Any GTAM'ers own an electric vehicle?

mimico_polak said:
Just want those stupid 300km in -20C. Is that too much to ask for!?
Click to expand...
That's a lot. That drives up purchase price and hurts kwh/km for every drive as you are dragging around a much bigger pack. A real 200km at -20 seems more reasonable with todays technology. There are a couple solutions that could improve things but I don't know if they will ever happen. Something like a few 100 lb removable batteries that you could install when you needed extra range but leave in the garage when you didn't (cost more, engineering challenge and most people would never bother removing them). A fuel burning heater is a low bar. Cheap and readily available and can both eliminate the huge draw of cabin heat and could heat battery. Would need to be really careful with controls so you didn't fill your garage with CO. Not sure how regulators would feel about a BEV that burns fuel.
 
GreyGhost said:
That's a lot. That drives up purchase price and hurts kwh/km for every drive as you are dragging around a much bigger pack. A real 200km at -20 seems more reasonable with todays technology. There are a couple solutions that could improve things but I don't know if they will ever happen. Something like a few 100 lb removable batteries that you could install when you needed extra range but leave in the garage when you didn't (cost more, engineering challenge and most people would never bother removing them). A fuel burning heater is a low bar. Cheap and readily available and can both eliminate the huge draw of cabin heat and could heat battery. Would need to be really careful with controls so you didn't fill your garage with CO. Not sure how regulators would feel about a BEV that burns fuel.
Click to expand...
It is a lot, but my real want is to get to cottage and back (260km round trip), or to furthest buddy's cottage (north of Algonquin) without charging.

I can charge over the weekend at his place, and can charge at the cottage over the weekend...but most of my trips are up/down to the cottage...

However...I can always just take the van, and leave the EV to my wife...so now needs to fit 3 baby seats in the back.

First world problems.
 
Let's hope this new charging network adopts the NACS Tesla standard & also offers other options as the market slowly decides which plug type will be left standing at the end.
 
They're saying they'll use both CCS1 and NACS connectors. There are a few hundred thousand vehicles built by these companies with CCS1 connectors already on the road (mine is one of them) and there's going to be probably a couple hundred thousand more over the next few years, so CCS is going to be around for many years.

The plug is the least of my concerns. There's going to be adapters between CCS1 and NACS. What this needs to sort out, is the payment methods. No more accounts to set up! If they arrange for "plug and charge" (the payment gets sorted out through communication of the VIN of the vehicle that plugs in) then make it work EVERYwhere. If they use an RFID tag for vehicles that can't do "plug and charge" then make the same RFID tag work EVERYwhere. If they insist on phone-app crap (and if you want to charge a non-Tesla at a Tesla supercharger, this is how it's going to be unless Tesla retrofits payment terminals, which they appear loath to do) then make it ONE phone app that works EVERYwhere and make Tesla play along. If they do something (either "plug-and-charge" or RFID tag) that requires setting up an account then make it so that it only has to be done ONCE. Not once per charging network ... ONCE.

That's what needs to get sorted out. The shape of the plug doesn't matter. The charging stations and networks and vehicles all need to talk to each other.
 
mimico_polak said:
Say it ain't so Tesla...say it ain't so...

electrek.co

Tesla vastly overstates its vehicles' range, report states

A new report out today details that Tesla, the world’s leading electric vehicle maker, is gaming the EPA system to...
electrek.co electrek.co
Click to expand...
That article is mostly fluff. Since when did any EPA range test closely align with real world usage (cough ecoboost)? At best, they let you compare between manufacturers. Based on this article, tesla gamed the EPA test to get ~5% more. That's hardly a deal breaker.
 
Brian P said:
They're saying they'll use both CCS1 and NACS connectors. There are a few hundred thousand vehicles built by these companies with CCS1 connectors already on the road (mine is one of them) and there's going to be probably a couple hundred thousand more over the next few years, so CCS is going to be around for many years.

The plug is the least of my concerns. There's going to be adapters between CCS1 and NACS. What this needs to sort out, is the payment methods. No more accounts to set up! If they arrange for "plug and charge" (the payment gets sorted out through communication of the VIN of the vehicle that plugs in) then make it work EVERYwhere. If they use an RFID tag for vehicles that can't do "plug and charge" then make the same RFID tag work EVERYwhere. If they insist on phone-app crap (and if you want to charge a non-Tesla at a Tesla supercharger, this is how it's going to be unless Tesla retrofits payment terminals, which they appear loath to do) then make it ONE phone app that works EVERYwhere and make Tesla play along. If they do something (either "plug-and-charge" or RFID tag) that requires setting up an account then make it so that it only has to be done ONCE. Not once per charging network ... ONCE.

That's what needs to get sorted out. The shape of the plug doesn't matter. The charging stations and networks and vehicles all need to talk to each other.
Click to expand...

isn't that what the point and big pro for NACS is?
 
killvino said:
isn't that what the point and big pro for NACS is?
Click to expand...

Nope. NACS just combines Tesla's connector with CCS communication protocol (in order to make them compatible via a physical adapter).

But ... Just because a Tesla supercharger recognises a Tesla vehicle when it's plugged in and recognises the VIN and correllates that VIN to a payment account set up at a Tesla server ... doesn't mean it's going to work when a vehicle with a mystery (to Tesla) VIN plugs in.

Tesla owners haven't seen these issues when charging at Tesla superchargers because Tesla is end-to-end responsible for the whole thing. As soon as you start mixing and matching charging station manufacturers, and vehicle manufacturers, and charging network operators, and payment methods, and everyone has to be capable of talking to everyone else, this all gets a LOT more complicated.

Tesla has built a small number of supercharger stations with the "magic dock" to allow non-Tesla vehicles to charge, but you still have to muck around with phone apps because Tesla superchargers don't have any other way of having someone pay for the charge. It's no better than charging the same non-Tesla vehicle at some other charging station. And apparently the superchargers don't work very well with vehicles that have 800v architecture (Hyundai).

And I've seen it the other way around, too. I got back to my car which was successfully completing a charge at an Ivycharge station (CCS) and found a Tesla owner beside me who couldn't get it to work. The difference was that I had the Ivycharge RFID tag and he didn't. BUT ... This approach doesn't work universally unless everyone agrees to use the same RFID tags and deal with cross-network payment ... because if every charging network has their own RFID tags and their own payment accounts then you need thirty different accounts and thirty different RFID tags, and that is no bueno.

There needs to be a universal cross-recognised method of paying for a charge. AND WE HAVE ONE. *cough* Credit cards!

Drive up to the charging station. Doesn't matter which car and doesn't matter which charging station. Plug in. Tap the credit card if your car doesn't have Tesla-style plug-and-charge (otherwise you can simply skip this step). It starts charging. DONE. That's the way it should work. It works like that at petrol stations, why shouldn't it work like that at charging stations?
 
This sounds like some sort of failure of steering servo assistance, although it's not clear from the article whether it's a failure of the servo drive/motor to respond to a command, or a failure of the supervisory control system to deliver the correct command to the drive/motor. Either way, it's a Tesla thing.
 
raginduck said:
www.businessinsider.com

Most cars still cost more to charge than to fill up with gas — when you take other expenses like home charging and fees into account

Fueling a regular F-150 and charging a Lightning may cost the same, but fueling smaller cars may still costs less than plugging in, on average.
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com
Click to expand...
That's a steaming pile of propaganda.

They have a Bolt at 12.55 USD/100 miles. Bolt is somewhere around 4 miles/kwh. So 100 miles needs ~25 kwh. Who is paying $0.50/kwh (USD) to charge at home? Only a moron.

When you put ridiculous unit prices in, you can publish ridiculous and misleading articles that appear factual. If I pretend gas costs $5 a litre, the article would flip conclusions and be just as valid.
 
I don't know. I saw the article and posted it.
I gave up trying to decipher all the different numbers and info..
I was going to buy an EV for my next.. but have decided not to.
 
I charge my Volt at home and am now getting ~100km per charge - that costs me $1/day. That's $30/month. I bet you can't fill up your car ONCE for $30 bucks. What GG said on the first sentence and no doubt some political motive behind that.
 
GreyGhost said:
That's a steaming pile of propaganda.

They have a Bolt at 12.55 USD/100 miles. Bolt is somewhere around 4 miles/kwh. So 100 miles needs ~25 kwh. Who is paying $0.50/kwh (USD) to charge at home? Only a moron.

When you put ridiculous unit prices in, you can publish ridiculous and misleading articles that appear factual. If I pretend gas costs $5 a litre, the article would flip conclusions and be just as valid.
Click to expand...
If you read the breakdown later in the article it seems like it's more referring to commercial chargers.

Business insider articles are usually misleading. Also the study was done by a consulting firm. I'd imagine someone payed for the study to be presented in a certain light.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LBV
If I take my entire average bill for a month and divide it by the average number of kWh I get an average 18.75¢/kWh CAD, which is roughly 14¢/kWh USD. That is all delivery, flat rate, ToD, taxes, all in not just the posted kWh rates.

If I need 25 kWh (mentioned above for Bolt) to go 100 miles (160 km) that is $3.50 USD to drive 100 miles or $4.69 CDN/100 miles, to totally metricize it $2.93 CDN/100 km.

My ICE VW gets an average 5.6l/100km for our driving. At $1.60/l that is $8.98 CDN/100 km.

In this context the EV could save me $907.50 a year, assuming I only charge at home and gas prices are $1.60/l.... etc. At the moment my ROI considering the difference in cost of the vehicles is 16+ years, less if there is a fat rebate.
 
Consultants. People you pay big bucks to so they can tell you what you want to hear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom