The EV fact thread

[Dryce]

That’s equally true for drivers of small cars wishing to travel an exceptionally long distance, and for drivers of large cars (or cars with local emissions) entering city centres by exception. In either scenario you use the right tool for the job.

Modern small ICE cars do long distances quite well. And quite economically.

We used to have a single car - a two seater. And we used to hire larger cars when we needed them. We don't do that any more. Much of the time the rental works OK. But you tend to remember the times when it doesn't - such as no availability of the car type you booked and that large saloon turns into a Micra. I used to dread the cheery call just before a hire - or on arrival the over friendly agent - about top tell you there was a problem. You learned after a while to avoid pickups on a Saturday or first thing in the morning. Or after snow and icy weather. Then there are the variable costs. I used to have a rate agreed with local hire car station a few years back - but these days the local managers don't negotiate so you're stuck with the variable internet rates which can be a bit polarised in terms of value.

We still have a two seater.

We use buses and trains a lot. And also cycle.

But. I own a large SUV basically because (a) I can; and (b) I am an idiot; and (c) I cannot be bothered with the hassle of not having it.

For most people the size of a car is about status - or perception of need. I would assert most cars are bigger and more expensive than the owners need them to be.

The real trick is not to own one in the first place.

 

[Will]

Just as an aside many (most?) modern smart watches seem to need charging every night, yet include sleep tracking functionality?!

If you need/want to use the sleep tracking, just pop it on charge in the morning when you get showered/have breakfast or whatever?

No need to charge only at night - have to think outside of the box

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Price perhaps? No idea if you bought new or used, or leased. But from a very quick skim of Autotrader a used 500e seems to be roughly double the cost of a petrol 500 of equivalent age (excluding insurance write offs)?

Whether I bought new or not doesn’t really matter in this because if cost is the most important factor - and a source of compromise - then you wouldn’t buy new, because buying new cars is expensive.

If cost is a compromise then surely you wouldn’t even consider buying anything other than the least expensive cars available, as long as they were in good order with no black marks in their history.

Excluding Category D cars, the least expensive Fiat 500e (EV)) on AutoTrader at this moment costs £9,500, and that’s for a one-owner 2021 71-plate car with 11,200 miles, from a dealer.



The least expensive equivalent Fiat 500 (ICE) on Autotrader costs £7995 (2022 71) , with filters set to exclude Category S and cars registered before 2021 with l<10,000 miles and 15,000< miles.



So the least expensive FIAT 500e (EV) costs £1,505 or 19% more than the least expensive equivalent Fiat 500 (ICE), from completely different generations launched almost 15 years apart.

More expensive but the significance of spending an extra £1,500 is down to your specific position. I’d say that most people looking for a car would be prepared to pay £1,500 for the next generation.

If that’s too much then the least expensive Smart ForFour (EV) - has a little less range - but can be bought for less than £6k, and a similar age and mileage example is on AutoTrader for £6,390.



Almost a year ago I spotted a 2-year old Fiat 500e for £9,000 at a Fiat main dealer with around 4k miles, and I was that car which sparked an interest in the Fiat 500e, so they’ve been less in the past.

I’d say purchase cost is only a compromise if you want it to be.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Just as an aside many (most?) modern smart watches seem to need charging every night, yet include sleep tracking functionality?!

Smartwatches don’t need charging overnight, they just need charging when you’re not using it, and that’s the time which offers least convenience.

I have an Apple Watch with a battery life of 20-24 hours. I wear it all day and at night, so I charge whilst I am in the shower and getting dressed.

If sleep monitoring is important then charge the smartwatch when doing something else. Like watching TV, working, driving or exercising.

If exercise monitoring is important then charge the smartwatch when doing something else. Like watching TV, working, driving or sleeping.

If seeing alerts whilst working is important then charge the smartwatch when doing something else. Like watching TV, driving, exercising or sleeping.

If not having to charge your watch is important then use an alternative. Like a digital, manual or automatic winding watch instead.

If cost is important then use a digital watch that’s in that drawer in the kitchen or the hall, you know the one with takeaway menus and balls of string.

 

[markjay]

...No need to charge only at night...

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Modern small ICE cars do long distances quite well. And quite economically.

I agree. It’s not unusual for me to drive 400 miles in one day, in a Smart with the slowest 1.0 naturally aspirated engine. Most would see it as unfit for purpose and I understand their view but it’s perfectly capable of cruising at the same speed as the traffic. It’s not what they were designed for but they are easily capable of doing it.

For most people the size of a car is about status - or perception of need. I would assert most cars are bigger and more expensive than the owners need them to be.

I agree, most cars are bigger and more expensive than the owners need them to be. They are also faster than they need to be, with a longer range than they need to have, and less fuel effluent too.

I would say that’s perception of need or because people buy what they want rather than what they need in most cases. I’m not so sure many people buy large cars for status but some probably do.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Only part of the battery life of old mobile phones was the lack of functionality. The bigger influence was that most people barely used them. Most people had no reason to or couldn’t afford to.

You can easily test this for yourself without the need for a brand new old Nokia, a Time Machine or rosy coloured spectacles. If you prefer then I do have a brand new old Nokia but I can’t help with the Time Machine - just bring you own rosy specs

Here’s how. When you’ve finished with your smartphone, first wipe it, and then set it up as a “clean” device (ie without all of the apps you use), fully charge it and don't use it apart from picking it up to see how much charge is remaining.

Prepare to marvel at how long the battery lasts.

 

[Will]

Reduced battery life of phones isn’t better, but I would argue that it’s not worse in practice. Most people charge their phone every night and very heavy users top up in between, at the desk, in the car, etc.

The number of people who have to charge their phone during the course of the day in such a way that it actually compromisess their use is small - or they’re using a very old phone very intensively.

So most people feel all of the benefit of the much much much greater capability you mention all of the time, but hardly ever - if ever - feel the impact of the battery life not lasting a week or even a day.

Only part of the battery life of old mobile phones was the lack of functionality. The bigger influence was that most people barely used them. Most people had no reason to or couldn’t afford to.

I had to charge all of my Nokias every night and at points during the day out of necessity because I used them a lot. The batteries had to be replaced too because of the number of charging cycles.

PA 25 years ago it was common for phone batteries to be flat when people tried to use them - there wasn’t a frequent and regular drumbeat. Now, not so much, because they charge every nigh(.

We have some relatively modern smartphones at work that are rarely used, but left on standby, and they seem to last easily a week or more.

People seem to forget that old monochrome push button phones were generally only used when a call or SMS came through (occasionally to play snake!) - whereas modern smartphones tend to be used for multiple hours per day of screen time for most users now, including no doubt viewing this thread ironically!

 

[190]

For most people the size of a car is about status - or perception of need. I would assert most cars are bigger and more expensive than the owners need them to be.

Couldn't agree more with that. I only have to look back at the size of cars I've owned over the last 50+ years to see we managed perfectly well with some surprisingly small cars. We used to go camping with two toddlers in a Peugeot 205. As the kids got bigger, there was always the option of roof box on the few occasions it was needed.

 

[Bellow]

I’m practice, do you see better fuel consumption in winter? I don’t.

No. But I don't see range depletion when I turn up the heating.

 

[BTB 500]

If you need/want to use the sleep tracking, just pop it on charge in the morning when you get showered/have breakfast or whatever?

No need to charge only at night - have to think outside of the box

I did - I have a Garmin watch that only needs charging every 5 days or so instead

How long do watches with a 20 hour or so battery life take for a full charge??

 

[Bellow]

It’s all a matter of perspective. Tell me where the compromise is in the following.

She drives 20 miles per weekday mostly B roads and narrow country lanes, and a typical total of 100-120 miles per week. She very occasionally travels on business to two locations 43 miles away and 74 miles away. She can charge at home, at work, and both locations she travels to. She can charge at multiple charging points along the routes to and from both business locations should she be unable to charge at start or end points.

With a worst-case 80 mile range and best-case 140 mile range, it’s ample for comfortably more than 99% of journeys, and there are plenty of options for the less than 1% of journeys which require more range.. Why would she carry around more weight, which requires more raw materials, more energy to move & stop, heavier components, more wear & tear on the car and more wear & tear on the road, all for the very rare occasion upon which it would be a just a little more convenient.

From my perspective - others are available - that’s fitness for purpose. There is zero compromise. I would say that a petrol or diesel car with 600 mile range would be less fit for purpose for my daughter and the way she uses her car, without any meaningful benefit - in fact it would introduce compromises. Useless for you in your scenario, perfect for her in her scenario. Likewise your choice of car would be useless to her.

A Fiat 500e with 24 kWh battery is a city car. It’s intended for short journeys and was designed for short journeys. We bought it for short journeys and a bit of an experiment to see what living with a EV is really like, so I can form views based upon real life experience. Some members claim that there is an unfulfilled need for smaller lighter less expensive cars - and EVs specifically - but don’t buy them. I purposely bought the lower capacity version.

Back to your opening comment regarding ICE baggage. Had I not chosen to do the opposite,I would have bought the larger capacity option (double the battery size) or perhaps a Tesla Model 3 believing that range is all important. I deliberately didn’t let my baggage hold me back from embracing something different, and I’m glad I didn’t. She views it as simply having the right car most of the time, and recharging in long journeys isn’t an issue, and hence no ICE baggage.

My beef as you doubtless are aware is with spending time recharging (which will always take longer than refuelling ICE) when charging at home isn't viable. Dryce in recent posts has made the pertinent points. That when we leave the house it is to do something - and that something is not spend time recharging cars. Often, as Dryce expounded, time constraints beyond our control intrude making both recharging and the intended task(s) impossible. Also, that we spend our own money on cars for convenience. Convenience is attaining a decent range in the shortest time.
Expecting those who cannot charge at home to leave the home for recharging is akin to asking them to stop using their washing machine and instead use a laundrette. Who relishes sitting around waiting when they could be anywhere else doing anything else?

I've no qualms about low-range EVs - I've advocated for them often enough. My comments were a consequence of your daughter questioning greater range. Those who need or want proper range are not freaks. And, as a long time advocate for the need to reduce CO2 emissions I fully understand the need to decarbonise the transport sector. But, other options are (or were) available that would not compromise range.

 

[BTB 500]

Whether I bought new or not doesn’t really matter in this because if cost is the most important factor - and a source of compromise - then you wouldn’t buy new, because buying new cars is expensive.

If cost is a compromise then surely you wouldn’t even consider buying anything other than the least expensive cars available, as long as they were in good order with no black marks in their history.

Excluding Category D cars, the least expensive Fiat 500e (EV)) on AutoTrader at this moment costs £9,500, and that’s for a one-owner 2021 71-plate car with 11,200 miles, from a dealer.

View attachment 166777

The least expensive equivalent Fiat 500 (ICE) on Autotrader costs £7995 (2022 71) , with filters set to exclude Category S and cars registered before 2021 with l<10,000 miles and 15,000< miles.

View attachment 166778

So the least expensive FIAT 500e (EV) costs £1,505 or 19% more than the least expensive equivalent Fiat 500 (ICE), from completely different generations launched almost 15 years apart.

More expensive but the significance of spending an extra £1,500 is down to your specific position. I’d say that most people looking for a car would be prepared to pay £1,500 for the next generation.

If that’s too much then the least expensive Smart ForFour (EV) - has a little less range - but can be bought for less than £6k, and a similar age and mileage example is on AutoTrader for £6,390.

View attachment 166776

Almost a year ago I spotted a 2-year old Fiat 500e for £9,000 at a Fiat main dealer with around 4k miles, and I was that car which sparked an interest in the Fiat 500e, so they’ve been less in the past.

I’d say purchase cost is only a compromise if you want it to be.

Much of that is subjective, which is absolutely fine. We all buy cars based on want as much as need.

All I'm saying is that if you need a car primarily for short local trips (so essentially as means of transport) then something like an older Toyota Aygo will do that perfectly for a fraction of the outlay and not a huge difference in running costs. E.g. Auto Trader UK - New and Used Cars For Sale

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

No. But I don't see range depletion when I turn up the heating.

I think you’re agreeing then that although theoretically an ICE should be more efficient in winter, in reality it’s not. In my experience it’s worse, despite some theory suggesting otherwise.

If the driver is not going to use all of the range - and the vast majority of EV drivers on the vast majority of journeys don’t - then ithere isn’t really a practical implication of the heater affecting range.

I hear EV drivers complain about the heating in their car, but they’re exclusively Jaguar iPace drivers, and exclusively because the heater repeatedly fails. Never about impact on range.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

I did - I have a Garmin watch that only needs charging every 5 days or so instead

How long do watches with a 20 hour or so battery life take for a full charge??

My Apple Watch has a hard life it’s constantly doing something. I’ve never measured how long it takes to fully charge. But u charge it for as long as it takes me to shower and dress, so not long.

Yesterday before work I took it off charge at around 0430 and I hadn’t had a low battery warning when I went to sleep which must have been around 0130 so that’s around 21 hours of use,

The battery life would be longer than that because I ca5 remember waking up in the morning and gr battery being flat even at the weekend when I tend to lie in bed later and so longer between charges.

 

[Will]

No. But I don't see range depletion when I turn up the heating.

Is this something you’ve seen when using an EV?

Just trying to understand whether this is a practical issue you have experienced or just something that you are concerned about in theory?

 

[Bellow]

Is this something you’ve seen when using an EV?

Just trying to understand whether this is a practical issue you have experienced or just something that you are concerned about in theory?

It's a known fact. Are you disputing that using heating in an EV reduces its range?

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

My beef as you doubtless are aware is with spending time recharging (which will always take longer than refuelling ICE) when charging at home isn't viable.

Your use situation is highly unusual, I don’t know of an EV which could even get close to meeting your requirements. That said you don't need to switch to an EV, so the fact that there isn’t a suitable EV doesn’t my matter in the short and medium term. In the long term, much can and will change.

Whilst your situation is unique, there are plenty of others - like @BTB 500 - who have a very unusual set of requirements and which also cannot be satisfied with an EV. But again, that’s OK because they can carry on using their preferred ICE vehicles too, for many many years to come.

However there are many many many more people who could drive an EV without any meaningful compromise, but don’t and that’s OK too because they don't have to. They just don’t need to come up with a 1,001 reasons why not. It’s OK to just prefer driving an ICE car, that suffices.

@ALFAitalia is very open about the fact that he’d never want an EV, but that’s not because of the reasons others often mention, it’s because he just prefers ICE and doesn’t have to switch. I’m the same, I choose to drive ICE because I love driving them, however I will probably get another EV soon.

The reason being that I believe that if those who can do, then those who can’t don’t have to. I can, and so to protect my right to drive ICE for fun - and protect other’s rights to choose to for whichever reason, then I will probably buy an EV for munching miles, and keep my ICE for pleasure.

 

[Bellow]

I think you’re agreeing then that although theoretically an ICE should be more efficient in winter, in reality it’s not. In my experience it’s worse, despite some theory suggesting otherwise.

This has been covered previously. Many external factors which are not connected to the engine contribute to this. Diesels it seems are affected by a change of fuel formation in winter. Petrol and LPG fuelled are not affected by this.
My point though - somewhat tongue in cheek - was that heat in winter from ICE is an additional (necessary) output with no other impact whereas the EV for cabin heating has to mine its energy resource intended for propulsion.

If the driver is not going to use all of the range - and the vast majority of EV drivers on the vast majority of journeys don’t - then ithere isn’t really a practical implication of the heater affecting range.

True - but a consequence is the need to choose a car with a larger battery than would otherwise be required - the knock on effects of which carry costs.
Yes, heat pumps will to some extent negate this but currently they are expensive (on an already expensive vehicle) and will add another complexity (and possible unreliability) eating into a supposed advantage of EV over ICE - simplicity.

I hear EV drivers complain about the heating in their car, but they’re exclusively Jaguar iPace drivers, and exclusively because the heater repeatedly fails. Never about impact on range.

If it isn't working, safe to say it won't impact range.

This issue though raises again the disparity between those who charge at home and can have a toasty warm car courtesy of the grid and those who cannot and have to heat the car from energy that could have turned the wheels. However incremental, this impacts on charging facilities.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Much of that is subjective, which is absolutely fine. We all buy cars based on want as much as need.

All I'm saying is that if you need a car primarily for short local trips (so essentially as means of transport) then something like an older Toyota Aygo will do that perfectly for a fraction of the outlay and not a huge difference in running costs. E.g. Auto Trader UK - New and Used Cars For Sale

Of course an older Toyota Aygo is much much less expensive than a much much newer Fiat 500e. Importantly it’s also much less expensive than a much much newer Toyota Aygo. It’s even much less than your Aygo was when it was brand new.

I don’t think anyone would expect a brand new car to be anything other than a very expensive business, or generally be surprised that newer cars cost more than older cars. I can’t think of a single rational reason to expect otherwise, can you?

When you bought your Mercedes Vito, someone could have said why buy that when a Bedford CF can do the same for a fraction of the price. Or when you bought your C-Class someone could have said that a a Mark 3 Vauxhall Astra estate can do all the same things for a fraction of the cost.

Had that happened then I suspect you would have agreed, and thought to yourself WTAF.