Discussion
Mikebentley said:
I am a confirmed car lover and am willing to give EV a chance when it is affordable to my family budget and practical for 85% of use. I posted earlier to show that I feel the tipping point is nigh. There are a lot of people out there can’t afford £25k + cars. I can’t justify £50k Tesla’s. What I do believe though is now the “car makers” and I don’t include Tesla in this are starting to move into the £25k to £35k marketplace then these vehicles will start to be affordable as a used option to others who prioritise their spending elsewhere than a car. What the manufacturers will need to do is give greater warranties on batteries though to ensure used market confidence.
The car manufacturers need to adjust their business model.It's hard to sell a 25k car that then needs nearly no service and no replacement for the next decade/300k km and still make a profit.
As far as I can tell they are still working out how they are going to keep making money, it's their biggest hurdle for now.
Just look at the e-tron and all the ways it fails (packaging, range) as a good EV. I find it impossible to believe it's the best VAG can do for now. It feels like an exercise to keep their diesel/petrol variants relevant for just that bit longer. Much like how Sony is still trying to keep off both movie and music streaming in favor of physical media. They know it's a futile exercise but every month they can keep on going like that means a lot of money.
coetzeeh said:
SWoll said:
coetzeeh said:
Perhaps not maximum range agreed, but useful like for like real life application incl manufacturers league table.
Helpful info when you make a decision buying an EV - nowhere to hide for the marketing/PR talk.
Very limited in usefulness IMHO, in the grand scheme of things how many people are regularly doing 250+ mile motorway trips?Helpful info when you make a decision buying an EV - nowhere to hide for the marketing/PR talk.
The 'how far will it go on a full charge' question is arguably a lot more valid for people considering an EV who don't have access to home charging, are doing 20-30 miles per day of mixed driving and want to know how often will they need to visit a public charger?
For the vast majority a 250+ mile trip is something that might happen at most once or twice a year so should have little relevance to a buying decision surely?
To your earlier comment - lots of stops and driver changes during the journey,
The total distance might not be relevant but it provides buyers an insight into real life performance beyond marketing BS and PR.
Would you assume that the overall result would have been the same had the test been conducted in the summer and over a route where average speed was more like 30-40 mph? I would assume some vehicles have more efficient heaters than others and would be less affected by aerodynamics at lower speeds etc so quite possibly not?
I'm just saying that blanket statements that a specific model only gets 75% etc. of claimed range as if that is always the case aren't very helpful?
I think it's probably fair to say that of the subset of people who are worried about range at all, most will be worried about range in winter conditions at motorway speeds. Those who don't care probably wont be reading the article anyway.
For us, the one log try I do moderately often is Southampton to the various London airports and back; when we buy an EV it would be desirable for it to be able to do that return trip with no more than one, half hourish stop (which ie long enough to pick someone up or drop them off at the airport). Stansted is furthest away so that means 120 miles or real-world range in the worst "likely" conditions (ie not spending 3 days sitting in a traffic jam) and the ability to do around 250 miles with no more than about half an hour of charging. Obviously these figures aren't exacty that usecase but along with others they give a useful metric.
For us, the one log try I do moderately often is Southampton to the various London airports and back; when we buy an EV it would be desirable for it to be able to do that return trip with no more than one, half hourish stop (which ie long enough to pick someone up or drop them off at the airport). Stansted is furthest away so that means 120 miles or real-world range in the worst "likely" conditions (ie not spending 3 days sitting in a traffic jam) and the ability to do around 250 miles with no more than about half an hour of charging. Obviously these figures aren't exacty that usecase but along with others they give a useful metric.
Edited by kambites on Monday 17th February 12:00
to those evangelicals saying the ICE cars run out of fuel - yes, you are correct they do. The big difference being that of refueling - an ICE car out of fuel on the M.way can be on its way within minutes of fuel being obtained. A Tesla on the other hand....
To say that "oh only stupid people run out of fuel" misses the point - if you've looked our roads you'll realisethat they are FULL of stupid people
To say that "oh only stupid people run out of fuel" misses the point - if you've looked our roads you'll realisethat they are FULL of stupid people
kambites said:
...the ability to do around 250 miles with no more than about half an hour of charging.
This is the sweet spot for me. I don't do trips like that all the time, much less than I used to...but that sort of capability and an EV is a fully viable option for me.I keep being tempted to get a Taycan on the company...but then not convinced it's not overly pricey. And am still clinging to last hurrahs from ICE vendors
RobDickinson said:
Mikehig said:
Isn't that well beyond the physical/chemical limits of today's battery tech? I have read that we are getting close to that limit, with Tesla being the most advanced, and that a step change in technology will be required to take us to the 500 Wh/kg level or beyond.
Can anyone confirm that, or explain that present technology can, in fact, be pushed to almost double today's performance?
Tesla is looking at 300wh/kg and up to 500 with lithium using maxwell tech without a step change in batteries. Can anyone confirm that, or explain that present technology can, in fact, be pushed to almost double today's performance?
https://www.electrive.com/2019/06/13/will-tesla-ma...
SWoll said:
coetzeeh said:
SWoll said:
coetzeeh said:
Perhaps not maximum range agreed, but useful like for like real life application incl manufacturers league table.
Helpful info when you make a decision buying an EV - nowhere to hide for the marketing/PR talk.
Very limited in usefulness IMHO, in the grand scheme of things how many people are regularly doing 250+ mile motorway trips?Helpful info when you make a decision buying an EV - nowhere to hide for the marketing/PR talk.
The 'how far will it go on a full charge' question is arguably a lot more valid for people considering an EV who don't have access to home charging, are doing 20-30 miles per day of mixed driving and want to know how often will they need to visit a public charger?
For the vast majority a 250+ mile trip is something that might happen at most once or twice a year so should have little relevance to a buying decision surely?
To your earlier comment - lots of stops and driver changes during the journey,
The total distance might not be relevant but it provides buyers an insight into real life performance beyond marketing BS and PR.
Would you assume that the overall result would have been the same had the test been conducted in the summer and over a route where average speed was more like 30-40 mph? I would assume some vehicles have more efficient heaters than others and would be less affected by aerodynamics at lower speeds etc so quite possibly not?
I'm just saying that blanket statements that a specific model only gets 75% etc. of claimed range as if that is always the case aren't very helpful?
We are all grown ups using multiple sets of data and information to decide which direction we going re EV ownership.
This test was one such a set - and an eye opener for me while I decide.
It was however a bit of an
irocfan said:
to those evangelicals saying the ICE cars run out of fuel - yes, you are correct they do. The big difference being that of refueling - an ICE car out of fuel on the M.way can be on its way within minutes of fuel being obtained. A Tesla on the other hand....
To say that "oh only stupid people run out of fuel" misses the point - if you've looked our roads you'll realisethat they are FULL of stupid people
This thread appears to have internal combustion fundamentalists trying to hold back the tide.To say that "oh only stupid people run out of fuel" misses the point - if you've looked our roads you'll realisethat they are FULL of stupid people
Just accept that change is coming, and that it have its benefits, even if driving itself, which I enjoy, may become a thing of the past.
coetzeeh said:
No one is suggesting the test is the be all and end all of EV ownership.
We are all grown ups using multiple sets of data and information to decide which direction we going re EV ownership.
This test was one such a set - and an eye opener for me while I decide.
You have a much higher opinion of the levels of intelligence and/or honesty of numerous posters on this forum than I do.We are all grown ups using multiple sets of data and information to decide which direction we going re EV ownership.
This test was one such a set - and an eye opener for me while I decide.
Why else state that an EV 'only' getting 75% of advertised maximum range in the scenario given comes as a surprise?
Anyway, I'm sure I've laboured the point to death now so will leave it be.
kambites said:
Mikehig said:
Thanks for that link. 500 Wh/kg would be game-changing: twice the range or half the weight or a blend of both.
I think that depends how it's achieved. Right now I think energy per unit price is probably a more important thing to improve than energy per unit mass. Mikehig said:
kambites said:
Mikehig said:
Thanks for that link. 500 Wh/kg would be game-changing: twice the range or half the weight or a blend of both.
I think that depends how it's achieved. Right now I think energy per unit price is probably a more important thing to improve than energy per unit mass. Mikebentley said:
What is helpful and interesting is the knowledge that the likes of Rob D and others bring. I find it fascinating (maybe I’m a geek after all). What isn’t helpful is the sometimes evangelical way in which the EV people put things across with an almost complete denial of the fact that EV production isn’t truly green.
Thanks! No one is in denial, we all realize theres a cost in producing EVs too, its just much lower than carrying on using ICE cars. Theres a wide range of changes needed (farming, industry, transport) and automotive is a relatively easy one to fix because we have applicable solutions right now
When you look at the oil industry, mining, extraction, shipping, refining , supply, burning, its an absolutely horrendous process, not everything about EV production is perfect though most are using renewable power where possible, but its a massive improvement.
Just putting 50L of petrol in your car produces 36kg of CO2, thats before you have burnt it.
xjay1337 said:
Mocking me isn't going to make me ignore the real problems of EV for a lot of people.
You are being mocked because most of the stuff you say is at best worst case scenario but otherwise entirely wrong. There is no point trying to educate you because you don't want to learn.Creating an infrastructure for petrol took a lot more work than creating an electric one will because all the hard work is already there. People had to buy petrol at the chemist to start with.
Do you genuinely think all the problems you mention haven't been thought about? Actually you probably do because you think kids go around unplugging electric cars.
MC Bodge said:
irocfan said:
to those evangelicals saying the ICE cars run out of fuel - yes, you are correct they do. The big difference being that of refueling - an ICE car out of fuel on the M.way can be on its way within minutes of fuel being obtained. A Tesla on the other hand....
To say that "oh only stupid people run out of fuel" misses the point - if you've looked our roads you'll realisethat they are FULL of stupid people
This thread appears to have internal combustion fundamentalists trying to hold back the tide.To say that "oh only stupid people run out of fuel" misses the point - if you've looked our roads you'll realisethat they are FULL of stupid people
Just accept that change is coming, and that it have its benefits, even if driving itself, which I enjoy, may become a thing of the past.
irocfan said:
Not a chance - will Mrs Iroc's next car be an EV? Possibly - if they can sort the range out
If current ranges aren't enough for you, I'm not convinced they're ever going to be "sorted out". I'm pretty sure we're never going to see thousand mile ranges in mainstream mass-market EVs; even 500 miles may never happen in really mass-market vehicles. As far as I can see the market just doesn't exist to make it commercially viable, at least in Europe. I guess falling battery prices and rising energy density will ultimately force the cost of such vehicles down but I still don't see them becoming the norm unless there's a huge step change in battery technology.
Edited by kambites on Monday 17th February 22:30
kambites said:
If current ranges aren't enough for you, I'm not convinced they're ever going to be "sorted out". I'm pretty sure we're never going to see thousand mile ranges in mainstream mass-market EVs; even 500 miles may never happen in really mass-market vehicles. As far as I can see the market just doesn't exist to make it commercially viable, at least in Europe.
I guess falling battery prices and rising energy density will ultimately force the cost of such vehicles down but I still don't see them becoming the norm unless there's a huge step change in battery technology.
This. I guess falling battery prices and rising energy density will ultimately force the cost of such vehicles down but I still don't see them becoming the norm unless there's a huge step change in battery technology.
Edited by kambites on Monday 17th February 22:30
If they can manage to make higher power density batteries than the best thing would be to fit fewer of them reducing the overall weight of the vehicles (which will improve range anyway) and focus on improving charging speeds. The number of users that need 300+ miles of absolute range is tiny in the grand scheme of things.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff