• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Electric Vehicles

Status
Not open for further replies.
MRC_Hans said:
Or, perhaps buyers, now they can get a low-maintenance drive train, should demand vehicles that don't rust. Obviously, suppliers will not like that, because vehicles with a life-span of several decades are not good for business, but if customers insist, they are going to have to supply them.

Hans
Click to expand...

That is a possibility, but I think there are some likely problems. First cost is one, as school budgets are usually pretty tight already. Evolving standards are another. No point buying a 50 year school bus if standards require getting a new one every dozen years. Changing demographics yet another in some places, where the school population is hard to predict. It's hard for people to plan that far ahead.

The article I saw referenced California and Maryland, so chances are good that rust will be of little consequence, and as long as the buses meet standards, and withstand normal wear and tear, I expect they'll serve well. And if the running costs are as much lower as I suspect they might be, the lifespan will be a lagniappe anyway.
 
The Lucid does look good. A bit rich for my blood. I could probably afford one, but I'd never get it. Heated seats and air conditioning and all that stuff are nice but I'd rather have a lighter car with longer range.

I'm still hoping for a base model electric hot rod. Put a Lucid motor in something the size of my Hyundai accent, skip the fancy wheels and the power this and that. It would go like a rocket. Make it a 4WD station wagon about the size of a Ford Focus and I'm in.

I know some of this stuff is mandatory these days, and I do like power windows and rear window defrosters and wipers, but you could skip the ABS and traction control and tire pressure monitors and lane change beepers. Drop the AC and bring back vent windows and sunroofs that open all the way.

Ok, I know I'm a retro curmudgeon about this. If I could change one thing on newer cars it would be the insanely stupid idea of coupling the air conditioner to the windshield defroster. Here in New England half the year you can't actually defrost the damned windshield without having to use the wipers to get the condensation off, and once you start, you can't turn it off again. Back in the day, a heated defroster would take longer, but it actually did the job, and when it finished you could turn it off again and the windshield wouldn't immediately become opaque again. Grrr. And get off my lawn, too!
 
MRC_Hans said:
Well, according to figures given in this thread, it seems the current EVs have about 5:1 operation to charge ratio, perhaps even better in an optimized set-up. So instead of battery swapping, which in an automated setting would require it's own class of robotics, you could simply have 20% extra robots. They could then just seek the charging station when needed. Commercial robots like vacuum cleaners and lawn movers already do this.

Hans
Click to expand...

Just catching up with this thread. At the point where there is a lot of talk about battery swapping, so my first contribution is point out that this is happening in China. Apologies if this information has already been posted.

Back to catching up
 
Jack by the hedge said:
I have the comparative luxury of a free car park at work. In recent years there's been political pressure around the idea of pushing commuters out of their cars and onto public transport by making employers pay tax on car park provision and perhaps charge their employees a parking fee.

The idea that I and colleagues might persuade my employer to pay to install and maintain charging points so we can charge our cars with their electricity seems far-fetched.
Click to expand...

My employer has approaching 50 free 6.6 KW charging points at my work place. There were plans for more, but they may have been shelved since we were all sent home for covid. There are grants available for installation, I believe
 
Filippo Lippi said:
Just catching up with this thread. At the point where there is a lot of talk about battery swapping, so my first contribution is point out that this is happening in China. Apologies if this information has already been posted.

Back to catching up
Click to expand...

Further, it was trialled in Europe (I think), but we didn't like it, in the same way we didn't like leasing the battery in the Renault Zoe we'd just paid for. We want to own the car, not just some bits of it

ETA - UK person. Long time interest in EV's, and bought a Nissan Leaf 40KW three years ago and had a home charger installed at the same time. Now completed 36K miles. Love it, don't want another ICE car. Work installed about 40 charging units, so could fill up during the day. Now on an EV tariff, so can charge the battery in the small hours for 40% of the cost of a KWH during the day. Range hasn't been a problem, though some places are more difficult to get to. Agree that the cars are too expensive and that charging is difficult in some places
 
Last edited:
Of hybrids:

"Plug-in hybrid cars burn significantly more fuel than official tests record, according to research that suggests pollution from the vehicles could be much worse than advertised.

Tests of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) by Which?, the UK consumer group, found that some popular cars achieved as little as a third of the fuel economy advertised in official tests."

Full report in The Guardian
 
GlennB said:
Of hybrids:

"Plug-in hybrid cars burn significantly more fuel than official tests record, according to research that suggests pollution from the vehicles could be much worse than advertised.

Tests of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) by Which?, the UK consumer group, found that some popular cars achieved as little as a third of the fuel economy advertised in official tests."

Full report in The Guardian
Click to expand...


All cars sold in Europe must, by law, be tested according to the worldwide harmonised light vehicle test procedure (WLTP). Which? argues they do not accurately reflect real-world driving conditions, and so tests cars over long ranges while using air conditioning and the radio, as well as running PHEVs for portions of its tests with an empty battery.
Click to expand...

Oh No! Standardised tests aren't realistic!

They never have been - and I don't think they've ever purported to be either.
 
I don't think they can be realistic, but they must be relevant. That is they must test relevant usage patterns. The value of standardized tests is that they are comparable. If car A performs better than car B in the test it should also do so in real life (even if none of them will perform like the test).

Hans
 
I think to a great extent it's true that standardized tests help, but you have to be careful to evaluate what is being tested and where.

The further away your use is from some perceived average, the less useful those figures are.

As a trivial example, when I rented a Prius a while ago, its mileage was very impressive in city driving, but dropped drastically on the highway. By comparison, my lowly Hyundai Excel regularly delivers much better mileage than its rating in the kind of country driving I do.

The more a test involves urban stop and go and idle time, or superhighway use, the less useful it is to the person who is likely to be cruising nearly non-stop in 20 to 50 mile legs at medium speed.
 
bruto said:
I think to a great extent it's true that standardized tests help, but you have to be careful to evaluate what is being tested and where.

The further away your use is from some perceived average, the less useful those figures are.

As a trivial example, when I rented a Prius a while ago, its mileage was very impressive in city driving, but dropped drastically on the highway. By comparison, my lowly Hyundai Excel regularly delivers much better mileage than its rating in the kind of country driving I do.

The more a test involves urban stop and go and idle time, or superhighway use, the less useful it is to the person who is likely to be cruising nearly non-stop in 20 to 50 mile legs at medium speed.
Click to expand...

A relevant standard should reflect a normal driving pattern. But of course, some special use could be different, as you note. The solution could be to additionally specify mileage on say, pure city stop-and-go, medium speed highway, and motorway. But then car manufacturers are really not big fans of too much transparency, and most buyers don't really choose from specs, anyway.

Hans
 
MRC_Hans said:
I don't think they can be realistic, but they must be relevant. That is they must test relevant usage patterns. The value of standardized tests is that they are comparable. If car A performs better than car B in the test it should also do so in real life (even if none of them will perform like the test).

Hans
Click to expand...

The problem is that as soon as you publish the test the engineers begin work on tweaking their designs to meet the test.

As an example, BMW had huge batteries in some seven series cars so that they could run most of the mileage tests without having the alternator kick in except during the highway portions. Thousands of cars sold with unnecessarily large batteries that only charged at highway speeds just to do a bit better on the test. Yes, this was a problem for some owners.

And thats leaving said the illegal stuff that VW pulled to get their diesels through testing.
 
MRC_Hans said:
A relevant standard should reflect a normal driving pattern. But of course, some special use could be different, as you note. The solution could be to additionally specify mileage on say, pure city stop-and-go, medium speed highway, and motorway. But then car manufacturers are really not big fans of too much transparency, and most buyers don't really choose from specs, anyway.

Hans
Click to expand...
Indeed, I imagine the tests do try their best to simulate a normal driving pattern but of course it's a statistical average that doesn't favor outliers on both ends, even though they do try with country and city cycles.

If I lived in town, I'd jump at a full plugin electric, but out here, given the cheapness and convenience of a little ICE, it's a harder sell.

My current Hyundai accent now has a bit over 95 thousand miles on it, and has needed almost no maintenance in its life: a front brake job, a couple of cheap strut mounts, a set of tires, and that's about it. I have a long time average of about 40 mpg. Although I bought it used with about 30K on it, it was one of the cheapest cars made, even new. An electric would likely be approaching battery end of life, and with first cost as a factor, I doubt it could give better cost benefit ratio. That's likely to change in the near future, but so far, it's a hard sell.
 
Just stumbled on a little podcast called Quick Charge. It's by electrec and is 5 to 10 minute daily summaries of what’s new with electric vehicles. Might be worth a listen for those who want to stay up to date on the latest news.
 
Last edited:
bruto said:
Indeed, I imagine the tests do try their best to simulate a normal driving pattern but of course it's a statistical average that doesn't favor outliers on both ends, even though they do try with country and city cycles.

If I lived in town, I'd jump at a full plugin electric, but out here, given the cheapness and convenience of a little ICE, it's a harder sell.

My current Hyundai accent now has a bit over 95 thousand miles on it, and has needed almost no maintenance in its life: a front brake job, a couple of cheap strut mounts, a set of tires, and that's about it. I have a long time average of about 40 mpg. Although I bought it used with about 30K on it, it was one of the cheapest cars made, even new. An electric would likely be approaching battery end of life, and with first cost as a factor, I doubt it could give better cost benefit ratio. That's likely to change in the near future, but so far, it's a hard sell.
Click to expand...

Not even close. An electric with good thermal management (which is nearly all of htem) would have used less than half of its battery life. Perhaps substantially less than half.

HOW LONG SHOULD AN ELECTRIC CAR’S BATTERY LAST?

The bottom line here is that if it’s properly cared for, an electric car’s battery pack should last for well in excess of 100,000 miles before its range becomes restricted. Consumer Reports estimates the average EV battery pack’s lifespan to be at around 200,000 miles, which is nearly 17 years of use if driven 12,000 miles per year.

Looking forward, Tesla says it’s working on technology that would enable its electric car batteries to last for as many as one million miles,
Click to expand...
 
"Properly cared for" is a bit of a weasel phrase there though, especially if "battery swapping" becomes the norm and you have zero idea how good the battery in your car has actually been treated.
 
Tesla warranties their batteries for 8 years or 150,000 miles, which ever comes first.

Chevy warranties the Volt's batteries for 10 years or 100,000 miles, which ever comes first.

Toyota warranties the Prius's batteries for either 10 year/150,000 miles OR 8 years/100,000 miles depending on which state you are in, going by emissions laws apparently.

So I'd say that 8-10 years, 100-150 thousand miles-ish is probably a fairly good upper limit to how much you can fully trust your batteries since that's as far as the big players are willing to put their money on the line.

//ETA: Rewording the last line//
 
Last edited:
JoeMorgue said:
"Properly cared for" is a bit of a weasel phrase there though, especially if "battery swapping" becomes the norm and you have zero idea how good the battery in your car has actually been treated.
Click to expand...

I don't think battery swapping will ever become the norm. The batteries are too big and that requires them to be integral to the frame.

I mean, I know it gets discussed here, but there seems to be zero interest from any of the manufacturers.

"Well cared for" also gets into the design of the battery pack because the thermal cooling system is part of the battery design. As far as I know, the Nissan leaf is the only EV sold in the U.S. that does not have liquid cooled batteries. Tesla and GM do, and they are showing very little battery degradation over time. Cars on the road now will likely still have 90% of their battery capacity at 300k miles - except the Nissan Leafs in hot climates.
 
Last edited:
crescent said:
I don't think battery swapping will ever become the norm. The batteries are too big and that requires them to be integral to the frame.

I mean, I know it gets discussed here, but there seems to be zero interest from any of the manufacturers.

"Well cared for" also gets into the design of the battery pack because the thermal cooling system is part of the battery design. As far as I know, the Nissan leaf is the only EV sold in the U.S. that does not have liguid cooled batteries. Tesla and GM do, and they are showing very little battery degradation over time. Cars on the road now will likely still have 90% of their battery capacity at 300k miles - except the Nisssan Leafs in hot climates.
Click to expand...

How much of an ordeal is it to swap a battery? I mean, people get engines and transmissions rebuilt all the time, and that's usually an expensive and time consuming process. I'm not saying it has to be super fast and easy, but if such a swap means doubling the lifespan of the car, it's probably worth spending a small bit rather than paying for a new vehicle.

The rest of the car usually has a lot of life left in it at 100,000 miles. It strikes me as awfully wasteful if battery lifespan means that the whole car is basically junk at only 150,000 miles.
 
We're not talking about battery swaps as a mid-life repair/replacement, we're talking it being the defacto way of refueling a car.

Imagine if gasoline was only sold in sealed tanks and to refuel your car you had to swap out the gas tank.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
How much of an ordeal is it to swap a battery? I mean, people get engines and transmissions rebuilt all the time, and that's usually an expensive and time consuming process. I'm not saying it has to be super fast and easy, but if such a swap means doubling the lifespan of the car, it's probably worth spending a small bit rather than paying for a new vehicle.

The rest of the car usually has a lot of life left in it at 100,000 miles. It strikes me as awfully wasteful if battery lifespan means that the whole car is basically junk at only 150,000 miles.
Click to expand...

"Swapping batteries" in the context of this thread means switching out a depleted battery for a charged battery instead of waiting for the battery to recharge. Like a gas station, only instead of gas you get fresh batteries for your car while your old battery charges up to go into someone else's car later in the day. I really don't see that happening.

That's not the same as replacing batteries that no longer hold a full charge. Replacing batteries happens, but is rare.

It is rare because they last a really, really long time. Longer than most ICE engines go between rebuilds. Much longer. I mean, the 100k warranty is similar to that of an ICE powertrain warranty - and most of those are not junk the moment the warranty expires, so I don't see the expectation that EV's would be junk the moment the warranty expires.



ETA: How Long Does A Tesla Battery Last?
Given that the Tesla batteries are manufactured to last between 300,000 and 500,000 miles, replacement should not be a worry that Tesla owners have. The estimated cost to replace a Tesla Model 3 battery is somewhere in the range of $3,000 $7,000.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
JoeMorgue said:
So I'd say that 8-10 years, 100-150 thousand miles-ish is probably a fairly good upper limit to how much you can fully trust your batteries since that's as far as the big players are willing to put their money on the line.
Click to expand...

Those numbers are low since the manufacturers are only going to guarantee that the batteries last about half as long as they are really expected to last.

My i3's battery has a warranty for eight years or 100,000 miles. If the capacity goes below 70% of the advertised capacity during that period, the battery will be repaired or replaced. So, I can expect that after about 16 years or 200,000 miles, the capacity will still be at least 70% of the advertised capacity.

My car is six years old and has about 50,000 miles on it. It still has 100% of the original capacity.
 
Last edited:
Note I didn't say "will last" I said "can be trusted."

A beater car will still often last, sometimes for a long while. A beater car can't be trusted, there's a difference.

I'm not talking "Well in the lab we determined that after X amount of miles the failure rate on battery cells stands at 1 in XXXXXXXX..."

I'm talking about that raw, gut feeling "Do I trust this car to not leave me stranded."

Everyone who's ever owned a beater car and had to relay on it as their only means of transport knows what I'm talking about.
 
Last edited:
crescent said:
"Swapping batteries" in the context of this thread means switching out a depleted battery for a charged battery instead of waiting for the battery to recharge. Like a gas station, only instead of gas you get fresh batteries for your car while your old battery charges up to go into someone else's car later in the day. I really don't see that happening.

That's not the same as replacing batteries that no longer hold a full charge. Replacing batteries happens, but is rare.

It is rare because they last a really, really long time. Longer than most ICE engines go between rebuilds. Much longer. I mean, the 100k warranty is similar to that of an ICE powertrain warranty - and most of those are not junk the moment the warranty expires, so I don't see the expectation that EV's would be junk the moment the warranty expires.



ETA: How Long Does A Tesla Battery Last?
Click to expand...

Curious what would become the critical failure for an electric car where repair was no longer the economically viable solution.

Like you say, for ICE cars usually a significant failure of either the motor or transmission is often what prompts the car being scrapped and replaced for new.

My understanding is that electric motors tend to also last much longer than an ICE. I suppose there's no good way to know what a realistic service life for the entire electric car is until we've had more of them on the road for longer. An ICE car that doesn't get wrecked can easily see over 200,000 miles before it's no longer economical to keep it running. It would be nice if EV's meant an even longer max service life.

Is the electric battery the most likely point of failure, or is there some other mechanical part that is likely to give up the ghost first?
 
Last edited:
The drivetrain of a typical ICE vehicle; engine, transmission, the whole smack, has about 2,000 moving parts.

An electric engine and drivetrain? About 20.

That pretty much tells you all you need to know.
 
crescent said:
Not even close. An electric with good thermal management (which is nearly all of htem) would have used less than half of its battery life. Perhaps substantially less than half.

HOW LONG SHOULD AN ELECTRIC CAR’S BATTERY LAST?
Click to expand...
Even if all this is true, it was not likely true when my car was new in 2013. I look forward to a more reliable future, but I am speaking of the choices that have been available up to now. I don't think the tide has completely turned yet.

And, of course, even new that car cost under 13 thousand dollars. Granted, there's a complex relationship between cost and environmental responsibility, but at some point you have to try to figure out how many of these little boxes you could stock up on for the price of a single Tesla.

e.t.a. I think I misspoke. The original price on my 4 door hatchback with auto transmission was a little under 15k.
 
Last edited:
JoeMorgue said:
The drivetrain of a typical ICE vehicle; engine, transmission, the whole smack, has about 2,000 moving parts.

An electric engine and drivetrain? About 20.

That pretty much tells you all you need to know.
Click to expand...

A side drift: Way back in the day my dad was a great fan of the two-stroke three cylinder SAAB. They advertised that the engine (which is valveless) had only seven moving parts, to which he replied, "Yes, six squirrels and a cat with a whip."
 
JoeMorgue said:
The drivetrain of a typical ICE vehicle; engine, transmission, the whole smack, has about 2,000 moving parts.

An electric engine and drivetrain? About 20.

That pretty much tells you all you need to know.
Click to expand...

That's what has me wondering, what's to keep an EV from just running forever if you keep replacing worn out batteries every decade or so? Could be a real "ship of Theseus" situation, or at least for a longer period of time than a traditional ICE car.

The phrase "drive a car until the wheels fall off" is often used, but EV's may make that more possible. Keep driving it until the chassis is so worn and rusty that it no longer makes sense to keep swapping out failed components.

Or perhaps I'm oversimplifying...
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
That's what has me wondering, what's to keep an EV from just running forever if you keep replacing worn out batteries every decade or so? Could be a real "ship of Theseus" situation, or at least for a longer period of time than a traditional ICE car.

The phrase "drive a car until the wheels fall off" is often used, but EV's may make that more possible. Keep driving it until the chassis is so worn and rusty that it no longer makes sense to keep swapping out failed components.

Or perhaps I'm oversimplifying...
Click to expand...

That's a nice idea (and I don't mean that snarkily or disingenuously) but even if a car runs "forever" (for our purposes) people are just generally not going to want to keep a car forever. They are gonna want a new car for new features (which no cannot be updated forever indefinitely) or just for general "I'm tired of this car and want a new one."

I mean honestly how many people really drive a car until it is literally beyond all hope of being repaired back to a drivable state now?
 
bruto said:
A side drift: Way back in the day my dad was a great fan of the two-stroke three cylinder SAAB. They advertised that the engine (which is valveless) had only seven moving parts, to which he replied, "Yes, six squirrels and a cat with a whip."
Click to expand...

//Slighter Hijack//

I'm trying to find a site but about a decade or so back a startup was trying to get a external combustion car engine off the ground, under the same idea that the engine has far fewer moving parts and could (theoretically) run with varying degrees on efficiency on any flammable fluid at all.

ETA: I think it was these guys: https://cyclonepower.com/
 
JoeMorgue said:
Tesla warranties their batteries for 8 years or 150,000 miles, which ever comes first.

Chevy warranties the Volt's batteries for 10 years or 100,000 miles, which ever comes first.

Toyota warranties the Prius's batteries for either 10 year/150,000 miles OR 8 years/100,000 miles depending on which state you are in, going by emissions laws apparently.

So I'd say that 8-10 years, 100-150 thousand miles-ish is probably a fairly good upper limit to how much you can fully trust your batteries since that's as far as the big players are willing to put their money on the line.

//ETA: Rewording the last line//
Click to expand...

By that logic all Hondas and Toyotas sold in the US can only be fully trusted to last 3 years or 36,000 miles. Does that make any sense?
 
bruto said:
A side drift: Way back in the day my dad was a great fan of the two-stroke three cylinder SAAB. They advertised that the engine (which is valveless) had only seven moving parts, to which he replied, "Yes, six squirrels and a cat with a whip."
Click to expand...

Your dad was good people.
 
JoeMorgue said:
That's a nice idea (and I don't mean that snarkily or disingenuously) but even if a car runs "forever" (for our purposes) people are just generally not going to want to keep a car forever. They are gonna want a new car for new features (which no cannot be updated forever indefinitely) or just for general "I'm tired of this car and want a new one."

I mean honestly how many people really drive a car until it is literally beyond all hope of being repaired back to a drivable state now?
Click to expand...

Not many individuals will do this, but cars often have many owners. The person buying it new probably has different spending habits than someone buying it used 20 years and 200,000 miles later.

It's pretty common to see beaters still on the road, especially in states that don't have emission standards. High school parking lots are often covered in the blue-white fog of exhaust from old engines burning oil. I see less of this in Massachusetts, but mostly because emissions standards means it's not acceptable to allow such poorly running cars on the roads.

Sure, the rich person buying a Tesla today isn't going to run it until the frame rusts through, but the 5th owner in 20 years might.
 
Dr. Keith said:
By that logic all Hondas and Toyotas sold in the US can only be fully trusted to last 3 years or 36,000 miles. Does that make any sense?
Click to expand...

No because this doesn't scale. Risk for systems of integrated parts and individual parts aren't the same thing.

It doesn't even scale with engines. An electric motor and a battery is piss-simple and pretty much is either going to work or not work.

An ICE? Ignition battery starter alternator fuel pump fuel injection spark plug firing cylinder etc all have to work in a specific order with specific timing.

It's why the Navy (until recently) never put a plane on a carrier with a single engine, even if the suggested engine was twice as "reliable" as the engines they already used. Because if one engine fails on a two engine plane you abort the mission and return to the carrier. If one engine fails on a one engine plane you fall into the ocean and die.

So let's say you have a engine with a single engine plane 1 in 5,000 flight failure rate and a double engine plane with a 2 in 5,000 flight engine rate. The single engine plane is doubly reliable right? Well... no only in the least meaningful, most technical sense of the term because that 1 single engine flight falls in the ocean and those 2 double engine flights just return to the carrier.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
That's what has me wondering, what's to keep an EV from just running forever if you keep replacing worn out batteries every decade or so? Could be a real "ship of Theseus" situation, or at least for a longer period of time than a traditional ICE car.

The phrase "drive a car until the wheels fall off" is often used, but EV's may make that more possible. Keep driving it until the chassis is so worn and rusty that it no longer makes sense to keep swapping out failed components.

Or perhaps I'm oversimplifying...
Click to expand...

Even ICE cars tend to be traded in for something less onerous than "complete engine/transmission failure". Sometimes it is just all the little systems not working quite right, or small repairs getting more frequent, or the seat is a bit broken down, or the smell from those margaritas that spilled in the back a few ears ago still comes up on hot days, or its just a bit dated.

Up north I expect rust is a much bigger factor than mechanical failure. At least the pistons have enough oil to keep from rusting. I have friend who still drives an old Pontiac that has a rusted out body from years up north. I won't ride in it, but he says the flex is hardly noticeable if you don't push it too hard.
 
If we do start seeing three, four, five hundred plus thousand mile car being the norm we probably won't make frames out of steel at that point.
 
JoeMorgue said:
No because this doesn't scale. Risk for systems of integrated parts and individual parts aren't the same thing.
Click to expand...

If you can only trust an item to last as long as the manufacturer is willing to warrant it for, then it is the same thing. Or at least a damn similar thing.

Some ICE cars come with 10/100k warranties for their drivetrain. I still think most consumers can expect them to last much longer if not abused.

For most consumer products you expect it to last longer, you just expect to have to cover the costs to make sure it does last longer.
 
bruto said:
Indeed, I imagine the tests do try their best to simulate a normal driving pattern but of course it's a statistical average that doesn't favor outliers on both ends, even though they do try with country and city cycles.

If I lived in town, I'd jump at a full plugin electric, but out here, given the cheapness and convenience of a little ICE, it's a harder sell.

My current Hyundai accent now has a bit over 95 thousand miles on it, and has needed almost no maintenance in its life: a front brake job, a couple of cheap strut mounts, a set of tires, and that's about it. I have a long time average of about 40 mpg. Although I bought it used with about 30K on it, it was one of the cheapest cars made, even new. An electric would likely be approaching battery end of life, and with first cost as a factor, I doubt it could give better cost benefit ratio. That's likely to change in the near future, but so far, it's a hard sell.
Click to expand...

Entirely agree. Four years ago I replaced my old Peugeot 307 station wagon (I'm in Europe), when it started running up too many repair bills. I bought a slightly smaller Peugeot 2008 mini SUV. I mainly drive short trips (live on a ten mile long island), and it gives me at least 60% more mileage for that. On the few longer cross country trips, it is not as advantageous, but still a good swap. A rough calculation says it earns half it's price in the same time as the old one lived, and so far (knock wood) repairs have been negligible, so I expect I already profited (the Peugeot 2xxx series are notorious for reliability).

Electric? Well, this island could be pioneering, but I think we currently have 2 (two) public charge stations. And I can't go across to Copenhagen where my family lives in an EV I can afford, so .... gasoline, so far. :o

Hans
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom