The EV fact thread

[Bobby Dazzler]

Epic fail. Four years in and required a massively costly battery replacement. Is anyone prepared to defend this?

I certainly can’t defend it.

I also wouldn’t have been able to defend Mercedes when several people I know (with the same model car) had to replace the transmission after 4 or 5 years at a cost of £22k.

Unfortunately, whilst rare, there are multiple examples of outrageously expensive drive train failures which affect vehicles in and out of warranty and that’s true for ICE cars too.

Just like ICE, repairs outside of the dealer network - rather than part/assembly replacement at main dealers - will reduce the costs of dealing with otherwise catastrophically expensive failures.

 

[Bellow]

I also wouldn’t have been able to defend Mercedes when several people I know (with the same model car) had to replace the transmission after 4 or 5 years at a cost of £22k.

Unfortunately, whilst rare, there are multiple examples of outrageously expensive drive train failures which affect vehicles in and out of warranty and that’s true for ICE cars too.

Really though, it's not the same.
The argument that ICE can fail is only valid for a few number of models where an inherent problem (invariably ironed out subsequently) afflicts one engine, one transmission, one SCR system, etc and affects only the models in that OEM's portfolio that have that equipment weakness. Some manufacturers have no problems, others have them in select models. The inherent frailty - battery technology is an unstable technology - of batteries can appear in any model from any manufacturer. That is very different from the odd rogue engine, transmission or SCR system. That's before we consider the vulnerability of EVs to the slightest of accident damage which occasions battery replacement where with an ICE the same accident would incur little more than panel damage.
I reiterate my point that were we using sustainable fuel ICE could be made simpler avoiding the bulk of the current afflictions. Thus, ICE has headroom for improvement while EVs are banging their heads on the wall that is 'premature battery failure' with no end in sight.

 

[ALFAitalia]

At present there is no such thing as sustainable fuel though......and when there is it will never be possible in the required quantities. And even then it wont be zero emissions when you burn it.

 

[Gollom]

At present there is no such thing as sustainable fuel though......and when there is it will never be possible in the required quantities. And even then it wont be zero emissions when you burn it.

But.... (and a genuine question) would the emissions when you burn it be greater or less than the carbon footprint and subsequent disposal costs caused by producing EV batteries?

 

[Bellow]

But.... (and a genuine question) would the emissions when you burn it

Zero emissions (overall) as the CO2 it emits in combustion is absorbed in its production. Hence sustainable.

be greater or less than the carbon footprint and subsequent disposal costs caused by producing EV batteries?

Less. The environmental (and other) factors of battery production and disposal aren't given due weight.

 

[Bellow]

At present there is no such thing as sustainable fuel though......and when there is it will never be possible in the required quantities.

True, for as long as you are happy to donate agriculture to feeding this:


I'd rather be feeding this:

 

[BTB 500]

As mentioned before EVs are powered by thousands (typically) of small individual cells, assembled (usually) into modules which are then linked together to form the battery. These cells all degrade slowly in terms of usable capacity and internal resistance from the day they are made, regardless of use. They then degrade (more significantly) based on the number of charge/discharge cycles, charge and discharge rates and temperatures, being left standing at high (or low) charge levels, etc. This is all normal and expected, and if all goes well the battery will simply lose capacity over the years ... giving a slow reduction in range.

But if individual cells start to actually fail (resulting either in an internal short-circuit or excessive internal resistance) the modules containing them will (usually) shut down, giving a sudden reduction in usable capacity and/or power (depending on how the battery is configured). Cell failure can happen at any point - these are small & cheap mass-produced items, and there are normally many thousands of them in a battery. It may be that the car will continue to operate fairly normally with a module or two bypassed, but if enough die then it will cease to charge or drive properly (or at all). I believe this is what @markjay experienced.

As @Bellow said this is fundamentally different to an ICE powertrain, which barring individual design or manufacturing cockups (which EVs will also suffer from of course) has a very high probability of giving a long service life without ever needing to be completely replaced. As at the end of 2023 over 30% of cars on the road in the UK were more than 12 years old and I would wager that the vast majority of those would still have their original engines and transmissions.

 

[markjay]

While we don't have sufficient statistical data at current to be able to determine if EVs are overall more reliable or less reliable than ICE cars, I would argue that it is inevitable that EVs will eventually be more reliable than ICE cars (if they are not already).

The reason for this assertion is that EVs have the upper hand over ICE when it comes to one very crucial factor affecting all mechanical devices: EVs have a significantly lower number of moving parts, when compared to ICE drivetrain (engine and transmission).

Regarding the point raised by Bellow, yes, it is true that mechanical devices tend to deteriorate gradually while electric and electronic devices are more likely to just stop working without warning.

However:

a. While not having a warning about a looming failure is indeed a disadvantage, it is only so if assuming that everything else is equal. Therefore, the question is - again - whether overall reliability is improved. Clearly, a product that is overall more reliable but when it fails it does so without warning, is preferable to a product that has poor reliability but does let you know in advance before it fails.

b. Having said that, modern cars are more and more equipped with critical electronic devices, that can fail and bring the car to a halt. And so, even if mechanical devices do provide (in most cases) advance warning, ultimately the more electronics we see in ICE cars, the less likely it is that the driver will get a warning before a breakdown. Ultimately, even if considering the advance warning as an advantage for ICE cars, this advantage is getting diluted by the installation of more electronic devices in ICE cars. Even simple things, such as electronic parking brake, can bring the car to halt if it fails in the deployed position. Or, a failure of the electronic instrument cluster will render the car roadworthy. Not to mention a failure of the TCU in an automatic transmission that can immobilise an ICE car. Another example are the electric fuel pumps that replaced the mechanical fuel pumps around 40 years ago - the mechanical fuel pump gave sign of trouble long before the diaphragm actually perished, while an electric fuel pump can just die on you without warning. The only way to maintain the 'advanced warning' benefit on ICE cars to a significant level is by going back to very basic cars that are almost 100% technical and have little by way of electronics - but this is a Luddite solution that is obviously not going to happen (unless you drive a Classic car).

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

True, for as long as you are happy to donate agriculture to feeding this:
View attachment 169680

I'd rather be feeding this:
View attachment 169681

And so you should. You'll be dead long before V8's and V12's have disappeared off the face of the Earth.

But does it really matter if wage slaves and Amazon drivers use electrics for their day to day high annual mileages?

 

[BTB 500]

The reason for this assertion is that EVs have the upper hand over ICE when it comes to one very crucial factor affecting all mechanical devices: EVs have a significantly lower number of moving parts, when compared to ICE drivetrain (engine and transmission).

As you've found out though a non-moving part is just as capable of killing your car if it fails.

 

[markjay]

But.... (and a genuine question) would the emissions when you burn it be greater or less than the carbon footprint and subsequent disposal costs caused by producing EV batteries?

I would broaden this question - can the overall pollution footprint of a car, any car - ICE or EV - ever be considered to be 'environmentally friendly'? From mining the iron ores, through the manufacturing of plastics and other synthetic chemicals, then shipping the cars across the globe - and up to the end-of-life recycling process.

I fully agree that EVs are not going to change much with regard to the damage we are causing to the planet. The only positive thing that EVs do - and they do it well - is removing harmful exhaust gas emissions from urban areas, which is where the majority of the population live and work.

But, ultimately, accelerating and decelerating over one ton of metal as our personal mobility solution, is wasteful, and it is also harmful to the environment. There should be fewer cars on our roads, and we should drive them less. Efficient, affordable, safe, and clean public transport is the only way forward - no car will ever be truly 'green', however powered.

 

[markjay]

As you've found out though a non-moving part is just as capable of killing your car if it fails.

Seriously, BTB? Anecdotal evidence isn't statistics... but you know that

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

As mentioned before EVs are powered by thousands (typically) of small individual cells, assembled (usually) into modules which are then linked together to form the battery. These cells all degrade slowly in terms of usable capacity and internal resistance from the day they are made, regardless of use. They then degrade (more significantly) based on the number of charge/discharge cycles, charge and discharge rates and temperatures, being left standing at high (or low) charge levels, etc. This is all normal and expected, and if all goes well the battery will simply lose capacity over the years ... giving a slow reduction in range.

But if individual cells start to actually fail (resulting either in an internal short-circuit or excessive internal resistance) the modules containing them will (usually) shut down, giving a sudden reduction in usable capacity and/or power (depending on how the battery is configured). Cell failure can happen at any point - these are small & cheap mass-produced items, and there are normally many thousands of them in a battery. It may be that the car will continue to operate fairly normally with a module or two bypassed, but if enough die then it will cease to charge or drive properly (or at all). I believe this is what @markjay experienced.

As @Bellow said this is fundamentally different to an ICE powertrain, which barring individual design or manufacturing cockups (which EVs will also suffer from of course) has a very high probability of giving a long service life without ever needing to be completely replaced. As at the end of 2023 over 30% of cars on the road in the UK were more than 12 years old and I would wager that the vast majority of those would still have their original engines and transmissions.

View attachment 169682

Cute photo and statistic but it tells us nothing about the reliability of EV's relative to ICE over the short or long term.

Until recently SWMBO ran a 20 year old Mx5 with 32k miles on the clock. Was she proving that ICE is more reliable? Obviously not. (Mazda: well that's a different matter)

ICE's are usually scrapped / broken at 15 years old. But is that's not because of drive train dying. Car's are written off because of their resale value, and the cost of maintenance and repair. It's a simple Bangernomics calculation: if you're car is worth x, and your expected maintenance, MoT and repair is y, then it's off to the breakers yard, and buy another quite old one.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

Seriously, BTB? Anecdotal evidence isn't statistics... but you know that

At what point did anyone say that your car was likely to be "killed" by the battery fault ?

Apologies, I haven't followed the thread.

Was your Ioniq5 ever a potential write off ?

and what was the actual cost of the warranty repair?

Did we ever know whether the entire battery pack was scrapped, and replaced with new?

Even if it was replaced entirely with new, do we know that the old pack isn't being refurbished / remanufactured before being used again?

 

[BTB 500]

Seriously, BTB? Anecdotal evidence isn't statistics... but you know that

Yes seriously. Any manufacturer will confirm that individual battery cells age, degrade and fail ... the fact that they don't move is irrelevant.

 

[Bellow]

While we don't have sufficient statistical data at current to be able to determine if EVs are overall more reliable or less reliable than ICE cars, I would argue that it is inevitable that EVs will eventually be more reliable than ICE cars (if they are not already).

Says the man who's four year old EV has just suffered a major and expensive fault to the man who's 25 year old ICE is in good rude health and will be in another 25 years. Lets start building the statistics - there's two data entries right there.

The reason for this assertion is that EVs have the upper hand over ICE when it comes to one very crucial factor affecting all mechanical devices: EVs have a significantly lower number of moving parts, when compared to ICE drivetrain (engine and transmission).

As per BTB500's comment, static items fail too. Properly designed and produced moving parts don't fail. (Were we to pursue sustainable fuels, engines could have much much fewer moving parts (I have a 140hp engine here that has no more than nine moving parts), ditto transmissions.

Regarding the point raised by Bellow, yes, it is true that mechanical devices tend to deteriorate gradually while electric and electronic devices are more likely to just stop working without warning.

As per BTB500's comment, EV batteries suffer degradation due to time alone. A well maintained ICE can be as powerful towards the end of its life as at its beginning. The sudden failure is more likely with an EV (failed battery cell/module).

However:

a. While not having a warning about a looming failure is indeed a disadvantage, it is only so if assuming that everything else is equal. Therefore, the question is - again - whether overall reliability is improved. Clearly, a product that is overall more reliable but when it fails it does so without warning, is preferable to a product that has poor reliability but does let you know in advance before it fails.

b. Having said that, modern cars are more and more equipped with critical electronic devices, that can fail and bring the car to a halt. And so, even if mechanical devices do provide (in most cases) advance warning, ultimately the more electronics we see in ICE cars, the less likely it is that the driver will get a warning before a breakdown. Ultimately, even if considering the advance warning as an advantage for ICE cars, this advantage is getting diluted by the installation of more electronic devices in ICE cars. Even simple things, such as electronic parking brake, can bring the car to halt if it fails in the deployed position. Or, a failure of the electronic instrument cluster will render the car roadworthy.

Luxuries that are present on both EVs and ICE - customer choice - and irrelevant to this debate.

Not to mention a failure of the TCU in an automatic transmission that can immobilise an ICE car. Another example are the electric fuel pumps that replaced the mechanical fuel pumps around 40 years ago - the mechanical fuel pump gave sign of trouble long before the diaphragm actually perished, while an electric fuel pump can just die on you without warning.

No reason not to use a mechanical pump - if the issue were so serious.

The only way to maintain the 'advanced warning' benefit on ICE cars to a significant level is by going back to very basic cars that are almost 100% technical and have little by way of electronics - but this is a Luddite solution that is obviously not going to happen (unless you drive a Classic car).

Much of that is achievable. If the CO2 emissions are not a problem (sustainable fuels) then ICE requires only very simple electronic controls. All plug 'n' play stuff, not deeply embedded. Or, Luddite like or not, all electronics could be dispensed with and ICE still function. That is not true of EVs. They cannot function without their own onboard complex electronics - and the internet's to constantly update and refine.

 

[markjay]

Says the man who's four year old EV has just suffered a major and expensive fault to the man who's 25 year old ICE is in good rude health and will be in another 25 years. Lets start building the statistics - there's two data entries right there.

OK, if we're doing single data points....

I ran a W203 and a W204, over a period of 14 year in total. Both cars were maintained to the manufacturer's recommended service schedule. Both cars were bought at around 20,000 to 30,000 miles and sold at around 50,000 miles.

I experienced the following during my ownership:

Two failed thermostats
Two failed Front Passenger Seat Occupancy Sensors
One failed Steering Wheel Angle Sensor
Four failed drop-links
Two failed hydro-bushes
Two failed front strut rubber bushes
Two failed rear dampers
Failed pilot bush in the 5G transmission
Failed coolant reservoir pressure cap
Failed parking break clip
Corrosion on alloy wheels
Rusted wheel bolts - replaced under warranty, then rusted a gain
Flaking centre wheel cap
Failed IR sensor in the driver's door handle
Front wheel bearing requiring adjustment prematurely

None of these faults got me stranded at the roadside, but each one required a trip to the garage. Not particularly convenient, or cheap.

Conclusion? MB make crap ICE cars. There's absolutely no reason to assume that they won't make equally crap EVs.

On the other hand, my Toyota Previa only ever suffered from a cracked engine coolant reservoir during the 22 years that I owned it. I imagine that Toyota make rock solid EVs as well.

 

[poormansporsche]

My mum's 25 year old, owned from new, Toyota Corolla 1.6 GL Executive Auto was finally scrapped due to not being able to source a replacement brake master cylinder and 4 excessively corroded alloys. It actually ended up going back to Japan to be scrapped. Still ran sweet as a nut, zero breakdowns and was completely solid underneath. Sad day when the pink peril went (did start off red)

 

[poormansporsche]

Or a alternative vision of the future .....

Accept the fact batteries degrade. Make EVs simpler and cheaper. Dump the battery cooling systems etc etc .......

Some article or the other but interesting nether the less

Discuss

 

[BIGDOG]

My mum's 25 year old, owned from new, Toyota Corolla 1.6 GL Executive Auto was finally scrapped due to not being able to source a replacement brake master cylinder and 4 excessively corroded alloys. It actually ended up going back to Japan to be scrapped. Still ran sweet as a nut, zero breakdowns and was completely solid underneath. Sad day when the pink peril went (did start off red)

Why back to Japan?