hph6203 said:
They are still inferior to Tesla's vehicles for things that are largely out of their control (they don't have access to Tesla's super charging network in a way that makes it functional as the battery voltage and charging voltage don't presently play well with each other), but from a pure vehicle standpoint they are actually in some ways superior to Tesla's vehicles.
Can't read can you? They also, by comparison, have poor route planning, which is where Rivian/Ford surpass them, but the actual hardware of the Kia/Hyundai lineup beats Tesla/Rivian/Ford, because they actually have the capability of charging 10-80% in ~18 minutes.
EVs are new in relative terms to ICE vehicles. That creates a situation where manufacturers do not yet know best practices/consumer expectations and desires and they have to assume what thresholds they have to meet in order to match those expectations. Tesla's charging infrastructure is good, their vehicle charging capabilities have fallen behind the competition. Rivian's design is good, but their charging experience is inferior (compared to the best available), Kia/Hyundai's peak charging rate is good, but their route planning and charging infrastructure isn't. Ford has reasonably good software and reasonably good hardware and reasonably good build quality, but their cost structure is bad. What happens over time is that the market converges on best practices where the "unknown" ideal process becomes less and the areas where experimentation becomes less.
That's why in Nortex's blogger article that referenced another article by Wired about the depreciation of EVs stated that one of the primary reasons that is occurring is because each iterative model is substantially more refined than the previous model, causing a scenario where consumers prefer to buy new over buying old. That effect diminishes as the market matures.