Hacker News Reader

Comment by balaji1 | Hacker News Reader

specific section - https://the-race.com/formula-1/newey-in-depth-aborted-ferrar...

"We now have electric SUVs – huge 4x4s with electric! Ludicrous. It just makes no sense whatsoever. It would just be nice to see cars getting a bit more efficient – whatever the propulsion unit might be, but in terms of the aero, weights, engine size. All these government organisations pat themselves on the back for the improved safety regulations but just like in F1 it makes the car very heavy. Also things like on the combustion engine having such low emissions from a cold start – again that puts weight into the car. The regulators don’t seem to think about that. They want utopia, a car with no emissions and is very efficient"

View on HN

In the end a car, electric or not, is a 1.5T complex machine that transport most of the time 80kg of human and that stays immobile 95% of the time.

You can turn it the way you want, the issue is the concept itself.

A bus is more logical, a bike is more logical, a train is more logical, even a commercial plane is more logical.

>a 1.5T complex machine

The article talks about massive cars with lots of weight - 1500kg is on the light side of the story.

Indeed, I've only owned compact cars but never owned a car that weighted less than 1.5 short tonnes.

The base-model manual-transmission 2022 Civic comes in at 2877lbs, so is actually under 1.5 short tons.

And walking is more logical.

the concept is having freedom to go wherever you want, whenever you want, whether you're young and healthy or old and frail, whether it's day or night, rain or snow

very controversial, I know

Having cars as the primary and often sole viable method of transportation, under any circumstances, be it for a soda craved in the middle of the night, vacationing in a different state or daily commute, and having all the cities and the country designed for them is totally a ridiculous concept.

and until we get star trek tech, the only alternative to cars in a city is getting on a meatwagon and having your day enriched by drunks, junkies, crazies and numerous other vibrant urban characters

and outside the cities, would you have buses run around the clock between little towns in the middle of nowhere on the off-chance that someone from a farm might need a ride in the middle of the night?

Cars and what you described are not the only two options.

Your perspective is way too American. Visit Europe and maybe you'll understand.

there's a number of differences between European (except a few, since some time ago) and American cities, and don't pretend you don't understand

If I lived in a perfect world with universal bike lanes and drivers that were actually mindful of cyclists and gave them space, I'd gladly do most of my errands with a cargo ebike. Sadly we do not live in that world. Cycling on public streets with real traffic is signing up for a lot of stress and a not insignificant chance of bodily harm. Until that's fixed with infrastructure changes on par with what they have in the Netherlands, I make my peace with using a 2T machine.

How did it actually go in the Netherlands? Was it "better bike infrastructure -> more bike usage" like you suggest? Or was it the other way around?

It was both. The Netherlands had relatively high bike usage before "the cycling revolution" in the 70s, but either way it's kind of a moot point.

Either way, if you're trying to insinuate that you first need the bikes and then the infrastructure, you're going to have a hard time finding good arguments.

is there a case for electric bikes? I enjoy electric bikes. It seems to add significant functionality (and I find it super fun), without changing much of the characteristics of a bicycle, biking itself (except maybe slightly more risky) and infra to charge bikes would be much more scalable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com