1 hour ago, wyx087 said:

Well, I think it is a valid comparison, because the battery failure is not guaranteed in the same way an engine that has been poorly service is not guaranteed to fail after X miles. They are both probabilistic cost incurred due to X chance of component failure.

 

I included engine rebuild in addition to engine replacement for that reason, engines are made up of components that can be individually replaced.

 

There are also many cases where the battery is working perfectly fine after 8 years. My Nissan Leaf for example. Just like there are many cases where ICE works perfectly fine out of warranty.

Differanc is that my mk3 was 9.5 years when wrote off, had 78,000 miles, original engine, no oil burning etc and unlike your leaf which did have less range due battery aging, my car gained range because it had been correctly run in when it was new and the mpg was climbing not declining, just saying. 

4 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

Differanc is that my mk3 was 9.5 years when wrote off, had 78,000 miles, original engine, no oil burning etc and unlike your leaf which did have less range due battery aging, my car gained range because it had been correctly run in when it was new and the mpg was climbing not declining, just saying. 

I don't see its 20% reduced range is a problem in any shape or form. Do people really drive their car full to empty? If the car is only used for 15 miles a day, just plug it in slightly more often. Actually, why only plug it in near empty? Plug it in everyday and forget about it.

 

EVM youtuber made a good analogy:

Think back to phones, if you have choice of two phones: a phone that lasts a week, but can only charge at the phone shop; or a phone that requires charging every day but can be charged at bedside table. Which one is more convenient?

 

I know not everyone have driveways, there's well over 12 years to sort this out. But the idea that EV must be a direct replacement to ICE car right down to refuel time/frequency must change. Batteries in EV's an asset to the grid, we need to get used to keep it plugged in to soak up excess renewables.

 

 

43 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

 

EVM youtuber made a good analogy:

Think back to phones, if you have choice of two phones: a phone that lasts a week, but can only charge at the phone shop; or a phone that requires charging every day but can be charged at bedside table. Which one is more convenient?

I like a good laugh like the next man, but it's a bit too early for me.

 

44 minutes ago, wyx087 said:

I know not everyone have driveways, there's well over 12 years to sort this out.

Spoken like a true politician💩

Free driveways for everyone!!

If only there was a solution where not everybody needed their own driveway 🙄

1 hour ago, wyx087 said:

I don't see its 20% reduced range is a problem in any shape or form. Do people really drive their car full to empty? If the car is only used for 15 miles a day, just plug it in slightly more often. Actually, why only plug it in near empty? Plug it in everyday and forget about it.

 

EVM youtuber made a good analogy:

Think back to phones, if you have choice of two phones: a phone that lasts a week, but can only charge at the phone shop; or a phone that requires charging every day but can be charged at bedside table. Which one is more convenient?

 

I know not everyone have driveways, there's well over 12 years to sort this out. But the idea that EV must be a direct replacement to ICE car right down to refuel time/frequency must change. Batteries in EV's an asset to the grid, we need to get used to keep it plugged in to soak up excess renewables.

 

 

If you are only doing 15 miles a day, 20% reduction in range may not be important, but it sure as hell is important if you're doing 300 to 400 a day or even less in some lower spec EV cars as you would need to factor in some extra time for recharging in order get home again. That has to be one of the dumbest things in this thread, you wrote there, so if your car had a new range of 200 miles, and now it only has 160 miles left that's all fine? If my car had a new range of 600+ miles, it still has a range of 600+ miles after 9.5 years, zero degradation. 

 

I'll refrain from commenting on the phone comparison 💀

 

So just how do you propose to solve the issue of not everyone having a driveway, talk is cheap, solving the issue of ensuring everyone has the capability of charging their car at home is not so easy nor cheap. To really gain traction with the public, EV's need to get much closer to the refuel time and frequency of an IC vehicle otherwise, everything will have to change, things will take far longer to get done be it delivering items or whatever and of course all the associated costs would be increased, cost of living would shoot up, but your wages wouldn't because suddenly you are no longer as productive as you used to be and money doesn't grow on trees. 

 

Where did you get this notion that we ever have a excess of renewables, the wind or sun is not always there, so you could be charging your car and actually producing far more CO2 and PM's than your IC car would? The only way you could sure of that is if you had your one wind or solar generator and used it solely for recharging your car.  You might think that you're doing the planet a good deed by running a EV, but you might not in reality, all you can safely say with 100% certainty is that you can drive in a city or other densely populated area and not be generating any tailpipe emissions because you don't have a tailpipe.

17 minutes ago, @Lee said:

If only there was a solution where not everybody needed their own driveway 🙄

What, erect a lamppost or install some sort of street furniture outside of everyone's house? What about if you have multiple vehicles, like 2 of my neighbours who have no less than 10 vehicles between them and often people come and stay overnight, adding to the number of cars?

I don't know if this has been said before, a lot of replies here but one of my many opinions on EV's is "If they are so good, we would not need to be forced into buying one". My UPS guy has just bought a two year old e-Golf (£23k less than it cost new!) and I wanted to wind him up so I looked up the current 🙄 price of a new battery, £28500!

@Graham ButcherWe do not. If that we is England. As in excess electricity.

Scotland has the excess and needs storage for the electricity that can be produced and even with the exporting it does to RoUK it still needs to transfer more.

Edited 23 August, 20232 yr by toot

22 minutes ago, @Lee said:

If only there was a solution where not everybody needed their own driveway 🙄

 

 

It is going to be the next big way of ****ing someone off, unplugging their car in the middle of the night so it is flat to go to work.

It is when charger cables are not locked in. 

Not as annoying as those locked in and not charging. 

 

By tomorrow i will have done over 1,000 miles since the 10th.

Charged free last night and this morning and paid less than £30 for electric (charging) in the past 2 weeks. 

 

(Charged once on a 3 pin charger, rest of the time on public chargers.)

 

Edited 23 August, 20232 yr by toot

22 minutes ago, @Lee said:

If only there was a solution where not everybody needed their own driveway 🙄

Pretty certain that number plate is illegal 🙃

 

They just dug up at the bottom of our street to repair the cable feeding the ~1km string of lamposts we have on the street. I guess the patched up 10mm diameter cable I saw just didn't take the strain of an EV owner plugging in.

13 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

What, erect a lamppost or install some sort of street furniture outside of everyone's house? What about if you have multiple vehicles, like 2 of my neighbours who have no less than 10 vehicles between them and often people come and stay overnight, adding to the number of cars?

How about bays and a sunken charging pillar? There are ways and means it just requires a little thought and the investment and will to get it sorted.

Edited 23 August, 20232 yr by @Lee

4 hours ago, toot said:

 

 

Both from 1 year ago.

 

 

3 years ago.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well, one thing that clearly indicates is that manufacturers are doing their level best at suppressing anything about battery issues and fire risks, and fires on EV's from leaking to the public at large. There can be no doubt that these things will get resolved in time but in the meantime with governments passing laws banning new IC powered cars, we are in effect to being unpaid crash test dummies in a figure of speech.

German Manufacturers are really naughty, same group as the emission scandal. 

The manufacturers that were putting the money into diesel hybrids.  They are cheeky chimps.

 

@Graham Butcher this might interest you. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 23 August, 20232 yr by toot

3 minutes ago, @Lee said:

How about bays and a sunken charging pillar? There are ways and means it just requires a little thought and the investment and will to get it sorted.

Is that an induction charging system, or does that pop up? Either way they also present other problems, induction charging requires the installation of the receivers being installed beneath the car, further reducing ground clearance, and then you need to position the car in the right spot. If a pop pole, then it becomes an extra hazard for other road users and also a potential fail point with it not popping up when needed, being hidden beneath parked cars or buried under snow and ice, or of course failing to go back down again and thus becoming a hazard again.

4 minutes ago, toot said:

German Manufacturers are really naughty, same group as the emission scandal. 

The manufacturers that were putting the money into diesel hybrids.  They are cheeky chimps.

As John Cadagan says, the World's most criminal car company.  Although to be fair, Mercedes and BMW were also found to have their own emission scandal but as it came after the other one, nobody paid much attention to it, so it largely went unnoticed.

Edited 23 August, 20232 yr by Graham Butcher

Daimler Benz were the ones that licensed the SCR system, and they with VW & BMW conspired over the AdBlue tank sizes and part costs.

They have a Government that supports the industry leaders and that is selectively blind, deaf and dumb. 

 

Those Renault engines in Mercedes were certainly emitting lots of emissions.

 

But then VW took the huff with Suzuki using Fiat engines and not giving up all that it had learned on small capacity turbo engines and electrification.

 

Eve of the scandal breaking.

VW loses top spot as No.1 car manufacturer back to Toyota who lent Suzuki the money.

http://bbc.co.uk/news/business-34275917

 

http://bbc.co.uk/news/business-34340301

 

 

 

 

Edited 23 August, 20232 yr by toot

20 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

If you are only doing 15 miles a day, 20% reduction in range may not be important, but it sure as hell is important if you're doing 300 to 400 a day or even less in some lower spec EV cars as you would need to factor in some extra time for recharging in order get home again. That has to be one of the dumbest things in this thread, you wrote there, so if your car had a new range of 200 miles, and now it only has 160 miles left that's all fine?

Well, yes. Why wouldn't it be? The car still functions as a car, in the odd days that you need to use the original full range of the car, it would only add 10min extra to your trip to do a quick splash-dash at rapid charger.

 

Do you need do 300-400 miles every day? Even if doing 350 miles a day, 200 miles degrade to 160 miles is the difference between 2 rapid charging stops and a few more minutes at same 2 rapid charging stops.

 

25 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

So just how do you propose to solve the issue of not everyone having a driveway, talk is cheap, solving the issue of ensuring everyone has the capability of charging their car at home is not so easy nor cheap. To really gain traction with the public, EV's need to get much closer to the refuel time and frequency of an IC vehicle otherwise, everything will have to change, things will take far longer to get done be it delivering items or whatever and of course all the associated costs would be increased, cost of living would shoot up, but your wages wouldn't because suddenly you are no longer as productive as you used to be and money doesn't grow on trees. 

There's many non-driveway solutions posted already.

The cost of living prediction is another of your spiralling doom conclusion based solely on poor assumptions.

 

Why would things need longer to be done? I sense there is a misconception or lack of will to seek out information. EV's can charge at 2 different grades of speed: slow (official name is fast) or rapid. If the delivery van have zero downtime, it can be rapid charged in 30min at the depo while loading. If it was parked somewhere for any length of time, plug it in and charge it up.

 

29 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

Where did you get this notion that we ever have a excess of renewables, the wind or sun is not always there, so you could be charging your car and actually producing far more CO2 and PM's than your IC car would? The only way you could sure of that is if you had your one wind or solar generator and used it solely for recharging your car.  You might think that you're doing the planet a good deed by running a EV, but you might not in reality, all you can safely say with 100% certainty is that you can drive in a city or other densely populated area and not be generating any tailpipe emissions because you don't have a tailpipe.

I've posted this previously. Even when charged via fossil fuel powered sources, EV is still greener than ICE car. Please refer to my previous posts you've conveniently ignored.

Can you post some reference for the second underlined statement? Expand on what aspects you are referring to?

As I said, please refer to my previous post on whole-life analysis of EV vs ICE car emissions.

 

Regarding excess renwables, no, we (England) does not currently have large amount of excess renewables. But it's coming. Rrenewables will to be built to excess, time-of-use electricity tariff will become normal, thus when wind or sun isn't generating there is still enough to push through low demands (driven low by expensive time-of-use pricing). Matching demand to supply will be name of the game.

https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/energy-explained/how-much-uks-energy-renewable

 

24 minutes ago, Graham Butcher said:

There can be no doubt that these things will get resolved in time but in the meantime with governments passing laws banning new IC powered cars, we are in effect to being unpaid crash test dummies in a figure of speech.

"we" will be  "crash test dummies"??

Have you seen Norway's ICE car ban timeline and their current adoption rate?

38 minutes ago, Crasher said:

I don't know if this has been said before, a lot of replies here but one of my many opinions on EV's is "If they are so good, we would not need to be forced into buying one". My UPS guy has just bought a two year old e-Golf (£23k less than it cost new!) and I wanted to wind him up so I looked up the current 🙄 price of a new battery, £28500!

And what is the price of a brand new ICE for an out of production car?

At current price of <$120 per kWh and e-Golf have around 35 kWh, a new pack using current battery tech should be around $4200. All in a replacement should be no more than £10k.

 

People are resistant to change, we need to stop burning stuff ASAP. BEV is currently the best solution, not prefect but best out of other solutions. So government has to step in to speed up the adoption.

Besides, no one is forcing anyone to buy EV for 12 more years.

The pop up chargers at Dundee Waterfront are OK, but the trial ones kerb side in the town as so so, it is getting at them.

 

http://drivedundeeelectric.co.uk/news/2022/10/24/urban-electric-retractable-kerbside-chargepoints

 

 

 

 

Edited 23 August, 20232 yr by toot

The price of a Golf engine roughly comparable to the e-Golf (say a 1.4 TSI) is £5200. The price of the e-Golf battery part number 5QE 915 597 AC is £28370.08 retail inc VAT, that is taken directly off the ETKA parts system. Incidentally the price of a Skoda ego battery is £16090.The pure ICE ban is coming in here in less than 7 years. As to needing to stop burning stuff, well that's a matter of opinion. Time will tell. Not everyone can afford a Model Y Long Range, well new anyway but an e-Golf is quite affordable after they have lost 2/3rd's of their value in two years.

@Crasher does he need a new battery?

For what its worth, I saw an E-Up battery pack with less than 10K miles on it second hand from a written off car about 6 months ago. £3200+VAT delivered. ISTR I posted about it at the time, but cannot find the post. £3200 seems very reasonable for a major component akin to a new engine. Like ICE cars, major parts will become available reconditioned and second hand as the market matures. EVs will not be more expensive than ICE, its the supply of cheap parts has not yet developed. 

That is how the trade is.

The more there are and the more accidents then the more accident damage and the EV,s are designed so that the batteries have protection.

 

 

3 minutes ago, Crasher said:

The price of a Golf engine roughly comparable to the e-Golf (say a 1.4 TSI) is £5200. The price of the e-Golf battery part number 5QE 915 597 AC is £28370.08 retail inc VAT, that is taken directly off the ETKA parts system. Incidentally the price of a Skoda ego battery is £16090.The pure ICE ban is coming in here in less than 7 years. As to needing to stop burning stuff, well that's a matter of opinion. Time will tell. Not everyone can afford a Model Y Long Range, well new anyway but an e-Golf is quite affordable after they have lost 2/3rd's of their value in two years.

Thanks for that. It's unlikely that part will ever be moved from the warehouse, considering the market value of e-Golf.

 

Pure ICE are a dying breed. Even now, 7 years before the ban, most cars are electrified to some degree.

Granted, we have yet to learn about the specific of the ban (eg. how many electric miles it must do to not be banned until 2035). This will likely driven by market forces based on what ICE manufacturer deem economically viable at that time.