Did Volvo just seal the combustion engine's fate?

K

Kedis82ZE8

'15 CX-5 AWD GT w/Tech Pkg
Contributor
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/volvo-electric-cars-combustion-engines-fate/

Volvo hoisted it for all to see on Wednesday, with its announcement that starting in 2019, its full lineup will have some kind of electric motor.

Volvo plans to launch five fully electric cars between 2019 and 2021, three of which will be sold under the Volvo brand and two high-performance models to be marketed under the company's luxury Polestar brand. Additional details about the vehicles will be announced at a later date.
 
No. Electric has a long ways to go. It's more damaging to the planet, it costs more, it's more dangerous in a wreck, and it's more expensive to maintain. In short, it's a rich man's toy due to the instant torque and novelty aspects.
 
When you have a large Chinese company as your owner, you can do and say pretty much what you want.

My guess is the combustion engine will be around for a while longer until such time as other technologies becomes more widespread and affordable for all makers to adopt them.
 
Volvo is a relatively insignificant player and, like Xeler8ting said above, subject to the whims of their Chinese masters who can't decide from one minute to the next what to subsidize/mandate in their own market. Sad fate for a once proud marque.
 
paris1 said:
Volvo is a relatively insignificant player and, like Xeler8ting said above, subject to the whims of their Chinese masters who can't decide from one minute to the next what to subsidize/mandate in their own market. Sad fate for a once proud marque.
Click to expand...

A little hyperbole? Volvo is doing fine, and will continue to do fine. There is a strong market for electric vehicles and it will only continue.
 
I don't think Volvo sealed ICE's fate, I think they're just a sign of the times. I think in 5 - 7 years electric cars will be major presence on the road, especially if you consider the worldwide automotive fleet.
Electric motors are better suited to powering vehicles, the problem has always been how to store their energy.

= Electric motors make torque in a much more useful range for motive power.

= Electric motors are 2 to 3 times more efficient then ICE when considering on-board energy in to energy at the wheels

= They're lighter and smaller for the amount of power they supply

=They don't require non-fuel consumables/renewables

= They're an order of magnitude simpler than ICE engines with all its valves and injectors and pumps and cams and manifolds.

= They don't require managing the timing of the various combustion and pumping parameters that ICE engines do.

= Their wear characteristics are far superior since all they do is spin instead of jerking a metal piston up and down inside a bearing sleeve.

= They don't even require transmissions, although I expect we'll see some two speed transmissions on electric cars at some point.

=They don't require all the devices that we use to spool ICE engines up to the point where they make useful power before engaging them: friction clutches, fluid clutches, torque converters etc.

=Their maintenance requirements are much lower and they're more reliable.

=They're much more compatible with self-driving systems.

There are just a lot of reasons that they're much better for this application.

Once range gets above 300 mi and recharging times down around 20 - 30 min. I think things will start to shift significantly. And I think automobile manufacturers will, for the most part, become proponents of the change.
 
Last edited:
sonoran said:
I don't think Volvo sealed ICE's fate, I think they're just a sign of the times. I think in 5 - 7 years electric cars will be major presence on the road, especially if you consider the worldwide automotive fleet.
Electric motors are better suited to powering vehicles, the problem has always been how to store their energy.

= Electric motors make torque in a much more useful range for motive power.
This is true!

= Electric motors are 2 to 3 times more efficient then ICE when considering on-board energy in to energy at the wheels
But considering the real world, they suck. Several hundred miles from a massive battery? No thanks.

= They're lighter and smaller for the amount of power they supply
They just don't go the distance, and talk about refuel time...have fun on that cross-country trip! Gonna get to know the locals rreeeaalllll well along the way!

=They don't require non-fuel consumables/renewables
What do you call a lithium battery? Ever seen a lithium mine?
= They're an order of magnitude simpler than ICE engines with all its valves and injectors and pumps and cams and manifolds.
They are also powered by things that are known to explode like a boss, react violently with water, and are full of chemicals that make a bath in gasoline sound therapeutic.
= They don't require managing the timing of the various combustion and pumping parameters that ICE engines do.
This is true.
= They don't even require transmissions, although I expect we'll see some two speed transmissions on electric cars at some point.
Direct drive, baby! Instant torque. This is what makes them such a fun toy!
=They don't require all the devices that we use to spool ICE engines up to the point where they make useful power before engaging them: friction clutches, fluid clutches, torque converters etc.

=Their maintenance requirements are much lower and they're more reliable.
Not really. TESLA sucks. Worst in the industry I believe. Like, makes Fiat look GOOD.
=They're much more compatible with self-driving systems.
And dying while watching Harry Potter.
There are just a lot of reasons that they're much better for this application.

Once range gets above 300 mi and recharging times down around 20 - 30 min. I think things will start to shift significantly. And I think automobile manufacturers will, for the most part, become proponents of the change.
Click to expand...

I think they will be a fixture in city cars and for people who don't drive very far, but for anyone who can only afford one vehicle, or who drives much at all, they are always going to be a poor solution, at least, for the future I can foresee anyways. Now, KERS type systems...those have a real future, IMO.
 
I am more interested in seeing how Hydrogen fuel cell technology develops.
 
I had heard - and I thought I read it on here - that Mazda had partnered with another company (maybe Toyota?) to work to develop a hybrid, but Mazda was developing the SkyActiv engine to get the highest compression ratio and mpg possible while the other company was going to develop the electric technology, and then they planned to merge technologies to meet the demands for hybrid engines, and theoretically do it better than any other company, b/c of Mazda's investment in the gasoline engine technology.

I think if, in a few years, the Mazda SkyActiv technology were to partner with a manufacturer who had spent those years working out the kinks of electric engines, we'd have a pretty good car.
 
Volvo will be providing Hybrid and Electric options for all models (it does not say that ICE production will cease). This is again sort of a misleading article.
I doubt that Volvo will ditch all the new turbo engines developed and not profit from it. They are in comeback mode just like Mazda.
2nd point is that the Chinese intervention saved Volvo and has helped it in many ways. If the Chinese know one thing that is making money is more important than being power masters.
P.S - has anyone seen how much V60s depreciate in USA? 23K USD for a 2016 still under warranty. Really a good value and looks decent.

Apart from Volvo - the next major step is this France will ban sale of ICE from 2040 (from my memory). Thats a big indicator of things to come. London might ban ICE and allow electrics or Hybrids in electric mode only. The biggest advantage imo on going Solar + electric specially for a small country that imports oil is de-coupling itself from oil / dollar price variations. It wont have to buy huge quantities of oil in US dollars. In days of crisis (Arab spring / War) - it can rely on Solar and still get by using less oil.
 
Laurel said:
I had heard - and I thought I read it on here - that Mazda had partnered with another company (maybe Toyota?) to work to develop a hybrid, but Mazda was developing the SkyActiv engine to get the highest compression ratio and mpg possible while the other company was going to develop the electric technology, and then they planned to merge technologies to meet the demands for hybrid engines, and theoretically do it better than any other company, b/c of Mazda's investment in the gasoline engine technology.

I think if, in a few years, the Mazda SkyActiv technology were to partner with a manufacturer who had spent those years working out the kinks of electric engines, we'd have a pretty good car.
Click to expand...

Mazda is partnering with Toyota . At this point they have 3 hybrid in Japan, MAzda 2 electric in Japan.
 
Unobtanium said:
I think they will be a fixture in city cars and for people who don't drive very far, but for anyone who can only afford one vehicle, or who drives much at all, they are always going to be a poor solution, at least, for the future I can foresee anyways. Now, KERS type systems...those have a real future, IMO.
Click to expand...

Word.
 
Unobtanium said:
I think they will be a fixture in city cars and for people who don't drive very far, but for anyone who can only afford one vehicle, or who drives much at all, they are always going to be a poor solution, at least, for the future I can foresee anyways. Now, KERS type systems...those have a real future, IMO.
Click to expand...

KERS might take some time to come to regular cars but the weight addition would be minimal - Volvo completed some tests on a KERS system few years ago.
You are true about city cars but as a % of total fuel burnt city cars are a big chunk. More and more bumper to bumper gridlocks are getting common burning more fuel.
 
I think the refueling/recharging issue for electric cars is the big deal as pointed out by Unob. On our recent road trip, I drove from Dallas to Houston, where we stopped for lunch, refueled and then drove to Galveston after. Refueling took me what, 5 minutes? If I was in an electric car, how long would I have had to stay recharging in Houston before I could continue on to Galveston? Even if there was a charging station in Houston, you would then be limited to getting lunch in places around the charging station. I don't know what the driving range are for electric cars, can they even get to Houston from Dallas without recharging along the way?

I'm all for electric cars and less pollution and a cleaner environment for the future, but a lot more has to improve before they can fully replace ICE vehicles.
 
I don't Volvo sealed it but I think the ICE powered vehicle is on the way out. I have been following Tesla closely. They are new and it shows both in good and bad ways. There cars are impressive. They are fun to drive, have great performance. (Note, two different but related things) They can easily be driven for 4 hrs at a stretch without the need to refuel. No, they are not better then ICE today but for a company that shipped it's first car in 2008 and has never built anything but electric they are very impressive. I would not bet against electric vehicles.
 
finch204 said:
I don't know what the driving range are for electric cars, can they even get to Houston from Dallas without recharging along the way?

.
Click to expand...

Yes, A tesla would have made the trip from Houston from Dallas without recharging. It would take 15 to 30 min to recharge it for the trip to Galveston.
 
Unobtanium: I was talking about electric motors, not necessarily the current incarnation of electic cars. Almost all the issues you point out are issues with energy storage, not motors. I think the biggest reason, aside from environmental concerns, that electric cars will eventually overthrow ICE is the overwhelming superiority of electric motors over ICE in vehicles.

Electric motors are 90%+ efficient when cruising at speed, ICE between 30% & 40% and even speciality gasoline engines top out a little over 40%. Electric motors can reach 98% efficiency.

The motors themselves produce far more power per lb and per cc of engine volume (not displacement but total volume).

In terms of reliability, Tesla's problems notwithstanding, electric motors have been around a long time and used in many applications, high quality electric traction motors can give over 1,000,000 miles of service. They're simple, well understood and have very few issues with wear.

Non fuel consumables/renewables are lubricants, coolants, friction plates etc. Electric motors have almost none of these, even brake linings last 2 -3x as long due to regenerative braking.

As far as range and battery charging time goes, we've gone from taking literally hours to charge an additional 100 mi range to current superchargers that charge 170 mi of range in 30 min. Next gen. Superchargers will probably do about 200 mi charge in 20 min. This is something that has improved greatly in the last few years and will continue to improve. Also a lot of attention is being paid to doing battery swaps at recharging stations which would reduce times even further.

The current crop of batteries and recharging times can't compete with ICE, but this is changing quickly.
 
Last edited:
Looking forward to the day when an electric car can be refueled in 2-3 minutes, as fast as a gas tank.

The voltage to come close to that is extremely high at the moment - poses some real challenges with safety... maybe charging multiple banks in parallel at more moderate voltage.
 
Please log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
    • Like
Mazda CX-5 (and other models) Oil Consumption TSB (WTF)
3 4 5
Replies
97
Views
39K
cz5gt
cz5gt
S
Mazda's new engine boosts fuel efficiency by 30%
2
Replies
23
Views
6K
Unobtanium
U
O
    • Like
The Great Skyactiv Resuscitation Project
Replies
3
Views
1K
ofted42
O

Latest posts

Back