Shahpor

Another thing that I hadn't considered before is would you fit a different tyre based on the performance of the car? Now, I am not talking supercars or anything, but, for example, my Stinger comes with Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S's. Personally, based on how I drive mine, I think the S's are overkill but the manufacturer obviously didn't think so. When it comes to stopping distances, the performance of the car should be largely irrelevant given the speeds involved, however, when it comes to handling, it is much easier for my rear tyres to lose traction than on my previous cars, so levels of grip might be important. So, in my instances, I will probably be 'downgrading' my tyres to the Pilot Sport 4's or something similar because the S's seem to be primarily for maximum performance and handling characteristics.

Seems to work just fine 🙂 Harry's garage also released their video of the same car today:

This is somewhat confusing to me, I must say. As Miles has pointed out, I was a part of said thread and I didn't think there was anything in there that Miles did wrong per se. At least, not enough to justify what sanctions are being apparently applied here. I also find it strange that no reply has been received that at least explains the reasoning behind what has happened. perhaps something has been missed along the way? In all my dealings with Mods/Admins here, I have always found them fair and understanding, and in fact, I think a little too hands off sometimes! Either way, I hope the situation gets resolved as soon as possible and any disagreements settled.

Ebay should be fine 🙂 https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/384916363410?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=vffrvws0qza&sssrc=2047675&ssuid=SLLUf-MjTOm&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY

I'm surprised by how shocked I am by this news.. Like many of you, I had come to know John as a very friendly, helpful character on here and it just won't be the same without him. A prolific contributor, always ready with a great reply, and a reassuring presence. RIP 😞

Thanks Kieran, Yep, already watching the apps on an hourly basis 🙂 Still trying to fine tune the battery charging, but apart from that, it is working well. I am charging it too much overnight at the moment, so it is already full for the day. I will modify my charging profile tonight to reduce it down even further. In a month or so, it will stop the overnight charge altogether and we should be 100% solar powered for the incoming summer months! Terrible performance over the weekend, but yesterday was much better: managed 14.5 kWh generated as opposed to 12.9 consumed 🙂 Don't have our solar water heater installed yet either, so a little more work to be done yet, but you are correct that it is definitely a good time of year to get it setup! Definitely looking forward to seeing my electric bills for the coming months.

The technology of the panels has come a long way, which is reflected in the price - roughly £150 per panel now! I also think that the biggest game changer with these systems in the inclusion of a battery. It adds massively to the efficiency as, for example, I am currently running from my battery that was charged during the day. This means that in the coming months I will be able to run my house on solar generated power 24 x 7. The cost of the battery's is a bit of an issue at the moment, but hopefully they will go the same way as the panels have in the near future.

Hey all, Time for an update. Finally got the system installed on Thursday! 🥳 So far, so good. Solar Water Heater is still on backorder, but the rest is done. A couple of small hiccups along the way, but nothing major and Daniel from Kembla has been great throughout, so definitely recommended. Still haven't ironed out a few setup quirks, the biggest one being that you can't stop the house battery from being drained if you charge your EV via the Zappi. I think there might be a way where you 'turn off' the house battery and use just the grid, but I haven't had a chance to test that yet. With the weather being what it is, solar production hasn't been great, but it is still a novelty to see the house not consuming grid power for most of the day 🙂 Our panel layout turned out like this in the end: With North being straight up, you can see that we actually have 3 panels facing north east, which despite not technically being recommended, still seem to put out a reasonable amount of power. This, again, came down to the great installers we had as it was their suggestion on the day once they had seen our roof that it would work in our case. Oh, and if anyone is considering a SolarEdge setup, I have found Anthony Dyer's videos invaluable, especially when it came time to setup storage profiles: https://www.youtube.com/@anthonydyer3939 Can't wait to watch the numbers like a hawk in the coming months now 🙂

My EV is being charged as I type this on the cheaper rate. We are on the Octopus Go tariff, which means 12p per kWh between 0:30 - 4:30 every night, with the rate being 43p per kWh at all other times. It does make it very cheap the 'fill' the car up as long as you are happy to charge it at these times.

Apologies if I got the wrong impression, but I am just going by what was quoted above. You said you didn't know how storing Hydrogen was difficult, I posted a site that claimed to explain why, you said that wasn't true and then brought up Rough in the same post. Perhaps you didn't mean 'as is', so a bad choice of words on my part, but the inference is that it isn't difficult to store hydrogen because Rough proves it? Again, this is my interpretation, but I hope it makes sense at least. As for entering and bar and staring a brawl, I kid you not, I did find that funny as I was thinking the same thing about you 🙂 You have very strong views and aren't afraid to share them... Having said that, I do hope you are right as I would happily buy a hydrogen powered car to replace my Stinger when the time comes.

Hi Ian, Assuming for the moment that you do have one, then the Toyota specialist should be able to diagnose it as a problem if it indeed the case. They should certainly be using TechStream, which is software that can run on any PC's with the right cable. As far as I am aware, there is only one test that can be run on the injector itself, which is: This does require removing it from the car though, so considering the cost of replacement (e.g. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/232810780762), it might be worthwhile just changing it whilst its out. Best of luck.

Apologies for being pedantic, but the 5th injector isn't actually on the fuel rail. As per the picture I posted, it is located on the back of the head and has its own separate fuel feed. So, with that being said, are you sure you don't have one? 🙂

Hi Miles, Are you sure about this? As far as I am aware, all IS220d's had a 5th injector. It should be located here: As for the original post, I don't believe there is or was a recall for the 5th injector, so a replacement might be the only option I'm afraid. It might be unrelated, but have you tried cleaning the EGR valve? There is a video of how to do so in the thread you posted. Failing that, you would need a copy of TechStream to really help diagnose the issue if a new injector doesn't work.

I actually didn't want my post to sounds argumentative as that wasn't my intention at all, but from Vlad's reaction, I may have failed 🙂 Thanks Graham, that makes perfect sense. I suppose when considering others' opinions on here the one thing that doesn't occur is that they may actual work in the field being discussed! The notion of 'keyboard warriors' is strong on Internet forums. Having said that, reading back on our respective comments, it does look like are in agreement on most aspects, it is just the costs implications where we differ slightly, which could very well be me being too cynical 🙂 Appreciate the info on Rough as well - Interesting stuff.

Oh dear, did I do a Linas? 🙂 (sorry Linas!) To be honest, the actual topic at hand wasn't even the point of my post - it could have been about anything. It is simply that it is difficult to have any meaningful discussions if everything that is said is just deflected constantly, which is what my last two posts were related to. I really hope it doesn't come across as a personal attack or some such and I am more than happy to be proven wrong if that turns out to be the case. As for mpg, a steady cruise of 70mph for a roughly 300 mile round trip netted me a whole 32mpg for my Stinger. Still, better than the 12mpg I managed a few days earlier 🙂

I don't mean to be critical Graham, but why is it that whenever I have made a simple statement in this thread - backed up by facts - someone goes on a tangent trying to get around what I said? Bearing in mind what you are referring to in your post is my answer to another point raised trying to suggest that the Rough installation somehow disproves what I posted? Your example is easiest for me to highlight: Can you please tell us where you got this information from? I did a quick Google search to see if what you say is accurate and found the following: https://escolaeuropea.eu/news/environmental-news/from-lng-to-hydrogen-pitfalls-and-possibilities/#:~:text=Dr Pratt says when it,kept at -253°C. Some exerts for those that don't want to read it all: "The bad news is that while your shipboard or bunkering design might look very similar, the components, like valves, hoses and piping are not necessarily interchangeable: “It’s a smaller molecule and it can escape through joints or seals that would retain LNG,” he adds. “You’d have to look to see if the current components would be suitable – but most likely I think you’ll have changes in your equipment,” says Dr Wuersig. And, he adds, it’ll work out quite a bit more pricey." "Dr Wuersig explains that the normal 40cm LNG insulation “just won’t work”. He says a moderately large LNG tank could lose 0.2% of its total volume a day but “store hydrogen in the same kind of tank and you would actually lose 5% of the contents every day to vaporisation”." "Dr Pratt says when it comes to bunkering, “the biggest difference is the much colder temperature of LH2” and explains that unlike LNG, H2 is actually colder than oxygen or nitrogen. While LNG can hover at -163°C, liquid hydrogen needs to be kept at -253°C." Now, I don't want to beleaguer others by going on and on about this, so I hope this does the trick, but for the record, all I am (and have been) saying is that it is commercially difficult to store and distribute hydrogen as a fuel source for cars. The technology to do so can be developed or, indeed, is already available, but the cost of such a venture is what I believe is putting manufacturer off being one of the first to embrace hydrogen as a car's power source.

As stated in the original link I posted, none of these issues are insurmountable, it is just a question of cost. I'm sure keeping something at a temperature of below -252C isn't straightforward! The same goes for maintaining a tank at up to 10,000psi for years at a time. So, as I am sure you can imagine, it wouldn't be a cheap endeavour to convert all those forecourts and production facilities to include either new cryogenic plants or replacement of all their store tanks and associated systems.

It appears that you are suggesting that the same facility that is currently used for other gases can be used to store hydrogen as is? If so, that's an 'interesting' statement. I presume you read that somewhere, so I don't suppose you could say where please? From Centrica's own site (they own Rough): https://www.centrica.com/media-centre/news/2022/centrica-and-equinor-sign-co-operation-agreement-for-east-yorkshire-hydrogen-hub/ "Centrica is advancing plans to convert its Rough offshore gas storage facility for hydrogen storage as part of its transition to a net zero future." https://www.centrica.com/media-centre/news/2022/centrica-re-opens-rough-storage-facility/ "Centrica’s long-term aim is to turn the Rough gas field into the largest long duration energy storage facility in Europe, capable of storing both natural gas and hydrogen." Neither of these claim that Rough is ready to store Hydrogen or that it can do so in its current state.

This site explains it well: https://www.twi-global.com/technical-knowledge/faqs/what-is-hydrogen-storage#:~:text=Why is it Difficult to Store Hydrogen%3F,easily lost into the atmosphere. "Hydrogen is difficult to store due to its low volumetric energy density. It is the lightest of and simplest of all elements, being lighter than helium, and so is easily lost into the atmosphere. Another challenge is the very low boiling point of liquid hydrogen (−252.8°C), which means that it needs to be kept cryogenically stored at low temperatures. Storing hydrogen as a gas also has its challenges as it typically requires the use of high pressure tanks (350-700 bar or 5000-10,000 psi)." "However, there are still hazards related to hydrogen that mean additional engineering controls need to be put in place to ensure its safe use. With a lower ignition energy than petrol or natural gas, hydrogen has a wide range of flammable concentrations in the air meaning that ventilation and leak detection are important for hydrogen systems. Special flame detector are also required as hydrogen burns with a near-invisible flame. Material selection for hydrogen systems is also important as some metals become brittle when exposed to hydrogen." So, as you can see, some difficult engineering challenges need to be overcome before hydrogen becomes commonplace in forecourts.

That's strange. When I used to go there, a courtesy car was usually available 2 to 3 weeks in advance. Perhaps they are cutting costs by keeping less cars?

The same article highlights the biggest problem with hydrogen cars that no one seems to have an answer for: "Axel Rücker, Program Manager Hydrogen Fuel Cell at the BMW Group, explains: We have a chicken-and-egg problem with hydrogen propulsion. “As long as the network of hydrogen filling stations is so thin, the low demand from customers will not enable profitable series production of fuel cell cars. And as long as there are hardly any hydrogen cars on the roads, operators will be reluctant to expand their refuelling network.”" Personally, I would like to see a dual setup scenario wherein you can buy either a pure electric or hydrogen fuel cell car. This sounds like the best of both worlds and I would have one of each for local and long distance driving. If only they could get both technologies to operate from the same location (rapid charging and hydrogen refuelling at the same stations), then it can work like petrol and diesel but I just can't see it, at least in the short term.

That looks like someone has bypassed the EGR altogether. There are a couple of picture if you scroll down this thread: Not recommended for emissions reasons, bur supposedly makes the car run better.

Say his name and he shall come... 🙂 I stand corrected. Thanks for the info. Whilst I agree with the sentiment in general, there are a few specific changes I would suggest perhaps. First, since ranges are extending quite a bit, I think 200 miles is quite stingy 🙂 Encouraging more urban use is certainly a good idea though. As for banning, I think it should be weight and size limited rather than range. Otherwise, you might end up with this monstrosity which weights over 4 tons! On the subject of lithium ion recycling and 2nd use, this article actually covers the issue well: https://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/18618/why-battery-recycling-is-critical-to-overall-ev-success As you can see, there is a situation brewing wherein the cost of the raw materials will go up to the point where it is commercial preferable to recycle batteries. There is also the geo-political implications, such as the US not wanting to import these minerals from certain foreign powers. Lastly, scaling up production of recycling/repurposing battery plants is significantly quicker and easier than a new mining operation, which, according to the above article, takes on average 16.5 years. So, the question becomes, if it is quicker, easier (practically and politically) and cheaper to reuse/recycle batteries than mine new minerals, why wouldn't you do it? The by-product being that is it helps with the environmental issues as well.

I'm sorry but this is a very strange reply to my post. Firstly, Carwow are interested in selling you cars through their site - In fact, I bought mine via them - and as far as I am aware, aren't pro or con anything in particular. Second, your view that anything VW says is automatically untrustworthy based on one example is complete nonsense. It also doesn't take into account the very obvious fact that they are building it right now! https://techcrunch.com/2022/07/07/volkswagen-breaks-ground-on-first-of-six-battery-factories/ As for asking for examples (in your previous post) of current recycling/reusing EV batteries: https://www.hydro.com/en/media/news/2022/europes-largest-electric-vehicle-battery-recycling-plant-begins-operations/ https://www.theregister.com/2023/02/08/ev_batteries_solar_storage/ Lastly, you keep going on about how EV batteries are going to be an ecological disaster when the fill up the landfills, but you haven't made mention of the fact that Lithium Ion battery have been used for decades on all sorts of other applications, so where are all these batteries going? https://ecotreelithium.co.uk/news/lithium-batteries-uses-and-applications/ As you can see, 14 different industries currently use these batteries with cars being only 1. Also, 3 out of the largest 10 producers of Lithium Ion batteries are using them for personal technology devices (including the phone you are using): Panasonic, Samsung and Toshiba. Now, I know this is going to come across as a Linas type post (sorry @Linas.P 🙂) but I do feel that your post demonstrates an unwillingness to accept anything that doesn't align with your point of view and is somewhat insulated in its thinking.

This article gives a good idea of what can be done with used batteries. https://www.carwow.co.uk/blog/ev-battery-recycling-what-happens-to-dead-batteries