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

[nilagin]

So in your mind, comparable means gas-guzzler Vs expensive car?
By that logic, I guess BMW 7 series PHEV is also comparable to a Mustang, if you only drive the PHEV in electric mode.
Let's get back to your original illogical assertion: therefore, BMW 7 series PHEV sold a lot less than Mustang, so BMW isn't "obviously doing well with supplying vehicles that people want to buy". What's the point of selling 7 series PHEV then? The sales number is the only important thing, according to you.

The reason Tesla had to advertise price taking off fuel savings as well as list price is because people are short sighted. They've always got the list price on their car builder, just the fuel saving price is in larger font. People are short sighted because people don't take into account of running costs. If you have done the sums on ACTUAL running cost, a slightly more expensive EV such as Kona EV vs Kona petrol, will be cheaper to run.

Notice I've never said £75k Tesla Model S is comparable to a £40k car. EV are currently only slightly more expensive than their ICE counterparts, and the finance figures already make sense if people do running cost sums, combining car depreciation, fuel cost, servicing costs and road tax.


Where are Ford invested chargers? I only see Tesla and Nissan/Renault logo on chargers at motorway service stations. Nissan/Renault initially funded the Ecotricity Electric Highway network across Britain, back in 2011-2013.


IONITY has Ford logo on it, but there are currently zero working chargers in UK.
https://ionity.eu/en/about.html

Any other form of investment in infrastructure from Ford, that you keep going on about? Put some credible source into your words.

In my mind comparable is people buying cars they want. Something you are obviously struggling to grasp.

Why ask me where the Ford invested chargers are then provide a link to chargers with Ford logos on?

I have no idea why the chargers aren't working (nor do I care) but fact still remains Ford and other manufacturers are still investing in a charging system in Europe.

Where is Tesla's investment in affordable EV's? Where is Tesla's investment in electric vans being tested and developed in London by various companies or as a parcel delivery service in Germany?

 

[gman]

Large enough that Ford have been selling electric cars, cabs and vans there for years.

I had a quick look and there seems to be a lot of Government/Federal support for them, but my thinking was more with the long distances involved in America and the range of EV's. Same for Australia, I wonder if there's any plans for portable battery packs or something similar just as at the moment you can carry a Jerry can?

 

[PaulF]

Are you sure you can do 500 miles in vast majority of cars? My Skoda can only do comfortably do 450 miles, considering I need to keep ~30 miles in case I can't buy diesel at my usual petrol station. Similarly, my parent's Volvo S40 petrol can only do 300 miles and a bit on a tank, having to refuel here everytime they visit me 150 miles from their home. My Mercedes C220 diesel I had previously had a larger tank, can do over 500 miles, but that costs over £65 to refuel.

Whereas refuelling a Tesla Model 3 long-range which has over 300 miles range, recharging while the car is parked costs less than £6 (8p/kWh). In a pinch, you can also use Tesla superchargers to gain 160 miles in 15min (this quicker method is more expensive)

My point is, EV gives you choices. You can either refuel your daily commute very cheaply while car is parked, never needing to visit any refuel stations. Or you can refuel very quickly while you use service station facilities during your long distance drive. Best part with EV is that you don't have to stand there holding the nozzle smelling the fumes.

You've got to take a break every 2-3 hours of driving anyway. Driving 500 miles non-stop in one sitting is a very hard task........... not good for your wellbeing and every other road-user's safety.

You need to keep 30 miles in case you can't use your usual petrol station, you live in London don't you. I'm sure you could find a petrol station closer than that.

As a side note, you may need to relax a bit more, I regularly have my car telling me it has a range of zero (it actually shows just dashes) and it'll go for another 20 miles easily. Mind you I don't usually floor it at that point. And I am restricted on the petrol stations I use as I have a fuel card through work that only allows BP!

 

[wyx087]

They don't! When I looked for a new car in Dec we quickly discounted EV due to cost of cars (as well as lack of infrastructure). At the moment having one ICE and one EV would be fine as we both work within 9 miles of home and go on occasional long trips. However, because mileage is low (for me 8k pa) its crazy. My Stonic is around £230 pm on PCP, on the same terms the e-Niro is £710. Even allowing for fuel at £70pm, its £400 more, a month!!!!! Even a bigger car like a Sportage would be significantly cheaper.

This is the current problem with EV's, manufacturers are not making enough of them. There's a high demand but not enough supply, so PCP deals are really bad in comparison.

But if you look at list prices, e-Niro "first edition" is £36,495 vs a normal Niro equivalent high spec is £26,740. That price difference of £10k disappears when you factor in fuel savings for 100k miles over next 8 years. There's also servicing cost savings of £367.29 for every 4 years 60k miles on Kia Soul EV.
https://www.goultralow.com/choosing/electric-car-service-and-maintenance/

 

[wyx087]

Why ask me where the Ford invested chargers are then provide a link to chargers with Ford logos on?

I have no idea why the chargers aren't working (nor do I care) but fact still remains Ford and other manufacturers are still investing in a charging system in Europe.

Where is Tesla's investment in affordable EV's? Where is Tesla's investment in electric vans being tested and developed in London by various companies or as a parcel delivery service in Germany?

Because you said they are investing in UK, I found your claim: Ionity, who have yet to have 1 charger installed and working in the UK, despite you say UK is part of Ford and others' charger investment over last few years.

You talk a lot of Ford corporate speak. But when asked for clarification or sources, you hide behind attacks against other company that actually do push EV forward.

The fact is, no manufacturer have done more to push EV acceptance than Tesla. They now have their mass market $35k car on sale, ready for delivery within 4 weeks. Whereas other manufacturers at best only make a few of their EV (Hyundai and Kia) then sit back as dealers shift more diesel SUV's.

 

[wyx087]

You need to keep 30 miles in case you can't use your usual petrol station, you live in London don't you. I'm sure you could find a petrol station closer than that.

As a side note, you may need to relax a bit more, I regularly have my car telling me it has a range of zero (it actually shows just dashes) and it'll go for another 20 miles easily. Mind you I don't usually floor it at that point. And I am restricted on the petrol stations I use as I have a fuel card through work that only allows BP!

Once upon a time, I had driven 20 miles with fuel light on, near my parents village, got to a fuel station and was told no fuel available. Because I commute 60 miles a day, mostly motorway, I look at my fuel in 30 miles blocks, I have my regular, cheapest petrol station at each end of my commute. I try to keep 60-120 miles of range in the diesel whenever possible, especially in winter. But total range of Skoda Octavia is only 500 miles at best

Whereas with EV, I know I can ALWAYS get a charge at home. So as long as I can arrive home, everything is fine and I don't have to remember to NOT take shortcuts so that I can fill up on my way home using congested trunk roads.

In that sense, EV's ability to recharge while parked at your destination is superb. The car's range is one less thing to worry about when driving regular commute, in comparison to petrol/diesel.

 

[PaulF]

This is the current problem with EV's, manufacturers are not making enough of them. There's a high demand but not enough supply, so PCP deals are really bad in comparison.

But if you look at list prices, e-Niro "first edition" is £36,495 vs a normal Niro equivalent high spec is £26,740. That price difference of £10k disappears when you factor in fuel savings for 100k miles over next 8 years. There's also servicing cost savings of £367.29 for every 4 years 60k miles on Kia Soul EV.
https://www.goultralow.com/choosing/electric-car-service-and-maintenance/

I wouldn't trust the figures on that link too much if I was you.
I have a larger (physical and engine) bmw diesel and 60k/5year service pack cost £599, when that is up I have a quote from my BMW dealer to cover a further 50k miles that comes to a total of just over £1100, includes 2 major and 1 minor plus mot's.

Plus, does the average new car buyer keep the car for 8 years? I'd say they don't so the fuel cost saving would need to be worked on what the average person would keep the car for not however long it takes to make up the difference in the retail price.

Notice Tesla service cost hasn't been mentioned, they're more expensive than BMW, by a long way judging by some comments I've seen.

 

[wyx087]

I wouldn't trust the figures on that link too much if I was you.
I have a larger (physical and engine) bmw diesel and 60k/5year service pack cost £599, when that is up I have a quote from my BMW dealer to cover a further 50k miles that comes to a total of just over £1100, includes 2 major and 1 minor plus mot's.

Plus, does the average new car buyer keep the car for 8 years? I'd say they don't so the fuel cost saving would need to be worked on what the average person would keep the car for not however long it takes to make up the difference in the retail price.

Notice Tesla service cost hasn't been mentioned, they're more expensive than BMW, by a long way judging by some comments I've seen.

Personal story always varies. My Nissan Leaf servicing is free for first 3 years of my ownership. That link is as good as you'll get for a quick overview of servicing prices.

True, most people only keep their car for 3 years. But at the end of 3 years 30k miles, a 3 year old £35k car will not magically worth the same as a 3 year old £25k car. The more expensive car will worth more and thus your hit of depreciation over 3 years will be a fraction of the £10k price difference and a different fraction of possible savings over the estimated 8 years, depending on your mileage.

Does Tesla make a petrol/diesel car that can be compared against? Different brand have different customer service standards. Currently, if you book a Tesla in and you get a £75k+ vehicle as curtsey car. Book a BMW 7 series in, you'll more likely to get a 3 series than another 7 series as curtsey car. That's just one example of differences off top of my head.

I took my Leaf in for service, I get a petrol or diesel car, they don't provide EV as curtsey vehicles. Shockingly bad cars, those CVT Nissans.

 

[nilagin]

This is the current problem with EV's, manufacturers are not making enough of them. There's a high demand but not enough supply, so PCP deals are really bad in comparison.

But if you look at list prices, e-Niro "first edition" is £36,495 vs a normal Niro equivalent high spec is £26,740. That price difference of £10k disappears when you factor in fuel savings for 100k miles over next 8 years. There's also servicing cost savings of £367.29 for every 4 years 60k miles on Kia Soul EV.
https://www.goultralow.com/choosing/electric-car-service-and-maintenance/

Having to wait 8yrs to break even is hardly justifiable. That is a long time to be tied into a car just to make it cost effective.

Because you said they are investing in UK, I found your claim: Ionity, who have yet to have 1 charger installed and working in the UK, despite you say UK is part of Ford and others' charger investment over last few years.

You talk a lot of Ford corporate speak. But when asked for clarification or sources, you hide behind attacks against other company that actually do push EV forward.

The fact is, no manufacturer have done more to push EV acceptance than Tesla. They now have their mass market $35k car on sale, ready for delivery within 4 weeks. Whereas other manufacturers at best only make a few of their EV (Hyundai and Kia) then sit back as dealers shift more diesel SUV's.

I said Europe and there are two charging stations currently under construction in the UK.
It's not Ford corporate talk at all. Not my fault if I know things you don't.
Tesla only build EV's and struggle to make any profit. Other car manufacturers make ice cars to make their profits, stay in business selling cars that the vast majority of people want to buy and help invest in their own EV programs.
I can't see how you can claim Tesla has pushed EV acceptance when all the cars are overpriced and beyond what people can afford to pay. Had Tesla actually developed an affordable electric city car, then you could claim they had pushed acceptance.
The only reason a Tesla 3 can be supplied in 4 weeks is because the demand is actually that low. If the demand was as great as other car manufacturers the wait would be considerably longer.

 

[nilagin]

Personal story always varies. My Nissan Leaf servicing is free for first 3 years of my ownership. That link is as good as you'll get for a quick overview of servicing prices.

I never bothered getting a service plan when I bought my car but at current prices it will only likely cost me around £1100 for 4yrs and that includes full breakdown coverage too.

 

[wyx087]

Tesla only build EV's and struggle to make any profit. Other car manufacturers make ice cars to make their profits, stay in business selling cars that the vast majority of people want to buy and help invest in their own EV programs.
I can't see how you can claim Tesla has pushed EV acceptance when all the cars are overpriced and beyond what people can afford to pay. Had Tesla actually developed an affordable electric city car, then you could claim they had pushed acceptance.
The only reason a Tesla 3 can be supplied in 4 weeks is because the demand is actually that low. If the demand was as great as other car manufacturers the wait would be considerably longer.

Had Tesla developed an affordable electric city car, no one would take note of their presence, no one will desire an EV. How well did G-Wiz do to advertise people capability of EV's? I mean, no one aspires to drive a Leaf/Zoe in the same sense as no one aspires to drive a run of the mill Fiesta. They are great city cars, but they don't get noticed.

The only reason Model 3 can be supplied in 4 weeks is because they are built in high numbers (good supply). The only manufacturer that can even dream of similar production number is Nissan's Leaf. The Leaf has a compromised platform that enables them to be produced on the same line as Juke. All other manufacturers have such a small EV production rate, it's laughable.

The demand is there as evident by the sold out Kona/e-Niro. But only Tesla is able to supply in a timely manner. Why? Is it because, as you said, other car manufacturers are more interested in continue to push their ICE cars? This is one of problem I have with traditional manufacturers, the complete lack of consumer choice as result of all the "cautious followers" in the car industry, no one is taking the risk to really innovate.



In other news, a report from New York City, where "gas" is a lot cheaper than here UK, says EV are cheaper to run..... comparing Leaf against Prius and Ford Fusion (Focus equivalent?).
https://qz.com/1571956/new-york-city-says-electric-cars-cheapest-option-for-its-fleet/

 

[PaulF]

True, most people only keep their car for 3 years. But at the end of 3 years 30k miles, a 3 year old £35k car will not magically worth the same as a 3 year old £25k car. The more expensive car will worth more and thus your hit of depreciation over 3 years will be a fraction of the £10k price difference and a different fraction of possible savings over the estimated 8 years, depending on your mileage.

You are correct that the 25k car would most likely be worth less than a 35k car after 3 years, however, the 35k will have lost more of it's initial cost than the 25k car, in general but there will be the odd exception. I know, as I never have and never will buy a new car, I usually buy around 12 month old cars with less than 10k on them, the bigger savings are on the higher list price cars.

 

[nilagin]

Had Tesla developed an affordable electric city car, no one would take note of their presence, no one will desire an EV. How well did G-Wiz do to advertise people capability of EV's? I mean, no one aspires to drive a Leaf/Zoe in the same sense as no one aspires to drive a run of the mill Fiesta. They are great city cars, but they don't get noticed.

The only reason Model 3 can be supplied in 4 weeks is because they are built in high numbers (good supply). The only manufacturer that can even dream of similar production number is Nissan's Leaf. The Leaf has a compromised platform that enables them to be produced on the same line as Juke. All other manufacturers have such a small EV production rate, it's laughable.

The demand is there as evident by the sold out Kona/e-Niro. But only Tesla is able to supply in a timely manner. Why? Is it because, as you said, other car manufacturers are more interested in continue to push their ICE cars? This is one of problem I have with traditional manufacturers, the complete lack of consumer choice as result of all the "cautious followers" in the car industry, no one is taking the risk to really innovate.



In other news, a report from New York City, where "gas" is a lot cheaper than here UK, says EV are cheaper to run..... comparing Leaf against Prius and Ford Fusion (Focus equivalent?).
https://qz.com/1571956/new-york-city-says-electric-cars-cheapest-option-for-its-fleet/

You only have to look at a G-Whiz to see why not many are sold. Hardly a good example of a city car.
No one aspires to drive a Fiesta yet it consistently outsells any other car in the UK and yearly sales above that of which some manufactures can manage with their whole range. The Fiesta has also managed to sell the most cars in it's size in Europe on several occasions.

Since the 2009 economic crash most car manufacturers build very little surplus stock. They mainly build to order, so if they are building ice cars in large numbers , it is because that is what the vast majority of people are wanting to buy. It really is that simple.

The Ford Fusion isn't the Focus equivalent, the Focus equivalent would be the Focus. The most recent incarnation of the Fusion (2012 onwards I believe) is the 2015 Mondeo, both the same car just different name used in America.

Why are they comparing a Leaf with a Fusion anyway? The Fusion is a much bigger car. They should be comparing it with the Focus (I guess that's why you figured it was a Focus equivalent). Where do they get the ludicrously high yearly maintenance cost from for the Fusion anyway? Unless servicing costs are very high in America for some reason, I would have thought it would cost in that region for about 8yrs not one.

 

[wyx087]

if they are building ice cars in large numbers , it is because that is what the vast majority of people are wanting to buy. It really is that simple.

Problem is, vast majority of people don't know what they want, don't know what's good for them.

Case in point 1: The horse vs car photo of early 1900's.

Case in point 2:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPc-VEqBPHI


Case in point 3: “It's really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you show it to them." - Steve Jobs.
If you asked people in 2006, what they want for a smart phone, it will certainly include a physical keyboard. 2007 iPhone without physical keyboard was seen as a suicide move, Blackberry CEO were laughing. Blackberry is no more, while iPhone sells by truckloads.


I see Tesla vs VW vs Ford now is like Apple vs Google vs Blackberry back in 2008/2009. iPhone is out for a year, Android is catching up and have started to release better phones, while Blackberry still sells in big numbers.

 

[PaulF]

I see Tesla vs VW vs Ford now is like Apple vs Google vs Blackberry back in 2008/2009. iPhone is out for a year, Android is catching up and have started to release better phones, while Blackberry still sells in big numbers.

Good analogy there, maybe better than you realized.
I can see the similarity between iPhone and Tesla in that they both charge the customer for hardware in the product that the customer cannot use! Bluetooth in early iPhone, auto pilot in Tesla

Not quite correct on the which has the better tech between iPhone and Android though, Android was truly multitasking long before iPhone for one, and there are far more features that Android was capable of first. Actually that may not be a totally correct statement, it may be better put that Android had features the users were allowed to use first.
Apple have done really well at marketing their products as desirable design lifestyle choice.

 

[broc]

Off the subject of this thread, but in my opinion Apple are a marketing company that thrives by buying up other companies that come up with good ideas. Also they take other peoples good ideas and turn them into premium products that sell.

Manufacturing is a necessary evil to them, that's why they 'outsource' it to a myriad of suppliers in China.

Look how they transformed the SONY Walkman & its clones into the iPod?

I own Apple products so I am not anti-Apple........

 

[nilagin]

Problem is, vast majority of people don't know what they want, don't know what's good for them.

Case in point 1: The horse vs car photo of early 1900's.




Case in point 3: “It's really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you show it to them." - Steve Jobs.

Case 1. The car was still in It's infancy in the early 1900's. Production was very slow, cars out of a lot of people's price range and very few people with knowledge to maintain them. Up until 1896 car drivers had to follow a pedestrian with a red flag or a lantern so no advantage to owning a car, and quicker to travel by a horse drawn carriage so few people felt it worthwhile buying a car.
As I mentioned earlier once the production line was invented and production became faster, the price of the cars fell by around 2/3rds. The exact same cars were now within the grasp of more people. Why hasn't the cost of EV's similarly dropped in price?

Case 2.
Steve Jobs statement makes absolutely no sense. The purpose of a Focus group is you present your product along with other products to the group and the group then let's you know what they want from what has been presented to them.

 

[ancient_mariner]

TBH a better comparison between the horse & car would be comparing any kind of current car with a personalised transport system that flew people to their destination while running off the power of the sun - it's an order of magnitude different. Continuing the analogy, the electric car is like using slightly different breed of horse that's a little skinnier and eats some stuff that's hard to find in the UK - it's not in the least revolutionary, so much as a minor incremental development of existing technology.

 

[nilagin]

True, most people only keep their car for 3 years. But at the end of 3 years 30k miles, a 3 year old £35k car will not magically worth the same as a 3 year old £25k car.

Using Kia's own pcp figures for guaranteed future value of an E Biro is £15390, a depreciation of £17605 off the list price after grant deduction.
Alternatively a top spec Niro is worth £12238 after the same 3yr 30k mile period which is a depreciation of £15502 off the list price minus £1000 allowance.
So not only is the e Niro £5200 more expensive to buy in the first place, but it will also lose an extra £2102.
The service intervals are also shorter on the e Niro for some reason so there is no financial gain in buying an E Niro even if you can recharge for free.

 

[neil_g]

But total range of Skoda Octavia is only 500 miles at best

Which one? Latest vrs Estate dsg is rated to 690m. Granted you have to drive like a granny in eco mode but it's not too hard to get near that on a motorway stint.

 

[wyx087]

Case 1. The car was still in It's infancy in the early 1900's. Production was very slow, cars out of a lot of people's price range and very few people with knowledge to maintain them. Up until 1896 car drivers had to follow a pedestrian with a red flag or a lantern so no advantage to owning a car, and quicker to travel by a horse drawn carriage so few people felt it worthwhile buying a car.
As I mentioned earlier once the production line was invented and production became faster, the price of the cars fell by around 2/3rds. The exact same cars were now within the grasp of more people. Why hasn't the cost of EV's similarly dropped in price?

Case 2.
Steve Jobs statement makes absolutely no sense. The purpose of a Focus group is you present your product along with other products to the group and the group then let's you know what they want from what has been presented to them.

Please see answer to your underlined question in bold. I could also ask why isn't non-Tesla manufacturers producing EV in volume?

Jobs' comment only makes no sense if you reject his idea of "people don't know what they want". Your statement shows you think the focus group knows what they want and showing a product to them, followed by change the design according to their comments will be a good thing. But as we all know, committee designed items can never be better than an item that has been designed by a single person with a vision. Case in point: McLaren F1 (just watched last night on Doug Demuro channel)

Using Kia's own pcp figures for guaranteed future value of an E Biro is £15390, a depreciation of £17605 off the list price after grant deduction.
Alternatively a top spec Niro is worth £12238 after the same 3yr 30k mile period which is a depreciation of £15502 off the list price minus £1000 allowance.
So not only is the e Niro £5200 more expensive to buy in the first place, but it will also lose an extra £2102.
The service intervals are also shorter on the e Niro for some reason so there is no financial gain in buying an E Niro even if you can recharge for free.

In another words, according to your numbers, the EV will retain 46% of its value while the hybrid retains 44%. Looks like EV retains more of its value than ICE cars, different from what you have said previously??
That £2102 price difference will pay for ~20k miles of petrol (assuming no petrol price changes, ~50mpg), you need to add £1000 worth of petrol to drive 30k over 3 years. EV only need to add £650 of electricity to drive 30k (8p/kWh, 3.7mi/kWh).
So looking at your numbers, despite your false claim, it's cheaper to run an EV over 3 years, 30k miles.

I just saw a '63 Nissan Leaf with 40k on the clock asking over £10k.
https://www.speakev.com/threads/2013-63-blue-24kwh-nissan-leaf-tekna.136400/#post-2558842
I paid £9100 for my '64 Nissan Leaf with 18k on the clock, back in Oct 2017. Hum....... the demand is strong with this one

 

[wyx087]

TBH a better comparison between the horse & car would be comparing any kind of current car with a personalised transport system that flew people to their destination while running off the power of the sun - it's an order of magnitude different. Continuing the analogy, the electric car is like using slightly different breed of horse that's a little skinnier and eats some stuff that's hard to find in the UK - it's not in the least revolutionary, so much as a minor incremental development of existing technology.

Does your property not have electricity? I'm sorry for your hardship.

I feel if you want to keep the horse comparison. It'd be like changing from a horse that poops, pees, and generally smelly to a horse that doesn't make the street dirty/smelly while able to produce more useful horsepower AND has less limbs to go wrong. The old style horse only eats from a few designated locations, while the new style horse only needs water, drinks from anywhere you can run a drinking hose.

Which one? Latest vrs Estate dsg is rated to 690m. Granted you have to drive like a granny in eco mode but it's not too hard to get near that on a motorway stint.

Octavia hatchback Mk3 pre-facelift, 2.0 TDI DSG. Fuel tank is only 50L. I've never managed more than 43L during a fill up.
It's rated to 682 miles of range, but how much do you trust VAG?
https://www.parkers.co.uk/skoda/octavia/hatchback-2013/20-tdi-cr-elegance-5d-dsg/specs/

 

[PaulF]

In another words, according to your numbers, the EV will retain 46% of its value while the hybrid retains 44%. Looks like EV retains more of its value than ICE cars, different from what you have said previously??
That £2102 price difference will pay for ~20k miles of petrol (assuming no petrol price changes, ~50mpg), you need to add £1000 worth of petrol to drive 30k over 3 years. EV only need to add £650 of electricity to drive 30k (8p/kWh, 3.7mi/kWh).
So looking at your numbers, despite your false claim, it's cheaper to run an EV over 3 years, 30k miles.

So, are you saying that for every 10k of miles the EV 'fuel' saying is just £350, I get the general impression provided so far in this thread that the saving would be much larger.

I drive 25-30k a year, so I'd only save £1050 (max) in fuel costs. That is if I actually paid for fuel, last tax year I had a bill of 80p . So I don't think that would make up the difference in initial outlay for the EV I would need to meet my requirements, it'd cost in the region of £30k more to purchase.

 

[nilagin]

Please see answer to your underlined question in bold. I could also ask why isn't non-Tesla manufacturers producing EV in volume?

Jobs' comment only makes no sense if you reject his idea of "people don't know what they want". Your statement shows you think the focus group knows what they want and showing a product to them, followed by change the design according to their comments will be a good thing. But as we all know, committee designed items can never be better than an item that has been designed by a single person with a vision. Case in point: McLaren F1 (just watched last night on Doug Demuro channel)


In another words, according to your numbers, the EV will retain 46% of its value while the hybrid retains 44%. Looks like EV retains more of its value than ICE cars, different from what you have said previously??
That £2102 price difference will pay for ~20k miles of petrol (assuming no petrol price changes, ~50mpg), you need to add £1000 worth of petrol to drive 30k over 3 years. EV only need to add £650 of electricity to drive 30k (8p/kWh, 3.7mi/kWh).
So looking at your numbers, despite your false claim, it's cheaper to run an EV over 3 years, 30k miles.

I just saw a '63 Nissan Leaf with 40k on the clock asking over £10k.
https://www.speakev.com/threads/2013-63-blue-24kwh-nissan-leaf-tekna.136400/#post-2558842
I paid £9100 for my '64 Nissan Leaf with 18k on the clock, back in Oct 2017. Hum....... the demand is strong with this one

No a product which is just one person's vision is just one person's vision, in no way does it make it better than ideas from several people.
The figures aren't mine, they are Lisa's own. You said that pcp deals are poor due to lack of supply of vehicles, yet the fact that the e Niro is so much more expensive to buy in the first place and loses more money, that means the pcp deals are less favourable than Niro. The depreciation on the e Niro is actually greater than 50% as the list price is over £36k but buyers get a government grant.
The e Niro has only just gone on sale, my previous comments on EV's suffering more depreciation were based on previous data showing the Leaf and Zoe suffering higher depreciation than average.
Just because you have found one advert for a Leaf asking for more than you paid for yours isn't a true indication of price. Dealers have different ways of playing the numbers game. Some will actually overprice a car by several thousand to start off with and gradually lower the price whilst it is in stock and still give haggle room to let the buyer think they have got a good deal. Dealers don't like stock hanging around too long, they may have had your car a while and wanted to move it on. Plus just because that advert is asking for more money, it doesn't actually mean the trade in value is higher and that is the figure that depreciation is worked out on, not the dealers asking price ( as I have pointed out to you several times before)
I will answer the question for a 3rd time as to why manufacturers are slow to supply EV's. Car manufacturers need to make money to pay employees and suppliers and stay in business. EV's make a loss so ice cars have to be sold to make up for those losses. As ice cars make up the higher majority of their orders it makes economical sense to make that their main priority until EV demand sufficient and able to make a profit.

 

[wyx087]

So, are you saying that for every 10k of miles the EV 'fuel' saying is just £350, I get the general impression provided so far in this thread that the saving would be much larger.

I drive 25-30k a year, so I'd only save £1050 (max) in fuel costs. That is if I actually paid for fuel, last tax year I had a bill of 80p . So I don't think that would make up the difference in initial outlay for the EV I would need to meet my requirements, it'd cost in the region of £30k more to purchase.

EV costs around 1/3 to 1/4 of what it would cost to drive the same distance in ICE car. It'd cost you ~£3000 to drive 30k with an economical 50mpg ICE car. It only costs you ~£650 to drive the same distance. This is quite a big saving, considering the falling cost of EV, in the coming years, buying EV will cost similar to ICE cars.

the fact that the e Niro is so much more expensive to buy in the first place and loses more money

Who is Lisa?
You keep ignoring how EV is projected to retain more of its value than equivalent ICE car, instead, you focusing on the cost difference. The small cost difference that disappears when you factor in fuel cost, as I have shown in my previous post.

my previous comments on EV's suffering more depreciation were based on previous data showing the Leaf and Zoe suffering higher depreciation than average.

As you said, previous data includes government grant. Which the first buyers will get, so your depreciation argument for first-gen EV is based on figures that doesn't relate to the real world cost of actually owning the car.

Car manufacturers need to make money to pay employees and suppliers and stay in business. EV's make a loss so ice cars have to be sold to make up for those losses. As ice cars make up the higher majority of their orders it makes economical sense to make that their main priority until EV demand sufficient and able to make a profit.

All the more reason to delay transition to EV, more reason to lobby for slower transition and more reason to continue to sell as much ICE cars as possible.

The motives are clear: cooperate greed. Due to the same greed, big oil industry have done enough harm to the world just by presenting climate change as a debate. The ball is currently in the car industry court, you can move away from the big oil, but it takes effort.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbW_1MtC2So

 

[ancient_mariner]

Does your property not have electricity? I'm sorry for your hardship.

Apparently that was neither a bird, plane nor superman passing overhead.

 

[Cobra]

Who is Lisa?

More to the point who the f*** is Alice

 

[nilagin]

EV costs around 1/3 to 1/4 of what it would cost to drive the same distance in ICE car. It'd cost you ~£3000 to drive 30k with an economical 50mpg ICE car. It only costs you ~£650 to drive the same distance. This is quite a big saving, considering the falling cost of EV, in the coming years, buying EV will cost similar to ICE cars.


Who is Lisa?
You keep ignoring how EV is projected to retain more of its value than equivalent ICE car, instead, you focusing on the cost difference. The small cost difference that disappears when you factor in fuel cost, as I have shown in my previous post.

As you said, previous data includes government grant. Which the first buyers will get, so your depreciation argument for first-gen EV is based on figures that doesn't relate to the real world cost of actually owning the car.


All the more reason to delay transition to EV, more reason to lobby for slower transition and more reason to continue to sell as much ICE cars as possible.

The motives are clear: cooperate greed. Due to the same greed, big oil industry have done enough harm to the world just by presenting climate change as a debate. The ball is currently in the car industry court, you can move away from the big oil, but it takes effort.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbW_1MtC2So

You really are on a different planet aren't you. How many more times must I repeat myself? The depreciation I have mentioned is the real world. The e Niro depreciation figures are Kia's own figures, the real world. Depreciation figures are worked out on the cars original list price regardless of any discounts or grants, because it is the only common ground to start with. But regardless of that, the e Niro costs more than the ice version to start with, even with the grant, then loses more in actual pound notes in the same 3yr 30k mile period.. Regardless of the EV using £650 in electricity and the ice using £3k in fuel, you still end up paying more for the EV.

 

[wyx087]

the e Niro costs more than the ice version to start with, even with the grant, then loses more in actual pound notes in the same 3yr 30k mile period.. Regardless of the EV using £650 in electricity and the ice using £3k in fuel, you still end up paying more for the EV.

You really are doing your best to ignore the obvious. Cost to drive a car is more than the money you've spent to buy the car.

If you add car depreciation together with car fuel cost, you get rough idea of car ownership cost (missing service charges and consumables)

Over 3 years 30k miles,
e-Niro is £2100 more expensive in finance payments. But fuel cost is £650 => £2750
Niro fuel cost would be £3000 to cover same distance
Therefore, ownership cost of e-Niro is cheaper than similar spec Niro. Despite the EV is slightly more expensive to buy, you end up paying less to drive the EV.

The depreciation I have mentioned is the real world.
Depreciation figures are worked out on the cars original list price regardless of any discounts or grants, because it is the only common ground to start with.

So..... it's not how much people will pay in the real world. Because the first owner doesn't pay the list price, the first owner pays the price minus the gov grant, but Leaf/Zoe depreciation figure you've quoted does include the grant, different to real world owner.

The Kia example is in the real world. Where the EV retains 46% of its after grant value compared to 44% of the normal Niro.

 

[nilagin]

You really are doing your best to ignore the obvious. Cost to drive a car is more than the money you've spent to buy the car.

If you add car depreciation together with car fuel cost, you get rough idea of car ownership cost (missing service charges and consumables)

Over 3 years 30k miles,
e-Niro is £2100 more expensive in finance payments. But fuel cost is £650 => £2750
Niro fuel cost would be £3000 to cover same distance
Therefore, ownership cost of e-Niro is cheaper than similar spec Niro. Despite the EV is slightly more expensive to buy, you end up paying less to drive the EV.


So..... it's not how much people will pay in the real world. Because the first owner doesn't pay the list price, the first owner pays the price minus the gov grant, but Leaf/Zoe depreciation figure you've quoted does include the grant, different to real world owner.

The Kia example is in the real world. Where the EV retains 46% of its after grant value compared to 44% of the normal Niro.

Very rarely does a car buyer pay the list price on any car, but as different dealers offer different discounts depreciation can only be worked out from the list price. On average most cars lose 50% in 3 yrs?
But the 54% loss of the EV is more than the 56% loss of the ice model, you are still losing more money. It only works in the EV's favour if the original cost identical but it isn't. The result being you have spent more, lost more and will have to spend more if you want another EV.
Once EV's become mainstream the grants will disappear. so both versions of the Niro haven't faired very well.

 

[broc]

Ford accelerates EV investment news

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47644323

 

[Nod]

About bleedin' time!

 

[wyx087]

Very rarely does a car buyer pay the list price on any car, but as different dealers offer different discounts depreciation can only be worked out from the list price. On average most cars lose 50% in 3 yrs?
But the 54% loss of the EV is more than the 56% loss of the ice model, you are still losing more money. It only works in the EV's favour if the original cost identical but it isn't. The result being you have spent more, lost more and will have to spend more if you want another EV.
Once EV's become mainstream the grants will disappear. so both versions of the Niro haven't faired very well.

Again, you have ignored the elephant in the room: total ownership cost, that is a combination of buying and running cost.

What was the reason most people switched from petrol to diesel in early 2000's? fuel economy. Diesel cost slightly more to purchase, but traveling salesman will end up spending slightly less at fuel pump to cover the same distance. Now, you can cover the same distance in the EV at 1/3 or 1/4 of the cost.

With the Niro example and EV in general, you spend less to own and drive the EV over 3 years 30k miles. No one is saying the EV Niro is cheaper to buy, a point you seems to think is disputed and very important. But as I have been saying from many many pages ago: despite EV is more expensive to buy, overall total ownership cost will be cheaper.

As long as a few prerequisites* are met, and there is an EV in the desired bodystyle, EV will be cheaper to own and run than equivalent model.
*Prerequisites: Driveway, Able to get home charger installed (permission/ownership), Daily mileage within EV range, Willingness to try new stuff.

Ford accelerates EV investment news

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47644323

Good, but late, start. A slow follower.

Yet, it's only plants to put vehicle together. VW have seen the problem with high EV production numbers and have already invested in building battery factories. Tesla is already started building its second battery factory.

 

[nilagin]

Again, you have ignored the elephant in the room: total ownership cost, that is a combination of buying and running cost.

What was the reason most people switched from petrol to diesel in early 2000's? fuel economy. Diesel cost slightly more to purchase, but traveling salesman will end up spending slightly less at fuel pump to cover the same distance. Now, you can cover the same distance in the EV at 1/3 or 1/4 of the cost.

With the Niro example and EV in general, you spend less to own and drive the EV over 3 years 30k miles. No one is saying the EV Niro is cheaper to buy, a point you seems to think is disputed and very important. But as I have been saying from many many pages ago: despite EV is more expensive to buy, overall total ownership cost will be cheaper.

As long as a few prerequisites* are met, and there is an EV in the desired bodystyle, EV will be cheaper to own and run than equivalent model.
*Prerequisites: Driveway, Able to get home charger installed (permission/ownership), Daily mileage within EV range, Willingness to try new stuff.


Good, but late, start. A slow follower.

Yet, it's only plants to put vehicle together. VW have seen the problem with high EV production numbers and have already invested in building battery factories. Tesla is already started building its second battery factory.

Difference is in the early 2000's diesel cars only cost around £1k more to buy and residuals were higher. Plus the diesel variants usually managed around twice the miles on a gallon than a petrol version could. The initial price difference could be recouped very quickly where as with an EV's you have to wait 2.5yrs going by your calculations.
Yet again your comment of slow start and follower yet Ford have been building electric vehicles since the 80's. Since then they have been testing and researching EV, Fuel cells, dual fuels and hybrids. 16 different fully electric vehicles over the next couple of years doesn't happen overnight. How many do Tesla make? 3 plus 1 or 2 on the way and let's face it they haven't got any other powertrain development going on.

 

[AlistairD]

I struggled to find a electric or hybrid that would tow 3.5 Tonnes. I don't see any reason why they can't build an Electric car which would tow significant weight but I haven't seen it yet....

A

 

[MatBin]

Again, you have ignored the elephant in the room: total ownership cost, that is a combination of buying and running cost.
Now, you can cover the same distance in the EV at 1/3 or 1/4 of the cost.

With the Niro example and EV in general, you spend less to own and drive the EV over 3 years 30k miles. No one is saying the EV Niro is cheaper to buy, a point you seems to think is disputed and very important. But as I have been saying from many many pages ago: despite EV is more expensive to buy, overall total ownership cost will be cheaper.

As long as a few prerequisites* are met, and there is an EV in the desired bodystyle, EV will be cheaper to own and run than equivalent model.
*Prerequisites: Driveway, Able to get home charger installed (permission/ownership), Daily mileage within EV range, Willingness to try new stuff.

When I looked seriously into getting an EV for my wife, as she does short miles, and very few per week she hated the body styles, but, putting that to one side, the cost of renting the battery far outweighed the cost of fuel (petrol in her case). Now whist I may agree that the cost of charging up the battery is a lot less than the cost of fuel, the rental for the battery clearly made it a non starter from a running cost per week. I doubt if the service costs would be much different, I expect the initial cost and depreciation would be worse in the EVs case. There is little cost benefit to me/us, then again there is little cost benefit in owning a diesel (unless one compares a diesel with a petrol of similar performance figures, namely a 190bhp/300Nm diesel to a 250bhp petrol car) but then tyres, dpf etc weigh heavily against a diesel but I enjoy the type of performance.
One can justify anything given the will and clearly you are happy with your EV choice, so I am pleased for you, but you will not convince everyone it's the right choice for them just because it was the right choice for you.
You wont do it on convenience, some cant charge their cars at work/home etc
You wont do it on costs, unless you buy an electric slug (on the motorway, 55mph is no good to me)
You wont do it on performance (unless you drive a Tesla, then you are screwed on costs)
You wont do it on environmental issues (the batteries alone should put you off)
You wont do it on the attractiveness of the car (most are pig ugly)
And most of all you wont do it on here.

 

[wyx087]

When I looked seriously into getting an EV for my wife, as she does short miles, and very few per week she hated the body styles, but, putting that to one side, the cost of renting the battery far outweighed the cost of fuel (petrol in her case). Now whist I may agree that the cost of charging up the battery is a lot less than the cost of fuel, the rental for the battery clearly made it a non starter from a running cost per week. I doubt if the service costs would be much different, I expect the initial cost and depreciation would be worse in the EVs case. There is little cost benefit to me/us, then again there is little cost benefit in owning a diesel (unless one compares a diesel with a petrol of similar performance figures, namely a 190bhp/300Nm diesel to a 250bhp petrol car) but then tyres, dpf etc weigh heavily against a diesel but I enjoy the type of performance.
One can justify anything given the will and clearly you are happy with your EV choice, so I am pleased for you, but you will not convince everyone it's the right choice for them just because it was the right choice for you.
You wont do it on convenience, some cant charge their cars at work/home etc
You wont do it on costs, unless you buy an electric slug (on the motorway, 55mph is no good to me)
You wont do it on performance (unless you drive a Tesla, then you are screwed on costs)
You wont do it on environmental issues (the batteries alone should put you off)
You wont do it on the attractiveness of the car (most are pig ugly)
And most of all you wont do it on here.

I'm just here to put the facts right and correct misconceptions people have due to mass media doing their best to muddle the waters.

First, battery rental is only optional on one model, the Renault Zoe. You can buy the Zoe outright without battery rental contract. Nissan Leaf had battery rental option, but were quickly retired in favour of buying the car as a whole. You ought to look closer at all the EV's on sale, most don't require battery rental.

Convenience: true not for everyone, but for those who can charge overnight, it's a LOT more convenient to begin the day fully charged.

Costs: costs are decreasing, the e-Niro vs Niro example earlier shows that total cost of ownership of EV is already cheaper. e-Niro has spacious interior, 201hp and 395 Nm torque, certainly not a slug.

Performance: Latest wave of EV are no slouch. These days, you don't need a Tesla to get more than diesel's 300+Nm of torque. Difference is, electric torque is instant and addictive, no gear change or turbo lag.

Environmental: Earlier in this thread, it has been shown that over the lifetime of EV, even if it's charged with fossil fuel generated electricity, it still produces less CO2 than ICE car. Rare earth material issue is temporary, as reliable supply chain get established, the issues will disappear like in all other industry.
The best environmental reason for EV is that EV you buy today will produce less CO2 per mile over the years as national grid improves, whereas the ICE car you buy today will produce the same CO2 per mile in 10 years time.

Attractiveness is subjective, no one can make you like the look of Nissan Leaf. But if it helps, Korean EV's all look like their ICE counterparts.

Towing is indeed lacking. Only Tesla Model X and Outlander PHEV can tow, I've no idea how much though.

End of the day, EV isn't for everyone right now, neither I or anyone have ever tried to convince EV is for everyone. But should be considered as long as prerequisites are met. Manufacturers should already be offering EV on every type of cars by now.

Yet again your comment of slow start and follower yet Ford have been building electric vehicles since the 80's. Since then they have been testing and researching EV, Fuel cells, dual fuels and hybrids. 16 different fully electric vehicles over the next couple of years doesn't happen overnight.

How many electric vehicles in total have Ford made since the 80's? Just saying this doesn't mean Ford is committed to EV's, only means Ford dips their toe in all area of technology, always ready to follow. I can also say I've been doing photography from age 2, doesn't mean I have 30 years of professional photographer experience.
Wake me up when Ford produces over 10,000 EV a week. Should be quick and easy for a large manufacturer like Ford?
Oh wait, you hadn't secured enough batteries to put in those empty chassis. Just one announcement to build EV factory doesn't mean anything, batteries supply is the key for volume EV production, I don't see any factory or deal being stuck by Ford. Not a very good follower, nevermind being slow

 

[nilagin]

How many electric vehicles in total have Ford made since the 80's? Just saying this doesn't mean Ford is committed to EV's, only means Ford dips their toe in all area of technology, always ready to follow. I can also say I've been doing photography from age 2, doesn't mean I have 30 years of professional photographer experience.
Wake me up when Ford produces over 10,000 EV a week. Should be quick and easy for a large manufacturer like Ford?
Oh wait, you hadn't secured enough batteries to put in those empty chassis. Just one announcement to build EV factory doesn't mean anything, batteries supply is the key for volume EV production, I don't see any factory or deal being stuck by Ford. Not a very good follower, nevermind being slow

Around 9500 but then the majority of people will find a ice or hybrid a better suitability. Just like 100yrs ago when Henry Ford built his first electric cars.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&s...CRAB&usg=AOvVaw1EePi8mk1oEwXmmXVc8w7R&ampcf=1

 

[broc]

As the volume of EV sales ramps up & the Government gets less revenue from fuel duty, VAT & VED, sooner or later they will have to tax EV users at which point a large slice of the 'savings' will vanish. Take a look at this article

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-n...l-road-toll-bill-as-evs-hit-fuel-duty-revenue

They have set a precedent, just look at how they changed VED recently as more and more cars attracted zero VED.

 

[Marc]

When I looked seriously into getting an EV for my wife, as she does short miles, and very few per week she hated the body styles

There are more choices out there now, the Hyundai Ioniq looks good, is reasonably price and there is no rental on the battery which comes with a very long warranty