The 'staggering' battery replacement for cheaper EV cars can often be 'almost the entire cost of the car' in lower-end vehicles. It varies widely, but the other risk is that in 8 years (or whatever optimistic claim is made), you are also hoping the custom battery pack for a possibly lower volume EV is still being produced. Good luck if you manage to get one to 10 years.

That's another reason EV's depreciate so much; it's not like going down to autozone to grab a new battery. And it can get much, much higher than $10-20K:



This cost is also why going to the shorter-range/smaller battery models often cuts the prices by $10K or more up front. In some respects, those are probably a better value, I'd guess vs. the 'long range' ones.

Surprised it isn't covered by warranty but yes this should at least be something considered by a buyer. If you are the type of person to keep a car for a decade then it may not be right for you. Prices for battery replacement should go down as more cars get on the road and people get used to replacing them but it's all speculation as to how much.

MaxPower said:

---

Surprised it isn't covered by warranty but yes this should at least be something considered by a buyer. If you are the type of person to keep a car for a decade then it may not be right for you. Prices for battery replacement should go down as more cars get on the road and people get used to replacing them but it's all speculation as to how much.

---

It wouldn't be a warranty issue but it should be covered by insurance.

Kansas Kid said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Surprised it isn't covered by warranty but yes this should at least be something considered by a buyer. If you are the type of person to keep a car for a decade then it may not be right for you. Prices for battery replacement should go down as more cars get on the road and people get used to replacing them but it's all speculation as to how much.

---

It wouldn't be a warranty issue but it should be covered by insurance.

---

Auto insurance that people buy currently?

or

Battery insurance?

If it's the former screw that idea.

bobbranco said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Surprised it isn't covered by warranty but yes this should at least be something considered by a buyer. If you are the type of person to keep a car for a decade then it may not be right for you. Prices for battery replacement should go down as more cars get on the road and people get used to replacing them but it's all speculation as to how much.

---

It wouldn't be a warranty issue but it should be covered by insurance.

---

Auto insurance that people buy currently?

or

Battery insurance?

If it's the former screw that idea.

---

Why? I know you hate EVs but why would auto insurance in any world not cover part of the vehicle other than windshields which in some states is a separate add on. It would also be priced into the insurance which is based on actuarial studies so it would be baked into the cost of insurance.

If a rock damages an EV battery, that's not an accident/loss usually covered, I'd think. It's more like 'normal wear and tear.' Without looking, I bet most claims around this would be denied.

nortex97 said:

---

If a rock damages an EV battery, that's not an accident/loss usually covered, I'd think. It's more like 'normal wear and tear.' Without looking, I bet most claims around this would be denied.

---

What does comprehensive insurance cover?
Comprehensive insurance coverage protects your vehicle against unexpected damage that's not caused by a vehicle collision. Such incidents may include:
Theft
Vandalism, fire, and explosions
Windshield and glass damage
Falling trees/limbs and other objects
Rocks/objects kicked up by or falling off cars
Storms, hail, wind, floods, lightning, and earthquakes
Accidents with animals (e.g., hitting a deer)

https://www.progressive.com/answers/comprehensive-insurance/

I have had a claim like this where the front grill of my car was damaged by a rock kicked up by a truck.

bobbranco said:

---

Mostly pimped out RAV4 costs as much as a $43,000 Model 3.

Sorry the Model 3 doesn't hold its value.

---

Sure, but that's not the vehicle you posted the depreciation chart for. That was a $36,000 Rav4 compared to a $48,000 Model 3, and the model the Model 3 depreciation is based upon historical rates of depreciation which isn't necessarily representative of what it would be absent government incentives. Meaning depreciation is dictated by what the vehicle owner paid for the car, not what the manufacturer received.

Sorry you don't understand things.

There are use-cases where EVs make a lot of sense for a lot of people, but obviously not everyone. It certainly doesn't make sense yet for many- such as if you can only afford one vehicle for your household, can't afford airfare or require long road trips instead of flying, and/or require heavy long hauls with boats/campers/trailers and can't afford to rent for those uses.

EVs should cost a lot less to operate and maintain, as charging at home vs fuel pump is much cheaper per mile and PMs like oil changes are not required, but many existing models still cost more to buy and they will not have good resale value. Those batteries might come with a 100k, 8 year warranty. No one wants to buy a 5-6 year old EV that only has 2-3 years left on the battery warranty. Leasing makes sense for some so they don't have to deal with resale value, but that's still going to be a problem for many buyers. Use-cases will increase and demand will grow in the free market as solid state battery technology improves and as public charging infrastructure improves.

These are not saving the planet though, and there's no real argument until power generation shifts to cleaner safer nuclear energy. As consumer fleets slowly transition to more EVs, air and noise pollution does improve. Government should not be manipulating the market with rebates or funding the infrastructure buildout to force demand for these things. Not a good use of tax payers' money when the government is already 35 trillion dollars in debt. Demand for EV will increase on its own in a free market eventually.

nortex97 said:

---

If a rock damages an EV battery, that's not an accident/loss usually covered, I'd think. It's more like 'normal wear and tear.' Without looking, I bet most claims around this would be denied.

---

A friend with a Model X ran over a piece of rebar and punctured their battery. It was covered by USAA 100%.

That's what happened with the Nissan Leaf. Folks could not get replacement batteries for them.

I really again don't know but would think a rock hitting the undercarriage/side of a vehicle is 'normal wear and tear' while a piece of rebar would not be. The experience/coverage would probably vary based on the insurer, I'd guess.

Quote:

---

These are not saving the planet though, and there's no real argument until power generation shifts to cleaner safer nuclear energy.

---

I see this a lot, and I think it is a fundamental misunderstanding of grid capacity.

Grid-scale batteries aside (which are a teeny tiny fraction of the grid right now) you can't store electricity, so you have to make it on demand. This means your total production capacity has to be equal to and actually greater than your peak demand.

But demand is cyclic. The peak daily load is typically somewhere between 1.2x and 2x the daily minimum, and peak annual load is something like 2x the typical daily minimum. That means that at any given time something like half of your total generation isn't producing, and every 25%-50% of your daily capacity goes unused.

That doesn't factor renewables with zero marginal cost and untimable load... wind often produces a lot at night, which pushes thermal power down (yes, yes, it's stupid and I agree, don't get me started).

What that translates to is we have a TON of excess production and distribution capacity for electricity... as long as it is not during peak hours (meaning, overnight).

But wait, there's more! By increasing demand only during off-peak hours, you raise the average demand on the grid without increasing the peak demand. This is a little counterintuitive but it actually lowers the average price of electricity, because it spreads the fixed costs over a larger pool of run-hours.

******

....Aaaaand now that I wrote all that out, I re-read your post and realized that I was talking about something completely off from what you meant. Sorry. For what its worth I don't care about "saving the planet". But, all that being said, I suspect (though have no analysis to back it) that the net efficiency of an EV is quite a bit higher than an ICE, when you include the whole chain (O&G upstream to generation to wheels vs O&G upstream to refinery to wheels). Probably both on an thermal efficiency basis and on a net carbon production basis.

nortex97 said:

---

I really again don't know but would think a rock hitting the undercarriage/side of a vehicle is 'normal wear and tear' while a piece of rebar would not be. The experience/coverage would probably vary based on the insurer, I'd guess.

---

Both are foreign object damage and covered. Wear and tear is specifically described in your policy.

Zobel said:

---

Quote:

---

These are not saving the planet though, and there's no real argument until power generation shifts to cleaner safer nuclear energy.

---

I see this a lot, and I think it is a fundamental misunderstanding of grid capacity.

Grid-scale batteries aside (which are a teeny tiny fraction of the grid right now) you can't store electricity, so you have to make it on demand. This means your total production capacity has to be equal to and actually greater than your peak demand.

But demand is cyclic. The peak daily load is typically somewhere between 1.2x and 2x the daily minimum, and peak annual load is something like 2x the typical daily minimum. That means that at any given time something like half of your total generation isn't producing, and every 25%-50% of your daily capacity goes unused.

That doesn't factor renewables with zero marginal cost and untimable load... wind often produces a lot at night, which pushes thermal power down (yes, yes, it's stupid and I agree, don't get me started).

What that translates to is we have a TON of excess production and distribution capacity for electricity... as long as it is not during peak hours (meaning, overnight).

But wait, there's more! By increasing demand only during off-peak hours, you raise the average demand on the grid without increasing the peak demand. This is a little counterintuitive but it actually lowers the average price of electricity, because it spreads the fixed costs over a larger pool of run-hours.

******

....Aaaaand now that I wrote all that out, I re-read your post and realized that I was talking about something completely off from what you meant. Sorry. For what it's worth I don't care about "saving the planet". But, all that being said, I suspect (though have no analysis to back it) that the net efficiency of an EV is quite a bit higher than an ICE, when you include the whole chain (O&G upstream to generation to wheels vs O&G upstream to refinery to wheels). Probably both on an thermal efficiency basis and on a net carbon production basis.

---

Reminded me of this. RIP Gilda Radner.

hph6203 said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

Mostly pimped out RAV4 costs as much as a $43,000 Model 3.

Sorry the Model 3 doesn't hold its value.

---

Sure, but that's not the vehicle you posted the depreciation chart for. That was a $36,000 Rav4 compared to a $48,000 Model 3, and the model the Model 3 depreciation is based upon historical rates of depreciation which isn't necessarily representative of what it would be absent government incentives. Meaning depreciation is dictated by what the vehicle owner paid for the car, not what the manufacturer received.

Sorry you don't understand things.

---

I understand Tesla's don't hold their value. Thank you very much.

Kansas Kid said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Surprised it isn't covered by warranty but yes this should at least be something considered by a buyer. If you are the type of person to keep a car for a decade then it may not be right for you. Prices for battery replacement should go down as more cars get on the road and people get used to replacing them but it's all speculation as to how much.

---

It wouldn't be a warranty issue but it should be covered by insurance.

---

Auto insurance that people buy currently?

or

Battery insurance?

If it's the former screw that idea.

---

Why? I know you hate EVs but why would auto insurance in any world not cover part of the vehicle other than windshields which in some states is a separate add on. It would also be priced into the insurance which is based on actuarial studies so it would be baked into the cost of insurance.

---

I own an EV. Try again. I do not own a BEV. Will my insco replace a failed ICE engine on my EV? A failed ICE engine on a conventional vehicle? A failed battery is equivalent to a failed ICE engine. Insco should not be paying for failed items. I can understand replacement for damage components but not replacement coverage for failed components.

bobbranco said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Surprised it isn't covered by warranty but yes this should at least be something considered by a buyer. If you are the type of person to keep a car for a decade then it may not be right for you. Prices for battery replacement should go down as more cars get on the road and people get used to replacing them but it's all speculation as to how much.

---

It wouldn't be a warranty issue but it should be covered by insurance.

---

Auto insurance that people buy currently?

or

Battery insurance?

If it's the former screw that idea.

---

Why? I know you hate EVs but why would auto insurance in any world not cover part of the vehicle other than windshields which in some states is a separate add on. It would also be priced into the insurance which is based on actuarial studies so it would be baked into the cost of insurance.

---

I own an EV. Try again. I do not own a BEV. Will my insco replace a failed ICE engine on my EV? A failed ICE engine on a conventional vehicle? A failed battery is equivalent to a failed ICE engine. Insco should not be paying for failed items. I can understand replacement for damage components but not replacement coverage for failed components.

---

Especially ones that are 8+ years old and out of warranty. That Geico lizard would just laugh in your face.

bobbranco said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Surprised it isn't covered by warranty but yes this should at least be something considered by a buyer. If you are the type of person to keep a car for a decade then it may not be right for you. Prices for battery replacement should go down as more cars get on the road and people get used to replacing them but it's all speculation as to how much.

---

It wouldn't be a warranty issue but it should be covered by insurance.

---

Auto insurance that people buy currently?

or

Battery insurance?

If it's the former screw that idea.

---

Why? I know you hate EVs but why would auto insurance in any world not cover part of the vehicle other than windshields which in some states is a separate add on. It would also be priced into the insurance which is based on actuarial studies so it would be baked into the cost of insurance.

---

I own an EV. Try again. I do not own a BEV. Will my insco replace a failed ICE engine on my EV? A failed ICE engine on a conventional vehicle? A failed battery is equivalent to a failed ICE engine. Insco should not be paying for failed items. I can understand replacement for damage components but not replacement coverage for failed components.

---

Depends on the policy language. If it includes mechanical breakdown coverage it will replace an ice engine for failure.

bobbranco said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Surprised it isn't covered by warranty but yes this should at least be something considered by a buyer. If you are the type of person to keep a car for a decade then it may not be right for you. Prices for battery replacement should go down as more cars get on the road and people get used to replacing them but it's all speculation as to how much.

---

It wouldn't be a warranty issue but it should be covered by insurance.

---

Auto insurance that people buy currently?

or

Battery insurance?

If it's the former screw that idea.

---

Why? I know you hate EVs but why would auto insurance in any world not cover part of the vehicle other than windshields which in some states is a separate add on. It would also be priced into the insurance which is based on actuarial studies so it would be baked into the cost of insurance.

---

I own an EV. Try again. I do not own a BEV. Will my insco replace a failed ICE engine on my EV? A failed ICE engine on a conventional vehicle? A failed battery is equivalent to a failed ICE engine. Insco should not be paying for failed items. I can understand replacement for damage components but not replacement coverage for failed components.

---

What caused the failure? If you are in an accident do you think the engine doesn't get replaced? Now if you never replace the oil and it fails, sure you won't get insurance coverage.

The video isn't a failed battery from a failed component from normal use. It is from sudden an accidental event damage.

Kansas Kid said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Surprised it isn't covered by warranty but yes this should at least be something considered by a buyer. If you are the type of person to keep a car for a decade then it may not be right for you. Prices for battery replacement should go down as more cars get on the road and people get used to replacing them but it's all speculation as to how much.

---

It wouldn't be a warranty issue but it should be covered by insurance.

---

Auto insurance that people buy currently?

or

Battery insurance?

If it's the former screw that idea.

---

Why? I know you hate EVs but why would auto insurance in any world not cover part of the vehicle other than windshields which in some states is a separate add on. It would also be priced into the insurance which is based on actuarial studies so it would be baked into the cost of insurance.

---

I own an EV. Try again. I do not own a BEV. Will my insco replace a failed ICE engine on my EV? A failed ICE engine on a conventional vehicle? A failed battery is equivalent to a failed ICE engine. Insco should not be paying for failed items. I can understand replacement for damage components but not replacement coverage for failed components.

---

What caused the failure? If you are in an accident do you think the engine doesn't get replaced? Now if you never replace the oil and it fails, sure you won't get insurance coverage.

The video isn't a failed battery from a failed component from normal use. It is from sudden an accidental event damage.

---

Probably more to the story. My car's tech features can show how I operated the car and if I drove it recklessly the mechanics have the tools to show where, when and how. There are cases where your driving habits can be used against you and warranty, not insurance, will be denied. I'm certain that Mercedes has better spy features than my Jap car. And didn't they say the wife was driving the car. They 4 wheel all the time over curbs, in ditches, wheel stops and make up every excuse...

I don't buy mechanical breakdown coverage. But for a Tesla it would be electrical breakdown coverage.

Takes 15 seconds to find the original post and find out it was covered by their insurance. It looks like Mercedes did a ****ty design with little shielding on the battery pack, a less Tesla learned back in 2015. Cost of the battery was significantly impacted by the lack of domestic availability of the battery in the U.S. and they had to ship it from Germany to complete the repair.

Also, Mercedes needs to re-think their undercarriage shielding strategy.

https://forum.leasehackr.com/t/my-eqs-mess-50k-battery-replacement/474381/119

Two of the top 3, and the top overall spot, for consumer brand satisfaction are exclusively EV manufacturers.

NEWS: Tesla has the 3rd highest owner satisfaction rating, according to a new Consumer reports survey.

Tesla also ranked #2 in ownership cost, #2 in most satisfying driving (behind Porsche) and #2 in cabin storage. pic.twitter.com/nPo5KY6Ypq

— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) December 6, 2024

MaxPower said:

---

Surprised it isn't covered by warranty but yes this should at least be something considered by a buyer. If you are the type of person to keep a car for a decade then it may not be right for you. Prices for battery replacement should go down as more cars get on the road and people get used to replacing them but it's all speculation as to how much.

---

My look at it was the used car market.

There are plenty of 10-20 year old vehicles on the road.

Having to replace a battery that costs $10K might might make prospective buyers hesitant.

Kansas Kid said:

---

bobbranco said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Surprised it isn't covered by warranty but yes this should at least be something considered by a buyer. If you are the type of person to keep a car for a decade then it may not be right for you. Prices for battery replacement should go down as more cars get on the road and people get used to replacing them but it's all speculation as to how much.

---

It wouldn't be a warranty issue but it should be covered by insurance.

---

Auto insurance that people buy currently?

or

Battery insurance?

If it's the former screw that idea.

---

Why? I know you hate EVs but why would auto insurance in any world not cover part of the vehicle other than windshields which in some states is a separate add on. It would also be priced into the insurance which is based on actuarial studies so it would be baked into the cost of insurance.

---

Why would insurance cover replacement of a battery?

It doesn't cover replacement of any other part of the car unless it is damaged in an accident,

In the posted story the battery was damaged by an object hit by the vehicle.

Teslag said:

---

In the posted story the battery was damaged by an object hit by the vehicle.

---

Ah...

I looked at the whole post and didn't see that.

Thanks.

And after a battery replacement please don't park one in a dwelling garage like this plano family found out. What a process; fire department had to cover it, drag it out into the street, then jack it up while ablaze to blast the battery with water for hours.

Quote:

---

"They got pretty aggressive with the hose lines. They got some spreaders underneath the vehicle and were able to elevate one side of the vehicle kind of jack it up on one side, like to change in the tire," Daly said. "By this time they were fighting a fire and putting the water directly on the battery underneath the car."
Those lithium-ion batteries used to power Teslas and other electric vehicles have been in the headlines this year after several reports of EV's spontaneously catching on fire. There's not much data on how frequently it happens.

But Daly said his department has done trainings on how to properly respond.

"The firefighting is very different. It's really just cooling and containing," he said.

The car's owner told WFAA that they had just gotten a new battery from the Plano Tesla service center just hours before the fire. WFAA's Janel Forte went to the service center to ask about what happened, managers there declined to comment.

Plano Fire says they're working to learn what went wrong.

"No cause right now at all. Still very much early and under investigation. The only thing that that we know is that it was, you know, electric vehicle and we had to get on that battery," said Daly.

Fortunately, there were no serious injuries, although the car owner did have to get checked out for smoke inhalation. Fire officials said there was some smoke damage to the home, but no fire damage, and a second car in the garage was also not damaged. Friday contractors were at the home cleaning up the mess.

---

That story is a year old

Correct.

So hundreds of thousands of teslas sold in the past year and the most recent story you could find of this common occurring problem that happens every day was a year ago?

Again, your attempts to divine my communication/intent simply fail. Yet again I'm not trying to communicate or convince you of anything. Harp on about whatever irrelevant tangent you want, just leave me out of it, please.

Just post recent relevant information. It's not hard. Should be Tesla fire stories burning down homes every day I'm guessing.

No, yet again, I am not posting at your command/wishes, nor did I make the claims you have now twice lied about this morning ("daily").

So you couldn't find one of this common occurrence happening in the past week? The past month? The past two months?