|
Could be any number of different modules. The big Hyundai/Kia recall was something to do with the ABS system https://www.consumerreports.org/car-recalls-defects/park-recalled-hyundai-kia-vehicles-outside-due-to-fire-risk-a1002120529/
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2022 20:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 01:18 |
|
|
https://insideevs.com/news/561549/study-evs-smallest-fire-risk/ There's some actual evidence about fire rates in EV's in that article.  EV's straight out just do not catch fire anywhere near the same rates that ICE do. I'm sure EV fires are a hell of a lot worse but every bit of evidence I can find is saying it straight out - EV's just do not burn anywhere near the same rate as ICE or hybrids. I mean if you want a fire risk, the data says hybrids are more of a concern than ICE
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2022 21:17
|
|
|
CAT INTERCEPTOR posted:EV's straight out just do not catch fire anywhere near the same rates that ICE do. This is average fleet age bias. MetaJew posted:So, what starts stationary EV car fires? If it's related to the 12V battery system, what is happening? A car in a front impact collision that bends the hood and shorts the positive and negative terminals would make sense to me, but I'm not sure what other situations would start one. So let's use the 97-early 2000s F150 example: one of the the cruise control defeat switches was a pressure sensor on the front of the bake fluid reservoir. It is a hydraulic pressure switch with a sealed set of electrical contacts on the other side. Except they weren't so well sealed and (flammable) brake fluid would sometimes migrate through from the hydraulic side to the electrical side. This switch was powered all the time, regardless of ignition state. It started many fires, at least two of which were full on house fires that I responded to (one was an F150, the second was an explorer, both parked many hours before in the garage). Another one from before that time that was a huge recurring problem were Jeep Grand Cherokees. The main wiring harness pass-through on the firewall was insufficient. After enough time the rubber grommet would be cut through entirely and eventually various wires would be stripped of their insulation and arc on the firewall pass-through, catching the inside carpeting under the driver side dash on fire. Neither of these failure modes required collision damage, which brings in a whole other host of failure modes, most similar to the Grand Cherokee one. Others more similar to "hot stuff now in contact with combustible stuff". Wiring that can be damaged and arc, hot stuff and combustible stuff all exist in EVs, hybrids and ICE vehicles.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2022 21:31
|
|
|
But as far as I can tell those studies aren't taking the age of the car into account. So while the statement that EVs catch fire more rarely than IC cars is true, it might not be true compared to IC cars of the same age. Mind you it might still be true compared to brand new gas cars, but as far as i can tell no one has the data on that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2022 21:34
|
|
|
Motronic posted:This is average fleet age bias. Frankly so far I see no evidence to support that especially when hybrids are clearly shown to be more prone to fire and they are quite certainly part of the newer car fleet. The absolute worst evidence I can find is a early Tesla catches fire every 3 million vehicle miles average vs similarly aged ICE at 1 million vehicle miles average - and those early Teslas are certainly the most fire prone EV's, the post 2018 Teslas just simply are not even that rate of risk. If that's the worst hard evidence, the real world evidence is not supporting your assertion, especially when the NTSB data appears to be trying compare similarly aged vehicles.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2022 23:09
|
|
|
Time will tell. We all have a sampling bias, mine is from the front line/direct evidence, but you can only have so much of that as an individual. That opinion is not out of line with the community of individuals who deal with these fires (and do the research) that I associate with. The collision and non collision reasons for car fires simply aren't all that different between EVs and everything else. People who don't do this focus on gasoline or diesel. It's just not that big of a factor. Hard to believe? I think the recent posts in this thread show that. Fuel is largely secondary. And the "fuel" of EVs is flammable metal. There's also the kicker: when an EV (and to some extent a hybrid) goes off it's many times worse. So even if the incidence ends up lower, the consequences end up higher overall as the fleet transitions. Unless somebody comes up with some better options than what we have now. My favorite so far is one the Dutch came up with: dumpster full of water on a truck with a knuckle boom. Just deposit the car in the dumpster. Motronic fucked around with this message at 23:23 on Apr 11, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2022 23:16
|
|
|
 It's like a bath tub for cars! The picture above is a BMW i8 that started smoking while sitting in the showroom. They pushed it outside while the fire dept was driving to the scene. As far as i know, the big tank of water is for after they extinguished most of the fire, to prevent reignition of the still hot battery cells. By soaking it in a tank of water the batteries get plenty of cooling, and even if one manages to catch fire it'll automatically get extinguished by the water around it. I don't think they grab the flaming car and dunk it into the tank. Hell, except for the i8 i can't find any pictures of them using the tank. But i think it's a good idea. Perhaps they could extinguish it even faster if they design a crane that can resist the flaming car's heat, and just dunk the whole fiery thing into the bath tub. Probably needs some extra heat protection for the hydraulic lines and such. LimaBiker fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Apr 12, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 18:54
|
|
|
*frantically tries to select wash package before driving an on fire car into a car wash*
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 19:27
|
|
|
LimaBiker posted:
Make it open top and bottom, put a gasket around the bottom part of it, drop it around the car on fire and flood it. Original idea do not steal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 20:32
|
|
|
I used to work at a (now defunct) electric vehicle company and we had fire extinguishers for specifically handling battery fires. We used nickel batteries first and moved on to lithium ion as technology progressed. We did a lot of R&D work which included simulating the life of a battery over the course of a month or so. We were doing some of the testing on a potential new supplier and one of the batteries just cracked open at the connection point and started blasting sparks and flames out of it. I grabbed the closest extinguisher to me, which happened to be a regular extinguisher and ran over to start blasting it and it did absolutely nothing. The test tech grabbed one of the other extinguishers and it went out in seconds. It was like a fine yellow powder that came out of it. We wheeled it outside and it never re-ignited or caused any other problems. Is there a reason fire departments aren't using such a thing to combat EV fires? Like is that chemical stuff so horrible to the environment that blasting it all over the streets is way more harmful than using gallons and gallons of water or one of those car bathtubs? Or is the cost maybe? Just curious since what I have seen it worked beautifully. Granted that is super anecdotal and was a one time incident but it was really effective.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 20:33
|
|
|
At least Lithium Iron Phosphate (LiFePO4) batteries are considerably safer. They don't instantly explode into a fireball when damaged. Instead they might smoke/simmer a bit. Or in some cases do nothing at all. More auto makers are starting to use LiFePO4. Like Tesla for example; "standard range" Tesla vehicles manufactured in the past 1-2 years are all LiFePO4 packs, not the 18650/2170 cylindrical cells they have always used. They are also gaining traction in the home battery storage market due to the safety aspects, much longer cycle life, and the fact they don't mind sitting at 100% charge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 21:08
|
|
|
 Car fire chat, this is going on a few blocks from me right now. So burned out I can’t even tell what it is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 21:12
|
|
|
bigbillystyle posted:I used to work at a (now defunct) electric vehicle company and we had fire extinguishers for specifically handling battery fires. We used nickel batteries first and moved on to lithium ion as technology progressed. We did a lot of R&D work which included simulating the life of a battery over the course of a month or so. We were doing some of the testing on a potential new supplier and one of the batteries just cracked open at the connection point and started blasting sparks and flames out of it. I grabbed the closest extinguisher to me, which happened to be a regular extinguisher and ran over to start blasting it and it did absolutely nothing. The test tech grabbed one of the other extinguishers and it went out in seconds. It was like a fine yellow powder that came out of it. We wheeled it outside and it never re-ignited or caused any other problems. Is there a reason fire departments aren't using such a thing to combat EV fires? Like is that chemical stuff so horrible to the environment that blasting it all over the streets is way more harmful than using gallons and gallons of water or one of those car bathtubs? Or is the cost maybe? Just curious since what I have seen it worked beautifully. Granted that is super anecdotal and was a one time incident but it was really effective. That would be a Class D extinguisher. A 30 lb version costs about $400 to refill (this is primarily material costs - an ABC is like $60) and a single one does almost nothing to an already established metal fire. You coworker got it early, so it worked. The fire department is going to get there 5+ minutes after something like that started burning so it's gonna be very much "off". I've never had much luck putting out even a magnesium wheel on a car with less than 2 30 lb class d extinguishers. And that's something right there that you can get at, unlike a hybrid or EV battery (until it burns though enough, but by that time the fire is gonna again be well "off"). I don't think it's practical. Not in any way that I know of that we have access to/can apply the stuff. If it was a liquid maybe, but it's powder which makes application tougher. I also don't see being able to carry enough or even be able to AFFORD it. You'd be better off driving around with a triaxle load of sand and just burying the drat thing (which we have done with a VW engine block fire due to a convenient sand pile and backhoe near the scene that the owners let us use). This stuff breaks the fire triangle chemically, so it needs to be in actual physical contact with the metal on fire. Unlike most fires where we're knocking them down by removing heat via water/steam and then removing oxygen when the fire is small enough by dousing it. Motronic fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Apr 12, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 21:18
|
|
|
Guinness posted:
That probably means it's a T-72 then.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 22:33
|
|
|
Can I bring up how terrible Chryslers uConnect bluetooth system is? And car bluetooth in general? It used to be I could just plug my phone into the line in and listen to podcasts over my car's speakers. Now it takes many minutes for it to recognize the phone is in the car, and once I starting playing the podcast/youtube/music the car will give all appearance of it working, except no audio. This is over multiple Dodge/Chrysler vehicles and 2 different phones. I've gotten to the point where I just turn the bluetooth off on the phone and set it in the cupholder to listen to my shows, bypassing the car's audio system. I rather long for the days when I just burned the History of Rome to a bunch of CDs and listened to the whole thing while I drove cross country instead of having to fumble around with a smartphone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 22:46
|
|
|
The fact that CarPlay etc… only works with a cable is annoying as even if car Bluetooth wasn’t awful I still have to use a cable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 22:51
|
|
|
Motronic posted:That would be a Class D extinguisher. A 30 lb version costs about $400 to refill (this is primarily material costs - an ABC is like $60) and a single one does almost nothing to an already established metal fire. You coworker got it early, so it worked. The fire department is going to get there 5+ minutes after something like that started burning so it's gonna be very much "off". Yeah that makes sense. I was thinking it had to be either cost of the stuff or that if it was used on the street and then washed into the water system it would kill everything within a 5 mile radius or something. I did a quick search just to make sure I was remembering what the things were correctly and I did see an advert for a 30lb unit for $700+ USD so that is where I figured cost must be a factor in this. Plus like you said, water gets everywhere without much effort while the powder stuff would be much harder to apply. Thanks for the insight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 23:18
|
|
|
bigbillystyle posted:or that if it was used on the street and then washed into the water system it would kill everything within a 5 mile radius or something If I recall, it's mostly sodium chloride, but even if that's the bulk of it.......lots of thing we use for more "exotic" firefighting have exceptionally toxic ingredients even if they're just in small quantities to help with caking/flow/whatever. Some of the early foams were just environmental disasters. And one of them was basically rotting leftover meat processing plant stuff with some really toxic poo poo in it (protein foam) so it was not only bad for the environment but it smelled like liquid pig poo poo. But drat it put out car fires fast.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 23:29
|
|
|
It is fun that airports were using PFAS based fire suppression foams which just poured tons of the stuff into the ground water. I mean it is too late now as we all have it in our bodies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 23:32
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:Can I bring up how terrible Chryslers uConnect bluetooth system is? And car bluetooth in general? And you know what's loving terrifying? uConnect is generally accepted as one of the better in-car entertainment systems
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 23:33
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Some of the early foams were just environmental disasters. And one of them was basically rotting leftover meat processing plant stuff with some really toxic poo poo in it (protein foam) so it was not only bad for the environment but it smelled like liquid pig poo poo. But drat it put out car fires fast. The Navy loved that stuff. My dad stole a bunch off his ship once to use to get his lawn started, on the new house they had bought in Mira Mesa (San Diego). Every time it rained or he watered it, the lawn would foam over. On hot days, the lawn looked black from all the flies on it. The smell was apparently legendary. Three months later, he had the nicest lawn in the county, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 23:43
|
|
|
GD_American posted:The Navy loved that stuff. My dad stole a bunch off his ship once to use to get his lawn started, on the new house they had bought in Mira Mesa (San Diego). Your story just gave me a very distinct scent memory. Would not recommend, but lol that story is hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 23:54
|
|
|
sarcastx posted:And you know what's loving terrifying? Ford's isn't bad if you have the phone plugged in with a cable but it's pretty worthless over bluetooth.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2022 23:57
|
|
|
I always wondered why Bluetooth in my (current-gen) Accord was so much more worthless than physically plugging in the phone. That tracks that it's an Apple problem.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 00:01
|
|
|
My Tesla has not caught on fire, and the fit and finish are not clown shoes. I think I win?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 00:02
|
|
|
Humbug Scoolbus posted:My Tesla has not caught on fire yet
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 00:19
|
|
|
BigPaddy posted:The fact that CarPlay etc… only works with a cable is annoying as even if car Bluetooth wasn’t awful I still have to use a cable. Wireless CarPlay (and Android Auto) does exist but it isn't that common yet. It'd only be useful for short drives anyway, at least on my phone battery life is already so bad that I'd have to have it charging for a trip of any distance
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 00:42
|
|
|
dissss posted:It'd only be useful for short drives anyway, at least on my phone battery life is already so bad that I'd have to have it charging for a trip of any distance Ya even with a fully charged new phone running navigation and streaming music will pretty rapidly nuke a battery so I’m not too bummed about missing wireless CarPlay since I’d plug-in a lot anyway. Maybe nice for frequent short trips I suppose, but not really my use case. I guess wireless CarPlay with wireless charging is arguably the solution, which some cars have, but wireless charging is already kind of finicky on a stationary desk much less a moving vehicle. Plus phone cases can get in the way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 01:52
|
|
|
I’d be surprised if wireless CarPlay doesn’t always come with wireless charging. I think it’s mainly been limited to a few luxury cars but maybe it’s starting to trickle down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 02:50
|
|
|
PeterCat posted:Can I bring up how terrible Chryslers uConnect bluetooth system is? And car bluetooth in general? Bluetooth sucks poo poo. I hate how it (doesn't) work sometimes at random. Some of the time it just won't connect to devices for no explanation requiring you to power cycle the device, switch Bluetooth off and back on... Sometimes it'll connect immediately, sometimes slowly, sometimes not at all. My current favourite is when your phone decides it loves a particular device more than the others and occasionally decides it needs to reconnect to it when you turn Bluetooth on. You go into the Bluetooth devices menu and your phone is trying to connect to a device that isn't even on or nearby over the device that's on and broadcasting an 'I'm here, talk to me!' signal. For audio, Bluetooth is just so much more finicky over just connecting a 3.5mm jack.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 03:23
|
|
|
Guinness posted:Ya even with a fully charged new phone running navigation and streaming music will pretty rapidly nuke a battery so I’m not too bummed about missing wireless CarPlay since I’d plug-in a lot anyway. Maybe nice for frequent short trips I suppose, but not really my use case. The upside I think is to use a high wattage charger for rapid charging.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 03:32
|
|
|
david_a posted:I’d be surprised if wireless CarPlay doesn’t always come with wireless charging. I think it’s mainly been limited to a few luxury cars but maybe it’s starting to trickle down. My 2021 F-150 has wireless CarPlay but no wireless charging. You needed to go up to the top Platinum or Limited trims to get the charging pad. I bought a $15 charging pad from Amazon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 04:16
|
|
|
Even a Dacia can be optioned with wireless charging these days...
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 04:26
|
|
|
Nidhg00670000 posted:Even a Dacia can be optioned with wireless charging these days... Good news!
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 04:54
|
|
|
david_a posted:I’d be surprised if wireless CarPlay doesn’t always come with wireless charging. I think it’s mainly been limited to a few luxury cars but maybe it’s starting to trickle down. The problem is you still need to take the phone out of your pocket or bag and place it on/in the charger so at that point you may as well be plugging in a cable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 06:18
|
|
|
So clearly what we need is wireless charging pockets
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 07:43
|
|
|
Humbug Scoolbus posted:My Tesla has not caught on fire, and the fit and finish are not clown shoes. I think I win? That's the thing with Teslas, you might get a good one if the factors of time of day it was produced, when in the financial quarter it was produced, how much or little racism was going on in the assembly line, how many battery modules with holes poked and glued in them was used, has the part vendor been paid on time and given Tesla good quality parts, how was the weather when they took it outside to the tent to paint it, and did Elon get to gently caress that day? If all of it works in your favor, you might get a perfectly fine car that will run for years without incident, while one built two hours later that day will be delivered scratched and dented with a door in a different color and will have its roof fly off on the first drive and spend the first three months of its life in a service center while you tweet at Elon about how much you love the car. While if a Toyota develops a rattle at a spot in the interior after 75,000 miles, 200 000 of that model will have that rattle, because they are all built exactly the same.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 09:48
|
|
|
evobatman posted:That's the thing with Teslas, you might get a good one if the factors of time of day it was produced, when in the financial quarter it was produced, how much or little racism was going on in the assembly line, how many battery modules with holes poked and glued in them was used, has the part vendor been paid on time and given Tesla good quality parts, how was the weather when they took it outside to the tent to paint it, and did Elon get to gently caress that day? If all of it works in your favor, you might get a perfectly fine car that will run for years without incident, while one built two hours later that day will be delivered scratched and dented with a door in a different color and will have its roof fly off on the first drive and spend the first three months of its life in a service center while you tweet at Elon about how much you love the car. Maybe in 2018 but that's not the case anymore. Shanghai cars are just simply not badly built. The Fremont cars arent even that crap anymore - they don't even really have a end of quarter issue now. Germany and Texas are more like Shanghai with improvements by the looks of them but there hasn't been enough cars coming off those lines to make a definitive statement. The bigger fact is now there's close to a couple of million of them running around now and..... well..... they are perfectly fine. Bunch of blithering idiots want to let Musk live rent free in their overly online brains and honestly once you get past the pro and anti idiots who cant wait but to breatlessly poo poo on Musk or lick his sweaty taint and call it a lollipop, Tesla makes average built cars. Nothing to be porud of but nothing to be that worried over or care about either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 10:37
|
|
|
Some people have weird fetishes for sure. https://twitter.com/Heyy_Mona/status/1514169226336083968?s=20&t=Muu75XHLNeTPG4JrZRWNzQ
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 11:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 01:18 |
|
|
I‘d call that misunderstood hysteresis, not a fetish.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2022 12:01
|
|
