Since I was banned from the Gas thread for simply saying I was glad I have a EV car now I thought I'd answer the question that was posed to me by another before I was banned.(still have zero idea why.
We have a Model 3 long range, it gets around 340 miles per charge and our all in was 50k for the car, $500 for the Wall Charger (you don't need but its cool looking)
Our previous car was a Porsche Cayenne, here is what we spent in the year we owned it. My wife is a rep and uses as her company car. ( she gets paid mileage) so we paid 40k for it. Was a year old when we got it. She drove it 50K in a year, we had to use premium unleaded gas and it got around 18 miles per gallon. We had to get it serviced 3 times with a average cost of $500-700 on each service. I don't know how much we paid in gas but lets assume we still had it today and Premium was going for 4.50 a gallon, it would be around 12-14k on gas a year, along with $1500-2000 in services so our all in each year was 13.5-16k per year in service and gas.
With our Tesla our electricity has seemed to go up $40-50 per month, so lets call it $600 plus tires rotated $100, windshield wiper fluid $5 so for the year its around $800 vs. 13.5-16k.
So the 10k cost difference was made up in less than a year and now we are saving 12k plus per year compared. Plus she loves the car much more than the Porsche.
I know compared with a ford focus the math may not ever make sense but for a nicer car its been awesome for us. [Reply]
Originally Posted by synthesis2:
The cybertruck trimotor will get 500 miles plus range, even pulling should get 400 miles or more.
Sorry man, I appreciate your enthusiasm, but 400 miles hauling a trailer is a load of shit.
Well, unless it defies the laws of physics.
You and I've had this discussion before. The Tesla truck is a weekend warrior mobile. I will be all-in on a usable truck. One that actually does work, hauls 13-18000 pounds with an unlimited range.
I'm picking up my next brand new pickup this week, another 2500 GM diesel. I can take that thing to work in Colorado, Oklahoma, Texas hauling a big-ass trailer non-stop, and if I do stop it's a 5 minute wait to refuel.
I can't wait until electric tech is ready to solve my problem. I have stated many times I will pay well over the 75-80k my current trucks cost. I am also not going to lie to myself and others just because I want it to be true today. [Reply]
We’ve seen other automotive media outlets do their own tests between electric and traditional pickup trucks recently, but they’re mostly disappointing. After all, we firmly believe trucks weren’t just made to look cool while you cruise around town. Yet these tests have focused on drag races, 0-60 acceleration, and other nonsense. You buy a truck primarily to do truck things: towing and hauling.
We’ve seen other automotive media outlets do their own tests between electric and traditional pickup trucks recently, but they’re mostly disappointing. After all, we firmly believe trucks weren’t just made to look cool while you cruise around town. Yet these tests have focused on drag races, 0-60 acceleration, and other nonsense. You buy a truck primarily to do truck things: towing and hauling.
Fortunately, The Fast Lane Truck gets that, so they decided to hitch an empty car carrier to a new GMC Sierra Denali Ultimate Edition and a Ford F-150 Lightning to see how they handled towing a load over long distances. The results were incredibly revealing, exposing one of the biggest doubts we’ve had about all-electric trucks and their real-world usefulness for doing truck things.
The whole point was to see which would happen first: the Sierra runs out of fuel or the Lightning’s batteries go dead. Now, we’ve known far too many EV enthusiasts who get all smug about range anxiety and how people need to just calm down because nobody needs the ranges they think they do. Well, that’s true if you only drive in the city and mostly commute. However, there are people who go out on the open road, hauling trailers in the wide open Western US where distances between cities often exceeds what your electric car can do on a single charge.
But Ford has been boasting about how with the larger chassis in the F-150 Lightning, it has that much more juice so you can really go out there and not have to worry about running the battery dry. Well, The Fast Lane Truck debunked that claim, at least when towing a trailer is involved. The Ford truck didn’t make it the 282 miles the onboard computer estimated, a figure which was adjusted to 160 miles once the driver provided the trailer specs. The plan was to go to a charging station 147 miles away, but as the batteries depleted more rapidly than expected, a destination 45 miles closer was chosen. However, the Lightning couldn’t even make it the 102 miles pulling the trailer, so the driver had to turn around and head back to a nearer charging station, arriving with 9 percent charge left.
With a 24-gallon tank in the Sierra, it had a much longer range. Like with the Ford, the computer estimates range with the trailer specs, pegging it at 264 miles. Unlike with the Lightning, the GMC did just fine on range, although when its rival turned around it just headed back to the starting point without stopping to refuel.
Another important problem with all-electric trucks, one we admittedly didn’t even think about, was exposed during this test. Charging one with a trailer hitched up isn’t exactly easy since most public chargers are set up in a regular parking stall. The Fast Lane Truck had to park the truck and trailer across multiple charging station spots to plug in the Ford Lightning. Perhaps having pull-through chargers like how gas pumps are set up would be a good idea in more places?
This test exposes the fact that EV technology isn’t ready to fully replace internal combustion engines, no matter how badly EV advocates want to see that happen rapidly. While the tech has come a long way, it still has a lot further to go.
Fascinating, that was interesting to see it all laid out like that. Clearly there are issues, but in theory they should be surmountable, especially given how slow the adoption curve likely will be.
On a random note, we switched to Time of Use pricing a year or so ago for some of the reasons he mentioned. The electric company doesn't want people charging in the summer afternoons because of all of air conditioners in use, so they give a huge discount for charging at night. Works out great for me, and I bet we'll see more and more of that over time.
(Weird video format, though. I'm not sure I could safely drive through those windy areas without being too distracted by the numbers he was spouting.) [Reply]
Biggest reason for this conclusion: They cost way too much to repair. Because of how the batteries are constructed, there is no cheap way to fix them so they must be replaced. Thus, even a low-mileage EV with a damaged battery is totaled. [Reply]
Biggest reason for this conclusion: They cost way too much to repair. Because of how the batteries are constructed, there is no cheap way to fix them so they must be replaced. Thus, even a low-mileage EV with a damaged battery is totaled.
That website popped up some Google is silencing conservative voices! disclaimer so I didn’t read. Thanks for the synopsis [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pablo:
That website popped up some Google is silencing conservative voices! disclaimer so I didn’t read. Thanks for the synopsis
Didn't pop up for me. Got the link from Instapundit, who, while definitely right-leaning, is generally pretty level-headed and not prone to wild conspiracy theories. Thanks for the heads up. I try to not post from sites that are over-the-top. [Reply]
Biggest reason for this conclusion: They cost way too much to repair. Because of how the batteries are constructed, there is no cheap way to fix them so they must be replaced. Thus, even a low-mileage EV with a damaged battery is totaled.
My Tesla has been the cheapest car to own Ive ever had. Had it for like 5 years now. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
My Tesla has been the cheapest car to own Ive ever had. Had it for like 5 years now.
No kidding - that article makes absolutely zero sense. If we were making decisions about car technology based on how likely it is they would be totaled in an accident, we'd all be driving 1970s F150s. [Reply]