1,036 km (644 miles) on a single charge under China’s CLTC testing standard.
Does anyone know how realistic this range is? You can get some absurd range from a vehicle if you're driving on a closed course at 60kmh with no air conditioning or entertainment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Light-Duty_Vehicle_Test_Cycle
The CLTC testing accounts for the country's higher congestion levels with more frequent stop-and-go and lower speed limits, which lead to increased low-speed driving and longer idling times that benefits electric vehicles.
WLTP, which is closer to US Highway driving, estimates 800 km. Or 500 Eagles.
I mean, that's still pretty darn impressive.
For better or worse, it's one of those sticking points keeping many away from electric. I was like that several years ago, but I've noticed my driving patterns since then. I can't do electric because I can't afford a new car and even worse I'm an apartment dweller, so there's no infrastructure. But if I could, I absolutely would get a vehicle. Long as it had a couple hundred miles of range, that's all I need (we have a second car anyway, so if we needed longer trips, we're covered). And less battery means moving less mass means even cheaper to run.
But my dad went looking a few years ago and ended up with a gas car again - because they do take trips and drive sometimes, and so the idea of having to recharge, even on infrequent trips, was a sticking point. But with 500 miles of range, it's getting to the point where that's getting close to a day's comfortable driving for a lot of people, and if you can charge overnight, then it becomes enough for trips and it helps eliminate the range anxiety.
I think once people start transitioning over to electric, their second vehicle might have less range…
I mean, that’s still pretty darn impressive.
Is it? 122 KWhr battery -they are just piling in more batteries, which means a huge waste on energy and money on carrying around battery packs.
Who drives 500 eagles without stopping?
I mean they can just fly out the window
Came across this which I've not validated but does seem to make sense at a glance: Comparison of WLTP and CLTC
Based on that the WLTP range would be 828-900km (515-560 miles).
Real world, 6-700km at a guess?
Yeah, the EV range is frustrating.
270 miles? Pretty good. Except you shouldn't drive it below 20% or above 80%, so really the range is like 170. Cold winter? Now it's like 75.
No regrets on our EV, but I would feel a whole more more comfortable with 2x the capacity.
Too bad we can't buy BYD here.
It’s amusing to me that the same folks to deride Chinese car manufacturers because they are somehow cheating by getting support from the government are the same people demanding that the US government artificially protect the US car industry by blocking Chinese imports. The point being that neither side actually objects to government participation in the market. But, one side uses it to make better products and service consumers, and the other does it to protect worse products from market forces.
"A free market is self regulating" until someone makes a better product for less money, I guess.
We tasted some of that self regulating 'free market' a while ago. Banks were having huge profits from the housing bubble until the subprime crisis hit, banks went into default, and the losses were picked up by public money.
My profit. Our losses.
The point both of you deliberately overlook is that China is not participating in a free market anyway. They never played by those rules so there‘s no point in treating them the same way as anyone who does. There is a lot of hypocrisy to be found in politics and economics around the world and China itself is a prime example of that. But a measure to defend yourself from an obvious case of economic warfare is the most understandable thing in history. Your criticism is misplaced and irrational. I mean do you seriously think a monopoly is desirable?
When has the US ever participated in a free market?
Man..interweb really drinks that anti-China koolaid.
Decades of propaganda works. Centuries of racism helps as well.
We've had of ecocomic warfare already. It was just fine for US companies to hollow out domestic manufacturing so China could build the manufacturing infrastructure that could have been built in the US.
But now that a Chinese company is building things that undercut a US company, you want protections for US billionaires that weren't afforded to US workers.
Are you ignoring the whole subsidies thing on purpose? This is not BYD attacking Tesla. This is the Chinese government attacking western industries.
If the Chinese government is losing money on each car they export, soon China will be bankrupt. It only makes sense to buy more China cars at cheap rates and bankrupt their country.
Also, there is no proof of subsidy, it's just made up Western cope.
USA subsidized Detroit $80B since 2008, and that's ignoring state graft for building assembly plants. What the fuck did they do with that money, attack Eastern industries?
Well, it was $79.7B to be exact. And what the US government did with that was not cut checks, but rather, purchased stock in the companies.
When it sold the stock it bought from manufacturers, it sold for around $70B. When they sold the approximately $2.4B invested into Ally (an auto financing firm), it sold for $17.2B.
So the money spent in 2008 actually made a profit. It was not distributed to the manufacturers or finance companies at all. Just used to shore up their value to prevent them from going out of business – and more importantly, probably, make sure investors didn't lose money, or at least not too much.
When you take into account inflation and the overall market gains over that time, they absolutely did not make their money back.
When you take into account that the original assertion was tht eighty billion was given to the auto manufacturers, I don't think my comment deserves the reaction it got, not a reply like yours.
Would you rather they ended up with zero dollars?
Would you rather they ended up with zero dollars?
Yes.
The only terms under which I could potential accept tax money being used to save a company from a collapse leading to massive layoffs, is if the resulting company is also made entirely employee owned.
Well, that's not how it would happen and you know it.
China defends its interests and follows what rules it deems advantageous. Just like everyone else does. It may upset you but they're just better at playing this game than most countries nowadays.
Because they don't have a class of politicians and billionaires stuffing their pockets.
644 mile range? But what if I need to drive 650 miles once in a decade? Electric cars are just a stoopid fad.
It’s not struggling to keep pace. It’s not trying to keep pace.
Not having to keep pace. They just get the competitive cars banned in the US, then charge so much fucking money here for their shit products it's worth losing the rest of the world.
Dealers arent incentivized to promote a vehicle that requires less maintenance they can mark up.
American Auto Industry Struggles to Keep Pace
You mean lobbies the government to ban Chinese EVs, because they have no means of competing whatsoever? Free market for me, but not for thee.
Has always been this way. Back in the late 70/early 80s, Harley couldn't compete with the Japanese bikes so they lobbied to daddy fed to make sure all the foreign bikes got tarriffed out of existence over 700cc. So the Japanese said "hold my soju" and made 699cc motorcycles that still made more power than the gargantuan Harley bikes of the time. USA has always tried to give US based companies a leg up over objectively superior products. Our tax dollars are why there are any American car companies left, sure Ford didn't get a direct bail out but we use them for police and other service vehicles across the country which has helped keep them afloat. Plus obviously Chrysler and GM taking govt bailouts and still flailing desperately while making trash vehicles and wondering why they don't sell. The American auto industry doesn't struggle to keep pace, it has NEVER caught up to or even compared to the rest of the world. They have always been 30+ years behind any European or Asian vehicle.
So the Japanese said “hold my sake”
FTFY. Soju is Korean.
Not like other countries arent doing the literal same.
But we also dont scream into the world that we are "LaNd oF tHe FrEe"
"Struggling" implies the American Auto industry is at least trying to keep pace. But really, they aren't trying at all. They are content to sit back thinking their current flock of geese will lay golden eggs forever even as more and more of those geese drop dead from old age.
But really, they aren’t trying at all.
GM's biggest sales increases are with Cadillac EVs last year.
Detroit followed the Tesla model, with the highest profit margins in the industry because their CEO convinced simps EVs should be expensive. So they jumped in early with poorly designed and expensive vehicles, thinking Tesla stans were everywhere.
There was a time, worldwide, if you just wanted a reliable and low cost sedan, you bought a Ford or Chevy, and they sold millions. But round 2016, Detroit lost interest in lower cost vehicles, and by 2020, they got addicted to price gouging cheap vehicles to make them expensive, and why not, people were paying $70,000+ for a Jeep and just taking it up the ass.
Given Detroit abandoned that part of the market, they shouldn't care if Chinese EVs arrive, right? Because their $60,000 EVs are a better product, right?
That‘s the main problem in Europe as well. I don‘t mind tariffs on heavily subsidized cars that are designed not to make profit but to destroy our industries. However, even then our manufacturers are in a constant crisis mode and unable to adapt. It‘s really pathetic.
But hey, when the car lobby is dead maybe that means more trains and cycling paths in the long run? Perhaps there‘s an opportunity here.
It’s all thanks to Germany though. They are the ones who have succeeded in scrapping the bill to ban new ICE vehicle sales after 2035
If it has to be forced, then it probably isn't a good idea.
We're only just now. Like this year just now, seeing batteries that can be made much cheaper and last much longer (sodium ion) and batteries that will last the actual lifetime of a vehicle (solid state lithiums, allegedly). The cars the past 5 years that have had LifePO4 batts will last decently long. Up until now you've been looking at EV's that cost more, with batteries that will go bad in them that cost huge amounts of money to replace. A 10 year old Tesla with 200,000 miles on it is essentially garbage. No one will pay much for it because it's about to need a $15,000 battery, and when it fails it's going to the junk yard. My little ice car has nearly 300,000 miles on it and is old enough to vote. If the engine blows up I could buy a working used one for like $500 and install it myself, or pay somebody else a couple grand to deal with it all for me.
Passenger cars aren't the end all be all to global warming or the environment, either. They aren't the main cause. Most countries grid systems couldn't handle a complete EV swap by 2035. Look at the issues these stupid ai server farms are causing grid systems.
My point is, no one should need to force ev. At this point it will become the better and obvious choice over ice on its own. It isn't there yet for tons of people or countries.
No one will pay much for it because it's about to need a $15,000 battery,
That's pretty rare though. Less than 5% of EVs need a battery replacement after 10 years (including those with defective batteries), and modern EV batteries should last at least 20 years, after which they're still estimated to have around 65-70% capacity.
Never understood why EVs aren't made with standardized hot swappable cells. Would solve the range problem and the wear problem.
There was at least one company several years ago that was trying. Go to a place and pay a fee, kind of like how you'd swap out a propane gas bbq grill tank. They'd forklift out the empty batt and forklift in the charged one, was their game plan.
The tech is all too knew for standardization. Too many chemistries and voltages and places to figure out where to stick batteries.
If what catl is producing right now is correct and true, we should be all set in the coming future. Supposed sodium batteries at 175wh per kilogram and over 10,000 charge cycles and very fast charging. Great for sub 300 mile range small econo vehicles. Then the solid state lithiums they're working on are also supposed to have a high amount of charge cycles and energy densities close to 500wh\kg, which will give plenty of range and make the cars lighter, which is really needed to ease up on suspension and efficiency and tread wear.
The US auto industry and market abandoned fuel efficient vehicles and continue to fail to improve BEV's and the infrastructure to support them.
American Auto Industry Struggles to Keep Pace
Them being end up second place isn't new, as these makers can't help but throw in too many features but cut out the quality or improve efficiency, such as being unable to match the fuel efficiency of non-US compact cars more than 50 years ago.
It doesn't matter US is so protectionist that american car brands simply can't fail. Which tbf is understandable and the case in most countries but the point being that car competition domestically is only worthwhile discussion from protectionism pov not actual technology
They need to hire a design studio, it's really ugly
And I fucking love it.
Reminds me of the new iX3 from BMW.
Just nice.
Another generic potato SUV. Yay.
Yeah, honestly this is the default car shape now and I hate it. At least the BYD looks like a big estate, which id much rather have.
That definitely is an advantage over the iX3. It's kind of like a Porsche Panamera, isn't it?
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
