Electric cars, does everyone really think they are amazing.
Discussion
Gary C said:
Not a stupid argument at all.
At the moment, I can choose a vehicle that does EVERYTHING I want it to, an EV can't.
That's clever. I can't buy a vehicle that does everything I want (to be both a convertible and a dog transporting estate).At the moment, I can choose a vehicle that does EVERYTHING I want it to, an EV can't.
There are always compromises in vehicle selection. I love my MX5, but it's not great at transporting much shopping and only has a 300 mile range. Not that I'd want to do more than that in one go in it anyway.
Some are prepared to make alternate arrangements for the few occasions they want to make longer journeys in exchange for the fuel savings and other benefits of an EV. Plus some just want the latest tech...
rscott said:
Gary C said:
Not a stupid argument at all.
At the moment, I can choose a vehicle that does EVERYTHING I want it to, an EV can't.
That's clever. I can't buy a vehicle that does everything I want (to be both a convertible and a dog transporting estate).At the moment, I can choose a vehicle that does EVERYTHING I want it to, an EV can't.
There are always compromises in vehicle selection. I love my MX5, but it's not great at transporting much shopping and only has a 300 mile range. Not that I'd want to do more than that in one go in it anyway.
Some are prepared to make alternate arrangements for the few occasions they want to make longer journeys in exchange for the fuel savings and other benefits of an EV. Plus some just want the latest tech...
So, at the moment, EV's are not a total replacement, and for me, no.
But I can see a day in the not to distant future when they will produce cars that do everything an equivalent ice model could do (which is the bit I think I missed from my original statement)
The hybrid age though is probably what I'm looking at first. Just wish they would do a hybrid 86.
Evanivitch said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
You might work in automotive but you're definitely not an engineer...There have been no leaps in battery tech. Recent range increases have indeed come from re-packaging batteries, not by going from one big battery to lots of smaller ones but the other way around going from lots of small batteries to a bigger battery. The battery packs used to contain lots of pencil type batteries the same as most laptop computer battery packs, there is lots of empty space in such designs, by making a single battery that only takes the same space as lots of pencil batteries there is no dead space - But this is not an advance of the battery chemistry / tech, it is just a benefit that comes from better packaging and now that you have gotten rid of the dead space... no better batteries for EVs on the horizon until there is a breakthrough in the actual tech. Don't hold your breath.
Engineers that have to obfuscate to make a point probably don't have much of a point?
Edited by SimonYorkshire on Friday 21st September 23:12
SimonYorkshire said:
Now that free charging even for Teslas is no longer available, and charging EVs at some roadside chargers costs nearly as much as refuelling a petrol car ...Now how sensible do they seem?
It depends what you are using it for and how you are charging. They aren't perfect and range for many would still be an issue. For my partner, it suits her needs. She has a Zoe and a full charge at home is £2.40 on our overnight rate, therefore in winter, it costs 2.2p per mile and in summer 1.5p. She uses it to drive to work and 99% local stuff. In the 14,000 miles since December 2017, twice, maybe three times has she required to charge it away from home and even then it has only been a top-up to get home.
On longer journeys we use my car because like I said, they aren't perfect and range for many, myself included, would be an issue.
SimonYorkshire said:
Now that free charging even for Teslas is no longer available, and charging EVs at some roadside chargers costs nearly as much as refuelling a petrol car ...Now how sensible do they seem?
I couldnt give a stuff about superchargers, I charge at home. The infrequent times I'd need fast charging on the road I dont really care what it costs because I'm saving a s
t ton by not buying petrol, $5000 this year or so.SimonYorkshire said:
There have been no leaps in battery tech.
Leaps , no not quite, but tesla 3 batteries are 30% more energy dense than the model S ones and typically energy density increases 7% a year, so doubles every 10, and price is falling faster than predicted. So we dont need a leap but they may be coming anyhow.back in your hole.
Now now Pherlop, 'crawl back under my rock' eh... really'?
I got bored of the banging head arguments and actually took some EVers advice - My time was indeed much better spent converting vehicles to LPG rather than arguing the toss against antiLPG threads (which seem to have been removed by moderators - I didn't bother being around, what happened for the thread to be removed?) and EVers on this thread who seemed just a bit too passionate about EVs. And, like you, tend to get abusive.
Same old banging head arguments. You wont' be doing 98% of charging at home if you commute far enough eh? Again let's not confuse £80k Teslas that might do hundreds of miles on a single charge (at 30mph) with £20k EV's that might struggle to get you to work and back without a charge in-between. Especially if you drive too quick (and what sort of speed would that be 50mph?) or want to use the heater / aircon / or have to use the wipers?
'Target use' - describe that then?
I got bored of the banging head arguments and actually took some EVers advice - My time was indeed much better spent converting vehicles to LPG rather than arguing the toss against antiLPG threads (which seem to have been removed by moderators - I didn't bother being around, what happened for the thread to be removed?) and EVers on this thread who seemed just a bit too passionate about EVs. And, like you, tend to get abusive.
Same old banging head arguments. You wont' be doing 98% of charging at home if you commute far enough eh? Again let's not confuse £80k Teslas that might do hundreds of miles on a single charge (at 30mph) with £20k EV's that might struggle to get you to work and back without a charge in-between. Especially if you drive too quick (and what sort of speed would that be 50mph?) or want to use the heater / aircon / or have to use the wipers?
'Target use' - describe that then?
RobDickinson said:
I couldnt give a stuff about superchargers, I charge at home. The infrequent times I'd need fast charging on the road I dont really care what it costs because I'm saving a st ton by not buying petrol, $5000 this year or so.
back in your hole.
Ahh... So now that superchargers do incur a cost you couldn't give a stuff about them. But most EVers on this thread could give a stuff about them (as anyone who reads enough of this thread through will notice) because there used to be lots of talk about how quickly EVs could be charged on superchargers. You did used to care about superchargers and you know plenty of others who might have been considering an EV do too. Read this thread if you have any doubts about numbers of people who will have been put off EVs since supercharging started to cost money. https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...t ton by not buying petrol, $5000 this year or so.SimonYorkshire said:
There have been no leaps in battery tech.
Leaps , no not quite, but tesla 3 batteries are 30% more energy dense than the model S ones and typically energy density increases 7% a year, so doubles every 10, and price is falling faster than predicted. So we dont need a leap but they may be coming anyhow.back in your hole.
I don't give a stuff about what Tesla calls it's batteries. '3' you say? What is the tech in 3 and how does it differ from the tech in 2 or 1? Describe the tech or point to a website that can.There is no new tech, not now and not on the agenda.
Edit - I'll tell you what fellas... I haven't been around for a long time. Last time I was here I'd have preferred a more grown up and realistic conversation about the challenges facing the tech rather than the banging heads tantrums and raging arguments. I'm up for drawing a line under all that if you are.
Now then - Energy density of batteries might have increased by 7% per year til now but now that we have got rid of all the empty space in batteries it cannot increase by 7% per year without different battery chemistry can it? This is not a similar case to just making transistors smaller as was the case with Moles Law is it? Chemistry is already at the atomic scale, transistors were not but are now approaching that scale hence Moles Law is coming to an end.
Edited by SimonYorkshire on Friday 21st September 23:48
We earn a sizeable salary combined. There is no single reason for me to consider buying one regardless of the fact I am also a limited company.
They are far far to expensive for my liking. Would rather drop a sizeable amount on an M4
Otherwise I'll keep the shed running. Kids are expensive you know
They are far far to expensive for my liking. Would rather drop a sizeable amount on an M4
Otherwise I'll keep the shed running. Kids are expensive you know
Anyhow in an utterly non telsa like 
180 degree turn around free supercharging is back
https://electrek.co/2018/09/21/tesla-model-3-free-...
180 degree turn around free supercharging is backhttps://electrek.co/2018/09/21/tesla-model-3-free-...
RobDickinson said:
If only there was some data on how people commute...
Lots of data I'm sure... But that didn't seem to prevent people who were considering an EV to use to commute from being put off EVs due to superchargers now costing money to use.
At one end of the scale there are people who only use vehicles for short distance trips - I have said before that if an EV was cheap enough it might be ideal for the missus to nip around in because she would never drive far anyway.
At the other end of the scale there are people who drive high mileages, these people would benefit the most from a car that costs near zero per mile to run. Of course they would have to overlook the negatives of EVs that go against practicality such as multi-hour charging time mid journey (when a petrol car can be refuelled in the couple minutes we're all used to).
In the middle of the scale are people who do both... They do lots of short trips but also do medium length and occasional long distance trips. These people (the majority) will weigh up the pros and cons... and they aren't going for EVs.
But if you're right about your 7% year on year range increase going forward then surely we won't be having this conversation in 5 years because (you'd reckon) it will all be clear cut and everyone will be able to use an EV without a negative effect of their lifestyle. I've just been away for 6 months but the EV position looks worse now than it did back then and I look forward to our chat in 5 years.
RobDickinson said:
Anyhow in an utterly non telsa like 180 degree turn around free supercharging is back
https://electrek.co/2018/09/21/tesla-model-3-free-...
Makes sense for Tesla though Rob. Why do you think this is the (full) headline... Tesla brings back free Supercharging to inventory cars and Model 3 to help sell cars in end of quarter rush 180 degree turn around free supercharging is backhttps://electrek.co/2018/09/21/tesla-model-3-free-...
To help sell cars that aren't selling, from a company that's losing money big time. Face it, Ferrari don't offer free fuel or any other incentives on the cars that they are able to sell before they are even built. People are being offered a sweetener to take on a Tesla but it's a sweetener that will disappear if Tesla go bust.
'Inventory cars' = unsold cars Tesla has on stock. If you say Tesla managed to sell all it's other cars(?), if they have'n't managed to sell these cars doesn't it seem people won't buy them unless they come with free supercharging (which I suppose would undermine 'I couldnt give a stuff about superchargers').
Edited by SimonYorkshire on Saturday 22 September 00:17
HannsG said:
We earn a sizeable salary combined. There is no single reason for me to consider buying one regardless of the fact I am also a limited company.
They are far far to expensive for my liking. Would rather drop a sizeable amount on an M4
Otherwise I'll keep the shed running. Kids are expensive you know
Me too. And I could have that M4 costing me half as much in fuel by converting it to LPG. I've converted the M3's and M5's, haven't converted an M4 yet but it won't be long until I do. They are far far to expensive for my liking. Would rather drop a sizeable amount on an M4
Otherwise I'll keep the shed running. Kids are expensive you know
JonnyVTEC said:
The difference that you are asking for in the end of your post. 20700 cell format rather than 18650.
If I have to explain that to you then you are not on a position to comment on battery technology.
But still - It is only mainly battery packaging that makes the difference. You wouldn't assume that if 20700 cells became 25000 cells that still only take the same physical volume the newer battery would have more electrical capacity. As implied, no use talking number of cells or 'this will be coming next year' unless you 're high up in the battery development ranks - can you instead point to authorities on the subject who can? The proof is in the pudding anyway - EVs still have s*** range and s*** length of charge times and S*** convenience for longer journeys due to long charge times and places to charge.. If I have to explain that to you then you are not on a position to comment on battery technology.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff