25 Replies to “We Don’t Need No Flaming Sparky Cars”

  1. Ethylene Glycol has been used as coolant and anti-freeze for a long time. Drinking it has always been regarded as a “bad idea”.

    The stuff has some interesting properties, one of which is toxicity.

    It is 100% miscible with water, human bodies bring full of that stuff.

    From Wonky-Pedia:

    “Ethylene glycol poisoning is poisoning caused by drinking ethylene glycol. Early symptoms include intoxication, vomiting and abdominal pain. Later symptoms may include a decreased level of consciousness, headache, and seizures. Long term outcomes may include kidney failure and brain damage. Toxicity and death may occur after drinking even a small amount.”

    If there is a high concentration of ethylene glycol vapor in the air inside a car, then it will be absorbed via the lungs, etc.

  2. Wow! Tesla soy boi’s are now … blaming the victims. Much as a rapist blames an attractive woman for wearing a tight skirt.

    Wow! Just Wow.

    And here I thought their self-driving, high-tech, eco-wonders, were capable of … well … self-driving. Even autopiloting a tipsy driver. Their advertisements and fan boi’s say as much.

    1. Actually the beloved VW beetle had a higher rear end fatality rate than the Pinto. Look up “ejector seat Volkswagen”. But since people died of a nice clean broken neck, instead of screaming in agony from inside a burning Pinto, the charming reputation of the Beetle lives on.

      1. ‘The beloved VW beetle’

        Yes,
        But would you not rather die in a blaze of glory, sitting in a locked $50,000 dollar car with a HAL computerized controlled scream recorder for your posterity, and ethylene glycol vapors in the air?

        But, I would prefer they used laughing gas.

        Dying in a $2,000 dollar VW beetle from a broken neck sounds so lame and nobody cares.

  4. I’d be curious to know how high is “high”, We see some fairly impressive blood alcohol levels in the trauma bays at the hospital but still within certain physiological limits. If the levels found in the victims of Tesla crashes are exceeding those, especially in individuals with no history of long term heavy alcohol consumption then one would have to look for a source from the vehicle itself either before or after the crash.

  5. This is not a defense of Tesla. I would only like to point out that many new technologies had unforeseen issues that were often fatal. Consider the Dehavilland Comet. A groundbreaking aircraft that beat Boeing to the passenger jetliner market. Until they began to disintegrate in flight. It would actually be surprising to see someone design a completely new car that did not have some teething problems. Again, this is a completely separate issue of whether the idea of electric cars makes any sense.

    1. Not to argue against your point, but aircraft had test pilots and were tested in flight PRIOR to being unleashed on the public. Which begs a point … why hasn’t the NTSB instituted crash tests which specifically target the weak spots of the Tesla … such as high speed crashes into low-lying commonplace objects such as raised curbs which shreds the battery pack?

    2. It wasn’t a teething problem that brought the planes down, but a design error. When the Comet was designed, someone appeared to overlook the fact that square corners on the passenger windows were stress concentrations, becoming points at which fractures began.

      That’s one reason why the windows have rounded corners.

      1. beat me to it B A. I have watched dozens of episodes of Mayday. there are new episodes coming out now.
        some would swear off airline travel, me, well, it instead shows me the outstanding tenacity of investigators who
        dig dig dig until the truth is revealed. and the problem FIXED.
        unlike say, oh, teslas . . . . . .
        I sent the ntsb a letter thanking them and sympathizing with the on site investigators who have to deal with death right in front of them and STILL wont give up until the evidence leading to a correct conclusion is gathered.

        God Bless them all.

        1. The problems with the Comet apparently inspired Nevil Shute to write his novel No Highway, which was made into the British movie No Highway In The Sky (with James Stewart as the lead).

  6. Bruce — great thought BUT why would an electric car have anti-freeze (ethelene glycol). Or am I missing something.

      1. Batteries get pretty hot. So do electric motors. Ever held an LG G5 when it is doing some serious catchup? Makes a nice pocket warmer on a cold winter day.

  7. I drove a Model 3 this weekend. I went in quite skeptical, but was blown away by it. There really is no comparison to that type of acceleration and handling at that price point. The lower center of gravity and instant torque is a byproduct of the electric platform. The range didn’t induce anxiety. It was, franky, and experience unlike any other. Even the limited self driving impressed me.

    I don’t support the subsidies, but from a technology standpoint this is an amazing piece of work. I get the fire incidents, but how does that compare per mile driven vs combustion engines with similar incidents? Data would make a better case than anecdotes.

    Seriously guys, drive one and then tell me what you think. I’m honestly interested what the responses would be.

    2. Ya, we know.

      Go to an amusement park, a speedway or an airport for your
      jollies. It’s safer!

      The WHITE light through the tunnel to see your Maker is very similar, they say. You wouldn’t want to go yet, now would you? It could have you thinking you went to hell instead! All that fire when it explodes is not the way you want to go! You’ll cry for Mumsie!

  8. The range didn’t induce anxiety. What was that “advertised” range? With which battery upgrade? At what cost?

    Most SUV buyers want a very reliable, safe, vehicle that is able to handle rough terrain. I would have mucho incineration anxiety that rolling over a curb or rock would ignite that nice low center of gravity battery pack.

    As a former ‘traveling’ competitive soccer coach, I would never put a child in the starting lineup if their parents drove an electric car to the tournament. Too risky. Too unreliable.

    1. precisely; aka ‘incineration vs acceleration’. this time it aint a tradeoff, ya get BOTH with a tesla.

    2. It was a rental that an extended family member made, so not sure what the price was off the lot, probably expensive and quite possibly not an economical alternative to another vehicle. The range was about 500km and seemed to be pretty accurate through rolling terrain over the course of a couple days.

      Again, I’d still like to see some data that shows these cars are more dangerous than ICE alternatives. Most rating agencies seem to sing their praises as far as safety is concerned and the greater crumple zones, by virtue of no big engine in the front seems to jive with that in my mind.

      So yeah, I get that it’s not a level playing field given the subsidies, but purely from a technology perspective, these are way better cars in my mind.

      If it helps in determining I’m coming from, my daily commuter is a Dodge Charger, and I’ve driven a lot of higher end vehicles. You just simply can’t get to that level of torque in a combustion engine without a lot more overhead and cost in the design. Don’t knock it till ya try one, I was of the same view till a few days ago.

  12. well with all the intense hype around electric cars those people probably believed that being drunk in an electric car was as magical as the media and leftists politicians say electric cars are

    if the car can magically be zero emission ( a complete lie) then being drunk in one protects you from dying in a crash = leftoid logic based on hype and fake news

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation