I can accept that the future of cars is EV, but...

ProDarwin said:

Keith Tanner said:

93EXCivic said:

I just hope someone starts to offer good EV conversions at reasonable prices. I would love to one day make my Element electric. 

When you consider the amount of re-engineering and sheer labor to do it - it will never be "reasonable" to re-power a car instead of starting with one that was an EV all along.

I think battery price will be the biggest reason it is not 'reasonable'.

Aside from that, its no less 'reasonable' than repowering a ICE car with a different manufacturer's ICE :)

It's a bit more involved. For example, you rarely need to change the fuel tank when repowering with ICE.

But even then, if you're actually getting paid for your time, the cost is often not considered "reasonable". 

Type Q said:

What to you think of this?

That's pretty hot.  What is it?

ShinnyGroove (Forum Supporter) said:

Type Q said:

What to you think of this?

That's pretty hot.  What is it?

Lucid Air. For people who think Teslas are slow and cheap :) Cool car. 

Aptera was a electric/hybrid startup that made big promises, took deposits, flamed out, and imploded without delivering even one (I believe). The shape, though, absolutely nails functionality and is indeed its own thing. I really like it.

Pretty sure they "borrowed" the design from VW, who decades ago spent a ton of time in the wind tunnel to come up with a shape nearly exactly like this that maximizes mileage yet is able to hold two people and the drivetrain. They probably didn't intend 3-wheels then, but whatever.

More on its demise here: Aptera closes doors

The Model 3 looks great when parked next to a Model Y or Model X.

kb58 said:

Aptera was a electric/hybrid startup that made big promises, took deposits, flamed out, and imploded without delivering even one (I believe). The shape, though, absolutely nails functionality and is indeed its own thing. I really like it.

 

Not so fast. Aptera, like zombie movies, just keeps on coming back. Their latest scam, I mean, their latest inspired idea is to represent them as self-charging.

https://www.aptera.us/

Kreb (Forum Supporter) said:

kb58 said:

Aptera was a electric/hybrid startup that made big promises, took deposits, flamed out, and imploded without delivering even one (I believe). The shape, though, absolutely nails functionality and is indeed its own thing. I really like it.

 

Not so fast. Aptera, like zombie movies, just keeps on coming back. Their latest scam, I mean, their latest inspired idea is to represent them as self-charging.

https://www.aptera.us/

 

Great... the company was/is local to me and the head guy had a lot of wishful articles in the local papers, about how awesomeness was right around the corner. It seems like a common theme, startups wanting things to be as they say so badly, that they just keep repeating it until they believe it themselves, never mind the reality.

Driven5 said:

The Model 3 looks great when parked next to a Model Y or Model X.

A Model Y is the only CUV that I would even consider owning. 
 

I think the beautiful part of EVs is that they are so ugly.

In 2035 when I'm 50 years old and driving around in my 72-year old Sunbeam, the three kids who are in time outs without screens will see it and think, "Damn...that thing is so...something."

Then their boring EV driving father will glare at me and tell the kids, "He's destroying the planet with that car you know! So frivilous and destructive." And the kids will roll their eyes and think, "But he's cooler than you are dad. With your stupid, ugly, car that looks like everyone else."

Dare to be different - don't give in to the EV 'future'. 

Duke said:

Driven5 said:

The Model 3 looks great when parked next to a Model Y or Model X.

A Model Y is the only CUV that I would even consider owning. 
 

The Model S is an attractive car externally.  It was strikingly so when it came out, although that's mellowed a bit with familiarity.

Trying to apply that same "design language" to the X, S, and Y was a mistake though.  None of them has pulled it off as anything other than goofy.

I've never liked the minimalist interiors on the Teslas.

As for the non-Tesla EVs out there, IMHO the problem is that everyone wants their EVs to stand out visually from the gas-powered cars.  There's really no reason that they have to, but those cars are much more expensive to build and are usually sold for less profit (or even a loss).  Car makers want to milk as much "we're green!" PR out of those losses as they can, so they want the cars to be obvious in what they are.  So they all look goofy.

If/when EVs become mainstream I suspect you'll see a lessening of the desire to make them visually radically different just for differentness' sake, and more EVs will be like the e-Golf.  It's an EV, but it's also a Golf, and unless you look at it closely it just looks like a Golf.

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

Don't try to tell people EV's cost more to make. You will upset there entire naritive.  Doesn't matter that the company's get kickbacks (ok, they don't use that word for it) to cover the difference. If Joe public pays the same, he'll  be able to talk about how green they are. 

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

Matters of taste... I think the S looks huge, and like they tried to drag the shape over too much car. Not ugly, it's better looking than the average car, I just think the 3 looks much tidier.

Although I am totally anti EV and ICE-for-life, I do hope that at least my favorite automotive  bodyform might be saved by EV designers doing "city car" type o' stuff.

3 door hatchbacks are nearly extinct.

Right now in USA market there is only MINI who carries on with a proper hot hatch, and Veloster is close enough too I guess with the funky 3.5 door.

Even in Europe the 3dr hatch is dying.

Chart circa 2016, probably even worse now.

03Panther said:

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

Don't try to tell people EV's cost more to make. You will upset there entire naritive.  Doesn't matter that the company's get kickbacks (ok, they don't use that word for it) to cover the difference. If Joe public pays the same, he'll  be able to talk about how green they are. 

Most of the popular EVs no longer have tax rebates.  Those only apply to the first few thousand that a company makes, I forget the exact numbers.  Theory being that once so many have been produced, they are a viable product.

I know Tesla no longer qualifies for them, pretty sure that Chevy also no longer qualifies, given scuttlebutt about the price of a Bolt no longer includes a tax rebate.

If they cost more to make, then they have to charge more for them to make a profit, and people will buy them or they won't.  And you can bet that they are trying to find cheaper ways to make them, just like anything else.

03Panther said:

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

Don't try to tell people EV's cost more to make. You will upset there entire naritive.  Doesn't matter that the company's get kickbacks (ok, they don't use that word for it) to cover the difference. If Joe public pays the same, he'll  be able to talk about how green they are. 

Just like you shouldn't tell people all of their gasoline is subsidized as well.

wspohn said:

The Model 3 is a beauty queen compared to the Muskmobile (aka the Cybertruck) - not THAT is fugly.

 

 

 

If you think that is ugly, wait till you see the Bolinger!

Oldboy Speedwell said:

Although I am totally anti EV and ICE-for-life, I do hope that at least my favorite automotive  bodyform might be saved by EV designers doing "city car" type o' stuff.

 

3 door hatchbacks are nearly extinct.

 

Right now in USA market there is only MINI who carries on with a proper hot hatch, and Veloster is close enough too I guess with the funky 3.5 door.

 

Even in Europe the 3dr hatch is dying.

Chart circa 2016, probably even worse now.

 

 

that is a shame, the 3 door hatch is my favourite configuration for a vehicle.  

Oldboy Speedwell said:

Interesting image.... shows that modern fugly-huge wheels are stylistically just whitewall tires.

RevolverRob said:

I think the beautiful part of EVs is that they are so ugly.

In 2035 when I'm 50 years old and driving around in my 72-year old Sunbeam, the three kids who are in time outs without screens will see it and think, "Damn...that thing is so...something."

Then their boring EV driving father will glare at me and tell the kids, "He's destroying the planet with that car you know! So frivilous and destructive." And the kids will roll their eyes and think, "But he's cooler than you are dad. With your stupid, ugly, car that looks like everyone else."

Dare to be different - don't give in to the EV 'future'. 

What makes you think EVs are boring to drive? Mine's a hot hatch with 200 hp and 266 lb ft of torque delivered instantly for fun squirting though traffic or punching it coming out of a corner. A corner that feels good to go through due to the ultra low CG of the car with it's batteries in the floor. Maybe the boring one is the person to closed minded to let go of one method of propulsing a car. I'm really getting tired of closed minded berkeleyers like you insulting cars like mine and the people who like to drive them.

In reply to Chris_V :

It's like the idea that you aren't really driving a car unless it has a manual transmission.

Odd that this sort of opinion coincides with what was good when they were coming of driving age.  There are people who insist that the best driving experience is with flathead engines, too, because they are simpler.  It's like "all modern music sucks" theory except applied to cars.

Easy fellas.  Based on my n=1 with the Model 3 I'm a huge fan and a believer on the benefits and performance potential.  IMO the advantages of EV's are self-evident from a technical and environmental standpoint.  Arguing otherwise is a fool's errand unless you plan to bring a bunch of facts to support your case.  This was intended to be a lighthearted thread about my entirely subjective (yet correct ;) view that most of today's EV cars are ugly.  The analogy between cars and music is apt (i.e. the things available in everyone's 16th year of life was their high-water mark for everything) but nostalgia is also a big part of car culture and nobody is obligated to like anything they don't want to.  I would however appreciate if people state their opinions respectfully and keep their thinly veiled political jabs to themselves.

Did Top Gear really predict the future of EVs?

In reply to Chris_V :

Edited:

Maybe you should take it down a notch? Calling me a berkeleyer is actually not only inappropriate but pot calling the kettle black for saying I'm 'close minded' when I have an opinion different than your opinion?

Sorry about your boring car.

EVs aren't the future, folks who think so are actually blind to the politics and reality of living in urban areas to build an EV infrastructure for the public. Fuel-Electric hybrids are the future. I could elucidate, but I actually doubt anyone actually wants to understand that.

Peace out to folks in this thread.

RevolverRob said:

Finally, unpopular opinion, the fact of the matter is electric vehicles aren't the future. Regardless of how many times folks repeat that saying. The future is strictly fuel-hybrid technology. Even in cities where it should be feasible to build the infrastructure, that infrastructure cannot be built for a wide variety of reasons. Electric vehicles will only remain viable for the portion of the population that live in single-family dwellings with dedicated parking areas. I.e., suburb dwellers. 

 Nah, all you really need is the tech to increase the recharging speed by, say, 20x.  If you can do that then recharging an EV works the same way that filling the tank on a gas car does.