good to drive for a driving enthusiast. Boring and uncomfortable. The build quality is very poor for the (subsidized) price. No sensible buyer would choose a Tesla over a similarly priced (even after subsidization) ICE powered car.

Battery technology is currently completely stalled with no prospect for improvements in energy density of the scale required to come close to matching ICE power.

The current driver for adoption of any form of EV is the frankly loony idea that burning fossil fuels will cause the demise of the human race. In the next five years or so this amazing collective delusion experienced only in the Western industrial countries will be conclusively demonstrated to be complete collywaddle. At which point the "investment" in EV technology will prove to be a complete waste of money and the whole segment of the transportation industry currently caught up in this hysteria will suddenly collapse.

Currently BEV market penetration is under 1% of total with no sign of accelerating rate of penetration. It is a rich economy's delusion, nothing more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,840 Posts
Facts are that EV sales are close to zero unless heavily subsidized. This is very easy to prove.

Fact is the Tesla is not very good to drive for a driving enthusiast. Boring and uncomfortable. The build quality is very poor for the (subsidized) price. No sensible buyer would choose a Tesla over a similarly priced (even after subsidization) ICE powered car.

Battery technology is currently completely stalled with no prospect for improvements in energy density of the scale required to come close to matching ICE power.

The current driver for adoption of any form of EV is the frankly loony idea that burning fossil fuels will cause the demise of the human race. In the next five years or so this amazing collective delusion experienced only in the Western industrial countries will be conclusively demonstrated to be complete collywaddle. At which point the "investment" in EV technology will prove to be a complete waste of money and the whole segment of the transportation industry currently caught up in this hysteria will suddenly collapse.

Currently BEV market penetration is under 1% of total with no sign of accelerating rate of penetration. It is a rich economy's delusion, nothing more.
Your assumptions are yours only, you have absolutely no contact with reality! Development in the car industry comes very fast indeed and in the EU from 2021 car emitting more than 95g CO2/km(on average for the whole fleet!) will be fined so hard that it will not be possible to market that car. EU is a big market leading in the change towards low emission and Electric cars. Cars not conforming to the new regulations will not be sold here. Change will eventually also come to remote places etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
Fact is the Tesla is not very good to drive for a driving enthusiast. Boring and uncomfortable. The build quality is very poor for the (subsidized) price. No sensible buyer would choose a Tesla over a similarly priced (even after subsidization) ICE powered car.

Battery technology is currently completely stalled with no prospect for improvements in energy density of the scale required to come close to matching ICE power.

The current driver for adoption of any form of EV is the frankly loony idea that burning fossil fuels will cause the demise of the human race. In the next five years or so this amazing collective delusion experienced only in the Western industrial countries will be conclusively demonstrated to be complete collywaddle. At which point the "investment" in EV technology will prove to be a complete waste of money and the whole segment of the transportation industry currently caught up in this hysteria will suddenly collapse.

Currently BEV market penetration is under 1% of total with no sign of accelerating rate of penetration. It is a rich economy's delusion, nothing more.

You have clearly never driven a Tesla. They are fantastic to drive. You are always in the power band and throttle response is instant. So much better than even the best automatics that still can get caught flat footed and take time to kick down. All of the weight of the vehicle is on the floor, which gives it a sense of agility you normally don't get in regular luxury sedans. They are also extremely comfortable because there is next to no noise or vibration from the powertrain. Things will only get better as automakers like Porsche with better quality get into the game. The Taycan should be fantastic.

Go argue about climate change in the giant thread devoted to that topic. But the best reasons for EV adoption have nothing whatsoever to do with the environment. While I will always cherish our old Alfas, EVs present some very exciting possibilities to provide outrageous performance in totally streetable packages.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
Your assumptions are yours only, you have absolutely no contact with reality! Development in the car industry comes very fast indeed and in the EU from 2021 car emitting more than 95g CO2/km(on average for the whole fleet!) will be fined so hard that it will not be possible to market that car. EU is a big market leading in the change towards low emission and Electric cars. Cars not conforming to the new regulations will not be sold here. Change will eventually also come to remote places etc.
Current government regulations are as permanent as the election cycle.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,736 Posts
You have clearly never driven a Tesla. They are fantastic to drive. You are always in the power band and throttle response is instant. So much better than even the best automatics that still can get caught flat footed and take time to kick down. All of the weight of the vehicle is on the floor, which gives it a sense of agility you normally don't get in regular luxury sedans. They are also extremely comfortable because there is next to no noise or vibration from the powertrain. Things will only get better as automakers like Porsche with better quality get into the game. The Taycan should be fantastic.

Go argue about climate change in the giant thread devoted to that topic. But the best reasons for EV adoption have nothing whatsoever to do with the environment. While I will always cherish our old Alfas, EVs present some very exciting possibilities to provide outrageous performance in totally streetable packages.
I have driven a Tesla model S. Boring. Poor build quality. Did I mention they are extremely expensive and very poor value for money. I live in a no subsidy jurisdiction (no fuel tax is the only de facto subsidy here, EVs don't even get the egregious HOV privileges extended to them in less enlightened jurisdictions). Enthusiast drivers here wouldn't dream of paying for a Tesla at full price required here.

Electric motors do not have a power band nor do they have throttle, technically speaking. Electric motors happen to develop peak torque just before they begin turning and torque declines in a fairly linear fashion up to maximum rpm. I did not find the Tesla noticeably comfortable. I did find it exceptionally boring with mundane handling. I would prefer the most humble of ICE powered vehicle even one equipped with a CVT, which mimics electric power trains reasonably well allowing the ICE to operate very smoothly and impressively within its very real powerband. Skilled drivers don't get left flat footed, it's called anticipation (fighter pilots call it situational awareness).

My passing reference to CO2 emissions was not about climate change but about allowing idiots to run government. Well, idiots should not run anything, they need constant supervision. Politicians generally know very little about technical matters. The current crop seem markedly deficient and seem absurdly proud of their ignorance.

Time will prove me right on this front, and not too much time now. The whole CO2 edifice is set to come crashing to the ground along with any and all associated regulation and technologies. Fossil fuel consumption continues to rise and proven reserves are also increasing. Cost of producing fossil fuels continues to fall.
 
781 - 800 of 883 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top