JamesE4 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Pew Research is out with a new study. Only 3/10 Americans are seriously considering buying an EV.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/06/27/about-3-in-10-americans-would-seriously-consider-buying-an-electric-vehicle/



Interesting graphic on how Americans assess the pros and cons of EVs.



Interestingly, "Better for the environment" is the biggest perceived positive despite what local posters tell us they like about the cars. Many on here have stated EVs are fun to drive but only 13 percent in the survey listed that as a pro.

---

This tells you how un-informed many people are. No doubt EVs are less expensive to fuel, and mine is definitely more fun to drive.

---

"Everyone who doesn't agree with me is uninformed"

EV owner confirmed.

JamesE4 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Pew Research is out with a new study. Only 3/10 Americans are seriously considering buying an EV.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/06/27/about-3-in-10-americans-would-seriously-consider-buying-an-electric-vehicle/



Interesting graphic on how Americans assess the pros and cons of EVs.



Interestingly, "Better for the environment" is the biggest perceived positive despite what local posters tell us they like about the cars. Many on here have stated EVs are fun to drive but only 13 percent in the survey listed that as a pro.

---

This tells you how un-informed many people are. No doubt EVs are less expensive to fuel, and mine is definitely more fun to drive.

---

They might be more fun to drive than the average slushbox transmission **** box commuter but they'll never be as much fun to drive as an equivalent ICE vehicle with a quality power train that is both visceral and engaging (ie. Powerful, rev happy, and manual or DCT). You might prefer to drive the EV but they really couldn't be more boring to those of us that love engines and transmissions. Great for a commuter car but not a replacement for a weekend sports car, imo. That being said I'd probably buy a lightning this week if it weren't for the depreciation and range. Just would never choose an EV for my fun car.

I like raw power and acceleration. Don't care how it gets there.

Teslag said:

---

I like raw power and acceleration. Don't care how it gets there.

---

Having driven the Plaid X and owning a BMW XM, the one second slower XM is way more fun to drive overall. The acceleration is fun on the Plaid, but the roaring engine sound and feel of the XM, the quality of the vehicle, and the overall experience is better in the XM. By a mile, not even close.

Disagree, came from the BMW M to the MYP.

Update on the Korean EV parking garage fire we've been following.

https://www.ft.com/content/5e7519ce-60ec-4a2e-8fbf-8b3fabb397a2

Quote:

---

This was illustrated by the reaction in South Korea to a luxury Mercedes EV that caught fire last month in an underground garage in the western Korean city of Incheon, hospitalising 23 people and damaging 40 other vehicles. The incident sparked a public backlash against electric vehicles, with residential and office buildings banning them from their car parks, EV owners panic selling their cars and several EV manufacturers giving in to pressure to disclose their battery suppliers for the first time.

---

Korean manufacturers generally hew to higher standards with their batteries but car makers are opting for the Chicom batteries many times due to cost.

Quote:

---

The reality, from a Korean perspective, is more worrying. South Korean battery makers have traditionally specialised in the production of NMC batteries, which are more expensive but have a higher density and therefore better performance than the lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries that leading Chinese battery makers specialise in.

But as car manufacturers come under intensifying pressure to reduce the price of electric models in response to sluggish consumer demand, and as Chinese companies improve the performance of their LFP batteries, the rationale for opting for a Korean battery is growing weaker and weaker.

---

Maybe less expensive to fuel, but a Nissan Leaf is about as fun as a cardboard box

It's a shame that the Nissan leaf is the only EV on the market

I thought I would miss the feel and sound of a V-8 when switching to an EV. While do like the engine in my last car, I don't miss it at all. Not only is my new car significantly faster, the instant response makes it feel even faster than the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times suggest. I guess some people like the "feel" of shifting gears and waiting for their car to rev to its power band. Don't get me wrong, I like driving a manual. It just comes at a major performance penalty compared to instant power on demand.

Musk continues to make libs wring their hands.

https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/tesla-owners-lose-that-loving-feeling/

Quote:

---

Tesla has found its most eager customers among Democrats and progressives, particularly on the West Coast. In Seattle, Teslas have become as ubiquitous as Subarus. Per capita, Washington has the second highest share of Tesla owners in the United States, lagging behind only California, where Teslas are as common as sunny days.

Surveys have shown, however, that many Left Coast liberals are now turning their new car desires toward other electric vehicle makers, such as Rivian, because they are turned off by Musk's political antics. The last straw for many was Musk's endorsement of former President Donald Trump and his pledge to dump some of his millions into promoting Trump's presidential campaign.

Just this week, Musk made headlines by expressing his willingness to serve in Trump's cabinet. Then, Brazil banned X because of its openness to extremist groups. And Musk topped it off by sharing an AI-generated image of Kamala Harris dressed as a communist dictator, as well as a post that insisted democracy should be replaced by a political system run by super-intelligent men to the exclusion of women and citizens with lower IQs.

---

That second paragraph does not support your commentary on it. Higher performance does not mean higher quality standards. Higher performance just means that the battery provides more power and has higher energy density. The largest EV battery recall related to fires that we've had was the Chevy Bolt, the battery supplier was LG Chem, a Korean company. The cause of the recall was manufacturing errors for the battery cells that went into the pack that caused the fire concern and LG had to compensate Chevy for the error.


NMC batteries are more volatile and are more likely to result in fires in comparison to an LFP battery. The thermal runaway temperature of an LFP battery is around 20% higher than an NMC battery. LFP batteries are cheaper not because they circumvent quality standards, but because they use significantly cheaper materials (about 70% the cost of NMC batteries).


While the battery in the Mercedes that caught fire was manufactured by a Chinese company, it was not an LFP battery as best I can tell. It was a Mercedes EQE 350. Here is Mercedes pamphlet on the model. Page 5 lists the battery as containing nickel, cobalt, and manganese (AKA NMC battery).

Teslag

There's a 100% chance the driver of that vehicle buys Oakleys with white frames

Teslag said:

---

There's a 100% chance the driver of that vehicle buys Oakleys with white frames

---

But he has your sticker of identifying as a Tesla

There's at least a 25% chance that's Silvy,

Maybe wireless charging will cut down on fires.

https://electrek.co/2024/09/07/tesla-reveals-wireless-home-ev-charging-station-patent-filings/

Teslag said:

---

There's a 100% chance the driver of that vehicle buys Oakleys with white frames

---

******. You could've just said he's a ******.

Fewer willing to buy an EV now than in 2023.

But but but … a million cars this year! 9 percent of the market! You just don't understand that the market share is growing!

Always read a Nortex link. Always.


34% of American buyers would consider an EV.

The literal headline of the article, yet our usual expert claims to have been mislead.


But, but, but…

I was responding to techno. He didn't know it was 34%.

Also from your link..

Quote:

---

"The consumer needs to be educated. Those batteries are proving to have 12-, 15-year life cycles, and most of us don't even hold a vehicle for 12 or 15 years.

---

Thanks for posting.

Teslag said:

---

There's a 100% chance the driver of that vehicle buys Oakleys with white frames

---

I only see white frames on drivers with white seat covers in Teslas.

That's not even a meme.

Major battery maker in trouble.

https://autos.yahoo.com/ev-battery-maker-now-trouble-162900585.html

Too many EV options with different technologies, primarily driven by geo-politics and supply-chains, not by the market.

Current EV market can be explained by a simple Psych experiment with samples. The more options you give, the less likely someone is to buy. Sample experiment works here because you usually aren't shopping for the sample product, it is thrust upon you forcing a decision.

When Tesla dominated and a few competitors existed, the decision was usually easy. Tesla was up-market and far more innovative than the nissan or chevy options. Fiat would soon prove the cheap electric car business model to be a failure. The late great Sergio was on record telling people NOT to by their 500e because he lost so much money on them.

Then major manufacturers added a premium EV to their line ups which was a direct comp to Tesla and was easy to make a decision. Either you sell your Audi and get a Tesla or you stay with the brand you already own and just get those social clout points you're really after.

Finally, we now have a burgeoning EV market with various options and price points, so you would think this market would be able to find a lot of buyers, only the market has no demand. This is mostly because the technology has not advanced far enough to produce a better product. All the advertised advantages aren't that impressive and there is so many differences between brands and models that it's overwhelming to keep track of. White noise causes people to change the channel.

Lastly, Tesla was smart in marketing towards things an ICE can't do, but many companies market their cars as a small or simple changes from their ICE models. Again, the tech is not compelling enough to make the change. This also explains Tesla's investments in autonomous driving. People do not want an EV, they want a spaceship that is legal to drive on public roads. That will drive demand, pun intended

my rivian feels like a spaceship sometimes.

OMB100GAS said:

---

Too many EV options with different technologies, primarily driven by geo-politics and supply-chains, not by the market.

Current EV market can be explained by a simple Psych experiment with samples. The more options you give, the less likely someone is to buy. Sample experiment works here because you usually aren't shopping for the sample product, it is thrust upon you forcing a decision.

When Tesla dominated and a few competitors existed, the decision was usually easy. Tesla was up-market and far more innovative than the nissan or chevy options. Fiat would soon prove the cheap electric car business model to be a failure. The late great Sergio was on record telling people NOT to by their 500e because he lost so much money on them.

Then major manufacturers added a premium EV to their line ups which was a direct comp to Tesla and was easy to make a decision. Either you sell your Audi and get a Tesla or you stay with the brand you already own and just get those social clout points you're really after.

Finally, we now have a burgeoning EV market with various options and price points, so you would think this market would be able to find a lot of buyers, only the market has no demand. This is mostly because the technology has not advanced far enough to produce a better product. All the advertised advantages aren't that impressive and there is so many differences between brands and models that it's overwhelming to keep track of. White noise causes people to change the channel.

Lastly, Tesla was smart in marketing towards things an ICE can't do, but many companies market their cars as a small or simple changes from their ICE models. Again, the tech is not compelling enough to make the change. This also explains Tesla's investments in autonomous driving. People do not want an EV, they want a spaceship that is legal to drive on public roads. That will drive demand, pun intended

---

People would switch if it was cheaper.

Given the same vehicle one EV and one ICE, if the EV were say $5,000 cheaper, let's say $30,000 for EV vs $35,000 for ICE, People would switch.

Except it's the opposite. EV is so much more expensive it takes a $7,000 + fed and/or state subsidies. And can only be price competitive in the high end luxury market.

The only reason manufacturers are making so many EVs is government forcing them.

bmks270 said:

---

OMB100GAS said:

---

Too many EV options with different technologies, primarily driven by geo-politics and supply-chains, not by the market.

Current EV market can be explained by a simple Psych experiment with samples. The more options you give, the less likely someone is to buy. Sample experiment works here because you usually aren't shopping for the sample product, it is thrust upon you forcing a decision.

When Tesla dominated and a few competitors existed, the decision was usually easy. Tesla was up-market and far more innovative than the nissan or chevy options. Fiat would soon prove the cheap electric car business model to be a failure. The late great Sergio was on record telling people NOT to by their 500e because he lost so much money on them.

Then major manufacturers added a premium EV to their line ups which was a direct comp to Tesla and was easy to make a decision. Either you sell your Audi and get a Tesla or you stay with the brand you already own and just get those social clout points you're really after.

Finally, we now have a burgeoning EV market with various options and price points, so you would think this market would be able to find a lot of buyers, only the market has no demand. This is mostly because the technology has not advanced far enough to produce a better product. All the advertised advantages aren't that impressive and there is so many differences between brands and models that it's overwhelming to keep track of. White noise causes people to change the channel.

Lastly, Tesla was smart in marketing towards things an ICE can't do, but many companies market their cars as a small or simple changes from their ICE models. Again, the tech is not compelling enough to make the change. This also explains Tesla's investments in autonomous driving. People do not want an EV, they want a spaceship that is legal to drive on public roads. That will drive demand, pun intended

---

People would switch if it was cheaper.

Given the same vehicle one EV and one ICE, if the EV were say $5,000 cheaper, let's say $30,000 for EV vs $35,000 for ICE, People would switch.

Except it's the opposite. EV is so much more expensive it takes a $7,000 + fed and/or state subsidies. And can only be price competitive in the high end luxury market.

The only reason manufacturers are making so many EVs is government forcing them.

---

If used EVs continue dropping you may see some interest pick up from late adopters. Get below the $20k mark and it might start sounding reasonable to some people. That's the price point for a lot of golf carts, side-by-sides and other fun but not necessary third and fourth vehicles.

https://insideevs.com/news/733279/tesla-model-3-used-ev-prices-dropping/amp/

re: cost: they cost about the same for me.

the Yukon Denali I bought for my wife was about $100k in 2023
the Rivian R1T I bought for myself was about $100k in 2024

Yukon requires regular maintenance and premium unleaded gasoline in a 24 gal tank. It gets about 15 mpg in the city. About a 375 mile range on a full tank. It looks like premium at the gas station by my house today per googlemaps is $3.42/gal.

Rivian requires almost no maintenance outside of tire rotations @7.5k miles. It gets about 2.5-3 miles/kwh in a 135 kwh battery pack. About a 320 mile range on a full charge. On my current 12 month fixed "power to chose" plan, I pay $0.159/kwh (if I charge at home). I can also charge for free for two hours near my office whenever I want. Public pay charging such as the tesla DC super chargers are more than the 16 cents/kwh I pay at home, but still less than gasoline.

It works out to about 26 cents per mile in the ICE and 6 cents per mile in the EV if i only charge my Rivian at home. So, the EV is cheaper and should save a lot over time. Anecdotally, my electricity bill has gone up since March, but I haven't been to a gas station since March when I used to drop $100 of regular unleaded into my 36 gal extended range fuel tank in the F150 every week or so, so I know I'm saving $$ on monthly expenses.


The problems with demand for EV is the use-case is not there for a lot of people in other ways; not necessarily the purchase price or the cost to drive.

For one, resale value sucks. Battery warranty is about 8 years 100k miles, and no one wants to buy a +5 year old used EV because battery replacement is too expensive once out of warranty.

The biggest downside is public charging infrastructure is still a mess. If you can only afford one vehicle in your household and have to take long road trips that would require public charging, it's possible, but can suck. DC fast chargers can be quick to charge- not much longer to charge than filling your gas tank, but they can be broken or inoperable when you get there or there could be long lines waiting for them. Other level 2 fast chargers can take a few hours to fully charge and might also have maintenance or wait times. I only bop around between work and home, around town running errands, kids activities, go to Houston or College Station and back, or to my ranch, etc. so I don't ever need public charging; can always charge at home or ranch. We don't take long road trips; generally fly everywhere, but if we ever drove to Colorado or something, we'd take the Yukon just to not stress about charging (although, I think there are enough telsa super chargers along the route that it should be close to same drive time as the Yukon, if all goes well). Wouldn't want to chance it and add hours to a trip.

"Batteries are getting cheaper and cheaper."

Volvo: 'We need $1.2 billion from the taxpayer to build a battery plant.' (In Sweden).

Are you suggesting they aren't?

hph6203 said:

---

Are you suggesting they aren't?

---

Yes, he is.

hph6203 said:

---

Are you suggesting they aren't?

---

Sorry for the confusion. If you want to compete with the CCP, you need massive subsidies, for your BEV batteries (which are a massive vehicle cost component).

Separately, confirmation EV's continue to rely on subsidies:

Quote:

---

According to S&P Global Mobility analyst Tom Libby, "The results are a combination of good performance by EVs that have been in the market for a while and the addition of several new models." Additionally, generous EV incentives are helping to boost sales.

"The caveat is that at full MSRP prices, these EV products will not sell," Libby noted. "They are being heavily incentivized to put their price point near internal combustion vehicles. If the incentives were pulled off, I think sales would drop tremendously."

---

Can we send some free EVs to Hamas? I think they'd have a blast driving them