I can accept that the future of cars is EV, but...

ProDarwin said:

RevRico said:

RichardSIA said:

The future of cars is........, ah, maybe not! 

EV buyers remorse!

So to summarize the article.

"Idiots who don't understand how electricity works are surprised their 120v level one home chargers take forever to charge"

These are probably the same people who complain their ancient 0.5 amp charger takes hours to charge their new cellphone that didn't come with the modern standard 3amp charger.

More money than brains, and a desire to be trendy.

True, but his article does demonstrate what manufacturers have to deal with: people who simply don't understand what they are buying.

Unfortunately, y'all have just described a very large percentage of the general population, when it comes to understanding anything about electricity. But the general public wants electricity to solve all problems, so they are not wanting facts to get in the way of their wishful thinking. I support ev's and improving the technology, but current plans by some people, and brags by some company's are still sci fi. But hey, the original Star Trek pushed changes in technology into a lot of what we have today!

Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:

wspohn said:

The Model 3 is a beauty queen compared to the Muskmobile (aka the Cybertruck) - not THAT is fugly.

 

 

 

If I can fit two dirt bikes in the bed, put my dogs in the back seat and tow a boat with that, I will take one! I really like the ramp. The fact that it looks like it was built by SpaceX to haul motorcycles for Captain Piccard is a good thing.

I too think it is quite ugly... but would own one in a heartbeat, could I afford the entry fee!

In reply to GI'm totally ready for the Cybertruck and the Aptera. I'm so happy cars are really starting to get weird; I'd rather something illicit a reaction rather than the next melted bar of soap Nissan thing.IRTHQUAKE :

I agree with this! I had to look up Aptera, and I know it's out of my finances, but I like it  

codrus (Forum Supporter) said:

03Panther said:

Once the liberals and tree huggers figured out that Nukes were not going to destroy the world, now they're ok. But VERY far from carbon neutral. But, once again, we are very far off topic.

I'm curious why you say nuclear power isn't "carbon neutral"?  The usual definition of that term means it's not adding net CO2 to the atmosphere, and there's none of that happening during the power generation process.  Yes, you need to figure out a way for all of the supporting activity (mining, enrichment, transportation, disposal, etc) to run off the nuclear power plant's output, but the electricity+CO2+H2O => hydrocarbon tech mentioned above would go a long way towards making that possible.

(For reference I'm neither "liberal" (in the sense of left-wing) nor a tree hugger, and have been a fan of nuclear power since I was old enough to know what it was).

The explanation is on your reply. May not be the "popular" way of defining a buzz word, but is more accurate. 
My family's been working with nuclear power since the 50's, so not only are we fans, but consider ourselfs at least a bit knowledgeable on it. 
To include an answer to another fella, prolly have just a bit of technical savvy in the family. Just not reliving on only what we wish is true. 
was not planing to sidetrack the aplipical discussion...

now, back the the ev's themselves...

frenchyd said:

In reply to 03Panther :

Most people who are technically savy understand the only flaw with nuclear is disposal of the spent waste. That is a purely political issue Caused by NIMBY which has nothing to do with political affiliation except justifiable concern about the location  of the waste site.   
PS if by tree hugger you mean someone who believes in leaving the world better for our children then we got it. Yes most people fall into that category .  

I really did try to walk away from your baiting, but a personally flaw won't let me. Apparently you are not technically savvy enough to know there is more to it than waste. How many plants have you worked at? I've worked at over two dozen, in addition to a bunch of subs, and a few carriers. 
as far as the tree huggers, I'm obviously not talking about your twisted version. You must have been asleep for the 40 years of protesters blocking the gates (or trying) at plants. Go back and read a few papers. I'm talking about people that are so screwed up in their thinking, that they would like to see you put to death, for all the trees you have harmed amassing your collection of wood. 
let's keep discussions realistic, instead of being condescending shall we?

One interesting tidbit of information regarding the Cybertruck is in the topic of safety - namely, the safety of other people on the road.  It's expected to weigh well over 6000 lbs, and is made of stainless steel that's apparently 4 times thicker than the steel in other cars - so this thing is an absolute beast.  What's going to happen when a Cybertruck t-bones someone?  It's going to absolutely destroy the other car.

There will have to be some modifications made to the Cybertruck for it to be sold here, such as adding airbags and rearview mirrors, but otherwise Musk has stated he wants the truck to pretty much remain as is.  It's ugly but I keep going back to look at it.  Plus the functionality of it is fantastic - built in electrical outlets, built in air compressor, the rear suspension drops so you can more easily load the bed, of course that tailgate ramp is great, and it can sit 6 people comfortably and has a 6.5" bed.  Elon has also stated that they might make a smaller truck in the future.

Also something fun on Tesla - I read that the Tesla semi can do 0-60 in 5 seconds when not carrying a trailer.

Elon spoke to why the truck looks like it does on Joe Rogan a month or so ago.  To paraphrase: "...we asked ourselves what people liked about trucks.  And it's that they're tough.  So then we asked, what's tougher than a truck?  How about a tank?  And what could be tougher than a tank?  Maybe a tank from the future.  So there you go..."

infinitenexus said:

One interesting tidbit of information regarding the Cybertruck is in the topic of safety - namely, the safety of other people on the road.  It's expected to weigh well over 6000 lbs, and is made of stainless steel that's apparently 4 times thicker than the steel in other cars - so this thing is an absolute beast.  What's going to happen when a Cybertruck t-bones someone?  It's going to absolutely destroy the other car.

There will have to be some modifications made to the Cybertruck for it to be sold here, such as adding airbags and rearview mirrors, but otherwise Musk has stated he wants the truck to pretty much remain as is.  It's ugly but I keep going back to look at it.  Plus the functionality of it is fantastic - built in electrical outlets, built in air compressor, the rear suspension drops so you can more easily load the bed, of course that tailgate ramp is great, and it can sit 6 people comfortably and has a 6.5" bed.  Elon has also stated that they might make a smaller truck in the future.

Also something fun on Tesla - I read that the Tesla semi can do 0-60 in 5 seconds when not carrying a trailer.

There are pedestrian collision tests that this thing will be subjected to.

Also stainless steel doesn't really mean anything over and above carbon steel other than it will be more corrosion resistant. It's not any tougher, and actually weaker in some important ways than alloy carbon steel.

In reply to 03Panther :

Perhaps I wasn't clear.  It's difficult in a brief sentence.  I accept nuclear power as being part of the solution.  Waste issue aside If you compare the death and injury rate of the nuclear industry to that of the oil industry, nuclear comes out the clear winner by miles. 
  With regard to tree huggers. Again it's a complex subject not fit for brief answers. Yet I'll try.  Trees while growing contribute oxygen but while decaying contribute greenhouse gases. Timberframes like mine last 500+ years thus delay that decay process.
    Protesters  while annoying do celebrate one of the basic freedoms of America.  I wish all protesters were polite and respectful but not all are. We tend to like and overlook that common flaw if we agree and object when we disagree. Just human nature.  

frenchyd said:

In reply to 03Panther :

Perhaps I wasn't clear.  It's difficult in a brief sentence.  I accept nuclear power as being part of the solution.  Waste issue aside If you compare the death and injury rate of the nuclear industry to that of the oil industry, nuclear comes out the clear winner by miles. 
  With regard to tree huggers. Again it's a complex subject not fit for brief answers. Yet I'll try.  Trees while growing contribute oxygen but while decaying contribute greenhouse gases. Timberframes like mine last 500+ years thus delay that decay process.
    Protesters  while annoying do celebrate one of the basic freedoms of America.  I wish all protesters were polite and respectful but not all are. We tend to like and overlook that common flaw if we agree and object when we disagree. Just human nature.  

Your first post was quite clear. this one, well once again, apparent you did not read what was written, 'cause none of this is applicable to the statements said. But its OK. I said the first time there was no need to derail the original post, so lets not. You are right on an in person discussion is easier to not be misunderstood, so we'll let the EV discussion continue without the tangent.

I just recently plunked down the $100 for a reservation spot on an Aptera. Hopefully it actually comes to market this time. While it's not the most beautiful vehicle ever penned it is unique and the form follows function. I actually think it looks pretty cool from the rear 3/4 view. The AWD version supposedly does 0-60 in 3.5s which is brisk. Those were 911 turbo numbers not too long ago. 

The MG Cyberster concept car looks pretty good too. Hopefully the over shape and proportions can translate to a production roadster.

 The AWD version supposedly does 0-60 in 3.5s which is brisk

 

Ummm yeah. The fastest street car I knew of in 1975 was a 930 turbo at 5.5 0-60. Now a TRUCK can do 3.5? God help me, I'm getting old. 

In reply to mblommel :

Part of me wants an Aptera so much as I wanted an original version years ago... but the realistic part of me asks "why?" since I don't really commute anymore and an Aptera doesn't have the utility I need.  So I'm left patiently waiting for some sort of EV minivan.

In reply to Ian F (Forum Supporter) :

Makes me wonder why nobody's come up with one yet. Seems like a FWD minivan would be the perfect application for an EV. Reminds me of a Tesla sales guy telling me that 60 percent of the model X sales were prompted by the gullwing doors. soccer moms FTW!

In reply to Kreb (Forum Supporter) :

This is what I keep saying. The vast majority of vehicles owners don't care about 0-60 times. Even with those that do there becomes a point of diminishing returns regarding practical use and beyond that point it's just a theoretical bragging point. Someone needs to step up and build a FWD minivan/CUV that seats 6, goes 400 miles on a single charge and costs $40k or less. A sub 6 sec 0-60 time is just gravy. These vehicles make up the bulk of new cars sales yet aren't targeted by the EV OEMs, which seem to think the only two markets that exist are performance luxury cars and tiny city runabouts.

infernosg said:

In reply to Kreb (Forum Supporter) :

This is what I keep saying. The vast majority of vehicles owners don't care about 0-60 times. Even with those that do there becomes a point of diminishing returns regarding practical use and beyond that point it's just a theoretical bragging point. Someone needs to step up and build a FWD minivan/CUV that seats 6, goes 400 miles on a single charge and costs $40k or less. A sub 6 sec 0-60 time is just gravy. These vehicles make up the bulk of new cars sales yet aren't targeted by the EV OEMs, which seem to think the only two markets that exist are performance luxury cars and tiny city runabouts.

To be fair, the Ioniq, Bolt, Leaf, Kona and Niro are on sale now, not expensive, and not tiny city runabouts. Their range is totally usable. These are on sale today.

infernosg said:

In reply to Kreb (Forum Supporter) :

This is what I keep saying. The vast majority of vehicles owners don't care about 0-60 times. Even with those that do there becomes a point of diminishing returns regarding practical use and beyond that point it's just a theoretical bragging point. Someone needs to step up and build a FWD minivan/CUV that seats 6, goes 400 miles on a single charge and costs $40k or less. A sub 6 sec 0-60 time is just gravy. These vehicles make up the bulk of new cars sales yet aren't targeted by the EV OEMs, which seem to think the only two markets that exist are performance luxury cars and tiny city runabouts.

To change public perception of a commodity like transportation you need to attract the opinion makers.  Those are the ones interested in performance. With only 2% of new car sales EV's the manufacturers have yet to arrive at the point where performance isn't a critical factor. 
    400 mile range just isn't needed by most buyers. 400 miles will take up to  8 hours to achieve and the human bladder gets very uncomfortable after 4 hours.  The Super charge sites set up already are closer than 4 hours apart. While they aren't yet on every corner like gas stations are they don't need to be. 

In reply to tuna55 :

I'll admit I was not familiar with the Hyundai/Kia offerings. VW has had the e-Golf in certain markets too. It's good some OEMs are taking this seriously. I don't consider the Bolt and Leaf to be "normal" sized cars. They're more in-line with a Honda Fit or my old Mazda2. Definitely a practical vehicle but not exactly the hot segment at the moment.

In reply to frenchyd :

400 is just a number I picked because it seemed reasonable for a modern ICE vehicle. Perhaps 300 would have been better. I agree few people will go 300 miles without stopping but range anxiety, however illogical, is still a thing. Like you said, you need to attract the opinion makers. My personal opinion is they should be focusing more on range and lower price points than power and 0-60 times to attract the greater market, which puts more emphasis on the appliance side of automobiles. Drop the performance (e.g. limit acceleration, power, top speed, etc.), drop the price and go after the Toyota Rav4s and Honda CRVs. It looks like Hyundai/Kia is doing this, which is refreshing. With more government mandates and restrictions coming we're going to see more coming, too.

I think perhaps the biggest hurdle, as already mentioned is the charging infrastructure. I'm less concerned about grid power loads than I am about charger access. A lot of us are fortunate to have private driveways and/or garages. A large population isn't. Combine that with multiple charging standards and it's going to be a while before the majority of urban and semi-urban vehicles owners make the switch. It's unfortunate because that demographic is the most well-suited for small, cheap EVs with less range.

How much of the quick acceleration is just the nature of the beast? (Flat electric motor torque curve)

infernosg said:

In reply to tuna55 :

I'll admit I was not familiar with the Hyundai/Kia offerings. VW has had the e-Golf in certain markets too. It's good some OEMs are taking this seriously. I don't consider the Bolt and Leaf to be "normal" sized cars. They're more in-line with a Honda Fit or my old Mazda2. Definitely a practical vehicle but not exactly the hot segment at the moment.

In reply to frenchyd :

400 is just a number I picked because it seemed reasonable for a modern ICE vehicle. Perhaps 300 would have been better. I agree few people will go 300 miles without stopping but range anxiety, however illogical, is still a thing. Like you said, you need to attract the opinion makers. My personal opinion is they should be focusing more on range and lower price points than power and 0-60 times to attract the greater market, which puts more emphasis on the appliance side of automobiles. Drop the performance (e.g. limit acceleration, power, top speed, etc.), drop the price and go after the Toyota Rav4s and Honda CRVs. It looks like Hyundai/Kia is doing this, which is refreshing. With more government mandates and restrictions coming we're going to see more coming, too.

I think perhaps the biggest hurdle, as already mentioned is the charging infrastructure. I'm less concerned about grid power loads than I am about charger access. A lot of us are fortunate to have private driveways and/or garages. A large population isn't. Combine that with multiple charging standards and it's going to be a while before the majority of urban and semi-urban vehicles owners make the switch. It's unfortunate because that demographic is the most well-suited for small, cheap EVs with less range.

The Bolt and Leaf are pretty normal size. I just took myself and my three boys (12, 11 and 9) camping an hour away with all of our gear, in total comfort in my Bolt. You skipped the Ioniq.

infernosg said:

In reply to tuna55 :

I'll admit I was not familiar with the Hyundai/Kia offerings. VW has had the e-Golf in certain markets too. It's good some OEMs are taking this seriously. I don't consider the Bolt and Leaf to be "normal" sized cars. They're more in-line with a Honda Fit or my old Mazda2. Definitely a practical vehicle but not exactly the hot segment at the moment.

In reply to frenchyd :

400 is just a number I picked because it seemed reasonable for a modern ICE vehicle. Perhaps 300 would have been better. I agree few people will go 300 miles without stopping but range anxiety, however illogical, is still a thing. Like you said, you need to attract the opinion makers. My personal opinion is they should be focusing more on range and lower price points than power and 0-60 times to attract the greater market, which puts more emphasis on the appliance side of automobiles. Drop the performance (e.g. limit acceleration, power, top speed, etc.), drop the price and go after the Toyota Rav4s and Honda CRVs. It looks like Hyundai/Kia is doing this, which is refreshing. With more government mandates and restrictions coming we're going to see more coming, too.

I think perhaps the biggest hurdle, as already mentioned is the charging infrastructure. I'm less concerned about grid power loads than I am about charger access. A lot of us are fortunate to have private driveways and/or garages. A large population isn't. Combine that with multiple charging standards and it's going to be a while before the majority of urban and semi-urban vehicles owners make the switch. It's unfortunate because that demographic is the most well-suited for small, cheap EVs with less range.

I don't own a Tesla ( yet) and I understand it shows all the charging sites.  But for the guys in Apartments, or living in Urban areas it won't take long to put curbside chargers everyplace. 
     One year to put modern ( using credit cards ) parking meters in the Minneapolis area. So will it be much longer to put chargers in?  
Right now the vast majority of EV's are home owners but there are Tesla Ubers /Lyft  in California  so in those locations there is sufficient charging for nearly steady usage. 
I doubt other congested cities are far behind  

The Bolt/Volt are built on the Chevy Cruz platform  so at least the next size up from the Honda Fit.  

One final point, Europe is going all in on EV's  and when actual range was tested there charging stations weren't much more than 15 miles apart, often much  closer. 

Wow... where have I been... I read through this thread and keep seeing "Aptera", and couldn't understand how you guys were talking about it in the present tense. I live close to their failed company location and know all about how they made unrealistic claims, may or may not have refunded everyone's deposites, and how they crushed the body molds and prototypes.

At that time, I was halfway interested in building a three-wheeler myself, and feel that they really nailed the body shape, something with both sufficient interior volume and really low drag. I have a well-known race car aerodynamics book, and there's a silhouette line drawing from VW that looks VERY much like the Aptera, so much so that I suspect they borrowed the shape...

Anyway, so they're back... hmm, wonder what they plan to do differently this time, hopefully not the hybrid version they once considered.

In reply to kb58 :

From what I've been able to learn is the two founders brought in a business guy to run the company who promptly E36 M3canned the 3 wheel design in favor of a more traditional 4 wheel setup. The founders left the company, and it went down in flames. This new iteration has the original two guys back in charge and a large number of changes over the original version. They are using individual wheel mounted motors, and it's all electric. I have enough confidence to plunk down $100. We'll see how it goes. 

In reply to mblommel : Given that they are claiming that their integrated solar panels will make the car unnecessary to charge, it's clear that they haven't lost their penchant for stretching the truth. 

In reply to Kreb (Forum Supporter) :

Yes and no. I live in Florida, and they are in SoCal. Areas with lots of sun make sense for roof mounted panels. The panels cover most of the upper surfaces (if you option it that way). They're claiming to be able to accumulate up to 40 miles of charge while it sits in a parking lot. To be honest I have not researched the exact output of the cells they plan on using. I know the most efficient house mounted panels are generating 400W these days. So we could probably estimate the area of the upper body surfaces to get an idea of how much power they could generate. Right now my commute is 14 miles each way, so if I can charge it at home and have it top itself up at work, that would be pretty cool. 

If you're just driving around town and live in a nice sunny climate it's feasible that you wouldn't have to plug it in all that often. I guess we'll see.