Most people have heard about the EV fire problem – i.e., the built-in (literally) possibility of a catastrophic fire igniting without a spark, even if the EV is parked. Not many people know about the EV weight problem.
Which is also a safety problem in that people who do not drive EVs are more likely to be hurt – and hurt more seriously – if their non-EV is hit by one.
That’s because even compact-sized EVs like the Nissan Leaf – which weighs 3,509 lbs. – are heavier than mid-sized non-electric cars like the Toyota Camry (which weighs 3,310 lbs.).
EV trucks and SUVs weigh as much as the heaviest-duty/almost commercial-sized trucks.
The Ford F1-50 Lightning, for instance, weighs in excess of 6,000 lbs. That is more than three tons. If you are driving a Honda Civic that weighs less than 3,000 lbs. and are struck broadside by a Lightning doing 45 through a red light, the number of air bags you have in the Civic won’t matter much – because there won’t be much left of the Civic.
Or – probably – you.
The typical EV is about 800-1,000 pounds heavier than an otherwise same-sized/generally similar vehicle. For example, the ’23 Mercedes EQE SUV I will be test driving next week weighs 5,300 lbs. A non-electric equivalent of this mid-sized SUV – such as the GLE 450 I tested a few weeks ago – weighs 4,608 lbs. The larger the EV, the heavier it is, because it needs a bigger (and so, heavier) battery to move its weight. That’s why the Ford Lightning weighs almost a ton more than a non-electric F-150.
So, one of the side effects of pushing EVs into general circulation is an increase in the number of very heavy vehicles in circulation – increasing the risk to those who aren’t driving them.
The insurance mafia (via the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety) has noted the fact – without noting what is making the problem worse. It warns about the potential threat “large or very large” pick-up trucks and SUVs present to drivers (and passengers) of smaller and lighter vehicles – but says nothing about the even greater threat to the latter presented by much heavier EV pick-up trucks such as the 6,000-plus pound Lightning . . . or the 7,000-plus pound Rivian RIT.
Predictably, the government that is sometimes “concerned” about our “safety” is silent about this growing threat to our safety. Perhaps because it is the government that is chiefly responsible for this threat to our safety. Six-ton-plus half-ton trucks are not a natural development. They are the result of the government decreeing that battery power must replace gasoline power and the only way to keep a half-ton truck rolling with batteries is by using extremely large and heavy ones.
This column has previously mentioned the fact that a gallon of gas weighs about six pounds. A full-size half-ton non-electric truck such as the Ford F-150 has a tank capacity of 26 gallons. That means a full tank weighs about 160 pounds. The “electrified” version of the F-150 – the Lightning – carries around a battery pack that weighs 1,800 pounds.
This is why the Lightning is a three-ton half-ton truck.
Interestingly, the Lightning would be even heavier than it already is in order to have a range comparable to its gas-powered sibling, which can take you more than 600 highway miles (and more than 400 city miles) on those 26 gallons – and about 156 pounds- of gas. The Lightning only goes about half as far – in part because it is lugging around about 16 times as much “fuel.”
In air fingers quotes because it’s actually worse than that. The EV’s” fuel” is electricity – which weighs essentially nothing. But the battery that stores it is another matter. To store the energy equivalent of 26 gallons of gas would probably require a 3,000 pound battery pack.
And it never gets lighter, either.
Even when it is “empty.”
One might call this wasteful.
It is certainly dangerous . . . to other drivers, who might be crushed by all that weight.
The government is silent.
As it has been silent about the EV immolation threat, which is more threatening than the threat of a gasoline fire in a non-electric car because EV fires don’t require a spark.
They are also more likely to happen – because whether an EV is hit from behind or broadside or runs into something, the battery will be hit – because it is typically spread out over the floorpan of the vehicle. Gas tanks are located in the vehicle’s rear, usually – and so are less vulnerable to impact damage from a frontal or side-impact collision. And even if the tank is damaged – even if the gas spills out – it still requires a spark to ignite the gas and start a fire.
Which can be quickly put out with water.
EV fires are much easier to start – and you don’t even need to have an accident first. They are much harder to put out and they can start again, after they have been put out.
Gas tanks do not become more fire-prone as they age. Batteries do. “Hard use” does not apply to gas tanks; it does to EV battery packs.
Never mind all of that – or all of that weight.
The government is “keeping you safe” – and the insurance mafia doesn’t want you to know that government is making it more likely you’ll be burned (or crushed) to death. Or that we’ll all be paying more for the “coverage” we’re forced by the government to buy – on account of increased payouts/losses caused by dangerously heavy, fire-prone EVs. Just the same as we’re all paying more to “cover” the cost of air bag-equipped cars, which are much more expensive to fix and often just thrown away because it’s too expensive to fix them.
. . .
f you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)
My eBook about car buying (new and used) is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here. If that fails, email me at [email protected] and I will send you a copy directly!
Bumper cars are an example of a force using a moving object, you drive it for the fun of it, nothing else, at the end of the ride, you are not injured and the fun is over. You bounce all over the place, you even try to go ballistic.
Just have a sphere where you ride on the inside and the body of the sphere is capable of no damage done, nobody gets hurt. Flubber cars or something.
The moon orbits the earth once every 28 days, not quite. The moon is a body in motion, not at rest. When the moon shines, the fun never stops.
After 365 days, the moon makes a coil in the earth’s revolution around the sun.
Two bodies in motion simultaneously, if one stops, there could be a collision.
If the earth slams into the moon, suddenly, it would seem at the time, the impact is going to be devastating. Not much will be left to salvage.
Might not be there at all, gone, vaporized, the earth’s molten core might remain, but be on the move in another direction.
It’ll be moon battery.
F=ma will apply when you are clipping along at 18.5 miles per second.
At 100,000 kilometers per hour, the earth hitting the moon will be the end of the world.
Yet, it moves – Galileo
The ultimate non-driver-soy-boi car channel: https://www.youtube.com/@WhamBaamTeslacam
Graves!
That was not what I needed first thing this morning!
Lol, I wasn’t sure if you had seen it or not. The channel narrator sounds like David Hogg, Oink Oink!
Has Vice President Kamala Harris spilled the beans when she was talking up the Biden regime’s push for “Green energy”?
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/reduce-population-kamala-harriss-verbal-slip-sparks-outrage
If the whole EV BS was truly all about saving the earth from “climate change” caused by ICE vehicles and natural gas appliances, than the DIPs (Demons in Power) would make available low weight EV golf cart-like vehicles for the average plebe to buy at a low, low price.
Also, all toys and small power tools, such as motor boats, ATVs, lawn mowers, chain saws, leaf blowers, dirt bikes and even motorcycles would ALL be electric/battery powered. Manufacturers would no longer be able to sell gas powered items.
Plus the DIPs in each state would no longer allow the registration of ICE vehicles, in order to get all ICE vehicles off the road, ASAP.
Finally, the DIPs in the federal government would be upgrading the nation’s electric infrastructure and installing electric charging stations throughout the country and tearing down gas stations. and giving subsidies (free money) to every American household to upgrade their home for the new electric revolution that is saving the earth from total destruction.
None of that is happening. It is not about saving the earth from big bad “carbon” (whatever *that* is), it is all about narcissism, chaos, grift and money for the DIPs.
Speaking of EV BS, take a look at this “rah rah, EV” story in the crappy Washington Post:
“The obsession with EV range is all wrong”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2023/07/07/ev-range-anxiety-battery-myth/
Per the article, 60 percent of all driving trips in America are trips less than 6 miles.
I don’t believe it. Hell, you might as well walk.
They forget to mention that many Americans make multiple 6 mile trips per day. Whatever.
My average driving round trip is 40-50 miles, seeing as I live in the icky country. Even when I lived in the suburbs and I had a daily commute, my average driving round trip was 35-40 miles.
Still not seeing any rah rah EV stories in the mainstream media explaining how much it costs to charge multiple electric vehicles at home on my 200 amp system. Is it free? Will my utility company “know” I am charging an EV and deduct that off my electric usage?
Will my electric bill go down, up, stay the same? One month I left two 60 watt bulbs in my attic on all day and night (I forgot to turn them off and didn’t know they were on). When I got my electric bill the following month, it had jumped an extra $30. I looked around the house to find what was causing the increase in electric usage and I then discovered the attic lights were on. I turned them off and next month my electric usage went down back to normal.
Will charging two electric vehicles at home use more electricity than two 60 watt bulbs left on 24/7?
If I can’t afford an extra $30 on my electric bill because of two measly 60 watt light bulbs, I will never be able to afford a $100,000 EV, plus the magic electric costs (not to know, not to know!) of charging the EV at home.
Bah.
HAH!
I had a 1974 International Harvester Camper Special pick-up truck.
It weighed in at 5500 pounds dry. The motor and transmission weighed 1100 of those pounds. REAL STEEL! 11 mpg all day long…
Not a speed merchant, but if I could get traction I was able to pull a house off of its foundation. Good Crashing Thru anything potential!
Just looked up a 1974 International Harvester pick-up truck. What a simple and cool machine. There’s one for sale on ebay.
The good news is that things which can’t go on won’t.
The bad news is how much it’ll cost to discover, this time.
Issues with Electric Vehicles (EVs):
1. They drive 40% less then what the dealer says in distance before needing charge. In cold weather they are worse then warm weather.
2. Using A/C, Heat, or other car features uses power and cuts down drive distance
3. To power them a person’s house needs to have an Electrician modify the house’s power so the EVs can be charged when not used (usually overnight), cost around $2K for the upgrade.
4. If a person lives in an Apartment or Condo then charging the EV off the person’s power is not usable. This causes the person to rely on charging stations.
5. The charging stations are not standard for all EVs. So the Federal Government should come up with standards for power plugs, charging amounts, and how the costs are made (Credit Cards, etc)
6. Many charging stations do not work at a location. With copper steals going on this increases the chance that Charging Stations will not work.
7. Charging at charging location take time and if people are there using the station it leads to much more delay not found with fuel vehicles when they fill up.
8. Charging stations have to be found through smart devices and planning when driving
9. The EVs have issues with the batteries over time. When the batteries fail then the EV dies and there is no way to have it working until a replacement battery is installed. These are not standard and based on the vehicle. If the vehicle is still made then at a minimum at will take 2-4 weeks. Costs are high and the batteries are from overseas and made of non standard materials that cannot be put into normal landfills due to toxic materials.
10. Lack of power, brownouts or blackouts affect charging EVs, non-EVs do not have this problem.
11. The USA is using about 2-4% of EVs and the push is 50% by 2030 but the Electrical Grid cannot support that.
12. The Electrical Grid power is mostly from Natural Gas, Coal, Nuclear, and then minor is Wind and Solar. Wind and Solar do not last over time.
13. The cost of an EV is much more then a gas vehicle+gasoline or diesel vehicle+diesel fuel
14. EVs are heavier then fuel vehicles so they wear out tires faster, wear on the road more then fuel vehicles, and with collision and fire issues they can cost more for insurance.
15. Hurricane Ian in Florida it was found that flooding of water (and sea water) causes EV batteries to catch fire, and when the FD puts it out they will still catch fire later. This causes fires to surrounding area. They are toxic.
16. Independent shops, service stations, and discount chains; e.g, the old Sears Auto Center, cannot maintain or fix EVs. You have to go to the dealer, which may be a problem finding even near major cities. In other words, if you break down in Iowa, the nearest garage is of no help.
17. It is not possible to buy a 3-5 year old EV for and drive it for 10-15 years as people do with gasoline and diesel cars.
18. Batteries aren’t the only thing that is fragile and doesn’t last long on EVs. EVs have far more electronic components, both hardware and software, that go obsolete and break down sooner than those in gasoline and diesel cars. Plus, EV manufacturers will decide to stop supporting them after so many years.
19. Very hot weather is also hard on EV batteries.
20. You will likely never be free from a car payment with EVs.
Skepticism about EV’s is now making alt media headlines:
https://www.frontpagemag.com/automakers-are-making-electric-cars-no-one-is-buying/
“GM plans to sell 1 million electric cars by 2025. It sold less than 40,000 in 2022.”
“Ford expects to sell 2 million electric cars in 2025. That’s up from 61,575 last year. How do you go from selling tens of thousands of cars to millions? The carmaker didn’t even sell 2 million cars in 2023.”
“The Ford/Soros investment in Rivian fared poorly with the trendy electric pickup truck manufacturer spending $220,000 to make vehicles it sold for $81,000”
———————
Are EV a trillion dollar malinvestment? Are EV’s a flash in the pan, just the latest fad in auto manufacturing?
Remember DeLorean – the modern gull wing coup? Tesla Model S. Cool logo.
https://logodix.com/logo/64751.jpg
https://wallpapercave.com/wp/wp3544550.jpg
The cool logo, it’s the future, things are cool in the future, especially the logo.
https://www.titlemax.com/discovery-center/planes-trains-and-automobiles/defunct-car-brands/
No worries Goyim, Elon sold a bunch of Tesla stock and moved over to Twitter.
——————
How dumb are the sheep? Dumber than dog dirt:
https://greentyranny.news/2023-07-05-59-percent-oppose-phaseout-gas-powered-cars.html
“The Pew Research Center polled more than 10,000 Americans from May 30 to June 4 of this year. It stated that overall, 59 percent of those surveyed do not want gas-powered cars to be eliminated by 2035. In contrast, 40 percent said they favor a phaseout of gas-powered vehicles in favor of EVs.”
40% want ICE cars gone. Ho lee fukk Batman!
EVs are a stupid change. What’s upsetting is the stupid part, not the “change” part. With transmission losses, EVs are doing nothing fight “CO2 emissions.” The electricity must be produced somewhere else, perhaps with coal, and then much is lost charging the batteries while your car sits unusable.
“Climate change” is a hoax perpetrated to justify global socialism, and “being afraid of change” isn’t why it should be opposed. It should be opposed because it’s a lie, and one leading us into a much worse world.
Another thing that wasn’t discussed here is that with the increased weight of EVs parking garages will terribly over-stressed with no warning or fix in sight. Also, bridges that have normally stopped traffic will be under much greater stress than were built for. Insurance companies are raising the rates on EVs because a minor fender bender can cause hidden damage to the battery pack which makes the auto unpredictable and possibly a fire risk. They are totaling cars that would not be with an ICE.
The party of 800,000 abortions a year and a mandated, useless, deadly clot shot are sure as hell not interested in our safety.
Agreed, and killing 500,000 Ukes thus far in the war, means they definitely are not interested in our safety. Although, driving to the war zone with your protective airbags made you safe until you were on the front line and Russian artillery blew your guts out.
And these self righteous morons lecture us about the environment – when they just made hundreds of square miles of blowed up toxic and dangerous unexploded ordnance shithole. Yep them kids in Vietnam and Cambodia still lose their limbs each year because we went over there to stop Communism, although we are now Communist.
Hell, there’s a place in France that’s a no-go zone 100 years after WW1 due to unexploded ordnance.
Assuming there’s an inflection point where the majority of vehicles are EVs what will happen to traffic patterns? Will traffic lights be adjusted to keep vehicles moving to treat the batteries with care (big current draws are hard on batteries)? Newton’s laws encourage objects in motion to stay in motion over stop-go-stop driving, made worse with large masses.
Oh, and if the governement woul do a better job of keeping traffic moving it would help ICE engines too -even make manual transmissions easier to drive.
My guess is the total net CO2 “saved” with this simple change will be more than the “savings” from rebuilding the entire automobile fleet.
What about regenerative braking? I would think an electro-dude would be all about that?
Cashy, fuck off troll.
Cashy’s comment is a classic example of instigation for instigation sake. It’s essentially: “Come on electrical dude, defend yourself. WTF.”
Fuck you, Cashy!
EV’s can kill in so many nasty ways. The cancer causing radiation emitted within, The danger if it Died Suddenly, leaving you stranded in the wild. Rear ending or being rear ended by some goober, then turning into a crispy critter. Getting Jack Legged while waiting in a bad neighborhood for some moar ‘range.’ Yet the most unappreciated way Ev’s will kill is from taxing an already overextended power grid.
At a time of dire climate crisis, with temperatures racing into the realm of Dantes inferno, power grids across the country strain with everything they have just to keep up. Now seems like it’d be a good time to add 50 million EV’s, all charging overnight. Great idea boneheads. Air conditioning/refrigeration for food or….Your clownish little virtue signal? U-pick.
Climate alarmists should be held personally responsible for the coming mass die-off resulting from the great reset. Before we destroy one more facet of civilization based on their sophomoric ideas, they should be thrown head first into an active volcano. Or conscript them into laying cable, because that grid, it isn’t going to build itself. Heres Hoping that Costco will hurry up with the Time Muhsheen. I really want to go back
I haven’t heard about cancer causing radiation? What’s that about?
Cashy, you have consistently shown that your comments are not made in good faith. Now go fuck off troll.
Yah, Mister Liberty, that comment of his was very trollish.
“not made in good faith”, good way to put it.
Its alright, for Clammy I’d say, look it up, or Goooogle it, or take your phone and scan the QR code inside the door.
If I was sitting on a treasure chest full of fucks, I still wouldn’t have any to give. I’m never buying one of the things and I’m too lazy to provide you any ‘hard data.’ Yet I get the feeling that wouldn’t influence you anyway, unless it was backed up by the insurance institute for truth and science.
Driving around in a Faraday cage that is, in effect an EMF producing appliance. What could go wrong?
Showing a trunk full of Duracell AA batteries is an excellent way to illustrate the weight of the main EV battery – which is alot – because batteries weigh alot because they are dense.
Try to pick up a 5 gallon bucket full of AA batteries some time to see what I mean.
Duracell is a top rated battery, and I bet you didn’t know you can buy them for 1/3 the price at Harbor Freight.
https://www.harborfreight.com/aa-prime-power-alkaline-batteries-18-pack-64490.html
HF puts one of battery lines on sale nearly every week, so if you are patient, you can buy a 18 pack of the Thunderbolt Edge (Blue and black label) for $4.99. I found this out with my trail cam project, spending hundreds of hours researching the cheapest batteries that last the longest.
The guy that discovered this is a Youtuber who tests batteries (and other things) and has a fancy battery discharger that measures how many microamps you can get at different discharge rates – and his testing gadget also graphed the discharge rate over time. The Duracell vs. ThunderBolt Edge had identical results.
They are made off the same line, obviously. I will look for that video and post it if I find it.
My Geo Metro weighs 1700 lbs (curb weight). That is about 3 times lighter than a typical Tesla.
The weight of a Tesla is absurd. To illustrate this, let me use an analogy, how many 5 gallon buckets of water would I have to put in my Geo Metro that equal a Tesla battery?
A gallon of water weighs 8.33 lbs. 5 gallons = 42 pounds.
Model S battery: 1377 lbs divided by 42 = 32.7 buckets
Model X battery: 1118 lbs – 26 buckets
Model Y battery: 1700 lbs – 40 buckets
The useful load of a Geo Metro is 688 lbs with occupants. When I load my Metro with 200 lbs I really can tell a difference in the performance of the vehicle.
Just the Model Y battery is the same weight as my Metro.
3 Geo Metro weight = 1 Tesla car weight
I am sorry Elon Musk, your car is an overweight abomination.
Tesla car fire videos:
https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=tesla+catching+on+fire+complilation&iax=videos&ia=videos
I bet those EV fires are super toxic. What about the environmental cost of that?
What is coming – insurers are going to start refusing to insure EVs, just like in California high fire areas where they refuse to insure homes.
ZH – “Shocking Number”: Rivian Owner Sees $42,000 Repair Bill For Minor Accident
“The latest example of insurers getting roasted on repairs is a report from The New York Times that says a Rivian owner said his R1T electric pickup truck was involved in a minor fender bender in February in Columbus, Ohio. The insurance company of the driver who struck Chris Apfelstadt’s R1T offered to pay about $1,600 for the repairs.
However, after the R1T was taken to a certified repair shop in Columbus, the costs soared to a whopping $42,000 — or about half of the starting price of the EV. ”
————–
ZH – “Not ESG-Friendly: Insurers Junk Entire EVs For Minor Accidents”
“…the Model Y battery pack has “zero repairability.”
“A Tesla structural battery pack is going straight to the grinder,” Munro said.”
Growing up, I rode all manner of off-road vehicles, pushed *past* the limit and have eaten shit hardily several times. Everything from BMX, mopeds, mini-bikes (w/ briggs & straton), ATCs, and XRs and YZs. Flying off jumps, over whoop-de-dos, through berms, and mud pits, full-fucking throttle like a mad man.
I also have ridden all manner of vehicles (except large heavy motorcycles), on road and driven those balls-out and have never wrecked or been the cause of an accident. I certainly have lost control once or twice (mostly on purpose, in a controlled situation), e.g., spin-outs, burn-outs, on loose pavement, slick roads, wet roads, ice roads, snow, yadda, yadda.
And, as a matter of fact, I once pulled all four tires off the rims driving a ’58 Ranchero like a maniac on a gravel/dirt road (when I wasn’t even supposed to be driving). ALL FOUR. Those ’58 Rancheros are heavy as shit and those tires were old.
But nobody got hurt — I did get in trouble and the parents sold the ’58 Ranchero out from under me. It was supposed to be mine when I turned 16 and was legal to drive. Punishment deserved!
So, I’ll repeat that pencil neck EV fags — like that “dude” talking about “smelly” and “drama” and smoking Chargers in gay EVs the other day — those fuckers have no idea how to handle all that weight. NFW.
As radical as my experience with vehicles has been, I’m no professional, and I would be very worried about it. I mean fine, if you’re gonna drive like grandma to church on sunday, no worries.
But if you’re gonna drive like I do. Or you think you’re gonna hot rod and smoke “fossils” driving Chargers, you better be a pro! Or your dumb ass is probably gonna wreck major shit, kill somebody and/or yourself.
Weight (and distribution across the vehicle) is one of the most serious considerations to any serious performance/radical driving. In everything from BMX bicycle to hot rod on the track, it matters and you have to have experience with it. Or you’re gonna eat shit and take somebody/something with you.
Texas has no lack of people who drive an F150 like they would a Mustang GT, even simply commuting back and forth to the office.
Truck makers surrender to California extortion:
https://apnews.com/article/california-trucks-zero-emission-gas-powered-6457fb67bf50af7e354dcfe511adc197
A factoid about EeeVee pollution:
‘According to road tests by research company Emissions Analytics, under normal driving conditions a gas car sheds around 73 milligrams per kilometer from four new tires. A comparable electric vehicle, however, sheds an additional 15 milligrams per kilometer – some 20 percent more.
‘People are spending a ton of money on these big monsters, when really we should be going towards small, light, economical vehicles,’ Nick Molden of Emissions Analytics said.
For Molden, it is a ‘no-brainer’ that the world should move towards hybrid vehicles.
‘They are hardly heavier than normal vehicles and they give you a big reduction in CO2,’ he said. ‘If you want to genuinely address the environmental problem, the intuitive way of doing it is making smaller, lighter vehicles. Not bigger and heavier monsters.’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12296721/electric-vehicle-tire-pollution-emissions.html
‘Do the maff,’ urges Nick Molden, fruitlessly. Toyota said the same damned thing in its 94-page comment on Regan’s Folly: the same amount of lithium needed for one EeeVee (which reduces CO2 ’emissions’ by 3.8 tons/year versus an ICE vehicle) could supply six plug-in hybrids (saving 20 tons/year) or eighty-four conventional hybrids (saving 120 tons/year).
But the secular religion of climate change is unconcerned with facts, and even with easily avoidable ’emissions.’
‘EeeVees GOOD, engines BAAAAAAAADDD,’ bleat the electric sheeple, as Big Gov (busily excavating their mass grave) benignly calls it ‘infrastructure investment.’ :-0
“If you want to genuinely address the environmental problem, the intuitive way of doing it is making smaller, lighter vehicles. Not bigger and heavier monsters.’ – Nick Molden.
Mr. Molden reveals the big lie about EV’s, it has nothing to do with “climate” and everything to do with enserfing the population and keeping them from wandering too far off the plantation.
KAMALA HARRIS: “When we invest in clean energy and electric vehicles and reduce population, more of our children can breathe clean air and drink clean water.”
https://twitter.com/RNCResearch/status/1679988366618624000
Notice her slow, sing-song delivery, like a schoolmarm teaching retarded eight-year-olds to spell D-I-E. Threatened with their own destruction, the libtard crowd whoops like trained seals. :-0
The White House issued a correction saying word salad Harris meant to say “reduced pollution”, … but there are some Climate Howlers calling for reduced population (hopefully the Global Whiners will be the first to go).
Clever of President Bidet to have Harris as his VP — she often makes less sense than he does when public speaking. Only Flusteredman can beat them in the nonsense department.
Interesting point of view I have not seen elsewhere. With all the deficiencies of EVs, the ones that get the most attention are the high price, battery range, and fires. While the fires are very dangerous, so far EV fires per 100,000 miles of driving have been far lower than other vehicles. Hybrids tend to have the most fires per 100,000 miles of driving. The presence of a gasoline engine next to a high-powered electric battery system is the cause of most problems — a big engineering error. The hybrid battery ought to be under a front seat, as in a Toyota Prius.
Brand and models that have had the most fire problems — Ford Pinto was not the worst!
read://https_www.hotcars.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hotcars.com%2F20-cars-with-the-highest-chances-of-catching-on-fire%2F
No other authors to be thinking abot the physics of weight in a crash. We hear about weight causing tire wear, more road pothole and potentially overloading parking structures. But not weight and crashes.
There is already a potential weight problem with full sized ICE pickup trucks and SUVs versus compact and sub-compact cars in a crash. This became very meaningful to me when a fifty-something friend in Illinois, as a pedestrian on a city street, was struck by a pickup truck making a low speed right turn at an intersection. The relatively tall and heavy pickup truck did enough damage to kill my friend. According to the police investigation, her parents were told a typical car moving at that slow speed most likely would have caused just non-life-threatening injuries. The truck driver was not drunk, not charged with a crime, and was driving at a very low speed: The weight and height of the ICE pickup truck did the damage. A heavier EV pickup truck would have been more dangerous.
Filing the title transfer paperwork on our household’s new (to us) 2016 Jetta, I noted a curb weight stat of 3300 lbs. Yikes!
What else should one expect? After all, the one and only thing governments do very well is kill people. They are indeed quite good at it. At least half the time against their own residents.
A spare gas tank sitting in a warehouse unused for a couple of years will not lose capacity or structural integrity.
Everyone I’ve talked to directly who plans to buy an EV believes that the manufacturer’s warranty on the battery will allow them to get as much reasonable life out of an EV as the 12-15 years they could expect out of an IC equivalent.
No one I’ve talked to believes the batteries will last a dozen years, but they believe they are covered. This may be the EV Waterloo, but reality won’t sink in until many states deadlines for going EV-only in new car sales.
Evidence so far is that batteries will last for 1,000 to 1,500 charges with only a modest range reduction at their limit. A higher percentage of fast charges results in faster battery range reduction, but few EV owners take long trips and do a lot of fast charging — not enough data to reduce the broad 1,000 to 1,500 charge range.
At 200 miles per charge, even 1,000 charges will get the owner to 200,000 miles — under 1.5% of car owners will exceed 200,000 miles.
With EVs averaging only 7,000 miles a year, 1000 charges at 200 miles per charge will be good for 28.6 years (200,000 miles) of driving. And the EV batteries will not be worthless after 28.6 years, although the rest of the EV probably will be.
Even at an average of 13,500 miles per year, 1,000 charges at 200 miles per charge would be good for almost 15 years (200,000 miles) of driving.
A typical person makes wild guesses about EV battery life based on no data or based on anti-EV propaganda.
How long EV batteries will last has not yet been identified as a problem for over 98.5% of people who will not be driving their vehicles over 200,000 miles.
Richard,
“Evidence so far is that batteries will last for 1,000 to 1,500 charges with only a modest range reduction at their limit.”
This is specious claptrap – in part because there is no “evidence.” There are assertions – conjecture. EVs have not been in any sort of mass use as daily drivers for more than a handful of years. Most – as you yourself admit – are not driven nearly as far or as regularly as most people daily drive their cars. They have not yet had to cope with months of cold weather driving and frequent heavy discharge/recharge cycles.
Your “evidence” no doubt assumes the battery packs are rarely, if ever, heavily discharged and usually charged back up using Level 1 or II systems that do not tax the battery nearly as much as Level III “fast” charging does.
Even so, it has been admitted – by the manufacturers – that buyers can expect a loss of 1 percent per year, so 10 percent after ten years. That is a major degradation, given the typical EV starts out with a best-case range of around 250 miles and that is often very optimistic – and off by 10-20 percent or more.
There are battery deterioration estimates based on data: Measurements of older EVs by engineers who pay owners to borrow their EVs for battery evaluations. These estimates are not specious claptrap.
The percentage of fast charging for each EV is an estimate by the EV owner, and I see no reason for an EV owner to lie. Few EV owners do a lot of fast charging, so understanding of that effect on battery life is limited.
I believe your claim of 1% battery range reduction per year is overstated, when assuming the current annual average EV mileage of only 7,000 miles a year.
Maybe 1% per year battery capacity deterioration is a good estimate for 13,500 miles a year?
That would mean after 15 years of driving 13,500 miles a year, or 202,500 miles, an EV battery would have lost 15 x 1%, or 15%, of maximum range. I consider that to be small reduction, and it would definitely NOT make the EV worthless, or even require a new EV battery.
If you started out with a modest 250-mile range with your new EV, your EV might have a 212.5 mile range after 15 years of battery deterioration (202,500 miles of driving).
Does a reduced 212.5-mile EV range, versus the original 250-mile EV range, make an EV worthless after 15 years? Not in my opinion.
You seem to disagree.
So now i declare YOUR opinion to be claptrap, and now we are in a claptrap war.
The bottom line is a 250 mile EV range stinks, versus an ICE or hybrid, and a 212.5 mile EV range would be even worse. But no one who paid a lot of money for a 250 mile range EV has a worthless EV, that needs a new battery, when the range has deteriorated to 212.5 miles, after 15 years (202,500 miles) of driving.
Have a Nice Day,
Your regular heckler
How much of the measuring takes place in temperate parts of coastal cities in California vs. more extreme environments in the US?
Regardless, no one will know for sure on battery degredation until it is too late to alter the current trajectory. The manufacturer’s design “pipelines” for the EV only future are being filled now, and make no mistake — Ford et al will nitpick warranties to avoid a financial catastrophe if the worst happens.
Re: extreme environment- gulf coast, high heat and humidity, salt air. Good luck!
Here in WA the coastal area has constant storms blowing from the west carrying salt mist with them. The houses are wrecks, our friends place was 100 yards from the beach but any and everything metal was corroded. Including inside the garage which opened to the east, the hot water tank shell was totally rusting thru the paint. That salt mist goes everywhere, how immune are those EV batteries? Once internal, that salt residue won’t rinse out.
Salted roads in northern snow county, humm.
The EV battery measurements I am talking about were made by Ford engineers in or near Dearborn, Michigan, of EVs “rented” from their owners, who usually live within an hour of Dearborn, Michigan.
A lot of salt is used on roads in SE Michigan.
Thanks to global warming, we don’t get much snow here anymore, and we like that.
“engineers who pay owners to borrow their EVs for battery evaluations”
Engineers working for whom? Paid by whom? A bit vague about your sources Richard. And then there are the abundant “I believe”s that are quite common in your comments.
Details in prior comment.
“I believe” is my short way of saying “My statement is based on data that I believe to be accurate, but could be wrong.”
I don’t see you requiring ANY data and sources for the “EVs Kill” claim in this article … or for the generic claim of EV fires … or for multiple comments about EV battery life.
Why is it that almost everything I write here is responded to by you with an “I don’t care” or a challenge comment?
There are no data provided here to support the EV Kils claim.
Such as the percentage of multiple car accidents where vehicle weight differences
caused deaths.
We do know that passenger vehicle collisions with trailer trucks are rarely deadly for the trailer truck driver.
We know weight should make a difference in multiple automobile crashes, but how much?
First of all, almost half of automobile accidents involve one vehicle.
“For multiple vehicle crashes: Being hit by a 1,000-pound heavier vehicle results in roughly a one in one thousand increase in fatality risk.
Over the past 35 years, the average weight of light vehicles sold in the United States has fluctuated substantially.”
SOURCE:
https://www.nber.org/digest/nov11/vehicle-weight-and-automotive-fatalities#
The National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) is a private, nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to undertaking and disseminating unbiased economic research to public policymakers, business professionals, and the academic community.
Richard,
Are you an imbecile?
It is a fact of physics that a heavier car imparts more force when it strikes another car; an even heavier car would impart even more force. EVs are massively heavy, due to the weight of their battery packs. A 6,000-plus pound Lightning that pile-drives into your car is going to total it – and probably you, too.
“Are you an imbecile?”
Are you being rhetorical?
Just the EP, “normal” way of responding to data when they contradict his over the top claim that “EVs kill”, which I tried to clarify with research how much of a problem that might be for a 1000 lb. difference in vehicle weights in a collision. Less than implied by “EVs kill”.
Richard,
I respond with facts – as in this case, f=ma. It is not a debatable point because it is not a matter of opinion.
Here’s another way to understand: Why do you suppose there are weight classes in boxing? Who hits harder – Mike Tyson or Sugar Ray Leonard?
EV batteries should be recharged before the reach 50 % discharge. This means you’ve lost 40% of your actual total distance! My experience with these batteries is that if they tell you you can get 1000 charging cycles on a battery, it’s actually only about 700. Time will tell, but for myself, don’t believe much of of what they’re saying! FJB
Amen, Alan –
The whole “EV” thing is riddled with disingenuousness. half-truths and outright lies. All to hide the facts from people – for just long enough to make it too late to stop it.
“EV batteries should be recharged before the reach 50 % discharge”
That is disinformation not backed by any data.
The 700 charge EV battery life is pure speculation, once again data free.
You make up numbers out of thin air, yet get an “Amen” from the author? Many people would view that as evidence of anti-EV bias.
Richard,
I don’t hide my bias. I loathe EVs. They are soul-less appliances that are functionally inferior in every way other than being “quick” to a 20-year-old Corolla.
But that does not change the facts. Just the same as my loathing of Face Diapers and their enablers does not change the facts I have reported about them.
Here are some more facts:
Heavy discharge/”fast” charge cycling is hard on batteries – all of them. EV batteries are not immune from the facts of chemistry. Read the god-damned owner’s manual for the Lightning. I did. I posted screen shots of what it said about heavy discharge/”fast” charge cycling.
The admitted-to loss in charge capacity is 1 percent annually. It is very likely to be much greater if the goddamn EV is used daily, the battery run down to nearly discharged and then “fast” charged (rinse and repeat) over and over again.
I loathe EVs too … and masks … and Covid shots … and leftists in power.
EVs have many problems we know about now.
I don’t want to speculate on, or exaggerate, potential EV problems that lack data. Such as EV weight and collision damage, which may be less of a problem than implied here. And the potential problem of needing to replace EV batteries in less than 15 years of driving 13,500 miles a year. In the long run, EVs may turn out to have more problems than we know today. Such as expensive collision repairs. Expensive insurance. Problems for EV owners living near salt water.
The list of actual and potential EV problems keeps growing, while the good news remains at one item: Fast acceleration that EV owners will rarely use. Maybe useful for passing another vehicle on a two land road.
The fast charging will deteriorate batteries faster that slow charging. But there not much data are available to know how much, because very few EV owners do a lot of fast charging. That is just an additional risk for an EV owner.
I have never driven an EV, but have found no reason to even consider buying one in the future. I would consider a Toyota hybrid.
The EV cheerleading by other auto reviewers is very biased.
Based on what I have heard, second hand from Ford engineers, the fast acceleration is exciting at first.
The high price doesn’t affect them at first since they are driving company cars. When they find out that EVs will sell for more than ICEs and hybrids, they think that will be a big problem for Ford customers.
Short EV trips are no problem. But after the first long trip, where fast charging on the road is required, EV satisfaction collapses. The co-pilot has to start locating a fast charger below a 20% charge because no one is sure of the actual range remaining. If they have to wait in line to use a fast charger that works, that’s the second problem. The third problem is they are going to waste a half hour getting an 80% charge with nothing to do for that 30 minutes. There’s no service station with bathrooms, or snacks to buy — so they will later stop at a gasoline service station with their EV for bathrooms and snacks anyway.
EVs would be better than ICEs and hybrids with much better batteries … which are always coming in 10 years, but never show up. The battery problem has existed for over a century. That’s why EVs need government mandates and subsidies to force them on customers. And no libertarian likes government mandates and subsidies.
Jesus, Richard!
f=ma is not “speculation.” It is well-established fact. In a collision, if one vehicle is much heavier than the other (EV or not) more impact force will be imparted to the other vehicle. This force imparted increases the amount of damage caused.
Do you really not understand this? Or are you trolling, again?
There’s just not a lot of coherence to what Richard say, but he sure likes to say a lot. He’s adamant about about telling us how many angels can dance of a pin, but at the same time somehow concedes all of his own points. He likes to vociferously defend the things that he professes to loathe. Me thinks somebody likes to listen to himself.
The generic F=ma does NOT specify what actually happens in real automobile accidents.
Start with almost half of the accidents that are single vehicle collisions. Let’s say hitting a tree. All the vehicles passed the same crash tests. How does F=ma apply there?
For multiple vehicle accidents, weight differences do make a difference and i previously provided data on 1,000 pound weight differences from a private research organization.
From the data, 1000 pound weight difference in actual automobile collisions was not close tp being as deadly as your title “EV Kills” implied.
Sure, in car crashes between pickup trucks and passenger vehicles, car drivers are much more likely to suffer fatal injuries than pickup drivers.
One could write an article titled “Pickup Trucks Kill”, claiming taller and heavier pickup trucks are dangerous for compact cars if the two collide. And then use the article to discourage people from buying pickup tracks?
Richard underscores Eric’s point: Additional mass kills. EVs necessarily must carry more mass than ICE vehicles, with no additional utility over a similarly sized ICE vehicle. In the case of pickups, their additional mass is a result of their additional utility. There is a benefit to that additional mass, which is not the case with EVs.
Richard writes:
“The generic F=ma does NOT specify what actually happens in real automobile accidents.”
Really? So what you’re claiming is that if I am driving a Miata and it gets hit by an M1 Abrams tank there will be no difference in terms of the effect upon the Miata vs. the effect of a car about the same weight hitting it?
Pickups do kill, by the way – in that they are heavier than Miatas.
Cashy, you have consistently shown that your comments are not made in good faith. Now go fuck off troll.
your assumption is that EVs are mostly fast charged thus resulting in such rapid degradation.
that I don’t believe since L2 charging at home/work is significantly cheaper & kinder to the battery than L3 charging.
as for weight, my Suburbans weigh over 6,000 lbs. & with modern safety standards in a collision I doubt I’m going to kill the occupants of a Corolla.
“At 200 miles per charge, even 1,000 charges will get the owner to 200,000 miles — under 1.5% of car owners will exceed 200,000 miles.”
I can’t help wondering if “Dick” recognizes the flaw in his argument. Methinks not.
How EeeVees Kill … yessss!
Some philistines will call this a hyperbolic tabloid headline. Resident trolls will excrete their slippery humbug. But I see it as the first installment of a noble trilogy:
How EeeVees Kill
How EeeVees Burn
How EeeVees Pollute
In a gesture of authorial restraint, Eric doesn’t even go into the other class of EeeVee deaths, peculiar to Tesla: self-driving [sic] fatalities.
‘This is why the Lightning is a three-ton half-ton truck,’ we read. Think about that. Ants can carry up to a thousand times their body weight. A three-ton half-ton [payload] truck would be a joke, but for the fact that ‘half ton’ is a term from the Before Times — the 1950s — that’s mutated beyond recognition.
‘Ford rates its regular-cab, long-bed, two-wheel drive F-150 with the 5.0L V-8 engine at up to 3,325 pounds of payload capacity,’ says a Motor Trend article. Whereas the F-150 Lightning’s maximum payload is but 2,235 lbs with the standard battery, and only 1,952 lbs with the extended-range battery.
Thus the 1.66-ton capacity of the V8 F-150 is slashed to 1.12 tons in the short-range Lightning, and 0.98 tons in the Lightning with the Big Boy battery.
So the fact stands despite the garbled labels: more battery, less payload. If you actually need to haul stuff in a pickup, much less a drayage truck, this trade-off don’t compute. Yet Commiefornia will mandate it next year for trucks serving ports and terminals, disrupting commerce nationwide. It’s a political War on Physics … in which we’re the hapless Ukies, getting our hands and feet blown off by Newsom’s remorseless land mines. 🙁
My Dad used to say that the human life span was about right, that if we lived much longer we wouldn’t be able to stand the changes we’d see. He was right.