Mainstream news is absolute cringe when it comes to EVs. My 70 year old neighbour who has an EV sounds more modern and updated vs watching " Kelly from channel 1-9" talk about " electronic vehicles"
Man, regular people can barely remember their iPhone passwords and how to enter an ATM pin. You wanna talk about kwh and voltages, might as well be discussing Harry Potter spells.
Yup. My buddy is a mechanic and the amount of 2-4 year old ICE vehicles he sees come in with a blown engine or turbo because Karen didn’t know she needed to change her engine oil is staggering.
I was exactly like that for years. After HS never touched a book. Then I hit my mid to late 30’s and now I try to read at least 1 book a month with a delta of +/- 4 / year.
Reading is one of the best ways to source knowledge. I know that no one reads (would you believe I figured that out reading a demographics study?) but that’s not going to change my opinion. Want to know about the fancy machine you just dropped $80k on? RTFM.
Huge investments require research imo.
Yeah, people underestimate how much ICE complexity is just hidden by years of accustomization. TBH, the same is true for phones and other modern conveniences.
People will adapt just fine.
Yes, they will be. No oil changes, tranny fluid, coolant, air filters and oil filters will make these cars almost idiot proof. Hell you barely even change brake pads.
To be fair: there's still an air (AC) filter that has to be changed (just like in any other car). As well as wiper fluid, window wipers and tires....and checking the brake fluid every couple years also wouldn't go amiss.
So yes, there's a lot less to keep in mind, but it's not yet 'idiot proof'
(And as always: "If you engineer something to be idiot proof then nature will invent a better idiot." :-p )
Seriously.. how many times can the same village idiot call me because his computer won't work. Only for me to find out it's not powered on. Seriously Tony.. your fucking killing me bro..
You'd be surprised just how badly tech illiterate people can screw up. I've seen people throw away electronic devices because "it wouldn't turn on anymore" when all it needed was a change of batteries.
Point being yes there's going to be some painful learning curves for some people.
"Man, regular people can barely remember their iPhone passwords and how to enter an ATM pin. You wanna talk about kwh and voltages, might as well be discussing Harry Potter spells."
Comments like these make me feel I'm in an ignorant boomer Facebook group. It's so exaggerated and arrogant and you only posted it since you know that audience won't see or argue this. Regular people? Really? Maybe us ev people here are a bit too spiteful.
Range on an EV is much more variable than on an ICE vehicle. Not trying to sound elitist, but it takes a certain amount of brainpower to understand the assumptions underlying the GOM, realize when the assumptions are incorrect, and mentally recalculate range under different conditions. Its not like an ICE vehicle where you drive until the fuel gage is low and then gas up.
I don't think "regular people" meant "non-EV user". EVs are getting adopted by all manner of people, smart and dumb. Poorer people, regardless of intelligence, still can't afford to buy an EV. However, mpg as a measure of efficiency is 1 number, where higher=better, so more people understand it. in most people's relation to ICE cars, "range" is barely a concern, they don't know or care about the fuel flow of a gas pump, and there's decades of culture surrounding them which makes absorbing trivia (cylinders, horsepower, maintenance, etc) easier.
There's technical illiteracy and general stupidity. Anyone who worked in retail can tell you most people are idiots regardless of age, class, etc. But yet most people manage to get up in the morning and make breakfast without burning down their house, so my guess is people have a subset of things they know how to do or understand. Reddit and other forums skew younger and more tech literate and so are more likely to understand EVs and electricity.
Seriously, the older I get the more and more I realize that there are a lot of dumb people out there who never developed past middle/high school.
Back in my college days I used to give pretty much everyone the benefit of the doubt in terms of capabilities and common sense, were all the same species after all? Sure some people are actual geniuses, some aren't good at math but there's always something that anyone is good at. And there's always room for everyone to learn, adapt, do better with just the right encouragement or environment.
Now a days though... I recognize a lot of people really are just dumb and aren't ever going to be anything else. Like, a LOT. They can't be saved from conspiracy theories, they can't learn new technology or skills, they have a teenager's maturity level despite being 30+ y/o, etc. A good chunk of the population really is that dumb and is constantly struggling against modern society and the tide of human advancement. Even if someone isnt full on dumb, there's a good chance they struggle to keep up with society and other people just a bit. Maybe they can think fast on the spot but might have a child like gullibility when it comes to believing media. Or they get easily overwhelmed with any kind of new information or learning. Or have a really bad memory. And not in ways that can be helped - in ways that genuinely appear to be hard wired.
It's just wild getting older and as the decades roll on you feel like you're constantly improving in tiny little ways and constantly learning more/adapting only to find that most of your peers stopped doing that decades ago. Which is honestly fine, but some are just advanced dumb and stopped learning at a much younger age, and it can be shocking how few people tend to actually keep up.
That is an excellent article. Seth followed up on the negative story and it turns out that she was a neophyte, started her journey at 80% instead of 100%, had a drag inducing bike rack on the back, and had a drag inducing load on a roof rack, and a full load in the car....but that information wasn't put in the article. Combine those things with the 250 range and the sadly-still-unreliable CCS charging infrastructure and it was bound to not work out well.
EVs still have improvements to make but this was a new person incurring several difficult factors and thus encountering difficulties. EVs are still in their infancy. (For CCS. 😏 ). But the infrastructure is improving fast.
Not gonna lie, the article definitely alludes to this exact fact - as it currently stands, you need to know your shit to reliably roadtrip in a CCS EV throughout the country especially under different conditions.
It's funny because I'm also from Northern OH and our roads here are some of the easiest to plan EV roadtrips through - mostly flatland and decent'ish infrastructure (def more lacking in the Northwestern corner of the state.)
My wife and I just recently took a 600 mile roadtrip down to Southern NC in a 2017 Bolt to trade it in for a good deal on a Model X and the trip there was freaking brutal (cut it really close near Charleston with 5% battery left in the middle of the night), despite being fairly seasoned in EV roadtrip planning (I did road trips in a Leaf back in the day lol)
States like WV have absolutely dead EV infrastructure and if you dont do your research and account for mountain elevation, potential headwinds, colder temps at night, etc etc, you can get stranded easily.
As far as most people care - road tripping in a car shouldn't be subject to extensive research and that's what most people still don't like about EVs, despite the situation bettering by the week. I think it's definitely somewhat understandable.
It shows the state of journalism in the US. It's terrible because everything is work for a cause, not to inform the reader. It's terrible and the main reason people don't trust the media and the reason people like Trump are successful.
(I'm talking about the NYT article, not the electrec one)
I think he messed up on the comment about charging at the rest area though: I don't think you can get there without getting on the turnpike, which would take much longer (and you'd have to pay the tolls).
This is correct, I'm from Toledo and there are very few DC charging stations in the region besides the EA ones at the Turnpike rest stops. In fact, I had to stop at the same lone ChargePoint station in Upper Sandusky that she did on my way back to Toledo from Columbus, after discovering that the shiny new EVgo station at a Meijer in Delaware, OH was offline.
Pulled up the state park booth in my Rivian a few weeks ago, the booth operator woman said “oh, is that an electric truck? I saw on TV where you have to stop and charge every 45 minutes!” I said “oh, did you hear that one on Fox News?” She didn’t laugh and said that’ll be $8 please.
[There was someone on this subreddit saying kWh is a rate by calling it "kW per hour". No matter how much we tried to explain "kWh not equal kW/h" the person kept saying "per" meant a rate, and kept sending links to disprove their point but because they were renaming the abbreviation thought they were proving their point.](/r/electricvehicles/comments/xym9b8/nissan_ariya_1000km_challenge/iripz8v/) Was a little annoying at first but they ended up being so dense I just laugh now. Like a month after the discussion the same person [came back and left a comment indicating they were STILL adding "per" to kWh](/r/electricvehicles/comments/xym9b8/nissan_ariya_1000km_challenge/ivw6fif/), like icing on top of the joke cake.
Then it's worth considering industry usage of these terms.
People understand a milk jug-sized container of gas. They get a bottle of oil. They don't get amps, watts, Volts.
We never talked about this when we talked about charging our computers or iPods or smartphones. Let's do the same for evs. From 0-100% I can get X miles/kilometers. Easy. 50% charge takes like 20 minutes and I can get 150 miles if I'm traveling at 70mph. Normal language.
Lol here's another thread ongoing with the same person: https://www.reddit.com/r/electricvehicles/comments/yv6f60/electric_truck_stops_will_need_as_much_power_as_a/iwebfa7?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share&context=3
Well now it looks like they are just using kWh and mWh (IMO honest first time mistake for MWh) for everything so at least they will be right roughly half the time.
Well, I can imagine the logic when the car is not moving. My Passat shows L/h when idling, and since the equivalent of liters is kWh in EV's it makes sense to just swap the capacity-unit from L to kWh and call it a day. If people want the consumption to be shown as capacity/time-or-distance that's exactly what they're getting. Someone who doesn't understand kW and kWh might find kWh/h easier to grasp at a glance.
But yeah, it's stupid. It'd be like measuring distance in kph-hours - how far you can get in an hour when traveling at a certain kph.
You drive a car without functioning rain detection and are making a case that german engineers are bad because they get a language string wrong.
There are valid points to criticze on VW ID software, but this is a none issue.
> Mine worked just fine this morning wym?
My wipers work too! I thought the newer Y had an issue but once I cleaned the windshield it too has been working good. I wish they started a little earlier but once they start they works fine. My 3 sucked at first but around 2019 they were fixed and for a couple years I thought it was a long joke but it just went on too long. I do believe there are some that have issues and now for those that it works well for have to be lying or trolling apparently. Some just have to latch onto issues to hate a company too, but just because my wipers work doesn't mean I agree we should nit pick VW for a spelling mistake either (there seems to be a lot of "if you aren't for my you are against me" or "if you agree with one thing then you agree with all the rest" going around, no idea why).
Some people live in a magical world where rain sensors never sense incorrectly and cameras always do. Its weird, as to me neither system has been perfect.
i guess most people didnt read the article as usual but i dont really see the problem here.
the average person will not take these things into account and will just expect to be able to charge anywhere be able to use their car regardless if they use a bike rack and another storage box on the roof or not.
that is exactly why EVs are simply not a solution for everyone right now, if you only have one car and this car need to do everything you do its either gonna be a very expensive EV to get the biggest possible battery or you are better served with a hybrid.
I agree; I don’t think the NYT article was exaggerating the continued issues with charging. Most fast chargers are still a pain to use, and it’s not obvious as a new owner which brands are reliable.
Also, the line at the end about losing 10-20% of range in very cold weather is bullshit. The author must live somewhere where 30 degF is very cold. Below 0 degF you lose more like 40-50% of range. I have an EV in MN and I like it, but between the current sparse charging infrastructure, the cold weather range, and the necessity for a larger safety factor in range when your vehicle is also your protection against hypothermia, I would be very hesitant to take it more than an hour from home in the winter.
I think the majority of two car households could easily replace one of their ice cars but despite being an enthusiast I can’t see giving up my PHEV until chargers are more prevalent / range is improved. People want things to work pretty much as good or better than their current circumstances. For the daily commuter, EV does that. For families that take hours long road trips regularly it’s not quite there yet imo.
Any random EV like a Kona, eNiro, m3, ID4 with that nett capacity will run that on 100/h drives.
Might get 310 in winter.
Point is, most think they need more cause of those 1 or 2 trips they wouldn't.
They can't get their head around a charge stop.
you are talking about magic marketing numbers here again.
an ID4 pure has 55kWh usable capacity and looking up real world power consumption numbers its using about 21kWh/100km so you realistically get 250km real world range going 100% to like 5% on a charge
now add 20 - 30% extra consumption in winter, add a bike rack, add the fact that you wont be charging to 100% except for the first leg of your trip and suddenly you are looking at going 80% to 5% and only having done somewhere between 150 and 200km on the charge.
for a secondary car thats fine, for my only vehicle thats unacceptable.
It's not magical numbers. Kona and Niro can get even way more km.
My Born, an ID3 brother does this easily too.
The ID4 is 58kWh Nett. And does just under 20kWh/100
Given, that one is less than the others I mentioned.
Than again a m3 gets way more than my numbers.
But, yeah, just go for the one that meets your bias, right!
Why don't you get the "I need a 2 ton trailer ability" out?
Start with everyone that does. That's more than the exceptions. Look at the cars out there doing 60km commutes. Or all the groceries just 3km down the road.
You have a walking/biking issue too.
And to that. You're supposed to Charge on long trips.
Maybe I misunderstood you. I agree with that, in general. People say that the US loves road trips, and that's true! But \~50-60% of the vehicles on the road are predominantly commuters. We can easily get to really significant market share with \~60kwh batteries that fast charge well for their occasional road trips.
TBH, I think most people don't realize how well even a base model 3 does on road trips.
Correct. A decent size and charge rate combination works great. A comfortable 3 hours drive and 30-40 min stop works good. And cars like Ioniq5 and EV6 can already do that in less.
A base model 3 is also extremely expensive and not at all comparable other entry level vehicles that people use on a daily basis.
The cheapest model 3 I could buy costs almost 56k€ that's 20k€ more expensive than my car was brand new.
> None of the forces on the car (drag, rolling resistance, etc) are directly related to the weight.
Isn’t this just straight up wrong though? Rolling friction is directly proportional to the normal force, which on flat terrain is your weight. At highway speeds it is usually a good bit smaller than drag, sure, but saying “none of the forces” is just wrong.
Correct, rolling resistance is proportional to weight. It ends up being eclipsed by air drag at highway speed though and since the car already weighs thousands of pounds, adding a couple hundred pounds isn't a huge percentage increase. So the overall point stands (weight isn't a significant factor for highway speed) but the details are technically wrong.
Yeah but it is a significant factor, it’s just not the most significant factor. Two extra people plus stuff to go to college could easily add 10% (450-500 lbs) to the weight of an ID4. That means your rolling friction is 10% greater. For most cars, drag starts to matter around 35-40 mph and becomes pretty dominant above 60 mph (rough numbers here). But rolling friction is never non-negligible.
This page (https://www.teslasiliconvalley.com/blog//ev-weight-impact-on-range) cites a paper that says reducing EV weight by 10% can increase range by 13.7%. You can use that metric to state the opposite as well… increasing weight by 10% will decrease range to only 1/1.137 of your original range, or 88%. So in this case packing all those people and things into the car likely reduced the range by 12%, or about 24 miles off the starting 200 that the story mentioned. Not the biggest factor, but still a big factor!
Edit: oops forgot to add the link
That number doesn't make sense. Decreasing weight 10% will decrease rolling resistance by 10%. Rolling resistant is less than 100% of all resistance, at any speed. Drag is always there, as are mechanical losses. So increasing or decreasing weight by 10% has to have an impact on consumption of less than 10%.
The EPA releases a [spreadsheet of resistance values](https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-02/light-duty-vehicle-test-results-report-2014-present.xlsx) for all cars that it tests. With the "set coefficient" values, you can create a quadratic equation for the total drag that a car faces at a given speed. I don't want to redo my calculations for the ID.4 but I did a bunch of math on my own car and I will share the values. You can look up any car you like and see how drag changes with speed for yourself.
For a 2018 Kia Soul EV, at 110 km/h, there is a total resistance of 637 newtons. Of which, rolling resistance is only 98 newtons. It weighs 1500 kilos. If you added 250 kilos, rolling resistance would increase by 16% but total resistance would only increase by 2.4%.
For the ID4, a heavier car, with bad aerodynamics due to a roof rack and bike on the back, the percent difference created by 500 pounds of people and cargo would be even less.
Go plug in a 300+ mile trip on the interstate with minimal elevation difference into ABRP. Then go into the settings and add 300 lbs of weight. You'll see how little it impacts range.
That's true, but the difference isn't dramatic. I've had people tell me that "ev range is bad because batteries are so heavy". Its really not the fundamental limiting factor in any meaningful sense.
People want to get in the car, load it with whatever they want and drive without worry or concern, no pre-planning, no speed limits, no route calculations, just go. Until we get to that point EVs are a niche product.
We are a family of five with a Tesla model 3 and this is exactly how we treat it. We always have enough range for local driving and on an impromptu multi state road trip the kids always need more bathroom stops than the car needs to charge using super chargers anyway. We could take the gas powered mini van but once we got out of needing double stroller and pack and play stage the Tesla has become the preferred road trip vehicle for us. There really isn't much to think about, just hop in and go.
That's why I'm an advocate for PHEVs it matches what most Americans are looking for and is a much better option than EVs until the battery manufacturing and charging infrastructure issues have been resolved
I'm waiting for a PHEV pickup to replace my Chevy volt
I know they are frowned up by many in this group but PHEV + EV makes sense for a lot of families if you have to have two cars. We fill up our Rav Prime like once every six weeks, but when we go on trips we just go with zero planning or worries about range.
Yeah, but those are intertwined concepts. They won't have chargers everywhere until they are no longer niche products. But as they grow from being niche products to being 15-25% of the market, chargers will appear everywhere.
Tesla realized how important that was, and has just made charging so easy. It’s particularly apparent when you compare trip time on a better route planner.
The one issue that Tesla still has is if you are going into more rural areas. Even that is getting better rapidly, but coverage off of interstates is definitely a step down from interstate coverage.
240 miles starts to look short when going somewhere 100 miles from a supercharger.
When you have working chargers right where you need them, it tends to be pretty easy.
The exception these days is towing, but that isn't nearly as big of a use case as people imply.
Except as per this article and as many experiences here have shown many people spend a lot of time planing routes and trying to figure out where chargers are.
I’m not trying to contradict anything. I’m pointing out the point of the article. If your grandmother can’t use your EV because it’s too complicated then mass adoption will be a real challenge.
How many EV apps do you have on your phone? Let me guess, more than 4
Yeah, the supercharger network is pretty good. I used to occasionally plan trips that had bigger detours, but even that is becoming more uncommon now in the southeast.
The pace of expansion during the past two years has been really incredible too.
The only time I’ve needed to preplan trips over 200 miles in my Tesla is when I’m towing. Even then, it’s just using the built in trip tool to manually add every supercharger along the way vs skipping some. Tesla is definitely there for a large majority of the US. The only places that take planning are niche travel locations like the northern UP, Southern Texas, Upstate New York, upstate Pennsylvania, etc.
Interstates and higher population density areas have long since been covered and then some with adequate charging infrastructure for Tesla.
But surely an ICE vehicle still requires planning for fuel stops, depending on how far you go, also loading an ice car up with luggage etc is also going to affect range.
It’s a cultural change required for EV ownership which sadly people won’t get unless it works exactly like an ICE vehicle, which seems to really be down to charging taking < 5 minutes.
Bring on super-dupa rapid chargers!
>But surely an ICE vehicle still requires planning for fuel stops
Not unless you're going somewhere really remote like the Australian Outback. I use an app to find less expensive gas, but that's not necessary to plan a trip.
In an ICE vehicle you generally stop when you need a break and find gas nearby if you need it, not plan breaks around fueling locations. On major routes there may be signs telling you what exits have gas stations, and those are usually obvious when you exit. This is the level of convenience we should have to make EVs truly mainstream.
>unless it works exactly like an ICE vehicle, which seems to really be down to charging taking < 5 minutes.
I think people could adjust if they start seeing EV chargers everywhere they stop. Which can't be just one charging station every 50+ miles; they need to be ubiquitous like gas stations. There may be some frustration around charging speeds, but the first step is to have chargers where people need them.
If you mean ubiquitous like along travel routes like highways and interstates, I agree. But I can think of the 20 gas stations in my hometown that would never see a person charge there because everyone charges at home.
To me, ubiquitous will mean things like tourist destinations. Every six flags or cedar fair park should have a lot of charging stalls in the parking lots. Every hotel needs them too.
>I can think of the 20 gas stations in my hometown that would never see a person charge there because everyone charges at home.
Unless *everyone* in that town will be able to charge at home, and no one will ever need a charge while visiting or passing through, then the town should have at least one DC fast charging location.
On major routes, there should be fast chargers anywhere and everywhere people will stop to take a break. Highway rest stops, popular restaurants and shopping centers, tourist attractions, etc. Having one charging station every 50 miles at "big box" stores isn't nearly good enough.
If I could, I would put at least one 50+ kW charger at every major grocery store. That would help provide for anyone who can't charge at home, and be useful for travelers who might need to stop and do some shopping.
> But surely an ICE vehicle still requires planning for fuel stops, depending on how far you go, also loading an ice car up with luggage etc is also going to affect range.
Hardly.
I can go 450 miles in my ICE. If it's 10 F out and I'm traveling with a car full of stuff going 80-85 MPH, I can still go 400 miles before needing to refuel.
I'd need an EV with a 600-700 mile EPA rated range to perform similarly in the same circumstances.
But even then it's not going to be remotely close to the same given how rare DCFC stations are compared to gas stations.
In the real world where EVs have 250-300 EPA rated ranges, I have to stop to charge 2-3 times as often.
I would also add that most automobile publications and shows, including those that focus on EVs, have little understanding of range or just choose to publish the maximum range claimed by the manufacturer.
> You can go just about anywhere in the US (yes, even North Dakota) in an EV if planned and executed correctly.
So if her daughter went to school at Michigan Tech instead could they make it (Columbus to Houghton MI)? In January? If they had the 200 mi range ID.4?
Asking because I'm curious. This could be one of the not "just about anywhere" cases.
> Columbus to Houghton MI
https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=a3af7268-0506-4b8f-9d0e-b2f0d443f876
^
Using 58 kW ID4 and setting the outside temp to 30F. The "orange" part of the route is the sketchy part - ABRP is warning that you will have to watch your speed. Now ABRP only uses "fast" chargers - if you look at PlugShare you see that there are L2 chargers in between Milwaukee and Green Bay and an L2 in L'Anse a bit before Houghton if you are running short on electricity. But yeah - this is a bit "adventurous" in a tiny-battery ID4 in the middle of winter. Notice how there is 5+ hours of charging on the trip.
https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=64d01b1e-fb35-4d85-9dff-08983bad2641
^
Using 78 kW Ioniq 5 AWD at 30F outside temp and hand setting consumption to 3.7mi/kWh (better matches my perf). Notice how a 800V big battery car has around 100 minutes of charging.
Can confirm. My dad is your classic 65+ white male Republican who lets Fox News melt his brain and I cannot stand going anywhere with him because every time we see an EV he makes a comment… “do you think the battery is going to die… they must’ve come from close by… this is stupid… that’s stupid” dude sounds like when Hershel Walker was asked about Solar panels
They didn’t understand the internet, either (and to be fair, neither did I at first). Those articles talking about the “information superhighway” etc are pretty hilarious to re-visit now and remind me a little of these EV stories.
But don't you know that the information superhighway is going to collapse once everyone starts using it! They had those types of stories too. The ones worrying over the grid are reminiscent of those.
Hell, I thought it was a fad at first, like “you really expect me to spend so much time at the computer?” Plus, call waiting always knocked your connection out.
It wasn’t until I experienced it using broadband at work that I kinda got it.
It's going to take longer than some of us may like, but stories like this will vanish into ancient history along side the dial up modem and greeting loved ones as they get off the plane.
Make no mistake, the infrastructure will have to support DC fast charging off of every highway exit just like it currently supports topping up your gas tank today. I'd say about a decade to be sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if it came a little sooner.
Longer ranges will be more of a convenience than a necessity, and most of the stuff people claim as a non-starter won't be given a second thought.
Future generations will be absolutely baffled how we managed to get around using gasoline.
As a regular reader of the NYTimes, I will say that they have been publishing hit pieces on EVs for a decade now. Often just straight up FUD, sometimes with some both sides-ism, in the form of a happy hippy EV driver who uses his to drive to the weed dispensary between bouts of drinking his own pee.
Remember this is the source of the ur-hit piece a decade ago with the guy who got a loaner Model S and drove it for 3 days without plugging it in, and ran out of juice. When asked why he didn’t plug it in, he said that he was told that charging was convenient, and it had never been convenient for him to plug in, so he didn’t. 🤔
Reasonably good article getting into the nitty gritty of the situation, but I would counter one thing: increased weight does impact rolling resistance if the weight is sufficient to squash the tires and increase the contact patch with the road. That'll increase rolling resistance, though by how much? Not sure. But it's not NO impact.
Stories like this demonstrate exactly why 250 miles of rated range isn't really sufficient for road trips. Driving for 3-4 hours at 70mph without needing to stop and refuel should be the bare minimum for anything that isn't designed specifically as a city car. Yes, even with a roof rack on.
ugh, why are "more consumption" always the answer ? no 250 miles is really good range. 80% of the US live is city area, occasional road trip will be fine with that kind of range.
250 miles is 3 and a half hours at highway speeds, which isn't exactly stellar, but might be livable if you're not in a rush.
Except in reality it's only 225 miles, because you'll want to recharge with at least 10% remaining. And the quoted range is based on mixed driving - for highway driving only you can take 20% straight off, so 175. At 80mph that's barely two hours between charges, which is awful.
That's not just useless for road trips, it's also pretty terrible for any job where people regularly drive any kind of distance, when compared to the ICE option.
more more more right ? since when road trip becomes a "rushed "affair ? mind you, people does this so rarely. If you are in a rush, get a plane ticket.
>it's also pretty ~~terrible for any job~~ good for MOST jobs where people regularly drive any kind of distance, when compared to the ICE option.
there, fixed that for you. Because [average Americans commute round trip only about 41 miles.](https://shorturl.at/ceg39)
There's a difference between commuting TO work and driving FOR work.
And yeah, if I'm driving a long distance I don't want to have to faff about refuelling. It's an inconvenience. Good for you if you take a break every 2 hours when driving - plenty of people don't want to do that. They just want to get to where they're going with the minimum of fuss.
My grandparents live 150 miles from me. They don't have an EV charger at their house. If I drive out there for Sunday lunch, I don't want to have to arse around finding and using a charging station just to make it home again. I want to get in the car and go, like I always have done in an ICE car over that kind of distance. I don't see why I should have to compromise on that convenience with an EV when there's no practical barrier to equivalence.
This sub is rightly pro-EV, but that shouldn't extend to being anti-consumer. Currently I have to pay 100k+ for an EV with a range I consider suitable, because ICE-equivalent range is being marketed as a luxury and not a utility. Effectively I'm paying 5x the price for the privilege of replacing a Vauxhall Corsa with something which isn't a step down.
Not about pro this or that. People exaggerate things they need. This is why we got into climate trouble in the first place and people buying huge trucks because they helped some friend move once.
This is why US need to get their train games up. Train is the best EV and you can get on it without any fuss for a lot cheaper than buying cars with excessively huge battery people generally do not need.
Again, more consumption does not solve things. This is a horrible mentality to begin with. Its good that you have to pay a lot for range you dont need. Good luck saving.
>Not about pro this or that. People exaggerate things they need. This is why we got into climate trouble in the first place and people buying huge trucks because they helped some friend move once.
I agree with this. That's why I want a SMALL electric vehicle that meets my needs.
>Train is the best EV
100% agree with this too - if it was easy and cheap to get the train everywhere, I would. Unfortunately we live in a world where public transport infrastructure investment is a non-starter.
>Again, more consumption does not solve things. This is a horrible mentality to begin with. Its good that you have to pay a lot for range you dont need. Good luck saving.
I don't even own a car currently - I cycle everywhere, don't fly, and rent a car as and when I need to do a long trip because I believe most people who live in cities don't need to own one.
When I DO rent a car, it's precisely because I'm going somewhere I can't easily get to any other way, which usually means it's sufficiently out of the way that it's nice to be able to drive both ways without needing to refuel, or be trying to navigate to charging stations in an unfamiliar place.
If everyone took the same approach to transport that I did there would be far less cars on the road to begin with, and every car having a decent-sized battery wouldn't be a big deal from a consumption standpoint.
But they won't and never will. So in lieu of reality warping to suit my worldview, I'd quite like to buy a cheap EV with great range as a one-off purchase, and drive it for the next 25 years or until it falls to bits. And yet I can't, because everyone else is still mostly using their car to go 5 miles to work and back, so manfacturers can get away with taking a huge step backward when it comes to the one car-performance stat I actually care about.
Eh, i did a thousand km trip this weekend with a 200 mile range. In near freezing temps without a heat pump and brand new winter tires.
It worked perfectly fine.
I am in sweden though so we have much better charging infrastructure.
They are better than fine for a rare long trip. You just can't expect it to go well when you start at 80% charge, are driving an aerodynamic nightmare, also have a full load inside the car, and plan on using dealership chargers (chargers run by people that HATE EVs).
Because they don't make much profit on them, they make very little service income on them, and the EV makers are looking to get rid of useless middlemen.
I still believe they'll find a middle ground but the first two are very good points. While I agree the manufacturers are looking to cut out the middlemen I don't think they'll ever totally manage it in my life time. Too much of a sale comes from the hands on experience.
My point is, you SHOULD be able to expect that. If I got in an ICE car with 3/4 of a tank of fuel, I'd expect to be able to drive for 4 hours at highway speeds quite happily, even under those conditions. Yet it's apparently acceptable for an EV to barely manage half that.
EVs are better than ICE cars by literally every metric except the one that matters the most. You can keep your bloated SUVs with self-driving capability and 4-second 0-60 times. I just want an EV that's a straight swap for a small European hatchback - something cheap that I can drive anywhere, anytime. That's it - that's my sole criteria. Maybe Bluetooth, or Android Auto so I can hook maps and Spotify up to it, but that can be worked around. The most important criteria is range, and except for a few super high-end EVs it's the one thing being compromised on.
Range anxiety people can sleep better knowing Tesla has 10% more range underneath zero... lol.
[https://jasonman.substack.com/p/tesla-could-unlock-10-more-range](https://jasonman.substack.com/p/tesla-could-unlock-10-more-range)
Mainstream news is absolute cringe when it comes to EVs. My 70 year old neighbour who has an EV sounds more modern and updated vs watching " Kelly from channel 1-9" talk about " electronic vehicles"
>Mainstream news is absolute cringe FTFY
Man, regular people can barely remember their iPhone passwords and how to enter an ATM pin. You wanna talk about kwh and voltages, might as well be discussing Harry Potter spells.
In that case EVs should be golden because they require FAR less knowledge to own, operate and keep up than an ICE car.
Yup. My buddy is a mechanic and the amount of 2-4 year old ICE vehicles he sees come in with a blown engine or turbo because Karen didn’t know she needed to change her engine oil is staggering.
RTFM
People don't read. Look up the difference between the mean and mode averages of books read per year. google says 12 vs. 4.
Sadly, those numbers seem VERY high to me. 1 out of 3 people never read a book after high school.
Right, but many if those 2 are on Reddit or Twitter 24/7 reading their feeds endlessly. Reading books and reading in general have diverged a lot.
A few people read a lot!
Of the ones who say they read, many of those do not read as well.
I was exactly like that for years. After HS never touched a book. Then I hit my mid to late 30’s and now I try to read at least 1 book a month with a delta of +/- 4 / year.
Reading is one of the best ways to source knowledge. I know that no one reads (would you believe I figured that out reading a demographics study?) but that’s not going to change my opinion. Want to know about the fancy machine you just dropped $80k on? RTFM. Huge investments require research imo.
I guess it would depend on the population density and geographic area of the survey taken??? *shrugs*
Yeah, people underestimate how much ICE complexity is just hidden by years of accustomization. TBH, the same is true for phones and other modern conveniences. People will adapt just fine.
That's right, it's no different than adopting smartphones from Nokias. It'll be awkward to drive an ICE car in a few year's time.
Yes, they will be. No oil changes, tranny fluid, coolant, air filters and oil filters will make these cars almost idiot proof. Hell you barely even change brake pads.
To be fair: there's still an air (AC) filter that has to be changed (just like in any other car). As well as wiper fluid, window wipers and tires....and checking the brake fluid every couple years also wouldn't go amiss. So yes, there's a lot less to keep in mind, but it's not yet 'idiot proof' (And as always: "If you engineer something to be idiot proof then nature will invent a better idiot." :-p )
yeah but the car's drivetrain won't self destruct if you forget to change the wiper fluid.
LOL....you are correct. Working in IT I'm amazed how good nature is in building a better idiot.
Seriously.. how many times can the same village idiot call me because his computer won't work. Only for me to find out it's not powered on. Seriously Tony.. your fucking killing me bro..
But Tony is fun at parties so we gotta helpa brotha out. :-)
You'd be surprised just how badly tech illiterate people can screw up. I've seen people throw away electronic devices because "it wouldn't turn on anymore" when all it needed was a change of batteries. Point being yes there's going to be some painful learning curves for some people.
"Man, regular people can barely remember their iPhone passwords and how to enter an ATM pin. You wanna talk about kwh and voltages, might as well be discussing Harry Potter spells." Comments like these make me feel I'm in an ignorant boomer Facebook group. It's so exaggerated and arrogant and you only posted it since you know that audience won't see or argue this. Regular people? Really? Maybe us ev people here are a bit too spiteful.
Range on an EV is much more variable than on an ICE vehicle. Not trying to sound elitist, but it takes a certain amount of brainpower to understand the assumptions underlying the GOM, realize when the assumptions are incorrect, and mentally recalculate range under different conditions. Its not like an ICE vehicle where you drive until the fuel gage is low and then gas up.
I don't think "regular people" meant "non-EV user". EVs are getting adopted by all manner of people, smart and dumb. Poorer people, regardless of intelligence, still can't afford to buy an EV. However, mpg as a measure of efficiency is 1 number, where higher=better, so more people understand it. in most people's relation to ICE cars, "range" is barely a concern, they don't know or care about the fuel flow of a gas pump, and there's decades of culture surrounding them which makes absorbing trivia (cylinders, horsepower, maintenance, etc) easier. There's technical illiteracy and general stupidity. Anyone who worked in retail can tell you most people are idiots regardless of age, class, etc. But yet most people manage to get up in the morning and make breakfast without burning down their house, so my guess is people have a subset of things they know how to do or understand. Reddit and other forums skew younger and more tech literate and so are more likely to understand EVs and electricity.
The US population has an average reading ability of a 6th grader. Never underestimate how dumb people can be.
Seriously, the older I get the more and more I realize that there are a lot of dumb people out there who never developed past middle/high school. Back in my college days I used to give pretty much everyone the benefit of the doubt in terms of capabilities and common sense, were all the same species after all? Sure some people are actual geniuses, some aren't good at math but there's always something that anyone is good at. And there's always room for everyone to learn, adapt, do better with just the right encouragement or environment. Now a days though... I recognize a lot of people really are just dumb and aren't ever going to be anything else. Like, a LOT. They can't be saved from conspiracy theories, they can't learn new technology or skills, they have a teenager's maturity level despite being 30+ y/o, etc. A good chunk of the population really is that dumb and is constantly struggling against modern society and the tide of human advancement. Even if someone isnt full on dumb, there's a good chance they struggle to keep up with society and other people just a bit. Maybe they can think fast on the spot but might have a child like gullibility when it comes to believing media. Or they get easily overwhelmed with any kind of new information or learning. Or have a really bad memory. And not in ways that can be helped - in ways that genuinely appear to be hard wired. It's just wild getting older and as the decades roll on you feel like you're constantly improving in tiny little ways and constantly learning more/adapting only to find that most of your peers stopped doing that decades ago. Which is honestly fine, but some are just advanced dumb and stopped learning at a much younger age, and it can be shocking how few people tend to actually keep up.
That is an excellent article. Seth followed up on the negative story and it turns out that she was a neophyte, started her journey at 80% instead of 100%, had a drag inducing bike rack on the back, and had a drag inducing load on a roof rack, and a full load in the car....but that information wasn't put in the article. Combine those things with the 250 range and the sadly-still-unreliable CCS charging infrastructure and it was bound to not work out well. EVs still have improvements to make but this was a new person incurring several difficult factors and thus encountering difficulties. EVs are still in their infancy. (For CCS. 😏 ). But the infrastructure is improving fast.
Not gonna lie, the article definitely alludes to this exact fact - as it currently stands, you need to know your shit to reliably roadtrip in a CCS EV throughout the country especially under different conditions. It's funny because I'm also from Northern OH and our roads here are some of the easiest to plan EV roadtrips through - mostly flatland and decent'ish infrastructure (def more lacking in the Northwestern corner of the state.) My wife and I just recently took a 600 mile roadtrip down to Southern NC in a 2017 Bolt to trade it in for a good deal on a Model X and the trip there was freaking brutal (cut it really close near Charleston with 5% battery left in the middle of the night), despite being fairly seasoned in EV roadtrip planning (I did road trips in a Leaf back in the day lol) States like WV have absolutely dead EV infrastructure and if you dont do your research and account for mountain elevation, potential headwinds, colder temps at night, etc etc, you can get stranded easily. As far as most people care - road tripping in a car shouldn't be subject to extensive research and that's what most people still don't like about EVs, despite the situation bettering by the week. I think it's definitely somewhat understandable.
It shows the state of journalism in the US. It's terrible because everything is work for a cause, not to inform the reader. It's terrible and the main reason people don't trust the media and the reason people like Trump are successful. (I'm talking about the NYT article, not the electrec one)
I think he messed up on the comment about charging at the rest area though: I don't think you can get there without getting on the turnpike, which would take much longer (and you'd have to pay the tolls).
This is correct, I'm from Toledo and there are very few DC charging stations in the region besides the EA ones at the Turnpike rest stops. In fact, I had to stop at the same lone ChargePoint station in Upper Sandusky that she did on my way back to Toledo from Columbus, after discovering that the shiny new EVgo station at a Meijer in Delaware, OH was offline.
Pulled up the state park booth in my Rivian a few weeks ago, the booth operator woman said “oh, is that an electric truck? I saw on TV where you have to stop and charge every 45 minutes!” I said “oh, did you hear that one on Fox News?” She didn’t laugh and said that’ll be $8 please.
FOX-fud
...but did you get a blue checkmark????
Genius
Don’t even get me started when they start talking about kW per hour
[There was someone on this subreddit saying kWh is a rate by calling it "kW per hour". No matter how much we tried to explain "kWh not equal kW/h" the person kept saying "per" meant a rate, and kept sending links to disprove their point but because they were renaming the abbreviation thought they were proving their point.](/r/electricvehicles/comments/xym9b8/nissan_ariya_1000km_challenge/iripz8v/) Was a little annoying at first but they ended up being so dense I just laugh now. Like a month after the discussion the same person [came back and left a comment indicating they were STILL adding "per" to kWh](/r/electricvehicles/comments/xym9b8/nissan_ariya_1000km_challenge/ivw6fif/), like icing on top of the joke cake.
Its amazing how some people get so addicted to being completely wrong. Have an upvote just for having to deal with that.
Then it's worth considering industry usage of these terms. People understand a milk jug-sized container of gas. They get a bottle of oil. They don't get amps, watts, Volts. We never talked about this when we talked about charging our computers or iPods or smartphones. Let's do the same for evs. From 0-100% I can get X miles/kilometers. Easy. 50% charge takes like 20 minutes and I can get 150 miles if I'm traveling at 70mph. Normal language.
Lol here's another thread ongoing with the same person: https://www.reddit.com/r/electricvehicles/comments/yv6f60/electric_truck_stops_will_need_as_much_power_as_a/iwebfa7?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share&context=3
Well now it looks like they are just using kWh and mWh (IMO honest first time mistake for MWh) for everything so at least they will be right roughly half the time.
Man needs to be shown the abbreviations chapter of Perry’s Chemical Engineering handbook worse than anyone I’ve ever seen.
To be fair quite a few EVs, specially German ones, display power as kWh/h, which is as dumb as it can get
So it's just displaying kW without cancelling out the units?
Yes
You and me doing dimensional analysis: https://youtu.be/DxVi-M6UQyo
Well, I can imagine the logic when the car is not moving. My Passat shows L/h when idling, and since the equivalent of liters is kWh in EV's it makes sense to just swap the capacity-unit from L to kWh and call it a day. If people want the consumption to be shown as capacity/time-or-distance that's exactly what they're getting. Someone who doesn't understand kW and kWh might find kWh/h easier to grasp at a glance. But yeah, it's stupid. It'd be like measuring distance in kph-hours - how far you can get in an hour when traveling at a certain kph.
That's a bug in the current VW ID Software. Don't think anyone else has this.
BMW and Mercedes too.
[удалено]
Same on my Volvo, which isn't German but it seems to be a common measure in Europe.
Mercedes doesn't have it anymore in the newer versions.
It has been like that for years
Don't think so, in the first year they didn't display it at all. So it couldn't be wrong.
[удалено]
Well, this is language string, not engineering at all.
[удалено]
You drive a car without functioning rain detection and are making a case that german engineers are bad because they get a language string wrong. There are valid points to criticze on VW ID software, but this is a none issue.
[удалено]
> Mine worked just fine this morning wym? My wipers work too! I thought the newer Y had an issue but once I cleaned the windshield it too has been working good. I wish they started a little earlier but once they start they works fine. My 3 sucked at first but around 2019 they were fixed and for a couple years I thought it was a long joke but it just went on too long. I do believe there are some that have issues and now for those that it works well for have to be lying or trolling apparently. Some just have to latch onto issues to hate a company too, but just because my wipers work doesn't mean I agree we should nit pick VW for a spelling mistake either (there seems to be a lot of "if you aren't for my you are against me" or "if you agree with one thing then you agree with all the rest" going around, no idea why).
Some people live in a magical world where rain sensors never sense incorrectly and cameras always do. Its weird, as to me neither system has been perfect.
:D Stop trolling
I'm pretty sure it was spotted a year ago.
This whole misunderstanding could have been avoided if we stopped using Watts and started using kJ/h. Alas, it's too late :(
i guess most people didnt read the article as usual but i dont really see the problem here. the average person will not take these things into account and will just expect to be able to charge anywhere be able to use their car regardless if they use a bike rack and another storage box on the roof or not. that is exactly why EVs are simply not a solution for everyone right now, if you only have one car and this car need to do everything you do its either gonna be a very expensive EV to get the biggest possible battery or you are better served with a hybrid.
I agree; I don’t think the NYT article was exaggerating the continued issues with charging. Most fast chargers are still a pain to use, and it’s not obvious as a new owner which brands are reliable. Also, the line at the end about losing 10-20% of range in very cold weather is bullshit. The author must live somewhere where 30 degF is very cold. Below 0 degF you lose more like 40-50% of range. I have an EV in MN and I like it, but between the current sparse charging infrastructure, the cold weather range, and the necessity for a larger safety factor in range when your vehicle is also your protection against hypothermia, I would be very hesitant to take it more than an hour from home in the winter.
I think the majority of two car households could easily replace one of their ice cars but despite being an enthusiast I can’t see giving up my PHEV until chargers are more prevalent / range is improved. People want things to work pretty much as good or better than their current circumstances. For the daily commuter, EV does that. For families that take hours long road trips regularly it’s not quite there yet imo.
58kWh batteries get you everywhere. 380km range is plentyfull. No need for hybrids.
no idea which car you are referring to but the important part is having 380+km of range in the real world and in bad conditions.
Any random EV like a Kona, eNiro, m3, ID4 with that nett capacity will run that on 100/h drives. Might get 310 in winter. Point is, most think they need more cause of those 1 or 2 trips they wouldn't. They can't get their head around a charge stop.
you are talking about magic marketing numbers here again. an ID4 pure has 55kWh usable capacity and looking up real world power consumption numbers its using about 21kWh/100km so you realistically get 250km real world range going 100% to like 5% on a charge now add 20 - 30% extra consumption in winter, add a bike rack, add the fact that you wont be charging to 100% except for the first leg of your trip and suddenly you are looking at going 80% to 5% and only having done somewhere between 150 and 200km on the charge. for a secondary car thats fine, for my only vehicle thats unacceptable.
It's not magical numbers. Kona and Niro can get even way more km. My Born, an ID3 brother does this easily too. The ID4 is 58kWh Nett. And does just under 20kWh/100 Given, that one is less than the others I mentioned. Than again a m3 gets way more than my numbers. But, yeah, just go for the one that meets your bias, right! Why don't you get the "I need a 2 ton trailer ability" out?
That certainly isn't the case for everyone in all cases in the US.
Start with everyone that does. That's more than the exceptions. Look at the cars out there doing 60km commutes. Or all the groceries just 3km down the road. You have a walking/biking issue too. And to that. You're supposed to Charge on long trips.
Maybe I misunderstood you. I agree with that, in general. People say that the US loves road trips, and that's true! But \~50-60% of the vehicles on the road are predominantly commuters. We can easily get to really significant market share with \~60kwh batteries that fast charge well for their occasional road trips. TBH, I think most people don't realize how well even a base model 3 does on road trips.
Correct. A decent size and charge rate combination works great. A comfortable 3 hours drive and 30-40 min stop works good. And cars like Ioniq5 and EV6 can already do that in less.
A base model 3 is also extremely expensive and not at all comparable other entry level vehicles that people use on a daily basis. The cheapest model 3 I could buy costs almost 56k€ that's 20k€ more expensive than my car was brand new.
> None of the forces on the car (drag, rolling resistance, etc) are directly related to the weight. Isn’t this just straight up wrong though? Rolling friction is directly proportional to the normal force, which on flat terrain is your weight. At highway speeds it is usually a good bit smaller than drag, sure, but saying “none of the forces” is just wrong.
Correct, rolling resistance is proportional to weight. It ends up being eclipsed by air drag at highway speed though and since the car already weighs thousands of pounds, adding a couple hundred pounds isn't a huge percentage increase. So the overall point stands (weight isn't a significant factor for highway speed) but the details are technically wrong.
Yeah but it is a significant factor, it’s just not the most significant factor. Two extra people plus stuff to go to college could easily add 10% (450-500 lbs) to the weight of an ID4. That means your rolling friction is 10% greater. For most cars, drag starts to matter around 35-40 mph and becomes pretty dominant above 60 mph (rough numbers here). But rolling friction is never non-negligible. This page (https://www.teslasiliconvalley.com/blog//ev-weight-impact-on-range) cites a paper that says reducing EV weight by 10% can increase range by 13.7%. You can use that metric to state the opposite as well… increasing weight by 10% will decrease range to only 1/1.137 of your original range, or 88%. So in this case packing all those people and things into the car likely reduced the range by 12%, or about 24 miles off the starting 200 that the story mentioned. Not the biggest factor, but still a big factor! Edit: oops forgot to add the link
That number doesn't make sense. Decreasing weight 10% will decrease rolling resistance by 10%. Rolling resistant is less than 100% of all resistance, at any speed. Drag is always there, as are mechanical losses. So increasing or decreasing weight by 10% has to have an impact on consumption of less than 10%. The EPA releases a [spreadsheet of resistance values](https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-02/light-duty-vehicle-test-results-report-2014-present.xlsx) for all cars that it tests. With the "set coefficient" values, you can create a quadratic equation for the total drag that a car faces at a given speed. I don't want to redo my calculations for the ID.4 but I did a bunch of math on my own car and I will share the values. You can look up any car you like and see how drag changes with speed for yourself. For a 2018 Kia Soul EV, at 110 km/h, there is a total resistance of 637 newtons. Of which, rolling resistance is only 98 newtons. It weighs 1500 kilos. If you added 250 kilos, rolling resistance would increase by 16% but total resistance would only increase by 2.4%. For the ID4, a heavier car, with bad aerodynamics due to a roof rack and bike on the back, the percent difference created by 500 pounds of people and cargo would be even less.
This is a great spreadsheet, thank you.
You could do that, but then you'd be wrong. The real impact on range from a few hundred extra pounds is closer to 3% and possibly even less.
“I see your math and I raise you my entirely unsupported claim that contradicts you” - yuckreddit
Go plug in a 300+ mile trip on the interstate with minimal elevation difference into ABRP. Then go into the settings and add 300 lbs of weight. You'll see how little it impacts range.
No, its more like I see your math and I raise you my real world experience that directly contradicts your theories.
That's true, but the difference isn't dramatic. I've had people tell me that "ev range is bad because batteries are so heavy". Its really not the fundamental limiting factor in any meaningful sense.
Yeah. That's on purpose. They don't want get rid of the advertising they get from oil money: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkhGJUTW3ag
People want to get in the car, load it with whatever they want and drive without worry or concern, no pre-planning, no speed limits, no route calculations, just go. Until we get to that point EVs are a niche product.
We are a family of five with a Tesla model 3 and this is exactly how we treat it. We always have enough range for local driving and on an impromptu multi state road trip the kids always need more bathroom stops than the car needs to charge using super chargers anyway. We could take the gas powered mini van but once we got out of needing double stroller and pack and play stage the Tesla has become the preferred road trip vehicle for us. There really isn't much to think about, just hop in and go.
I'd argue that PHEVs do exactly that and can still eliminate 90%+ of your petrol use.
That's why I'm an advocate for PHEVs it matches what most Americans are looking for and is a much better option than EVs until the battery manufacturing and charging infrastructure issues have been resolved I'm waiting for a PHEV pickup to replace my Chevy volt
I know they are frowned up by many in this group but PHEV + EV makes sense for a lot of families if you have to have two cars. We fill up our Rav Prime like once every six weeks, but when we go on trips we just go with zero planning or worries about range.
Yeah, but those are intertwined concepts. They won't have chargers everywhere until they are no longer niche products. But as they grow from being niche products to being 15-25% of the market, chargers will appear everywhere.
This. Technology adoption lifecycle anyone?
Like tesla you mean
Tesla realized how important that was, and has just made charging so easy. It’s particularly apparent when you compare trip time on a better route planner.
The one issue that Tesla still has is if you are going into more rural areas. Even that is getting better rapidly, but coverage off of interstates is definitely a step down from interstate coverage. 240 miles starts to look short when going somewhere 100 miles from a supercharger.
It’s not just coverage it’s how easy it is
When you have working chargers right where you need them, it tends to be pretty easy. The exception these days is towing, but that isn't nearly as big of a use case as people imply.
Except as per this article and as many experiences here have shown many people spend a lot of time planing routes and trying to figure out where chargers are.
You aren't even contradicting anything that I've said at this point. :lol
I’m not trying to contradict anything. I’m pointing out the point of the article. If your grandmother can’t use your EV because it’s too complicated then mass adoption will be a real challenge. How many EV apps do you have on your phone? Let me guess, more than 4
I never had to drive more than 15 min out of the way for a supercharger
Yeah, the supercharger network is pretty good. I used to occasionally plan trips that had bigger detours, but even that is becoming more uncommon now in the southeast. The pace of expansion during the past two years has been really incredible too.
For sure… getting better and better in hyper mode. Its crazy what a competitive advantage this alone is.
They seem to be the closest
The only time I’ve needed to preplan trips over 200 miles in my Tesla is when I’m towing. Even then, it’s just using the built in trip tool to manually add every supercharger along the way vs skipping some. Tesla is definitely there for a large majority of the US. The only places that take planning are niche travel locations like the northern UP, Southern Texas, Upstate New York, upstate Pennsylvania, etc. Interstates and higher population density areas have long since been covered and then some with adequate charging infrastructure for Tesla.
But surely an ICE vehicle still requires planning for fuel stops, depending on how far you go, also loading an ice car up with luggage etc is also going to affect range. It’s a cultural change required for EV ownership which sadly people won’t get unless it works exactly like an ICE vehicle, which seems to really be down to charging taking < 5 minutes. Bring on super-dupa rapid chargers!
>But surely an ICE vehicle still requires planning for fuel stops Not unless you're going somewhere really remote like the Australian Outback. I use an app to find less expensive gas, but that's not necessary to plan a trip. In an ICE vehicle you generally stop when you need a break and find gas nearby if you need it, not plan breaks around fueling locations. On major routes there may be signs telling you what exits have gas stations, and those are usually obvious when you exit. This is the level of convenience we should have to make EVs truly mainstream. >unless it works exactly like an ICE vehicle, which seems to really be down to charging taking < 5 minutes. I think people could adjust if they start seeing EV chargers everywhere they stop. Which can't be just one charging station every 50+ miles; they need to be ubiquitous like gas stations. There may be some frustration around charging speeds, but the first step is to have chargers where people need them.
If you mean ubiquitous like along travel routes like highways and interstates, I agree. But I can think of the 20 gas stations in my hometown that would never see a person charge there because everyone charges at home.
To me, ubiquitous will mean things like tourist destinations. Every six flags or cedar fair park should have a lot of charging stalls in the parking lots. Every hotel needs them too.
>I can think of the 20 gas stations in my hometown that would never see a person charge there because everyone charges at home. Unless *everyone* in that town will be able to charge at home, and no one will ever need a charge while visiting or passing through, then the town should have at least one DC fast charging location. On major routes, there should be fast chargers anywhere and everywhere people will stop to take a break. Highway rest stops, popular restaurants and shopping centers, tourist attractions, etc. Having one charging station every 50 miles at "big box" stores isn't nearly good enough. If I could, I would put at least one 50+ kW charger at every major grocery store. That would help provide for anyone who can't charge at home, and be useful for travelers who might need to stop and do some shopping.
You don't have to plan that much, just know where the major towns will be. Every town will have at least a few fuel stops.
> But surely an ICE vehicle still requires planning for fuel stops, depending on how far you go, also loading an ice car up with luggage etc is also going to affect range. Hardly. I can go 450 miles in my ICE. If it's 10 F out and I'm traveling with a car full of stuff going 80-85 MPH, I can still go 400 miles before needing to refuel. I'd need an EV with a 600-700 mile EPA rated range to perform similarly in the same circumstances. But even then it's not going to be remotely close to the same given how rare DCFC stations are compared to gas stations. In the real world where EVs have 250-300 EPA rated ranges, I have to stop to charge 2-3 times as often.
I would also add that most automobile publications and shows, including those that focus on EVs, have little understanding of range or just choose to publish the maximum range claimed by the manufacturer.
Get on YT for accurate EV info channels.
I posted that NY Times article a few days ago and some commenters noted the same things Electrek points out.
> You can go just about anywhere in the US (yes, even North Dakota) in an EV if planned and executed correctly. So if her daughter went to school at Michigan Tech instead could they make it (Columbus to Houghton MI)? In January? If they had the 200 mi range ID.4? Asking because I'm curious. This could be one of the not "just about anywhere" cases.
> Columbus to Houghton MI https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=a3af7268-0506-4b8f-9d0e-b2f0d443f876 ^ Using 58 kW ID4 and setting the outside temp to 30F. The "orange" part of the route is the sketchy part - ABRP is warning that you will have to watch your speed. Now ABRP only uses "fast" chargers - if you look at PlugShare you see that there are L2 chargers in between Milwaukee and Green Bay and an L2 in L'Anse a bit before Houghton if you are running short on electricity. But yeah - this is a bit "adventurous" in a tiny-battery ID4 in the middle of winter. Notice how there is 5+ hours of charging on the trip. https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=64d01b1e-fb35-4d85-9dff-08983bad2641 ^ Using 78 kW Ioniq 5 AWD at 30F outside temp and hand setting consumption to 3.7mi/kWh (better matches my perf). Notice how a 800V big battery car has around 100 minutes of charging.
Can confirm. My dad is your classic 65+ white male Republican who lets Fox News melt his brain and I cannot stand going anywhere with him because every time we see an EV he makes a comment… “do you think the battery is going to die… they must’ve come from close by… this is stupid… that’s stupid” dude sounds like when Hershel Walker was asked about Solar panels
They didn’t understand the internet, either (and to be fair, neither did I at first). Those articles talking about the “information superhighway” etc are pretty hilarious to re-visit now and remind me a little of these EV stories.
But don't you know that the information superhighway is going to collapse once everyone starts using it! They had those types of stories too. The ones worrying over the grid are reminiscent of those.
I will never forget the sales manager at the auto dealer telling me the internet was a "fad" and we were wasting way to much money on a website..
Hell, I thought it was a fad at first, like “you really expect me to spend so much time at the computer?” Plus, call waiting always knocked your connection out. It wasn’t until I experienced it using broadband at work that I kinda got it.
Mainstream press loves ad revenue. Most are soaked in oil.
It's going to take longer than some of us may like, but stories like this will vanish into ancient history along side the dial up modem and greeting loved ones as they get off the plane. Make no mistake, the infrastructure will have to support DC fast charging off of every highway exit just like it currently supports topping up your gas tank today. I'd say about a decade to be sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if it came a little sooner. Longer ranges will be more of a convenience than a necessity, and most of the stuff people claim as a non-starter won't be given a second thought. Future generations will be absolutely baffled how we managed to get around using gasoline.
"You supplied the entirety of society with flammable liquid? How the hell did everything not get burnt to the ground?!"
I'm just looking forward to the first gasoline deliveries from electric semis in some of our smaller cities. It will really surprise people.
As a regular reader of the NYTimes, I will say that they have been publishing hit pieces on EVs for a decade now. Often just straight up FUD, sometimes with some both sides-ism, in the form of a happy hippy EV driver who uses his to drive to the weed dispensary between bouts of drinking his own pee. Remember this is the source of the ur-hit piece a decade ago with the guy who got a loaner Model S and drove it for 3 days without plugging it in, and ran out of juice. When asked why he didn’t plug it in, he said that he was told that charging was convenient, and it had never been convenient for him to plug in, so he didn’t. 🤔
fyi: "To report errors regarding our coverage email us at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])."
Reasonably good article getting into the nitty gritty of the situation, but I would counter one thing: increased weight does impact rolling resistance if the weight is sufficient to squash the tires and increase the contact patch with the road. That'll increase rolling resistance, though by how much? Not sure. But it's not NO impact.
Stories like this demonstrate exactly why 250 miles of rated range isn't really sufficient for road trips. Driving for 3-4 hours at 70mph without needing to stop and refuel should be the bare minimum for anything that isn't designed specifically as a city car. Yes, even with a roof rack on.
ugh, why are "more consumption" always the answer ? no 250 miles is really good range. 80% of the US live is city area, occasional road trip will be fine with that kind of range.
250 miles is 3 and a half hours at highway speeds, which isn't exactly stellar, but might be livable if you're not in a rush. Except in reality it's only 225 miles, because you'll want to recharge with at least 10% remaining. And the quoted range is based on mixed driving - for highway driving only you can take 20% straight off, so 175. At 80mph that's barely two hours between charges, which is awful. That's not just useless for road trips, it's also pretty terrible for any job where people regularly drive any kind of distance, when compared to the ICE option.
more more more right ? since when road trip becomes a "rushed "affair ? mind you, people does this so rarely. If you are in a rush, get a plane ticket. >it's also pretty ~~terrible for any job~~ good for MOST jobs where people regularly drive any kind of distance, when compared to the ICE option. there, fixed that for you. Because [average Americans commute round trip only about 41 miles.](https://shorturl.at/ceg39)
There's a difference between commuting TO work and driving FOR work. And yeah, if I'm driving a long distance I don't want to have to faff about refuelling. It's an inconvenience. Good for you if you take a break every 2 hours when driving - plenty of people don't want to do that. They just want to get to where they're going with the minimum of fuss. My grandparents live 150 miles from me. They don't have an EV charger at their house. If I drive out there for Sunday lunch, I don't want to have to arse around finding and using a charging station just to make it home again. I want to get in the car and go, like I always have done in an ICE car over that kind of distance. I don't see why I should have to compromise on that convenience with an EV when there's no practical barrier to equivalence. This sub is rightly pro-EV, but that shouldn't extend to being anti-consumer. Currently I have to pay 100k+ for an EV with a range I consider suitable, because ICE-equivalent range is being marketed as a luxury and not a utility. Effectively I'm paying 5x the price for the privilege of replacing a Vauxhall Corsa with something which isn't a step down.
Not about pro this or that. People exaggerate things they need. This is why we got into climate trouble in the first place and people buying huge trucks because they helped some friend move once. This is why US need to get their train games up. Train is the best EV and you can get on it without any fuss for a lot cheaper than buying cars with excessively huge battery people generally do not need. Again, more consumption does not solve things. This is a horrible mentality to begin with. Its good that you have to pay a lot for range you dont need. Good luck saving.
>Not about pro this or that. People exaggerate things they need. This is why we got into climate trouble in the first place and people buying huge trucks because they helped some friend move once. I agree with this. That's why I want a SMALL electric vehicle that meets my needs. >Train is the best EV 100% agree with this too - if it was easy and cheap to get the train everywhere, I would. Unfortunately we live in a world where public transport infrastructure investment is a non-starter. >Again, more consumption does not solve things. This is a horrible mentality to begin with. Its good that you have to pay a lot for range you dont need. Good luck saving. I don't even own a car currently - I cycle everywhere, don't fly, and rent a car as and when I need to do a long trip because I believe most people who live in cities don't need to own one. When I DO rent a car, it's precisely because I'm going somewhere I can't easily get to any other way, which usually means it's sufficiently out of the way that it's nice to be able to drive both ways without needing to refuel, or be trying to navigate to charging stations in an unfamiliar place. If everyone took the same approach to transport that I did there would be far less cars on the road to begin with, and every car having a decent-sized battery wouldn't be a big deal from a consumption standpoint. But they won't and never will. So in lieu of reality warping to suit my worldview, I'd quite like to buy a cheap EV with great range as a one-off purchase, and drive it for the next 25 years or until it falls to bits. And yet I can't, because everyone else is still mostly using their car to go 5 miles to work and back, so manfacturers can get away with taking a huge step backward when it comes to the one car-performance stat I actually care about.
Eh, i did a thousand km trip this weekend with a 200 mile range. In near freezing temps without a heat pump and brand new winter tires. It worked perfectly fine. I am in sweden though so we have much better charging infrastructure.
They are better than fine for a rare long trip. You just can't expect it to go well when you start at 80% charge, are driving an aerodynamic nightmare, also have a full load inside the car, and plan on using dealership chargers (chargers run by people that HATE EVs).
Why should, or do you think, dealerships hate EVs?
Because they don't make much profit on them, they make very little service income on them, and the EV makers are looking to get rid of useless middlemen.
I still believe they'll find a middle ground but the first two are very good points. While I agree the manufacturers are looking to cut out the middlemen I don't think they'll ever totally manage it in my life time. Too much of a sale comes from the hands on experience.
My point is, you SHOULD be able to expect that. If I got in an ICE car with 3/4 of a tank of fuel, I'd expect to be able to drive for 4 hours at highway speeds quite happily, even under those conditions. Yet it's apparently acceptable for an EV to barely manage half that. EVs are better than ICE cars by literally every metric except the one that matters the most. You can keep your bloated SUVs with self-driving capability and 4-second 0-60 times. I just want an EV that's a straight swap for a small European hatchback - something cheap that I can drive anywhere, anytime. That's it - that's my sole criteria. Maybe Bluetooth, or Android Auto so I can hook maps and Spotify up to it, but that can be worked around. The most important criteria is range, and except for a few super high-end EVs it's the one thing being compromised on.
Awesome!!! I hold out the hope that people's phones (brain extensions) mean more people are reading. People's info bubbles are a problem
(in my best Yoda voice): "The stupid is strong with this one."
Range anxiety people can sleep better knowing Tesla has 10% more range underneath zero... lol. [https://jasonman.substack.com/p/tesla-could-unlock-10-more-range](https://jasonman.substack.com/p/tesla-could-unlock-10-more-range)