Human-nature?: One of EV’s unanswered questions:

[kambites]

OldDuffer said:

kambites said:

Indeed, and I haven't really seen any evidence either way in the automotive market (EVs are just too new) but I work with Lithium Ion batteries and I see no reason to believe they wont last that well if looked after properly.

I've never managed to get decent Yuasa 12V batteries from Halfrods last much over 5 years, then again, that might be me.

Err, isn't that a Lead Acid battery?

[DodgyGeezer]

ZesPak said:

Do you have another arbitrary scenario that might have happened to you once about a decade ago?

Not really been there the past 2 weekends, regularly visit daughter 200 miles away (occasionally there and back same day), weekends with a few hundred miles round-trip not unusual, prior to covid European road-trips with no planning (destination known but stops en-route whenever felt like) undertaken, story short round trips (possibly) exceeding the, current, range of an EV is not unusual.

On that basis an EV is unlikely to be *the* solution - I'll admit that for Mrs Dodgy an EV is a very distinct possibility since, for day to day usage, it's fine. For fun usage it currently does not meet my requirements (leaving aside the aural side of things).

Nice to see you ignored my acknowledgements about improving tech and how that will make a lot of my issues disappear

[ZesPak]

OldDuffer said:

I've never managed to get decent Yuasa 12V batteries from Halfrods last much over 5 years, then again, that might be me.

[TheDeuce]

OldDuffer said:

If fact, EVs are viable at 20 years on the ex-factory battery, your case is won - this thread has no reason to exist.


I suppose the question could be rephrased, how will Bangernomics work with a 15YO EV?

The 'fact' is that the average age a car is scrapped in the UK is 13.9 years. Average mileage at that age is around 110k apparently (although to me that seems too low - feel free to correct if you can find a better source). Most manufacturers warranty their battery to at least 70% capacity up to 8 years/60k miles.

However... There are many examples of EV's used as taxi's that have gone well past 200k miles and STILL retain more than 80% of their original range. So you're right, this thread has no real purpose other than to confirm there is no problem and that the batteries, in most cases won't need or be worth replacing. Tesla have demonstrated something like 76% remaining capacity at 300k miles of use.

As for 'bangernomics'... I think there is a need to get away from running old and increasingly inefficient cars on a tight budget. It's fair enough if it's a special/cherished car that is maintained out of love - but keeping an old banger on the road in some attempt to prove you can have a 'real car' as opposed to the car you actually afford is quite selfish. Cars should be disposed of before they become 'bangers' imo. The environmental motivation to recycle very old cars and replace with newer, more efficient, safer cars is more powerful than ever given that the dirtiest part of an EV is the battery pack, and that part can go on to be re-used and live a useful second life as a home or grid storage battery.

Edited by TheDeuce on Thursday 2nd December 12:02

[LukeBrown66]

I never have and never will own anything remotely new on the road, my current car is nearly 6 years old, newest I have ever owned.

And in my experience, if a car runs fine, doesn't owe or cost you anything, passes MOT's, is safe, decent on fuel and does its job, even if its 15 years old, keep it.

the crossover is not happening yet, emissions will be crippling you for tax, but other than that it is likely paid for, and done its job.

[Janluke]

If we're thinking "green" then surely what should happen is, as the tech improves, better batteries and motors are made so they can be retro fitted into older models.

If electric cars become like phones then that's defeating the whole object

[TheDeuce]

Janluke said:

If we're thinking "green" then surely what should happen is, as the tech improves, better batteries and motors are made so they can be retro fitted into older models.

If electric cars become like phones then that's defeating the whole object

No it doesn't defeat the whole object. There are sensible reasons to retire cars as they become very old even if they can be 'kept going'. But as already made very clear in this thread... EV's are already proven to last at least as long as the existing ICE cars before their average scrap age. In all likelihood most EV's will still be useful and reliable for someone on a very tight budget as a run around car when they're well over 200k miles old.

[OldDuffer]

TheDeuce said:

....keeping an old banger on the road in some attempt to prove you can have a 'real car' as opposed to the car you actually afford is quite selfish.

But is it? Be clear I don't know the answer to this. I'm a high-mile user never doing less than 15K, until lock-down, often 25-26K a year. I bought my 1998 car at 2 years old. Most of you have owned 4-5 cars in that time. Me? With galactic miles, one shed. And i do own a engine-crane. Had I bought 4-5 odd cars most would be scrap by now. Which is greener? I can't answer.

4-5 x Prius etc or 1 x 1998 Eurobox?

I suspect the four extra most of you have owned made for worse than the one I still run.

And i could be wrong.

Edited by OldDuffer on Thursday 2nd December 12:27

[ZesPak]

OldDuffer said:

But is it? Be clear I don't know the answer to this. I'm a high-mile user never doing less than 15K, until lock-down, often 25-26K a year. I bought my 1998 car at 2 years old. Most of you have owned 4-5 cars in that time. Me? With galactic miles, one shed. And i do own a engine-crane. Had I bought 5-6 cars most would be scrap by now. Which is greener, I can't answer this Q?

4 x new Prius or 1 x 1998 Eurobox?

I suspect the four extra most of you have owned made for worse than the one I still run.

And i could be wrong.

It's not bad running something until it breaks. I also don't know the answer, but don't pretend like those 4 cars would have been scrapped. They would go to the next owner and to the next owner. In the end there is no reason to assume they had a shorter life than your 1998 car.

Still, keeping a car longer is a good thing that can only be applauded.
25k miles/year is my MO and I found and EV to be perfectly suited to that. I can't say I miss the weekly fuel stops or the monthly 400 EUR fuel bill for a 4 cyl diesel stinker.
If I get the math right you're talking about a car doing half a million miles?
So, with the work in that (as you own your own engine crane), don't you think it's likely that someone like you would replace the battery once in two decades to achieve similar? You'll both be outliers but the fact remain that in the BEV it'll be a lot more feasible to get that sort of mileage than it ever was in an ICE.

[5s Alive]

OldDuffer said:

But is it? Be clear I don't know the answer to this. I'm a high-mile user never doing less than 15K, until lock-down, often 25-26K a year. I bought my 1998 car at 2 years old. Most of you have owned 4-5 cars in that time. Me? With galactic miles, one shed. And i do own a engine-crane. Had I bought 4-5 odd cars most would be scrap by now. Which is greener? I can't answer.

4-5 x Prius etc or 1 x 1998 Eurobox?

I suspect the four extra most of you have owned made for worse than the one I still run.

And i could be wrong.

Edited by OldDuffer on Thursday 2nd December 12:27

2 Prius! but your/my usage is not exactly typical... but you could be right.

Oh, and put down the wooden spoon.

[otolith]

OldDuffer said:

What we’re getting is cars that dependent on who you listen to, have significant range reduction in 4-8 years. The ICE equivalent of requiring a replacement engine in any 4-8YO ICE vehicle.

Your entire argument is based on a flawed premise.

Multiple flawed premises, in fact.

You've assumed that the degradation is far worse than it is.

You've assumed that a car with degraded range is worthless.

[TheDeuce]

OldDuffer said:

TheDeuce said:

....keeping an old banger on the road in some attempt to prove you can have a 'real car' as opposed to the car you actually afford is quite selfish.

But is it? Be clear I don't know the answer to this. I'm a high-mile user never doing less than 15K, until lock-down, often 25-26K a year. I bought my 1998 car at 2 years old. Most of you have owned 4-5 cars in that time. Me? With galactic miles, one shed. And i do own a engine-crane. Had I bought 4-5 odd cars most would be scrap by now. Which is greener, I can't answer this Q?

4-5 x Prius etc or 1 x 1998 Eurobox?

I suspect the four extra most of you have owned made for worse than the one I still run.

And i could be wrong.

Your logic is so out on this. Why would the 4-5 cars you could have bought, prius or otherwise, be scrap by now? Their fate would depend entirely on the people that own them after you did. The person who sold you your 1998 car probably assumes it was scrapped ages ago, but of course it hasn't been.

Anyway, EV's are greener overall. Given your mileage, you could have scrapped your current car something like 8 years ago and replaced with an EV, and by now you would be winning in green terms.

You would also be dragging less pollution in to population centres and contributing to overall safer roads - partly due to improved safety tech, but chiefly because things have a habit of 'letting go' on ageing cars that can be entirely unexpected and create dangerous situations. I was nearly wiped out driving an old transit van when the front left suspension collapsed just a week or two after passing an MOT.

Apart from generally helping to release less CO2, clean up town centres and avoid unpredictable mechanical failure on the open road.. You could also change your username as you would be able to enjoy witchcraft such as Bluetooth and adaptive cruise control

Edited by TheDeuce on Thursday 2nd December 12:40

[TheDeuce]

otolith said:

Your entire argument is based on a flawed premise.

The entire thread is flawed

It's proving gently amusing though..

[SHutchinson]

TheDeuce said:

............ witchcraft such as Bluetooth and adaptive cruise control

Just like electric windows, neither of those two things will catch on. Just ask my dad, it's simply more things to go wrong!!

Honestly, all anyone needs is a st old Montego that needs new brake cylinders every year to get through the MOT.

[OldDuffer]

I'm not so sure of the argument the other way. The foot-print to make 4-5 cars is vast because that's the complete picture. What might tip things is my miles. Had I not 'driven' mine and done more average miles, I'm pretty sure my route wins. But yes, just over 500K on two engines and that's far from green, thus I suspect I'm not looking so good. And yes, I am the sort that WILL change batteries, only that's not the norm. Most woudl struggle to produce much more than a Halfrods comedy trolley-jack.

I would put big money on a 1950s Cadillac doing 12mpg still running as greener than the umpteen cars others bought to replace such things.

Edited by OldDuffer on Thursday 2nd December 13:01

[limpsfield]

I’ve read this thread and still no idea what the question was.

The “I don’t like EV’ posts on this site are bizarre. I don’t like diesels so have never owned one and don’t post about why they are so bad. There’s always a lot of choice.

I have absolutely no desire to change the battery in my car. In the same way in 35 years of driving I never changed the engine in any of my other cars.

But I am still no clearer on the point of this thread!

[MuscleSedan]

Someone always mentions EV reliability as if nothing will ever go wrong. There's still a huge amount to potentially go wrong, an out of warranty EV with faults won't be a fun thing.

[limpsfield]

OldDuffer said:

. I bought my 1998 car at 2 years old. Most of you have owned 4-5 cars in that time. Me? With galactic miles, one shed. And i do own a engine-crane. Had I bought 4-5 odd cars most would be scrap by now.

Edited by OldDuffer on Thursday 2nd December 12:27

This is a car enthusiast website. Some people will probably change their car reasonably often.

If this was handbag-heads.com I don’t think many of the users would still be running their Mulberry leather clutch from 2002 because it still did the job and was greener than buying a new one.

[TheDeuce]

OldDuffer said:

I would put big money on a 1950s Cadillac doing 12mpg still running as greener than the umpteen cars others bought to replace such things.

Edited by OldDuffer on Thursday 2nd December 13:01

Admit it... You're being silly aren't you?

Do you understand that your car, and definitely the 50's Cadillac have created far more CO2 from their use than their manufacture? If you had switched to a greener car mid point through your current cars life you would almost certainly be greener at this point - in fact, given your mileage, you definitely would be.

[ZesPak]

MuscleSedan said:

Someone always mentions EV reliability as if nothing will ever go wrong. There's still a huge amount to potentially go wrong, an out of warranty EV with faults won't be a fun thing.

Out of warranty with any modern car is going to be problematic.
Look at the top items putting ice cars out of commission and tell me how they affect an EV.