LOL, Model X slides down boat ramp, burns under water. Florida, of course.

Quote:

---

It's unclear at what point the Model X started sliding into the water, but the Hollywood Professional Firefighters report that the vehicle "lost traction and slid into the inter-coastal." It says that the salt water then reacted with the electronics, causing them to short, and sparking a fire that burned for an "extended period of time."

"The fire was allowed to burn underwater until it extinguished itself," Hollywood Professional Firefighters wrote on Facebook. "And even then, it had to be loaded carefully onto a special carrier, and followed by the Fire Engine to the impound lot, where they'll keep the vehicle isolated for a few days in the very real possibility of re-ignition."

---

At least there was enough water in the lake to contain the fire.

Study: EV's driven 4000+ fewer miles per year than ICE. It's almost as if EV drivers must have range anxiety or something.

nortex97 said:

---

Study: EV's driven 4000+ fewer miles per year than ICE. It's almost as if EV drivers must have range anxiety or something.

---

Or they bought it as the commuting car and have a bigger vehicle for family transport.

Tanya 93 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Study: EV's driven 4000+ fewer miles per year than ICE. It's almost as if EV drivers must have range anxiety or something.

---

Or they bought it as the commuting car and have a bigger vehicle for family transport.

---

Yep, this one was pretty easy to figure out.

Tanya 93 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Study: EV's driven 4000+ fewer miles per year than ICE. It's almost as if EV drivers must have range anxiety or something.

---

Or they bought it as the commuting car and have a bigger vehicle for family transport.

---

Or, wait for it, EV's in reality only work as city cars despite the numerous EV fan posts about how great they work for cross country travel for them here.

Which EV owners have said they are great for cross country travel? I think all have been in universal agreemtn that these aren't well suited for that.

nortex97 said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Study: EV's driven 4000+ fewer miles per year than ICE. It's almost as if EV drivers must have range anxiety or something.

---

Or they bought it as the commuting car and have a bigger vehicle for family transport.

---

Or, wait for it, EV's in reality only work as city cars despite the numerous EV fan posts about how great they work for cross country travel for them here.

---

Isn't that what we've been saying all this time? My EV is my primary car because I primarily go to work and back. Just like most people. We take my wife's car on trips. Maybe you have dyslexia and don't read so good.

nortex97 said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Study: EV's driven 4000+ fewer miles per year than ICE. It's almost as if EV drivers must have range anxiety or something.

---

Or they bought it as the commuting car and have a bigger vehicle for family transport.

---

Or, wait for it, EV's in reality only work as city cars despite the numerous EV fan posts about how great they work for cross country travel for them here.

---

I've always had the dad with the work commute car and the mom with the bigger family travel car.

Your hard on for attacking everything about EVs is obsessive

Teslag said:

---

Which EV owners have said they are great for cross country travel? I think all have been in universal agreemtn that these aren't well suited for that.

---

I'm too lazy right now but didn't you claim trip planning was bulletproof from Dallas to aggie land austin etc?

nortex97 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Which EV owners have said they are great for cross country travel? I think all have been in universal agreemtn that these aren't well suited for that.

---

I'm too lazy right now but didn't you claim trip planning was bulletproof from Dallas to aggie land austin etc?

---

You consider Dallas to College Station to be "cross country travel"?

Teslag said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Which EV owners have said they are great for cross country travel? I think all have been in universal agreemtn that these aren't well suited for that.

---

I'm too lazy right now but didn't you claim trip planning was bulletproof from Dallas to aggie land austin etc?

---

You consider Dallas to College Station to be "cross country travel"?

---

350 miles round trip. Most likely would need to recharge somewhere.

edit - And please don't post up that your Telsa goes 400+ miles on a charge. Not every EV does that, nor will long-range EVs do that distance under all conditions.

A lot of confounding variables aren't being taken into account with a study this simplistic, as evidenced by the fact that when controlling just for vehicle type (SUV) the gap shrinks to just 10% less than the ICE counterpart, despite SUVs having a lower available maximum range on average. What happens when you control for vehicle type and income to remove the issue of choice rather than capability (i.e. I don't drive 2000 miles to California if I want to go to California for vacation, because I can afford to fly, an option that isn't available to a lot of people). Comparing the kind of owner that would have a Model Y to a RAV4 at this stage is premature. EVs have to reduce in price to achieve mass adoption and for a 1:1 comparison based upon sales figures to carry much weight at all.

torrid said:

---

Teslag said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Which EV owners have said they are great for cross country travel? I think all have been in universal agreemtn that these aren't well suited for that.

---

I'm too lazy right now but didn't you claim trip planning was bulletproof from Dallas to aggie land austin etc?

---

You consider Dallas to College Station to be "cross country travel"?

---

350 miles round trip. Most likely would need to recharge somewhere.

edit - And please don't post up that your Telsa goes 400+ miles on a charge. Not every EV does that, nor will long-range EVs do that distance under all conditions.

---

One charge on a trip isn't a big deal and certainly not range anxiety inducing. And it's definitely not "cross country travel"which was his claim. It was a bad take and he got called on it.

hph6203 said:

---

A lot of confounding variables aren't being taken into account with a study this simplistic, as evidenced by the fact that when controlling just for vehicle type (SUV) the gap shrinks to just 10% less than the ICE counterpart, despite SUVs having a lower available maximum range on average. What happens when you control for vehicle type and income to remove the issue of choice rather than capability (i.e. I don't drive 2000 miles to California if I want to go to California for vacation, because I can afford to fly, an option that isn't available to a lot of people). Comparing the kind of owner that would have a Model Y to a RAV4 at this stage is premature. EVs have to reduce in price to achieve mass adoption and for a 1:1 comparison based upon sales figures to carry much weight at all.

---

So, EV owners are richer/whiter/younger/smarter so they can't be compared to mere plebians who actually drive their vehicles across city lines/go outside of town regularly, like LOL poors in RAV4's.

I think you are inadvertently proving some of my points about EV's, and their drivers/owners/who is looking to foist them upon the rest of us.

Teslag said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Study: EV's driven 4000+ fewer miles per year than ICE. It's almost as if EV drivers must have range anxiety or something.

---

Or they bought it as the commuting car and have a bigger vehicle for family transport.

---

Yep, this one was pretty easy to figure out.

---

If it was easy to figure out we would not have an 85 page thread featuring you zealously defending against every perceived slight against EVs.

So rather than contending with the argument I made about people with more money making different travel decisions than people with less money, which might explain the variation in mileage-driven as well or better than the variation in technology, you decided to create a caricature of a person that thinks it's just because those people are inferior. You tried to make me into a bad person rather than a person making a bad argument. I noticed you didn't try to refute the underlying argument. I wonder why that is. Pretty weak.

EVs are too expensive for mass adoption currently, which is a claim I've made as many or more times than you on this thread. The difference is I think they'll get cheaper and achieve a price point where they can be adopted by the masses, you don't.

hph6203 said:

---

So rather than contending with the argument I made about people with more money making different travel decisions than people with less money, which might explain the variation in mileage-driven as well or better than the variation in technology, you decided to create a caricature of a person that thinks it's just because those people are inferior. You tried to make me into a bad person rather than a person making a bad argument. I noticed you didn't try to refute the underlying argument. I wonder why that is. Pretty weak.

EVs are too expensive for mass adoption currently, which is a claim I've made as many or more times than you on this thread. The difference is I think they'll get cheaper and achieve a price point where they can be adopted by the masses, you don't.

---

Wait, hang on, I was told EV's are cheaper now than ICE vehicles, for people smart enough to look at the total costs, and a model 3 for instance is cheaper than a Camry. Is that wrong? Do you disagree with Teslag on that?

I don't actually intend, by any stretch, to lob some cheap 'racist' insult at you, in all seriousness, I apologize if that came across as such. But anyway, in reality, our subsidized EV's are being bought/leased by wealthy Asians/whites predominantly (or at least disproportionately), from what I have read.

Quote:

---

But anyway, in reality, our subsidized EV's are being bought/leased by wealthy Asians/whites predominantly (or at least disproportionately), from what I have read.

---

Why does that matter to you?

GAC06 said:

---

Quote:

---

But anyway, in reality, our subsidized EV's are being bought/leased by wealthy Asians/whites predominantly (or at least disproportionately), from what I have read.

---

Why does that matter to you?

---

It's one of those 'disproportionate impacts' our leftist friends (not addressed to any given ones on this thread) might find interesting.

nortex97 said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Study: EV's driven 4000+ fewer miles per year than ICE. It's almost as if EV drivers must have range anxiety or something.

---

Or they bought it as the commuting car and have a bigger vehicle for family transport.

---

Or, wait for it, EV's in reality only work as city cars despite the numerous EV fan posts about how great they work for cross country travel for them here.

---

The Model 2 is rumored to be first built at GigaBerlin, it is supposedly designed as a city car, less range and fewer luxury items better suited to the European ecosystem; smaller compact cities closer to each other where range is not critical. LFP batteries, too. Once production ramps up it'll be a money printing machine for Tesla and probably in the sweet spot of the S curve of BEV adoption.

ICE cars will die in Europe first as they are in Scandanavia. Koenigsegg may hang around for a while, but it'll go electric just as even Ferrari will (in spite of what they say).

nortex97 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Quote:

---

But anyway, in reality, our subsidized EV's are being bought/leased by wealthy Asians/whites predominantly (or at least disproportionately), from what I have read.

---

Why does that matter to you?

---

It's one of those 'disproportionate impacts' our leftist friends (not addressed to any given ones on this thread) might find interesting.

---

What's the disproportionate impact of vehicle buying trends? I only see you bring it up here over and over.

Speaking of playthings of the rich, my brother just took delivery on his Taycan Turbo S, so I drove it this weekend. Insane power and grip. Anyone who has not driven a pure EV has no idea how different and addicting it is.

But of course, TexAgs is known for it's Marxist liberals always worried about how the working man can't afford an EV, lol.

Elon Musk predicted EV startups Lucid and Rivian would both go bankruptat least one of them seems to be over the hump

Article from last week; SIAP.

I was thinking about scheduling a Rivian test drive if they're not going bankrupt.

oh no said:

---

Elon Musk predicted EV startups Lucid and Rivian would both go bankruptat least one of them seems to be over the hump

Article from last week; SIAP.

I was thinking about scheduling a Rivian test drive if they're not going bankrupt.

---

They might become collectors items. Like the Edsel.

VitruvianAg said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Study: EV's driven 4000+ fewer miles per year than ICE. It's almost as if EV drivers must have range anxiety or something.

---

Or they bought it as the commuting car and have a bigger vehicle for family transport.

---

Or, wait for it, EV's in reality only work as city cars despite the numerous EV fan posts about how great they work for cross country travel for them here.

---

The Model 2 is rumored to be first built at GigaBerlin, it is supposedly designed as a city car, less range and fewer luxury items better suited to the European ecosystem; smaller compact cities closer to each other where range is not critical. LFP batteries, too. Once production ramps up it'll be a money printing machine for Tesla and probably in the sweet spot of the S curve of BEV adoption.

ICE cars will die in Europe first as they are in Scandanavia. Koenigsegg may hang around for a while, but it'll go electric just as even Ferrari will (in spite of what they say).

---

Personally, I wouldn't mind that myself. With the Model 3 length at around 183" its about a foot longer than I'd prefer. It'll suit me just fine for a commuter vehicle handling 99.9% of my trips on its own.

I don't think total cost of ownership is the appropriate metric to determine the viability of the technology for mass market adoption, because it doesn't capture all of the tradeoffs and that a Model 3 RWD isn't the appropriate comparison to a Camry as it exists today. If a person were in the market for a vehicle and their choices were a Tesla Model 3 RWD and a Toyota Camry, they'd probably opt for the Camry today just based upon the total vehicle package even if the Model 3 RWD would cost less in the long run (if working off of a purely utilitarian view, which is what mass market adoption generally is).

For mass EV adoption I think the Model 3 RWD as a representative comparison for EVs to ICE has to:
-Have 330+ miles of range
-Cost as much as a V6 Camry (not to own, to buy)
-800V Architecture (to improve costs, range, and charge rates)
-Have V2L capability (vehicle to load), which will allow one vehicle to charge another vehicle and for the vehicle to back up power for a person's house

I think all of those things happen by the end of the decade, and given those metrics you end up with a vehicle that allows you to drive 4ish hours in a single stretch, stop, charge for ~15 minutes, drive for another 3 hours and stop to charge for 15 minutes and do that in perpetuity (provided charging infrastructure continues to improve). I think that additional time gets offset by the cost savings on fuel/maintenance and the ability to have a house that never loses power again. I think for most people the added time tradeoff is worth the cost savings/marginal utility.

I think that things like aggressive CAFE standards and emissions standards do the opposite of help in the "push" to electric vehicles (I use quotations, because I don't believe in pushing electric vehicles, but rather think the technology will mature to the point that they're the obvious choice for the majority of people). I think the CAFE standards and emissions standards push manufacturers into creating electric vehicles without doing the appropriate engineering to make them a genuinely good product and that most of the offerings on the market have some significant flaw that make them less interesting than they could/should be (150 kW charge limit on Ford's vehicles as an example).

I think that people who put demands on 100% EV by 2035 are stupid and overestimating their ability to plan (can it happen? Maybe, forcing it to is dumb), and that anyone that is trying to "pull" gas vehicles off the road is equivalently overestimating their ability to plan. I think EVs are the answer long term if the market is left to work and that doing it 5-10 years sooner is a stupid goal that might end up being the turd in the punch bowl that makes people turn against them.

GAC06 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Quote:

---

But anyway, in reality, our subsidized EV's are being bought/leased by wealthy Asians/whites predominantly (or at least disproportionately), from what I have read.

---

Why does that matter to you?

---

It's one of those 'disproportionate impacts' our leftist friends (not addressed to any given ones on this thread) might find interesting.

---

What's the disproportionate impact of vehicle buying trends? I only see you bring it up here over and over.

---

One use of the taxpayer's money on EV subsidies and policies is to favor a status/luxury item for white people, hence in the jargon of the 1964 civil rights act, a 'disproportionate impact' by race is seen in the drivers of these vehicles benefitting from the subsidies and infrastructure 'investments' in them our collective funds have gone toward.

It's not 'liberal' to see that this is an inefficient use of resources, and toward what goal? Our own (predominantly white) EV posters have decried repeatedly they don't care about the environmental BS associated with green energy/EV's etc, so as a conservative or leftist/liberal alike one should be opposed to ongoing pushes from the government to get more and more to buy/lease these things.

As a conservative, just as HUD is using 'disproportionate impact' to force home lenders to ensure more 'racial equity' by zip code, I favor reciprocally forcing automakers to ensure EV's are sold at a fair rate relative to races. To do away with perceptions and disparate impact, of course. Because why not? Make an obama judge shoot down such silliness.

HTH.

https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/new-toyota-camry-to-be-sold-only-as-hybrid-71e6c155

Toyota remains one of the few car companies that has kept their wits about them with this whole EV thing. The transition to hybrids is pretty smart.

nortex97 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Quote:

---

But anyway, in reality, our subsidized EV's are being bought/leased by wealthy Asians/whites predominantly (or at least disproportionately), from what I have read.

---

Why does that matter to you?

---

It's one of those 'disproportionate impacts' our leftist friends (not addressed to any given ones on this thread) might find interesting.

---

Have you considered for a moment that none of the EV owners here, the people you are debating with, aren't "leftists"?

Teslag said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Quote:

---

But anyway, in reality, our subsidized EV's are being bought/leased by wealthy Asians/whites predominantly (or at least disproportionately), from what I have read.

---

Why does that matter to you?

---

It's one of those 'disproportionate impacts' our leftist friends (not addressed to any given ones on this thread) might find interesting.

---

Have you considered for a moment that none of the EV owners here, the people you are debating with, aren't "leftists"?

---

Not gonna trouble shoot your grammar, but I consider anyone who supports the CCP a leftist.

So basically anyone that buys or owns a consumer electronic, appliance, power tool, or basically anything at all is a leftist?

techno-ag said:

---

https://www.wsj.com/business/autos/new-toyota-camry-to-be-sold-only-as-hybrid-71e6c155

Toyota remains one of the few car companies that has kept their wits about them with this whole EV thing. The transition to hybrids is pretty smart.

---

$14 billion total for a battery plant in NC. Something tells me they are planning more than just hybrids.

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/toyota-invest-8-bln-north-carolina-battery-plant-2023-10-31/

Quote:

---

Oct 31 (Reuters) - Toyota Motor (7203.T) said on Tuesday it would boost investment by $8 billion and add about 3,000 jobs at its electric-vehicle battery manufacturing plant in North Carolina, accelerating the Japanese automaker's push to electrify its lineup.

The company, which plans to have electrified options for all its models available by 2025, said the latest move will bring its total investment in the plant to about $13.9 billion and jobs to more than 5,000.

---

Yeah that recent legislation targeting American made EVs reminded them to keep stuff stateside.

Teslag said:

---

So basically anyone that buys or owns a consumer electronic, appliance, power tool, or basically anything at all is a leftist?

---

No, although I won't deign to 'explain' it to you again, the scale matters.

Every thinking/attentive American with an EV though, is a CCP supporter.

nortex97 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

So basically anyone that buys or owns a consumer electronic, appliance, power tool, or basically anything at all is a leftist?

---

No, although I won't deign to 'explain' it to you again, the scale matters.

Every thinking/attentive American with an EV though, is a CCP supporter.

---

This guy never buys anything, I guess. I mean, literally anything. He makes his own clothes spun with cotton grown on his land, doesn't own a phone, sneakers, jeans or underwear. He just sit's naked on his empty lot with no house complaining about everyone else in the world buying items made in China and calling them all Communists. Nice.