Featured Motortrend: Prime vs Volt (and other alt. vehicle comparisons)

My point is we know how to test for security but it is more profitable to ignore security, collect profits, and pay a possible token fine as an expense.
It is profitable to produce dangerous services, unfortunately.

 

As one who was in the industry, paid for the lab testing, paid for the independent automated analysis, got the patent, got the approvals and with a product designed with security first and always and performance and cost be damned, I'd say 10 years to develop a secure product is a reasonable time table if the best assumptions are met. There are only a very few people who know how to design and fewer how to test even simple things. Now bring in standardization cycles, interoperability testing, dozens of sensors and generations of CPUs (we were always behind a critical generation) and varying funding schemes and the time table for lawyers to prepare patents and the time table to get a patent approved (some of the patent lawyers and examiners don't understand to the depths necessary what it is they are examining. Anyone who did would be making 3 times as much in some startup.) and I'm thinking 10 years is optimistic. Then you have rollout and you'll still meet the kid in a Jeep or the '82 Honda on the road without the 'lets cooperate' technology.

 

My point is the US wants the V2V standard locked in by 2019. Mandated in half the cars by 2021 & all by 2023.
Not nearly enough time for security & standard between now & 2019!

 

Would like to hear some intelligent discussion on what Tesla is doing with their Autopilot. And if your only argument is about the man that got killed in FL than your argument is probably pretty weak, at least from a mathematical/statistics standpoint.

 

You might find more discussion here.
EV (Electric Vehicle) Discussion | PriusChat

 

Thanks for the article, seems like a keeper. I say "seems" cus, between the Motor Trend site's horrible format, and my OCD quest for "print friendly" version, I just couldn't stay focused. Why the heck are web pages formatted thus? Yeah I know: click bait pays the bills.

 

Bueller? Couldn't get you guys to shutup before...now nothing.

 

true - and it also turns on how many miles per kWh you get. our SUV ev only gets 3 miles per kilowatt-hour so it would take ~13 hours just to regenerate the ~40 miles average round trip national daily average driving distance. That's ok, if your traction packs' surplus is large enough for that occasional extra drive time.

it was the hydrogen lobby that provoked tesla's quick thinking, to create their swap station. The hydrogen lobby claimed no one would find batteries advantages compared to (what they claimed to be) necessary fast refueling stops. So - tesla proved their swap station could snap apart the power / cooling / operational monitoring connectors, as well as drop & install a loaner pack faster than hydrogen refills, under hydrogen's very best recharge conditions ... meaning station tanks aren't depleted from a prior car. Once tesla beat hydrogen at their own refuel game - the best the FC lobby could do was kill fed incentive $$ for buyers making over $100K/yr ... except for hydrogen fool cells of course. Yet the plugin buyers just keep coming.
Best of all - regarding quick battery swaps? (imo) the notion/possibility of interchangeability. Go in with your 'puny' 60kWh pack - and swap for that mongo 100kWh bad boy.

.

 

CARB also killed the bonus ZEV credits for fast refueling in regards to battery swapping. I want VW to install some 300kW chargers just to see their response then.