Electric Vehicles?

[j_garcia]

To be honest, you kind of prove my point. Your Prius is currently getting 40+ mpg. I have two customers driving 10 yr old Golfs getting 50+ mpg. No expensive batteries, no extra weight breaking down roads. And they've done this since new.

I just finished reading two 7yr studies of fully electric vehicles. They are showing on average a decrease of 35% capacity at the 7yr mark. Batteries do not degrade linearly, so conservative estimates have the batteries sitting at a 60% degradation at 10yrs. More pessimistics say 95% degradation. Probably more likely 80%.

China is following the wests lead and deflecting where the real issues lie. While certainly every bit helps, the idea of making ICE illegal is ludicrous. Make them more effecient. More and more so. At least until a proper alternative can be found. One that actually works for the world, not just pockets.

I agree they could do more about getting mileage, but there's also emissions. Reduction or elimination of those emissions vs. number of vehicles is a benefit. Mileage helps, but still isn't 100% clean. Yes, the process of building an EV isn't clean either, but that same infrastructure already exists currently.

With lithium batteries, there's also no way to really know when that battery will fully die too - it doesn't gradually die, it will limp along and then: 100% dead, will not charge. Lithium is a limited resource as well and not exactly renewable.

I see companies looking at lithium-sulfur batteries, something definitely much more renewable. There are a ton of new technologies being looked at, but none are ready or are likely to be ready for years.

 

[Push]

Some of what you say is quite true, but I'd like to see the source of your info just to inform myself better since a lot of what you said also doesn't quite add up.

I 100% agree that the infrastructure getting beefed up is long overdue, but now even more so due to EVs. Charging needs standardization, charging needs to be widespread enough that even backwoods service stations have charging stations.

Alot of my information comes from two trade magazines: Automotive Service Tech and CARS Magazine. I get paper copies here, so I'm not even 100% certain if they're available online. Since we're an OK Tire affiliate, I also get inundated with bulletins from head office and EV stuff is currently all the rage. If you can point to particular inconsistencies, I'll happily try and find the supporting documents.

I checked on the cost of a fast charge system for my shop (we also have an attached gas station/convenience store, right out of the 1970s lol). The price was, to me, somewhat staggering. For an all-vehicles, fast charging system, I was looking at $50,000 Cdn installed. And thats only because I already have 3-phase power into my shop already. Unless a government grant comes along, I won't be doing it anytime soon. The few hybrids (4 at last count) and the 1 full EV in town charge at home and are only used for commuter duties anyway. The owners have other vehicles for lake runs and long trips. And the transient traffic we get are mostly fisherman and hunters, and there simply isn't an electric vehicle that will tow a camper and 22 foot fishing boat, so my payback schedule would be into the decades.

Rod

 

[Push]

I see companies looking at lithium-sulfur batteries, something definitely much more renewable. There are a ton of new technologies being looked at, but none are ready or are likely to be ready for years.

Yep, exactly what I mean and why I don't recommend to any of my customers to buy an EV right now. We have no way of knowing if the new batteries will be backwards compatible, what charging options they'll eventually settle on, etc etc. To me, EVs feel a little like Betamax or Laser Disc. Good idea, definite improvement over old tech in many ways, but not quite ready for mainstream and early adopters will get left with something pretty much unusable in 5 or 10 years. The "no ICE after 2035" rule is ludicrous. We simply don't have the tech yet to make it happen, nor are we likely to in the 13 years left to the deadline, especially in Canada where our moron leader has echoed the 2035 sentiment.

 

[j_garcia]

Yep, exactly what I mean and why I don't recommend to any of my customers to buy an EV right now. We have no way of knowing if the new batteries will be backwards compatible, what charging options they'll eventually settle on, etc etc. To me, EVs feel a little like Betamax or Laser Disc. Good idea, definite improvement over old tech in many ways, but not quite ready for mainstream and early adopters will get left with something pretty much unusable in 5 or 10 years. The "no ICE after 2035" rule is ludicrous. We simply don't have the tech yet to make it happen, nor are we likely to in the 13 years left to the deadline, especially in Canada where our moron leader has echoed the 2035 sentiment.

I think there will be a bit of a shift with the adoption of EVs though. With ICE cars, people generally kept them a long time, possibly up to100K and maybe 5-10yrs. All of my current cars are ~10yrs old. Because EV tech and charging tech will definitely change, people will upgrade sooner. I think people will simply keep EVs for a shorter period, not unlike phones, until the tech stabilizes and standardized specs (charging and infrastructure, batteries, etc...).

Nio is testing hot swap. That could potentially solve the whole battery life and battery changes over time question somewhat, but is that really the best option? You buy the car, but don't "own" the battery, you lease it. That is an interesting idea because the proposal is that if you wanted to take a long trip, you could get a high capacity battery for a week for 400 mi. Then you go back to your normal commute, you switch back to your 200 mi range battery. A number of other manufacturers seem to be looking to license this tech too.

IMO, 300 mi range is enough for most people realistically, but it won't meet the odd long trip needs for most anyone. The low end Leaf proved that ~150 is not enough too. A friend owned one and said that "range anxiety" drove him nuts so he sold it and bought a Tesla.

 

[Mikado463]

I think I have a couple years on you, young fella, given how your responses are framed.

EV range is poor compared to virtually every new ICE vehicle. Come on, don't just spew rhetoric, actually think about what you're saying. Great EV range is now in that 3-400 mile mark. I can't think of a single ICE vehicle, non-performance, that gets less than 500 miles to a tank. Many are in that 6-700 mile range. And it takes about 5 minutes to completely refill an ICE vehicle. Fast charging, if you can find a fast charge system, is at best, 10 minutes to 80%.

#6 - You realize there are more people in the world than those that live in the USA, right? Cold climate isn't -5C. For a large number of people in the world, those are nothing temperatures. Hell, block heaters on new vehicles don't even engage until -18C. So no, EVs don't work in cold climates. I quoted three Jeeps with REAL world range in REAL WORLD circumstances, and you argued against it with no evidence, no practical experience and no intelligence. The only thing you've proven is that you're a waste of my time. When you come back with REAL numbers, feel free to post, otherwise I'll be ignoring you and spending my time with those who are worth answering.

LMAO, you are so full of poop with your stupid rationale that you can't see the forest for the trees !

let me ask you this genius ........why then did GM commit billions to the EV future ?

 

[Push]

1) I think there will be a bit of a shift with the adoption of EVs though. With ICE cars, people generally kept them a long time, possibly up to100K and maybe 5-10yrs. All of my current cars are ~10yrs old. Because EV tech and charging tech will definitely change, people will upgrade sooner. I think people will simply keep EVs for a shorter period, not unlike phones, until the tech stabilizes and standardized specs (charging and infrastructure, batteries, etc...).

2) IMO, 300 mi range is enough for most people realistically, but it won't meet the odd long trip needs for most anyone. The low end Leaf proved that ~150 is not enough too. A friend owned one and said that "range anxiety" drove him nuts so he sold it and bought a Tesla.

1) Agree with this sentiment, but now we're manufacturing more new replacements, increasing our carbon footprint for manufacturing. I personally believe we should be minimizing the carbon footprint of the manufacturing sector first, which inarguably spews more gasses into the atmosphere than driving. Fix China and India's horrible carbon footprint, get our infrastructure in place, then look at alternatives to cars. In the meantime, put more and more stringent standards on ICE vehicles. The engine makers still have some room for improvements: more stringent standards on sensors for one example (currently some sensors are allowed +-10% ranges. This can easily drop an engine out of stoichemetric efficiency).

2) Yep, 300 miles is enough for a city commuter or warmer climate daily driver. But where I live, and the lifestyle that people have, its simply not enough. Hell, two kids in hockey can see some parents putting on 500 miles in a day, so unless there are charging stations at the hockey rink, you're walking.

Rod

 

[Mikado463]

I think there will be a bit of a shift with the adoption of EVs though. With ICE cars, people generally kept them a long time, possibly up to100K and maybe 5-10yrs. All of my current cars are ~10yrs old. Because EV tech and charging tech will definitely change, people will upgrade sooner. I think people will simply keep EVs for a shorter period, not unlike phones, until the tech stabilizes and standardized specs (charging and infrastructure, batteries, etc...).

Nio is testing hot swap. That could potentially solve the whole battery life and battery changes over time question somewhat, but is that really the best option? You buy the car, but don't "own" the battery, you lease it. That is an interesting idea because the proposal is that if you wanted to take a long trip, you could get a high capacity battery for a week for 400 mi. Then you go back to your normal commute, you switch back to your 200 mi range battery. A number of other manufacturers seem to be looking to license this tech too.

IMO, 300 mi range is enough for most people realistically, but it won't meet the odd long trip needs for most anyone. The low end Leaf proved that ~150 is not enough too. A friend owned one and said that "range anxiety" drove him nuts so he sold it and bought a Tesla.

I agree on the range issue but also predict that within a decade(or less) it will be resolved and battery top off(or exchange) will become painless

 

[Mikado463]

1) Agree with this sentiment, but now we're manufacturing more new replacements, increasing our carbon footprint for manufacturing. I personally believe we should be minimizing the carbon footprint of the manufacturing sector first, which inarguably spews more gasses into the atmosphere than driving. Fix China and India's horrible carbon footprint, get our infrastructure in place, then look at alternatives to cars. In the meantime, put more and more stringent standards on ICE vehicles. The engine makers still have some room for improvements: more stringent standards on sensors for one example (currently some sensors are allowed +-10% ranges. This can easily drop an engine out of stoichemetric efficiency).

is this stringent enough for you .......

NHTSA Announces New 49 MPG Fleet Fuel Economy Standard By 2026

A day after a record release of U.S. oil reserves, NHTSA has announced stricter new fuel economy standards to make automaker fleets more efficient.

www.motortrend.com

You're obviously a Jeep / Mopar guy, wonder what kind of mpg this baby will get ?

500+HP Hurricane I-6 Engine Coming to Jeep, Ram, Dodge

All-new 3.0-liter twin-turbo Hurricane will power trucks and SUVs for decades to come.

www.motortrend.com

2) Yep, 300 miles is enough for a city commuter or warmer climate daily driver. But where I live, and the lifestyle that people have, its simply not enough. Hell, two kids in hockey can see some parents putting on 500 miles in a day, so unless there are charging stations at the hockey rink, you're walking.

Rod

Demographics, you obviously live well up North (Canada ?) Your population density is small compared to the areas that EV's will do well in

 

[Push]

1) You're obviously a Jeep / Mopar guy, wonder what kind of mpg this baby will get ?

500+HP Hurricane I-6 Engine Coming to Jeep, Ram, Dodge

All-new 3.0-liter twin-turbo Hurricane will power trucks and SUVs for decades to come.

www.motortrend.com

2) Demographics, you obviously live well up North (Canada ?) Your population density is small compared to the areas that EV's will do well in

1) Not sure. High horsepower does not necessarily negate mileage, especially if those ponies are made efficiently. Every vehicle has a certain amount of torque required to pull it efficiently through the air at a given speed. Putting too small an engine into a certain vehicle MAY cause lower mileage than a high horse engine, as long as the driver watches his right foot. Just an example: I had a 2001 Dodge 3500 with a Cummins in it. Stock mileage after break in was 18 mpg empty, 12 mpg with a normal load. Factory horsepower was 245. 2 years later, after injectors, twin turbos, and stacked timing boxes I was running 638 HP. Average calculated empty mileage was 24mpg, average loaded was 16.

2) Our density may be low, but we still need reliable transportation. Our current idiotic administration is spouting adopting California rules BEFORE we have the technology in place. Its pure folly. And don't forget our weather patterns are echoed overseas in higher density locations than Canada, with an equivalent echo in the southern hemisphere. Forcing a questionable technology that does not suit half the world's population baffles me, especially when you consider that those areas of the world account for the majority of foodstuffs needed to feed the rest of the world.

 

[Mikado463]

1) Not sure. High horsepower does not necessarily negate mileage, especially if those ponies are made efficiently. Every vehicle has a certain amount of torque required to pull it efficiently through the air at a given speed. Putting too small an engine into a certain vehicle MAY cause lower mileage than a high horse engine, as long as the driver watches his right foot. Just an example: I had a 2001 Dodge 3500 with a Cummins in it. Stock mileage after break in was 18 mpg empty, 12 mpg with a normal load. Factory horsepower was 245. 2 years later, after injectors, twin turbos, and stacked timing boxes I was running 638 HP. Average calculated empty mileage was 24mpg, average loaded was 16.

2) Our density may be low, but we still need reliable transportation. Our current idiotic administration is spouting adopting California rules BEFORE we have the technology in place. Its pure folly. And don't forget our weather patterns are echoed overseas in higher density locations than Canada, with an equivalent echo in the southern hemisphere. Forcing a technology that does not suit half the world's population baffles me.

All right, we're in agreement (#2) !!!!

Now for the 'diesel thing', there is zero reasoning behind buying a diesel in todays market unless you tow. I'm speaking of course with regards to economics.

 

[j_garcia]

1) Agree with this sentiment, but now we're manufacturing more new replacements, increasing our carbon footprint for manufacturing. I personally believe we should be minimizing the carbon footprint of the manufacturing sector first, which inarguably spews more gasses into the atmosphere than driving. Fix China and India's horrible carbon footprint, get our infrastructure in place, then look at alternatives to cars. In the meantime, put more and more stringent standards on ICE vehicles. The engine makers still have some room for improvements: more stringent standards on sensors for one example (currently some sensors are allowed +-10% ranges. This can easily drop an engine out of stoichemetric efficiency).

India's primary fuel for ~90% of vehicles is Diesel. They also use a lot of oil/coal/wood so, they are their own worst enemy when it comes to pollution. China it is their infrastructure more than the vehicles.

2) Yep, 300 miles is enough for a city commuter or warmer climate daily driver. But where I live, and the lifestyle that people have, its simply not enough. Hell, two kids in hockey can see some parents putting on 500 miles in a day, so unless there are charging stations at the hockey rink, you're walking.

Yeah, I get that. That wouldn't fall into the "average" category and there will be enough of those. I do fall into that average category during the week, but Fri-Sun I tend to drive a lot more and go to LA and San Diego from here (~500-600mi respectively) so an EV isn't what we'd be taking.

A 500mi range car should not cost $150k. Some of the new ones coming on the market in the $50-70K range are promising 400 miles.

 

[Push]

Now for the 'diesel thing', there is zero reasoning behind buying a diesel in todays market unless you tow. I'm speaking of course with regards to economics.

Not just economics, but even efficiency wise or pollution wise. Small diesels for commuter cars are getting 60-70mpg, equivalent gas engines are sitting in the 60 ranges. Diesels emit lower levels of some GHGs, but higher in other areas, and just when I think the jury has settled on which pollutants we really have to watch for, someone publishes a paper saying something different.

 

[Mikado463]

While I'm no fan (in the looks dept) of the new BMW's here's their CEO's EV latest response ......

BMW CEO warns against electric-only strategy

BMW Chief Executive Officer Oliver Zipse said companies must be careful not to become too dependent on a select few countries by focusing only on electric vehicles, adding that there was still a market for combustion engine cars.

www.reuters.com

 

[j_garcia]

I guess it was true that the Vette was "cancelled". Not cancelled, just re-oriented like the STI. Seems the STI will potentially be fully electric, while the Vette will go hybrid. Likely something similar to what the NSX did:

The Chevrolet Corvette is officially going electric

General Motors will produce a fully electric Chevrolet Corvette, GM President Mark Reuss announced in a LinkedIn post Monday morning.

www.cnn.com

 

[Mikado463]

I guess it was true that the Vette was "cancelled". Not cancelled, just re-oriented like the STI. Seems the STI will potentially be fully electric, while the Vette will go hybrid. Likely something similar to what the NSX did:

The Chevrolet Corvette is officially going electric

General Motors will produce a fully electric Chevrolet Corvette, GM President Mark Reuss announced in a LinkedIn post Monday morning.

www.cnn.com

yep, I fully expect the ZR1, 'Zora', whatever it will be called to be a hybrid version with an equivalency of 900-1000HP. As 'Bonnie Prince Charlie' would have said, 'mark me' .......

 

[Mikado463]

Roadblock for EV's ??

Dark clouds on the horizon for electric vehicles - CFACT

The lithium supply chain for electric vehicle batteries may be in question as well as insurability of cargo ships to bring EVs to America.

www.cfact.org

 

[highfigh]

I needed to pick up some friends from their motel near the airport and since I drive a cargo van, it wasn't a great option even though we would all fit inside with their luggage because it only has two seats. Since our mutual friends were available for lunch, they offered to let me use her car, which is a Toyota Highlander Hybrid. I watched the guages as the Eco/Power/recharge was shown and if/what level of recharge was happening. It also shows fuel econ and for most of the time, it was around 38 MPG. During all of the driving, which probably totaled 45 miles, if the gas gauge moved, I would be surprised.

At this point, I think Hybrid is the way to go. The friends I picked up have a Honda Hybrid and he told me the range for a full tank is about 650 miles. I told him that I hate him. My tank holds 22 gallons and I don't get much more than 400 miles on the highway but the need to haul things makes it necessary.

 

[j_garcia]

Hybrid is still a fully viable option for now and Toyota believes this. Our Lexus hybrid is over 11yrs old and still gets ~35-40 mpg on the freeway.

 

[panteragstk]

Hybrid is still a fully viable option for now and Toyota believes this. Our Lexus hybrid is over 11yrs old and still gets ~35-40 mpg on the freeway.

Hybrids are the real tech people should be looking at. It makes a lot more sense as a "transition" type of tech before fully electric vehicles can totally take over. There are a lot of types of hybrid vehicle out there, but they all get better mileage and have more power than their IC-only counterparts. Most of the ultra high end supercars are all hybrids now.

 

[j_garcia]

Hybrids are the real tech people should be looking at. It makes a lot more sense as a "transition" type of tech before fully electric vehicles can totally take over. There are a lot of types of hybrid vehicle out there, but they all get better mileage and have more power than their IC-only counterparts. Most of the ultra high end supercars are all hybrids now.

That is because even the hyper cars still need to meet mileage standards for those companies. Not because they think it is a good idea. Electric is more likely to happen, but hybrid will remain a factor because publicly available chargers won't happen everywhere right away and range limitations are still a concern.