• Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m fairly convinced that the reason internal combustion won - even though it would regularly break your wrist when you started it - was that it made loud noises.

    Back then cars were a luxury, and if you’re buying something flashy you want people to notice you. A gasoline engine sputtering down the road would draw far more attention than an electric motor, so people bought those.

    • grandkaiser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 month ago

      From an engineering standpoint, liquid fuels have a far greater energy-to-weight ratio than batteries. Some of the largest advancements in combustion engines for the purpose of conveyance were made during the world wars. Noise was something they actively fought against. Loud tanks are scary, but unexpected tanks are much scarier. If they really needed it to be loud, sirens exist (see: Jericho siren). The energy-to-weight problem is only now finally being solved via modern batteries using exotic materials and processes well outside of early 1900’s technology.

    • ch00f@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 month ago

      Fun to remember that Mr. Toad was a parody of all the dicks who drove cars.

    • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      A gasoline engine sputtering down the road would draw far more attention than an electric motor, so people bought those.

      They’re still doing exactly this. ICE designs have never been quieter, but meanwhile Ford and GM are pumping out the L O U D E S T car options in decades.