Toyman, that's better than I said it. She definitely represents the vast majority of car buyers and is thus representative of the market Tesla will have to conquer if they are to survive. Any car company exec who ignores that does so at their peril.
Toyman, that's better than I said it. She definitely represents the vast majority of car buyers and is thus representative of the market Tesla will have to conquer if they are to survive. Any car company exec who ignores that does so at their peril.
Sign of the times... took delivery of this tonight. Kia Soul EV.
I don't think Toyman's sister represents the vast majority of car buyers. Her attitude, maybe, but not her situation. Many people are in multi-car households where converting one vehicle to a 40 mile max range would make zero difference. Actually, it would make a big difference - they would spend probably 4 hours less per year standing at gas pumps.
Just thinking off the top of my head, of the 30 people I work relatively closely with, at least 15 could switch to a leaf tomorrow with not ill effects. Those that can't either A) live too far from work or B) are single-car households and can't deal with having no long range vehicle. The rest of us would just use the other car when we need to go far.
In reply to ProDarwin:
Her household has 4 cars. A MB C class, a 911 and 2 Prius. The MB and the P car are what her husband drives. One of the Priuses is at college with the kids. She doesn't like the MB or the 911 and didn't want to add another car to the stable that she wanted to use for long trips.
She represents the car buyer with extra cash to buy one and the extra cash to have multiple cars to drive, but doesn't want a car she has to fiddle with. Or watch the range meter. Or worry about getting caught 10 miles from home, trying to find some place to charge. The Leaf was probably the perfect car for her 95% of the time but she still didn't like it.
I've been in the car business since 1985 and can say with some authority that the vast majority of new car buyers are not like us. Two car households have nothing to do with it; they, as Toyman says, don't want to have to worry about things like range etc. Stick the key in and go IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCE is of paramount importance and right now EV's ain't gettin' it done.
We have 2 Leafs in the family. (Leaves? Leafes?)
My son and his wife are the "perfect" candidate. They work a lot from home, cover minimal miles, live in a major city, make decent income, and are flexible. They got one.
They did just fine on 1 older vehicle before. It was a paid for Honda, got good fuel economy.
Now, they have a pretty sizable payment, 2 vehicles to maintain, the need for a 2nd parking space (with proximity for charging), much bigger insurance, and less money to live on.
And that 70 mile range is frequently challenging, even living in a big city. They drive the Honda more than half the time.
I'm not convinced that is an improvement in their lives.
The "sacrifices" we suggest as "car guys" are not practical for people in the real world. The sacrifices that worked for them (no payments, low operating costs, occasional ride sharing and inconvenience) were a better choice.
Curmudgeon wrote: Fearless prediction: Musk overextends himself, Tesla loses money like crazy, the gummint refuses to back him again (see Solyndra) the stock price crashes, it goes bankrupt and one of the big car manufacturers picks up the pieces for cheap. It then becomes a badge engineered whatever and at that point may start seeing true success.
I agreed with most of the rest of the post - but I think this prediction is wrong. Musk isn't all-in on Tesla. He is building the world's largest and most sophisticated battery mfg plant and investing heavily in the development of better technology. He is where Nissan will buy their batteries. He is using federal funds and his own money to further space research - the net result being tech he can use. He is divested into solar and other energy sources. He is/was SpaceX, Paypal, X.com, Tesla, Solar City, a bunch of philanthropist efforts and he sits on the board of United States National Academy of Sciences Aeronautics and Space Engineering. He is a very interesting guy. Definitely not an "all-eggs-in-one-basket" entrepreneur type.
The Tesla may very well be acquired by one of the big companies but it won't hurt Musk at all. It's practically a pet project for him.
I'll step out and say 100miles is the line in the sand. While the typical family may use 40 miles most people are capable of 100 miles in a day, everyday. If the leaf/soul (even volt) had that electric range I would own one. No question, $30-35k, take my money.
Curmudgeon wrote:GameboyRMH wrote: Tesla's biggest mistake IMO is their love of proprietary charging technologies and wacky, fleetingly-useful ideas like battery swapping.Battery swapping would get rid of a lot of range problems, that's what the guy in Israel (Better Place) was looking to do. http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/06/21/6-reasons-teslas-battery-swapping-could-take-it-to-a-better-place/ He was leasing batteries and dealing with much shorter ranges than Teslas offer, among other things. It's not like it's a new idea; forklifts have done battery swaps for years. The weird thing about this type battery swapping: it would be similar to buying, say, a Ford here in the States and then being only able to gas it up at a Ford gas station. If you were in East Timbuktu and there was only a Chevy gas station you'd be screwed. Notice also in that article that Musk is saying there would be a charge for battery swapping 'based on gas prices in the area'. So much for EVs being cheaper to run than ICEs because no gasoline.
The thing is, battery swapping could be useful right now, but in a few years the amount of range and the kind of charging speed EVs will have will make it seem silly and pointless, like having a tire re-treading machine at every gas station. That's what I meant by "fleetingly useful." Is making the design compromises and building the infrastructure worth it for just a couple years of use? I'd say not.
I dont see this super battery on the horizon in the next five - six years. It takes a lot Of time to develop, test and implement something like this. We are coming up on twenty years of focused development from the automotive industry (with a break for the recession in there) and the developments haven't netted the expectations without significant cost. End user isn't interested in that extra cost so tesla is the one selling boutique cars because exclusivity.
If I'm wrong say so in a constructive manner, I've been watching this since my neighbor had a tester EV-1 and was pissed when they took it back. I want this to work.
I think the next big battery breakthrough to make it to the shelf will be either solid-state lithium or dual-carbon batteries. The latter makes a lot more sense to me.
In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:
I think he was saying that Musk could overextend himyself in Tesla.
I don't think anyone would say Musk is not very smart, very influential, and very diversified.
Musk isn't going anywhere, but Tesla could.
The Zero electric motorcycles are making use of swappable battery packs. So, theoretically you could keep one on a charger at the office and commute 150 miles one way, swap batteries and ride home immediately.
I am not sure of the weight of them but I doubt they are conducive to carrying like you would an extra can of fuel or there would be more excitement.
chandlerGTi wrote: I'll step out and say 100miles is the line in the sand. While the typical family may use 40 miles most people are capable of 100 miles in a day, everyday. If the leaf/soul (even volt) had that electric range I would own one. No question, $30-35k, take my money.
The new Soul EV is just about at that range...rated at 93 but TTAC was getting 113 in their review.
I don't think the range is going to be as important as the ease of use, convenience, and speed of fill ups. It's not just a tech problem. It's a infrastructure problem
GameboyRMH wrote:Curmudgeon wrote:The thing is, battery swapping could be useful *right now,* but in a few years the amount of range and the kind of charging speed EVs will have will make it seem silly and pointless, like having a tire re-treading machine at every gas station. That's what I meant by "fleetingly useful." Is making the design compromises and building the infrastructure worth it for just a couple years of use? I'd say not.GameboyRMH wrote: Tesla's biggest mistake IMO is their love of proprietary charging technologies and wacky, fleetingly-useful ideas like battery swapping.Battery swapping would get rid of a lot of range problems, that's what the guy in Israel (Better Place) was looking to do. http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2013/06/21/6-reasons-teslas-battery-swapping-could-take-it-to-a-better-place/ He was leasing batteries and dealing with much shorter ranges than Teslas offer, among other things. It's not like it's a new idea; forklifts have done battery swaps for years. The weird thing about this type battery swapping: it would be similar to buying, say, a Ford here in the States and then being only able to gas it up at a Ford gas station. If you were in East Timbuktu and there was only a Chevy gas station you'd be screwed. Notice also in that article that Musk is saying there would be a charge for battery swapping 'based on gas prices in the area'. So much for EVs being cheaper to run than ICEs because no gasoline.
IF (and that's a very important word, IF) that happens then yeah it makes no sense to invest in the infrastructure. The problem is that no one can predict the future, thus it's difficult to make that decision right now. I sympathize with Musk's problems on this front.
Toyman01 wrote: I don't think the range is going to be as important as the ease of use, convenience, and speed of fill ups. It's not just a tech problem. It's a infrastructure problem
Very true. In some ways, an EV is simpler to own than an ICE, such as when you get home you just plug the thing in and forget about it till it's time to go somewhere. But that's assuming (with current tech) that you have a space and the correct charger. Okay, it comes with the car, that problem is solved; hang that puppy on the wall in your garage.
But what if you live in an apartment? Where are you going to install the thing and what's the liability of having a 240V cord running across a common area to your car? Okay, the complex provides a charging station.
But should all apartment complexes be required to provide charging stations? Who pays for them? How does the electricity get paid for?
That's only one of the many infrastructure problems which will go with EV's if they become much more common. There's another question: electrical grid capacity. It's not a problem now because they are still pretty rare, but when, say, every other house has an EV and they are all charging at the same time along with people cooking, running appliances, taking hot baths etc. the possibility of overloading the grid becomes very real. That kind of upgrading is NOT cheap or easy.
I'm not saying EV's should be restricted etc; I'm just pointing out the very real questions which must be asked and the very real problems which must be solved.
Curmudgeon wrote: But what if you live in an apartment? Where are you going to install the thing and what's the liability of having a 240V cord running across a common area to your car? Okay, the complex provides a charging station. But should all apartment complexes be required to provide charging stations? Who pays for them? How does the electricity get paid for?
They are building several new apartment buildings a couple blocks from me. One of the features they are emphasizing in their ads is garages with 240V EV chargers. I would guess the renter would pay for the electricity used.
There was an article in the newspaper last week about one of the older apartment buildings downtown with a private parking garage was retro-fitting a number of spaces with chargers. The city is also talking about putting pay chargers in the public parking garages.
So, around here at least, the infrastructure is coming. Now if someone would make a EV Transit Connect type vehicle with a ~100 mile range I would be first in line to buy one.
In reply to Hal:
With all due respect, that's not infrastructure. It's a couple of random charging points.
They haven't even figured out the format. It's like the early days of video, arguing about VHS or Betamax.
Curmudgeon is right on this one.
I think changes in infrastructure will come but it won't be quick easy or cheap. Also, there's talk of Tesla battery swapping stations but here's the deal with those: at this point it seems the $ for a battery swap will be around $60-80.
http://www.dailytech.com/Teslas+Battery+Swap+Only+Takes+90+Seconds+Costs+6080/article31810.htm
There goes the EV's fuel cost advantage. But the swap itself is very quick, about 90 seconds.
Something else: right or wrong, people have been taught that water and electricity don't mix and are terrified of plugging in an extension cord in the rain. That means the EV will need to be in a reasonably dry area and that typically means a garage. Not every place someone will live will have a garage. The inductive paddle chargers should help with that, but there's still going to be that anxiety of standing in the rain with a lot of electricity in your hand.
I do think EV's are the future, I just don't see them being viable for the masses right now.
I have noticed that many of the parking garages in cities have EV only parking spots with chargers. I noticed because they don't have any berkeleying motorcycle only parking.
It surprised me because these are for profit type garages in PHL and Hartford so either they must have been incentivized by the govt. or a legitimate customer demand. They have them at the short term lot in Newark airport too. And two of my larger heath care clients have stations in all their lots. Times. They are a changin'.
A couple of years old article on infrastructure:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterdetwiler/2013/01/28/electric-cars-and-the-power-grid-how-are-they-coming-together/
Basically most power companies don't see a problem with the majority of the grid, they see a potential failure point at the 'street level' transformers though.
There's something on the horizon for the US called HVDC (High Voltage DC) transmission which must be taken into account as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-voltage_direct_current It's already in use in some parts of Europe and China.
SVreX wrote: We have 2 Leafs in the family. (Leaves? Leafes?) My son and his wife are the "perfect" candidate. They work a lot from home, cover minimal miles, live in a major city, make decent income, and are flexible. They got one. They did just fine on 1 older vehicle before. It was a paid for Honda, got good fuel economy. Now, they have a pretty sizable payment, 2 vehicles to maintain, the need for a 2nd parking space (with proximity for charging), much bigger insurance, and less money to live on. And that 70 mile range is frequently challenging, even living in a big city. They drive the Honda more than half the time. I'm not convinced that is an improvement in their lives.
To be fair, would the impact on your son's household due to the expense of buying/leasing two new vehicles be any less if they had chosen gas-powered cars instead?
Range though... range continues to be the biggest constraint for the current generation of affordable EVs. The unavoidable fact is they work best as a household's second car.
I'm curious about the 70 miles you quote. My parents' Leaf is 18 months old but can still stretch to 85 miles in a pinch. I haven't tried testing it out yet in the real world, but my Soul EV's dashboard claims to have a 120 mile range.
My question for you real life EV'ers: does the battery range get shorter as the battery ages?
I don't have an EV, but yes it will - you've probably seen the same effect with any laptop or phone that has a li-ion battery.
You'll need to log in to post.
