Wow - I sure did ruffle some feathers by asking to be left alone to enjoy my inexpensive, "outdated" ICE vehicle, on a site called Grassroots Motorsports that is dedicated to people enjoying inexpensive, outdated ICE vehicles. You'd have thought I impugned someone's religion.
The whole point of this eight-page thread is that no one makes an EV - at any price - that can do what an "outdated" Odyssey or Caravan or Sienna can do, unless you're talking about a 1/4-mile drag race. The Model Y comes closest, but the second row doesn't even have armrests and the third row is a joke unless you're under five feet tall.
Maybe I just need more education from an educated educator to appreciate the $55,000 family transportation marvel that is the Tesla Model Y.
We are allowed to talk about things beside inexpensive outdated ICE vehicles on Grassroots Motorsports. Hell, one of the frequent contributors to the magazine has run a variety of new McLarens in the One Lap. It's not all old cheap crap here.
Nobody makes that electric minivan yet. But what would it be like if someone did? How would it affect something like, say, a banzai run to Florida once a year? Might be interesting to extrapolate that based on actual tech that's on the market today. If you're not interested, well, there are many other interesting threads included in your forum.
bluebarchetta said:
Wow - I sure did ruffle some feathers by asking to be left alone to enjoy my inexpensive, "outdated" ICE vehicle, on a site called Grassroots Motorsports that is dedicated to people enjoying inexpensive, outdated ICE vehicles. You'd have thought I impugned someone's religion.
People pondering why there are no EV minivans isn't going to do a damn thing to prevent you from enjoying your expensive ICE vehicles.
By my figuring, if you are middle aged today, you can most likely drive a nice expensive ICE vehicle until the day you can no longer drive. The average age of a vehicle is ten years old and the shift to EVs is going to be relatively slow in a fleet sense. The math: The average age of a car on the road is, what, 10 years old now? And the number keeps getting longer. If all vehicles sold tomorrow were exclusively EVs, then it would take until 2032-2033 before the majority, not entirety, of vehicles were EVs. This means that there will still be a lot of used ICE vehicles out there, and it also makes an assumption about the future availability of ICEs that is impossible: that they suddenly stopped now.
I look forward to what can be done with EVs, but as the owner of a 16 year old car, a 36 year old car, a 38 year old car, a 39 year old car, a 41 year old car, and a 49 year old car..... ICEs aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Or distant. A lot of new cars today will be 49 year old cars someday.
tuna55
MegaDork
12/2/21 8:57 p.m.
93EXCivic said:
In reply to tuna55 :
What is your point then?
I am and have always been speaking of new car buyers in this thread. Don't be pedantic.
I'm enjoying the thread - I want to learn what the future holds, from the folks who are trying it out right now. I want to see how my assumptions stack up against real world results. I love a good build thread, but some of the threads I've learned the most from are Keith's Tesla thread and Tuna's Bolt one. And John Welch has a couple good ones where I've learned more about the Prius.
As someone who's been driving around town to the tune of 50-60 miles per day in my beloved ICE minivan getting 17 MPG, I see a hybrid/EV as a way to save money. And I think that's still grassroots.
I'm a long way off from purchasing a new EV, but the more new ones that people buy, the more used ones will be available for folks like me. And I'm good with that. I think ICE vehicles will always have a place with enthusiasts, but I think the same will be true of EVs.
STM317
UberDork
12/2/21 9:22 p.m.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:
STM317 said:
In reply to tuna55 :
It was more rhetorical. In many states, EVs can cost hundreds of dollars more per year to register, and that added fee alone can offset a whole lot of O2 sensors or serpentine belts. But those somewhat hidden costs aren't always considered when people tout how economical EVs are. I'm not doubting your numbers or anything. I appreciate you posting them to add to the conversation. I just wanted to add a few things that prospective EV buyers should consider when doing this sort of calculation. A large part of it seems to come down to how much government subsidizes EVs or not. There are places where EVs are financial home runs, and other locations with little or no subsidy where costs get a lot tighter compared to a comparable ICE.
The hundreds of dollars is to offset the hundreds of dollars in state fuel taxes that they aren't getting, that you would be paying if you had an ICE. Net difference is zero, give or take.
I did some math, and I could buy a new EV "for free" if it was under about $30k... Huge money saver. I'd be okay paying a $200/yr EV fee. Hell, I'm paying $50/yr extra to have a personalized plate, and it doesn't do anything for me except make me giggle...
The math between fuel tax in an ICE and an annual fee of some sort for an EV is really just 3 variables. It comes down to how much the EV fee is, how fuel efficient the similar ICE is, and how many miles are driven. In a few cases with higher fees, the EV fee can actually be more than fuel taxes in a reasonably fuel efficient car that sees average miles driven. If you burn a lot of fuel, or the EV fees are low/non existent then the EV is the clear winner.
My larger point was that external factors like policy in a given location can have pretty noticeable impacts on TCO calculations. So if an EV is being purchased in part because of expected lower TCO, the buyer might need to know more than just how much might be saved by eliminating fuel tax or not having oil changes. Large rebates on the initial purchase, paying little or no annual fee, or super cheap electricity (perhaps solar at home or free at work) can save tons of money for an EV owner. But if you start taking away any of those advantages, the financial gap narrows. It wouldn't shock me if an EV in a location without subsidies (no tax credits at purchase, and enough of an annual fee to fully offset fuel taxes unpaid) and public charging ended up being essentially the same cost per mile.
I like EVs just fine. I just think there's often an incomplete picture of them that's presented by advocates and detractors alike. They're different, and seem to require more consideration of individual scenarios to determine if they make sense for a certain buyer.
tuna55
MegaDork
12/2/21 9:41 p.m.
In reply to STM317 :
Read my ownership thread, it's all in there. I believe Keith detailed all of his stuff in his thread as well.
Over the past 12 months, I've driven my Grand Caravan a little less than 10K miles (thanks to WFH - usually a LOT more). During that time I bought 476.191 gallons of gas (I keep detailed records). The PA /gal tax is 58.7 cents. Plus, there is the Federal tax of 18.4 cents/gal. Now while not all of the gas was bought in PA, we'll ignore that for the sake of this discussion, the taxes I paid were $279.52 to the State and $87.62 to the Fed.
FWIW, the tax on diesel is even more at 75.2 cents (plus the same 18.4 cents Fed tax). Ironically (?), when my TDI was my main daily driver, I rarely bought diesel in PA. Almost always in NJ, since that's where I worked and where my ex- lives.
So... if I went back to a work commute my miles per year would double at least, so even a $500/year registration fee for an EV would be less than I'd pay to PA alone in gas tax.
STM317 said:
Pete. (l33t FS) said:
STM317 said:
In reply to tuna55 :
It was more rhetorical. In many states, EVs can cost hundreds of dollars more per year to register, and that added fee alone can offset a whole lot of O2 sensors or serpentine belts. But those somewhat hidden costs aren't always considered when people tout how economical EVs are. I'm not doubting your numbers or anything. I appreciate you posting them to add to the conversation. I just wanted to add a few things that prospective EV buyers should consider when doing this sort of calculation. A large part of it seems to come down to how much government subsidizes EVs or not. There are places where EVs are financial home runs, and other locations with little or no subsidy where costs get a lot tighter compared to a comparable ICE.
The hundreds of dollars is to offset the hundreds of dollars in state fuel taxes that they aren't getting, that you would be paying if you had an ICE. Net difference is zero, give or take.
I did some math, and I could buy a new EV "for free" if it was under about $30k... Huge money saver. I'd be okay paying a $200/yr EV fee. Hell, I'm paying $50/yr extra to have a personalized plate, and it doesn't do anything for me except make me giggle...
The math between fuel tax in an ICE and an annual fee of some sort for an EV is really just 3 variables. It comes down to how much the EV fee is, how fuel efficient the similar ICE is, and how many miles are driven. In a few cases with higher fees, the EV fee can actually be more than fuel taxes in a reasonably fuel efficient car that sees average miles driven. If you burn a lot of fuel, or the EV fees are low/non existent then the EV is the clear winner.
My larger point was that external factors like policy in a given location can have pretty noticeable impacts on TCO calculations. So if an EV is being purchased in part because of expected lower TCO, the buyer might need to know more than just how much might be saved by eliminating fuel tax or not having oil changes. Large rebates on the initial purchase, paying little or no annual fee, or super cheap electricity (perhaps solar at home or free at work) can save tons of money for an EV owner. But if you start taking away any of those advantages, the financial gap narrows. It wouldn't shock me if an EV in a location without subsidies (no tax credits at purchase, and enough of an annual fee to fully offset fuel taxes unpaid) and public charging ended up being essentially the same cost per mile.
I like EVs just fine. I just think there's often an incomplete picture of them that's presented by advocates and detractors alike. They're different, and seem to require more consideration of individual scenarios to determine if they make sense for a certain buyer.
Your statement while valid is less than complete. In that we as a society need to work towards the betterment of society as a whole.
Individuals will always have variations but we cannot let those variations confuse the goal. An ICE even with the best minds of a century and a 1/2 cannot make a 4 stroke engine as efficient as an electric motor which is always producing peak torque. Compared to 1 stroke of 4 producing power and only for a relative short arc of that stroke producing peak torque.
Yes multi cylinders can increase that but they require additional fuel and added wear/complexity.
Compare the economic life of the Diesel engine to the electric motor of a train.
codrus (Forum Supporter) said:
twowheeled said:
I think marketing dropped the ball trying to make minivans soley for families. There's a big crowd into outdoor hobbies and van life.
Did you buy your van new or used? Manufacturers really only care about new car buyers (that's who gives them money), used buyers are a distant second (but not quite zero, they push up resale value which helps with brand appeal).
Most of the people I know who buy minivans for purposes like that are buying them used.
As for stow-n-go, it may depend on flexible they can be with the shape of the battery packs and how much volume they need. Perhaps the batteries can be fitted around the cubbies.
I bought used to dip my toe in minivan ownership. But after a year I'm sold and looking to buy new. I don't have a problem with spending more for a minivan that is exactly how I want because it seems like a vehicle you just keep in the family until the wheels fall off.
IMO the stow n go is the right direction and 2nd row captains seats is not. Everyone behind the driver seat is most likely going to be kids or extended family on the rare occasion, and they can sit on an old pickup truck bench seat for all I care, bound and gagged.
STM317
UberDork
12/3/21 9:06 a.m.
tuna55 said:
In reply to STM317 :
Read my ownership thread, it's all in there. I believe Keith detailed all of his stuff in his thread as well.
I'll check back in on your thread as its been awhile. I know that you'd been doing a good job of sharing your experience. Your numbers are a useful data point and I enjoy hearing your updates. I'm not trying to invalidate your EV experience.
My larger point was that TCO can vary even when comparing two identical ICEs in slightly different usages. It seems to be even more variable with EVs to me, so a prospective EV buyer needs to consider more variables if they're concerned about TCO. An EV owner in a state with lots of incentives, no annual fee, and access to super cheap electricity will have drastically lower TCO than somebody with the same exact EV in a spot with fewer subsidies and/or more expensive electricity.
None of this means that EVs are bad, or have no redeeming value. I'm just saying that TCO varies a lot so we have to be considerate of that in threads like these. It's great to have some actual numbers to chew on, but we need to be careful about assuming that those numbers will be similar for everybody (not saying that you specifically do this, just that everybody in the discussion needs to understand that).
twowheeled said: ... 2nd row captains seats is not...bound and gagged.
We use the 2nd row captains as a "reward" for the least E36 M3ty of ours and put the other two in the "way back" peasant seats. Though binding and gagging all would be preferred.
I've been driving (and loving) my kia sedona for five years now. I love how I can easily fit my family of four and all our junk for a long weekend, or a trip to the lake, or camping. The best replacement EV I've seen is the new Lightning, and I'd REALLY like one. An EV minivan would be even better. In a few years when it's new-car time, I expect that there will be an EV minivan ready and waiting for me.
Erich
UberDork
12/3/21 10:11 a.m.
STM317 said:
tuna55 said:
In reply to STM317 :
Read my ownership thread, it's all in there. I believe Keith detailed all of his stuff in his thread as well.
I'll check back in on your thread as its been awhile. I know that you'd been doing a good job of sharing your experience. Your numbers are a useful data point and I enjoy hearing your updates. I'm not trying to invalidate your EV experience.
My larger point was that TCO can vary even when comparing two identical ICEs in slightly different usages.
That's a good point. I've seen electricity prices regionally anywhere from $0.08/KwH to $0.20. Gas prices vary too, not by the same amount regionally, but much more over time. It's best to get a TCO for your individual state/time. The variables seem to be:
- Electricity rates
- Gas prices
- ICE efficiency
- EV efficiency
- federal and state incentives
- manufacturer incentives
- utility incentives
- gas tax
- EV registration surcharge
- Maintenance costs
- depreciation
- miles driven
In my experience, other than the surcharge, reg fees are the same ICE vs EV, and insurance is too. Calculate all the above on a spreadsheet and you have a realistic comparison of the two. Obviously with all those variables it's impossible to generalize for everyone which is cheaper, as it depends on too many factors.
STM317 said:
tuna55 said:
In reply to STM317 :
Read my ownership thread, it's all in there. I believe Keith detailed all of his stuff in his thread as well.
I'll check back in on your thread as its been awhile. I know that you'd been doing a good job of sharing your experience. Your numbers are a useful data point and I enjoy hearing your updates. I'm not trying to invalidate your EV experience.
My larger point was that TCO can vary even when comparing two identical ICEs in slightly different usages. It seems to be even more variable with EVs to me, so a prospective EV buyer needs to consider more variables if they're concerned about TCO. An EV owner in a state with lots of incentives, no annual fee, and access to super cheap electricity will have drastically lower TCO than somebody with the same exact EV in a spot with fewer subsidies and/or more expensive electricity.
None of this means that EVs are bad, or have no redeeming value. I'm just saying that TCO varies a lot so we have to be considerate of that in threads like these. It's great to have some actual numbers to chew on, but we need to be careful about assuming that those numbers will be similar for everybody (not saying that you specifically do this, just that everybody in the discussion needs to understand that).
If the numbers are close enough to be meaningless, isn't the long term future worth considering as a deciding factor?
While there is still oil to be found it's in more and more remote places, like under the arctic ice or deeper out in the ocean etc. Those added costs will be passed on to the consumer.
Compare that to solar and wind energy which arrives at our homes at no cost. At what point does energy independence become of value? Not just from the transporting of crude oil, but from empowering countries which may not be friendly to Us?
I was going to argue the point about the average American's new car purchase vs the average purchase price of a new car, thinking that $46k was way high, dragged up by a smaller number of very expensive cars.
And there's probably some of that, but with the F-Series still leading the way in sales numbers and some of the other stuff way up there... Maybe that is right, and more representative than I'd have thought.
Erich
UberDork
12/3/21 11:01 a.m.
Re: total cost of ownership. Here's a quick comparison calculation I did, comparing an average used EV, bought cash 30k miles to an average ICE with 30k miles, bought cash.
- Miles/yr: 12,000
- Gas Prices: $3.06/gallon (taxes removed)
- Electric rates: $0.16/KwH
- EV Reg fee: $135/yr (Michigan)
- gas taxes: $0.44/gallon
- Maintenance: $300/yr for EV, $800/yr for an ICE
- gas MPG: 25
- EV efficiency: 4 mi/kwh, with 90% efficiency charging
- EV depreciation: $1000/yr
- ICE depreciation: $800/yr
So yearly costs: EV: $528 in electricity, $135 reg fee, $300 maintenance, and depreciation is $1000. $1963 yearly cost.
ICE: $1468 in gas, $211 in gas tax, $800 in maintenance, and $800 in depreciation. $3279 yearly cost.
Insurance and reg costs are otherwise identical, adding another $1200/year in my instance.
Owning a car is expensive!
edit: just for fun I threw the numbers in for a brand new Tesla Model 3. It compares well even with the used ICE, because depreciation is so low, only about 10% over the first three years. It came out to a cost of $3375 a year.
STM317
UberDork
12/3/21 11:08 a.m.
In reply to frenchyd :
If environmental concerns are driving vehicle purchase, I'd say a PHEV does more than a full BEV. I think we agree that we see environmental benefits from each mile driven with electric power, so it's natural to assume that EVs get us the largest benefit but that's not necessarily true at the moment. Battery production is super bad for the environment and currently limited by capacity. So, we should be trying to get as many EV miles driven as possible from as little battery production as possible. PHEVs are a great way to do that.
If you can take the resources needed for a single BEV battery and divide them equally into a few PHEVs, you end up with far more miles driven under electric power for the same amount of work and limited resources needed for a single long range BEV. If the Average American driver does 12k miles per year, and we put them in a BEV with 85kwh of battery capacity and 300 miles of range we've replaced 12k miles of ICE driving with EV driving.vThats good, but came at a high environmental and supply chain cost of 85kwh. If we split that 85kwh of battery into 6 PHEVs that each have about 50 miles of EV range, they'd probably do at least 75% of their 12k annual miles on electricity. That's 9k miles per PHEV X 6 PHEVs = 54k miles driven on electricity each year from the same 85kwh as the single BEV. After 5 years, the single BEV will have driven 60k miles under electric power while the 6 PHEVs will have driven 270k miles under electric power.
There's nothing wrong with taking steps to reduce environmental impact, but I don't think electrifying 5% of the new vehicles made each year (while otherwise going about our lives) is going to do much for the environment. It can't hurt, but it's only a small part of the solution. The best way to reduce your environmental impact is to reduce all forms of consumption. Drive less. Live someplace where you can walk or ride a bike to get where you need to go. Buy less, especially new things. There's a chance that keeping the old beater running is better environmentally than buying a new EV for several years.
STM317 said:
In reply to frenchyd :
If environmental concerns are driving vehicle purchase, I'd say a PHEV does more than a full BEV. I think we agree that we see environmental benefits from each mile driven with electric power, so it's natural to assume that EVs get us the largest benefit but that's not necessarily true at the moment. Battery production is super bad for the environment and currently limited by capacity. So, we should be trying to get as many EV miles driven as possible from as little battery production as possible. PHEVs are a great way to do that.
If you can take the resources needed for a single BEV battery and divide them equally into a few PHEVs, you end up with far more miles driven under electric power for the same amount of work and limited resources needed for a single long range BEV. If the Average American driver does 12k miles per year, and we put them in a BEV with 85kwh of battery capacity and 300 miles of range we've replaced 12k miles of ICE driving with EV driving.vThats good, but came at a high environmental and supply chain cost of 85kwh. If we split that 85kwh of battery into 6 PHEVs that each have about 50 miles of EV range, they'd probably do at least 75% of their 12k annual miles on electricity. That's 9k miles per PHEV X 6 PHEVs = 54k miles driven on electricity each year from the same 85kwh as the single BEV. After 5 years, the single BEV will have driven 60k miles under electric power while the 6 PHEVs will have driven 270k miles under electric power.
There's nothing wrong with taking steps to reduce environmental impact, but I don't think electrifying 5% of the new vehicles made each year (while otherwise going about our lives) is going to do much for the environment. It can't hurt, but it's only a small part of the solution. The best way to reduce your environmental impact is to reduce all forms of consumption. Drive less. Live someplace where you can walk or ride a bike to get where you need to go. Buy less, especially new things. There's a chance that keeping the old beater running is better environmentally than buying a new EV for several years.
I've very deliberately avoided discussions of the environment. Focusing on the economics and capability of EV's.
I'll admit in the short term batteries are not as cleanly made as they will be in the future. But at least the air doesn't suffer as much. Baby steps.
I do happen to agree that consume less, drive less, is good. So much so it's one of the reasons I'm keeping my F150ICE rather than trading it in for my preference of a F150 EV.
However my wife will be trading her 2012 Honda CRS for a Tesla. We expect that to be our last automotive purchase.
I also will be building a couple of cars from scraps I have in the shop. Yes they are ICE but what little fuel I'll be using will be E85.
So after years of tantalizing us with cool images of retro vans, veedub comes up with this:
Really? To call it a disappointment is putting it mildly.
tuna55
MegaDork
12/3/21 4:12 p.m.
Kreb (Forum Supporter) said:
So after years of tantalizing us with cool images of retro vans, veedub comes up with this:
Really? To call it a disappointment is putting it mildly.
It's certainly not very attractive like the concepts were.
I am not thrilled with the ID line just yet. I am thrilled that it exists, but since they came out 4-5 years after the Bolt and Model 3, not quite matching the performance or range of either seems like a miss.
