RE: The best used electric cars to buy right now

[SWoll]

kambites said:

SWoll said:

Scrimpton said:

My Ioniq is paying for itself at the moment as the 40p I get for business mileage is covering the lease cost and all the electricity. Lovely stuff.

That's for a personal car used for business use though. Company cars are limited to 5ppm, which works out as a repayment of 15-20p per kW of power for most EV's. Many people paying more than that at home already, come October it's only going to get significantly worse.

Still a damned slight cheaper than petrol though!

Assuming you do most of your charging at home. Mix in regular rapid public charging and there's much less in it, especially with petrol prices steadily dropping again and electricity doing the opposite.

[Scrimpton]

SWoll said:

Scrimpton said:

My Ioniq is paying for itself at the moment as the 40p I get for business mileage is covering the lease cost and all the electricity. Lovely stuff.

That's for a personal car used for business use though. Company cars are limited to 5ppm, which works out as a repayment of 15-20p per kW of power for most EV's. Many people paying more than that at home already, come October it's only going to get significantly worse.

In isolation not great but then you do make a decent saving on BIK if you have to have a company car. My tariff is fixed at 20p per kW until Autumn 2023, an option unfortunately not available with petrol last year.

[kambites]

SWoll said:

Assuming you do most of your charging at home. Mix in regular rapid public charging and there's much less in it, especially with petrol prices steadily dropping again and electricity doing the opposite.

Yeah I certainly wouldnt buy an EV without the ability to do at least 90% of my charging at home.

[JD]

SWoll said:

Absolute rubbish I'm afraid.

A Model 3 with 280hp would cost a 40% tax payer £322 a year in BIK. A BMW 330i with 254hp £5443.

Lease costs for 3 years and 30k mile? Model 3 = £690 BMW 330i = £750

That's approx £18k less for the Tesla over 3 years and 30k miles than an equivelant 3 series if taken as a company car. If doing a personal lease the difference is still £2k before accounting for running costs.

It’s not rubbish though is it, because absolutely nobody is choosing a 330i as a company car are they? the only one that would be picked is a 330e.

On our scheme, a 330e is £750 a month, and Model 3 LR is £950, (even the SR is £850)

[KarlMac]

JD said:

It’s not rubbish though is it, because absolutely nobody is choosing a 330i as a company car are they? the only one that would be picked is a 330e.

On our scheme, a 330e is £750 a month, and Model 3 LR is £950, (even the SR is £850)

If that’s true your companies lease contract is absolute garbage. Leaseplan quote us less than that for the Y.

[CheesecakeRunner]

JD said:

SWoll said:

Absolute rubbish I'm afraid.

A Model 3 with 280hp would cost a 40% tax payer £322 a year in BIK. A BMW 330i with 254hp £5443.

Lease costs for 3 years and 30k mile? Model 3 = £690 BMW 330i = £750

That's approx £18k less for the Tesla over 3 years and 30k miles than an equivelant 3 series if taken as a company car. If doing a personal lease the difference is still £2k before accounting for running costs.

It’s not rubbish though is it, because absolutely nobody is choosing a 330i as a company car are they? the only one that would be picked is a 330e.

On our scheme, a 330e is £750 a month, and Model 3 LR is £950, (even the SR is £850)

At 40% tax (which if you’re looking at these kind of cars on a company scheme, you’re likely paying) a Model 3 LR is £439 per year, on the base 330e Sport is £2146.

Per month, that’s a difference of £142. So that leaves £57 per month as the actual difference between the 330e and the 3 LR on your scheme.

You could probably offset that 57 quid in the price of fuel.

[JD]

CheesecakeRunner said:

At 40% tax (which if you’re looking at these kind of cars on a company scheme, you’re likely paying) a Model 3 LR is £439 per year, on the base 330e Sport is £2146.

Per month, that’s a difference of £142. So that leaves £57 per month as the actual difference between the 330e and the 3 LR on your scheme.

You could probably offset that 57 quid in the price of fuel.

Which is exactly what I am saying, the price difference is not some extreme example that therefore is the only thing that justifies why people end up in a Tesla.

For my example, the fixed personal mile costs of the hybrid (and a charging allowance), versus the unknown and rising fuel costs of the EV make the comparative costs near enough exactly the same.

[Clivey]

Scrimpton said:

My Ioniq is paying for itself at the moment as the 40p I get for business mileage is covering the lease cost and all the electricity. Lovely stuff.

But then you’re stuck driving an Ioniq.

[BAMoFo]

ajap1979 said:

BAMoFo said:

Roll on the day when EVs start being taxed more to compensate for the loss of fuel duty and Road Tax.

Roll on people being taxed according to how much they use their car...

I agree. I pay more than £1 per mile on road tax for two of my cars despite SORNing pretty ruthlessly.

[BAMoFo]

Elmariachi said:

As a general rule of thumb, I'm happy for people to do what they like as long as it doesn't harm me or other people. In this case, driving an unnecessarily polluting car does affect me because it's killing the planet.

So while I get your point that you want to be able to talk piston-y things without the inconvenience of someone commenting on your selfish and irresponsible behaviour, I'm not prepared to let it go, sorry - the situation is too dire and it's getting far too late in the day.

Presumably you have made the conscious decision never to have children?

[BAMoFo]

DriveSnowdonia said:

Clivey said:

Except that politicians will use the switch to EVs as an excuse to arbitrarily ban ICEs from every urban area...if the public tolerates the current WEF / eco-communist groupthink, they'll make driving a petrol car on public roads about as practical as riding a tiger to the shops (whilst disregarding the misery of those for whose usage an EV is unsuitable).

Hell, they don't even want you to own an *electric* car.

Is that the same Klaus Schwab who travels the world by private jet, along with the other very wealthy protagonists of the Global Warming Climate Change Climate Crisis Climate Emergency agenda?

Do as we say not as we do. Hasn't that always been the case for those people with an air of superiority about them? Their hypocrisy should be treated with the contempt that it deserves. Unfortunately, their campaign has successfully recruited many disciples (whether they recognise that is what they essentially are is a different matter) and they are extremely passionate about their cause.

[BAMoFo]

GT9 said:

Note that average demand has fallen by 7 GW over the last 10 years.

That's enough power to keep 25 million EVs charged.

And there we were panicking that the grid can't cope....

What happens when/if the government rolls out its intention to ban gas fuelled boilers and replace them with Air Source and Ground Source Heat Pumps?

[BAMoFo]

Fastlane said:

I'm just a car enthusiastic, not an "EV boy" and as such appreciate all types of cars (my other car is an Ariel Atom) and don't feel threatened by what fuels my cars or for that matter, yours.

However, like a lot of engineers in the automotive world who are actually involved in designing cars for a living (many of whom seem to patiently post their actual experiences on here) the future is undoubtedly challenging.

However, with challenge, generally comes innovation. We are pretty early on in the electrification of transport and I believe we are currently living through the genesis of the car and transport in general.

For those willing to embrace the change, I believe the future is exciting.

Edited by Fastlane on Wednesday 3rd August 19:44

Edited by Fastlane on Wednesday 3rd August 20:00

Does the innovation include devising software cheats to falsely meet diesel emission targets that are set by governments and unachievable? I have sympathy for the engineers and manufacturers when governments meddle with things that they have insufficient understanding of.

[BAMoFo]

Clivey said:

DriveSnowdonia said:

Is that the same Klaus Schwab who travels the world by private jet, along with the other very wealthy protagonists of the Global Warming Climate Change Climate Crisis Climate Emergency agenda?

gtechrob said:

from a progression POV - once self driving cars become a thing. The next logical step will be to move to private transport as a service as it is correct that over 90% of cars are parked at any one time which reinforces the argument that private cars are an incredibly wasteful thing.

You can bet your bottom dollar that us enthusiasts will get priced out of the joy of every day driving and driving per se will become a minority interest.

I wonder if the people advocating this will be as zealous when it comes to cutting back on their "wasteful" foreign travel, weekend breaks and other leisure activities? Will they draw the line at banning meat and fast fashion? Or will they finally be happy when we're living in pods and plugged in to 'The Matrix' whilst being fed plant-based slop via a tube?

gtechrob said:

Doubt it will be in my life time though.

I hope for the same...but I'm only 33.

Surely nobody should wish it anyone's lifetime?

[BAMoFo]

SWoll said:

Company cars and salary sacrifice. The BIK tax savings that are available make EV's an absolute no brainer.

As an example for 40% tax payer a BMW 320d would cost neary £5k in BIK alone per year. A RWD Model 3, £300. Take those cars on today for 3 years and by 2025 you'll have paid £14k in BIK on the BMW or £900 for the Tesla.

Model 3's are also available far more quickly than many alternatives and have been available for a lot longer. We had ours pretty early back in 2019 when they were first released and you'd be lucky to see another for weeks.

If you're earning £100k+ and can get one on a salary sacrifice scheme a Taycan could be yours for around £500 a month..An equivelant Panamera would cost 3 times that.

Edited by SWoll on Friday 5th August 10:52

Nobody can argue against that but is it right for government policy to enable those with the means to be subsided by those that don't?

[GT9]

BAMoFo said:

GT9 said:

Note that average demand has fallen by 7 GW over the last 10 years.

That's enough power to keep 25 million EVs charged.

And there we were panicking that the grid can't cope....

What happens when/if the government rolls out its intention to ban gas fuelled boilers and replace them with Air Source and Ground Source Heat Pumps?

Domestic gas boilers are indeed a major contributor to UK carbon footprint, even more so than cars.

Heat pumps are able to provide several multiples of the electrical input power in terms of heat output, typically averaging about 3 for air-source. Full replacement of all domestic boilers would require a similar order of magnitude of electricity as full replacing of all ICEs with EVs.

And let's not forget all the green hydrogen we are hoping to use to decarbonise other transport sectors.

It's fair to say that this multi-sector decarbonisation via electrification is going to significantly increase demand from the grid.

As you might appreciate, the National Grid has had a bit of warning and have been scenario planning for some time now.

Each year, they produce a public document to summarise how they see it playing out, and have identified 4 different paths we might follow towards decarbonisation, depending on how successful each approach in each sector has been.

There is no denying that the ability to decarbonise entirely depends on the ability to renewably generate electricity.

In their most aggressive scenarios for 2050, electricity demand has risen from 300 TWh to almost triple that, with the lion's share of it coming from offshore wind.

Now it's fair to say that we probably won't achieve that, which is no doubt why they have a scenario called 'falling short'. In this scenario, natural gas is still used significantly in industry and home heating.
But interestingly, near-100% decarbonisation of the road transport sector is assumed to have taken place even in this scenario.

So you do have a valid point in the sense that there is a challenge for the grid to cope with society-wide decarbonisation, but singling out EVs as the evil buggers that will break the grid doesn't make much sense to me.

Here is the short version of the 2022 report with energy flow charts to show where energy is sourced and where it is used. Note they've included all forms of energy, so it's a useful tool to understand the high level picture and how transportation and passenger cars fit into that.

https://www.nationalgrideso.com/document/263861/do...

The full length version of the report is 250 pages long for those who want much more detail. I'm sure you can find it online if that's the one for you.

[BAMoFo]

GT9 said:

Domestic gas boilers are indeed a major contributor to UK carbon footprint, even more so than cars.


And let's not forget all the green hydrogen we are hoping to use to decarbonise other transport sectors.

It's fair to say that this multi-sector decarbonisation via electrification is going to significantly increase demand from the grid.

So you do have a valid point in the sense that there is a challenge for the grid to cope with society-wide decarbonisation, but singling out EVs as the evil buggers that will break the grid doesn't make much sense to me.

Here is the short version of the 2022 report with energy flow charts to show where energy is sourced and where it is used. Note they've included all forms of energy, so it's a useful tool to understand the high level picture and how transportation and passenger cars fit into that.

https://www.nationalgrideso.com/document/263861/do...

I've snipped your response for brevity but thank you for the comprehensive reply and the link to further information. I didn't single out EVs as evil buggers that will break the grid. However, I am sceptical that all of the demands that could be placed on it in the future have been fully thought through and that the cost of decarbonising has been somewhat glossed over.

Most of Britain's housing stock isn't suitable Heat Pumps because they are not sufficiently insulated and may also be very difficult to install larger radiators / underfloor heating. In my house I am currently fitting insulated plasterboards to the internal face of all of the external walls because the gas bills are forecast to be almost £1000 per month during the Winter to keep the house at a temperature of 14 degrees Celsius!! It is unbelievably intrusive work, but it has to be done because it is an old house with solid stone walls that lose a lot of heat.

[GT9]

BAMoFo said:

GT9 said:

Domestic gas boilers are indeed a major contributor to UK carbon footprint, even more so than cars.


And let's not forget all the green hydrogen we are hoping to use to decarbonise other transport sectors.

It's fair to say that this multi-sector decarbonisation via electrification is going to significantly increase demand from the grid.

So you do have a valid point in the sense that there is a challenge for the grid to cope with society-wide decarbonisation, but singling out EVs as the evil buggers that will break the grid doesn't make much sense to me.

Here is the short version of the 2022 report with energy flow charts to show where energy is sourced and where it is used. Note they've included all forms of energy, so it's a useful tool to understand the high level picture and how transportation and passenger cars fit into that.

https://www.nationalgrideso.com/document/263861/do...

I've snipped your response for brevity but thank you for the comprehensive reply and the link to further information. I didn't single out EVs as evil buggers that will break the grid. However, I am sceptical that all of the demands that could be placed on it in the future have been fully thought through and that the cost of decarbonising has been somewhat glossed over.

Most of Britain's housing stock isn't suitable Heat Pumps because they are not sufficiently insulated and may also be very difficult to install larger radiators / underfloor heating. In my house I am currently fitting insulated plasterboards to the internal face of all of the external walls because the gas bills are forecast to be almost £1000 per month during the Winter to keep the house at a temperature of 14 degrees Celsius!! It is unbelievably intrusive work, but it has to be done because it is an old house with solid stone walls that lose a lot of heat.

Apologies, the' evil buggers' remark was directed at no-one in particular. I think any sensible person would have to be skeptical about such a large increase in electricity demand for all-sector decarbonisation.

I think it is telling though that every scenario has near 100% electrification of passenger cars by 2050, at varying adoption rates. What this says to me is that of all the decarbonisation plans on the table, that one has more going for it than the other sectors, a more obvious methodology, timeline and outcome. With the added benefit of making a big improvement to local air quality. It's also doable with a relatively modest increase in electricity demand, and at a manageable ramp rate.

[DodgyGeezer]

Here's an interesting(?) tidbit on electric cars and towing - I guess that this (might) also show why a BEV artic may not be a good idea (leaving aside the issue of reduced cargo allowance due to weight)


https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/ford-f150-light...

[mat205125]

BAMoFo said:

SWoll said:

Company cars and salary sacrifice. The BIK tax savings that are available make EV's an absolute no brainer.

As an example for 40% tax payer a BMW 320d would cost neary £5k in BIK alone per year. A RWD Model 3, £300. Take those cars on today for 3 years and by 2025 you'll have paid £14k in BIK on the BMW or £900 for the Tesla.

Model 3's are also available far more quickly than many alternatives and have been available for a lot longer. We had ours pretty early back in 2019 when they were first released and you'd be lucky to see another for weeks.

If you're earning £100k+ and can get one on a salary sacrifice scheme a Taycan could be yours for around £500 a month..An equivelant Panamera would cost 3 times that.

Edited by SWoll on Friday 5th August 10:52

Nobody can argue against that but is it right for government policy to enable those with the means to be subsided by those that don't?

With those kind of stats, it seems pretty evident that the government priority seems to be to provide cheap premium products to those who are the highest earners, or who are spinning all of their motoring costs through their own companies.

Where's the carrot for the regular motorist, who just sees a choice between a Corsa for about £20k, or an EV equivalent that is likely to exceed £35k??