I test drove a VW ID.4 this weekend
- Thread starter Obliviax
- Start date
Most EV manufacturers understand this and provide additional conditioning to the battery to avoid the overheating. That routing of energy to condition the battery does reduce travel distance.
LINK: 2030 ban on gas vehicles vetoed by Washington governor
Better Roads:
Washington's governor partially vetoed legislation that would have banned the sale, purchase and registration of new gas-powered vehicles in the state starting in 2030. Gov. Jay Inslee had been expected to sign the Clean Cars 2030 legislation passed a month ago that would have instated the country's earliest ban of new gas-powered vehicle sales, starting with 2030 passenger and light-duty vehicle models. But on May 13, he vetoed the section that deals with phasing out gas-powered vehicles in favor of electric vehicles.
"Currently, about half of Washington state’s road funding comes from gasoline taxes and registration fees, and gas tax revenues are expected to reduce as electric vehicles become more common. As a reaction to this, many states have implemented punitive electric vehicle fees (backed by fossil industry propaganda), scapegoating electric vehicles for poor road status, rather than the fact that many of them haven’t raised the gas tax in decades.
Washington is one of these states that has added an electric vehicle fee (though they have also raised the gas tax in recent years as well). EV drivers are thanked for their use of a less environmentally impactful option with an extra $150 registration fee per year, on top of the taxes they already pay on the electricity used to fuel the vehicle (WA taxes electricity at a 14.25% rate – at current gas prices, WA state gas taxes come out to about 14% as well). This fee is comparable to the amount of WA state gas taxes on about 300 gallons of gasoline. For comparison, if an EV has an EPA rating of 120MPGe (and many are around this number), that’s the equivalent of 36,000 miles of driving they’re paying for – even though few drive that many miles. (Edit: WA state also has an additional $75 fee, for a total of $225 per year for EVs)
Another way around this future problem of reduced gas tax revenue is to start charging a road usage fee for all vehicles, based on miles driven and/or weight, which would be a more equitable way to have roads funded by all who use them. This way, the more miles you drive, the more you pay for roads. The vetoed bill had a provision to implement a road usage fee in Washington for this reason."
Last month, a dozen governors called on President Joe Biden to support a ban on sales of new gas-powered cars and light trucks by 2035, Reuters reported. Inslee was among the governors signing the letter, as well as those from California, New York, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon and Rhode Island.
Better Roads:
Washington's governor partially vetoed legislation that would have banned the sale, purchase and registration of new gas-powered vehicles in the state starting in 2030. Gov. Jay Inslee had been expected to sign the Clean Cars 2030 legislation passed a month ago that would have instated the country's earliest ban of new gas-powered vehicle sales, starting with 2030 passenger and light-duty vehicle models. But on May 13, he vetoed the section that deals with phasing out gas-powered vehicles in favor of electric vehicles.
"Currently, about half of Washington state’s road funding comes from gasoline taxes and registration fees, and gas tax revenues are expected to reduce as electric vehicles become more common. As a reaction to this, many states have implemented punitive electric vehicle fees (backed by fossil industry propaganda), scapegoating electric vehicles for poor road status, rather than the fact that many of them haven’t raised the gas tax in decades.
Washington is one of these states that has added an electric vehicle fee (though they have also raised the gas tax in recent years as well). EV drivers are thanked for their use of a less environmentally impactful option with an extra $150 registration fee per year, on top of the taxes they already pay on the electricity used to fuel the vehicle (WA taxes electricity at a 14.25% rate – at current gas prices, WA state gas taxes come out to about 14% as well). This fee is comparable to the amount of WA state gas taxes on about 300 gallons of gasoline. For comparison, if an EV has an EPA rating of 120MPGe (and many are around this number), that’s the equivalent of 36,000 miles of driving they’re paying for – even though few drive that many miles. (Edit: WA state also has an additional $75 fee, for a total of $225 per year for EVs)
Another way around this future problem of reduced gas tax revenue is to start charging a road usage fee for all vehicles, based on miles driven and/or weight, which would be a more equitable way to have roads funded by all who use them. This way, the more miles you drive, the more you pay for roads. The vetoed bill had a provision to implement a road usage fee in Washington for this reason."
Last month, a dozen governors called on President Joe Biden to support a ban on sales of new gas-powered cars and light trucks by 2035, Reuters reported. Inslee was among the governors signing the letter, as well as those from California, New York, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon and Rhode Island.
Last edited:
Politicians are so easily bought. On principle alone I love politicians that are hated by the media and both sides. They're the ones least likely to be trying to steal, oh I'm sorry, swindle money from the taxpayers.
By Perry Gottesfeld
link: https://www.climatedepot.com/2021/0...e-a-dirty-little-recycling-problem-batteries/
In September, Tesla announced that it would be phasing out the use of cobalt in its batteries, in an effort to produce a US$25,000 electric vehicle within three years. If successful, this bold move will be an industry game changer, making electric vehicles competitive with conventional counterparts. But the announcement also underscores one of the fundamental challenges that will complicate the transition to electric vehicles. Without cobalt, there may be little financial incentive to recycle the massive batteries used to power the cars — and that could lead to an environmental disaster.
The switch to electric vehicles has been promoted as a major, necessary step to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in order to stave off the worst effects of a changing climate. The switch would also significantly reduce health risks associated with vehicle emissions. Every major auto manufacturer now has at least one electric vehicle in production, and some — including Daimler, Volkswagen, and General Motors — have pledged to phase out the production of gas and diesel engines entirely. More than a dozen countries, including many in Europe, have said they plan to ban sales of gasoline and diesel cars by 2040 or sooner. California also just announced a plan to phase out gas and diesel cars by 2035.
But electric cars have their own dirty little secret: Every electric vehicle, and most hybrid vehicles, rely on large lithium-ion batteries weighing hundreds of pounds. One of the largest, the battery for the Mercedes-Benz EQC, comes in at 1,400 pounds. Typically made with cobalt, nickel, and manganese, among other components, these batteries cost thousands of dollars and come with an environmental burden: They require ingredients sourced from polluting mines and smelters around the world, and they can ultimately contaminate soil and water supplies if improperly disposed.
In the rush to embrace this technology, auto companies are adopting the same pretence that has been embraced by the plastics industry: They are claiming that used batteries will be recycled. However, the truth is being swept under the rug. None of the lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles are recyclable in the same sense that paper, glass, and lead car batteries are. Although efforts to improve recycling methods are underway, generally only around half the materials in these batteries is currently extracted and repurposed. And without the most valuable ingredients, there will be little economic incentive to invest in recycling technologies. The result, if nothing is done to tip the scales, could be a massive health and environmental crisis.
Despite ongoing research into recycling technology, this situation is unlikely to resolve itself. Lithium-ion battery makers have yet to develop the technology that can economically extract components in a form that can be used to make new lithium-ion batteries. Rather, the batteries are typically processed to remove the cobalt and a few other expensive metals, with much of the remainder released as air emissions or used as filler in concrete or other construction products. This is one reason why less than five per cent of lithium-ion batteries are currently recycled.
Complicating matters further, different battery makers use different ingredients, cells, and modules, which makes the extraction process less efficient and more expensive. In fact, manufacturers are not even required to disclose the contents of their batteries to would-be recyclers.
To account for the inevitable growth in this waste stream, manufacturers and electric vehicle advocates are touting the potential for these batteries to be reused after their useful life in vehicles has been realized. Some companies have launched efforts to repurpose these high voltage, flammable electric vehicle batteries for solar energy storage and other backup power applications by rebuilding batteries using a combination of reused and new parts. But even if these efforts succeed in developing technologies to safely and economically remove, transport, dismantle, and remanufacture batteries, this would simply delay a battery’s ultimate fate by a few years.
The business case for recycling will become even more tenuous as Tesla and other car manufacturers take steps to lower costs by eliminating the most expensive metal components from their battery designs. Even if auto companies succeed only at reducing the concentration of these components, financial incentives will be needed to ensure that these batteries are collected and recycled. These subsidies will need to make up for the difference between the cost of transporting and processing spent batteries and the value of the extracted materials
.
Without these incentives, lithium-ion batteries will be dumped, incinerated, or exported to countries with weaker standards, where they will contaminate the environment and threaten public health. Nickel has been shown to cause lung and nasal cancers, reduce lung function, and cause bronchitis. Cobalt can cause serious health conditions such as asthma and pneumonia, and it is a possible carcinogen. Exposure to manganese can result in respiratory problems, loss of coordination, and other neurological problems.
We have already started shifting the burden of lithium-ion battery disposal to low- and middle-income countries, many of which lack stringent environmental safeguards and the facilities to recycle or otherwise process used batteries in an environmentally sound way. Some have even put in place incentives, including tax waivers, to encourage used electric and hybrid vehicle imports. A recent United Nations report found that hundreds of thousands of electric and hybrid vehicles are being exported annually from Japan, the E.U. and the U.S. to countries like Sri Lanka and Mauritius.
To avoid the acceleration of these trends, regulations will be needed as we shift to an electric vehicle future. Whereas China and the E.U. require electric vehicle manufacturers to take back spent batteries from consumers, no similar regulation or legislation has been adopted in the U.S. The track record in the U.S. for recycling e-waste does not offer much relief. Only three states have extended producer responsibility laws mandating that manufacturers take back lithium-ion batteries used in electronics, and none include vehicles. There are no clear prohibitions against exporting used lithium-ion batteries or selling used vehicles with degraded batteries to low-income countries at fire-sale prices.
But these are still early days, and there is still time to implement legislative solutions that can help avert an impending waste crisis. To that end, the California Environmental Protection Agency has formed a multi-stakeholder committee, of which I am a member, that will advise the state legislature on crafting practical solutions.
Today, most electric vehicles retail at the luxury end of the market, with sticker prices up to US$150,000. The federal government subsidizes these sales — as do some state governments — to help electric cars compete with conventional vehicles. But as battery prices and production costs fall, such subsides will no longer be needed. In anticipation of the expected increase in sales, we must start now to plan for a future when individual lithium-ion battery consumption transitions from the one-ounce battery in your cell phone to the behemoth in your garage.
link: https://www.climatedepot.com/2021/0...e-a-dirty-little-recycling-problem-batteries/
In September, Tesla announced that it would be phasing out the use of cobalt in its batteries, in an effort to produce a US$25,000 electric vehicle within three years. If successful, this bold move will be an industry game changer, making electric vehicles competitive with conventional counterparts. But the announcement also underscores one of the fundamental challenges that will complicate the transition to electric vehicles. Without cobalt, there may be little financial incentive to recycle the massive batteries used to power the cars — and that could lead to an environmental disaster.
The switch to electric vehicles has been promoted as a major, necessary step to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in order to stave off the worst effects of a changing climate. The switch would also significantly reduce health risks associated with vehicle emissions. Every major auto manufacturer now has at least one electric vehicle in production, and some — including Daimler, Volkswagen, and General Motors — have pledged to phase out the production of gas and diesel engines entirely. More than a dozen countries, including many in Europe, have said they plan to ban sales of gasoline and diesel cars by 2040 or sooner. California also just announced a plan to phase out gas and diesel cars by 2035.
But electric cars have their own dirty little secret: Every electric vehicle, and most hybrid vehicles, rely on large lithium-ion batteries weighing hundreds of pounds. One of the largest, the battery for the Mercedes-Benz EQC, comes in at 1,400 pounds. Typically made with cobalt, nickel, and manganese, among other components, these batteries cost thousands of dollars and come with an environmental burden: They require ingredients sourced from polluting mines and smelters around the world, and they can ultimately contaminate soil and water supplies if improperly disposed.
In the rush to embrace this technology, auto companies are adopting the same pretence that has been embraced by the plastics industry: They are claiming that used batteries will be recycled. However, the truth is being swept under the rug. None of the lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles are recyclable in the same sense that paper, glass, and lead car batteries are. Although efforts to improve recycling methods are underway, generally only around half the materials in these batteries is currently extracted and repurposed. And without the most valuable ingredients, there will be little economic incentive to invest in recycling technologies. The result, if nothing is done to tip the scales, could be a massive health and environmental crisis.
Despite ongoing research into recycling technology, this situation is unlikely to resolve itself. Lithium-ion battery makers have yet to develop the technology that can economically extract components in a form that can be used to make new lithium-ion batteries. Rather, the batteries are typically processed to remove the cobalt and a few other expensive metals, with much of the remainder released as air emissions or used as filler in concrete or other construction products. This is one reason why less than five per cent of lithium-ion batteries are currently recycled.
Complicating matters further, different battery makers use different ingredients, cells, and modules, which makes the extraction process less efficient and more expensive. In fact, manufacturers are not even required to disclose the contents of their batteries to would-be recyclers.
To account for the inevitable growth in this waste stream, manufacturers and electric vehicle advocates are touting the potential for these batteries to be reused after their useful life in vehicles has been realized. Some companies have launched efforts to repurpose these high voltage, flammable electric vehicle batteries for solar energy storage and other backup power applications by rebuilding batteries using a combination of reused and new parts. But even if these efforts succeed in developing technologies to safely and economically remove, transport, dismantle, and remanufacture batteries, this would simply delay a battery’s ultimate fate by a few years.
The business case for recycling will become even more tenuous as Tesla and other car manufacturers take steps to lower costs by eliminating the most expensive metal components from their battery designs. Even if auto companies succeed only at reducing the concentration of these components, financial incentives will be needed to ensure that these batteries are collected and recycled. These subsidies will need to make up for the difference between the cost of transporting and processing spent batteries and the value of the extracted materials
.
Without these incentives, lithium-ion batteries will be dumped, incinerated, or exported to countries with weaker standards, where they will contaminate the environment and threaten public health. Nickel has been shown to cause lung and nasal cancers, reduce lung function, and cause bronchitis. Cobalt can cause serious health conditions such as asthma and pneumonia, and it is a possible carcinogen. Exposure to manganese can result in respiratory problems, loss of coordination, and other neurological problems.
We have already started shifting the burden of lithium-ion battery disposal to low- and middle-income countries, many of which lack stringent environmental safeguards and the facilities to recycle or otherwise process used batteries in an environmentally sound way. Some have even put in place incentives, including tax waivers, to encourage used electric and hybrid vehicle imports. A recent United Nations report found that hundreds of thousands of electric and hybrid vehicles are being exported annually from Japan, the E.U. and the U.S. to countries like Sri Lanka and Mauritius.
To avoid the acceleration of these trends, regulations will be needed as we shift to an electric vehicle future. Whereas China and the E.U. require electric vehicle manufacturers to take back spent batteries from consumers, no similar regulation or legislation has been adopted in the U.S. The track record in the U.S. for recycling e-waste does not offer much relief. Only three states have extended producer responsibility laws mandating that manufacturers take back lithium-ion batteries used in electronics, and none include vehicles. There are no clear prohibitions against exporting used lithium-ion batteries or selling used vehicles with degraded batteries to low-income countries at fire-sale prices.
But these are still early days, and there is still time to implement legislative solutions that can help avert an impending waste crisis. To that end, the California Environmental Protection Agency has formed a multi-stakeholder committee, of which I am a member, that will advise the state legislature on crafting practical solutions.
Today, most electric vehicles retail at the luxury end of the market, with sticker prices up to US$150,000. The federal government subsidizes these sales — as do some state governments — to help electric cars compete with conventional vehicles. But as battery prices and production costs fall, such subsides will no longer be needed. In anticipation of the expected increase in sales, we must start now to plan for a future when individual lithium-ion battery consumption transitions from the one-ounce battery in your cell phone to the behemoth in your garage.
Scientists find fast charging destroys electric vehicle batteries
Maybe best not rely on charging your car from zero to full, on fast-charge all the time
STORY BY
Matthew Beedham
For time-crunched EV drivers, fast-charging points are a boon to minimizing enforced stoppages. But scientists have found that continually using high-powered, fast-charging points can decrease the life of EV car batteries.
Engineers from the University of California, Riverside (UCR) say that commercial fast-charging stations subject EV car batteries to high temperatures and resistance which can cause cells to crack, leak, and lose storage capacity.
[Read: VW wants its EVs to become part of the power grid when charging]
TNW Conference 2021
Attend the tech festival of the year and get your super early bird ticket now!GET TICKETS
As a control, the group of engineers and scientists charged a set of Panasonic lithium-ion cylinder cells (similar to what’s found in Tesla‘s power packs) using the same method as is found at many public fast-charging stations.
The researchers also charged a set of cells using a new algorithm-based protocol, which charges the batteries as fast as possible but takes into consideration the battery‘s internal resistance.
According to the engineers, high internal resistance in a battery can cause problems when charging. If these go unaddressed, battery cells can be permanently damaged.
To prevent such potential damage, the UCR’s proposed charging method cuts out when internal resistance gets too high. In theory, this limits damage to cells.
Battery life dramatically reduced
Using the industry standard charging process, battery capacity was reduced by as much as 40% after 40 charge cycles. However, using the internal resistance-based method battery capacity was only reduced by about 20% by the 40th charge cycle.According to the researchers, the standard process effectively killed the batteries after just 25 charging cycles. An EV car battery is considered end-of-life when it holds less than 80% of its original total capacity.
Credit: Ozkan Lab/UCRAfter 60 fast-charge cycles EV batteries begin to deteriorate. In some cases, cells cracked and exposed their internal components.
After 60 charge cycles under the industry standard process, the cells began to crack, exposing the internal components. In extreme cases, this can be enough to cause fire.
If you are an EV driver that enjoys the convenience of fast charging, there are some things you can do to be on the safe side, though.
The UCR Battery Team recommends minimizing the use of commercial fast chargers, recharging your EV before the battery is totally empty, and be sure not to overcharge.
In reality, most people will rarely charge their electric vehicle from zero to full. But it’s good to know that doing so might not be a great habit to slip into.
Researchers recently published their full findings in the Energy Storage journal, read their full research paper here.
Amazing that there are Tesla's out there with 200K miles on them that have charged on superchargers exclusively with more than 85% of their battery life remaining.Scientists find fast charging destroys electric vehicle batteries
Maybe best not rely on charging your car from zero to full, on fast-charge all the time
STORY BY
Matthew Beedham
For time-crunched EV drivers, fast-charging points are a boon to minimizing enforced stoppages. But scientists have found that continually using high-powered, fast-charging points can decrease the life of EV car batteries.
Engineers from the University of California, Riverside (UCR) say that commercial fast-charging stations subject EV car batteries to high temperatures and resistance which can cause cells to crack, leak, and lose storage capacity.
[Read: VW wants its EVs to become part of the power grid when charging]
TNW Conference 2021
Attend the tech festival of the year and get your super early bird ticket now!
GET TICKETS
As a control, the group of engineers and scientists charged a set of Panasonic lithium-ion cylinder cells (similar to what’s found in Tesla‘s power packs) using the same method as is found at many public fast-charging stations.
The researchers also charged a set of cells using a new algorithm-based protocol, which charges the batteries as fast as possible but takes into consideration the battery‘s internal resistance.
According to the engineers, high internal resistance in a battery can cause problems when charging. If these go unaddressed, battery cells can be permanently damaged.
To prevent such potential damage, the UCR’s proposed charging method cuts out when internal resistance gets too high. In theory, this limits damage to cells.
Battery life dramatically reduced
Using the industry standard charging process, battery capacity was reduced by as much as 40% after 40 charge cycles. However, using the internal resistance-based method battery capacity was only reduced by about 20% by the 40th charge cycle.
According to the researchers, the standard process effectively killed the batteries after just 25 charging cycles. An EV car battery is considered end-of-life when it holds less than 80% of its original total capacity.
Credit: Ozkan Lab/UCRAfter 60 fast-charge cycles EV batteries begin to deteriorate. In some cases, cells cracked and exposed their internal components.
After 60 charge cycles under the industry standard process, the cells began to crack, exposing the internal components. In extreme cases, this can be enough to cause fire.
If you are an EV driver that enjoys the convenience of fast charging, there are some things you can do to be on the safe side, though.
The UCR Battery Team recommends minimizing the use of commercial fast chargers, recharging your EV before the battery is totally empty, and be sure not to overcharge.
In reality, most people will rarely charge their electric vehicle from zero to full. But it’s good to know that doing so might not be a great habit to slip into.
Researchers recently published their full findings in the Energy Storage journal, read their full research paper here.
The consensus among the auto industry is different, with the ID4 being another incredibly bland VW design.
Bland is one thing. The ioniq is straight up ugly.
Last edited:
I generally don't like VWs outside of the GTI and Golf R/R32 lineup, although I think the Arteon is sharp. I've only owned GTIs and Rs and have never shopped/considered any other products. They're investing more in suvs which is unfortunate and going fully haptic in the new generation golf is very unfortunate. Won't consider one unless they bring real buttons back.
The Ioniq is an ugly car and I wouldn't buy an ID.5. The only electric car I currently find compelling and would consider is the model 3 performance.
Guess I'm an outlier in this conversation. We just purchased a 2018 Genesis G90 3.3TT AWD that uses above averaage fuel, premium at that! In suburban/urban areas electric vehicles do well generally. When you have to travel further it becomes problematic for true 100% electric powered vehicle. I like the idea, the responsive direct feeling of a more efficient drive with electric as the source of the drive and the peaceful, quiet cabin. They are a sweet ride, just not enough endurance and distance for my needs.
Wow, a car thread that is ten days old and not a single post by @massimoManca II. He hasn’t posted since April 29......hope his anger management classes weren’t terminal!
As a EV owner my guidance would be:
If you need to tow anything - don’t buy one.
If your daily commute is more that 200 miles round trip, don’t buy one.
If you don’t have a garage or dedicated parking spot and $500 to install a 220v charger, don’t buy one.
If you regularly do road trips over 500 miles and rush in and out of rest-stops like you’re in Cannonball Run, don’t buy one.
If you think finding chargers is hard and charging on the road takes a long time, learn more.
If the idea of giving zero sh!ts about the price of gasoline is appealing, learn more.
If you never again want to fumble with a credit card at a gas pump in freezing weather on the way to work, learn more.
If the idea of saving 50% on maintenance- no oil changes, tune ups, transmission fluid, etc is appealing, learn more.
Last edited:
No doubt, there is a lot to learn by all of us and those who are developing the EV's too. As noted earlier, I like the idea but the mileage limitation is a big factor as all our family lives over 350 miles from us so the 200 mile charging issue is a tough nut to crack. I'm retired so the commute is not a factor, I can fill up when I see the weather is more appealing. We currently live in an apartment to the infrastructure is not feasible. My spine requires a soft ride which we discovered is not easy to fine. The Genesis fit the bill for my needs. An EV certainly may be in our future, who knows? I suspect one will down the road. I'd enjoy the quiet ride and quick response of the throttle.
Did not read everything. I work for a VW-Audi dealer.
I'm no great source of info but from what I was told by our Service Mgr you get free electric for a coupla tree years, the Uncle Sam is on top of it. Sell it; so if you run out of juice it depends...
You have two or three chargers (all free) at your local dealership. Some are fast, some are slow. All are free. The G is covering it. Some are 7 or 8 hours. Some are a half-hour, It all bends on what you want and how good your charger is. You get some card from Audi that says you have free electric. Swipe at your own peril, I suppose.
I was also told this...most people who buy electrics lease. You get free electric for three years. I don't know what an E=Tron costs to lease but obviously there are no oil changes, no fuel costs at all. I know they start at about $37K for a new car. I have no idea what the monthly lease is but you will have zero fuel cost. I have driven them. They run like a mother but it sucks juice on hills or going fast.
The bad side is you get about 250 miles on a full charge. If you nurse it, maybe 275.
I'm no great source of info but from what I was told by our Service Mgr you get free electric for a coupla tree years, the Uncle Sam is on top of it. Sell it; so if you run out of juice it depends...
You have two or three chargers (all free) at your local dealership. Some are fast, some are slow. All are free. The G is covering it. Some are 7 or 8 hours. Some are a half-hour, It all bends on what you want and how good your charger is. You get some card from Audi that says you have free electric. Swipe at your own peril, I suppose.
I was also told this...most people who buy electrics lease. You get free electric for three years. I don't know what an E=Tron costs to lease but obviously there are no oil changes, no fuel costs at all. I know they start at about $37K for a new car. I have no idea what the monthly lease is but you will have zero fuel cost. I have driven them. They run like a mother but it sucks juice on hills or going fast.
The bad side is you get about 250 miles on a full charge. If you nurse it, maybe 275.
Just an FYI, a 360 mile trip from Harrisburg PA to Columbus OH only requires a 35 minute supercharger stop in Washington PA. Breaking up the 6 hr trip with a 35 min stop to grab a bite to eat, use restrooms and get a coffee works well.
The 5 is a modern take on the Giugiaro designed Pony, who also penned the Golf and Lancia Delta (hence, the resemblance - which is why many have said the 5 would have been a great design for VW's electric).
Here's a restomod of the original.
In the Top Gear review, there's a subtle dig at the ID4's design at the 1:55 mark.
The diagonal crease along the side and lines/marks on the wheel well cladding are really the only points of contention on the Ioniq.
But design is only one aspect, the 5 has quicker charging, better performance and can be used to run household appliances during a blackout or recharge another BEV.
Last edited:
Genesis will have 3 EVs on the lots within a year.
Electric variants of the G80 sedan and the upcoming GV70 crossover and the GV60 crossover (on a dedicated EV platform).
The next gen G90 will likely get an electric variant as well.
here's my thought...buy a 600+hp gas guzzler and call it a day.and was simply blown away. As I understand it, VW got caught lying about deisel engine performance. They got fined billions and had to commit to some R&D. This is the result. I also understand that VW is trying to restore their name and establish themselves as the EV go-to car. This car comes in at ~ $42k but when you apply the $7500 tax credit is $35k out of pocket. Compare that to the prices for the Ford Mach E (which isn't a mustang, its an SUV) or Testla and it is far lower in price.
I may have to buy one.
- while I've driven some EV's, this was by far the quietest
- Today it is RWD with AWD coming but with so much computer assist, over 4,500 lbs and great balance, is AWD needed?
- 0-60 lags versus a tesla, but it was very comfortable and fine. I mean, how often do you need to blow someone off the line of scrimmage in a car?
- the roof is all glass. can't put it up but it apparently adds to headroom.
- Great room in the front and back and still has plenty of storage
- Seems like just the right video screen. The Mach E and Tesla seem like overkill to me.
- The balance and safety features of this car are really great.
- it has a really compact front and, where the motor is, which makes the driver feel like they are in a much smaller vehcle
- the turning radius is nuts. You can do a U-turn on a normal two-lane road using the shoulder.
Thoughts?
It was the nicest ride home we've ever enjoyed. Silky smooth, more than enough power and options galore that come standard.These are sick Gen. is KILLING it
I just read that that may be changing. Some didn't realize the planning required to charge their vehicle and don't like the inconviences. Tesla owners are staying committed to their choice but others aren't.
The study is attached but behind a paywall. UC Davis researchers found that 18% of California EV users go back to gas, mainly because they live in apartments without a place to charge. Frankly, these people weren’t good candidates in the first place.
As you indicated, Tesla owners were least likely to go back to gas.
Two or three years ago I read that British and German engineers were making tremendous strides towards producing a reliable turbine-steam engine car.
That's awesome! Does it burn coal?
I'm sure these are level 2 chargers so you probably won't come back to a fully charged car. But you may be able to pick up 30 miles of range for every hour parked. Should be enough to get you on your way and access to much faster level 3 chargers along the freeways.
Yikes.
The one thing I'm still puzzled about is the charger location along the road. If plenty of people have EVs won't there be a huge queue at the charging station and you might have to wait hours and hours for your turn for the level 3 half hour charge?
Remember most people will charge 90% of the time at home. They will only be using the level 3 chargers when they travel long distances. It's not like a gas cars that all have to visit gas stations to fuel up.
I can only really speak to Tesla as they build and control their own level 3 charging network. When you plan a long trip with a Tesla the car routes you to appropriate chargers automatically. It knows in real time how many chargers are being used at each station and uses this information to plan the route.
The other weird thing with EV's is that the more empty the battery is the faster it charges. So you may be able to go from 20% state of charge to 70% in 20 minutes. But it may take another 25 minutes to go from 70% to 100%. So you are better off getting to the level 3 charger with not much juice left in the battery and then charging it up just enough to make to the next level 3 charger. You may end up with more stops but spend much less time charging.
Here is guy taking a long trip and supercharging along the way.
Similar threads
