Car buyers should have 'long, hard think' about diesel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nod said:
We do more than 150 miles per week so have other vehicles for longer (or fun) journeys. The Leaf is for the shorter, urban journeys (for which it's ideal and will continue to be so even if/when it has 1/2 the range it has now.)

As an only car, the Leaf wouldn't suit us but as an extra for fairly specific duties, it does make sense, especially while we can charge for free at Sainsburys (unless some ringpiece CBA to find a space elsewhere!)
Click to expand...

So your EV is an extra vehicle only used for specific journeys that suit it's capabilities. That's not a convincing argument for EV's though is it. One of the general arguments put forward is that EV's will be cheaper to run, not so if is an additional vehicle. I just use my diesel for all my journeys and I do a minimum of 70 miles a day but mostly well over a 100, and often 150 plus in my car.

I have no problem with EV's for those were they suit their needs, I do have a problem with the EV supporters thinking that every current issue will (note 'will' not 'could') be resolved in a short timescale and once 'there are more EV's on the road' with no thought to anyone who's lifestyle EV's do not suit. As stated on a number of occasions, not everyone can charge at home, I could but the range to cost is no where near good enough for the type of vehicle I require, plus charging at work is not an option for most. Just wish people would be more realistic with the issues, not everything will be instantly solved once there are more EV's around. The issues need to be resolved in order for there to be more EV's around.

Personally, I know no one who owns an EV, our company does offer hybrid to those that go into congestion zones on a regular basis but that's purely to save on the expenses bill. The solar panels on houses are mostly on council owned ones, very few privately owned.
 
I agree - that's why we have other means of transport. I'm a firm believer in having the right tool for the job and we're very lucky to be able to afford them and to have a drive big enough to keep them on. I'm under no illusion that the conversion to EVs will be a quick one, although the rate of uptake is fairly rapid, especially now that 2nd hand ones are available at a considerable saving over new.

Do EVs suit every use? Not yet but with the inevitable advances in technology, longer ranges and faster charging WILL happen fairly quickly and a suitable infrastructure WILL appear. (IF the bewigged ringpiece doesn't cause Armageddon...)
 
wuyanxu said:
For example, in 2040:
- Tim the travelling salesman drives 400 miles a day, bought a 100kWh car. He rapid charge once a day, pays £300 a year in road & pollution tax and £20 rapid charge to recover 200 miles, £8 of which is tax (calc: 60kWh energy for a very inefficient 3.33miles/kWh car using expensive 30p/kWh energy = £12)
Click to expand...
I like your idea of shifting the taxation onto battery purchases and rapid charges. But unfortunately your numbers don't add up. I wish they did, because I'm generally in favour of a migration to EVs but they don't.

In 2018, Tim he travelling salesman is probably driving 400 miles a day in a diesel-engined car that gets 50 mpg. So he's using 8 gallons of diesel per day, which is 36 litres, and the total tax on fuel (fuel duty plus VAT) is around 80p per litre . So he's currently paying £28.80 per day in fuel tax, and you're replace that with £8 per day for his rapid charge. That's a big hole in the receipts to HMRC. If your rapid charge were to cost £40 instead of £20, that would work. And it wouldn't be entirely unreasonable, because Tim's currently paying over £40 per day on fuel. But that wouldn't do much for the take-up of EVs and super chargers. People would avoid them like the plague, if they could, knowing that the same charge would cost only £12 or less at home.
 
decigallen said:
You're making the assumption that all those 5 vehicles will need to be charged at once. The average weekly mileage in the UK is around 150miles. In the very near future (or now if you buy a Tesla/Hyundai), 300 mile EVs will, for most people, need to be charged once a week. Along with this, you could have your EV plugged in while at work rather than charge at home.

Along with this, there are constant breakthroughs in fast charging and an improved charging infrastructure.
Click to expand...
Most people cannot charge their car at work, we employ 80 people in our building, the car park is big enough for 25, so even if all of them could charge at work we have 55 people who will need charge points in the street. What happened to your assertion that "everyone" will charge their cars at home after peak demand? You can't have it both ways!
 
MatBin said:
Most people cannot charge their car at work, we employ 80 people in our building, the car park is big enough for 25, so even if all of them could charge at work we have 55 people who will need charge points in the street. What happened to your assertion that "everyone" will charge their cars at home after peak demand? You can't have it both ways!
Click to expand...
I don't think he has cottoned onto the fact that with a dramatic increase in electric vehicles, the off peak hours soon become the peak hours.
 
Cobra said:
I do almost double that in a day, in my Diesel van and I guess that would be an average figure for van drivers

I've no idea what mileage they do but they all come piling back in between 4-6pm.
(It looks like whacky races I should sell tickets :D)
This is beginning to sound like a very expensive hobby to me! Take photography, you buy a base camera, to see if you like it, then you "Need" an L lens,
Then your body is not good enough so you upgrade that, and oh hang on, more L lenses are required along with a tri pod, flash maybe some studio lights back drops ....
Click to expand...

But you aren't an average user - you and some other van drivers are outliers. At the other end of the scale, some weeks I do between 0-10 miles. The point is that when 300 mile evs are the norm, there won't be masses of people charging everyday. Most drivers will not do more than 300 miles a day (that's 75-78,000 miles a year based on a 5-day week.

I don't get your analogy at all. Hobbyist photographers don't save money on their bills by upgrading gear. Getting an ev, home battery and solar panels will eventually pay for itself. But these people aren't just doing it for the money but the ethical, environmental reasons. That's laudable.
 
MatBin said:
Most people cannot charge their car at work, we employ 80 people in our building, the car park is big enough for 25, so even if all of them could charge at work we have 55 people who will need charge points in the street. What happened to your assertion that "everyone" will charge their cars at home after peak demand? You can't have it both ways!
Click to expand...

You're misrepresenting what I said. Few will need to charge their cars between 4 and 6pm when ranges are 300 miles. Having the option to charge at work will be an option for many. And certainly all 5 cars will not need plugged in at once.

You're looking at future problems but basing it on current tech/infrastructure. Charge points are growing exponentially. Range is improving drastically. Charging is getting quicker. By 2030 most new cars sold will be ev.
 
nilagin said:
I don't think he has cottoned onto the fact that with a dramatic increase in electric vehicles, the off peak hours soon become the peak hours.
Click to expand...

Really, I haven't? Off peak price increases to the same as on-peak would still make ev charging greatly cheaper than ICE refuelling.

Maybe you haven't cottoned on to more homes producing renewable energy and having cheaper ways of storing it.
 
decigallen said:
you and some other van drivers are outliers.
Click to expand...
I'm not a Courier I use the van to get to my work "Stations" that is average in my company with 6 others doing much the same, and I'm sure that we aren't an isolated case.
decigallen said:
I don't get your analogy at all.
Click to expand...
It was to prove that when you buy an EV it doesn't stop there there are also "must haves"
decigallen said:
Getting an ev, home battery and solar panels will eventually pay for itself.
Click to expand...
I believe that 7 years has been banded about in this and other threads ..Thats quite an initial lay out under the guise of saving money ...
..... eventually.
 
Cobra said:
I'm not a Courier I use the van to get to my work "Stations" that is average in my company with 6 others doing much the same, and I'm sure that we aren't an isolated case.

It was to prove that when you buy an EV it doesn't stop there there are also "must haves"
Click to expand...

I didn't say you were isolated. I said you were an outlier, just as I am. The point of averages in large samples is to give a representation of the majority.Van drivers make up only 14% of road users. Of those, many aren't kept at home and I'm fairly sure not all do over 300 miles per day.

What are these must haves for ev drivers you talk about?
 
decigallen said:
What are these must haves for ev drivers you talk about?
Click to expand...
You've already mentioned them,
decigallen said:
Of the 5 people I know that have EV cars, 2 have Tesla batteries in their home and 4 of the 5 have solar
Click to expand...
The analogy was to suggest that it doesn't end with the car and the charging point,
Of course these aren't absolutely essential but people will buy them to get ahead of the game.
Just like a photographer buys more and more expensive kit and add ons, to get ahead of the game.
The analogy is perfectly sound.
 
You could probably argue that if anything vans and haulage (and public transport, busses are absolutely dire) should probably be a bigger target for diesel pollution than the average motorist.

But I guess its an easier target to hassle the average motorist.
 
neil_g said:
(and public transport, busses are absolutely dire
Click to expand...
I had to chuckle, we have a few electric buses, they are only a "local" service.
I was following a bus, yesterday, and there was a big notice on the back,
"I'm sorry I'm not electric, but while my brothers and sisters are charging, I'm here for you"
;)


neil_g said:
But I guess its an easier target to hassle the average motorist.
Click to expand...
As always
 
decigallen said:
Really, I haven't? Off peak price increases to the same as on-peak would still make ev charging greatly cheaper than ICE refuelling.

Maybe you haven't cottoned on to more homes producing renewable energy and having cheaper ways of storing it.
Click to expand...

There is currently 30.9 million cars registered in the UK. Approximately 140,000 of those are Ev's. When that figure goes up and becomes the majority, everybodies electricity goes up, even those without a car. My use of petrol has no adverse financial impact on only me.

Out of the millions of homes in the UK, how many have renewable energy or cheaper means of storing it? I don't know of any in my immediate area.
 
Last edited:
Cobra said:
It was to prove that when you buy an EV it doesn't stop there there are also "must haves"
Click to expand...


Home charge point and a 10 metre charging cable are the only things we've had to buy for it and even those are more of a convenience thing than "must haves".
 
nilagin said:
There is currently 30.9 million cars registered in the UK. Approximately 140,000 of those are Ev's. When that figure goes up and becomes the majority, everybodies electricity goes up, even those without a car. My use of petrol has no adverse financial impact on only me.

Out of the millions of homes in the UK, how many have renewable energy or cheaper means of storing it? I don't know of any in my immediate area.
Click to expand...
The national grid has already said that a lot of money needs to be plowed into infrastructure and supply to prevent shortages due to increases in electric car charging.

The Gov will try and get their 10p worth too to recoup from falling fuel sales. So expect some sort of "tax" there.

Ultimately we're all going to foot the bill sooner or later.
 
nilagin said:
There is currently 30.9 million cars registered in the UK. Approximately 140,000 of those are Ev's. When that figure goes up and becomes the majority, everybodies electricity goes up, even those without a car. My use of petrol has no adverse financial impact on only me.
Click to expand...
I thought you had a good point there. But then I remembered that you're one of the faction who is obviously totally biased against EVs, like Cobra, so that made me question it. Which is a shame really, because on the face of it, it *is* a good point.

But now I'm in questioning mode: say we've reached the point where 16 million ICEVs have been replaced by 16 million EVs. What's happened to the price of electricity, and why?
 
StewartR said:
But now I'm in questioning mode: say we've reached the point where 16 million ICEVs have been replaced by 16 million EVs. What's happened to the price of electricity, and why?
Click to expand...
As above. The national grid needs massive expenditure to make sure we don't have rolling blackouts when everyone gets home and plugs in (on top of everything else). That cost will get passed to the utility companies and onto the Consumer.

Plus all of these public charging points, are they going to be installed and maintained by local authorities? If so will that increase local taxes?

There's real potential for this to get pricey for everyone imo. I'd happily be proved wrong but call me skeptical.
 
Regarding mileages, I'm sure that the average city dweller does the small mileage that skews the appearance of low average mileage for a 'typical' driver, while anyone living in a town or village outside of a major centre of population will do a much higher mileage. Electric vehicles have an obvious benefit to those living in cities, so *for them* there is little need for a decent range, while those who live outside a city really need an EV capable of much greater distances between charges. My typical mileage is 250-300 miles/week, but sometimes much more than that, and I'd really want an EV with a 500+ range for it to be an acceptable daily drive.
 
ancient_mariner said:
Regarding mileages, I'm sure that the average city dweller does the small mileage that skews the appearance of low average mileage for a 'typical' driver, while anyone living in a town or village outside of a major centre of population will do a much higher mileage. Electric vehicles have an obvious benefit to those living in cities, so *for them* there is little need for a decent range, while those who live outside a city really need an EV capable of much greater distances between charges. My typical mileage is 250-300 miles/week, but sometimes much more than that, and I'd really want an EV with a 500+ range for it to be an acceptable daily drive.
Click to expand...
To a point you are correct, but, say I live in town (I do actually) and my car has a current range of 120/140 real miles and I haven't charged it for a few days, so I have 80 odd miles of charge remaing and I need to go over and get to my son's house in an emergency, not unlikely as he has 2 children, both he and his wife work, sometimes he's abroad and sometimes his wife can't get away if one of the children need picking up from school as they have been taken ill. So now I need to drive 40 miles there do a pickup and bring my grandchild back to my place, another 30 miles, do you think I would risk that in car that has 80 mike's left of "fuel" left? Unless they can get the range up to 250 miles forget it, who would drain their IC cars down to 60 miles of fuel remaining unless they knew they had garages nearby to refuel their car easily.

And according to a write-up I read today, several of the manufacturers are fitting their cars with their own bespoke charging system, without a universal system how will this long awaited for network if charging points work?
 
decigallen said:
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/hyundai/kona/103973/new-hyundai-kona-electric-2018-uk-review

A sub £30k car (after EV grant) that has the 300-mile range. Ranges will continue to go up and prices will go down. Many will baulk at that price for a budget car brand, but you have to consider that if you do 10,000 or so miles a year, you'll be saving a lot of money on fuel.
Click to expand...
That may be true but have you factored in the cost of battery "rental", I have and it makes little or no financial sense to use a battery car instead of hydrocarbons at present.
 
Last edited:
StewartR said:
I thought you had a good point there. But then I remembered that you're one of the faction who is obviously totally biased against EVs,
Click to expand...
I am not against them totally, if they suit some people then fine, but I would prefer a hybrid where an electric motor can provide extra torque or take over completely where needs must. Or a small engine not connected to the drive train that would act as a generator whenever the battery needs a recharge.
 
StewartR said:
I like your idea of shifting the taxation onto battery purchases and rapid charges. But unfortunately your numbers don't add up. I wish they did, because I'm generally in favour of a migration to EVs but they don't.

In 2018, Tim he travelling salesman is probably driving 400 miles a day in a diesel-engined car that gets 50 mpg. So he's using 8 gallons of diesel per day, which is 36 litres, and the total tax on fuel (fuel duty plus VAT) is around 80p per litre . So he's currently paying £28.80 per day in fuel tax, and you're replace that with £8 per day for his rapid charge. That's a big hole in the receipts to HMRC. If your rapid charge were to cost £40 instead of £20, that would work. And it wouldn't be entirely unreasonable, because Tim's currently paying over £40 per day on fuel. But that wouldn't do much for the take-up of EVs and super chargers. People would avoid them like the plague, if they could, knowing that the same charge would cost only £12 or less at home.
Click to expand...
This is the whole point of making rapid charging expensive and heavily taxing it. The same charge of 60kWh at 10p/kWh (currently I pay 8p/kWh E7) would only cost £6 to cover 200 miles. But the car would charge slowly.

This is the main thing people need to get used to: different energy recuperation speeds. If you want rapid charging, you will have to pay dearly for it. The slower the charging, the less burden your EV is on the grid. Similarly, charging when parked (overnight or at office) is a big difference to ICE cars. I can arrive home with 2 miles of range left and not worry, just plug it in. Whereas I begin to panic when my fossil fuel gauge get close to 1/4 because I can't fill up at home and have to plan my route to drive past a petrol station.

That's why a battery size tax (similar to CO2 tiered road tax) is needed when EV hit mainstream. Because, as we've seen in this thread, many people don't fully understand EV range and think they need 600 miles cars. I think 65kWh cars are the sweet spot, allowing 200 miles all weather real world driving with reserve, meaning at motorway speeds it is around 3 hours of driving between pit-stops. Buying any bigger doesn't make much sense.

decigallen said:
I've read about instances where EVs have been used to store renewable energy and then power homes - using the car like a generator. So in effect, during a planned outage, people could keep their home powered (apparently for around 20hrs or so) even when the grid is down - an advantage of owning an EV.
Click to expand...
V2G is the word you are looking for: https://cleantechnica.com/2018/03/23/vehicle-grid-cars/

My Nissan Leaf is compatible with V2G. I do plan on getting a home battery system with V2G connectivity when the tech matures for home use. For example 5kWh wall-hang battery to soak up the solar during the day, then when I get home, my EV is able to earn money when parked at home.

Commercial example where EV is plugged in to help stabilise the grid and earn money when parked: https://newsroom.nissan-europe.com/...ly-commercial-vehicle-to-grid-hub-in-denmark1


nilagin said:
You can't know that for sure. What about people who have been out all day, need to recharge ready to go out again in the evening. What about people who work odd hours and that encompasses the only time they get to recharge?
Click to expand...

So you are saying their car is only ever parked up between 4pm and 6pm. All other 22 hours of the day they are driving it constantly? I have to congratulate them on their ability fight against sleep.

nilagin said:
I am not against them totally, if they suit some people then fine, but I would prefer a hybrid where an electric motor can provide extra torque or take over completely where needs must. Or a small engine not connected to the drive train that would act as a generator whenever the battery needs a recharge.
Click to expand...

Welcome to 1997.

Hybrids are only good if you insist to have your power come from ICE burning fossil fuel. But with electricity so readily available from renewable sources, using it to power our transport needs seems like a no brainer. Battery tech has moved on a lot from early 2000's, and cheaper than ever: we are seeing mass market 64kWh Kona EV with 200+ps horsepower selling for £29k compared to Kona with 177ps horsepower ICE asking £25k.
 
decigallen said:
You're misrepresenting what I said. Few will need to charge their cars between 4 and 6pm when ranges are 300 miles. Having the option to charge at work will be an option for many. And certainly all 5 cars will not need plugged in at once.

You're looking at future problems but basing it on current tech/infrastructure. Charge points are growing exponentially. Range is improving drastically. Charging is getting quicker. By 2030 most new cars sold will be ev.
Click to expand...
Maybe they will all need to charge or they wont, but the 25 spaces are reserved for senior people, ordinary workers have to park in the street, municipal car park or wherever they can find a spot, which may or may not have a suitable charging point. This mythical 300 miles, when is that going to be a practical amount, read the Top Gear drive in an I Pace, just about did the trip, creeping along at 47mph, no AC, no lights, no wipers etc. For mass transport EV are not now nor ever will be practical, they are a niche market and will remain so for ages, a different approach is required and whilst I think the age of the IC car/vehicle is coming to an end EV isnt the answer for all.
 
wuyanxu said:
This is the main thing people need to get used to: different energy recuperation speeds. If you want rapid charging, you will have to pay dearly for it. The slower the charging, the less burden your EV is on the grid. Similarly, charging when parked (overnight or at office) is a big difference to ICE cars. I can arrive home with 2 miles of range left and not worry, just plug it in. Whereas I begin to panic when my fossil fuel gauge get close to 1/4 because I can't fill up at home and have to plan my route to drive past a petrol station.
Click to expand...
Most ice cars should have around 50 miles range left by the time the warning light comes on. I reckon around 80 miles at quarter of a tank. Not really a cause for panic. My sister in law runs a Nissan Leaf, she had a 25 mile round trip to make with 32 mile range on her battery when she left home. She had to call roadside assistance on the return journey because she had run out of juice.
 
wuyanxu said:
Welcome to 1997.

Hybrids are only good if you insist to have your power come from ICE burning fossil fuel. But with electricity so readily available from renewable sources, using it to power our transport needs seems like a no brainer. Battery tech has moved on a lot from early 2000's, and cheaper than ever: we are seeing mass market 64kWh Kona EV with 200+ps horsepower selling for £29k compared to Kona with 177ps horsepower ICE asking £25k.
Click to expand...
That is still expensive. I could buy another new Focus RS 350ps for a tad more than that.
 
nilagin said:
Most ice cars should have around 50 miles range left by the time the warning light comes on. I reckon around 80 miles at quarter of a tank. Not really a cause for panic. My sister in law runs a Nissan Leaf, she had a 25 mile round trip to make with 32 mile range on her battery when she left home. She had to call roadside assistance on the return journey because she had run out of juice.
Click to expand...
Her biggest mistake is to trust the range guess-o-meter.

As we are all well aware, the range is heavily dependent on how we drive. That 50 miles you've quoted would be much less if you are stuck in traffic jam. EV doesn't have such problem, you are either drawing power to move the car, or you are not drawing power by being stationary.

nilagin said:
That is still expensive. I could buy another new Focus RS 350ps for a tad more than that.
Click to expand...
So we are now comparing apples to oranges?

Kona has both ICE version and EV. At the same trim level, there is only £4000 difference.

If you are driving 10k miles per year you'd save over £800 per year in fuel cost along. Just like the calculations people do to justify their diesel purchases, except EV saves a LOT more.

nilagin said:
I like the bit about if you are recharging your Phev and an EV needs to recharge, you should do the right thing and let them use the charger as you have an engine to fall back on. Obviously a Phev is the right choice over an EV to remain mobile then. ;)
I can see it causing a few arguments over charging stations though.
Click to expand...

As I've said, there's different charging rates, different use-cases:

I personally don't have an issue any car charging at a 7kW "destination" charger. All plug-in cars should be treated equal here. If your battery EV can't plug-in, then just charge at rapid charger for 15min on the way back.

At rapid charger however, there is absolutely no place for PHEV, PHEV should never block a rapid charger. Rapid charger are typically 50kW, allowing most EV to recover 60% of its range (so eg. 10% to 70%) in 30min. Apart from a few exceptions*, unfortunately all other PHEV can plug-in via the Type 2 AC cable and only charge at 3.3kW, a tiny fraction of the charging speed on offer. These rapid chargers are like motorway petrol stations, more expensive than home charging but enables long distance travel.

(* exceptions: Outlander PHEV can charge at 25kW. i3 REX is actually a full EV with a range extending lawnmower engine, so it can rapid charge at full speed)

I think the article is a bit strange, trying to be helpful but makes it sound like a very complicated business with hidden rules. Living with EV for a week everything will be clear.


If you really want to burn fossil fuel, i3 REX design is the way forward. It combines electric motor instant power and drivetrain simplicity, together with a petrol range extender that allows you to go have a backup if you feel current infrastructure is lacking.
 
wuyanxu said:
Her biggest mistake is to trust the range guess-o-meter.

Kona has both ICE version and EV. At the same trim level, there is only £4000 difference.

If you are driving 10k miles per year you'd save over £800 per year in fuel cost along. Just like the calculations people do to justify their diesel purchases, except EV saves a LOT more.
Click to expand...
1) Guess o meter - oh great so I have no idea how far the EV car will go when down to say the last 30 miles, so I'll need to keep it topped-up just to be sure i.e. daily charging, my diesel returns 48mpg on average mixed driving or at worst 43mpg in town so my remaining distance meter is accurate enough and anyway I can refuel in minutes if I need to, not the hours it will take with most chargers (ignoring the superfast as they arent either readily available, my car cant use them or my cars incompatable - see the report quoted above)

2) You may save on hydrocarbon fuel costs against EV charging costs but factor in the battery cost/lease and that saving goes right out of the window. I seriously contemplated an EV as a second car (for my wife) and we live in a reasonably sized town and we rarely if ever do long journeys in the second car but the battery lease was almost as much as the fuel costs per month without even including the charging costs at home on "cheap"* electricity.

3) A Renault battery for example cost £99 per month to lease on a 9000 miles per year basis, hydrocarbon fuel costs pretty much the same at £1.30/litre and assuming 45mpg, there's a £10/month difference in EV favour. Add in the cost of charging and tell me where there's a BIG saving. There isnt one.

4) EV's cannot be justified on cost of car, they are more expensive that their ICE equivalents, they cant be justified on "fuel" costs they are about the same, they cant be justified on environmental issues as they pollute so much during their manufacture and they cant be justified on range. In short someone/everyone/most people are once again being sold a dummy.

5) My son writes for a motoring magazine, he has tried many different EV and tbh he likes their low to mid speed performance a lot, but he doesnt have to pay for the car or the "fuel" but even he is extremely concerned about their overall pollution on a Global rather than local scale.
I've sat in a few of the ones he's had on test and I quite liked them but for me all of the above is a concern and the killer was their poor performance on the motorway at 65/70 mph draining the battery far too quickly and reducing the range dramatically, something you just dont get with a modern ICE vehicle.

* When the nuclear power stations come on line there wont be "cheap" electricity with the price per unit the generators/energy firms have been guaranteed and I cant see non nuclear generated electricity being sold at a cheaper rate because how would anyone know what was used to generate the electricity. Current wholesale price is £44, guaranteed rate is £90 (roughly) with the Government stating the difference will be paid for by consumers, so can we really see electricity prices not going up quite considerably?
 
Last edited:
wuyanxu said:
Her biggest mistake is to trust the range guess-o-meter.

As we are all well aware, the range is heavily dependent on how we drive. That 50 miles you've quoted would be much less if you are stuck in traffic jam. EV doesn't have such problem, you are either drawing power to move the car, or you are not drawing power by being stationary.


So we are now comparing apples to oranges?

Kona has both ICE version and EV. At the same trim level, there is only £4000 difference.

If you are driving 10k miles per year you'd save over £800 per year in fuel cost along. Just like the calculations people do to justify their diesel purchases, except EV saves a LOT more.


.
Click to expand...
Guess what, my car only uses petrol when it is moving, if stationary it switches off and no fuel gets used.
The cost of fuel is worth it for the driving experience and grin factor every time I get behind the wheel.
 
MatBin said:
3) A Renault battery for example cost £99 per month to lease on a 9000 miles per year basis, hydrocarbon fuel costs pretty much the same at £1.30/litre and assuming 45mpg, there's a £10/month difference in EV favour. Add in the cost of charging and tell me where there's a BIG saving. There isnt one.
..........

I've sat in a few of the ones he's had on test and I quite liked them but for me all of the above is a concern and the killer was their poor performance on the motorway at 65/70 mph draining the battery far too quickly and reducing the range dramatically, something you just dont get with a modern ICE vehicle.
Click to expand...
£100 A month is roughly my monthly petrol bill, gets me on average around 430 miles.

I often find Ev's and the odd hybrid travelling slower than the rest of traffic, I assume they are trying to conserve energy and eke out those extra few miles of battery life.
 
StewartR said:
But then I remembered that you're one of the faction who is obviously totally biased against EVs, like Cobra,
Click to expand...
Thanks for jumping to conclusions yet again (y)
No where have I said I am totally biased against EV's I can see they are like the smart cars when they first came out, ( late 90's iirc, I remember seeing a herd parked out of sight, around the back, at the head offices of D/B, before they hit the market, and wondering wtf is that?) the idea is sound, for those that drive in heavily congested cities with limited parking spaces, and suitable charging points there in.
But for normal everyday use there are so many pit falls to address first, and just about all have been amply covered in this thread,
before they become the only form of transport, and I doubt that it will happen in my life time.
 
MatBin said:
1) Guess o meter - oh great so I have no idea how far the EV car will go when down to say the last 30 miles, so I'll need to keep it topped-up just to be sure i.e. daily charging, my diesel returns 48mpg on average mixed driving or at worst 43mpg in town so my remaining distance meter is accurate enough and anyway I can refuel in minutes if I need to, not the hours it will take with most chargers (ignoring the superfast as they arent either readily available, my car cant use them or my cars incompatable - see the report quoted above)

2) You may save on hydrocarbon fuel costs against EV charging costs but factor in the battery cost/lease and that saving goes right out of the window. I seriously contemplated an EV as a second car (for my wife) and we live in a reasonably sized town and we rarely if ever do long journeys in the second car but the battery lease was almost as much as the fuel costs per month without even including the charging costs at home on "cheap"* electricity.

3) A Renault battery for example cost £99 per month to lease on a 9000 miles per year basis, hydrocarbon fuel costs pretty much the same at £1.30/litre and assuming 45mpg, there's a £10/month difference in EV favour. Add in the cost of charging and tell me where there's a BIG saving. There isnt one.

4) EV's cannot be justified on cost of car, they are more expensive that their ICE equivalents, they cant be justified on "fuel" costs they are about the same, they cant be justified on environmental issues as they pollute so much during their manufacture and they cant be justified on range. In short someone/everyone/most people are once again being sold a dummy.

5) My son writes for a motoring magazine, he has tried many different EV and tbh he likes their low to mid speed performance a lot, but he doesnt have to pay for the car or the "fuel" but even he is extremely concerned about their overall pollution on a Global rather than local scale.
I've sat in a few of the ones he's had on test and I quite liked them but for me all of the above is a concern and the killer was their poor performance on the motorway at 65/70 mph draining the battery far too quickly and reducing the range dramatically, something you just dont get with a modern ICE vehicle.

* When the nuclear power stations come on line there wont be "cheap" electricity with the price per unit the generators/energy firms have been guaranteed and I cant see non nuclear generated electricity being sold at a cheaper rate because how would anyone know what was used to generate the electricity. Current wholesale price is £44, guaranteed rate is £90 (roughly) with the Government stating the difference will be paid for by consumers, so can we really see electricity prices not going up quite considerably?
Click to expand...
1. Are you saying you have a magic car that can do 43mpg when stationary? How would you feel on a 31c day sitting in stationary traffic for 10min with the engine off?
Did you read my charging speed difference post?

2. Battery lasts life of the car. The life of your car depends on your needs. My 3-4 year old Leaf can do 80 miles on one charge, even if it can only do 30 miles in 20 years, it would still be a valuable local car for us. Battery lease is stupid.

3. Battery lease is stupid. Buy a Renault Zoe "I". No other manufacturer do battery lease.

4. Fuel costs are vastly cheaper, as you've acknowledged in your previous point. Because there's no battery lease. Apart from cost of the car, every other aspects are cheaper on EV.

5. Lifetime pollution is a lot less than ICE car. So I'm not sure where your environmental issue comes from.
The motorway performance feels different but doesn't mean it is bad by any means. There's no kick-down required. 2 similar powered cars cruising side by side, the EV will always accelerate faster from 50 to 70mph.

Clean and cheap energy is renewables. Only problem is that they are a bit unpredictable. EV and batteries are part of the solution.
 
As happens, we were chatting to a Zoe owner who was leasing his battery while we were both at the (FREE!) chargers at Sainsbury's (the longer you chat, the more FREE miles you get!). He was paying £49pcm lease on his battery which is more than our monthly fuel bill on the s***box let alone the A-Class.

As for anyone who is worried about the performance of EVs - have a play in one; you'll be surprised how nippy they are, especially when you don't need to worry about range. As I've said before, they don't suit everyone or even every journey but if they do suit, they make more sense than ICE cars (or even hybrids.)
 
wuyanxu said:
There's no kick-down required. 2 similar powered cars cruising side by side, the EV will always accelerate faster from 50 to 70mph.
Click to expand...
But as I mentioned earlier, for the same initial outlay you can buy a faster more powerful ice car.
 
wuyanxu said:
1. Are you saying you have a magic car that can do 43mpg when stationary? How would you feel on a 31c day sitting in stationary traffic for 10min with the engine off?
Click to expand...

The same as you sitting in your EV on that day I guess..
 
wuyanxu said:
This is the main thing people need to get used to: different energy recuperation speeds. If you want rapid charging, you will have to pay dearly for it. The slower the charging, the less burden your EV is on the grid. Similarly, charging when parked (overnight or at office) is a big difference to ICE cars. I can arrive home with 2 miles of range left and not worry, just plug it in. Whereas I begin to panic when my fossil fuel gauge get close to 1/4 because I can't fill up at home and have to plan my route to drive past a petrol station.

That's why a battery size tax (similar to CO2 tiered road tax) is needed when EV hit mainstream. Because, as we've seen in this thread, many people don't fully understand EV range and think they need 600 miles cars. I think 65kWh cars are the sweet spot, allowing 200 miles all weather real world driving with reserve, meaning at motorway speeds it is around 3 hours of driving between pit-stops. Buying any bigger doesn't make much sense.

Snip


So you are saying their car is only ever parked up between 4pm and 6pm. All other 22 hours of the day they are driving it constantly? I have to congratulate them on their ability fight against sleep.
Click to expand...

Let me just make sure I have understood that correctly, I fear I have misunderstood. You have are 10 miles from home, your EV says it has 12 miles remaining and that situation causes you no concern at all, you continue happily on your way with no concern there could be an accident/road closure requiring a 3 mile diversion. But, you begin to panic when the 'fossil fuel' car goes down to having around 150 miles in the tank and you change your route to pass a petrol station, really, that 150 miles is more than the EV will do on a full charge, it's a wonder you ever go out in the EV if that's the case.

Ok, the 22 hours comment, in the real world, lets use mine as an example, if I was to use an EV I would be out at work all day with zero chance of charging it, assuming I stay on site and do not need to go elsewhere during my work. Although I am based on a large site with a good few thousand employees there are no charge points on site at all apart from the ones for a particular companies sole use for their on site vehicles. So, I arrive home and need to go out again I would need to charge the EV beforehand, assuming I have access to off street parking.
So, you see, in the real world most employers do not provide charge points for their employees EV's and frankly why should they pay for their employees 'fuel' at the companies cost.
 
Thing is with mileage in an ICE car, you are seldom more than 10 miles from the nearest recharging point, where refuelling takes a couple of minutes, so you can happily run the tank practically dry before filling up. That's not the case of an EV, and in a worst-case scenario (we've all known someone who has run out of fuel) a simple gallon container is enough to get the car going again. What happens to an EV with a flat battery?

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-r2af_4-9...Hz2pEYfBJsCn3DACLcBGAs/s640/1531938426647.jpg

The countryman will do more than 500 commuting miles on a single tankful, and that's without particularly trying.

nilagin said:
I often find Ev's and the odd hybrid travelling slower than the rest of traffic, I assume they are trying to conserve energy and eke out those extra few miles of battery life.
Click to expand...

I've noticed that too - I occasionally see an Ion on my morning commute that creeps around the area where I work. It was a trend I'd first noticed with the Toyota Priapus, and wondered if it was the weight of the batteries made people drive slower than normal.
 
Last edited:
wuyanxu said:
1. Are you saying you have a magic car that can do 43mpg when stationary? How would you feel on a 31c day sitting in stationary traffic for 10min with the engine off?
Did you read my charging speed difference post?

2. Battery lasts life of the car. The life of your car depends on your needs. My 3-4 year old Leaf can do 80 miles on one charge, even if it can only do 30 miles in 20 years, it would still be a valuable local car for us. Battery lease is stupid.

3. Battery lease is stupid. Buy a Renault Zoe "I". No other manufacturer do battery lease.

4. Fuel costs are vastly cheaper, as you've acknowledged in your previous point. Because there's no battery lease. Apart from cost of the car, every other aspects are cheaper on EV.

5. Lifetime pollution is a lot less than ICE car. So I'm not sure where your environmental issue comes from.
The motorway performance feels different but doesn't mean it is bad by any means. There's no kick-down required. 2 similar powered cars cruising side by side, the EV will always accelerate faster from 50 to 70mph.

Clean and cheap energy is renewables. Only problem is that they are a bit unpredictable. EV and batteries are part of the solution.
Click to expand...
1 same as an EV in stationary traffic, engine off and no fuel being used, as EV, no AC etc, so yes my car will average 43 in town or more on a run, consistently up to about 80mph, I won't ever run out of fuel because of the abundance of petrol stations as opposed to the scarcity of charging points.
2 you would be unwise to purchase any new technology in its first throws of design, do you really want to be lumbered with a very out of date battery pack 3,4 or 5 years down the line, I don't.
3 Renault are being very decent in allowing you to not have to purchase upfront something that could well be old hat in 3 years, purchasing the battery upfront adds to the overall cost of the car and it's hardly fair to discuss ownership costs and ignore initial purchase price. However if you use deferred cost option i.e. final balloon payment you are in effect leasing the battery anyway.
4 how can you ignore the fact the car costs a great deal more than a similar ICE, it all comes down to monthly payments and running costs assuming you don't pay cash up front, but even if you did you would still have far less in your savingaps account after buying an EV.
5 Pollution really, so whereas current ICE cars will easily last 8/10 years as the technology won't have moved on too far, I would suggest most EV owners will want to trade up as the technology is rapidly improved upon, or so we are constantly being told by EV supporters e.g. battery range.
Battery creation is a dirty item and creates enormous pollution, but as it's not in the UK I suppose it's ok?
6 50-70 acceleration on a motorway? You will be on the inside lane between lorries if that is your performance criteria, personally I prefer not to be wedged between lorries or worried I won't have the performance to overtake someone doing 60/65 in the middle lane, fully aware that most people seem to drive at 75/80 in the outside lane, which may be illegal but is real world driving.

Sorry but most EV are no better than town runabouts at which they are brilliant but unfortunately a lot of us need cars that will do 150/200 miles in a single trip without having to recharge or worry we won't make it. Or worse still will have to crawl along at 55/60 on a motorway.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top