Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
So I’m not a Tesla or Elon musk fanboy but having owned a hybrid always fancied a go or leasing one. Not now though.
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/tesla-asks-suppliers-cash-back-bid-reach-profit
theyre asking suppliers who are amongst all the stories of a poor cash position are already having to trust them to pay their invoices, to refund money for goods already received. Cheeky bstards!!
so how long post collapse until your £80k Tesla bricks itself because it hasn’t received an update for 2 weeks......
Can't they just ask the government to cough up?
Oh sorry they got the climate change deniers in this time.
Actually they’re stuffed trying to negotiate that with new suppliers if the current ones tell them to do a hike. Suspect they’d get offered higher prices and you pay in advance mr musk .....
Actually they’re stuffed trying to negotiate that with new suppliers if the current ones tell them to do a hike.
There will come a point where it depends how much you have invested in the tooling for the bits you are making and what you can re purpose
If you are in and invested your part of the process, there comes a point where you in on the projet
Also
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-nissan-subsidies-analysis-idUKKBN12X0K7
LONDON (Reuters) - Compensating carmakers in Britain for any post-Brexit tariffs on exports to Europe could see the government hand the companies more money than they need to pay the salaries of all their British workers, a Reuters analysis of corporate filings shows..
If we are investing in cars do we get a choice what that subsidy pays for? I'd rather not pay for the prolonging of the internal combustion engine.
Throw in Jag and other mainstream manufacturers ev’s Coming soon and it could get interesting for Tesla
I’m not a fan of Musks either, but that “buy back” funding sounds like an “investment” by any other name.
Suggests that the suppliers who do “cash back” to Musk would be “investing” in the Brand and no doubt Musk would support the suppliers who do subscribe to become “favoured” suppliers with enticements of long term contracts for services etc.
However, if the bloke was so “invested” into both product and Brand, he could make a donation of his own $bn’s and save face at the same time, but that’s the obvious option and we all know that investing your own money into your own company doesn’t pay dividends until it returns profit... and that’s the big point here... it’s a loss making organisation with projected ROR way out there in the either, along with its product without investing in the infrastructure.
Best of luck to him, two of my mates have the P(iss)100 thingumybobs and they’re built like 1970’s Allegros on a Friday afternoon. Awful.
Lost money/lost cause IMO
On the basis of Musk alone, I’m out 😄
Can’t they just ask the government to cough up?
The government committed to oil?
Also mr musk may not have real billions of all his money is in Tesla and spaceX stock
Well I’ve negotiated a cash back based on spend with a number of my suppliers. Effectively it’s bulk discount but I have to have spent the money prior to discount being applied.
not a million miles away from this.
I’d drive and EV (i3) and have been in a Tesla (couple of times). So I’m very pro electric.
problem they have in the long run is once the full electric USP goes, because other manufacturers catch and then over take them in terms of technology. They are going to start to struggle. Current crop of cars appear to be Ford standard (nothing wrong with that) quality build for premium prices.
Once you can buy a BMW/ Mercedes etc full electric, with a range of over 300 miles for under £100k, with there dealer network etc etc, you will struggle to get many takers for model S’s. And once Ford etc start doing Focus’s for under £40k, they are in a lot more trouble.
As mentioned above, look at the Jag I-Pace, makes Tesla look expensive and it’s is just a toe in the water for a medium size manufacturer (been in one of those as well, very nice)
i think they are going to have a tough times in the years ahead. Which a shame as they lead the way showing electric cars can works.
Musk has also acted like a bit of dick lately (some may say longer) and has put a lot of people’s back up.
Once you can buy a BMW/ Mercedes etc full electric, with a range of over 300 miles for under £100k, with there dealer network etc etc, you will struggle to get many takers for model S’s. And once Ford etc start doing Focus’s for under £40k, they are in a lot more trouble.
Well I'd say 10 years for that one
And once Ford etc start doing Focus’s for under £40k, they are in a lot more trouble.
By £40k I guess that should read £15k for a basic model because otherwise it is just scan expensive non luxury car. If manufacturers can’t work out how to hit the low price points the only market is rich westerners
If manufacturers can’t work out how to hit the low price points the only market is rich westerners
what your really missing is the car stops being a status symbol or a possession but a commodity that we consume as we need it. Unless you drop crumbs in it.
By £40k I guess that should read £15k for a basic model because otherwise it is just scan expensive non luxury car. If manufacturers can’t work out how to hit the low price points the only market is rich westerners
Under £30k was probably a better guess. EV costs are going to be a lot higher than ICE cars for a long time, but your running costs are then considerably lower, so costs are front loaded. But think of the penguins your saving.
Well I’d say 10 years for that one
i3x (x3 electric) due in 2020 and underpinning exspected to be used for 3 and 5 series. Range estimated to be 250 miles (I get over 120 out my i3). So I’d say real world 300 miles isn’t to far away. Also much faster charge times coming.
New Nissan Leaf is getting around 170 miles real world and a bigger battery is meant to be coming.
Charging infrastructure is improving all the time, but still has a long way to go.
"He claimed “only costs that actually apply to Q3 and beyond will be counted," in Tesla's bid to operate under positive cashflow"
what could possibly go wrong with accounting for supplier rebates:
https://www.economist.com/business/2015/06/18/buying-up-the-shelves
he could make a donation of his own $bn’s and save face at the same time
He doesn't actually have a huge pile of cash, his wealth is a 20% stake in Tesla (which he can't really start to sell even if he wanted to as the share price would plummet) and a valuation of SpaceX (privately held). I'm not saying he struggles to afford groceries but being worth $7b and being able to throw $1b around are two very different things.
I still hope Tesla succeed and carry on growing, can't wait for the Roadster (not that I'd ever be able to afford one). Without Tesla the fully electric market would still just be stuff like Leaf's (and even then probably gen 1 stuff).
Now the big manufacturers are investing seriously in the high end full electric market Tesla is going to struggle unless they sort out production and QC issues. But if they disappear then the pace of development will likely slow down again.
The example of the rebates given by posters above and in that economist article are for deals struck re sales moving forwards though. The tesla one seemed to be a retrospective one for past sales.
I am interested to know how the sw in these cars would react to the company going offline and if it would render your otherwise perfectly good car defunct.
They have a lax attitude to safety as well, so could (potentially) face a massive class action suit from workers and former workers:
I've looked at Tesla as a company aiming for failure for a while now. Their production numbers are woefully low, they have QC issues that refuse to go away, loads of lawsuits against the company for worker's rights and the cars are having to use gimmicks to get themselves noticed. The underlying tech inside them is good but is easily reproduced by the big car manufacturers given a few years though. It's basically been a race between Tesla and the traditional carmakers to see whether Tesla gets their manufacturing act together and starts to turn a profit or if the likes of Ford, VW, Renault and Nissan get hold of decent electric tech to compete and then get decent models to the showrooms. My money has always been on the traditional manufacturers as they had everything bar the battery tech but, as Jaguar are demonstrating with the I-Pace, that gap is no longer there to make Tesla more attractive.
I think they'll be gone in under 5 years when the investors and suppliers pull out.
I follow a chap on YouTube who buys salvage Teslas and attempts to get them working again despite Teslas best efforts to stop him!.
He did a reliability survey as well as the first generation are just coming to the end of their eight year warranty. In year nine you can expect to spend half the value of the car in repairs.
I know it will hurt Elon Musks ego to do so but I wonder if they will pull back from car manufacturing and concentrate instead on supplying batteries and electric tech to the other big manufacturers.
The whole 'car ownership' model is probably a busted flush - why buy an expensive' depreciating asset that spends 80% of its time doing nothing? A shared ownership / hire-by-the-hour scheme makes far more sense in densely-populated urban areas. The current reality is that car companies make most of their money through finance, selling you a PCP with a guaranteed buy-back in an attempt to keep prices high - but there is simply over-capacity, particularly in Europe and the US and once the Chinese gear-up their manufacturing, the likes of Tesla won't survive.
Once all the big boys get there acts together, they'll be on borrowed time manufacturing cars. Supplying the tech to the big boys would be far more prudent, however, will EM be prepared to go that route or continue with vehicles?
The current reality is that car companies make most of their money through finance, selling you a PCP with a guaranteed buy-back in an attempt to keep prices high
This is interesting as I listened to some economists on R4 talking recently who described car finance as the next sub prime mortgage crash. Lots of people over financed in a poorly regulated industry, the risk level is through the roof.
It's a complete non story.
It's normal to ask suppliers for a discount as volumes increase.
He did a reliability survey as well as the first generation are just coming to the end of their eight year warranty. In year nine you can expect to spend half the value of the car in repairs.
But who would seriously be expecting to own a Tesla in year 9. We have the new Nissan Leaf at work, very very good car but I wouldn't buy one. I would happily lease but no way would I buy, the tech is moving so fast the depreciation must be outrageous.
"But who would seriously be expecting to own a Tesla in year 9. We have the new Nissan Leaf at work, very very good car but I wouldn’t buy one. I would happily lease but no way would I buy, the tech is moving so fast the depreciation must be outrageous."
so your suggesting an 8 year life span for a vehicle is ok in your books ? someone somewhere will have it in year 9 other wise the whole green transport aspect is a bust.
Saw loads of them in California. Across the whole state.
We've got an EV Soul. Whilst it's not single car status yet, this is going to happen faster than we all think.
As for Tesla who knows. I think they will get through but clearly not in the present set-up.
Once numbers in the second-hand market of older Leafs etc gets to a certain point some enterprising company will start selling replacement motors, batteries and control systems that can be retrofitted to the older cars. Modern bodies last a good 15 years before they rust out, if not longer, so financing an engine swap instead of a new car should be decent business. There is already a company that electrifies old classics sympathetically so that you can refit the original drivetrain without modifications. There's a few of their conversions on the Fully Charged Youtube channel including a very nice E-Type. It'll be the future equivalent of putting in a modern Honda engine in your old Mini. They'll probably call it E-Rodding!
someone somewhere will have it in year 9 other wise the whole green transport aspect is a bust.
Battery powered cars aren't really green, anyway. They're just moving the pollution to a different location - in this case moving local air pollution in European cities to ground pollution in Chile, and moving one type of environmental catastrophe (climate change) to another (unsustainable mining).
Have a look into lithium mining in Chile and it's consequences to the local populations.
The real answer to transport problems is public transport, but people will have to change their mindset and it will require real investment from governments. Alternatively, this "public transport" could be funded privately and be essentially structure-less, such as driverless or rentable by the hour cars.
It’s a complete non story.
It’s normal to ask suppliers for a discount as volumes increase.
The topic isn’t about discounts, that’s a given on supplier volume requirements and economies of scale.
This is about supplier chain giving money Back to Tesla, hard cash to prop up a top heavy balance sheet with aspirations of seeing its core foundations collapse....
I thought Hydrogen fuels cell car were meant to be the ultimate answer!? They seem to be a forgotten sector though.
This is about supplier chain giving money Back to Tesla, hard cash to prop up a top heavy balance sheet with aspirations of seeing its core foundations collapse….
Money back / discounts - all the same thing at the end of the day, a purchaser trying to maximise their buying power e.g. Tesco do it with their suppliers.
It only gets headline news because it's Tesla and a large number of people are Tesla / EV haters.
Its not unheard of for big chain stores in the UK to demand money from suppliers for the privilege of having their products stocked on their shelves. Similar situation.
BMW did it to suppliers when they took over Rover.
They know Tier 1 suppliers will sell at a low margin/loss to premium brands so that they can boast "we supply BMW/Audi/Merc" when negotiating with lesser marques and try to recover margin on those sales.
After buying Rover, they went through the respective parts lists and went back to suppliers saying you sold this widget to BMW for £1 but the same item to Rover for £2, we think a rebate due. The implied threat of losing future business and the cachet of supplying a premium brand was enough for suppliers to cough up.
They’re just moving the pollution to a different location – in this case moving local air pollution in European cities to ground pollution in Chile, and moving one type of environmental catastrophe (climate change) to another (unsustainable mining).
Sort of muddling things up a bit, from a OPEX/fuel perspective you've reduced oil usage but increased (mainly gas) usage, although WE is rapidly migrating to renewable, so long term the fuel CO2 footprint is shrinking.
The Cobalt etc is a one off cost for the battery (current life predictions for Tesla batteries are 500k miles+ based on usage data). With petrol / diesel you have similar costs in terms of mining oil, so there's no net gain in the one off Capex footprint in the short term.
Some stats on Tesla batteries.. https://evannex.com/blogs/news/how-long-will-my-tesla-battery-last
chevy bolt does 238 miles, costs £23k ($30k) after subsidies, it just isn't available here
https://www.chevrolet.com/electric/bolt-ev-electric-car
but that's really not much additional cost compared to a focus or similar (they generally retail for ~$25k in the states)
I thought Hydrogen fuels cell car were meant to be the ultimate answer!? They seem to be a forgotten sector though
There's a few due out this year/next year - it's the lack of infrastructure that's killing them (as you can't refill at home you need local facilities). A hydrogen-electric hybrid might make some sense as a stop-gap but as it stands now I think my nearest station is 50-60 miles away which is still too far for me.
I thought they stopped selling the Volt? Or was it the Ampera that disappeared?
I thought Elon Musk had previously said that he didn't want to own a car company he wanted to do just enough to get the other manufacturers to take electric vehicles seriously.
I thought Hydrogen fuels cell car were meant to be the ultimate answer!? They seem to be a forgotten sector though.
The Car Tech is cracked, Honda had a production Fuel Cell car 10 years ago.
The problem is hydrogen is inefficient to refine at the moment, but in theory if you could build a refinery powered by renewables we’d be laughing. ‘Normal’ range no massive heavy batteries, quick refuel and its arguably easier to repurpose Petrol stations as Hydrogen stations than it is to build charging stations.
its arguably easier to repurpose Petrol stations as Hydrogen stations than it is to build charging stations.
The problem with hydrogen is that it is incredibly dangerous.
It has a horrible tendency to go bang. Makes petrol look almost inert in comparison.
There is still a long way to go to shift towards mass adoption with issues like moving down to affordable price points for cars, concern over battery life, culture shift away from ownership to subscription model, charging infrastructure (eg no drive houses), renewable energy storage etc.
But there are a hell of a lot of very cleaver engineers working on this stuff with Robert Llewellyns Fully Charged channel providing interesting watching. From that you can start to see a pathway to a solution, even if the final technologies are not fully developed yet:
Subscription models where autonomous vehicles just appear when required (gig economy workforce to clean them inside based on info from sensors) - choosing the right car sub may make choosing a mobile look like childs play;->
EVs using combination of batteries and capacitors (latter for initial acceleration as much better for high discharge and v higher cycle rate which maximises battery range and life)
On street charging from lampposts / wireless charging / in road charging
Ever increasing amounts of renewables as more efficient generating tech gets rolled out
Energy storage systems - why the hell they've cancelled Swansea bay I don't know - gravitricty looks interesting
Still think the reliance on sw and over the air updates for smart cars is a major weak link if companies go bust or an amusing/damaging hack for foreign regimes.
its arguably easier to repurpose Petrol stations as Hydrogen stations than it is to build charging stations.
The problem with hydrogen is that it is incredibly dangerous.
It has a horrible tendency to go bang. Makes petrol look almost inert in comparison.
Agreed, but LPG, Butane and Propane are a bit bangy too and we manage okay. Also unlike LPG and Petrol it's so much lighter than air a leak dissipates really quickly.
why the hell they’ve cancelled Swansea bay I don’t know
The rate they wanted to be paid for the electricity plus the inevitable going over budget and expecting to be bailed out thing that happens in every large scale project of late?
Also unlike LPG and Petrol it’s so much lighter than air a leak dissipates really quickly.
A hydrogen leak dissipating really quickly earlier... 🙂
Some petrol/oil dissipating earlier
Waaaay OT, but:
Best "subject" line in a work related email:
"Re replacement of hydrogen torpedoes"
I wouldn't write off Tesla yet.
1. The Model 3 has ~30k parts as opposed to 60-70k for a similar ICE car. If they can crack the manufacturing process that'll have a massive impact on cost.
2. They don't have the baggage of the old manufacturers (investment in ICE, Dealer networks, unions and outdated business processes)
3. There are probably plenty of Silicon Valley fans/investors who will help Musk out if it comes to it.
I have literally just walked in from a lecture from Thatcham the guys that do all the car safety research (i work for large insurers).
In the engineers word "if i had £80,000 to spend on a car, it certainly wouldn't be a Tesla, their shite"
They had a Tesla, a new BMW 7 series and the latest Volvo XC90 all that had been involved in accidents showing the construction of the vehicles, the safety features and how each had been involved in the same accident 30mph into a deformable object to the front offside corner. On the results, i'd be placing my wife and daughter every time in the Volvo. They haven't not had a single fatality in a Volvo XC90 since the latest model came in 2012 worldwide.
Looked at the Tesla and where the BMW and Volvo had carbon fibre and the highest strength steel safety cells around the driver, the Tesla was just nearly all aluminium.
It was fitted with the autonomous system that allows the driver to not steer or do anything for up to 20 seconds, he explained how it does this by reading the lane markings, but that put simply it didn't work, they were driving to Norwich in one the other day and one of the roads had the chippings put down, so lane markings were gone, the car just started drifting to the left and wanted to go off road, he corrected it, and it then wanted to drive straight over a roundabout!
On the plus side, he said that all the electrics are done by Apple, in the latest Apple update, the car downloaded a "ludicrous" mode, which meant 0-60 was 2.3 instead of 3.00 seconds.
3. There are probably plenty of Silicon Valley fans/investors who will help Musk out if it comes to it.
He'd have no problem raising more money, so I don't see what the fuss is all about really. It's just an ego thing between Musk and Wall Street over whether he needs to raise more cash.
and its arguably easier to repurpose Petrol stations as Hydrogen stations than it is to build charging stations.
It really isn't
Pretty much all the infrastructure at a petrol station would be pretty much useless for storing and transporting hydrogen.
The petrol station would already have an electricity supply, though...
For cars hydrogen is going nowhere; it's just so inefficient to produce and transport that if we can produce enough clean energy to make it without using oil we'd be better off just sticking that energy directly in batteries instead.
How come no one has mentioned the new car that DYSON is creating?
I have no idea why some people seem to act as if EVs are a personal insult; they do come up with a lot of rubbish about Tesla and electric vehicles in general. Like this:
On the plus side, he said that all the electrics are done by Apple
No they aren't
he explained how it does this by reading the lane markings, but that put simply it didn’t work
Tesla's Autopilot has now racked up a total of 1.2 billion miles; it is intended - and they clearly say this - for highways and most definitely not roundabouts at this point.
why the hell they’ve cancelled Swansea bay I don’t know
the price/kW, the numbers on the construction that don't add up, and the guy in charge is a complete shyster, but apart from that.. :thumbsup:
On the plus side, he said that all the electrics are done by Apple, in the latest Apple update, the car downloaded a “ludicrous” mode, which meant 0-60 was 2.3 instead of 3.00 seconds.
apple 'doing' tesla's electronics? hmm.....
for highways and most definitely not roundabouts at this point.
Well some highways. Just not those with stopped emergency vehicles or a sliproad which confuses its self driving capability. On the plus side if it does crash you will get the fun of Tesla attacking you and trying to pass the blame.
Tesla’s Autopilot has now racked up a total of 1.2 billion miles
if you are going to accuse people of being inaccurate probably best you dont join them. That was an estimate. Its also unclear exactly what that means eg its not the same as Alphabets clear definition of what their vehicles are doing.
How come no one has mentioned the new car that DYSON is creating?
It sucks...
IGMC
and the guy in charge is a complete shyster, but apart from that.
Its not something I have followed closely but the reports in Private Eye really werent trust inspiring.
That was an estimate
It was an estimate by an AI research team at MIT; I imagine it's not going to be very far off, and as no-one knows any better - and as it has not been refuted by Tesla who do know - I see no reason to doubt it.
Tesla's Autopilot is nowhere near as clever as Waymo's FSD but they don't describe it as such so there is nothing dodgy going on there. It does not mean the driver can stop paying attention. Yes, it has issues like the white truck incident from a couple of years ago and the more recent sliproad-with-funny-lane-markings fatality, but in both those high profile cases the investigation concluded that the drivers had ample time to take over if they had been paying attention.
and as it has not been refuted by Tesla who do know – I see no reason to doubt it.
You cant see any reason why Tesla wouldnt deny it? A nice handy high figure generated by someone else, so they dont have to do their normal games with stats, that people will then throw out in support of Tesla.
Nah I cant think of any reason either.
but in both those high profile cases the investigation concluded that the drivers had ample time to take over if they had been paying attention.
Which as anyone with a basic understanding of human psychology would know is a rather big "if". Particularly if the person hadnt read the small print or hadnt realised the latest patch had altered the behaviour. There is a reason the more serious companies chose to do the leapfrog of self driving levels.
Tesla advertising is rather disingenuous with regards to what "auto-pilot" can and cant do.
and the guy in charge is a complete shyster
So a bit like Circuit of Wales then? We gave £9m to a bunch of con artists (and thankfully stopped before we gave them another £16m) just to develop the plan to build a £425m Motorsport facility in Ebbw Vale.
Their business plan called for it to be part-financed by hosting MotoGP for 5 years I think, but it was finally shot down (they'd canned it a few times before, but kept coming back for more development money) because someone worked out it was 'risky' to guarantee £200m to £300m towards the cost...
Risky?
Let's put it into perspective, I believe it was NEVER going to cost £425m in real money. no they were going to fleece it for all it was worth and the money the Welsh Gov guaranteed would be more than the actual cost of the venue.
Secondly, the value - £425m and largely funded by a weekend of MotoGP racing? Yeah right, Silverstone (a sort of famous racing faculty, in the heart of 'Motorsport Valley' home to at least a few teams from every motorsport series in the world, which currently has both MotoGP and the F1, failed to find a buyer for £33m.
You cant see any reason why Tesla wouldnt deny it?
Fair point! The first bit of my point - that it came out of MIT - was the important bit, I don't know why I didn't just stop there...
Which as anyone with a basic understanding of human psychology would know is a rather big “if”
Absolutely, but the majority of people using it have found it a useful addition and despite several high profile events and an enormous amount of public attention they are still allowed to sell it and advertise it in multiple regulatory areas around the world, so I really don't think it's anywhere near as big an issue as it's made out to be.
that it came out of MIT
Which doesnt prevent it being a guess. I would say it would have been more meaningful if it had come from Tesla but given their relaxed approach to accuracy its probably not any better.
so I really don’t think it’s anywhere near as big an issue as it’s made out to be.
That doesnt show much beyond some good lawyers and careful wording (its fascinating looking at the autopilot hype page vs other info). Most other car companies with similar tech are far more careful about what they say their systems can do. Of course that does mean they are seen as boring out of date companies who dont have the cutting edge tech of Tesla.
They had a Tesla, a new BMW 7 series and the latest Volvo XC90 all that had been involved in accidents showing the construction of the vehicles, the safety features and how each had been involved in the same accident 30mph into a deformable object to the front offside corner. On the results, i’d be placing my wife and daughter every time in the Volvo. They haven’t not had a single fatality in a Volvo XC90 since the latest model came in 2012 worldwide.
Tesla use a comparison with the Volvo S60 to show how tough the Model 3 is....
Although not so good on the small overlap frontal test
https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-model-s-crash-test-safety-iihs/
Why is Norman Collier presenting the Tesla 3?
This is interesting as I listened to some economists on R4 talking recently who described car finance as the next sub prime mortgage crash. Lots of people over financed in a poorly regulated industry, the risk level is through the roof.
I don't think this is true. I work in the car financing industry and it is heavily regulated. We are also very strict over who we lend to with a minimal amount of defaults. This may not be true for the whole industry, but most Manufacturer lead finance these days are pretty stringent. Whilst I am sure there are a lot of people getting vehicles that they simply cannot afford these are usually new vehicles that will have a fairly static residual and you always have the option to voluntary terminate the agreement once over a certain milestone.
The risk here is minimal compared with the ability of some to apply for five credit cards and rack up a credit card debt of £60K. At least with vehicle finance you have an asset.
The main risk is if the second hand market collapses the finance companies will have to absorb the hit on the resale values of all the cars when the owners finish the contract period....
I think Tesla need to be recognised for really bringing forward EV's to the mainstream mindshare aspect of the public. Would I buy one ? nope.
I think the other mainstream car makers have used Tesla as a free test bench on public opinion on what they want out of an EV ( and what's achievable) and are only now getting into it using that learning. To the masses, though, the EV is still extremely expensive to buy into compared to a combustion engine vehicle.
Will Tesla go down the pan? I think it'll hang on for a bit yet … but once mainstream makers bring out their stuff, Tesla are really going to struggle.
That Hyundai Kona EV up there looks very impressive. Up to 300 mile range & <£30k.
I'm starting to think that by the time it comes to replace my current car, it'll be with an EV; longest journey we generally do is ~200 miles and we'd probably keep an ICE car for a while yet anyway.
That Hyundai Kona EV up there looks very impressive. Up to 300 mile range & <£30k.
I’m starting to think that by the time it comes to replace my current car, it’ll be with an EV; longest journey we generally do is ~200 miles and we’d probably keep an ICE car for a while yet anyway.
I've been thinking the same, I'd want to hear how 'real world' that 300 miles is though. I tried to make a Leaf work for me 4 years ago - 110 mile range at the time (I think) but 'real world' at motorway speeds, when it wasn't warm and involving hills it was more like 70 and that wouldn't work for me.
300 miles would be a game changer though, admittedly I'm mentally saddling up for the annual 800 mile drive to Morzine next week, but the savings for EVs mean I'd happily fly/drive or hire a car for that one trip, but even if I didn't want to - 300 miles at 70 takes over 4 hours, even if you ignore the 2 hour break thing, in theory I'd be 'empty' just about as you're getting to the port - if the Ferry / Tunnel people had charging points to use whilst you hang around for that hour they want you to you'd be early I'd need another charge about lunch time, all very civilised - but that does require the 300 mile range to be a 300 mile range when you're loaded up and driving up mountains at motorway speeds, I'd bet the range then would be 200 at most.
The main risk is if the second hand market collapses the finance companies will have to absorb the hit on the resale values of all the cars when the owners finish the contract period….
There has been a lot of talk on this but not sure how likely it is. Fairly balanced view in the Independent (with added car ads 🤔):
I'd want a claimed range of ~400 miles that would match a tank of fuel in my Fabia before I jumped from IC cars. That would mean a real life of at least 300 miles from full and a fast charge to 80% would get you 250 miles or so, making longer journeys perfectly reasonable with regards to regular stops etc. The big issue for me is still charging as I can't have a charge point at home (rented flat, nowhere to put one) and don't take the car to work where there is also nowhere to put a charging point in.
What scud said makes me even less likely to choose a Tesla now. It reminds me of the Mercedes A-Class Elk Test where they were building their first FWD car and had gone all radical on the design, Turned out it fell over despite the glowing test review initially. Tesla seems to walking the same path, once the hype has worn off the issues are becoming visible.
The problem with hydrogen is that it is incredibly dangerous.
It has a horrible tendency to go bang. Makes petrol look almost inert in comparison.
Completely unlike batteries? At least a hydrogen tank is only half of a rocket - you need oxygen too. You've got all the chemicals you need for a large release of energy in a battery. (and in both cases the answer is crashworthiness, the difference being that you need to protect a tiny amount of hydrogen or a huge amount of battery)
An article on Tesla’s cash flow & debt position:
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/07/teslas-cash-crunch-explained/
Summary - not great, but wait for Q2 results next week.
In the report (via KTVU), the fire department said that they monitored the battery pack and it reignited days after the March 23 accident.
Mountain View Fire Chief Juan Diaz commented:
“In this particular case, six days later, the temperature inside those cells increased to the point of ignition. That’s why the car reignited. You have stored energy that is frankly unstable.”
The joys of your car now starting to reignite days after the fire brigade put it out...
Firefighters arrived at the scene to find the Model S engulfed in flames. They extinguished it using as much as 300 gallons of water and foam. A small portion of the vehicle’s lithium-ion battery was ejected during the crash, and although there was no visible fire, firefighters sprayed it with water and foam as well.
As the car was being loaded for removal from the scene, the battery reignited and was quickly extinguished. Upon arrival at the storage yard, the battery caught fire again and was again put out. NTSB officials have not given a reason for the battery fires.
You’ve got all the chemicals you need for a large release of energy in a battery.
No where near as volatile, the worse case Li-ion car battery fires have been pretty tame events. 1000s of cells all each in steel containers, with lots of steel cladding around them makes for a slow, fairly controlled release of energy.
There are some good videos on YouTube of people trying to destroy Tesla car batteries and failing quite miserably....
Only pretty tame if it's not mixing with, say, petrol frm the other car in the crash?
Only pretty tame if it’s not mixing with, say, petrol frm the other car in the crash?
It's not suddenly going to explode, no. The biggest risk would be from the petrol on fire itself (although petrol tanks are pretty good these days and don't often rupture).
If you look at the design of the Tesla car battery, there is a lot of steel sheeting in there to keep it rigid, as it effectively is the floor pan of the car. The cells are pretty well protected and the energy is split up into 1000s of individual units, each with it's own steel case.
There are over 300k Teslas and 1000s of other electric cars on the road and no exploding batteries. A handful of small fires that no one got very excited about (other than the occupants of course), but it's not as if petrol cars don't occasionally catch fire...
No where near as volatile
Volatility is only relevant for combustible materials. The battery doesn't need air so doesn't need to be volatile.
After a bad crash, the battery will be in pieces and pose a danger, as illustrated by the self-reigniting bits of battery above. All the water is doing is cooling things down, it's not stopping the energy release as it might on a normal fire.
Consider the consequences of a large pile-up or a crash in a remote location where firefighters can't put as much effort into one car.
Sure, it being lots of small batteries makes it less bad, but having so much mass of a material storing energy seems a bad idea in principle which maybe can be mitigated adequately - but doesn't seem to be for now.