Kansas Kid said:

---

Teslag said:

---

From you article

Quote:

---

The researchers have conceded that current crash statistics aren't yet robust enough to reach scientific conclusions

---

---

This is one where common sense says it is more likely to have them with EVs because many/most of these accidents are from pedestrians not paying attention (ie posting on Texags with their phone) and the quietness of the EV isn't noticed. I hate the noise makers when driving at low speeds being mandated, but I think they are needed to greatly reduce the risk and liability for the drivers and car makers.

---

You also probably have a lot more hands off drivers in Tesla's than anything else, which is why you see more pedestrian accidents.

Absolutely. There's an overconfidence there. Researchers noted the same thing when SUVs grew popular. People felt bulletproof in those bigger vehicles and got into more wrecks.

techno-ag said:

---

They're probably comparing it to pumps. Google says there's about 200,000 gas stations in the US. What's the average number of pumps per station? 6 or 8?

---

Comparing EV charging stations to gas pumps makes no sense. You can't refill your car at home every night where over 80% of EV cars are charged. I know that doesn't fit your narrative that people are sitting around all the time waiting on their cars to charge but it is reality. Most EV owners spend less time recharging at public chargers in a year than the average driver spends pumping gas.
The article did a thought exercise via a third party and concluded 6x the number of public charges are needed or a little over 1.2mm. Unless those are all level 3 fast chargers with reliability of Tesla's network, I think that is low by 50-100% IF all vehicles are EVs which won't happen. The non Tesla chargers are notoriously unreliable and slow as most are level 2 or low powered level 3 chargers. A massive problem for EV owners that are forced to use them on a basis and why I wouldn't consider buying a car that can't access the Tesla system.

techno-ag said:

---

Absolutely. There's an overconfidence there. Researchers noted the same thing when SUVs grew popular. People felt bulletproof in those bigger vehicles and got into more wrecks.

---

We could go into the tech back and forths, but on the other side for instance was the Lucid model that had a set number of times a 'go fast' mode could be activated…over the lifetime of the car. Not the battery or year, but the car itself. Batteries can be 'fast charged' just like they can be 'fast discharged' but it will wear them out quickly. Charging at home can be slow and all, but the risk of thermal runaway increases if the batteries aren't 'gently treated' over time.

There isn't really a need for 'equal' chargers to pumps, even in a hypothetical 80% EV world, but for spaces like the…highways in the Midwest etc. People would just have to accept the more limited long-range mobility in the event of a disaster/lock down etc. attendant to an EV-dependent population. Wait, that's yet another of my objections. Dammit, I was trying to get along on this post.

nortex97 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Absolutely. There's an overconfidence there. Researchers noted the same thing when SUVs grew popular. People felt bulletproof in those bigger vehicles and got into more wrecks.

---

We could go into the tech back and forths, but on the other side for instance was the Lucid model that had a set number of times a 'go fast' mode could be activated…over the lifetime of the car. Not the battery or year, but the car itself. Batteries can be 'fast charged' just like they can be 'fast discharged' but it will wear them out quickly. Charging at home can be slow and all, but the risk of thermal runaway increases if the batteries aren't 'gently treated' over time.

There isn't really a need for 'equal' chargers to pumps, even in a hypothetical 80% EV world, but for spaces like the…highways in the Midwest etc. People would just have to accept the more limited long-range mobility in the event of a disaster/lock down etc. attendant to an EV-dependent population. Wait, that's yet another of my objections. Dammit, I was trying to get along on this post.

---

Multiple studies have shown that fast charging doesn't have a material impact on battery degradation thanks to thermal management. The reason why EV makers tried to limit max acceleration was due to concerns about tie parts of the car that take the extra torque wearing out quicker. The main thing shown to degrade batteries faster is regularly charging them to 100% or letting them drop to 0-5% regularly.

"In August, Recurrent published a new report about the relationship between DC fast charging and battery degradation. "We compared cars that fast charge at least 90% of the time to cars that fast charge less than 10% of the time. In other words, people who almost exclusively fast charge their car and people who very rarely fast charge. The results show no statistically significant difference in range degradation between Teslas that fast charge more than 90% of the time and those that fast charge less than 10% of the time," Recurrent says."
https://cleantechnica.com/2023/11/05/study-reveals-effects-of-fast-charging-on-electric-car-battery-health/amp/

'Multiple studies' is fine (there's a lot of propaganda out there about EV's) but many have noted how important it is to manage charging/use when considering what used EV to buy. And there are innumerable warnings in various manuals/buyers guides/recommendations about that. That a glycol cooling system CAN do something theoretically throughout a battery, evenly, for a decade, doesn't mean it holds up over time, with those tiny fluidics etc. in different use cases.

And we could get into a battle of links etc. but I want to emphasize I'm not arguing with you, just sharing info for others. I respect you've researched it and reached your conclusions, with which I just disagree largely.

You just linked to an article comparing battery life from 2019 based upon data derived from vehicles made in 2015, using liquid cooled versus passive air cooled battery packs. Think things might have changed just a bit in the last decade?

hph6203 said:

---

You just linked to an article comparing battery life from 2019 based upon data derived from vehicles made in 2015, using liquid cooled versus passive air cooled battery packs. Think things might have changed just a bit in the last decade?

---

Well he did say there was a lot of propaganda out there about EV's.

Just saw a Tesla in Houston with a sticker that says "Bought before we knew how awful he is"

redaszag99 said:

---

Just saw a Tesla in Houston with a sticker that says "Bought before we knew how awful he is"

---

Yeah libs are upset he seems conservative.

hph6203 said:

---

You just linked to an article comparing battery life from 2019 based upon data derived from vehicles made in 2015, using liquid cooled versus passive air cooled battery packs. Think things might have changed just a bit in the last decade?

---

A battle of the links is pointless, as I've said. Those who understand liquid electrolyte batteries at all from an engineering perspective understand that…all the 'revolutionary' advancements in them are not as much as claimed.

redaszag99 said:

---

Just saw a Tesla in Houston with a sticker that says "Bought before we knew how awful he is"

---

That stupid billionaire didn't know free speech was a far right wing extremist thing now

"Sitting in the back of a Tesla is as comfortable as trying to sleep on top of a balance beam"

Another day, another recall.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/05/31/business/tesla-recall-faulty-seat-belt-warning-system

In before "It's OTA!"

" Tesla is recalling 125,227 vehicles in the United States…

The regulator said the vehicles failed to comply with the federal safety requirements as their seat belt warning light and audible chime may not get activated when the driver is unbelted."


A nanny regulation is getting fixed without any action whatsoever by Tesla owners. Devastating!

Strange hobby you have here.

Warning: I am posting this one because it just made me laugh, not claiming it is serious. A reason for an EV?

Quote:

---

"Skyworth cars can relieve high blood pressure, improve immunity, and eliminate habitual
diarrhea," he said. "Since driving Skyworth electric cars, my high blood pressure, diabetes and other problems have been cured," he claimed according to Chinese media.

Hongsheng's bizarre comments didn't end there as he allegedly also said the car can "extend [the driver's] life by 30 years, allowing each car owner to enjoy a hundred years of life."

The man behind the Skyworth brand failed to mention how he thinks the EV6 has such incredible healing properties, nor did he show any evidence to back up his audacious claims. He did say that he likes to sleep in the EV6 during his lunch break and believes that it promotes deep sleep.

As reports of the founder's statements spread like wildfire through Chinese media, the carmaker issued a response. It claimed his comments were taken out of context, suggesting that he said the EV6 promotes deep sleep and that this can help with a variety of ailments.

---

Seems totally legit to me.

"Toyota Chairman Akio Toyoda apologized Monday for massive cheating on certification tests for seven vehicle models as the automaker suspended production of three of them.

The wide-ranging fraudulent testing at Japan's top automaker involved the use of inadequate or outdated data in collision tests, and incorrect testing of airbag inflation and rear-seat damage in crashes. Engine power tests were also found to have been falsified."

This won't be fixed with OTA updates.

https://finance.yahoo.com/

Also a recall for engine failures this past weekend, but let's focus on software updates.

https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a60964046/toyota-tundra-lexus-lx600-recall-engine-debris/

If all the software on the EVs can easily be updated, it can also be hacked.

That could be a bad thing.

Ag with kids said:

---

If all the software on the EVs can easily be updated, it can also be hacked.

That could be a bad thing.

---

Given a large majority of cars have some form of connection like Onstar and Sync, thar is far from an EV only issue. I have more faith in a firm like Tesla that is staffed by tech people to have better anti hacking systems than old guard car manufacturers but everyone is going to have to put a lot of effort into the issue.

Kansas Kid said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

If all the software on the EVs can easily be updated, it can also be hacked.

That could be a bad thing.

---

Given a large majority of cars have some form of connection like Onstar and Sync, thar is far from an EV only issue. I have more faith in a firm like Tesla that is staffed by tech people to have better anti hacking systems than old guard car manufacturers but everyone is going to have to put a lot of effort into the issue.

---

True...but, the Onstar/Sync systems are much more segregated from the software that performs actual functionality for the ICE vehicle. Further, even though many functions on an ICE have some computer support, the main functionality is still mechanical.

I don't doubt there is a lot that goes into cyber security for the EVs, though. However, a breach has a potential of reaching much deeper into the functionality. It is definitely something that needs to be VERY protected. Especially since it appears that many of these can be accessed OTA.

Ag with kids said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

If all the software on the EVs can easily be updated, it can also be hacked.

That could be a bad thing.

---

Given a large majority of cars have some form of connection like Onstar and Sync, thar is far from an EV only issue. I have more faith in a firm like Tesla that is staffed by tech people to have better anti hacking systems than old guard car manufacturers but everyone is going to have to put a lot of effort into the issue.

---

True...but, the Onstar/Sync systems are much more segregated from the software that performs actual functionality for the ICE vehicle. Further, even though many functions on an ICE have some computer support, the main functionality is still mechanical.

I don't doubt there is a lot that goes into cyber security for the EVs, though. However, a breach has a potential of reaching much deeper into the functionality. It is definitely something that needs to be VERY protected. Especially since it appears that many of these can be accessed OTA.

---

This hack gave control over essentially every function except driving and GM let this hack go unfixed for 5 years.
"when another group of researchers quietly pulled off that same automotive magic trick five years earlier, their work was answered with exactly none of those reactions. That's in part because the prior group of car hackers, researchers at the University of California at San Diego and the University of Washington, chose not to publicly name the make and model of the vehicle they tested, which has since been revealed to be General Motors' 2009 Chevy Impala. They also discreetly shared their exploit code only with GM itself rather than publish it."

"We basically had complete control of the car except the steering," says Karl Koscher, one of the security researchers who helped to develop the attack."

https://www.wired.com/2015/09/gm-took-5-years-fix-full-takeover-hack-millions-onstar-cars/

There have been other onstar hacks that allowed them to enter the car, start it and steal it.

PS. My 2003 Vette is drive my wire for steering and similar for throttle and breaking. Most cars no longer have the direct mechanical connections like cars of yesteryear.

Kansas Kid said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

If all the software on the EVs can easily be updated, it can also be hacked.

That could be a bad thing.

---

Given a large majority of cars have some form of connection like Onstar and Sync, thar is far from an EV only issue. I have more faith in a firm like Tesla that is staffed by tech people to have better anti hacking systems than old guard car manufacturers but everyone is going to have to put a lot of effort into the issue.

---

True...but, the Onstar/Sync systems are much more segregated from the software that performs actual functionality for the ICE vehicle. Further, even though many functions on an ICE have some computer support, the main functionality is still mechanical.

I don't doubt there is a lot that goes into cyber security for the EVs, though. However, a breach has a potential of reaching much deeper into the functionality. It is definitely something that needs to be VERY protected. Especially since it appears that many of these can be accessed OTA.

---

This hack gave control over essentially every function except driving and GM let this hack go unfixed for 5 years.
"when another group of researchers quietly pulled off that same automotive magic trick five years earlier, their work was answered with exactly none of those reactions. That's in part because the prior group of car hackers, researchers at the University of California at San Diego and the University of Washington, chose not to publicly name the make and model of the vehicle they tested, which has since been revealed to be General Motors' 2009 Chevy Impala. They also discreetly shared their exploit code only with GM itself rather than publish it."

"We basically had complete control of the car except the steering," says Karl Koscher, one of the security researchers who helped to develop the attack."

https://www.wired.com/2015/09/gm-took-5-years-fix-full-takeover-hack-millions-onstar-cars/

There have been other onstar hacks that allowed them to enter the car, start it and steal it.

PS. My 2003 Vette is drive my wire for steering and similar for throttle and breaking. Most cars no longer have the direct mechanical connections like cars of yesteryear.

---

Fair enough...didn't realize the Onstar was not as segregated in 2010 as it should have been. I certainly hope that actually has been addressed.

And here's hackers doing the same to Tesla for a contest.

But, I think that both examples show my point that they CAN be hacked.

Cyber security is the thing that I don't think ANY of them take seriously enough...


BTW, are you sure you have drive by wire STEERING? There's no steering column at all in the vehicle?

You will get no argument from me that Tesla's have been and will be hacked again in the future along with any devise connected to the internet. The reason I put more faith in companies like Tesla with a tech background is they sponsor these white night hack competitions and spend a lot of resources internally to secure their systems. Where it took GM 5 years to fix their hole, I would bet the Tesla's of the world would fix the issue in 5 days to 5 weeks.

The Vette isn't pure drive by wire but it is computer controlled variable input steering that varies based on speed and I believe performance settings. Sorry, I should have made that clearer. For Tesla, I believe the only pure steer by wire is the Cybertruk.

Kansas Kid said:

---

You will get no argument from me that Tesla's have been and will be hacked again in the future along with any devise connected to the internet. The reason I put more faith in companies like Tesla with a tech background is they sponsor these white night hack competitions and spend a lot of resources internally to secure their systems. Where it took GM 5 years to fix their hole, I would bet the Tesla's of the world would fix the issue in 5 days to 5 weeks.

The Vette isn't pure drive by wire but it is computer controlled variable input steering that varies based on speed and I believe performance settings. Sorry, I should have made that clearer. For Tesla, I believe the only pure steer by wire is the Cybertruk.

---

Fair enough. Tesla is much more of a tech company than an auto company. I know the Big 3 have HUGE inertia in that area that will take a long time to change. I think the GM issue was partly that AND partly the fact it was 14 years ago, when cyber hacking in that arena wasn't as prevalent...GM SHOULD have fixed it quicker though - by a LONG time.

One thing though about the ICE cars though is that it it IS easier to segregate the CAN bus from any external system that it would be for an EV that does full OTA updates. Because that means the CAN bus (or whatever equivalent they're using) HAS to be available for the EVs.

Now, WILL the ICE makers do that segregation? Meh...I have my doubts because of the aforementioned inertia.

Ah....ok so your Vette has basically variable speed tuning to the power assist it sounds like. That makes much more sense.

One analyst suggests selling your stock. From $414 in 2021 to $138 recently then a tick up to $179 with Elon's surprise visit to the Chi-coms. He says sell now.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4697113-tesla-570-billion-market-cap-should-shrink-as-expectations-are-unmet

I agree with your general assessment. I would think the addition of all of driver assist technologies will require less segregation in order to work making it harder to segregate systems on all vehicles. Is that a correct assessment as you understand it?

Kansas Kid said:

---

I agree with your general assessment. I would think the addition of all of driver assist technologies will require less segregation in order to work making it harder to segregate systems on all vehicles. Is that a correct assessment as you understand it?

---

Well, yes and no.

Yes, the addition of those technologies could DEFINITELY require less segregation if they are needing to be updated OTA. In order to update all of those functionalities they HAVE to be accessible and can't be segregated. This applies to both EVs and ICE.

No, the addition could still be segregated by keeping all OTA systems separated and doing any updates specifically in house (still a breach point there, but, much smaller one).

IMO it's the OTA update part that is the weak link. That makes it a much easier attack vector...

It's the same with all sorts of new tech that does ANY OTA. Before, you needed physical access to breach the system. But with OTA, you generally don't. Hell, spoofing key fobs is a big thing now. Lots of people use faraday bags to protect them from hacking.

The things that make our life easier also make our lives less secure it seems.

Do you have a phone or other devices that get updates? Are you worried about your passwords, bank info, credit cards, etc?

GAC06 said:

---

Do you have a phone or other devices that get updates? Are you worried about your passwords, bank info, credit cards, etc?

---

Yes.

Yes.

Amazingly, for the same reasons.

But, not worried about my phone driving me off the road because a hacker is ****ing with me.

I'm more worried about someone stealing from me than driving my car off the road

GAC06 said:

---

I'm more worried about someone stealing from me than driving my car off the road

---

Well, give it time...

It is the new frontier of hacking.

None of the automakers have anything like Link16 security protocols...

But, sigh...this is one of my points on here.

Any time I point out something that might be negative about EVs, it's immediately attacked with <well what about this>.

JFC, just accept that there might be negatives.

I think EVs are a cool idea. I like the tech. I work with autonomy so I really like some of the stuff being done, even if I disagree with the decisions.

Agreed. Anytime a normal vehicle catches on fire it's posted here.

Weird leap there. No one is saying there aren't drawbacks or risks. In this case, all cars are potentially vulnerable to hacking. Actually the traditional car makers are apparently more vulnerable.