325
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
325 points (97.1% liked)
Technology
59598 readers
3061 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
And like most of the tesla mess, this is just going to hurt EVs in the long run.
Because a lot of the exageration can be attributed to weather. You are going to have shorter range in the winter. How much shorter will depend on technology, build quality (uh oh), and so forth. And that is what this will mostly focus on which will make people even more afraid of getting an EV.
Which has more or less been what tesla ran on to begin with. Plug-in Hybrids were AWESOME... a decade ago. And tesla marketing basically made everyone terrified of their range because clearly you need a massive battery that takes up most of your car because everyone is going on long distance drives every day. And you also need the fastest possible charging because you need to charge up your entire battery in one go and need to sit in your car while you do it.
All of which is bullshit. PHEVs were pretty much perfect as a stopgap. Regenerative braking more or less would stretch a tank of gas out by weeks, if not months (to the point you have to start worrying about the gas in that tank) for the vast majority of commuters. And for longer distance drives, you still had a less efficient ICE.
And same with range for the longer drives or even charging during the week. Because tesla wanted to push their network (which is nice) and their massive batteries (which are overkill), the idea was that EVERYONE is going on massive road trips all the time and you should only ever charge up at a special tesla branded station. Rather than the reality that you plug your car in while you are food shopping or while you take a piss on a road trip and stay in the 20-80% range.
Which gets to the upcoming debacle. Yes, EVs have significantly less range in the cold. So do the vast majority of ICE vehicles. But also? How likely are you to go on a long road trip when it is snowing an inch an hour and is below zero? And, much like with driving in the cold, you have to be more aware of where to stop because you might need to pull off on the side of the road and rely on your car to keep you alive.
In a less shitty and less musk infested world? We would have seen the traditional automakers continue on the path they were on and would likely have most lines over the past three or four years being PHEV, bare minimum. With a gradual migration to full EVs because people trust their charging networks and so forth. Instead of a mad rush to get massive batteries with super fast charging being the requirement and the idea of a sedan being even less viable.
It’s more than weather. I don’t believe it’s possible to achieve the advertised range on any public road in any weather. I can drive like an old lady and I’m nowhere close. Driving normally typically results in at least 75 miles below advertised range and I live in a warm place.
That said, the range hasn’t been a problem. I always have enough range. It’s not really something consumers need to worry about because you can drive like you stole the car and still have plenty of juice to get to the next Supercharger.
However, it is a problem that the stated range is so far off the mark. You sort of expect it to be off in every car under normal driving but possible if you drive in a way to extend range. That’s not the case with Tesla. Their range estimates are entirely misleading like so many other things with the car.
I have an EV and so does my wife, we road trip all the time, the biggest issue is recharging times. Sitting 30 mins for a charge is fine every couple hours, but those level 2 chargers and slow DC chargers just kill all momentum on a road trip. Electrify America has decent chargers, and the most up to date ones work better than the last generation, but neither car can take their top speed charging, if they did it would be a much better experience.
Well, a lot of the chargers also can't charge the ioniq5 and the like at their full rates. So that is indeed a mess. But it is also the kind of mess that gets resolved over time as there is a bigger emphasis on "plug in while you go shopping" rather than dedicated locations.
Which gets back to the fundamental disconnect. People think of it in terms of going to a gas station and staring at the display while you debate if it is worth getting back in your car. When it really should be about 5-20 minutes here and 5-20 minutes there.
Its still going to be a disruption relative to stopping for gas and then flooring it for another 8 hours. But... my ass is old and that is a good recipe to have massive blood clots in my legs. Similarly, friends who can put up with children will always be on the lookout for a playground or a sit down restaurant. And, in terms of range, stuff like the ioniq5 and subaru soltera are more or less in that sweet spot of "stop at lunch, charge up, stop at a hotel and then get dinner at your destination" model. Combine that with 5 minutes here or there to increase margins and take a piss and it really isn't that different than a road trip for people who don't still think they are in their early 20s and trying to go 800 miles on a weekend trip.
Just based on build quality and reputation, I'd take a Subaru Solterra over even the highest-end Tesla any day. I live in Minnesota, and my bigger concern about Teslas is the lack of ground clearance. If I can get out of the snow bank in the ditch, I don't need my car's heating system to last 12 hours.
Would strongly suggest NOT buying a '23 Solterra. For some unfathomable reason, Subaru decided that you don't need a rear windshield wiper. Which means you are completely blind if you are driving on a mountain row in the snow/slush and so forth. ioniq5 has the same problem.
But yeah. You have solid build quality and a frame that is heavily based on tried and true designs. Versus something where the build quality is so bad that you need to be careful if it rains...
I won't be buying one for quite a while. I'm driving my 2021 Crosstrek with a manual transmission until it dies and I can't reasonably repair it anymore. It's the first new car I've ever had, it's my first manual transmission car, and I'm not giving it up for anything besides another of the same in a newer model. (and unfortunately, it looks like manuals are getting phased out throughout the market)
(Edit to add: I would be sorely tempted by a BRZ though.)
What's wrong with your side mirrors? They probably removed it to increase the range... wipers are notorious for creating significant drag even if they're on the rear.
Most vehicles don't have a rear wiper... some don't even have a rear window at all.
Many (most?) vehicles at least have those defrosting wires in the rear windshield to help improve visibility.
And for most driving, that is fine. People barely use their rear view mirror, let alone their sides. But when you are driving on a mountain road with slush and snow flying everywhere and frost on every surface of your car? You have a massive blind spot behind you (moreso if your side mirrors are frosted or sludged over) and now have to assume there is someone riding your bumper every time you decide how much you have to slow down into a curve and so forth.
I totally was not surprised to see the ioniq5 get rid of them because "Aerodynamics mean your rear window never gets dirty!". Subaru actually make SUVs for people who do sports (whether you are a lesbian soccer mom or a climber spending a weekend at the crag) and should know better.
You will not have that problem with Tesla though. All chargers are 150kW+.
Yeah right, and they are a big problem. I haven’t encountered a single V1 super charger in Europe after 4 years.
I have only ever seen one in the US and it was surrounded by V2 and V3.
That's not true, there are level 1 and level 2 chargers for Tesla on top of the DC chargers.
Honestly, I strongly feel that charging time is an important metric if you’re trying to displace ICE vehicles. Range, as long as you’re somewhere around 200-300 miles, is fine. On the highway my 4Runner gets about 300 a tank, my TLX gets about 500. In either case I’m lucky to go 180-200 before either someone has to pee, it’s lunch time, or I’m just tired and need to stretch. If I can charge up in ~15 min, while we’re all eating, stretching, using the restroom, etc, that’s perfectly acceptable and would easily replace my ICE vehicles. If it’s going to take an hour or more that really kills any sort of road trip. Especially around holidays when the chargers are going to be slammed. Think about the amount of pumps the average gas station has now and then realize that you’re talking 5x for 25min, if it’s an hour, 10+ times as long a stay at each one. That really changes the way we move in the US.
Sure day to day, this won’t matter. I’ll top off over night and be good to go for my commute. But no one’s going to buy one EV and one ICE/hybrid just to be able to visit family. They are WAY too expensive for that, and unfortunately, We don’t have the train/airline infrastructure here in the US for not doing that.
Thats just getting the charging network sorted as I can already charge my EV from 20 to 80% (or about 47kwh) in about 18 minutes at the right charger and faster charging EVs are already coming. My car doesn't even have battery pre conditioning that would improve things further.
Charging to 100% on stops on a road trip is always a bad idea, you are always going to need A LOT longer to get that last 20% or so than the 60% of charge from 20 to 80% due to the way current batteries work.
It is almost always quicker on an ultra fast charger to charge twice to 80% than once to 100% and you get significantly more range doing so. Charging twice to 80% nets me 94kwh and charging once to 100% from 20% nets me 61.6kwh, and the former is usually minutes faster to do as well.
Big batteries don't charge faster than small ones due to both being different amounts of smaller batteries, at the same time installing quick charging capabilities in domestic garages is complete overkill, over night is perfectly adequate.
There's probably going to be a mix of services: Quick charge ones which just might be done before you're done peeing and looking at sandwiches, where the operator wants you out of the booth as quick as possible so another can come in, and more relaxed road side diner like situations where an hour is perfectly acceptable (well, at least from an European POV), but there's also going to be as many chargers as parking spots.
Yea, 300-400 miles would be okay imo. However it takes me five minutes to fill my Gass tank and in that time everyone could go and pee and we can be on the road again. Roght now it's like 40 minutes for am 80% charge on these cars. Also every few miles there is a gas station. Who knows how long inhale to drove to get to a charger.
I think instead of ev tax credits that largely benefit the wealthy they should have spent that rebate money rolling out rv charging stations. To be honest I think we need at least a 2:1 ratio of ev chargers to current gas pumps and more likely a 4-1 ratio for this stuff to really take oft.
I’m not sure whether to vehemently agree or strongly disagree - this is all over the place
But
— yes, PHEVs were a fantastic step to reduce global warming … decades ago. The biggest issue with PHEVs was they were never widely produced and sold. Now that technology has caught up with a better choice, it’s too late to turn around and say “we’ll do what we should have 15 years ago”.
— my ICE car can go 340 miles on a tank of gas, supposedly, however I typically get 280. Have I sued? No, I understand it’s affected by weather, by the impossibility of creating a perfect standard behavior, and my lead foot. The manufacturer of course wants their product to look its best, so has an incentive to stretch that as far as they legally can
Wait what? The fuel efficiency is based on the 5 cycle fuel economy test, which includes a mix of highway and city driving. IIRC the figures from EPA/CARB are less rosy than EU/WLTP.
Tesla is definitely the odd one out here. Most manufacturers you can meet or exceed if you try hard enough. When you look at legislation, they say to use good engineering practice. Tesla arguably is not in this case.
I’m not sure if the the BEV/PEV regulations were solidified when Teslas first came to market, but they sure as hell are now.
As much as I like car and driver, that article is absolute dog shit. The edmunds article is interesting though.
I bet your gripe isn't with the EPA, but with SAE. I may be wrong, but if I recall correctly SAE uses EPA tests to define J1634 and allows manufacturers to either run an SCT or an MCT. EPA then adopts that into legislation. I believe EU/WLTP also uses J1634 but substitutes the EPA test cycles with the appropriate WLTC cycle (usually 3b for vehicles you would find in the US).
It’s more than weather. I drive a non-Tesla PHEV and it achieves about 60% of the claimed range when I drive highway speeds like 60mph.
The weather is a factor though. How will EVs ever be viable in freezing temperatures? The batteries will just shut down.
Wind makes for significant impacts, even on good cars. Let alone cars built so shittily that they shake apart on highways and leak when it rains.
The MPG ratings for ICE vehicles are a god damned mess on their own. There are lots of write ups out there but it is worth looking up the "golf ball car" video from Mythbusters (or just interviews with Adam Savage on Norm and Will Smith's Tested). Your mood generally makes for massive variance. It is just that people tend to not really focus as much on a car they refuel once a week or once a month.
But, because of regulations, those are still incredibly valuable numbers. Maybe you aren't getting 40 MPG city. but you ARE getting "about 33% better" fuel economy than a car with 30 MPG city.
Whereas tesla kind of just fucks around and then relies on gaslighting, fraud, and cultists. As is their way
The batteries prioritize keeping themselves warm. I’ve driven my Tesla down to -40. The range is decreased and phantom drain is increased, but it always starts at the end of the day, even when ICE cars all over my work parking lot don’t. I suppose it could be an issue for someone who isn’t mindful of the charge levels or who doesn’t have access to daily charging.
You probably have to use a portion of that energy to manage optimal thermal range.
I don't really buy that. We don't (well, most people don't) drive around in freezing cold cars. The cares are heated and it doesn't use much energy. Also if your EV is plugged in overnight it should be pre-heated to a sensible temperature (still cold, but not freezing).
Combustion engines also struggle in cold weather - that's why the cooling system is disconnected until the engine reaches operating temperature. Electric motors and batteries generate heat when they're running - harnessing that to keep the batteries warm.
Some brands only lose 3% of their range in cold weather. The shitty brands lose up to 35%... that's not the technology's fault, it's a failure by the engineering team and consumers should be entitled to a refund if it was sold in a cold climate with only the summer range advertised. The car isn't fit for purpose.
I would be interested in the cars that lose 3% in cold weather. Got a source for what cars do they? Even the new Fords lose massive range
You might "buy" more things if you actually continue reading rather than instantly feeling the need to stop and respond to a post?
But to address a few of your expansions on what I said immediately after you just HAD TO CORRECT SOMEONE!!!!
And then you just reiterated exactly what I said after you cut off the quote, regarding different brands and models having different behavior.
Erm... this is a community focused on discussion. And I wasn't "correcting" you, I was disagreeing with you.
If the cabin is warm and the battery is cold, somehow exchange heat between the two. It's not hard and it can be done only when the weather is cold.
ICE cars have had the capacity to exchange heat between the cabin and the motor for pretty much as long as they have existed. You'd have to go back almost a hundred years to find a car that lacks that feature - (that's how car heaters generally work).
Every car has a heat pump - it's more commonly called air conditioning, but it's the same thing. And while some are only capable of cooling the ones that can do both cooling and heating cost basically the same to manufacture.
That's relatively easy to fix though. Chargers don't cost much to install, get it done in your own home (even if it's just 110v - more than enough to keep the batteries warm) and you should be able to find hotels that have them (though seriously, how often are you staying in hotels and driving your own car? that's a bit of a niche...)
I did read your entire comment. I agree with the facts you wrote but what I don't agree with is your interpretation of them. A car that has 35% less than the advertised range for several months of the year does not meet customer expectations and should be either fixed with a recall or customers given a refund. It's false advertising. It's illegal. And it's good to see the DOJ is probing them.
All Tesla had to do was tell the truth "you get this range in winter, this range in summer". Simple. They can't turn back time though - that advertising had to be made before anyone in a cold climate bought a car off them.
All telsa had to do is complie with current standards which is to list highway and local mpg equivalent.
Chevy doesn't list a cold range when I need to idle the engine to get it warm enough to drive on a standard car.
Like the Toyota Prius Prime? They're already doing exactly what you said. Unless I misunderstood.