The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) says that with the growing popularity of EVs, it is becoming clear that they are inherently safer than gas-powered vehicles. This is becoming increasingly apparent as more EVs hit the market.

Teslag said:

---

https://kfoxtv.com/news/instagram/el-paso-fire-department-tackles-condition-2-fire-on-totonaca-lane-no-injuries-reported

Another one. Ban ice now.

EPFD said the fire started in a car and made its way to the home.

Quote:

---

"My son called us that smoke was coming out of his car. He went to the neighbor's house by the time that he came back from the neighbor's, the car was on fire, and the garage was on fire. When we drove up we drove up to all this," said Ronnie Delgadillo.

---

---

The last car fire that I'm personally aware of was an ICE car that caught fire due to it's little starting battery.

Aggie Apotheosis said:

---

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) says that with the growing popularity of EVs, it is becoming clear that they are inherently safer than gas-powered vehicles. This is becoming increasingly apparent as more EVs hit the market.

---

Yep. The people who stand to lose the most money seem to have no issue. Maybe they should set premiums by click bait articles instead of actuaries.

5.8 million Kias and Hyundais recalled after thousands of car fires reported.

Kia and Hyundai recall

Exactly. The actuaries are going to start looking at the payouts and they'll see an uptick in payouts due to electric battery fires. If it is moving the needle, then it will affect the rates and the coverage. That's what I'm asking not whether a one off event would cause a change.

A decent actuary would have already noticed a trend. The problem is there just isn't one. EV fires are statistically irrelevant.

We're not talking about on the road. We're talking about causing a fire in a garage when it's charging or parked and destroying a home.

Teslag said:

---

A decent actuary would have already noticed a trend. The problem is there just isn't one. EV fires are statistically irrelevant.

---

Is this your opinion or are you stating this is a fact because you studied the numbers and the data is actually been collected over the last few years that show what you're saying?

Then the federal government will come in and declare that state boards can't discriminate against EV owners by charging higher homeowner premiums if you got an Ev.

Reinsurers already mad because they getting jacked with on the covid deaths.

They jimmy-jobbed the numbers for two years now and they coming to the realization.

We about to see some sort of action for big insco to recover those losses. In fact theres already been rumbling of it.

By the way, I'm not saying there is an issue because I don't have the data or statistics that prove one way or another. I'm just asking the question?

Per the NTSB EV's have a fire rate of 0.3% per 100,000 compared to 1.05% per 100,000 for ICE.

Teslag said:

---

Per the NTSB EV's have a fire rate of 0.3% per 100,000 compared to 1.05% per 100,000 for ICE.

---

I'm talking about in the garage specifically where they're charging or not charging. I don't care about on the open road. These are two different arguments.

Well we've had two major manufacturers specifically warn you not to park their ice vehicles in a garage. What does that tell you?

The Dodge Ram of EVs

Quote:

---

fire rate of 0.3%

---

Is it fair to say the risk of an EV fire and the risk of dying of covid are the same?

Teslag said:

---

Well we've had two major manufacturers specifically warn you not to park their ice vehicles in a garage. What does that tell you?

---

It tells me you didn't answer his question.

That was an LPG car filling up in Uzbekistan. It's like you people don't even try anymore.

Teslag said:

---

Well we've had two major manufacturers specifically warn you not to park their ice vehicles in a garage. What does that tell you?

---

You do understand that the ICE isn't the cause of any of these fires. Specifically in the case of the Ford/Lincoln recalls it was the possible BATTERY sensor damage during servicing. Easily fixed by installing a fuse.

HarryJ33tamu said:

---

---

Holy ****, that was brutal!!

Yet those are necessary components of the ICE power plant are they not?

snowdog90 said:

---

HarryJ33tamu said:

---

---

Holy ****, that was brutal!!

---

Yep. More reason we should ban ICE vehicles. That man would still be alive it were an EV.

No EVs for me.

I'll be 100% good with one of these normally aspirated, 4 litre manual shift machines.

Teslag said:

---

Yet those are necessary components of the ICE power plant are they not?

---

Yes, just like sensors in the EVs. And it was not a common occurrence.

You're conflating this in comparing to the fires caused by lithium batteries.

Everything under the hood of an ice bomb is on the table. Another point for EV's is the lack of extra parts and points of failure, as we routinely see in these catastrophic ice vehicle fires.

Teslag said:

---

AgBandsman said:

---

Teslag said:

---

https://www.khou.com/article/news/local/sugar-land-car-house-fire/285-d55134fd-9cab-4ac9-b7c2-9c0d8cf89c9a

ICE vehicles are so dangerous that they can burn your house down even if parked OUTSIDE the garage.

Quote:

---

Sugar Land police said the fire started when a 2023 Range Rover SUV parked outside the home caught fire and spread to the garage. This happened as the family had just fallen asleep upstairs.

---

---

ICE vehicles catch fire from improper engineering and can be fixed with recalls.

EV's catch fire because of the nature of EV's. There's no recall that can prevent one from exploding.

edit: from the article, "KHOU 11 learned there was a recall issued back in April on the same model for a missing gasket on an oil drain pipe that could lead to a fire."

---

What a load of garbage

---

How is it garbage? It's apt to the discussion, and correct.

CDUB98 said:

---

But if it saves just one CO2 molecule.

---

Ironically the fire that it created probably generated the amount of CO2 that 100 ICE cars would make in one year

Why do you come on every thread critical of EV's? Are you paid to do this?

geoag58 said:

---

Why do you come on every thread critical of EV's? Are you paid to do this?

---

It's a political message board. The point is back and forth and debate. If you don't want that just say so.

These threads are never stated by EV drivers. Are they paid by the oil companies?

An engineering expert witness I know in the battery arena said based on data from the last two years EV's are 3.2 times more likely to catch on fires than an ICE vehicle. So for every 1 ICE vehicle fire there are 3.2 EV vehicle fires. Sounds about right.

Lone Stranger said:

---

An engineering expert witness I know in the battery arena said based on data from the last two years EV's are 3.2 times more likely to catch on fires than an ICE vehicle. So for every 1 ICE vehicle fire there are 3.2 EV vehicle fires. Sounds about right.

---

George Wilbur?

Lone Stranger said:

---

An engineering expert witness I know in the battery arena said based on data from the last two years EV's are 3.2 times more likely to catch on fires than an ICE vehicle. So for every 1 ICE vehicle fire there are 3.2 EV vehicle fires. Sounds about right.

---

Well, kind of. The difference is the sheer numbers of ICEs compared to EVs.

Jack Squat 83 said:

---

Look out we're about to get 1000 words telling us how uncommon this is. There must be a meeting this morning.

---

And that:

1. It was the homeowner's fault. He or she should have both an EV and an ICE vehicle and on this particular occasion should have parked the EV at least 300 yards away, depending on wind speed and direction. Think Walmart parking lot. On days and nights when the EV is not going to catch on fire, it is ok to park it in the garage.
2. EV manufacturers built this susceptibility to fire into the vehicles, part of the design. During winter, the fire can help warm the house.
3. Additionally, parents can use the fire to roast marshmallows with their children, hence planned family time not available for ICE vehicles.
4. This planned fire feature will result in job creation for malnourished kids in the Congo as more raw materials will need to be mined, thus providing an economic boost.
5. Free training for fire departments is a side benefit to these fires. The training will be useful in the future as more and more dweebs buy EVs.
6. The EV fires can save homeowners a lot in property taxes as fires destroy the garage and possibly part of the house. The reduction in square footage is a nice bonus come property tax time.

Lone Stranger said:

---

An engineering expert witness I know in the battery arena said based on data from the last two years EV's are 3.2 times more likely to catch on fires than an ICE vehicle. So for every 1 ICE vehicle fire there are 3.2 EV vehicle fires. Sounds about right.

---

Was his name George Glass?

richardag said:

---

Lone Stranger said:

---

An engineering expert witness I know in the battery arena said based on data from the last two years EV's are 3.2 times more likely to catch on fires than an ICE vehicle. So for every 1 ICE vehicle fire there are 3.2 EV vehicle fires. Sounds about right.

---

Well, kind of. The difference is the sheer numbers of ICEs compared to EVs.

---

That's why the NTSB publishes the numbers in per 100,000 rates. And it overwhelmingly shows ICE bombs to be more fire prone.