How many teens have $20k to drop on a car?
And I don't know about you, but when I bought my very first '88 Chevy Cavalier (for $2k in 1993), I drove that thing EVERYWHERE. I often took trips that exceeded the ranges of most of today's EVs.
That's nice.
Maybe. Again, it depends on how they intend to use it.
Oh, I know for a fact that people ignore all kinds of recommendations, including you.
Suffice to say, I've driven for 30+ years this way. It is absolutely unnecessary for me to stop every 2 hours, no matter what the recommendation might be.
Really? You're comparing a country with 148,729 square miles of land area to a country with 3.797 million square miles of land area. I think there are more than a few differences to be considered.
Maybe, but I think you underestimate the similarities -- including the fact of terrain and climate, as well as the fact the country is over 1,000 miles long. There also remains the fact that most Americans drive less than 50 miles per day.
It's not BS.
Just because these things aren't issues for you doesn't mean they aren't issues for others. Your arrogant proclamation that my very valid concerns about EVs are "BS" is not how you are going to convince people to convert. In fact, you'll just drive them further away.
Sorry it is, and I'm not talking about your preferences in what you require. A great example is your statement about regenerative braking and if they use it -- it isn't something "optional" or that you have to specifically use, it is the same as you using a physical brake when you step on the gas peddle of your car.
Another is the various claims about EV tire wear. It seems the answer about if EV will wear tires (to include the 20% faster figure) is "definitely maybe." Yes, an EV is heavier, and that can contribute to tire wear. Likely the more important issue is the "instant torque," particularly on cars such as Teslas and the "GT" specs of EVs. I'm sure you've known people who bought sports cars, started showing off how fast their cars were when lights turned green, and then were shocked (or maybe they even knew) when their tires wore out in 10,000 or 20,000 miles.
And, honestly, that seems to be the biggest factor Tire Rack found -- that some EVs (such as the Tesla they bought to be their long-term EV) have that instant torque and shoot off the line, and the drivers end up liking that which kills the tires faster. Of course, they also found that using softer tires on an EV (so you can really get the speed) rather than a LRR, which has a harder rubber compound, also wore faster (just like softer tires used on a sports car will do).
And, as I keep pointing out, the average new car weighs roughly the same as many EVs now, so has similar issues of extra tire wear -- but for some reason that is never brought up as an issue on those cars, only on EVs. There are a lot of these types of things, either half truths, things exaggerated, etc.
Yeah, we'll see how quickly it arrives.
Faster than you think. As I pointed out, your issue with West Virginia is improved possibly by summer, and definitely by the end of the year, since Kia is adopting the Tesla charging standard (and current cars will be made compatible with an adapter).
Additionally,
West Virginia is building fast chargers (up to 350 kWh) every 50 miles along all Interstates in their state, which includes I-79 and I-77. From what I'm seeing, most are expected to be completed by the end of this year -- making charging stops through West Virginia as short as the rest of the trip (20 minutes rather than an hour or more).
This is something occurring in almost every state currently, as it was part of the infrastructure bill.
It is an issue, because you have to stop and add HOURS to your trip with charging. This is vastly different than fueling up an ICE vehicle.
Again, just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean it's not an issue.
I'm not trying to claim you don't find it an issue, but you aren't everyone. I also know people who really believed it was going to be a major issue when they purchased their EV and, to their shock, it isn't an issue for them. Again, they found the trip much more relaxed and enjoyable and were better rested when they arrived at their destination.
And, again, you are being less than truthful in your claims of what it would take in an EV. Looking at your EV6 example (and trying to recreated it -- though I don't know exactly where you are leaving from it appears to be close to Meadville), it shows 6 stops that total 3 hours and 9 minutes. You claim 6 stops in your car for 30 minutes but you know that isn't a real life number -- it will be a minimum of an hour, once you include bathroom breaks, stopping to pick up food, etc. So as stands today, with an EV6, you are adding something over 2 hours to an over 16 hour (once we include at least an hour for your 6 stops) trip.
Now, if we swap -- because of the Superchargers along that route -- to a Tesla Model 3, then suddenly you are down to 5 stops that total 1 hour and 17 minutes. Not much different than the time it would take in your gas car; even using your 30 minute number, that is less than an hour extra on an almost 16 hour trip (after stops in your gas car).
I find it amusing how you question the myriad of articles I posted because, apparently, you believe it's all some big conspiracy by tire executives, yet you uncritically quote Tesla's study of Tesla as authoritative.
No, I questioned the claims of "tire executives" -- and everyone else -- because the figure never went back to any type of study, and one of the quotes was even taken out of context. The quote didn't say what you claimed. I mentioned above from what I can find from Tire Rack -- none of the articles that claim to talk of a study by Tire Rack ever links to that study, and I was unable to find any such Tire Rack study.
And, perhaps you didn't notice, I didn't just quote Tesla but gave three other links, as well, though I didn't elaborate on the other links. I could have mentioned that Hyundai was so sure of their batteries that they had a lifetime battery warranty for their cars (which included a certain amount of degradation, I believe roughly no more than 30%) for almost a decade -- and that included their EVs, as well as their hybrids and PHEVs. My recollection is they ended it during the Pandemic, another casualty of supply chain problems. Still, a decade is a long time for that warranty to be issued (and still be active on thousands of cars) if batteries degrade as much as you are trying to imply.
Tesla's study of Teslas. Compelling stuff.
Let's ask this guy, who owns a Tesla.
When the car was new, Neary would see a rated range of 252 miles after a full charge. “But now I don’t trust the car beyond 100 miles of range,” he said. The range degradation combines a number of factors. Now, when fully charged the gauge shows 174 miles. “And for the last two years, I can’t drive to an indicated zero miles anymore,” Neary said. “With a rated 30 miles left the car will tell me to pull over and shut down.”
If you take the time to read this article, you'll see that this guy has driven his Tesla. A lot. But now he's at a place where he can't get 100 miles of range, and he'll have to shell out ~$20k to get a new battery.
Yes, one isolated person. And he admits that others he knows doesn't have his issues, that it is his specific car that has an issue. He points to a car similar to his that only lost 6% of capacity over 300,000 miles -- more than he has driven. They also provide the case of a Chevrolet Volt that after 300,000 miles had no degradation.
And I could make a similar claim about your engine, that you have a good chance to need to replace before 200,000 miles; since that was a major issue on Optimas (what is now the K5) and Hyundai/Kia ended up recalling millions of cars for that issue.
Battery degradation = range degradation. And for people already anxious about how far their EV can take them, a reduction in the already limited range is yet another concern as the car ages, especially for people who drive long distances regularly.
I've already stated that for people that drive long distance regularly, they likely shouldn't be getting an EV.
Great. So if my battery loses 25% of its life, I just have to deal with a 25% reduction in the already limited range. So instead of the 282 mile range on the EV6 AWD, now I'd only get 211 miles. More stopping. More charging. More waiting.
But why would it lose 25% in degradation? The 30% number is one they set because they know, if it degrades that much, then there is a clear issue with the battery pack. If you see 25%, the overwhelming believe would be that the battery pack is failing, it is just a matter of how long it takes before it fails.
I'll admit, I have no official numbers and the isolated examples I've seen are mostly after a single year (and however many miles they drove) but I'm seeing little to no actual degradation from the people reporting it. The use an OBD2 scanner to get the details on their battery and run tests to determine exactly how much capacity they have, and many of them did the same test when the battery was new so they could make an accurate comparison.
Instead, is I have some few studies, such as Tesla's, battery testing by various groups which basically find similar results to Tesla, and then the anecdotal claims. What the studies all appear to show is likely not more than 15% degradation over a decade/200,000 miles. A lot depends on the car, what battery safeguards were built in (such as a buffer for the battery), how effective the heating/cooling system is on the battery, and the effectiveness of the Battery Management system. Even going back to the 2013, that was a decade ago now on one the earliest produced cars of Tesla's first mass produced model. A lot has been learned and improved in both battery manufacturing and battery management over that decade.
www.aaa.com
