Electric cars

Martyn1981

gzoom wrote: »

Tesla have also said the next Roadster will have an EPA range of 600 miles, your need a 200kWh pack for that.

Tesla is trying to cut battery production cost more than increase capacity at moment.

Hiya. Yep, I've gone with 200kWh in order to meet the 600 mile range, but, isn't that range a bit too big for a sports car, given the extra weight and cost - hence I'd suggest that that battery size is needed in order to provide the enormous amount of power (not energy) needed to give that astonishing performance.

If they could reduce the size of the pack, without reducing the amount of short term instantaneous power available (what super-capacitors can provide), would they do that instead?

Just pondering really.

Martyn1981

Nearly_Old wrote: »

think of the number of new cars that have not been built because people like us keep cars for a long time.

Technically, no difference in the number, since over a large enough, and stable sample, you sort of need one car out, to let one new car in. Unless people are choosing to scrap new(ish) cars too early.

If you'd bought more new cars, then more SH cars would have gone into the pot, lowering the price and making SH cars more attractive, and thereby shifting someone else from buying a new car to a SH car instead.

Basically, the cars need to be removed from the pot, too old, or crashed/destroyed.

And yes, I appreciate that many, many alternatives and micro arguments can be made against what I've said, but on a macro scale, it'll balance out, or mostly balance out.

Regarding the weight of BEV's, I think that's a bit misleading. they are heavy because they have to be, instead of through laziness, or even 'stuff' like soundproofing engine bays.

Also, as has been pointed out, whilst some ICE's are proud to have a 50:50 weight distribution, that can be described as dumbbell like, with weight both forward of the front wheels and behind the rear wheels, whereas BEV's can not only have 50:50 weight distribution on the axles, but also have the mass (and therefore rotational inertia) better spread out across the whole 'skateboard'.

Edit - And of course the BEV's have a lower center of gravity, which is safer, better etc etc. too.

AdrianC

gzoom wrote: »

Tesla nailed it with £ to performance ratio of the S/X. I was in the market for a £50k+ performance Saloon/SUV.

And yet the entry level new prices for the S and X are both a tidge over £90k after the government rebate, but before any petrol savings. Tesla's website shows the cash price taking into account and 5yrs/60k of petrol saving, taking both to just under £85k. Even after those fuel savings, that's damn near a 2/3 increase over the £52k starting point for an Audi Q7. Even the top-top-spec Q7 "Vorsprung Edition" (!!!!!!) doesn't make it to £80k.

But for proper mass market adopting prices have to come down as most people aren't interested in performance cars, so cannot justify the high initial cost of purchase. Prices are starting to fall though as Hyundai/Kia are showing.

Didn't Nissan do that with the Leaf eight years ago? £26k after rebate - at a time when the entry-level Focus Mk3 was just being launched with prices from £16k. The just-launched Mk4 Focus now starts at £18,500, with the Leaf starting at £27k.

gzoom

AdrianC wrote: »

And yet the entry level new prices for the S and X are both a tidge over £90k after the government rebate, but before any petrol savings. Tesla's website shows the cash price taking into account and 5yrs/60k of petrol saving, taking both to just under £85k. Even after those fuel savings, that's damn near a 2/3 increase over the £52k starting point for an Audi Q7. Even the top-top-spec Q7 "Vorsprung Edition" (!!!!!!) doesn't make it to.

I paid £71k, a diesel Q7 speced up to the same trim was only £1k cheaper and a SQ7 from memory was £5k MORE despite been slower to 60!!

.

Since than Tesla has been on a drive to increase profits - which after all is what all their critics wanted to see. That combined with the £ dropping in value means the S/X have become progressively more expensive. But all of that was predictable hince we ordered our car when we did.

As you have already eluded we are in a similar position with VED for EVs and even home chargers. VED on EVs cannot stay £0 forever and government funded home chargers now have to be 'smart' presumably to make future taxation on home EV charging possible.

But if you can see these things coming than getting an EV now makes even more sense. Governments rarely if ever force retrospective changes on cars/services already in place. Think water meters, smart meters, previous VED car bands.

Most people don't think that far ahead, but you clearly are, in which case am amazed you haven't ordered an EV yet!!

AdrianC

gzoom wrote: »

I paid £71k

Yes, you did. But the cheapest available now is nearly £15k more.

But if you can see these things coming than getting an EV now makes even more sense. Governments rarely if ever force retrospective changes on cars/services already in place. Think water meters, smart meters, previous VED car bands.

Most people don't think that far ahead, but you clearly are, in which case am amazed you haven't ordered an EV yet!!

I'm still on non-CO2 VED cars - and heading rapidly towards more of the fleet being £0 than chargeable - and smart meters won't work here, since we have no mobile signal...

gzoom

AdrianC wrote: »

Yes, you did. But the cheapest available now is nearly £15k more.

Actually in decent seat/interior config the cheapest is now £30k more, am not sure what your point is apart from highlighting how strong demand for EVs are if Tesla dare to whack up prices .

Back in 2015 you could have got a decent spec Model S for under £50k, 4 years on people are now waiting for the 'cheap' Tesla to arrive in the UK, but I suspect the cheapest Model 3 you can buy later this year here in the UK will be barely any cheaper - £45-47k for the AWD LR Model 3.

You can keep waiting though, given the state of parliament in a few weeks time we might all end up paying another 5-10% on imported goods like EVs .

Am also not sure why you keep on bringing up Model X prices as clearly only a small number of people will spend that amount on a car. The Kona/Nero are £30k EVs which offer MORE range than my X, but cost ALOT less. I suspect both cars will depreciate next to nothing over the next few years, that plus their cheap running costs make them fab purchases for anyone looking at changing cars.

Nearly_Old

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Technically, no difference in the number, since over a large enough, and stable sample, you sort of need one car out, to let one new car in. Unless people are choosing to scrap new(ish) cars too early.

If you'd bought more new cars, then more SH cars would have gone into the pot, lowering the price and making SH cars more attractive, and thereby shifting someone else from buying a new car to a SH car instead.

Basically, the cars need to be removed from the pot, too old, or crashed/destroyed.

And yes, I appreciate that many, many alternatives and micro arguments can be made against what I've said, but on a macro scale, it'll balance out, or mostly balance out.

Regarding the weight of BEV's, I think that's a bit misleading. they are heavy because they have to be, instead of through laziness, or even 'stuff' like soundproofing engine bays.

Also, as has been pointed out, whilst some ICE's are proud to have a 50:50 weight distribution, that can be described as dumbbell like, with weight both forward of the front wheels and behind the rear wheels, whereas BEV's can not only have 50:50 weight distribution on the axles, but also have the mass (and therefore rotational inertia) better spread out across the whole 'skateboard'.

Edit - And of course the BEV's have a lower center of gravity, which is safer, better etc etc. too.

If the Citroen, the Z4 and the Z3 had been changed every 3 years then that would be around 15 new cars. The point I was trying to make is that the pollution and use of resources (materials, energy, etc) is generally worse than keeping the original car running. When replacing the Citroen the only car we found with the equivalent boot space (remember that this is the everyday workhorse) was the Octavia. There may be a BEV somewhere at £30/40/50k but the Skoda was only £14.5k and ticked all the boxes.



I take your points about BEVs but I've yet to see one on a track day.:o

Martyn1981

Nearly_Old wrote: »

If the Citroen, the Z4 and the Z3 had been changed every 3 years then that would be around 15 new cars. The point I was trying to make is that the pollution and use of resources (materials, energy, etc) is generally worse than keeping the original car running. When replacing the Citroen the only car we found with the equivalent boot space (remember that this is the everyday workhorse) was the Octavia. There may be a BEV somewhere at £30/40/50k but the Skoda was only £14.5k and ticked all the boxes.



I take your points about BEVs but I've yet to see one on a track day.:o

Yep, I get what you are saying, and I agree with the idea of keeping cars longer from a personal perspective.

But what I was trying to point out was that whilst on a micro level, you'd be introducing more new cars, on a macro level, your (and other similar folks) decision would likely influence the market and balance this out on a macro level.

So overall, there would not be a significant difference in the number of new cars. If you took the thought to the extreme (in order to test it) then if everyone, or just most people went for a new car each year, then the second hand market would be flooded - this would create very cheap SH cars, and also cause you problems in that the price you'd get for the 1yr old would be tiny and probably mean you wouldn't have enough money to buy a new car.

Effectively, the new and second hand markets, and the total number of working cars within a market, are all inter-related, and the sum of individual decisions push and pull on said individual decisions.

Not trying to be difficult, nor deny your personal car choices, just pointing out that on a macro level, your choice would probably have little to no effect on the total number of new cars.

What can have an impact is 'nudge' economics or policies, where we are all gently moved. Such as tax policies, subsidies, public transport, etc. etc. which can make cars more or less expensive, and more or less pleasant to own and run, and such policies can be used to nudge us all towards to EV's too.

gzoom

Nearly_Old wrote: »

I take your points about BEVs but I've yet to see one on a track day.:o

I'm in the process of trying to convince my wife she should think about ordering the 'Performance' Model 3 instead of the regular one. 1.41 around Laguna Seca isn't bad at all....

https://electrek.co/2018/12/12/tesla-model-3-performance-laguna-seca-production-ev-record/

However my wife been very sensible points out why she should spend an extra £10K on the same car, for extra performance she will never use and less range .

Infact my wife is frankly just far too sensible when it come to spending on cars, she sees no reason why she should spend £30k+ to change her 4 year old Lexus which only does 6K miles a year, £10/VED, cheap servicing , and rock solid reliability for any other car :rotfl:.

Realistically there is no financial reason for us to get another EV at present given how cheap and reliable the Lexus is and how little miles we do in it - less than one fill up per month. The EV does everything we need as a family interms of holidays/trips, its fully owned, so the running costs really are tiny and will stay us for years and years.

At some point we'll go full EV, but actually after doing the sums I think we're unlike to change cars for another 5 years+, and I think we can all agree there is no better way to practice money saving than by not swapping cars :money:.

Martyn1981

Another article suggesting that we've reached, or passed, peak ICE for light vehicles. And I'd guess that SUV's and pick ups etc will be an easier win as BEV's would make ideal replacements.

Boom! Fossil Vehicle Sales Are Officially Now Decreasing In China, Europe, & USA — #CleanTechnica Report