Aug 11, 2014
I don't even know where to start with this.
Yeh, people have some crazy ideas about what science is on here.
Theories changing as a result of new observations IS WHAT SCIENCE IS!
Perhaps another 'scrapage scheme' to get rid of a lot of the older more polluting and inefficient cars would be a better way for the government to spend money than offering a £5,000 subsidy of new hybrid cars.
Both would be good. The scrappage scheme was actually more about the economy than anything green though - it boosted the new car industry a bit again after the recession. I can see the more polluting vehicles being taxed more and more heavily as time goes on though. The uptake of the subsidy is rising sharply though, it is definitely working as an incentive. Investment in an electric car infrastructure would be good too.
What ever you may think, people are allowed to have their own views. Whist you may have made your mind up about certain things it's for each and every one to make their own minds up based on the evidence that is or isn't available.
I suggest that you act like an adult (I presume you are one?) and allow freedom of thought, freedom of speech and the freedom to allow others to have views different to your own. The example you give above doesn't do you any credit what so ever.
If the scientist acknowledged as 'The Father of Global Warming' can change his mind then I suggest there isn't irrefutable evidence. I would respectfully suggest that he knows more than you.
And I would respectfully suggest that 98% of the world's scientific community know more than you do, and if you are going to disagree, you had better have damn good watertight reasons why!
A single person changing their mind doesn't make a study, or evidence. And I will speak out against freedom of speech when I believe it is damaging. I think you need to look up what freedom of speech actually means - it means you can hold your own views, not that you can spout them at whoever you like and whenever you like. It's unbelievable the damage that is being done to the world by people who deny that anything is happening, and unbelievable that the media perpetuates the myth that there is some kind of massive disagreement, or that it's some kind of contentious issue in the scientific community. Just as with evolution (which actually has less support as a percentage of the science community according to some studies), just because a tiny minority of people disagree, doesn't make their view 'equally as valid' as the consensus.
There being 2 opposing sides to a theory doesn't mean each view is equally as valid when one has a humongous amount of support and weight with it compared to the other side. Another logical fallacy.
Guys, can we just keep my thread on topic. I really appreciate that there are going to be differences on opinions but i wanted thoughts more on the e-tron please. I like the concept, and where i live there are a fair few outlets for charging and as more of this technology becomes available the idea and concept of electeic/hybrid cars will take off. I would like to see the e-tron and fully intend to do so when they are available to see within a reasonable travelling difference. Thank you all who have contributed so far. x
Just some reminders...
1) The thread's about the A3 e-tron, and associated technologies.
2) Opinions on the above are more than welcome.
3) The thread's not about the various tactics distracted folks might employ in order to win an argument on the internet.
Really, arguing about method & type of argument is next level futile! Please get back on topic folks.
A scrappage scheme could go some way to removing a good number of the worst polluting cars from the roads which would help. The biggest problem is that if an e-tron or other electric/hybrid cars require a government subsidy to get people to buy them, then what happens when the government decide to stop the subsidy. What's more if a lot more "e-tron type" cars were sold it would still not make a big dent in the so called global warming because your would still need an increase in electricity generating capacity to cope with the demand and at the moment that increase would need to come from fossil fuel powered power stations and all this for 31 miles of electric power and all the rest using normal petrol.
If the A3 e-tron makes financial sense for the individual because of the subsidy and lower tax and company car tax then fine but I don't think they are going to 'save the planet'. And still no one has come up with the mpg figures for the car running say 100 or 200 miles on the petrol engine with all the extra weight of the electric motors and batteries. VAG have spent a lot of money on the MBQ platform and the new engines to make the cars lighter and more economical surely adding all that extra weight is going in totally the opposite direction.
Horses for courses though.
At the minute, diesel is the smart choice for high mileage and long journeys while small petrol can be better for stop start.
If you're racking up 20,000+ per year doing 100 mile journeys I'd imagine the e-tron is not for you. If your commute is short enough that you can go mostly electric then it's almost a no brainer, especially as a company car.
Missed this earlier - apologies...
No, I'm not missing the point - and I agree, there is no right and wrong answer (unlike both you and cemerson say where you keep telling me AGW is FACT because lots of people say so, whereas I'm just saying the climate is changing). MY point is the data is so sparse and inaccurate beyond 100 years ago that it can be interpreted in an almost infinite number of ways. What people have done is chose a particular way of fitting the theory to the data which provides an alarmist viewpoint, which others have jumped on and all of a sudden, there is a huge gravy train which is self sustaining.
And my concern about the population explosion isn't about environmental issues like AGW, it's whether we can feed all of them.
AHAHA: wondered when the mods would intervene and didn't see the second page before posting
In my particular case, as I'm retired, there is no daily commute any more but I do some quite long journeys with my A3 for my holidays, usually 300-400 miles each way so obviously the e-tron would not be on electric power for long. At the moment I do around 14,000 miles a year and all of it is just for pleasure so I prefer a car which, to me, is fun to drive, which is why I have a 184 quattro.
But as you say it is horses for courses but I fail to see why ordinary tax payers should subsidise a company car purchase to the tune of £5,000 just because it's a hybrid and can do 31 miles on electric power. A subsidy to scap cars that are not EU5 or EU6 compliant would, in my view, be much better for both pollution levels and the environment in general.
The car is interesting on paper - and it should work for Audi regardless of environmental considerations.
I am genuinely stumped people exist that deny the environmental effects we're having on the planet. That said - best way to be "green" is buy a used car or keep yours till it falls over. The energy to build a new car from raw material outweighs the energy it consumes in the cars average lifetime.
We should all be more concerned about how much red meat we eat and how cows farts are making more greenhouse gases. That is true, but I'm joking so no need for anyone to get upset.
The scrappage scheme was a huge con. When it came in, in conjunction with the VAT reduction to 15% in the UK, most marques took the opportunity to fill their pockets with huge price rises, negating the effect of the scrappage scheme and the would-be savings associated with it and the VAT reduction. For example, when the MK6 Golf GTI/GTD arrived, it had almost no extra tech over the MK5 GTI/GTSport 170TDI, took advantage of significant production cost/time savings (most significant was the simplification of the multi-link rear suspension, knocking 6 hours and an estimated £450 off every Golf with it) - and yet RRP was 20% higher on the MK6 than the last price of the MK5. A MK6 GTI was £24k, compared to £20k at the end of MK5. In 2009, VW had 3 price rises for the UK market, 2 of them in the 4 month wait I had for the order placed for my just released Scirocco TDI (original order placement price honoured).
They need to get pre-DPF diesels and pre-catalyst petrol cars off the road as much as is practicable.
For a short while, everyone getting in on the scrappage scheme were paying the same (or close to it) for their cars with big price rises negated by the incentive, and for those that didn't have a banger to trade, and for everyone else thereafter, the car companies made a killing.
The only problem with that argument is that if everyone stopped buying new cars their would be no second-hand ones to buy
Does the 'farting' only apply to cows or to all animals, including humans?
The Audi UK publicity blurb for the A3 e-tron is 580 miles total range. Which is implying somewhere north of 60 mpg when on petrol only given 31 miles on electric only and a 40 litre petrol tank.
It claims to regenerate the battery charge (KERS like) during braking so perhaps its possible ? I don't think its using the COD version of the 1.4 TFSI engine.
I'm still waiting for the final spec (and available options - if any) to be released.
How about a nice video
That's interesting. 60 mpg is a lot less than the 176 mpg quoted in some of the Audi blurb. How does that rate compared with a normal 1.4 A3?
What I find interesting is that the electric range is quoted as ~30miles correct? Now this is enough to get to work and back if your round trip is less than this, however if your commute is more, then you would obviously be running the petrol engine on the return. Granted this would allow for significantly reducing your commuting fuel bill, but if you wanted to run electric the whole commute - surely the question is how many companies would allow you to recharge the car at work (using their electric) or provide facilites for doing so? (Assuming its not a company car, or even if it is - put them in place?). This is only an observation by the way - I'm sure someone more knowledgeable will correct me if I'm wrong!
The 176mpg figure is from the 'standard' test (ECE or whatever) which means that for a large part of it is on battery only and using no fuel.
The 150PS (COD) A3 has figures of 60mpg combined which equates to probably 50mpg on a good day and 45 most of the time. So with the extra weight and non-COD engine I think the e-tron will struggle to get that range - hope I'm wrong
I think if I was doing just short commutes I'd prefer just an electric only vehicle like the Nissan Leaf.
Yes you are right. Website https://www.zap-map.com/ gives a clue to where there are charging points currently.
So the car is not going to work for everyone.
Even if you couldn't charge at work though you'd be able to half your fuel consumption by doing the trip in on the battery. For daily figures of up to 100 miles or so I can easily see how this would save a lot of money.
Well, there is something called planned obsolescence. Whether we want to admit it, marketers make us think we need new cars and automotive companies design cars to expire, but actually, there is nothing to say we couldn't have a car for 50 years or longer with relative economic viability.
Of course you need a good car in the first place, and Audi aren't going to make a car to last because no one behaves that way (and would pay extra).
about farts - they are bad on many levels - apparently though, its the cows belching which is worse, but its far less funny.
Audi e-tron technology looks exciting and is proven through the LM cars. However, imho the technology has got to get to the next level in terms of cost v battery performance before the concept will seriously take off for Audi (or any other car manufacture). I would be interested in such a car/technology (far more than the driverless car!), but the range will have to improve dramatically before Iâm persuaded, irrespective of the fact that the government is subsidising all such purchases (currently) to the tune of 25% or £5000. If Iâm going to go down the âelectricâ route, then I want a car that will be electric for at least half of all my journeys. (Or at least half of all my non European road trip journeys)!
One of the major supermarket chains opened a new store close to us around three years ago. It has a biomass boiler, uses rainwater for the toilets, has light tubes etc and is generally very environmentally friendly. It has electric charging points in the car park. Have I ever seen even one being used? No.
Companies are most likely to offer free charging as its a tax benefit for the company, although expect it will be bigger ones.
I would absolutely consider the A3 e-tron as my next car. My journey to work is 25 miles (mix of motorway and town driving), and I get around 55-60mpg in the 2.0 TDI 150.
I like the concept of the e-tron and if the numbers (costs and mpg figures) worked out, I would consider it. The idea of it being mated to the S-Tronic gearbox appeals to me also.
I've actually registered with Audi to be kept up to date on e-tron developments. I reckon the new TT e-tron would be a cracker though!
Prices and specs...
So, looks like earlier reports of not being able to spec options aren't true then. You get a whole load of stuff as basic kit as well!
I reckon the only options I would need to add on would be 18" alloys, auto dimming mirror and leather. A lot of standard spec, yes!
It's a good spec - can't deny.
Very interesting car......
Wondering if the figures of 150PS power and 250Nm torque are correct? I thought 350Nm torque was quoted before?
Love it, a very nice spec car.
My thoughts? Simples ...
... This is without doubt the future of motoring IMHO
If only it was a little cheaper I would be seriously tempted, but I suspect as technological advances in this field increase prices will drop
I still want them to make an EV only version (like the eGolf - so the platform definitely supports it). That would be pretty attractive to me.
Though I test drove a Tesla Model S today... and that is one hell of a machine! Amazing.
Yes price is a problem at the moment. If I compare the cost of the E-ton to my present car it would cost me over £2,000 more for a lot less performance. My present quattro is to me my 'ultimate' car and at this stage I do not see any point in going backwards in my car choice.
Price shouldn't really matter... My concern is what the final payment (guaranteed future value) would be on a 3 year pcp deal? Given the batteries are going to deteriorate would a 3 year old e-tron be desirable...? Hmmm not sure.
Thing is, everyone is saying batteries are going to deteriorate... but the evidence is that they are holding up a lot better than all the naysayers like to have you think.
The batteries are guaranteed for 8 years, true!
There is an Electric Toyota RAV 4 somewhere in California I believe with over 200,000 miles on the clock on the same battery pack, and still doing fine...
Separate names with a comma.