Chevy Bolt EV Forum banner

161 - 180 of 181 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
772 Posts
Meanwhile a recent Green car reports article says basically people need to get over range and that 500 miles is "not needed". most comments seem to disagree with the article.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
Meanwhile a recent Green car reports article says basically people need to get over range and that 500 miles is "not needed". most comments seem to disagree with the article.

The question I always ask is should that be the average or should this be a maximum option?

Every time an article like this comes out, the outliers comes out the woodwork. "Well, I need to be able to tow a boat in the dead of winter over the mountains. If a BEV doesn't have 500 miles of range, then it's not useful to me." Now that could be a perfectly valid anecdote. But what it projects is "I need that type of range, so everyone else should need that type of range too."

I get perturbed when this discussion, like many EV discussions, happen completely without regards to cost or competition. Every item has an implied "better at the same or lesser cost than we have now." But that's not the reality of the situation. EVs cost too much now. EVs with 500 miles of range are priced off the chart. But the Osborne effect is in full effect. Everyone keeps touting that 400-500 mile EVs that are cost effective are just around the corner. I wish I got a buck for every time "solid state batteries" is posted. So why buy a 250 mile EV now when in a "couple of years" it'll be possible to get a 500 mile EV for the same price.

The future is not promised in this regard. The time to act is now. Explaining that we're good enough now for most drivers is critical. I fear that normalizing the "500 mile range, 3 minutes to charge from empty to full" midset is going to poison the well. Somehow we have to convince a wider driving populace that letting the perfect be the enemy of the good is a really bad idea.

ga2500ev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,908 Posts
This sounds like the exact reason GM came up with the Ultium battery, allowing different battery capacities.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
772 Posts
This sounds like the exact reason GM came up with the Ultium battery, allowing different battery capacities.
YES and I will be VERY VERY GLAD if the ULTIUM tech is such they can fit a variety of sizes in the same car. I would be very excited to see 3 versions for sale in Bolt -Base bolt=50 Khw ultium, LT=100 Khw ultium, Premier=150 Kwh ultium. The size / weight at this stage of the tech may not allow them to fit the exact sizes I am mentioning. It would be good marketing to have at least "small medium large" pack options. I believe that is what VW with ID3 is doing so hopefully GM is planning to offer similar.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,345 Posts
Meanwhile a recent Green car reports article says basically people need to get over range and that 500 miles is "not needed". most comments seem to disagree with the article.

I'm of the opinion that, despite appearances, a majority of consumers are actually very pragmatic and aware of their needs. If you could point to DC fast chargers at even a fraction of the locations these consumers frequent (I don't think it even needs to be 25%), then you might convince a majority of consumers that 500 miles is unnecessary, and they would likely make do with 200 to 300 mile EVs. Because we can't point out that infrastructure (and won't be able to for the foreseeable future -- or possibly ever), these pragmatic consumers are looking at options that enable them to do all of their driving without needing to search out these public fast charging unicorns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,345 Posts
The question I always ask is should that be the average or should this be a maximum option?

Every time an article like this comes out, the outliers comes out the woodwork. "Well, I need to be able to tow a boat in the dead of winter over the mountains. If a BEV doesn't have 500 miles of range, then it's not useful to me." Now that could be a perfectly valid anecdote. But what it projects is "I need that type of range, so everyone else should need that type of range too."

I get perturbed when this discussion, like many EV discussions, happen completely without regards to cost or competition. Every item has an implied "better at the same or lesser cost than we have now." But that's not the reality of the situation. EVs cost too much now. EVs with 500 miles of range are priced off the chart. But the Osborne effect is in full effect. Everyone keeps touting that 400-500 mile EVs that are cost effective are just around the corner. I wish I got a buck for every time "solid state batteries" is posted. So why buy a 250 mile EV now when in a "couple of years" it'll be possible to get a 500 mile EV for the same price.

The future is not promised in this regard. The time to act is now. Explaining that we're good enough now for most drivers is critical. I fear that normalizing the "500 mile range, 3 minutes to charge from empty to full" midset is going to poison the well. Somehow we have to convince a wider driving populace that letting the perfect be the enemy of the good is a really bad idea.

ga2500ev
It's a valid question of, "Why buy a 250-mile EV now?" I can say why I bought a 250-mile EV nearly 4 years ago. Today, it would be tougher. I've reviewed the 2020 Bolt EV and the 2019 KIA Niro EV. I've driven parallel drives with the Hyundai Kona Electric and the Tesla Model 3 LR. None of them convinced me that they were worthy of an "upgrade" from my 2017 Bolt EV today. Why? Because they aren't enough better. I don't know if that's the exact opposite of the Osborne Effect, but it's close.

Now, my needs aren't everyone's needs, and I think what you're referring to is a greater societal issue at this point: The lack of nuance. Even your position presupposes that others shouldn't be allowed to ask for a 500 mile EV, even if they know that is what would meet their needs. And as we've discussed in other threads, either way, there's going to be a cost. An average EV fleet range of 250 miles would easily require ten times as much public charging infrastructure as an average EV fleet range of 350 miles. Someone has to pay for that difference. And if those with a need for 400 to 500 mile EVs are forced to buy 250 to 350 mile EVs, that additional infrastructure will be even more necessary.

As it stands, EVs only represent about 2% market share, so something's not right. Whether it's the charging infrastructure, the vehicle format, the price, or the range (or mostly likely a mixture of all those factors), the current crop of EVs and their support structure aren't winning over American buyers.

We have cheap EVs. They don't sell well.
We have short-range EVs. They don't sell well.
We have mid-range (250 to 350 miles) EVs. They do sell well (in fact, the top four selling BEVs in the United States fall into that category).

Essentially, we already know what sells best given the current crop of available EVs, and trying to convince a consumer to buy something that they don't want or don't feel will meet their needs is a fool's errand. Whether you agree or not, the perception by the average consumer that they need more range than what is currently offered is real.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,345 Posts
Have more choices (where's the truck?) and make them cheaper than buying an ICE vehicle, then the floodgates will be open.
Yes, I'll called these points out separably, but they do need to be considered together. It's not enough to have a cheap EV (many of the short range EVs are cheap). Rather, those cheap EVs still need to pass a certain threshold of basic capabilities.

With incentives that bring the cost down to $25,000 to $30,000, the Bolt EV sells reasonably well. That tells me that the basic range that U.S. consumers expect is about 250 miles. Make a variety of 250-mile EVs without production constraints available for an upfront cost of about $25,000, and you're likely to see domestic EV sales skyrocket.

That model would likely apply to trucks too; however, truck consumers will have different expectations than car consumers. The baseline range will probably need to be significantly higher, especially for full-size trucks (probably closer to 350 miles). With an EV car, you really only have winter to point to and say, "You'll lose half your range." For truck owners, that could be a year around proposition with trailers, loads, inefficient off road tires, etc.

Prices for trucks are also different. Overall, they're higher, but midsize ICE trucks start in the low $20,000s, Even if you say that the 250-mile bar is an acceptable range for a midsize truck, you some how would need to get its price down to similar levels as the 250-mile EV cars I mentioned above, and doing so would require at least 30% to 50% more battery capacity (still the most expensive component on an EV).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
It's a valid question of, "Why buy a 250-mile EV now?" I can say why I bought a 250-mile EV nearly 4 years ago. Today, it would be tougher. I've reviewed the 2020 Bolt EV and the 2019 KIA Niro EV. I've driven parallel drives with the Hyundai Kona Electric and the Tesla Model 3 LR. None of them convinced me that they were worthy of an "upgrade" from my 2017 Bolt EV today. Why? Because they aren't enough better. I don't know if that's the exact opposite of the Osborne Effect, but it's close.
But you, I, or anyone on this forum is not the audience of this discussion. We've already made the committment. The audience for this discussion is folks driving around in regular ICE that eventually will consider another car. All the elements I'm talking about discourages those folks from switching.
Now, my needs aren't everyone's needs, and I think what you're referring to is a greater societal issue at this point: The lack of nuance. Even your position presupposes that others shouldn't be allowed to ask for a 500 mile EV, even if they know that is what would meet their needs. And as we've discussed in other threads, either way, there's going to be a cost. An average EV fleet range of 250 miles would easily require ten times as much public charging infrastructure as an average EV fleet range of 350 miles. Someone has to pay for that difference. And if those with a need for 400 to 500 mile EVs are forced to buy 250 to 350 mile EVs, that additional infrastructure will be even more necessary.
I didn't say they couldn't ask for a 500 mile EV. I'm saying that they shouldn't normalize it. If out of 1000 people, 3 of them actually need a 500 mile EV, the other 997 shouldn't either be forced, or convinced that EVs won't work unless they have 500 mile EVs too. But many discussions out here in the wild go exactly like that, with the 3 screaming that whatever comes out is insufficient.

And honestly, so what if more charging infrastructure is needed. Literally every building in first world countries are electrified. Charging is an access problem. It's not like there isn't electricity everywhere. Take every fast food, or sit down, restaurant along every interstate and state highway and stick 2 or 3 chargers in the parking lot. People with "shorter range" EVs will pay to use them. They will almost always stop in the place to get some snack or another too. That's how they get paid for.
As it stands, EVs only represent about 2% market share, so something's not right. Whether it's the charging infrastructure, the vehicle format, the price, or the range (or mostly likely a mixture of all those factors), the current crop of EVs and their support structure aren't winning over American buyers.
It's simple complacency. Human beings are generally creatures of habit. Someone who has owned an ICE car for some time and that ICE does what they expect have little motivation to switch. That's why I keep saying that EVs need to be better (which they are) and cheaper (which they are not) in order to get people to switch.
We have cheap EVs. They don't sell well.
We have short-range EVs. They don't sell well.
Those two go together right now. That's part of the problem. There is a minimum range that switches of the discomfort of range anxiety. Unfortunately, it's a perception thing where the real value is probably a lot less than the perceived value. I remember when Nissan was touting that 175 miles in the 2018 Leaf would be enough to satify the needs of most drivers. The EV world howled at the notion. Nissan is probably close to being right. But folks perceptions simply will not allow for it.
We have mid-range (250 to 350 miles) EVs. They do sell well (in fact, the top four selling BEVs in the United States fall into that category).
And all those sales are a drop in the bucket compared to the top 10 sellers in the US. It's just simple economics. RAV4s and Equinoxes and Corollas generally cost less than Tesla Model 3's, Leafs and Bolts.
Essentially, we already know what sells best given the current crop of available EVs, and trying to convince a consumer to buy something that they don't want or don't feel will meet their needs is a fool's errand. Whether you agree or not, the perception by the average consumer that they need more range than what is currently offered is real.
And that is in fact the problem. Especially with car purchased, people operate on wishful thinking. We see it all the time with 4 wheel drive cars that speed 100% of the time on road in moderate climates, or folks commuting in pickup trucks that tow an item once a year and haul virtually nothing. It's not a real need, but a perceived one. And of course marketer play up those fanciful uses because it upsells vehicles.

Non EV people don't know about EVs. So they project what they believe about ICE cars onto EVs to get the perceptions they get. That somehow charging is hard or takes a really long time, so the solution is never to charge. That everyone is iron butts who drive 10 hours straight with no stops. That they are going to take 3 cross country trips a year. It's all a fantasy. But they build their perception of what they think they need based on them. And I agree that perception is unfortunately turning into reality. But it hampers adoption because of costs, and lack of availabilty.

I give an example of my EV introduction to a contractor that came to the house. Sees the EV charging. Ask instantly about range. I note to myself "Why is that always the first question?". Then asks "What kind of gas does it take?" That's the level of knowledge (or lack thereof) that we're dealing with. There needs to be a more concerted education campaign about EVs. But first and foremost, the prices need to be in line with comparable offerings. Until that happens, we're going to be stuck at the early adopter phase of the S-curve.

ga2500ev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,345 Posts
But you, I, or anyone on this forum is not the audience of this discussion. We've already made the committment. The audience for this discussion is folks driving around in regular ICE that eventually will consider another car. All the elements I'm talking about discourages those folks from switching.

I didn't say they couldn't ask for a 500 mile EV. I'm saying that they shouldn't normalize it. If out of 1000 people, 3 of them actually need a 500 mile EV, the other 997 shouldn't either be forced, or convinced that EVs won't work unless they have 500 mile EVs too. But many discussions out here in the wild go exactly like that, with the 3 screaming that whatever comes out is insufficient.

And honestly, so what if more charging infrastructure is needed. Literally every building in first world countries are electrified. Charging is an access problem. It's not like there isn't electricity everywhere. Take every fast food, or sit down, restaurant along every interstate and state highway and stick 2 or 3 chargers in the parking lot. People with "shorter range" EVs will pay to use them. They will almost always stop in the place to get some snack or another too. That's how they get paid for.

It's simple complacency. Human beings are generally creatures of habit. Someone who has owned an ICE car for some time and that ICE does what they expect have little motivation to switch. That's why I keep saying that EVs need to be better (which they are) and cheaper (which they are not) in order to get people to switch.

Those two go together right now. That's part of the problem. There is a minimum range that switches of the discomfort of range anxiety. Unfortunately, it's a perception thing where the real value is probably a lot less than the perceived value. I remember when Nissan was touting that 175 miles in the 2018 Leaf would be enough to satify the needs of most drivers. The EV world howled at the notion. Nissan is probably close to being right. But folks perceptions simply will not allow for it.

And all those sales are a drop in the bucket compared to the top 10 sellers in the US. It's just simple economics. RAV4s and Equinoxes and Corollas generally cost less than Tesla Model 3's, Leafs and Bolts.

And that is in fact the problem. Especially with car purchased, people operate on wishful thinking. We see it all the time with 4 wheel drive cars that speed 100% of the time on road in moderate climates, or folks commuting in pickup trucks that tow an item once a year and haul virtually nothing. It's not a real need, but a perceived one. And of course marketer play up those fanciful uses because it upsells vehicles.

Non EV people don't know about EVs. So they project what they believe about ICE cars onto EVs to get the perceptions they get. That somehow charging is hard or takes a really long time, so the solution is never to charge. That everyone is iron butts who drive 10 hours straight with no stops. That they are going to take 3 cross country trips a year. It's all a fantasy. But they build their perception of what they think they need based on them. And I agree that perception is unfortunately turning into reality. But it hampers adoption because of costs, and lack of availabilty.

I give an example of my EV introduction to a contractor that came to the house. Sees the EV charging. Ask instantly about range. I note to myself "Why is that always the first question?". Then asks "What kind of gas does it take?" That's the level of knowledge (or lack thereof) that we're dealing with. There needs to be a more concerted education campaign about EVs. But first and foremost, the prices need to be in line with comparable offerings. Until that happens, we're going to be stuck at the early adopter phase of the S-curve.

ga2500ev
As a counterpoint, I could ask, who are you to determine if someone else needs that much range? As you said, we're an audience (mostly) of people who've already made the switch. Others haven't, and they have their reasons.

I, personally, am not perturbed by the question, "How much range does it have?" I just answer factually. I'm not in a position to question another person's needs. I had a discussion the other day with someone who was asking about both my Bolt EV and Volt. He actually knew all about the Volt, asking about it's range on electricity before the gas generator kicks on. He knew less about the Bolt EV, and you're right, when he found out it was all-electric, his first question was, "How far does it go on a charge?" I told him I usually get about 250 miles, at which, his follow-up question was, "What's the range at freeway speeds?" I told him less... about 200 miles. And he just nodded, and said he thought that was still pretty impressive. So he was working with more knowledge than a lot of EV owners give non-EV owners credit for.

Unfortunately, modern EVs have a history that they're going to need to overcome before we'll see mainstream adoption. We have about 20 years of history where these EVs had less than 100 miles of range in ideal conditions, which is nowhere near enough for the average American's driving routines. So asking about range is valid, even now. Whether 250 miles or 500 miles is adequate for an individual is another question.

It's just like getting over the "replacing batteries" ever three years. There's a history to that. I know a lot of conspiracy theorists who watched Who Killed the Electric Car? believe that the automakers and big oil tried to kill electric cars by shelving the large form factor NiMH batteries; however, the truth is, they were terrible for automotive use. They had about a 500 cycle lifespan, meaning most of these EVs would only get 30,000 to 40,000 miles before the entire battery pack needed to be replaced. So again, these questions about battery life are also valid, and in my opinion, the best way is to answer them factually. "Modern EVs are using different batteries now that last at least five to six times longer than those old batteries that had to be replaced every few years."

Basically, when speaking to non-EV owners, I think it's good to start with the assumption that they might actually know their own needs and know what they're talking about, though the information they're operating on might be dated. So basically, bring them up to speed without preaching or speaking down to them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
As a counterpoint, I could ask, who are you to determine if someone else needs that much range? As you said, we're an audience (mostly) of people who've already made the switch. Others haven't, and they have their reasons.
Because all of the data collected indicates that those general perceptions simply are not true. You are a living example of a 0.01% outlier with over 100,000 road trip miles in a 250 mile EV. When the data shows that the number of days a vehicle travels 150 miles or more is 5 days a year and 500 miles or more less than 1 day a year, the perception that these ultra high range vehicles is exactly that: a perception.
I, personally, am not perturbed by the question, "How much range does it have?" I just answer factually. I'm not in a position to question another person's needs. I had a discussion the other day with someone who was asking about both my Bolt EV and Volt. He actually knew all about the Volt, asking about it's range on electricity before the gas generator kicks on. He knew less about the Bolt EV, and you're right, when he found out it was all-electric, his first question was, "How far does it go on a charge?" I told him I usually get about 250 miles, at which, his follow-up question was, "What's the range at freeway speeds?" I told him less... about 200 miles. And he just nodded, and said he thought that was still pretty impressive. So he was working with more knowledge than a lot of EV owners give non-EV owners credit for.
A lot more knowledge that the average person. With a lot of people there is a vast difference between what is enough range and what "feels" like is enough.
Unfortunately, modern EVs have a history that they're going to need to overcome before we'll see mainstream adoption. We have about 20 years of history where these EVs had less than 100 miles of range in ideal conditions, which is nowhere near enough for the average American's driving routines. So asking about range is valid, even now. Whether 250 miles or 500 miles is adequate for an individual is another question.
Actually it's the dichotomy of vehicle usage. I quote the "only 5 days of 150 miles or more" annually. So clearly on average their range needs are a lot less. However, those 5 days a year are built into the fabric of American car usage. People rarely take road trips in terms of frequency. But virtually everyone actually takes road trips. So vehicles have to be able to support that usage. And sub-100 mile EVs cannot effectively pull that off, even though they can be quite effective as a 2nd or 3rd car. I have a household with 5 drivers and 5 cars. Only 2 of the 5 are road trip capable. The 3 that are not, primarily due to age (and my FIAT 500e), could trivially be replaced with a 125 mile range EV and serve 100% of the driver's needs. Especially here in the Atlanta area which is dotted with dozens of 50 kW DCFC to support range extension on the rare days that local travel exceeds that range.

This isn't a question of what range is needed for an individual driver. I'm discussing the fact that a few individual drivers, who could possibly have legitimate long range needs, are driving a normalization that everyone needs the same. And again as you've pointed out, once the seed of that perception is placed, it becomes a new reality.

The answer is simple and suggested elsewhere: battery sizes should be trims for vehicles. Tesla definitely has it right with SR, SR+, MR (is this still a thing?), and LR trims at differing price points. Let people balance their perceptions against the costs. When they see that a 500 mile EV costs $25k more (or whatever the price difference ends up being) more than a 250 mile EV, then sales will show if perception or reality wins out.
It's just like getting over the "replacing batteries" ever three years. There's a history to that. I know a lot of conspiracy theorists who watched Who Killed the Electric Car? believe that the automakers and big oil tried to kill electric cars by shelving the large form factor NiMH batteries; however, the truth is, they were terrible for automotive use. They had about a 500 cycle lifespan, meaning most of these EVs would only get 30,000 to 40,000 miles before the entire battery pack needed to be replaced. So again, these questions about battery life are also valid, and in my opinion, the best way is to answer them factually. "Modern EVs are using different batteries now that last at least five to six times longer than those old batteries that had to be replaced every few years."
Actually I'm pretty sure for non-EV people that cell phone batteries drive their perceptions of how EV batteries work. I doubt many non EV people know the history of the EV1, or the history of DIY lead acid EVs.
Basically, when speaking to non-EV owners, I think it's good to start with the assumption that they might actually know their own needs and know what they're talking about, though the information they're operating on might be dated. So basically, bring them up to speed without preaching or speaking down to them.
It's not a matter of the information being dated. It's literally a set of assuptions created out of whole cloth. A lot of what they learn is by watching us. And when we drive the normalization of these outlandish narritives, we're doing it to the detriment of EV adoption. We as a community need to normalize average needs, not extreme ones. So yes there are some people who need 500 miles of range. You, new user, may actually be one of them. But the driving patterns of average urban and suburban drivers really doesn't support that need across all drivers. Or that needing to be able to recharge in 5 minutes is a requirement. While of course there may be a situation where it is warranted, that with 90% of charging happening overnight, and with most road trip stops taking 15-20 minutes, again that it's not really warrented. Or like the one I continue to have to push over in the charging forum where new users feel compelled to drop several hundred dollars on a top of the line EVSE because they think the car will not operate without one. There are other options. Those are the types of narratives we should be promoting so that new folks can see that where we are now is good enough for the average driver even though it may not meet the needs of a few extreme ones. We need to do it because getting the costs down into the same range as comparable ICE is the true path to increasing EV adoption. The more we normalize average usage, the cheaper EVs will get.

ga2500ev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
As a counterpoint, I could ask, who are you to determine if someone else needs that much range? As you said, we're an audience (mostly) of people who've already made the switch. Others haven't, and they have their reasons.
As someone in the audience who has not switched yet, I figured I would share my "outsider perspective". Keep in mind I have done soooo much research so I'm committed but in a "high school football player committed to college" way: where I intend to have a Bolt in my driveway in a few months but pen hasn't hit paper yet.

I currently drive a 2008 Ford Escape. Purchased it in 2011. It's served me well mostly. Replaced the transmission, rusting out a bit, and the exhaust is held together with clamps in a way that would not meet many's approval. However, it still runs and gets me where I need to go. Did pool servicing for a few years and the space was just enough to fit my equipment. Overall a good experience.

If I were, for whatever reason, looking for a new vehicle 5 years ago I would have taken a quick look at Tesla and then gotten another Escape. Almost every day of driving comes out to at least 50 miles, and that includes winter. Sub-100 mile EVs are not an option. When I started looking this year and found the Bolt I recognized that both the range and the DCFC options had reached a point where we could consider it. Does it fit perfectly? No. Due to winter driving 350 miles would be a better fit, but we will have an ICE to meet those situations. Luckily I don't take many cold weather road trips. So that's why I'm jumping on the Bolt now and in a few years when we are looking to hand down my wife's ICE to our child we will likely be looking at an EV. My wife and I have talked to length about it and agree that the technology has matured enough that getting one now makes sense and believe it will mature enough in the next few years that going full-electric will be an option.

Actually I'm pretty sure for non-EV people that cell phone batteries drive their perceptions of how EV batteries work. I doubt many non EV people know the history of the EV1, or the history of DIY lead acid EVs.
Don't be so sure. When I mentioned to a few family and friends I was looking at an EV as my next vehicle "you know you have to replace the battery after a few years" was the second most common thing they said. The first being "Oh, a Tesla?" :sneaky: Short life EV batteries has settled in the public consciousness, even I had some trepidation at first. I'm glad a few channels on YouTube were able to ease my fears by showing long-term results and now it doesn't even fit my thought process. NC of course was one of them and that helped assure me that I can easily own this vehicle for 10 years with my driving habits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
ga2500ev said:
Actually I'm pretty sure for non-EV people that cell phone batteries drive their perceptions of how EV batteries work. I doubt many non EV people know the history of the EV1, or the history of DIY lead acid EVs.
Don't be so sure. When I mentioned to a few family and friends I was looking at an EV as my next vehicle "you know you have to replace the battery after a few years" was the second most common thing they said. The first being "Oh, a Tesla?" :sneaky: Short life EV batteries has settled in the public consciousness, even I had some trepidation at first. I'm glad a few channels on YouTube were able to ease my fears by showing long-term results and now it doesn't even fit my thought process. NC of course was one of them and that helped assure me that I can easily own this vehicle for 10 years with my driving habits.
I think you missed my point. I agree with you that folks have the "you know you have to replace the battery after a few years" perception. All I was trying to say is that perception may come from people's experiences with cell phones where in fact batteries wear out after a few years of usage, and not the history of EV car battery generations.

It's a perception that isn't necessarily grounded in facts. That's a continual problem that many folks, unlike you, don't actually do the research and simply come up with their own conclusions.

ga2500ev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,345 Posts
Actually I'm pretty sure for non-EV people that cell phone batteries drive their perceptions of how EV batteries work. I doubt many non EV people know the history of the EV1, or the history of DIY lead acid EVs.

ga2500ev
But most are aware of 12 V lead acid life cycles, and they don't need to go back to the EV1. They can simply look at the Toyota Prius.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
855 Posts
Interestingly, I visited the folks on Fathers Day and stopped at a new "self service" rest stop adjacent to the Mohawk River. It was well done and themed in honor of the Erie Canal and it's importance to western migration, etc.
What caught my eye though was 3 fast chargers so I took a few photos. But what surprised me the most, is they all are Chademo, no CCS that I can see. Not functional yet however.

I'll post these over on the NYS fast charging thread too. View attachment 29687 View attachment 29688 View attachment 29689 View attachment 29690 View attachment 29691
Those have actually been there for quite a while, they're not new, they were installed in partnership with Nissan some years back EVolve New York plans to tear them out and put in CCS chademo combo chargers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
As it stands, EVs only represent about 2% market share, so something's not right. Whether it's the charging infrastructure, the vehicle format, the price, or the range (or mostly likely a mixture of all those factors), the current crop of EVs and their support structure aren't winning over American buyers.

We have cheap EVs. They don't sell well.
We have short-range EVs. They don't sell well.
We have mid-range (250 to 350 miles) EVs. They do sell well (in fact, the top four selling BEVs in the United States fall into that category).

Essentially, we already know what sells best given the current crop of available EVs, and trying to convince a consumer to buy something that they don't want or don't feel will meet their needs is a fool's errand. Whether you agree or not, the perception by the average consumer that they need more range than what is currently offered is real.
And this because people like to show off AND they usually don't know what they need but when asked, it definitely has to be BIG ! Big range, big battery, quick charge even though they have a commute of 10 miles a day. And maybe once in a blue moon they go to their cousins who live 150 miles from them.

There is also the "media" who tells stories that the EV's are only appliances and 45% of the population of the US is led by this "media". People are so divided that if you look Fox News, you definitely should hate MSNBC and viceversa. Soooo... a lot of misconcepts are floating around EV's and we all know, it's easier to blame others than use our own brain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
I'm fine with the range on the 2020 Bolt, more than enough for me, even when taking trips. The only problem I have is the DCFC charge rate. Capping out at 55kWh and only getting even that below 51% charge is just too slow when traveling. I'm fine stopping every 170 to 200 miles if I can charge up in 15 to 20 minutes.

I got the Bolt as a commuter car and it is working great for that. But I really have no interest in taking it on a trip that would be over roughly 200 miles one-way. I'm okay with charging at the destination where sitting may not bother me, but if I'm on a 500 mile road trip I don't want to have to stop every 170 miles and charge for an hour. I'd be perfectly fine stopping every 170 miles and charging for 15 minutes though.

Our ICE will be due for replacement in about three years. I'm hoping to have more options then to replace it with an EV that has a DCFC of 150kWh or better. Right now the only affordable choice available to us to get that is a Tesla M3.
 
161 - 180 of 181 Posts
Top