Electric vehicle war, is gas soon to be toast?

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

I got 15-16 mpg in my F-150, in my day to day
I'm 2/3 of the way through my first tank in the Maverick and according to the dash I am getting 46. The F150 was not built for stop start small road effeciency. The Maverick seems to be.

That’s not really an apples to apples comparison. Based on real world data, the gas Maverick gets about 25-26 mpg while the hybrid gets about 35-37 mpg. So that’s about a 30% reduction in fuel usage by going hybrid.

[timun]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

This is what I was referring to all along

Except... OldDutch wasn't making the argument you're arguing against.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by opendoor

That’s not really an apples to apples comparison. Based on real world data, the gas Maverick gets about 25-26 mpg while the hybrid gets about 35-37 mpg. So that’s about a 30% reduction in fuel usage by going hybrid.

Right. I'm talking about choices. My choice cut my driving emissions by 3x.We shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Real world data for PHEV's shows, according to that recent study, emissions are 5-7 times higher than EPA rating.
But, as they say, YMMV

[photon]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

10 years from now, I expect a 5 year old EV will be cheap and far superior to what people spend 6 figures on today. In the mean time I'll just continue to focus on reducing how much we drive each year.

Heck you don't even need to wait 5 years, some of those expensive EVs are only a year or two old and are selling for a huge percentage off.

Enough to make me hesitant to get one, what does everyone else know that I don't.

Or is it just a combination of factors like the people who can afford and use an EV having already got one and prices of EVs being so much more than similar ICE cars and enough people thinking like you?

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Right. I'm talking about choices. My choice cut my driving emissions by 3x.We shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Real world data for PHEV's shows, according to that recent study, emissions are 5-7 times higher than EPA rating.
But, as they say, YMMV

Emissions are 5-7 times higher?

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Emissions are 5-7 times higher?

Yeah. Particularly in luxury brands. Where their EV is more virtue signaling than a lowering emissions choice. So they don't bother plugging it in to charge and drive around carting the extra 500kg burning mostly gas. Apparently. So EPA calculated emissions should have taken into account that BMW drivers are mostly #######s.
So it's driving habits, not emissions exactly. A PHEV is only as eco friendly as the driver.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by photon

Heck you don't even need to wait 5 years, some of those expensive EVs are only a year or two old and are selling for a huge percentage off.



Enough to make me hesitant to get one, what does everyone else know that I don't.



Or is it just a combination of factors like the people who can afford and use an EV having already got one and prices of EVs being so much more than similar ICE cars and enough people thinking like you?

I think the fact there's a $5k grant off the purchase price means an extra $5k depreciation (up to $9k in BC and $10k in Quebec).

The luxury ones though for sure don't seem to be holding value, but I suspect it's because the people buying them aren't the brand's normal customers and are the first mover types who want what's newest all the time.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by photon

Heck you don't even need to wait 5 years, some of those expensive EVs are only a year or two old and are selling for a huge percentage off.

Enough to make me hesitant to get one, what does everyone else know that I don't.

Or is it just a combination of factors like the people who can afford and use an EV having already got one and prices of EVs being so much more than similar ICE cars and enough people thinking like you?

Using the concept of expential growth, let's say an EV made in 2009 is your baseline and rates as a 2 in terms of product quality and durability and the cycle is 5 years. Today's vehicle in theory would be a 16, and the one from 5 years ago is an 8. Than add in how most see the market more linearly. There is not much of a history of used EV's and the ones sold as used vehicles were not very good compared to what might be available today. So the market will cling to that stigma longer than it likely should because most really don't understand exponential growth. They're still used to how the ICE market worked. So my theory is that today's EV would be a 16...5 years from now its 32 and 10 its 64 and close to maxed out...so the 32 will be a good vehicle seen as inferior among the new and hopefully a good buy.

Of course, I could be dead wrong. I'm from the middle class lowlife tax bracket...I'm still keeping 20 year old vehicles alive to keep a roof over my head and food in the pantry. The idea of spending more than 40 grand on a vehicle is something my meek little mind can't comprehend...let alone exponential growth.

[photon]

The major component of the EV is the battery, and improvements there have been more incremental than exponential.. 50% more capacity now than 10 years ago.

I think a significant jump in capacity or transformative change (i.e. near instant charging) would require a completely different technology or chemistry, so that's difficult to predict.

Plus the current cars are already super efficient, to the point that factors like temperature or aerodynamics make a huge impact on range, so not sure how much more could be done on that front to make better use of the existing battery capacity.

But I get what you're saying and while I might not lean towards the same numbers the idea I still agree with; this stuff is still early days and it would have to make a lot of sense for me right now. I wouldn't buy one if there wasn't a significant portion of the battery warranty left for example.

[Brupal]

Here’s a video of a pick up truck driving Texas Oil Worker who has never seen a Cybertruck experiencing one for the first time. You can see him slowly warming up to it. https://youtu.be/jz3hgtOiARg?si=Dh1w7jpT2mKM-p3f

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by photon

The major component of the EV is the battery, and improvements there have been more incremental than exponential.. 50% more capacity now than 10 years ago.

That could be perception because we are still early in that journey. If your start number is say 1.05, than it takes 15 years to double type of thing so that it appears linear. But to your point, it's likely a major breakthrough change that ultimately propells the technology forward.

Although it doesn't mean that replacing a Tesla battery 10 years from now in a 15 year old vehicle will still be prohibitively expensive. People drive around in compromised ICE cars everyday because they still work good enough to serve what the owner needs. So maybe a Tesla with 50% range is fine for most if the price is right.

[cral12]

Fisker Ocean prices slashed by up to 39% in the US

"Fisker has announced substantial price reductions across its lineup of Ocean SUVs in the United States, as the automaker struggles to stay afloat."

https://driveteslacanada.ca/news/fis...oogle_vignette

[photon]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

So maybe a Tesla with 50% range is fine for most if the price is right.

Yeah exactly. If in 10 years the range of cars is double today and they charge in 5 minutes that doesn't mean current cars don't work.

It'll just hurt the resale value but I tend to own cars longer anyway too.

[Fuzz]

The thing to worry about with an EV battery isn't the slow drop in capacity, it's the sudden death syndrome.

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

The thing to worry about with an EV battery isn't the slow drop in capacity, it's the sudden death syndrome.

How common is that? Genuinely curious, not trying to be smart.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Whynotnow

How common is that? Genuinely curious, not trying to be smart.

List at the bottom of this article.


https://www.businessinsider.com/elec...n-tesla-2023-3


I'm sure it is getting better, but some of those are risky.

[8sPOT]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Yeah. Particularly in luxury brands. Where their EV is more virtue signaling than a lowering emissions choice. So they don't bother plugging it in to charge and drive around carting the extra 500kg burning mostly gas. Apparently. So EPA calculated emissions should have taken into account that BMW drivers are mostly #######s.
So it's driving habits, not emissions exactly. A PHEV is only as eco friendly as the driver.

But even if you dont bother plugging in, wont the battery still charge through re-gen braking? Essentially operating similar to a regular hybrid? I dont understand how or why the battery would be at 0%.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by 8sPOT

But even if you dont bother plugging in, wont the battery still charge through re-gen braking? Essentially operating similar to a regular hybrid? I dont understand how or why the battery would be at 0%.

It doesn't put a lot back into the battery though. For example, I saw a video on YouTube a few days ago where a bunch of the EV trucks were driven down the Ike Gauntlet in Colorado which is a pretty long descent and the re-gen only put a couple % charge into the battery. Most people aren't going to be driving downhill to that degree so normal around town re-gen isn't going to do anything for putting power back into a battery.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by 8sPOT

But even if you dont bother plugging in, wont the battery still charge through re-gen braking? Essentially operating similar to a regular hybrid? I dont understand how or why the battery would be at 0%.

It is essentially just a normal hybrid if you don't plug in. The reason that study found 5-7x worse emissions was because the EPA emissions number comes from assuming very regular plugging in and only occasional is off the gas engine. A regular hybrid would emit 5-7x more CO2 than a plug in hybrid if plugged in every day.

I'd caution reading applying that study to North America though as it looked at 3 vehicles in Europe where a) the ownership model was mostly company vehicles which is way more common there and meant that the people driving them didn't choose that vehicle, and b) many people didn't have a place at home to plug in anyways. Neither of those are as common here. Most people owning a plug in hybrid here will have a place to plug it in and will pay for it themselves so they'll know about the savings of charging it at home.

[photon]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

It doesn't put a lot back into the battery though.

As a percentage of battery no, but as a percentage of energy used it's worth doing. If a car can recoup 10-30% of the energy used to accelerate (and that's pretty typical) then it can extend the range by that much.

20% range increase in battery mode is well worth doing.