Jump to content

Drew Dowdell

Admin
  • Content Count

    51,152
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    223

Posts posted by Drew Dowdell

  1. 4 hours ago, ocnblu said:

    I do hate fooling with water shut-off valves.   Turning the water back on at the short supply lines is a trick because they always drip until they're turned at the EXACT angle necessary.  Does anyone know a secret to avoiding this problem?

     

     

    Do what @balthazarsaid, but on supply line valves, I always replace them with quarter turn valves. They don't seem to have the problem you described. Much more reliable.

    • Thanks 1
    • Upvote 3
  2. 3 hours ago, balthazar said:

    I've never plowed with my truck.
    I put in 4L once. In treacherous snow I only need 4H.

    When I plowed for a buddy of mine using 3 or 4 different vehicles of his, I only ever used 4H.  With plowing, it's better to have a bit of slip anyway.  4L is serious off road / mud pit stuff.
     

    I still have yet to figure out if I have a locking transfer case or not. The difference between Auto and 4H for me is that the front wheels are engaged, but the front diff is not locked in Auto. 4H locks the front diff. At least that’s my understanding.

    • Upvote 2
  3. 5 minutes ago, David said:

    Seems the official Mustang Mach E EPA numbers are out and they run from 211 miles to 300 miles depending on model and battery pack.

    Ford Mustang Mach-E has 211 to 300 miles of range, depending on model | Autoblog

     

    I started looking at these with an eye on 4-5 years down to road to replace the Chrysler 300C (Yes, I'm aware I just bought it and I'm aware I have a problem).

    But the interiors are terribly blah.... why can't we get an EV with a decent interior?!

    Right now the Defender and Rivian R1S are tops on the list.  I did go test drive a Defender with my best friend on Friday. 

    • Upvote 3
  4. 1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

    It's gotta be the whole small displacement and turbo situation. When out of boost, there's just too much drag at those speeds for a small n/a engine OR you're dabbling in the boost also decreasing fuel economy. 

    I'm sure of it. 65 - 70 was the sweet spot for MPG for that car.... 32ish mpg highway was possible if it was just me.  Put some people in it and it would drop because of the mountains around here. I could see as much as a 5mpg drop by going 75 instead of 70. 

    • Thanks 1
  5. 1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

    Those numbers just don't add up.. 27.6mpg for all a 4WDm loaded and towing.. I mean I don't have any reason to believe he is lying but 27.6 seems out of reach for an unloaded 2WD 3.5EB going 75-80mph. 

    Heck, I'm pretty sure when I'm running 75-80mph I'm only about 25mpg.

    It's gotta be the whole small displacement and turbo situation. When out of boost, there's just too much drag at those speeds for a small n/a engine OR you're dabbling in the boost also decreasing fuel economy. 

    Overall cost saving would probably favor the 5.3 though. Unless you have a heavy foot(which it doesn't sound like it with 16.25 out of the 2500HD) I'd bet you could get right around 20mpg with the 5.3. 

     

    58 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Yeah, i thought it was odd, but those were his actual numbers. He frequently sees above 20 with that truck. 

    Denver to Columbus is downhill. Lee Iacocca pulled the same trick in a Mustang 60ish years ago.  

    • Thanks 2
    • Upvote 1
  6. A lot of the Anti-EVers like to say "Well, your EV is powered by coal! Coal is what is used to generate your electricity!"

    Well... that's become less and less true. It's time to start retiring that line.

    According to the Energy Information Administration - U.S. Renewable Sources Generate More Electricity Than Either Coal or Nuclear and Begin to Close the Gap with Natural Gas

     

    For the period January - September, solar-generated electricity – including distributed solar - expanded by 22.1% (compared to the same period in 2019) and provided more than  3.4% of the nation’s total. Wind grew by 12.2% and accounted for 7.9% of total generation. Combined, net electrical generation by wind and solar was 15.0% greater than a year ago.   

    Electrical generation by geothermal energy and hydropower also increased - by 3.3% and 0.1% respectively - while that from biomass fell by 2.1%. Together with wind and solar, renewables provided 20.5% of total electrical output - up from 18.4% a year earlier.    

    Moreover, renewables' share of U.S. electrical generation has eclipsed that of nuclear power (19.4%) and coal (18.6%).  Renewables produced almost a tenth  (i.e., 9.8%) more electricity than coal through September 2020. In fact, electrical generation by coal was 23.5% lower than a year earlier. In addition, renewable energy sources produced 5.2% more electricity than did nuclear power whose output fell 1.8% during the same nine-month period. 

     

    • Upvote 4
  7. On 11/26/2020 at 11:46 AM, balthazar said:

    Constantly evolving 'technology' is supposedly something everyone is supposed to unconditionally love and embrace, but the fact of the matter is, 1. it's a personal preference, and 2. most consumer technology is merely marketing.

    A smart phone was a huge advance over a dumb phone. An iPhone 12 is 102% of a iPhone 10. Your needs remain fairly static; what worked for you in 2015 still works in 2020 [feel free to pull those numbers apart another 10 years].

    I agree with most of this, however, there are some people who are against progress of any sort and just hate it to hate it.  They hold the view that "It won't work for me today, so that means it will NEVER WORK FOR ANYONE EVER!".

    Tesla was a game changer for EVs. It made EVs substantially more accessible to more people, not just in cost, but in range.  Before Tesla, most EVs topped out at 120 miles or 150miles max. It doesn't matter if you were Jeff Bezos, that is a deficit of utility that those EVs could not overcome. Telsa coming out with 250, 300, 350, 400 mile ranges meant that suddenly the vehicle was usable to 99.9% of trips with no range anxiety.  Yes they are still more expensive than regular cars, but now you don't have to be Jeff Bezos to own one.

    EV development will largely be incremental from here on out.  There is really no need for a range beyond 400 miles in a standard passenger, so rather than adding additional range, manufacturers are going to start to work on things like charging speed and battery size... neither of which will generate much in terms of headlines. 

    So, you're correct that the next Tesla with a 350 mile range is going to be 105% of the current one, that means the 30 minute charge from 0%-80% will take 28 minutes instead of 30, but also the battery will weigh less and the car will improve its regen efficiency.  Battery cost will also stay flat or go down making it more accessible to more people.

    So, it's really only a matter of time before EVs become ubiquitous even if you don't personally own one. 

    • Upvote 4
  8. 4 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    I've gotten pretty good mileage out of my two EcoBoosts. I have a pretty light foot though so I expect to do a little better than the ratings. I have also noticed with both of them that once you hit about 70mph, the fuel economy starts to drop quite significantly compared to n/a vehicles I've owned

    My AWD 2.3T MKC is rated at 18/23 and my lifetime average over the 19,094 miles I've had it has been 23.2mpg.

    My AWD 2.0T Escape was rated at 21/28 and I averaged 24.7mpg over 24,611 miles. 

    That was definitely the case with the Encore. 

    • Upvote 1
  9. 3 hours ago, ocnblu said:

    No way, the Custom or LT trims look the best.  The High Country blurs the retro locomotive appeal of the overall aesthetic.

    I’m.... not seeing locomotive in the current crop of Chevy trucks. Where are you seeing it?

    • Confused 2
    • Upvote 1
  10. 2 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Cool I guess. (see what I did there?)

    But the other two vaccines don't require that sort of cold storage.  The Pfizer vaccine is probably only going to be used for frontline healthcare workers. The third vaccine coming can be stored in a standard freezer purchased at lowes. 

    • Upvote 2
  11. 57 minutes ago, balthazar said:

    LOT of ugliness in that collage of EV trucks. No way does Bolinger survive; the price vs. appearance is totally inverted. The Big 3 by far have the best chances moving forward.

    I've seen the Bolinger in person.  It's what happens when someone gets an EV powertrain and has a bunch of flat sheet metal, an arc welder, a JC Whitney Catalog, and a few rolls of remnant office carpeting laying around.  They had a booth at the L.A. show the same year the Rivian debuted.... and I was like, "You can't be serious.... "

    • Haha 2
    • Upvote 1
  12. 2 hours ago, ykX said:

    Since @David didn't answer my question about electric consumption demand as we switch EVs here is a good estimate:

    How Much Electricity Will It Take to Power Electric Cars of the Future? (inverse.com)

    Since Texas and California consume more electricity than any other states, they provide a good snapshot of what a future filled with electric vehicles might look like. In both cases, an increase in EVs would drive consumption higher, with the potential to strain local infrastructure.

    If virtually all passenger cars in Texas were electrified today, the state would need approximately 110 more terawatt-hours of electricity per year — the average annual electricity consumption of 11 million homes. The added electricity demand would result in a 30 percent increase over current consumption in Texas.

    By comparison, because of a more temperate climate, California might require nearly 50 percent more electricity than it currently consumes if passenger vehicles in the state were fully electrified. That means California would need to generate an additional 120 terawatt-hours of electricity per year.

    In 2018, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, the organization that manages most of Texas’s electric grid, hit a new peak demand of roughly 73 gigawatts on July 19. Looking at the off-peak hours for July 19, 2018, we found the ERCOT grid had spare capacity to provide more than 350 gigawatt-hours of additional electricity if idled power plants continued to operate throughout the day, not just during peak demand.

    Based on our estimates, the charging requirements for a fully electrified fleet of personal cars in Texas would be about 290 gigawatt-hours per day, less than the available surplus of generation capacity. In other words, the Texas grid could theoretically charge a fully electrified vehicle fleet today if vehicles were charged during off-peak hours.

    When we did the same analysis for California, however, we found that if EVs become the norm, it could push the total demand for electricity beyond the existing capacity of the Golden State’s grid.

    To meet that demand, California and Texas would need to build new power plants or buy more electricity from neighboring states than they already do. The states might also need additional transmission and distribution infrastructure to accommodate new automotive charging infrastructure.

    There's a number of flaws with this, it makes assumptions that aren't part of reality.  It assumes that everyone would plug-in and charge their vehicle at the same time.  I think everyone here can agree that would not be the case. 

    Also, most modern chargers are, or have the capability to be, smart chargers.  They can be set up to only charge at the rate required to get to the desired level of charge by a specific time and during specific hours.  What do I mean by that? I'll give you the scenario... these numbers are made up for this illustration, but the actual numbers work the same way.

    You drive your Tesla home from work and it has a 60% charge left.  You've had a long day and don't intend to go out again that evening when you get home at 6pm.  Because you want to preserve your battery health as long as possible, you've already set your Tesla to only charge up to 80% capacity.  You plug your car in at 6, but because you get a lower electricity rate starting at 11pm, your charger doesn't start charging the car until 11.  You tell the car that you want to be at 80% charge by 7am tomorrow.  Once the charger kicks in, it only charges at the rate required to get you to 80% at 7am when starting charging even though the charger can go faster. This is much better for the battery as slow charging is better.   So instead of running at the max 11.5 kWh, the Tesla charger will run at say, 8kWh. 

    The reason the electric rate is cheap from 11pm to 6am is because that's when usage is lowest. It's the best time for EVs to charge. It takes a long time for power plants to ramp up and ramp down demand (unless they're NatGas Spiker units only used for unplanned spikes in demand).  So a lot of energy gets wasted during this low demand period.

    A bunch of EVs charging at night would smooth out demand for utilities significantly.

    Do we still need more capacity? Yes. Do we need as much as this article is claiming? No

    • Thanks 1
    • Upvote 2
  13. 11 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

    Yeah, Laredos are in that range.  My current one is a Limited, my next would be an Overland or a Summit.  Though another CPO makes more sense than new.  But it’s all hypothetical since my ‘14 only has 49k.  I really don’t see myself shopping for at least another 3-5 years.  

    You'll probably be shopping for the new platform by the time you're ready to trade, so everything you know about the current vehicle will be out the window. 

    15 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

    I checked out the configurator for Rivian R1S.  Spec'd out a 5-seat in Forest Green w/ green interior, Adventure package.   $81k... love the green interior and exterior, but if I were shopping in 2021, I'd get another Grand Cherokee for $30k less...

    The one I specd out was $79,500 in Forest Green w/Green Interior and 7 seats. 

    • Upvote 3
  14. 19 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    It's not the Jeep we worry about. Rather, it's the Land Rover.

    I was getting ready to try it at break. I think you need a really base model. 

    Yeah I know.. I was pointing out the difference. 

    • Upvote 1
  15. 26 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    The steelies on the Defender look KICK-@SS!

     

    Defender Steelies.jpg

    Defender Steelies2.jpg

    REALLY like those wheels on that.  My best friend has a Jeep Liberty and loves it.  He's not really sure what he wants to go to next and he's kinda defaulting to a Wrangler, but I've been raising the idea of a Defender to him for a few years from now when they've worked the bugs out. 

    • Upvote 3

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...