Associate
I think a proper, well managed, cheap, high speed public transport network is the real answer if we’re trying to save the planet. But we’ll never get there.
Is the end of Battery EVs coming?
- Thread starter Resident
- Start date
Well insurers also seem to think that way
I guess that means Range Rovers are doomed.
The UK public transport is far more comprehensive than many other countries.
Public transport is very inflexible, that’s the issue with it. It’s fine for predictable fixed journeys like commuting. But it absolutely dire for leisure and ad-hoc travel.
This, it’s not the best but it’s not completely terrible as many make out. We commute by public transport because it’s faster and easier.
It’s not cheaper although that’s only looking as the marginal cost of the journey. Once you factor in all the costs of owning a car, in reality public transport is cheaper.
Soldato
When did you last catch a train?
No one dives to 200m in their Omega Seamaster either, doesn't mean they are going to win any favours by marketing it as splash resistant.
Most folks say that but want the comfort and flexibility of there own transport.
Soldato
We have a Model 3 LR and solar that produces enough power to cover both the car and the house. This setup is great for us, but I doubt there are enough people for whom this would work.
1) The cars are too expensive to make sense as simple transportation. An ICE car at half the price wil cost less overall...even when the cost of gas is figured in.
2) They are only more convinient than ICE cars if you can charge at home and the range fits your driving habbits.
I just did a quick search for "average number of cars per household" and, in the US at least, it seems that it's 2.x for over 90% of households.
The percentage of households that can charge at home somewhere between 45-65% depending on the language I used in the search.
I think becoming the second-car in the garage / driveway is the thin edge of the wedge they should focus on.
Crazy zero-to-60 times and the ability to summon your car with an app on your phone are great features for headlines, but not the best way to gain market share IMO.
If they can make EV's that are slightly better for daily driving needs than the nicer of the 2.x cars in homes that could charge an EV, they might get away with being only slightly more expensive.
I don’t know if fewer bells and whistles and zero-to-60 times in the 7's and 8's (instead of the 3's and 4's) would trim enough cost from manufacturing an EV to make it profitable at low-enough price points, but the price has to come down if they want to gain meaningful market share.
1) The cars are too expensive to make sense as simple transportation. An ICE car at half the price wil cost less overall...even when the cost of gas is figured in.
2) They are only more convinient than ICE cars if you can charge at home and the range fits your driving habbits.
I just did a quick search for "average number of cars per household" and, in the US at least, it seems that it's 2.x for over 90% of households.
The percentage of households that can charge at home somewhere between 45-65% depending on the language I used in the search.
I think becoming the second-car in the garage / driveway is the thin edge of the wedge they should focus on.
Crazy zero-to-60 times and the ability to summon your car with an app on your phone are great features for headlines, but not the best way to gain market share IMO.
If they can make EV's that are slightly better for daily driving needs than the nicer of the 2.x cars in homes that could charge an EV, they might get away with being only slightly more expensive.
I don’t know if fewer bells and whistles and zero-to-60 times in the 7's and 8's (instead of the 3's and 4's) would trim enough cost from manufacturing an EV to make it profitable at low-enough price points, but the price has to come down if they want to gain meaningful market share.
Caporegime
@Twinz I would suggest that one of your negatives ref driving habits isnt a real issue. The vast vast majority of journeys are short distance with the majority of people rarely doing more than 20 miles a day.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 May 2006
- Posts
- 7,811
my wife and 3 other family members got the train from Cambridge to London yesterday. the train was so packed people could barely get on the train (kings cross was closed so everyone was going to Liverpool Street). obviously was standing only and one of the group was a pensioner (eventually a nice person offered her a seat)
once in London the tube was also carnage with a lot of the entrances into the stations barricaded off.
when they left the Albert hall they were strongly recommended to wait 30 mins or walk to another station because the tube station outside was utter carnage..
the train back to Cambridge was mildly better but still rammed.
overpriced and a poor experience. not likely to convince people to get the train when there is any other option imo.
Soldato
That's why I looked up the percentage of households with two cars. The second car (which would still be an ICE vehicle) covers the occasional long road trip. In the rare instance that a trip would cause range anxiety, just take the ICE vehicle. It also puts less presure on the charging infrastructure and fancy high-speed-charging battery tech.
-Just be able to recover your daily range (plus a little extra as a cushion) overnight in your garage. It doesn't have to be battery tech recovered from a UFO crash site.
Last edited:
Caporegime
That is also a bit of a twist. If someone is doing 20 mile a day commutes but going away at the weekends on a 300 mile round trip then yes the majority of their journeys is low mileage but then they cannot go away for the weekend without stopping to charge which is a massive inconvenience. Especially when you only got two days the last thing you want to do is spend an hour plus in a services.
Just because the vast majority are short it doesn't change the fact you still need to do longer journeys especially if you have any sense of adventure. We also live in a little country. This issue is obviously a lot bigger on say the continent or the states.
Last edited:
I am guessing it was aleast £20 per person, even with London parking costs thats going to be £50 by car
Soldato
I drove to London yesterday with 5 people and parked in London. £5 in fuel and £19 to park. Train probably £70 each.
My train to work is 30 mins + 15 mins walk vs an hour+ in heavy traffic and a toll that's 3x the cost of the train.
Mostly I get the train, sometimes I'll drive if I think traffic will be lighter and I need to be earlier.
It all depends on your journey. How you plan your life around transport. They might be car, might not be.. Depends.
Soldato
lol £19 quid parking, this country is trash-tier.
Most EVs won't require a hour+ charging to do 300 mile round trip. Even in my ICE cars I don't do a 300 mile trip without stopping. I assume most people staying for a weekend will at some point sleep. Car will be parked for 8-10 hours each time they sleep.
If you are doing long distance journeys at the weekend on a regular basis then you aren't part of the majority who don't do that. Obviously enough.
Trash-tier. What a brilliant application of such words.
Been to somewhere it’s £24 parking regardless 1hr or a day. Tourist trap trash-tier
Had to go into Oxford about 20yrs ago and parking was extortionate then, god knows what it's like now
Addenbrooks/hospital parking for the win - you need extra pain killers after a visit to A&E - was >£20 about 2 yrs ago - Khan could learn something.
land rover were worried their owners would think the parking sensors would back up to the edge of a cliff, though ... but - maybe defenders are robust, Duke thought so.