The joy of not having a 'posh' car.

[chris667]

The performance is pretty incidental. It's what you get when you have a massively efficient motor instead of of something that works pretty much the same way as it did 100 years ago. However you try to argue it, it *is* more environmentally sound than an ICE car. It doesn't emit gasses.

That's a vast oversimplification, and therefore bad science.

The car itself doesn't emit CO2 but the electricity being used to power it does. And it uses much more CO2 in its production than a conventional car, and will require more again at the end of its life. With the technology as proprietary as it is there's no chance of them being fixed as they get older - it is not in their interests as a company for them to be repairable.

The performance is completely unnecessary. I had a look and the lightest Tesla (Model 3) weighs 1,840 kg as opposed to my Vauxhall at 940kg. There's no reason for a vehicle to weigh twenty times as much as its operator. There's certainly no reason for it to be a luxury car.

Rather than being incidental, the performance is a deliberate decision to make it attractive to those who are egotistical enough to want a fast car.

My car is deeply unsexy, but it is used very rarely when I have to go somewhere a long way away or carry something that I can't get on a bike. I ride my bike or walk most places. If most Tesla owners actually cared about being environmentally sound they would do the same but I don't see many of them riding bikes to work.

 

[icowden]

The performance is completely unnecessary. I had a look and the lightest Tesla (Model 3) weighs 1,840 kg as opposed to my Vauxhall at 940kg. There's no reason for a vehicle to weigh twenty times as much as its operator. There's certainly no reason for it to be a luxury car.

The performance is pretty much an incidental side effect of the huge efficiency of electric motors vs ICE. All electric cars accelerate very fast. The weight is incidental to the rather obvious problem that you have to have a battery capable of powering the car and they are not light. The reason that Tesla started with luxury cars is that the technology is expensive and therefore only people who purchase from the luxury market will be able to afford one.

They have now diversified into the "affordable" Model 3 and Model Y. As @gzoom has pointed out, although the purchase price is expensive, a lot of the costs are defrayed (e.g. electricity is way cheaper than diesel). They are appealing to the mass market, and prices will drop further. We still don't have the cheapest models of Tesla available in the UK. In the US you can buy a model 3 for $35,000 (£29,000).

It's great that you can ride your bike or walk to most places. Many people need to use the car to do the weekly food shopping for their family, or to transport children to here there and everyone. I cycle and use the car. If I only need a few bits, I'll use the bike, but I can't use that for £300 worth of shopping, nor to get the kids to school (school is on a dangerous road and cycling in is forbidden).

 

[chris667]

The performance is pretty much an incidental side effect of the huge efficiency of electric motors vs ICE. All electric cars accelerate very fast.

No.

There is no reason to give a car like that the performance that it has. It could have smaller batteries and motors. The new Citroen Ami is going to be a game-changer, as are electric bikes and scooters. They both run at speeds that are safer for those around you.

I was nearly wiped out by a moron in a Tesla. He was going much too fast and talking on his phone. In fact, I very rarely see Teslas being driven at low speeds. The performance and refinement must be addictive.

There's none of banger age yet, and there will never be.

There's nothing environmentally sound about unrepairable, disposable cars.

It's a luxury item for rich people - this year's Range Rover. As to an "affordable" one, £25,000? Give over.

The people that buy them are rarely environmentalists. Almost all of them are doing it for a tax break.

 

[icowden]

There is no reason to give a car like that the performance that it has. It could have smaller batteries and motors.

But then it wouldn't go so far. It has a big battery for range, not power. The big battery has to be protected by armour and the strength of the car has to be beefed up to support the battery. Electric motors are a lot lighter than ICE engines and there isn't really any reason to use a smaller motor. You want a motor to be the most efficient it can be when moving at normal speeds.

The new Citroen Ami is going to be a game-changer, as are electric bikes and scooters. They both run at speeds that are safer for those around you.

Not if you are on the motorway. Doing 28mph on the motorway would get you arrested. The Ami is not a substitute for a car. It's great if you live in a town and don't want to go anywhere else, but pointless if you want to go anywhere else. It won't be a game changer.

I was nearly wiped out by a moron in a Tesla. He was going much too fast and talking on his phone. In fact, I very rarely see Teslas being driven at low speeds. The performance and refinement must be addictive.

Weird, Around me they all get driven at whatever the speed limit is for the road that they are on - often slower if there is traffic. They just aren't producing any fumes or using much energy when stationary.

There's none of banger age yet, and there will never be.

So what's banger age? I can get me a 2011 Nissan Leaf for £4,700. 112,000 miles on the clock, does 25 to 40 miles on a full charge. A better deal might be a Peugeot Ion from the same year - 94 miles of range only 50,000 miles on the clock. Or for £6,000 a Leaf from 2012 with 109 miles of range.

There's nothing environmentally sound about unrepairable, disposable cars.

Agreed. But that applies to ICE vehicles as well.

It's a luxury item for rich people - this year's Range Rover. As to an "affordable" one, £25,000? Give over.

As above - you don't have to buy new. If you are buying new, £25,000 isn't that bad. I bought the Scenic 10 years ago for £15,000. Bearing in mind that I can deduct the cost f diesel, get a lot of free parking, not pay any ULEZ or congestion charges, there can be some great savings.

The people that buy them are rarely environmentalists. Almost all of them are doing it for a tax break.

You can't be both? I'm pretty sure you can be both. Let me check with myself. Yep. You can be both.

 

[chris667]

But then it wouldn't go so far. It has a big battery for range, not power. The big battery has to be protected by armour and the strength of the car has to be beefed up to support the battery. Electric motors are a lot lighter than ICE engines and there isn't really any reason to use a smaller motor. You want a motor to be the most efficient it can be when moving at normal speeds.

Then why doesn't it have its speed limited to 50mph so it can have a longer range from a smaller battery? As any cyclist knows the faster you go, the more effort you have to put in. Does it have the same range at top speed as it does at 50mph? Really? If I drive my car to my dad's (154 miles each way) I know I spend about 20% more on petrol for the journey if I drive at 50 instead of 70. Do electric cars not have to worry about physics?

So what's banger age? I can get me a 2011 Nissan Leaf for £4,700. 112,000 miles on the clock, does 25 to 40 miles on a full charge. A better deal might be a Peugeot Ion from the same year - 94 miles of range only 50,000 miles on the clock. Or for £6,000 a Leaf from 2012 with 109 miles of range.

So a £4,700 purchase is affordable? My last car was £850.

A car with a range of 20-40 miles would be pretty useless to me for most of the times I need a car. And frankly if I spent £1,500 more on a car that would depreciate from a range of 109 miles to 40 miles after a year it doesn't look like affordable motoring. If it couldn't get me from one side of town to another then it's an end of life vehicle.

You can't be both? I'm pretty sure you can be both. Let me check with myself. Yep. You can be both.

You seem to be trying to justify your luxury car purchase. That's fine, but don't kid yourself that you're saving the planet.

The real issue is unnecessary journeys and a system that favours cars above every other form of transport. And arguably weird lifestyle choices. I would hate to live in a place where my kids couldn't ride a bike or walk to school safely.

 

[fossyant]

We need more 107/Aygo/C1 equivalents in electric, with say 100 mile range, not some whopping massive cars. The ID4 is bloody huge, for example, which I thought was supposed to be a 'Golf' equivalent.

We bought a cheap Aygo for £2k. It's needed about £1k on bits and bobs, main one being complete exhaust - manifold back, due to age and mileage (60 plate on 100k). It's been pretty good run about, and is our choice for going shopping in it. The 'bigger' cars are used for distance where MPG is less affected - mine returns about 23mpg if I commute in it, the Aygo nearer 50.

For cheap city cars you can't go wrong with the 'city bugs' as they are known. The new models are even better, but still use the same engine.

 

[icowden]

The ID4 is bloody huge, for example, which I thought was supposed to be a 'Golf' equivalent.

It's all perspective. I think the ID4 is a pretty average size and my wife hates "huge" cars. It's nowhere near the size of an XC40 for example.

We bought a cheap Aygo for £2k. It's needed about £1k on bits and bobs, main one being complete exhaust - manifold back, due to age and mileage (60 plate on 100k). It's been pretty good run about, and is our choice for going shopping in it. For cheap city cars you can't go wrong with the 'city bugs' as they are known. The new models are even better, but still use the same engine.

I entirely agree. Small electrics are great for the city.

 

[icowden]

Then why doesn't it have its speed limited to 50mph so it can have a longer range from a smaller battery? As any cyclist knows the faster you go, the more effort you have to put in. Does it have the same range at top speed as it does at 50mph? Really? If I drive my car to my dad's (154 miles each way) I know I spend about 20% more on petrol for the journey if I drive at 50 instead of 70. Do electric cars not have to worry about physics?

No, but there isn't a good reason to restrict them to 20mph under the national speed limit. That would just be silly. Some EV drivers do drop it down to 60 if they are going a long way and want to conserve mileage.

So a £4,700 purchase is affordable? My last car was £850.

Yes I'd say so. My first car was £250. I've moved up since then. Got older, had kids, got a better job.
According to nerdwallet:

The average person in the UK spends £478.70 on their vehicle with finance or £283.90 without finance.

A car with a range of 20-40 miles would be pretty useless to me for most of the times I need a car. And frankly if I spent £1,500 more on a car that would depreciate from a range of 109 miles to 40 miles after a year it doesn't look like affordable motoring. If it couldn't get me from one side of town to another then it's an end of life vehicle.

I agree.

You seem to be trying to justify your luxury car purchase. That's fine, but don't kid yourself that you're saving the planet.

Nope. I just recognise that an EV is going to be better for the planet than another diesel.

The real issue is unnecessary journeys and a system that favours cars above every other form of transport. And arguably weird lifestyle choices. I would hate to live in a place where my kids couldn't ride a bike or walk to school safely.

Unfortunately there are lot of those places in the UK. We can't all live in tiny rural villages or town centres.

 

[fossyant]

THe ID4 is a damn site bigger than a Golf, and my large saloon car (not SUV) - it won't have anymore room inside than either.

 

[icowden]

THe ID4 is a damn site bigger than a Golf, and my large saloon car (not SUV) - it won't have anymore room inside than either.

Well, the Golf has a boot space of 381 litres or 1287 litres with the seat down. The ID4 has 543 litres going up to 1575 litres. So it's definitely bigger than a golf. It is, however, smaller than my Renault Grand Scenic which isn't a very large Chelsea tractor.

 

[fossyant]

A Grand Scenic is a bus !

 

[gzoom]

We need more 107/Aygo/C1 equivalents in electric, with say 100 mile range, not some whopping massive cars.

You mean cars like the GWizzy, Twizzy, and Citroën C-Zero?

Car manufacturer keep thinking along the same lines, but the vast majority of the car buying public simply aren't interested. You probably have better chance of getting people on an eBike than a 'city' EV.

 

[gzoom]

So a £4,700 purchase is affordable? My last car was £850.

I think you might need to start to realign your car buying expectations!! Right now a 'good' car with kind of half decent performance (sub 5 second 0-60) is pushing 6 figure sums.......

 

[chris667]

I think you might need to start to realign your car buying expectations!! Right now a 'good' car with kind of half decent performance (sub 5 second 0-60) is pushing 6 figure sums.......

Thanks for that insight. The point of sub 5-second 0-60 really escapes me though.

 

[Tom...]

I think you might need to start to realign your car buying expectations!! Right now a 'good' car with kind of half decent performance (sub 5 second 0-60) is pushing 6 figure sums.......

Really? My Golf R did a sub 5 second 0-60 and was nowhere near £100k+