[RM7]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

Doesn't bother me a bit they are there. It does bother me that my money is buying them.
Let me check off the counter points to your points

Evidently it does, when you can't resist showing how misinformed you are on the subject.

1. It uses electrical power. Problem here is the grid is not prepared for a significant increase in useage.

It's not a problem, as I said before, these cars actually exist, are on the road, driving around. I'm sure you've seen them if you are driving a billion miles every day. Are there upgrades that will be necessary as we move forward with more? Sure, but infrastructure doesn't last forever anyway, as pointed out elsewhere, charging occurs off-peak, so you could argue it makes better use of the existing grid.

2. Maybe overall it is including the transport of fuels etc. Not sure of that though as I have seen studies where the amount of energy required to generate and deliver the electricity uses more fossil fuels than the current ICE way. And the gas infrastructure must remain now as all gas cannot be replaced by electrics. The gas infrastructure is there already. The electric is not. Finding a charge station can be daunting and inconvenient comparitively.

Not sure how to make any sense of this. Sounds like you are rationalizing here. Burning fuel to move fuel is never a good idea if you can burn it in one location and get the energy out in a more efficient way. Wasting money for the sake of wasting it is dumb. You've seen studies, I've seen studies. ICE engines are around 20% thermal efficiency. But, like I said, this doesn't count all the fuel/energy you use trucking fuel around, storing it, pumping it, paying for the gas station, etc., hell, you waste energy trying dole out multiple grades and types of fuel. Burning fossil fuels, natural gas in this case, at a modern gas-turbine power plant, yields a thermal efficiency around 65%, and all you do is beam it out on the grid. If it's a renewable source like wind, solar, hydroelectric, etc., then you are doing even better. That's really the true genius, it allows flexibility for power-source by region. In some regions, they may be able to get significant power from water run-off, in other locations, it may be a nuclear power plant, rather than something like hydrogen that would tie you to a new and expensive infrastructure system to truck and store, not to mention the energy spent extracting. Not only that, but reducing our reliance on foreign oil, or maybe in a case you would definitely support, allowing our military to have more oil for staying deployed eternally.

3. Its works for some, definitely not all. What about trucking, towing, or soneone like ne who drives over 500 miles a day a dozen or more times a month? Good for city commuters but not for a large subset of the population.

And if everyone had the same habits as you, that would actually mean something in reference to where I said ranges for electric vehicles have made it into the useful realm. Since they do not, it only means you are a unique snowflake.

4. He did do a good job at this. But that's not an argument to buy his product.

It wasn't an argument to buy it, it was an argument to show how much of an achievement it was to get electric cars out on the road as a practical form of transportation, instead of something more akin to science fiction.

So again, maybe in 20 years when we have 3 min charge times, ability to have level torque amounts at speed, towing, charging stations as prevalent as gas stations, 400+ mile range, a grid that can handle the power, and competitive pricing without subsidies and I'd change my mind.

I'm not trying to convince you to buy one, I'm simply showing how they have become viable transportation for a large number of people, off the drawing board, off the conceptual stage, and into the real world, where they are driven every day. Going back to stuff like the GM EV1, this is so far ahead it's not even on the same planet, so while some of the previous attempts couldn't be taken seriously, the Tesla models are actually out there and doing it. That is quite an achievement IMO.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by fr240

LMAO this thread is so entertaining.

Like I said, some people have an irrational hate towards EVs, or maybe it's a fear of the future. It is entertaining to watch someone try to support their confirmation bias with invalid data.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

1. The us mostly isnt a solar friendly environment. You'd need to cover the state if Nevada to cover our power requirements too.
2. I'm in the camp that electrics are far worse for the environment than gasoline powered. Carbon emmissions global warming is a 100% myth hoax. Deal with it. However heavy metals for lithium batteries isn't. They create enviromental catastrophes in their manufacturing.
2. Again lol. The cost I'm quoting is total cist if the vehicle and operation. Right now you pay more for an electric and electricity than an equivalent gas powered and gasoline. The only thing that makes electrics and hybrids affordable is subsidies. My money buying someone else's car. That's bs.
2.5 For an average commuter car ok. For someine like me who covers half the state of Floridaas a territory, or someone who uses a truck to tow, etc, they suck.
3. A second car maybe. Just
-make it handle
-get the charging problem fixed
-give it a pair if balls over 60 mph
-make them pleasing to the eye inside and out. Right now they're boring outside and hideous inside
-get your liberal snowflake tree hugging hand out of my pocket and kill the subsidies. If they survive then so be it.

Then maybe.

When there is talk about the Model 3 then one has to bring the new Chevrolet Bolt into the discussion. The Bolt is the first "affordable" long-range BEV. Let's look at it's stats.

-Larger passenger space and luggage space than an E90
-The same passenger space as a Tesla S
-Weighs about 200 more pounds than an E90
-Weighs about 700 pounds less than a Tesla S
-Smaller overall dimensions than an E90
-Far more efficient use of fuel than ICE
-From all reports in the various mags, it handles quite well, and is truly in the "hot hatch" category. I've driven it, and it is a very good driver's car.
-$7,500 tax rebate was signed into law under the Bush Administration, the free market still dictates sales.
-Most EVs will charge at night when the grid capacity is low.
-Make up your 3 bucks used to offset someone else's EV purchase by buying GE stock

EVs work for a lot of people's commutes.

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Evidently it does, when you can't resist showing how misinformed you are on the subject.

It's not a problem, as I said before, these cars actually exist, are on the road, driving around. I'm sure you've seen them if you are driving a billion miles every day. Are there upgrades that will be necessary as we move forward with more? Sure, but infrastructure doesn't last forever anyway, as pointed out elsewhere, charging occurs off-peak, so you could argue it makes better use of the existing grid.

Not sure how to make any sense of this. Sounds like you are rationalizing here. Burning fuel to move fuel is never a good idea if you can burn it in one location and get the energy out in a more efficient way. Wasting money for the sake of wasting it is dumb. You've seen studies, I've seen studies. ICE engines are around 20% thermal efficiency. But, like I said, this doesn't count all the fuel/energy you use trucking fuel around, storing it, pumping it, paying for the gas station, etc., hell, you waste energy trying dole out multiple grades and types of fuel. Burning fossil fuels, natural gas in this case, at a modern gas-turbine power plant, yields a thermal efficiency around 65%, and all you do is beam it out on the grid. If it's a renewable source like wind, solar, hydroelectric, etc., then you are doing even better. That's really the true genius, it allows flexibility for power-source by region. In some regions, they may be able to get significant power from water run-off, in other locations, it may be a nuclear power plant, rather than something like hydrogen that would tie you to a new and expensive infrastructure system to truck and store, not to mention the energy spent extracting. Not only that, but reducing our reliance on foreign oil, or maybe in a case you would definitely support, allowing our military to have more oil for staying deployed eternally.

And if everyone had the same habits as you, that would actually mean something in reference to where I said ranges for electric vehicles have made it into the useful realm. Since they do not, it only means you are a unique snowflake.

It wasn't an argument to buy it, it was an argument to show how much of an achievement it was to get electric cars out on the road as a practical form of transportation, instead of something more akin to science fiction.

I'm not trying to convince you to buy one, I'm simply showing how they have become viable transportation for a large number of people, off the drawing board, off the conceptual stage, and into the real world, where they are driven every day. Going back to stuff like the GM EV1, this is so far ahead it's not even on the same planet, so while some of the previous attempts couldn't be taken seriously, the Tesla models are actually out there and doing it. That is quite an achievement IMO.

Do you really know the condition og the grid? Can it handle a million ev cars? Sure. 100 million? Not even close.

Did I ever say fossil fuels were more efficient? No. Are they? No. But are they more economical? Yes. Remove the subsidies and compare the operating cost as well as the purchase cost for an average driver and the ev costs much more.

You decided to bring in energy sources to the mix. In the US right now the renewable sources aren't alternatives to nuclear and fossil fuels. They can supplement but the technology is not nearly advanced enough to make them replace meaningful amounts of electric power. But who cares for this discussion.

Not sure how a 50 yr old Senior Director for one of the largest financial firms counts as a "snowflake". Actually I'm pretty much the definition of an antisnowflake.

Is tesla an achievement for Musk? Sure. He built a company from scratch, etc. Are ev an achievement vs ICE? No. And that was my point.

Are they viable? Sure for some and in limited numbers until they get the grid upgraded. Economically superior? No. Environmentally friendly? No. Desirable? Maybe to the must have newest gadget crowd, misguided envirofreaks, and people who think a car being fast happens in the 0-30 mph range. Its a statement car now. I think I'm saving the environment or look at me, I have the latest gadget, not a superior vehicle. Someday it may be but there's a loooong way to go.

And please stop with the personal attacks. I haven't attacked you personally. I'm offering a counterpoint about a type of car. Snowflake, misguided, etc. My points are just as valid as yours. Have I generalized buyers of these cars? Sure. The buyers of corvettes are typically middle aged men who are going through a middle age crisis. So what. Just reality. I don't see the average Joe or Jane saying oooooh, I want an ev. Never heard that, ever. Its still a niche vehicle, not mainstream. But I didn't say you were this or that. I didn't say your points weren't valid or correct. I did just add the counterpoint to them and to the car. Big difference.

[fr240]

Why are people so butthurt?

I've had this experience with all my "car enthusiast" friends too. Shitting on EVs all day, while not really having any real arguments other than "charging time" and "supercharger network is lacking in the GTA" and bullshit complaints like "the car is too quiet, I need gears, muh V8, etc." or "Tesla quality control is so bad, I'll never buy one!"

[fr240]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

Do you really know the condition og the grid? Not sure how a 50 yr old Senior Director for one of the largest financial firms counts as a "snowflake". Actually I'm pretty much the definition of an antisnowflake.

In your case, since you're a big shot, just buy 2-3 of them and have a robot snake charging station installed where they can autonomously go charge for you, and then swap cars as necessary.

Or you could pay for a supercharger voltage level charger within a 300km radius of your average location center point. Being realistic though, just buy a VW TDI "clean diesel" and keep pissing in the diesel fluid tank, you'll be good.

[Alfisti]

I don't buy into almost any of the far right arguments.

BUT, until the charging issue is resolved EV's will remain very niche.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by fr240

Why are people so butthurt?

I've had this experience with all my "car enthusiast" friends too. Shitting on EVs all day, while not really having any real arguments other than "charging time" and "supercharger network is lacking in the GTA" and bullshit complaints like "the car is too quiet, I need gears, muh V8, etc." or "Tesla quality control is so bad, I'll never buy one!"

I think I qualify as a car enthusiast. I have four, 3 of which are sort of unique, 2 of which are under 11,000 of total unit production. I even have a motorcycle with a flat 6 just because I like that engine configuration. Started building car models when I was 6 years old. Have a $40K auto shop that is my detached 1,100 square foot garage. Count all my engines up (vehicles and yard equipment) and I have 19 engines with a total of 48 cylinders (it's a fun game my friends and I play).

But I like EVs too. Here's why. When the price gets to $35K, and the range gets over 200 miles per charge, EVs start to make economic sense as an alternative to petroleum-fueled cars. This is why Tesla and GM shot for a 200+ mile range at a Mid-$30K price point. I did the math on the Tesla S a few years ago, and a $35K price point for the Model S (nee Model 3) gets the EV option comparable to total ownership cost of ICE.

Also, most all EVs come with a 1-speed transmission, so the car is always in the correct gear for cut-and-thrust driving. EVs can be driven like a manual transmission'd car. And EVs do not have the stupid start-stop tech that most current ICE have that shuts the idling engine off at traffic lights and drive throughs. And EVs with regen braking behave much like a manual trans with one-pedal driving.

All the environment BS about EVs I have to agree with Fundguy on; it's all Liberal smoke and mirrors. And lithium is a conflict mineral as much as crude oil is. But gasoline is not going anywhere soon; Fundguy is correct about that. And refuel cycle times still suck for EVs as compared to ICE, but ICE is over-capacity in that regard for most people.

My 2 cents.

[fr240]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

I don't buy into almost any of the far right arguments.

BUT, until the charging issue is resolved EV's will remain very niche.

Global warming is a Chinese hoax, bro. We all know that OPEC is going to bring back the Messiah.

Also, you could say the "charging issue" would prevent 1 day battery life smartphones from being commonplace, but nope.

[Alfisti]

The charging issue is real, this is the last hurdle.

A smart phone can be lugged almost anywhere, even in your car. With EVs, on a real cold day the range is shorter and let's say you want to drive say 50 miles with wife and kids in tow. Your 225 mile range is now 175 because of the cold. You visit the cousin and they say hey let's go skiing or on the way home you need to divert to pick up something and now it's minus 20 out and you have the family in the car, are you really gonna cut the range to less than 50 miles in case she shits herself?

Until you can charge in like 5 minutes, range anxiety will mean EV's remain a niche.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

The charging issue is real, this is the last hurdle.

A smart phone can be lugged almost anywhere, even in your car. With EVs, on a real cold day the range is shorter and let's say you want to drive say 50 miles with wife and kids in tow. Your 225 mile range is now 175 because of the cold. You visit the cousin and they say hey let's go skiing or on the way home you need to divert to pick up something and now it's minus 20 out and you have the family in the car, are you really gonna cut the range to less than 50 miles in case she shits herself?

Until you can charge in like 5 minutes, range anxiety will mean EV's remain a niche.

I think EVs are going to gain much in market share of multi-car households.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by fr240

In your case, since you're a big shot, just buy 2-3 of them and have a robot snake charging station installed where they can autonomously go charge for you, and then swap cars as necessary.

Or you could pay for a supercharger voltage level charger within a 300km radius of your average location center point. Being realistic though, just buy a VW TDI "clean diesel" and keep pissing in the diesel fluid tank, you'll be good.

Sound like you are a little but-hurt too.

Just saying.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

The charging issue is real, this is the last hurdle.

It is very real. However, I would suggest that the issue can and will be addressed not just by technological advances, but also turnover in buying population.

Until you can charge in like 5 minutes, range anxiety will mean EV's remain a niche.

For you, me, and many others who own ICE vehicles today, that's largely true.

But for younger folks and upcoming generations, things can change. I personally don't like the idea of changing my driving habits, and indeed the way I schedule activity and live my life away from my home, to accommodate an appreciably longer charge time for an EV vs. the refueling time for a fossil fuel powered vehicle. Newer drivers, however, won't necessarily have the same expectations.

This means that charge times needn't necessarily reach parity with today's refueling times for growth in uptake to increase sharply. And that means that estimating EV sales volume potential based purely on the expected rate at which technology will progress - eventually allowing for a five minute charge - will perhaps yield significantly inaccurate forecasts.

That type of judgmental misstep is just one reason - and there are more - why folks cry foul at all the shift in expenditures today where charging the car still takes on the order of hours, not minutes, and where that time is not set to be reduced drastically, at least on a large scale "soon".

There exists successful products and business ventures that faced plenty of skepticism up front due to flawed reasoning similar to what I describe above. It is those who start with the proper models at the outset so they can see the cultural shift before it happens and take the risks based on that data that stand to benefit, and also who help shape the future.

[fr240]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Sound like you are a little but-hurt too.

Just saying.

I'm bored at work since I'm not a Senior Director, so I have nothing better to do.

On a serious note though, let's say there was a supercharging station within 20 mins of wherever you drove, and you could charge your battery about 50-70% in 10-15 mins, would that relieve "range anxiety"? Would that change the views of the majority to accepting EVs?

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by fr240

I'm bored at work since I'm not a Senior Director, so I have nothing better to do.

On a serious note though, let's say there was a supercharging station within 20 mins of wherever you drove, and you could charge your battery about 50-70% in 10-15 mins, would that relieve "range anxiety"? Would that change the views of the majority to accepting EVs?

For me, 3-5 minute charge time, better cars, charging spots as common as gas stations.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

For me, 3-5 minute charge time, better cars, charging spots as common as gas stations.

Since you can charge your car at home, why would you need as many stations as we have for gas stations? If I had a fuel dump at home, I'd use gas stations about three times a year.

[Fundguy1]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Since you can charge your car at home, why would you need as many stations as we have for gas stations? If I had a fuel dump at home, I'd use gas stations about three times a year.

Because I drive 500 miles in a day a dozen times a month. Another dozen I stay at hotels and I've only seen one with a charge station. So if they aren't as prevalent, I'd spend however much extra time hunting them down like i do for e85 for my 335i. Extremely inconvenient. Then add in the charge time so I can drive home. Seriously sucks.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by Fundguy1

Because I drive 500 miles in a day a dozen times a month. Another dozen I stay at hotels and I've only seen one with a charge station.

Right, but your situation isn't made for this type of car. Much like Germans didn't like M Coupes because they were at redline at vMax. Or why an E60 M5 with a small gas tank and 14mpg highway wouldn't make sense for you either, with 200 mile range.

My wife has gone years without her car going more than 25 miles from our home. She could live with an i3 and a 110v charger.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Since you can charge your car at home, why would you need as many stations as we have for gas stations? If I had a fuel dump at home, I'd use gas stations about three times a year.

I am more concerned that if I am not diligent about charging every night, I could be left without enough remaining charge for my day. Sure, you use an electronic reminder, get in the habit, and it becomes second nature. But life can sometimes be unpredictable (and for that matter, occasional voluntary spontaneity builds character), and the time I forget is the time I am going to need to drive a couple hundred miles in one day for whatever reason. So it's not the fact that you can mitigate the need to charge away from home with some simple steps. It is the fact that those few times you might need to recharge, it could stop you dead in its tracks.

In fact, this is why a PHEV makes the most sense right now for a lot of people. You get the benefits of electric most of the time, but you have the ICE for those times when you really need more range without any delay in your day.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

I am more concerned that if I am not diligent about charging every night, I could be left without enough remaining charge for my day. Sure, you use an electronic reminder, get in the habit, and it becomes second nature. But life can sometimes be unpredictable (and for that matter, occasional voluntary spontaneity builds character), and the time I forget is the time I am going to need to drive a couple hundred miles in one day for whatever reason. So it's not the fact that you can mitigate the need to charge away from home with some simple steps. It is the fact that those few times you might need to, it could stop your schedule dead in its tracks.

In fact, this is why a PHEV makes the most sense right now for a lot of people. You get the benefits of electric most of the time, but you have the ICE for those times when you really need more range without any delay in your day.

Exactly why the Audi eTron will likely replace our 3er, not an i3 or a Model 3.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by fr240

I'm bored at work since I'm not a Senior Director, so I have nothing better to do.

On a serious note though, let's say there was a supercharging station within 20 mins of wherever you drove, and you could charge your battery about 50-70% in 10-15 mins, would that relieve "range anxiety"? Would that change the views of the majority to accepting EVs?

Assuming no other EV is charging and there is an open spot. Tesla's and other EVs have low risk of occupied charge stations because they are just 1% of the market share at the moment. When occupancy rates go up and waiting times to charge start to happen, it will be another story.

And if you have a single-car household with an EV and the electricity fails overnight...

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

And if you have a single-car household with an EV and the electricity fails overnight...

Good point. Another potential pitfall I didn't think of.