EVs... no one wants them!
Discussion
Jk89 said:
nammynake said:
That is simply untrue. What specifically do you mean and what’s your source?
This is the problem with cults.Why can’t anyone be objective anymore?
Tesla build quality is Fisher price compared to European and Japanese cars.
Solid mechanicals as you'd expect but the interior is toss and is wearing poorly
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.
Sort of true, sort of myth.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.
Batteries don't like a high or low state of charge and left like that, so battery care is 20 to 80 rule of thumb. Charging to 100% overnight and driving the next day is fine, the same as driving to nearly zero and then charging.
Charging to 100% is also recommended for cell balancing. Just don't leave it at the airport at 100% and come back 2 weeks later. I mean, car and battery will still be fine, but if you want to take care of it, it's better to leave it half charged rather than fully.
So yeah, you've always got 100% battery usage at your disposal rather than the mythical 60%. Not to be confused with battery care recommendations, which are 20 to 80
Ice car can't be used fully until the oil warms up, but some will ignore that and floor it from cold. Same sort of principle. If you want to look after your vehicle, do it. If not, the life of it will shorten.
EddieSteadyGo said:
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
Hmmm so that 15 minutes on a supercharger we were talking about to get you 150 miles will kill your battery? Doesn’t sound as good as the 450-600 miles you’ll get from filling an ICE car with a tank of fuel in 5 minutes. At 80% battery capacity, I wonder what the range is? Surely it’s the equivalent of buying a second hand phone that can barely make it through the day on a single charge? Meanwhile an ICE will do 250k miles with the same range and fuel efficiency. Doesn’t sound much progress to me.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
No doubt some angry, small man will be along in a moment to tell me I’m wrong.
dmsims said:
craigjm said:
JLR have just announced another battery recall for the I-Pace this time impacting only on cars built before 2019. There is no fix at present so the advice is to just not charge beyond 75%
soupdragon1 said:
Sort of true, sort of myth.
Batteries don't like a high or low state of charge and left like that, so battery care is 20 to 80 rule of thumb. Charging to 100% overnight and driving the next day is fine, the same as driving to nearly zero and then charging.
Charging to 100% is also recommended for cell balancing. Just don't leave it at the airport at 100% and come back 2 weeks later. I mean, car and battery will still be fine, but if you want to take care of it, it's better to leave it half charged rather than fully.
So yeah, you've always got 100% battery usage at your disposal rather than the mythical 60%. Not to be confused with battery care recommendations, which are 20 to 80
Ice car can't be used fully until the oil warms up, but some will ignore that and floor it from cold. Same sort of principle. If you want to look after your vehicle, do it. If not, the life of it will shorten.
And remember that LFP batteries can and should be charged to 100%. Batteries don't like a high or low state of charge and left like that, so battery care is 20 to 80 rule of thumb. Charging to 100% overnight and driving the next day is fine, the same as driving to nearly zero and then charging.
Charging to 100% is also recommended for cell balancing. Just don't leave it at the airport at 100% and come back 2 weeks later. I mean, car and battery will still be fine, but if you want to take care of it, it's better to leave it half charged rather than fully.
So yeah, you've always got 100% battery usage at your disposal rather than the mythical 60%. Not to be confused with battery care recommendations, which are 20 to 80
Ice car can't be used fully until the oil warms up, but some will ignore that and floor it from cold. Same sort of principle. If you want to look after your vehicle, do it. If not, the life of it will shorten.
GT9 said:
wormus said:
No doubt some angry, small man will be along in a moment to tell me I’m wrong.
You were saying something earlier about passive aggression?Here’s a joke to cheer you up: How can you tell if an EV driver is an extrovert? They stare at somebody else’s shoes when you talk to them.
wormus said:
Hmmm so that 15 minutes on a supercharger we were talking about to get you 150 miles will kill your battery? Doesn’t sound as good as the 450-600 miles you’ll get from filling an ICE car with a tank of fuel in 5 minutes. At 80% battery capacity, I wonder what the range is? Surely it’s the equivalent of buying a second hand phone that can barely make it through the day on a single charge? Meanwhile an ICE will do 250k miles with the same range and fuel efficiency. Doesn’t sound much progress to me.
No doubt some angry, small man will be along in a moment to tell me I’m wrong.
In that example, their car had charged for roughly 38,000 miles on a DC fast charger. That is a lot of 15 minute sessions. And the car in total had done more than 100,000 miles and yet the battery degradation was still only around 10%. If the original range was roughly 280 miles (real-world) then the current range would be just over 250 miles. Considering the rate of degradation slows down, I'd think it won't reach 80% until it has driven maybe near to 300,000 miles at which point the range would be somewhere around 220 miles.No doubt some angry, small man will be along in a moment to tell me I’m wrong.
And the comparison with phone batteries isn't valid. The chemistry is different, in order to achieve better longevity and to accept a higher charging current. Plus there is thermal management on modern EVs, so the temperature is kept in the optimal range in order to preserve performance (that was the big reason the Nissan Leaf batteries struggled).
nammynake said:
Jk89 said:
Tesla build quality is awful.
That is simply untrue. What specifically do you mean and what’s your source?I think the Tesla (model 3) won the range test but when the AA came to tow it on to a truck to take it to the nearest charger they discovered the hole for the towing eye hadn't been threaded.
That doesn't exactly say great QC.
Edited by nunpuncher on Wednesday 27th March 19:48
Jk89 said:
Tesla build quality is awful but they are way ahead of the competition in terms of range and battery reliability/longevity.
I read that Kia batteries don’t do well at all with regard to longevity.
I expected the build quality to be terrible based on what I'd read but it's really not bad relative to other new cars. Shutlines are fine, and interior is still squeak and rattle free after 25k miles. It's not like a W124, but no complaints here. I read that Kia batteries don’t do well at all with regard to longevity.
EddieSteadyGo said:
As a personal example, my model 3 is now three years old, and I've spent precisely zero on servicing. All it has needed are new tyres. Nothing goes wrong, no work is needed. It just works.
Same story here. 15k and 2 years and all I've done is replace wiper blades and fill screen wash. Tyres were new when we bought it and there's still useful tread left. It might not be exciting but it's stupidly cheap and easy to own.wormus said:
Hmmm so that 15 minutes on a supercharger we were talking about to get you 150 miles will kill your battery? Doesn’t sound as good as the 450-600 miles you’ll get from filling an ICE car with a tank of fuel in 5 minutes. At 80% battery capacity, I wonder what the range is? Surely it’s the equivalent of buying a second hand phone that can barely make it through the day on a single charge? Meanwhile an ICE will do 250k miles with the same range and fuel efficiency. Doesn’t sound much progress to me.
No doubt some angry, small man will be along in a moment to tell me I’m wrong.
It feels like you're using this thread to vent. I'm not sure why though. Even when contradictory evidence from real experience is presented you still seem keen to argue and antagonise.No doubt some angry, small man will be along in a moment to tell me I’m wrong.
FiF said:
You've missed one group E: people who do not believe all the BS spouted on here for whom an EV could currently work but don't have one because the market for new vehicles doesn't yet provide a vehicle that is suitable for their use case for genuine reasons completely other than because it's an EV. Those people are keeping watch on developments and will happily change to EV at the next opportunity when a) they need to change vehicle and b) a suitable one becomes available in a design and/or at a price point they are willing to pay, be that new or used.
Yeah, that one.EV would suit me perfectly these days, but I've got a coming-up-to 8 year old Skoda with low miles, good servicing ('cos I did most of it myself), easily over 40mpg and a very short commute. It's paid for and I can't see me changing it for several years yet as EVs are just too expensive to save the cost-to-change at maybe 6k miles/year.
(I might have thought about getting in the the £200/month Hondas if I'd have seen it in time, but I probably wouldn't have sold the Skoda, just laid it up).
Dave200 said:
It feels like you're using this thread to vent. I'm not sure why though. Even when contradictory evidence from real experience is presented you still seem keen to argue and antagonise.
Typical tinfoil merchant. Probably thinks Covid was fake, Brexit was a great idea and Farage is a top boy.Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff