In reply to aircooled :
No kidding... I'm sure hay is more expensive now than back when horses were used by everyone for transportation.
That said, so much of oil production goes towards gasoline.
I can see the "charging cafe" becoming a thing for folks who cannot charge at home. You drive to the cafe, plug the car in for a fast charge (for a fee), go inside for coffee, a snack, internet, etc. An app on your phone pings you when the charging is done.
My next new car will likely be an EV - assuming some company eventually builds the one I want - at which time I'll dump the TDI. Which I'm sure will make the TDI faithful's heads spin. But it's all about the convienence for me. Not having to buy gas for my daily driver would be nice. Granted, if the WFH thing continues, then it won't matter as much. I'm buyng gas around once a month or so. That said, owning an EV as my DD doesn't mean I'm dumping my ICE vehicles for fun driving.
preach (Forum Supporter) said:
My newest car is 14yo this year.
Hate me if you want but the only RUSH song I like is Red Barchetta. I will be the guy just making the one lane bridge but my cars will be german.
I would get an EV to commute to work, but you can put me in an EV but you will never take the ICE from my blood.
You sound just like those loyal horse owners when that dreaded Model T became popular.
frenchyd said:
preach (Forum Supporter) said:
My newest car is 14yo this year.
Hate me if you want but the only RUSH song I like is Red Barchetta. I will be the guy just making the one lane bridge but my cars will be german.
I would get an EV to commute to work, but you can put me in an EV but you will never take the ICE from my blood.
You sound just like those loyal horse owners when that dreaded Model T became popular.
You are correct.
Yet, I am a huge fan of the VW ID-R and to some degree the Porsche Taycan. Watching the recent-ish Tesla Roadster hit 60mph in 1.9s was amazing.
I am willing to bet that many EV folk still own horses.
In reply to Ian F (Forum Supporter) :
Until you drive the new EV's. We are used to a power curve. EV's have max power instantly. That's addictive as hell.
So MA has banned the sale of NEW ICE vehicles starting in 2035. That means that used ICE vehicles can still be sold in MA in and after 2035. What about new cars purchased outside of MA by MA residents? Will they be able to register those in MA? So far, the answer appears to be yes. And what is a used car? What if the "used" car I'm looking at has, say, 6 miles on it, because that's the distance from the new car dealer in NH to the used car dealer (owned by the same person) in MA ? And what about trucks, motorcycles, etc? The linked article incorrectly uses "vehicle" and "car" interchangeably, so it's not clear. It's too early to know, but I can't not think about it.
I guess we can always pipe in the sound of a TR-6 or a aircooled 6 at full song to aurally stimulate the drving experiance...
sanman said:
Tom_Spangler (Forum Supporter) said:
Vajingo said:
My concern is how this will affect my trade in of my used ICE in the future. Will everyone be like "sorry, we aren't accepting those" and you're stuck with an aging appliance that has no value? (And potentially a really expensive fuel source...)
Yeah, that's a valid concern, but it always happens when a major technological change occurs. It's one of the costs of progress. Besides, I suspect it'll be a slow, gradual process. It'll be a LONG time before there are no ICE cars on the roads. And even then, I think those of us with our "antiques" will still be able to drive them on track, to shows, etc. But you're right, fuel will become very expensive and hard to find.
Expensive gas is one concern, I wonder about the viability of keeping hobby cars running when mechanics and auto parts stores start to disappear or start charging Ferrari rates to stay in business. I do some of my own wrenching, but I don't have a lift and still like to farm out some work. Personally, my DD is fairly new and I can see getting an EV for myself in 10 years or so. I won't mind one bit to have lower maintenance on the commute mobile. With the way Europe and other regions of the world are pushing it, the change is inevitable as automakers won't find it cost effective to make both.
EVs still need servicing. They have brakes and tires and bushings and ball joints and wiper blades and window motors and everything else a car has that isn't an internal combustion engine.
The average, yes average age of a car on the road and in active use in California is 14 years old. That is on the low side for other states. I cannot even fathom how they will make it stick without massive payouts or huge changes in battery tech or really good electric fleets that you can rent.
So figure 2060 by the time it is all settled and I will be dead or dying then. I just hope we go after the big polluters like cargo transport on sea as well. Pull one of those off the sea and you likely save the effect of a million 2018+ cars. There is a very cool partial wind powered cargo ship being built in dock now overseas.
I'm totally ready to embrace EVs, but I still dread the long term cost of ownership. We don't have much data on how the batteries deal with age or high mileage. Unlike a hybrid, they are charged more, depleted more, etc. Also unlike a hybrid, their battery packs are much, much larger.
What little data is available shows battery replacement being insanely expensive, and it can total the vehicle - not unlike a cordless tool.
The definition ICE vehicle is important as well, does that include parallel hybrids, series hybrids?
frenchyd said:
In reply to Ian F (Forum Supporter) :
Until you drive the new EV's. We are used to a power curve. EV's have max power instantly. That's addictive as hell.
I have driven a dual motor performance Model 3. It's definitely a fun car. And maybe when it becomes feasible, I'll convert my old Triumphs to EV power and pipe in the sound of the original ICE. And the smells. But much like how I drive low power imports rather than max-power muscle cars. There is a certain part of the driving experience I don't want to give up. Much the same way people still go out for horseback rides. Or how I go for long bicycle road rides. It's not just the destination or how quickly I can get there, but the journey itself.
In reply to frenchyd :
There is a whole sense that the OP doesn't want the change to EV's. That somehow we're better staying in the past with ICE's. Comfort in the familiar.
I understand that. There are still horses out there. Steam or ICE's didn't eliminate them.
There will be ICE's long into the future. But just about as common as horses.
I think the issue some of us have is the switchover date dictated by government mandate rather than technological advancement and market forces. They pulled the 2035 date out of their greenhouse gas emitting body part. Nothing new, California did the same thing in the past- remember the ridiculous mandate to make a relatively high percentage of new car sales zero emissions? That never happened, they were trying to legislate technical advancement. Much like that mandate, the 2035 mandates are pure posturing. They may as well mandate that cancer is to be cured by 2035. The current politicians won’t likely be around then anyway, but they can enjoy the headlines and brownie points today. If 2035 rolls around and the market is saturated with EV’s and the infrastructure is up to date, this will be meaningless. Likewise, if the cost and range are still significantly behind ICE vehicles and the infrastructure is not there, this won’t happen.
I think we will get there, but it will be slow steady steps, not great leaps. There will also be speed bumps along the way, we will be trading known and solved problems for new ones. We are finally energy independent from the Middle East, now we are pushing towards dependance on another foreign adversary for battery materials. One that doesn’t really care how much pollution they make getting those materials.
As for the horses analogy- there was never a government mandate to replace horses with cars. Cars replaced horses when the cost and benefits drove consumers to choose cars over horses, and sufficient infrastructure existed. The differences between the function of a horse and a car back then was much greater than the difference in function of an ICE car and an EV.
In reply to ProDarwin :
Fear of the unknown is normal. What if you knew in 1920 that gasoline would cost you $2.09/9 a gallon 100 years later. In reference back in 1920 a well trained Black Smith might barely earn $2 a day for a 12 hour day
It's about perspective. Who cares what the cost is if we have the means to afford it?
I like EV's I've wanted one since the 70's. but as a cost effective solution, we have come a long way, but have a long way to go. Plus other issues a lot of folks pretend are not there.
I don't thing the tech. advances will be there by 2035. I wish the will be, but remain doubtful. 'Course by 2035, it will not be one of my major concerns. If USED ones every do get banned, I'll prolly be to senile to know.
I do like EV's. I also like ICE's, just as I like horses. They all have their pros and cons!
frenchyd said:
Who cares what the cost is if we have the means to afford it?
That's an absurd question. I care about cost, even if I have the means to afford it. I prefer a lower operating cost because it lets me save money for other things.
In reply to Boost_Crazy :
Government regulation has always been the stimulus for advancement. At at least, since 1966 when automotive emissions started to be regulated. (No more road draft tube, you need a PCV system to recycle the crankcase gases) Even electronic ignition was adopted because it was needed to meet emissions specs.
If it wasn't for the regulatory carrot, we'd still be driving cars with points and carbs that needed deep maintenance every few months, and were worn out garbage after two or three years.
Yes, there's something romantically lost about the automotive experience, but then, my daily driver is a 15 year old car with 240,000mi that runs high 13s, emits exhaust cleaner than the air it breathes in (barring CO2), gets decent fuel economy, regular maintenenance consists of an oil change every now and then, and I'd probably walk away from a high speed collision. And it's only getting better.
CyberEric said:
In reply to secretariata (Forum Supporter) :
I’m intrigued. Can you provide a link to that study?
I googled & couldn't find it. I also checked my work email but I previously deleted the email with the link. I'll check & see if I have the PDF on my work computer tomorrow. If I do, that may help me find a link.
ProDarwin said:
frenchyd said:
Who cares what the cost is if we have the means to afford it?
That's an absurd question. I care about cost, even if I have the means to afford it. I prefer a lower operating cost because it lets me save money for other things.
I agree with you completly! I'm broke these days, so I have to care, and prolly will stay this way, but I wasn't always... I always cared. if not for myself, then for others.
Boost_Crazy said:
In reply to frenchyd :
There is a whole sense that the OP doesn't want the change to EV's. That somehow we're better staying in the past with ICE's. Comfort in the familiar.
I understand that. There are still horses out there. Steam or ICE's didn't eliminate them.
There will be ICE's long into the future. But just about as common as horses.
I think the issue some of us have is the switchover date dictated by government mandate rather than technological advancement and market forces. They pulled the 2035 date out of their greenhouse gas emitting body part. Nothing new, California did the same thing in the past- remember the ridiculous mandate to make a relatively high percentage of new car sales zero emissions? That never happened, they were trying to legislate technical advancement. Much like that mandate, the 2035 mandates are pure posturing. They may as well mandate that cancer is to be cured by 2035. The current politicians won’t likely be around then anyway, but they can enjoy the headlines and brownie points today. If 2035 rolls around and the market is saturated with EV’s and the infrastructure is up to date, this will be meaningless. Likewise, if the cost and range are still significantly behind ICE vehicles and the infrastructure is not there, this won’t happen.
I think we will get there, but it will be slow steady steps, not great leaps. There will also be speed bumps along the way, we will be trading known and solved problems for new ones. We are finally energy independent from the Middle East, now we are pushing towards dependance on another foreign adversary for battery materials. One that doesn’t really care how much pollution they make getting those materials.
As for the horses analogy- there was never a government mandate to replace horses with cars. Cars replaced horses when the cost and benefits drove consumers to choose cars over horses, and sufficient infrastructure existed. The differences between the function of a horse and a car back then was much greater than the difference in function of an ICE car and an EV.
Please realize that in a democracy. Even the flawed one we have. We are the government. You and I and all the 330 million of us.
So those less than perfect Government servants are trying their best to prepare us for the future. Object if you are absolutely sure that you are right. On the other hand you can stand back and wait to see. Perhaps the future will be interesting in a positive way.
frenchyd said:
In reply to ProDarwin :
Fear of the unknown is normal. What if you knew in 1920 that gasoline would cost you $2.09/9 a gallon 100 years later. In reference back in 1920 a well trained Black Smith might barely earn $2 a day for a 12 hour day
It's about perspective. Who cares what the cost is if we have the means to afford it?
I started to ask what the relavance was, but thought it through, and don't want to go there... but I will point out that it is totally irrelevant.
frenchyd said:
Please realize that in a democracy. Even the flawed one we have. We are the government. You and I and all the 330 million of us.
So those less than perfect Government servants are trying their best to prepare us for the future. Object if you are absolutely sure that you are right. On the other hand you can stand back and wait to see. Perhaps the future will be interesting in a positive way.
You are correct in that we are supposed to be. unfortunate, the truth of the matter is very different.
And I, for one, will stop there, as per rules.
11GTCS
HalfDork
1/6/21 7:55 p.m.
I’m up for it. Better get busy rebuilding the electrical grid though. No way it has the capability of supporting the demand of an electric vehicle (or three) in every driveway as it stands today.
11GTCS said:
I’m up for it. Better get busy rebuilding the electrical grid though. No way it has the capability of supporting the demand of an electric vehicle (or three) in every driveway as it stands today.
Thats one of the things a lot of folks seem to ignore!
