EV are they worth it?
- Thread starter ericmark
- Start date
- Status
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 25,011
- Reaction score
- 2,895
- Location
- Llanfair Caereinion, Nr Welshpool
- Country
The charging of a discharged battery needs the battery to have some voltage so the circuit to prevent being fitted wrong way around can work, and in some cases to detect if 6 or 12 volt, with the latter it needs between 7 and 8 volt to charge a 12 volt battery can't remember exact figure. But when 12 volt only it is some where around 3 volt.
The same with a jump start battery pack with the croc clips, but with the cig lighter connection it does not have the protection for reverse polarity except for the fuse, I remember with my father-in-laws car the ignition would not switch on, so we could not charge through the cig lighter connection, and I had to jack up rear of car and drag it part out of garage to open bonnet as it was parked under the work bench, not being able to get into a car without the battery being charged is daft, but that is nothing to do with being an electric car.
Do you think £100,000 is value for money for an anonymous looking battery Volvo?
No idea why anyone would spend £100K on an electric car, a petrol car, or any car.
A colossal waste of money and resources.
Obese impractical clumpwagons.
Sponsored Links
I don't see that rich people spending a lot of money on an electric car are any worse than rich people spending a lot of money on a petrol car or any worse than rich people spending a lot of money on a hybrid car.
Can you prove that one is better or worse than the others?
Interesting case in point, this every evening! There I was, charging at Annandale Water services. I noticed a couple in a Kia EV on another charger a few down from the one I was using. They seemed to be having some kind of problem. When I came out, 10 minutes later, they were still there, so asked if they were having problems. They were! Their charging flap wouldn't close. For reasons best known to themselves, Kia had made the charging flap electrically operated. For some reason, it wasn't working. They could push the flap closed by hand, very easily (no harder than a petrol filler flap). However, unless the car's own electric actuator closed the flap, the car thought the flap was open - which meant it wouldn't power-up, wouldn't release its electric handbrake and would't move! They were stuck there, with plenty of electricity in their battery!
Sadly, I couldn't think of anything, s I had to leave them to it. I went back to my low-tech BMW, unplugged it, pushed the flap shut with my finger, and drove off...
Is this proof that EV owners are being taken for mugs and the whole EV thing is getting even more preposterous? £100,000 for the latest completely forgettable and anonymous battery blandmobile from Volvo, that looks like any other battery blandmobile. Is anyone mad enough to spend a tenth of a million on this?
The £100k Volvo EV that drove me to distraction: We drive the EX90
It is packed with tech to keep Volvo at the top of the game for safety. However, an unfortunate and irritating flaw threatens to undermine that laudable claim and heritage...www.thisismoney.co.uk
Gosh! There I was, waiting for the article to tell me how it broke down, or malfunctioned in some way to drive him to distraction, and it turns out that actually nothing went wrong with it, he was just having a moan about the touchscreen!
I don't like touchscreens either, but would you like me to find you a £100k ICE car with a touchscreen?
That article had naff-all to do with it being an EV, and everything to do with it being a modern car with a touchscreen!
You've not been concerned with such trifles as "proof" before, and I doubt anything has changed in this regard
ICE evangelists ought to welcome us EV pioneers: selflessly ensuring that our contributions to climate protection will allow them more slack to keep polluting it
Gosh! It's normally Nutjob who posts ****e like this! What's got into you?!
Note the "terrifying" statistic quoted at 2 mins and 9 seconds in. 1.43 spontaneous combustions per 10,000 vehicles. Sounds awful, doesn't it?
It's actually BETTER than the figures for ICEs!
Depending on which sources you fancy, ICEs are around
"With data corroborated from a US insurer, the study found that EVs suffer 25 fires per 100,000 sold." (That's 2.5 per 10,000)
"Petrol or diesel vehicles were found to experience 1,530 fires per 100,000, with hybrid vehicles at a notably higher risk of 3,475 fires per 100,000." (That's 153 pr 10,000 and 348 per 10,000 respectively!
Or if you prefer a different source:
Tusker fleet data reveals the truth about EV fires
The salary sacrifice specialist has analysed data from its fleet to understand if there is any truth behind some of the commonly shared myths surrounding EVs.
www.fleetnews.co.uk
So basically, the transition to EVs should see FEWER fires per day n China than they have now!
Data from fleet operators, leasing companies, etc should be good, as all their vehicles are new.
I'd be wary of using data from insurers, or fire & rescue services, without drilling down into it, as their EV fire figures will be for new(ish) cars, whereas ICE ones might include cars decades old which have not been properly serviced. Not that I believe the anti-EV nuts about EVs being mobile bombs, but if you want to (pointlessly) argue with them on the basis of facts, your facts must be unassailable.
I'd be wary of using data from insurers, or fire & rescue services, without drilling down into it, as their EV fire figures will be for new(ish) cars, whereas ICE ones might include cars decades old which have not been properly serviced. Not that I believe the anti-EV nuts about EVs being mobile bombs, but if you want to (pointlessly) argue with them on the basis of facts, your facts must be unassailable.
- Joined
- 25 Jul 2022
- Messages
- 12,531
- Reaction score
- 983
- Country
So as ice cars get older the figures are likely to get worse you mean.
Insurers are probably the best source of risk factors. It's their very business.
They do, and will,price risk accordingly
I agree on the last point, wholeheartedly. None of the current generation of EVs is 20 years old yet. However, it's such a basic statistical practice, that I would really hope the figures are quoted per 100,000 (or 10,000 ) of each AND that the statistical samples are selected so as to avoid skewing the sample sets of each group. (In other words, not going out of their way to count all the 20+ year old ICE "bangers", but only counting EVs under a year old)!
I'm fairly certain that's the case anyway, because those same figures also include hybrids (which are even worse than ICEs!) and they haven't been out much longer than EVs have. To me, that's the most telling feature that leads me to believe this is nothing more than a propaganda war. There are dozens of anti-EV posts citing the fire risk, yet none of the people scaremongering about EV fire risks, ever say a word about hybrids - despite them being the worst of the three!
If one didn't know better, one might be forgiven for thinking that vehicle fires are only really a problem for vehicles that never have to visit a filling station to buy petroleum-based products...
- Status
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
