this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2024
116 points (88.7% liked)

Electric Vehicles

3116 readers
577 users here now

A community for the sharing of links, news, and discussion related to Electric Vehicles.

Rules

  1. No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
  2. Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
  3. No self-promotion
  4. No irrelevant content. All posts must be relevant and related to plug-in electric vehicles — BEVs or PHEVs.
  5. No trolling
  6. Policy, not politics. Submissions and comments about effective policymaking are allowed and encouraged in the community, however conversations and submissions about parties, politicians, and those devolving into general tribalism will be removed.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
whoopThereItIs@lemmy.world
pushpush@lemmy.world
cosmic_slate@dmv.social
cosmic_slate@lemmy.world
116
Why No One Wants To Sell You A $25,000 EV (insideevs.com)
submitted 4 weeks ago by MyOpinion@lemm.ee to c/evs@lemmy.world
90 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

There is a fundamental truth you have to understand about car companies:They do not exist to make cars. They exist to make money. That distinction, analyst Kevin Tynan tells me, is why they’re not really interested in making affordable electric vehicles.

Perhaps that’s an oversimplification. Tynan is the director of research at an auto-dealer-focused investment bank, the Presidio Group, with decades of experience as an analyst at firms like Bloomberg Intelligence. What he means isn’t that automakers have no interest in affordable products. It’s that their interest begins and ends with winning customers who will eventually buy more expensive, higher-margin products.

One of the auto industry’s dirtiest secrets is that at scale, it doesn’t cost that much more to make a bigger, more expensive than a smaller and cheaper one. But they can charge you a lot more for the former, which makes this a game of profit margins and not just profits. In recent years especially, that’s a big part of why your new car choices have skewed so heavily toward bigger crossovers, SUVs and trucks.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 3 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

You don't need a 100kWh pack. Most of the smaller cars are closer to 60.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 2 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

If you’re comparing an ICE vehicle that can get 400 miles a tank to an EV then you are being completely disingenuous to compare it to an EV that only gets 100-150 miles of range. They’re not comparable. An EV that gets even close to the same range is going to way much much more than a comparable ICE vehicle.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 3 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

If you got 400 miles on a 100kWh pack you'll be getting 300 on a 60kWh pack.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It completely depends on your drive configuration and aerodynamic efficiency rating. Also I don’t know why you think I said anything about getting 400 miles on a 100kWh pack. This conversation is about weight. You don’t just get to say “get a smaller battery pack and then the cars weight the same” because it makes them completely different cars. The average ICE vehicle (of the top25 sold) gets 460 miles of range. https://insideevs.com/features/527446/electric-cars-range-equilibrium/ (funny enough this article is literally what we’re arguing about!)

In any case, I’m not even arguing for larger batteries! I’m just stating that you can’t compare weight if you aren’t going to compare range. They go hand in hand.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 1 points 2 weeks ago

2w old conversation, but what I was trying to say is that 100-150 miles (your example) isn't the alternative to 400 miles in an EV (which will absolutely require a 100kWh pack). As you reduce the range through a smaller battery you get some range back through reduced weight.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

No it's not? 400 miles of range is completely unnecessary.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It’s not. I own a very nice EV. I can make arguments for and against both EVs and ICE vehicles. If you are comparing battery size (which you did) then you are talking about range. If you are talking about range then you are comparing against ICE vehicles which have ranges from 350 miles to over 600. I used 400 because I own two ICE vehicles with that amount of range and one EV with 265 miles of range. The 265 miles is plenty for everyday stuff, it’s even good for road trips! But you made a comparison of weight. EVs are much heavier if they have equivalent range.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 points 2 weeks ago

If you are talking about range then you are comparing against ICE vehicles

I wasn't talking about range, I was talking about weight.

[–] WalrusDragonOnABike@lemmy.today 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I certainly don't and wouldn't consider it. But if someone wants 1000 miles of range, we probably aren't getting that without some major technological breakthroughs in material sciences any time soon without packs around 100kWh.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 3 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

We don't need 1000 miles of range...all we need is more charging stations.

[–] WalrusDragonOnABike@lemmy.today 1 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

Lack of a need for that won't stop people from getting them if that's an option...

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 4 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Economics of lugging all that extra battery weight around on daily commutes is why smart people wont go for the extra large pack.

[–] WalrusDragonOnABike@lemmy.today 2 points 4 weeks ago

Given what the top selling vehicles are in the US, I don't expect people to be smart, even if they're pay more upfront and long-term for their stupidity.

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl -1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

What people choose to buy does not make "EVs are heavier than ICE vehicles" true.

[–] WalrusDragonOnABike@lemmy.today 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

If you want an equivalent vehicle, you need that kind of capacity. If you want to match the range of a vehicle with a 24gallon tank (ie: if you want to convert a typical ICE truck into an EV), you probably need a 200kwh pack. If you want to match a ~12 gallon tank (ie: if you want to convert a typical ICE sedan into an EV), you probably need a 100kwh pack. If you had a car efficient enough to get 1000 miles on 100kwh, you'd be comparing it to a 3 gallon tank for an ICE equivalent. To match an 8 gallon tank (ie: a 2-seater car), you need about 60 kwh battery. Even if you want to compare a 80mile range fortwo EQ to a 300 mile range ICE fortwo, its already 300lbs heavier without even being close on the range and being quite limiting for even just normal commuting around here (assuming you don't have a guaranteed charger at work).

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl -2 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

If you want to match the range of a vehicle with a 24gallon tank

Don't want to, don't need to.

Really the only thing that matters for the purposes of this comparison is physical dimensions.

[–] NateNate60@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

What people need and what people irrationally want can be two different things

[–] helenslunch@feddit.nl 0 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

For the purposes of this conversation, only 1 of those matter. The point is EVs are not inherently heavier than ICE vehicles. They're only heavier if you insist on unnecessarily large vehicles with unnecessarily long range. That's why a Chevy Bolt weighs 3600 lb and a Hummer EV weighs a patently insane 9k lbs.