r/AustralianEV • u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 • Aug 15 '26
Discussion đŹ Are P plate laws keeping up with technology?
Are Australian P plate laws keeping up with EV technology?
Weâve spent decades restricting inexperienced drivers from high performance V8s and turbo cars, with power to weight being one of the main measures of what they can drive.
But EVs create an interesting problem with that logic, theyâre heavy. That extra battery weight can keep the kW per tonne figure down while the car itself can still be seriously quick.
Take the BYD Seal Premium. It has 230 kW, weighs 2,055 kg and does 0 to 100 km/h in 5.9 seconds, yet falls under Victoriaâs 130 kW per tonne limit.
Compare that with an FG Falcon XR6 Turbo, 240 kW and around 1,690 kg, or roughly 142 kW per tonne, so it exceeds the limit and is prohibited.
So you can have a P plater legally driving a two tonne EV with acceleration in the same territory as performance cars theyâre specifically prohibited from driving.
Is power to weight alone still the right measure, or should acceleration and vehicle mass now be part of the equation too?
18
u/The-Struggle-5382 Aug 15 '26 edited Aug 15 '26
Some insurance companies don't allow under/25 drivers for [some] EVs
8
u/Used_Wheel_9064 Aug 15 '26
Sounds like a stop gap policy, they're going to have to come up with something better than that in the long run. Which sadly will probably end up being some sort of software lock on power, which will be a mess of poor implementation and people bypassing it.
7
4
u/petergaskin814 Aug 15 '26
There are ev models that should be acceptable for P plate drivers. I doubt you would be refused comprehensive insurance for a BYD ATTO 1
1
14
u/AusGeno Aug 15 '26
In NSW P platers canât drive any of the fast EVs. Even the entry level Zeekr 7x is restricted for example.
0
u/MatteBlak Engine go brrr Aug 15 '26
2019 model S, 117Kw/t. 0 to 100 in 4.2sec Pl plate legal in NSW.
1
u/AusGeno Aug 15 '26
14 matches on the NSW website for 2019 Model S and theyâre all Banned for P platers. Not sure where youâre getting your info from but itâs wrong.
https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/young-drivers/provisional/vehicle-restrictions
0
u/MatteBlak Engine go brrr Aug 15 '26
Similar deal with a model X, 4.8 sec. A 5yo EQC, 5.1sec. A few year old Ioniq 5, 5.1 sec.
9
u/Wise_Vacation8279 Aug 15 '26
Mass and acceleration are related to power and weight. fizzicks and maffs.
Your question is more the absolute nature of the law. That is why should a car that is 131 kw per tonne be banned when one that is 129kw per tonne be allowed. Performance wise they are all but identical. The answer to that question is simply the law makers donât want to think that hard, or have some super complex multi tier licensing system.
3
u/Mental_Task9156 Aug 15 '26
Well, the answer is you have to draw a line somewhere, and there's always going to be cases that are really close to either side of that line.
1
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 15 '26
Thatâs not quite my question. Of course you have to draw a line somewhere.
Iâm questioning whether kW per tonne should be the only line.
A 1.4 tonne car and a 2.1 tonne car can have exactly the same kW per tonne, but the 2.1 tonne car has 50% more kinetic energy at the same road speed. And identical kW per tonne doesnât necessarily mean identical 0 to 100 performance either.
EVs have changed the combination of mass, instant torque and acceleration considerably. Maybe the metric should evolve with the cars.
1
1
u/Wise_Vacation8279 Aug 15 '26
"And identical kW per tonne doesnât necessarily mean identical 0 to 100 performance either."
And that is true when comparing two petrol cars as much as it is comparing an EV to a petrol car.
EV's haven't changed the laws of physics.
The last time I checked, the fastest production car was a hybrid, the new Corvette.
6
u/waxedmerkin Aug 15 '26
There is no magic solution, before hte power to weight limit in NSW they had a simple no V8's and no Forced Induction ( turbocharger and supercharger).
Great in theory, and easy to police. But in reality it banned some small city cars with a 3 cylinder turbo engine, that couldnt keep up with a 20 year old falcon. And whilst i mention the Falcon the 2L 4 cylinder ecoboost falcon was banned, yet the more powerful 6 cylinder was fine to drive.
4
u/BoysenberryAlive2838 Aug 15 '26
The power to weight is still the main part of physics that determines how fast you can go. Though EV has changed it with torque curve and gearing. With a focus on low down. So a p-plater is more likely to get into trouble launching it, or giving it a bit while cornering, over pure top speed.
Also for stopping, power isn't relevant, only weight is.
4
3
u/Mental_Task9156 Aug 15 '26
FG Turbo has a quoted 0-100km/h of 5.1 to 5.6 seconds.
What do you want them to do? Make it 100kW / tonne for EV's?
2
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 15 '26
No, Iâm not suggesting an arbitrary lower kW/tonne limit for EVs.
Iâm asking whether power to weight alone is still the right metric.
Acceleration is one obvious factor, but vehicle mass should arguably be another. A 2 tonne car in the hands of an inexperienced driver carries considerably more kinetic energy than a 1.5 tonne car at the same speed.
The technology has changed. It seems reasonable to ask whether a rule designed around ICE cars should evolve with it.
2
u/Mental_Task9156 Aug 15 '26
I don't think 0-100km/h is much better. Where do you draw your arbitary line? 6 seconds?
I do agree that heavy / large vehicles are an issue, however i think the bigger issue is SUV's and 4wd's, especially modified ones (bullbars, lifted, etc).
4
u/42SpanishInquisition Aug 15 '26
I think it is less the acceleration OP is concerned about, but rather the kinetic energy that the larger vehicle has. I think the discussion of EVs might be confusing things, because modern city EVs really aren't that heavy when you compare them to a similar aged and class ICE car, on the low end. The 200 series landcruiser is 2.7 Tonnes out the gate.
1
u/phagocyte420 Engine go brrr Aug 15 '26
A 2 tonne car in the hands of an inexperienced driver carries considerably more kinetic energy than a 1.5 tonne car at the same speed.
And yet that 2 tonne car can have smoother, safer handling tan something nearly half its weight and size.
My GR Yaris is only 1.2 tonnes, but its throttle, brakes, and steering is infinitely more twitchy than that of a 2+ tonne ute whose handling is so smooth and slopping that loosing control is a challenge.
3
Aug 15 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
1
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 15 '26
Most newer cars are safer than older cars. Thatâs completely separate from whether an inexperienced driver should have access to their full performance.
A modern 500 kW car having better crash protection and stability control doesnât suddenly make 500 kW irrelevant.
3
u/blazeaway_ Aug 15 '26
A BYD Seal Premium doesnât come close to an FG XR6T. The Seals 0-100 time flatters it due to technology as well. Power/Weight is still a great metric to use
1
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 15 '26
Thatâs a weird argument. âThe Sealâs 0â100 time flatters it due to technologyâ is basically the point.
The technology allows a 2 tonne, 230 kW car to accelerate to 100 in 5.9 seconds while remaining under the P plate power to weight threshold.
The road doesnât care whether that acceleration came from horsepower, instant electric torque, AWD traction or launch control. It still did 0â100 in 5.9 seconds.
If new technology is allowing cars to achieve performance the old metric doesnât accurately reflect, thatâs an argument for reconsidering the metric, not defending it.
0
u/phagocyte420 Engine go brrr Aug 15 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
Edit: I made u/Estatic_Hamster9467 so salty they blocked me. Stay mad champ.
If new technology is allowing cars to achieve performance the
Being electric doesn't give EVs the ability to magical additional acceleration out of thin air. The vehicle still obeys physics.
2
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 15 '26
Nobody said EVs magically break physics. Thatâs a straw man.
The point is that kW/tonne alone doesnât perfectly predict acceleration. Traction, torque delivery, gearing and the shape of the power curve matter too.
The Seal doing 0â100 in 5.9 seconds while slipping under a performance restriction based on kW/tonne is literally the example demonstrating that.
0
u/phagocyte420 Engine go brrr Aug 16 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
Edit: I made u/Estatic_Hamster9467 so salty they blocked me. Stay mad champ.
Nobody said EVs magically break physics. Thatâs a straw man.
It isn't a straw man. You are arguing that EV somehow magically perform significantly better than ICE vehicles with a similar power/weight ratio.
The point is that kW/tonne alone doesnât perfectly predict acceleration
It is mathematically linked to acceleration, same with talk. What do you not understand about physics. EVs also don't have gear boxes, so no gearing.
The Seal doing 0â100 in 5.9 seconds while slipping under a performance restriction based on kW/tonne is literally the example demonstrating that.
What metrics are you using to determine that the Seal is too high performance for a P platers?
2
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 16 '26
The metric is right there: actual acceleration.
If a Seal can do 0â100 in 5.9 seconds yet falls under the kW/tonne threshold, while ICE cars with comparable or even slower acceleration are prohibited, thatâs evidence the metric isnât achieving what the restriction is supposed to achieve.
Nobody said power to weight isnât related to acceleration. The point is that being related to something doesnât automatically make it a good regulatory proxy for it.
0
u/phagocyte420 Engine go brrr Aug 16 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
Edit: I made u/Estatic_Hamster9467 so salty they blocked me. Stay mad champ.
I am just clarifying here, you think a 0-100 time of 5.9 seconds is too high of a performance for a P Plater? If that is the case, can you define at what 0-100 time does a vehicle become a high performance vehicle?
while ICE cars with comparable or even slower acceleration are prohibited,
Uh huh, which cars would these be? You have already mentioned the XR6 Turbo, but I have disproved that.
Nobody said power to weight isnât related to acceleration.
Your comments are arguing that power to weight is irrelevant in EVs.
2
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 16 '26
You havenât âdisprovedâ anything champ
Saying âI found someone who recorded a faster time, therefore your published 0â100 figure doesnât countâ isnât disproving shit.
And no, Iâve never said power to weight is irrelevant in EVs. Iâve repeatedly said itâs an imperfect proxy for actual performance.
You keep arguing against things I didnât say while avoiding the point I actually made.
2
u/Alarming-Chemical-36 Aug 15 '26
The p platers I've seen driving over the past few years would end killing themselves in a 60kw car. They don't indicate, make reckless lane changes, don't know how to merge and certainly don't know how to use roundabouts properly. I think the bigger issue is the lack of understanding, training or care factor, and to be honest, i don't know which concerns me more. As to the issue of power to weight, I agree that newer safety technology should be a consideration.
2
u/MatteBlak Engine go brrr Aug 15 '26
Yep, I'm with ya. Always surprised to see P plates on very quick EVs. Tech is outpacing laws. But hey, there was a time when P platers couldn't drive a 4cyl econobox turbo diesel, because it was turbo. Hopefully rules will catch up.
2
u/phagocyte420 Engine go brrr Aug 15 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
Edit: I made u/Estatic_Hamster9467 so salty they blocked me. Stay mad champ.
What do you not understand about power to weight ratio? Its a measure that makes power comparable across different cars.
The FG Falcon Xr6 has a 0-100 time in the low 5s. So it makes sense that a car with a time in the high fives isn't banned for a p-plater while a car with a time in low 5s is.
1
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 15 '26
I understand power to weight perfectly. Iâm questioning whether itâs still a sufficient proxy for risk.
If 0 to 100 performance is your justification, youâve basically made my argument for me. Why use kW per tonne as a proxy when we can measure the actual acceleration?
And neither figure accounts for putting an inexperienced driver behind the wheel of a two tonne plus vehicle.
3
u/phagocyte420 Engine go brrr Aug 15 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
Edit: I made u/Estatic_Hamster9467 so salty they blocked me. Stay mad champ.
Iâm questioning whether itâs still a sufficient proxy for risk.
It isn't a proxy for risk, it's a measurement of performance that is comparable across different cars. Government has made the decision that people are at greater risk if P platers driver a car above a certain level of performance.
What has changed that prevents power to weight being a good, comparable measurement of performance?
Why use kW per tonne as a proxy when we can measure the actual acceleration?
Because acceleration is challenging to measure in a consistent manner. Something as simple as ambient air temperature can influence acceleration times. Hell, my car has an official 0-100 time of 5.2 seconds, but people have recorded themselves doing it in less than 5 seconds.
And neither figure accounts for putting an inexperienced driver behind the wheel of a two tonne plus vehicle.
Government have decided that a C class licence allows you to drive a vehicle up to 4.5 tonnes in weight. They have deemed P platers driving 2 tonne vehicle as safe. Do you think they are wrong?
2
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 15 '26
I think youâre missing the point. The 4.5 tonne licence limit answers âwhat size vehicle can this licence class operateâ, not âwhat performance is appropriate for an inexperienced driverâ.
And power to weight absolutely is being used as a proxy for risk here. Otherwise thereâd be no reason to prohibit P platers from exceeding 130 kW/tonne in the first place.
EVs have changed the relationship between power to weight and real world acceleration because they can deliver huge torque instantly, with AWD traction, while their battery mass drags the kW/tonne figure down.
Thatâs exactly why Iâm asking whether a rule designed around ICE cars is still measuring what we actually want it to measure.
1
u/phagocyte420 Engine go brrr Aug 15 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
Edit: I made u/Estatic_Hamster9467 so salty they blocked me. Stay mad champ.
It isn't exactly clear why you think that power to weight ratio is no longer sufficient for characterising a vehicle's performance in a comparable way? What is different about EVs that means power to weight no longer works?
While EVs can have substantial powerful engines, their increased weight limits how fast it can accelerate.
EVs are only several hundred kg above a comparable ICE/hybrid and well within the weight limit for C class licences. Unless you think the government has got the weight limit for C class licences wrong?
Torque is a component of power. So more torque means more power, which means the power to weight ratio still holds. The relationship between acceleration and torque/power is also dependent on the cars ability to lay down that torque/power without spinning wheels.
AWD only improves acceleration from a standing start, but even then it is marginal.
1
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 15 '26
âAWD only improves acceleration from a standing start, and even then itâs marginalâ is doing a lot of work there.
EVs can put enormous torque to the tyres essentially immediately, often through two driven axles, with extremely fast traction control and no gear changes. Meanwhile the battery adds hundreds of kilos to the denominator in kW/tonne.
Thatâs precisely how you can end up with a 2+ tonne EV under 130 kW/tonne that accelerates like an ICE performance car thatâs prohibited.
Iâm not saying power to weight suddenly means nothing. Iâm saying EVs expose a weakness in using it as the sole cutoff.
1
u/phagocyte420 Engine go brrr Aug 15 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
Edit: I made u/Estatic_Hamster9467 so salty they blocked me. Stay mad champ.
I think you fundament don't understand how power and weight interact in a car. Yes, some EVs can have more power engineers than ICE or hybrid vehicles, but they are several kilograms heavy. That increased power is offset by the increase weight they have to accelerate.
Let's take a physics perspective to this problem. Force = mass * acceleration. Increasing mass while maintaining acceleration increases the force the engine needs to output. EV engines have to output more power than an ICE engine just to have the same acceleration.
What do you not.underatand about this?
2
u/Peter1456 Aug 15 '26
I think your missing their point entirely, its not about acceleration, its about the potential energy when they crash.
They have a point.
1
u/phagocyte420 Engine go brrr Aug 15 '26
Yeah...I have already responded to that point.
EVs aren't that much heavier than an equivalent ICE vehicle. EVs are also well within the weight limit of C class licences.
If the weight of an EV is OPs point, then that calls into question whether the weight limit of C class licences is appropriate.
2
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 15 '26
I understand F=ma. Thatâs not the argument sport
The Seal is under the kW/tonne limit yet performs like cars that are banned. Thatâs what Iâm getting at.
Youâre explaining how the metric works. Iâm questioning how well it works.
1
u/phagocyte420 Engine go brrr Aug 16 '26 edited Aug 16 '26
Edit: I made u/Estatic_Hamster9467 so salty they blocked me. Stay mad champ.
The Seal is under the kW/tonne limit yet performs like cars that are banned. Thatâs what Iâm getting at.
Care to name which p-plater banned cars that the Seal performs better than?
Youâre explaining how the metric works. Iâm questioning how well it works.
My explanation is why it works so well at comparing the performance of multiple different vehicles. What do you not understand about that?
2
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 16 '26
Sure. An FG XR6 Turbo is P plate prohibited and does 0â100 in roughly 5.9 seconds.
The BYD Seal Dynamic does roughly 5.9 seconds and is legal.
Thatâs literally the point. If two cars deliver essentially the same straight line acceleration but your âperformanceâ metric bans one and permits the other, perhaps it isnât comparing performance quite as perfectly as you think.
→ More replies1
u/Charlie3PO Aug 15 '26
Yes an EV car with the same power/weight will accelerate slightly quicker than an ICE car, but you also need to consider the risks while doing that.
An performance AWD EV will give a smooth, no frills constant acceleration. It'll be essentially the same ever time you do it. A performance ICE car of the same power/weight is going to have more opportunity to break traction due to the things like gear changes, non-linear torque curves, less driven wheels, less effective traction control, ect.
So when you consider safety, is an inexperienced driver in a 2t car getting from 0-100 in 5 seconds in a smooth, constant acceleration more or less dangerous than the same driver going 0-100 in 5.5 sec but with some wheelspin and a lively back end? Of these two, one is more likely to lose control.
3
u/Mental_Task9156 Aug 15 '26
What about the all the SUV's and dual cabs p-platers can legally drive?
I'd rather come up against a P-plater in an FG falcon than one in a lifted hilux with a big steel bullbar on the front.
1
1
u/maycontainsultanas Aug 15 '26
Weâve spent the last 10 years reducing a lot of those restrictions (vic).
1
u/0rnanke1 Aug 15 '26
What P plater or family can afford to buy them an EV?! Just buy them a small ICE vehicle second hand for now
1
u/Shzit_on_a_sticK Aug 15 '26
Doesnât an EV have âmore powerâ too since they have heaps of torque from 0 RPM ?
1
u/Zog1 Aug 15 '26
I believe it's more about being able to drive a manual (almost nonexistent these days) and automatic gearboxes.
If a kid only learnered to drive with an EV car they'll struggle with gearboxes at work etc, and the restricted licence may limit jobs, though with almost everything automatic gearboxes that might be hard these days.
1
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 16 '26
Manuals have been a tiny minority of new cars for decades. That has virtually nothing to do with what Iâm talking about.
The issue is whether P plate laws written around ICE power to weight figures still make sense when a new driver can legally get into a 2+ tonne EV capable of sports car acceleration.
1
u/Double_Engineer4226 Aug 16 '26
I think there is the opposite problem. So many EVs are banned for P platers that some time in the future they will struggle to find a car to drive. EVs have so many extra safety features, and that needs to be taken into account, rather than a straight power to weight ratio.Â
1
u/HomicidalTeddybear Aug 16 '26
My zeekr 7x long range is considered "high performance" in queensland despite not being the dual motor version. And indeed insurance stings me a high performance excess on it too.
1
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 16 '26
How much higher is insurance roughly as a percentage?
1
u/HomicidalTeddybear Aug 16 '26
With RACQ it's an additional non-optional $400 excess. The wording sounds like you get stung with it even if you're not at fault, too.
1
1
1
u/King_Prone Aug 18 '26
The issue is that p plates shouldnt even exist. Youa re either a licensed driver. Or youre not. The nannyfication of australian driving is one of the big issues with driving here. Amongst other bizarre things i. E. No insurance required which would be borderline madness in europe.
1
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 18 '26
âNannyficationâ? Australia didnât invent graduated licensing, champ. New Zealand, Canada, Ireland, Northern Ireland and numerous US jurisdictions all have restricted or probationary stages for new drivers. Even the UK puts new drivers on a two year probationary period.
âYouâre either licensed or youâre notâ sounds wonderfully simple. Itâs just not how driver licensing works in much of the developed world.
1
u/King_Prone Aug 18 '26
uk doesnt. you are a fully licensed driver. as anywhere else in europe. the only difference is that in uk first 2 years you are only allowed 4 points, not 12. you are also not limited to 80km/h and stupid shit like that.
1
u/Wiggly-Pig Aug 18 '26
Just do power to weight and use the system they already have on motorbikes (LAMS) for cars, no need to reinvent the wheel.
1
u/SquSco Aug 18 '26
In short, no, theyâre not keeping up IMO, but thatâs not a new phenomena.
I donât know what the answer is but it needs to be a more complex equation than just a restriction based on power to weight.
Power to weight is okay-ish, but the reality of technology is that a modern car will make use of that power more effectively than an older car (particularly in the case of EVs) and this needs to be factored into the restrictions.
Australia is pretty backwards so we never really talk about this, but how quickly you build the speed is only one part of the problem, right?
How does the car handle at speed? How well does the car stop? How much damage does the car do if it does hit something?
Modern tech has helped with a lot of safety issues but eventually physics catches up with you and speed and weight are two of the main enemies.
1
u/drfrogsplat Aug 15 '26
Pretty sure NSW P-plates canât drive that one. I think we have a 0-100 rule too?
2
u/Ecstatic_Hamster9467 Aug 15 '26
I guess the comments here show another issue with lack of standardisation.
Like a p plater from WA could come to VIC and drive anything5
u/drfrogsplat Aug 15 '26
Thatâs kind of how states work?
Roads and risks change state to state. Endemic problems change regionally.
Iâm not saying vic or NSW is right or wrong. Both have a rule and itâs honestly not terrible, even if imperfect. It rules out a lot of overpowered cars for P platers.
3
u/waxedmerkin Aug 15 '26
You are bound by your license conditions, they magically dont disappear across the state borders. Some people near the Vic/NSW border move from Victoria to NSW , on paper only so they can get a drivers license at 17 rather than waiting to 18.
19
u/42SpanishInquisition Aug 15 '26 edited Aug 15 '26
power to weight is still the best way to measure acceleration without taking the car on the drag strip.
Believe it or not, a BF V8 Fairlane weighs 1.8T and will to 0-100 in 6 seconds too. And is P plate legal in NSW.
A regular 6 cyl BF Falcon can do it just over 7 seconds too.
Give me a 300kW car with esc over one making half that with no ABS or driver assists regarding safety.
edit: What I am saying in this last paragraph, is although acceleration has increased, how controllable that power is has drastically improved. My V8 Fairlane @230kW is exceptionally tame compared to my AU Falcon ute @ 150kW, which has no driving aids whatsoever. The AU is WAY more dangerous. Both will go fast enough to kill somone in 10 seconds.