EVs... no one wants them!

[tupak798]

Adding to my list of reasons not to buy an EV would be being associated with some of the posters in here. Some seriously abrasive personalities to say the least.

[TheRainMaker]

JustGetATesla said:

TheRainMaker said:

That has nothing to do with the question

It has everything to do with the question. Why would anyone need a car that can do 300 miles non-stop in winter? As the guy said, his Model 3 could - but as almost everyone stops on a drive of 4 hours+, who cares.

I spent 20 years driving diesels up and down. 50k miles a year at the peak. How far the thing would go non-stop was never an issue as I always did what everyone else did - took a break because need a wee / hungry / need to call someone / bored etc etc etc.

There is no real world need for any car to do 500 miles on a single tank because practically nobody drives like that. Its FUD, and pretty laughable FUD as well.

It has nothing to do with the question, I asked what car he had that did 300+ in the winter.

You just went off in a rant about not needing to drive 300 miles without stopping

Edited by TheRainMaker on Wednesday 27th March 13:25

[Seasonal Hero]

tupak798 said:

Adding to my list of reasons not to buy an EV would be being associated with some of the posters in here. Some seriously abrasive personalities to say the least.

On what planet would you be associated with anyone? Would you drive with a list of usernames on the car?

[anonymous-user]

Seasonal Hero said:

You chose to not reply because you had no reply.

What was your point ? I’ll take another look.

[GT9]

tupak798 said:

Adding to my list of reasons not to buy an EV would be being associated with some of the posters in here. Some seriously abrasive personalities to say the least.

Some of the nicest people I know use Fox News and the Daily Mail as their source for balanced, informed, inclusive content.
Not.

[DoctorX]

JustGetATesla said:

It has everything to do with the question. Why would anyone need a car that can do 300 miles non-stop in winter? As the guy said, his Model 3 could - but as almost everyone stops on a drive of 4 hours+, who cares.

I spent 20 years driving diesels up and down. 50k miles a year at the peak. How far the thing would go non-stop was never an issue as I always did what everyone else did - took a break because need a wee / hungry / need to call someone / bored etc etc etc.

There is no real world need for any car to do 500 miles on a single tank because practically nobody drives like that. Its FUD, and pretty laughable FUD as well.

As someone who really quite fancies following your lead but cannot charge at home, a long range would be a absolutely a requirement (albeit not for non-stop driving) such that I don't have to spend much time in dingy multistories like in your recent video Enjoyable video, by the way, cracking scenery.

[Dave200]

TheRainMaker said:

JustGetATesla said:

TheRainMaker said:

That has nothing to do with the question

It has everything to do with the question. Why would anyone need a car that can do 300 miles non-stop in winter? As the guy said, his Model 3 could - but as almost everyone stops on a drive of 4 hours+, who cares.

I spent 20 years driving diesels up and down. 50k miles a year at the peak. How far the thing would go non-stop was never an issue as I always did what everyone else did - took a break because need a wee / hungry / need to call someone / bored etc etc etc.

There is no real world need for any car to do 500 miles on a single tank because practically nobody drives like that. Its FUD, and pretty laughable FUD as well.

It has nothing to do with the question, I asked what car he had that did 300+ in the winter.

You just went off in a rant about not needing to drive 300 miles without stopping

Edited by TheRainMaker on Wednesday 27th March 13:25

I didn't mention the winter specifically. But the journey I did the other night, which would have given me a total range of >300 miles was at between 5 and 7 degrees according to the dashboard. I just drive it like I do any other car. Stick cruise on for motorway sections, and have it keep up with the outside lane at 75-80. It just works.

[Seasonal Hero]

wormus said:

What was your point ? I’ll take another look.

Wasted on you, clearly. Don't worry about it, I'm not.

[craigjm]

tupak798 said:

Adding to my list of reasons not to buy an EV would be being associated with some of the posters in here. Some seriously abrasive personalities to say the least.

Seems to be prevalent at the extremes on both sides of the argument with the extreme anti EV lot behaving like they are being told to murder their first born, The debate has just become the next Brexit / covid / latest thought debate.

[otolith]

craigjm said:

Seems to be prevalent at the extremes on both sides of the argument with the extreme anti EV lot behaving like they are being told to murder their first born, The debate has just become the next Brexit / covid / latest thought debate.

It's been successfully dragged into the culture wars.

[Dave200]

otolith said:

craigjm said:

Seems to be prevalent at the extremes on both sides of the argument with the extreme anti EV lot behaving like they are being told to murder their first born, The debate has just become the next Brexit / covid / latest thought debate.

It's been successfully dragged into the culture wars.

Seemingly with the support of people like the sensationalist youtube guy who was posted a few pages ago. His comment section read like a bunch of people who were out there looking for opinions to reinforce their own.

[Seasonal Hero]

Whilst at the same time telling people who've been running EV's for years how wrong they are.

[heebeegeetee]

rowley birkin said:

Group E: the people who just want to enjoy their petrol cars without listening to others banging on about EV's.

Noo, there has to another letter for those who just want to enjoy their petrol cars without listening to others banging on about EV's but can be found on EV threads anyway.

We also need a subgroup for those who just want to enjoy their petrol cars without listening to others banging on about EV's but can be found on EV threads anyway to tell those who are happy with the EVs they've owned and ran that they don't know what they're talking about.

[Ankh87]

I recently watched a video where a YouTuber goes to see an EV mechanic to bust some myths about EVs. I think the video is rather old itself but it popped up on my feed.

They asked about battery life etc, which left me with more questions.

The EV mechanic said that you should really keep the car between 20-80% and try not to allow the car to charge either from below 20% or all the way up to 100% because that has an effect with the battery deg. So to me that means you actually only have 60% of the range available because you'll damage the battery which seems a bit daft. He said to look at it like red lining a car, it will damage the engine. OK I get that but the battery isn't the motor only is it? It is also the "tank" and "fuel" supply of the vehicle, so why are manufacturers saying an range of say 300 miles when it is only really 60% of that?

I know with ICE cars MPG is a load of tosh with what they all claim but the main thing is that it's not overly promoted unless it was/is an eco car as such. EVs also will only ever get that max range if the battery is at 100% health. As stated by the EV mechanic that ceiling drops each time you charge up to 100% or use a super duper charger.


He also stated that manufacturers offer long warranties on EVs because there's less parts to go wrong, which is awesome for us all. My question about that is surely this will change because the manufacturers will want people to buy their new car won't they? Come 2035 if battery deg is minimal and everything is pretty much as reliable as paying taxes, then manufacturers aren't going to want people driving around in the car they bought 5 years ago and still using it 10 years more. Going off the Telsa that AutoAlex bought, that car is practically say 4-6 owners mileage.


I'm thinking that at some point the reliability bubble will end and things will start to "break" and force people to buy a newer EV.

I can't see myself going full EV as it doesn't fit my needs but for my partner it would be OK as long as we get a charger installed.

[Dave200]

Ankh87 said:

I recently watched a video where a YouTuber goes to see an EV mechanic to bust some myths about EVs. I think the video is rather old itself but it popped up on my feed.

They asked about battery life etc, which left me with more questions.

The EV mechanic said that you should really keep the car between 20-80% and try not to allow the car to charge either from below 20% or all the way up to 100% because that has an effect with the battery deg. So to me that means you actually only have 60% of the range available because you'll damage the battery which seems a bit daft. He said to look at it like red lining a car, it will damage the engine. OK I get that but the battery isn't the motor only is it? It is also the "tank" and "fuel" supply of the vehicle, so why are manufacturers saying an range of say 300 miles when it is only really 60% of that?

I know with ICE cars MPG is a load of tosh with what they all claim but the main thing is that it's not overly promoted unless it was/is an eco car as such. EVs also will only ever get that max range if the battery is at 100% health. As stated by the EV mechanic that ceiling drops each time you charge up to 100% or use a super duper charger.


He also stated that manufacturers offer long warranties on EVs because there's less parts to go wrong, which is awesome for us all. My question about that is surely this will change because the manufacturers will want people to buy their new car won't they? Come 2035 if battery deg is minimal and everything is pretty much as reliable as paying taxes, then manufacturers aren't going to want people driving around in the car they bought 5 years ago and still using it 10 years more. Going off the Telsa that AutoAlex bought, that car is practically say 4-6 owners mileage.


I'm thinking that at some point the reliability bubble will end and things will start to "break" and force people to buy a newer EV.

I can't see myself going full EV as it doesn't fit my needs but for my partner it would be OK as long as we get a charger installed.

Every time mine has been plugged in at home, it's been charged to 100%. I took the view that as it's on finance and we'll be returning it in a couple of years the long term battery health is less important to me than the usable range in the time I own it. I can't say that I've noticed any drop in range over the 15,000 miles I've used it for, taking it up to 25,000 total (bought used). It's entirely possible that this might drop off a cliff later in life, but it certainly hasn't just yet. 340 miles displayed range is entirely possible with careful driving and 300+ is a regular occurrence.

I'm sure someone posted up a graph of self-reported Tesla owners showing battery degradation over time. I seem to remember 7% at 100,000 miles being the figure that stuck in my head. Not the end of the world.

[RayDonovan]

One of the bigger EV dealers in the UK tested a 100k 69 plate Model 3.
It had lost circa 8% battery capacity during those miles which is pretty impressive as 38% of all their charging was DC Supercharger (worse for battery long term health)

Rest of the car appeared decent.

[Ankh87]

Dave200 said:

Every time mine has been plugged in at home, it's been charged to 100%. I took the view that as it's on finance and we'll be returning it in a couple of years the long term battery health is less important to me than the usable range in the time I own it. I can't say that I've noticed any drop in range over the 15,000 miles I've used it for, taking it up to 25,000 total (bought used). It's entirely possible that this might drop off a cliff later in life, but it certainly hasn't just yet. 340 miles displayed range is entirely possible with careful driving and 300+ is a regular occurrence.

I'm sure someone posted up a graph of self-reported Tesla owners showing battery degradation over time. I seem to remember 7% at 100,000 miles being the figure that stuck in my head. Not the end of the world.

This is it, he didn't really explain when a problem would occur or what what happen by charging it to 100% all the time. Granted for you it's fine but someone buying used and intending to keep it a very long time, it's not great.

Understandably it's no different than someone red lining a car every time they drive it and then the next person having no clue. Again it seems that there's no real consistency about true figures as such. 7% at 100k is great but is that people charging up to 100% each time and never letting it go below 20%? Who really knows apart from Tesla. It's obviously selected data which is fair enough. No different than saying our 2009 Kia Picanto has cost us practically nothing but maintenance parts. Others might say otherwise.


I guess there will be a wider range of data available once more and more EVs become attainable for common people.

[Dave200]

Ankh87 said:

Dave200 said:

Every time mine has been plugged in at home, it's been charged to 100%. I took the view that as it's on finance and we'll be returning it in a couple of years the long term battery health is less important to me than the usable range in the time I own it. I can't say that I've noticed any drop in range over the 15,000 miles I've used it for, taking it up to 25,000 total (bought used). It's entirely possible that this might drop off a cliff later in life, but it certainly hasn't just yet. 340 miles displayed range is entirely possible with careful driving and 300+ is a regular occurrence.

I'm sure someone posted up a graph of self-reported Tesla owners showing battery degradation over time. I seem to remember 7% at 100,000 miles being the figure that stuck in my head. Not the end of the world.

This is it, he didn't really explain when a problem would occur or what what happen by charging it to 100% all the time. Granted for you it's fine but someone buying used and intending to keep it a very long time, it's not great.

Understandably it's no different than someone red lining a car every time they drive it and then the next person having no clue. Again it seems that there's no real consistency about true figures as such. 7% at 100k is great but is that people charging up to 100% each time and never letting it go below 20%? Who really knows apart from Tesla. It's obviously selected data which is fair enough. No different than saying our 2009 Kia Picanto has cost us practically nothing but maintenance parts. Others might say otherwise.


I guess there will be a wider range of data available once more and more EVs become attainable for common people.

The data that was shared which I can't find now was nothing to do with Tesla themselves. It was a third-party source that had polled owners. Nothing on the post indicated the impact of charging to 100% or fast charging though. To tell you the truth it all feels a bit overblown in the absence of real data based on my experience. In the same way that petrol cars might lose a bit of smoothness or efficiency over time, so will EVs. As said it doesn't bother me because I'll probably hand the car back to the finance people in two years without noticing any real difference.

[EddieSteadyGo]

Dave200 said:

Ankh87 said:

Dave200 said:

Every time mine has been plugged in at home, it's been charged to 100%. I took the view that as it's on finance and we'll be returning it in a couple of years the long term battery health is less important to me than the usable range in the time I own it. I can't say that I've noticed any drop in range over the 15,000 miles I've used it for, taking it up to 25,000 total (bought used). It's entirely possible that this might drop off a cliff later in life, but it certainly hasn't just yet. 340 miles displayed range is entirely possible with careful driving and 300+ is a regular occurrence.

I'm sure someone posted up a graph of self-reported Tesla owners showing battery degradation over time. I seem to remember 7% at 100,000 miles being the figure that stuck in my head. Not the end of the world.

This is it, he didn't really explain when a problem would occur or what what happen by charging it to 100% all the time. Granted for you it's fine but someone buying used and intending to keep it a very long time, it's not great.

Understandably it's no different than someone red lining a car every time they drive it and then the next person having no clue. Again it seems that there's no real consistency about true figures as such. 7% at 100k is great but is that people charging up to 100% each time and never letting it go below 20%? Who really knows apart from Tesla. It's obviously selected data which is fair enough. No different than saying our 2009 Kia Picanto has cost us practically nothing but maintenance parts. Others might say otherwise.


I guess there will be a wider range of data available once more and more EVs become attainable for common people.

The data that was shared which I can't find now was nothing to do with Tesla themselves. It was a third-party source that had polled owners. Nothing on the post indicated the impact of charging to 100% or fast charging though. To tell you the truth it all feels a bit overblown in the absence of real data based on my experience. In the same way that petrol cars might lose a bit of smoothness or efficiency over time, so will EVs. As said it doesn't bother me because I'll probably hand the car back to the finance people in two years without noticing any real difference.

I think this video gives a pretty good "worst case" scenario. Their car has done over 100,000 miles with 38% of the charging being DC fast charged. As we know, it is fast charging which does the most damage to battery health. In this example, their battery has lost around 10-11% of its original capacity after over 100,000 miles.

And the battery degradation curve isn't linear; it tends to slow down with increasing age/mileage. So the next 100,000 miles will likely result in less capacity being lost.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AbStgJrRic

[Mikehig]

Dave200 said:

Ankh87 said:

Dave200 said:

Every time mine has been plugged in at home, it's been charged to 100%. I took the view that as it's on finance and we'll be returning it in a couple of years the long term battery health is less important to me than the usable range in the time I own it. I can't say that I've noticed any drop in range over the 15,000 miles I've used it for, taking it up to 25,000 total (bought used). It's entirely possible that this might drop off a cliff later in life, but it certainly hasn't just yet. 340 miles displayed range is entirely possible with careful driving and 300+ is a regular occurrence.

I'm sure someone posted up a graph of self-reported Tesla owners showing battery degradation over time. I seem to remember 7% at 100,000 miles being the figure that stuck in my head. Not the end of the world.

This is it, he didn't really explain when a problem would occur or what what happen by charging it to 100% all the time. Granted for you it's fine but someone buying used and intending to keep it a very long time, it's not great.

Understandably it's no different than someone red lining a car every time they drive it and then the next person having no clue. Again it seems that there's no real consistency about true figures as such. 7% at 100k is great but is that people charging up to 100% each time and never letting it go below 20%? Who really knows apart from Tesla. It's obviously selected data which is fair enough. No different than saying our 2009 Kia Picanto has cost us practically nothing but maintenance parts. Others might say otherwise.


I guess there will be a wider range of data available once more and more EVs become attainable for common people.

The data that was shared which I can't find now was nothing to do with Tesla themselves. It was a third-party source that had polled owners. Nothing on the post indicated the impact of charging to 100% or fast charging though. To tell you the truth it all feels a bit overblown in the absence of real data based on my experience. In the same way that petrol cars might lose a bit of smoothness or efficiency over time, so will EVs. As said it doesn't bother me because I'll probably hand the car back to the finance people in two years without noticing any real difference.

From comments on here, EVs have the big advantage that the health of the battery and its history can be checked. So a prospective buyer can see how it's been treated - frequent rapid charging, for example.
Whereas there's not much that can be learnt about a used ICE other than service history and apparent condition - if it's been red-lined from cold every morning, for example.