Move over Tesla, it’s the Sony Vision-S

bcp2011 said:

z31maniac said:

According to the last census it's more like 82% of the population live in a "metro area."

Please don't litter this thread with facts.  Thank you.  

I know, they get in the way of uninformed rants. 

I don't understand this mindset, "Well, it won't work for me in my specific edge case, so it's terrible and can't possibly work for anyone."

If it won't work for you, don't buy one. It seems pretty simple. 

Saying that one is being "pushed" to use EVs reminds me of a very sad story. The daughter of an acquaintance died in a car wreck driving a Smart car. One of his main ways of  dealing with the grief was to blame Obama for forcing that sort of vehicle down our throats. 

Make of that what you will.

I've posted before about my trip to Las Vegas - the EV version would have been identical to the ICE version, assuming I actually ate lunch sitting at a table like a civilized human instead of choking down a drive-through burger while steering with my knees. And that's through a section of interstate that's so non-urban that the "last gas for 100 miles" signs are ignored at your peril. 

The Jackson Hole - Cody trip is totally plausible, as it turns out. There are a couple of Level 2 chargers in Riverton. Stop for a bite to eat and pick up a chunk of range. Plugshare has reviews from a bunch of Tesla owners including one in December, so this is a trip people are actually doing. Also - I've never seen this mentioned anywhere - an RV hookup is pretty darn close to a Level 2 charger and those are everywhere.

It's always possible to come up with an edge case, but the truth of the matter is that modern EVs can do the vast majority of what people do with ICE vehicles. They also bring a different set of attributes to the table. It's interesting to see the reasoning people have for purchasing - for some, it's balls-out speed. For some, it's environmental. For some, it's a way to save money, or maybe it's the lack of noise and vibration. All valid reasons, but surprisingly varied.

Tom_Spangler said:

dculberson said:

Im not aware of a single person "pushing" this tech on you any more than any other product gets pushed since they're trying to, you know, sell things. Maybe try to unwrap your feelings of being thought a bumpkin from the discussion of a car. 

I'm going to try not to patio this thread by treading lightly, but you can't say nobody is "pushing" EVs when they've enjoyed significant government incentives for quite some time. I don't think you'd see nearly as many of them around if the free market was determining demand on it's own. I'm not saying that's a good or bad thing, but it is a fact.

Having said that, you can obviously still buy ICE cars, keep what you have, etc.

I appreciate it your treading lightly. Honestly there have been so many tax incentives for oil and gas production but we don't spend every thread about a new gas powered car railing about those. I don't know and haven't looked into it, but I suspect the cumulative tax breaks for gas and oil eclipse those for EVs by several orders of magnitude at this point. Encouraging a new technology is also not at all equivalent to pushing them down people's throats.

dculberson said:

I appreciate it your treading lightly. Honestly there have been so many tax incentives for oil and gas production but we don't spend every thread about a new gas powered car railing about those. I don't know and haven't looked into it, but I suspect the cumulative tax breaks for gas and oil eclipse those for EVs by several orders of magnitude at this point. Encouraging a new technology is also not at all equivalent to pushing them down people's throats.

Could be, I haven't looked into the numbers. All I'm saying is that there are forces at work to try and encourage/push/emphasize however you want to put it, EVs.

Then again, I guess you could say the US "pushes" ICE vehicles by having much lower fuel taxes than the rest of the developed world. It's a complex issue, to be sure.

The Model S in Ludicrous+ mode does 0-60 in 2.28 seconds.  After experiencing that, I don't understand how anyone who enjoys cars can still complain about electric cars.  They're the future and the future is coming fast, and I'm excited for it.  A cleaner vehicle - even if 100% powered by coal energy, it's still cleaner - that's faster, quieter, no toxic exhaust fumes, lower center of gravity, and boy oh boy that acceleration!  

Looks like there's some speculation that Sony's car may just be something to show off all their new technology, not an actual car.  But, I read that it has 500+ horsepower and does 0-60 in 4.8 seconds with a top speed of 149.  I hope they make it and keep the price reasonable.  The horsepower (voltage?) wars of EVs are beginning and it's berkleying awesome.

https://www.tomsguide.com/news/sony-vision-s-electric-car-prototype

Can we talk about the car? You know, the one this thread is about?

The theory that it's more a rolling technology showcase than an actual marketable vehicle is the only thing that makes sense to me, because this seems like a pretty rough time to start making electric cars and a pretty great time to start making parts for electric and autonomous cars. Tesla, Porsche and Polestar already make similar cars, Lucid, NIO, Byton, Faraday Future and probably some others are working on a similar car and Dyson gave up on making one after a massive investment. What is it about this one that makes it competitive in this kind of market? 

The proliferation of screens is nothing new, but it's interesting that they chose to do an innovative car audio system. As cars become quieter and need less driver input, I can see car audio becoming much more relevant than it is currently. 

As the EV market evolves, it'll be interesting to see if it remains analogous to the ICE market (every manufacturer has unique power trains and platforms) or if it reverts to the older coachbuilding model (a small number of manufacturers provide the power train and platform, other companies turn these into finished vehicles). For example, are the power units going to be Bosch/Dana vs Webato, or will they be Ford vs GM? Does it make sense for the ICE manufacturers to develop their own tech or just buy it?

Or, in the ICE world, TVR (bespoke engines) vs Morgan (we got this one from BMW, but maybe we'll use a Ford next time)?

In reply to Keith Tanner :

And for me: the pure laziness of not wanting to go to a gas station once or twice a week for my DD. 

Janel absolutely loves the fact that she never has to go to the gas station. I had no idea this was such an annoyance for her.

z31maniac said:

Gingerbeardman said: Half of Americans live outside of major metro areas in the "flyover states".

 

According to the last census it's more like 82% of the population live in a "metro area."

 

 

Yes, And this is 99% of the problems in America. Spread out people!

Keith Tanner said:

As the EV market evolves, it'll be interesting to see if it remains analogous to the ICE market (every manufacturer has unique power trains and platforms) or if it reverts to the older coachbuilding model (a small number of manufacturers provide the power train and platform, other companies turn these into finished vehicles).

One thing I've never really understood is why BetterPlace failed.  I know next to nothing about batteries or electric motors, but the idea of creating a common battery pack that could be swapped seems like an easy solution to the issue of range, charging, etc.  Imagine, if that infrastructure is in place, which admittedly is a high hurdle, one can basically just go get battery packs like we do gas right now.  And, since it's a common pack, it could go into different vehicles with different needs (e.g., two packs for a truck that needs range or towing capacity, etc.).  

Also, given the high cost of batteries, it could lower tha barrier to electric car adoption.  So instead of buying a car with a battery pack, consumers would basically buy a car without a battery pack, and then pay for electricity as they go (along with deposit for the battery pack).  Maybe I'm just not thinking futuristic enough on the pace of improvement of battery / charging tech, but the fundamental idea struck me as sound.  

infinitenexus said:

The Model S in Ludicrous+ mode does 0-60 in 2.28 seconds.  After experiencing that, I don't understand how anyone who enjoys cars can still complain about electric cars. 

There's probably a lot of people here who actually don't care considering that they could have gotten 300hp cars that don't handle for the same price as their 100hp cars that do.

dculberson said:

Tom_Spangler said:

dculberson said:

Im not aware of a single person "pushing" this tech on you any more than any other product gets pushed since they're trying to, you know, sell things. Maybe try to unwrap your feelings of being thought a bumpkin from the discussion of a car. 

I'm going to try not to patio this thread by treading lightly, but you can't say nobody is "pushing" EVs when they've enjoyed significant government incentives for quite some time. I don't think you'd see nearly as many of them around if the free market was determining demand on it's own. I'm not saying that's a good or bad thing, but it is a fact.

Having said that, you can obviously still buy ICE cars, keep what you have, etc.

I appreciate it your treading lightly. Honestly there have been so many tax incentives for oil and gas production but we don't spend every thread about a new gas powered car railing about those. I don't know and haven't looked into it, but I suspect the cumulative tax breaks for gas and oil eclipse those for EVs by several orders of magnitude at this point. Encouraging a new technology is also not at all equivalent to pushing them down people's throats.

The figure I read a decade or so ago is that we would have to tax gasoline/Diesel at about $5-6 per gallon to cover what it is spent to keep it flowing.

Granted, this is not a number that could ever be precisely pinned down because of all of the variables, but there is definitely a great enough incentive to minimize oil use (not just for economic reasons) that encouraging EV adoption makes sense.  

Anyway,  aren't those tax breaks gone now?

The tax breaks for EVs are determined by manufacturer and they only apply to a certain number of cars. Tesla has run out, GM is about to (IIRC). FCA has loads left over :) 

bcp2011 said:

Keith Tanner said:

As the EV market evolves, it'll be interesting to see if it remains analogous to the ICE market (every manufacturer has unique power trains and platforms) or if it reverts to the older coachbuilding model (a small number of manufacturers provide the power train and platform, other companies turn these into finished vehicles).

One thing I've never really understood is why BetterPlace failed.  I know next to nothing about batteries or electric motors, but the idea of creating a common battery pack that could be swapped seems like an easy solution to the issue of range, charging, etc.  Imagine, if that infrastructure is in place, which admittedly is a high hurdle, one can basically just go get battery packs like we do gas right now.  And, since it's a common pack, it could go into different vehicles with different needs (e.g., two packs for a truck that needs range or towing capacity, etc.).  

Also, given the high cost of batteries, it could lower tha barrier to electric car adoption.  So instead of buying a car with a battery pack, consumers would basically buy a car without a battery pack, and then pay for electricity as they go (along with deposit for the battery pack).  Maybe I'm just not thinking futuristic enough on the pace of improvement of battery / charging tech, but the fundamental idea struck me as sound.  

Why not standardization? Because that's not something the car industry does well. We can't even share lug nuts across all cars, and that's about as non-controversial an item you can think of. I agree that it sure would make life better for everyone but vehicle designers.

Battery swaps bring in all sorts of potential problems (what if you get a used one?), and it turns out it's not actually any faster than charging but is a whole lot more difficult to actually do. Tesla actually tried it and it turned out owners weren't actually interested. Think about what a battery swap station would look like, too - you can put a charger anywhere, but a battery swap is going to require infrastructure. 

Gingerbeardman said:

I'm most disappointed in just how car-like it looks.

I actually like that it has car-like looks.  That's always been a thing that's bugged me about hybrids and EVs, the stylists came up with unusual styling to set them apart.

Ian F said:

In reply to Keith Tanner :

And for me: the pure laziness of not wanting to go to a gas station once or twice a week for my DD. 

I was off the last two weeks of December, so I think this morning was the first time I've put gas in the car since before Thanksgiving. 

Keith Tanner said:

Battery swaps bring in all sorts of potential problems (what if you get a used one?), and it turns out it's not actually any faster than charging but is a whole lot more difficult to actually do. Tesla actually tried it and it turned out owners weren't actually interested. Think about what a battery swap station would look like, too - you can put a charger anywhere, but a battery swap is going to require infrastructure. 

I think everyone realized supercharging is not much more of an inconvenience.  I find supercharging breaks relaxing.

stuart in mn said:

Gingerbeardman said:

I'm most disappointed in just how car-like it looks.

I actually like that it has car-like looks.  That's always been a thing that's bugged me about hybrids and EVs, the stylists came up with unusual styling to set them apart.

This.  It seems like they are trying to one up each other with how butt ugly they can make a vehicle.  The first time I saw an i3 I could not believe that BMW could make something so hideous.

bcp2011 said:

Gingerbeardman said:

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against toys, two-wheeled, four-wheeled, or more-wheeled, nor am I racist against motive power, be it actual horse power, steam, gas, diesel or electric, nor am I a Luddite worried about newfangled tech and our robot overlords. What I am against is dreamy navel gazing and hamfisted legislative attempts to force me into the brave new world.

No way in hell am I buying an $80k "car" that I can't drive almost half the year, still forced to rely on old "dirty" ICE to get me around during the winter, because Musk and Co. didn't think about hills, cold weather, long distances between towns and actually getting work done, rather than posing for Instagram likes.

You say you're not a luddite, but... 

That's not being a Luddite...tech for tech sake doesn't help anyone. Shiny new toys doesnt' mean better new toys. If it can't do the basics of what ICE can do ALL THE TIME, it's not an equivalent.

In reply to Gingerbeardman :

If people didn't want hybrids or EVs, they wouldn't buy them and the market would crater.  When the Model 3 was announced, people were lining up blocks-long to get the opportunity to put down a deposit.  People want them and other manufacturers are taking notice.

I'm completely unthrilled with how nobody sells small cars in the US anymore, but this is because people have voted with their dollars that they'd rather drive small trucks.  Or large trucks.  So we get what we got, because that is what is selling.

What I find interesting is that people used to say the automobile market was closed because of how expensive it is to start a new car company.  Now we are seeing new car companies.

mtn said:

Any of my "normal" trips (from Chicagoland) which include trips to St. Louis, the UP, Louisville, Rural Kentucky and Indiana, Ames, IA, and Ely, MN... Well, most if not all of that is through Flyover country. The biggest city I pass through on any of these trips is either Indianapolis or Milwaukee. Not exactly booming metropolis's (metropolis'? Metropoli?) 

 

Looking at the Tesla supercharger network, at most they'd take me 15 minutes longer than an ICE vehicle right now. If we include my family who drives from Evansville, IN to Chicago to pick me, then to Ely, MN, it adds about 1 hour to a 14 hour car ride.... and part of that is because we wouldn't be able to charge at the destination. I really think we can move beyond the "it won't work for too many people" schpeel, even those in flyover country... unless they're such exceptionally poor planners that they can't even get gas when their tank is on E?

I think you'll find reality doesn't match your "perfect world" scenario. It takes significantly longer to charge than to fuel up...that's if the charging station isn't blocked, which is a common occurrence. And those charging stations are not as conveniently located as fueling stations, which requires more driving, which takes more time.

Jason from Engineering Explained and the guys at Fast Lane Cars have actually done some really good videos about Tesla road and stress tests, and they own them...they do a better job of showing the actual pitfalls, rather than just fanboying.

Gingerbeardman said:

bcp2011 said:

Gingerbeardman said:

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against toys, two-wheeled, four-wheeled, or more-wheeled, nor am I racist against motive power, be it actual horse power, steam, gas, diesel or electric, nor am I a Luddite worried about newfangled tech and our robot overlords. What I am against is dreamy navel gazing and hamfisted legislative attempts to force me into the brave new world.

No way in hell am I buying an $80k "car" that I can't drive almost half the year, still forced to rely on old "dirty" ICE to get me around during the winter, because Musk and Co. didn't think about hills, cold weather, long distances between towns and actually getting work done, rather than posing for Instagram likes.

You say you're not a luddite, but... 

That's not being a Luddite...tech for tech sake doesn't help anyone. Shiny new toys doesnt' mean better new toys. If it can't do the basics of what ICE can do ALL THE TIME, it's not an equivalent.

The trick is, we are finding that for a lot of people, what an ICE can do is not really necessary.

Lemme tell you a story.  When I started working where I do, the kid here said "How can he be any good, he doesn't have a truck!".  I said well, I don't need a truck except for maybe once every other year, it makes no sense for me to compromise the other 40-50,000 miles I will drive in that time just for an outlier condition.  I drive 20 miles to work and 20 miles back, I never haul anything that I can't carry on a 4' trailer.  So he said, "But you don't have a truck!  How can you work on cars if you don't have a truck?"

EVs won't be an equivalent.  For a lot of people (no not everyone, but a lot) they don't need an equivalent.