GameboyRMH wrote:chandlerGTi wrote: I'll step out and say 100miles is the line in the sand. While the typical family may use 40 miles most people are capable of 100 miles in a day, everyday. If the leaf/soul (even volt) had that electric range I would own one. No question, $30-35k, take my money.The new Soul EV is just about at that range...rated at 93 but TTAC was getting 113 in their review.
Soul EV is not available in my "market".
In reply to nderwater:
Yes, the 70 miles is a little conservative. So?
We are talking about range. If the range question is an issue, it would mean people are pushing 70 or more. What is the point of "pushing it " (as a routine) when there are no recharge stations to pull into and fix the problem?
I can squeak better fuel economy out of my ICE any time I want to. But there is a gas station on every other corner, so it doesn't really matter if I am wrong.
The fact that it can be stretched is a useless piece of trivia in the real world.
To the general buying public, they need reliability and convenience. It ain't reliable if you don't know where the next charging station is, and Mapquesting your entire life into 70 (or 85) mile increments is silly.
nderwater wrote: To be fair, would the impact on your son's household due to the expense of buying/leasing two new vehicles be any less if they had chosen gas-powered cars instead?
Yes. Well, sort of.
They don't need 2 cars. They only need 1, but now need to maintain 2 in order to keep their 1 (the Leaf) running.
AND, being "green" and going EV meant a large investment. They never would have bought new if they were buying an ICE, but the options on used EVs are slim to none.
BUT, the discounts and incentives and tax breaks made the initial cost much more palatable. The temptation for them was that, on paper, the car appeared to be virtually "free" after incentives and fuel savings. So, they bought more car than they would have.
But, the calculations did not include maintaining a 2nd vehicle.
Your question assumes they were going to buy 2 cars. Wrong question.
I am not knowledable on this subject, but it interests me.
One question I have had for a while now.... If R/C car batteries have come such a long way in such a short period of time, why can't EV batteries?
We went from Nicad to NiMh to know liFe or Lipo batteries in teh last 10 years.
The jump between NiCd to NiMh was a fairly large increase in performance. The jump to LiPo or LiFe was MASSIVE! THe batteries are half the weight and last 2 to 3 times as long! The price has not really increased over the years either.
I don't understand how full size cars haven't made progress like this.
I do see that the Leaf and now the next gen Prius will use Lithium Ion batteries. We have been running lithium batteries in RC cars for 5+ years. Why is this just now(ish) getting into full size cars?
There are some cars with LiFe batteries, like the Mirage. LiPos haven't been used for safety and reliability reasons. But full-size cars have made progress, it's that progress that's made EVs quick and practical over the last 10 years. The EV manufacturers are vastly more conservative about what kind of batteries they use than the RC manufacturers, who are happy to slap any hot new thing in their toys. The EV manufacturers are going to wait for a well-established technology which is why they've mostly been sticking to Li-ion.
Also I think your timeline for RC technology is quite a bit behind...NiMh in RCs was outdated by the early/mid 2000s.
There are a lot of folks here arguing with data that they don't have.
I drive one every day. I work 15 miles from my house. I cannot charge anywhere but home on 100V. It's been nearly two years and I have needed to seek alternate transportation three times, always to errands after work after a ton of driving during the day.
I promise, for the vast majority of people who already own another car they make a lot of sense now. They're only going to get better. In ten years time they will be everywhere, and be double digit percentage of the overall sales in the US.
I think Curmudgeon's point was that most car buyers aren't so logical and are going to suffer from irrational range anxiety until EVs' capabilities overwhelm their actual driving needs by a wide margin.
It's more that someone who can only afford 1 vehicle is going to find themselves in a tight spot if an emergency arises, they will be in a bad spot range and time wise. It's not always practical to go rent a ICE car for 1 trip, at $35-$40 a day a 3 day trip is going to be $120 not including mileage, insurance and fuel, call that another $120. If someone is barely able to swing a $139 per month lease on a Spark then it makes no sense to park the thing to spend $240 for their trip when they can buy an Aveo for close to the same price and shell out another $35 for that trip's gas cost.
Range anxiety: we will use Toyman's sister as an example. She lives in Charlotte, he lives in Charleston, about 212 miles. Their parents live further out on Edisto, add another 60 miles for 272 miles. Heaven forbid, there is a family emergency. That's a 4.94 (okay, 5) hour trip. She hits the road and will have to recharge every 85 miles, that's 3.2 recharges. If we figure the car is fully charged when she leaves that means she will have to recharge twice. But the 100% charge is only if the car is plugged in for 4 hours. That means 8 hours JUST TO RECHARGE. There are DC fast chargers available, they will recharge to 80% in about 1/2 hour. Now she has to stop every 68 miles or 4 times, figure 3. That's an hour and a half extra for the trip. http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/08/24/5-common-electric-car-questions-answered.aspx
All these numbers assume perfect conditions, in truth they rarely are. A Pious has a 540 mile range and can make it without stopping.
This is the type of real life scenario which must be overcome for mainstream EV acceptance.
The local Fiat dealer has a 2012 Mitsubishi i with 9k miles on it for $9k.
This is when the things start to make sense. Even a single person like me can consider having a dedicated 2nd commuter car.
GameboyRMH wrote: I think Curmudgeon's point was that most car buyers aren't so logical and are going to suffer from irrational range anxiety until EVs' capabilities overwhelm their actual driving needs by a wide margin.
Logic schmlogic.
People's needs are irrelevant.
People's perceived needs and wants are all that matter.
SVreX wrote: Logic schmlogic. People's needs are irrelevant. People's perceived needs and wants are all that matter.
Politics, relationships, economics, and everything human was just explained.
Curmudgeon wrote: Range anxiety: we will use Toyman's sister as an example. She lives in Charlotte, he lives in Charleston, about 212 miles. Their parents live further out on Edisto, add another 60 miles for 272 miles. Heaven forbid, there is a family emergency. That's a 4.94 (okay, 5) hour trip. She hits the road and will have to recharge every 85 miles, that's 3.2 recharges
I don't get it. Didn't he say earlier this is a multi-car family? Why would she take the electric car when she can just hop in another vehicle that can complete the trip without issue? I don't think a 3 car family where a person is unable to use the other two vehicles is a common scenario.
ProDarwin wrote:Curmudgeon wrote: Range anxiety: we will use Toyman's sister as an example. She lives in Charlotte, he lives in Charleston, about 212 miles. Their parents live further out on Edisto, add another 60 miles for 272 miles. Heaven forbid, there is a family emergency. That's a 4.94 (okay, 5) hour trip. She hits the road and will have to recharge every 85 miles, that's 3.2 rechargesI don't get it. Didn't he say earlier this is a multi-car family? Why would she take the electric car when she can just hop in another vehicle that can complete the trip without issue? I don't think a 3 car family where a person is unable to use the other two vehicles is a common scenario.
You've missed the point. If she did not have that to fall back on, what would she do? Poof, there goes another lost EV sale.
Also, she traded the Leaf in on another Prius and I would be willing to be the type scenario I outlined had a fair amount to do with it.
Cars are, first and foremost, freedom. As it is you can jump in an ICE car and go pretty much anywhere with little to no concerns about refueling. Electrics, you can't (at least not with conventional technology). There goes the freedom.
In reply to ProDarwin:
It's not a question of unable to, she just doesn't want to. She wants one car that will do everything she needs. As much as she wanted it to be electric, they just aren't there yet.
Until they can make the customer like her happy, they will be a niche vehicle.
You're all correct in a way. The current capabilities of electric cars are sufficient for 99% of the driving folks do. The problem is that folks buy cars that are capable of 150% of their needs, and that's not gonna change. All of my single nonparent coworkers drive midsize SUVs that really don't make any sense for a nurse to drive.
That's a market that EVs will have a very difficult time penetrating, and from observing traffic around me, it's about 80% of the market. Logic and need have nothing to do with it, and it's kind of pointless pursuing that market at this time, considering most folks would never consider a compact hatchback to begin with, let alone an electric one.
Having driven a Leaf for nearly 2 years now, I think it would be perfect with 200 miles of range. It works nearly perfectly for me now, but my work commute is only 35 miles round trip. What if I wanted to take a job further away? What if a family member or friend moved just out of range?
I'd definitely consider a Leaf with a 200 mile range IF! I could run the HVAC without an unreasonable fear of cutting the range down to stupid low numbers. Call me lazy or whatever, I just don't like the idea of a long trip either sweating like crazy or freezing my ass off, or listening to passengers complain. And I think I speak for a large percentage of the car buying population on that one. I'm not sure how the manufacturers are going to tackle that problem. I'm guessing small catalytic heaters and perhaps those Peltier thermoelectric coolers, I have no idea of their power consumption.
In reply to tuna55:
drive one every day. I work 15 miles from my house. I cannot charge anywhere but home on 100V. It's been nearly two years and I have needed to seek alternate transportation three times, always to errands after work after a ton of driving during the da
I believe to most car buyers, having to seek alternative transportation to their new car three times in the first two years would be three times too many.
Boost_Crazy wrote: In reply to tuna55:drive one every day. I work 15 miles from my house. I cannot charge anywhere but home on 100V. It's been nearly two years and I have needed to seek alternate transportation three times, always to errands after work after a ton of driving during the daI believe to most car buyers, having to seek alternative transportation to their new car three times in the first two years would be three times too many.
I can attest to this. 
I have, more than once, seen cars traded over something minor like a dead battery in the first year of ownership.
Curmudgeon wrote: I'm not sure how the manufacturers are going to tackle that problem. I'm guessing small catalytic heaters and perhaps those Peltier thermoelectric coolers, I have no idea of their power consumption.
Their power consumption can be whatever you want, but their efficiency is horrible.
What a lot of EVs and hybrids are using these days is a "heat pump" system which is something like a conventional AC system with a pump and and radiators in the cabin and engine bay, but it can do both heating and cooling.
My Soul has heated and cooled seats to help reduce the need to rely on climate control. The HVAC system uses a heat pump (as mentioned above) and there is a driver-only setting fan setting for greater efficiency. Small steps, but they do make an impact on range.
I'm curious to know what sort of insulation techniques might be used in the future to reduce dependence on climate control for vehicle occupants.
The Chrysler side of the BMW/GMC/Chrysler collaboration on a hybrid SUV used an electrically driven compressor for the HVAC which required 744 volts. 
So there was a step up transformer and all kinds of stuff to make it work. I kept scratching my head, it just didn't seem very efficient to me.
Insulation will be important, most current cars have nearly none.
I know that when I got the DeLorean's windows tinted and was talking with the tinting guy about the type that had been recommended to me by the other D owners (a metallic film tint), he mentioned that is was what many hybrid owners were using to tint their windows since it drastically cut down the heat in the cabin and thus the need for running the A/C and draining the battery. Would obviously work against you in the winter though- but that would only be a concern in places that HAVE winters of note.
bastomatic is definitely right about most people buying for WAY more than they actually need- SWMBO is a perfect example of this. 98% of her driving is done with just her in the vehicle and not carrying much in the way of cargo- usually just what would fit into a small backpack. She has two regular 'commutes': three days a week she drive to and from one studio that is about 5 miles away, two days a week she has to drive to a studio about 35 miles away. The rest of the time is usually just driving around town, almost never more than 20 miles in a trip. A few times a year, we drive the 10 hours to Wisconsin with our large dog and luggage. Her driving patterns are such that a decent-ranged electric or hybrid would be PERFECT.
She currently drives a 2008 Mercury Mariner, and had an XTerra before that. She actively dislikes having to drive my 2005 Prius because she 'doesn't feel comfortable driving such a small car' despite the fact that we'd save a LOT of money on gas even if she only drove the Prius to and from the closer studio. She's just wedded to the idea that the larger, heavier, and far less efficient SUV is just SO MUCH safer than the Prius despite the fact that in most situations the Prius is easier to control and going to be less likely to get into an accident in the first place- and it has more safety features than her SUV. But like too many people, she's bought into the American mindset that 'bigger cars are better'.
EVs will go away entirely the minute Hydrogen becomes available.
In fact, they will be buried in the same rhetoric that now makes them attractive.
"Drive a Tesla H. It's so green you could drink the waste, instead of those nasty electric vehicles which run off power generated by coal fired power plants"
And hydrogen could be distributed through existing fuel delivery infrastructure, and waste water could be dumped at the same time the vehicle is fueled.
CA will be first. Water can be recirculated to help with the water shortage.
The Jeeza wrote:SVreX wrote: Logic schmlogic. People's needs are irrelevant. People's perceived needs and wants are all that matter.Politics, relationships, economics, and everything human was just explained.
I think we live in a pretty sweet day and age when needs are pretty much irrelevant. Who could complain about anything in this type of society?
SVreX wrote: EVs will go away entirely the minute Hydrogen becomes available. In fact, they will be buried in the same rhetoric that now makes them attractive.
Hydrogen's been available for a long time, what's the hold up? Other than the fact that it escapes through solids, is more dangerous than gasoline, is difficult to transport (really almost nothing like gasoline - and it sure can't be delivered through wires), and is almost entirely fossil-sourced, I mean.
The only way hydrogen will take off is if someone invents a form of fusion power that produces it as a byproduct, then we'll have to find something to do with it. Otherwise, if it was going to take off it would've happened by now. The oil companies would be all-for it!
You'll need to log in to post.
