Electric Vehicles

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Wyzz Kydd

I agree. A hybrid supercharged V8 would be a blast to drive. The best of both worlds.

If you can settle for a hybrid twin-turbocharged V8 you should be excited about the future. Start saving though. It ain’t gonna be cheap.

[Wyzz Kydd]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

If you can settle for a hybrid twin-turbocharged V8 you should be excited about the future. Start saving though. It ain’t gonna be cheap.

Already doing that. I have to buy three vehicles over the next four years then it will be my turn again.

[genxer]

Originally Posted by Wyzz Kydd

I agree. A hybrid supercharged V8 would be a blast to drive. The best of both worlds.

I meant an NHRA-like centrifugal clutch, but actively controlled.

Toward hybrids. I don't see how GM doesn't get forced to offer small-block hybrids in the half-tons. So, there would cover a hypothetical Camaro7 LT1/SS trim with auto trans offering.

[Wyzz Kydd]

Originally Posted by genxer

I meant an NHRA-like centrifugal clutch, but actively controlled.

Toward hybrids. I don't see how GM doesn't get forced to offer small-block hybrids in the half-tons. So, there would cover a hypothetical Camaro7 LT1/SS trim with auto trans offering.

I've resigned myself to the idea that the Camaro is dead. The Corvette doesn't work for me for a variety of reasons, so a hybrid Mustang-GT500 is probably my only path forward.

[90503]

I thought this article expressed a good brief summary of the change to EVs and why the future looks sad...

https://www.topspeed.com/how-the-ele...ve-about-cars/

Here's one about future EVs and lost gasoline tax revenue.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/r...ctric-vehicles

[Wyzz Kydd]

Originally Posted by 90503

I thought this article expressed a good brief summary of the change to EVs and why the future looks sad...

https://www.topspeed.com/how-the-ele...ve-about-cars/

Here's one about future EVs and lost gasoline tax revenue.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/r...ctric-vehicles

That's a good article and pretty much sums up my feelings about EVs. In an open market, a company would continue to provide the types of vehicles that enthusiasts want, but given the fact that this switch is being driven by regulation I'm pretty confident that's not going to be allowed to occur.

[GearheadSS]

Originally Posted by 90503

I

Here's one about future EVs and lost gasoline tax revenue.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/r...ctric-vehicles

This is a big one that most EV buyers don't think about. Right now, it's cheap top charge your EV but when states and govt can't make money on gas, they're going to start taxing electricity to make up for it. It's going to cost a lot more to charge an EV when that happens.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by GearheadSS

This is a big one that most EV buyers don't think about. Right now, it's cheap top charge your EV but when states and govt can't make money on gas, they're going to start taxing electricity to make up for it. It's going to cost a lot more to charge an EV when that happens.

I think that rather than taxing across the board for electricity states will have to be more creative. Charging across the board would also increase the rates for residential non-vehicle related electricity. That is already governed by regulatory agencies that limit increases proposed by power utilities. Instead, states are more likely to get revenue to support road maintenance from:

• Vehicle registration fees. A number of states already have higher rates for registering an EV simply because EVs don’t participate in gasoline taxes. Some get around specifically calling out EVs by setting rates on a weight based metric. EVs are going to weigh more than ICE vehicles in the same product classes and therefore pay higher registration fees.
• Establishing a use tax for public chargers. They may even be able to vary the tax based on the charging rate. So people who mostly charge at home will be affected least. Those who have to use public charging would be most impacted.
• More states could follow the lead of California and New York (and others) that require annual mechanical / safety inspections for all vehicles. This “new” revenue could be directed to state road maintenance budgets.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by 90503

I thought this article expressed a good brief summary of the change to EVs and why the future looks sad...

https://www.topspeed.com/how-the-ele...ve-about-cars/

Here's one about future EVs and lost gasoline tax revenue.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/r...ctric-vehicles

One thing I can point out without getting kneecapped by my leadership relates to this clip from the TopSpeed article…

If you have driven enough internal combustion-powered vehicles and EVs, you would know that fossil fuel-burning cars have their own character. Each one feels unique, has a different torque and power band, weight distribution, suspension setting, etc. Essentially, they have character. With EVs, this variety is almost non-existent. Yes, you have the obvious difference in handling dynamics between a high-riding e-SUV like the Mercedes EQG and a low-slung EV sedan like the Porsche Taycan, but the power band and overall “temperament” of the motor are about the same.

This part will not be true going forward. We are working with a number of clients on what it takes and what people will pay for what we call “Software Defined Vehicle Metrics”. Long story short, it’s all about software calibration of electric motor and other system dynamics. Not only will Vehicle A have significantly different torque “curves” and power bands from Vehicle B, but users might be able to purchase more aggressive or more efficient profiles and there may also be room to geofence specific calibrations. For example, an energy efficient cal when you’re driving to work or the grocery store, a more aggressive cal when the car is located at the dragstrip and a different aggressive cal when you are located at the road track. Probably all I can say for the moment.

[genxer]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Not only will Vehicle A have significantly different torque “curves” and power bands from Vehicle B, but users might be able to purchase more aggressive or more efficient profiles and there may also be room to geofence specific calibrations. For example, an energy efficient cal when you’re driving to work or the grocery store, a more aggressive cal when the car is located at the dragstrip and a different aggressive cal when you are located at the road track. Probably all I can say for the moment.

Geofence specific calibrations? Start publishing your horror short stories and make bunk turning them into movies.

[90503]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

We are working with a number of clients on what it takes and what people will pay for what we call “Software Defined Vehicle Metrics”. Long story short, it’s all about software calibration of electric motor and other system dynamics. Not only will Vehicle A have significantly different torque “curves” and power bands from Vehicle B, but users might be able to purchase more aggressive or more efficient profiles and there may also be room to geofence specific calibrations. For example, an energy efficient cal when you’re driving to work or the grocery store, a more aggressive cal when the car is located at the dragstrip and a different aggressive cal when you are located at the road track. Probably all I can say for the moment.

Good luck with that. I would just keep in mind that these options for EVs shouldn't come out looking like a cheesey attempt at re-creating ICE characteristics. Those that we have seen so far are pretty cringe-worthy.

If it applies, another negative would be having to pay extra for something that is already built into the EV, software or otherwise. Having to pay extra for "just turning it on" or for a subscription have already shown to be unpopular.

[Wyzz Kydd]

I don't like the idea of paying a monthly subscription and I believe the idea of a geofence is the camel's nose under the tent. It will start with you controlling the fence, but where will it end? My prediction...no need to worry about tickets in the future because speed limits and your driving will be controlled by geofences set up by big brother.

I'm sure I'll get feedback about how ridiculous that idea is, but think about this, in Scotland it's already begun. Trips beyond established perimeters are limited in number and those who exceed those 'approved' number of trips will be fined. Next, you won't be able to exceed the approved number of trips because your vehicle will simply cease to function when you try to, just as the throttle on my son's Mustang ceases to function when he tries to exceed 75 mph.

[Wyzz Kydd]

Originally Posted by 90503

Good luck with that. I would just keep in mind that these options for EVs shouldn't come out looking like a cheesey attempt at re-creating ICE characteristics. Those that we have seen so far are pretty cringe-worthy.

If it applies, another negative would be having to pay extra for something that is already built into the EV, software or otherwise. Having to pay extra for "just turning it on" or for a subscription have already shown to be unpopular.

Popularity isn't going to be a factor. We've already been told (warned) 'you will own nothing, and you WILL like it.'

[snizzle]

Originally Posted by Wyzz Kydd

Popularity isn't going to be a factor.

Even on the topic of EVs, where is the groundswell of support from a consumer perspective (<6% in 2022 sales) that in a theoretical free market would urge automakers to continue. We've discuss ad nauseam the other driving factors. I believe "they" want us to rent these cars and associated features with a recurring revenue model. It's not a one and done purchase anymore. The tech industry is doing this as well which is now tied in via a software defined vehicle concept. Say a pandemic arrives, wouldn't it be nice to lock everyone down and turn off their vehicles OTA (for the "greater good" of course).