Interesting Motor Trend article about EVs

[StumblingElk]

On the Motor Trend InEVitable podcast they mentioned the webpage views and searches for their EV articles are massive compared to most everything else. Tesla, F-150 Lightning, Hummer EV, etc. The public is obviously interested in EVs - they’re following the demand.

That's a fair point. I think the criticism with MT isn't that EV's are being covered but rather how they are being covered/reviewed. MT, and several other people and businesses, are far less critical when reviewing EV's. It is difficult to ignore this.

I don't know about your area of the world, but in my area EV's represent less than 1% of all cars on the road and a very small percentage of new car sales. My state represents less than 0.5% of all EV registrations in the USA. California alone is about 40%.

While the readers of MT may be interested in EV cars, the tech, and enjoy seeing how they compare against other cars (myself included) the average new car purchaser isn't buying EV. So when some car rag lines up a Tesla model X and a bone stock V8 Mustang or Camaro to run a quarter mile time and the Tesla wins, everyone cheers. There is little mention of most other aspects of the car and the aspects that are mentioned aren't necessarily critical critiques but rather represented as a tradeoff for having such a 'great car' or an EV car in general. There isn't generally any mention of how some light to medium mods to that V8 will result in blowing the doors off of the Tesla. Or how much more fun the V8 (like the Alpha Chasis) is to drive, etc.

It just comes off as forced to so many people. Especially when just a few years ago folks were removing their cats and blasting down the road in cars that got 8-10mpg. There is a transition happening and many people just aren't ready or willing to make that transition, yet. Many of these reviews and opinions make ICE cars sound like they belong in the Neolithic era or at the very least are uncivilized and un-refined compared to the high-class or elegant EV.

Current EV registrations in the US: How does your state stack up and who grew the most YOY?

A detailed list breaking down the most recent data involving registrations of battery EVs in the US, compared by side-by-side by state.

electrek.co

 

[Shel_B]

,

 

[JeffKeryk]

That's a fair point. I think the criticism with MT isn't that EV's are being covered but rather how they are being covered/reviewed. MT, and several other people and businesses, are far less critical when reviewing EV's. It is difficult to ignore this.

I don't know about your area of the world, but in my area EV's represent less than 1% of all cars on the road and a very small percentage of new car sales. My state represents less than 0.5% of all EV registrations in the USA. California alone is about 40%.

While the readers of MT may be interested in EV cars, the tech, and enjoy seeing how they compare against other cars (myself included) the average new car purchaser isn't buying EV. So when some car rag lines up a Tesla model X and a bone stock V8 Mustang or Camaro to run a quarter mile time and the Tesla wins, everyone cheers. There is little mention of most other aspects of the car and the aspects that are mentioned aren't necessarily critical critiques but rather represented as a tradeoff for having such a 'great car' or an EV car in general. There isn't generally any mention of how some light to medium mods to that V8 will result in blowing the doors off of the Tesla. Or how much more fun the V8 (like the Alpha Chasis) is to drive, etc.

It just comes off as forced to so many people. Especially when just a few years ago folks were removing their cats and blasting down the road in cars that got 8-10mpg. There is a transition happening and many people just aren't ready or willing to make that transition, yet. Many of these reviews and opinions make ICE cars sound like they belong in the Neolithic era or at the very least are uncivilized and un-refined compared to the high-class or elegant EV.

Current EV registrations in the US: How does your state stack up and who grew the most YOY?

A detailed list breaking down the most recent data involving registrations of battery EVs in the US, compared by side-by-side by state.

electrek.co

Remember, CA has 13% (or more) of the population and overall high wages. And tech. So new things tend to happen here first. My niece from TX used to say while visiting, "We come here to count Teslas." It will even out as more products are released.

 

[StumblingElk]

Remember, CA has 13% (or more) of the population and overall high wages. And tech. So new things tend to happen here first. My niece from TX used to say while visiting, "We come here to count Teslas." It will even out as more products are released.

It's a mixed bag using Ca as the canary in the coal mine. Their very high cost of living means higher than average salaries but they also have more homeless people than all other states combined and the most expensive real estate in the continental United States. California is also mandating that 35% of all new car sales be EV by 2026 and 100% by 2035 and ever-increasing emissions regulations which will skew these numbers.

In other words, while EV is becoming more popular the trends in California don't necessarily reflect nationwide trends. In my area, I would need fast chargers setup all over the metro and rural areas just to go visit family, commute, run errands, go camping, fishing, hunting, take kids to their games, etc due to how sprawled out my midwest area is and the lack of metro transport options. Otherwise, I would be stranded on a monthly basis out in the middle of nowhere. I have zero interest (or ability) to own only EV cars unless the range can be increased significantly and the cost comes down tremendously. A 100-200 mile range simply wouldn't be enough for many/most people in many cases and the thought of spending $30k - $60k to do that just doesn't make sense financially.

And then of course, we need to have an electrical grid which can accomodate all these new EV cars which is a whole other discussion. California Energy Commission has stated they will have a 1700-1800 MW shortfall annually through 2025 (Before EV mandates). According to them, this could leave 1.2 million people without power altogether. I doubt the grid in my area could handle a huge influx of EV as well.

California Energy Officials Warn of 1,700-Megawatt Power Shortfall this Summer

California energy officials on Friday issued a sober forecast for the state's electrical grid, saying it lacks sufficient capacity to keep the lights on this summer and beyond if heatwaves, wildfires or other extreme events take their toll.

timesofsandiego.com

 

[JeffKeryk]

It's a mixed bag using Ca as the canary in the coal mine. Their very high cost of living means higher than average salaries but they also have more homeless people than all other states combined and the most expensive real estate in the continental United States. California is also mandating that 35% of all new car sales be EV by 2026 and 100% by 2035 and ever-increasing emissions regulations which will skew these numbers.

In other words, while EV is becoming more popular the trends in California don't necessarily reflect nationwide trends. In my area, I would need fast chargers setup all over the metro and rural areas just to go visit family, commute, run errands, go camping, fishing, hunting, take kids to their games, etc due to how sprawled out my midwest area is and the lack of metro transport options. Otherwise, I would be stranded on a monthly basis out in the middle of nowhere. I have zero interest (or ability) to own only EV cars unless the range can be increased significantly and the cost comes down tremendously. A 100-200 mile range simply wouldn't be enough for many/most people in many cases and the thought of spending $30k - $60k to do that just doesn't make sense financially.

And then of course, we need to have an electrical grid which can accomodate all these new EV cars which is a whole other discussion. California Energy Commission has stated they will have a 1700-1800 MW shortfall annually through 2025 (Before EV mandates). According to them, this could leave 1.2 million people without power altogether. I doubt the grid in my area could handle a huge influx of EV as well.

California Energy Officials Warn of 1,700-Megawatt Power Shortfall this Summer

California energy officials on Friday issued a sober forecast for the state's electrical grid, saying it lacks sufficient capacity to keep the lights on this summer and beyond if heatwaves, wildfires or other extreme events take their toll.

timesofsandiego.com

I have said a bazillion times, EVs are not for everyone. I depends on your use case.

 

[circuitsmith]

The NYT is quoted and that is certainly a biased reporting source.

Every media outlet has a bias, including this forum.

 

[LouC]

Motor Trend has always been a joke. Go back in time & look at some of their car of the year awards for proof. I read them, Car & Driver and Road & Track regularly from about 1969-2000. MT was always the least credible.

 

[LDM]

I have said a bazillion times, EVs are not for everyone. I depends on your use case.

And this would be the part where it would be fine, except you have the government and the rest trying to force them down people's throats in name of "environmentalism." Not going any further than that due to the political part but the reality is that EVs as they currently are will not work for most people, especially where I live. I certainly have no interest in replacing my truck or Camaros with an EV but for my current job I could probably use an EV as where I work is less than 2 miles from my home right now. I'd consider an EV if I could get a cheap one that wouldn't require me to spend $10K+ to upgrade the electrical system in my home and garage to handle fast charging. But spending $25K-$75K to buy a new car and then the money to upgrade my home is not a good financial decision at all.

 

[Cujet]

This article makes some valid points, but it ignores the inefficiencies that result from generating electricity, losses in electric transmission lines, and battery-charging inefficiency. In other words, the energy expended to create the electricity used to charge an EV's batteries is far greater than the energy available from the batteries that power an EV.

Correct. Additionally, the claim of 16% to 25% propulsive efficiency with gasoline powered cars is now utterly false. The Prius/Camry/Accord hybrids have 41% thermal efficiency, very low transmission losses, and RECAPTURE kinetic energy from braking.

It is this simple:

Try charging your EV with an efficient generator and drive down the highway, to see the MPG. As highway travel creates no significant braking energy recapture. Answer: 12 to 26MPG. A 44% Thermally Efficient diesel generator with a 95% generator head (far better than grid average) will provide no more than 26MPG highway for a Tesla. Period, end of story.

Sorry folks, that article is disingenuous at best. There is no "free lunch" when it comes to doing real work.

You are being lied to, by EE, by MT and by the .gov.

 

[Pelican]

You're Being Lied to About Electric Cars

Sorry, that meme you just retweeted isn't correct.

www.motortrend.com

Says EVs are greener than ICE autos no matter what metric you use.

1. EVs produce less emissions including battery production over time, somewhat less than 2 years.

2. Even if the grid were to be fueled by coal alone, the EV still wins for total emissions.

and more

That's because they NEVER consider the pollution caused by extracting the minerals needed for batteries.

 

[circuitsmith]

I could probably use an EV as where I work is less than 2 miles from my home right now. I'd consider an EV if I could get a cheap one that wouldn't require me to spend $10K+ to upgrade the electrical system in my home and garage to handle fast charging.

I think if all you did with the vehicle ws a 4 mile daily commute to work you wouldn't need fast charging.
Besides, repeated short trips are hard on an ICE engine, but not electric.
I went a similar distance to work on a e-bikes for 25 years (retired in April).
The current bike has a 40 mile range and the charger's rate is 5 mph.
So when I was working, 2 hours charging per week, not counting recreational rides.

 

[E365]

Motor Trend has always been a joke. Go back in time & look at some of their car of the year awards for proof. I read them, Car & Driver and Road & Track regularly from about 1969-2000. MT was always the least credible.

The 2014 Subaru Forester was the Motor Trend “SUV of the Year”. It appears you bought a 2017 Forester? Why would you buy their “joke” of a choice?

 

[LDM]

I think if all you did with the vehicle ws a 4 mile daily commute to work you wouldn't need fast charging.
Besides, repeated short trips are hard on an ICE engine, but not electric.
I went a similar distance to work on a e-bikes for 25 years (retired in April).
The current bike has a 40 mile range and the charger's rate is 5 mph.
So when I was working, 2 hours charging per week, not counting recreational rides.

Probably don't. Now show me where I can buy a $5K EV that I could use to get back and forth to work. I'm not spending $25K+ on a new car just to drive 2 miles back and forth to work. I'm not getting rid of my truck as I need it for other uses that actually involve towing and hauling things that an EV can't even come close to doing, not to mention at a reasonable price for the cost of an EV truck.

I'll just keep riding my bike when it is nice and drive the truck when it is raining/cold.

 

[LouC]

The 2014 Subaru Forester was the Motor Trend “SUV of the Year”. It appears you bought a 2017 Forester? Why would you buy their “joke” of a choice?

Ok they were right a few times. But wrong many more times.

 

[mva]

Correct. Additionally, the claim of 16% to 25% propulsive efficiency with gasoline powered cars is now utterly false. The Prius/Camry/Accord hybrids have 41% thermal efficiency, very low transmission losses, and RECAPTURE kinetic energy from braking.

It is this simple:

Try charging your EV with an efficient generator and drive down the highway, to see the MPG. As highway travel creates no significant braking energy recapture. Answer: 12 to 26MPG. A 44% Thermally Efficient diesel generator with a 95% generator head (far better than grid average) will provide no more than 26MPG highway for a Tesla. Period, end of story.

Sorry folks, that article is disingenuous at best. There is no "free lunch" when it comes to doing real work.

You are being lied to, by EE, by MT and by the .gov.

This calculation appears to be incorrect

I get a much higher mpg using your inputs:

1 US Gallon of diesel contains 40 kWh gross energy

40 kWh x 44% x 95% = 16.7 kWh net generator output

Teslas model 3 use about 30 kWh per 100 miles highway (less in city driving)

Therefore 16.7 / 0.3 = 57 mpg

Still pretty good.

 

[mva]

If you could get a Tesla to charge while driving it would have to tow a 21 kW (28 hp) generator to hold the battery charge at 70 miles per hour.

 

[Trav]

Basically the same setup as a diesel electric locomotive.

 

[demarpaint]

Basically the same setup as a diesel electric locomotive.

Which is tried and true.

 

[Ws6]

You're Being Lied to About Electric Cars

Sorry, that meme you just retweeted isn't correct.

www.motortrend.com

Says EVs are greener than ICE autos no matter what metric you use.

1. EVs produce less emissions including battery production over time, somewhat less than 2 years.

2. Even if the grid were to be fueled by coal alone, the EV still wins for total emissions.

and more

Isn't this stuff we already knew?

 

[UncleDave]

Isn't this stuff we already knew?

Many here do, many refuse to accept any info that clashes with their feelings or preconceived notions on the subject.