Still want an EV?

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by pikkagtr

Hypothetical safety feature
Cliff on right side
Bunch of blind orphaned children with down syndrome on left side of road getting of their special needs bus
You brakes have malfunctioned and the AI autopilot need to make a decision
Does it plow into the children or kill you by going off the cliff

Do we really want some geek who programmes these EV motherboards or whatever making that decision
Hey! a Tottenham supporter, I used to be.

[fcman]

Originally Posted by gblansten

There is no way anyone in this thread is actually in real life fearful of being in an EV and then not having it stop. It's just fear porn. It's not a real concern. They are just sh*t posting.

Some people really are just that scared of every little thing.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by fcman

E-brake on my 2021 Model Y works the same as it did on my 2015 Corvette and my 2023 BMW M2. All 3 are just buttons. Nothing to do with the drivetrain

Then lets hope in such a moment the driver remembers to use it..I noticed the driver in the vid wearing flip flops while driving and not the best footwear should he do an emergency stop if the tip tags the brake pedal.
Driving in flip flops whatever the weather is banned in UK now.

[fcman]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

Then lets hope in such a moment the driver remembers to use it..I noticed the driver in the vid wearing flip flops while driving and not the best footwear should he do an emergency stop if the tip tags the brake pedal.
Driving in flip flops whatever the weather is banned in UK now.

LOL I hate driving in flip flops. If I am wearing them i put them in the passenger footwell and drive barefoot, that's Florida life though

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by fcman

LOL I hate driving in flip flops. If I am wearing them i put them in the passenger footwell and drive barefoot, that's Florida life though

That must be an experience driving with bare feet

[jmg]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

I'll point out the obvious. A non-EV would slow down naturally then stop with the help of the handbrake also.
The EV kept on driving and a police van was used to slow it to a stop and held like that because it wanted to keep moving.
You say the brakes are mechanical on this EV, what about the parking brake, that's right, it probably hasn't got a conventional one? making it a high accident risk for the uninitiated.
It begs the question how would it pass the compulsory safety examination required after 3 years from new.

The handbrake or lack of a handbrake is not exclusive to the EV. Plenty of ICE vehicles also have an electronic handbrake.

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Last I checked, ICEV have an ignition switch that can turn off the engine and ICEV also have a transmission that has a neutral position to disengage the engine power from the drivetrain. So even in the case of a drive-by-wire throttle malfunction there are still user interface failsafes that can be implemented to prevent the ICEV from contuing on its own power.

There are plenty of ICE vehicles that are push button start and an electronic drive mode selector. These are not EV exclusive features.

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I was thinking the incident is tied to the EV-only regenerative braking function. Just a guess though.

I was thinking this too, but the regenerative braking function is downstream of the brake system. There is no regenerative component that directly affects brake pressure, and it actually senses wheel speed, the brakes don't even need to be depressed for the system to initiate.

[EDIT: Apologies, I had a zoom meeting, so I didn't have time to expand on this thought until now:]

However, for argument's sake let's imagine a scenario, regardless of how unlikely, that the regenerative braking system somehow caused the brakes to fail:

• While it increases efficiency, regenerative braking is not an essential component to the EV.
• The validity of the EV as an alternative to the ICE on a global scale does not hinge upon a non-essential component.
• Addressing risk factors with the component is the solution, not dismissing the EV as a viable means of transportation.

These unsubstantiated assumptions are counterproductive and undermine the overall credibility of the anti-EV sentiment in this thread. It's difficult for anyone with sound reason outside of the filter bubble to take these arguments seriously. This is why these echo chambers are so attractive. It provides validation for very little actual worth.

[M5Rick]

[QUOTE=jmg;30545492]The handbrake or lack of a handbrake is not exclusive to the EV. Plenty of ICE vehicles also have an electronic handbrake.

----------------------------------

Sure . But we expect it to slow the car down and stop it eventually.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

Sure . But we expect it to slow the car down and stop it eventually.

Sure, given it wasn't user error, or mechanical defect with the brakes, lack of brake fluid, etc. However, if these brake and handbrake components are essentially identical on the ICE counterpart, how is this exclusively an issue with the car being an EV?


There are dozens of reasons why brakes fail on vehicles, both ICE and EV, but to jump to the conclusion that it must be because the car is an EV is just another example of confirmation bias.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by jmg

Sure, given it wasn't user error, or mechanical defect with the brakes, lack of brake fluid, etc. However, if these brake and handbrake components are essentially identical on the ICE counterpart, how is this exclusively an issue with the car being an EV?


There are dozens of reasons why brakes fail on vehicles, both ICE and EV, but to jump to the conclusion that it must be because the car is an EV is just another example of confirmation bias.

The hand or park brake, be it electronic or handle pull is separate from the main master cylinder operated brake fluid system and it's unlikely that the main brake failure would have an effect on this.
As KRS suggested it could be connected to software that had a glitch exclusive only to an EV.

[freakystyly]

The story sounds like it was out of control for at least an hour if not more. It also doesn't mention (I didn't read every post) how the car was disabled, not just stopped, in the end, by the police officer. I guess driving into the side of the curb to slow down doesn't work anymore with these monstrous SUV wheels.

We've heard the stories with Toyotas and floor mats, this sounds a bit different as it was a steady slower speed (cruise control).

Why would the carmaker allow the operating system to have full control over the brakes without redundancies or a kill switch is another question.

[M5Rick]

More EV hell and I don't suppose charging machines take cash, no thought not.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/2427...s-paying-fuel/

[jmg]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I have no understanding of the specific MG SV EV architecture, so my thoughts are based on my general knowledge of EV drivelines.
Considering most EV have some level of regenerative braking and most are a gear-reduction single speed transmission with no neutral (i.e. no gear disengagement), I can see were a module malfunction could cause a no-stop condition in an EV. While I agree the brake system is hydraulic, does the tie-in to an adjustable one-pedal drive of the mechanical brake system make it a true drive/brake-by-wire where any brake pedal modulation is digitized in conjunction with the motor controller. If that is a design architecture then a code error could possibly cause a no-stop situation in an EV vs. an ICEV.

• Since an ICE's throttle input is also by wire in many modern vehicles, this no-stop scenario caused by input control errors is not exclusive to the EV.
• An EV's motor's output is reculated a through a by-wire control system. Many ICE transmissions are by-wire as well, so the failure point is similar in that a software limitation or error could prevent a vehicle from disengaging the engine in both vehicles. Again, not exclusive to the EV.
• Hyundai has developed a EV disconnector system for it's AWD platform, which could act as a safety redundancy instead of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

As the thread you linked to states, the concensus is the story is BS. Could be, but an interesting discussion regardless. I've read and heard that Teslas one-pedal drive can be adjusted to essentially stop the car at low speeds without touching the mechanical brakes. If I were the driver of the MG, with all the apparent time he had, perhaps adjusting to max regen would have saved the day.

Many EVs, including all of my i3's have enough regenerative braking to be able to stop the vehicle without using the brakes.





I edited my post as you were replying so I will include it here because I think it still applies:

Originally Posted by jmg

[EDIT: Apologies, I had a zoom meeting, so I didn't have time to expand on this thought until now:]

However, for argument's sake let's imagine a scenario, regardless of how unlikely, that the regenerative braking system somehow caused the brakes to fail:

• While it increases efficiency, regenerative braking is not an essential component to the EV.
• The validity of the EV as an alternative to the ICE on a global scale does not hinge upon a non-essential component.
• Addressing risk factors with the component is the solution, not dismissing the EV as a viable means of transportation.

[fcman]

Originally Posted by jmg

Many EVs, including all of my i3's have enough regenerative braking to be able to stop the vehicle without using the brakes.

In the Teslas you can't even adjust it anymore, regen is always set to max and if you pull your foot all the way off the throttle it brakes very aggressively. I barely ever touch the brake pedal

[jmg]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

The hand or park brake, be it electronic or handle pull is separate from the main master cylinder operated brake fluid system and it's unlikely that the main brake failure would have an effect on this.
As KRS suggested it could be connected to software that had a glitch exclusive only to an EV.

Software is downstream of the hydraulic brake, control comes from the pedal, not the software in both an EV and an ICE.

In the case of an electronic handbrake, implementation is the same in an EV and an ICE. A handbrake software glitch is just as possible in an ICE just as it is an EV.

Originally Posted by M5Rick

As KRS suggested it could be connected to software that had a glitch exclusive only to an EV.

Here is what he said:

Originally Posted by KRS_SN

An ICE without Adaptive cruise control might not develop a software glitch that makes it keep going at 30mph. Also brake failures don't keep.a car going at 30mph for long. This sounds like a software specific issue and EV are full of software etc..

His argument is presented as two statements of evidence to support his conclusion, however, those statements are ineffective:


Evidence #1: "An ICE without Adaptive cruise control might not develop a software glitch that makes it keep going at 30mph"
An ICE with AAC could develop this glitch, so this doesn't establish this as an issue exclusive to the EV.



Evidence #2: "Also brake failures don't keep.a car going at 30mph for long"
For argument's sake, let's imagine this is true (it is not). This statement only speculated that there is likely more than just brake failure to blame in this scenario, but does not state what that could be, nor does it state a reason that is exclusive to the EV.



Conclusion: "This sounds like a software specific issue and EV are full of software etc.."
After two statements that do not establish this as an issue exclusive to the EV, KRS jumps to the conclusion that it is exclusive to the EV. To an echo chamber eager to reach the favorable conclusion, this might sound like a good argument, but it doesn't hold under scrutiny.

The "evidence" is completely disconnected from the conclusion. It's a non sequitur, and it fails to provide any coherent support for your argument.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

More EV hell and I don't suppose charging machines take cash, no thought not.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/2427...s-paying-fuel/

"More"... really?

There is absolutely nothing new in this article, yet you are presenting this as a new outrageous problem and mounting evidence to support you bias. Yet, this has been discussed several times in this thread with valid points brought up by BOTH sides.

Bringing this up as if this is new information indicates either poor memory or intellectual dishonesty. In other words, they are either not capable of retaining the information, or are pretending to not retain the information. Both undermines credibility.

[gblansten]

Originally Posted by jmg

"More"... really?

There is absolutely nothing new in this article, yet you are presenting this as a new outrageous problem and mounting evidence to support you bias. Yet, this has been discussed several times in this thread with valid points brought up by BOTH sides.

Bringing this up as if this is new information indicates either poor memory or intellectual dishonesty. In other words, they are either not capable of retaining the information, or are pretending to not retain the information. Both undermines credibility.

Covered multiple times and quite recently. Agree. There is broad consensus that the EV charging build out needs much more work.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by jmg

"More"... really?

There is absolutely nothing new in this article, yet you are presenting this as a new outrageous problem and mounting evidence to support you bias. Yet, this has been discussed several times in this thread with valid points brought up by BOTH sides.

Bringing this up as if this is new information indicates either poor memory or intellectual dishonesty. In other words, they are either not capable of retaining the information, or are pretending to not retain the information. Both undermines credibility.

Say what you like, it does not detract that more and more public are not considering EV's, its the beginning of the end for them and it will be a long painful process of understanding that its a climate change dream gone horribly wrong.
I'm providing newsworthy proof of why this is so and where is yours?

[jmg]

I liked your post Efthreeoh, because it's so predictable, and so your MO. Follow me for a bit:

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Your last 3 bullets are your own conclusions

Which ones and how?

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

which you then claim are unsubstantiated.

I don't see that. Specifically where did I claim that and what was I referring to?

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

None of the people you refer to as the echo chamber made any of those ascertations, so you are arguing with yourself.

Which acertations are you referring to?

This is either another strawman argument, or you are being purposefully vague to mislead people into thinking you have a valid point. This lack of transparency makes your argument appear stronger than it is, and the echo chamber loves it, since it doesn't matter how nonsensical the argument is, just that it supports the bias.

This is a common tactic in debate and especially in this thread. This is part of the reason I constantly have to quote entire discussions. It's an effective way to maintain a clear picture so that others cannot use confusion to make weak arguments.

Additionally, this tactic you used is an attempt at evading counterarguments, likely because you are concealing a weakness in your argument by changing the subject. This is a TEXTBOOK example, as evident of your reply that is literally making a hard right from the dangers of the EV from runaway scenarios to the inconvenience of charging:

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

In the current state of the automotive environment, EV do not make a compelling argument to switch from ICEV. Regarding the MME, the manufacturer states at-home Level 2 charging is best for maintaining high voltage traction battery health....

It's as if the echo chamber had a secret meeting to turn the tide of a losing debate by agreeing to change the subject.

Here was attempt #1:

Originally Posted by M5Rick

More EV hell and I don't suppose charging machines take cash, no thought not.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/2427...s-paying-fuel/

Your post is attempt #2.

Here is attempt #3:

Originally Posted by M5Rick

Say what you like, it does not detract that more and more public are not considering EV's, its the beginning of the end for them and it will be a long painful process of understanding that its a climate change dream gone horribly wrong.
I'm providing newsworthy proof of why this is so and where is yours?

It's so transparent, it's almost insulting people's intelligence. This is a circus.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by jmg

Which ones and how.

I don't see that. Specifically where did I claim that and what was I referring to?



Which acertations are you referring to?

This is either another strawman argument, or you are being purposefully vague to mislead people into thinking you have a valid point. This lack of transparency makes your argument appear stronger than it is, and the echo chamber loves it, since it doesn't matter how valid the argument is, just that it supports the bias.

This is a common tactic in debate and especially in this thread. This is part of the reason I constantly have to quote entire discussions. It's an effective way to maintain a clear picture so that others cannot use confusion to make weak arguments.

Additionally, this tactic you used, is an attempt at evading counterarguments, likely because you are concealing a weakness in your argument by changing the subject. This is a TEXTBOOK example, as evident of your reply:




You are attempting to change the subject from the dangers of the EV from runaway scenarios to the inconvenience of charging. It's as if the echo chamber had a secret meeting to turn the tide of a losing debate by agreeing to change the subject. Here was attempt #1:



It's so transparent, it's almost insulting people's intelligence. This is a circus.

Mate . You have inadvertently built your own flying circus and are swinging on the ropes without a safety net.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

Mate . You have inadvertently built your own flying circus and are swinging on the ropes without a safety net.

The echo chamber is your safety net.

Rope swinging is more entertaining without it.



Mate.

[G35POPPEDMYCHERRY]

i miss BGM at least he knew how to troll

[jmg]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

.

Follow along:

Originally Posted by jmg

The handbrake or lack of a handbrake is not exclusive to the EV. Plenty of ICE vehicles also have an electronic handbrake.

There are plenty of ICE vehicles that are push button start and an electronic drive mode selector. These are not EV exclusive features.

I was thinking this too, but the regenerative braking function is downstream of the brake system. There is no regenerative component that directly affects brake pressure, and it actually senses wheel speed, the brakes don't even need to be depressed for the system to initiate.

[EDIT: Apologies, I had a zoom meeting, so I didn't have time to expand on this thought until now:]

However, for argument's sake let's imagine a scenario, regardless of how unlikely, that the regenerative braking system somehow caused the brakes to fail:

• While it increases efficiency, regenerative braking is not an essential component to the EV.
• The validity of the EV as an alternative to the ICE on a global scale does not hinge upon a non-essential component.
• Addressing risk factors with the component is the solution, not dismissing the EV as a viable means of transportation.

These unsubstantiated assumptions are counterproductive and undermine the overall credibility of the anti-EV sentiment in this thread. It's difficult for anyone with sound reason outside of the filter bubble to take these arguments seriously. This is why these echo chambers are so attractive. It provides validation for very little actual worth.

These unsubstantiated assumptions are referring to you and M5Rick' statements which are quoted in in that post. I apologize if that was unintentionally unclear.