EVs... no one wants them!

[otolith]

The only thing that really matters is the service life of the car, not how many owners it has in that duration. And in order for there to be used cars, we need people to be generous enough to buy new ones (and swallow all the depreciation) before punting them on.

[Tony33]

Ankh87 said:

You'd think there would be a bigger push to try get people to own and maintain a car for longer. Rather than go down the route of treating a car like a disposable white goods device. Maybe put a limit on how many cars can be sold a year or something. I've seen and heard so many people sell their car as it nears 90-100k miles just because of that. Car works but they just no longer want it due to its miles on the clock, when it's going to be much cheaper to keep running than buying another 3 year old car and run it for 5/6 years (including financing it or paying out in cash). Maybe it's just me and I'll happily just keep a car running as long as it can.

People enjoy change. In fact the opposite of white goods device where people will typically run a washing machine until it no longer works. Many get excited about getting a new car, even if it is three years old and enthusiasts think it is dull.

[Sheepshanks]

Ankh87 said:

Unless BEVs can charge up just as fast as putting fuel in and do the miles. Before people harp on about home chargers, this isn't an option for everyone clearly, so having something similar to what is in place is a must. I've been up North recently and the area I were in had zero off street parking, that's 1000's of houses with cars outside, on the street with nowhere to have a charger installed. Their front door was on the path, no garden or anything.

There's getting to be some very rapid charge rates but even if that can be cracked at scale, there's still the massive issue of cost - charging away from home ends up with similar cost per mile, if not more, than an ICE vehicle.

[Ankh87]

Sheepshanks said:

There's getting to be some very rapid charge rates but even if that can be cracked at scale, there's still the massive issue of cost - charging away from home ends up with similar cost per mile, if not more, than an ICE vehicle.

I know. It cost my mate £10 for 100 miles in his EV car which worked out more than my ICE. This is why something has to change. People won't buy an EV if it's going to cost just as much as an ICE. Plus then you have to wait X amount of time more to charge up.

If public chargers cost the same or maybe 2p more than charging up at home, then fair enough. Until then, it's going to be an option for many.

[AstonZagato]

Frimley111R said:

..snip...

EVs are brilliant in some circumstances but in many, they are just a complete no-no.

I'd say EVs are brilliant in many circumstances but in some, they are just a complete no-no. I'd wager that the majority of people could live with the limitations of an EV if they actually tried it seriously and didn't do stuff like not plugging it in when they have a long journey the next day, or don't think about where they need to charge. There will always be a (large) minority who need to commute 600 miles a day, towing a caravan and have 6l bladders...

[AstonZagato]

FiF said:

740EVTORQUES said:

As people move out of ICE vehicles, restrictions and taxes on their continual use will surely rise. How many cities will prohibit their use for example?

As such, the pool of people willing to own even interesting legacy petrol cars will shrink and so will the values.

While a Ferrari might still find enough buyers, I suspect many other decently interesting cars will fall by the wayside

Yes the numbers will fall, just as with classics today. As often mentioned on the bangers show some of the driving force is nostalgia, as in my Dad had one of those. Thus certain models are preserved even though they were a bit rubbish when they were new. Clearly some of them are now down to single numbers registered and on the road. Opinion on whether they're interesting or significant depends on the view of the individual.

However the technology on them is such that they're straightforward for a reasonably competent spannerman to maintain. Not sure their value will diminish. In my opinion there are so few of them and typically do so few miles that they should be exempt from your suggested increased restrictions and taxes.

The question I have is twofold. If we look at general run of the mill cars over recent years, the complications is such that they will become increasingly difficult and maybe impossible to keep running, maybe the expense will deter the casual owner driven by the Dad had one of those sentiment. Second part is I find modern stuff difficult to get that emotional connection to want to run them essentially forever. These will reduce in value clearly, though don't think that applies to anything that is seen as significant, say GR Yaris as one example, though not a run of the mill vehicle clearly. In other words it's not going to be just Ferraris and their ilk.

I suspect the analogy might be smart/quartz watches versus mechanical. The former killed the latter in all but the most desirable brands which have became status symbols and male jewellery. I'm sure there are those that collect early Timex watches but it isn't where the big money is AFAIK.

[CheesecakeRunner]

CivicDuties said:

Amazing how these brand new accounts keep popping up, posting bullshine essays and diatribes on why EVs are the End of the World in this thread, because it isn't in NP&E.

It's almost as if there's a concerted, co-ordinated campaign of misinformation going on.

Makes you wonder if the EV sub-forum should also have a minimum posts rule, and this thread moved there. It’s not really about car buying any more. Wouldn’t need to be as high as NP&E, but enough to stop the simplest of trolls.

[Dave200]

Ankh87 said:

Sheepshanks said:

There's getting to be some very rapid charge rates but even if that can be cracked at scale, there's still the massive issue of cost - charging away from home ends up with similar cost per mile, if not more, than an ICE vehicle.

I know. It cost my mate £10 for 100 miles in his EV car which worked out more than my ICE. This is why something has to change. People won't buy an EV if it's going to cost just as much as an ICE. Plus then you have to wait X amount of time more to charge up.

If public chargers cost the same or maybe 2p more than charging up at home, then fair enough. Until then, it's going to be an option for many.

Haven't we done to this to death? Didn't you bring this exact point up a dozen or so pages ago? More than 50% of Joe Public have private off-street parking where they could install an EV charger.

[Frimley111R]

braddo said:

Read GT9's post above.

Your comments make you sound really old. Time to accept reality that EVs are here to stay as the mainstream means of propulsion for cars.

I did and it is his opinion, some of which may be/is right, but the lovely world of EV dreamland is also a world away from the reality of many global markets. There are a huge number of countries where EVs will be a massive challenge (weather, electrical infrastructure, wealth of population) and unrealistic without big improvements in EVs.

I did not say EVs are not here to stay, I said that they will simply be one propulsion option, not the only one, for decades.

You think my comments make me sound old but they are balanced and I don't have a delusional view of EVs. I like them but they are not the golden green transport bullet that some evangelists think they are.

[Ankh87]

Dave200 said:

Haven't we done to this to death? Didn't you bring this exact point up a dozen or so pages ago? More than 50% of Joe Public have private off-street parking where they could install an EV charger.

Haven't the exact same points in this entire thread been brought up over and over again? Maybe it's time to close this thread then?

50% have off-street parking, great. What about the rest though? Should we just not give a care about those? Is it, I'm alright Jack? I guess though if 50% are fine then that's all what matters then.

.

[Oilchange]

Balanced comments?
You run the risk of being hated by both sides, mind how you go! Lol

[Frimley111R]

Ankh87 said:

Batteries have changed over the last decade so not sure where you are coming from here.
.

To clarify, they have made minor improvements in them but given how long batteries have been around there hasn't been any significant improvements in them. Li-Ion batteries are the best we have for EVs but are still heavily compromised by cost, temperature, capacity, size and weight. Solutions to some of these often then compromise/exaggerate other negatives.

Solid state and various other super batteries could be game changers at some point but even SS, which has been coming forever is, I think, only just about ready and due soon, IIRC. Given the billions spent on R&D globally, it just shows how hard it is to improve on what we have right now, which isn't great.

[FiF]

Dave200 said:

Ankh87 said:

Sheepshanks said:

There's getting to be some very rapid charge rates but even if that can be cracked at scale, there's still the massive issue of cost - charging away from home ends up with similar cost per mile, if not more, than an ICE vehicle.

I know. It cost my mate £10 for 100 miles in his EV car which worked out more than my ICE. This is why something has to change. People won't buy an EV if it's going to cost just as much as an ICE. Plus then you have to wait X amount of time more to charge up.

If public chargers cost the same or maybe 2p more than charging up at home, then fair enough. Until then, it's going to be an option for many.

Haven't we done to this to death? Didn't you bring this exact point up a dozen or so pages ago? More than 50% of Joe Public have private off-street parking where they could install an EV charger.

Yes it's been raised a number of times, yet there seems to be possibly deliberately, yet repeated and studied avoidance by some who seem to put the telescope which looks to the future to their blind eye. The nearly 50% who don't have off street parking or cannot install a charger at their home space seem to be repeatedly ignored and plans to sort that not evident, not even in very early stages, one major issue being land that won't be sorted easily nor quickly.

Does nobody any favours. Cue smarmy answers about poor people.

[otolith]

"Yes, we screwed the climate, but doing anything else would have caused some people some inconvenience"

[Oliver Hardy]

Dave200 said:

Haven't we done to this to death? Didn't you bring this exact point up a dozen or so pages ago? More than 50% of Joe Public have private off-street parking where they could install an EV charger.

I would love an EV, with a range of about 200 miles, sadly they are to expensive for the use it would get, a range of about 100 miles would be OK, but need as second car.

Surprised 50% have off road parking.

[clockworks]

Frimley111R said:

Globally the electrical infrastructure varies in quality massively. Governments have the right idea but that is a world away from reality on the ground.

Battery tech has not changed much at all. I'm not sure why people think it has. Motors and BMS have improved a lot but the basics of a battery are unchanged for 50 years or more. New battery tech, if it ever arrives, could help lighten car weight and reduce the impact of mining for materials but cars will still consume HUGE amounts of power across each country. Thankfully the slow/slowing adoption of EVs will give them decades to achieve this.

I am interested to see what happens when manufacturers tell governments that people don't want EVs in the numbers the government expects and they can't accept penalties from them without going out of business. The first government to drop the stupid 2035 thing will get a barrage of environmentalists and media scumbags whining about a massive U-turn, environmental commitment etc. I'll get my popcorn...

I've been "into" various forms of radio control over the past 35 years, and the battery tech has come on in leaps and bounds - lead-acid, nicad, nimh, lipo. The availability of lipo cells at relatively low prices massively increased the power and run time.
Same with the switch from brushed to brushless motors.
Improved performance in a smaller/lighter package.

Same with portable electronics - can you imagine a smart phone with a lead-acid battery?

[Sheepshanks]

Ankh87 said:

I know. It cost my mate £10 for 100 miles in his EV car which worked out more than my ICE. This is why something has to change. People won't buy an EV if it's going to cost just as much as an ICE. Plus then you have to wait X amount of time more to charge up.

If public chargers cost the same or maybe 2p more than charging up at home, then fair enough. Until then, it's going to be an option for many.

10p per mile in an ICE vehicle is pretty good going - over 60MPG at current prices.

However your EV charging cost doesn't sound right - that works out at around 30p/kWh, which is normal domestic rate. Rapid public charing could be 3x that, so it would have cost your mate £30 for 100 miles.

[FiF]

Oliver Hardy said:

Surprised 50% have off road parking.

The actual figures are that roughly 30% across the nation have no off road parking and no land which can be converted to off road parking sufficient to park one vehicle the size of a Ford Fiesta. This is based on analysis of Ordnance Survey digital mapping.

On top of this there needs to be considered that there are residences where in theory there is land which could be converted, but other factors would make that difficult, eg planning regulations, conservation areas, difficulty of legal access to public highway. There hasn't been an accurate determination of how much that increases the 30% figure.

Then there is the issue of those living in apartments, HMOs, affordable housing where they do have off road parking but no means to have a charging point connected to the supply to their dwelling. Again that's not been accurately determined and depends where you look but a reasonable estimate seems to add another 10% to make it 40% affected.

Yes a minority but a significant one.

Note the original 30% figure varies regionally and there are other factors. For example London 42% of residences have no off street parking, a similar % have no car, but to offset that there is a completely different public transport setup.

So the question is this 40% would ultimately have to charge on the public network, where, how, time taken, cost all being factors. I think the cost issue can be solved easily, eg RFID card from your home supplier that would allow you to buy from public chargers at your home rate or with a small premium. The rest needs to be considered properly as the current rollout mix of destination chargers and some on motorways plus charging stations in big cities needs to be augmented. Plus it needs to be seen to be being augmented to remove this element of the FUD in the buying public's mind.

[otolith]

Yes, you also need to account for somewhere in the region of 20% of households not having a car, and the extent to which they are more or less likely to be the same households which don't have anywhere to charge one.

[soxboy]

otolith said:

Yes, you also need to account for somewhere in the region of 20% of households not having a car, and the extent to which they are more or less likely to be the same households which don't have anywhere to charge one.

Unless the sector of ‘my car is essential but I can’t charge it anywhere’ are likely to swing the outcome of a political party (of any colour) getting into power then nobody is going to give two hoots about them.