Electric car shape & design

DOBLY

Prominent Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Messages
1,892
Reaction score
779
Points
445
Location
Dunedin
I am surprised and maybe disappointed that all the electric cars produced to date look so much like conventional cars. Surely, by eliminating the reasons why most cars are the shape they are (big square lump of metal between the front wheels, fuel tank under / behind the rear of the passenger compartment) electric cars could be more interesting and efficient shapes?
Just a thought...
 
There’s only so far you can go with 4 wheels a safe passenger cell and a trunk I guess

But the iPace and the Model X have good repackaging imo
 
I don’t want my electric car to look different. I’ve seen some of the efforts and they all look like those cars from films when they try and guess what we’ll be driving in the future. Some examples; BMW i3, Nissan Leaf, etc

Just give people an electric 3 series that looks like a 3 series or a Nissan Micra that looks like a Micra. Why the need to make it look different?
 
I agree. I chose mine (Hyundai Ioniq) because - lack of a radiator grille aside - it looks fairly conventional. I'd imagine that the conventional curvy and smooth "three box" shape is probably about as good as it gets in efficiency terms as well - and that's pretty important.
 
I am surprised and maybe disappointed that all the electric cars produced to date look so much like conventional cars. Surely, by eliminating the reasons why most cars are the shape they are (big square lump of metal between the front wheels, fuel tank under / behind the rear of the passenger compartment) electric cars could be more interesting and efficient shapes?
Just a thought...
Not sure what car you are looking at, but the majority are not big square lumps of metal.
Sure, the likes of say Volkswagon could spend millions designing a new chassis for an electric car, to gain an extra 20 miles of range, but those millions will be passed on to the consumer, which makes the car more expensive.
Whilst with the e-golf, they just use an electric motor instead of ICE, and keep the costs way down
 
The likes of the i3 and Kia Soul are different to the norms. But the likes of the Prius/Ioniq etc are specifically designed to be drag efficient to increase range etc.
 
I am surprised and maybe disappointed that all the electric cars produced to date look so much like conventional cars. Surely, by eliminating the reasons why most cars are the shape they are (big square lump of metal between the front wheels, fuel tank under / behind the rear of the passenger compartment) electric cars could be more interesting and efficient shapes?
Just a thought...

Mandatory crash safety zone dictate the shape of cars as much as anything else.

Efficiency is all down to aero, which is all down to design. Mercedes is clearly very good at aero even on their large saloons.

Whats amazing is the fact a Hummer has double the drag coefficient of a Model X!! I cringe slightly when I look at the energy consumption on our X at 80mph+, the amount of energy needed to move a Hummer at 80mph must be mad!!

The most aerodynamic new cars you can buy in 2018 | Motoring Research
 
Last edited:
Thus ugly.

Good aero is one of the most important part of car design, especially for EVs as range at high speeds is determined solely by energy usage and battery size.

Car and Driver did a great bit of work a few years back with real off the line cars tested ib a wind tunnel back to back.

You can see Mercedes even back in 2014 was on the ball with aero, scroll to the table at the bottom and look at the power needed to sustain 75 and 100mph. In effect due to lazy aero design on the Leaf it uses MORE energy to sustain 75mph than the much larger and more powerful Tesla Model S.

Aero is also why the iPace is so awful when it comes to Motorway range. It doesnt matter what size battery you stick into an EV if the aero is bad the range will be bad. Its really quite astounding in this day and age EV manufactures still aren't pushing aero as the most important design point of any EV.

Drag Queens: Aerodynamics Compared – Comparison Test – Car and Driver

I cannot wait to see what Mercedes can do with their first proper ground up EV, all the evidence shows they know how to do aero, and do it really well. Add in their experience with EV drivetrains from F1, previous collaborations with Tesla, they should deliver a really interesting product.
 
electric cars could be more interesting and efficient shapes?
Just a thought...
I agree....
2DD4E69F-CA19-429E-9925-AAA896DBAD77.jpeg
 
Good aero is one of the most important part of car design, especially for EVs as range at high speeds is determined solely by energy usage and battery size.

Car and Driver did a great bit of work a few years back with real off the line cars tested ib a wind tunnel back to back.

You can see Mercedes even back in 2014 was on the ball with aero, scroll to the table at the bottom and look at the power needed to sustain 75 and 100mph. In effect due to lazy aero design on the Leaf it uses MORE energy to sustain 75mph than the much larger and more powerful Tesla Model S.

Aero is also why the iPace is so awful when it comes to Motorway range. It doesnt matter what size battery you stick into an EV if the aero is bad the range will be bad. Its really quite astounding in this day and age EV manufactures still aren't pushing aero as the most important design point of any EV.

Drag Queens: Aerodynamics Compared – Comparison Test – Car and Driver

I cannot wait to see what Mercedes can do with their first proper ground up EV, all the evidence shows they know how to do aero, and do it really well. Add in their experience with EV drivetrains from F1, previous collaborations with Tesla, they should deliver a really interesting product.
The newer (from 2011 ish) models of all Mercedes look brilliant (especially compared to the older models, remember the old A class?)
Mercedes also have a few EV lined up, and Lewis Hamilton has one (I believe)
Mercedes-Benz EQC Edition 1886 electric SUV kicks off a new era
 
What shouldn’t be underestimated is the impact of (EU) regulations in how a car looks. I’m not saying that they are bad or good, but there’s a lot of rules like height of bunkers and size. What a bonnet must do. And so on.

And whilst the Tesla may have been shaped effectively, to me it has led to ugliness by looking rather anonymous. I know that is subjective. But the X especially, having seen the 3 on the road now as well and wow again pretty bad. The S I don’t mind too much, but the inside has been impacted. My daughter and wife were touching the ceiling there is so little headroom in the back. And similar for me on the passenger seat.

Once the designers cracked the balance then we are talking. I don’t think they’ve managed to do that yet.
 
And whilst the Tesla may have been shaped effectively, to me it has led to ugliness by looking rather anonymous. I know that is subjective.

The X has MORE cargo space than this thing, and if you have seen a GLS in real life am sure you would agree its not subtle car.

fd7eadf71b03184c31bc29a20f975eaa.jpg



Looks are subjective, but for a family huller the X is pretty fine, especially since every time we have to put some one in the back (pretty much every time we drive the car) am reminded how mad/unique the car is :).

38919791830_869efdc055_b.jpg
 
The X has MORE cargo space than this thing, and if you have seen a GLS in real life am sure you would agree its not subtle car.

fd7eadf71b03184c31bc29a20f975eaa.jpg



Looks are subjective, but for a family huller the X is pretty fine, especially since every time we have to put some one in the back (pretty much every time we drive the car) am reminded how mad/unique the car is :).

38919791830_869efdc055_b.jpg
Hahaha we went from a Prius to a Mercedes-AMG GLS :) I owned one from new for 55K miles.
 
Hahaha we went from a Prius to a Mercedes-AMG GLS :) I owned one from new for 55K miles.

I would hate to ask you the running costs, given the a 2liter diesel XC90 struggles to get 30mpg in real life.

Our X is now on 32k at 2 years, I suspect we'll be at well over 100K by the time we even think about swapping for one.

For a low slung EV, the Roadster 2.0 looks great, but family duties mean realistically a 2+2 coupe is not viable for us till nearly 2030 :(.
 
I would hate to ask you the running costs, given the a 2liter diesel XC90 struggles to get 30mpg in real life.

Our X is now on 32k at 2 years, I suspect we'll be at well over 100K by the time we even think about swapping for one.

For a low slung EV, the Roadster 2.0 looks great, but family duties mean realistically a 2+2 coupe is not viable for us till nearly 2030 :(.
Actually that wasn't bad at all. We easily got about 34mpg and that is with a lot of city driving. But to me that confirms my long standing theory. A 2.0 diesel for a car like an XC90 is seriously underpowered, it needs to work much harder thus needs more fuel. Whilst a larger engine you need to feed more cylinders, it barely ticks over and has no load.

On our current Mercedes-AMG GLC we were consistently at around 40mpg on our trip to Amsterdam over Easter. And I was pushing it.
 
You got 34mpg out of a 500bhp+ 2.5ton SUV!! Isn't even the 'offical' MPG rated at 20 something?

I would have been pleased with 20mpg from something with that level of power.
 
Last edited:
ue to lazy aero design on the Leaf it uses MORE energy to sustain 75mph than the much larger and more powerful Tesla Model S.
The Leaf isn't aerodynamic you say? Why would you think that?

upload_2019-4-23_18-27-55.png


I think the Octavia Estate probably has a lower profile in reverse than the Leaf does forwards...

And I was astonished at how much lower the Octavia is when we got it home.
 
You got 34mpg out of a 500bhp+ 2.5ton SUV!! Isn't even the 'offical' MPG rated at 20 something?

I would have been pleased with 20mpg from something with that level of power.
Gentle right foot, can't drive it fast anyway in the UK...I think official was 27mpg, ours was the X166 model. Prius style pulse and glide :p
 
The seats are amazing, once I've got down there :laugh:
 
Fair point, I'm enjoying it while I can still get back up :)
 
Actually that wasn't bad at all. We easily got about 34mpg and that is with a lot of city driving. But to me that confirms my long standing theory. A 2.0 diesel for a car like an XC90 is seriously underpowered, it needs to work much harder thus needs more fuel. Whilst a larger engine you need to feed more cylinders, it barely ticks over and has no load.

On our current Mercedes-AMG GLC we were consistently at around 40mpg on our trip to Amsterdam over Easter. And I was pushing it.
Agree with your theory.

However we went from a GL550 to an XC90 and mpg went from 18mpg to 32 mpg:)

I do however seriously miss the engine ftom the Merc it sounded wonderful and was effortless. Still amazed what Volvo have done witb the 2l diesel just wish they would do a 2.8 or 3l diesel
 
But the iPace and the Model X have good repackaging imo
iPace just looks like any other SUV to me...but less useful. It's just a saloon on stilts, doesn't seem to have any more space inside or in the boot than other SUVs. I'm not sure what it actually is.
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom