EV Discussion thread

Martyn1981

Grumpy_chap said:

I guess really, the difference is in mind-set.  Tesla, MG, BYD have embraced EV as the future and going fast to be fully-electric.  Legacy auto are still in the mind-set that EV is something to be resisted, tick-box a minimum number of units to satisfy pesky Government targets.  It may take one or two of the major players to go to the wall before the survivors get the message.

Until a year ago, I would have said VW/VWG too in that short list, but they've also now run scared of transitioning as fast as possible. Maybe Ford(?) they seem to be talking a good game, but I suppose we need another year to see how their ramp up goes.

2023 could be the start of a very tough period for legacy auto. Not helped by the Chinese buying more cars from the Chinese!

Grumpy_chap

Martyn1981 said:

Until a year ago, I would have said VW/VWG too in that short list, but they've also now run scared of transitioning as fast as possible. Maybe Ford(?) they seem to be talking a good game, but I suppose we need another year to see how their ramp up goes.

Ford are a tough one to understand.  They've discontinued a large number of their ICE models and not yet launched a meaningful EV line-up (Mach-E is a low-volume product and Ranger / F-150 not yet launched - in Europe at least).

I wouldn't include VAG in that shortlist as they are still behaving like legacy auto, and always were in my mind. 

The new EV companies are starting from a point of gladly embracing the EV and going for it as an entirely new approach.  The innovation is beyond simply the drive-train but also the entire car, which is then "pressed" out en-masse plus the "minimalisation" which has been marketed as design but is really all about cost-efficiency in manufacture.  It results in changes that we may not all like, but that is the price of progress.

The legacy auto-are clearly designing cars and then adapting them to be electric.  Even the better options (and even those without ICE powertrain variants) such as the EV6 show that they were originally ICE cars and then adapted to EV.

Think of legacy auto as the coach-builder who is reluctantly making the horseless carriage and bleating about the loss of employment for stable-hands.  

michaels

JKenH said:

Either there is some substance to this claim or there isn’t but it’s not the first time we have heard it. It seems though from the previous article that Tesla might be disowning the self driving claims attributed to them so maybe there is a grain of truth in this report.

Tesla's not even in the top 10 of self-driving firms, according to experts who ranked all of the leading companies working on automation

The "leaders" include Mobileye, Waymo, Baidu, and Cruise. Tesla was named the only "follower" given its low ratings in automated-driving execution and strategy. The company has long come under fire for its "Full Self-Driving" and Autopilot technologies. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-sef-driving-not-in-top-ranked-autonomy-guidehouse-research-2023-3

As stated above, Tesla are trying to come up with the 'General theory of relativity' not 'special relativity'.  They may well fail to get there but comparing them against other companies who are trying to automate either some motorway driving or operation within a specific geo-fenced area with back up remote 'drivers is apples and pears.

JKenH

Grumpy_chap said:

Martyn1981 said:

Until a year ago, I would have said VW/VWG too in that short list, but they've also now run scared of transitioning as fast as possible. Maybe Ford(?) they seem to be talking a good game, but I suppose we need another year to see how their ramp up goes.

Ford are a tough one to understand.  They've discontinued a large number of their ICE models and not yet launched a meaningful EV line-up (Mach-E is a low-volume product and Ranger / F-150 not yet launched - in Europe at least).

I wouldn't include VAG in that shortlist as they are still behaving like legacy auto, and always were in my mind. 

The new EV companies are starting from a point of gladly embracing the EV and going for it as an entirely new approach.  The innovation is beyond simply the drive-train but also the entire car, which is then "pressed" out en-masse plus the "minimalisation" which has been marketed as design but is really all about cost-efficiency in manufacture.  It results in changes that we may not all like, but that is the price of progress.

The legacy auto-are clearly designing cars and then adapting them to be electric.  Even the better options (and even those without ICE powertrain variants) such as the EV6 show that they were originally ICE cars and then adapted to EV.

Think of legacy auto as the coach-builder who is reluctantly making the horseless carriage and bleating about the loss of employment for stable-hands.  

I think that (in bold) unfortunately sums up the arrogance of those in power today. They decide they know what’s best and, if the majority doesn’t like it, it’s tough cookie - that’s the price of progress.

The move to EVs is occurring, not through choice but, by government mandate. EVs are being imposed on us whether we like it not. That’s fine; that is what in a democracy, we empower governments to do, and they have very good reasons for doing it even if it is unpopular. 

However, I don’t think we should compare the move to EVs with the gradual transition over several decades from horse to cars which was driven by market forces. Regulation and massive incentives are driving this change within a prescribed timetable. Governments are making it impossible for people to buy ICE cars and for manufacturers to sell them. 

This isn’t the S-curve of a disruptive, superior technology. EVs are an alternative technology facilitated by governments who have objectives that are not compatible with current technology. Without the incentives and penalties offered the change would not be happening anywhere near as fast, if at all. As we have seen in Norway the speed of transition is entirely a function of the degree of carrot and stick. If it was all about the superior technology,  change would have happened at the same pace in the US as it has in Norway. After all that’s where the “disruptive” technology was developed. 

The planned phase out of the ICE industry is not something therefore to celebrate; it is necessary but why would we want to gloat over it. It’s a hollow victory when we have to use regulation to win. 

Perhaps, we should spare a thought for those whose livelihoods will be lost, replaced by jobs in China, skilled men and women who are forced to retrain, businesses going to the wall and perhaps refrain from referring to those, who say they are disadvantaged by these massive changes, as “bleating”. 

thevilla

Shouldn't we spare a thought for the countless children damaged in cities around the world by choking fumes, asthma and even lead until quite recently.  Just crossing a busy road is enough to tell you that enough is enough and we need clean air.  I live in a relatively small town but couldn't imagine inner London.  Yet people insist in the freedom to choose and to hell with the consequences.

shinytop

Martyn1981 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

I guess really, the difference is in mind-set.  Tesla, MG, BYD have embraced EV as the future and going fast to be fully-electric.  Legacy auto are still in the mind-set that EV is something to be resisted, tick-box a minimum number of units to satisfy pesky Government targets.  It may take one or two of the major players to go to the wall before the survivors get the message.

Until a year ago, I would have said VW/VWG too in that short list, but they've also now run scared of transitioning as fast as possible. Maybe Ford(?) they seem to be talking a good game, but I suppose we need another year to see how their ramp up goes.

2023 could be the start of a very tough period for legacy auto. Not helped by the Chinese buying more cars from the Chinese!

The current timetable for EV adoption is entirely down to government legislation.  I can't see Europe legislating its auto industries into extinction nor can I see the USA allowing itself to become completely dependent on China.  There may have to be a bit of give and take on these pesky Government targets.         

Martyn1981

Grumpy_chap said:

Martyn1981 said:

Until a year ago, I would have said VW/VWG too in that short list, but they've also now run scared of transitioning as fast as possible. Maybe Ford(?) they seem to be talking a good game, but I suppose we need another year to see how their ramp up goes.

Ford are a tough one to understand.  They've discontinued a large number of their ICE models and not yet launched a meaningful EV line-up (Mach-E is a low-volume product and Ranger / F-150 not yet launched - in Europe at least).

I wouldn't include VAG in that shortlist as they are still behaving like legacy auto, and always were in my mind. 

The new EV companies are starting from a point of gladly embracing the EV and going for it as an entirely new approach.  The innovation is beyond simply the drive-train but also the entire car, which is then "pressed" out en-masse plus the "minimalisation" which has been marketed as design but is really all about cost-efficiency in manufacture.  It results in changes that we may not all like, but that is the price of progress.

The legacy auto-are clearly designing cars and then adapting them to be electric.  Even the better options (and even those without ICE powertrain variants) such as the EV6 show that they were originally ICE cars and then adapted to EV.

Think of legacy auto as the coach-builder who is reluctantly making the horseless carriage and bleating about the loss of employment for stable-hands.  

Yes very true. And whilst I was somewhat shocked that legacy auto 'didn't get it' 10yrs ago, and then 5yrs ago, I'm amazed that for many, even today, that they can't see the writing on the wall. You have a superior product, creating one of the largest disruptions in history, and they haven't realised that the key is the factory, with rapid, and cheap mass production.

Your analogy to horses is interesting, as cars didn't impact them too much during the early small and expensive production. But when Henry Ford went for low choice, mass production, and reduced costs of the Model T from about $900 down to ~$300 over its two decade production run, things changed in about one decade.

After that, once mass production had been achieved, and costs fell - and 100's of companies had failed, or been amalgamated into General Motors - you start to get improved choice, and higher prices as the industry stabilised - ironically this wasn't seen by Ford, who lost massive market share.

Grumpy_chap

Martyn1981 said:

Your analogy to horses is interesting, as cars didn't impact them too much during the early small and expensive production. But when Henry Ford went for low choice, mass production, and reduced costs of the Model T from about $900 down to ~$300 over its two decade production run, things changed in about one decade.

That's kind of where Elon is right now - focus on low-cost mass-production of EV's.  At the same time, legacy auto are stuck in the mindset that EV's are a new technology and warrants a premium cost for early adopters...

JKenH said:

It results in changes that we may not all like, but that is the price of progress.

I think that (in bold) unfortunately sums up the arrogance of those in power today. They decide they know what’s best and, if the majority doesn’t like it, it’s tough cookie - that’s the price of progress.

I don't think it is arrogance.

We want EV's that are safe, well-equipped with creature comforts and technology, etc.  We want all that to be affordable for the masses and for the companies to survive and create jobs.

Elon has seen the way is giant factories and cars that are more simply made.  That is a totally different way of creating the sub-frame and body shell.  It also results in a minimalist interior.

The interior design of the TM3 is marketed as a style feature.  I really think the real reason is how much cost it saves.  One screen is, say, £100 and only requires a simple wiring loom to one location.  Every button probably costs, say, £1 and makes the whole wiring far more complicated. 
The glovebox (which was a pet-hate of mine being controlled from the screen) likely has a simple electromagnet catch and the power is simply dropped for a fraction of time when the screen button pressed, allowing the hatch to fall open.  No doubt that is all much cheaper than fitting a catch assembly and clip to the glovebox cover and the frame.  The marketing dept. can then promote this as a benefit (secure / lockable glovebox?).

So, I didn't think all that much of it, but it is probably better for the effort and investment to go into making the car safe and long range rather than buttons or a catch for the glovebox.
The contrary is the MG5, which is more conventional in the way it does things but failed to achieve a safety rating.

Also, is the change that I don't like all that dramatic?  If I had never been in a car before and, hence, had no preconceptions, would I think that the way the TM3 is all touch-screen controlled obvious?

JKenH

michaels said:

JKenH said:

Either there is some substance to this claim or there isn’t but it’s not the first time we have heard it. It seems though from the previous article that Tesla might be disowning the self driving claims attributed to them so maybe there is a grain of truth in this report.

Tesla's not even in the top 10 of self-driving firms, according to experts who ranked all of the leading companies working on automation

The "leaders" include Mobileye, Waymo, Baidu, and Cruise. Tesla was named the only "follower" given its low ratings in automated-driving execution and strategy. The company has long come under fire for its "Full Self-Driving" and Autopilot technologies. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-sef-driving-not-in-top-ranked-autonomy-guidehouse-research-2023-3

As stated above, Tesla are trying to come up with the 'General theory of relativity' not 'special relativity'.  They may well fail to get there but comparing them against other companies who are trying to automate either some motorway driving or operation within a specific geo-fenced area with back up remote 'drivers is apples and pears.

And without radar/LiDAR they are trying to do it with one hand tied behind their back. 

1961Nick

From what I've seen the appetite for EVs in the UK is strong enough not to require a governmental stick to achieve the 2035 target. The (hopefully temporary) rise in electricity prices & the sluggish roll out of public charging has slowed things down but I doubt that will last for the next 12 years. The EV price war & vehicle availability should heat the market up again regardless of the former issues.