Economic analyzes on the passage from 90 km / h to 80 km / h in France ...

[Christophe]

Tesla's site is well supplied with technical information, I have never seen a specific consumption curve on the sites of other major car manufacturers ... Bravo Tesla so

On the other hand, even after reading this page, I still cannot understand the ascent at low speed (under 40 km / h) of Tesla ...

Is it also a problem of box layering?

Electric motors do not have a completely flat yield curve but it varies little: http://www.favi.com/rotors-industriels/

As Tesla is at the top of technology I suppose that Copper + optimization is the technology used by Tesla S (Wiki: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S )

So we go from 82,5 to 88% or + 6,7%

The consumption curve goes from 190 to 215 Wh / Mile, i.e. + 13% ... or double.

There is therefore something else that should explain this increase in consumption at low speed ...

What am I quibbling about? Well yes I like to understand!

[Gaston]

There is therefore something else that should explain this increase in consumption at low speed ...

What am I quibbling about? Well yes I like to understand!

I think that we should not take into account only the consumption of the engine.

There are many elements which have a constant consumption independent of the speed (computers, screens, pumps, fans ...) which is negligible (expressed in Wh / km) when driving "normally" but which becomes predominant at low speed.

An electric vehicle stationary (ignition on) consumes approximately 200 to 500W.
If we drive at 10 km / h, this corresponds to an additional consumption of 20 to 50 Wh / km.
And of course, at a standstill, an infinite consumption per km

[Christophe]

Ah yes, hidden and incompressible consumption!

Good answer from Gaston, thank you for asking!

Why the ascent is faster on some electric models than others? Definitely a history of design or measurement accuracy?

[sen-no-sen]

I like to reason with the absurd.

And why the speed would not be limited to 50 for example on all roads?

The objective of reducing speed on secondary roads is to reduce the number of accidents.
The drop in speed from 90 to 80km / h is one of the last joker of the government, in the sense that it would no longer be acceptable to see the speed decrease even more.
Each measurement therefore comes up against a limit, the speed cannot be lowered too much, the radars not too numerous etc ... we come up against a maximum that it will be very difficult to exceed without resorting to the best methods to exist:reduce the number of vehicles in circulation.
This option is the phobia of economists, fewer cars is less tax revenue (74 billion taxes!) And everyone knows that the motorist and a cash cow and that there is therefore no question of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs!

Consequently, faced with the poor road safety figures, the government has no choice but to take less and less popular measures, while waiting for technological innovation to make it possible to reduce the number of fatalities (via automation ).

[Christophe]

Joker ... Oh that the term is well chosen because it is a government which plays poker (liar) with the citizens

There are still deaths that count more than others ... Tobacco and alcohol kill more than 10 times more deaths than the road each year ... and we talk about 10 times less (I think. ..especially about alcohol!)

Ah yes, but in our society, we can (we must!) Do without smoking and drinking ... but above all we must not do without a car ... as you rightly point out! And now the circle is complete!

Automation has its limits imposed by physics (kinetic energy, adhesion ...), the resistance of materials (and I include the human body in it) and ... behaviors!

It is not tomorrow the day before that the vast majority of drivers will give up the "pleasure" of driving and will blindly trust the technology (even if they already do so with the smartphone) ... the transition will be long! Very...

Example: "diehard" drivers already do not support ESP type assistance and even ABS in some cases ... like on snow!

[Adrien (ex-nico239)]

I like to reason with the absurd.

And why the speed would not be limited to 50 for example on all roads?

The objective of reducing speed on secondary roads is to reduce the number of accidents.
The drop in speed from 90 to 80km / h is one of the last joker of the government, in the sense that it would no longer be acceptable to see the speed decrease even more.
Each measurement therefore comes up against a limit, the speed cannot be lowered too much, the radars not too numerous etc ... we come up against a maximum that it will be very difficult to exceed without resorting to the best methods to exist:reduce the number of vehicles in circulation.
This option is the phobia of economists, fewer cars is less tax revenue (74 billion taxes!) And everyone knows that the motorist and a cash cow and that there is therefore no question of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs!

Consequently, faced with the poor road safety figures, the government has no choice but to take less and less popular measures, while waiting for technological innovation to make it possible to reduce the number of fatalities (via automation ).

It is very useful to look at the numbers ... even if they are incomplete

https://www.preventionroutiere.asso.fr/ ... accidents/


We learn that on 3464 killed in 2015 499 are ... pedestrians (who rolled too fast ???)

That car accidents represent only 50% of those killed

That speed only intervenes for 26%

The other being "innocent" and yet counted by the stats of death or wounded so undercame guilty

That 50% are without thirds: pedestrians and other vehicles.
What about third parties?

Good 625 killed on motorcycle + 1663 in auto + 143 in light trucks + 56 trucks and public transport = 2487

25% that rolls too fast gives 621 admitting that all types of vehicles are involved in this stat of excessive speed

How many CONDUCTORS driving these accidents too fast involved?
That we do not know.
Because if a driver rolls too fast his passengers killed in the accident they did not drive too fast

Good to ladle I take a little to know the passengers of the reckless passing from 621 to 550
Here we must add the speed-induced collisions that also kill perfectly innocent people from the slightest excess speed.
It is said that 1 on 4 is hit in a frontal collision remain = 413

If you weight the various rights of way: alcohol, cannabis 23 and 28%
And I do not count the killed with the animals nor speeds said excessive but below the legal limit and victim of the circumstances: rain, snow, ice, mud, vintage, pebbles, oil, object on the road ... etc

It remains, it seems to me even if I am quite zero in math, quite a few DRIVERS in speeding with full knowledge and lucidity.

So a national speed limit for 2 to 300 dangerous drivers?

I'm gorging myself?

[Adrien (ex-nico239)]

The objective of reducing speed on secondary roads is to reduce the number of accidents.

Precisely an evolution of the NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS over several years would you know where to find it?

A collision between a heavy goods vehicle and a bus that leaves 43 dead being counted as ONE SINGLE accident ...

[Christophe]

So a national speed limit for 2 to 300 dangerous drivers?

I'm gorging myself?

It's a bit like that yes! It seems consistent, thank you for this new point of view!

I told you that this measure was an economic and ecological tartuferie ... you have just shown that it was also social!

[Christophe]

Precisely an evolution of the NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS over several years would you know where to find it?

A collision between a heavy goods vehicle and a bus that leaves 43 dead being counted as ONE SINGLE accident ...

To do well, you must correlate the number of accidents to km traveled... and there we see that immense progress has ALREADY been made since 1970 (where the park was much less important than now, as is the mobility of people ...) at least on the number of killed ...

The Belgians did it, already in 2007: new-transport / security routiere-des-digit t5572.html

[Christophe]

I also found this: Company-and-philosophy / hypocrisy-social-and-health-of-the-security-routiere-t12448.html