Still want an EV?

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

I live in horse country and no one out here has their horses on food stamps. Horses may be the king of expensive hobbies
Also Horse women are not inexpensive either.

This.

My wife owned a horse for 18 years. I could be retired now if she had a different hobby. If you like to keep your money, DO NOT marry a horse woman (unless she already wealthy).

[Efthreeoh]

Culpeper Killed Superman

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

I'm in agreement with most of your post but.
"750 mile range and 10 minute charge" The physics behind this don't work. I for one would not want to be around any battery that was charged at a rate that would fulfill that EV prophecy. (BOOM) That said if a safe battery was used and the battery weight was reduced I think a lot of folks would have no issue with with a EV as a second vehicle and maybe their primary vehicle with home charging. I also think a properly designed hybrid will find a large market. Not the pseudo EV with a gas engine being peddled by most companies. I would most likely buy one of those.

GM needs to reconstitute its Volt team and build a true series hybrid. Give the engine guys a task to come up with a new ICE architecture specifically for a serial hybrid. There has to be engineers within GM who want to do one.

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

GM needs to reconstitute its Volt team and build a true series hybrid. Give the engine guys a task to come up with a new ICE architecture specifically for a serial hybrid. There has to be engineers within GM who want to do one.

I think the new Corvette E-Ray Hybrid is very interesting technology for a start but I would have ZERO faith in Mary Barra doing the right or smart thing.

First Drive: Corvette E-Ray, In-Depth with Chief Engineer

[SteVTEC]

Originally Posted by Dan B

IMO, EVs are a great idea experiencing a lot of growing pains. As the technology improves and infrastructure adapts, they will be the future or personal automobiles.

For example, if Toyota can deliver on their battery timeline, and it does not require some special charger infrastructure, it could be a game changer. 750 mile range and 10 minute charge to go from a 10%-80% charge will be a lot closer to the ICE experience. I have NOT read how solid state batteries respond to extreme heat or cold so that could have an impact.

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a4...battery-plans/

With all that said, there is a lot of ancillary work that needs to be done and all of that requires time and money.

I read this and it's very interesting, but you can see they have the cost labeled as TBD for their solid states. It's NOT going to be inexpensive or a cheaper option. That's not how technology works. The way I see it, we're several generations away from EV's truly being able to replace ICE. You need the claimed capabilities of the solid state batteries, but at prices *cheaper* than today because most cannot even afford EV's. They're a tough sell and will continue to be.

[Weather Man]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

GM needs to reconstitute its Volt team and build a true series hybrid. Give the engine guys a task to come up with a new ICE architecture specifically for a serial hybrid. There has to be engineers within GM who want to do one.

Why spend that money when hybrid are banned right along with pure ICE? Toyota is basically praying that sanity returns to the room, big bet.

[SteVTEC]

Originally Posted by Weather Man

Why spend that money when hybrid are banned right along with pure ICE? Toyota is basically praying that sanity returns to the room, big bet.

I think Toyota had it right 25 years ago with their hybrid technology, and that they still have it right today continuing to lean on both hybrids and now their PHEV's. Lots of manufacturers are going to lose billions of dollars on EV's that they can't sell, but not Toyota.

[SteVTEC]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

What China’s EV buyers’ remorse means for the world
Apr 12, 2024
China is the most important country in the world when it comes to the future of electric vehicles: It accounts for about 60% of all global EV sales, its market for EVs is surging, and it is home to the planet’s biggest EV manufacturer.
Alongside that remarkable growth, however, has been frustration: The survey from McKinsey China pegged battery EV buyers’ “regret rate” as surging from 3% in 2022 to 22% last year, which its report blamed largely on limited charging infrastructure.
Early adopters of EVs were often more affluent, curious, and well-researched on the topic. But as the market has ballooned, consumers quickly shifted from trailblazers to more everyday users, who may be less prepared for challenges associated with EVs, he said.
https://www.semafor.com/article/04/1...-for-the-world

Anecdotal data point, but there's definitely EV regret here in the affluent D.C. suburbs.

When they first came out, I started to see the Ford Mach-E just about everywhere. There were TONS of them on the road almost overnight, and people were buying them like crazy. Now I hardly see a single one. The big issue here is lack of infrastructure for anything other than Tesla's. Just for curiosity's sake I checked reviews for some of the other non-Tesla public charging stations in the area, and most of them don't work at all, and are constantly broken and needing to be repaired. So unless you're home charging, you're screwed. I'm sure Ford quality and recalls and software issues didn't help, but people very clearly and quickly unloaded these things over a year or so. Plenty of Tesla's here, though.

I have no problems with EV's, but you have to have the infrastructure to support them, and nobody wants a vehicle that's going to blow up in your face, metaphorically or for real.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Weather Man

Why spend that money when hybrid are banned right along with pure ICE? Toyota is basically praying that sanity returns to the room, big bet.

In the weeds, but it's just Cali that has a limitation on how many percent of sales a ICE-Hybrid can be used to meet the Zero-Emissions mandate (by 2035). It's just 20%. The other 19 or so states that adopted Cali's CARB standards can choose whether or not to continue to be a CARB-Regulated state. Hopefully the other states citizens will begin to pay attention to what their Lawmakers are doing to their transportation choices and push back on CARB mandates.

Perhaps the pending EPA emissions regs proposed by the current administration will drive development of cleaner, more efficient ICE to power a true series hybrid. It won't happen in my driving lifetime, but I'd happily give up my manual transmission fettish for a true (pure) serial hybrid. I love the EV drivetrain from an engeering and energy usage perspective, I just think carrying around a huge, slow charging, heavy battery to power it is stupid.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by SteVTEC

Anecdotal data point, but there's definitely EV regret here in the affluent D.C. suburbs.

When they first came out, I started to see the Ford Mach-E just about everywhere. There were TONS of them on the road almost overnight, and people were buying them like crazy. Now I hardly see a single one. The big issue here is lack of infrastructure for anything other than Tesla's. Just for curiosity's sake I checked reviews for some of the other non-Tesla public charging stations in the area, and most of them don't work at all, and are constantly broken and needing to be repaired. So unless you're home charging, you're screwed. I'm sure Ford quality and recalls and software issues didn't help, but people very clearly and quickly unloaded these things over a year or so. Plenty of Tesla's here, though.

I have no problems with EV's, but you have to have the infrastructure to support them, and nobody wants a vehicle that's going to blow up in your face, metaphorically or for real.

Now that Ford has adopted the NACS and offeres an adapter (for free thru June 30th) the Mach E owners are all wetting themselves over access to the Tesla network. Even though most HATE Elon Musk for his eX's (err... Tweets).

[SteVTEC]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

In the weeds, but it's just Cali that has a limitation on how many percent of sales a ICE-Hybrid can be used to meet the Zero-Emissions mandate (by 2035). It's just 20%. The other 19 or so states that adopted Cali's CARB standards can choose whether or not to continue to be a CARB-Regulated state. Hopefully the other states citizens will begin to pay attention to what their Lawmakers are doing to their transportation choices and push back on CARB mandates.

Perhaps the pending EPA emissions regs proposed by the current administration will drive development of cleaner, more efficient ICE to power a true series hybrid. It won't happen in my driving lifetime, but I'd happily give up my manual transmission fettish for a true (pure) serial hybrid. I love the EV drivetrain from an engeering and energy usage perspective, I just think carrying around a huge, slow charging, heavy battery to power it is stupid.

That right there is the core of the issue. The heavier your vehicle, the MORE energy it's consuming. You can't cheat physics, and pulling from the grid isn't more efficient than what a hybrid can already deliver on today. Here in Maryland I have zero hope for sanity returning, but we only have a little over 3 years left here before we move on.

[Dan B]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

I'm in agreement with most of your post but.
"750 mile range and 10 minute charge" The physics behind this don't work. I for one would not want to be around any battery that was charged at a rate that would fulfill that EV prophecy. (BOOM) That said if a safe battery was used and the battery weight was reduced I think a lot of folks would have no issue with with a EV as a second vehicle and maybe their primary vehicle with home charging. I also think a properly designed hybrid will find a large market. Not the pseudo EV with a gas engine being peddled by most companies. I would most likely buy one of those.

Please provide a reference for why you say it won't work. No offense and I am making an assumption (with all the possible pitfalls understood) that the Toyota engineers are not speaking out of their ass. They have working prototypes that have not blown up and killed them.

Here is an interesting paper from 2 years ago that talks about charging rates, lifecycle, safety etc..

https://seas.harvard.edu/news/2022/0...rs-solid-state

Also, equivalent density SS batteries weigh about 1/3 of a Li-Ion. That will make a difference in efficiency and safety.

Originally Posted by SteVTEC

I read this and it's very interesting, but you can see they have the cost labeled as TBD for their solid states. It's NOT going to be inexpensive or a cheaper option. That's not how technology works. The way I see it, we're several generations away from EV's truly being able to replace ICE. You need the claimed capabilities of the solid state batteries, but at prices *cheaper* than today because most cannot even afford EV's. They're a tough sell and will continue to be.

I agree, early tech is always more expensive. You have to pay to be an early adopter. When the technology becomes mainstream prices typically normalize.

[Weather Man]

Originally Posted by Dan B

Please provide a reference for why you say it won't work. No offense and I am making an assumption (with all the possible pitfalls understood) that the Toyota engineers are not speaking out of their ass. They have working prototypes that have not blown up and killed them.

Here is an interesting paper from 2 years ago that talks about charging rates, lifecycle, safety etc..

https://seas.harvard.edu/news/2022/0...rs-solid-state

Also, equivalent density SS batteries weigh about 1/3 of a Li-Ion. That will make a difference in efficiency and safety.



I agree, early tech is always more expensive. You have to pay to be an early adopter. When the technology becomes mainstream prices typically normalize.

The problem with high density solid state level 4+ charging batteries is that you are dealing with just stupid consumer level voltage and amperage. It only exacerbates grid problems to the next level not to mention it demands every battery be made perfectly times millions.

[SteVTEC]

I would trust Toyota to "get it right", I just know for a fact that they're not going to be inexpensive. Just a guess, but I think you're far more likely to see this battery technology deployed in some $200k exotic first, like a hypothetical "LFA EV," where every bit of range and performance counts. Then, once they can ramp it and bring costs down, it will finally find its way into lower and middle tier consumer transportation appliance type vehicles.

[murderspice]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

I live in horse country and no one out here has their horses on food stamps. Horses may be the king of expensive hobbies
Also Horse women are not inexpensive either.

In 1900, i could buy 6.6 solid horses (or 100! old nags) for the cost of a car; 5.6 once the model t came out. I would much rather have a different horse for each day of the week than be stuck w just a single car. More expensive = bad, full stop.

[murderspice]

Originally Posted by SteVTEC

I read this and it's very interesting, but you can see they have the cost labeled as TBD for their solid states. It's NOT going to be inexpensive or a cheaper option. That's not how technology works. The way I see it, we're several generations away from EV's truly being able to replace ICE. You need the claimed capabilities of the solid state batteries, but at prices *cheaper* than today because most cannot even afford EV's. They're a tough sell and will continue to be.

Im thinking most govts are hoping for a battery breakthrough to pull us out of our current transition phase; this era of subsidies is unsustainable. Hopefully we are smart enough.

However, one only needs look at the state of automobiles at the turn of the century to appreciate how far we can bring a technology. Id take a g87 over a model T any day.

With AI helping now? Cars might fit in a backpack one day.

[murderspice]

Originally Posted by Weather Man

Why spend that money when hybrid are banned right along with pure ICE? Toyota is basically praying that sanity returns to the room, big bet.

Nobody is banning shit. If GM approached the US govt with a clean, easily sourced hybrid that required a fraction of the infrastructure and still got 100s+ mpg/range, there is absolutely no doubt our EV attitude would at least be questioned, but likely changed. There are still smart people in this country.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by murderspice

The goal was to make you think about how cars introduced countless concepts or ideas that those who rode horses would have never been aware of, or that may not have existed without humanity’s technological advancement; unfortunately, i failed.

I don't know why you keep harping on the topic of horse vs. automobile.

My point has always been the analogy of 19th century pushback on automobiles (assuming by horse users) is not relevant to the question of ICEV vs. EV in the 21st century. Cars (and tractors) were new technology in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. EV is not really new automotive technology, it's just a different fuel source that requires a minor architecture adaptation to the current automobile. In the 19th and early 20th centuries the internal combustion engine was a new technology to get work done at a higher quantity for a lower cost. EV do not provide any technological jump over the ICE-powered automobile in the same manner the automobile (and tractor) did over the horse.

Until 1990 when CARB began forcing the requirement for "zero-emission" vehicles and the made-up associated climate scare meme, the automotive market didn't give a shit about electric cars. The market still wouldn't give a shit about EV if not for legislation first incentivising it and now mandating EV.

The majority of posts in this thread is over the forced adoption of EV by government legislation.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I don't know why you keep harping on the topic of horse vs. automobile.

My point has always been the analogy of 19th century pushback on automobiles (assuming by horse users) is not relevant to the question of ICEV vs. EV in the 21st century. Cars (and tractors) were new technology in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. EV is not really new automotive technology, it's just a different fuel source that requires a minor architecture adaptation to the current automobile. In the 19th and early 20th centuries the internal combustion engine was a new technology to get work done at a higher quantity for a lower cost. EV do not provide any technological jump over the ICE-powered automobile in the same manner the automobile (and tractor) did over the horse.

Until 1990 when CARB began forcing the requirement for "zero-emission" vehicle, the automotive market didn't give a shit about electric cars. The market still wouldn't give a shit about EV if not for legislation first incentivising it and now mandating EV.

The majority of posts in this thread is over the forced adoption of EV by government legislation.

Horses for courses

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by murderspice

Nobody is banning shit. If GM approached the US govt with a clean, easily sourced hybrid that required a fraction of the infrastructure and still got 100s+ mpg/range, there is absolutely no doubt our EV attitude would at least be questioned, but likely changed. There are still smart people in this country.

Right, shit is not being banned, but governments are banning the combustion of hydrocarbon fuels by the internal combustion engine. Googleit.

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by Dan B

Please provide a reference for why you say it won't work. No offense and I am making an assumption (with all the possible pitfalls understood) that the Toyota engineers are not speaking out of their ass. They have working prototypes that have not blown up and killed them.

Back ground: My company sells LiPo's and I have been racing with them for 10 plus years.
The charging of almost any battery is a chemical reaction to store the energy. The rate of charge is limited by numerous factors like the chemical reaction speed and control of heat build up. In RC Racing we use far more sophisticated chargers that monitor individual cells and balance the charge. This is not the case in a EV LiPo battery which balances packs not cells. Fact is the faster you charge a LiPo the greater internal resistance in the cells and the lower capacity and shorter battery life.
Many companies have been saying they have 5min recharging but I have yet to see commercially available prototypes.
A while back I posted an interesting article on a new technology that changed the fluid electrolytes for ICE like recharges.
https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/rele...tomobiles.html

If you have 3-phase current 480V voltage.
A 250 kW V3 Supercharger charges at 300amps
Charges a Tesla Model 3 from 5 to 90 percent in 37 minutes

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

Back ground: My company sells LiPo's and I have been racing with them for 10 plus years.
The charging of almost any battery is a chemical reaction to store the energy. The rate of charge is limited by numerous factors like the chemical reaction speed and control of heat build up. In RC Racing we use far more sophisticated chargers that monitor individual cells and balance the charge. This is not the case in a EV LiPo battery which balances packs not cells. Fact is the faster you charge a LiPo the greater internal resistance in the cells and the lower capacity and shorter battery life.
Many companies have been saying they have 5min recharging but I have yet to see commercially available prototypes.
A while back I posted an interesting article on a new technology that changed the fluid electrolytes for ICE like recharges.
https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/rele...tomobiles.html

If you have 3-phase current 480V voltage.
A 250 kW V3 Supercharger charges at 300amps
Charges a Tesla Model 3 from 5 to 90 percent in 37 minutes

No, no, no. You don't get it. YoU cAN cHRaGe aT hoMe!,,! Fast charging at DCFC is for loooosers.