Is the EV Hype Over?

[mackinaw]

AAA finds that interest in EV's is declining as Americans turn their interest to hybrids.

 

https://newsroom.aaa.com/2024/06/is-the-ev-hype-over/

[Rick73]

Perhaps hype was not exactly the issue as much as BEVs haven’t achieved promised deliverables; though that can be a distinction without a difference for many.

[twintornados]

I believe that once BEV sales are standing on their own without government subsidies, you will see their true value exposed. I personally like the idea of a BEV but bought a Maverick hybrid instead. 

[rmc523]

I think EV hype was always way overblown.  Long term they may get there, but hybrids were always a better transition step as many of us here said.

[fordmantpw]

If people could get over the thought that they need 400 miles of range in an EV, and people would just drive one, I think sales would increase drastically.  The driving experience of an EV far surpasses that of an ICE.

 

We generally keep our Mach E charged (to 85%) so we've got it available.  Last week, my mom called at 7:00 in the AM and I needed to take her to the hospital to see my dad.  The Mach-E didn't have enough charge for the round trip (forgot to plug it in since we weren't going anywhere), so I debated on the Bronco, but it's hard for older folks to get into.  So, I figured I would find a charging station and top off the Mach E before I headed home from the hospital.  Well, it was about 5 minutes out of the way, but in 11 minutes of charging, I was able to add enough Tesla fuel (thanks for the adapter Ford!) to get us home with 25 miles to spare.  It was easy!

 

Plus, in nearly 13k miles, we STILL haven't had to take it in for an oil change!  😄 

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, fordmantpw said:

If people could get over the thought that they need 400 miles of range in an EV, and people would just drive one, I think sales would increase drastically.  The driving experience of an EV far surpasses that of an ICE.

 

We generally keep our Mach E charged (to 85%) so we've got it available.  Last week, my mom called at 7:00 in the AM and I needed to take her to the hospital to see my dad.  The Mach-E didn't have enough charge for the round trip (forgot to plug it in since we weren't going anywhere), so I debated on the Bronco, but it's hard for older folks to get into.  So, I figured I would find a charging station and top off the Mach E before I headed home from the hospital.  Well, it was about 5 minutes out of the way, but in 11 minutes of charging, I was able to add enough Tesla fuel (thanks for the adapter Ford!) to get us home with 25 miles to spare.  It was easy!

 

Plus, in nearly 13k miles, we STILL haven't had to take it in for an oil change!  😄 

What’s missing for many whether they realize it or not enough to quantify is that automobiles (vehicles in general) provide a sense of freedom that BEVs compromise to a greater degree.  It’s not that BEVs are bad, just a reality that they are different.  I can get into my old Ford van right now and head across the country without any planning whatsoever.  And I’ve actually done it in the past.  By comparison, the fact that you even thought of wanting to drive the Bronco to avoid a MachE “limitation” highlights why some people, especially those who only have one car, hesitate committing to buying or leasing a BEV.

 

On a side note, not sure why oil changes are such a big deal.  Most people probably get by with two changes per year that can take as little as 30 minutes each, and most importantly they can be scheduled when there’s nothing else to do, considering exact mileage is not critical.  At least not critical like charging where a vehicle stops running if you don’t do it.

 

I like BEVs a lot and look forward to owning one but also want to remain 100% objective.  They do many things better than ICE but are not a direct replacement for some needs.  Higher BEV costs also doesn’t help with buyers accepting some compromises/limitations.

[fordmantpw]

I pull a 38' fifth wheel when we take trips, so I'm used to planning my long trips.  I need to stop roughly every 300 miles for fuel, and some stations just aren't doable when you're that long.  An electric vehicle has similar limitations, and I'm OK with that.

 

Oil changes are a PITA for us.  We are very particular with our vehicles, and NOBODY treats them like we do.  My wife usually drops them off (she works within walking distance of the dealer), but every single time they leave something filthy.  It's ridiculous and it ticks us off.  Plus, oil changes are up over $100 at our dealer now.  I used to do it myself, but dealing with the waste oil and finding the time to do it was too much of a pain for my limited free time.

 

Also of note, is that we save so much time not going to gas stations.  We charge 99% at home (in 13k miles, we've used public charging twice), and the fact I can just plug it in and not have to stop at gas stations is an awesome "freedom" of owning a BEV.

 

Now, I realize not everyone has the ability to charge at home, and everyone's needs are different.  I 100% would NOT own an electric vehicle if I couldn't charge it at home.  However, I would guess most people's driving routines are similar to ours, and an EV would work perfectly well.

[rmc523]

4 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

If people could get over the thought that they need 400 miles of range in an EV, and people would just drive one, I think sales would increase drastically.  The driving experience of an EV far surpasses that of an ICE.

 

We generally keep our Mach E charged (to 85%) so we've got it available.  Last week, my mom called at 7:00 in the AM and I needed to take her to the hospital to see my dad.  The Mach-E didn't have enough charge for the round trip (forgot to plug it in since we weren't going anywhere), so I debated on the Bronco, but it's hard for older folks to get into.  So, I figured I would find a charging station and top off the Mach E before I headed home from the hospital.  Well, it was about 5 minutes out of the way, but in 11 minutes of charging, I was able to add enough Tesla fuel (thanks for the adapter Ford!) to get us home with 25 miles to spare.  It was easy!

 

Plus, in nearly 13k miles, we STILL haven't had to take it in for an oil change!  😄 

 

Did you guys lease or buy the Mach E?

[fordmantpw]

13 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

Did you guys lease or buy the Mach E?

 

We bought it.  We've never leased a vehicle as we normally keep them 5-7 years.

[rmc523]

31 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

 

We bought it.  We've never leased a vehicle as we normally keep them 5-7 years.

 

I buy too, but was curious - I feel like I'd want to lease an EV given how the tech is progressing and values are dropping.

[fordmantpw]

15 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

I buy too, but was curious - I feel like I'd want to lease an EV given how the tech is progressing and values are dropping.

 

You're still paying for the depreciation regardless.  Only difference with leasing is that you KNOW what the depreciation will be upfront so you don't have the risk.

[Biker16]

5 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

If people could get over the thought that they need 400 miles of range in an EV, and people would just drive one, I think sales would increase drastically.  The driving experience of an EV far surpasses that of an ICE.

 

We generally keep our Mach E charged (to 85%) so we've got it available.  Last week, my mom called at 7:00 in the AM and I needed to take her to the hospital to see my dad.  The Mach-E didn't have enough charge for the round trip (forgot to plug it in since we weren't going anywhere), so I debated on the Bronco, but it's hard for older folks to get into.  So, I figured I would find a charging station and top off the Mach E before I headed home from the hospital.  Well, it was about 5 minutes out of the way, but in 11 minutes of charging, I was able to add enough Tesla fuel (thanks for the adapter Ford!) to get us home with 25 miles to spare.  It was easy!

 

Plus, in nearly 13k miles, we STILL haven't had to take it in for an oil change!  😄 

 This!

I don't understand why so many of my brethren are so committed to giving their money to the oil and gas industry. With Solar being so cheap these days and Battery costs falling like a rock, it is a no brainer for those who can to invest in Solar, batteries and an EV.

I just don't get it. 

[fordmantpw]

57 minutes ago, Biker16 said:

 This!

I don't understand why so many of my brethren are so committed to giving their money to the oil and gas industry. With Solar being so cheap these days and Battery costs falling like a rock, it is a no brainer for those who can to invest in Solar, batteries and an EV.

I just don't get it. 

 

It is a pretty cool feeling to plug our Mach E in when the sun is shining and channel that energy directly from the sun through our solar panels and into our Mach E.  Side note...even with our Mach E, our electric bill for our 100% electric home was $34 last month, all of which was the connection charge.  We actually produced 73 more kWh than we used in May. It cost $10 just to add 100 miles' worth of Tesla fuel.

[Sherminator98]

3 hours ago, Biker16 said:

 This!

I don't understand why so many of my brethren are so committed to giving their money to the oil and gas industry. With Solar being so cheap these days and Battery costs falling like a rock, it is a no brainer for those who can to invest in Solar, batteries and an EV.

I just don't get it. 

 

Because they are perfectly fine in doing what they are doing because its not broken in their minds. 

[akirby]

3 hours ago, Biker16 said:

I don't understand why so many of my brethren are so committed to giving their money to the oil and gas industry.

Same reason you give your money to restaurants and grocery stores instead of raising your own animals and growing your own crops.  It’s more convenient.

[Motorpsychology]

4 hours ago, Biker16 said:

 This!

I don't understand why so many of my brethren are so committed to giving their money to the oil and gas industry. With Solar being so cheap these days and Battery costs falling like a rock, it is a no brainer for those who can to invest in Solar, batteries and an EV.

I just don't get it. 

As an upside, I get gasoline, hot water, hot meals,  and home heating in return for the money I give them. I think that until we can engineer near eternal battery design such as nano diamond technology (theoretical life of 26,000 years), solar won't be the Final Answer. The other shoe to drop is devising a practical, fair and simple way to tax energy for vehicle use and/or BEV, PHEV, EREV H2EV's etc themselves; roads will always need to be updated and fixed, and at some point, federal and state fossil fuel taxes aren't going to be enough.

[Rick73]

2 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Because they are perfectly fine in doing what they are doing because its not broken in their minds. 

That mindset doesn’t explain greater acceptance and growth of hybrids.  People don’t mind change, they just don’t like change they perceive as bad.

[Rick73]

4 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

It cost $10 just to add 100 miles' worth of Tesla fuel.

At present gas costs in my area, one can buy ~ 4 gallons of regular for same $10, and driving an Accord or Camry hybrid, it would get approximately 200 miles of range.  Fact that hybrids have improved so much, and gas prices have remained so low, has made financial justification for BEVs much less attractive.  Granted, gas prices in some areas are much higher, and charging BEVs at home is generally cheaper than at Tesla Superchargers.  Still, promised savings are not what was initially projected.

 

As example, if I enter Tesla site, it still projects significant energy cost savings in order to help justify higher cost of their cars, but that number must be based on comparison to gas guzzling options, not newer hybrids.  Funny thing is that as hybrids become more efficient and help reduce gasoline demand, that will drive fuel cost even lower; at least in the short term.

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, Motorpsychology said:

As an upside, I get gasoline, hot water, hot meals,  and home heating in return for the money I give them. I think that until we can engineer near eternal battery design such as nano diamond technology (theoretical life of 26,000 years), solar won't be the Final Answer. The other shoe to drop is devising a practical, fair and simple way to tax energy for vehicle use and/or BEV, PHEV, EREV H2EV's etc themselves; roads will always need to be updated and fixed, and at some point, federal and state fossil fuel taxes aren't going to be enough.

Another piece of puzzle that doesn’t get enough attention and or clarity is that many BEVs charged at home are done at night when solar doesn’t contribute much.  Sure, there is some battery and other storage systems, but presently natural gas still powers most of the marginal energy consumption.  Unfortunately we are still a long ways from powering most BEVs with renewables.  We do have nuclear power technology available today, but it’s expensive and scary to many.  It’s a proven way to generate electricity with minimal GHGs, unlike what China has done to power large numbers of BEVs with coal-generated electricity.  

[akirby]

2 hours ago, Rick73 said:

That mindset doesn’t explain greater acceptance and growth of hybrids.  People don’t mind change, they just don’t like change they perceive as bad.

Sure it does.  Driving a hybrid is no different than driving a non hybrid rid except your fuel costs are lower.  No change involved.

[Sherminator98]

7 hours ago, akirby said:

Sure it does.  Driving a hybrid is no different than driving a non hybrid rid except your fuel costs are lower.  No change involved.

 

Not to mention some dumbasses don't even plug in their PHEVs

 

I also work with someone who has a Chevy Volt and they charge it via 120v line because they don't drive it much at all either. 

[Rick73]

7 hours ago, akirby said:

Sure it does.  Driving a hybrid is no different than driving a non hybrid rid except your fuel costs are lower.  No change involved.

Buying and or owning a hybrid (not just driving it) also involves accepting some changes compared to ICE vehicles, but fortunately differences are generally to the better so people don’t bitch about them.  Why would people complain about something getting better?  My point was that people don’t resist change when it’s good for them.

 

Hybrids generally cost more, a bad change, but their higher fuel economy often makes up for it over time, a good thing.  The higher fuel economy means less GHGs, also a good change.  Higher MPG usually means greater range per tank of gas, and having to fill less often, also changes to the good that reasonable people will not complain about.  Other than higher initial cost there are many reasons to like hybrids, and people do.  That’s why buyers are presently accepting hybrids better than BEVs.

 

Anyway, my post was meant to challenge the argument that people don’t like change which is flawed IMO.  People clearly love change when it’s good for them, like winning the lottery, getting a raise, buying a new car or house, etc.

[akirby]

A large percentage of people still don’t like change, even when it’s for the better.  My wife refused to use dual monitors for work until I just went and bought the second one and hooked it up.  Then she loved it.  

[twintornados]

19 minutes ago, akirby said:

A large percentage of people still don’t like change, even when it’s for the better.  My wife refused to use dual monitors for work until I just went and bought the second one and hooked it up.  Then she loved it.  

 

Agreed, I did the dual monitor setup at my worksite and everyone thought I was a witch....then demanded that I set their work station up the same way....

[fordmantpw]

11 hours ago, Rick73 said:

At present gas costs in my area, one can buy ~ 4 gallons of regular for same $10, and driving an Accord or Camry hybrid, it would get approximately 200 miles of range.  Fact that hybrids have improved so much, and gas prices have remained so low, has made financial justification for BEVs much less attractive.  Granted, gas prices in some areas are much higher, and charging BEVs at home is generally cheaper than at Tesla Superchargers.  Still, promised savings are not what was initially projected.

 

As example, if I enter Tesla site, it still projects significant energy cost savings in order to help justify higher cost of their cars, but that number must be based on comparison to gas guzzling options, not newer hybrids.  Funny thing is that as hybrids become more efficient and help reduce gasoline demand, that will drive fuel cost even lower; at least in the short term.

 

Well, a Mach E GTPE isn't exactly an Accord or Camry hybrid either.

 

With our current gas prices, paying $0.45/kWh to charge our Mache E is like getting 30 MPG, which is about what our Escape got.  So, to us, it's the same as gas prices if we were to always charge at public charging locations.  But we pay just under $0.10/kWh at home, so our fuel costs are generally 22% of what they were before.  But, since we have solar, it's less than that because we overproduce in the spring, summer, and fall, so we're using some of those electrons we would be selling back at $0.025/kWh.

 

 

21 minutes ago, akirby said:

A large percentage of people still don’t like change, even when it’s for the better.  My wife refused to use dual monitors for work until I just went and bought the second one and hooked it up.  Then she loved it.  

 

I just went to a 34" curved widescreen, and I use it like two monitors, and then have one next to it, so it's like I have 3.  It took some getting used to and I didn't like it at first, but now I love it.  Since I do mostly web development, I can have the code open on the left, the browser on the right, and SQL on the other monitor.  I also have the ability to fill the entire screen with code if necessary.  It's pretty slick!  I'd be lost with only one monitor!