Car buyers should have 'long, hard think' about diesel

[wyx087]

Probably Tesla's misinformation on their website again. Odd that Chris Harris referred to the car he was driving as the £60k Performance model, no mention of the car having extras to push the price up.
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-revie...ives/tesla-model-3-performance-2019-uk-review
Autocar review on the £56,900 performance model, that's two respected sources against a manufacturer known for giving false pricing information on It's websites.

When have Tesla ever given false pricing information on their website?
If you are referring to "after gas saving" business, it's not false information, it's just a questionable way of educating customers. The true price is always within a couple of clicks away.

Tesla misinformation on their website? Or you were wrong. You probably heard Tesla's mission statement through grape vines rather than go to the source. You are happy to live a dogmatic life, following what other people have told you rather than work out its reasoning by yourself. "People like us do stuff like this."
Have a read on how to think for yourself: https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/11/the-cook-and-the-chef-musks-secret-sauce.html

 

[wyx087]

A couple of interesting things I saw:

Hyundai Kona EV is able to charge its 12v battery automatically if the car is parked for a while. Preventing 12v battery from dying thanks to having readily available electric power source.
https://www.speakev.com/threads/if-the-12v-battery-runs-low.137754/#post-2647330

Norway Wants to Be Europe’s Battery:
https://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/wind/norway-wants-to-be-europes-battery

There should be many more cables to come if European countries make good on official goals to eliminate carbon emissions from power generation by 2050. The German government’s Advisory Council on the Environment, for example, concluded in its influential 2011 report that an optimal zero-carbon power system for Germany would need more than 40 gigawatts of interconnection to Norway. That system, the council projected, would deliver power at a very affordable 6 to 7 euro cents per kilowatt-hour. Without Norwegian storage, power costs would rise to 9 to 12 euro cents per kilowatt-hour.

With help from batteries, electricity can be cheaper for everyone. EV and its battery can be made to help towards that.


BMW experimenting with performance EV powertrain:
https://electrek.co/2019/06/25/bmw-power-bev-electric/

Key to its dynamic attributes is that the two electric motors at the rear axle are controlled separately. This brings e-torque vectoring into play, which enables maximum drive power to be translated into forward propulsion even in extremely dynamic driving manoeuvres.
The result is more effective and precise than with a limited slip differential, because actively targeted inputs are possible in any driving situation. By contrast, a limited slip differential always reacts to a difference in rotation speed between the driven wheels.

Like I've been saying, electric motors have the potential to be better than current differential-based systems used by ICE cars. But I was shouted down by references to Focus RS or some other Ford.

Funny, my local Ford dealer said they only have a hybrid, no EV's available.

Was this what Ford dealership were like?

View: https://www.youtube.com/embed/rXodSqMpuUQ

 

[nilagin]

When have Tesla ever given false pricing information on their website?
If you are referring to "after gas saving" business, it's not false information, it's just a questionable way of educating customers. The true price is always within a couple of clicks away.

Tesla misinformation on their website? Or you were wrong. You probably heard Tesla's mission statement through grape vines rather than go to the source. You are happy to live a dogmatic life, following what other people have told you rather than work out its reasoning by yourself. "People like us do stuff like this."
Have a read on how to think for yourself: https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/11/the-cook-and-the-chef-musks-secret-sauce.html

Is your memory seriously that bad that you need me to keep telling you the same things over and over again, or are you that dense, it just doesn't sink in.
Tesla have been found, at least twice, misrepresenting the prices of their cars on their websites. Having to negotiate further pages of the website to find the true price is b******t.

I have provided you with a link to Tesla's original mission statement, Tesla's own site. How is that getting it from the grapevine?
So now I am incapable of reasoning things out for myself. Yet you have been accusing me of making wild assumptions. Those assumptions as you like to call them are from reasoning and use of logic.

I could give you my reasoning as to why Tesla changed their mission statement, but you wouldn't like it.

 

[nilagin]

A couple of interesting things I saw:

Hyundai Kona EV is able to charge its 12v battery automatically if the car is parked for a while. Preventing 12v battery from dying thanks to having readily available electric power source.
https://www.speakev.com/threads/if-the-12v-battery-runs-low.137754/#post-2647330


BMW experimenting with performance EV powertrain:
https://electrek.co/2019/06/25/bmw-power-bev-electric/

Like I've been saying, electric motors have the potential to be better than current differential-based systems used by ICE cars. But I was shouted down by references to Focus RS or some other Ford.



Was this what Ford dealership were like?

View: https://www.youtube.com/embed/rXodSqMpuUQ

How long is parked for a while? From what I read the system can only kick in so many times then has to be reset by driving the vehicle to recharge the system. Unless a 12v battery is old and dying or the alternator isn't charging properly an ICE battery will be fine after 2 weeks even more, so how long are you leaving an EV parked up for it to require a charge?

So you are saying it is impossible to do similar with more than one ice? Perhaps Tesla got the idea of their twin electric motors from VW and their Golf with two engines. Nothing to prevent using more than two small compact engines to power a car.

See reasoning, thinking for myself.
You want to try it sometime, you might actually have a revelation.

 

[wyx087]

I have provided you with a link to Tesla's original mission statement, Tesla's own site. How is that getting it from the grapevine?
I could give you my reasoning as to why Tesla changed their mission statement, but you wouldn't like it.

I have provided the reason for their change of mission statement. Please refer to post #3555. As said in that post, their mission statement was never what you have claimed.
Yes, you have provided links, but the link does not agree with your claim, as have been pointed out in post #3555.

How long is parked for a while? From what I read the system can only kick in so many times then has to be reset by driving the vehicle to recharge the system. Unless a 12v battery is old and dying or the alternator isn't charging properly an ICE battery will be fine after 2 weeks even more, so how long are you leaving an EV parked up for it to require a charge?

Firstly, the "only 10 times" limit is to prevent problems with overcharging and/or faulty battery.
Secondly, your 2 weeks is over simplification. You forgot to mention the amount of time you have to drive (hence charge) every 2 weeks, and that it must be better than mild weather. It is known that infrequent and short journeys will likely discharge your car battery. (my parent's Volvo ran into this, about 3 miles once a week, battery slowly discharged)
Thirdly, dashcams that can record in parked mode are plentiful these days. If you want to use such device but only drive the car a few miles locally, you'll run into 12v battery problems. With Hyundai's system, you can run those dashcam no problem. There's zero chance an ICE car 12v system is able to support likes of Tesla sentry mode.

So you are saying it is impossible to do similar with more than one ice? Perhaps Tesla got the idea of their twin electric motors from VW and their Golf with two engines. Nothing to prevent using more than two small compact engines to power a car.

No, not me. The BMW engineer is saying electric motors is more efficient and precise than single ICE and differential setup employed by almost all performance ICE cars.
There's nothing to prevent having 2 ICE engines to power a car, but can you do it with same or better practicality as existing cars? What about 4 engines? Why isn't 2 ICE setup used thesedays?

See reasoning, thinking for myself.
You want to try it sometime, you might actually have a revelation.

Sorry, all I saw in your posts is pitiful words strung together in attempt at reasoning.

 

[nilagin]

I have provided the reason for their change of mission statement. Please refer to post #3555. As said in that post, their mission statement was never what you have claimed.
Yes, you have provided links, but the link does not agree with your claim, as have been pointed out in post #3555.


Firstly, the "only 10 times" limit is to prevent problems with overcharging and/or faulty battery.
Secondly, your 2 weeks is over simplification. You forgot to mention the amount of time you have to drive (hence charge) every 2 weeks, and that it must be better than mild weather. It is known that infrequent and short journeys will likely discharge your car battery. (my parent's Volvo ran into this, about 3 miles once a week, battery slowly discharged)
Thirdly, dashcams that can record in parked mode are plentiful these days. If you want to use such device but only drive the car a few miles locally, you'll run into 12v battery problems. With Hyundai's system, you can run those dashcam no problem. There's zero chance an ICE car 12v system is able to support likes of Tesla sentry mode.


No, not me. The BMW engineer is saying electric motors is more efficient and precise than single ICE and differential setup employed by almost all performance ICE cars.
There's nothing to prevent having 2 ICE engines to power a car, but can you do it with same or better practicality as existing cars? What about 4 engines? Why isn't 2 ICE setup used thesedays?


Sorry, all I saw in your posts is pitiful words strung together in attempt at reasoning.

Cars have had smart alternators for over 10yrs. They just charge when they need to and invariably when the car is braking or slowing down.
3 miles once a week is dreadful use of a car let alone battery, your parents are the ideal candidates for an EV. Why aren't they driving one?

2 ice set up isn't used for the most part because it really isn't needed. Does the twin motor Tesla have differentials? If not it would explain the poor handling experienced on Top Gear. Being able to vary drive to each wheel would have given much better traction and control.

I would have expected the BMW to have 4 motors, having 3 makes no sense.

It isn't my posts that are pitiful, it is your lack of comprehension and foresight.

 

[Deleted member 49549]

How long is parked for a while? From what I read the system can only kick in so many times then has to be reset by driving the vehicle to recharge the system. Unless a 12v battery is old and dying or the alternator isn't charging properly an ICE battery will be fine after 2 weeks even more, so how long are you leaving an EV parked up for it to require a charge?

So you are saying it is impossible to do similar with more than one ice? Perhaps Tesla got the idea of their twin electric motors from VW and their Golf with two engines. Nothing to prevent using more than two small compact engines to power a car.

See reasoning, thinking for myself.
You want to try it sometime, you might actually have a revelation.

Are you always this obnoxious or is this a week where decided you are really going for it?

 

[nilagin]

I have provided the reason for their change of mission statement. Please refer to post #3555. As said in that post, their mission statement was never what you have claimed.
Yes, you have provided links, but the link does not agree with your claim, as have been pointed out in post #3555.

No you have supplied your guess as a reason for the change in their mission statement. Ask yourself why they didn't just amend the statement to sustainable transport and energy.
The only way they could have accelerated sustainable transport is to have supplied affordable EV's. Cars with a list price of over £40k are not considered affordable. Even at the high price for a Tesla, they can't turn a profit, Musk is having to buy more shares to inject money into the cpmpany to stay affloat they are failing. Nothing sustainable there. Rumour has it Musk has his own battery factory that when he can get it up and running, he will no longer need to buy his batteries from Panasonic. Add that to Solar City and you have the reason why the mission statement had an omission instead of an inclusion.

 

[nilagin]

Are you always this obnoxious or is this a week where decided you are really going for it?

If someone's being a prize dick, I will provide a deserving response.

 

[ancient_mariner]

If someone's being a prize dick, I will provide a deserving response.

Please don't go down the Phil V route of reaction Neil.

 

[nilagin]

Please don't go down the Phil V route of reaction Neil.

I try to resist, but It's frustrating when someone repeatedly asks the same question over and over again and then tries to make snide remarks when the proof that they have been proved wrong is staring them in the face.
Then it's all guns blazing.

 

[wyx087]

Cars have had smart alternators for over 10yrs. They just charge when they need to and invariably when the car is braking or slowing down.
3 miles once a week is dreadful use of a car let alone battery, your parents are the ideal candidates for an EV. Why aren't they driving one?

2 ice set up isn't used for the most part because it really isn't needed. Does the twin motor Tesla have differentials? If not it would explain the poor handling experienced on Top Gear. Being able to vary drive to each wheel would have given much better traction and control.

I would have expected the BMW to have 4 motors, having 3 makes no sense.

My parents want to drive 150 miles to us, with 1 stop in the middle. Where are the sub-£10k second hand EV's that do that? Where are the charging infrastructure? All they need is a 30-40kWh EV with multiple (6+, no queuing) rapid chargers near the middle. 30-40kWh EV now is ~12k for cheapest Leaf, such infrastructure is only available by Tesla.
Now that you've asked for it, I can't help but point out the motor industry's failure to invest early and offer choices for customers like my parents.

But that doesn't change the fact your "2 weeks" statement on 12v battery problem is over simplified.
It's a problem can be solved by a well designed EV, power is no longer limited to when the ICE is running. You can run air-con, dashcam, anything while the car is stopped without wasting fuel and producing tailpipe pollution.

I thought we were talking about the BMW's test mull? The new Tesla Roadster will get dual rear motors. Why do you keep changing the subject?
4 motors also works, the Rimac supercar EV has 4 motors. I don't see any ICE supercar have 2 engines as you've originally suggested. It's not needed or it takes too much space, too complex? Differential reaction speed of milliseconds is okay, but nanoseconds is surely better?

No you have supplied your guess as a reason for the change in their mission statement. Ask yourself why they didn't just amend the statement to sustainable transport and energy.
The only way they could have accelerated sustainable transport is to have supplied affordable EV's. Cars with a list price of over £40k are not considered affordable. Even at the high price for a Tesla, they can't turn a profit, Musk is having to buy more shares to inject money into the cpmpany to stay affloat they are failing. Nothing sustainable there. Rumour has it Musk has his own battery factory that when he can get it up and running, he will no longer need to buy his batteries from Panasonic. Add that to Solar City and you have the reason why the mission statement had an omission instead of an inclusion.

Oh dear, the spin doctor is at it again. No wonder it took half page of posts to get this out of you. You never take anything from Tesla at face value do you?

I try to resist, but It's frustrating when someone repeatedly asks the same question over and over again and then tries to make snide remarks when the proof that they have been proved wrong is staring them in the face.
Then it's all guns blazing.

I agree it's very frustrating. It's all guns blazing precisely because you started with the snide remarks. I can stop the remarks whenever I want and discuss like adults, can you?

 

[dod]

Now that you've asked for it, I can't help but point out the motor industry's failure to invest early and offer choices for customers like my parents.

That's interesting. Is it really the responsibility of the motor industry to provide that "fuel" infrastructure? In the case of the ICE it's a totally different industry that provides it.
I'm not saying they shouldn't, or couldn't, but at the moment it's not a part of their business model.

 

[nilagin]

My parents want to drive 150 miles to us, with 1 stop in the middle. Where are the sub-£10k second hand EV's that do that? Where are the charging infrastructure? All they need is a 30-40kWh EV with multiple (6+, no queuing) rapid chargers near the middle. 30-40kWh EV now is ~12k for cheapest Leaf, such infrastructure is only available by Tesla.
Now that you've asked for it, I can't help but point out the motor industry's failure to invest early and offer choices for customers like my parents.

But that doesn't change the fact your "2 weeks" statement on 12v battery problem is over simplified.
It's a problem can be solved by a well designed EV, power is no longer limited to when the ICE is running. You can run air-con, dashcam, anything while the car is stopped without wasting fuel and producing tailpipe pollution.

I thought we were talking about the BMW's test mull? The new Tesla Roadster will get dual rear motors. Why do you keep changing the subject?
4 motors also works, the Rimac supercar EV has 4 motors. I don't see any ICE supercar have 2 engines as you've originally suggested. It's not needed or it takes too much space, too complex? Differential reaction speed of milliseconds is okay, but nanoseconds is surely better?


Oh dear, the spin doctor is at it again. No wonder it took half page of posts to get this out of you. You never take anything from Tesla at face value do you?

I agree it's very frustrating. It's all guns blazing precisely because you started with the snide remarks. I can stop the remarks whenever I want and discuss like adults, can you?

Fairly sure you were advocating, many pages ago, about people buying an EV for their daily use and if the need arose, hiring a vehicle for longer journeys. Yet now you say an EV is too expensive, not enough range, having to stop more than once for a charge is a problem. Where have I read words to similar effect before.

I have just found an 2015 80Kw Leaf on eBay for £10,900, so £9500- £10k after negotiations. Money saved on fuel, road tax and maintenance will save your parents money in the long run, so the initial cost doesn't matter, as you like to keep reminding us.

Why would you require a cars air con running for weeks on end when a car is parked? You have some really odd uses for your cars. If you are referring to sitting in a car for short periods of time with the air con on, for instance stop start traffic, switch off the air con and keep the blower on it will continue to circulate cold air for at least 10-15 minutes, more than long enough before traffic starts moving again. If your car can't manage that, you have a very poor air con / ventilation system in your car. I seldom have a need to use the air con. I dare say my car interior will be hot when i finish work from sitting in the sun all morning. Opening the windows allows the heat out and I can close the windows again. If excessively hot, I put the air con on for a couple of minutes, then switch it off again but the blower if needed continues circulating cold air.

I haven't changed the subject, I simply asked if the twin motored Tesla had a differential, just adding a second motor to make it awd, isn't good enough these days, cars have moved beyond that for better handling, traction and safety. Hence why the BMW test mule has 3 motors, but I am still unclear as to why it wouldn't have 4. Incidentally Michelin were developing a car wheel with an electric motor more than 16yrs ago. The idea being 2 or 4 could be fitted to a car to power it. Odd that we haven't seen anything similar until now.

There you go with the tiresome spin doctor remarks and after your claim that I am incapable of thinking for myself. I did warn you that you wouldn't like my reasoning, hence why I never bothered posting it, automotive industry experts can see Tesla failing, financial experts can see Tesla failing, automotive journalists can see them failing, all the signs are there.

 

[wyx087]

That's interesting. Is it really the responsibility of the motor industry to provide that "fuel" infrastructure? In the case of the ICE it's a totally different industry that provides it.
I'm not saying they shouldn't, or couldn't, but at the moment it's not a part of their business model.

If they truly want to sell EV, it is their responsibility to get the infrastructure started.
Tesla built supercharger network. Nissan + Renault funded Ecotricity Electric Highway. VW is funding Electrify-America. Multiple companies are funding Ionity in Europe. VW is also funding a Tesco chargers being built today.
https://www.zap-map.com/pod-point-partners-with-vw-tesco-for-charge-point-roll-out/

Fairly sure you were advocating, many pages ago, about people buying an EV for their daily use and if the need arose, hiring a vehicle for longer journeys. Yet now you say an EV is too expensive, not enough range, having to stop more than once for a charge is a problem. Where have I read words to similar effect before.

How often do most people do long journey? My parents do the 150 miles drive, 300 miles return journey 6-12 times a year.

Yes. I have been saying EV is perfect for most people's daily use. Hiring a vehicle for those 1-2 longer journey per year. Or if multiple car ownership, only keeping 1 ICE car for longer journey.

I have just found an 2015 80Kw Leaf on eBay for £10,900, so £9500- £10k after negotiations. Money saved on fuel, road tax and maintenance will save your parents money in the long run, so the initial cost doesn't matter, as you like to keep reminding us.

kW is different to kWh. What you've found is a 24kWh Leaf. 80kW motor, which is ~105bhp. 24kWh battery, allowing 80 miles. 80 miles becomes 60 dependable motorway miles in winter, due to Leaf's high-speed inefficiency. The car cannot do the journey with a single stop. I know because I've driven this journey in a 24kWh Leaf.

They need efficient EV like 30kWh Ioniq, or 40kWh Leaf due to its high-speed inefficiency. There's absolutely zero need for 90kWh E-Tron or I-Pace as the industry seems to be heading towards. High speed efficiency is key.

If you are referring to sitting in a car for short periods of time with the air con on, for instance stop start traffic, switch off the air con and keep the blower on it will continue to circulate cold air for at least 10-15 minutes, more than long enough before traffic starts moving again.

Tell all that to the idling "tractors" outside the school gates. Producing pollution just to power climate-control in the car for 1 person.
Whereas I've sat in the car for over 1 hour a few times, when baby is asleep and wife went to do the grocery shopping. I can do this in any extreme weather and my EV with tiny 24kWh battery only used 1-2% energy.

But the original point was, you cannot run electronics in car for long periods of time without engine keeping the battery charged. This limitation doesn't exist for EV, usable energy is always readily available.

automotive industry experts can see Tesla failing, financial experts can see Tesla failing, automotive journalists can see them failing, all the signs are there.

And yet today, Tesla is still selling more and more cars, expanding and bringing out new models.
Tell me, does oil/auto/financial/media companies have a vested interest in Tesla failing? Make sure move to electric is slower, get rid of the disruptor, to short stock, drum up sensational news.

 

[dod]

If they truly want to sell EV, it is their responsibility to get the infrastructure started.
Tesla built supercharger network. Nissan + Renault funded Ecotricity Electric Highway. VW is funding Electrify-America. Multiple companies are funding Ionity in Europe. VW is also funding a Tesco chargers being built today.
https://www.zap-map.com/pod-point-partners-with-vw-tesco-for-charge-point-roll-out/

Ta I don't really see it as the responsibility of the manufacturers to be honest but that's just my opinion. They're manufacturers, not fuel suppliers, I'd be wanting the government to put in the investment, it's their targets Perhaps they're looking at taking a cut of that market as well in the future though, who knows.

Interesting the Tesco ones will be free initially. They're probably seeing the writing on the wall for petrol/diesel sales and taking advantage of other people putting in development cash as well. I can't honestly see it being free to charge forever and they'll want to recoup some of the revenues they'll lose over time.

 

[Nod]

Our local Sainsbury's has had free charging (for up to 3 hours - the longest you're allowed to park there) for a couple of years. We keep expecting them (or the supplying organisation) to start charging (tried to avoid the pun but can't!) but no indications as yet. 6 spaces and there are usually at least 3 available (with ICE cars/vans often taking 1 or 2 [policed so they tend to get "fined" now]). I reckon that if they had put the chargers further from the doors (they're as close as the disabled parent/child slots for some reason [possibly cheaper to install hefty power]) there would be fewer ICEings. A 1 hour charge is enough to "fuel" a normal day's use for us.

 

[MatBin]

Ta I don't really see it as the responsibility of the manufacturers to be honest but that's just my opinion. They're manufacturers, not fuel suppliers, I'd be wanting the government to put in the investment, it's their targets Perhaps they're looking at taking a cut of that market as well in the future though, who knows.

Interesting the Tesco ones will be free initially. They're probably seeing the writing on the wall for petrol/diesel sales and taking advantage of other people putting in development cash as well. I can't honestly see it being free to charge forever and they'll want to recoup some of the revenues they'll lose over time.

There are people getting ready to create the equivalent of petrol stations in the UK where you can rapid charge your car, for a price, they are suggesting they will use solar panels/wind to provide the electricity and have airport style lounges.
There's no way on this planet that charging will remain free, as Govt revenues drop as less carbon based fuels are used they will need to recoup that loss and I'd bet my life savings that the Govt (and it doesnt matter which party/parties are in power or if we are in or out of the EEC) will create some sort of cost associated with owning and running an EV.
So all this financial modelling showing EV are at present cheaper to run than ICE will I am afraid amount to nothing when the Govt starts to lose revenue.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

So all this financial modelling showing EV are at present cheaper to run than ICE will I am afraid amount to nothing when the Govt starts to lose revenue.

I think you will be proved correct. Look forward to the car tax on EVs rising into the thousands if the Treasury finds a hole in fuel duty revenue.

 

[wyx087]

The way I see it, if you want to sell a product, you have to make sure the product has surrounding support infrastructure.
So, if car manufacturer really do want to sell EV, they got to make sure they either install the infrastructure or fund companies that do.

So all this financial modelling showing EV are at present cheaper to run than ICE will I am afraid amount to nothing when the Govt starts to lose revenue.

But there's no way for government to tax home charging. They either blanket tax all electricity use, or no tax. If they put tax on home EV chargers, there's no way to police use of domestic socket to home charge.

So the modelling still works, as long as you charge at home majority of the time. Tax heavily on rapid chargers (the airport style lounge as you mentioned) is a future I can see. You pay close to petrol prices for long distance drive but you pay peanuts for normal day to day use.

 

[MatBin]

But there's no way for government to tax home charging. They either blanket tax all electricity use, or no tax. If they put tax on home EV chargers, there's no way to police use of domestic socket to home charge.

So the modelling still works, as long as you charge at home majority of the time. Tax heavily on rapid chargers (the airport style lounge as you mentioned) is a future I can see. You pay close to petrol prices for long distance drive but you pay peanuts for normal day to day use.

You are living in cloud cuckoo land. It becomes compulsory in 2025 for instance for all cars to have meters installed to show how much charge they have received, you are then liable to supply this information at the time you pay your road tax and are then liable to pay a fee. You put in false figures to keep it low, when your car is serviced or sold or has an MOT the figures are recorded and sent to Govt. Private buyer has to send meter numbers or he becomes liable, so no way round selling privately. Or there becomes a legal liability to tell your insurance company or a legal requirement to have your vehicle mileage verified annually and a flat rate levy per mile is payable, there's a million ways to ensure the Govt could establish some sort of fee. Alternatively road tax for EV's could be increased, some will win some will lose, just the same as now, I pay a lot for my motorcycle road tax but I only do 2000 miles a year, my wife drives very little but her road tax is over £200, I drive a big diesel to work over 2000 miles a month and I pay £30 pa, it's never been a fair system, anyone complain?

You need to think outside what we have now in terms of revenue collection, for someone so aware of the advantages of thinking laterally in terms of private transport your are very blinkered in terms of what a Govt could do if they wish to find a method to recoup lost revenue.

 

[ancient_mariner]

The way I see it, if you want to sell a product, you have to make sure the product has surrounding support infrastructure.
So, if car manufacturer really do want to sell EV, they got to make sure they either install the infrastructure or fund companies that do.

They've never had to previously, with businesses queueing up to sell fuel and lubricants, so this is an unknown and high risk area for them, hence he reluctance. At the same time with so many places giving free/low cost charging there's no business incentive to invest in a charging network other than PR or trying to flog a few cars into a presently niche market.

There needs to be a way to extract money directly from car use regardless of where it's charged and how it's fuelled, and it's likely that tracking devices will become compulsory to enable this.

 

[Nod]

En-route rather than destination chargers seem to be relatively expensive. The only free chargers I've seen are at Sainsbury's (run by PodPoint IIRC) who get you in their store shopping while you top up with a few miles of charge and at a few city centre car parks where you pay to park but get charge for free (at the moment).

Since we have a charge point at home and don't go beyond the charge range in the Leaf, we haven't used any en-route chargers. IIRC, some Teslas can charge for free at some points.

Many new cars have tracking devices as standard but the manufacturers use them as a selling point and call it sat nav...

 

[nilagin]

If they truly want to sell EV, it is their responsibility to get the infrastructure started.
Tesla built supercharger network. Nissan + Renault funded Ecotricity Electric Highway. VW is funding Electrify-America. Multiple companies are funding Ionity in Europe. VW is also funding a Tesco chargers being built today.
https://www.zap-map.com/pod-point-partners-with-vw-tesco-for-charge-point-roll-out/


How often do most people do long journey? My parents do the 150 miles drive, 300 miles return journey 6-12 times a year.

Yes. I have been saying EV is perfect for most people's daily use. Hiring a vehicle for those 1-2 longer journey per year. Or if multiple car ownership, only keeping 1 ICE car for longer journey.


kW is different to kWh. What you've found is a 24kWh Leaf. 80kW motor, which is ~105bhp. 24kWh battery, allowing 80 miles. 80 miles becomes 60 dependable motorway miles in winter, due to Leaf's high-speed inefficiency. The car cannot do the journey with a single stop. I know because I've driven this journey in a 24kWh Leaf.

They need efficient EV like 30kWh Ioniq, or 40kWh Leaf due to its high-speed inefficiency. There's absolutely zero need for 90kWh E-Tron or I-Pace as the industry seems to be heading towards. High speed efficiency is key.


Tell all that to the idling "tractors" outside the school gates. Producing pollution just to power climate-control in the car for 1 person.
Whereas I've sat in the car for over 1 hour a few times, when baby is asleep and wife went to do the grocery shopping. I can do this in any extreme weather and my EV with tiny 24kWh battery only used 1-2% energy.

But the original point was, you cannot run electronics in car for long periods of time without engine keeping the battery charged. This limitation doesn't exist for EV, usable energy is always readily available.


And yet today, Tesla is still selling more and more cars, expanding and bringing out new models.
Tell me, does oil/auto/financial/media companies have a vested interest in Tesla failing? Make sure move to electric is slower, get rid of the disruptor, to short stock, drum up sensational news.

Your parents ideal car situation then would be to buy a cheap old Leaf for their once a week 3 mile trips and hire a longer range more capable EV for the 300 mile round trips. You are always harping on about the environment and emissions yet the 3 mile weekly journey will be producing very high emissions as the engine will never get fully warmed up for the majority of It's use.

It's illegal to keep a car idling whilst parked and more and more schools have car exclusion zones at drop off and pick up times so it doesn't really matter.
I have had my stereo on in my car for 3-4hrs many times whilst cleaning and the battery is just fine. More than enough charge to lock the car, unlock the car and start the car on the next journey.
First 3 months of this year Tesla's sales were around 15k less than they had anticipated. Musk has readjusted his estimate for this year as a consequence. As I mentioned ed before when you brought this up, most of what you perceive to be an increase in sales is Tesla finally managing to increase their car build date and finally supply cars that people had pre-ordered up to a year before.

No one has a vested interest in Tesla failing, no one has anything to gain if they do. With CO2 limits being imposed around the world, all manufacturers have their bit to do anyway, Tesla is of no consequence to them. Car manufacturers don't wish to put each other out of business, they just seek to sell more cars than their competitors and/or make sufficient money to pay their bills, share holders and invest money in future products and ventures. During the financial crash when car companies were almost bankrupt and were begging for bailouts, Ford weren't bordering on bankruptcy, but they went along to the meetings begging on the behalf of the other manufacturers to ensure they got bailouts, not exactly the actions of a company with a vested interest in another car company failing, more the actions of a company revelling in the fact they have competitors.
Your still referring to Tesla as the disruptor, just what disruption have they caused? Other manufacturers are still building and selling their cars, still making profits, Tesla aren't making a profit, where's the disruption.

 

[nilagin]

The way I see it, if you want to sell a product, you have to make sure the product has surrounding support infrastructure.
So, if car manufacturer really do want to sell EV, they got to make sure they either install the infrastructure or fund companies that do.


But there's no way for government to tax home charging. They either blanket tax all electricity use, or no tax. If they put tax on home EV chargers, there's no way to police use of domestic socket to home charge.

So the modelling still works, as long as you charge at home majority of the time. Tax heavily on rapid chargers (the airport style lounge as you mentioned) is a future I can see. You pay close to petrol prices for long distance drive but you pay peanuts for normal day to day use.

It took Tesla 4 years to start installing their own charging network, prior to that owners had to make use of what had already been installed or rely on home charging. Are you saying Tesla weren't seriously interested in selling cars during those 4 years?

Don't be so sure governments won't find a way to tax home charging. They managed it with people that made their own fuel from used cooking fat.

 

[srichards]

HMRC don't tax biofuels now below something like 1000 litres a year. They realised it wasn't worth the effort of collecting.

It seems to be above 2500 litres before they care. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/pay-excise-duty-on-biofuels-and-other-fuel-substitutes-ho930


I'd think it will be the same with home use of electricity unless smart meters can be programmed to do it automatically. Far easier to slap VED on all new EVs.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Far easier to slap VED on all new EVs.

True. I suspect they won't confine it to new cars if EVs start to sell in large numbers. Fuel duty alone feeds £28 billion a year into the Exchequer with 20% VAT on top. My guess is that someone is going to realise quite soon that electric car owners aren't paying their share and will put their road tax up to cover it or charge them the equivalent per mile to make up the difference.

 

[wyx087]

You are living in cloud cuckoo land. It becomes compulsory in 2025 for instance for all cars to have meters installed to show how much charge they have received, you are then liable to supply this information at the time you pay your road tax and are then liable to pay a fee. You put in false figures to keep it low, when your car is serviced or sold or has an MOT the figures are recorded and sent to Govt. Private buyer has to send meter numbers or he becomes liable, so no way round selling privately. Or there becomes a legal liability to tell your insurance company or a legal requirement to have your vehicle mileage verified annually and a flat rate levy per mile is payable, there's a million ways to ensure the Govt could establish some sort of fee. Alternatively road tax for EV's could be increased, some will win some will lose, just the same as now, I pay a lot for my motorcycle road tax but I only do 2000 miles a year, my wife drives very little but her road tax is over £200, I drive a big diesel to work over 2000 miles a month and I pay £30 pa, it's never been a fair system, anyone complain?

You need to think outside what we have now in terms of revenue collection, for someone so aware of the advantages of thinking laterally in terms of private transport your are very blinkered in terms of what a Govt could do if they wish to find a method to recoup lost revenue.

That's a very interesting and convoluted way to levy tax. But I'm sure if it racks in the money, they will find a way.

But I don't believe any annual tax will be applied retrospectively. This has never been done (to my knowledge). So buy cheap EV's now?

They've never had to previously, with businesses queueing up to sell fuel and lubricants

Previously, the big oil companies are very profitable, so they built the distribution network to make sure everyone rely on their products. So now, they set the price, you pay up.
But problem with EV is that most EV drivers are able to not rely on public charging so they can choose to be price sensitive. (eg. my home is sub 8p/kWh, work is 12p/kWh, I charge as little as possible at work) Therefore, there is very little business case for charging operators if they want to make a profit. There is a HUGE barrier to entry as a new charging operator, the installation cost. This is why I feel the initial investment of installing hardware, getting charge operators up and running, need to come from those who want to sell the cars, want their new products to succeed.

You are always harping on about the environment and emissions yet the 3 mile weekly journey will be producing very high emissions as the engine will never get fully warmed up for the majority of It's use.

So it is the end user's fault for the inherent flaw with ICE. The few miles per-go is also precisely how many Chelsea diesel tractors get used. Majority of mothers and old folks must be using their car wrong. The very high emission is totally not manufacturer's fault and the government is totally correct in only measuring warmed up engine. Yes, it totally makes sense

It took Tesla 4 years to start installing their own charging network,

No, 0 year. Again, you have ignored facts and insisted on spreading misinformation. As I've pointed out previously, their first car was not built to use quick charger First car able to use Tesla' charging network is Model S came out in 2012, their Supercharger network was built in 2012.

 

[PaulF]

No, 0 year. Again, you have ignored facts and insisted on spreading misinformation. As I've pointed out previously, their first car was not built to use quick charger First car able to use Tesla' charging network is Model S came out in 2012, their Supercharger network was built in 2012.

For crying out loud, stop it, you are looking silly now.
Fact - Tesla launched first car in 2008.
Fact - Tesla started installation of Tesla only superchargers in 2012.

The fact their first car can't use their own supercharger network does not change the fact that Tesla relied on other suppliers on route chargers. In fact, it could be said that they continued to rely on other suppliers if, as you say, the first roadster could not use their own fast charger.
Unless, of course, the first Tesla's were designed to stay within there range of home!

 

[nilagin]

No, 0 year. Again, you have ignored facts and insisted on spreading misinformation. As I've pointed out previously, their first car was not built to use quick charger First car able to use Tesla' charging network is Model S came out in 2012, their Supercharger network was built in 2012.

Regardless of whether the first Tesla's could use a quick charger or not, they still needed charging. They had to rely on chargers already in place or I assume owners charged at home. Where is the misinformation? It is a fact Tesla had not started it's own charging network in the first 4yrs it was selling EV's.

 

[nilagin]

So it is the end user's fault for the inherent flaw with ICE. The few miles per-go is also precisely how many Chelsea diesel tractors get used. Majority of mothers and old folks must be using their car wrong. The very high emission is totally not manufacturer's fault and the government is totally correct in only measuring warmed up engine. Yes, it totally makes sense

Yet you are happy for your parents to continue to use their car as such, whilst you are preaching to us. Your parents are probably doing more damage to the environment than two cars doing 10 mile journeys. When an engine doesn't get warm enough it causes condensation and dilutes the oil, not only does the extra volume create more friction, it also degrades the oil, again increasing friction. The engine will produce higher emissions, the engine will use more fuel and produce higher emissions from the increase in fuel consumption. The engine will wear more and more and emissions will continue to increase. Why haven't you insisted that your parents get an EV? Frorm the frequency they use a car, they don't even need one? just get a cab for the one day a week they need to make their 3 mile journey and hire an EV for their trips to you.
Yes a lot of old people do use their cars wrongly, we even conduct engine tests at work to replicate it to try to ensure engine wear and the degradation of oils used is kept to a minimum.

 

[wyx087]

Fact - Tesla launched first car in 2008.
Fact - Tesla started installation of Tesla only superchargers in 2012.

The fact their first car can't use their own supercharger network does not change the fact that Tesla relied on other suppliers on route chargers. In fact, it could be said that they continued to rely on other suppliers if, as you say, the first roadster could not use their own fast charger.
Unless, of course, the first Tesla's were designed to stay within there range of home!

I think it was the latter. First Tesla roadster does not have quick charge capability, you have to buy third party modification: https://shop.quickchargepower.com/JdeMo-for-Tesla-Roadster-JdeMORoadster.htm
So, although those two facts are correct, the 2008 car itself dose not seem like it is designed to be taken away from owner's home. It doesn't matter if there were public infrastructure or not at that early time.

But Model S was promised as able to replace ICE cars. So Tesla had charging network ready before the car came out. Model 3 in Europe had different charging head to existing Tesla cars, before 3 came to Europe, a lot of stations were modified to allow Model 3 to quick charge.
Any new EV today must have quick charge capability, so like the Model S and 3, the en-route quick charging infrastructure needs to be funded and ready before the cars arrive. Eg. now.

Yet you are happy for your parents to continue to use their car as such, whilst you are preaching to us. Your parents are probably doing more damage to the environment than two cars doing 10 mile journeys. When an engine doesn't get warm enough it causes condensation and dilutes the oil, not only does the extra volume create more friction, it also degrades the oil, again increasing friction. The engine will produce higher emissions, the engine will use more fuel and produce higher emissions from the increase in fuel consumption. The engine will wear more and more and emissions will continue to increase. Why haven't you insisted that your parents get an EV? Frorm the frequency they use a car, they don't even need one? just get a cab for the one day a week they need to make their 3 mile journey and hire an EV for their trips to you.
Yes a lot of old people do use their cars wrongly, we even conduct engine tests at work to replicate it to try to ensure engine wear and the degradation of oils used is kept to a minimum.

So you are saying it is not acceptable for my parents to use their car in the same way as their peers. Ignoring the fact their demand for a car is higher, includes long distance drive 6-12 times a year. Yet, the lack of choice for EV on the market and the lack of infrastructure even today has nothing to do with the way automotive industry is dragging their heels slowly changing to EV.

If cold engine is so bad and produces higher emission, why isn't this regulated? Why are the regulation only on warm engines? Seems like a rather large regulatory loophole for pollution from all cars on the road.

 

[Nod]

If cold engine is so bad and produces higher emission, why isn't this regulated?

VERY hard to police any regulations like that. Neil's right (in some respects) about short (sub 5 mile) journeys being the worst thing for engines and the environment, although he's wrong about the condensation diluting the oil - it can form an emulsion with it but will not dilute it and will be driven off once the oil reaches operating temperature. Unburnt fuel can creep past the piston rings (freshly started engines tend to have boosted fuelling for a second or 2) and that can dilute the oil but again should be driven off at proper running temperatures.

Mrs Nod has to go down to town (2 miles each way down [then back up!] the highest hill in the city) 4-6 times a day, hence the want/need for an EV. The fact that the Leaf is capable of ~80 mile round trips is a bonus.

 

[nilagin]

VERY hard to police any regulations like that. Neil's right (in some respects) about short (sub 5 mile) journeys being the worst thing for engines and the environment, although he's wrong about the condensation diluting the oil - it can form an emulsion with it but will not dilute it and will be driven off once the oil reaches operating temperature. Unburnt fuel can creep past the piston rings (freshly started engines tend to have boosted fuelling for a second or 2) and that can dilute the oil but again should be driven off at proper running temperatures.

Mrs Nod has to go down to town (2 miles each way down [then back up!] the highest hill in the city) 4-6 times a day, hence the want/need for an EV. The fact that the Leaf is capable of ~80 mile round trips is a bonus.

But his parents aren't burning off the condensation or fuel. They are only doing journeys capable of doing that 6 -12 times a year in between the damage is being done, cylinder bores being washed of lubrication and degraded oil on start up, not a very good combination, that is aside from all bearing faces which can't be maintained at the proper lubricated gap.

 

[nilagin]

I think it was the latter. First Tesla roadster does not have quick charge capability, you have to buy third party modification: https://shop.quickchargepower.com/JdeMo-for-Tesla-Roadster-JdeMORoadster.htm
So, although those two facts are correct, the 2008 car itself dose not seem like it is designed to be taken away from owner's home. It doesn't matter if there were public infrastructure or not at that early time.

But Model S was promised as able to replace ICE cars. So Tesla had charging network ready before the car came out. Model 3 in Europe had different charging head to existing Tesla cars, before 3 came to Europe, a lot of stations were modified to allow Model 3 to quick charge.
Any new EV today must have quick charge capability, so like the Model S and 3, the en-route quick charging infrastructure needs to be funded and ready before the cars arrive. Eg. now.


So you are saying it is not acceptable for my parents to use their car in the same way as their peers. Ignoring the fact their demand for a car is higher, includes long distance drive 6-12 times a year. Yet, the lack of choice for EV on the market and the lack of infrastructure even today has nothing to do with the way automotive industry is dragging their heels slowly changing to EV.

If cold engine is so bad and produces higher emission, why isn't this regulated? Why are the regulation only on warm engines? Seems like a rather large regulatory loophole for pollution from all cars on the road.

You have been telling us there is enough choice of EV on the market and the recharging infrastructure is adequate for the number of EV cars on the road at present. Every time someone posts up a journalists article on their EV experience and how they found pitfalls or difficulty in finding working charges etc. You always say it is written by someone who dislikes EV's and wants to see them fail and they are just making up excuses. Now you are saying those excuses are a valid reason. You really do need to make your mind up, you seem confused.
Engines have to be warm during MOT tests, if a garage damages a cold engine during the test, they will be liable. Plus if a car is used properly' as most of them are, it will spend most of It's journey with a warmed up engine. Why should testing penalise those who use cars properly? More modern engines have methods of reducing emissions even when a vehicle is cold, but from what you have said about your parents Volvo, I suspect it isn't that modern.

 

[Nod]

your parents Volvo

Probably uses an old Ford Diesel engine!!!

 

[nilagin]

Probably uses an old Ford Diesel engine!!!

Doesn't matter who made it, they aren't doing it any favours.

 

[MatBin]

That's a very interesting and convoluted way to levy tax. But I'm sure if it racks in the money, they will find a way.

But I don't believe any annual tax will be applied retrospectively. This has never been done (to my knowledge). So buy cheap EV's now?


Previously, the big oil companies are very profitable, so they built the distribution network to make sure everyone rely on their products. So now, they set the price, you pay up.
But problem with EV is that most EV drivers are able to not rely on public charging so they can choose to be price sensitive. (eg. my home is sub 8p/kWh, work is 12p/kWh, I charge as little as possible at work) Therefore, there is very little business case for charging operators if they want to make a profit. There is a HUGE barrier to entry as a new charging operator, the installation cost. This is why I feel the initial investment of installing hardware, getting charge operators up and running, need to come from those who want to sell the cars, want their new products to succeed.


So it is the end user's fault for the inherent flaw with ICE. The few miles per-go is also precisely how many Chelsea diesel tractors get used. Majority of mothers and old folks must be using their car wrong. The very high emission is totally not manufacturer's fault and the government is totally correct in only measuring warmed up engine. Yes, it totally makes sense


No, 0 year. Again, you have ignored facts and insisted on spreading misinformation. As I've pointed out previously, their first car was not built to use quick charger First car able to use Tesla' charging network is Model S came out in 2012, their Supercharger network was built in 2012.

 

[MatBin]

Who said anything about retrospective tax? Go forward 5 years and revenue from carbon based fuel is dropping, the Govt will put a bill onto EV ownership, running costs against ice cars no longer looks so attractive. They will be more expensive to buy, initial price and more expensive to run. They already are in some ways, I could buy 2 similar cars, one ice and one EV, which will be more expensive? And if the EV breaks the higher tax bracket the difference in road tax is £290 pa. That's about 200 ltrs or more than 2400 miles, 3 months average mileage. If the Govt increase the road tax for EV then that's even more "free" miles for the ice car.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

Who said anything about retrospective tax? Go forward 5 years and revenue from carbon based fuel is dropping, the Govt will put a bill onto EV ownership, running costs against ice cars no longer looks so attractive. They will be more expensive to buy, initial price and more expensive to run. They already are in some ways, I could buy 2 similar cars, one ice and one EV, which will be more expensive? And if the EV breaks the higher tax bracket the difference in road tax is £290 pa. That's about 200 ltrs or more than 2400 miles, 3 months average mileage. If the Govt increase the road tax for EV then that's even more "free" miles for the ice car.

The government will always find ways to screw you and bend you over. It may be that they will do so even more for ICE cars or any privately owned cars period. Communism is here in the UK and it is time to evacuate.