Electric Vehicles

[snizzle]

Originally Posted by docwra

Look back over this thread. For the last ~50 pages or so there have only been two guys actually giving positive info (not sure how its propaganda when its accurate?) about EVs, funnily enough that happens to be the two guys that actually own one.

Every other post has been about:
how expensive they are, how the infrastructure isnt there (valid tbf)
the environmental cost of manufacture and how they arent actually cheaper to run (not true at all)
or how clean power isnt actually possible or EVs arent selling (absolute bollocks thats easily disproven)

...... there is soo much negativity towards them, particularly in the USA its crazy. If they had 1000 miles ranges and cost $10 to fill up people would still have a problem, its madness.

ETA: nice to see "bollocks" isnt in the swear filter

They are expensive. The infrastructure is lacking. There is still an environmental impact to manufacture them. Nobody is saying clean power isn't possible (just that there are still many "dirty" sources generating power). It's ok to be skeptical and ask yourself if all this is really worth the zero tailpipe emissions goal or if that's just the public face of it.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by snizzle

They are expensive. The infrastructure is lacking. There is still an environmental impact to manufacture them. Nobody is saying clean power isn't possible (just that there are still many "dirty" sources generating power). It's ok to be skeptical and ask yourself if all this is really worth the zero tailpipe emissions goal or if that's just the public face of it.

Most are expensive. There are several that are not. There are additional models coming to market throughout 2024 and 2025 that will fall into mainstream pricing.

As far as environmental impact to manufacture, like-for-like an EV will have more environmental impact than an ICE. That impact will be quickly offset by environmental impact of normal usage.

Check the webpage of your local energy provider. Chances are their splash page provides detail on their plans to provide cleaner energy. Chances are also good that your state has committed to carbon neutral power generation by 2040 - 2050, timing dependent on state. Michigan is 2040. They know how to do it. It’s now a question of time and money. Virginia is 2045 for one of the major power providers, 2050 for the other. A list of states’ committed dates for carbon neutral power can be found here. https://www.cesa.org/projects/100-cl...energy-states/

Back to expensive. The EV I bought cost me $52,000. It’s a midsized premium SUV. If I compare it to other midsized premium SUV (ICE) it actually fits towards the high middle of the pack. And that’s before the IRA incentive. A similarly equipped Buick Envision would have cost $46,000. Buick Enclave around $53,000. Chevrolet Blazer RS around $48,000. Chevrolet Traverse around $52,000. Just for giggles I priced a similarly equipped Tahoe. $71,000.

So even though the Model Y as I trimmed it out is pricey, it’s not really any more pricey than popular ICE models in the same class.


FWIW - average new vehicle price in the US in 2023 is around $48,000. I spent $4,000 above that and should be getting $7,500 of that back. Chevrolet Bolt EV and EUV are both priced under $30,000.

[snizzle]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Most are expensive. There are several that are not. There are additional models coming to market throughout 2024 and 2025 that will fall into mainstream pricing.

True, there are a few you can cherry pick now that are reasonable. Staying with the GM theme, GM is ensuring they stop providing those to the public (Bolt). You know I was looking at the Blazer EV RS, it is easily 10k more than the ICE counterpart. I wonder if GM can meet the pricing estimates on the upcoming Equinox EV. Doubt it.

As far as environmental impact to manufacture, like-for-like an EV will have more environmental impact than an ICE. That impact will be quickly offset by environmental impact of normal usage.

Driving your current ICE vehicle into the ground is arguably better for the environment, especially if it's relatively fuel efficient.

Check the webpage of your local energy provider. Chances are their splash page provides detail on their plans to provide cleaner energy. Chances are also good that your state has committed to carbon neutral power generation by 2040 - 2050, timing dependent on state. Michigan is 2040. They know how to do it. It’s now a question of time and money.

We will see. Like the automakers, the efforts will be subsidized by the tax payer and mired in bureaucracy.

[Capricio]

Originally Posted by docwra

Look back over this thread. For the last ~50 pages or so there have only been two guys actually giving positive info (not sure how its propaganda when its accurate?) about EVs, funnily enough that happens to be the two guys that actually own one.

So, because we have a majority of vocal contributers on a single thread in an obscure section of a marginally popular forum for ICE enthusiasts, that somehow offsets the media and regulatory policy capture the EV side enjoys? I see this as one of the few safe havens where anything negative about EVs can be discussed somewhat freely. You should see all the positive EV spin total crap coming into my google news feed every day.

I turned off any support for EVs when the regulatory state forced the OEMs to push out turbo versions of small displacement engines that will result in shorter longevity and higher repair costs for consumers. All to conform with silly EPA mileage standards with bogus data that never is achievable in real life. A modern, properly maintained, naturally aspirated inline 4 cylinder or V6/V8 can easily go 300K or more miles without a major overhaul. We're entering an age of overpriced disposable cars with rapid depreciation and short lifecycles, including EVs.

Another turning point for me, in the US, is the government manipulation of the marketplace, with this silly carbon credits scheme and the $7500 "rebate". We've beaten that one to death, but that's a fundamental disagreement on the role of government more than an EV debate.

I try not to take any criticism personally here. We're all fond of our Camaros and sad to see them fade out of production (even if some of us yearn for souless short range heavy transportation appliances as part of a gov't welfare program).

[Capricio]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Check the webpage of your local energy provider. Chances are their splash page provides detail on their plans to provide cleaner energy. Chances are also good that your state has committed to carbon neutral power generation by 2040 - 2050, timing dependent on state. Michigan is 2040. They know how to do it. It’s now a question of time and money. Virginia is 2045 for one of the major power providers, 2050 for the other. A list of states’ committed dates for carbon neutral power can be found here. https://www.cesa.org/projects/100-cl...energy-states/

Cleaner! ...and significantly cheaper, and more reliable, too, I'm sure! We'll make electricity more expensive, while driving up demand with EVs!

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by snizzle

True, there are a few you can cherry pick now that are reasonable. Staying with the GM theme, GM is ensuring they stop providing those to the public (Bolt). You know I was looking at the Blazer EV RS, it is easily 10k more than the ICE counterpart. I wonder if GM can meet the pricing estimates on the upcoming Equinox EV. Doubt it.

They have already backed down on the $30k base price. They will eventually(?) get to a $34k version, but with more range than was projected for the $30k version. And they will launch with higher trim, higher content versions first that will likely sticker in the high $3x,xxx range.

Originally Posted by snizzle

Driving your current ICE vehicle into the ground is arguably better for the environment, especially if it's relatively fuel efficient.

That is always true to some degree, even when comparing ICE to ICE. Driving a 30 year old pickup into the ground is probably more beneficial in the short term than replacing it with a Prius. But at the end of the day, the last operating day for the Prius will be long beyond the last operating day for the 30 year old pickup (collisions notwithstanding) so the question becomes measuring what the 30 year old truck is replaced by against the Prius.

Originally Posted by snizzle

We will see. Like the automakers, the efforts will be subsidized by the tax payer and mired in bureaucracy.

No doubt about that.

[Capricio]

Interested to see how the "Model 2/Model Q" plays out. Wish it wasn't another crossover.

https://topelectricsuv.com/news/tesl...esign-details/

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Did that obsolete my car? Nope. Similar dynamic with the improvements that are coming for EVs. There will still be a used market for them among people who can’t afford or don’t want to spend for a new. Same as with ICE today.

There's plenty of people here who'd say the old 4 speed automatic is still the best and there was no need to add extra gears and complexity.

The old saying of just because you can doesn't mean you should kind of applies here. In '99 with the old 305 hp 5.7 LT1 and 4 speed they were getting 0-60s in the 5 second range. Pretty sure with the 455 hp 6.2 LT1 and that same 4 speed we'd be getting sub 4 seconds today anyways.

Don't need 8, 10, or even 5 or 6 gears in the auto!

[docwra]

Originally Posted by Capricio

So, because we have a majority of vocal contributers on a single thread in an obscure section of a marginally popular forum for ICE enthusiasts, that somehow offsets the media and regulatory policy capture the EV side enjoys?

Whatever they are reading is clearly not the same as youre seeing, otherwise they might be a bit more positive about the subject
On balance people seem to be slightly anti EV until they actually use one, of course they arent for everyone though.

Originally Posted by capricio

Nobody is saying clean power isn't possible (just that there are still many "dirty" sources generating power). It's ok to be skeptical and ask yourself if all this is really worth the zero tailpipe emissions goal or if that's just the public face of it.

You might want to check back on some of Wizz Kydds posts .......

Anyway, power generation in Q2 here was 42.1% renewables, if youve got your own solar generation you can increase that considerably.
It doesnt matter how efficient ICE cars become, they are still going to pollute, but there are already people using EVs on a daily basis and creating no emissions at all, I honestly dont think there can be an argument against them on the basis of emissions.

[snizzle]

Originally Posted by docwra

Anyway, power generation in Q2 here was 42.1% renewables, if youve got your own solar generation you can increase that considerably.
It doesnt matter how efficient ICE cars become, they are still going to pollute, but there are already people using EVs on a daily basis and creating no emissions at all, I honestly dont think there can be an argument against them on the basis of emissions.

The argument(s) against them is not based solely on emissions. You know that. Don't be surprised on a forum dedicated to loud gas guzzlers that you get push back from folks upset we're losing the cars we love.

The last time I checked, solar on my house would cost over 20k and take at least 13 years to break even. If you believe you're saving the world, fine, but financially it doesn't make sense for many.

Yes, there are also folks that trashed a fuel efficient vehicle taking the manufacturing environmental penalty for a new EV to charge at home using power provided by coal. That varies based on where you live. It's complicated.

[Capricio]

Originally Posted by docwra

Whatever they are reading is clearly not the same as youre seeing, otherwise they might be a bit more positive about the subject
On balance people seem to be slightly anti EV until they actually use one, of course they arent for everyone though.

Being forced on everyone that wants personal transportation for themselves, eventually, though.

When have major media outlets ever misled the public with a false narrative to drive an agenda? ...I'm sorry I even dared to question anything.

Originally Posted by capricio
Nobody is saying clean power isn't possible (just that there are still many "dirty" sources generating power). It's ok to be skeptical and ask yourself if all this is really worth the zero tailpipe emissions goal or if that's just the public face of it.

....this quote is not attributable to me. Not that I necessarily disagree with it, though. Some healthy skepticism.

Originally Posted by docwra

Anyway, power generation in Q2 here was 42.1% renewables, if youve got your own solar generation you can increase that considerably.

And how much have rates increased in europe as they transition to expensive green sources of energy? When are the impacts of importation, mining, and disposal of rare earth elements ever discussed? When will they ever be addressed as the cost of batteries keeps increasing?

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by MSS1LE

This is an interesting thread. One group of people who want to be left alone to drive what they want and another group that wants to dictate the driving choices that other people have.

You can see why the Revolutionary War happened.

[Capricio]

Originally Posted by MSS1LE

This is an interesting thread. One group of people who want to be left alone to drive what they want and another group that wants to dictate the driving choices that other people have.

I'm always fascinated by how the EV advocates seem to believe this outcome was "inevitable" without government intervention, because EVs are just "that good" on their own merits. And if they manage to concede that point, then its back to apocalyptic climate alarmism despite no real proof taking western tailpipe emissions to zero will have any impact relative to all other forms of carbon production. Upending a whole industry for such marginal outcomes.

[ABM2SS]

You can see why the Revolutionary War happened.

Just saying...