Many will know Rowan Atkinson as an actor and comedian. But, in addition to that, he's a keen car enthusiast, collector, and racer who holds a degree in electrical engineering and a master's degree in control systems. He is also an early adopter of electric cars, having bought a BMW i3 EV in 2014. Considering all of these factors, I think Atkinson is uniquely qualified to assess the viability of electric cars and the electrified future we are being sold on.
Atkinson, for his part, is not convinced and says so in the article below...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson
He makes a compelling argument and I have to say I find myself agreeing with him. EVs are just not ready for prime time and I don't think they ever will be, for the very reasons Atkinson states. For proof of this, consider that since this article was published, the UK had pushed back the date of the ICE-ban from 2030 (as mentioned in the article) to 2035. And I wouldn't be surprised if the date were to be pushed back again. And again. And again. Because banning internal combustion engines will ultimately prove to be an unworkable solution.
Needless to say, Atkinson has unleashed a firestorm of controversy over this article and has become public enemy number one among the legions of EV evangelists.
Let's see. He says this about EV batteries: "and they are estimated to last only upwards of 10 years" which has already proven to be false, with EVs over 10 years old running around, many with very high miles on them. Yes, the early low range cars will last less time, due to the number of charge cycles and range equalling fairly low overall miles. But on cars with 200-300 miles of range (unlike his i3) the number increases to half a million miles or more, which is 40+ years in normal use. Since we already see early Teslas over 10 years old and with 300k+ miles on them, THAT looks to be true, not his claim about "upwards of 10 years."
He also mentions hydrogen. The "hydrogen future" has been 5-120 years off for decades. It's just too energy intensive to get hydrogen from hydrocarbons or water. You'd use less energy just putting that electricity into batteries directly. As an electrical engineer, he should know that.
So I'm skeptical about the rest of his facts in that piece.
Yes, there were some exaggerations, but overall he is correct. It's been more than 10 years and EVs are still not ready for prime time, even setting aside the ever-increasing acknowledgement that they're probably not more environmentally friendly in scale (esp. NIMBY pollution transfer).
As most probably know, EVs have been around just as long as ICE-powered vehicles, however, they've always lagged in utility in general. Even so, they've stuck around because in isolated instances, they are better - such as electric forklifts inside a large factory. However, those instances are rare and so it goes with EVs.
Yeah there was a lot of pushback on that.
My feeling is that few EV buyers suddenly become cognitively dissonant, lose all objectivity, yield to post-purchase rationalization, & ignore the faults in their new purchases. The people I know who have bought EVs tend to be engineers, left brain thinkers: nerds, techies & geeks who overanalyze the hell out of everything.
If they say they are delighted with their EV, it's not because they have suddenly lost all critical faculties. It's just possible they are delighted because their EVs are objectively and legitimately better than the ICE vehicles they had before.
Quote from: GoCougs on October 12, 2023, 07:27:57 AMYes, there were some exaggerations, but overall he is correct. It's been more than 10 years and EVs are still not ready for prime time
If you need to exaggerate like that to make a point as an engineer, you lost the plot already. If you're trying to sway people by pointing out facts, you don't do it with non-facts.
Prime time? When have edge cases become "prime time?" The majority of folks out there can use an EV as is right now. People who road trip weekly or tow 10,000 lbs plus every day aren't going to be well served by them, but those folks are NOT in the majority. The majority of drivers drive less than 1 500+ mile road trip annually and most never go beyond 200 miles, even in rural areas where you are rarely more than 100 miles from your town to do the weekly/monthly shopping. A LOT of studies have been done about this (studies that have nothing to do with EVs, but by insurance companies and outfits like AAA studying the driven habits of Americans).
Yes, 10 years ago, the only EVs were either old lead acid city cars and hobbyist conversions or the Tesla and Leaf (and the first gen Volt). And there were no DCFC sites anywhere, though Tesla was starting to roll out Superchargers. 5 years ago, you could (though not easily) travel from coast to coast, though there were a LOT of charging deserts and the fastest fast chargers were only 50kW units. 5 years later and there are tens of thousands of fast charge points in the country and you're never more than 50 miles from one. EVs have gone from 70-80 mile range compliance cars to the average EV having 250 miles of range, so you're ALWAYS within range of a fast charger. But we've also seen that, like with gas cars, most people rarely need to visit one as they rarely take road trips. They are proving to last way longer than early expectations.
If, similar to what has happened in the UK, the USA were to backpedal on EVs, what would be the reasons?
He makes some good points, especially that development should continue on various environmentally safe fuels for ICE cars.
My favourite Rowan Atkinson skit...
I think the harsh truth is that no car-based solution can be environmentally feasible in the long run. It's not just the cars themselves, it's also how cities and societies need to build around them. This is especially true for for the places that are currently experiencing massive population explosions, e.g. sub-saharan Africa.
We are kind of kidding ourselves that EVs are a solution. At best they are a harm reduction measure. (They are comfortable, fun and convenient which is why I like mine.)
The government definitely shouldn't be paying for rich people's carbon-positive EV toys. An electric Hummer with its gargantuan 246kWh battery will NEVER break-even over an ICE counterpart. It's an abomination that perversely will still be used by yuppies to signal their environmental virtues. IMO a lot of the BEV stimulus bucks should go toward hybridization where a little bit of extra $ can go a long ways toward reducing emissions.
Quote from: ChrisV on October 12, 2023, 09:43:52 AMIf you need to exaggerate like that to make a point as an engineer, you lost the plot already. If you're trying to sway people by pointing out facts, you don't do it with non-facts.
Prime time? When have edge cases become "prime time?" The majority of folks out there can use an EV as is right now. People who road trip weekly or tow 10,000 lbs plus every day aren't going to be well served by them, but those folks are NOT in the majority. The majority of drivers drive less than 1 500+ mile road trip annually and most never go beyond 200 miles, even in rural areas where you are rarely more than 100 miles from your town to do the weekly/monthly shopping. A LOT of studies have been done about this (studies that have nothing to do with EVs, but by insurance companies and outfits like AAA studying the driven habits of Americans).
Yes, 10 years ago, the only EVs were either old lead acid city cars and hobbyist conversions or the Tesla and Leaf (and the first gen Volt). And there were no DCFC sites anywhere, though Tesla was starting to roll out Superchargers. 5 years ago, you could (though not easily) travel from coast to coast, though there were a LOT of charging deserts and the fastest fast chargers were only 50kW units. 5 years later and there are tens of thousands of fast charge points in the country and you're never more than 50 miles from one. EVs have gone from 70-80 mile range compliance cars to the average EV having 250 miles of range, so you're ALWAYS within range of a fast charger. But we've also seen that, like with gas cars, most people rarely need to visit one as they rarely take road trips. They are proving to last way longer than early expectations.
Again, I agree, the piece was mos def not well thought out - even just the title was click baity. However, the conclusions are correct - many people could roll an EV but an EV is not equivalent to an ICEV and truly being environmental WRT personal transportation is buying a used efficient ICEV and driving less.
Being truly environmental is ebikes everywhere and an infrastructure which allows people to ride them safely. :lol: A kilowatt hour of electricity is more than most people will need in a day. Even a modest solar panel would be enough to recharge a bike in just a few hours.
The two times I went to China were before and after mass ownership of cars. The mass mobility on bikes in the Before-Times was so much better than the stoplight gridlock I experienced a decade later.
Quote from: Laconian on October 12, 2023, 12:03:47 PMI think the harsh truth is that no car-based solution can be environmentally feasible in the long run. It's not just the cars themselves, it's also how cities and societies need to build around them. This is especially true for for the places that are currently experiencing massive population explosions, e.g. sub-saharan Africa.
We are kind of kidding ourselves that EVs are a solution. At best they are a harm reduction measure. (They are comfortable, fun and convenient which is why I like mine.)
The government definitely shouldn't be paying for rich people's carbon-positive EV toys. An electric Hummer with its gargantuan 246kWh battery will NEVER break-even over an ICE counterpart. It's an abomination that perversely will still be used by yuppies to signal their environmental virtues. IMO a lot of the BEV stimulus bucks should go toward hybridization where a little bit of extra $ can go a long ways toward reducing emissions.
The level of car accidents that we find acceptable is crazy, IMO. Everyone hurtles along at 80 mph to and from work, burnt out and barely awake, just hoping no one else crashes into them.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on October 12, 2023, 03:08:06 PMThe level of car accidents that we find acceptable is crazy, IMO. Everyone hurtles along at 80 mph to and from work, burnt out and barely awake, just hoping no one else crashes into them.
It is rapidly getting worse. Soon, I will have get something bigger than TUNDRA just to not die.
Before buying my Escape, I briefly thought about an EV. After all, I'd love not spending money at least twice a week putting a smelly, expensive, and hazardous liquid into my car. The savings on maintenance and servicing also appealed to me, too. I have a long commute to work, consisting of mostly interstate driving, so my theoretical savings would be considerable.
However, after looking at all the available options and crunching the numbers, I quickly determined going electric would actually cost me more money on a per-mile basis than sticking with gasoline. The biggest contributing factor was the cost of the EV itself. All of the affordable models had inadequate range for my needs while the ones with sufficient range were outrageously expensive. The up-front costs more than wiped out any savings in fuel and servicing I would experience. Simply put, the positives didn't outweigh the negatives. Or, as the cool kids would say, "The juice ain't worth the squeeze!"
I can see an EV working as a second or third car in a multi-car household. But even then, I think an EV has too many limitations compared to an ICE car that can be had for far less money. I can buy a lot of unleaded with the money I save on an ICE car and not have to worry about pre-planning my route or being stranded somewhere with a depleted EV battery and no fast charger in sight. Maybe things will be different in ten, twenty, or thirty years time but, in the here-and-now, an EV just isn't a viable option for me, nor for a lot of other people.
Fact is, MANY people in our country can't realistically charge an EV unless it's at work. More people live in apartments than some people (especially law makers) realize.
I'm convinced hybrid is the immediate best solution. Small batteries. No charging infrastructure needed. Double the mpg of a regular ICE vehicle.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on October 13, 2023, 04:07:38 AMFact is, MANY people in our country can't realistically charge an EV unless it's at work. More people live in apartments than some people (especially law makers) realize.
I'm convinced hybrid is the immediate best solution. Small batteries. No charging infrastructure needed. Double the mpg of a regular ICE vehicle.
This will be the answer given to my backpedaling question above. "The infrastructure isn't there" and "Hybrids are the answer."
This will satisfy the established car makers, unions, oil companies, dealers, and their political representatives.
It will not satisfy health advocates & climate campaigners.
The market for pure EVs will be ceded to Tesla, BYD and a couple of other Chinese brands I can't even name.
Oh, yes. Predatory Chinese carmakers are watching Western manufacturers abandon entire vehicle segments, and you can bet they are rubbing their hands with glee, ready to pounce. They can hardly believe their luck! They're already flooding Latin America and Europe with cheap EVs and it's only a matter of time before they set their sights on North America. You heard it here first!
BTW, another expense I had to consider when I was contemplating an EV was installing a wallbox charger in my garage. I also considered the possibility of charging at work, too. However, without any fast charging facilities at work to rely upon, the best I could hope for was being granted access to a conventional 120v electrical outlet. Hardly ideal, but better than nothing. At least I'm in the fortunate position of being a homeowner with a garage, thus making fast charging at home a realistic proposition. But what are people who live in apartments or high-rise buildings to do? Public chargers are few in number, expensive and are often occupied or broken when needed. It seems to me, unless you are able to charge at home, running an EV is a non starter.
I might have been willing to modify my driving habits if there were a real, demonstrable environmental benefit to EV driving but, yet again, the reality has not lived up to the promise. The environmental and human costs involved in the manufacture of EV batteries has been well documented and is far from the clean and green magic bullet they were cracked up to be.
Carbon neutral synthetic fuels show much more promise. The problem with the internal combustion engine is not the engine, it's the fuel that goes in it. To address this, Porsche has a pilot plant in Chile using wind power and carbon capture technology that removes CO2 from the atmosphere to make synthetic motor fuel. It may be expensive to produce now but it's only a matter of time before production can be scaled up to the point where the cost will come down. Most of us already run synthetic oil in our engines, so it's hardly a giant leap of imagination to think of putting synthetic fuel in our tanks someday.
In closing, It seems I'm not the only EV sceptic out there. A new Yahoo Finance-Ipsos poll shows 57% of Americans say they are unlikely to buy an EV.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/new-yahoo-finance-ipsos-poll-shows-over-half-of-americans-unlikely-to-buy-an-ev-130040140.html
Correct. Until the charging infrastructure is there to support a massive, massive number of EVs (think, truck-stop sized places necessary for all the people that can't charge at home), it's a complete non-starter.
The people that can afford a $50k+ EV that has an adequate range are likely homeowners that can afford to also have a proper charger installed in their garage.
This is not the everyman. Only 66% of Americans actually own their home, and not all of those are wealthy people in a suburb with a garage and money to burn.
Quote from: Madman on October 13, 2023, 10:55:16 PMOh, yes. Predatory Chinese carmakers are watching Western manufacturers abandon entire vehicle segments, and you can bet they are rubbing their hands with glee, ready to pounce. They can hardly believe their luck! They're already flooding Latin America and Europe with cheap EVs and it's only a matter of time before they set their sights on North America. You heard it here first!
Motortrend did some investigation on China EVs and how they intend to take over the US market. I posted it on the EV thread, but in short they are investing massive money in Mexican factories as their entry fee for US distribution.
It's not surprising less than 60% of Americans would consider an EV. Only 63% of households have a garage or carport (many of which are just a single car space as well).
The Lucid Sapphire is pretty sweet tho. But it takes $250k to get there, and even then Lucid will not survive on its own. The majority of the USA (probably 60% at least) is somewheres between paycheck-to-paycheck and worse than broke.
Despite many years, the dismal state of non-Tesla fast charging infrastructure is predictor of the eventual level of adoption of EVs (= small, and otherwise not near to the extent justifying the destruction of the US auto industry via mandates and regulation).
They issued the mandates without sitting down to figure out who would build the EVs.
I don't understand why a good solution needs to be perfect for everyone?
Not every American owns a home and has a garage, sure. But a majority of Americans do! And in-home charging is really where EVs shine. Charging happens invisibly, slowly, and off-peak. It's an amazing convenience when it all works, and there are many many millions of households that are eligible.
For folks that don't have access to garages and whatnot, they can all benefit from hybridization which reuses the very same fruits of the R&D tree as BEVs.
Honestly if China cracks the market of lower end cars then they deserve it.
For too long US automakers have cynically deprived Americans of right-sized transportation in the name of maximizing sales of profitable barn-door behemoths.
Quote from: Laconian on October 14, 2023, 11:50:14 AMI don't understand why a good solution needs to be perfect for everyone?
Not every American owns a home and has a garage, sure. But a majority of Americans do! And in-home charging is really where EVs shine. Charging happens invisibly, slowly, and off-peak. It's an amazing convenience when it all works, and there are many many millions of households that are eligible.
For folks that don't have access to garages and whatnot, they can all benefit from hybridization which reuses the very same fruits of the R&D tree as BEVs.
Thing is, to build affordable vehicles of any motorvation takes immense time, money and resources. The only way EVs become both affordable and a viable business is fairly widespread adoption.
You don't need to look any further than the engagement rate on this Electric Power board in the 'SPIN to see where things are going. EVs pique spinners' interest and several of us have already made the jump.
My argument that we'll backpedal on pure EVs is not to do with the shortcomings of EV hardware & (crucially) software. I'm not worried about that; stuff is being fixed, the pace of development over the last 10 years has been rapid, and I don't see it slowing down.
I think we'll backpedal because EVs are such a threat to established players and all the livelihoods tied up in ICE manufacturing: automakers, suppliers, dealers... millions of folks whose skills will not be required. This is worth watching. It covers some of it, highlights VW, but ignores VW's struggles to sell its current EV offerings, which are largely hobbled by crap software.
I'm still calling it - Detroit planned this strike in order to break the UAW and EVs is a big part of it.
Quote from: r0tor on October 14, 2023, 07:46:26 AMMotortrend did some investigation on China EVs and how they intend to take over the US market. I posted it on the EV thread, but in short they are investing massive money in Mexican factories as their entry fee for US distribution.
I found the article you mentioned. Yep, you called it!
Mexico will be the Trojan Horse from which the Chinese carmakers will invade America. The Detroit Three have already been complicit in clearing a path for them by abandoning passenger cars altogether and affordable vehicles in general. Detroit's motto should be "If you can't compete, retreat!"
Yes, the Chinese have come a long way over the last few years. Of course, that's pretty easy for them to do when their Western partners are forced to hand them all of their technology and intellectual property.
Oh, and don't think for one minute the Chinese will limit themselves to EVs in America, either. As the video attached to the article made clear, many of the Chinese transplant factories in Mexico are building ICE cars, too. If the Chinese come to dominate the affordable vehicle segment in the US, you can expect to see the Detroit Three retreat even further behind their tariff-protected truck sales.
Nah, China has no chance against VinFast!
I don't think China will make significant inroads into the U.S. auto market in terms of Chinese branded cars. As the article mentions,
"In simple terms, it comes down to whether the U.S. government will allow Chinese automakers to establish American operations; considering today's political tensions, it's unlikely we'll see Chinese cars here any time soon."
I think Congress and/or the next POTUS will alter the rules of the Inflation Reduction Act and the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA - which replaced NAFTA) to prevent a Chinese takeover of the EV market. Also from the article: "The U.S. will end up with expensive electric vehicles because of this determination to protect the domestic market..."
I want a cheap EV. I can't afford a 'merican one.
Quote from: Laconian on October 14, 2023, 11:50:14 AMI don't understand why a good solution needs to be perfect for everyone?
Because if governments around the world are hell-bent on banning ICE cars, EVs will NEED to be perfect for everyone.
Alternatively, we could just allow the engineers and scientists work out more practical and effective solutions, free from political interference. But why would we want to do that, right? ;)
Quote from: Madman on October 17, 2023, 04:15:54 PMBecause if governments around the world are hell-bent on banning ICE cars, EVs will NEED to be perfect for everyone.
This.
Maverick, Escapes, something else I'm sure are hecho en Mexico.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on October 17, 2023, 06:33:30 PMMaverick, Escapes, something else I'm sure are hecho en Mexico.
New Taco is a Mexican.
G20 BMWs too
The argument will be that the planet is burning up, and if we are incapable of supplying the needed EVs, then let it be the Chinese; so be it.
As I've mentioned before, I'm pretty certain the lobbying from the established players to backtrack on the mandates will be deafening.
The diktats were put in place on the assumption that it would be traditional vehicle manufacturers that would deliver.
They haven't.
So hybrids it is.
They can do hybrids.
Can't they?
We really should be pushing for regular hybrids at this stage of development if we cared about the planet.
Quote from: r0tor on October 19, 2023, 06:00:32 AMWe really should be pushing for regular hybrids at this stage of development if we cared about the planet.
That's unacceptable to environmentalists and politicians. The change must be drastic/complete and happen now. There's no room for discussions of logical stepping stones.
Quote from: r0tor on October 19, 2023, 06:00:32 AMWe really should be pushing for regular hybrids at this stage of development if we cared about the planet.
If we cared about the planet we'd also completely remove safety mandates: all those crush zones, side-intrusion beams and reinforced roof pillars are incredibly heavy and exact huge CO2 penalties.
Quote from: r0tor on October 19, 2023, 06:00:32 AMWe really should be pushing for regular hybrids at this stage of development if we cared about the planet.
I agree. Hybrids, given the ongoing research and development, will/should become much more efficient both in their I/C and electric motivation as technology progresses. As well, the I/C component may well become much more environmentally friendly as alternative "green" fuels are more available.
Welp, hybrids were given a good go for 20+ years, and WtP didn't really buy them either, unless it was a Toyota. They'll have the same limitations as EVs for widespread adoption (batteries, more electronics, high cost) just not so much.
Hybrids are fine - Toyota's honed them to goodness.
But, with the plugins, if you actually plug them in, I can't help thinking that their gas engines spend most of their existence shut off. Cold deadweight. If you don't plug them in they just suck gas dragging the battery & motor around.
So I'd say go with a pure EV or a regular hybrid.
Quote from: Morris Minor on October 19, 2023, 08:35:55 PMHybrids are fine - Toyota's honed them to goodness.
But, with the plugins, if you actually plug them in, I can't help thinking that their gas engines spend most of their existence shut off. Cold deadweight.
You could say the same thing about your typical BEV in a suburb.
I've driven over 1000 miles this month and I don't think I've used more than 35% of the pack's capacity on any given day.
I think either way you are carrying extra weight/material around with a BEV or PHEV. Either way is still more efficient than a pure ICE vehicle.
Personally I think I'd prefer a pure EV. At least you can avoid having to do oil changes in the future (I do my own today because its more convenient than driving to a dealership or garage, but its still not fun).
Quote from: SJ_GTI on October 20, 2023, 06:04:46 AMI think either way you are carrying extra weight/material around with a BEV or PHEV. Either way is still more efficient than a pure ICE vehicle.
Personally I think I'd prefer a pure EV. At least you can avoid having to do oil changes in the future (I do my own today because its more convenient than driving to a dealership or garage, but its still not fun).
Pure EV, and ICE rentals if you're uncomfortable about long haul trips.
I read some comparison that PHEV really don't make sense economically compared to hybrids. :huh:
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on October 20, 2023, 12:15:17 PMI read some comparison that PHEV really don't make sense economically compared to hybrids. :huh:
It all depends on usage patterns, the PHEV price premium, and the price of gas in your state.
PHEVs usually are averaging only 1-2 miles per KW which makes them pretty terrible.
Quote from: Madman on October 17, 2023, 04:15:54 PMBecause if governments around the world are hell-bent on banning ICE cars, EVs will NEED to be perfect for everyone.
Alternatively, we could just allow the engineers and scientists work out more practical and effective solutions, free from political interference. But why would we want to do that, right? ;)
Do you think the bans will be implemented as-is? I'm fully expecting the dates to shift, but having aggressive targets is a great way to drive the necessary urgency and set the tone of long term schedules and investments.
I think pretty close to zero percent chance that bans of ICE will be implemented in the U.S. even in California.
Example Los Angeles is not very public transit friendly and < 50% of inhabitants own their own homes.
It's ludicrous to think you can successfully ban new ICE cars with those facts on the ground.
The EV charging infrastructure needs to be commercialized before an ICE ban forces it, or shit will hit fans
Quote from: Laconian on October 21, 2023, 10:54:12 AMDo you think the bans will be implemented as-is? I'm fully expecting the dates to shift, but having aggressive targets is a great way to drive the necessary urgency and set the tone of long term schedules and investments.
The ICE ban date in the UK has already shifted from 2030 to 2035, and I fully expect it to be delayed again at some point. Same goes for the EU's current 2035 ICE ban. As that date approaches and cold hard reality smacks regulators in the face, even they will have to reluctantly admit their grandiose plans for an all-electric utopia on such a short timescale was naïve at best and foolishly asinine at worst.
Also consider in the next few years alternative technologies such as local on-site hydrogen production and carbon neutral synthetic fuels may very well ramp-up to the point of commercial viability and give the internal combustion engine a new lease on life. Such innovation could very well render EVs a technological dead end in much the same way the internal combustion engine combined with the electric self starter consigned early EVs to redundancy by the 1920s.
We may soon be enjoying the benefits of these new technologies, assuming Western car manufacturers haven't all driven themselves into bankruptcy developing and building EVs nobody wants to buy.
Quote from: veeman on October 21, 2023, 12:52:59 PMI think pretty close to zero percent chance that bans of ICE will be implemented in the U.S. even in California.
Bingo! An ICE ban in the US, even in California, would be political suicide for any politician stupid enough to even suggest such a thing. The blowback from voters across the political spectrum would be swift and punishing. Therefore, it will never happen. Hell, we haven't been able to raise the Federal Fuel Tax since 1993 to fix our post-apocalyptic third world roads because our spineless so-called "leaders" are too chickenshit to make the case for doing so to the brain-dead American electorate.
The compelling thing with EVs is the lack of moving parts. They'll always beat reciprocating engines on that front.
Quote from: Morris Minor on October 22, 2023, 06:23:34 AMThe compelling thing with EVs is the lack of moving parts. They'll always beat reciprocating engines on that front.
They have plenty of moving parts- but small coolant pumps and other EV tech are way easier to replace than a big cast iron (or aluminum) motor with all the other bits that are required to make it run...
Quote from: Morris Minor on October 22, 2023, 06:23:34 AMThe compelling thing with EVs is the lack of moving parts. They'll always beat reciprocating engines on that front.
I've had issues with wheel bearings, ball joints, shocks, and brakes more than anything else related to the ICE itself on a vehicle...things that EVs also still have to have (aka, regular maintenance items).
People are so jacked they don't need to change their oil once or twice a year like it's some miracle from God.
You guys change it more than every couple years??....
Quote from: giant_mtb on October 22, 2023, 07:03:29 AMI've had issues with wheel bearings, ball joints, shocks, and brakes more than anything else related to the ICE itself on a vehicle...things that EVs also still have to have (aka, regular maintenance items).
People are so jacked they don't need to change their oil once or twice a year like it's some miracle from God.
How many moving parts are optimal?
Also ICE engines stink, literally.
Quote from: Morris Minor on October 22, 2023, 08:23:47 AMHow many moving parts are optimal?
Also ICE engines stink, literally.
Please, do tell me how suspension components and brakes are not "optimal."
Quote from: Morris Minor on October 22, 2023, 08:23:47 AMHow many moving parts are optimal?
Also ICE engines stink, literally.
Oh? Was that from your experience with the Honda and the G37? :devil:
They stink. And you need nitrile gloves to handle them. It's like steam locomotives vs diesels. Maintenance & upkeep are like night & day.
Quote from: Laconian on October 19, 2023, 09:03:45 PMYou could say the same thing about your typical BEV in a suburb.
I've driven over 1000 miles this month and I don't think I've used more than 35% of the pack's capacity on any given day.
Metcalfe going a bit into the weeds on PHEVs vs EVs. He hits on a lot of the points you've made.
Quote from: giant_mtb on October 22, 2023, 07:03:29 AMI've had issues with wheel bearings, ball joints, shocks, and brakes more than anything else related to the ICE itself on a vehicle...things that EVs also still have to have (aka, regular maintenance items).
People are so jacked they don't need to change their oil once or twice a year like it's some miracle from God.
No oil changes, pretty much no brake pad changes, no spark plug changes, no trips to the gas station every week, no transmission oil changes, no engine air filter changes, no head gasket problems, no topping up the oil once you're over 100k miles, etc.
If you look at the maintenance schedule for my Bolt vs. my Miata or 3 series, it's so much less.
For sure maintenance is better!
I gas Mav up once/month and don't ever fret about recharging..
I do fret over what the maintenance is going to look like in 6+ years....
Quote from: CaminoRacer on October 22, 2023, 09:22:10 PMNo oil changes, pretty much no brake pad changes, no spark plug changes, no trips to the gas station every week, no transmission oil changes, no engine air filter changes, no head gasket problems, no topping up the oil once you're over 100k miles, etc.
If you look at the maintenance schedule for my Bolt vs. my Miata or 3 series, it's so much less.
Yeah, there's a substantially less amount of fluids, belts, etc to worry about. The Bolt is literally: tire rotation and cabin filter :lol: There isn't even an air filter.
That reminds me, I need to rotate the Bolt tires. I'll probably just do it myself with jack stands in the garage.
I just put $15 in TUNDRA. That'll last through Wednesday. TUNDRA.
Quote from: MrH on October 23, 2023, 01:39:15 PMYeah, there's a substantially less amount of fluids, belts, etc to worry about. The Bolt is literally: tire rotation and cabin filter :lol: There isn't even an air filter.
That reminds me, I need to rotate the Bolt tires. I'll probably just do it myself with jack stands in the garage.
The problem with EVs for enthusiasts is that there is so little maintenance. You'll be rotating the tires every week.
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on October 23, 2023, 01:53:10 PMThe problem with EVs for enthusiasts is that there is so little maintenance. You'll be rotating the tires every week.
:rockon:
Quote from: CaminoRacer on October 22, 2023, 09:22:10 PMNo oil changes, pretty much no brake pad changes, no spark plug changes, no trips to the gas station every week, no transmission oil changes, no engine air filter changes, no head gasket problems, no topping up the oil once you're over 100k miles, etc.
If you look at the maintenance schedule for my Bolt vs. my Miata or 3 series, it's so much less.
Most owners don't even own a new car long enough to worry about most of that stuff outside of gas and maybe the $20 air filter
Low maintenance is one of the few items you can put in the "plus" column for EVs when evaluating EV versus ICE, and probably one of an EV's biggest selling points. If only there were more positives to outweigh the negatives, I could make a valid case for purchasing an EV.
I think the reason for the recent softening of EV sales is that we are nearing a saturation point for EVs in the marketplace. By which I mean that nearly everyone who wanted to buy an EV has already done so, leaving limited scope for future growth in the segment. With more EV models being introduced and competing for fewer customers, I predict a glut of unsold cars and a great deal of financial pain for a good many car manufacturers in the next few years.
Again, EV sales were up 49.8% over the same quarter last year (in the US). Saying that the "market is softening" is misleading. The growth is slowing. The growth is still extremely large relatively to anything else within the car market. 49.8% growth also does not suggest everyone who wants an EV now has an EV or that there are fewer people buying EV's.
2023 will be a record year for EV's. There is nothing on the sales side that suggest 2024 won't be another new record.
Quote from: SJ_GTI on October 26, 2023, 05:57:13 AMAgain, EV sales were up 49.8% over the same quarter last year (in the US). Saying that the "market is softening" is misleading. The growth is slowing. The growth is still extremely large relatively to anything else within the car market. 49.8% growth also does not suggest everyone who wants an EV now has an EV or that there are fewer people buying EV's.
2023 will be a record year for EV's. There is nothing on the sales side that suggest 2024 won't be another new record.
The measure of success, both for the OEM and the general perception, is not comparing adoption rate and YoY growth. It's the measure of supply and demand. We're seeing inventory sit for EVs, big price cuts, and it's only just starting. The EV capacity & number of models is growing faster than the demand. The number of new EVs coming is wild too. OEMs are scrambling to dial things back and invest more into hybrids.
It doesn't matter if EV market share grows year over year, if there's an excess of supply and every OEM is losing their ass on each car.
Quote from: MrH on October 26, 2023, 02:42:48 PMThe measure of success, both for the OEM and the general perception, is not comparing adoption rate and YoY growth. It's the measure of supply and demand. We're seeing inventory sit for EVs, big price cuts, and it's only just starting. The EV capacity & number of models is growing faster than the demand. The number of new EVs coming is wild too. OEMs are scrambling to dial things back and invest more into hybrids.
It doesn't matter if EV market share grows year over year, if there's an excess of supply and every OEM is losing their ass on each car.
You are talking about different things (ie: moving the goalpost).
The demand for EV's is growing. The production of EV's is growing faster than demand. Neither of those support the conclusions presented in the post I was responding to:
Quote,,,nearly everyone who wanted to buy an EV has already done so, leaving limited scope for future growth in the segment./
BTW, as someone who will probably buy an EV when my current daily driver is done I am really happy that they are overproducing. Hopefully it will mean lower prices when I am ready to buy.
Quote from: SJ_GTI on October 26, 2023, 02:55:16 PMYou are talking about different things (ie: moving the goalpost).
The demand for EV's is growing. The production of EV's is growing faster than demand. Neither of those support the conclusions presented in the post I was responding to:
Quote,,,nearly everyone who wanted to buy an EV has already done so, leaving limited scope for future growth in the segment./
Ah, didn't realize you were responding specifically to Madman's post. In that sense, I agree. My bad.
Quote from: SJ_GTI on October 26, 2023, 02:56:21 PMBTW, as someone who will probably buy an EV when my current daily driver is done I am really happy that they are overproducing. Hopefully it will mean lower prices when I am ready to buy.
Same :lol:
The whole market is going to be wild, especially when you throw in potential tax incentives, the loopholes associated with them, clearing end of year inventory, and rapidly changing models. Some crazy deals will be had.
Quote from: SJ_GTI on October 26, 2023, 02:56:21 PMBTW, as someone who will probably buy an EV when my current daily driver is done I am really happy that they are overproducing. Hopefully it will mean lower prices when I am ready to buy.
That's all I can hope for. I can't even afford a Bolt, Jolt, Spark, whatever the cheapest one is
For the EV manufacturers, the early adopters were the low hanging fruit. They were going to buy one anyway, no matter what. The problem is most of those early adopters already have their EVs. Now the EV manufacturers have to convince everyone else that an EV is the way to go and that is going to be a MUCH tougher hill to climb.
EV sales may still be growing, albeit at a slower rate than before, but dealer inventory is also growing much faster than the rate of sales.
https://jalopnik.com/dealers-are-turning-away-ev-inventory-report-1850771467
https://www.businessinsider.com/dealers-turning-away-evs-velectric-cars-demand-cools-inventory-2023-8
Quote from: SJ_GTI on October 26, 2023, 05:57:13 AMAgain, EV sales were up 49.8% over the same quarter last year (in the US). Saying that the "market is softening" is misleading. The growth is slowing. The growth is still extremely large relatively to anything else within the car market. 49.8% growth also does not suggest everyone who wants an EV now has an EV or that there are fewer people buying EV's.
2023 will be a record year for EV's. There is nothing on the sales side that suggest 2024 won't be another new record.
If I sell one widget today, and two widgets next year, I'm up 100%. But not really. My business is failing if not failed. IOW, Scale (and scope counts). Against the backdrop of the slow down in growth, the new entrants, the many (MANY) days of supply, the price drops, and EV sales have absolutely softened.
Hold up, there are a couple things that need discussing.
First of is EV mandates. There are no ban on ICE coming down the pike. the mandates (for 12 years in teh future) are for no NEW ICE sales (except for PHEVs with 50+ miles of range). No band on existing ICE vehicles, so in 12 years time, you'll still be able to drive/buy USED ICE vehicles. So we don't have to have the infrastructure ready for everyone to drive EVs in 12 years time. It'll be many decades before that needs to occur. So all this handwringing about how the infrastructure isn't perfect NOW for everyone to go to EVs is patently stupid. It physically can't happen, so acting like it will is just dumb. There's more than enough time to figure it out for the 25% of people that have either on-steet parking or are in apartments/condos.
Second is this horseshit:
"It's the measure of supply and demand. We're seeing inventory sit for EVs, big price cuts, and it's only just starting. The EV capacity & number of models is growing faster than the demand. The number of new EVs coming is wild too. OEMs are scrambling to dial things back and invest more into hybrids.
It doesn't matter if EV market share grows year over year, if there's an excess of supply and every OEM is losing their ass on each car."
Don't know if you've noticed, but inventory is up for ALL cars now, vs a year ago. It's not that demand is dropping, but that supply chains are working themselves out and we are getting back to historically NORMAL inventory levels. But, and this is important, EVs are actually doing well. Look how the Bolt has been doing in the links below, substantially under industry average (ICE or EV). At the top end, there is actually LOWER inventory for the F1-50 lightning than the regular F150 by a slight figure (both around 100 days supply). Look at how the industry has been trending for the last few months:
https://www.coxautoinc.com/market-insights/new-vehicle-inventory-june-2023/
https://www.coxautoinc.com/market-insights/new-vehicle-inventory-july-2023/
https://www.coxautoinc.com/market-insights/new-vehicle-inventory-august-2023/
Here's the takeaway: EVERY vehicle above $50k is seeing increasing inventory, as people shy away from the high interest rates and what that does to car payments on vehicles over $50k. As they said about EVs in that last one:
"As with the wider industry, EV inventory varies greatly across brands and products. The affordable Chevy Bolt – among the bestselling non-Tesla EVs – has less than 30 days, the tightest among volume EVs. Inventory of the popular new Cadillac Lyriq and BMW i4 is also well below the industry average. Hyundai, Subaru, Toyota and Volkswagen dealers are holding EV inventory between 80 and 100 days, about average for EVs. EVs with the highest inventory, as measured by days' supply, are mostly high-end, German-made luxury EVs, all with listing prices well above $100,000."
So it's EXPENSIVE cars (EV and ICE) that are seeing higher than normal inventory, but ALL of them are only just now getting back to pre-Covid inventory levels. NOTHING in the actual trends show a slowing demand for EVs, merely a larger number available and not supply-chain constrained anymore.
The House of Lords blames Rowan Atkinson for poor EV sales and a negative public perception of EVs in the UK.
For anyone not aware, Atkinson (who has degrees in electrical engineering and a master's in control systems) wrote an article in June of last year, telling of his own personal experience with EVs and why he feels they are not the panacea for all of motoring's ills their proponents make them out to be.
For reference, I posted the original article at the beginning of this thread.
Needless to say, Atkinson's logical, thoughtful, and well-reasoned assessment of the shortcomings of current EV technology unleashed a firestorm of biblical proportions and sent the EV Evangelist Brigade into apoplectic fits of rage!
And now the cabal of inbred toffs who have never had to live in the real world, known as the House of Lords, are blaming Atkinson for riling-up the peasants and causing them to say "No" to their silly ideas. I say, the bloody cheek! I heard one Peer of the Realm was so taken aback he almost spilled his gin & tonic! :lol:
Article here...
https://news.yahoo.com/rowan-atkinson-blamed-poor-electric-173922796.html