GM Is Ready To Lose Close To $9,000 On Every Bolt Sold

Exactly...the future will go to those who embrace it.

People were still investing in steam ships right up until the point Boeing brought out the 707 Jet....and then the Steam ship went the way of the steam locomotive...

It is just a matter of time at this point.

58 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Interesting is the recent interview by Ford CEO Mark Fields which clearly states that if possible they would have trump stop all efforts moving forward to make cleaner auto's as he says that with 55 models on the market, which is only 2.8% of the auto sales, there is no market for EV's or hybrids. Yet earlier in the year he contradicts himself and even admits that everything FORD has built to date is compliance EV's / hybrids. 

On top of this Ford CEO says no reason to not move production to other countries unless tax breaks are given to FORD. Trump has clearly now made us hostage to companies to move jobs out of country without tax breaks being given.

Dec 2nd Bloomberg Story Pressure on auto companies without reducing EPA requirements for making auto's. Sees no market for EV's.

Bloomberg Interview Where Ford CEO says he will work with Trump to reduce requirements by states and gov to allow making autos more profitable. Pretty much says no market for EV's / Hybrids.

CleanTechnica Story where ford states that currently everything is compliance and by 2030 Ford is now reviewing on how to build real EV / Hybrid auto's.

Rueters Small Car production moving to Mexico along with Compliance EV / hybrid auto production.

Very interesting as this would tend to say that if they get money from the GOV, they will do all the right things in building EV / Hybrid auto's otherwise no need to build better auto's let us just build what we have.

GM on the other hand clean sheet the BOLT and from what I have seen it will be a big success for them. Battery tech was always the thing holding back EV auto's. The future will go to those that embrace it.

A thousand times, THIS^^!!

Mark Fields never said that he wished for stoppage to ALL efforts for cleaner vehicles.

Not even close.

57 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

A thousand times, THIS^^!!

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt..agree with you and dfelt.....

On ‎12‎/‎5‎/‎2016 at 7:14 PM, smk4565 said:

 

The reality is there is not one single auto executive that would not be upset if there were roll backs of Emissions and or CAFE.

Now they will not splash this in the PC press as risk being made a victim of attacks by many who would be upset with this but that is just the way it is and they would  sleep better with any advantage they would have to make more money and sell cars at a lower price while keeping development cost down.

Just found this new commercial for the European version of the Bolt

Opel Ampera-e

 This is awesome, we need commercials like this here.

3 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Just found this new commercial for the European version of the Bolt

Opel Ampera-e

 This is awesome, we need commercials like this here.

Ohhh absolutely....

Although I find the idea of a diety presented at the end of the video dated and irrelevant....

I loved their first commercial that shows it being all the other opels.

3 hours ago, dfelt said:

Interesting is the recent interview by Ford CEO Mark Fields which clearly states that if possible they would have trump stop all efforts moving forward to make cleaner auto's as he says that with 55 models on the market, which is only 2.8% of the auto sales, there is no market for EV's or hybrids. Yet earlier in the year he contradicts himself and even admits that everything FORD has built to date is compliance EV's / hybrids. 

On top of this Ford CEO says no reason to not move production to other countries unless tax breaks are given to FORD. Trump has clearly now made us hostage to companies to move jobs out of country without tax breaks being given.

Dec 2nd Bloomberg Story Pressure on auto companies without reducing EPA requirements for making auto's. Sees no market for EV's.

Bloomberg Interview Where Ford CEO says he will work with Trump to reduce requirements by states and gov to allow making autos more profitable. Pretty much says no market for EV's / Hybrids.

CleanTechnica Story where ford states that currently everything is compliance and by 2030 Ford is now reviewing on how to build real EV / Hybrid auto's.

Rueters Small Car production moving to Mexico along with Compliance EV / hybrid auto production.

Very interesting as this would tend to say that if they get money from the GOV, they will do all the right things in building EV / Hybrid auto's otherwise no need to build better auto's let us just build what we have.

GM on the other hand clean sheet the BOLT and from what I have seen it will be a big success for them. Battery tech was always the thing holding back EV auto's. The future will go to those that embrace it.

I am still waiting for proof of your claim in the first line of this quote above.

7 minutes ago, Wings4Life said:

I am still waiting for proof of your claim in the first line of this quote above.

 

You watch the interview and interpret how you take it. Pretty much all the stories give a very mixed bag of how Ford with their Compliance EV's and Hybrids really would deal with moving tech forward.

I am left with the impression that Ford would keep things static as long as they made profits and paid themselves well in comparison to moving forward with better propulsion systems.

For you Wings we will have to almost always agree to disagree as you see Ford as perfect, I see a different side to Ford. These stories pretty much state that.

5 minutes ago, dfelt said:

You watch the interview and interpret how you take it. Pretty much all the stories give a very mixed bag of how Ford with their Compliance EV's and Hybrids really would deal with moving tech forward.

I am left with the impression that Ford would keep things static as long as they made profits and paid themselves well in comparison to moving forward with better propulsion systems.

For you Wings we will have to almost always agree to disagree as you see Ford as perfect, I see a different side to Ford. These stories pretty much state that.

Don't make this about me. I only asked for proof of your claim, and you have none, because you completely made it up.

Never ever said Ford was perfect, and never suggested as much and never will. I have faulted Ford many times.  Agree to disagree my ass, you stated something exactly as if it were taken out of the links you posted, BUT THEY WERE NOT!!!  

Ford would never say something so irresponsible and foolish....but you did.  

It’s false news like defelt stated that is part of the misinformation problem that we have today. This is not me over-reacting, this is seeing how stuff gets thrown out there in different forms of media, complete with links  that few will take the time to completely read or listen to, and then people believe it and spread the word. 

Thanks for being part of the problem dfelt.

Now, I am curious if you correct your original post and state it as an opinion, rather than a quote…..or will you just ignore my rant.

Don’t worry, I already have my expectations, and I am in no way offended either way.

18 minutes ago, dfelt said:

You watch the interview and interpret how you take it. Pretty much all the stories give a very mixed bag of how Ford with their Compliance EV's and Hybrids really would deal with moving tech forward.

I am left with the impression that Ford would keep things static as long as they made profits and paid themselves well in comparison to moving forward with better propulsion systems.

For you Wings we will have to almost always agree to disagree as you see Ford as perfect, I see a different side to Ford. These stories pretty much state that.

I'm confused. You make the comment that " its clearly stated...."

But now are saying its how one interprets it?

9 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

I'm confused. You make the comment that " its clearly stated...."

But now are saying its how one interprets it?

 

 

He completely made it up, and Fields clearly did not state anything close to that.

Ford wants to continue to help boost fuel economy and lessen the industry’s environmental impact, because the company acknowledges climate change as a serious threat, Fields said.

....does that sound anything close to what dfelt said?

I updated my post above stating that I am clarifying this is my take on the stories.

Yet if you watch the interview these are some of the very clear statements made by Ford CEO. This leave much to be wondered and I am seeing more and more stories along this same thought process from other news outlets. So one has to wonder ...........

“Well when you look at the policy recommendations we support, obviously we will continue to advocate for currency manipulation rules, for free and fair trade; we’ll continue to support comprehensive tax reform — and to your point, we want to make sure that fuel economy regulations are aligned with market realities.

“And I think we’ll engage as we always have done in very positive discussions with the administration and policymakers on what that means not only for our business, but importantly, what does it mean in terms of providing jobs and economic growth here in the United States?”

“Well, I think — when we agreed to the one national standard back in 2011, one of the things we agreed to was a checkpoint in 2018 — what they call a midterm review. And listen, as a company, we want to make sure that our vehicles are as easy on the planet as possible. We want to have great fuel economy for our customers. But we also want to make sure that those regulations are aligned with how consumers are reacting to some of the new technologies and the new economic realities. And that’s the discussion we want to have, because we want to make sure our vehicles provide great customers satisfaction but customers can afford it and it can provide economic growth in the country.”

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

You watch the interview and interpret how you take it. Pretty much all the stories give a very mixed bag of how Ford with their Compliance EV's and Hybrids really would deal with moving tech forward.

I am left with the impression that Ford would keep things static as long as they made profits and paid themselves well in comparison to moving forward with better propulsion systems.

For you Wings we will have to almost always agree to disagree as you see Ford as perfect, I see a different side to Ford. These stories pretty much state that.

You should know better than to speak ill of the blue oval lol!

4 minutes ago, dfelt said:

I updated my post above stating that I am clarifying this is my take on the stories.

Yet if you watch the interview these are some of the very clear statements made by Ford CEO. This leave much to be wondered and I am seeing more and more stories along this same thought process from other news outlets. So one has to wonder ...........

“Well when you look at the policy recommendations we support, obviously we will continue to advocate for currency manipulation rules, for free and fair trade; we’ll continue to support comprehensive tax reform — and to your point, we want to make sure that fuel economy regulations are aligned with market realities.

“And I think we’ll engage as we always have done in very positive discussions with the administration and policymakers on what that means not only for our business, but importantly, what does it mean in terms of providing jobs and economic growth here in the United States?”

“Well, I think — when we agreed to the one national standard back in 2011, one of the things we agreed to was a checkpoint in 2018 — what they call a midterm review. And listen, as a company, we want to make sure that our vehicles are as easy on the planet as possible. We want to have great fuel economy for our customers. But we also want to make sure that those regulations are aligned with how consumers are reacting to some of the new technologies and the new economic realities. And that’s the discussion we want to have, because we want to make sure our vehicles provide great customers satisfaction but customers can afford it and it can provide economic growth in the country.”

 

 

There is this term "double speak" that comes to mind here. 

*points in one general direction*  HAHA...

The story from GM comes out today that the Bolt (and other electrics, they don't single themselves out) could lose up to FORTY PERCENT of battery capacity/RANGE over 8 yerrs.

Funny... I've never heard of a gasoline vehicle's FUEL TANK shrinking over ANY LEMF of time.   

3 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

*points in one general direction*  HAHA...

The story from GM comes out today that the Bolt (and other electrics, they don't single themselves out) could lose up to FORTY PERCENT of battery capacity/RANGE over 8 yerrs.

Funny... I've never heard of a gasoline vehicle's FUEL TANK shrinking over ANY LEMF of time.   

It is called loss of compression. 

1 minute ago, hyperv6 said:

It is called loss of compression. 

Hyper you make me laugh.  Over 8 years... an internal combustion engine... loses 40% of its compression?

Guys there are two reasons companies build clean cars. 

#1 Regulations pure and simple. 

#2 Public Relations and image. Companies want to look clean to the Green Buyers as their money is as green as anyone else. 

None are doing it just to be good guys as there is no profit in that especially when development of these systems are really affecting the bottom line. 

2 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

Hyper you make me laugh.  Over 8 years... an internal combustion engine... loses 40% of its compression?

I am glad you laughed as it was a joke unless you drive a Fiat, Lada or Yugo

It is well know batteries degrade as anyone with a cell phone or lap top know this. 

If you have ever played with RC cars you know fast charges kill battery life even faster.  The same applies here. 

As I have stated before the EV market may be much like the Smart Phone  market where there is little use for a used model. Technology will move faster making these car less appealing as in 5 years the new one will go 40-50 miles more and who wants to buy an old car that needs an expensive battery? Or you need to live close to work to make it worth while. 

Here is a simple fact that anyone can look up,

We all know what CARB is and what they do, dictating most automakers emissions levels to be able to sell in Cali. and thus, other states too.  Well, they are much stricter than other government regulations.  Why?  Because it is in their very charter to do so.  IOW, they would not even need to exist if they did raise them above other government controlled regulations. They are all about self preservation, first and foremost, and the nations well being is low on their priority. So here is an agency that does not care how hard or fast it pushes automakers to conform to unrealistic demands, and only cares to raise them above the other regulations.  How much do you think they care about the economic well being of automakers and thus our country, if they are stepping on our collective necks to justify their existence and take all the credit.  

Finding fault with industry for suggesting fairness, rather then just bending over without question at the demanding behest of regulators is par for some of you. I get that.  Does not mean I have to not correct lies.

https://my.chevrolet.com/content/dam/gmownercenter/gmna/dynamic/manuals/2017/Chevrolet/BOLT EV/Owner's Manual.pdf

PDF file of the 2017 Chevy BOLT, Yes on page 322 it states:

Like all batteries, the amount of energy that the high voltage “propulsion” battery can store will decrease with time and miles driven. Depending on use, the battery may degrade as little as 10% to as much as 40% of capacity over the warranty period. If there are questions pertaining to battery capacity, a dealer service technician could determine if the vehicle is within parameters.

This is not different than any other auto with a battery even ICE. So no big deal.

Yes ICE even loose HP / Torque over time depending on how well they are taken care of. Amazing how wide of range that can happen. 

Check out page 313 for Maintenance schedule. I would like to see any ICE that has that minimal maintenance.

23 minutes ago, dfelt said:

https://my.chevrolet.com/content/dam/gmownercenter/gmna/dynamic/manuals/2017/Chevrolet/BOLT EV/Owner's Manual.pdf

PDF file of the 2017 Chevy BOLT, Yes on page 322 it states:

Like all batteries, the amount of energy that the high voltage “propulsion” battery can store will decrease with time and miles driven. Depending on use, the battery may degrade as little as 10% to as much as 40% of capacity over the warranty period. If there are questions pertaining to battery capacity, a dealer service technician could determine if the vehicle is within parameters.

This is not different than any other auto with a battery even ICE. So no big deal.

Yes ICE even loose HP / Torque over time depending on how well they are taken care of. Amazing how wide of range that can happen. 

Check out page 313 for Maintenance schedule. I would like to see any ICE that has that minimal maintenance.

A car battery does in fact only last about 4-5 years.  Then you spend $100 to replace it.

Is that really ' no different and no big deal'  to you?  Do you think the Bolt battery is cheap and easy to replace?

Or better yet, do you think if an engine decreases power from about 300hp to 270hp over time, that is even remotely the same as the range dependency of a BEV?

defelt, you are scaring me with your opinions.

There is a correlation between a battery in an electric vehicle being equivalent to a fuel tank in an internal combustion vehicle, as the juice in the battery powers the motors, the fuel in the tank drives the engine.

So it extends to battery range/fuel tank size.  A fuel tank never shrinks.

"Could" and "Do" aren't the same thing.  The Volts and Tesla don't have that level of degradation.  GM is under promising here so they can over deliver later. 

3 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

There is a correlation between a battery in an electric vehicle being equivalent to a fuel tank in an internal combustion vehicle, as the juice in the battery powers the motors, the fuel in the tank drives the engine.

So it extends to battery range/fuel tank size.  A fuel tank never shrinks.

Interesting.  I'm having problems with rusted out fuel lines on my CR-V.  I've had them replaced, but the car is still not right and will be going back for the fourth time.... there is still a bit of a leak somewhere..and now they're going to try a new fuel pump.. coincidentally, my range isn't as far as it once was. 

Funny what age does to cars. 

14 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

There is a correlation between a battery in an electric vehicle being equivalent to a fuel tank in an internal combustion vehicle, as the juice in the battery powers the motors, the fuel in the tank drives the engine.

So it extends to battery range/fuel tank size.  A fuel tank never shrinks.

But IC engines do start to lose MPGs as they age as well so...

31 minutes ago, Wings4Life said:

A car battery does in fact only last about 4-5 years.  Then you spend $100 to replace it.

 

Is that really ' no different and no big deal'  to you?  Do you think the Bolt battery is cheap and easy to replace?

 

 

Or better yet, do you think if an engine decreases power from about 300hp to 270hp over time, that is even remotely the same as the range dependency of a BEV?

 

defelt, you are scaring me with your opinions.

More FUD. The battery (along with every other component on the Bolt) is covered for 8 years or 100K miles.

Don't worry folks. When Ford puts out their first true EV (and not a short range Focus) the tune here will change immensely.

Even Ford has stated that they've had a minuscule number of hybrid battery replacements in Fusions and Escapes. 

A 100000 mile warranty does not warrant against a 40% loss.

Ahhhhh, ignorance is bliss for some.

4 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

You should know better than to speak ill of the blue oval lol!

At least they were kind enough to highlight the problem in blue and circle it with an oval on the front of the car when it left the factory.

Just now, A Horse With No Name said:

At least they were kind enough to highlight the problem in blue and circle it with an oval on the front of the car when it left the factory.

Lame as efff

How proud you must be though, siding with a complete BS statement.

9 minutes ago, Wings4Life said:

A 100000 mile warranty does not warrant against a 40% loss.

 

Ahhhhh, ignorance is bliss for some.

It's not just the warranty.... the need isn't there.  Civics did have an issue with their batteries losing range, but the Escapes, Fusions, Camrys, and Pruii don't suffer the same effect.  We've had this discussion multiple times before.  The batteries in the hybrid Taxis generally last the life of the taxi.  They have much more frequent charge/discharge cycles too. 

54 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

"Could" and "Do" aren't the same thing.  The Volts and Tesla don't have that level of degradation.  GM is under promising here so they can over deliver later. 

Interesting.  I'm having problems with rusted out fuel lines on my CR-V.  I've had them replaced, but the car is still not right and will be going back for the fourth time.... there is still a bit of a leak somewhere..and now they're going to try a new fuel pump.. coincidentally, my range isn't as far as it once was. 

Funny what age does to cars. 

Which is why one tries to avoid lower level Asian cars.  As I have said before, my father's Toyota Highlander has not aged nearly as well as my Mini.

An electric with fewer moving parts will have better than an ICE car as the technology progresses.

But right now, Subaru, Lexus, Acura would be the only Asian cars I would consider... would consider GM...

1 minute ago, Drew Dowdell said:

It's not just the warranty.... the need isn't there.  Civics did have an issue with their batteries losing range, but the Escapes, Fusions, Camrys, and Pruii don't suffer the same effect.  We've had this discussion multiple times before.  The batteries in the hybrid Taxis generally last the life of the taxi.  They have much more frequent charge/discharge cycles too. 

Is that why GM stated themselves, the 10-40% loss effect?

You can choose to believe what you want, but batteries lose effectiveness.  And wait until you see how much range drops in the winter, when you require things like, I don't know, electric generated heat.

3 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

It's not just the warranty.... the need isn't there.  Civics did have an issue with their batteries losing range, but the Escapes, Fusions, Camrys, and Pruii don't suffer the same effect.  We've had this discussion multiple times before.  The batteries in the hybrid Taxis generally last the life of the taxi.  They have much more frequent charge/discharge cycles too. 

Prius is a wonderful product, would consider that before I would consider any other Hybrid other than Volt.

Just now, Wings4Life said:

Is that why GM stated themselves, the 10-40% loss effect?

 

You can choose to believe what you want, but batteries lose effectiveness.  And wait until you see how much range drops in the winter, when you require things like, I don't know, electric generated heat.

It's called under promising and over delivering.   Being with Ford, I'd expect you to not understand how that works.

There is a decade of experience with hybrids out there.... 40% is simply not the norm for battery degradation. 

5 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

It's called under promising and over delivering.   Being with Ford, I'd expect you to not understand how that works.

There is a decade of experience with hybrids out there.... 40% is simply not the norm for battery degradation. 

Battery degradation is a fact.  

Nobody claimed 40% as a norm.

Let's not spread FUD please.

2 minutes ago, Wings4Life said:

Battery degradation is a fact.  

Nobody claimed 40% as a norm.

Let's not spread FUD please.

You're the one spreading FUD and you do it in every EV thread that happens on this site.... I'm tired of hearing you repeat it as if it were a truth......  Most hybrids run into the 200k miles before any significant battery degradation happens.   Teslas are routinely running to 150k miles without issue... and I capped it there just because there simply aren't many 200k mile Teslas yet. 

10 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

It's called under promising and over delivering.   Being with Ford, I'd expect you to not understand how that works.

There is a decade of experience with hybrids out there.... 40% is simply not the norm for battery degradation. 

Even with the First generation of Prius, I know of several people driving them with zero issues.  Woman I work with just Replaced a 98 Lincoln with a Prius, Going from 14 Miles per gallon to 48 has made her very happy. ironic that you would mention Issues with your CRV, her husband has an aging CRV and they are thinking about replacing that with a Prius also.

Just now, A Horse With No Name said:

Even with the First generation of Prius, I know of several people driving them with zero issues.  Woman I work with just Replaced a 98 Lincoln with a Prius, Going from 14 Miles per gallon to 48 has made her very happy. ironic that you would mention Issues with your CRV, her husband has an aging CRV and they are thinking about replacing that with a Prius also.

I'm just trying to keep it in top shape for its age so I can get a decent price for it when I sell it for a Sierra or Avalanche. 

...and for anyone who hasn't driven the latest Prius, Toyota did a fantastic job on it.

Just now, Drew Dowdell said:

I'm just trying to keep it in top shape for its age so I can get a decent price for it when I sell it for a Sierra or Avalanche. 

Both of those would be nice choices.

I really like the Sierra idea...

10 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

You're the one spreading FUD and you do it in every EV thread that happens on this site.... I'm tired of hearing you repeat it as if it were a truth......  Most hybrids run into the 200k miles before any significant battery degradation happens.   Teslas are routinely running to 150k miles without issue... and I capped it there just because there simply aren't many 200k mile Teslas yet. 

Here is what I have stated in this thread about EV's,

Battery degradation happens to every BEV - FACT!!!!

Warranty does not cover battery degradation - Fact!!!!!

And I also corrected your 40% norm statement, and that GM states a 10-40% possibility range.

Now, short of those facts, why don't you try to prove I said something that is false here.

And BTW, the roadster is not exactly a good example of typical long term good battery life, because nobody drives them in cold weather, which seriously degrades batteries even quicker.  But the numbers I have seen was around 80% after 100K, which is probably about as good as it gets for BEV. Downhill from there.
 

http://www.hybridcars.com/how-long-will-an-evs-battery-last/

You are welcome.

So some quick math on a 100K plus BEV vehicle that degraded to 80% or less, you then can factor in another 70-80% effect in the winter months.  So that 200 mile brand new BEV drops to 160 range after 100K in the summer, and about 115 mile range in the cold winter months.  And it never stops degrading.  So hot summers and cold winters only degrade it faster yet.

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

You're the one spreading FUD and you do it in every EV thread that happens on this site.... I'm tired of hearing you repeat it as if it were a truth......  Most hybrids run into the 200k miles before any significant battery degradation happens.   Teslas are routinely running to 150k miles without issue... and I capped it there just because there simply aren't many 200k mile Teslas yet. 

This and then some. Glad I'm not the only one who's FUD detector was going off here. Fact is that if this were a Ford product, this would be a totally different conversation.

No one ever claimed that this would be the best solution for everyone but to flat out ignore the fact that it will be quite useful for quite a few folks while spreading a ridiculous amount of FUD is just flat out talking with one's eyes closed.

IC Engine degradation is also a fact missed by some here trying to spread FUD about EVs. It's also a really good thing that ICE cars don't lose MPGs during the summer months. Oh wait, they do.

Per someone else's link, I find this part about horse buggies and ICE cars perfectly poetic given the stance some want to have here about EVs.

"Then again, when the first gasoline cars started to come along, and people compared those noisy, smelly, breakdown-prone and flammable contraptions to horses, while fence sitters stuck with what was known reliable, well, you know the rest of that story."

Like I said, perfectly poetic.

Also seemingly missed by some is this part (from the same link provided by someone else).

"“Personally, I think there’s much less to worry about with EV battery longevity than there is with the volatile global oil market. We’re always one big storm, one terrorist attack, one surprise announcement from an oil dictator away from $8/gallon gas and rationing. I know the cost of electricity won’t suddenly double overnight,” said Saxton. “For most people, by the time their battery pack has lost significant capacity, they will have saved more than enough in gasoline costs to cover any associated loss in value.”

FUD busted.

One thing that has to be condiered here is the types of batteries and how they are used.  

Even in the case of a Cell Phone performace varys from phone to phone and then add in the factor on how people use them. Do they drain them down flat and recharge often or do they recharge them all night. What size they are. What kind of power loads and how long to they last.

The problem is it is as difficult to compare batteries as it is a Spark to a Corvette. While they are all batteries they are all not equal in use, size, quality and charging. There is a standard for each unit but each unit is different and comparing is difficult.

Add to this that each year we see more improvement so a vehicle 2 years newer can even see some improvement. . 

Like even gas cars some people can see fuel pumps last a quarter million miles because they kept the fuel tank filled much of the time but others put in only $5-$10 at a time and the pump over heats as it is never cooled in fuel and fails before 100K miles. 

Just many variables. 

But it is clear many batteries do fail sooner if charges fast. That is why some cars recommend not doing it unless you have to as it could affect the life. 

I still thing the problem with used Electric cars will be the pace of the advancment of the new models as they will make the old one as desirable as a Apple I3 Phone today. 

Leasing these cars may be a good idea if you want to keep up with advancements like many do on the Apple phone program that gives you the option to trade up yearly or pay it off and keep it in two years. This covers both trains of thought. 

Lets face it if you have a car that will go 200 miles and you are just getting by one that is gets 300 miles a year later would have a great attraction. 

Then for the lease turn in's the automaker could sell them back to the public a year later at cheaper prices to get more people into them. 

32 minutes ago, hyperv6 said:

One thing that has to be condiered here is the types of batteries and how they are used.  

 

Even in the case of a Cell Phone performace varys from phone to phone and then add in the factor on how people use them. Do they drain them down flat and recharge often or do they recharge them all night. What size they are. What kind of power loads and how long to they last.

The problem is it is as difficult to compare batteries as it is a Spark to a Corvette. While they are all batteries they are all not equal in use, size, quality and charging. There is a standard for each unit but each unit is different and comparing is difficult.

Add to this that each year we see more improvement so a vehicle 2 years newer can even see some improvement. . 

Like even gas cars some people can see fuel pumps last a quarter million miles because they kept the fuel tank filled much of the time but others put in only $5-$10 at a time and the pump over heats as it is never cooled in fuel and fails before 100K miles. 

Just many variables. 

But it is clear many batteries do fail sooner if charges fast. That is why some cars recommend not doing it unless you have to as it could affect the life. 

I still thing the problem with used Electric cars will be the pace of the advancment of the new models as they will make the old one as desirable as a Apple I3 Phone today. 

Leasing these cars may be a good idea if you want to keep up with advancements like many do on the Apple phone program that gives you the option to trade up yearly or pay it off and keep it in two years. This covers both trains of thought. 

Lets face it if you have a car that will go 200 miles and you are just getting by one that is gets 300 miles a year later would have a great attraction. 

Then for the lease turn in's the automaker could sell them back to the public a year later at cheaper prices to get more people into them. 

You are absolutely right about the pace of advancement, which will eventually doom current electric cars and current ICE cars.

The one variable to consider here is human behavior...small slow change and a slow adaptation to electric is the best thing, as humans do not deal well with rapid change.

And we are looking at this with the completely bass akward paradigm...we (myself included) have raked our domestics over the coals for a decade here about not keeping up, not investing in the latest technology, not showing a sense of fight and desire for market share.

Our domestics are now doing the best they have done in terms of building competitive product (both ICE and electric) at any time since the Beatles still sang together and we were still trying to put a man on the moon....

...and yet all I seem to hear on this site is complaining.  Dammit man...I love foreign cars also...how ironic is it that the guy here who has more passion for foreign cars is the one who has more pride in our domestics right now than many of our domestic guys? Could we please give both Ford and GM one hell of an atta boy for getting things really really right?

I say this not so much directly to Hyper, but to the whole board....

11 hours ago, Wings4Life said:

A 100000 mile warranty does not warrant against a 40% loss.

 

Ahhhhh, ignorance is bliss for some.

The eight year warranty kills your 4-5 year replacement claim. That was the point of me mentioning it. Talk about ignorance is bliss. 

4 hours ago, Wings4Life said:

You really need to stop the f@#king lies.

Begin by admitting that I have been very consistent and realistic on Ford EV's just as I have on every single EV, that they are not selling because they are still a great compromise for most and not much of a value, yet you constantly make that same statement over and over and I constantly have to repeat this.

And I never stated or accused anyone of suggesting that EV is for everyone, yet here you are with another ridiculous statement claiming I did.

And I never 'missed the fact that there is ICE degradation' but in fact I did mention it complete with examples when I stated what a horrible analogy it is to compare to BEV, as slight power loss hardly equates to fewer miles drive.  But you did in fact completely ignore my remark, and yet again repeat your ICE analogy. Lame-O!!!!

And finally, if I am spreading so much FUD, I would like you to prove just one thing I said as such, because your rant missed on every horrible example that you attempted.  

So man the f@#k up or STFU.

 

 

BTW, I have to say, I miss debating with surreal as I have mostly ignored him.  But not any more, as this is far too easy and fun.

 

tootles

Let me make something very clear to you. If you want to debate, fine. I'm always game but if you want to do it while telling to "Man THE f@#k up or STFU" then quite honestly you can take a leap off the tallest building in Detroit. Take your own advice and man up and stop being such a whiny pussy because someone simply has an opinion different from yours. 

And my examples and and analogies are spot on. It's not my fault that you are ignorant to history and facts so much that you have to lash out and post like a twelve year old in response. 

Maybe you can just send me another harassing PM like you always do when you don't get your way. 

One last thing. You are telling to admit to your stance about Ford EVs. Why would I do that when Ford hasn't done hardly jack in the EV world compared to GM? I don't care what you have to say about Ford in this regard so you know exactly where you can stick that presumptuous little attitude of yours. All I know is I must be doing something right to elicit such an "adult" and colorful response by someone claiming to be a 51 year old man. Pure comedy gold!

1 hour ago, A Horse With No Name said:

You are absolutely right about the pace of advancement, which will eventually doom current electric cars and current ICE cars.

The one variable to consider here is human behavior...small slow change and a slow adaptation to electric is the best thing, as humans do not deal well with rapid change.

And we are looking at this with the completely bass akward paradigm...we (myself included) have raked our domestics over the coals for a decade here about not keeping up, not investing in the latest technology, not showing a sense of fight and desire for market share.

Our domestics are now doing the best they have done in terms of building competitive product (both ICE and electric) at any time since the Beatles still sang together and we were still trying to put a man on the moon....

...and yet all I seem to hear on this site is complaining.  Dammit man...I love foreign cars also...how ironic is it that the guy here who has more passion for foreign cars is the one who has more pride in our domestics right now than many of our domestic guys? Could we please give both Ford and GM one hell of an atta boy for getting things really really right?

I say this not so much directly to Hyper, but to the whole board....

Well the auto industry here really was in a way lucky they all failed leading up to where we are now. Ford< GM and Chrysler were on a death spiral. Ford leveraged the plants and got the loans that they are paying off. GM got the  bail out and more importantly the debts removed. Chrysler got bailed out but tossed back into the fire with Fiat.

Ford and GM both now more freed up are able to do the things they needed to do for a long time and not a minute too soon with the high cost of development eating many companies alive.

The key to the EV movement is to make a car that can Make Money for the company and that can provide transportation equal to what we have now and not require a life style change.

Right now the EV is not profitable and as for the cars you have to change the way you drive and live around range and charge times right now. Once both of these change they will be accepted very much wide spread as the prices  come down.

But with limits on range, high prices, and longer charging times than it takes to fill a tank of gas the acceptance will be challenged.

The EV at this point is just not a car for everyone and one that if it is your only car everyone could live with. Even where you live can effect how this fits your life. In time these will be resolved but it will take continued time and investment.

Much of this hinges on better batteries and with all the battery operated items we have today a lot is going into them and not in the car industry.
The other wild card is higher voltage systems that will even be in ICE cars will require different batteries. VW has made it know they are moving to a 48 volt system as with the new cars and power demands they see it will be needed. There is a good chance we will see engines with more electrical things like Turbochargers and even possibly electric operated valves. Add this to the bigger computers and DI injection there is going to be a lot of voltage needed.

So in the future use care working on the car. LOL!

S 

1 hour ago, A Horse With No Name said:

You are absolutely right about the pace of advancement, which will eventually doom current electric cars and current ICE cars.

The one variable to consider here is human behavior...small slow change and a slow adaptation to electric is the best thing, as humans do not deal well with rapid change.

And we are looking at this with the completely bass akward paradigm...we (myself included) have raked our domestics over the coals for a decade here about not keeping up, not investing in the latest technology, not showing a sense of fight and desire for market share.

Our domestics are now doing the best they have done in terms of building competitive product (both ICE and electric) at any time since the Beatles still sang together and we were still trying to put a man on the moon....

...and yet all I seem to hear on this site is complaining.  Dammit man...I love foreign cars also...how ironic is it that the guy here who has more passion for foreign cars is the one who has more pride in our domestics right now than many of our domestic guys? Could we please give both Ford and GM one hell of an atta boy for getting things really really right?

I say this not so much directly to Hyper, but to the whole board....

Well said. Unfortunately some here only really want success from one company and screw everyone else. They are not and should not ever call themselves "car fans".