High interest rates, high cost of new vehicles because of inflation, poor economic headwinds.

Teslag said:

---

High interest rates, high cost of new vehicles because of inflation, poor economic headwinds.

---

Well then, that explains the discounts now doesn't it?

Yes. No one said otherwise. ALL vehicles are being discounted. But only one type is growing in sales compared to the other.

Kansas Kid said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Translation: Govern me hard, daddy.

---

The EVidians are out in force today.

Oh Mr Government, force things on those around me to protect against an extremely rare event. When I have heard things like that before…..

---

No this is a prudent measure on the Koreans' part. I would have been disappointed with anything less. It was a wise and measured response to prevent another catastrophe.

But it won't do anything. It only keeps people from parking if they are charged above 90%, which virtually no EV owner does on a regular basis

Teslag said:

---

But it won't do anything. It only keeps people from parking if they are charged above 90%, which virtually no EV owner does on a regular basis

---

It's a step in the right direction. They're going to mandate a maximum 80% fast charge nationwide. If and when there's another catastrophe, they'll institute more stringent rules.

You should be cheering this, TA. Steps to prevent the perception of fire risk should smooth adoption.

I never cheer big government nanny state action

Quote:

---

They're going to mandate a maximum 80% fast charge nationwide.

---

This is also made up nonsense

A little history...

Says everyone that advocates for government control over individual autonomy. Govern me harder, daddy.

Literally zero EV car batteries are charged to 100%. None.

hph6203 said:

---

Says everyone that advocates for government control over individual autonomy. Govern me harder, daddy.

Literally zero EV car batteries are charged to 100%. None.

---

Now do EV mandates, CAFE standards, Build Back Better fast chargers, and EV tax rebates.

Oh a government wants to make things safer? Help! I'm being oppressed!

ETA I think the Mercedes blew up at 90%.

Point to a post where I have supported any of those. This isn't team talk, this is you advocating for something and getting mocked for it. Be the individual you are, own your love for daddy government and just realize that you're not that different than the people that advocate for those things you criticize.

hph6203 said:

---

Point to a post where I have supported any of those. This isn't team talk, this is you advocating for something and getting mocked for it. Be the individual you are, own your love for daddy government and just realize that you're not that different than the people that advocate for those things you criticize.

---

LOL. This from one of the leading EVangelists on here.

So you are for no safety standards. Got it. No seat belts for you, big guy. Big daddy government isn't going to tell you what to do, no sir.

Thanks for the lunchtime laugh. Always enjoy reading fanatical takes.

techno-ag said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Says everyone that advocates for government control over individual autonomy. Govern me harder, daddy.

Literally zero EV car batteries are charged to 100%. None.

---

Now do EV mandates, CAFE standards, Build Back Better fast chargers, and EV tax rebates.

Oh a government wants to make things safer? Help! I'm being oppressed!

ETA I think the Mercedes blew up at 90%.

---

I think every regular EV owner on this thread is opposed to these. We are consistent. You aren't.

Big difference between the government mandating the safety standards and providing information about the safety profile of different vehicles/systems. Saying a safety belt is safer than no safety belt is different than mandating its use. Feel free to supply information, but threatening individuals with financial penalties that can extend into imprisonment over a seat belt? Nah, not in favor of that. Not for people of driving age.

The people that advocate for those restrictions are using the same justification to bring them into existence as you are for this restriction: safety. You just happen to disagree with the pseudo justification they have for it in the same way they probably disagree with your justification for this.

techno-ag said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Translation: Govern me hard, daddy.

---

The EVidians are out in force today.

Oh Mr Government, force things on those around me to protect against an extremely rare event. When I have heard things like that before…..

---

No this is a prudent measure on the Koreans' part. I would have been disappointed with anything less. It was a wise and measured response to prevent another catastrophe.

---

Just like the Covidians said….. Safety first.

Shouldn't they ban diesel cars as well since they have actually burned down a parking garage in the recent past?

hph6203 said:

---

Govern me hard, daddy. I'm scared of the monster under the bed and I need you to protect me.

---

The data supports the ban.

Tesla semi caught fire in a crash. That's a big battery.

https://apnews.com/article/tesla-semi-fire-ntsb-investigation-battery-00f0d86ed17ee03ab169df6e7ee66c4d

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Govern me hard, daddy. I'm scared of the monster under the bed and I need you to protect me.

---

The data supports the ban.

---

1.2mm people die per year in vehicle accidents. I guess the data says we should ban all of them according to your view.

Only if you pay attention to frequency of anecdote that hits your algorithmic feed and use that as a stand in for "data." If you look at actual population data? Not so much.

Interesting write up from an FSD skeptic. Big grain of salt because this is Rolling Stone and they have a history of fake articles like that woman who lied and said she got raped at U Va.

Quote:

---

When the "Full Self-Driving" setting is enabled in a Tesla, according to the automaker's own description, the car "attempts to drive to your destination by following curves in the road, stopping at and negotiating intersections, making left and right turns, navigating roundabouts, and entering/exiting highways."

"Attempts" would be the crucial word here, as I learned during an occasionally harrowing demonstration of FSD around surface streets and freeways in Los Angeles. While it's true that the technology manages to impress at first, it doesn't take long for severe and dangerous shortcomings to emerge. And, contrary to claims from exaggeration-prone Tesla CEO Elon Musk, it certainly didn't seem safer than having an average human driver at the wheel.

---

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/self-driving-tesla-drive-1235079210/amp/

hph6203 said:

---

Only if you pay attention to frequency of anecdote that hits your algorithmic feed and use that as a stand in for "data." If you look at actual population data? Not so much.

---

Did you figure out how to extinguish an EV battery on fire? Or are you still using a 3X damage multiplier while invorrectly assuming everyone lives/parks in a single-family home?

IIRC you wrote "it would have to burn down your house and your neighbors" which happened to 139 neighbors in the Korean fire

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Govern me hard, daddy. I'm scared of the monster under the bed and I need you to protect me.

---

The data supports the ban.

---

Oh really…

I'm old enough to remember "safe, free, and effective" & Hunters laptop.

I'm sure you'll forgive me for no longer trusting "the experts"

And the hand wave….

Right on cue

Anecdote doesn't make the rule.

hph6203 said:

---

Anecdote doesn't make the rule.

---

You can't even tell me how to put the fire out. Anecdote is not needed.

^

Obviously not an engineer. Or anyone that works with numbers.

Water and time.

hph6203 said:

---

Water and time.

---

Your wrong. Every EV fire in history is still burning because they make their own oxygen.

Who needs fusion? We've got millions of limitless forms of energy right under our noses!

I've been told battery health is monitored electronically to ensure it is safe. But, Mini just recalled 4 years of EV cooper's for having been built with defective batteries that could lead to a fire:

Quote:

---

MINI has initiated a voluntary safety recall affecting approximately 12,535 vehicles equipped with high-voltage batteries that may not have been produced according to specifications.

The recall targets all-electric Cooper SE models manufactured between March 21, 2019, and January 25, 2024, which may experience faults in the high-voltage battery or system. The safety risk associated with this issue is significant. In rare cases, these faults could cause the high-voltage battery to overheat, potentially resulting in a thermal eventmore commonly known as a fire even when the vehicle is not in operation.

MINI became aware of this risk following a field incident in October 2023 involving a MINI Hardtop 2 Door Cooper SE model in the U.S., where the vehicle caught fire. Further analysis identified isolation faults within the high-voltage battery, leading to a broader investigation.

---

But don't worry folks, a new software patch is available. BMW has you covered.

Ford gives up on 3-row EV SUV. Not profitable.

Quote:

---

As well as the three-row, Ford has also pushed back plans for a next-generation full-size electric pickup truck, which would replace the current F-150 Lightning model. The new model, dubbed "Project T3" by Ford, will now be delayed by up to 18 months as part of a reduction in spending on fully electric models. The truck's new launch date in 2027 means Ford will be able to make use of its lower-cost battery technology as well as other "cost breakthroughs" that could develop while the EV sector continues to evolve, Ford explained in a statement.

If there are two cars that you'd have thought would sell like hot cakes for Ford, it's a three-row SUV and a pickup truck. In the past, these categories have been real winners for the Blue Oval, with the three-row Explorer being Ford's best-selling SUV in 2023 and the F-Series trucks holding strong as the best-selling trucks in America for multiple decades.

---

hph6203 said:

---

Water and time.

---

The time thing is kind of my whole point, but what exactly do you think the water is gonna do? Until it's done burning, the correct answer is not much.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Water and time.

---

The time thing is kind of my whole point, but what exactly do you think the water is gonna do? Until it's done burning, the correct answer is not much.

---

I see someone is way smarter than the fire departments that are trained to put water on the EV fires if they can't let it burn itself out.

Either that or someone isn't an engineer or chemist that understands that water evaporating/boiling extracts heat. Extract enough heat and the chemistry of generating oxygen/burning becomes unsustainable and the fire goes out. You say you can't put out an EV fire with water but that is false. It does take longer and more water to get the desired effect but using water will put it out faster than doing nothing. It is what people call science.

Water used on other fires is doing the same thing. It doesn't prevent oxygen from getting to the fuel source, it drops the temperature of the fire site.

PS. You don't want to use water on a petroleum fire (I.e. gasoline, diesel or oil). Would you like an explanation for why that is?

I saw my first Cybertruck in the wild the other day in a parking lot. I drove over to get a closer look since I had only seen one online in pictures. Holy ****, that thing is even uglier in person. Looked like a cheap aluminum box on wheels. Utterly terrible design.