EVs... no one wants them!
Discussion
otolith said:
There is a certified test used in Norway. The Labour manifesto says that they will introduce such a certification here, so that used EV buyers can have confidence in battery health. There are already third party providers of this service - see the 430,000 mile Tesla being done here;
That was an interesting watch. The Model S was in pretty decent health notwithstanding the general lack of servicing (I concede that might be Tesla's fault for telling consumers they don't need to service it, if that's really what's happened). The wear items are no more or less what you'd expect from any ICE car but the Tesla has none of the ICE problems or servicing requirements. Even the batteries have 75% capacity remaining - up to around 200 miles per "fill up" after all that distance driven. That last point ought to silence some people who still claim batteries are dead by 100K miles.£25k and hold for a decade then weigh in the cells for a bit of cash and it really is potentially about as cheap as motoring gets given that maintenance and fuel costs over that ten years is likely to be much lower than the ICe equivalent like a Mondeo, a 318D or any of the basic, mid sized ICE that are traditionally cheap to use.
The downside being that to access the saving you ideally need a driveway etc.
DonkeyApple said:
It's no different to the whole SUV rage, that's all about money. Some blokes using them to make out they have money, others angry at the objects that remind them that they don't have as much money as they want.
I can't speak for anyone else but I don't hate SUV's for monetary reasons. Without getting all "powerful built director" I could comfortably buy one if desired... I just hate them from the perspective of not *wanting* one and yet they're the way the "market" is going and other preferred non-SUV options are vanishing. I also rather dislike them for how much they get in the way of visibility. So any desire to see them restricted/banned/taxed more is a desire on purely selfish grounds to see the market wane and move back away from them!
That said if I lived in pothole strewn London with it's speed bumps every 5m something with long travel soft suspension that could handle the near off road situation would probably be much higher on my list of desirable cars!
irc said:
Why trade in your old petrol car to buy an EV when you won't save on running costs and will be paying increased depreciation costs.
Without a driveway the savings on running costs would probably be limited indeed. As for depreciation, used EVs don't seem to depreciate more than used ICE cars from what I have seen.
If you don't buy new they would actually be a bargain.
nickfrog said:
irc said:
Why trade in your old petrol car to buy an EV when you won't save on running costs and will be paying increased depreciation costs.
Without a driveway the savings on running costs would probably be limited indeed. As for depreciation, used EVs don't seem to depreciate more than used ICE cars from what I have seen.
If you don't buy new they would actually be a bargain.
Dave200 said:
irc said:
Why trade in your old petrol car to buy an EV when you won't save on running costs and will be paying increased depreciation costs.
What this thread needs is more people to wade into the middle of a conversation without reading anything that's been posted recently.irc said:
I agree once EVs have taking the initial 2/3 year hit. Thereafter depreciation less of an issue. What I was getting at was more there is no incentive for anyone running an older ICE car to switch. Better running the old banger into the ground than buying a £10-12k second hand EV if you are not saving on fuel because you can't home charge.
Yup. You do need that private parking but the majority of households do and that percentage is heavily skewed the higher the spend so in all likelihood the majority of people in the market for £10k+ cars have home charging capability. Of the 36m+ cars in the U.K. only 1m are EVs so they only need the tiniest of demand.
I'm also not convinced by the big depreciation view that some have as they're tending to use the faux RRP number with which to fabricate the largest possible loss number. New to freshly used is almost entirely a monthly cost business so we do need to compare the monthly cost at new and the monthly cost at 3 year old to really see what the actual depreciation is. I'm not sure on that metric there is any real depreciation at all.
It would be genuinely interesting if PHers who bought EVs back in 2021/2 would post what their monthly post BIK&incentive cost was then and we can then compare that to the typical monthly cost to run the vehicle now.
nickfrog said:
irc said:
Why trade in your old petrol car to buy an EV when you won't save on running costs and will be paying increased depreciation costs.
Without a driveway the savings on running costs would probably be limited indeed. As for depreciation, used EVs don't seem to depreciate more than used ICE cars from what I have seen.
If you don't buy new they would actually be a bargain.
Buying used and holding for a longer period is still definitely the way to go and as used prices fall they're becoming a more attractive proposition for both the buying public and dealerships as there's less money at risk
Rusty Old-Banger said:
You like an argument, don't you Dave?
Dave posted a video of a Model 3 Performance Stealth saying it wasn’t a Model 3 Performance to make some point about it beating an M340i. Gets pointed out a Model 3 Performance Stealth is a Model 3 Performance without the trim (I looked it up as I didn’t know). Dave then asks me to explain why anyone would buy an M340i over a Model 3, a point I never raised or suggested. Complains I have jumped into the conversation half way through without context, despite me making a valid point purely about the video he posted and nothing else and despite me having read every page of this thread since it started. Dave must own this thread to be able to gatekeep it with such conviction. And I’m out…not worth even communicating with people like Dave. Browter said:
Rusty Old-Banger said:
You like an argument, don't you Dave?
Dave posted a video of a Model 3 Performance Stealth saying it wasn’t a Model 3 Performance to make some point about it beating an M340i. Gets pointed out a Model 3 Performance Stealth is a Model 3 Performance without the trim (I looked it up as I didn’t know). Dave then asks me to explain why anyone would buy an M340i over a Model 3, a point I never raised or suggested. Complains I have jumped into the conversation half way through without context, despite me making a valid point purely about the video he posted and nothing else and despite me having read every page of this thread since it started. Dave must own this thread to be able to gatekeep it with such conviction. And I’m out…not worth even communicating with people like Dave. Dave200 said:
DonkeyApple said:
Dave200 said:
Congratulations. Perhaps now you can explain why someone might pay the same to own a zero-option M340 when it's so much slower than a stock Performance.
They're much wealthier and more successful? 
Edited by Unreal on Tuesday 16th July 14:46
PinkHouse said:
nickfrog said:
irc said:
Why trade in your old petrol car to buy an EV when you won't save on running costs and will be paying increased depreciation costs.
Without a driveway the savings on running costs would probably be limited indeed. As for depreciation, used EVs don't seem to depreciate more than used ICE cars from what I have seen.
If you don't buy new they would actually be a bargain.
Check the price of used ID3s, EV6s and CX30s either trade or private over the past 6 months and come back to me. I do hope you're right by the way but facts tell me otherwise sadly.
CG2020UK said:
Surely you could just ask this about any car as every car is flawed
Exactly. A point that is missed when doing EV vs ICE comparisons - each car has its own merits and flaws. Its not really that difficult to see.
I cant really decide these days whether I would bother with a fast performance ICE car now. One it attracts attention - which some quite enjoy and two after being in the tesla on/off for 18 months, I just dont need anything more. Frankly if I am exploring any more performance than is on offer on the main road then I deserve to be banned.
I suspect even that "emotion" of a nice sounding engine would maybe attract me for a day or two until I decided in reality I just want that a few weekends a year and for the rest of the time just making progress quietly without shouting about it.
Register1 said:
I cant believe there is any vehicle with cheaper running costs than a Tesla model 3 
163 watt hours per mile is insane.
It is for all intent and purpose, running for nothing.
Charging at home off peak at 7 pence per Kw hour.
Do the maths.
Is it accurate? I have an EV too, so I'm not a sceptic in that way, but on my eNy1, I've worked out the difference between what I'm being charged by Octopus, the actual increase in charge, and the drop over a certain distance. I make it I'm getting about 10% less than what I'm paying for (expected heat losses etc), and the car itself is a bit too generous by only a few %163 watt hours per mile is insane.
It is for all intent and purpose, running for nothing.
Charging at home off peak at 7 pence per Kw hour.
Do the maths.
Most car OBDs exaggerated the mpg figures, I had a Panda that was out by 10% !
I've averaged 3.9 miles / kWh over 2300 miles (that's 256 Wh / miles) something all the testers and reviewers said wasn't 'realistic' in an eNy1.
Not used it on a very cold day yet mind.Register1 said:
I cant believe there is any vehicle with cheaper running costs than a Tesla model 3
163 watt hours per mile is insane.
It is for all intent and purpose, running for nothing.
Charging at home off peak at 7 pence per Kw hour.
Do the maths.
163 is fantastic. I assume this was slow-moving traffic without loads of accessories on?163 watt hours per mile is insane.
It is for all intent and purpose, running for nothing.
Charging at home off peak at 7 pence per Kw hour.
Do the maths.
I'm happy to see <250, as that typically means I'm going to get over 300 miles to a 'fill'. I think my ownership average is a shade over 250, because I tend not to do too many journeys where I'm worrying about range/consumption. That said, it's perfectly possible to do long journeys on mixed roads in the 220s without hypermiling.
halo34 said:
CG2020UK said:
Surely you could just ask this about any car as every car is flawed
Exactly. A point that is missed when doing EV vs ICE comparisons - each car has its own merits and flaws. Its not really that difficult to see.
I cant really decide these days whether I would bother with a fast performance ICE car now. One it attracts attention - which some quite enjoy and two after being in the tesla on/off for 18 months, I just dont need anything more. Frankly if I am exploring any more performance than is on offer on the main road then I deserve to be banned.
I suspect even that "emotion" of a nice sounding engine would maybe attract me for a day or two until I decided in reality I just want that a few weekends a year and for the rest of the time just making progress quietly without shouting about it.
It’s not the fastest, not the most comfortable, not the best looking, not the most practical, not the best EV and not the cheapest.
You just weighed the factors up for however suit you best and it seems your Tesla was the right choice for you. Equally others may have a different criteria that a Tesla can’t meet so they wouldn’t buy it. Doesn’t mean a car is bad just doesn’t suit you.
Horses for courses.
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff