>>28774657
Less than 2 weeks

>>28774657
The issue has never been cost. It's always been range and convenience. No one is going to buy a car that has to wait 15m-30m+ (god forsaken you if you can't make it to a supercharger) and potentially wait in lines since there's usually at best 1 or 2 chargers compared to the 6-8+ pumps just to get going again. Good hybrids give ranges of over 600mi. EVs are dogshit in comparison.

>>28774691
I will buy a worse car if it's cheaper

>>28774691
Also before some cuck tells me to plan my route around interstates you may as well fucking fly. Interstates run through some of the most boring fucking parts of the US save for a select few. Anyone that actually enjoys roadtrips goes backroads and old highways

>>28774657
I see shit like low mileage Renault Zoe on marketplace for like 12k Euro. You can buy one, drive the shit out of it with minimum maintenance required and cheap home charging, then sell it three years later for not much less. Equivalent ICE may have been cheaper to buy but the running costs would set you at a greater loss regardless.

>>28774657
This is so sweet.
Imma buy a M3 tesla in the 3rd of Jan.

>>28774830
There's only one M3, and it's not made by a south african manchild.

>>28774830
tesla doesn't build ice cars, so there's no parity to be had there

>>28774691
>The issue has never been cost
ofc it fucking was
it took a long ass time for tesla to become profitable, and many other mfgs are still not net positive in their EV endeavors to this day

> It's always been range and convenience
range is an issue right up to the point where the range is enough to cover the longest time the majority of users wanna drive in a single stint. with modern evs having 300 miles as a baseline (~4 hours at 70mph) and 400+ for upper trims (~6 hours), we're past that. any further range improvement is simply not necessary

convenience is the big thing, but that has mostly boiled down to
>can you charge at home?
if yes, EV convenience >>> ICE convenience. if not, its the other way around, so you don't buy EV

charging speed was also a concern, but we're already approaching the ideal "by the time you grabbed some coffee, took a piss, pulled your underwear out of ur asscrack, and walked back to the car, its already done" goal.
aka ~10mins charging for ~200miles more range, whereas now we're at 15-20m, depending on ev - charger combo

>No one is going to buy a car
the model y was literally the best selling car in the world for 2 years running. its only losing the spot (still #1 ev, just not overall) because it had to stop producing for months to retool. it'll take #1 back next year

>that has to wait 15m-30m
we're already at around 20mins for typical mid-trip charging stops. outside of trips, charging is done at home

>since there's usually at best 1 or 2 chargers
lol, where?
highway charging stations have shitloads of them, dozen + is not at all uncommon

>hybrids
literally the worst of both worlds. all the weight and complexity of an ICE powertrain, and of an ev powertrain, and bonus weight and complexity for all the systems to mesh them together
to be fair, after 20+ years of fucking around with the concept, toyota seems to have it down pretty well, but they're the only ones.
and its still a retarded idea if you can do ev instead.

>>28775188
>range is an issue right up to the point where the range is enough to cover the longest time the majority of users wanna drive in a single stint. with modern evs having 300 miles as a baseline (~4 hours at 70mph) and 400+ for upper trims (~6 hours), we're past that. any further range improvement is simply not necessary
You would have a point here if those range numbers were actually accurate. The problem is, you lose range from cold weather (or hot weather, too), you lose range from driving over 70 mph, you lose range from the car aging, and you lose range if you charge it to 80% like they recommend (and is practical in road trips). In practice after all those losses a 300 mile range car is easily down to 150 miles actual practical range, which is way below what people actually want.

Most people's road trips happen during winter to see family for thanksgiving / christmas. Most people don't limit themselves to 70 mph on highways to maximize range. And these cars are not going to stay brand new and will lose 2-3% of battery life every year. They need more range so that under the actual circumstances that people use them that they can provide enough range to make the trips people want.

>>28775192
>you lose range from cold weather
heat pumps are omnipresent in modern ev, precisely to deal with this issue

>driving over 70 mph
going to 75 or 80 isn't really gonna make a big difference.
its one thing to do a pull now and then for fun, but how many people are actually doing entire trips at 100+ mph?

>the car aging
in practice, its been observed that battery degradation stops at around 80-85%

>if you charge it to 80% like they recommend (and is practical in road trips)
you're absolutely allowed to top it up the night before a trip, but yes, not in mid-trip stops.
actually topping up takes a lot longer, the last 10% from 90 to 100 might take as much as the previous 30%
this is why most mfgs specifically advertise 10-80% charging times, that's the sort of charging stop you wanna be doing mid-trip

>300 mile range car is easily down to 150 miles actual practical range
lol, no, you don't lose 50% of your range, not even in the worst case
more like ~250 miles, for a typical ~300 miles rated entry level ev, if starting at 100%
there's plenty of real-world range tests, notably carwow does them often.
iirc in the last one, the MY LR managed ~320miles in pretty shitty bong weather, a/c on ofc

if you really wanna optimize for long trips , you can always get the extended battery version of whatever EV you're looking at, but imo its not worth it.
you're spending 5-10k to save yourself an extra stop or 2, once or twice a year, over the 3-5 years you're gonna keep the car, realistically. do the math and those extra stops are paying you what a high end lawyer charges per hour.

in fact, lets actually do the math, assuming 2 extra stops per trip, each at 30 mins, 2 road trips per year, 5 year ownership:
2 x 30 x 2 x 5 = 600 extra minutes, aka 10 hours. assuming the extra battery cost you only 5k, that means that every one of those 10 hours charging (presumably spent drinking coffee and scrolling 4chan, ass deep in a chair) is saving you $500
not bad, imo

>>28775192
samefag as >>28775221
another thing i wanted to mention, but ran out of char limit
i do kinda agree with you, evs are definitely not optimal for road trips
if some1 told me they don't work, but instead they spend all year road tripping around the country, i'd recommend something else. well, assuming they want to actually do the driving themselves, because if not, FSD kinda wins it for tesla and evs again... but i digress

what im trying to argue is that they're definitely capable of road trips currently, without major concessions, and even more in the future (mostly due to even faster charging, i doubt we'll see ranges go much higher).
but yes, they're not optimal for it.
the thing is though, the ARE optimal for the rest of the time. they are ideal commuters, and you're gonna be commuting ~250 days per year, vs doing 2-3 road trips.
so, again tradeoffs.

>>28775221
>heat pumps are omnipresent in modern ev, precisely to deal with this issue
They don't "deal" with the issue, they only decrease the loss. You go from losing 40% of the range without a heat pump to losing 30% of the range with it. It helps, but it's nowhere near a solution.

>going to 75 or 80 isn't really gonna make a big difference.
You are dead wrong here, most EVs will lose 10%-15% max range going 80 compared 70. They're extremely sensitive to aerodynamic loss.

>lol, no, you don't lose 50% of your range, not even in the worst case
50% is being realistic. 20% from not charging to full, 30% from cold weather, 10% from driving 80 mph, 10% from the battery being old = 55% loss. You only get 45% of the listed range on the battery.

File: golf cart.jpg (2.99 MB, 3840x2160)

2.99 MB JPG

The only electric car I have ever driven or ever will drive.

>>28775236
I've driven some electric go-karts that were kind of fun.

>>28775230
>the thing is though, the ARE optimal for the rest of the time. they are ideal commuters
With a huge asterisk here -- for people who own their homes they are ideal commuters. For apartment dwellers they are not. Even if their apartment installs chargers in their lots, they still are not.

Why? Something nobody talks about is how chargers MASSIVELY markup electricity. Like we're talking 2.5-3x as much per kWh at chargers than at home. So yes, if you're charging at home, you get cheap electricity, you get an efficient car. But if you're charging at a public charger -- or a charger you apt complex installed -- your EV will be approximately as expensive per mile to drive as a 20 MPG gas guzzler ICE. They are not cheap to operate if you can't charge them at home. And if you can charge at home you'll get approx 60 MPG out of them at current prices, which is pretty good but again not a reason to buy one, you can literally get hybrids that get that level of efficiency.

The stickers you see on EVs at the stealership saying they're "110 MPGe" were calculated using 2020-era gas and electricity prices. Since then, gas has gone way down, and electricity has gone way up. And with the rollout of AI datacenters slurping up all our electricity we're only gonna see that trend continue.

>>28775234
>You go from losing 40% of the range without a heat pump to losing 30% of the range with it
actually its close to 15%, with a heat pump. around 30% without.
and note that this is the sort of loss you can expect at or below freezing temps, during summer you'd be doing better

>most EVs will lose 10%-15% max range going 80 compared 70.
correct, i double checked this

>50% is being realistic.
no, its overly pessimistic, as it assumes the worst weather, constant speeding, and nearly maxed out battery loss. and actually overestimates climate losses by 2x, as explained above

again, i urge you to check real world tests, which are more than plentiful on youtube. modern evs frequently manage 300+ mile stints with ease, without any hypermiling shenanigans.
and, if you care to see what happens when they are much older, there's a relatively recent test by whatcar that included a 2016 model s, which managed 200 miles on its original battery. iirc that was an 85d, original rated range at ~260miles.

>>28775249
>actually its close to 15%, with a heat pump. around 30% without.
I have seen dozens of top tier high quality EVs with heat pumps still losing 30% not even in freezing weather but just cold weather. You are either ignorant in how these things work or are lying. Actual super below freezing temps you can expect to see even worse losses.

>>28775221
>going to 75 or 80 isn't really gonna make a big difference.
Aerodynamics take speed squared

>>28775241
>With a huge asterisk here -- for people who own their homes they are ideal commuters
agreed, but with a small asterisk of my own

>Something nobody talks about is how chargers MASSIVELY markup electricity
indeed, but here's where my asterisk comes in
for me, the main thing is the convenience of the matter, not so much the cost/savings
the most important thing is to be able to charge conveniently, without needing to take time out of your schedule to do it during the course of every day life.
and ofc, having the savings from much cheaper running costs is also important, but even in the worst case where you have to pay higher prices for charging, you still benefit from not having to worry about maintaining an ICE, which by itself is significant savings.
so, to me, the litmus test is really "can you charge *conveniently*", and this includes stuff like charging at work, or charging at your neighborhood grocery store, or whatever else, even at higher prices.

>I have seen dozens of top tier high quality EVs with heat pumps still losing 30% not even in freezing weather but just cold weather
bullshit.
i asked chatgpt about it, and i see no reason to mistrust it on an encyclopedic question like this. the ~15% number it quoted was for -5 to +5 c, aka exactly around freezing
heat pumps have some range in which they operate optimally, so im sure once you get temps low enough you will start to see way worse perf, but that's *far* below freezing
but really, if your argument is "you'll lose 30% of range if you drive it in a fucking polar vortex" i mean, that's not exactly fucking fair.

and again, for like the 4th time, this isn't some unexplored frontier of science. there are many real world tests available to check out on youtube, incl ones done in cold weather. many evs easily manage above 300 miles 100% to 0%, and those same vehicles easily manage above 200 miles on typical 80% to 10% mid trip charger to charger stints.

>>28775428
>i asked chatgpt about it
lmao
Ask ANYBODY who has ever driven these things, it's enormous. I've done nearly encyclopedic research into the non-Tesla EVs on the market (I have no interest in owning a Tesla, for other reasons entirely) and the UNANIMOUS result is somewhere around 25-30% loss at 40F and upwards of 50% loss at 0F. This is all of them. Even the $100k+ cars with heat pumps get similar numbers, though less bad than the ones without. Every single reviewer who drives the car in winter mentions it. Every single one.

You are absolutely full of shit and have no idea what you're talking about.

>>28775482
yea, that's 100% bullshit, you're straight up lying.

for any other anons who are interested, i urge you to check out real world tests to see what sort of ranges/range loss from cold weather people actually get.

>>28774657
The new chevy bolt starts at like $29k, so yeah it’s here.
>>28774691
I bought an ioniq 6 for $30k and I charge it at home for free using home solar. It has a range of 320 miles

>>28775241
>The stickers you see on EVs at the stealership saying they're "110 MPGe" were calculated using 2020-era gas and electricity prices. Since then, gas has gone way down, and electricity has gone way up.
MPGe ratings are a measure of energy efficiency, not a cost ratio. EVs are about 4 times as energy efficient as ICE.

>>28775504
>I bought an ioniq 6 for $30k
I FUCKING HATE YOU AMERICANS SO MUCH THAT CAR IS MINIMUM 40 GRAND HERE EVEN IF DAILY USED LIKE A COMMON BITCH