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

newrider3 said:

Might I ask, for those people living the densely-populated urban dream, why does every household where you live need one to two cars? I thought the point of living downtown was to ibe within walking distance of amenities, and walking or public transportation distance of work? What's the point of living like that if you're all still commuting 20 minutes or more to work in a car by yourself? My preconceived notions of dense urban living is that you do it because it puts you closer to things and provides access to good buses and rail systems so you have less reason to own a car at all.

Limited parking in dense urban areas like this is already a thing, limited access to chargers in these areas seems no different to me.

Then again, I also cringe whenever I see someone say they drive to work and their commute is less than 5 miles or less than 5 minutes, because that seems exceedingly wasteful and unnecessary to me, but that's not what we're talking about here.

Good point•••• Well except for a few things.  Groceries.  There are few downtown grocery stores if any.  For that reason they are called food deserts.  Downtown era have to take a bus out to the suburbs to get a wide choice of groceries at a reasonable price. Then they are limited to how much they can carry. In addition, not every event occurs downtown. Families might be in the suburbs or even more rural.   A lot of jobs aren't downtown. Special events too. 
   In addition with the Gig economy living downtown gives a shorter commute time to a variety of locations. But that may not coincide with public transportation.  
My point is personal transportation is not exclusive  to only one location. Yes problems will be dealt with and charging cars in urban eviorments is easily solved.  

In reply to RevolverRob :

Why wouldn't any new-build apartment complex put a NEMA 6-20 outdoor outlet between every pair of parking spaces? If it's covered parking it would be able to be put in at the same time as the structure, if it's not then the four spots around each light pole could have one. 

You are absolutely right, but I'm playing the devils advocate here. I can see freeloaders plugging in to charge their EV and blocking parking. So there probably needs to be some control. Maybe locks or activation by approved card?  

In reply to newrider3 :

Urban living is a lot more complicated than it's sold as on TV. Many neighborhoods lack easy access to efficient public transit infrastructure, particularly poorer ones. There are far fewer services available than folks think as well. Some areas get/are better. When I first moved to my neighborhood, the closest grocery store with a decent selection of fruits and vegetables was 8-miles away. Since then, we've had two grocery stores come into the neighborhood, reducing a need to actually drive to the grocery. Of course, my wife and I are fortunate, we can afford to have our groceries delivered, further reducing our need to go to the grocery store.

But there are a lot of things folks take for granted as being present that are not present though - Movie theaters, auto parts stores, hardware stores, furniture stores, etc. They all have to be driven to. Well, no they don't. I could take a series of busses to Home Depot, it's 8-miles and a 15-minute trip during light traffic by car or an hour and change and three busses.

The pandemic has calmed things down, but ride-share service is peak in cities, because of the actual inconvenience of public transit. I thought for a long time electric Zip Cars and the like might be able to really make a dent. But it turns out folks abuse those services pretty regularly and the companies weren't great at maintaining the fleet. Our local ZIP Cars were eliminated two years ago. When the parking lot was sold and turned into a high-rise apartment complex (packing more folks into a dense area, but with no change in frequency of public transit service).

Anyways, not all things are available on a public transit line and time is valuable and cars and gasoline are cheap.

In reply to chaparral :

Man, I wish I knew the answer to that.

In my time here I've seen three new buildings get built in just a three-block radius in the last 3-years. Because parking is at a premium, they typically include dedicating parking for at least (some) of the units. Even a single EV spot that rotated could allow residents of the building and if they contract with a company, potentially allow them to gain 'passive' income by leasing the charger(s) to other folks. None of the buildings have accommodated EV charging. Maybe it's just not requested?

I can't figure out why when they built the new Whole Foods in my neighborhood with a dedicated parking garage, it didn't get 2-4 chargers installed. Ones near downtown have them. Though as Frenchy pointed out in his devil's advocate post - I've seen the spaces near downtown be monopolized by a few 'free loaders'. I've also seen jackasses in trucks park in front of them and block them from being used. It doesn't give me a lot of faith in folks.

At present the nearest charger to me is 8-blocks away. It's not super expensive to charge there, $0.93/kwH, but you also have to pay to park in their parking garage at $12/hour. It says it's a 440v Tier 2 charger, so that should be empty to full in <1/2 hour. Assuming 20-25 kwH of energy + your 12 bucks to park, it's around $30 to fill up your EV. Unfortunately, you're stuck waiting for it, because the grocery store is 5-blocks the other direction and there is nothing in that area, unless you live in that vicinity. The only other chargers in my neighborhood in the hospital parking garages and similarly $12/hour to park + ~0.8-0.9/kwH to charge.

Now that we've gotten WAY off topic - can we return to the OP and wonder why is it most current EVs are so ugly and/or boring appliance like-vehicles?

About the only EV out there that I really like is the Honda e - Which is adorable and evokes the old hatchbacks. But I mean, it has a hood scoop and look at those little winged mirrors!

Personally, I kind of want an EV that makes laser sounds when you step on the go pedal. Or maybe sounds like the Millennium Falcon. Just because it is electric doesn't have to mean it sounds boring and is dominated by a gigantic infotainment stack in the center.

Yeah, parking garages are the ultimate in "Why ARENT you doing this? ... aside from group X complaining about the look" things. I want to say they largely fall by the wayside JUST due to that, but I know there's more to it.

RevolverRob said:

Now that we've gotten WAY off topic - can we return to the OP and wonder why is it most current EVs are so ugly and/or boring appliance like-vehicles?

About the only EV out there that I really like is the Honda e - Which is adorable and evokes the old hatchbacks. But I mean, it has a hood scoop and look at those little winged mirrors!

Personally, I kind of want an EV that makes laser sounds when you step on the go pedal. Or maybe sounds like the Millennium Falcon. Just because it is electric doesn't have to mean it sounds boring and is dominated by a gigantic infotainment stack in the center.

Take a pop onto the Brekr site and look for the "They will hear you Coming" sound affect. I wish all EVs sounded like that at low speeds, or at least gave you the option to change it (Like the Model 3 does for the EU).

I think the Buzz looks kinda cool.  Supposedly to released in 2022 with a guesstimated a $40K base price.

We shall see.  I'm cautiously optimistic, but it depends on what it actually turns out to be and what the cargo area can look like. 

GIRTHQUAKE said:

Yeah, parking garages are the ultimate in "Why ARENT you doing this? ... aside from group X complaining about the look" things. I want to say they largely fall by the wayside JUST due to that, but I know there's more to it.

Take a pop onto the Brekr site and look for the "They will hear you Coming" sound affect. I wish all EVs sounded like that at low speeds, or at least gave you the option to change it (Like the Model 3 does for the EU).

YES! That SOUNDS AWESOME.

Here's a dumb vid of a dude who changes his Model 3's sound at 2:10. I, for one, would have mine be the opening guitar line of Motorhead's "Marching off to War!" first and foremost, but there's tons of ones you could do.
Also, Model 3's with bodykits look better than I thought.

That is the saddest/funniest brap brap I've ever heard.

Edit: 

my bad, it's saying "bruh"

lol, great sound effect. 

(The bike though... top speed is 15 mph for 4,500 euros? Holy crap!)

Dude, plug in the sound of a V-12 Merlin at full song. Blow minds. Or, even better, a Harley Potato- potato-potato.

The Lotus Evija looks damn good to me. To bad they are £2 million each. 

Maybe some of that tech and good looks will trickle down to an electric Elise replacement.

Adding vroom vroom is something I would have thought very cool, back when I put a playing card in my spokes. 

An adult wanting them, is kinda sad.

Kinda like people that actually spent money for different ring tones a few years back... I don't get it. 

In reply to Keith Tanner :

I would miss the cool noises.  

I agree Hydrogen isn't a perfect solution, and Curtis73 also brings up some good points.  I doubt that any of the problems are insurmountable, if, and only if, there was the will and economic incentive to solve them.  Hydrogen lacks the energy density of traditional petroleum-based fuels, but still exceeds that of modern batteries by quite a bit.  Since an HFC vehicle would use it's electrical power at least as efficently as any other EV it is probably still worth investigation and investment.  History is full of engineering projects that are impossible....until they aren't.  It would be interesting to see some real data on overall system efficency of fuel-cell vs. traditional ICE vehicles.  Would their increased efficency result in lower overall fossil fuel consumption all things considered?  I've no idea, that kind of research is above my head, but it would make for interesting reading.  Problem is, any company or agency with the $ and resources to actually do a compariaon will almost certainly not be impartial.

Since I doubt, (and hope and pray) that traditional gas and diesel powered cars are going to be around at least until I'm cold and in the ground (Scattered at sea actually), It's not a huge concern for me.  Merely an interesting thought excercise.  

I do agree 100% with the origional premise of this thread though.  Damn near every EV is needlessly ugly. I realize that apperance is subjective, but I have enever understood why manistream automakers always feel the need to make any "new technology based" vehicle look like something from a 60's low-budget Sci-Fi movie....  That's actually my favorite thing about the Hyundai fuel-cell SUV, it looks like any other small SUV on the market.  Very few of which are good-looking IMHO, the current Mazda CX-5 being a notable exception (they are also very nice to drive and moderately "sporty").  It was the Hyundai that sparked my interest in fuel-cell cars.  The Tesla cars aren;t bad looking IMHO, but just kind of blah.....  Someone here mentioned that almost all mass-market cars, those affordable to most people, are ugly.  I can't agree.  There are plenty of good-looking cars out there, at least in my view.  The current generation Miata is a beautiful little car, the Mazda CX-5 looks very nice, Toyota Camry, a car I hate with every fiber of my being due to being forced to drive so many of them a rentals in the late 90's and early 2000's (surely the most boring, and ininspiring driving experience in the history of motorized transportation) in it's current iteration is a very nice-looking car.   

03Panther said:

Adding vroom vroom is something I would have thought very cool, back when I put a playing card in my spokes. 

An adult wanting them, is kinda sad.

Kinda like people that actually spent money for different ring tones a few years back... I don't get it. 

What if you go with the Imperial Death March from Star Wars?

My EV song:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30QzJKCUekQ

In reply to nderwater :

Actually up to ~25mph, but yeah Euope land has some very strict rules about mopeds and the like. I think they're hedging their bets on the removable battery packs and its cool appearrance.

mikedd969 said:

Gasoline has roughly 100 times the energy density of even the very latest and greatest storage batteries.  I can't see how the EV can ever be efficient enough to overcome that. 

While that is accurate, its misleading.  Put ICE efficiency into the equation as well.  The range per mile kg difference of a battery pack vs. gasoline is about 20:1, which is a lot closer (assuming a 30mpg car and a Tesla Model S - obviously this will vary)

GIRTHQUAKE said:

Also, claims about "Grid capacity" and "Muh infastructure!" are myths. We already have solar cells with their own level 2 charge battery systems out in the hills of Colorado as proof-of-concept, and any home in America can run a dryer; have a 220 volt pulg, that's 22-25 miles of range each hour and more than 90% only drive 40-50 miles a day at most.

I don't think 220 volt plug an infrastructure are related.  The grid issue some are concerned about is if everyone has an EV and everyone starts charging them simultaneously, the total load on the grid will skyrocket.  Just like if everyone in your neighborhood all ran their dryer during the same hour of the day.  Or, more realistically, brownouts caused by high A/C usage.

mikedd969 said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

I would miss the cool noises.  

 

I agree Hydrogen isn't a perfect solution, and Curtis73 also brings up some good points.  I doubt that any of the problems are insurmountable, if, and only if, there was the will and economic incentive to solve them.  Hydrogen lacks the energy density of traditional petroleum-based fuels, but still exceeds that of modern batteries by quite a bit.  Since an HFC vehicle would use it's electrical power at least as efficently as any other EV it is probably still worth investigation and investment.  History is full of engineering projects that are impossible....until they aren't.  It would be interesting to see some real data on overall system efficency of fuel-cell vs. traditional ICE vehicles.  Would their increased efficency result in lower overall fossil fuel consumption all things considered?  I've no idea, that kind of research is above my head, but it would make for interesting reading.  Problem is, any company or agency with the $ and resources to actually do a compariaon will almost certainly not be impartial.

 

Since I doubt, (and hope and pray) that traditional gas and diesel powered cars are going to be around at least until I'm cold and in the ground (Scattered at sea actually), It's not a huge concern for me.  Merely an interesting thought excercise.  

 

I do agree 100% with the origional premise of this thread though.  Damn near every EV is needlessly ugly. I realize that apperance is subjective, but I have enever understood why manistream automakers always feel the need to make any "new technology based" vehicle look like something from a 60's low-budget Sci-Fi movie....  That's actually my favorite thing about the Hyundai fuel-cell SUV, it looks like any other small SUV on the market.  Very few of which are good-looking IMHO, the current Mazda CX-5 being a notable exception (they are also very nice to drive and moderately "sporty").  It was the Hyundai that sparked my interest in fuel-cell cars.  The Tesla cars aren;t bad looking IMHO, but just kind of blah.....  Someone here mentioned that almost all mass-market cars, those affordable to most people, are ugly.  I can't agree.  There are plenty of good-looking cars out there, at least in my view.  The current generation Miata is a beautiful little car, the Mazda CX-5 looks very nice, Toyota Camry, a car I hate with every fiber of my being due to being forced to drive so many of them a rentals in the late 90's and early 2000's (surely the most boring, and ininspiring driving experience in the history of motorized transportation) in it's current iteration is a very nice-looking car.   

The hydrogen problems have been under heavy attack by the engineering community for some time, and it's just not getting any closer. The Japanese automakers in particular are throwing resources at it due to heavy government subsidies and have been for a while.

When you're looking at the energy density of hydrogen, don't forget to take the mass/volume of the tank itself and the fuel cell into account. The 152 hp Toyota Mirai weighs about 4100 lbs and has a range when full of 312 miles. The 283 hp 2wd Tesla Model 3 Long Range weighs 3800 lbs and has a range when full of 325 miles. So is the lower energy density of those batteries really a problem?

The big difference is what happens when you get to the end of those miles. The Mirai can only be refueled at a hydrogen fueling system - find them all here. The Tesla can be recharged at a Supercharger, at a destination charger, at a house, at any Level 2 charger, at a number of non-Tesla high speed chargers (using an adapter), etc. Also, those electric charging stations rarely explode while an H2 station blew up in South Korea in 2019 and another in Norway that same year. That's a pretty high percentage of the total number of worldwide hydrogen refueling stations!

The electric infrastructure is there, it's just the end points that are needed and they're growing very fast. If I wanted an electric charger at my work, it would just be a matter of wiring in a $500 unit. Or taking the mobile charger that comes in the trunk of a Tesla and plugging it into one of our 220v welding outlets. If I wanted to charge with hydrogen, umm...

So while hydrogen's engineering problems may be solveable, does it make sense when battery EVs (BEVs) are already on an equal footing in every aspect other than theoretical minimum refueling time - and arguably ahead when it comes to regular home charging for a large percentage of the population? Does it make sense to build out a hydrogen refueling network when it's easier to expand the existing BEV recharging network? I think hydrogen's missed the window of opportunity. In the early 90s, maybe. Today, it's hard to come up with a justification for the massive investment. As I noted earlier, heavy trucks that work out of the same depots and cannot afford down time over a 24 hour period  may have different math.

The design language for EVs is evolving. We're all used to cars with grilles and ICE cars are doubling down on grilles right now - looking at you, Germany. Meanwhile EVs are chasing maximum efficiency so they are more biased towards aerodynamic efficiency, and people don't like that as much.

Appleseed said:

In reply to ShinnyGroove (Forum Supporter) :

I dont think it's more of "Are are EVs  Feasible?" because they are. It's more of how long will it take electric to surpass fuel it terms of practically. If the mass banning of ICE by 2035 is a reality, rural citizens have to be accounted for. I'm hoping the next 14 years of development are mind blowing.

Look back at EVs 14 years ago. The Tesla Roadster hadn't yet made it to market - when it did, a year later, it cost the equivalent of about $137k. The Nissan Leaf didn't get introduced until the 2011 model year, and it had a massive 73 miles of range at the time.

Today, the first of the Tesla Roadsters has been blasted off to Mars and its descendants are outselling the BMW 5 series. 

So yeah, we may have our minds blown by the next 14 years.

There are big players getting into it now, not that Musk isn't one of the biggest.

Technology will happen pretty fast and competition...

My point (from my personal perspective) is that I don't care how long it takes to charge batteries, I will just accept it and alter my range/travel time accordingly.  If I had a Crown Vic and wanted to travel cross country, I realize it would take me about 4 days when you factor in sleeping and 5-minute gas stops every 300 miles.  If I wanted to take a Tesla cross country, I realize it would take me 5-6 days with an hour every 300 miles for recharging. 

I realize I'm probably more chill than most, I'm simply saying that I DGAF how it impacts my daily travel times.  I also realize that most of the world doesn't view things that way.  I know there will be a majority of people that will be shopping for a new car and look at the ICE version with a 400 mile range, and the EV version with a 300 mile range, and they'll pick the ICE just "because 400 miles."  I'm just saying that I ain't one of those persons.

The only reasons I don't have an EV as my commuter is because A) not in my price range yet, B) I need a full size truck/van for work and towing and having two vehicles simply for two different purposes kinda further violates reason "A."  But as soon as it becomes feasible for me, I'm down with EVV like Marky Mark.

Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:

My point (from my personal perspective) is that I don't care how long it takes to charge batteries, I will just accept it and alter my range/travel time accordingly.  If I had a Crown Vic and wanted to travel cross country, I realize it would take me about 4 days when you factor in sleeping and 5-minute gas stops every 300 miles.  If I wanted to take a Tesla cross country, I realize it would take me 5-6 days with an hour every 300 miles for recharging. 

I realize I'm probably more chill than most, I'm simply saying that I DGAF how it impacts my daily travel times.  I also realize that most of the world doesn't view things that way.  I know there will be a majority of people that will be shopping for a new car and look at the ICE version with a 400 mile range, and the EV version with a 300 mile range, and they'll pick the ICE just "because 400 miles."  I'm just saying that I ain't one of those persons.

The only reasons I don't have an EV as my commuter is because A) not in my price range yet, B) I need a full size truck/van for work and towing and having two vehicles simply for two different purposes kinda further violates reason "A."  But as soon as it becomes feasible for me, I'm down with EVV like Marky Mark.

From Yankee stadium to Dodger Stadium, it is Only 12 hours more in a long range model 3 than it is in a normal car. That is assuming 9 Fuel stops at 5 minutes each in the Crown Vic.