I recently had my first EV experience, when I had a Porsche Taycan as a courtesy car while my (petrol) car was in for a service. Here's what I observed:
• the instant urge is exciting, and eery (silent).
• the Taycan handles superbly, especially given its mass of ~2200kg.
• it's a big ol' thing at nearly 5m long yet the interior room and luggage space aren't brilliant, is this due to packaging of the batteries and leccy gubbins, I'm not sure.
• the displayed remaining range seemed to track well with actual use (contrary to what I've heard about this being optimistic / inaccurate); IOW, I covered about 110 miles and the remaining range dropped by about 110 miles.
• the nav system displays EV chargers, and there are loads of them - I thought that this immediately addressed any 'range anxiety'.
• the electric range of the model I had was 'only' 200 miles or so; but, thinking about it, that's 3-4 hours of driving by which time I'd be happy to take a break to recharge myself!
• I plugged it in at home 'just to see'; plugged in to a standard UK 13A outlet, was adding about 2 miles of range for every hour of charging; now, this is not a typical use case (a dedicated charger would be more typical), and it seemed hopeless, until I realised that plugging in overnight would add maybe 24 miles of range, and that would actually cover a worthwhile chunk of my daily commute.
On returning the Taycan and picking up my ICE car, it felt like stepping back in time
I wouldn't want an EV as my sports car. But as a daily driver, it would be excellent and would suit me just fine.
Out of Spec Motoring held a race from Seattle to Boston pitting 14 different EVs and single ICE car. 3 man teams. All the cars were limited to no more than 10mph over. It was more about range and charging speeds. The ICE car came in first. But nobody really drives like that.
The thing is, with my EV, I almost never have to stop to "fill up." The car basically has a full tank every time I leave my driveway.
On the contrary- the Australian public DEMANDS greater safety- unlike the US viewpoint of 'dog eat dog, and man eat man'- most countries have a much different attitude to 'public safety'- it wasnt 'da ebil gubbermint taking away our guns' and 'putting in orwellian cameras'- these are things the general public demanded happen- and any politicians who refused to listen (like some who opposed the original gun 'ban' here and things like reduced speed limits in towns, and speed cameras and the like- WILL lose their jobs and not be re-elected....
Nah. They just need more revenues.
As multiple people have said- there really isnt much difference at all lol...
BS....
Unless this "discretionary tolerance" can be demonstrated to be documented in law, I wouldn't trust it to exist. People always seem to assume that they can go a certain amount above the speed limit, but show me the legal evidence.
Not in the least.
"If" is a condition contrary to fact.
In my "fictional scenario", we will be driving the Nautilus, leaving Las Vegas around 0600. The only time my wife and I will stop for a sit down meal on the trip will be at exit 66 on Interstate 40, just east of Kingman, for Dunkin Donuts. While only 125 miles from home, it somehow gets the trip off to a good start.
I did. If the law does not state explicitly that the police can tolerate a certain amount over the limit at their discretion, then you can't assume that they will.
