• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

The EV fact thread

They appear to have gone up in the last couple of years.....because the two years prior to that (COVID) there were simply a lot less total miles driven.....which is why deaths per unit of miles (millions or billions) is more informative.
 
Yes, I looked at one of these prior to getting the I3. The home charger would allow me to charge to car quicker at about 7kWh, but that is almost double the output of my solar system, so at best, it would still be getting half the energy from the grid.
The fact that the i3 is small and light and therefore has a small and light battery (about 50% of most EV's) means I have never had to charge for more than about 12 hours on a domestic 13amp socket to fully refuel.
The Zappi charger was an about £1k, the Meross smart plug about £10, but that only means I save enough to 'fuel' the car for about another 50K miles.....
Can you guess which one I chose?
I came to the same conclusion - the payback of the investment in a Zappi was far too long. I'm pretty sure that the same is true for most people who buy them but they don't have basic numeracy skills to calculate payback.
 
I came to the same conclusion - the payback of the investment in a Zappi was far too long. I'm pretty sure that the same is true for most people who buy them but they don't have basic numeracy skills to calculate payback.
For my specific usage of an EV and my surplus solar supply, it would never payback at all!
Yes, I would be able to charge quicker, but there has never been a situation when I put the car in the garage that I didn't have time for the charge required for my next outing on a 13amp socket.
If I were a heavier user, or had a heavier EV, then maybe it could be useful.
Now, if I'm away from home and mid journey I don't mind paying for a quicker charge, but that has only happened once since August....
As my 'local' car shared by myself and my wife, it's very cost effective as far as running costs are concerned.
 
They appear to have gone up in the last couple of years.....because the two years prior to that (COVID) there were simply a lot less total miles driven.....which is why deaths per unit of miles (millions or billions) is more informative.
Nothing empirical, just an observation but the year or so break from driving had left a lot of people so rusty in observation and general skills that accidents went up. Plus cheaper dash cams you now have a lot of people in their own personal heavens say8ng “See, see watch, it was my right of way…”
 
Tesla compare the model 3 with the 3 Series. Petrol 3-Series starts at 1525kg. Tesla model 3 starts at 1777Kg.
That's a 250kg difference for the short range RWD version. The long range version is 313kg heavier.
Tesla figures quoted US style without driver.
BMW weight quoted EU style with driver of 65kg and 7 kg luggage.
So .... that would make the equivalent figure of the BMW 1453kg. That would make the two Tesla numbers 323kg and 386kg heavier.
(I have seen slightly lower figures for the BMW)
323kg is 22% of the BMW weight. 386kg is 26% of the BMW weight.
The SUV style EVs from other manufacturers can be asbsurdly heavy. And it is also likely that with fewer diesels being purchased the average ICE weight is dropping a bit. I suspect 20% to 35% range is not unreasonable.
Worth acknowledging that you feel that 15% weight reduction every mile you drive that lumbering Tesla 3.

The BMW is a legendary nimble Exec saloon. This Yankee or Chinese built wannabe doesn't stand a chance in comparison to the decades and billions in German product development spent so far. Maybe one day, but not any time soon.


Screenshot 2024-02-23 at 10.59.50.png
 
Saw this today:


This is not surprising.

The point I've been making all along is that electric cars are essentially cheaper to make than cars equipped with traditional internal combustion engines and automatic transmissions.

The reasons that current EVs are expenses that (a) range anxiety means that manufacturers insist on cramming-in some very large batteries that most people don't need, and the big batteries then make up a considerable proportion of the overall cost, (b) manufacturers habitually add lots of clever features and other expensive tech options into their EVs, thinking that EV buyers prefer sophistication and tech as well as higher trim levels, and (c) manufacturers are competing by trying to differentiate themselves with their own tech, meaning that they need to recoup the R&D before they turn a profit.

The first manufacturer to be brave enough to make a small no-frills electric car with a battery sized to satisfy city dwellers' needs, no fancy tech or upmarket creature comfort features, and relying on existing tech that's royally-free, will easily be able to understandcut similar ICE cars.
 
Worth acknowledging that you feel that 15% weight reduction every mile you drive that lumbering Tesla 3.

The BMW is a legendary nimble Exec saloon. This Yankee or Chinese built wannabe doesn't stand a chance in comparison to the decades and billions in German product development spent so far. Maybe one day, but not any time soon.


View attachment 153644
What exactly is the point of constantly comparing an ICE 3-Series to a Tesla EV - or any EV - when the ICE on account of being lighter will have certain obvious advantages? Compare an electric 3 -series to a Tesla for the comparison to be valid. For good or bad, the ICE 3-Series will disappear from the market so comparison to it is as meaningful - or meaningless - as comparing 2024 to 1924. The past has passed and the ICE 3-Series will soon be gone.
In 2024 though - to pick up on your final sentence - Tesla have more EV experience than BMW. Is your constant harking of BMW ICE superiority over Tesla an unspoken recognition of that? Stanley was good at steamers - then it didn't matter.
 
This is not surprising.

The point I've been making all along is that electric cars are essentially cheaper to make than cars equipped with traditional internal combustion engines and automatic transmissions.
But mainly due to very low labour costs and development and infrastructure costs funded by Chinese government.
The reasons that current EVs are expenses that (a) range anxiety means that manufacturers insist on cramming-in some very large batteries that most people don't need, and the big batteries then make up a considerable proportion of the overall cost, (b) manufacturers habitually add lots of clever features and other expensive tech options into their EVs, thinking that EV buyers prefer sophistication and tech as well as higher trim levels, and (c) manufacturers are competing by trying to differentiate themselves with their own tech, meaning that they need to recoup the R&D before they turn a profit.
But mainly due to manufacturers' desire to push up-market where the profits are.
The first manufacturer to be brave enough to make a small no-frills electric car with a battery sized to satisfy city dwellers' needs, no fancy tech or upmarket creature comfort features, and relying on existing tech that's royally-free, will easily be able to understandcut similar ICE cars.
If you build an ICE to the standards of these cars - quadricycle in the case of the Ami. very low performance and range of the BYD - it will undercut EV. Only like with like comparisons have any meaning.

Becoming clearer by the day that the West - or the European element of it - is more than willing to surrender its car industry to the country which is more than happy to trade with Russia.
 
This is not surprising.

The point I've been making all along is that electric cars are essentially cheaper to make than cars equipped with traditional internal combustion engines and automatic transmissions.

Except the market doesn't reflect that assertion at all.

If your assertion is just about the fact that EVs could be cheaper if they were further limited in features - then the same argument can be applied ICE vehicles (I write as somebody quite taken by the idea of asking SMWBO if I can have a tuk-tuk for my next birthday).

The proof is in the pudding as they say. If we see genuinely low cost EVs that are attractive in their own right as products that people will choose to buy then that would be a game changer.
 
What exactly is the point of constantly comparing an ICE 3-Series to a Tesla EV - or any EV - when the ICE on account of being lighter will have certain obvious advantages? Compare an electric 3 -series to a Tesla for the comparison to be valid. For good or bad, the ICE 3-Series will disappear from the market so comparison to it is as meaningful - or meaningless - as comparing 2024 to 1924. The past has passed and the ICE 3-Series will soon be gone.
In 2024 though - to pick up on your final sentence - Tesla have more EV experience than BMW. Is your constant harking of BMW ICE superiority over Tesla an unspoken recognition of that? Stanley was good at steamers - then it didn't matter.

As I said, the BMW is THE legendary nimble Exec saloon. I did NOT say that every ICE is a legendary Exec saloon.

The 3er has five decades of multi-billion DM/€ product development behind it. The incoming EV brands don't.

Those five decades of small executive saloon leadership will shortly evolve into the BMW 3er EV, which will be streets ahead of BYD and Tesla equivalents. Munich knows how to design, build, market, distribute, sell, service and repair cars.

It's nonsense to obsess with the drivetrain and Supercharger advantage - that's a tiny part of the motoring experience. What matters is the overall design, manufacturing, marketing, distribution, servicing and repair capability.

This Yankee or Chinese built Tesla 3 wannabe doesn't stand a chance in comparison to the decades and billions in German product development spent so far.

Maybe one day, but not any time soon.

Test drive a Tesla 3 back to back with a 3 series. It's easily arranged. See for yourself.

The only reason to choose a Tesla 3 today is the enormous company car tax advantage on new car purchase, and the ability to fuel an EVat 3p mile instead of 15p - call it £960 a year IF you're doing 8,000 miles a year - IF you fuel solely from overnight rates on your driveway. (Use "free" electricity at work or in your office, and that saving is greater.)
 
Worth acknowledging that you feel that 15% weight reduction every mile you drive that lumbering Tesla 3.

The BMW is a legendary nimble Exec saloon. This Yankee or Chinese built wannabe doesn't stand a chance in comparison to the decades and billions in German product development spent so far. Maybe one day, but not any time soon.


View attachment 153644
The weight argument is meaningless when you put a BMW M3 with 4 passengers each weighing 90kg up against a Tesla with just the driver - or the other way round!
The Tesla weighs the same (within a few millionths of a gram) whether it has 1% charge or 100% charge.
A petrol car will weigh up to 100kg heavier with a full petrol tank and another 100kg more with a dead body in the boot!
Weight is a spurious argument - when you compare a ground up well designed ICE car with a ground up designed EV.
Weight problems may arise when legacy car makers remove an engine, gearbox and ancillaries from an old design of ICE car and then shoehorn an EV system into it!
 
Isn't that what Citroen's Ami was for?
The Ami isn't a general City car. It's a Quadricycle in a plastic shell, designed for French teenagers and people who are banned from driving a car.

Fragile and speed limited to 28mph, you would need a change of clothes if you tried to pull out of a side turning into normal traffic.

This is not 0-60 in 10 seconds, this is 0-28 in 10 seconds. And that's not fast enough for city life.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
The weight argument is meaningless when you put a BMW M3 with 4 passengers each weighing 90kg up against a Tesla with just the driver - or the other way round!
The Tesla weighs the same (within a few millionths of a gram) whether it has 1% charge or 100% charge.
A petrol car will weigh up to 100kg heavier with a full petrol tank and another 100kg more with a dead body in the boot!
Weight is a spurious argument - when you compare a ground up well designed ICE car with a ground up designed EV.
Weight problems may arise when legacy car makers remove an engine, gearbox and ancillaries from an old design of ICE car and then shoehorn an EV system into it!
Fair point. The lumbering Tesla 3 long range probably feels like that just because it's badly designed, whereas the BMW has had decades of experience and improvement.

As for the M3: who cares? Barely anyone drives one. It's as irrelevant as an E63.

What matters here is what's happening between the vehicles that people actually use in the real world.
 
The point I've been making all along is that electric cars are essentially cheaper to make than cars equipped with traditional internal combustion engines and automatic transmissions.
They're simply not, which is why the car industry is in crisis.

If Mercedes could make an EV for anything like the cost of the legendary E220, they would be as happy as Larry.

They can't.

Ditto Porsche and the 911
 
The Tesla weighs the same (within a few millionths of a gram) whether it has 1% charge or 100% charge.
A petrol car will weigh up to 100kg heavier with a full petrol tank and another 100kg more with a dead body in the boot!
Are there many cars with 135 litre petrol tanks?
Are there any cars that have a fuel tank - empty or full - that weigh 400kg?
 
The first manufacturer to be brave enough to make a small no-frills electric car with a battery sized to satisfy city dwellers' needs, no fancy tech or upmarket creature comfort features, and relying on existing tech that's royally-free, will easily be able to understandcut similar ICE cars.
Et voilla.

Not cheap enough but still inexpensive compared to the majority of EVs but neither sold well.

1708696003512.jpeg

1708695964248.jpeg
 
The weight argument is meaningless when you put a BMW M3 with 4 passengers each weighing 90kg up against a Tesla with just the driver - or the other way round!

Tesla don't compare against 3-Series rather than specifically against the M3.

Weight is a spurious argument - when you compare a ground up well designed ICE car with a ground up designed EV.

It's not a spurious argument - with current battery technology limitations and the products manufactured for the market - it's a fact of life.

So the point is - that in principle the 3-Series is considered to be a well designed ICE - and the Model 3 a well designed EV. The EV is significantly heavier.

Does that matter. Well yes in the real world it does for a couple of reasons. There is a safety aspect. More weight means the bad news of more momentum and kinetic energy in an accident. But in terms of the market it creates a stress on the product where in order to compete with ICE equivalents the EV has to be made heavier - and that weight also acts a practical limit to its range performance. (And it doesn't matter if in reality the range isn't so important - just as long as consumers think it is important - which means those designing and manufacturing and selling EVs have to factor in the additional weight ). This has a knock on beyond the vehicles by putting emphasis on charging infrastructure and charging technologies - which has further impact on the market and and puts pressure on the need for additional facilities investment.

You can make light of this by using the M3 and dead bodies as factors. That's a deflection from the underlying problem.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom