Why do you hate the electric car

[Devil2575]

odyssey2200 said:

Devil2575 said:

odyssey2200 said:

Agreed.

I hate the way the true believers absolutely know that there will be a revolutionary battery technology really soon yet can't say what or when, but it will definitely happen and then petrol is dead.

I don't like the use of the term true believers. Do you refer to everyone who buys into a new technology early on as a true believer? or is it just reserved for those who buy into a tech you don't like?

Given enough research I don't doubt that battery technology will improve as time passes. Do you believe that we currently know all there is to ever know about battery technology?

There are a number of posters on here that seem to actually hate the ICE to the point of an almost religious blind faith in the EV .

I am sure that technology will improve but may never improve to the point where an EV can offer the levels of convenience and range that the ICE can.

Batteries have been around for years but technology hasn't improved that much.

A faith in technology to save the day is not new. It's what the Nazis were depending on to win them the war once the tide had turned. What it did result in though was some remarkable leaps in technological avancement that underpined the space race amongst other things.

As for whether the technology of bateries will ever improve to the point where EV offers the conveneience of petrol, i'd be amazed if it didn't.
The reason that battery tech hasn't advanced much is more to do with a lack of necessity. This has changed hence the big steps made over the last decade or so. Necessity is the mother of invention. Just look at how slow the progress was on the developement of aircraft between the 1918 and 1939 compared to the period 1939 to 1945.

[chrisw666]

Maybe the supermarkets killed EV development.

[EskimoArapaho]

Don't hate them, and would happily replace the daily with one (except for the current purchase costs).

[simo1863]

I think the main problem isn't with the vehicles themselves but with the infrastructure powering them. They are environmentally friendly if we allow them to be.

Range is an issue for some but the time of charging was more a problem for me, I rarely sleep 7 hours a night during the week and I can easily use that much juice for my commute so I'd find myself trying to top up at work and at home, between trips for half an hour and constantly monitoring the current charge level.

The cars are actually functional, relatively practical, short range vehicles.

In terms of actual driving, I've used a Leaf, iOn, Twizy, Zoe and Fluenze and all offer something different to conventional motoring. The power delivery is different and I can see the argument that it doesn't have the same 'personality' as a V6 or V8 but the instant power is intriguing. Granted I've not driven the Tesla S yet but I'm hoping to get one for a few weeks in the new year so my opinion on that could change.

The hyper aggression towards them here is for a number of reasons;
- We're all PHers, it's not in our nature to appreciate the most efficient way for a granny to get to the shops.
- The future is something to be feared! Just look at some of the opinions on lane assist, ESP, TC, City Safe, drive by wire etc. Car's are undoubtedly safer these days but some people on here seem to still be poking that fire with a stick, afraid to take the next step forward.
- We all like older cars, with few exceptions new cars aren't as desirable. Through nostalgia or because they were genuinely more 'involving' and from a time when things were more important than what the neighbours think of your badge.
- They may one day make conventional motoring obsolete.

Would I buy one? No. Not because I don't believe in them but they don't yet have the same presence or sense of fun and enjoyment as a regular car.
Would I replace the parents' Micra with a leaf for their daily tootle to the shops? Absolutely, except my old man is still one of those cavemen poking that fire with a stick.

[bodhi]

Simple, they're all tedious as fk and the owners are smug pious tts I'd really rather not associate with. They really do seem to be the next big step in turning cars into household appliances (they even sound like fridges), which is not why I got into cars in the first place.

[AnotherClarkey]

bodhi said:

Simple, they're all tedious as fk and the owners are smug pious tts I'd really rather not associate with.

That makes me want one more. I hope 2nd hand Leafs stay cheap - if I can pick one up for 5k or so in three years time I will go for it.

[aka_kerrly]

chrisw666 said:

Maybe the supermarkets killed EV development.

Brilliant, as if we weren't short on ammo when it come's to slating supermarkets and their impact!

[MrBig]

300bhp/ton said:

I don't hate electric cars.

However I do HATE:

-how they are portrayed as being so green when they aren't.
-how they are so fashionable in most US TV shows and with Hollywoods finest as the current must have (hybrids more so than pure EV's).
-how they are portrayed as being "cheap", when most are nothing more than a rich mans toy.
-how they get cheap VED, parking and other perks when most people buying and using them have more than enough money to not need these incentives.
-how EV is touted as the future by prats who forget that many people don't live in a city and do need to do more than 6 miles a day.

This pretty much sums it up for me. I would happy have one if I could afford it, the range was suitable for what I need a car to do and it didn't look like a reject from the Jetsons!

[anonymous-user]

bodhi said:

They really do seem to be the next big step in turning cars into household appliances .

er, cars are, and probably have been for over 40 years "household" appliances. For every GT-R that Nissan sell, they probably sell 1000 micras. The vast majority of cars sold are simple a means for transporting people from A to B. In fact, the same was true of Horses, and when a better means of mass transport became available, we could then used horses just for fun. I see no reasons electric cars should be any different?

I know us PH like to tear around with our trousers on fire in 600horse power monsters shouting "POWER" at the tops of our voices, but next time you're out for a drive, count how many people are just using there car as white goods...........

[anonymous-user]

MrBig said:

and it didn't look like a reject from the Jetsons!

A somewhat out-of-date assumption no? OK, looks are totally subjective, but i'd have a hard time deciding which of these was a reject from the jetsons:















EV's have come a long way from the G-Wiz btw ;-)

[Devil2575]

Max_Torque said:

bodhi said:

They really do seem to be the next big step in turning cars into household appliances .

er, cars are, and probably have been for over 40 years "household" appliances. For every GT-R that Nissan sell, they probably sell 1000 micras. The vast majority of cars sold are simple a means for transporting people from A to B. In fact, the same was true of Horses, and when a better means of mass transport became available, we could then used horses just for fun. I see no reasons electric cars should be any different?

I know us PH like to tear around with our trousers on fire in 600horse power monsters shouting "POWER" at the tops of our voices, but next time you're out for a drive, count how many people are just using there car as white goods...........

This.

[300bhp/ton]

300bhp/ton said:

Max_Torque said:

But that is only because you are applying your existing knowledge and expectations of IVE engineed vehicles to EV's. You consider ICE refuelling, but really, the only reason it needs to be fast is because you have to go somewhere specific to do it, and you only "refuel" when a light comes on.

I may be using existing knowledge, but to be fair that is the current limitation of the technology and nobody can foresee when there will be an unknown breakthrough.

Personally I'm all for electric power and in things like RC planes and cars it's certainly the way to go and far superior to the IC ones IMO.

But for personal transport I think it is different. We don't always have time to plan ahead and it's just far too easy for things to happen that mean you are reactive (going and filling up when the light comes on) rather than proactive. IC engines give you both options, EV's don't.

Max_Torque said:

EV's aren't really like that. The vast majority of people spend no more than 2hrs a day in their cars, leaving 22 left to recharge it! Because you can install a recharging station at home, you don't wait till it's "empty" to recharge, you just leave it plugged in.

If you note, this was one of my points in my earlier post (although not the part about calling you an idiot).

But the thing is, some people do spend more than 2 hours a day driving. Hence why I hate the blanket view it's such a good idea for everyone.

And critically and most importantly - NOT everyone can have a recharging station at home. Lots and lots and lots of people don't have off street parking. Which makes this completely unviable. And many people live in flats or park in areas that simply are either unsuitable or far too costly to install enough public charging points.

Max_Torque said:

Personally, i like to get a good 8hrs sleep every night, plenty of time for my car to top itself up!

And what if your car is parked 50 yards down the road? And chances are you won't be able to park in the same place tomorrow?

Max_Torque said:

Fast charging is only really useful for those unexpected trips or occasions (and these do happen) but the current crop of EVs are starting to offer 30min "fast" charges in emergencies. etc

Umm 30 min for how much juice though? I can fast charge lead acid 12v batteries, but 30 mins of charge time really isn't a lot of amps. Same is true with my LiPo, LiFePO4 and Li-ion ICR and IMR cells.

And while I'm sure range will continue to increase on EV's, although part of this is just bigger capacity batteries, which will then need a longer charge time... But unexpected things can happen a lot, be it an emergency (someone hospitalised/in an accident but you can't go to them as the car still needs another 4 hours of charge first). Or something simple like forgetting to get some bread, but the car is flat and by the time it's charged the shops will be shut.

Max_Torque said:

The issue really is just one of familiarity. We have all spent the last 50 years driving ICE engined cars, and have adapted to them. We will just have to adapt to a slightly different way of thinking that's all!

Adapting is fine, so long as it isn't a backwards step. Start removing and reducing ability and function, and it's then a no brainier that it likely isn't the solution, just a compromise.

@Max_Torque

I see you've avoided replying to my comments?

[McWigglebum4th]

bodhi said:

Simple, they're all tedious as fk and the owners are smug pious tts I'd really rather not associate with. They really do seem to be the next big step in turning cars into household appliances (they even sound like fridges), which is not why I got into cars in the first place.

behold the majesty of the nissan mica K11

Excuse me a minute

[McWigglebum4th]

300bhp/ton said:

Max_Torque said:

But that is only because you are applying your existing knowledge and expectations of IVE engineed vehicles to EV's. You consider ICE refuelling, but really, the only reason it needs to be fast is because you have to go somewhere specific to do it, and you only "refuel" when a light comes on.

I may be using existing knowledge, but to be fair that is the current limitation of the technology and nobody can foresee when there will be an unknown breakthrough.

Personally I'm all for electric power and in things like RC planes and cars it's certainly the way to go and far superior to the IC ones IMO.

But for personal transport I think it is different. We don't always have time to plan ahead and it's just far too easy for things to happen that mean you are reactive (going and filling up when the light comes on) rather than proactive. IC engines give you both options, EV's don't.

Max_Torque said:

EV's aren't really like that. The vast majority of people spend no more than 2hrs a day in their cars, leaving 22 left to recharge it! Because you can install a recharging station at home, you don't wait till it's "empty" to recharge, you just leave it plugged in.

If you note, this was one of my points in my earlier post (although not the part about calling you an idiot).

But the thing is, some people do spend more than 2 hours a day driving. Hence why I hate the blanket view it's such a good idea for everyone.

And critically and most importantly - NOT everyone can have a recharging station at home. Lots and lots and lots of people don't have off street parking. Which makes this completely unviable. And many people live in flats or park in areas that simply are either unsuitable or far too costly to install enough public charging points.

Max_Torque said:

Personally, i like to get a good 8hrs sleep every night, plenty of time for my car to top itself up!

And what if your car is parked 50 yards down the road? And chances are you won't be able to park in the same place tomorrow?

Max_Torque said:

Fast charging is only really useful for those unexpected trips or occasions (and these do happen) but the current crop of EVs are starting to offer 30min "fast" charges in emergencies. etc

Umm 30 min for how much juice though? I can fast charge lead acid 12v batteries, but 30 mins of charge time really isn't a lot of amps. Same is true with my LiPo, LiFePO4 and Li-ion ICR and IMR cells.

And while I'm sure range will continue to increase on EV's, although part of this is just bigger capacity batteries, which will then need a longer charge time... But unexpected things can happen a lot, be it an emergency (someone hospitalised/in an accident but you can't go to them as the car still needs another 4 hours of charge first). Or something simple like forgetting to get some bread, but the car is flat and by the time it's charged the shops will be shut.

Max_Torque said:

The issue really is just one of familiarity. We have all spent the last 50 years driving ICE engined cars, and have adapted to them. We will just have to adapt to a slightly different way of thinking that's all!

Adapting is fine, so long as it isn't a backwards step. Start removing and reducing ability and function, and it's then a no brainier that it likely isn't the solution, just a compromise.

Most of you points work on the assumption that now that the selling of EVs make petrol cars instantly vanish

Have a life where you can't plan ahead then buy a petrol car

Have a life where you drive 18 hours a day buy a diesel

Have a house with no charging buy a petrol car



As to EVs being a backward step if you think that buy a petrol car

However if you think of it as a backwards step would you dishwasher be improved by needing to be taken to the shop once a week to refill the soap?

[Escort3500]

300bhp/ton said:

McWigglebum4th said:

I am curious to know why folk have such an utter hatred of the whole idea behind the electric car.

Why are they so angry about the idea that some day my crappy little petrol sipping shopping trolley will be replaced by one powered by electrons?

Do they really want the last gallon of petrol in the world to be used taking granny to the shops?

I don't hate electric cars.

However I do HATE:

-how they are portrayed as being so green when they aren't.
-how they are so fashionable in most US TV shows and with Hollywoods finest as the current must have (hybrids more so than pure EV's).
-how they are portrayed as being "cheap", when most are nothing more than a rich mans toy.
-how they get cheap VED, parking and other perks when most people buying and using them have more than enough money to not need these incentives.
-how EV is touted as the future by prats who forget that many people don't live in a city and do need to do more than 6 miles a day.

Me too. Good point well made etc

[McWigglebum4th]

300bhp/ton said:

-how EV is touted as the future by prats who forget that many people don't live in a city and do need to do more than 6 miles a day.

I love this concept that everyone either lives within 3 miles of a city centre in a 28 floor flat or they live over 50 miles from a city centre



I live 23 miles from a city centre and have 2 acres of land and parking on the drive for about 30 cars should i want to.

Am i unique?

[calibrax]

Max_Torque said:

For example the statement "The facts are that most well-maintained £1k sheds are many times more environmentally friendly" is both highly questionable, and also if you assume it is correct, should lead to the banning of ALL new car sales, no matter what their energy source is, not the halt of EV sales persay......!

It's not highly questionable - it is an established fact that they are more friendly over the life of the vehicle, as the environmental cost of manufacturing is spread over the maximum number of miles usage. It's called efficient use of resources. And in no way does that suggest we ban new cars - just that we should use the older ones for their full useful life. Replacing cars when not needed is a waste of resources.

zeppelin101 said:

calibrax said:

they still use electricity produced from fossil fuels

If a take-up in renewable energy sources is actioned though then this point is invalid.

So you're saying in 50 years this point won't be valid? I'm talking about NOW, not in 50 years. In any case, even in 50 years time, we will still not be using 100% renewables, even if we commit huge resources to it, because all the models for this scenario rely mainly on wind and solar energy. So we will need a backup option for any extended periods when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining.

[Mr GrimNasty]

budgie smuggler said:

odyssey2200 said:

Batteries have been around for years but technology hasn't improved that much.

Yes it has, massively so. Compare NIMH W/KG, charge efficiency and expected cycles to LIPO for example. Li Air should give good gains again.

Nope, the EXPECTED advances have NOT been made. Millions wasted on research for poor return. The problem is physics, energy density.

The only result has been better cordless tools.

[TLandCruiser]

Because when we had some bad snow and all the motorways joining onto the m25 were at stand still, people were stuck for hours on end it was chaos, i was in my 4x4 and took the empty country lanes which a lot of people avoided due to the heavy snow it took me hours to get home and much faster than sitting on the m1, electric cars would have been fubared!

Plus no electric car will have the soul that my land rover has

[900T-R]

AnotherClarkey said:

900T-R said:

Max_Torque said:

Again, no more substantial than the vast number of complex and heavily engineered parts than make up a current petrol or diesel car!

What part of 'rare earth materials' you don't understand?

You do realise that they aren't particularly rare?

They are if you want to equip, say, 20 million vehicles with a 35 kWh battery pack (which is what you need to give an average family car a 200 km range under favourable conditions). Also, 80 percent of the world's reserves of lithium are in Bolivia, so with regards to dependency on politically unstable regions it would be a case of from the fire into the frying pan.

Rare earth materials aren't expensive yet because so far the demand has pretty much only been for applications that require tiny quantities of them. That would drastically change if EV would become the mainstream in passenger cars - all toting hundreds of kilograms worth of lithium-ion batteries...