Climate control and low temperatures takes its toll on your range. As long as you understand that, you will be fine once you develop your sense of operational charging and how to find the DC chargers while traveling.
@@barryredman2803 that's a major problem that needs to be addressed and became glaringly obvious with the cold weather we've had recently. My ICE's mpg drops by less than 5% when it's in single digits outside and it still only takes 3 minutes to get enough fuel to go 400 miles. EVs range drops significantly in the cold and so does the time it takes to charge.
@@Noah_E Yes, so that means only 9% of the available energy in gasoline is actually powering your car, the rest of it is lost to friction, air resistance, and heat. Any actual solutions or do you just want to remain an advocate for carbon monoxide?
I would like to see battery/range degradation numbers for each vehicle, as a function of calendar aging and mileage. Even more useful would be an EPA approved website where I can select a car model and year, and then input various parameters (payload, outside temperature, typical driving speed, vehicle mileage, etc), and get a range estimate. The more parameters I enter, possibly the more accurate the result).
Good point. Nobody fills their gas tank to 80% because it doesn't make the tank smaller over time to fill it to 100%, nor does it take an extra hour or two to put in that last 20%. Realistically, drivers should be more interested in the actual usable range, not the theoretical range that will degrade the battery if you actually fill it 100% and run it down to zero.
@3:15 "they provide us with a car" so the manufactures choose the vehicle. surely the EPA should randomly purchase a typical example, rather than allowing the manufacturer to choose a top performing example ?
@@MI-gs1qoyeah let's ask the computer what's going on instead of actually measuring it. Reports don't matter real numbers do. VW proved this flaw. On emissions why does it matter what's reported and if it's orginal and not what is actually coming out the exhaust?
0:26: 🚗 Electric vehicles (EVs) are gaining popularity in the US, but there are concerns about the accuracy of their range estimates. 3:27: 🚗 The EPA tests cars to ensure they meet regulations and collects data for other agencies. 6:51: 🚗 The EPA faces challenges in testing electric vehicles due to the complexity of factors like battery depletion, real-world driving conditions, and heating/cooling systems. 9:32: 🚗 The way electric vehicle (EV) range is tested and reported can lead to discrepancies between lab results and real-world driving, causing range anxiety for drivers. 12:46: 🚗 Car and driver testing data shows that EVs fall short of their range numbers by 12.5% on average, and the range can vary depending on driving conditions. 16:19: 🚗 Automakers have a history of pushing against regulations, as seen in the Dieselgate scandal, but the focus is now on electric vehicles and ensuring they are environmentally friendly. Recap by Tammy AI
I want to see a min/max range reported for EVs that is more than just city vs highway. Let's take two simple examples: he manufacturer would test the car like this: 1. A gentle drive around the city, no jackrabbit starts, no maxing out the power, no air conditioning or heating used, no use of the sound system. 2. A drive on a very hot day, with the air conditioning on, climbing at high speed up a mountain road, with the 2,000 watt stereo blasting and somebody in the back seat watching a video on a screen powered by the car. 3. A drive up a mountain on a very cold day with the heat fully turned on, deicers and widow wipers going. IThis way I can get some idea of what range to reasonably expect and what my safety margins are in each scenario.
So why don't they just report miles per kilowatt for city and highway like the Gas cars? Or just change the ICE numbers to total combined range like EV's? Oh that's right, the oil companies want you to have range anxiety so you avoid EVs.....They could also put range with the cost to recharge/refuel. Like 350 miles/$120 for an F150 or 350 miles/$20 for an F150 EV.
Cost to recharge isn't something they can do, given the wildly varying costs of electricity by region/state, and also varying cost by time in many cases. They definitely should have separate range numbers for highway and city just like ICE, and the highway test needs to be updated to be representative of real world highway conditions in the United States. The EPA "highway" cycle never goes above 60 MPH and spends a lot of time below 40 - when in reality nearly all interstates are 65+.
They kinda do! And mine will tell me right on my dash. Hyundai says I'm supposed to get 17kwh /100km I get around 12-15 in the summer and 17-20 in the canadian winter. Public charging is pay per minute, so a ton of factors go into how much a charge will cost to dc fast charge. I dont use public chargers much, but it costs me about $20 for 400km. You can Google energy rates in your area, I dont pay utilities, and charge completely for free from home, so I can't help. But you could tell me how much it would cost to charge my 64 kwh battery by finding out how much a kwh costs at your home. It's cheap. Ridiculously cheap compared to gas
Could the EPA rating use some adjustment? Sure. I would argue it isn't that big a deal. It'll ALWAYS be inaccurate; too many variances between how people drive, conditions driven in, etc. By now people should understand any EPA estimate (gas, EV, whatever) is ideal and should not be taken as gospel. This isn't new. What we really can get from it, aside from a range estimation, is the ability to compare different cars to one another. THIS is what we need. The key, then, is having manufacturers all follow the same program and report the same. No hedging numbers in either direction. Test correctly and report those tests.
i think it would also be helpful that the specific test parameters be provided with the stated EPA ratings (transparency), so the consumer knows exactly what test that EPA number was generated from. And to be fair, who the source of that test result data was provided by (the manufacturer or the EPA agency). and if there were any discrepancies, to disclose what the discrepancies were and what was done to resolve them.
I have seen multiple people say they get more range sometimes. I don't think they are lying. I just wonder if their meters are wrong. Like are you drafting a few feet from semis on the highway? How are you getting 20 to 30 miles more. Then the Taycon having that much of a difference. What did they say. Nearly 80 miles more? The hell. Anyway that is a scary thought. Having a messed up range meter or gauge. One side note. Auto makers should make more ways to have it where you charge at 20-80%. In fact when the car is at 20% make it say zero. Since min maxing your battery is one guaranteed way to shorten your battery life... Just like ICE cars require things like oil changes. EVs require that to extend the life of the vehicle. Hopefully the government pushes ways for battery swaps to be easier, and those batteries recyable.
@@michaellong2439and more than likely people drive at least five over. So even with a 65 posted speed the average speed is 70, but the EPA still tests at 55.
You an tie a horse up on a treadmill and force it to run but that will never tell you how far it can go in a day. These so-called experts need to get out in the real world to test these cars and not be hiding in a building making worthless guesses.
I just want to say, if we're worried about efficiency and reduced emissions, it's better to just ditch commuting by car and switch to walking, cycling, and public transit. For short distances, you can easily commute by walking or cycling. For longer distances, its far, far more efficient to transport dozens on a bus or hundreds on a train. This also reduces car traffic and pedestrian deaths/car accidents. Cities need to be designed right to make these safer and more reliable. Take a look at Tokyo or Amsterdam, a majority of the population do not commute by car or even own one, and the streets look beautiful. Cars are the wrong tools for the
You can't walk anywhere in so many parts of America. Walk-ability was designed out decades ago. The only places you can get anywhere on foot are the older cities (pre-WWI cities). Some places are starting to see the folly of those car-centric urban planning decisions, but it's going to take decades of hard work by thousands of municipalities before we start to see much of a reversal of the car-dependent system that's in place right now.
The cost of purchasing a new car today is very expensive, depreciation, insurance, maintenance, liability, and more. Car is a just a huge financial expense. An E-bike would more sense for a good portion of the population !
@@michaeloreilly657 Oh, good. I’ll just ride an e-bike on a highway, and across a toll road bridge, then I’ll plug it in to charge at my job where we have an abundance of charges.
They need to rate EVs by miles per KW highway and city using 70 degrees Fahrenheit. Then people can realize or understand that extremes are going to change the outcome. Example : Say a Nissan Leaf one of the first gen early models without active cooling. They had a sweet spot for mileage in town at about 35 mph and 50 degrees F that is where they did their best. Anything warmer started to drastically change the range and anything over 60 mph started to drastically change the range. So as an example realistically you could give it a rating of 4 mpkw city and 2.8 mpkw Highway at 70 degrees. Now we know that in town driving can vary all over the place and that Highway speeds can vary but the faster you go with an EV the quicker your range drops off. The more extreme the temperature is away from 70 degrees the greater the range loss. The Nissan Leaf would have had the biggest swing in range loss and something like the Tesla in that era would have had the least change in range loss but both would have been affected the same way. Now when you looked at the data on the window sticker it would have told you that. It also would have the equivalent mpge to give people a comparison to a gas vehicle near the same size. If your vehicle came with a 30 KWh battery pack vs a 60 KWh battery pack you could get a sense of how much range to expect out of your vehicle. The first gen Leaf got some range improvement when they went to the 30 KWh battery pack and you could expect to get around 75 miles average when it was newer. Many ICE car owners would have known more of what to expect out of their Electric vehicles if that information was on the sticker.
@@cerisem7727 No they won't, electric motors are rock-solid. I think some of Teslas very early designs didn't always hold up well long-term, but those issues are in the past. And very few EVs will ever need new batteries. The batteries that need replacing are generally caused by manufacturing defects, and are generally caught before the warranty period has elapsed. Manufacturing is getting better all the time. And no, batteries will not need to be replaced due to degradation -- that's not a thing any more (you're thinking of Nissan LEAFs, which passively air-cooled their batteries). Everyone liquid cools their batteries now, and after reducing to about 85% of their original range over 5-10 years, they'll stay there for the rest of the cars general lifespan. Battery capacity will drop slowly, but most cars will be junked before the battery holds such little charge that it's not useful to either its current owner or a downmarket owner who finds the range acceptable. So much more can go wrong in a combustion car due to the increased complexities. EVs are able to get rid of so many complex systems. Now there's fewer complex systems, though there's still plenty of complexity.
Look at the discrepancy on the Porsche Taycan 4S. Rated at just over 200 miles yet they were able to get over 300. I have a Kia EV6 GT rated at 206 miles yet I am getting 270-280 miles. The EPA needs to drive them, not just hook them up to machines and then use arbitrary correction factors.
I think they need to do both since it's difficult to get repeatable conditions in a real world driving environment (temperature and wind, a tester's driving style, etc.).
I do think it's best to underestimate than to overestimate. It's hard if you go to a 300 mile journey but stop at 200 miles because you're out of juice. Better just plan for a 200 mile journey and still have plently left over if you need to charge up.
We should have all of the above. Safe bicycle paths, walkable neighborhoods with access to things people actually need, and electric cars when traveling longer distances.
Yes, but walkable neighborhoods are largely fantasies in the USA due to past zoning mistakes. If every municipality decided today to rectify this, it'd take 50 years to reverse those mistakes affordably.
8 years into EV ownership with over 200k miles driven between 5 different EVs. 2 owned and 3 rented for long distance trips. The craziest thing to me is the cold hit to range and then the second biggest observation I have had is how much of a difference it makes on highways to stay behind a semi going long distances. You can do 65-70mph 3 car lengths behind a semi and be getting the same efficiency as doing 45-50.
Put another way, temperature, wind resistance, elevation, and speed, are the biggest factors when estimating the the range of am EV. The truck takes a brunt of the wind resistance allowing it to go further. Driving that close to a truck can be dangerous if it unexpectedly stops and it seems most EV drivers want to go faster than the trucks which leaves them in confusion why they didn't get the range advertised by the EPA.
@lancesbeataxes2901 Indeed, it can be dangerous staying close to the rear of a truck. Lucky at 35 I have a flawless driving record and always keep eyes forward. I'm not a distracted driver at all. I only use that method when I know I have to squeeze out a trip somewhere and back without charging.
Even not going behind a semi, but driving 60-65mph vs 70-75mph on the highway makes an enormous difference for EV range. I try to stay under 67 mph and go slower if that’s pace of the slower lane as long as it’s not super slow. I have a plug-in hybrid. So I try to save the fast highway driving of over 70mph for when the gas engine has engaged. And that really mostly only happens on overnight trips.
My first EV had a range of barely 30 miles. It was a '67 Mustang with a series wound motor and lead acid batteries. That was 30 years ago. My latest EV will go a month without charging unless I drive to the ball park and back.
@@blink182bfsftw Pretty much all of them will do that. I drive 3,000 miles a year. Model 3 is my current model and I charge every other sunday whether I need to or not. Level 1 works for me.
There are a few things they missed. Legacy automakers tend to do better than their published ranges, the range drops are mostly in start ups and mostly in Tesla's. The reason is they use the 5 part test but also the Germans go one step further and state a lower range than tested, knowing that the cars will loose range over time. Some pf the other legacy automakers do the same, but to a lesser extent. Also, many of the things that shrink EV range shrinks gas range too, its is just less noticeable.
If you read the EPA submissions from Porsche, they gamed the numbers AGAINST their favor in classic Porsche underpromise and overdeliver. The EPA allows you to use less aggressive dyno coefficients than the target, with the logic that the dyno itself and tires have rolling resistance that is in addition to the dyno set coefficients. Many AWD EVs even have negative values for some of the coefficients because the dyno rollers lead to higher rolling resistance than flat pavement. Porsche didn't even bother to deal with this. They just set the dyno coefficients to the target, which meant that rolling resistance was double counted in their test in a manner EXTREMELY unfavorable to them. Which is one of the reasons why the Taycan is one of the only EVs to beat its EPA range numbers when driven at 70 MPH steady-state - it not only does so, by does so by a MASSIVE margin.
@@deficator750 Yes, that’s what most people observed. Established carmakers like Porsche are honest, startup car makers like Tesla are crooks. Elon, Kanye, trump. Same thing.
My brand new Ford Fusion got closer to HALF the MPG it was rated for, even with premium gas and gentle driving. I took it back to the dealer, they agreed, but said the official response from Ford was that FORD was ok with that. I never bought a Ford again.
and yet they still cant get MPG/EV range right with all this high tech stuff. rule of thumb for EVs 30F-95F subtract 15% off the EPA range over 95F-100F 20% off the EPA range over 100F 40-50% off the EPA range youre welcome. an EV owner can figure this out better than the EPA does. they dont test things in the real world period.
It’s not that the ranges may be inaccurate, they are inaccurate. This has been tested by multiple people & the estimated range is on average 20% more than it actually is. This is not the case with ICE vehicles. This EV manufacturers need to stop this. Stop testing this stuff in a lab & do a real world test instead, because the numbers you get in a lab with no wind resistance or grade changes is not going to be accurate at all, as well as not placing any people in the vehicles. Also, they need a separate City/Highway range for all EVs, not listing this is simply irresponsible.
BS. I prefer not to have to think about my car multiple times a day. Range anxiety is a thing. Be honest how may times a day do you look at your phone to check on the charge status of your vehicle? Yep thats what I thought
@@DonTRump-j8e mine’s got a full tank every morning, so annual holidays are the only minor planning exercise for me. I haven’t breathed petrol fumes for more than 3 years and the savings pay big time.
@@DonTRump-j8eI have a full battery every single morning, so I worry about my battery WAY less than I used to worry about gas. It's incredibly rare I drive more than 400kms in a single day
EVs should have a city and hwy rating. They peform poorly under load ; such as drving at freeway speeds. A Rivian was driven towing a trailered mustang 2400 miles across the US. It had to stop every 120 miles to charge for an hour; that is 3 hours to travel 120 miles or 40mph. The EPA rating was 350 miles - EPA= biased liars.
For starters, the idiots at the EPA need to include a 70 mph constant speed test. That would better represent what one could expect to get on a highway trip with a mix of 75 mph running, plus some slow downs for construction and lower speed zones, etc.. Only the government can make it this hard to do such a simple test that actually would be meaningful. Of course there also should be a city driving rating.
This is why I keep searching for RU-vid videos doing exactly these tests on both ICE and BEV cars. For my speed of interest, 130 kmh (80 mph) almost all BEV perform poorly and this is why I do not plan to buy a BEV in the near future. If I have to go slower than a bus, what's the point of paying for a car?
@@anxiousearth680 I drive regularly at 130kmh-140kmh. And distances over 300km in total. The buses in my country drive at a constant 100kmh in the highways.
Of course, companies tend to exaggerate range than actual mileage especially Tesla models . I mean the gap between Tesla claims and EPA testing are getting smaller but there is still big difference. I trust EPA .
EV's aren't just worse on the highway. They are abysmal on the highway. Range anxiety is not a thing. Its time anxiety. When you factor in the time, the cost per mile highway on an EV is roughly equivalent to a 1 ton gas truck. It is atrocious. EV's are great in the City, being roughly on par with 25+ mile all electric range PHEV's. Hybrids continue to be the lowest total city and highway cost per mile vehicles. Additionally performing cold and hot tests would greatly lower EV city and highway and PHEV city only economy. ICE and Hybrids will mostly retain their numbers. The EPA should rate in cost per mile and just use the national average kWh, gas, and diesel prices at the time, and should definitely factor in time for highway. It is not apples to apples to allow the EV to take a 30 minute break to charge every couple hundred miles while requiring the Hybrid, PHEV, and ICE to mush on. Total time of trip matters.
This discussion has no resolution. The variables factors are many. Take two identical F-150 trim level, engine, etc. trucks and one driver’s aggressive technique shall render an mpg up to 50% less than a driver with moderate technique. Change that to range and, just using numbers, a 300 mile truck shall have a 150 mile range. The reason to have EPA test under lab conditions is for consumers to have a comparison basis. I doubt any pickup owner selects the brand, model and trim level based on MPG test results. Take two Tesla Model Y’s and follow suit as to one driver cruising at 65 mph, in flat terrain, the other drives at 85 mph in hilly terrain. Range estimates from the lab go away. The range estimator in the car adjusts based on history. It’s not inaccuracy as to the software!
It is not the range that counts but the ABC always be charging. It will be with you for the duration of owning an EV. Range must consider the using of air-conditioning, the radio, simple charging your phone, light open at night driving, too much stream cold/ hot condition, driving up hill/ mountainous places are all degrading your battery plus the weight if you have a spare tire/ number of passenger so numbers of range depletion is the issue but the EV again being unreliable/ unpredictable. This is not the future but n old technology rather just an alternative solution not for all. The third world countries, island nation, stream hot/ cold places and mountainous places are not suited for EV. It could not be in rental services, bus companies in cross country trips, dump trucks in mining operation, military vehicle/ police mobile, container trucking cross country, airline industry, shipping industry not fitted for such situation needs. Expensive to purchase, expensive to maintain so much software dependent and insurance so expensive. This is only for rich countries and rich individuals as second car the EV...
Do gas cars give same calmed mileage regardless or throttle changes, elevation change, traffic, etc? How can you expect Evs to give the same calmed range. It’s just an estimate.
I want a real world test of range. With the batteries at 100%, drive from Columbus to Indianapolis on I70 at posted speed limits, with the AC or heat on like a normal person. To and back.
EVs are completely different than fuel vehicles and the EPA needs better clowns to perform better jokes. At least that’s how this agency is being ran like.
back in the 80's smog was bad in city's couldnt even see a skysrcaper. then epa came in an put o2 sensersors on which worked. EV has gotten to safe an its the worst now good luck people with your decisions on buying a piece of junk that will make you bankrupt. sorry to burst your hubba bubba bubble. i wish they still made hubba bubba gum. damn those were good times.
Why do you always put Tesla in the front space of anything that is derogatory about. I don't own a Tesla but I think most people have realize that the Tesla's go father on a charge than the range they advertise. You continually badmouth Tesla I am wondering why
I would like to know what they consider as range.; The vehicle is at a dead stop in the middle of the road ? Nobody in their right would drive an ICE car like that. On my car I only need to see when the low fuel warning lite goes on and I am good for 50km. for sure at normal power.
Jessssus. Get a Tesla and no range anxiety. This is a term for companies that don't have charging infrastructure. Epa tests average usage and by far most time spent by people is inside the city not on highways.
HMm, with the ability to send data to manufacturer why don't we use real drivers results to create a real world result? I assume once you get a few hundred cars running you might get a good sample.
Ev's ranges are dramatically exaggerated offical figure's are no where near actual range in daily driving especially in adverse weather ev's have a place in motoring but are no where near ready to replace ice when everything is taken into consideration rushing ev's is the wrong way forward and the 2030 ban in new ice cars is madness no doubt most of them or their components will be made in China currently ev's are also way too expensive for everyday folk and they're no more environmentally friendly than ice unless you drive massive mileage even then it's not clear politicians need to rethink
Don't forget to add in the cost to society from air polution: 6 million deaths per year (lung cancer, emphysema, etc.). And global warming: house insurance increases, storm devistaions, beach erosion, etc., from ICE cars.
Working with an adviser like "Jackson Sten Marsh," my finance. I’m glad he pulled through, despite the crises. I am retiring next yr at 55 with 3 houses paid off worth 4.5 million . One is my place of residence the other 2 properties will give me $80,000per/yr rent . I will have an income stream of $20,000 per yr through my super which gives me total $100,000 a yr to live comfortably . I have no debts ... Stay Motivated!!!!!
You have done great for yourself. I understand the fact that tomorrow isn't promised to anyone, but investing today is a hard thing to do for me now because I have no idea of how and where to invest in. I would be happy if you could advise me based on how you went about yours, as I am ready to go the passive income path.
Credits to Jackson Sten Marsh, he saw me through the process. You can glance his name up on the internet and verify him yourself. he has years of financial market experience....
Anyone with a scooter like myself could tell you, it's never the actual range.. weight of the person(s) and other things like lights etc plays a factor for the effect its range. Especially, if you're staying on the same mph.
Not my observation - main factor is speed only - not constant / variable but speed - drive local streets 45 mph max with start / stop - you'll hit 330 m range - constant speed of 100 mph cuts it to 150 miles range
Range anxiety will truly be gone, once charging stations are as ubiquitous as gas stations. IMO the range of the vehicles aren't the problem but access to plentiful charging stations.
The number of chargers won't change the inconvenience of using public chargers. It only takes 3-4 minutes to get enough fuel to go 300 miles in an ICE and the range typically drops less than 5% in winter and you can use essentially all of the fuel because you don't need a reserve to "precondition" a tank like an EV's battery when it's too hot or too cold. Even if every charger was a supercharger it would require at least five times the number of bays to charge the same number of vehicles daily and that would require a tremendous amount of energy and infrastructure vs a couple tanks in the ground and some pumps.
@@Noah_E except it does make a difference because not every car is in use all the time. Chargers at home (multiple at apt complexes) alone solves the majority of usage which is where most vehicles would naturally be charged at and more frequent chargers completes the gap. Again precondition isn’t an issue if chargers are plentiful because that preconditioning is taken care of while plugged in and at no real cost to your “tank” the biggest issue is reliable and plentiful charging because any and all public charging would be only necessary to get you to your next destination (home) to then complete the rest of your charging.
The EPA range should be after the degradation. It’s kind of a rip off to state the MPG on a new battery. ICE cars maintain their range for many years. I happen to own a Tesla Model Y long range. The range drops after 3 months and drops further for a little more time.
The company who will win the EV war is the company who can bring a vehicle that has a good range plus an affordable price 35k for a base EV is not feasible for most Americans
@Rommie26 EV is still in adoption phase so the price will continue to be high. It's funny you say that $35k is too high for most Americans. When there are a lot of Americans who take 120 month finance on their new $70k+ truck. Those same people will scoff at the fact that EVs are so expensive lol. When you think about a vehicle cost, you don't just look at the price of the vehicle. But how much does it cost to run it. Gas, insurance, maintenance, etc. Now do the same comparison and you will see EVs are far more cheaper.
I think "most Americans" are about to see a pay bump. With many countries choosing to operate world trade using a basket of currencies the US Dollar, long the dominant reserve of the world, will see a decrease in value. Additionally many of their dollars will begin flooding back into the US, driving inflation higher. As a result...pay will increase. According to history it's either that or we go into a period of civil disruption and that is not very profitable.
And pay $20,000+ to replace the EV battery every 10 years to restore the cars original range?!? Tesla/EV fanboys must be loving that constant car mortgage, like a brand new Apple Phone every year. I'll take that early retirement. My 25-year old Honda Accord has been paid since 2001, with original engine and transmission, and I have earned soooo much money without purchasing a car for over 20-years.
Tesla EV shows 310mi range. In summer I usually get close to 310mi with methodical driving (not crossing 70mph, more lower speeds, sparing ac usage, no crazy acceleration). In winters it's about 10% lower at about 280mi if heaters are blasting else it's close to 310mi with preconditioned battery. Overall Tesla is not bad. The software updates have made it less accurate and doing 75mph or 85mph does reduce range for sure. But it's also true in my gas car which has 360mi range. Drive bit more aggressive or at 80mph and you get lower gas mileage. If you're in traffic EV shines but gas fizzles in poor range. Gas is better at coming to ita range at 40mph to 65mph speeds.
@@KC-zi4qb I do ;) I live in Northeast where it gets quite cold. My Whr/mi is about 242 Whr/mi. You have to precondition car with scheduled departure while it's plugged in. Then use heated seats and basically use heater sparingly. If you go ballistic without these then range loss is higher. Also if you commute longer the hit is lower opposed to quick 10m to 20m drive. My commute was about 65m each way
@@KC-zi4qb also sometimes depending on what I did it would even hit 300mi range in winter. Good driving practices have to be done for best EV result. EV can take hit from poor driving just like gas. For my gas too hit was a lot (380mi range dropped to about 300mi if I blasted heater and drove without warming engine and crazy acceleration and high speed)
@@Ayyyyydootdoot so I'm still on the original tires. I did have 2 incidents of nails through the tires. They're plugged at present. I ensure the psi is hovering around 42. ( I usually on cold morning set it to 43). It goes up after a long drive to about 45 and car seems zippiest and bouncy at that psi and seems to use least energy presumably due to reduced contact surface area with ground but some small %.
@@fr9714I don't have to pre-condition my vehicle, and I can run my air conditioning or heated seats heated steering wheel and heater. I get 450 miles, then stop for 10 minutes and get another 450. Keep that electric junk.
Hopefully this will put an end to the extremes both sides on this present. Car manufacturers are promising an unrealistic range or charge time. While the “take my gas and guns over my dead body” crowd claim that a rivian won’t go over 50 miles and takes 20 hours to charge. It will be nice to see a trusted third party be able to share some insight 👍
“Take my guns over my dead body “ should be said by every free person.. learn history from 100years ago to today and you will still see government genocide in the millions ..
@brandontierney9489 there's a detailed video from Engineering Explained which compares the pollution from production and running long-term for both ICEVs and EVs. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-6RhtiPefVzML.html
But overall, over the lifespan of a vehicle, those total pollutants are much much less than that of a combustion vehicle. And technically, there is one often-over looked pollutant -- brake dust. But regenerative braking doing most of the slowing down of EVs gives of much less brake dust than a combustion vehicle (despite EVs being heavier to comparably-sized combustion vehicles).
It's really not that much energy, compared to the energy needed to move the vehicle. My ev tracks every kwh, about 94% goes to the drive train, compared to less than 5% for both the climate (which I always keep at 21°c) and electronics (my speakers, displays, heated seats, heated steering, self driving computer and sensors)
Ill gust live in the same place i eork and buy an Ebike Costs less than 4 tires (that are mandatory to buy every 4 years) vs a one time buy and 1,500mpge
My Tesla tires are eleven years old. Should I buy new ones? It's never been to the shop so maybe I should call them or better yet, wait until my car tells me I need new tires. Ebikes are cool. Really cool.
@@bingosunnoon9341 yeah, I've never been a car guy. Then I learned about Tesla and fell in love. Then I learned about how car culture is expensive (the 2 most expensive things you'll buy is a car and a house, road maintenance is paid for through Ponzi scheme growth, and 8 parking spaces per person that was bought by car lobbyists and paid for by the business that small businesses cant afford so there's no competition or walkability) I find it really sad that every American loves the mall and Disney World, a place where there is no cars within but every American says that they would never give up their car.
I have no problem with ev. They work well for some people, and they don’t work for others. My problem is that people are pushing ev onto people. It should be an option to buy an ev, there should also be hybrid, PHEV, and gasoline cars available to buy as well.
You have options now, your don’t have to. It an EV, but there are always future regulations or we would all still be driving Slant 6 and 426 Hemis. Things evolve.
You have all of those options right now. We're talking at least 15 years until pure ICE is eliminated for consumers (and plugless hybrids maybe a decade after that, so 25 years). Until infrastructure and charging speed improves greatly (which they will), I think PHEVs will make sense for most people for a long time. But man, let me tell you... if you can charge at home, a BEV can't be beat.
Until 2035 manufacturers can make all types of cars. You will be able to buy NEW until then, but there will be fewer and fewer choices as people decide electric is better. For some needs it will be a decade before electric is better, so buy something else until then. Shouldn't be a problem. Eventually, in a few decades, gas cars will have range anxiety as filling stations become scarce.
What’s most ridiculous is that there’s no infrastructure for the EV agenda they’re pushing. It’s a classic liberal tactic - superficial idea but once you scratch the surface there’s no substance to it…
Hybrid cars seems to be the best as it can run in electric and petrol mode, people need not worry about running out of battery while traveling long distances. Electric cars take long time to recharge and this is very irritating when we want to go to some place very quickly or in an emergency. Hence car manufacturers must provide Hybrid cars instead of only making either electric or petrol cars.
Hybrid needs engine maintenance and usually they didn't have the most advanced electric power units like the battery and the motor. When you run out of the battery, the engine has to drag several hundreds KGs more of dead weight. For comparison my Model 3 performance can charge 20-80% in 18 mins, my friend's hybrid requires 1.5 hours of charging to run 50ish miles. And when his battery ran out, the fuel consumption is higher than the other equivalent ICE vehicles.
There's tradeoff though. A plug-in hybrid, if only used for short trips, is carrying around an unnecessary combustion engine and wasting electricity. And EVs don't really "take a long time to charge" in a real-world sense if you can charge at home. You plug it in every evening, and have a full charge by morning. I do think hybrids have a place for at least the next 15-20 years in the USA (especially for those who cannot charge at home). Advancements are continually happening, we're getting higher battery densities at lower costs. Also, faster charging technologies are in active development. In 10-15 years, I wouldn't be surprised if we see non-luxury cars with 500 mile ranges and 10-80% charge times of 5-10 minutes.
What's the big deal about a 350-mile range EV? 350 miles is a distance greater than the distance between Raleigh, North Carolina and Savannah Georgia. Most people don't make that kind of a commute in a day, so with the potential for overnight charging at one's home or apartment: 350 miles should suit most people. Personally, if I had to go 350+ miles to get somewhere: I would take a plane.
The simplest way to get a real average would be to pull the data from say 100 different people in different circumstances living in different climates collectively you should be able to go to good sense of average highway and city numbers
I disagree. Standardized testing is the only real way for the consumer to compare one car to another. The tests are not intended to be a guide for the consumer as to how far they would be able to go on a single charge, but should enable the consumer to compare one vehicle's range to another.
@@Hans-gb4mv with a sample size large enough (as n approaches infinity), the statistical reliability of a measurement approaches 100%. All you need is to find the standard deviation, and with a sample size of just 2-3x that, you can be 99% confident that your estimate is accurate. It's basic statistics.
If you want to know real world milage for any of these there are a lot of tests done by people on ytube running cars from 100 percent to 0 on the same highway or course loops.
absolutely - surely there's so much tracking these days that we can aggregate enough data to come up with some statistically sound real world numbers for different scenarios
wow, the doomer takes in this thread. only 2 countries in the world are responsible for half of global carbon footprint, it’s not an impossible goal, we just gotta convince irresponsible and stupid doomers.
13:23 - 13:42 How about a new required standard on that MSRP sticker: manufacturers must write a warning label to customers something like “Charge the EV at 20 percent”. Could help a bit with range anxiety for now. Or a software warning built into all EVs alerting the driver when the battery hits 20 percent, 10 percent, 5 percent, and finally at 1 percent. Could lastly offer suggestions to where the closest charging station is, too?
whats amazing about EVs in my experience, lets say you are going to the mountains that's about 60miles. Going up could more or less meet 60miles on range because it could take some energy uphill.. On my way back home that says 60 mile, as we going down hill with regenerative breaking and more efficiency along the highway, I was only able to use 20 miles off the battery because I was gaining back so much energy back... that's amazing to me.
Yeah I was in Colorado and the Tesla app said that I had 71 percent battery. And when I would arrive at my destination, some 35 miles later, I would have 72 percent battery. At first I thought this must be some sort of terrible mistake. But then I realized that I'd be losing 6,000 feet in elevation for the trip. And when I arrived at my destination, damn if I didn't have 72% battery power. So I'd actuallly gained 1% batterty power after driving 35 miles. Amazing!
Anyone know if aftermarket performance companies can elect to have the EPA test a car modified with their device? We have a device that we believe will improve both fuel economy and emissions over factory. How would you go about approaching the EPA on getting an official test done and how much would it cost?
Just purchased a new model 3 rear wheel drive with all the rebates and tax credit I'm basically paying $28k for the car. My elect bill only goes up $75 more per month. A fun small car to drive and don't miss stopping at a gas station
