EV Discussion thread

Grumpy_chap

Martyn1981 said:

Thanks, really thought provoking. With respect to your BiL, I don't think he's right. Whilst some BEV's may reach 1,000 mile range, I actually doubt it may happen, or be of any significant number. There's little point having such range since it won't get used often. Of course the contradiction to that is a poor charging network, but even so, 400+ miles is probably a limit when the cost and weight of extra batts makes it less worthwhile adding more.

Further reasons why the 400-mile range is a good target.

1. Overnight charging.
An efficient EV can do around 4 miles / kWh, so 400 miles requires a 100 kWh battery.
Maximum charge rate on single-phase power supply is a little over 7 kWh.  
On a 14-hour overnight stop, that 100 kWh is the most you can charge.
There are no indications that EV's achieving better than 4 miles / kWh are imminent and there'd have to be to change this part os the consideration.

2.  Driving time.
400 miles is about 8 hours driving time.
Yes, you can get 400 miles in less than 8 hours if you start and finish on the motorway, complete the entire distance at national speed limit without encountering any traffic or junctions.  Reality will be at an average speed nearer the 50 mph mark.

3.  Rapid charging.
If you really do need to do more than 400 miles in the day, even the strongest bladder is going to force a comfort stop.  That gives the opportunity to add more range without extending the overall journey time beyond the comfort stop that is required in any case.

Martyn1981

Grumpy_chap said:

Martyn1981 said:

Thanks, really thought provoking. With respect to your BiL, I don't think he's right. Whilst some BEV's may reach 1,000 mile range, I actually doubt it may happen, or be of any significant number. There's little point having such range since it won't get used often. Of course the contradiction to that is a poor charging network, but even so, 400+ miles is probably a limit when the cost and weight of extra batts makes it less worthwhile adding more.

Further reasons why the 400-mile range is a good target.

1. Overnight charging.
An efficient EV can do around 4 miles / kWh, so 400 miles requires a 100 kWh battery.
Maximum charge rate on single-phase power supply is a little over 7 kWh.  
On a 14-hour overnight stop, that 100 kWh is the most you can charge.
There are no indications that EV's achieving better than 4 miles / kWh are imminent and there'd have to be to change this part os the consideration.

2.  Driving time.
400 miles is about 8 hours driving time.
Yes, you can get 400 miles in less than 8 hours if you start and finish on the motorway, complete the entire distance at national speed limit without encountering any traffic or junctions.  Reality will be at an average speed nearer the 50 mph mark.

3.  Rapid charging.
If you really do need to do more than 400 miles in the day, even the strongest bladder is going to force a comfort stop.  That gives the opportunity to add more range without extending the overall journey time beyond the comfort stop that is required in any case.

Yep makes a lot of sense. And for cars that are mostly doing city driving, and second (or more) cars in a household, I think 200 miles may be an upper target. This would still allow for longer journeys, but will run into potential charging issues, where 70's BiL's comments come in, and offer an alternative.

Will be fun to see how things work out. Looks like some of the potential solid state batts can achieve twice or better the energy density (mass and volume), so if prices get cheap enough, then 1,000 mile range will be doable, but I'm not sure how far in the future that will be, perhaps at least 10yrs. TBC 10+yrs for batts to be cheap enough for a significant minority to consider such huge capacity (200kWh+?)

I'm off on a digression again, but I don't recall any ICE offerings of larger fuel tanks* so some drivers can choose where to buy fuel, and avoid peak motorway fees? Presumably there are after market options for extreme vehicles, but any (small) extra cost and the loss of storage, would probably not be worth it for occassional high price purchases. Obviously I appreciate that the difference between batts and fuel tanks, and 'fueling' opportunities are very different, but still, a thought.

*In essence, I suppose the vehicles expected to do longer trips had larger fuel tanks (as standard) than the smaller city cars, so quite similar to a potential BEV future.

Exiled_Tyke

Meanwhile, are there signs of optimism for the charging structure yet?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jan/01/record-number-of-public-electric-vehicle-chargers-installed-in-uk-in-2022

Grumpy_chap

Martyn1981 said:

I'm off on a digression again, but I don't recall any ICE offerings of larger fuel tanks* so some drivers can choose where to buy fuel, and avoid peak motorway fees? Presumably there are after market options for extreme vehicles, but any (small) extra cost and the loss of storage, would probably not be worth it for occassional high price purchases. 

My Citroen C5 officially quoted 1,000 mile range on the fuel tank but I never managed more than a measly 980 miles

Even with more humble cars, I never needed to fill with petrol at the motorway or other excessively priced locations.

The early Jaguar XJ was fitted with two fuel tanks.

Outside of that I suspect you would be considering proper expedition vehicles, so Land Rover and the like for optional / secondary fuel tank sizes.

We must be careful though as this is roaming outside the topic of the thread and we might end up excluded.

michaels

Martyn1981 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Martyn1981 said:

Thanks, really thought provoking. With respect to your BiL, I don't think he's right. Whilst some BEV's may reach 1,000 mile range, I actually doubt it may happen, or be of any significant number. There's little point having such range since it won't get used often. Of course the contradiction to that is a poor charging network, but even so, 400+ miles is probably a limit when the cost and weight of extra batts makes it less worthwhile adding more.

Further reasons why the 400-mile range is a good target.

1. Overnight charging.
An efficient EV can do around 4 miles / kWh, so 400 miles requires a 100 kWh battery.
Maximum charge rate on single-phase power supply is a little over 7 kWh.  
On a 14-hour overnight stop, that 100 kWh is the most you can charge.
There are no indications that EV's achieving better than 4 miles / kWh are imminent and there'd have to be to change this part os the consideration.

2.  Driving time.
400 miles is about 8 hours driving time.
Yes, you can get 400 miles in less than 8 hours if you start and finish on the motorway, complete the entire distance at national speed limit without encountering any traffic or junctions.  Reality will be at an average speed nearer the 50 mph mark.

3.  Rapid charging.
If you really do need to do more than 400 miles in the day, even the strongest bladder is going to force a comfort stop.  That gives the opportunity to add more range without extending the overall journey time beyond the comfort stop that is required in any case.

Yep makes a lot of sense. And for cars that are mostly doing city driving, and second (or more) cars in a household, I think 200 miles may be an upper target. This would still allow for longer journeys, but will run into potential charging issues, where 70's BiL's comments come in, and offer an alternative.

Will be fun to see how things work out. Looks like some of the potential solid state batts can achieve twice or better the energy density (mass and volume), so if prices get cheap enough, then 1,000 mile range will be doable, but I'm not sure how far in the future that will be, perhaps at least 10yrs. TBC 10+yrs for batts to be cheap enough for a significant minority to consider such huge capacity (200kWh+?)

I'm off on a digression again, but I don't recall any ICE offerings of larger fuel tanks* so some drivers can choose where to buy fuel, and avoid peak motorway fees? Presumably there are after market options for extreme vehicles, but any (small) extra cost and the loss of storage, would probably not be worth it for occassional high price purchases. Obviously I appreciate that the difference between batts and fuel tanks, and 'fueling' opportunities are very different, but still, a thought.

*In essence, I suppose the vehicles expected to do longer trips had larger fuel tanks (as standard) than the smaller city cars, so quite similar to a potential BEV future.

There is 200 and there is 200 tho.  I think it was vauxhall who had a calculator on their website that showed the 200 mile e-corsa would get less than 100 miles motorway speeds in the cold.  Problem is it is the odd motorway journey where any lack of range is most acutely felt.  We upgraded to a 160 mile leaf 40 - but DW still has to be extremely careful making a 100 mile round trip to her sister's when it is cold and this is only about 60 miles motorway and the rest a mix of 20/30/40/50.

shinytop

Nobody has mentioned the elephant in the room (except maybe in passing). Most people can't, and will never be able to, afford a 400 mile range EV.  Even second hand; they just won't.  Ever. We need a charging infrastructure that properly supports real 200 mile EVs where drivers sometimes want to travel 3-400 miles.  

I keep saying this; most motorcycles have a range of much less than 200 miles but nobody cares because refuelling is quick and easy.  A 400 mile motorcycle is possible but nobody wants/needs one.     

thevilla

Sandy Munro on Fully Charged the other week predicted a 1000 mile swappable super capacitor the size of a VHS cassette ( remember them?) in 20 years time.

Predicting "never" is both brave and depressingly negative.  I hope it was tongue in cheek 🙂

Martyn1981

michaels said:

Martyn1981 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Martyn1981 said:

Thanks, really thought provoking. With respect to your BiL, I don't think he's right. Whilst some BEV's may reach 1,000 mile range, I actually doubt it may happen, or be of any significant number. There's little point having such range since it won't get used often. Of course the contradiction to that is a poor charging network, but even so, 400+ miles is probably a limit when the cost and weight of extra batts makes it less worthwhile adding more.

Further reasons why the 400-mile range is a good target.

1. Overnight charging.
An efficient EV can do around 4 miles / kWh, so 400 miles requires a 100 kWh battery.
Maximum charge rate on single-phase power supply is a little over 7 kWh.  
On a 14-hour overnight stop, that 100 kWh is the most you can charge.
There are no indications that EV's achieving better than 4 miles / kWh are imminent and there'd have to be to change this part os the consideration.

2.  Driving time.
400 miles is about 8 hours driving time.
Yes, you can get 400 miles in less than 8 hours if you start and finish on the motorway, complete the entire distance at national speed limit without encountering any traffic or junctions.  Reality will be at an average speed nearer the 50 mph mark.

3.  Rapid charging.
If you really do need to do more than 400 miles in the day, even the strongest bladder is going to force a comfort stop.  That gives the opportunity to add more range without extending the overall journey time beyond the comfort stop that is required in any case.

Yep makes a lot of sense. And for cars that are mostly doing city driving, and second (or more) cars in a household, I think 200 miles may be an upper target. This would still allow for longer journeys, but will run into potential charging issues, where 70's BiL's comments come in, and offer an alternative.

Will be fun to see how things work out. Looks like some of the potential solid state batts can achieve twice or better the energy density (mass and volume), so if prices get cheap enough, then 1,000 mile range will be doable, but I'm not sure how far in the future that will be, perhaps at least 10yrs. TBC 10+yrs for batts to be cheap enough for a significant minority to consider such huge capacity (200kWh+?)

I'm off on a digression again, but I don't recall any ICE offerings of larger fuel tanks* so some drivers can choose where to buy fuel, and avoid peak motorway fees? Presumably there are after market options for extreme vehicles, but any (small) extra cost and the loss of storage, would probably not be worth it for occassional high price purchases. Obviously I appreciate that the difference between batts and fuel tanks, and 'fueling' opportunities are very different, but still, a thought.

*In essence, I suppose the vehicles expected to do longer trips had larger fuel tanks (as standard) than the smaller city cars, so quite similar to a potential BEV future.

There is 200 and there is 200 tho.  I think it was vauxhall who had a calculator on their website that showed the 200 mile e-corsa would get less than 100 miles motorway speeds in the cold.  Problem is it is the odd motorway journey where any lack of range is most acutely felt.  We upgraded to a 160 mile leaf 40 - but DW still has to be extremely careful making a 100 mile round trip to her sister's when it is cold and this is only about 60 miles motorway and the rest a mix of 20/30/40/50.

Our 28kWh IONIQ has a solid 130 miles, and can do 150 if driven properly. For wifey and I, that's more than enough, so if battery/vehicle cost is an issue, that seems enough range.

Martyn1981

shinytop said: 

I keep saying this; most motorcycles have a range of much less than 200 miles but nobody cares because refuelling is quick and easy.  A 400 mile motorcycle is possible but nobody wants/needs one.     

BEV motorbikes and scooters have a huge advantage too, due to the swappable battery schemes. Not sure if any have reached the UK yet, but walls of batteries, seem a common offering/solution. There's even a Swappable Batteries Motorcycle Consortium (SBMC).

Here's an example, but just picked at random, many others have been around before Honda:

Check out Honda’s swappable battery stations for electric motorbikes, hoping to go global

Grumpy_chap

shinytop said:

Nobody has mentioned the elephant in the room (except maybe in passing). Most people can't, and will never be able to, afford a 400 mile range EV.  Even second hand; they just won't.  Ever. 

Yes, they will be able to afford it.
EV is new technology and the prices will fall rapidly.  Just like the price of the motorcar, VHS recorder, CD player, vacuum cleaner, washing machine, and every other new thing.

shinytop said:

We need a charging infrastructure that properly supports real 200 mile EVs where drivers sometimes want to travel 3-00 miles.  
    

I agree.
It does need to be a real 200 mile though:

michaels said:

There is 200 and there is 200 tho.  I think it was vauxhall who had a calculator on their website that showed the 200 mile e-corsa would get less than 100 miles motorway speeds in the cold.  Problem is it is the odd motorway journey where any lack of range is most acutely felt.  We upgraded to a 160 mile leaf 40 - but DW still has to be extremely careful making a 100 mile round trip to her sister's when it is cold and this is only about 60 miles motorway and the rest a mix of 20/30/40/50.

This is the real problem - optimistic test figures for efficiency on an ICE car don't really have any impact on usability.  An ICE car with a range of 100 miles would be annoying on a long run but pretty much any ICE will get 300 miles or more on a tank - the exceptions are, well, exceptional (think Ferrari) and not everyday cars.

Optimistic test figures for EV range really do impact usability.
I was saved by this thread from making that mistake with the Lexus UX, where the quoted 210 mile range would, apparently, not be enough for a 140-mile commute.  To be fair, the Dealer also fessed up.

Anyway, I am officially grumpy today as I eventually persuaded Mrs G-C that we should visit MG to at least see in reality whether any of their EV's would be something we'd shortlist.  I rang the Dealership only to find they are closed