It doesn't really work in cars though does it. The stupidly small amount of power regenned in braking before a roundabout is used up before you are half way around said roundabout.

 

Let's be honest there is no practical effect at all, it's just part of the marketing.

 

It's not quite as bad as that. I've yet to evaluate it with the same care I used in assessing the range, but it's already evident there is a usable difference.

 

The best indicator of regen in cars is probably the Toyota Prius. Driven moderately it gives diesel mpg with a petrol engine, something an equivalent petrol only car cannot do.

 

Even driven hard to kill the range by the Top Gear goons it gave 37 mpg, something no petrol only car of that size will do when driven hard. My slightly smaller last petrol car only gave 27 mpg driven very hard when new.

.

Edited August 7, 20187 yr by flecc

That garage size was my worry, but it fits neatly and the sonars and cameras display on the screen allows absolute inch perfect precision in placing it just inside with space at the front to plug in.

.

In my smallish new build type garage I have

2 E-bikes.

E-lawnmower.

E-cultivator, E-strimmer and E-Leaf vac.

E-charging station.

Petrol rotovator

CH boiler and associated pipework.

Double Tool cabinet.

Bike stand and other general cycling parifinalia.

Wheelchair.

 

Audi A1 which has 100mm sideways to spare and about 300mm front to back.

It's a tricky parking menouver which is not to be attempted when pissed and I am sure the leaf is considerably larger than the Audi.

In my smallish new build type garage I have

2 E-bikes.

E-lawnmower.

E-cultivator, E-strimmer and E-Leaf vac.

E-charging station.

Petrol rotovator

CH boiler and associated pipework.

Double Tool cabinet.

Bike stand and other general cycling parifinalia.

Wheelchair.

 

Audi A1 which has 100mm sideways to spare and about 300mm front to back.

It's a tricky parking menouver which is not to be attempted when pissed and I am sure the leaf is considerably larger than the Audi.

 

I had a lot of stuff in my garage with the Suzuki SX4 SZ5 which is 13 inches shorter than the new Leaf but the same width.

 

The answer for me was to be ruthless in loading up for a visit to the council tip!

 

But it seems you need a garden shed or tools cupboard.

.

It's not quite as bad as that. I've yet to evaluate it with the same care I used in assessing the range, but it's already evident there is a usable difference.

 

The best indicator of regen in cars is probably the Toyota Prius. Driven moderately it gives diesel mpg with a petrol engine, something an equivalent petrol only car cannot do.

 

Even driven hard to kill the range by the Top Gear goons it gave 37 mpg, something no petrol only car of that size will do when driven hard. My slightly smaller last petrol car only gave 27 mpg driven very hard when new.

.

I had my last car 3.5 years and never reset the computer from new so 17000 miles or so it did 43mpg, and that's with the allegedly more efficient multi cylinder technology. Current car is exact same model but without the cylinder on demand technology which has been replaced with lift and coast and so far it is averaging 47mpg yet today on a run around the sales it did 63mpg.

As with most cars its not possible to drive it hard..

As with most cars its not possible to drive it hard..

 

Wanna bet?

 

You've never seen me really drive hard.

.

Wanna bet?

 

You've never seen me really drive hard.

.

What I was meaning was that modern cars just go so fast.. To drive mine hard ( 1.4 Turbo DSG Double Clutch 7 Speed box) in Sport mode it red lines in every gear whilst its floored and 70 on the bypass comes oh so quickly, and you cant keep this up for long cos you run out of straight road. If I were to do that on twisty roads, if you cant keep your foot down hard it starts short shifting.. still accelerating hard enough to lose traction but not enough to stress things. I have had a few goes going fastish in manual which doesn't really do it for me.. The flappy paddles I can manage OK but not the sequential gear lever.. it just feels so wrong and I want to revert to the normal way, which of course I cant.

All I am saying is, someone could drive far too fast and in a reckless and dangerous manner but not necessarily stress a modern car especially with traffic volumes as they are.

What I was meaning was that modern cars just go so fast.. To drive mine hard ( 1.4 Turbo DSG Double Clutch 7 Speed box) in Sport mode it red lines in every gear whilst its floored and 70 on the bypass comes oh so quickly, and you cant keep this up for long cos you run out of straight road. If I were to do that on twisty roads, if you cant keep your foot down hard it starts short shifting.. still accelerating hard enough to lose traction but not enough to stress things. I have had a few goes going fastish in manual which doesn't really do it for me.. The flappy paddles I can manage OK but not the sequential gear lever.. it just feels so wrong and I want to revert to the normal way, which of course I cant.

All I am saying is, someone could drive far too fast and in a reckless and dangerous manner but not necessarily stress a modern car especially with traffic volumes as they are.

 

Yes, some modern cars do indeed make it difficult to stress them. It's easiest with the smaller conventional ones.

 

Driving unsociable hours as I've done can do the trick though. Every run to my brother's in Dorset for a number of years was done in just under two hours for the 140 miles. Less than half is motorway and much of it narrow lanes at the other end.

 

In normal hours impossible, but setting off from mine at 4am or setting off from the other end at 2am, no bother. You'd perhaps be surprised how many are cruising at 100 mph or much more at those times and there's never any evidence of police.

 

The smallest car doing that was a 3 cylinder 1.2 Skoda Fabia, so you can guess how hard that was working, right on the limit nearly all the time!

.

Yes, some modern cars do indeed make it difficult to stress them. It's easiest with the smaller conventional ones.

 

Driving unsociable hours as I've done can do the trick though. Every run to my brother's in Dorset for a number of years was done in just under two hours for the 140 miles. Less than half is motorway and much of it narrow lanes at the other end.

 

In normal hours impossible, but setting off from mine at 4am or setting off from the other end at 2am, no bother. You'd perhaps be surprised how many are cruising at 100 mph or much more at those times and there's never any evidence of police.

 

The smallest car doing that was a 3 cylinder 1.2 Skoda Fabia, so you can guess how hard that was working, right on the limit nearly all the time!

.

.

Point taken.

When I replaced the other Audi (the COD 150PS ) with this one I intended to buy the 3 cyl 95ps one for that reason exactly as a report I had read said it's great fun to rev it up without breaking the speed of light but the salesman talked me out of it he argued I wouldn't like the big drop in power so went for the 1.4 120ps instead.

Now before everyone jumps on me and starts talking voltages and currents, please be aware that this is something I'm already quite familiar with so let's not all waste time trying to explain the physics of why "this can't work" because it's already being used on cars.

it is still useful to set the general scene:

the expected gain by regenerative braking is illustrated by this equation:

 

Gain = motor efficiency * recuperated proportion of braking energy * proportion of braking

Typically: Gain = 0.6 * 0.8 * 0.1 = 4.8%

It is of course only possible in direct drive motors, in all other arrangements, the additional weight and cost of the KERS outweighs the possible gain.

Point taken.

When I replaced the other Audi (the COD 150PS ) with this one I intended to buy the 3 cyl 95ps one for that reason exactly as a report I had read said it's great fun to rev it up without breaking the speed of light but the salesman talked me out of it he argued I wouldn't like the big drop in power so went for the 1.4 120ps instead.

 

Another example of this was my tinny (yes, tinny, not tiny) little Chevvy Matiz with the 1 litre four. I only tried it once on the open road and it struggled above 60 mph, though if given a day or two would reach 95.

 

But around town it was great fun, very nippy driving it foot down, freely revving through the box. There's a lot to be said for a car only just up to the road environment it's to be used in.

 

The new Leaf has changed my driving already though. It's so quiet and smooth and the degree of control so precise that I'm super relaxed in its peaceful environment and happy to just go with the flow, however slow that is. It's enjoyable at any speed. I'd never have believed this could happen so completely, despite the test drives. It's definitely the best and most relaxing car to deal with very heavy traffic conditions, so perfect where I live.

.

it is still useful to set the general scene:

the expected gain by regenerative braking is illustrated by this equation:

 

Gain = motor efficiency * recuperated proportion of braking energy * proportion of braking

Typically: Gain = 0.6 * 0.8 * 0.1 = 4.8%

It is of course only possible in direct drive motors, in all other arrangements, the additional weight and cost of the KERS outweighs the possible gain.

Here we go wirh numbers and equations again..

A bike and rider weighing 120kg dropping 1000ft over a mile or so must need a lot of energy to keep the speed down. Surely this energy if harnessed must make a difference. One of my rides to my daughters house of about 6 miles is all uphill to the mid point and then down the other side, and then the reverse and these downhill need a lot of braking. I agree that without big hills there is no benefit but without big hills to zap the battery we don't need it anyways.

Another example of this was my tinny (yes, tinny, not tiny) little Chevvy Matiz with the 1 litre four. I only tried it once on the open road and it struggled above 60 mph, though if given a day or two would reach 95.

 

But around town it was great fun, very nippy driving it foot down, freely revving through the box. There's a lot to be said for a car only just up to the road environment it's to be used in.

 

The new Leaf has changed my driving already though. It's so quiet and smooth and the degree of control so precise that I'm super relaxed in its peaceful environment and happy to just go with the flow, however slow that is. It's enjoyable at any speed. I'd never have believed this could happen so completely, despite the test drives. It's definitely the best and most relaxing car to deal with very heavy traffic conditions, so perfect where I live.

.

Is this what's called thread hijacking?

Is this what's called thread hijacking?

 

I prefer thread development.

 

Anything can be made better.

.

I agree that without big hills there is no benefit but without big hills to zap the battery we don't need it anyways.

 

With bikes low weight yes, but not with electric cars. Even in flat areas, if any braking is done, it must be an advantage to turn that into charge current rather than brake pad heat. Not only a range advantage but also a running costs reduction.

.

Well to stay on topic..

In the manual for my last car it said something about regenerated energy from braking was stored as an over voltage in the battery for use when required. Or sumsuch.

I could never understand how that ciuld work.

Wanna bet?

 

You've never seen me really drive hard.

.

 

Oh you naughty Italian person!

 

When I am in the Spanish bit of Spain I always explain to passengers not to be surprised if my driving becomes slightly more aggressive. After many visits I found it was easier to drive like them to fit in the flow of traffic. The mother of my two youngest said one day "you can't turn left here it is forbidden" to which I replied "we have been turning left here all week... and the three cars in front just did too right now"

 

Back on topic!

 

On a velomobile site (bent rider???) a Swiss guy explained that he doesn't charge at home because his drive to work is all down hill and with regen the battery was never emptied. He gets to work and tops up the missing 30% for the ride home which empties the battery.

Well to stay on topic..

In the manual for my last car it said something about regenerated energy from braking was stored as an over voltage in the battery for use when required. Or sumsuch.

I could never understand how that ciuld work.

 

Doesn't make much sense on an average ic car.

 

Suzuki now have strange regen system on at least one model. They have a crankshaft speed starter motor that regenerates on the overrun to charge a little lithium battery under the front passenger seat. That battery current is then put back into the starter motor to assist the engine in the following acceleration. Like a mini KERS system. From what reviewers say it seems to work to some degree.

.

Wanna bet?

 

You've never seen me really drive hard.

.

Wanna bet?

 

You've never seen me really drive hard.

.[/QU

Google being Google and with me typing Audi in a few times it has shown me this report which I find interesting because I thought the leaf did this anyway... or is it just gobbledygook?

http://www.alphr.com/cars/1009779/audi-e-tron-solved-ev-range-regenerative-braking-charging

Google being Google and with me typing Audi in a few times it has shown me this report which I find interesting because I thought the leaf did this anyway... or is it just gobbledygook?

http://www.alphr.com/cars/1009779/audi-e-tron-solved-ev-range-regenerative-braking-charging

quote from that article:

 

"In reality, nobody is going to go and seek out a hill to eke out a few more miles as they drive, but it’s a great example of just how effective the regenerative braking technology seems to be."

 

For average use, if you have regenerative braking, you can expect about 4%-5% saving on energy. That is not because the circuitry is not efficient, it's because you don't brake as often as you keep your foot on the accelerator.

quote from that article:

 

"In reality, nobody is going to go and seek out a hill to eke out a few more miles as they drive, but it’s a great example of just how effective the regenerative braking technology seems to be."

 

For average use, if you have regenerative braking, you can expect about 4%-5% saving on energy. That is not because the circuitry is not efficient, it's because you don't brake as often as you keep your foot on the accelerator.

Yes but it's making it out to be something new, revolutionary even.

Yes but it's making it out to be something new, revolutionary even.

that article reads a bit like an 'editorial advert'.

In the pre-internet days, I used to place my PC ads on the 'right hand page facing matter', a euphemism for placing the ad where my PC review was printed. Terms like 'ground breaking' were frequently used in reviews then.

Google being Google and with me typing Audi in a few times it has shown me this report which I find interesting because I thought the leaf did this anyway... or is it just gobbledygook?

http://www.alphr.com/cars/1009779/audi-e-tron-solved-ev-range-regenerative-braking-charging

 

That's total rubbish, the Leaf for one has always done this. My routine braking never engages the pads, even in normal mode it's all done by the drag of the motor regenerating on the overrun.

 

If I flick the puck into B mode it multiplies the regen, feeling like a giant hand grabbing the car to hold it back. All with no brake pad engagement.

 

The proof is that owners report the brake pads almost never need renewal, since with normal driving they are only used for emergency braking.

.

That's total rubbish, the Leaf for one has always done this. My routine braking never engages the pads, even in normal mode it's all done by the motor regenerating on the overrun.

 

If I flick the puck in B mode it multiplies the regen, feeling like a giant hand grabbing the car to hold it back. All with no brake pad engagement.

 

The proof is that owners report the brake pads almost never need renewal, since with normal driving they are only used for emergency braking.

.

Which is what I thought.. so how can Audi advertise this as innovative?

Which is what I thought.. so how can Audi advertise this as innovative?

 

It's called marketing, relying on public ignorance. Remember, Audi is VW, the emission cheats, crime against consumers is nothing new for them. The EU has heavily fined them three times for price fixing, first €4 millions, then when repeated three years later, €31 millions, and in the latest case involving their Scania truck company, a massive €880 millions.

 

If you get a chance sometime, beg a Leaf test drive. You'll discover the normal gentle braking of regen on lifting off, and by flicking back the drive puck to B mode, you'll find how strongly that brakes. It's too strong for holding the car at 30 mph on a 10% downhill, slowing it down, just balancing it at 30 on a 15% downhill.

 

Here's further proof that regen does the normal braking. On my new Leaf there's the choice of using e-pedal instead of normal two pedal driving. In that mode lifting off a little does the usual regen braking, lifting off further applies the brakes as well.

 

If that was similar to what it did usually as Audi claim, why would it now be provided as a choice?

.