EVs... no one wants them!

[LowTread]

BricktopST205 said:

Zj2002 said:

Sorry - yes, we are at cross purposes.

Not asking him to swap, more questioning why someone with a BMW can’t accept why someone else would want to drive the most recent one - particularly one that has more power and cheaper running costs that it’s modern ICE equivalent.

It’s ok to say I can’t afford or don’t want an EV without making up nonsense arguments to denounce them.

That is pretty much it for me when the closest upgrade to my current family wagon that meets my needs is a 100 grand Porche Taycan then yes!

That's fine. Nobody has said that you have to buy an EV. If you're happy running an older car as a cheap daily then hats off to you. I used to run an £800 Avensis estate that was indestructible!! It was ideal for my needs at the time.

But i don't get why you're on here telling everyone why you don't want an EV, when you're not in the market for one anyway??

I don't want a Range Rover because i don't need to tow a 3 tonne horsebox, but i'm not on the Range Rover forums telling everyone that horses are dangerous, towing means burning more fuel and causes squirrels to cry (or some other made up nonsense)

[Dave200]

BricktopST205 said:

I have owned my Saab 9-5 for 15 years now. I am far more green than yourself chopping and changing your rented car every 3 years.

Edited by BricktopST205 on Tuesday 30th April 13:01

Yes, because the cars I own get immediately crushed and dumped in the North Sea as soon as I hand them back to the finance company. Again, a Saab 95 is not really the sort of ice car to be dying on a hill over. It's a perfect candidate for replacement with an EV, as a fairly bland and largely soulless daily hack.

[T_S_M]

740EVTORQUES said:

survivalist said:

Almost everyone is.

The majority of people who are in EVs are in it for cost reasons due to tax benefits. Company car tax, salary sacrifice etc make them artificially cheap to a particular set of users,

The lack of second hand demand for EV and the fact that new car share has stalled around 16% both demonstrate this.

People want green, sustainable etc but only if it doesn’t inconvenience them or cost them more money.

That’s actually a fair point, I chose my EV in part due to wanting to pollute less but I appreciate not everyone feels as strongly.

But that’s why there need to be mandates as otherwise people will wait for unicorns for ever

I bought my EV at 3 years old as a private buyer. No company car tax/salary sacrifice etc. Initially I did buy it due to the lower running costs compared to an ICE car. After having it 6 months, even if it cost the same to run as the equivalent diesel/petrol, I'd still choose the EV. As a daily/commuter car it's just nicer to drive, smoother and quieter.

I took my ICE car out at the weekend. Range anxiety? Try being in deepest, darkest Wales on a Sunday evening in a 5.0 V8 when the fuel light comes on. Squeaky.

[BricktopST205]

Dave200 said:

Yes, because the cars I own get immediately crushed and dumped in the North Sea as soon as I hand them back to the finance company. Again, a Saab 95 is not really the sort of ice car to be dying on a hill over. It's a perfect candidate for replacement with an EV, as a fairly bland and largely soulless daily hack.

You accused me of being more polluting because i refuse to give up my 20 year old car for a new EV yet you are more polluting leasing and chopping and changing your EV every 3 years. That is fact not fiction.

[Dave200]

BricktopST205 said:

Dave200 said:

Yes, because the cars I own get immediately crushed and dumped in the North Sea as soon as I hand them back to the finance company. Again, a Saab 95 is not really the sort of ice car to be dying on a hill over. It's a perfect candidate for replacement with an EV, as a fairly bland and largely soulless daily hack.

You accused me of being more polluting because i refuse to give up my 20 year old car for a new EV yet you are more polluting leasing and chopping and changing your EV every 3 years. That is fact not fiction.

Yes, because the cars I own get buried in National Trust grounds as soon as I hand them back to the finance company. You're getting a bit desperate now.

[SWoll]

Dave200 said:

Yes, because the cars I own get buried in National Trust grounds as soon as I hand them back to the finance company. You're getting a bit desperate now.

[740EVTORQUES]

BricktopST205 said:

Dave200 said:

Yes, because the cars I own get immediately crushed and dumped in the North Sea as soon as I hand them back to the finance company. Again, a Saab 95 is not really the sort of ice car to be dying on a hill over. It's a perfect candidate for replacement with an EV, as a fairly bland and largely soulless daily hack.

You accused me of being more polluting because i refuse to give up my 20 year old car for a new EV yet you are more polluting leasing and chopping and changing your EV every 3 years. That is fact not fiction.

Actually every new EV sold displaces an often much older stinky petrol or diesel car further down the food chain so changing your new EV as frequently as possible, while not being a great financial move, is doing the environment a favour by decarbonising the fleet quicker.

Really there should be incentives and tax breaks to encourage this pump priming, oh wait, there are!

Funny, it’s almost as if the authorities have thought this through?

[TheBinarySheep]

BricktopST205 said:

You accused me of being more polluting because i refuse to give up my 20 year old car for a new EV yet you are more polluting leasing and chopping and changing your EV every 3 years. That is fact not fiction.

The only way your idea really works is if everyone kept their car forever. Eventually cars get written off, or they're simply too old and need to be replaced with newer models. That's always going to be the case.

There could probably be some environmental benefit if people were encouraged to keep vehicles for longer, but then there'd be less jobs in manufacturing, less tax in tax etc. It's never straightforward.

[BricktopST205]

740EVTORQUES said:

Actually every new EV sold displaces an often much older stinky petrol or diesel car further down the food chain so changing your new EV as frequently as possible, while not being a great financial move, is doing the environment a favour by decarbonising the fleet quicker.

Really there should be incentives and tax breaks to encourage this pump priming, oh wait, there are!

Funny, it’s almost as if the authorities have thought this through?

Displaces a perfectly good car that has had its carbon footprint and still has many years of value and use.

[Muzzer79]

BricktopST205 said:

Muzzer79 said:

Why?

Why does it need to do the things in bold?

I get the need for a car of a certain size and one that can tow a trailer.

But why does it need to have that range and charging speed?

Do you do multiple 400 mile journeys in a day? That's a hell of a lot of driving if you do.

Did you select the ICE car you drive on the basis of how many miles you can get out of a tank?

Like already pointed out it isn't for everyone.

So why the vitriol for EVs?

Why not just accept that they work for some people, but not you?

I wouldn't buy a Caterham 7 as my daily driver - there's not enough seats or boot for my needs, I'd get wet and it would be too noisy.

But I don't go on car forums saying how useless Caterhams are or how they're doomed to fail. I just accept that they don't suit my needs.

[BricktopST205]

Dave200 said:

Yes, because the cars I own get buried in National Trust grounds as soon as I hand them back to the finance company. You're getting a bit desperate now.

You as a person still produce more emissions than me though whichever way you try and spin it. There are plenty of serviceable and good cars that have already had their carbon footprint that get thrown away because of how we are as consumers. Some EV's can take up to a decade before they break even.

[BricktopST205]

Muzzer79 said:

So why the vitriol for EVs?

Why not just accept that they work for some people, but not you?

I wouldn't buy a Caterham 7 as my daily driver - there's not enough seats or boot for my needs, I'd get wet and it would be too noisy.

But I don't go on car forums saying how useless Caterhams are or how they're doomed to fail. I just accept that they don't suit my needs.

The thread title is "EVs... no one wants them!" That is why I am in this thread.

[Discombobulate]

BricktopST205 said:

Displaces a perfectly good car that has had its carbon footprint and still has many years of value and use.

It mostly certainly hasn't "had its carbon footprint". Unless it just sits in the drive and never uses any diesel or petrol.

[Zj2002]

BricktopST205 said:

Muzzer79 said:

So why the vitriol for EVs?

Why not just accept that they work for some people, but not you?

I wouldn't buy a Caterham 7 as my daily driver - there's not enough seats or boot for my needs, I'd get wet and it would be too noisy.

But I don't go on car forums saying how useless Caterhams are or how they're doomed to fail. I just accept that they don't suit my needs.

The thread title is "EVs... no one wants them!" That is why I am in this thread.

Perhaps we need a - 15 year old Saab - no one wants one thread. That way non shed drivers can have a go at sheds like the EV detractors on this thread.

[Muzzer79]

BricktopST205 said:

Muzzer79 said:

So why the vitriol for EVs?

Why not just accept that they work for some people, but not you?

I wouldn't buy a Caterham 7 as my daily driver - there's not enough seats or boot for my needs, I'd get wet and it would be too noisy.

But I don't go on car forums saying how useless Caterhams are or how they're doomed to fail. I just accept that they don't suit my needs.

The thread title is "EVs... no one wants them!" That is why I am in this thread.

Okaaaay.

That doesn't really answer the question though?

You have a right to speak your mind - I'm not disputing that.

I am genuinely curious about why you hate a means of car propulsion and are finding arguments against it, when you acknowledge that it has different suitability for different people?

[FiF]

Dave200 said:

BricktopST205 said:

Dave200 said:

You don't need to wear the car you own on finance like a badge of pride. Me saying it has a rubbish engine is not insulting you personally. I didn't buy my Tesla to drive around the Nurburgring, I have other cars for that sort of thing, all of which have more interesting engines than the lump in the GR86 that it shares with such luminaries as the Subaru Ascent. As for your enjoyable chassis, I have no idea what that has to do with the EV vs ice debate. On the subject of Nurburgring laptimes, thanks to its asthmatic engine the GR86 gets around in about the same time as a V6 automatic Mercedes SLK. Hardly anything to write home about.

Edited by Dave200 on Tuesday 30th April 10:32

The car isn't on finance I own it. Renting cars isn't my thing which is why I have a 20 year old family wagon and 29 year old Group A homologation special for the weekends

The GR86 is a fun daily commuting tool for myself and the wife.

The thing you took from all of that was the finance part? Like I said, you shouldn't need to wear the car you own like a badge of pride. It's the same thing that causes people to call EV owners silly names.

It could be argued that throwing out an unwarranted smart arse comment sometimes leads to snippy retorts and silly names.

Sometimes one wonders if some posters spoke to others in real life like they do on here how often in a week they'd be told to fk off.

[KingGary]

Zj2002 said:

Perhaps we need a - 15 year old Saab - no one wants one thread. That way non shed drivers can have a go at sheds like the EV detractors on this thread.

At last, a thread I could support. Until last year I too had 2003 Saab 9-5 which I loved. Quicker than you’d think with a remap and super comfy. Did more than 300 miles to a tank too!

[Dave200]

BricktopST205 said:

Dave200 said:

Yes, because the cars I own get buried in National Trust grounds as soon as I hand them back to the finance company. You're getting a bit desperate now.

You as a person still produce more emissions than me though whichever way you try and spin it. There are plenty of serviceable and good cars that have already had their carbon footprint that get thrown away because of how we are as consumers. Some EV's can take up to a decade before they break even.

Yes, you're right. We should all stop buying new cars, and instead run around in old Saab bangers.

[740EVTORQUES]

BricktopST205 said:

740EVTORQUES said:

Actually every new EV sold displaces an often much older stinky petrol or diesel car further down the food chain so changing your new EV as frequently as possible, while not being a great financial move, is doing the environment a favour by decarbonising the fleet quicker.

Really there should be incentives and tax breaks to encourage this pump priming, oh wait, there are!

Funny, it’s almost as if the authorities have thought this through?

Displaces a perfectly good car that has had its carbon footprint and still has many years of value and use.

ICE cars start off with a low ish carbon footprint and then it gets worse through use, increasingly so as they get old and less efficient.

An EV starts off with a higher footprint and it gets comparatively better as the in use emissions are far lower than an ICE car.

So the lifetime Carbon footprint per mile of an ICE car gets worse the more you use it while that of an EV gets better.

An ICE car never ‘pays off’ its carbon footprint as you describe


You couldn’t be more wrong if you tried

(I’m assuming that you are mistaken rather than trolling mind? I’m actually not sure which I’d find more disturbing, that someone could be so simplistic or that they would bother to troll in this way )

Edited by 740EVTORQUES on Tuesday 30th April 15:04

[Dave200]

740EVTORQUES said:

I’m assuming that you are mistaken rather than trolling mind you

Real mix of both in this thread to date.