Reality check on electric cars

[Nordberg]

They'll work for virtually no one. Aside from that, that still doesn't address government FORCING them on the market rather than letting the market decide. People don't want them even with massive subsidies and other government bribes attached.

That is simply not true. They are suitable and should be preferred by nearly everyone. People like you are showing why the government has to intrude. They are a big part of the environmental cleanup and you angry little government haters will do the wrong thing on your own. You are an example of why it has to be forced.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

That is simply not true. They are suitable and should be preferred by nearly everyone. People like you are showing why the government has to intrude. They are a big part of the environmental cleanup and you angry little government haters will do the wrong thing on your own. You are an example of why it has to be forced.

More than two-thirds (69%) of Americans said their next vehicle won't have any kind of electrification, while only 5% saw their next vehicle being an EV, according to the study, which was conducted globally via email questionnaire. In comparison, 17% said they could see a hybrid as their next car.

The majority of consumers surveyed in Southeast Asia, China, and India also said their next vehicle would have no electrification, as did 49% of German respondents. Just 39% of Japanese respondents and 37% of South Korean respondents agreed with that sentiment, with rest anticipating their next vehicle would be a hybrid, plug-in hybrid, or all-electric car.
https://www.greencarreports.com/new...nt-ev-yet-half-wont-pay-extra-for-electrified

Some 41 percent of U.S. adults would not buy an electric car, according to an April 12 Gallup poll of a random sample of 1,009 people. This, if extrapolated to the wider population, would represent around 106 million Americans who are against a key plank of Joe Biden's vision of a green economy.
https://www.newsweek.com/biden-electric-cars-evs-target-epa-emissions-poll-1795077

About 4 in 10 U.S. adults are at least somewhat likely to switch, but the history-making shift from the country’s century-plus love affair with gas-driven vehicles still has a ways to travel.

The poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago shows that the Biden administration’s plans to dramatically raise U.S. EV sales could run into resistance from consumers. Only 8 percent of U.S. adults say they or someone in their household owns or leases an electric vehicle, and just 8 percent say their household has a plug-in hybrid vehicle.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation...-going-electric-for-their-next-car-poll-shows

Why are Americans less interested in owning an EV? Cost and charging still play a part.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...ns-ease-fewer-people-want-to-own/70469087007/

Electric cars have been around now for nearly 150 years. They have NEVER been popular. At best, they represent a niche market of miniscule size, mostly among urban dwellers that never leave their home city.

Listen to Jay Leno, car expert starting at about 4:40 in this video.

They aren't popular now, and the ONLY--ONLY--reason they are getting any traction in the car market is force of government. The government is FORCING them on people whether people want them or not. That WILL end disastrously. Government is horrible at predicting markets.

As for "saving the environment," you and your ilk are simply ill-informed, anti-scientific, self-absorbed jackasses pushing your wants and desires on everybody else. Electric cars won't "save the environment." They're just a means of virtue signaling for radical Leftist environmental idiots.

You know, every time--EVERY TIME--I go to one of those greentard sites, like say, Friends of the Earth

https://foe.org/

I go through the resumes of the staff of the organization and find almost 100% of the time that nobody--NOBODY--on the staff has any background whatsoever in anything close to scientific. I often find those with a degree--a small portion of the whole usually--have one in some liberal art like music or womyn's studies, or some other crap non-scientific nonsense. I read the articles they produce and they either parrot the consensus on things like Gorebal Warming, or they're babbling insanely and stupidly about something or another they know nothing about, but it's bad (or good) because they and their little circle of like-thinking friends say it's bad (or good).

I say let's get government out of deciding what kind of car we can have and let the market decide. You on the other hand, want the dictatorship of government to make those decisions for us and use the force of government to ram them down everyone's throats. So much for "democracy..."

 

[Into the Night]

That is simply not true.

It is true, Sock. The EV market is crashing for a reason (again).

They are suitable and should be preferred by nearly everyone.

The EV market is crashing, Sock.

People like you are showing why the government has to intrude.

Paradox. Irrational. You can't argue that people want them and say that the government has to force people to buy them at the same time, Sock.

They are a big part of the environmental cleanup

Buzzword fallacy. What 'environmental cleanup'?

and you angry little government haters will do the wrong thing on your own.

The Constitution is the government, Sock. The government it creates has NO authority to implement communism or fascism.

You are an example of why it has to be forced.

Paradox. Irrational. You are contradicting yourself again, Sock.

 

[Nordberg]

If only the auto companies had your deep knowledge of how bad EVs are.
Ford credited EVs for their strong first quarter and announced plans to expand hybrids. Hybrid sales, including the Maverick and F-150s are driving sales in a big way. They are refitting another plant to make EVs.
How can they be so stupid and you guys so smart?

 

[QP!]

They will work for nearly everyone. There is no arcane usage required. They are simply better ways to commute and shop. You Luddites spend a lot of time conjuring up special circumstances that EVs may not serve. They get over 200 miles of range. When GM built the Volt in 2013, they did an arduous study that showed its EV range was adequate for 83 percent of the people. Now the range is 4 or 5 times longer and there are lots of charging stations. EVs will work for almost everybody.

Yup. The vast, VAST majority of commutes most people make are Work/Home/Errands around time, with a sprinkling of weekend getaways which are all within the range of EV performance.

But irrational EV haters obsess over any area they do not work, as if that is a reason to say the entire class does not work.

They ignore that ICE econo boxes, do not work in many areas. Same for Pick up trucks. Same for Sports cars.

It is NEVER about what a vehicle will do, or not due for more niche needs, as those people (minority of buyers) will just buy appropriately.

And yet the Magats obsess over those minority of buyers, while saying it will not work, because of them.

They'll work for virtually no one..

^^^See. Morons.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Yup. The vast, VAST majority of commutes most people make are Work/Home/Errands around time, with a sprinkling of weekend getaways which are all within the range of EV performance.

But irrational EV haters obsess over any area they do not work, as if that is a reason to say the entire class does not work.

They ignore that ICE econo boxes, do not work in many areas. Same for Pick up trucks. Same for Sports cars.

It is NEVER about what a vehicle will do, or not due for more niche needs, as those people (minority of buyers) will just buy appropriately.

And yet the Magats obsess over those minority of buyers, while saying it will not work, because of them.

^^^See. Morons.

Morons describes you and Nordburg...

If all you can use your EV for is a commuter car--eg., a second vehicle--and you still need another vehicle for things like weekends, towing a trailer, or whatever, you now have to have TWO vehicles that cost maybe $50 K apiece. If on the other hand, you accept a somewhat higher gas bill, you buy ONE vehicle that does it all and commute in that, even if it costs more to fill up because you didn't spend $50K on a fucking second vehicle that is single purpose!

That's reality. Just because all YOU use your car for is commutes to work and local trips to the gay bar, doesn't mean everybody else is doing that.

 

[Nordberg]

Morons describes you and Nordburg...

If all you can use your EV for is a commuter car--eg., a second vehicle--and you still need another vehicle for things like weekends, towing a trailer, or whatever, you now have to have TWO vehicles that cost maybe $50 K apiece. If on the other hand, you accept a somewhat higher gas bill, you buy ONE vehicle that does it all and commute in that, even if it costs more to fill up because you didn't spend $50K on a fucking second vehicle that is single purpose!

That's reality. Just because all YOU use your car for is commutes to work and local trips to the gay bar, doesn't mean everybody else is doing that.

This will be tough for you to understand. There are circumstances where an EV is not a great choice. Try and understand that. I do. However, for almost everybody, it is a great choice. Is the 200 plus mile range a difficult problem for you to digest? Is waking up to a full charge every day, one day after another tough for you to comprehend?
So your daily trip is 300 miles. OK. An EV would require charging. So would your gas tank.
This is you again making up a scenario and implying that is nearly universal. The EVs are going to be everywhere because they are better and cleaner.
I suppose you should contact Ford and tell them your brilliant analysis. They have nobody in the entire company who could understand the nuances as you do.

 

[QP!]

Morons describes you and Nordburg...

If all you can use your EV for is a commuter car--eg., a second vehicle--and you still need another vehicle for things like weekends, towing a trailer, or whatever, you now have to have TWO vehicles that cost maybe $50 K apiece. If on the other hand, you accept a somewhat higher gas bill, you buy ONE vehicle that does it all and commute in that, even if it costs more to fill up because you didn't spend $50K on a fucking second vehicle that is single purpose!

That's reality. Just because all YOU use your car for is commutes to work and local trips to the gay bar, doesn't mean everybody else is doing that.

Terry you continue to be simpleton moron.

Lets address this in a few ways:

!.

What you say is true of all the people who live in cities who have eco box cars as their primary vehicle for every day driving. They still need another vehicle towing a trailer or whatever. Do these people NOT EXIST driving these type of vehicle in MASS ABUNDANCE and if so is that not a HUGE market EV's can satisfy.

2.

Now on to the stupidity of your other point. Towing a trailer and other stuff? At this point in the discussion you do not even realize that there are EV's that are pick up trucks and Mini vans that CAN and DO tow.

How is it you are this far in to this topic and you STILL do not know that?


The EV's limitations are contained to trouble in extreme cold climate areas and in areas that are very rural with very little access to chargers. That is almost it.

Those two factors represent such a small percent of all drivers that it is beyond stupid to keep pushing this idea that if EV's are not ideal for those tiny populations then they are not good for anyone.

But you are stupid. Painfully so and thus you will keep repeating it.

 

[QP!]

This will be tough for you to understand. There are circumstances where an EV is not a great choice. Try and understand that. I do. However, for almost everybody, it is a great choice. Is the 200 plus mile range a difficult problem for you to digest? Is waking up to a full charge every day, one day after another tough for you to comprehend?
So your daily trip is 300 miles. OK. An EV would require charging. So would your gas tank.
This is you again making up a scenario and implying that is nearly universal. The EVs are going to be everywhere because they are better and cleaner.
I suppose you should contact Ford and tell them your brilliant analysis. They have nobody in the entire company who could understand the nuances as you do.

It is all the morons like Terry have on this issue. To keep looking for the small amount of people and trips that an EV is not ideal for to then say 'therefore they are not good for anyone'.

Within the ICE world, an econo box cannot do all those things for all people. A convertible cannot do all those things for all people. A pickup truck cannot. And so on and so on. And yet Terry and no one else uses, what they are not great for to say ICE is not good for anyone.

It is idiocy but Terry cannot help himself. In his world a typical Sedan, whether ICE or EV is not viable because if you have a large trailer you need to tow up to your camp ground that would require you to buy a second vehicle, a pick up truck. Thus Terry has proven Sedans do not work well in the market.

It truly is painful dealing with people like him who are so stupid that they think the argument "Sedans make no sense as they do not have good tow capacity', is a good argument.

 

[gfm7175]

We have 3 electric cars in our family.

Ummmm, no. At least one of them is an ICE vehicle (the Chevy Volt). Sure, you can call it "hybrid", but those are effectively ICE vehicles with a "beer belly".

Our next cars will also be electric. We have had lots and lots of ICEs. Even you idiots can figure out that we know something about them through many decades of experience. We prefer EVs after living with and driving ICEs . You rightys on this board hate EVs and have had zero experience. That makes you less qualified to compare them.

 

[gfm7175]

They will work for nearly everyone. There is no arcane usage required. They are simply better ways to commute and shop. You Luddites spend a lot of time conjuring up special circumstances that EVs may not serve. They get over 200 miles of range. When GM built the Volt in 2013, they did an arduous study that showed its EV range was adequate for 83 percent of the people. Now the range is 4 or 5 times longer and there are lots of charging stations. EVs will work for almost everybody.

Continued EV salesman tripe.

In reality, in non-ideal conditions (and following proper battery maintenance protocol), EV's might have 100 miles of range (give or take)... Heck, in certain conditions, they even have 0 miles of range.

 

[gfm7175]

That is simply not true. They are suitable and should be preferred by nearly everyone.

YOU don't get to tell ME what I "should prefer".

People like you are showing why the government has to intrude.

Fuck your Marxism.

They are a big part of the environmental cleanup

They are WORSE for the environment, dude.

and you angry little government haters will do the wrong thing on your own. You are an example of why it has to be forced.

Fuck your Marxism.

 

[gfm7175]

Paradox. Irrational. You can't argue that people want them and say that the government has to force people to buy them at the same time, Sock.

Good catch!

 

[Nordberg]

It is all the morons like Terry have on this issue. To keep looking for the small amount of people and trips that an EV is not ideal for to then say 'therefore they are not good for anyone'.

Within the ICE world, an econo box cannot do all those things for all people. A convertible cannot do all those things for all people. A pickup truck cannot. And so on and so on. And yet Terry and no one else uses, what they are not great for to say ICE is not good for anyone.

It is idiocy but Terry cannot help himself. In his world a typical Sedan, whether ICE or EV is not viable because if you have a large trailer you need to tow up to your camp ground that would require you to buy a second vehicle, a pick up truck. Thus Terry has proven Sedans do not work well in the market.

It truly is painful dealing with people like him who are so stupid that they think the argument "Sedans make no sense as they do not have good tow capacity', is a good argument.

They think the auto companies have done no studies and have no idea what is happening. They have huge investments and do not do things without rigorous testing. I played racketball with a guy at Ford whose job was testing the EVs under extreme conditions to see how they would survive and what changes were needed. He went to extremely hot or extremely cold places and tested the cars under real-world conditions. All he had to do was talk to the geniuses on this board. They would have straightened him out.

 

[gfm7175]

If only the auto companies had your deep knowledge of how bad EVs are.

They do. That's why a number of them are getting out of EVs (Toyota, for example)

Ford credited EVs for their strong first quarter

Nope. Ford realizes what Toyota realizes.

and announced plans to expand hybrids.

"Hybrids" are not EVs. They are ICEs.

Hybrid sales, including the Maverick and F-150s are driving sales in a big way.

"Hybrids" are not EVs. They are ICEs.

They are refitting another plant to make EVs.

"Hybrids" are not EVs. They are ICEs.

 

[gfm7175]

This will be tough for you to understand.

Doubtful, but try me anyway.

There are circumstances where an EV is not a great choice.

Yup, and those circumstances are VERY numerous. (Some of them have already been detailed earlier in this thread)

Try and understand that. I do.

No, you don't. You keep peddling EVs in the face of all the detailed circumstances in which EVs are NOT a great choice.

However, for almost everybody, it is a great choice.

Nope. I've already went through various examples in which an ICE vehicle is required in order to meet a person's needs. (towing, hauling, very cold, very hot, snowy, long trip, delivery, shipping goods, farming, logging, etc etc)

Is the 200 plus mile range a difficult problem for you to digest?

There is no "200+ mile range" if you follow proper battery maintenance procedures, and under non-ideal conditions, said range can and will decrease to 100 miles or less.

Is waking up to a full charge every day, one day after another tough for you to comprehend?

Is being able to refuel without falling asleep while waiting tough for you to comprehend?

So your daily trip is 300 miles. OK. An EV would require charging. So would your gas tank.

Gas tanks aren't charged... but I get what you're trying to say. A gas tank can be filled from "fumes" to "tank topped off" in minutes. An EV battery takes hours to fill from "20%" to "80%".

This is you again making up a scenario and implying that is nearly universal.

No, this is what YOU are doing. You are pretending as if commuting to work and back within the big city is all that there is. You are ignoring farmers, loggers, semi drivers, towing, hauling, forest roads, very cold, very hot, blizzards, and on and on and on...

The EVs are going to be everywhere because they are better and cleaner.

Nope. They are worse for the environment.

I suppose you should contact Ford and tell them your brilliant analysis. They have nobody in the entire company who could understand the nuances as you do.

They're already aware of them.

 

[Into the Night]

They think the auto companies have done no studies and have no idea what is happening. They have huge investments and do not do things without rigorous testing. I played racketball with a guy at Ford whose job was testing the EVs under extreme conditions to see how they would survive and what changes were needed. He went to extremely hot or extremely cold places and tested the cars under real-world conditions. All he had to do was talk to the geniuses on this board. They would have straightened him out.

EVs do not charge in extremely cold environments. They have very limited charging rates in cold environments. They have even more limited range in hot or cold environments or in environments with inclement weather.

Both Ford and Toyota are getting out of EVs. They are the two largest car makers in the world, Sock. The EV market is crashing (again). People don't want them (except for a few religious nuts like you that think you are somehow 'saving the planet' with them! ).

 

[Into the Night]

If only the auto companies had your deep knowledge of how bad EVs are.
Ford credited EVs for their strong first quarter and announced plans to expand hybrids. Hybrid sales, including the Maverick and F-150s are driving sales in a big way. They are refitting another plant to make EVs.
How can they be so stupid and you guys so smart?

Ford is getting out of EVs, Sock. You are still locked in your paradox too.
Hybrids are not EVs. They are gasoline cars (with lousy mileage).

 

[Into the Night]

Yup. The vast, VAST majority of commutes most people make are Work/Home/Errands around time, with a sprinkling of weekend getaways which are all within the range of EV performance.

But irrational EV haters obsess over any area they do not work, as if that is a reason to say the entire class does not work.

They ignore that ICE econo boxes, do not work in many areas. Same for Pick up trucks. Same for Sports cars.

It is NEVER about what a vehicle will do, or not due for more niche needs, as those people (minority of buyers) will just buy appropriately.

And yet the Magats obsess over those minority of buyers, while saying it will not work, because of them.



^^^See. Morons.

Yet you support the government requiring everyone buy an EV. Make up your mind, Sock.

 

[Into the Night]

Morons describes you and Nordburg...

If all you can use your EV for is a commuter car--eg., a second vehicle--and you still need another vehicle for things like weekends, towing a trailer, or whatever, you now have to have TWO vehicles that cost maybe $50 K apiece. If on the other hand, you accept a somewhat higher gas bill, you buy ONE vehicle that does it all and commute in that, even if it costs more to fill up because you didn't spend $50K on a fucking second vehicle that is single purpose!

That's reality. Just because all YOU use your car for is commutes to work and local trips to the gay bar, doesn't mean everybody else is doing that.

Bingo. They are literally trying to justify the expensive EV as a 2nd car to be used for specialized and narrow conditions.