Featured The Dirty Truth About Combustion Engine Vehicles

The plateau in the US happened years before COVID, and there was no other external constraints on car sales at the time.

The gas price spike in 2008 was big for the US. it was over $4 a gallon locally, with still having lower taxes on it. There was also government incentives for hybrids during the time of the Prius' sales growth, and the only other companies serious about hybrids were Ford and Honda then. The US also has a generally poor selection of smaller, more efficient cars, and that was more true back then.

It appears that people took advantage of the incentives and other programs to get a Prius when gas prices went up, and then they went back to the car type they really wanted when it was time to replace the Prius. By then gas prices had dropped, and there were no more hybrid incentives. Those that still wanted a hybrid also had other choices by then.

Plus advances in engine tech meant non-hybrids were burning less fuel than those person's pre-Prius car. The 'compact' SUVs people are buying now have EPA ratings close to that of any sedans being traded in for them.

Fuel efficiency isn't big a selling point in the US as it is in Europe, because of the different fuel prices, and hybrids don't really offer much more than that. So car buyers will generally skip the hybrid to save some cash, or get the features they really want.

Some companies tried performance hybrids, but they generally didn't wow people, and sales of them were poor. The Rav4 hybrid is a bit of a power one, in that it has a higher rating than the base engine, but what is really selling it is that it's just around $700 more than the AWD ICE model. toyota manages that by giving up the usual profit they make selling the AWD system. The difference between the Corolla and Camry ICE and hybrid is around $3000.

 

Good points. I’m paying about 8p ( 6 cents ) per mile. And happy with 10 sec 0-60

 

That is a poor assumption.

Definitely fair to say infrastructure is not up to where it needs to for your trips. The best infrastructure in the US for fast charging is tesla's supercharger network (986 locations , +3550 Chademo locations with an adapter), but they fund it by taking new cars sales profits. You don't want a tesla so in their consideration unless others appear to want one that travel those routes, they will take longer to build. Still I would expect that part of the network to be built out in the next decade. The CCS network has 3414 locations but many of them are the old 50 KW version and not located strategically on routes. I have no idea if this will be built out enough for you anytime soon.

So in reality a 350 mile tesla model 3 long range would be long range for you, as this can go 250 miles @75 mph in non ideal weather with a safety margin.

We do have the moving goal posts. First bevs needed to go 100 miles real world, then 300 miles on the old epa, then 400 miles on current epa. Now that they are here at a reasonable price you pick 800 miles, and when there are light vehicles that can do that it will go up again. But somehow a 400 mile range epa phev fuel cell vehicle that Has no infrastructure on your long trips and no manufacturer that wants to build it, is a solution?

1) It is really quite strange to refer 400 mile range of the tesla model S as not respectable. Respectable to whom? The best selling bev in the world has a 263 mile epa range (tesla model 3 standard plus). The trick to sell more is to bring down costs and going for 800 mile epa range doesn't make much sense for volume. Tesla and VW are moving to lithium iron phosphate batteries for these cars and catl is building mammoth capacity to bring down costs which likely will fall to around $4000 for a 50 kwh battery pack to the manufacturer when built cell to pack to go 200+ miles. These batteries are lower in cost since they don't use cobalt or nickel, two of the main cost drivers of battery packs. This also makes them more sustainable. Long range packs will use different chemistries to charge faster and weigh less but are more expensive. Technology is there for 1000 mile packs, but it is doubtful these will sell well, so they are unlikely to be produced in a volume car.

2) Infrastrucure is very new and continues to evolve. It definitely needs to improve and is improving. The first cars that could even charge at 250 kw didn't come out until 3 years ago. Semi trucks will need even faster charging and these standards are still in flux. China the worlds largest market for bevs is building fast chargers quickly, but this is government policy. Tesla's sold in china have the same plug, and their stations will soon be able to charge people with other cars. The chargers are slower than the us standard tesla v3 (250 kw) or ccs 800V (350 kw) but with rapid deployment costs are much lower. In the US it would be helpful if the dc fast charge networks had both plugs. Orders of magnitude are not needed for road trips. It is probably about 3000 dc fast charge stations if they had dual plugs to cover most use. There are 4500 today. As I said I expect this in the next decade. Until then a phev is a good option.

 

Wow. In a single year, this person spent 8260 minutes finding something to do while his car charged. His average travel between charges was only 150 miles. Given the average charge duration of 21 minutes, that gives him a peak travel speed (on a 65 MPH highway) of 56 miles in an hour. That sounds like a car that only an owner can love.

Bob asserts that the charging points coincide with necessary bio breaks, but that's not what you get when you use the Tesla web page that tells you where to charge and how much to charge. It shows things like charging within 20 minutes of the start of your trip, or within a few miles of your destination. The tesla web page assumes that you start with a 100% SOC and it also assumes that you have the extended range??? model. It says so on the page.

Go Anywhere | Tesla

 

Perhaps oddly, but for my locations CCS tends to be better. There's a CCS charger in one town I like to visit where there is no Tesla charger, super or destination.

CCS fast chargers tend to be very near to superchargers.

The place I want to go to this summer has no plans for either charging system. There's a gofundme for a local solar company to install some NEMA 14-50's so that the location is accessible to EVs. But they aren't in yet.

If charging infrastructure was ubiquitous. But there are places I go where I park in a dirt lot.

I think you either made that up or confused me with someone else. 100 miles is fine only for in-town use. For out-of-town use, I've always wanted at least 650 miles.

Not without the infrastructure. But at least it would lead to lighter, cheaper cars, smaller easier-to-build infrastructure and, most importantly, 5 minute fill ups. Current charging rates are wholly unacceptable to me.

A $20,000 Corolla has a 500 mile range and can be refueled in 90 seconds. Why should a $90,000 car have less range and refuel slower, and yet be considered "respectable".

People who buy cars.

If you want "regular people" (non EV-enthusiasts) to buy one, instead of a Corolla, it will have to be better.

It would if batteries didn't suck so badly.

They'd sell well if they had reasonable cost. But they don't because today's batteries suck.

One thing that's just happening now is the opening of the Supercharger network to non-Teslas. The advantage there is that if the CCS system in the local town is down, there's a backup, and vice-versa. Right now, a broken charging system means you're stranded because the chargers are too far apart to skip one or go back to the last one, and there's generally only one in each town (not "megalopolis" like the LA area - town).

 

That was actually what happened with our Prius.

We drive the cars we own the way we want.

Kyle has already showed the best Tesla practice for shortest block-to-block speed is shorter legs between SuperChargers because it leads to higher charge rates, 170 kW vs 50 kW. For example:

Leaving with a just enough charge to reach the next SuperCharger with a reserve means more time at highway speed with less time parked adding excess charge, kWh. In this case, 10 minutes would have added 20 miles reserve allows faster highway speeds, +75 mph. The extra minutes were due to an unexpected long BM during the biology break. Of course that never happens except in real-life.

Bob Wilson

 

That's an interesting graph. 10 minutes charge to get 20 minutes driving... How much overhead is involved in getting off and back on the freeway every 20 minutes?

So for a 65 mile trip, that would be drive 20 minutes at 65 mph(speed limit),charge 10, drive 20, charge 10, drive 20. At this point you have, supposedly, an empty battery that you'll have to charge at a destination charger. Sounds like a lot of overhead. Total miles per hour is 48, right?

 

So you would drive 57 miles in 20 minutes or about 57 / (20/60) = 171 mph?

Nothing because you the "20 minutes" to drive 57 miles is inaccurate. As pointed out, the 57 mi / +75 mph ~= 0.76 hours (45 minutes.)

Your math literacy is based upon claiming "20 minutes" to drive "57 miles." Not to worry, we'll ignore not reading that my BM at the biology break took longer than expected.

Once I got to the Manchester SuperCharger to get home:

• 2020-03-08T11:13:20-05:00 -ChargeStartDateTime
• *** - Vin
• Robert Wilson m3 - Name Model
• US Manchester, TN - Country SiteLocationName
• 17.00 min 0.11 min ... $1.98 - Description

This was enough charge to drive 76 miles from Manchester TN to Huntsville AL. Google map calls it 1hr 33 min.

Bob Wilson

 

Bob, I'm finding that my math skills are deteriorating with age, but you say in post 186: "Leaving with a just enough charge to reach the next SuperCharger with a reserve means more time at highway speed with less time parked adding excess charge, kWh. In this case, 10 minutes would have added 20 miles reserve"


That implies a duty cycle of 66%. In an hour you drive 20 minutes, charge 10 minutes, drive 20 minutes, charge 10 minutes, drive 20 minutes. That's 60 minutes without taking into account the time it takes to get off the freeway and back on. 66% of the speed limit (65 mph) gives you about 45 miles in an hour.

Not very efficient. Do people really do that? I do battle a mile form of dyslexia too, but after checking the math multiple times it usually comes out right.

 

Since I drive the car and pay the bills, I'll use my numbers and drive at my comfort level. My favorite car was a 1966 VM MicroBus which could barley reach +65 mph.

Not to worry, many years ago, I once commuted with someone who would drive drive faster than +80 mph on the Interstate. He only wanted me to pay half his gas bill. Worse, he only took one break in the middle of the drive. Not a happy time for me.

Some folks like to drive differently than I enjoy. I have no problem watching them pass only to catch up when the trooper pulls them over. Actually, I prefer to follow semi-trailer trucks at a distance long enough to steer around road debris. The semi-trailer serves as camouflage to avoid tail gate drivers.

Bob Wilson

 

20 miles *reserve*.

10 minutes added just under 80 miles (look at the graph) for a 57 mile trip.

I'd never do that myself since there's only one station so I'd add enough to get to the next station or go back to the previous one. So I'd want an 80 mile reserve at a minimum (150 preferred). But if you're comfortable with a tiny reserve, this is the fastest way to travel in a car with a slow taper charge.

 

At one time, I was looking at the charge curve and consumption as function of mph to make an optimal, block-to-block, math model. Then I realized it would give me answers in seconds and in real-life, you're lucky to get things timed in minutes. Since then, I just use the Guess-of-Meter (GOM) to estimate reserve and depending on route, add reserve as common sense (aka., temperature, winds, and rain) suggests. Not perfect but adjusting speed and/or having PlugShare makes this a reasonable, conservative approach.

Bob Wilson

 

My guess o meter is pretty accurate, and I know after owning the car for over 2 years how much to guess over or under. Still I charge about 5 minutes longer than my trip planner says. This adds about 8 minutes to the drive if I'm hitting 4 charging stops as they don't cascade. Still the amount of time I've saved by not having to go to gas stations for normal driving is much more than I've spent at superchargers.

Each of us has there own requirements, and those that want to have a 100 mile buffer just in case probably don't really want a bev anyway.

I can understand why dbstoo had trouble reading your chart. Its probably much easier to understand if you eliminate 2 of the lines and just show miles charged versus minutes, with a longer minutes axis so people can see visually the slow down of charge rate by the curving slope .

 

Uh...not even close to true, if you know my history.

First, I bought my first BEV in 1986 - a Carl Goldberg Electra, which was my first R/C airplane. 6-cell NiCd, 1200mAh generic sub-C cells, Mabuchi 550 DC motor. My next one was a Sig Ninja modified to electric. 7 cell NiCd, 1800mAh Sanyo sub-C cells, Astro Cobalt (Samarium Cobalt) DC motor, DC speed control. I currently own about 30 R/C aircraft, all electric, all run on very high-power Lithium Polymer batteries and "brushless DC" (3-phase AC) motors with speed controls (inverters). I got my BS and MS in power electrical engineering and did my thesis on the dynamometer testing of a 3-phase PM generator for wind turbine use. I've spent my entire career in renewable energy, mostly wind. The first EV I drove/rode in was the 1998-era Ford Ranger EV we had at work. I've also been in two research-grade FC vehicles, both SUVs, and several BEVs. I've pushed V2G and dispatchable load charging technology since the days of T-Zero by AC Propulsion (which have an interesting relationship to the beginnings of Tesla) and followed EV development intensively since then.

The difference is, I am unwilling to tolerate owning a car that can't take me wherever I want to go, and charge on the way in a reasonable period of time (8 minutes is reasonable to me, if I have window cleaning supplies). Current EVs fail on both fronts so I have a PHEV (Prius Prime) until EVs become practical and cost-effective. I look at my Prius Prime as a Model 3-like vehicle with superior features (i.e. dash and HUD), a 150kWh "battery", 5,000kW charging and a cost of $23,400 after tax credits. The downside is that I "only" get to be a pure EV 80% of them time (99% in-town) but the upside is I can go anywhere and charge quickly at a low total cost.

 

That's not fair Lee. This sub-forum relies on supposition, guesses and personal biases for it's vitality. Being an educated expert in the field of electrical engineering is about as unfair as those pesky physicists who pop up on the Flashlight forums and have to explain why you can't power a 5 watt led at full strength from a common AAA battery.

But it's nice of you to explain why you have strong feelings on the subject.

 

I'm into flashlights too! But not too much - my best is my two Astrolux FT03's. Nice devices for the price!

 

I collected flashlights for a while, but stopped when the Chinese clones of custom $100 lights started selling for $20. I was building my own lights for a while but it got to the point where I could not buy the materials to build one for the price of the imports.

 

Please note my response was not to you but to bob who may have been referring partially to your statement. Really it is for the whole group of people that don't want to get a bev for the advantages they have but want to check every box that as gasoline car has and are not willing to pay for that extra equipment to do the best of both.

I'm sure this is interesting to some but nothing there makes me think you want a bev with current costs and limitations.
I don't know what tiny electric rc planes (I say tiny because I fly real planes that you can well pilot from inside the plane, not to be derogatory). My nephew likes flying his drone for a hobby. It doesn't have anything to do with what I mean by bev - which means to me and most others something you can sit in and go somewhere - (cars, suvs, trucks). Yes you had some tiny output devices while I was still in school and my gf was a toddler. That would matter in the 90s but not much today.

Yes I know the tzero, I got to ride in one as a passenger, my dad got to drive it. It was number 2 (I believe there were only 3 made) and the one I rode in stayed lead acid, a different one later was converted to lion. My dad worked for the company that made the batteries. In my teenage years I cut the lawn on an experimental electric riding mower also with lead acid batteries. None of that really mattered for me buying a bev. The infrastructure finally looked to meet my needs in 2019, and a car was developed that had all the functionality I wanted at a price I was willing to pay in 2018. I did put down the deposit on the first day long before but it was refundable.

[/QUOTE]

Which makes me quite confused on why you wrote this long meandering narative. That says you do not want a bev. That is not an insult. It doesn't meet your idea. Less than 1% of cars are plug-ins today and you seem to own one that you like. Only 4.5% of new cars sold were plug-ins last year, and that was the best year so far. Why pretend you want a bev when you obviously don't given technology and manufacturing. I'd like to get to 30% of new cars being plug-ins and you are already there.

You also claim to want a phev hydrogen fuel cell car and that they and the infrastructure can be built quite cheaply. To the first part, sure desire away. As to the second, it makes no sense. I met Mr. Gage from ac propulsion, first with my dad then later when we both had contracts with bmw through our respective companies. Very nice man. The tzero could not be built and make a profit. The later car ideas became the mini-e. I'm sure tesla lost over $100K on each roadster they made, but it was a lot cheaper than other companies R&D. Gage would have lost control of the company had he taken Musk's money and built the roadster. I do think he would have stayed at the company and been a richer man today. I last saw him over a decade ago. He seemed happy. Knowing car economics you would need to lose hundreds of millions to get any fuel cell car produced in volume. Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, and GM have each individually lost billions on fuel cells so far.

 

Why is it hard to understand the idea that I do want a BEV, just one that doesn't suck like the ones we have today? I've wanted a BEV since about 1990. But I'm still waiting for one that's actually decent enough to serve the function of moving me, my family and my stuff where I want to go, in a reasonable time and at a reasonable cost.

 

Because you conflate your personal reasons in past statements for calling today's BEVs not good enough to that they aren't good enough for anyone.