I am surprised that Tesla hasn't spun the charger network out into a separate company, as I think it has real potential (har har) to be an industry leader. They certainly have a head start. They'd have to open it up to other cars in order to do that which would change the competitive landscape.
In my area, the Electrify America network looks like they just photocopied a Supercharger map and then found the closest Walmart/Sams/Target.
This article just showed up on Autotrader.ca https://www.autotrader.ca/newsfeatures/20191017/ford-ev-to-get-480-km-range-automaker-launches-charging-app/ the Ford.ca site front page has the Mustang inspired SUV but not on Ford.com
Damn kilometers! How far is that in freedom units?
279. Right between the Standard Range and Long Range Model 3s, to put it in perspective. Most of the $3x.000 EVs are in the mid-250s. I think that's what the public will accept so that range anxiety (justified or otherwise) is no longer a problem. The article says that's for their extended range variant, I wonder what the standard range will look like and what the price point is?
I like the fact that Ford is offering a network-agnostic (to a point) app. Hopefully it will be better curated than some of the crowdsourced sites. That home charger is burlier than most. I'm not sure the difference between 48A and 32A is significant - both require an overnight charge to fill a heavily depleted battery - but I still like the option :)
MrFancypants said:If I have to rent or buy a second vehicle to get to where I need to go doesn't that nullify any benefits an EV might offer? In my case, the reality is that there are no EV charging stations within the entire county of a location I visit once or twice a year. Sure, if I never travel far from home this isn't a problem, but I'm multiple stops away from both my family and my in-laws. In the current state of things an EV just doesn't make sense for me.
No it doesn't. It happens all the time. Many people only need a truck once a year or so, so they rent from Home Depot. Many people rent a van and or trailer from U-haul for occasional trips. I have a friend who bought a new STi, but to drive from Detroit to Chicago once a month he's rent a mid size sedan as even with rental costs it was less than the gas for the STi to do it, and had a better ride for into the bargain. So no, I don't see a vehicle that can only manage 95% of your needs as a deal stopper. Many people already have ICE vehicles and still rent or borrow something else for the remaining 1-5% of their needs.
That's actually a much more logical way to do things. I mean, I don't own a house that's big enough for my extended family to sleep in. But my town has hotels, so that's okay.
Adrian_Thompson said:MrFancypants said:If I have to rent or buy a second vehicle to get to where I need to go doesn't that nullify any benefits an EV might offer? In my case, the reality is that there are no EV charging stations within the entire county of a location I visit once or twice a year. Sure, if I never travel far from home this isn't a problem, but I'm multiple stops away from both my family and my in-laws. In the current state of things an EV just doesn't make sense for me.
No it doesn't. It happens all the time. Many people only need a truck once a year or so, so they rent from Home Depot. Many people rent a van and or trailer from U-haul for occasional trips. I have a friend who bought a new STi, but to drive from Detroit to Chicago once a month he's rent a mid size sedan as even with rental costs it was less than the gas for the STi to do it, and had a better ride for into the bargain. So no, I don't see a vehicle that can only manage 95% of your needs as a deal stopper. Many people already have ICE vehicles and still rent or borrow something else for the remaining 1-5% of their needs.
Your friend didn't buy an STI to fill a need in the most financially efficient way possible, so spending extra dollars to rent something that makes the Subaru's ownership costs a little lower makes sense.
If you're purchasing an EV to fill a need and have chosen this route because it's going to save you money, then paying insurance and upkeep costs for a second vehicle doesn't make sense. Then if you rent often enough you could then nullify your savings and possibly end up spending more.
The variables are different for all of us, but if I had purchase another vehicle or rent every time I needed to do something a ~$30k EV couldn't manage I'd almost certainly double my monthly transportation budget on top of what I'm spending right now. If I wanted an EV because I think they're neat and I wasn't just filling a need, then whatever. But I'm not there yet and probably will not be until I can get an EV Miata.
Sounds like your needs are greater than most drivers. Most people can meet >95% of their needs with an EV, so those rentals would be infrequent.
Today was a long day for me. 220 miles. Average us 100-125 a day.
In incredibly rural areas.
I love the idea of electric vehicles, but for me they dont make sense yet. Especially sice i do this kind of mileage EVERY DAY. I'd wear it out before the payments were over vs a used gas burner.
But someday, i want tesla p90d acceleration EVERY time.....
ProDarwin said:Sounds like your needs are greater than most drivers. Most people can meet >95% of their needs with an EV, so those rentals would be infrequent.
This.
The only real argument I have against an EV when I get rid of my Mazda 3 at some point...........I want a boost buggy, a V8, or a convertible.
Adrian_Thompson said:No it doesn't. It happens all the time. Many people only need a truck once a year or so, so they rent from Home Depot. Many people rent a van and or trailer from U-haul for occasional trips. I have a friend who bought a new STi, but to drive from Detroit to Chicago once a month he's rent a mid size sedan as even with rental costs it was less than the gas for the STi to do it, and had a better ride for into the bargain.
Exactly. I have a regular 300 mile RT for work. I sometimes rent just to put the miles on something else. Rental+fuel even comes in cheaper than the mileage reimbursement.
Dusterbd13-michael said:I love the idea of electric vehicles, but for me they dont make sense yet. Especially sice i do this kind of mileage EVERY DAY. I'd wear it out before the payments were over vs a used gas burner.
I'm really curious as to the longevity of the batteries. I understand the Leaf batteries have degraded due to lack of cooling, but haven't heard other issues. Does anyone have insights on battery life under this type of usage (e.g., running full to half or 1/4 empty on daily basis, vs. high mileage but with frequent recharges)?
If it helps, Tesla has an 80,000 mile warranty on the powertrain and Toyota just announced theirs would be 100,000. Tesla surveys have indicated that the lifespan of the battery pack should be in the 300-500k range. I don't know if it's better to do frequent fast charges or run from 80%-20% every day.
It sounds like Tesla has figured out how to make batteries last, so I can't imagine other companies are far behind.
In reply to bcp2011 :
Charging a lithium battery is what wears it out. Charging one to full wears it out the most.
So the longest life in terms of charging is to charge it to 80% once and then not recharge it until it is down to 20%.
So you will notice then that 40% of the capacity is not used in this approach. Another is use a smaller battery (lighter, cheap) and wear it out and replace it is cheaper than making a bigger one (heavier, more expensive) last longer.
Notethis is very different than other batteries, particularly lead acid that last longer when kept fully charged.
There are batteries that have lower energy density that can be charged and discharged fully and last a long time, they are expensive
In reply to bcp2011 :
It's not a full BEV, but This Chevy Volt, presumed to be the highest mileage example on the road, has over 141k EV miles (out of over 400k total miles) with zero battery degradation. It gets charged from empty to full daily to complete the owners commute.
I just can’t wait for the day when we look the Saudis in the eye and can say “...you have a large portion of the world’s oil. Now Berking go drink it!”
In reply to A 401 CJ :
I wonder to what extent it's oil that keeps us in bed with the Saudis anymore. The days of Americans anxiously reading about OPEC meetings seem to be long gone, thanks to deepwater drilling, fracking, and the like. And the "great powers" (or "international community" now) were mucking around in that part of the world long before the automobile.
I don't know, but I wonder.
In any case, the fever for electric vehicles has not infected me. It just seems like your getting less of a car. More of what actually propels you down the road is ommitted from what you own, and centralized.
the issue I have is the BEV or Hybrids that I want/or are sporty are 60k+ or 100k+.(Model 3 performance/P100D,RLX Sports Hybrid, LC500h, NSX, Taycan, etc)
My shortlist of possible next new new car for me is the NSX or the Taycan. Unless someone comes out with a cheaper sporty hybrid. Hybrid Mustang maybe?
Saudi Arabia doesn't really supply the US with that much oil (relative to other sources). I believe the total provided by Saudi Arabia has fluctuated between 10% and 15% of the US's overall consumption over the last ten years.
At the moment I'm pretty sure that the US is it's own biggest supplier, followed somewhat closely by Canada.
In reply to STM317 :
From wikipedia on the Volt:
To ensure the battery pack would last ten years and 150,000 miles (240,000 km) expected for the battery warranty, the Volt team decided to use only half of the 16 kWh capacity to reduce the rate of capacity degradation, limiting the state of charge (SOC) up to 80% of capacity and never depleting the battery below 30%.
b13990 said:In any case, the fever for electric vehicles has not infected me. It just seems like your getting less of a car. More of what actually propels you down the road is ommitted from what you own, and centralized.
That's a really odd way to look at it, I have to say. If you want more complexity and want to retain ownership of the power supply, I guess you can get a generator to charge the thing at home :) It's not like you own the gas station with a gas car, really.
You own the same amount of the car. It takes in energy, and uses that energy to move you down the road. It doesn't make any difference what form that energy takes, whether it's gasoline, diesel, electricity, hydrogen or whatever. You don't own the means of production or distribution of that energy unless you're winding up a big rubber band or something. Sure, the car is fundamentally simpler in terms of the components in the drivetain - batteries and an electric motor or two - but electronic ignition is fundamentally simpler than points and not many of us want that back.
Different people have different reasons to be enthusiastic about EVs. For some, it's the ability to run the car on renewable energy and decrease the number of independently maintained and monitored emissions sources. For others, it's raw nasty speed - if you've ever been in a good electric when the driver mats the accelerator, it'll almost take your breath away. For some people, it's seen as a cheap way to get around because your price per mile is lower. Still others like the fact that they're smooth and low maintenance and eerily quiet. They're all good reasons and you don't need to agree with all of them of appreciate the concept.
I was gonna say, " More of what actually propels you down the road is ommitted from what you own, and centralized" makes no sense to me as a criticism of an electric car. An electric car is less centralized. You can not in any way make your own gasoline, but you can readily make electricity by buying solar panels, making or buying a wind turbine, etc. Even without that, you don't need to go somewhere to fuel up, you can do it at home or anywhere there's an electric outlet. A gasoline car continuously depends on a ridiculously long supply chain that literally starts miles underground and follows thousands of miles of discrete complex steps to finally get into the gas tank and be burned. Electric cars are far more simple and depend upon fewer steps.
If someone proposed building out the gasoline infrastructure we have now from scratch they'd be laughed out of the room.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
I'd go a step further and suggest that electric generation is far less centralized than oil refining. Have a windmill? You can get electrons! Have a solar panel? You can get electrons! Have a bike you can pedal? You can get electrons!
Have a barrel of oil? Well... you can't do much with it.
Keith Tanner said:They're all good reasons and you don't need to agree with all of them of appreciate the concept.
All I said was that I've never wanted one, and then I tried to understand why. It's something I've struggled with. I don't much care if a car has a turbo, or a naturally aspirated V8, or a Wankel motor... I like them all. But I guess a battery with an electric motor attached to it seems ho-hum. It's a refinement (granted, an extreme one) of technology learned in elementary school.
Some of it may relate to my experience riding out Hurricane Katrina. People talk about electric car ranges, charging networks... how would an EV hold up as my last connection to civilized life for a few weeks, running DC radios, lights, etc.? I have no idea, but I know my little 2.3L Ford was a godsend back then.
You'll need to log in to post.
