return to table of content

Fewer people are buying electric cars

outlace
169 replies
3h48m

EV’s currently make the most sense for people who own a single family home or otherwise live in a community with readily available near-home chargers, where EV’s are on average more convenient than gas cars. People who rely on street parking and apartment dwellers would likely find EV’s more inconvenient than a gas car.

We may be close to saturating the market for the former group.

Another factor that could be at play is that all the non-Tesla EV makers have recently announced they will switch their chargers to NACS, but this will take a couple of years to roll out, so it’s not a great time to buy a non-Tesla since it already has legacy charging hardware.

atestu
114 replies
3h25m

I'm in that first group and I don't see how it makes the most sense. They are not more convenient. I can "charge" my gas car in 2 minutes basically anywhere in the country.

I'm going on vacation next week, driving with 2 young children. It'll be about a 11 hour drive which is not crazy for a US vacation. I don't want to plan where I stop and stop for 45 minutes to fuel up with 2 toddlers in the car.

And they're all much more expensive than a nice 5 year old gas car.

pentae
29 replies
2h42m

I feel the same way and after speaking with many EV people i've realised the main benefit is how cheap they are to run. This comes down to the increase in efficiency compared to an ICE - ~80% of the battery energy finds its way to the wheels on EV's, vs ~30% on an ICE. If you live somewhere where electric costs are very low then a 0 to full charge your EV costs about $10. (Someone please correct me if i'm off on this one)

Depending on your mileage, by saving $3k-$4k a year on gas theres certainly a case to be made for an EV being a more sensible financial decision in the long term especially given government tax incentives

One of the biggest reason for the massive disparity in efficiency on EV's is due to regenerative braking (16-25%). So what's interesting is when you compare an EV to a Hybrid ICE vehicle then the efficiency disparity becomes a lot less and you still have the benefit of being able to take long trips and not needing a home charger.

Anyone thats driven a Hybrid Toyota will tell you that fuel consumption is dramatically less, in my real world scenarios I use about 2.5x less gas in something like a Toyota Corolla Cross compared to my not overly thirsty ICE BMW.

Another benefit to Hybrids is they only require a ~1kWh battery instead of needing a huge 60-70kWh battery like an EV. So you could create 60 or 70 hybrid vehicles for the same amount of lithium mining as one EV.

One has to wonder why the governments aren't just pushing everyone into Hybrids instead of EV's? If a young person was asking me to recommend a car and they didn't have a home charger I wouldn't hesitate to recommend something like a new Toyota HEV / Honda e:hev - they are basically an EV with an on-board Atkinson engine as a powerplant.

blue_cadet_3
7 replies
2h22m

If you live somewhere where electric costs are very low then a 0 to full charge your EV costs about $10.

I rented a Tesla Model 3 recently. From 40% to 98% cost me $7 CAD and I was able to drive from Vancouver to Tacoma, WA on a single charge and arrived with 20% battery. In the Seattle suburbs it cost a bit more, $13 USD, to go from 20% to 90% due to a supercharger station having issues so demand was higher at the next closest one.

$7 to go 175mi(283km) sold me on an EV as my next car. I never felt like I would be stranded and when the battery is conditioned for fast charging by time you pop in somewhere to use the bathroom and grab a coffee or snacks you're pretty much good to go.

strunz
5 replies
1h41m

by time you pop in somewhere to use the bathroom and grab a coffee or snacks you're pretty much good to go.

I really think these comments are just EV driver rationalization. You really spend 30-45 minutes at a rest stop on road trips? When we take road trips we spend almost no time stopped. Even if we're eating, it's in the car. I can't even imagine stopping multiple times for 30-45 minutes to recharge, that is not the same as "going to the bathroom and grabbing a snack". That takes like 5 mins tops, the rest is just wasting time you could be on the road.

cjcenizal
1 replies
1h23m

I think the point is that one group of people is imagining a change and saying, “That change will be intolerable!” And then another group is actually experiencing the change and saying, “Hey, it’s actually pretty good.” You won’t know how you really feel about it until you try it yourself, and speculating about the second group won’t net you any benefit.

j4yav
0 replies
37m

It’s quite simple really, there’s a wrong group who disagrees with me, and a right one who agrees. Not sure what all the debate is about to be honest.

cromka
0 replies
1h29m

20 minutes every 6 hours is absolutely minimum for me, if not more often. That’s to stretch, relax, walk around. I don’t know anyone who doesn’t do that. But this is in Europe where distances are smaller.

Pet_Ant
0 replies
1h29m

Seriously? If I take a shit, it's more than 5 minutes itself. Waiting in line to buy coffee or a donut, let alone eat (I guess if you are in a real hurry eat in your car, but don't you want a break???). Just doing a lap of the parking lot to stretch my legs. Even if that's just 25 minutes, that's still quite a bit of charge. That said I'll still choose a bus or train over a car trip any day I can, but yeah..

Eggpants
0 replies
43m

45 minutes is only if you are trying to charge over 80% which you don’t actually want to do. Unlike gas tanks that have a consistent fill rate, batteries are like a sponge where near empty the charge/fill rate is much much faster than when it’s nearly full. 20% to 80% is about 10 /15 minutes depending on how new the super charger station is. This gives you about another 3 hours of normal highway driving or so depending on conditions like temperature, 70mph+ and how hilly/windy the drive is. However, if you time the stop around meal times then you can take 45 minutes to charge to fill while you are eating at a restaurant.

Sadly, it is true most non Tesla chargers are terrible and require you make an account/give up personal information first and are not maintained well. Tesla does as well but the stations are maintained and the account signup happens when you buy the car so you just plug it in and charge.

There needs to be a just a pay and fill chargers like gas pumps but that doesn’t fly with todays VC vultures.

Electrify America was built by Volkswagen as punishment for the diesel scandal. They have zero interest in maintaining them.

brailsafe
0 replies
50m

I also usually rent a car for the same trip, but am quite happy to continue renting every single time. $150 for the couple of days I usually leave for, maybe at most 3 times a year, and maybe $80 in gas. Saves me like $2000/year minimum. Buying a car hasn't seemed sensible since moving to Vancouver, because the transit is so good, and I'm not rich and don't want the liability of owning one when the job market disappears (now).

Not that there aren't reasons to own one here mind you, surely a long and unwieldy commute might do it, but then you're probably in Delta or a suburb, which was my situation when I last had one; after it was crashed, I just didn't buy another and realized that I used it more because I had it rather than having it to help me go distances I'd need to anyway.

recursive
4 replies
2h39m

i've realised the main benefit is how cheap they are to run

Depends what you value. For me, that's a nice to have. Greater benefits are: never go to a gas station, no oil changes, no fumes, more fun to drive.

Rumudiez
2 replies
1h30m

more fun to drive

I’d argue the opposite, but it’s certainly subjective. Driving my sister’s Model 3 was leagues below my cheap little BRZ, and it’s still slower than my motorcycles if I want to accelerate fast. The suspension is crap. Body roll was astoundingly bad and the front end doesn’t want to push you through corners when trail braking. I was excited to drive it, but after 500 miles of backroads and open freeway I firmly believe a cheap sports car is a much better driving experience.

recursive
0 replies
1h22m

I've never driven a cheap sports car, so I might agree with you. However, my subjective take is, between otherwise similar non-sports cars, the EV is more fun to drive. For a few reasons, I can't realistically have a purely fun car at the moment.

chokolad
0 replies
24m

BRZ/GR86 are ridiculously fun to drive. There is just no comparison in that price range, other than Miata.

conk
0 replies
2h0m

IMO the lack of fumes/exhaust is my favorite part of owning an EV. Sure there are some downsides with EVs (more expensive to buy, less range, lack of public charging infrastructure) but those don’t impact me and I’d gladly take the negatives for a car that doesn’t smell every time I park it in my garage.

m_mueller
2 replies
2h10m

Anyone thats driven a Hybrid Toyota will tell you that fuel consumption is dramatically less, in my real world scenarios I use about 2.5x less gas in something like a Toyota Corolla Cross compared to my not overly thirsty ICE BMW.

well that depends on the ICE car and your driving behaviour. E.g. VW group turbo 4 cylinders from ~5y ago are very efficient. I drive a 5yo Seat Leon ST (basically like a slightly smaller Golf Variant, e.g. a typical European hatchback), and mostly at highway speeds with some mountain driving also. With this I get ~45-47mpg or ~5.0-5.2l/100km. A hybrid would maybe get me up to 50mpg but not much more, as highway speeds are not really where they gain you much. They're great for the occasional shopping run, but where I live those are max. 20min driving both ways, so not that much of an impact either.

pentae
0 replies
1h31m

Absolutely! But most ICE vehicles people drive don’t get anywhere near that type of mileage because we tend to be buying much larger heavier cars. Hybrids help a lot of people get god level mpg and the reduced running costs without needing to go all in on electric

fho
0 replies
37m

As "someone with a Toyota hybrid": I consistently use about 1l/100km than that. (The dash keeps a "best milage" number, which is 3.8l/100km for me right now.

At some point it becomes bike shedding, but a 20% reduction (from 5l to 4l) is still impressive to me.

danans
2 replies
58m

If you live somewhere where electric costs are very low then a 0 to full charge your EV costs about $10.

It's not that simple because "full" means something very different in a Cybertruck (123kWh battery) vs a base Ioniq 6 (53kWh battery).

Likewise the fuel economy is dramatically different with the Cybertruck at 2 miles/kWh Vs the Ioniq 6 at 4.6 miles/kWh.

Assuming a cheap electricity rate of $.15/kWh, the Cybertruck will cost $.07/mile to drive.

The Ioniq will cost $.03/mile.

The regular hybrid Prius gets 56 mpg. At the cheapest current (i.e. Texas) gas price of $3/gallon, it would cost $.05/mile to operate.

It will be far less performant than either the Cybertruck or the Ioniq 6, though.

One of the biggest reason for the massive disparity in efficiency on EV's is due to regenerative braking (16-25%). So what's interesting is when you compare an EV to a Hybrid ICE vehicle then the efficiency disparity becomes a lot less and you still have the benefit of being able to take long trips and not needing a home charger.

The disparity is still around 28%, which when talking about efficiency is pretty big.

Another benefit to Hybrids is they only require a ~1kWh battery instead of needing a huge 60-70kWh battery like an EV. So you could create 60 or 70 hybrid vehicles for the same amount of lithium mining as one EV. > One has to wonder why the governments aren't just pushing everyone into Hybrids instead of EV's?

We aren't lithium constrained, we are battery manufacturing capacity constrained. One goal of the IRA (and its EV incentives) is stimulating the build-out of a domestic battery manufacturing supply chain. That battery production capacity is a strategic asset, not just for cars, but also for stationary storage. It's a win-win for energy security and decarbonization.

There are also plugin hybrids that use smaller batteries, but let you use either/both electricity and gasoline (albeit with an efficiency penalty on both drivetrains).

Also, 67% of Americans live in single family homes (mostly suburbia), many with an electrical outlet near their parking spot that they can use to charge their cars. These are also the people who drive the most on a per capita basis.

If a young person was asking me to recommend a car and they didn't have a home charger I wouldn't hesitate to recommend something like a new Toyota HEV / Honda e:hev - they are basically an EV with an on-board Atkinson engine as a powerplant.

Depends on the young person. For one thing, I wouldn't recommend that any young person buy a new car unless they are very financially comfortable. But if you don't have a home charger (or nearby DC fast charging) it's not a matter of a recommendation, but rather a physical requirement to get an ICE car, so it might as well be a hybrid.

tsimionescu
1 replies
26m

The Cybertruck is a bad example, being a car that doesn't really exist (they've sold what, a hundred cars?) and that has at best a tiny niche market (man children living their boyhood dreams of driving a Transformer).

danans
0 replies
10m

The Cybertruck is a bad example, being a car that doesn't really exist (they've sold what, a hundred cars?)

Then sub the F150 Lightning or the Rivian and you'll get basically the same numbers.

and that has at best a tiny niche market (man children living their boyhood dreams of driving a Transformer)

I agree with the customer characterization (although I suspect that number of such people out there is higher) and from an efficiency perspective it's just as bad as it's more conventional looking EV truck competitors.

coryfklein
2 replies
39m

EVs are still solidly in the "luxury" category; they're specifically being sold to folks who are not paying attention to the price at the pump in the first place. So I don't understand why "they save you money" is even a selling point at all right now.

Once you see folks replacing their beat-up 1992 Honda Civic with EVs then you'll know that "they save you money" is actually a thing.

jes5199
0 replies
11m

I have a 2021 Chevy Bolt, it is not a luxury car, it was hella cheap. My sister-in-law drives for Uber/Lyft and bought a Tesla model 3 because the total cost of ownership is lower than any gas car

bluGill
0 replies
4m

A lot of people have weird budgets. So they will think nothing of $1000/month for a car payment, but complain about gas prices that work out to $100/month. They rarely consider that they could get better mileage luxury car for similar monthly payments but using a lot less gas.

Which is to say I do know people who complain about gas prices on their luxury cars.

skwirl
1 replies
1h12m

the main benefit is how cheap they are to run

This is a pretty weak main benefit as ICE cars are already cheap to run. At 12k miles/year, 30 MPG, and $3.20/gallon you are only talking $1300/year in fuel.

According to AAA, taking fuel, maintenance, repair, and tires into account someone driving 15k miles a year would only save $330. Given the cost premium on an EV over a comparable ICE car, I’m not sure you would ever come out ahead, although the cost gap is admittedly shrinking.

shagie
0 replies
40m

There's a section on XKCD 980's chart for that - https://xkcd.com/980/huge/#x=-2004&y=-6294&z=6

While it's a bit dated, you can see the parts with the cost difference and the "if gas was this much".

You can see some things like the Honda Insight (hybrid) has a slightly lower 5 year cost of ownership than the Honda Fit (ICE).

It would be curious to do an update of that part of the chart for current models.

phpisthebest
1 replies
1h45m

I tend to keep my Vehicles longer than most people, currently I drive a 2015 model.

All that savings goes out the window if I am hit with with $40,000 to $60,000 repair bill to change the battery, even if my entire drive chain goes out in my ICE I am looking at probably $5,000 and that rarely happens.

batteries 100% will need replaced, and ICE can go decades with no major issues

lanstin
0 replies
7m

Except global warming.

mushufasa
0 replies
2h24m

I think the savings argument often misses the context of discount rate: the NPV of the savings is a lot less than the total savings, especially with high interest rates.

insane_dreamer
0 replies
2m

If you live somewhere where electric costs are very low then a 0 to full charge your EV costs about $10. (Someone please correct me if i'm off on this one)

Our utility offers very cheap prices at night, so our Tesla 3 costs $2.25 to fully charge vs. $55-70 for our Forester.

Also, maintenance is cheaper on EVs.

fho
0 replies
31m

As "somebody who just bought a 2013 Toyota Yaris Hybrid":

Full EVs are for some selected few... Here in Germany it's just homeowners with PV already installed. I did the math before deciding on the hybrid and literally everybody else is paying more for electricity (at 0.4€/kWh) and is producing more CO2 (at avg. 400g/kWh).

I really pity the guys in their Dacia Spring SUVs in the supermarket parking lots (at 0.6€/kWh) who bought a EV to "do the right thing" here.

(That said, that's a problem very unique to Germany ... Most countries around us have cheaper electricity and a smaller CO2 footprint per kWh.)

bragr
18 replies
3h15m

I don't want to plan where I stop and stop for 45 minutes to fuel up with 2 toddlers in the car.

With fast charging you typically only stop for 15-25 minutes, the infotainment or app does the planning for you, and the frequency you'll have to stop at matches the natural frequency people typically need to stop anyways by design.

serial_dev
12 replies
2h56m

"It only takes 5x longer to charge at some specific charging stations that may or may not be conveniently located for your trip, I don't know what's the big deal"

I can see how EV cars are good options for people who live in the city and only go grocery shopping, but for people who have family scattered around the country / continent with young children or babies, it sounds extremely inconvenient.

jewayne
4 replies
2h39m

I have personally found Supercharging to be too fast at times. Multiple times I've had to unplug and move the car because it finished charging before I was ready to leave the restaurant/store. I think people underestimate how long they spend stopped on road trips.

serial_dev
3 replies
2h29m

I've had to unplug and move the car because it finished charging before I was ready to leave the restaurant/store

And you bring this up as an advantage of EVs, it's mind blowing.

jewayne
1 replies
2h20m

Not so much an advantage, but a counterpoint to the misinformation that says EVs take 45+ minutes to charge on a Level 3 charger. And also to counter the false belief (present only in EV debates, strangely enough) that the average stop on a road trip is ~2 minutes.

serial_dev
0 replies
1h56m

Agree, the average stop is not 2 minutes even with a car, it's not what I was saying. I'm saying that quite often, though, it is really only 2 minutes, and in my opinion, in those scenarios having to deal with a 20 min forced wait time is annoying, and people insisting that "having a nice meal next to the Supercharger" is a valid counterargument is annoying.

Sure, if EVs work out for you, that's awesome, but let's not pretend that the 20 minutes wait time cannot be a disadvantage for some people.

hombre_fatal
0 replies
2h7m

As opposed to taking so long that you can go shopping and have a sit down restaurant meal?

LeafItAlone
2 replies
2h46m

That’s disingenuous because while pumping gas you remain with the vehicle (because it’s quick). With charging an EV, you charge while going inside to use the bathroom and get food. Provided there are available chargers and it is as convenient of an experience as a Tesla charging in a Supercharger, it’s very quick to set up. I drive a lot by myself and can see the convenience of popping it on a charger while running in. I am in and out very quickly, but even that short time can add reasonable distance. With small children it takes longer and you get more of a charge.

serial_dev
1 replies
2h34m

It's not disingenuous at all, in fact I think your argument (that I hear over and over again) is misleading or missing the point completely.

Sure, if you need to charge exactly when your family gets hungry or tired and you happen to be exactly at a Supercharger, and the restaurant is exactly the kind of restaurant you like, it's not worse (but not better either) than traditional cars. If any of those conditions are not met, it's now an inconvenience charging your car.

In my experience (Europe), you can't really drive longer than 10 minutes without passing by a petrol station, and you can put gas in your car, pay, and leave easily under five minutes. Then, if everyone in the car feels like it, you can drive again for hours. If someone wants to eat, you can look up which restaurant you want to go to, and stop there. Eat your sandwiches at the top of the mountain while the sun is shining! Or pick anything else you want, Thai, local, Burger King, or get some snacks at a supermarket. ! I can decide which restaurant I go to or where I take my 30 min break, and it is not decided for me by the charger network.

LeafItAlone
0 replies
2h9m

Doesn’t sound like an EV is going to fit in the exact experience you want. That’s ok.

I don’t have an EV, but do drive long distances a lot. I regularly drive for six hours without stopping. I have been scoping out the feasibility of getting an EV and it seems that the Long Range style vehicles would just almost fit into my traveling without any disruption.

To each their own.

s3p
0 replies
2h47m

Sigh. As someone who just made two different 27 hour drives across the country in the last 6 months, I can tell you this is completely fine. Driving on major US highways you will always be able to plan it out and find one. Plus, I took longer breaks of that size anyway because every 2-3 hours I needed to get out of the car and stretch. Having forced time to get out of the car for a longer trip would have been beneficial for me.

pr0zac
0 replies
1h46m

Interesting that you and I evaluated who EVs are good options for completely differently. I've considered getting one for many years but only felt doing so made sense now that I'm moving out of the city to the country in a few weeks.

It never made sense before because I didn't have anywhere to plug an EV in nor did I want the hassle of street parking two vehicles. I have a 4x4 for offroading, mountain biking, and other weekend trips but getting around town on bike/foot/transit was faster day to day.

Now that I have a house and land getting an EV as a daily driver for the 20 to 100 mile round trips I take into town/the city actually makes sense since I have plenty of space to keep multiple cars, can install the necessary charging (and solar) equipment, and don't want to die riding my bicycle on unlit country roads.

meroes
0 replies
2h12m

I drove Chicago->SF recently. I had to stop for bathroom breaks before gas ran out. And then you might as well fill up the gas and get something to eat. And you should stretch your legs for 5-10 min. Oh what do you know, by now my EV has enough miles to do the same all over again in about 300 miles. And I made the trip in 2 LONG days (36 hours of driving). And EV would not have slowed me down on this breakneck pace. I have no idea where all these families are road tripping off to who have to beat some world record time.

abenga
0 replies
2h42m

Can one drive continuously without rest stops for more than a couple of hours with children in the car? Even when I'm driving alone, 2 hours is absolutely the limit before my knees force me to stop and stretch my legs for a bit. As long as the charging locations are numerous enough and have all the facilities that people with many children need, isn't it easier to just do both at once? If there are not enough reliable charging points with restaurants, bathrooms, etc., I understand your objection.

volkk
4 replies
2h42m

this isn't quite accurate. fast charging isn't available everywhere. did a road trip within california a few years ago and our model 3 ruined our trip on the drive from yosemite to sequoia national park. fast chargers became non existant to the point where we had to stop for 2 hours to wait for some low charge place to get us to 40% so we could make it to the next fast charging place.

i'm sure happy path traveling is great, but it becomes stressful as hell very quickly

LargeWu
2 replies
2h28m

Right. It's the situation where if everything goes well it's wonderful, but if not it's hell. Until level-3 chargers are available every 25 miles EV's aren't viable for long-distance travel.

"I did a long trip no problem", you say.

Would that have been as pleasant if 10x the number of electric cars were on the road? If you had to wait 45 minutes for a charger to become available due to demand? I doubt it. I have an EV (not a Tesla, one on the CHAdeMO standard) and I love, love, love it for driving around the city, but I don't dare take it on longer trips. Even doing a lot of driving in a single day is dicey in the winter.

Until the charging network is as ubiquitous and reliable as gasoline pumps, EV's will remain a niche.

shagie
1 replies
2h6m

"Next gas {100+} miles" is a reminder for some cars to fill up their tank... and a significant obstacle for many EVs.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=5335.0

(I once paid close to $10 USD / gallon (after converting from cpl) diving from Banff to Jasper at a station that had 4 pumps and on that day, a 10 minute wait to get to one of the pumps)

jcranmer
0 replies
1h28m

Random off-topic comment, but I like this quote in that thread:

the road, at the beginning, should be signed with "speed limit enforced by unmarked frost heaves".
frumper
0 replies
2h11m

Maybe you did this many years ago, but looking at that route there are superchargers dotted all along that route.

christiangenco
13 replies
2h3m

My wife and I own a single family home, a gas-powered car (Toyota Rav4), and an electric car (a standard range Tesla model 3). The electric car is much more convenient for us for city driving and the gas-powered car is much more convenient for road trips.

Refuelling the Rav4 is an errand that takes time, planning, and mental energy. For my wife it's also a low-level danger: women find gas stations spooky, apparently.

Refuelling the Tesla is automatic and effortless. After you park at home, if the charge is <40% then plug it in. The next time you need to drive somewhere it will be full. It took me an afternoon hanging out with my electrician cousin and about $400 in parts from Amazon to build our own at-home electric refuelling station.

Road trips with the Tesla, however, are currently impractical: we end up adding another ~30% to the drive time. With only a ~220 mile range the Tesla needs to stop about every 150 miles for 40 minutes which is brutal. Range anxiety also becomes a much bigger factor driving through more rural areas and your route choices weigh supercharger locations above everything else.

We've got used to the self driving convenience of the Tesla but the Comma[1] on our Rav4 is just about as good for highway driving.

1. https://comma.ai/

coryfklein
5 replies
43m

It took me an afternoon hanging out with my electrician cousin and about $400 in parts from Amazon to build our own at-home electric refuelling station.

This is a big reason I haven't even considered an EV. How I'd find someone to do this work on my garage, and how much it would cost is a huge unknown, and that's just enough friction to simply not consider getting an EV.

My vehicles are first and foremost utilitarian; I use them to get from A to B. EVs make that simple equation "complicated", and I have other issues maintaining a household that demand my attention.

turtlebits
0 replies
4m

Plug it into any AC outlet. I gain around 50 miles overnight, which is plenty for my commute/errands.

justsomeoldguy
0 replies
33m

it depends on how much charging you want. all EV's can charge off of a slower 115vac 15amp circuit. At my last place I had a dedicated 40amp 230vac socket much like you'd have installed for a big electric heater in a garage or a pool heater or a dryer. Good recharge times which I actually have only needed once in my life.

At my current place I'm just using an extension cord to my outdoor outlet and I give it the 1500 watt option. You can even cut that in half if you don't want the "my this cord is warm.." effect.

In the end, the slower charge is the better charge, so my laziness has been winning. I don't see installing a 230vac socket any time soon given how well it's been working.

I've got an older phev that originally only got 14 miles of pure electric @ up to 79 mph, it's battery is down to about 9 miles expected. And that isn't a lot, but it is enough for 90% of my trips around town. Where you REALLY see this working well is if you have to go out every day to pick something or someone up locally. The amount of fuel burned on warmup cycles and local trips is not insubstantial.

The gas tank needle just LOVES to move with every small trip otherwise.

I sometimes go months without buying gas using that tiny miniscule range.

insane_dreamer
0 replies
5m

How I'd find someone to do this work on my garage, and how much it would cost is a huge unknown, and that's just enough friction to simply not consider getting an EV.

Car dealerships will sell the hookups and have connections with local companies who will install for you. No effort required on your part .

UniverseHacker
0 replies
37m

I suppose it depends on the length of your commute and what vehicle, but I’ve found that a standard Level 1 charger plugged into a regular outlet, if plugged in all of the time, was more than enough for daily EV commuting. Slow charging is also better for the battery. A lot of people likely don’t need a high powered charger install.

AtlasBarfed
0 replies
33m

Charging at home is difficult compared to driving to a gas station?

This is all moot. Sodium ion and lfp and newer battery techs will increase range and drop the initial purchase price of EVs under what an ICE can compete with

Some snap in time clickbait article won't change the technological tsunami. Even if the US drags it's feet, the rest of the world will eagerly adopt them. EVs promise energy independent and cheap transport combined with wind / solar.

Every automaker knows this to differing levels of organizational denial, but they all feel it coming.

tannedNerd
2 replies
1h2m

I have a SR+ and have done about a dozen trips from Lake Tahoe to San Diego and back about 10 hours in a ICE car and 11.25 in my SR+

You really should never be charging past 70% (the exception being before climbing in sub freezing temps in the sierras) on road trips and instead plan to make much shorter charging stops more often. I’m normally out of a supercharger in 15-20 min if I precondition the battery before charging and it’s about the time my wife needs to stop for a pee break anyways so it’s kinda great to stop. Use the restroom and be ready to go again. If you are charging 45 min you are doing it so wrong.

Solvency
1 replies
5m

This entire idea just underscores the inane mental burden for the average person just to drive their car long distance.

jewayne
0 replies
2m

Maybe it would be, if the Tesla nav system didn't do most of that work for me.

citrusybread
2 replies
43m

ith only a ~220 mile range the Tesla needs to stop about every 150 miles for 40 minutes which is brutal.

If you ask my Eastern Europe wife, that's pretty much the way she needs to road trip lol. I think if we get it to 3hrs / 15 minutes break it would be perfect. 240km/40 minutes is a bit of a reach.

scarby2
0 replies
7m

this is how i road trip generally. i almost never drive more than 3 hours without stopping for coffee/lunch/dinner. And if its more than 300 miles 90% of the time i'm going to fly.

Any time i'm road tripping more than 3 hours i'm trying to find some cute little town along the way to stop in at. Usually these cute little towns have chargers.

bluGill
0 replies
7m

Your doctor will tell you stop more often than that. I haven't been able to find anything official though, but nobody says more than 2 hours between breaks for health reasons.

hiddencost
0 replies
1h35m

I hope you're really good to that cousin. It's damn hard to get time with skilled contractors.

natch
5 replies
2h52m

I don’t think I’ve ever done a 45 minute charge stop in many trips between California and faraway places including Colorado, Montana, and Texas. These are not day trips. People read stuff and just believe it without questioning. Most of my charge stops are much quicker than what you think. 10 minutes usually. Sometimes 20 or more ahead of a long desert stretch where gas stations are also few and far between, but usually 10.

The most priceless thing though is safety for your family. I read about accidents people had in their nice 5 year old gas cars, and it’s just sad to me that they didn’t see the options for what they were, and could have easily afforded a much safer car, but instead based their choices on bad information about supposed long charging times and supposed long lines at chargers.

wing-_-nuts
1 replies
2h33m

I'm sorry I was with you until you started talking about safety? Gas cars are not inherently unsafe. Yes, a lot of EVs have very high crash safety ratings but I'd be willing to bet a volvo is safer overall even if tesla has managed to game some scores. I will admit that evs typically have a much lower rollover risk, but frankly stability control will not let you drive a car beyond it's limits. Even a hulking SUV is pretty hard to rollover these days.

natch
0 replies
1h11m

I'm sure Volvos are safe (definitely far behind Tesla though, I've owned multiple of both) but now knowing that Volvo is a China owned company, I would never buy one for that reason, nothing to do with safety.

wernercd
1 replies
1h33m

Safety is great in EVs until a battery pops and it takes a 3 alarm fire crew and 36,000 gallons of water to put it out.

https://www.thestar.com.my/tech/tech-news/2024/01/02/unusual...

“This was a first for Autauga County,” the fire department wrote. “Electric vehicle fires are unusual and present unique challenges and dangers to firefighters.” The smoke from these types of fires contains toxic gases such as hydrogen fluoride and hydrogen chloride, officials said. The batteries can also reignite even after they blaze has been put out, the fire department added.

"I read about accidents people had in their nice 5 year old gas cars" So the question becomes why is "I've read about" a valid response and how does it stand up against "I read about how dangerous EVs are in a random article somewhere online sometime"?

natch
0 replies
52m

Now post a link abut how often fires happen in gas vehicles versus EVs.

"I read about" is only part of my response, and the rest of my response speaks for itself. One does have to poke beyond what one reads.

Poke beyond the dramatic headlines and you see that if EV batteries ever burn, which they usually don't even in accidents, they always make the news, but they burn slowly, giving occupants ample time to get away assuming they avail themselves of the easily grasped and intuitively placed manual door releases.

s3p
0 replies
2h46m

Agreed :) I've driven a Wrangler since I got my drivers license (nearly a decade ago) and I am just waiting for the day I am side swiped or my car rolls over due to some unforseen accident. Whether it's my fault or not. I love my car but the safety ratings are abysmal and I for one look forward to the day I have a savings high enough to afford a safe EV.

lucaspm98
5 replies
3h3m

I've charged my EV at a public charging station less than 5 times in the past year. Instead of a 5 minute stop once a week at a gas station it's 5 seconds every time I get home to plug it in.

Any trip within a 3 hour drive is possible round trip on a single charge. Any trip within a 5 hour drive is possible with no stops and destination charging, actually saving a stop.

Any trip over a 5 hour drive generally takes less time and costs less to fly (I'm sure with many edge cases around rural destinations). Even on long road trips, charging from 20-80% takes 15-20 minutes and most drivers will at least need a bathroom break every 3-4 hours.

New Tesla Model 3 prices are comparable to entry level sedans like the Civic and Camry. Used Chevy Bolt's are abundant at <$20k with much less ongoing maintenance costs versus used gas cars. There aren't yet affordable large SUVs and trucks if those are your only vehicles in consideration.

wing-_-nuts
4 replies
2h25m

New Tesla Model 3 prices are comparable [in cost] to entry level sedans like the Civic and Camry.

I was with you until this. This is provably false just by going to the tesla and toyota websites.

zaroth
2 replies
2h9m

Well…

2024 Camry XLE with Nav and Cold Weather - $36,965

Tesla Model 3 - $38,990 - without any credits or subsidies.

But worth noting two things - first, there may be significant State tax credits for buying a Model 3, and the base Model 3 currently doesn’t qualify for the $7,500 Federal subsidy, only as of 12/31/23.

In other words, last week the base Model 3 was at least $7,500 cheaper than $38,990.

DiggyJohnson
1 replies
1h0m

Why are you not comparing base prices? This is extremely misleading as you're misrepresenting the Camry and including the rebate (even though you say you're not).

According to their US websites, the 2024 Camry starts at $26,420. The Model 3 starts at $46500 (not including the $7500 rebate).

LUmBULtERA
0 replies
37m

Base Model 3 in inventory right now near me is $36,440, fyi. LR version is $43,190. Both not including $7500 rebate.

megaman821
0 replies
2h16m

With the rebate a Model 3 is within a couple grand of Camry similarly equipped.

hotpotamus
5 replies
2h47m

I'd think a bit of inconvenience would be worth it for a better future for your children as well as all the world's children, but I've been around long enough to come to the understanding that that's just wishful thinking on my part; truly you are just one incredibly minuscule drop in the ocean of carbon emissions that will doom us. I don't envy young children the future world they're going to inherit.

everdrive
4 replies
2h41m

Don't worry, at some point those children will grow up. They'll cease to be innocent victims, and will be forced into the same moral compromises that all adults are forced into. My only hope is that some of them will realize how silly their youthful generational blame had been.

hotpotamus
2 replies
2h21m

I assume all of us heard something to the effect of "you'll understand it when you grow up". Fair enough, but I guess I never really grew up because the older I get, the less I understand any of this really. As far as I can tell, everyone is just trying to "get their kicks in before the whole shithouse goes up in flames" to quote Jim Morrison. I wish I could do that, but it seems to be beyond me not to worry about the future.

everdrive
1 replies
1h10m

Contrary to stereotype, I don't think most adults are _intentionally_ passing the buck to the next generation so much as they are _incidentally_ passing the buck to the next generation. They don't know how to live without producing carbon & other waste, and there are practical expenses they need to answer for. (bills, family members, putting food on the table) Most adults don't have many skills beyond using the infrastructure which is laid out for them. (roads, cars, supermarkets, public schools, available careers, etc.)

And crucially, my point is that today's kids will simply not be in a better situation. They'll have the tools of society at their hands, and in general, not much more. I don't love child labor, but I genuinely have no practical way to know if my clothing was produced via child labor. (I buy 99% of my clothing used, so hopefully that's helping) I don't have any practical way to know if my plastic recycling isn't getting dumped in the ocean in Turkey. I'd like to use less carbon, but my wife isn't willing to live with the heat set any lower than 62 F. Etc. The impacts which I can make are pretty small. Populations are rising, and technology is not the panacea some people think. Technology can improve carbon output, but everyone needs to eat and live. This will always be deleterious to the environment, and the "victim" generation will eventually grow up to be the victimizers as they have to run governments and companies.

They'll be faced with compromises they can't avoid, no matter their politics.

hotpotamus
0 replies
37m

I fully understand all this which is why I've become very sad for the future of humanity; I try to look for reasons for hope, but watching trees die in my hometown while wells failed was very hard. All I can say is that I'm increasingly happy I opted out of the idea of children long ago, because while I used to be jealous of the young for the future they would live to see, I feel exactly the opposite these days.

melagonster
0 replies
1h46m

yes, I had understood that this is time to type GG, we have no chance haha.

outlace
4 replies
2h47m

I would guess most single family home owners have two or more cars. This is a total guess based on my own situation and those of people I know who own EV’s but most EV owners with a single family home will also own a gas car.

So an EV is more convenient than a gas car for daily commutes because you never have to go to a gas station. For the rare times you go on a long trip, you just take the gas car or you put up with having a longer trip in the EV.

JohnFen
3 replies
1h50m

I would guess most single family home owners have two or more cars.

I was curious so looked this up. Not sure how good these stats are, but here's what I found at https://www.thezebra.com/resources/research/car-ownership-st...

The average US household owns 2.28 vehicles. 35% of US households own three or more cars. I found that interesting because almost no household that I personally know owns more than one vehicle (regardless of income level), so there may be large geographical variances here.

Also interesting is that the total number of registered vehicles in the US declined by over 25 million between 2012 and 2019. There is hope!

trgn
0 replies
1h21m

Also interesting is that the total number of registered vehicles in the US declined by over 25 million between 2012 and 2019. There is hope!

Really? Awesome! The future is bright indeed. EVs are objectively better than ICE-cars, they don't nearly trash up the city as much as ICE-cars (less noisy, less stinky, no gas stations, nothing trashes up a neighborhood than a gas station), but a lot feel like they have made strides in being safer for pedestrians, cyclists, ...

Hard to square with the overall increased aggressive vibe in overall traffic, more antisocial driving, larger cars, meaner looking cars, ...

r0m4n0
0 replies
35m

I think a household will tend to average on how many adult drivers there are in the home. You don’t want to be stuck at home while someone else is at the gym, store, etc

burntsushi
0 replies
37m

Out here in the suburbs of Massachusetts, it is very common to see 3 (or more) cars in the driveways of single family homes. In my experience, it's usually because some of the cars belong to one or more of the kids who live there. And each parent usually has their own car.

Growing up, getting a car was a watershed moment for me personally. It marked a transition into a new type of independence from my parents, and also the primary motivation for getting my first job. It was liberating. Out here, it's not feasible to get anywhere, really, without a car. Before getting my own car, if I needed to get somewhere, I had to convince some adult (usually my parents or a friend's parents) to take us there.

syntheticnature
3 replies
2h44m

Tangent: As someone driving a gas car, I would like to know how your car takes only 2 minutes to refuel. 5 minutes? Certainly, if the station is not getting heavy traffic (which seems to slow the pumps), and on a long trip it's quite likely it will a busy interstate-side station that might get to ten minutes due to slow-flowing gas.

Even so, as we both know, it's unlikely to reach 15 minutes as discussed else-thread, and while I do need breaks on a trip, 15 minutes is about the maximum I want to take unless I'm eating.

6gvONxR4sf7o
2 replies
1h31m

Maybe it depends on what you drive? My car takes about 6-7 gallons when empty, but I see tons of other cars taking huge amounts.

happyopossum
1 replies
1h9m

Maybe it's a North America thing, but I can't think of a (purely ICE) car here that has anything smaller than a ~13 gallon tank... Maybe there are a few with 10-12 gallon ones, but they'd be outliers for sure.

For a typical family-hauler that's be used on road trips like a Honda Odyssey, 16-20 gallons is totally common.

6gvONxR4sf7o
0 replies
54m

Huh, I'm in the SF bay area with a prius (advertised as a 11.9 gallon tank, but due to one thing or another, it's never more than 7 even when beeping at me to refill. But I do agree that pretty much every time I fill up and look at what the previous car used, it's some crazy high number in comparison.

conductr
3 replies
2h0m

I’m in that first group too and I bought a new car in 2023. I went ICE ultimately because I didn’t see many electric options I would want. Cars are part fashion so I wanted to “like it”. But I also mostly car about reliability and longevity as I usually buy new but keep for 10-12 years and don’t want the inconvenience of maintenance beyond the routine stuff. In the past, this put me in a Honda/Toyota but this time I was open and even wanted something more luxurious/expensive.

Most EVs are just unproven in my opinion. Just because it says Mercedes, nice test drive I don’t want to be their EV Guinea pig in terms of long term ownership. Companies like Rivian, cool but way too new for me to even blink an eye at. This basically left me with Tesla as an only option. If you do any research at all you’ll hear/see how hit and miss their build quality is. Seems worse on certain models, but ultimately I also know too much about Musk’s management style and it does the opposite of instilling confidence in the product. I also happen to just not “like” the interior/dash setup. So, I just felt like I was sacrificing /risking too much with EV. The other issue in some cases, the EV has been announced with a release date and accepting deposits but I couldn’t actually purchase one like I needed/wanted too; Too much friction in 2023.

I ended up in a Lexus. Basically the luxury Toyota. So i essentially kept my purchasing behavior unchanged due to not finding any compelling EV, but i kicked some EV tires.

aftbit
1 replies
1h49m

Don't get a Mercedes if you want reliable. Spoken from second hand experience at least.

Toyota and Lexus are hard to beat.

conductr
0 replies
1h12m

Yeah I have that long standing impression too. Heard a lot of bad stories over the years on all the German manufacturers except maybe VW. It was something I considered sacrificing on as it seems the be a luxury tax of sorts. They do make more luxurious vehicles than Lexus, but it’s pretty marginal IMO after consideration even on their ICE vehicles. I’d probably have gone with a loaded GM/Ford over a German vehicle. Domestic manufactures also have a dealership problem though. They are the sleeziest of them all and I just really get turned off by it. Also, I didn’t need a tank in the Yukon but also didn’t like their smaller SUVs as much.

theLiminator
0 replies
28m

Curious if you looked at any PHEV options?

sigspec
2 replies
2h15m

It's always the "vacation that I take once a year" that people use as an excuse, meanwhile families are filling two vehicles twice a week.

Get real and get new material.

themaninthedark
1 replies
58m

I recently changed job; I used to fill my car every week now every other week. (60 miles roundtrip to 30 miles roundtrip)

I also have some times where I have to drive 10.2 hours(730 miles one way) almost non-stop. When I have to do something like that, I want to drive. Not stop and wait.

The Tesla trip planner with the Model 3 Long Range edition for that drive show it will take 13h for the same drive so about 28% longer with 4 stops @ 30min each.

Realize that people have different use cases.

lanstin
0 replies
3m

It would be cool, if climate change were a convenient truth, rather than slightly inconvenient.

arbitrary_name
2 replies
1h4m

It'll be about a 11 hour drive which is not crazy for a US vacation

Uhhhh, that's crazy to me. I don't know anyone who drives that far for a holiday, especially with kids.

s0rce
0 replies
5m

I do that, can be fun, there is so much to see on the way. Drove last Christmas from Riverside county to Bisbee, AZ and back via San Diego.

avgDev
0 replies
57m

During COVID, I drove 24 hours to Florida. Longest stint of driving was 16 hours.

AYBABTME
2 replies
2h11m

I drove from Reno to LA recently in a Model Y and my charging stops all lined up with bathroom breaks and food. I never actually waited for the charging process itself. It doesn't take 45min and it's not like I have any interest in sitting for more than 3h-4h straight without stopping at all. I've done plenty of long distance trips with my kids and the Tesla and, really, charging is a non-issue.

The only actual negative I have is that chargers aren't as present in remote locations and if it's not a Tesla charger, it's not real. Also when towing a camper uphill to Yosemite, it was stressful but we made it on top.

mythhabit
0 replies
2h2m

As more and more people buy EVs, it's not uncommon that the charging infrastructure is not expanding at the same rate. Many EV owners I know, have all experienced to wait in a line for 15 min charge on a trip. Those that have had a Tesla for 7-8 years all agree that it is a relatively new thing.

The infrastructure will improve and will expand to keep up, but it is one of the teething issues that is slowing mass adoption.

NegativeK
0 replies
50m

Different strokes, different folks.

I prefer stopping every four hours, and making the stop take less than 10 minutes. Having my EV is very much worth it overall, but it _is_ annoying to add more than an hour for every eight hours of driving.

pwthornton
1 replies
13m

EV stops have a big advantage in that they force you to get out and move around a bit. Sitting in a car all day is bad for you. Taking a break every few hours is good. Walking around during that break is ideal.

You don't want to give yourself a blood clot on a family vacation.

tines
0 replies
11m

Is there a name for when someone bends over backwards to paint a disadvantage as an advantage? I guess it's the same as the old "It's not a bug, it's a feature!" trope.

kaiken1987
1 replies
2h40m

Realistically having done road trips, it's stopping every 3 hours and it's not 45 minutes, it's basically the amount of time it takes to get 2 kids out of the car, in to use the restrooms, and back into the car.

themaninthedark
0 replies
54m

That depends; When I had toddlers, like the parent, I would often drive at night while they were asleep.

Now they are older and we travel more in the day but it is around 4 hours and have to schedule a meal.

tshaddox
0 replies
2h38m

It all depends on how much importance you put on those few road trips per year. With an EV those few road trips definitely take slightly more time, but the rest of the year (assuming you can charge at home or work) you never go to a gas station or charging station and almost certainly save vastly more time over the entire year.

scarby2
0 replies
11m

I'm going on vacation next week, driving with 2 young children. It'll be about a 11 hour drive which is not crazy for a US vacation. I don't want to plan where I stop and stop for 45 minutes to fuel up with 2 toddlers in the car.

How often do you do this? Once, maybe twice a year? With my current commute i have to go out of my way to get gas every week. It takes at least 15 minutes extra on my way home (but thats only because the gas station on the route is about $1 a gallon more). i'd be prepared to add an hour twice a year in return for getting 15 minutes back 48 times a year. And the annoyance of having to make an unexpected trip when i was planning to get gas the next day (whereas i could keep an EV charged abouve 50% at all times).

r0m4n0
0 replies
32m

Based upon the amount of comments here this must be a controversial comment but I can’t imagine how you do this. With one toddler, she can barely make a 1 hour trip let alone 11 hours. I could use an electric vehicle with a 90 mile range for that trip because that’s about how often I would need to stop. Props to you for keeping 2 toddlers in the car for 11 hours

organsnyder
0 replies
2h11m

I just did a road trip with my family (four kids aged 6-13). If we had an EV, I would have simply topped off the battery any time we stopped for a bathroom break (I get excited whenever we're able to pass a service plaza without someone needing to go).

insane_dreamer
0 replies
8m

We're in the first group and it definitely makes sense for us. 90% of our driving is in town, and we can recharge at night in our garage for a small fraction of the cost of gas. We also have 2 young kids. For vacations, camping trips, etc., we would take our Forester (which we already had before we bought an EV), but otherwise we don't need to use it. If we only had one car (and we did for years), we'd keep the EV and would rent an ICE SUV for long-range vacations (which, this being the U.S., we get precious little of), and still save tons of money.

huytersd
0 replies
2h38m

I’m in the first group with a 30 minute commute every morning. With the solar panels on my roof, transportation is essentially free for me.

calamari4065
0 replies
2h54m

It's more convenient when you can charge at home overnight when you aren't using the car

jsight
16 replies
3h15m

Yes, EVs are most convenient for well over half the country. I'd say that we are nowhere near saturation.

But reading the room leads me to believe that there are a lot of people in your target demographic who think that EVs are for city dwellers.

The biggest issues for getting from 10% to ~50% are communication, price, and availability.

troyvit
14 replies
2h41m

An EV just doesn't do anything that my 2007 Pontiac Vibe doesn't do better. My car is worth about $3,000. It:

- Has a 400 mile range

- Can stop anywhere and refuel in just a few minutes, including very isolated areas

- Plays all the music I want

- Hauls anything I want (ie. I don't care if I trash the interior with a pile of mulch on a plastic tarp)

- I can sleep in the back

- Fits in nicely in my lower middle class neighborhood

- Has plenty of spare parts at the junkyard if I need to repair it

On top of that, it doesn't require a #$@# subscription, doesn't force me into some plutocrat's idea of an infotainment system, isn't tracked remotely, with that data being sold to randos, and doesn't cost as much as a Master's degree. Last thing is that while EVs are probably more environmentally friendly than a new ICE car, they still don't compete with a used one from the aughts over their lifetime.

tshaddox
8 replies
2h34m

Until you get in an accident. If you can afford a newer car, I hope your understandable affection for your Pontiac isn’t causing you to unknowingly significantly compromise your safety.

trgn
2 replies
1h17m

The tragedy of the commons perfectly encapsulated. Until this government has the courage for top down intervention, either people choose to be part of the problem or choose to be part of the solution.

troyvit
1 replies
17m

I'm not sure which side I'm on in your comment ;) Right now I'm focusing on the first 2 R's of the 3 R's (reduce, reuse, and recycle). I'm reducing my footprint by reusing an existing car and fixing it with used parts when I can. This vs saving a little carbon over long, long run by buying an EV? I still don't think an EV has a smaller footprint than a used ICE car but I could be wrong.

trgn
0 replies
2m

I'm not sure which side I'm on in your comment

I was referring more to the large vehicle arms race.

Right now I'm focusing on the first 2 R's of the 3 R's > I'm reducing my footprint by reusing an existing car and fixing it with used parts when I can.

I'd agree that's probably the most environmentally conscious approach. I'm somewhat similar, holding on to an old car, but more almost out of spite than any sort of rational consideration haha.

wakawaka28
1 replies
2h8m

EVs that catch fire are impossible to extinguish. EVs that are involved in accidents are recommended to be stored 50 feet apart and monitored by thermal cameras due to the tremendous risk of battery fires. It is not economical to fix EVs at this time. Someone was just quoted $60k to fix a Hyundai Ioniq because of dents on the bottom panel. Insurance companies, parking garages, and ferries are beginning to wise up and want nothing to do with EVs.

Nevermind that half of the EVs out there don't have conventional mechanical door latches to let people out of the car should the power fail. EVs are far heavier than standard cars. I heard that they don't crumple as much either, to protect the battery from causing a bigger disaster. Rigid vehicles cause much more harsh deceleration in a crash, which is likely much worse for the people in the car. Look up the Youtube channels MGUY Australia or Geoff Buys Cars if you want some real dirt on EVs.

Passenger EVs are barely practical, risky, and not nearly as environmentally sustainable as the marketing says. EV trucks (consumer and commercial) are a sick joke.

wing-_-nuts
0 replies
1h12m

There are little kernels of truth sprinkled throughout your comment, but much of it is FUD. EVs aren't chinese scooters primed to burst into flame at a moment's notice. They're as safe as gas cars (though i would like to see data on injuries per 100,000 mi instead of safety ratings as those can be gamed)

ryandrake
1 replies
1h51m

In the event of an accident, what happens to the 2007 Pontiac that doesn’t happen to a newer EV?

jsight
0 replies
24m

There are some significant engineering advantages to not having an engine. The crumple zones are overall more effective.

The Vibe isn't bad at all, though. I wouldn't switch just for safety ratings.

wing-_-nuts
0 replies
1h19m

There was a huge leap in auto safety from 2000 to 2010 due to the increased use of high strength steel. I don't doubt that a modern car today is after than a 2007 model, but by how much? 5%? 10%? It's very hard to quantify.

Also a lot of what makes modern cars 'safer' is the inclusion of nannyTech such as stability control, automatic braking, etc. All of this is great, but if you were already a safe driver, there's little additional safety for you personally.

mrcarruthers
1 replies
30m

To be fair to your last paragraph, you're less annoyed at EVs than at new cars in general. All new cars are trending towards this, with a few stragglers for the models that haven't been refreshed in a while.

troyvit
0 replies
21m

This is so true. Even an ICE car has those problems.

jsight
1 replies
27m

Most of your issues have nothing to do with EVs, tbh. :lol

Your Vibe fills up in your garage while you are sleeping? Cool.

troyvit
0 replies
20m

I don't need it to, and I don't need a separate room in my freakin' house for a car. I spend 5 minutes while I'm washing the windows and then it's done.

ryandrake
0 replies
1h45m

This is where I am too. When I finally sold my ‘90-era beater, I upgraded to a 2009. It does everything I need it to, and importantly, doesnt have those anti-features of new cars (EV or otherwise). I don’t know what I’m going to do in 15 years when it’s time to sell this one. Car companies are not really making products for guys like us today.

gottorf
0 replies
2h37m

The biggest issues for getting from 10% to ~50% are communication, price, and availability.

I would simplify this down to just price. Price is a signaling mechanism in the market, which takes care of both communication and availability.

Nobody would need to communicate the virtues of an EV if it's priced like a Toyota Corolla with sufficient range.

shmatt
12 replies
3h24m

EVs aren't cheap either, in 2 years one will get better battery tech and a new connector, plus whatever deprecation the battery will go through if you buy one today. 2023-4 and earlier EVs will lose a huge chunk of their worth once NACS cars with better than 200 mile range become available

The value of my leased Volvo C40 has already fallen off a cliff and is less than my residual value. Once my lease is over there will be an NACS EX-30 that will be cheaper brand new, than what Volvo are charging for me to keep my old connector used battery car

jsight
10 replies
3h13m

Bolt starts at ~$26k. Civic starts at just under $24k. The Bolt is a mediocre road tripper, but lots of cars in that segment are just commuters that only very occasionally road trip. It'd be a great choice for a lot of people.

shmatt
6 replies
2h49m

Bolt can't fast charge, at some point we need to look beyond the single family home consumer

blackguardx
2 replies
2h10m

My Bolt supports DC charging at 55 kW. What is considered “fast?”

xeromal
1 replies
1h52m

The OG Tesla chargers charged at 125kW but the standard ones now charge at 250kW and a select few newer cars charge at 350kW.

55kW sounds like it uses Chademo?

micromacrofoot
0 replies
45m

it uses CCS

micromacrofoot
1 replies
46m

Bolt can absolutely fast charge, I've done it myself — the feature has to be added when purchasing, and it's limited to 55kW (~80% in an hour depending on conditions). The slower rate is partially how they kept the price down AFAIK.

jsight
0 replies
32m

Thankfully, DCFC is now standard! The rate isn't phenomenal, just as you pointed out, but this car competes with Civics. Many of those are purely commuter cars that might only very rarely do 300-400 miles.

It is a great vehicle.

jsight
0 replies
30m

Sure, but we don't have to look past them to get to 50% market share. The market can grow by 5x without moving past them.

The problem in the US is that you have to have really large market share to start convincing property owners that they should install chargers. Thankfully, we are seeing this, with widespread installations at hotels this year. I'm guessing apartments won't be too far behind that in metropolitan areas.

GrinningFool
1 replies
2h15m

Looks like it starts at 28.5. Low-end IC cars (with more range and convenience) start at ~15-16k new in the US. (Kia, Nissan, etc).

That's a huge difference when that's the price range you're shopping, with added benefits of higher issue rates and less convenience when it comes to charging.

jsight
0 replies
29m

For a lot of commuters, the EV will be more convenient. Getting out of the car during the commute home (or worse, the commute to work) was never fun.

everdrive
0 replies
2h39m

I don't want a $26k car. Back in 2014, I bought a base model Ford Fiesta for $14k. Modern cars are badly overpriced, which is part of why people are holding onto used cars so strongly.

recursive
0 replies
2h36m

once NACS cars with better than 200 mile range

What do you think current ranges are? There are very few EVs available with less than 200 miles of range. The Leaf and that Mazda thing are the only ones I know of.

aquaticsunset
7 replies
2h8m

I think the market for the current lineup of EVs is tapping out.

My wife and I own one that was very comparably equipped to a similar luxury crossover / SUV, and the type of driving we do in that car is perfectly within the capabilities of our range & charging habits. Never going to gas stations or getting the annual oil change is a nice convenient perk for us. But we fit right in this targeted demographic:

1) Can afford an expensive, new car 2) Own a home and can install an EV charger 3) Have a second ICE vehicle for long trips

However, I can't imagine many people wanting EVs who fit this criteria don't have one by now. If the manufacturers want to keep selling EVs, they'll need to figure out how to replace the 2015 Accords and Tahoes without access to charging at home.

aftbit
3 replies
1h51m

Hi! I'm one of these people. All three of those conditions are true for me, and yet I don't own an EV. Why? Because it seems like the technology is going to be much much better and cheaper in 5 years or less, and I'd hate to drop a big ball of cash on a new EV today when I can probably get either a better new one or a cheaper used one in just a couple of years.

qaq
0 replies
1h44m

It's obviously a matter of personal priorities. Someone might opt for 5 years of convenience vs potentially saving 10K and other person might opt to wait 5 years and save 10K.

pr0zac
0 replies
1h9m

I've been thinking about this same thing lately since I will soon fit those conditions as well and I think at least for me personally this year may be the best time to buy one.

While I agree the technology will be better and cheaper 5 years from now that will always be the case and it seems like we are past the point of exponential improvements in short periods of time. Current EVs meet or exceed my needs regarding range, reliability, and performance so I don't have a quantitative goalpost that needs to be reached anymore.

What is really pushing me over the line though is changes to the relevant financial incentives. The new income caps mean I still qualify for the $7,500 tax rebate because I took a bunch of time off work in 2023 but will no longer be eligible after this year. I can't see the technology improving so much in the next few years it outweighs that discount combined with not having to wait.

cmrdporcupine
0 replies
1h44m

Eh, I don't see it. Not a lot has changed in the last few years. They're all using lithium ion battery packs built around similar tech, and around 60kWh seems to be the standard sweet-spot. L2 charging is the most common (at home especially), and that hasn't changed in over a decade. They mostly have similar propulsion systems and similar efficiency. The good ones all have battery heating/cooling to extend battery life, and have for some time.

The only major thing that has really altered has been the speed of DC fast charging. Which, TBH, is something that is only used on road trips, and takes a toll on battery life if you use it frequently anyways. So while I'd love an EV with really high kW DC fast charge, it's not something I'd make as my primary concern.

FWIW, I'm in a 2017 Chevy Volt and drive it 95% electric only and have felt no real urge to upgrade. I'd love a bigger battery, and DC fast charge, I guess. But the actual electric driving experience isn't appreciably different on newer BEVs. I'll drive it into the ground for another 5 years, and then get an EV with a bigger battery.

Toyota and others have spread a bit of FUD with promises of solid state batteries and the like, but I actually think EV technology right now is pretty mature and good. What's needed is infrastructure for apartment buildings, and city streets etc. for charging and that will only happen once consumers push for it.

And, yeah, vehicle makers need to make economy-class EVs. That just hasn't happened yet in North America even though it absolutely could with battery prices being what they are now.

light_hue_1
1 replies
1h46m

You definitely don't need a second ICE car for long trips. We don't have one. Long trips in our EV work perfectly.

wepple
0 replies
36m

To say “definitely” don’t need one with near zero information on what a long trip constitutes is wild.

Do you tow anything on your long trips? Go into extremely cold environments? Go into areas with no or minimal charging infrastructure? Does the endpoint of your journey lack power outlets?

LUmBULtERA
0 replies
32m

Uh, that market is far far from tapped out. Just drive around any neighborhood that likely fits those characteristics and the vast majority of cars you'll see are still ICE (maybe hybrid).

thereddaikon
2 replies
2h38m

nother factor that could be at play is that all the non-Tesla EV makers have recently announced they will switch their chargers to NACS, but this will take a couple of years to roll out, so it’s not a great time to buy a non-Tesla since it already has legacy charging hardware.

This is a big factor and one I note to anyone I know who is thinking of buying an EV. You don't want to be stuck with a dead end tech. Buying a non-Tesla that hasn't already adopted the north american charger is a foolish move at this point. I'm sure there will be conversion kits for many models at some point but that's another cost and one you likely want to have a professional do. Best to either buy a Tesla or just wait a year or two.

jewayne
1 replies
2h34m

Somebody check my facts here, but isn't the NACS/Tesla charging standard just CCS with a different plug? Shouldn't the CCS-to-NACS adapters available today work seamlessly both now and in the future? Am I missing something here?

wing-_-nuts
0 replies
1h11m

They are, but Tesla makes it difficult for non tesla owners to use their chargers as they have no built in 'pay here' infrastructure (at least from what I've seen)

everdrive
2 replies
2h44m

I'd take that even further. EVs make the most sense when all the conditions you noted are satisfied, _and_ the family can afford at least two cars, and it's not important that both cars have long range, and the family can afford the extra up-front cost of the EV. I've got a Nissan Frontier and a Nissan Leaf. The Leaf is older (2017) and has a degraded battery. (about 80% of its original life, and approximately 100 miles of range) The Leaf is very convenient for my wife, but primarily because she doesn't have a commute, and we have a more practical family car in situations where the EV won't cut it. Her mother lives with us, and also has a gas car as an additional backup.

We got the Leaf for $11k used, and if the EV were our only car we'd have had to spend significantly more on a car with much more range (at least 230 miles or more) and we'd have required the installation of a fast charger to handle the longer range. (120v charging is really pretty suitable for a car with only 100 miles of range.) All of these would have introduced significant costs and constraints, which were only offset by the very low price of a used Leaf, and the fact that we always have a backup option.

doctorpangloss
0 replies
1h47m

_and_ the family can afford at least two cars

So you're saying EVs make the most sense for "people who buy cars?"

Can't fault manufacturers for targeting that audience.

Anyway you are pulling on the thread of unique selling points (USPs) which are among the many prevailing traditions in autos sales. I don't know how much they really matter in a secular sense.

albrewer
0 replies
2h6m

I meet all the requirements you listed, but I _also_ need to make a 310 mile trip (1 way) fairly regularly. In a Prius, I can do that on one tank. In an EV, you've added at least 30-60 minutes to each leg of the trip, unless you spring for higher end models.

tshaddox
1 replies
2h41m

We may be close to saturating the market for the former group.

From what I’m reading EVs are around 1% of total cars and around 10% of new car sales in the U.S., while at least 60% of housing units are single family homes.

staticman2
0 replies
48m

Not all single family homes have driveways or garages- so not all are equipped for electric vehicle charging.

insane_dreamer
1 replies
12m

not a great time to buy a non-Tesla since it already has legacy charging hardware

there will be adapters that will make current models compatible with Tesla's network once the switch is made(at least for Polestar, not sure about other brands)

parineum
0 replies
5m

Adapters are incredibly annoying.

sonicanatidae
0 replies
1h16m

The problems for me are a few.

EVs cost more.

EVs take more than a couple of mins to "gas up".

EV range is still lacking, compared to available charging stations, imo.

When the market gets it right, I'll jump in with both feet, but I'm not spending twice the money on a car, then deal with horse shit like Tesla and others when it comes to service visits, scheduling, etc.

resoluteteeth
0 replies
2h28m

EV’s currently make the most sense for people who own a single family home or otherwise live in a community with readily available near-home chargers, where EV’s are on average more convenient than gas cars

If they are full EVs and not PHEVs they also make the most sense for households that have multiple cars where one of the other cars is a gas car. While the vast majority of trips are short, and charger networks are improving, a lot of people in the US drive longer distances at least occasionally, so it is much easier to replace one out of two cars in a household an electric car than switch to only using electric cars.

I think that once enough people have EVs and the charger networks are better this will be less of an issue, but a lot of people seem to downplay this issue, which I think is not a good idea, because I think there's a genuine risk that there could be a chicken and egg problem to mass adoption of EVs where the market of people who are able to use an EV in 2024 could be saturated before enough people are using EVs to build out the charger network sufficiently.

mrcarruthers
0 replies
28m

This is why I bought a PHEV. Only one car, 90% of the time we're on electric, and I still have the gas engine for when I want to go far.

mlinhares
0 replies
2h54m

I'm on the single family home case and would really like to buy the ID Buzz to replace our Atlas (always wanted to own a Konbi) but it would be the second car in the home, we'd still keep our combustion SUV for the long trips and I think this is a lot of the current market for EVs.

Trouble is that pricing is awful, availability is also awful (there's still no date for when the Buzz will be around in the US) and I'm pretty happy with the gas price at the moment, so other than hype to buy a Tesla there's not much reason to buy electric at the moment.

mattmaroon
0 replies
1h49m

2/3 of Americans live in a home they or their immediate family own. They’re like 2% of car sales. The market is far from saturated.

The reality is that range just isn’t there for most people, and the extra cost of an EV is far more than fuel savings.

It’s going to take a better battery chemistry. That’s it.

lmpdev
0 replies
3h10m

All people in my network have moved on from EVs being the “solution” to transport

The real solution we seem to roughly agree upon is getting cars as a whole off the road where possible

Permanent investment in mass transit and any tech which plugs the gaps is the way forward in our view

The often subpar urban planning in North America (think Phoenix not Montreal) is simply incompatible with a sustainable and decarbonised future

Insisting on EVs over hybrids in the 2020s is a laughable total solution to the current situation we find ourselves in

Aqueous
8 replies
3h6m

Sorry, but in what world do sales of electric cars going up and market share of electric vehicles increasing lead to the thesis that "fewer people are buying electric cars?"

Oh - I get it. It's the world where this publication wants clicks for ad revenue.

"Sure, electric vehicles are becoming more and more widely adopted, but wouldn't it be better for this article if they weren't?"

charles_f
2 replies
2h32m

The actual title of the article is "What happened to EVs" and the page title is "Why America's electric car push isn't working". I don't know where the HN title is coming from, whether it's an update of the article's title because of precisely what you're advancing, or if it's heavy editing from the submitter.

Generally speaking the article exposes that the pace of adoption as stated by DoT didn't grow enough to meet their 2030 goal (i.e. The second derivative is going down), and goes on to explain why.

I think the article is fair, I think its title also is, I think the HN title is problematic unless you slap "than required to meet 2030 goals".

pavon
0 replies
2h10m

The article title matched the HN title when I first viewed the story yesterday.

ericjmorey
0 replies
1h43m

Business Insider subsequently changed the subtitle to another false statement as well.

a-posteriori
2 replies
2h34m

Market-share is a cumulative metric, representing the sum of all purchases over several years. Sales is a flow metric, representing the sum of purchases in a given year. Market-share can increase, yet sales can be down in a given year.

Not everything is a conspiracy.

agloe_dreams
1 replies
2h19m

Sales were actually up, the title is just wrong and is editorialized by the submitter. The article has a different tile.

ianai
0 replies
53m

It changed since they submitted the article. No need to assume ill will.

somerandomqaguy
0 replies
25m

It's not so much that the market share isn't going up; 55% growth is great!

It's a little more of an issue if you are Jim Farley or Mary Barra telling your Wall Street investors that it's supposed to be 65% sustained YoY growth every year, with all of the major manufacturing investments based around that even higher growth number (don't take the number too literally, I'm just using them to illustrate).

Probably it's just that everyone's predicted growth expectations were just a little too high in the first place.

hinkley
0 replies
1h42m

We’ve come full circle to Hearst and Pulitzer duking it out for the title of world’s richest liar.

Alfred Nobel at least felt guilty for introducing high explosives to warfare. The prize was his penance.

Everything I learn about Pulitzer says he’s a piece of shit, and I don’t know why anyone would want to win a prize named after either of those two oligarchs. But it does say something very on the nose about the epicycles in news reporting.

zelon88
6 replies
58m

While bigger batteries allow drivers to travel farther between charges, they also make the cars heavier, more dangerous, more expensive, and worse for the planet.

Bigger vehicles in general are safer than smaller vehicles. If you are in a 2,000lb car with a 5 star safety rating, you will still probably be killed in an accident with a 6,000lb truck that has a 3 star safety rating. Despite all your advanced driver aids and BS. You will die, and the 1995 Ford F-250 owner will walk away. Mass is the most significant safety feature you can buy. Don't let some journalist in a suit tell you any different. He only wants you to drive the Corolla because he's driving a Suburban.

Personally, I buy cars based on my enjoyment of them. To buy a car for any other reason is silly. None of your friends or family will remember that time you got 55mpg on vacation, but nobody will forget the adventures you can have with a 4x4 on 35's.

postalrat
2 replies
56m

I'd love to see a small 2,000 car with a 5 star rating that's built like a ramp that redirects the collision from larger vehicles over the roof.

wing-_-nuts
0 replies
43m

Ah, the battlebot strategy

HackeNewsFan234
0 replies
34m

Maybe there's an aftermarket opportunity here. Instead of a roof rack, roof ramps.

mayneack
2 replies
57m

Safer for the occupants, not safer overall.

zelon88
1 replies
52m

They are safer overall because if you don't choose one, you are at a disadvantage. There is no risk to owning a larger vehicle. Conversely there is a risk with owning a smaller vehicle. When designing a vehicle for safety it is the primary objective to increase the safety for the occupants. They are the customers of the safety product. I am not paying for features that diminish my safety for the safety of people that aren't in my car. Other people can be responsible for choosing the safety features that they believe are most effective. Whether they choose correctly or not is not my problem.

garte
0 replies
50m

Well there is the risk of seeming like an asshole to everyone else. Like, EVERYONE else, not just a single person. But that doesn't seem to be your concern.

vertnerd
5 replies
5h18m

1. Range. But this speaks to the failure of the industry to provide charging infrastructure. This was one big thing that Tesla got right.

2. Price. An EV is inherently simpler to build and should cost less. Indeed, early EV offerings were almost affordable, if not for the high cost of the batteries. Now that batteries are less expensive, the automakers are pushing large, expensive cars (because they think they can sell them?). The Nissan Leaf is going away. The Chevy bolt stumbled badly out of the gate on technical issues.

3. Somebody figured that if extravagant pickup trucks are the most popular cars in American, then what America wanted was an electric pickup. The "I want a pickup" idea does not tickle the same brain cells as the "I want an EV" idea.

Make affordable, entry-level EVs and sufficient infrastructure to make them usable by people with HOA restrictions or apartments, and they will sell like hotcakes.

cryptonector
2 replies
2h30m

Who could want a pickup besides people who need a pickup?

NegativeLatency
0 replies
1h50m
LeafItAlone
0 replies
1h48m

Who could want a pickup besides people who need a pickup?

Most of the people that buy pickups.

apitman
1 replies
3h9m

The "I want a pickup" idea does not tickle the same brain cells as the "I want an EV" idea.

Very anecdotal but I disagree. My dream vehicle might be a hybrid pickup that sacrifices the frunk for an ICE that can give me much greater range if needed, while still having a full size battery I can use for around town and camping.

Also, EV pickups are basically the perfect work truck for people using plug-in power tools. My neighbor is building a new house, and the workers have needed to borrow our power outlet multiple times.

agloe_dreams
0 replies
1h56m

Dodge is building this for you next year - it is called the Ramcharger. It is a 190mi EV with a v6 generator for an added 400 miles of gas range.

jklinger410
4 replies
4h25m

Cars used to weigh half as much and make their own electricity. Repair costs are exponential on EVs compared to normal cars.

I can fix a car with a carburetor with analog parts, that I can machine myself.

It does not require an electric drive-train and battery to have back up cameras, tablets, even self-driving.

EVs are priming us for micro-transactions in our vehicles that we do not actually own.

So maybe the ecological impact makes sense, but the financial does not.

nozzlegear
3 replies
4h18m

I’ve had my EV for 14 months and 17k miles driven now and haven’t had any repair or maintenance costs at all. There are no micro-transactions because they simply don’t require as much maintenance as a combustion vehicle.

jklinger410
2 replies
4h12m

haven’t had any repair or maintenance costs at all

When you have to replace your battery your repair costs will come in one big lump sum. Your tires and suspension system will require more repair due to the weight of your vehicle.

There are no micro-transactions

The first few generations of EV do not have them, but the future ones will.

nozzlegear
0 replies
2h14m

The first few generations of EV do not have them, but the future ones will.

I have a Bolt EUV 2023 (purchased November 2022) for reference. I can't speak to replacing the battery, tires or suspension system, though. Your statement about the tires and suspension needing more repair due to the weight of the vehicle makes sense to me.

Schiendelman
0 replies
4h8m

People have put 300k miles on their EVs already. Batteries already outlast the car.

codegrappler
4 replies
6h51m

One thing I have not heard discussed is the all-too-common family visit. If I drive 200 miles to visit some family and stay at their house what’s the etiquette for using their power to charge my car? I wouldn’t feel comfortable asking and saying “I’ve got to leave for two hours to find a charging station” also feels awkward. I want to maximize our time together and not burden folks with needing to pay to charge my car.

pornel
0 replies
5h56m

If it’s really awkward you can charge on the way at a public charging station. In new EVs that’s 20-30 mins, not 2 hours.

The cost of domestic electricity to top up an EV will be around $15 (public chargers have relatively high markup), so probably not a big deal?

lagadu
0 replies
2h34m

Just charge the car immediately before getting to their house? You can leave 20min earlier to adjust for that.

cald0s
0 replies
6h46m

Then pay them. It's not hard to figure how much energy you consumed and what the cost of electricity is, make a conservative estimate, round it up and give them the money.

aembleton
0 replies
2h0m

Just ask them if you can plugin. They're family.

olavgg
3 replies
3h6m

Im grateful that the Norwegian gouverment sponsored me a top specced Porsche Taycan Turbo for half the price. Now I drive more than ever, because now driving is really fun.

I will repay the Norwegian gouverment by announcing my move to Sweden. I cannot let my kids grow up in a country that spend tax money like a drunk sailor.

njarboe
1 replies
2h59m

Doesn't Norway just not tax EVs unlike ICE cars which are highly taxed? A bit different that the US where domestically made EVs are subsidized.

dns_snek
0 replies
2h5m

What's the difference? Either way <less money> is available for <useful things> because it was allocated towards <luxury purchases>

tentboy
0 replies
32m

what does turbo even mean in the context of an electric car? not sure how you could have forced induction or why porsche would name it that

jussij
3 replies
7h52m

In 2023, Australian full battery electric vehicles made up 7.2 per cent of all new vehicles sold, compared with 3.1 per cent in 2022. That is despite a decade of EV denial by one particular side of Australia government, meaning EV re-charging infrastructure in Australia is still decades behind the rest of the developed world.

ghiculescu
2 replies
7h48m

Why do Australians think EV chargers should be provided by government? Petrol stations aren’t.

lagadu
0 replies
2h47m

Because investing in infrastructure (of many types) often carries with it capital expenses and have low returns that are unbearable for most potential market players but once in place allow the provisioning of services who are very useful to the population.

In this case, nobody was going to build EV chargers if there were no EVs on the road and nobody would buy an EV if there were no chargers on the road. Stepping in and giving the initial incentive to break that cycle is what this type of intervention, such as subsidies, does.

jussij
0 replies
4h56m

And why do Australians think governments should build power distribution systems? Why can't we leave that up to private enterprise?

And why do Australians think governments should fund the building and upkeep of federal highways? Why can't we leave that up to private enterprise?

Surely the best option is to make sure every public road is a toll road. That Liberal Party approach to road building has worked great in NSW.

Toll Holdings is now one of the most profitable companies in the world, thanks to a Liberal NSW government turning every major NSW 'public' road into a Toll Holding toll road.

That's how good government works, making sure the public pay tooth and nail for a 'public' road as that helps out the donors and the shareholders.

insane_dreamer
3 replies
13m

Article is spot on about the problems, but as much as I'm a huge fan of European style mass transit, we really need to let go of the idea of "push more public transportation" as some sort of solution in the U.S. IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. The US as a country has for the past 100 years been built around cars, both in cities and rural areas, and it would probably take another 100 years to change that if there was even the willpower to do so (which there is not). So whatever solutions we implement need to just accept that fact; it's fanciful and counter-productive otherwise.

s0rce
0 replies
12m

Didn't major European cities manage to pivot away from some pretty major car centric design effectively...

iamthirsty
0 replies
10m

IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN

It could happen, it would just require such a massive shift in current attitudes and regulation that it's not very likely.

So whatever solutions we implement need to just accept that fact; it's fanciful and counter-productive otherwise.

Discussion is almost never counter-productive. I would highly advise against trying to reduce the amount of discussion (in general and on this issue.)

It's not a fact that it won't happen because it is technically possible, and there is a large portion of people pushing for it, and it's expanding in cities like Miami (where I live), Florida in general, Texas, etc.

Ironically, with enough discussion anything is possible, including a massive shift to public transport in the U.S.

Althuns
0 replies
4m

These things don't have to be one or the other. There are places where it's very important that we transition towards less car-focused infrastructure and there are others where we will invest more in that infrastructure. Contrary to many contrarian beliefs, European style mass transit doesn't include the complete removal of cars.

iamleppert
3 replies
5h49m

Until they can produce an EV that doesn’t feel like a massive downgrade in connvience, performance, cost, basically all the ways normal people measure the decision of buying a car, I’m not sold.

I like the fact it takes a few minutes to refuel my car, and it’s the same process regardless if I’m traveling 5 miles or 500. I don’t need to deal with charging stations, and if I run out of gas I can take a gas can to the car and problem solved. I can also store as much excess gasoline as I want just by having an extra container and if I take it with me, I can basically define whatever range I want.

I also don’t mind stopping at gas stations and it’s part of my routine where I like to talk to the people there. Sitting alone for an hour in a parking lot where I have somewhere to be isn’t my cup of tea.

I don’t want a vehicle that gradually looses half of its range over time, then has to have over $10k invested (sometimes quite a bit more) in a new battery every 100-150k miles. It’s like buying a gasoline car where the engine not only wears out and performance greatly degrades, but is virtually guaranteed it will always need a complete engine replacement.

I don’t want to worry about greatly reduced range in the winter. I don’t want to worry about a battery fire. When’s the last time you have seen a gasoline car spontaneously combust just sitting in a garage? Despite having a lot of flammable liquid it just doesn’t happen.

I also expect the resale value of the car to be reasonable, at least consistent with a good quality gasoline car.

Then there’s Elon Musk. His toxicity is reason alone for me to delay any EV purchase (not just Tesla) for as long as possible.

Outside of the tech echo chamber, I think I represent the majority of people who aren’t interested in EV’s and likely never will be. I wouldn’t care if they had a full self driving car, or make the car out of glass, or put a giant screen in it, I’m not buying it.

vel0city
0 replies
3h0m

I like the fact it takes a few minutes to refuel my car

I guarantee you spend more time fueling your ICE than I do my EV in a given year.

ben_w
0 replies
5h38m

and if I run out of gas I can take a gas can to the car and problem solved.

Fair. IMO there should at least be an emergency slot for a short-range battery to get you a few miles.

I don’t want a vehicle that gradually looses half of its range over time, then has to have over $10k invested (sometimes quite a bit more) in a new battery every 100-150k miles. It’s like buying a gasoline car where the engine not only wears out and performance greatly degrades, but is virtually guaranteed it will always need a complete engine replacement.

Sure, but also the engine doesn't need (so much) servicing in the meantime. You can pick your poison — and yours preference is of course valid, and I suspect the norm — but there's no perfect answer.

When’s the last time you have seen a gasoline car spontaneously combust just sitting in a garage? Despite having a lot of flammable liquid it just doesn’t happen.

Apparently it does: https://electrek.co/2022/01/12/government-data-shows-gasolin...

Then there’s Elon Musk. He’s reason alone for me to delay any EV purchase (not just Tesla) for as long as possible.

This is a bit of a surprise. "Musk -> no Tesla" I can understand, but why take his shenanigans to also exclude all the other car companies?

Sankozi
0 replies
3h55m

You need to choose better sources. Your post seems like a list of common anti EV fake tropes.

Except battery range, charging time during long trip and initial cost (of a new car) EV are already better than ICE.

You don't change battery every 100-150 miles due to 50% capacity loss. You lose maybe ~10% by then.

Unless you are driving in Arctica you don't lose much range in winter (and in ICE you lose range too).

Your ICE car is more likely to spontaneously combust than EV car.

garte
3 replies
55m

Reading this thread gives me the creeps. So much entitlement. As if owning multiple cars or being able to drive 1000s of kilometres for holidays is a human right.

Having kids and reading this thread is fucking depressing.

mathiasgredal
1 replies
21m

Yeah, people here don’t seem to realize that burning fossil fuels is the primary driver(~90% of CO2 emission) of global warming: https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/science/causes-effects-c...

Still they can’t be inconvenienced the slightest by driving an EV, even though they have a much lower carbon footprint: https://lutpub.lut.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/163938/Kandidaa... (see figure 4)

I reality we could do much better than EV’s, since their production still has a large impact on the environment, and we should instead be focusing on cycling or using public transport, instead of driving everywhere.

I don’t have much hope for this, given what I see here.

garte
0 replies
17m

Producing cars at the scale we're currently at is what's most troubling. EV's won't save us, we have to reduce individual car ownership and push for alternatives (car sharing and public transport).

BirAdam
0 replies
3m

I disagree that this is entitlement.

Some areas are built around automobiles. I'd rather not be financially burdened with buying/maintaining vehicles for myself, for my wife, and for my son. Unfortunately, most areas of the USA that are affordable are also built around the expectation that people have automobiles. While mass transit exists, it also isn't reliable in many of those selfsame areas. There's no sense of entitlement involved, this is more "what it takes to make it" in some areas.

Driving 1000s of kilometers for a holiday also isn't necessarily the thing. When my brother was having some emotional issues that became an emergency it was a good thing to be able to drop everything, get in my car, and drive out to see him. When my sister was in the ER about 1200 kilometers away, same thing. People argue for flight in those cases, but that would have taken longer and been more expensive.

As for kids, while things may be difficult in the future, I have faith that humankind will face and overcome the challenges thrown at the species. Humans have done so in the past, and I trust that they will do so in the future. Further, humans are not responsible for situations/actions that they had no hand in, had no say in, and have no control over. If people really want to start pointing blame for the way things are, they will inevitably be pointing fingers at some dead person or dead group of people. We can deal with things now, but unless someone can get the US congress to stop giving oil companies corporate welfare (voting hasn't helped despite Americans voting for candidates who had this as a campaign promise), I do not see anything changing.

donatj
3 replies
6h21m

For myself, someone who actually wants an electric car, a big part of the hesitation is that I'll have to basically give up my garage to our cars.

As is, it's basically a detached workspace - so my family having to park two cars in there makes an electric car a massive loss of usable square footage.

It would also likely mean having to rewire my garage which had an actual Fusebox from the 70s - a cost I'd love to avoid.

pornel
2 replies
6h2m

There are outdoor chargers, if you have a driveway.

Also note that in city/commute use BEV needs to be charged about once a week, not every night.

donatj
1 replies
5h30m

I’ve thought about that. There is a fence immediately right of my driveway and an alley immediately left. I have very little space to install any sort of pole, and as I live in Minnesota, what little space I do have is needed badly for snow storage. It’s already a problem, last winter the snow was stacked above 6 feet either side.

The left side of my garage potentially has room for a charger to be mounted to the face of the garage, the right side does not.

How long are the cables generally? If I could charge both cars from the left of the garage with like extra long charging cords it could maybe be workable if not a tripping hazard. I also wonder how flexible the cables are in -20°F to -30°F weather? Do they get stiff/brittle?

vel0city
0 replies
3h8m

The cable lengths can vary. The EVSE I recently installed has 24ft of cable. I can't speak to what the cable is like in that cold though, around here my garage rarely gets below freezing.

https://grizzl-e.com/products-specs/grizzl-e-classic/

darkstar_16
3 replies
8h11m

I think this is a US only problem. People in the US probably take longer road trips than the rest of the world. When I take a Roadtrip, I need a 20 minute break every two hours anyway, and as far as I have seen that is enough for a charge for the next two hours. It's not perfect but I don't think it's as bad as the people in this thread are making it out be. I'm in Europe btw.

thatfrenchguy
0 replies
3h13m

I live in the US, the number of folks who told me “can’t buy an EV, I drive for 5 hours straight” is pretty high, it’s fairly crazy. Especially when you think of how much not stopping increases your accident risk.

sandos
0 replies
3h40m

Agree, the american perspective is hard to understand for me as a european.

On the other hand, people with extreme needs, I think, more often write online. It is normal even in my european country seeing a bunch of comments just not agreeing with what a majority if people think.

I have very modest car needs at all, and I seldom write that almost any EV would satisy my range needs. For me its an economic problem instead, just not worth it when driving seldom.

jdeisenberg
0 replies
42m

Driving from San José California to Los Angeles with 20 or 30 minute recharging stops every two hours works great for me. I get to walk around, stretch, maybe do some shopping if the charging station is at a shopping center. Yes, it adds time to the trip, but (at least for me) it’s a lot less stressful.

Tiktaalik
3 replies
24m

The article nails it really. The core problem here is that a small minded swap from ICE to EV is only a mild implementation improvement on top of an already fragile transportation system that is riddled with problems.

The government could really get the ball rolling by incentivizing a switch further by by adding more stick along with the current carrots, adding a carbon tax to make ICE vehicles less appealing, but that is likely to be unbelievably contentious as it is in Canada.

The bigger gains have always been a more fundamental transformation of the transportation system from car oriented to a multi-modal system of moving people around via walking/cycling/bus/train.

The article suggests that this is expensive but I don't really think it is. Cycling infrastructure is unbelievably cheap compared to everything else, and walking is made more viable at the stroke of a pen simply by changing the zoning and building code to actually allow people to build walkable neighbourhoods with retail amenities, which unbelievably remain outright banned in so many places.

iamthirsty
0 replies
13m

adding a carbon tax to make ICE vehicles less appealing

Taxes are already built in, heavily so — on fuel, registrations, etc.

The #1 way to push the stick would be to dramatically raise fuel prices.

I'm personally an overall fan of ICEV over EV, but if you wanted to do it, raising fuel prices at the exact moment ICEVs in the U.S. are becoming bigger & heavier would greatly increase the incentive to move to EV.

Solvency
0 replies
8m

Our entire approach to town and city building is fucked. People/professionals all vacation to places like Tulum (etc) where you can just walk through little slices of paradise on foot (or scooter) and reach everything you need sans car, rave about how great it is, and then go back home and continue designing and building the worst imaginable human experience infrastructure.

DoubleDerper
0 replies
12m

"and walking is made more viable at the stroke of a pen simply by changing the zoning and building code to actually allow people to build walkable neighbourhoods with retail amenities,..."

This is an easy claim but unrealistic in North America. For the Boomers that have lived in single family housing for decades, those who also represent the larget voting block in most major cities, you're expecting them to forfeit their percieved "quality of life."

Have you seen large apartment projects in US cities, they are atrociously designed, with the vanity of walkability but rarely deliver the NYC or San Francisco level of walkability that they are selling.

Yimbys would do well to insist upon better replacement products.

JohnFen
3 replies
5h29m

I won't buy any car, electric or ICE, that comes with a data connection to someone else's server. That appears to include all EVs.

t_tsonev
2 replies
5h10m

I've got some bad news for you...

oittaa
0 replies
4h10m

Yep. These luddites and trolls haven't been paying attention.

eCall was made mandatory in all new cars approved for manufacture within the European Union as of April 2018
JohnFen
0 replies
1h48m

What's that? That I can only buy old vehicles? I already know that, it's been true for a while now.

HackeNewsFan234
3 replies
37m

For those with EVs or considering EVs, do EV buyers buy with the intent of keeping the car and running it into the ground?

I have no problem buying a VW or Toyota and keeping it running until it gets so old that it is no longer feasible. I don't buy an EV for this because I don't think it would make it nearly as long. I might be wrong, but that is my mindset.

Going with this, I feel this limits EV buyers to those who intend to get a new car every few years.

p1esk
0 replies
35m

I bought a plugin hybrid because I don't like the noise and smoke of the gas engine.

halper
0 replies
31m

We did. According to our estimates of electricity vs petrol, we would break even (vs petrol car) after about seven years, assuming it was valued at zero at that time. Now we have driven a bit more than we estimated, so it has been less costly than a petrol car. The range has dropped perhaps 5% in the time, which is hardly noticeable. The AC compressor blew up four days before the warranty expired, so let's hope it lasts another few years.

The next purchase is probably 3–4 years in the future. At that time the child is older and can stand some longer road trips, which means we are going to want more range.

buerkle
0 replies
33m

I bought a one year old used Leaf back in 2016 and still use it. The range isn't great with only 50-60 miles, but it works well for my commute and getting around town. For longer trips, I use my wife's car. I've considered buying a newer EV with longer range, however, I don't need it, so I've stuck with the Leaf and will probably drive it for another few years.

Keep in mind, newer EVs have better temperature control with longer lasting batteries than the ones on my 2015 Leaf. And my car started with only 85 mile range. But I knew that when buying the car.

phtrivier
2 replies
6h58m

A missing part of the "flawed" plan: it was relying on expectation that battery ranges would improve exponentially thanks to all the "breakthroughs" that were published on a regular basis to get views on tech news site.

Except, no, it still does not work as a drop-in replacement, so you have to change the whole society instead, which sucks because we're kinda on a deadline here, aren't we ?

To put it mildly "the engineers got their estimates wrong, the salespersons oversold, and now we have to do a massive redesign of the product to give you only 60% of what you used to have".

Or, to put it less mildly, "everyone lied, and now we're in trouble".

mips_r4300i
0 replies
2h43m

A typical high end 18650 cell in 1997 was 1600mAh. A typical high end 18650 cell in 2023 was 3200mAh.

So it took us 25 years to get a 2x density improvement in li-ion cells.

We desperately need higher density but it is very slow going. The density necessary to "save" EVs for the layman is unfortunately not coming soon.

Astronaut3315
0 replies
3h49m

As an EV owner, range doesn’t matter to me beyond ~200 miles real world or so. It’s the 10-70% charge speed that matters the most. And advances are being made there- see KIA/Hyundai.

imhoguy
2 replies
9h9m

Charging needs to be more convenient like gas refueling is. Max 5 minutes in any town or remote station. It is only achievable with battery swap/rental system - such already function in Asia for scooters.

genocidicbunny
1 replies
8h6m

Exactly. Many frequently cite the lower cost of charging the car vs paying for gas, but don't acknowledge the extra time spent.

Let's say I spend $500/mo on gas for an ICE car. That's roughly 6 fill-ups per month at the gas prices where I live for a full tank that gets me 350 miles of range. How long does charging up an EV take for the same kind of range? How long does it take for 6 full recharges per month? Filling up the gas tank takes me 3 minutes on average, that's about 20 minutes per month. I bet EV recharging takes a lot longer, but even if we're generous and we say 20 minutes for a full 0-100 charge, that's 2 hours a month. 2 wasted hours of my time is worth far more than $500 to me.

When I'm driving my car, and specifically refueling, most often it is not on some long journey where I could use the 20 minute break from driving to stretch, go to the bathroom, etc. It's during commuting where I have other stuff to do. That extra time spent waiting for the EV to charge is just wasted time to me -- I don't want to sit around futzing with my phone or 'relaxing' -- I have shit to do. And no, I can't charge at home because there's no way that's happening where I live, nor do I frequent any shops/malls that have charging stations that I can rely on, nor does my workplace offer such a service.

thatfrenchguy
0 replies
3h14m

People with EVa charge 99% of their miles at home, so you’re gaining time.

complianceowl
2 replies
3h31m

For those folks who think they're saving the planet by driving an electric car, they need to realize most of the power for their EV is generated by fossil fuels and natural gas -- not wind, solar, or hydro.

bluGill
1 replies
3h24m

In some places, but share of wind and solar is increasing fast. Where I live we are 103% wind - that is we generate more electric from wind than we use (it is exported to other regions nearby and when the wind isn't blowing we do import power from other sources).

Meanwhile your ICE is 100% fossil fuel. And the ICE is less efficient at turning those fossil fuels into power than a central power plant.

complianceowl
0 replies
3h11m

That's an awesome scenario to be in! Hopefully that scenario becomes more common throughout the world.

GNOMES
2 replies
2h16m

The biggest hurdle for many is the price of a new car + premium for electric.

--

Imagine a fairly priced "off the shelf kit" to convert existing cars:

1) Wide spread adoption of renewable energy, reducing fears of range anxiety, more demand for charging/fuel stations.

2) Dealers can option existing inventory as renewable, possibly increasing sales/profits

3) Would increase jobs/expertise in the mechanic and after market industries.

4) Keeps existing cars out of the scrap yards/land fills. Cut on manufacturing pollution of new cars.

5) Hobbyists and collector car owners could convert their cars as well.

Negatives that kill the idea:

1) Would cut into automaker profits, so I doubt lobbyist support/government incentives

2) Would hurt adoption of new safety features. Insurance companies go womp womp.

wakawaka28
1 replies
1h53m

Off the shelf kits exist. There are also people who specialize in installing them. I think these kits don't take off because the people who are car nuts do some research about what type of performance can be expected from a conversion, and they conclude it would make the car worse overall. Worse performance, worse resale value.

Classic cars are only possible to collect at all because of a lower level of proprietary crap than new cars. If you convert a perfectly working classic car, you're throwing away whatever engineering goodness is inside it to install some inferior bespoke and likely proprietary system. You will probably have to cause permanent damage to the original frame and body of the car. What you end up with is a weird combination that could malfunction in some circumstances, and has inferior range and resale value.

GNOMES
0 replies
1h35m

I was thinking more along the lines of a simple/reversible modification like existing propane conversions. I know there are people doing body off Tesla conversions and the like.

I envision batteries + motor/bio fuel cell in the trunk or something. I believe Mazda is looking into electric motors inside of wheels/hubs and Honda was exploring hydrogen in push rod engines.

I come from a hot rod family, so I understand your point on classics. Perfect example is a T-bucket vs a Model T.

xivzgrev
1 replies
3h26m

I’m surprised none of the top comments mention that California will be banning gas cars starting in 2035, with a handful of other states following

So whatever problems are being mentioned here…will have to be figured out in the next 10 years.

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/states-banning-new-gas-po...

a_gnostic
0 replies
3h22m

California has banned many things, that are still widely available. If the history of banning things has taught us anything, it's that if you ban gas powered cars; People will build them in their bathtubs.

temporallobe
1 replies
1h42m

About two years ago, I tested my friend’s Tesla and was so thrilled (I love fast cars, and it absolutely blew away any muscle/sports I had owned). But after some time, I got turned off by the absurd pricing, lack of chargers in my area, and all the other inconveniences/problems/bugs of an EV. The friend who has the Tesla is now disenchanted with the while EV experience and wants out. EV ownership is unnecessarily complicated and until we vastly improve our infrastructure, work out the bugs, and standardize everything, they won’t get widespread adoption.

escaper
0 replies
1h38m

What are you even talking about? EV's require far less ongoing maintenance than ICE cars and if you have charging at home, you're not stopping for gas all the time in the middle of errands etc. There are almost never "bugs" and if there are, most are taken care of by over-the-air updates whereas any problem in an ICE car requires you to go to a dealership.

My experience has been that 99% of EV owners I've talked to say they'll never buy another ICE vehicle.

poulpy123
1 replies
6h1m

- I buy my cars used for less than 10k€ - I just have one car - I sometimes have to drive 500+km - I have no way to charge it at home or at the people I visit

so I'm in the people that are not going to buy an electric car soon

oittaa
0 replies
4h14m

Every time these same low tier troll comments. Can someone point me how to block these trolls? I couldn't see anything in the FAQ about blocking/muting.

paulsutter
1 replies
3h42m

Flagged for misleading clickbait. The article says that the growth rate has slowed, yet the title says sales are declining.

Sure, sales of EVs keep going up — a record 300,000 cars sold in the US in the third quarter of 2023 were electric — but the pace of adoption has markedly slowed
datadrivenangel
0 replies
3h39m

The anti-EV fud is so strong right now. Now it's down to only 30% YoY sales.

offices
1 replies
8h18m

in the US

Oh, so we're ignoring the massive increase in China.

rcMgD2BwE72F
0 replies
7h47m

Have EV sales actually declined in the US in 2023? Or even 2023 Q4?

jakewins
1 replies
6h50m

Data: EV sales up 50% YoY. Business Insider headline: “Fewer people are buying electric cars”.

A useful discussion for HN might be: Why are they choosing this framing?

Some discussion in Electrek about why the record growth is framed as if the numbers show absolute-figure declines: https://electrek.co/2023/11/09/which-is-it-already-is-us-ev-...

dnissley
0 replies
2h55m

The answer is obvious when you look at who wrote this op-ed.

Always remember: It's bad on purpose to make you click.

howduzitwork
1 replies
4h12m

I can't afford 30K for a new battery every few years.

Schiendelman
0 replies
4h10m

That’s not a real concern; it’s propaganda.

holoduke
1 replies
6h12m

Can someone advise me when you have a family of 4 kids? Thinking of buying a Ford Explorer. About 30k for a 3 years old one. I believe there are no equivalent EVs. An old model X is just not practical.

vel0city
0 replies
2h56m

I don't have four kids, but I am really interested in getting an EV/PHEV minivan eventually. Hopefully more vehicles like the ID.Buzz come out and prove a bit of a market for it. Right now, the only PHEV minivan in the US market is the Chrysler Pacifica, and I'm not entirely sure on the reliability of its drivetrain.

But yeah there's currently not a lot of 3+ year old used EVs out there because a lot of models are barely even three years old and haven't even been produced in mass quantities for 3+ years. This situation is likely to change over the next 5 years or so.

braiamp
1 replies
3h13m

Since Americans have been promised a one-to-one substitute for their gas cars, this seems like a failure; an EV should be able to do everything a gas car can. This idea persists even though in 2023 the average US driver traveled only about 40 miles a day, and in 2022 about 93% of US trips were less than 30 miles. Still, in a survey conducted by Ipsos last fall, 73% of respondents indicated they had concerns about EV range.

This right here is the problem. For >99% of your yearly trips you do not need the range. EV's aren't 100% replacements of ICE. They are a replacement for urban, interurban and trips under 500 km range. For my country, for example, there's no two way trip that is longer than 200 km, and the ones that are are so rare and usually overnight so you have charging figured out.

rchaud
0 replies
2h45m

That isn't good enough when you consider how much these vehicles cost compared to a used ICE car. Charging infrastructure is terrible outside of some states, whereas gas stations are plentiful even in the middle of nowhere.

The people that think "I won't need this range" aren't buying EVs, they are using Uber, transit or Hertz.

vmfunction
0 replies
9h7m

At this point the whole greenwash thing, do I really want drop one environmental disaster tech for another? With old car it is at least the devil we know, and it is superior tech from user point of view.

victor106
0 replies
6h40m

When automakers pivoted to EVs, they focused on the kinds of cars that were already popular — which meant a flood of big electrified SUVs and trucks.

This point is flat out wrong. The only true EV- SUV that was available till the end of 2022 is the model-X.

tonis2
0 replies
1h27m

I'm going to wait until battery technology updates, everyday I see in the news about solid-stage batteries, sodium batteries ..etc

Like 60% of the price of electric car are the batteries, I guess.

tk90
0 replies
24m

Rather than doom and gloom based on personal EV demand, I'd love to see the numbers on corporate EV adoption too (corporate fleets and electric semi trucks). The push for renewables in states like California show an entirely different story than what this article suggests.

theltrj
0 replies
6h48m

the first line of the article "a record 300,000 electric cars sold in the US in the third quarter of 2023"; the spreading of FUD around EVs continues, nothing new here; this time it is from the opposite end of the spectrum from the crowd saying "Getting Americans to ditch driving altogether would be the most effective way to reduce emissions, but it would require a massive rethink of our transport system."

classic case of the great being the enemy of the good;

thedays
0 replies
8h14m

This HN headline is misleading.

The article makes it clear that sales of EVs in the US are still increasing but the rate of increase has slowed.

It says “…sales of EVs keep going up — a record 300,000 cars sold in the US in the third quarter of 2023 were electric — but the pace of adoption has markedly slowed”.

@dang - This headline should be changed to the article headline “What happened to EVs?”

taneq
0 replies
6h23m

Sure, sales of EVs keep going up — a record 300,000 cars sold in the US in the third quarter of 2023 were electric — but the pace of adoption has markedly slowed

I feel that the headline subverts the lede somewhat. This is in line with most articles like this, where the big headline is a surprising/edgy “EVs are FAILING due to this ONE WEIRD THING” and the body of the article is “EV sales climb for the 15th consecutive quarter, but the quarter-on-quarter increase is slightly down on last quarter.”

t43562
0 replies
5h20m

The car manufacturers have been going after the top end of the market for obvious reasons - it's the first thing to do when your battery supply and manufacturing capacity and electronic components are or have been limited.

There's got to be a point where that stops working. Perhaps it has arrived more suddenly than expected because of inflation due to ...... natural gas and petrol prices.

As for range, it's obvious that people who drive a lot will get a Return on Investment from an EV sooner than the rest of us and thus they can justify the purchase to themselves. So their demand for range is what is being satisfied. My need is for a car with modest range that I can easily afford - no need for fancy infotainment or acceleration or status. I'm not a good target for car companies till they have satisfied higher profit segments of the market.

stillbourne
0 replies
3h43m

I want to buy one, I just can't afford one.

skywhopper
0 replies
1h51m

This headline is just wrong. Sales growth is down, but sales are growing.

That said, what bugs me about these articles is the parroting of stats about how the average driver drives 40 miles a day. But for most drivers, the "average" day is not actually a typical day, and doesn't tell you anything about the capabilities they actually require from their vehicle.

I average 25 miles of driving a day, but most days I do no driving. And then there are the handful of days a year when I do 600 miles in a single day. There are long stretches of the drives I make that have few if any charging stations. I assume the more populated stretches have more, but I don't see them when I'm stopping for gas or restroom breaks. And while I could probably prepare for a 600 mile EV trip on a route I take regularly, if I were driving to different places all the time, I would be far too anxious to rely on my ability to find working, high-quality chargers at the right intervals.

sigzero
0 replies
4h36m

They are still too expensive and the infrastructure isn't in place.

shmerl
0 replies
8h39m

> Getting Americans to ditch driving altogether would be the most effective way to reduce emissions

And build more sidewalks, please. It's ridiculous how bad it is in some places.

shever73
0 replies
5h35m

* Fewer people in the United States.

The World Economic Forum reports that EV sales are still strong in Europe[0]

[0] https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/11/electric-car-sales-eu...

saaspirant
0 replies
4h42m

At least India, 2 out of 10 car I see in my small town is electric

rtorr
0 replies
5h10m

Title is misleading. It is saying growth of market has slowed. EV sales are doing really well, considering interest rates.

roc856
0 replies
55m

The headline is incorrect. The article clearly says that sales are up, but the pace has slowed. Acceleration and velocity are different.

robertlagrant
0 replies
5h22m

In the UK we now have two holdups to futher adoption:

- road tax is going to start ramping up (already!) for electric cars

- ditto BIK tax

pelasaco
0 replies
1h48m

TL;DR:

"While it may be a sexy and industry-friendly approach to the climate crisis, an EV-first plan isn't the most effective way to tackle the enormous challenge we face."

okokwhatever
0 replies
9h0m

I want to drive as much as I want the IC/EV car that I want with the range that I decide, whenever and wherever I want. I dont care If the common HN guy decides to buy the next Apple Car because the fancy screens or the expensive Tesla paid with the startup Options, I want a car I feel proud to own for many many years to dedicate time to work in the engine and to be able to fix it by myself. Somehow it's a matter of freedom that, I'm observing more and more this days, has been lost in the past of this forum.

nbzso
0 replies
8h30m

Two problems: Infrastructure. Price. Solve this and nobody will think using ICE cars.

munificent
0 replies
6m

> Niedermeyer said that while an electric car can meet most people's driving needs, it struggles with edge cases like road trips because of the need to recharge. Since Americans have been promised a one-to-one substitute for their gas cars, this seems like a failure; an EV should be able to do everything a gas car can. This idea persists even though in 2023 the average US driver traveled only about 40 miles a day, and in 2022 about 93% of US trips were less than 30 miles. Still, in a survey conducted by Ipsos last fall, 73% of respondents indicated they had concerns about EV range.

It's entirely true that an EV will work perfectly fine for 90%+ of the drives a typical person in the US makes. Logically, the right solution is to buy an EV for commutes and errands, and rent a gas engine car for road trips.

But the result of that logic is asking people to make one of the most expensive purchases of their life where:

1. They will only use it do things they don't enjoy: driving to work and running errands.

2. They won't get to use it for the things they do enjoy about that product category: road trips, camping, vacations, etc.

Logical or not, it's a psychologically shitty deal. Especially when you compare it to gas vehicles where you can use the same vehicle for both the fun and unfun stuff (at some loss of efficiency and environmental value). So at least when you're stuck in traffic on your horrific work commute, you're in a vehicle that pleasantly reminds you of your awesome camping trip last week.

mgaunard
0 replies
57m

I live in a city that's built for pedestrians and public transport. I have a twenty year old car because there is no value in selling it, but otherwise a car is pretty useless; I mostly use my bike instead.

maxdo
0 replies
3h4m

There is a big media push to say EV market is in trouble. If you look at the price change dynamics for batteries, it's a constant decline. In fact, the first Tesla battery pack battery and the current one have a price diff of 30x.

Right now, the cost goes below 100 kWh. That is an industry agreed threshold of EV becomes cheaper to produce compared to ICE cars. So this and next year, market will introduce several EVs that are cheaper compared to ICE. Add to this government funding incentives. Plus, the side effects of expensive batteries pushed companies like Tesla to adopt stamping techniques, higher levels of automation, etc.

So, the typical buyer persona will switch from upper mid-class early adopters to people who need a cheap car for their day-to-day use.

That's going to be another EV rush, where they will be selling everything they can produce.

Fun fact: China surpassed Japan as the biggest car exporter. And battery revolution held mostly by Chinese companies will strengthen that lead x2 since they are the most capable of producing cheap EV's.

Why would you buy a gas Toyota Corolla if you will be able to buy an EV that is $5-10k cheaper? And btw, Chinese manufacturers are buying factories in Mexico to be ready to export EVs to the US.

Scary conspiracy theory: The Western world is very scared of this wave of cheap EVs, and that's why we see these ridiculously misleading articles.

post-WW2 world: The West produces cars and sells them to the rest of the world; no one else is capable of producing good enough ICE cars.

post-2025 world: west is not able to compete with the price and efficiency of Chinese-produced batteries and hence EVs market overall.

mathgradthrow
0 replies
6m

There is a best of both worlds option, in theory, which is a car with a much smaller battery than can still be fully electric for a commute.

We're wasting our battery capacity on cars anyway. Grid storage is much more important, and cars have the worst possible power demands for use with batteries.

kkfx
0 replies
7h35m

Sorry but NO. I have choose an BEV for a simple set of reasons:

- WFH in a zone with p.v. is a reasonable choice, I live in a home and I have p.v. so at least partially I can recharge from my own energy when the Sun shine, beside that I can still recharge at home from the grid, meaning no needs to go somewhere just to give juice to my car;

- state incentives that coupled with less energy expenses to travel almost put the TCO of my car on par with a equivalent new ICE;

- some "small bonuses" like here and there free parking in paying areas of various cities, access to "emission free" or "limited circulation" zones of some cities, a pleasure to drive, option to activate A/C from remote without polluting other parked cars nearby, similarly keeping the A/C on in case of a long traffic jam and so on.

The point though is that for what I get a BEV is absurdly high priced. It's reasonable price should be LESS than an ICE counterpart, because there is far less inside, less fine machining to build the parts, less to assembly them, less for me in range terms, less in MTBF and so on. I've choose and entry level Chinese EV (MG ZS long range 2022) because of that. The crappy crapware on board is not much more crappy than the crapware on board of any new vehicle, and all of new connected crapware on wheel are a national security and a personal security threat, I chose to accept that simply because ALL car's now are such a nightmare. The rest is just an economy will by some to remove the ability to own a personal transportation mean to the masses, and still retaining the ability to remotely lock those who can still afford one.

Most people are not Citizens and attentive enough to IMPOSE by public will in furor to end such practice, but still smart enough to understand the crappyness and their side implications so they simply choose to stick with old vehicles as much as they can. That's is. Is not a rate toward glorified golf cart, that's the OEM will, it's not about range anxiety (instead about knowing that the large battery you have the less charging cycle you do in a timeframe, so the long it last) witch is STILL just sufficient for most use cases, not more than enough since sometimes it's cold, we are in hurry and on steep roads where a 450km WLTP range became a ~200km real range. That's just PR bullshit to sell chairs with wheel to be sold in dense cities just to move few km per day, ignoring the fact that such model is economically untenable.

kgwxd
0 replies
3h1m

My in-law’s hybrid Jeep just started on fire while charging in their driveway, confirming what I was starting to consider an irrational fear of EVs. I’d rather move around on exploding gas than go anywhere near these gigantic bricks of highly flammable, inextinguishable chemicals.

jms703
0 replies
51m

It is not trivial to get electricity service upgrades that many homes need to charge electric cars. It is expensive and many utilities are backed up with service upgrade requests. PG&E in the SF Bay Area is currently quoting 12-18 months for service upgrades.

jes5199
0 replies
4m

this is one of those "nobody wants a smartphone, the sound quality is shit" kind of articles

hospitalJail
0 replies
4h46m

I want a minivan that holds 8 and can drive itself (mostly).

Electric or Not, I literally don't care.

gusennan
0 replies
7h59m

I bought an EV on December 18. On December 19 I took my family on a 2400 mile road trip up the US east coast and Canada, with multiple days of all day driving.

It worked out fine! Driving the car was also much more enjoyable than driving our loud gas car. Yes, we stopped to recharge every few hours, but I also needed to give my mental focus a break from driving, too.

greenthrow
0 replies
8h14m

The headline is not true. EV sales are still increasinf YoY. The rate of increase has slowed, but it went from +75% YoY to +42% YoY. So it's still increasing quite rapidly.

fredgrott
0 replies
4h51m

You know what is fascinating about hydrogen fuel cell technology that uses the same electric motors that EV uses?

A hydrogen leak is somewhat a non issue as it dissipates with no fire whatsoever due to the pressure hydrogen has to be under to stay at the low temps required.

And its the same issue in the diesel usage case where its actually being burned instead of generating electricity for the output to drive the vehicle.

The only downside will be the same expensive replacement of the fuel-cell itself compared to EV batteries.

ericjmorey
0 replies
1h45m

Why is this blatantly incorrect title allowed here? The correct title is, "more people than ever are buying EVs but the pace of the growth has significantly slowed".

The article itself confirms this as the truth and the original title as a flat out falsehood.

eggy
0 replies
2h31m

I know it's a motorcycle and a non-plug-in hybrid, but I think Kawasaki's offering of a 450cc ICE with a "strong" EV hybrid hits the sweet spot for me. You get 1000cc performance with the EV assist off the line, and 250cc gas mileage when just cruising.[1]

The longer wheelbase is going to make it less of a bike for the twisties than the dragstrip, but you can't have it all!

  [1]  https://www.cycleworld.com/motorcycle-reviews/kawasaki-ninja-7-hybrid-motorcycle-first-ride-review/

doener
0 replies
6h47m

The editorialized headline is not correct. From the article:

"Sure, sales of EVs keep going up — a record 300,000 cars sold in the US in the third quarter of 2023 were electric — but the pace of adoption has markedly slowed, and analysts have suggested the country is no longer on track to hit the government's sales targets."

dns_snek
0 replies
1h46m

European perspective, Opel's lowest range model Corsa (ICE) starts at 17k EUR while Opel e-Corsa (EV) starts at 33k EUR. EVs are a status symbol, not a wise financial decision, for most people. /thread

dimitrios1
0 replies
2h52m

Plug-in Hybrids are the best of all worlds, but currently ridiculously expensive. I wanted a plug in hybrid minivan, but I couldn't justify it even after the tax incentive. It should be the default engine configuration, not some "premium feature"

digger495
0 replies
4h35m

I'm not buying an electric car because they are twice as expensive, still.

dangus
0 replies
3h37m

The most disingenuous part of this article is labeling a slowing growth rate (which is still a very healthy double digit percentage growth rate) to “fewer people buying” electric cars.

That’s not how growth works.

It also needs to be pointed out that the auto industry as a whole is slowing down.

The other thing that needs to discussed is interest and financing. This is a terrible time to buy any car. I’m not personally going to get into a 7% auto loan if I don’t have to. I think a lot of people are waiting.

If borrowed $50,000 for a car in 2021 your payment was $834 a month (0% interest).

That same payment with a typical 5% new car loan will knock $6,000 off the sticker price of what you can afford.

Essentially, cars are 15% more expensive than they were two years ago just when talking financing.

coolgoose
0 replies
7h33m

I guess I am in the minority looking at all the comments here, but I only use my car 1-2 times per week, and that means 350km+ usually on a trip (there and back, and no not even NL has charging stations everywhere).

A car with constant 400km+ range, in colder weather at 100km/h highway speed is still no way cheap enough to be worth it.

boldorange
0 replies
7h3m

I want to buy one as well, but there are few things which i want to know,

1. can I buy a used one? what about the battery life? I live in EU, my primary mode of transport is bike and public transport, buying a car is not a necessity but I would buy mostly for getting around. So I rather buy something bit cheaper. 2. How durable are batteries, been reading that getting a new one cost fortune.

anyone having experience with buying a used one

blitz_skull
0 replies
2h57m

EVs have to be a superior product (read: including the infrastructure) before the majority of people will switch to them, plain and simple.

billy99k
0 replies
6h58m

Some friends of mine bought an electric car, thinking they could go on a road trip about 80 miles away with us (it was fully charged before they left).

They weren't calculating the weight of other things they brought in the car for the trip and would have ran out of charge in 30 minutes.

Full electric is skipping an important step. It's hybrid. Hybrid makes perfect sense. Boost gas powered cars and increase their milage. It allow us to build up the infrastructure to then convert to full electric.

Now, it's a shit-show where major car companies won't ever be interested in electric again because they are losing too much money.

bentt
0 replies
4h27m

Gas is cheap. $3.19 near us vs. $5.00+ a few years ago. Guess what happened when gas prices went up?

api
0 replies
3h57m

We need a ton of infrastructure build-out for EV chargers.

There was funding for EV chargers in one of the recent infrastructure bills, but while the money is there the execution appears lacking. They've barely built anything.

ZeroGravitas
0 replies
7h18m

This headline is false, and it's not the original.

The original sub-head contains the text "sudden slowdown in electric car sales", but the article itself correctly reports that sales are still rising.

The rate of growth has declined, as it often does when things are growing quickly from a small number.

Tiktaalik
0 replies
22m

The "road trip problem" wouldn't be a problem if folks could casually get on a train to the next town over etc.

It really speaks to the broader issues of North America where Canada and the United States declined to build improved rail service for decades on decades. Whoops.

SantiagoElf
0 replies
7h59m

In my family - we have two cars - all Alfa Romeos.

Alfa Romeo Stelvio 2018 / 2.0 petrol / 280 bhp Alfa Romeo Stelvio Quadrifoglio 2021 / 2.9 V6 / 510 bhp

We have ZERO incentives to change these cars with electrics; why would I change my convenience to put gas in the established gas network with the dubious charging station availability (Eastern Europe)?

I drove a Hyundai Kona electric last year; well, when you drive it at 150-180 km/h - the battery dies quite fast :)

I am not convinced AT ALL in electric cars. Maybe in 20-30 years ...

ProllyInfamous
0 replies
51m

Tennessee's state parks are (almost always) FREE TO ENTER, and all of the EV-chargers within (Rivian-badged, will charge anything) are FREE TO USE — and yet I rarely seen them used, even at those within city urban areas (i.e. very easy to access).

I think until electric vehicles can reliably and safely work (in leiu of e.g. a Tesla Powerwall &c) in both directions with the grid plug-ins

...and until legislatively we can STOP PENALIZING EV ADOPTION WITH ANNUAL FEE INCREASES UPON EVs, only. E.g. in Tennessee, EVs (& Plug-in-hybrids?, IIRC) the annual registration fee is about 4x a gas-only vehicle [so $120, instead of $30, depending on county].

Only then can we fully justify lugging around 2000 pounds of LiFePhos...

OrwellianChild
0 replies
43m

HN title is wrong. From the article: "Sure, sales of EVs keep going up — a record 300,000 cars sold in the US in the third quarter of 2023 were electric..."

Discussion is about a more slowly growing market - not one in decline. YoY sales are up like 40%. This is FUD.

LightBug1
0 replies
8h48m

I'm a fan of EV technology, I'm as green as they come and love nature, our lungs, and believe in climate change and the need to pull the planet back from that.

And I have absolutely no intention of buying an EV.

My balance is to run older cars, much less. I commute to work by train, I walk to the supermarkets and back, I cycle sometimes.

For longer distances, I might bust out our 2005 5 door Toyota ... for fun, I'll roll out a 69 Bug at the weekend ... I have some other classics in mind.

I got excited about EV's, Tesla, etc about 10 years ago ... and the passion has absolutely fizzled out.

I've spent time with a few and they're boring computers (and I love computers). I firmly believe that maintaing older cars and using them less is much better for the enviroment overall. AND, importantly, I still enjoy the hell out of my cars.

The only EV I got mildly excited about, recently, for looks was the ioniq 5 ... that looks pretty badasss ... but even that has faded. All the rest look like something I'd ride to the airport. They almost all have the design language of a taxi-cab.

I'm not sure what EV companies can do to reach me. But add me to the list of fewer people buying electric cars.

GeertB
0 replies
5h16m

This article really confuses the problems that legacy car manufacturers have with switching to EVs, with EVs in general. EVs work, just look at countries farther ahead in the transition, or ask the 1.8 million people who bought a Tesla last year. The transition is in full swing.

Tesla's excellent supercharger network is already more than sufficient for roadtripping in the USA and Europe, and now is open to non-Tesla EVs. This piece of writing is just a poorly researched bit of trash.

14
0 replies
2h18m

It is all about cost. Who can afford the cost of a new EV? Not the average household around me. Next I can guarantee the moment widespread adoption has taken place the new road taxes will be added into the equation wiping out the savings EV drivers currently experience.