Open Discussion of all Things Electric Vehicle (aka EV) for Those Pro or Con, BE RESPECTFUL!

[Jer]

The current market of EVs is not practical for me. Wife and I have particular needs so neither are 90% of ICE vehicles.

Time is our most valuable commodity and I'm not going to spend 45 minutes to an hour getting less range than I can with a gasoline powered vehicle. I'm also not going to let the charging infrastructure dictate the path of my travel and add scheduling criteria.

Tesla's new Model S has over 400 miles of range on a single charge and can replace 80% of that range in like 10-15 minutes.

[Gman]

Tesla's new Model S has over 400 miles of range on a single charge and can replace 80% of that range in like 10-15 minutes.

Source please for the 80% of 400 mile range in 10-15 minutes. I can't find that, even looking at Tesla's information. Maybe 50% of range in 15 minutes using a Supercharger.

New Model S starts at $94,990. Sedans don't work for us. Really expensive sedans really don't work for us.

[DDT951]

Source please for the 80% of 400 mile range in 10-15 minutes. I can't find that, even looking at Tesla's information. Maybe 50% of range in 15 minutes using a Supercharger.

New Model S starts at $94,990. Sedans don't work for us. Really expensive sedans really don't work for us.

That has been an issue with EVs.

They are "premium" cars charging more than ICE cars. Really, based upon manufacturing costs, EVs should be lower, but subsidies have pushed prices up and novelty has them higher.

EVs will be more popular when prices is the same (or lower) than ICE vehicles without subsidies.

[Jer]

That has been an issue with EVs.

They are "premium" cars charging more than ICE cars. Really, based upon manufacturing costs, EVs should be lower, but subsidies have pushed prices up and novelty has them higher.

EVs will be more popular when prices is the same (or lower) than ICE vehicles without subsidies.

I'm not sure I'm tracking this claim you're making.

[DDT951]

I'm not sure I'm tracking this claim you're making.

I am saying EVs are cheaper to make. But they are sold at a premium price. Part of that premium price is the federal kickback. "But you get $7500 back from the government" (cough cough "so we will charge you an extra $7500")

Once prices come in line (or cheaper) than ICE, they will be the first choice of consumers.

As an example, a 2019 VW e-golf was $32K. A 2019 Golf GTI was $28.5k. Base Golf was $22.7k (I used those because the ID4 has replaced Golf and same car could be compared). So the EV versions are [much] more expensive.

[MrPrena]

I am saying EVs are cheaper to make. But they are sold at a premium price. Part of that premium price is the federal kickback. "But you get $7500 back from the government" (cough cough "so we will charge you an extra $7500")

Once prices come in line (or cheaper) than ICE, they will be the first choice of consumers.

As an example, a 2019 VW e-golf was $32K. A 2019 Golf GTI was $28.5k. Base Golf was $22.7k (I used those because the ID4 has replaced Golf and same car could be compared). So the EV versions are [much] more expensive.

Great point.


It does cost less because they have a higher margin.
Sadly not selling enough, so they have those tax rebate upto certain quantities (~200k)

It is more of a micro econ issue than manufacturers trying to charge more to their ev customers. More quantities they manufacture, less marginal cost to make a vehicle.
I believe 1 single engine plane is also cheaper to make than 1 Hyundai, but they just do not have enough quantities sold to make the MC lower.

This is why automakers are pushing ev on the tv ad. Less parts and less cost assuming if they sell same quantity of ev as much as ice.





https://www.forbes.com/sites/brookec...h=4f5927c037fd

[Jer]

Great point.


It does cost less because they have a higher margin.
Sadly not selling enough, so they have those tax rebate upto certain quantities (~200k)

It is more of a micro econ issue than manufacturers trying to charge more to their ev customers. More quantities they manufacture, less marginal cost to make a vehicle.
I believe 1 single engine plane is also cheaper to make than 1 Hyundai, but they just do not have enough quantities sold to make the MC lower.

This is why automakers are pushing ev on the tv ad. Less parts and less cost assuming if they sell same quantity of ev as much as ice.





https://www.forbes.com/sites/brookec...h=4f5927c037fd

Now that consumers are receptive to EVs the competition is fierce to be the "next" EV manufacturer people look to in order to claim those sales and that segment. This is why (finally) you see commercials.

Don't forget that most car manufacturers sell new cars at nearly no profit. They know they'll get that back on service & parts and EVs won't bring that revenue they've come to expect and plan for.

Advantage: consumer.

This also plays a large role in why all other manufacturers shunned Tesla's offer to allow them use their established network for free other than the cost of the electricity and maintenance costs. Tesla didn't build the Supercharger network to be a revenue generator. They created it to speed up the migration to more sustainable energy sources. With that in mind and knowing it was a major hurdle for those just entering the segment, they offered to let them hop onboard. The problem is that the legacy manufacturers see it as an opportunity to have their own proprietary ports/system and become the "gas stations" of the future to make residual income on their cars to support their (rapidly shrinking) business model.

If you liked the endless charger circus for cell phones in the late 90's and early 2000's, just wait until you see them 6ft tall and sprinkled all over the nation.

[Jer]

I am saying EVs are cheaper to make. But they are sold at a premium price. Part of that premium price is the federal kickback. "But you get $7500 back from the government" (cough cough "so we will charge you an extra $7500")

Once prices come in line (or cheaper) than ICE, they will be the first choice of consumers.

As an example, a 2019 VW e-golf was $32K. A 2019 Golf GTI was $28.5k. Base Golf was $22.7k (I used those because the ID4 has replaced Golf and same car could be compared). So the EV versions are [much] more expensive.

Maybe ultimately they will be cheaper but have you priced any sort of lithium-ion based battery going back since their inception? Like an EGO lawn tool as an example? A typical 5.0Ah battery from EGO has twenty-eight 18650 cells in it and costs about $250 retail. A Tesla Model S's 100kWh pack has 8,267 of these. Applying the per-cell price to that amount of cells gets my to about $73k. I realize this is over simplification and doesn't factor any economies of scale but it also doesn't account for the far more complex chemistry in the ones used for a Tesla or any of the R&D that went into the management system or the car itself. Did I mention it can drive itself too?

[Jer]

Source please for the 80% of 400 mile range in 10-15 minutes. I can't find that, even looking at Tesla's information. Maybe 50% of range in 15 minutes using a Supercharger.

New Model S starts at $94,990. Sedans don't work for us. Really expensive sedans really don't work for us.

Typo. That was supposed to say 50% (the 5 is right under the 8 on a 10key) in like 10-15 minutes. That's still going to put about 200 miles on the car in a pretty rapid rate and will get you to your next stop in most instances. As the pack reaches higher SoC (State of Charge) the charge rates start to taper to protect the battery. That's why, when traveling it's better to live in the bottom half of the battery than in the top half. Just to bring it full circle, it will take you about 30-minutes to recover the 80% that I stated previously. All of those numbers are still pretty staggering when you think of where we were not all that long ago. They keep improving too at a pretty rapid rate so whatever we're discussing now will be old news next year.

I can tell you that, from first hand experience, you're not going to be running a stop watch at your Supercharging sessions so it really is a non-issue. You start to plan and go about your road trips differently. You start to see what is around in the immediate area, catch up on emails/text messages or (my wife's personal favorite) take a quick nap. We actually camp in ours during road trips (like I said, rear seats fold flat and a queen-size air mattress fits nearly perfectly) so most of the time we just leave our bedding there as we travel. If you wanna relax a bit you can crawl in back and catch up on emails or nap... whatever.

Our trips now are SO much less stressful now overall. Between those short little breaks, complete lack of Central Nervous System-wrecking droning/vibrations/smells and autopilot I'm not sure how we ever lived before. It's a totally different experience and the negatives as many people like to focus on really aren't once you own one and experience it for yourself.

As for a $100k new car... hell to the nah! We don't buy new. The depreciation on new vehicles is absurd and I'm not sure how anyone can afford that hit.

[Gman]

I can tell you that, from first hand experience, you're not going to be running a stop watch at your Supercharging sessions so it really is a non-issue. You start to plan and go about your road trips differently.

...and there you lost me. You've come to accept that your vehicle is driving you, not the other way around.

On another note, I keep seeing people talk about how fast these vehicles can be. You owe it to yourselves to check out how the braking is on most of these very heavy vehicles when trying to quickly slow them from those fast speeds.