Into the Night
Verified User
You aren't making up large numbers!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Tesla Model 3 named winner in KBB’s 5-Year Cost to Own Awards 2022. MAGA wets panties
- Thread starter Joe Capitalist
- Start date
You aren't making up large numbers!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Joe Capitalist
Racism is a disease
You're right. I'm not. I copied them from the article. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Surrender accepted, IntoTheCult.
Into the Night
Verified User
Copying random numbers doesn't make them data. Argument from randU fallacy. False authority fallacy. Assumption of victory fallacy. Semantics fallacy.
Joe Capitalist
Racism is a disease
How Long Will Your Tesla Battery Really Last?
Pierce Keesee
APRIL 27, 2022
How Long Will Your Tesla Battery Really Last?
Battery life is one of the top concerns for both current and prospective owners of electric vehicles. Tesla is the pioneer of technology and innovation with its battery longevity ranging between 300,000 to 500,000 miles. According to an Impact Report released by Tesla in 2019, Tesla Model S and X batteries retain over 80% of their range even after driving 200,000 miles.
Tesla is designing vehicles with a battery life that will outlast the vehicle itself. Tesla also started offering a minimum 70% battery retention guarantee over a period of 8 years or 100,000 to 120,000 miles. A study on 286 Tesla Model owners across the world revealed that Tesla vehicles lose just 5% of their capacity in the first 50,000 miles. Additionally, these vehicles will exceed 150,000 miles of driving before losing 10% of their initial battery life.
ZenMode
Well-known member
You find that same information on most every site that talks about Tesla batteries. It's based on a Tweet by Elon Musk who, as we know with how far you can go on one charge, is very likely based on ideal conditions. One assumption made is that the driver is only going to drive about 14k miles per year. That will be very, very low for a lot of people, especially those who use their car for work, as my neighbor does. He drives from patient to patient all day, so he put high miles on his car.
Tesla also likely has the best battery on the market. We were looking for a car for my daughter and came across a 2011 Nissan Leaf (I believe it was a Leaf. It was whatever electric car they offer). It was a really good price for having about 150k miles and being in really good condition...until you read the details. In those details was that the car would only take you about 35 miles total on a full charge.
EV cars will get there... eventually.
Why is that such a shock?
Back in 2011?
A Nissan Leaf was only good for about 73 miles when new.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Leaf#2011/12
After 150,000 miles?
If it was the original battery?
Of course the range would be down by about 1/2.
I bet you if your smart phone was used that much?
It's battery would only be about 1/2 as good as it was when new.
Last edited:
ZenMode
Well-known member
Right. That's the issue with EV cars. Tesla, as I mentioned above, probably has the best battery on the market. Other EV cars are, like the Leaf, are going to be less. Even with the best battery/technology, you can only go just over 300 miles on a single charge with the best Tesla.
It would be one thing if the cars were inexpensive, but the new Nissan Leafs are $25-35k and only go 149 miles on a charge. Completely unrealistic for the average consumer to have an EV car as a primary vehicle, because of the limited mileage, and also unrealistic for many people as a second car because of the price. Give me a $15k car that can go 500 miles when you're running the AC and going up and down hills.
Joe Capitalist
Racism is a disease
Give me the car that requires no oil changes, no coolant maintenance, no Auto Trans fluid maintenance, has instant torque and is one of the safest and fastest cars on the road.
You really can't appreciate an EV until you own one and drive it. You realize that the motor is a thousand times more efficient and practical than an ICE car. And, oh yes, no noxious emissions. Tesla does make the best EVs probably because they've been making more and longer and they have a genius aspie for a CEO. I guess the other EV manufacturers have some catching up to do.
Have you ever driven an EV?
ZenMode
Well-known member
I've driven a Tesla and whatever the Chevy EV is called. . I have no issue with electric vehicles. The technology in them is cool. They're quiet. No pay for gas, oil changes. Obviously there are other types of maintenance. No vehicle is maintenance-free.
From where I live in arizona, I could not drive to San Diego, which we do often, without intentional modifications to our trip to account for recharging and that is in the top EV car that will run me $60k. I've also never, in my 30 years of driving, thought "I wish my car had more consistent torque."
The technology for EVs will improve. Costs will come down and I'm sure I'll eventually get one.
Last edited:
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
Actually, it's more likely that Toyota, Honda, and other manufacturers will perfect the hydrogen fuel cell and it will end up dominating the market in the long run.
After we have wasted so much money on this other plan.
ZenMode
Well-known member
How much money will have been wasted on ICE vehicles whenever they are eventually put out to pasture?
Joe Capitalist
Racism is a disease
You still floating that bullshit? Try Googling "why fuel cell technology for cars won't work" and educate yourself.
-You cannot fill up like you do with gasoline or diesel. It is actually pretty ridiculous how hard it is to fill up a HFC powered car
-You won’t even go 100 miles on current tech hydrogen tanks that are still safe to carry around in a car
-Fuel cells wear out crazy fast and are hard to regenerate
-Hydrogen as a fuel is incredibly hard to make and distribute with acceptably low losses
-Hydrogen fuel cells have bad theoretical and practical efficiency
-Hydrogen storage is inefficient, energetically, volumetrically and with respect to weight
-HFCs require a shit ton of supporting systems, making them much more complicated and prone to failure than combustion or electric engines
-There is no infrastructure for distributing or even making hydrogen in large quantities. There won’t be for at least 20 or 30 years, even if we start building it like crazy today.
-Hydrogen is actually pretty hard to make. It has a horrible well-to-wheel efficiency as a result.
-Easy ways to get large quantities of hydrogen are not ‘cleaner’ than gasoline.
-Efficient HFCs have very slow response times, meaning you again need additional systems to store energy for accelerating
-Even though a HFC-powered car is essentially an electric car, you get none of the benefits like filling it up with your own power source, using it as a smart grid buffer, regenerating energy during braking, etc.
-Battery electric cars will always be better in every way given the speed of technological developments past, present and future
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
Honda did something like it in the 1970's too. Back then, when the original Clean Air Act passed, all the US auto manufacturers added catalytic converters to their vehicles to comply with the act. It killed performance. At Honda, they came up with a new engine design called the CVCC engine (Compound Vortex Controlled Combustion). This engine ran so clean that it didn't require a catalytic converter to meet the air standards and as a result had far better performance and got better gas milage too.
The US manufacturers came to realize that they'd have to copy this technology in order to regain performance on their new car models and began licensing it from Honda. Of course, better technology has since surpassed it, but for more than a decade, the CVCC design was the leader.
The point I'm making here is US auto manufacturers tend to take the easiest route forward with the least investment in R&D and other unprofitable investments. The path of least resistance. Right now, the government is making that path battery cars. Down the road, the Europeans and Japanese will have invented ways to make fuel cells work far better than batteries--a technological dead end.
And, yes, batteries are a technological dead end. You cannot get around the physics and chemistry of battery technology.
Once they have a fuel cell that works really well, and a storage method for hydrogen that works great, battery cars are doomed.
Anhydrous ammonia is another alternative fuel cell fuel. Interestingly, it's already been used in the past safely and widely. During WW 2, Belgium went to anhydrous ammonia in their ICE engines for public transit and other uses because gasoline was nonexistent during Nazi occupation. They used it for several years without serious incident. It too can be used in a fuel cell and is easily stored compared to hydrogen gas. In the agriculture sector it is the go-to manufactured fertilizer of choice. It's made from natural gas so that production can continue in operation. All the infrastructure for its use is in place and it avoids the massive environmental disaster of mining materials for batteries.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
You are wrong on every point you made...
https://www.progressive.com/answers...wered cars in terms of the driving experience.
https://www.livescience.com/49594-electric-fuel-cell-vehicles-explainer.html
https://www.hotcars.com/reasons-why...cture. ... 5 Practicality. ... More items...
Even the government experts admit they're a better deal
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/03/f9/thomas_fcev_vs_battery_evs.pdf
The only people that are doggedly advocating for battery cars without real alternatives are the scientific illiterates and retards (like you) on the political Left. As always, the retards on the radical Left get it wrong. They latch on to some idea and it becomes religious dogma for them. Sane and sensible people know not to listen to such morons, and that's where fuel cell cars come in. They are the future, and like Japan and Germany have done before--repeatedly--they will be the ones that lead the technological change to fuel cells while the US gets fucked because they went with radical Leftists while their auto manufacturers went the route of least resistance forward not investing in serious R&D.
Hydrogen has a lot of problems. First and foremost, as a gas, it is very little energy per volume. Even if you pressurize it insanely, a tank will still not get you far. As a liquid, it is not as good as gasoline, but it is in the right direction, but it is darn tough to get it into liquid form (very cold, a lot of pressure). It is tough to transport as a liquid. And it is not always easy to produce.
Risking everything on it would be insane.
The way you develop is that you try a bunch of things. If you think of it as wasting money, you fall behind, and you go bankrupt.
"“If I had an hour to solve a problem I'd spend 55 minutes thinking about the problem and five minutes thinking about solutions."
Einstein.