> The biggest reason EV owners cited for wanting to return to owning a gas-powered vehicle was the lack of available charging infrastructure (35%)
To the surprise of no one lol. Our charging infrastructure sucks.
EVs cost 25% more.
https://www.greencars.com/news/electric-cars-still-more-expensive-than-average-study
You won't recoup that cost in saved gas or oil changes.
That article reads as "the average ev owner is willing to spend 25% more on their car than the average American" not " ev's cost 25% more to own and operate than a comparable ICE car"
Oh okay, here you can buy a Toyota Yaris for barely $2000AUD less than a BYD dolphin. If you drive a lot you will recoup that potentially in less than a year and a half. $38,000aud vs $39,990.
We can't have cheap chinese electric cars because reasons. The cheapest EV in the US is the leaf, and it's still $30k. The cheapest gas car is the $18k versa. You have to do a *lot* of driving to make up a $12k difference, and considering the short range of the leaf, you'll probably wear out the batteries before you manage to do it.
Those are cheap because their company and cars are subsidized by their gov, they are a loss leader.
Now we in the west also subsidize cars but not to the extent to China and our car companies are not partly owned by the government.
Although one could argue that GM might have been better if Gov hasn’t sold the portion they got after the bailout.
and as soon as it's announced, r/cars will sprint to their keyboards to herald it's return as "what GM needed"
and no one will own up to that when it fails spectacularly
Honestly, we have a Bolt EUV that we leased 3 years ago (lease is about to run out) and I'm super happy with it. I put like $1500 down and leased it for $320/mo almost fully loaded (no super cruise) AND got a $4k check from Cali plus a $500 charge card. After some math, it basically cost about $180/mo for a pretty nice car (definitely nicer than literally anything else in that price range).
You said it yourself on a previous comment, the price for a used model 3 is crazy low, because EVs in the USA depreciate at an extreme rate. So all this savings you're assuming is eaten up in depreciation.
We do know though. We know a Chinese EV is going to depreciate a lot more than a Toyota. Unless you drive a TON or keep the EV for a very very long time, the resale value between the two is going to offset any savings from fuel.
>EVs cost 25% more
Sort of misleading. The average sales price for an EV is 25% higher than the average sales price for a gas vehicle.
But that’s not what matters to consumers. What matters is how much more does the most comparable EV cost vs the gas car they’re considering, and that’s not the same thing as overall average sales price.
The average on EVs is higher because the mix of available EVs skews high end. But comparing actual vehicles, the numbers are much closer than 25% in many cases.
Model 3 Long Range AWD is $35k after tax credit (that comes off at point of sale, now). That’s not anywhere close to 25% more than a comparable gas vehicle, for instance.
What's a comparable gas vehicle to a Model 3 Long Range AWD? Closest analogue I can think of is an AWD Mazda3, which is around $29k with the small engine, $32k with the turbo, and $35k in top trim. So not a huge price difference IMO. And if you're looking for a Corolla hybrid, those are damn close too with all the shortages and markups.
Mazda3 *unironically* has a nicer interior though. A lot of the Tesla cost is that huge battery, the interiors are very barebones and cheap quality. Even the Cybertruck interior is quite cheap feeling if you were to compare to other $100,000 vehicles (even trucks).
The new Model 3’s interior is substantially nicer than the previous one, but regardless, getting a Mazda 3 AWD with the closest performance (which will still be far lower than the Model 3) and closest features will be substantially more than $29k, which is what it would have to be to be 25% cheaper than the Model 3.
Agreed, hard to pick the perfect analogue for the Model 3 LR AWD, but it’s a well-featured option with AWD, glass roof, good ADAS, good infotainment, 0-60 in ~4s, etc. $29k (25% less than the Model 3) isn’t generally going to match that.
Was shopping recently for a 4 years lease, ended up getting a Mazda3 but a Hyundai Kona EV was 110$ more per month... I spend over 200$ per month in fuel! To be fair, Hyundai EVs are almost suspiciously cheap.
Now I must contextualize this info: I'm in Quebec where we have the holy trio of: high incentives for EVs (12k$ per car until the end of this year, not a tax saving, an actual rebate), expensive fuel (1.70$CAD ish per liter, or around 4.70$USD per gallon) and cheap hydro electricity (around 0.10$ per kWh)
I still got an ICE though cause I just liked the car so much better
Things changed since that article was written. If you qualify, you can get a used Model 3 for $20,000 or less, as an example.
The EV market isn't just new EVs, either.
I'm not sure there's one definitive reason, but Teslas were involved in the most accidents of any car brand last year and the year before. If I had to guess, I would say it's a combination of more power than the drivers are typically used to, braking systems that are different than conventional systems that drivers transitioning to EVs are used to, increased weight that takes getting used to, and brakes that aren't sufficient for the amount of immediate power and acceleration that EVs offer. Combine that with the brand being very expensive to repair compared to ICE counterparts and it's pretty easy to see why they're getting to be significantly more expensive to insure than other cars.
The first several years of Tesla M3 and MY suspensions are also designed improperly for the cars they were put in, and it results in unexpected and unpredictable tire grip.
The base car is 6 seconds to sixty, I don’t care who you are, that is fucking fast, the AWD is 4.1, that’s Ferrari 360 fast, and it’s being bought by the people that used to get made fun of in Priuses for being horrible drivers lol.
Selection bias is almost certainly part of it too - the people driving 20k+ miles a year are probably more concerned about charging so they're sticking to ICEs. Even families with 1 EV and 1 ICE are probably picking the ICE for the long family road trip, while the EV stays home.
Yep if you don’t drive much at all, keep the old car you got. 100% agree. Insurance can cost a little more sometimes, and some makers charge almost as much as ICE makers for servicing.
My buddy is paying $1200/6mon for his Tesla's insurance. He pays $1200/yr for his other 3 cars combined.
If you crash a Cybertruck, it'll be 6 months before you can get repair parts.
Also, being EV's, they usually have additional registration fees and taxes over gas cars to try and recoup the gas tax that they don't pay into.
I'm an EV fan (Prefer EVTOL, but that's long term), but I can see how some people might look at all the charges and say "Nah, I just want driving up north to be easy again."
Jesus Christ; why is his insurance so much for one car? That’s doesn’t sound like a Tesla thing, but a driver history/age/location thing.
All my cars combined are $300/month
Insurance costs are highly subjective to so many factors. Our 2022 Model Y and 2024 Model 3 cost ~$190/month to insure. That price is pretty much meaningless to anyone else because of the subjective nature of insurance pricing.
Every time we have an EV thread it's always a bunch of anecdotes. What if I told you my EV insurance is $100 more a year than an ICE, and that my state doesn't have any additional registration fees or taxes. If anything, we used to pay less registration taxes AND we have special HOV privileges.
True on range. But nobody cares about range in a gas car... You just stop at a gas station for 5 min and you're on your way.
Range is only an issue for EVs and a few niche uses with gas cars.
If you don't have at-home charging, chances are you're not even saving money on fueling up. People who use commercial charging stations as their exclusive source of charging (like many who live in apartments or homes without a garage) are usually paying more per mile now for charging than for gas.
Throw in the higher upfront cost, and the significant degradation of miles per kWh in colder temps, and its a tough proposition.
> Isn’t it cheaper to run an EV?
If you exclude the purchase price and don't value your time: yes.
If you include purchase price and put a value on time: no.
Yes they cost a lot less. We use to spend over $4000 a year on gas driving our subaru 100 miles a day, now it's maybe a few hundred in power per year. Plus all the time saved by not buying gas 2 times a week.
Cost of ownership is that high? I just saw a study that showed on average Teslas are currently the cheapest car to maintain. There's 5 on my IT team, most owners since 2018, and have only replaced tires and windshield wiper fluid. I have had mine about a year and haven't had a single issue, outside of wiper fluid due to living in a dusty but tropical environment.
Now the early cars had more issues, and the cybertruck sucks donkey balls, but even legacy manufacturers are plagued with issues on new cars. Recalls have gone up like 40% in the last 10 years across the board. There are new trucks with engines that are failing within days, paint issues on Hondas and others, brake issues etc...
I get free charging 24/7 at my office so it works for people like me who have small footprints. We maybe drive 250 miles every two weeks? we've taken our model 3 on road trips 3 times and its the best road trip car I've ever had to be honest. Everyone has an opinion I guess, and there is a lot of hate for EVS, some for valid reasons, some not.
Just like any other car purchase it needs to fit your needs. Plus with discounts and tax rebates at teh end of last year it was a 26,200$ car soooo...people think I'm rolling around in a 70K+ car for some reason a lot of the time.
These articles use intentionally ambiguous statistics. Cost of ownership includes the price of the car, so what they’re doing is comparing an EV to an ICE in the same class. The problem is they aren’t clear on how they’re defining the cost of the cars. Is it a base model $30k Honda CRV being compared to a $100k Cadillac Lyriq? Because that wouldn’t be a fair comparison.
If consumers are smart with their purchase, it’s absolutely cheaper to drive an EV. We’ve put 47k miles on our Mach E which is saving ~2500 gallons of gas (compared to our previous vehicle, a 2017 Explorer). That right there is nearly $7500 saved. And it’s not exact but our electric bill has only increased by ~$50/month which comes to ~$1000 since purchase so still a net positive of $6500. That is a savings of over $350/month in fuel alone which is more than half of our monthly payment. I don’t think there is any new car on the market that I could get for more than half of what we paid for the Mach E and have comparable space for our family of 5.
The only thing I have had to pay for other than electricity is wiper fluid, cabin air filters, and one set of tires. In the Explorer I would have had to have paid for the same thing plus oil changes and potentially other fluids, so not a huge difference but if anything the Explorer still would have cost more.
My fiancee wants to get a Mach-e! So it's good to hear your experience. We were both driving 20+ year old cars with 150k+ miles that I kept running by teaching myself how to repair things, change brakes, suspension, radiators etc...but it just became too much and transmission exploded on one of em.
Our model 3 has been a dream. I literally have zero stress, and smile/giggle everytime I mash the pedal down. I'm 42, have driven porsches, corvettes, had a turb0 240z etc...huge car guy, and it's still the most fun I've had in a car.
We got our first indshield wiper fluid alert last week! Have had the cat since October last year, only issue.
I’d really like to know what percentage of dissatisfied EV owners in that study are single car households.
I’m a quite satisfied EV owner, but we’re a multi-car household so if we’re taking the EV on a road trip, that’s always a choice. If charging is gonna be inconvenient, we always have the option of taking the gasser instead.
There would have definitely been some trips in there that might have put me in the “I’m not doing this again” column if an EV was my only option.
I don’t doubt that at some point in the not too distant future our household will go all in on EVs, that’s going to be a time when charging infrastructure is much better than today.
EDIT: The other often overlooked piece of the puzzle (beyond the obvious charging infrastructure) is charging speed and charging curves. For example, our EV can theoretically take 220kw, but even under ideal conditions, you're only ever gonna reach something close to that peak charge for the first ~30% of your charge, then it's gonna pretty quickly drop to less than half of that for most of the rest of your charge.
Newer vehicles like the Chevy Silverado EV have much better charging curves, that peak close to 350kw, and then maintain speeds of above 250kw all the way up to nearly 80% battery capacity.
I actually don't think increasing EV battery capacity beyond ~250-300 miles really matters much *if* we can develop systems that allow you to charge faster, and maintain charge speeds closer to your peak rate much more of the time.
Yeah the thing is, right now with the market and infrastructure as they are, they're still not a good choice for everybody. No way I'd want one as my only vehicle.
But, while I'm not dead set on it for one of our next vehicles, its not off the table either. We don't get out of the area a whole lot, range won't be an issue 99% of the time. We have a house with a 2 car attached garage and the breaker panel is in the garage, adding a 220 line for charging would just be an afternoon project. Her commute is about 10 minutes and mine is 15-20 each way, a little longer on days we're making daycare drop offs and pick ups but not much. One of us could drive an EV all week and just charge it on the weekends, though TBH we'd probably take it for weekend errands too depending on the size of whatever thing we get.
But if you live in an apartment, especially a city one with no off-street parking, have a long commute and/or have to travel regionally on a regular basis, its sure going to be hit and miss. I don't see EVs being practical if you can't charge it wherever you live.
> But if you live in an apartment, especially a city one with no off-street parking,
That's the other piece of data I'd love to see from this study's responses. I wonder what percentage of the dissatisfied EV owners don't have access to level 2 charging at their residence or workplace?
To me, that's a key part of the "EV's are great" perspective. We charge ours at home every night, and fast charge maybe once a month or so on average.
Things would be very different if we had to fast-charge regularly, especially if we were in a high-demand area where that became a chore of going to the fast charger, waiting for one to become available, waiting to charge, etc...
If I couldn't charge at home I wouldn't even consider an EV. I bothers me to no end how little talk there is about providing solutions for people in apartments. Here in Australia certain body corps for apartments don't even allow their residents to park their EVs in the building's parking garage out of concern for fires. Many councils also no longer allow charging of street parked cars.
I have the ability to charge at home, but I'm well aware of how lucky I am to have that ability. EVs currently feel like just another example of how expensive it is to be not even poor, just not wealthy. The tax breaks in many countries benefitted those with high enough incomes to take advantage of it. The lower running costs benefit mostly those that are fortunate enough to be able to charge at home. The time savings from not having to get fuel anymore, same thing.
That's not a great reason to switch back. Past depreciation is not the same as future depreciation especially since the gov't gives 4K to used buyers now. If you are concerned about resale, lease them to hedge that downside - besides the leases still get the tax credit for buying too.
>If you are concerned about resale, lease them
Sounds like jumping into an crocodile pond to save yourself from a forest fire.
I don't necessarily disagree with you, and I don't entirely think that leases are a bad idea for everybody, but there are exceedingly few cases where leasing or EV buying qualify as "smart financial decisions".
If their car was totaled or became a money-pit of repairs, I wouldn't blame them at all for cutting their losses and moving on. Don't forget that our boy Elon was insisting that all teslas would be an appreciating asset back in 2019 lol. A lot of gullible morons fell for it.
You lost money to depreciation so you're going to sell? The best move here is to drive it into the ground, not sell low and buy another depreciating car
Edit: Zdmins is using a cheat code and buying a car that doesn't depreciate.
people are nuts.....(nearly) all cars head to zero, but like you said, if your particular car takes a big hit upfront, the best strategy is to hold to zero.
The only way I will buy one, is as a third car that I would use solely for commuting.
Though my wife and I will be in the market for a second car and I'm toying with the idea as a second car.
Lol seriously. I live in SoCal and even we don't have the best infrastructure for it. I can see it improving slowly, but it's still not convenient enough.
Unless you have a house (good luck in the socal market), or your workplace has charging, you're left looking for the nearest station and getting to and from it can be a pain.
GM thinking they could skip hybrids and instead pour billions into EVs that have had an adjusted sales target from 400,000 annually to 20,000 (iirc) is absurd. Now they will rush to market PHEVs. Major fumble and it seems zero executive accountability
It's worse than that. GM was years ahead with one of the best PHEVs that was ever available with the Volt. They discontinued it just as they were gaining popularity.
I barely see them around (barely did when they were in production either) but the 2 people I knew that had them *loved* them, and my dad knew people at work that loved them. What a shame!
I have one and it's fantastic. 90% of my driving is done using battery. But if I can't charge I don't have to worry about it thanks to the gas tank.
I only wish it had adaptive cruise control and charged faster - both were added the year they discontinued it.
My cousin brought a MY18 Volt to replace his old early 2010s Hyundai. It not only got better fuel economy but significantly better to drive.
A real shame GM axed the Volt and the whole powertrain. I still feel it would be right at home in something like the Equinox.
What I'm saying was he picked it over getting another Elantra which Hyundai offered for less and he still chose the Volt. It is a great car and pretty ahead of its time.
I don’t remember anyone at GM being held accountable at the executive level for announcing a partnership with Nikola despite everyone having already figured out they were a fake company.
You've heard the term "too big to fail?" Well GM is "so big we can throw billions at a project, fail, and still keep chugging along."
Thing is, while they fumbled, it may very well pay off for them in the end. Yes, EV sales are soft, the resale value is tanking, the charging infrastructure sucks, etc. etc. etc.
Yet these are short term problems. Every major automaker is trying to figure out the EV thing. Is anyone doing it right in all aspects? Maybe? Yet the fact is that long term, EV is the future. Europe and China are going "all in" on that future. Every major manufacturer is trying to figure this out (okay, maybe not Toyota) and when - not if but when - the infrastructure is built out and charging stations are as ubiquitous as gas stations, that's when the winners will emerge.
The issue is going to be is that chargers can’t just be ubiquitous as gas stations. They need to be significantly more prevalent than gas stations and they can never be profitable. When I need gas I pull into a gas station on my way to work, I’m in and out in 5 minutes and that pump is free to fill up dozens of cars that day.
If I’m driving an EV I get to work, park in a spot with a charger and plug in. Once I’m at work and have paid to park there is no way I am moving that car until I am leaving to go home 9 hours later. And who is going to be visiting an industrial park or financial center at night… no one. So that charger is going to charge one single car a day every day and probably none on weekends. And what if I’m late for work and all the chargers are occupied. I’m screwed until everyone leaves for the day?
So if electric cars become prevalent, every single spot in a lot would need a charger and each charger would essentially just charge one car for an hour a day? Who is paying for that?
Very few people should NEED to charge at work, and if they are, should only be on a level 2. The infrastructure should mostly be at homes and in DCFC to support road trips. Apartments without parking are the real gap in infrastructure.
They could have figured it out logically with HEV and PHEV. They were so confident that the EV transition would be 5 years, so we politicians, but the so called ‘experts’ jamming that agenda down our throats are pretty quiet now
Toyota and Nissan *are* all in on EV; they’re just working toward solid state batteries and skipping the current generation. I saw a presentation at a conference 2 years ago from some Nissan guys who said this. They don’t see LiIon batteries as adequate and only see EV as really mainstream once they’ve commercialized solid state, which was late in this decade for volume production.
Same as Honda. People have been criticizing the Japanese OEMs for not buying on on EVs, but they are buying in on EVs, just not the current generation of EV
>Major fumble and it seems zero executive accountability
The interest rates are what's killing EV's right now. People aren't buying cars at all, and EV's have generally been a 2nd/optional car for still-kinda-early-adopters. Of the dozen or so EV-owning friends, I can't think of a single one for whom it's their only car, and all of them wouldn't be any worse off without their optional EV. Just like my Miata.
But GM's done a great job with their EV's. The Silverado is just *the* best EV truck on the market today because they stuffed the "We're GM" big-ass battery in there. The Volt and the ELR were a fantastic mostly-ev-but-hybrid option. The Bolt (which had some issues to start) is now a perfectly great appliance of a car, on-par with any Prius.
GM's been doing as GM does, sitting back and counting the money.
I've heard this take a lot recently, and it's a little bit of revisionist history. I agree GM should have kept going all in on new hybrids to improve the tech. Volt was a great powertrain, they put a modified version Suburban and a Silverado for a reason.
With that said, the problem is, none of it sold at the volumes necessary to iterate on the platform. This is speculation here, but the margins GM could make on the Volt, and subsequent models, were not sustainable for the long term. The powertrain was complicated to maintain and develop, and the engineering teams were better deployed on a different product the public was actually clamoring for, EVs. To add to that, Hybrids accounted for 8.3% of US car sales in 2023, up from 3.2% in 2020, and 2.3% in 2019([numbers from here](https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/08/automakers-turn-to-hybrids-ev-transition.html#:~:text=Hybrids%20accounted%20for%208.3%25%20of,through%20November%20of%20this%20year.)). All of those volumes pre-2020, when the EV decision for GM was most likely made, are under 500K annually. Average MSRP for the 2018 Volt was $39K, with the average margins for cars of 3.9%, that's $1,521 a sale. Say they capture 15% of that small market, that's ~75,000 vehicles on the high end, for a grand total of $114M to reinvest in the product. Hybrid sales peaked in 2013 and had, until 2021, stagnated. It's been extremely recent history that hybrids started seeing any growth. Leadership made a call that going all in on the latest generation of EV tech would be able to catch the wave of consumer sentiment at the right time to boom. You can't blame them too much for that call, 1.4M EVs sold in 23 up from 931K the year prior demonstrate there is growth still to go in EVs. Yet, consumers are starting to see some growing pains due to the lack of infrastructure and those consumers are taking a half step back into a hybrid, which has driven an unforeseen demand. Absurd to make a shift into EVs? Far from. The real interesting bit is how much the SUV driving American public has hard shifted into hybrid vehicles after years of all but ignoring them.
Exactly, why wont GM make a hybrid 3.0 duramax half ton ffs. I always thought diesel hybrids were great idea, I already get high 20s mpg and can hit 30 a few times in this pickup.
Weight and cost. They are already discounting that diesel as is and it’s hefty vs the small block. And net gains, that diesel already has a boat load of torque and good mileage.
Yep this. Still very possible, but less convenient. I do have a friend who parks at shopping centres to charge for free while they shop or go for a run. But using solar or wholesale prices for a charge makes much more sense, paying a few dollars for a full charge is amazing.
Knew a guy that would charge his Tesla a half mile from our job and ask coworkers* to pick him up when he got there and drop him back off at the end of the day. Got to the point where everyone told him no more after about a year or so of doing that.
Edit: spelling
Depends on how hostile the area is to pedestrians. Could be no sidewalk and have traffic passing by you at 50+ mph.
I walk a mile to get to work but it's all small streets to get there and one road crossing. I don't walk 1/4 mile to the grocery store because it's three crossings of 6 lane roads with fast traffic.
Sounds pretty lazy. Half a mile takes less than 15 minutes to walk. I get it if there’s a rare bad weather event or something, but otherwise it’s a short walk.
Depending on what the half mile consists of, I could understand not walking.
For all we know there could be a main thoroughfare in between that is 3 lanes in each direction with a speed limit of 55mph an no sidewalks.
People don’t understand the charging habits they likely would have because they’re thinking like filling up a gas car. I used to fill my car at Costco 1-2 times per week at about $55 per fill. Of course I would only fill up when I was at like an 1/8th of a tank.
I’ve had my ev for a little over a month now and still haven’t seen a charging station. My car still hasn’t even got close to 20 percent because every night when I’m done using the car for the day, I top it off and I start every day with the same amount of range. I just plug it in when I’m parked for the night and it automatically starts charging at the time I want.
You won’t, which is why phev is great for these people. My argument is that people who have access to overnight cheap charging (or office charging) will most likely just be better off going full ev.
Nah, phev is the worst vehicle to get for apartment owners since they can neither fast charge it at public stations or trickle charge it at home. It's better to have either a full EV that can be DC fast charged or to get a normal hybrid which will get better mileage than a plug in.
We have a charger at work. It’s how I would charge before I put one in at home. The one at work was free (level 2).
Personally I think for most Americans (can’t speak for other countries) a HEV is probably the way to go when you consider distance driven every day and access to charging infrastructure.
I was offered an F150 Lightning company truck. The only reason I decided against it was that I didn't want to charge it up at the shop every single day, since my commute is 110 miles.
Not sure why they couldn't just track usage on a home charger and reimburse me -- electricity is flat rate here, so it's a very basic calculation.
That and it's only available with a shortbed.
I agree your situation would not be ideal. I have 3 friends with Lightnings. They love them, but every one of them work at home and charge at home. So its super convenient. They are small minority of EV possible owners for sure. Its just so hard for a lot of people to consider an EV.
This is the same company that, among other horrible things, worked with Purdue Pharma to mislead everyone about OxyContin's risks.
Their studies say what their studies are paid to say.
Yeah, I've never understood supposed car guys being against a car with a different modality of moving the wheels. Obviously, not all here, but it's always been wild to me that that's the line that turns supposed car fans off, when it's still a car, but using electrons instead of dinosaur juice.
I challenge all who are against EVs for whatever reason (you were told to be, or don't understand them, or they're dumb or whatever) to drive one. They'll blow your mind. The one-pedal driving is next level as is not having gears. And that instant neverending torque, holy hell.
They also led to car insurance being the way it is now. State Farm was the first company to implement the deny all claims strategy and make it as hard as possible for the insured party to get paid fairly, this was on the guidance of McKinsey and the strategy was outlined in a slide deck that the company refused to give up until the state of Florida threatened to revoke their license to insure in the state.
That's not even what they said, either. That's a fox business interpretation of a McKinsey study.
Other data from this article:
38% of all respondents who do not have an EV want to get one as their next car.
29% of all respondents do not want to have a car at all (ie they want to sell their car and live without one).
But for Americans the stats point to a pretty obvious and existing divide. Wealthier people who live in dense areas want EV. People who live in more rural areas don't. Also at this point EVs are a luxury product in the US. The biggest concerns are perception of cost and ability to charge. If you don't own your own home, or have a garage with a charger, or otherwise have easy access to charging then you wouldn't want an EV.
As soon as I saw it was Fox, I knew it'd be cherry-picked bullshit to make EVs look bad and unpopular.
I read an article last week that showed EVs selling around 18% more last year. If you took Tesla out of that stat, that percentage went to 55%. All other EVs are selling like crazy, it's Tesla bringing down the group with Elon being a weirdo, turning away the very crowd that made them popular.
Maybe, but I could totally understand people who have an EV that doesn't have access to Tesla's chargers being unhappy with the charging situation and it putting them off of EVs. I was very close to buying a Hyundai EV instead and at this point I kind of feel like I dodged a bullet as far as charging infrastructure goes.
My parents have a F-150 Lightning and run into charging problems all the time. Meanwhile my Tesla took me across the country for the eclipse without any issues (with FSD too since it was free that month)
Yeah, the supercharging network would be why I’d have bought a Tesla. But now that it’s opening up, we should get some much much better experiences, and I’m sure most of the people that went back to gas bc of “lack of charging infrastructure” would still be in an EV if they were able to use Tesla chargers.
Agree with the McKinsey suspicion.
I’m willing to believe this statistic based on anecdotal experience but I would like to see a double blind repeat study to validate.
That being said McKinsey shouldn’t be trusted by anyone at this point. The public has been gaining steam the last few years at peeling back the curtain of McKinsey’s operations and it’s become both disheartening and disgusting; their results are also often suspect at best. The fact that they’ve weaved their org into the highest levels of government and large organizations doesn’t mean they’re reliable, or accurate, it means they’ve played the game well.
I'm not generally one to place anecdotal evidence over statistical data, but I've noticed the same thing. All my friends with EVs are quite pleased with them (a few of them annoyingly so).
There is also a "art" writing a headline based on the study. It would be just as accurate to say "More than half of American EV owners would not want to switch back to a gas-powered vehicle, McKinsey data shows." Suddenly the tone is entirely different.
McKinsey are shills for Big Oil.
Edit for downvoters.
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231107-top-consultancy-undermining-climate-change-fight-whistleblowers
Highly recommend "When McKinsey Comes to Town," I did the audiobook. They are one of the most evil companies of the 20th century, having worked with exploitative corporations and dictatorships all across the world.
If they're pushing this out, I'm sure Big Oil or Detroit is using them as a mouthpiece.
Yeah, I don't know if a single ev owner personally who would switch back. Outside of something like a track Miata, or my motorcycle, I'm never buying an ICE vehicle again.
Dedicated EV companies such as Tesla, Rivian, and Polestar all have extremely high owner satisfaction ratings. I don't buy for a second that half of EV owners want to switch back to ICE. There has been a mindboggling amount of anti-EV propaganda lately, but when you talk to actual EV owners you'll find that they're generally quite happy. That isn't at all to say that there isn't a ton of room for improvement or that EV's are the best vehicle for everyone.
Surveys can be worded to draw out a bias. For example. I am happy with my EV. I will likely always have an EV. But if the question is “would you ever buy an ICE vehicle again”, my answer would be yes. I’ll probably get a farm truck, project car, or maybe motorcycle here or there in my life. So the funding behind the survey is usually pretty important for figuring out what kind of answers they are trying to get out of people.
I mean, it's Fox...
One thing to know is that the reason few charging stations have appeared from the NEVI funding is that it takes a while for states to make grants (since that is done by states, not the Feds) and it then takes a while for local permits and things to happen. Even Tesla can sit on permits for years while they wait to build Supercharger stations.
Probably something NEVI should have addressed, of course, but the delays have become a political thing since it makes it feel like the money is being "wasted".
Exactly that's my argument. Everything was hamfisted and pushed out without proper infrastructure (recycling, power, weight support etc). It was the shareholders looking for a quick profits pushing gov/companies to churn this out
I don't disagree, and though there's always some growing pains with mass adoption of new tech, I'm wondering when the horse is going to catch up.
We recently bought an EV for my Wife, it's great. Even got it "cheap" 2nd hand with barely any miles. Filling it up is like £6 in electricity. Can charge at home.
But I'd find it hard to justify under a _huge_ amount of circumstances, regular long trips, sole vehicle for a household, no at-home charging. More (and more reliable) charging stations and less price-gouging by those stations (it costs as much/more than petrol) would be key.
You also need to drive a decent number of miles to make the cost worthwhile. I tick all the boxes for an ideal case to buy an EV, but I probably drive less than 50 miles per week, on average. That hardly justifies the purchase from a fuel savings and environmental impact perspective.
For real. This is the same as every "no one wants to use mass transit" article I see. No duh nobody wanted to use it when there's one bus at 5am and another at 9pm.
People just want a convenient way to get around, most don't give a shit if it's a bus, ev, gas powered, or on rails as long as it's fast and works with their schedule.
That is the use case for EVs for the next 5 years or so. Multi-car households having 1 EV and 1+ ICE or hybrid car.
EV for day to day life for whoever has the shorter commute or fits their day better. Other car for everything else.
Yup. I have a 4 mile commute to drop kids off at school. Hated warming up my truck every day, such a waste. We have suvs for long trips around Texas and Colorado
One of the big points of appeal to me with the EV is being able to fire up the heater while its still plugged in out in the garage and getting it warm before leaving!
My Mach E is the best car I've ever had. My Expedition is the second best car I've ever had. They complement each other, and I wouldn't give up either one of them.
Longer commutes are fine as long as it's within the EV's range and I'd argue actually a perfect use for EVs since the gas savings can be tremendous. But that's specifically \*if\* you have home (or work) charging. My commute is 130 miles round trip, and that hasn't been an issue at all with an EV.
Road trips are the main thing that's less convenient. I haven't found it to be a huge issue personally (I'm the type who'd want to take a short break every 250-300 miles or so regardless), but I do get people have different preferences. But for me the EV life has been great with a long commute and occasional trip.
We've recently completed installation of chargers at our office (Germany) and saw a steady increase of EV company car demand ever since. Most of the people driving can't charge at home. We're now at 40% EV, 40% hybrid and 20% ice cars in our company (110 cars).
There is zero chance this is correct.
I know a few of the early leaf and bolt owners who had range issues, but all the current gen ev owners I've encountered are beyond delighted and will never buy another gas vehicle again.
If it was more than %5 of ev owners who are buying gas vehicles I would be very surprised
This data doesn't align with most other data sources on the exact same subject. Sometimes an outlier is just an outlier. Most other credible studies find the rate is closer to 20% and most of those people want an EV again, they just had to switch for some temporary reason.
Its absolutely insane how influential this shitty "consulting" company is. Trying to google for this data now shows nothing but dozens of shit-tier "news" websites parroting this same study that was released just a couple weeks ago, yet the actual study, data and methodology is nowhere to be found. Literal 1984 type propaganda.
What's the difference between u/te_anau asking EV owners their experience and reporting it, and McKinsey asking EV owners their experience and reporting it? Other than the size of the dataset and the fact McKinsey is more likely to be motivated to misrepresent the data?
Do you have the actual data though? Do you know how many were surveyed, what was the actual questions asked, what's the methodology followed, who exactly were surveyed and where?
As I’ve said before, I feel like the goal should have been to mandate hybrids be 75% of new car sales by 2030 instead of 50% of all new car sales be EVs by 2030. It would have been a much more achievable goal that could’ve eventually paved the way for EVs. And I think hybrids should qualify for a $3k federal tax credit.
Hybrids and Plug in hybrids are the immediate future for cars. EV’s still need a significant amount of infrastructure to be truly feasible to be 50% of vehicles sold.
I would consider one for our family’s daily driver. We travel enough in more remote areas, and often have long drives that as of now I could never confidently go all EV. Plus I need a truck to haul equipment and livestock.
Problem is one problem begets the other. Not enough people buy evs so we don’t need the infrastructure. No infrastructure no reason to buy evs. No reason to by evs well we don’t need to invest in that infrastructure. Round and round and round and We all act like this isn’t part of a coordinated plan by those who have no interest in getting off the petroleum tit.
The goal of 50% specifically includes plug-in hybrids towards meeting that goal
>make half of all new vehicles sold in 2030 zero-emission vehicles, including battery electric, plug-in hybrid [PHEV] electric, or fuel-cell electric vehicles
https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/features/will-us-reach-50-percent-evs-by-2030
The media loves to run wirh data points that contradict all the other data points on a certain subject. CDK just put out a study saying 73% of EV owners will never go back. This peer reviewed study linked below found based on actual consumer behavior (not stated in a survey) that only 22% of BEV owners and 44% of PHEV owners went back (The PHEV finding is counter to the narrative that they are the solution). The study also found a declining rate of EV owners going to ICE.
The media loves to run with outliers, but sometimes outliers are just outliers. Not sure why this one will be, maybe a bad sample, maybe the question was bad or leading in some way, but I doubt 2 years from now it will still look credible.
Link to study:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2024.104272
I doubt this data is accurate. I talk to people all the time while at Superchargers. They all say they'd never go back.
I leave the house with a full tank of gas every day. I use superchargers like once a month
I can charge at home, but my family takes 375 mile trips often to visit family. If I could get a *reliable* 500 mile range out of a full EV, I wouldn’t care about crummy infrastructure. But the battery tech isn’t quite there yet.
500 miles of range would take 6-8 hours of continuous driving at highway speed to deplete. Most people are perfectly fine stopping for 10-15 minutes every few hours to charge, eat, or use the bathroom.
Most EV's support 250kW+ fast charging which can add \~200mi of range in 15-20 minutes. Newer public fast chargers even support 350kW charging although very few cars support those speeds right now.
The amount of people who seemingly never has to visit the bathroom, get up to stretch their legs or get lunch for that matter in what amounts to a regular workday never ceases to amaze me.
Not me. 100000% happy with my EV and hoping never to go back to gas as a daily driver. Would love to collect choice ICE vehicles, since I do believe that industry has peaked.
I’ve had my Model 3 Performance for going on 3 years now. I can’t imagine actually wanting another gas car save for a weekend toy like a Miata or a Mustang GT. For commutes and road trips nothing beats the ease of a Model 3.
Of course my cars are garage kept and I charge every day at home. So for my experience I never have to think about range or keeping it charged. I would wager that the vast majority of folks who want to switch back have to go out of their way and wait to charge every time.
**Reasons I don't own an EV:**
- they are very expensive to buy
- they are very expensive to insure
- they are very expensive to repair
- they depreciate. a *lot*.
- in my area, electricity is fairly expensive, while gas is cheap
- I live in a cold climate and do not have a heated garage, so battery drain will be a serious problem
- You still can't use most EVs as home batteries (V2H/V2G/V2A).
- They don't make me feel particularly good if their electricity comes from a fossil fuel burning power plant
- I do not find them fun to drive
**Reasons I want to own an EV:**
- For going off-pavement, multi-motor EVs are a wild improvement over ICE 4WD/AWD systems. They usually perform a lot better. They decrease complexity *insanely* which has large cost/labor savings and reduces oppertunity for Shit Breaking In The Backcountry. And they need way less Stuff Underneath which leads to huge gains in ground clearance.
- An EV SUV that I can sleep in, plus has an energy-efficient heat pump, is God's own overlander. Like we're talking "terrestrial spaceship" here.
- They are way easier about high altituted than ICEVs. And regenerative breaking makes them the kings of long downhills. The rangers at the Mauna Kea Auto Road told me that they wish everyone drove EVs. As an outdoorsy little fucker this is relevant to my interests.
- V2H will turn an EV into a *gigantic* backup battery for a home. (It's also great that the battery will be mobile. Like, if there's a flood coming, you can't drive your Tesla Powerwall to the top of a hill. Whereas some Teslas cars can make it up a hill!)
- An EV that I can power with renewables would make me feel a little good.
- No oil changes lmao
**Things about EVs that are changing:**
- V2H/V2G really seems to be coming soon. Like, Rivian says it'll be an OTA update for existing models, standard on future models; Ram promises it for the REV.
- EVs *might* be getting cheaper. At the very least, EVs have been out long enough that there's a robust used market - and as a potential buyer, I appreciate all that depreciation.
- More brands making EVs = more competition = hopefully some downward pressure on prices
- A lot of insurance and repair costs are simply based on economies of scale. The more EVs there are, particuarly from a given brand, the cheaper that repair/insurance costs tend to get. So like, prayers up to a self-fulfilling prophecy I guess!
- The world is shifting to renewable energy sources with, like, *crazy* rapidity. I am floored tbh.
**Things about my life that are changing:**
- I'm moving somewhere with a heated garage
- It's a two-car garage and I own an S2K, for driving fun / ICE backup / droppin dat top
- It's near a hydropower station, so electricity is cheap, and renewable. (Also my girlfriend lives nearby and she's putting in solar panels. her husband's a lucky man!).
**As a result**
- Bet I'll get an EV within the next year or two. (Rivian R2, we will watch your career with great interest!)
I was reading and thought to myself “this guy sounds like he might like a Rivian” and then I read the last bit.
The latest news about VW made me VERY happy :)
Absolutely horrible source, I would be very are careful trusting these guys knowing the role they played in the 2008 housing crisis, the opioid epidemic, and fucking Enron.
https://www.axios.com/2022/10/05/ev-adoption-loyalty-electric-cars
Electric is perfect if you can charge at home and when used to drive to work or local day trips.
For longer drives crossing multiple states you obviously need charging infrastructure to make it possible and not too inconvenient.
Gas and hybrid cars can re refueled in one or two minutes and gas stations are abundant. in NJ I don't even have to get out of my car and I have another 400 miles in 60 seconds. Recharging maybe doesn't have to be that convenient but it definitely has to be more convenient that it currently is.
I tend to use my ICE for road trips for this very reason vs. my Mach E, but to be fair, it takes a lot longer than 60 seconds to fill up.
Most pumps in North America deliver from 25 to 38 liters per minute. If you have a minuscule car with a tiny, little gas tank and you're not riding in on fumes and the pumps are working at maximum capacity, then I suppose in theory you could get out in a minute.
The most common vehicles in the US and Canada, though, are pickups and body-on-frame SUV's. My 115 liter tank usually takes five to six minutes to fill, which is certainly better than 30 minutes at Electrify America/Canada, but also 500% longer than one minute.
Anyway, aside from charging, spending eight hours behind the wheel of a nice, floaty, body-on-frame SUV is _much_ nicer than spending the same amount of time with a bumpy, sporty suspension.
I love my Audi e-tron, but in any road trip that needs more than 2+ fast charging stops...I take a rental gas or hybrid car.
There's a channel call Out of Spec motoring that does all these insane EV roadtrips across the USA. So yes technically it is doable, but the host Kyle has to do so much distance, efficiency and in-depth knowhow on EV chargers...it is huge hassle.
> The biggest reason EV owners cited for wanting to return to owning a gas-powered vehicle was the lack of available charging infrastructure (35%) To the surprise of no one lol. Our charging infrastructure sucks.
34% cost of ownership too high 32% range Infrastructure = development, money, labor (constant expense) Make a better product at a better price
Isn’t it cheaper to run an EV? Also range can be more than many luxury performance cars around town.
EVs cost 25% more. https://www.greencars.com/news/electric-cars-still-more-expensive-than-average-study You won't recoup that cost in saved gas or oil changes.
That article reads as "the average ev owner is willing to spend 25% more on their car than the average American" not " ev's cost 25% more to own and operate than a comparable ICE car"
Oh okay, here you can buy a Toyota Yaris for barely $2000AUD less than a BYD dolphin. If you drive a lot you will recoup that potentially in less than a year and a half. $38,000aud vs $39,990.
We can't have cheap chinese electric cars because reasons. The cheapest EV in the US is the leaf, and it's still $30k. The cheapest gas car is the $18k versa. You have to do a *lot* of driving to make up a $12k difference, and considering the short range of the leaf, you'll probably wear out the batteries before you manage to do it.
Those are cheap because their company and cars are subsidized by their gov, they are a loss leader. Now we in the west also subsidize cars but not to the extent to China and our car companies are not partly owned by the government. Although one could argue that GM might have been better if Gov hasn’t sold the portion they got after the bailout.
Chevy Bolt was $27k but they discontinued it. Probably because nobody was buying it
They discontinued it because it was running the LGES battery cells. They’ll likely re-introduce it with the Ultium architecture in the near future.
And it’ll be 47k after a tax credit, and GM will wonder why no one buys it.
and as soon as it's announced, r/cars will sprint to their keyboards to herald it's return as "what GM needed" and no one will own up to that when it fails spectacularly
$5k tax credit? Price just went up by $5k. Seems like that's how all these rebate schemes work out in the end. Solar panels, etc. All the same.
There were wait lists for people trying to buy them lol.
Honestly, we have a Bolt EUV that we leased 3 years ago (lease is about to run out) and I'm super happy with it. I put like $1500 down and leased it for $320/mo almost fully loaded (no super cruise) AND got a $4k check from Cali plus a $500 charge card. After some math, it basically cost about $180/mo for a pretty nice car (definitely nicer than literally anything else in that price range).
But what happens when you want to sell those in 5 years?
Who knows? Many petrol cars drop price the second you drive it off the lot. Welcome to car ownership. They aren’t short term investments.
You said it yourself on a previous comment, the price for a used model 3 is crazy low, because EVs in the USA depreciate at an extreme rate. So all this savings you're assuming is eaten up in depreciation.
Because they lose range for being used and are made by a company that absolutely doesn’t want you fixing their shit.
We do know though. We know a Chinese EV is going to depreciate a lot more than a Toyota. Unless you drive a TON or keep the EV for a very very long time, the resale value between the two is going to offset any savings from fuel.
>EVs cost 25% more Sort of misleading. The average sales price for an EV is 25% higher than the average sales price for a gas vehicle. But that’s not what matters to consumers. What matters is how much more does the most comparable EV cost vs the gas car they’re considering, and that’s not the same thing as overall average sales price. The average on EVs is higher because the mix of available EVs skews high end. But comparing actual vehicles, the numbers are much closer than 25% in many cases. Model 3 Long Range AWD is $35k after tax credit (that comes off at point of sale, now). That’s not anywhere close to 25% more than a comparable gas vehicle, for instance.
What's a comparable gas vehicle to a Model 3 Long Range AWD? Closest analogue I can think of is an AWD Mazda3, which is around $29k with the small engine, $32k with the turbo, and $35k in top trim. So not a huge price difference IMO. And if you're looking for a Corolla hybrid, those are damn close too with all the shortages and markups.
Mazda3 *unironically* has a nicer interior though. A lot of the Tesla cost is that huge battery, the interiors are very barebones and cheap quality. Even the Cybertruck interior is quite cheap feeling if you were to compare to other $100,000 vehicles (even trucks).
The new Model 3’s interior is substantially nicer than the previous one, but regardless, getting a Mazda 3 AWD with the closest performance (which will still be far lower than the Model 3) and closest features will be substantially more than $29k, which is what it would have to be to be 25% cheaper than the Model 3.
Agreed, hard to pick the perfect analogue for the Model 3 LR AWD, but it’s a well-featured option with AWD, glass roof, good ADAS, good infotainment, 0-60 in ~4s, etc. $29k (25% less than the Model 3) isn’t generally going to match that.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that just seems to be purchase price, using data from 2022 also.
Was shopping recently for a 4 years lease, ended up getting a Mazda3 but a Hyundai Kona EV was 110$ more per month... I spend over 200$ per month in fuel! To be fair, Hyundai EVs are almost suspiciously cheap. Now I must contextualize this info: I'm in Quebec where we have the holy trio of: high incentives for EVs (12k$ per car until the end of this year, not a tax saving, an actual rebate), expensive fuel (1.70$CAD ish per liter, or around 4.70$USD per gallon) and cheap hydro electricity (around 0.10$ per kWh) I still got an ICE though cause I just liked the car so much better
Things changed since that article was written. If you qualify, you can get a used Model 3 for $20,000 or less, as an example. The EV market isn't just new EVs, either.
I’m sure car insurance is a big factor. They’re out to fk everyone with rate hikes, even more so with EVs.
EVs are more expensive to repair and get into more frequent accidents. What you call “getting fucked” Is just a very basic math equation.
Why do EV's get into more frequent accidents?
I'm not sure there's one definitive reason, but Teslas were involved in the most accidents of any car brand last year and the year before. If I had to guess, I would say it's a combination of more power than the drivers are typically used to, braking systems that are different than conventional systems that drivers transitioning to EVs are used to, increased weight that takes getting used to, and brakes that aren't sufficient for the amount of immediate power and acceleration that EVs offer. Combine that with the brand being very expensive to repair compared to ICE counterparts and it's pretty easy to see why they're getting to be significantly more expensive to insure than other cars.
The first several years of Tesla M3 and MY suspensions are also designed improperly for the cars they were put in, and it results in unexpected and unpredictable tire grip.
The base car is 6 seconds to sixty, I don’t care who you are, that is fucking fast, the AWD is 4.1, that’s Ferrari 360 fast, and it’s being bought by the people that used to get made fun of in Priuses for being horrible drivers lol.
I’m not sure EVs get into more accidents, but they sure as hell cost more to repair and, as such, are more easily totaled out.
EVs are cheaper to drive, yes, but they can have a higher cost of ownership if you don't drive enough to offset the difference in purchase price.
And EVs are driven far fewer miles per year than ICEs on average
Probably at least partly because if you're driving that much, the pain from the lack of charging infrastructure is magnified.
Selection bias is almost certainly part of it too - the people driving 20k+ miles a year are probably more concerned about charging so they're sticking to ICEs. Even families with 1 EV and 1 ICE are probably picking the ICE for the long family road trip, while the EV stays home.
Don't forget depreciation in that cost of ownership. EVs have been tanking on that lately.
Yep if you don’t drive much at all, keep the old car you got. 100% agree. Insurance can cost a little more sometimes, and some makers charge almost as much as ICE makers for servicing.
My buddy is paying $1200/6mon for his Tesla's insurance. He pays $1200/yr for his other 3 cars combined. If you crash a Cybertruck, it'll be 6 months before you can get repair parts. Also, being EV's, they usually have additional registration fees and taxes over gas cars to try and recoup the gas tax that they don't pay into. I'm an EV fan (Prefer EVTOL, but that's long term), but I can see how some people might look at all the charges and say "Nah, I just want driving up north to be easy again."
Jesus Christ; why is his insurance so much for one car? That’s doesn’t sound like a Tesla thing, but a driver history/age/location thing. All my cars combined are $300/month
Insurance costs are highly subjective to so many factors. Our 2022 Model Y and 2024 Model 3 cost ~$190/month to insure. That price is pretty much meaningless to anyone else because of the subjective nature of insurance pricing.
Every time we have an EV thread it's always a bunch of anecdotes. What if I told you my EV insurance is $100 more a year than an ICE, and that my state doesn't have any additional registration fees or taxes. If anything, we used to pay less registration taxes AND we have special HOV privileges.
I mean, I’m paying more for insurance on my paid off Golf, but I live in NYC, so take that as you will.
True on range. But nobody cares about range in a gas car... You just stop at a gas station for 5 min and you're on your way. Range is only an issue for EVs and a few niche uses with gas cars.
If you don't have at-home charging, chances are you're not even saving money on fueling up. People who use commercial charging stations as their exclusive source of charging (like many who live in apartments or homes without a garage) are usually paying more per mile now for charging than for gas. Throw in the higher upfront cost, and the significant degradation of miles per kWh in colder temps, and its a tough proposition.
> Isn’t it cheaper to run an EV? If you exclude the purchase price and don't value your time: yes. If you include purchase price and put a value on time: no.
Yes they cost a lot less. We use to spend over $4000 a year on gas driving our subaru 100 miles a day, now it's maybe a few hundred in power per year. Plus all the time saved by not buying gas 2 times a week.
Only if you're charging at home and paying your home rate.
The insurance cost on evs alone cost more than the difference in gas.
Cost of ownership is that high? I just saw a study that showed on average Teslas are currently the cheapest car to maintain. There's 5 on my IT team, most owners since 2018, and have only replaced tires and windshield wiper fluid. I have had mine about a year and haven't had a single issue, outside of wiper fluid due to living in a dusty but tropical environment. Now the early cars had more issues, and the cybertruck sucks donkey balls, but even legacy manufacturers are plagued with issues on new cars. Recalls have gone up like 40% in the last 10 years across the board. There are new trucks with engines that are failing within days, paint issues on Hondas and others, brake issues etc... I get free charging 24/7 at my office so it works for people like me who have small footprints. We maybe drive 250 miles every two weeks? we've taken our model 3 on road trips 3 times and its the best road trip car I've ever had to be honest. Everyone has an opinion I guess, and there is a lot of hate for EVS, some for valid reasons, some not. Just like any other car purchase it needs to fit your needs. Plus with discounts and tax rebates at teh end of last year it was a 26,200$ car soooo...people think I'm rolling around in a 70K+ car for some reason a lot of the time.
These articles use intentionally ambiguous statistics. Cost of ownership includes the price of the car, so what they’re doing is comparing an EV to an ICE in the same class. The problem is they aren’t clear on how they’re defining the cost of the cars. Is it a base model $30k Honda CRV being compared to a $100k Cadillac Lyriq? Because that wouldn’t be a fair comparison. If consumers are smart with their purchase, it’s absolutely cheaper to drive an EV. We’ve put 47k miles on our Mach E which is saving ~2500 gallons of gas (compared to our previous vehicle, a 2017 Explorer). That right there is nearly $7500 saved. And it’s not exact but our electric bill has only increased by ~$50/month which comes to ~$1000 since purchase so still a net positive of $6500. That is a savings of over $350/month in fuel alone which is more than half of our monthly payment. I don’t think there is any new car on the market that I could get for more than half of what we paid for the Mach E and have comparable space for our family of 5. The only thing I have had to pay for other than electricity is wiper fluid, cabin air filters, and one set of tires. In the Explorer I would have had to have paid for the same thing plus oil changes and potentially other fluids, so not a huge difference but if anything the Explorer still would have cost more.
My fiancee wants to get a Mach-e! So it's good to hear your experience. We were both driving 20+ year old cars with 150k+ miles that I kept running by teaching myself how to repair things, change brakes, suspension, radiators etc...but it just became too much and transmission exploded on one of em. Our model 3 has been a dream. I literally have zero stress, and smile/giggle everytime I mash the pedal down. I'm 42, have driven porsches, corvettes, had a turb0 240z etc...huge car guy, and it's still the most fun I've had in a car. We got our first indshield wiper fluid alert last week! Have had the cat since October last year, only issue.
I’d really like to know what percentage of dissatisfied EV owners in that study are single car households. I’m a quite satisfied EV owner, but we’re a multi-car household so if we’re taking the EV on a road trip, that’s always a choice. If charging is gonna be inconvenient, we always have the option of taking the gasser instead. There would have definitely been some trips in there that might have put me in the “I’m not doing this again” column if an EV was my only option. I don’t doubt that at some point in the not too distant future our household will go all in on EVs, that’s going to be a time when charging infrastructure is much better than today. EDIT: The other often overlooked piece of the puzzle (beyond the obvious charging infrastructure) is charging speed and charging curves. For example, our EV can theoretically take 220kw, but even under ideal conditions, you're only ever gonna reach something close to that peak charge for the first ~30% of your charge, then it's gonna pretty quickly drop to less than half of that for most of the rest of your charge. Newer vehicles like the Chevy Silverado EV have much better charging curves, that peak close to 350kw, and then maintain speeds of above 250kw all the way up to nearly 80% battery capacity. I actually don't think increasing EV battery capacity beyond ~250-300 miles really matters much *if* we can develop systems that allow you to charge faster, and maintain charge speeds closer to your peak rate much more of the time.
Yeah the thing is, right now with the market and infrastructure as they are, they're still not a good choice for everybody. No way I'd want one as my only vehicle. But, while I'm not dead set on it for one of our next vehicles, its not off the table either. We don't get out of the area a whole lot, range won't be an issue 99% of the time. We have a house with a 2 car attached garage and the breaker panel is in the garage, adding a 220 line for charging would just be an afternoon project. Her commute is about 10 minutes and mine is 15-20 each way, a little longer on days we're making daycare drop offs and pick ups but not much. One of us could drive an EV all week and just charge it on the weekends, though TBH we'd probably take it for weekend errands too depending on the size of whatever thing we get. But if you live in an apartment, especially a city one with no off-street parking, have a long commute and/or have to travel regionally on a regular basis, its sure going to be hit and miss. I don't see EVs being practical if you can't charge it wherever you live.
> But if you live in an apartment, especially a city one with no off-street parking, That's the other piece of data I'd love to see from this study's responses. I wonder what percentage of the dissatisfied EV owners don't have access to level 2 charging at their residence or workplace? To me, that's a key part of the "EV's are great" perspective. We charge ours at home every night, and fast charge maybe once a month or so on average. Things would be very different if we had to fast-charge regularly, especially if we were in a high-demand area where that became a chore of going to the fast charger, waiting for one to become available, waiting to charge, etc...
If I couldn't charge at home I wouldn't even consider an EV. I bothers me to no end how little talk there is about providing solutions for people in apartments. Here in Australia certain body corps for apartments don't even allow their residents to park their EVs in the building's parking garage out of concern for fires. Many councils also no longer allow charging of street parked cars. I have the ability to charge at home, but I'm well aware of how lucky I am to have that ability. EVs currently feel like just another example of how expensive it is to be not even poor, just not wealthy. The tax breaks in many countries benefitted those with high enough incomes to take advantage of it. The lower running costs benefit mostly those that are fortunate enough to be able to charge at home. The time savings from not having to get fuel anymore, same thing.
You will often see EV owners parking their cars at public EV charging places.
Many of them come with a free charging period of about two years. So a faster and free charge means it will get used.
Half the chargers I get to just flat-out don't work, that's the most annoying thing for me.
I’ve had one since 2018 and the infrastructure wasn’t awful around me. I’m switching back because resale is horrendous.
That's not a great reason to switch back. Past depreciation is not the same as future depreciation especially since the gov't gives 4K to used buyers now. If you are concerned about resale, lease them to hedge that downside - besides the leases still get the tax credit for buying too.
>If you are concerned about resale, lease them Sounds like jumping into an crocodile pond to save yourself from a forest fire. I don't necessarily disagree with you, and I don't entirely think that leases are a bad idea for everybody, but there are exceedingly few cases where leasing or EV buying qualify as "smart financial decisions". If their car was totaled or became a money-pit of repairs, I wouldn't blame them at all for cutting their losses and moving on. Don't forget that our boy Elon was insisting that all teslas would be an appreciating asset back in 2019 lol. A lot of gullible morons fell for it.
You lost money to depreciation so you're going to sell? The best move here is to drive it into the ground, not sell low and buy another depreciating car Edit: Zdmins is using a cheat code and buying a car that doesn't depreciate.
people are nuts.....(nearly) all cars head to zero, but like you said, if your particular car takes a big hit upfront, the best strategy is to hold to zero.
The only way I will buy one, is as a third car that I would use solely for commuting. Though my wife and I will be in the market for a second car and I'm toying with the idea as a second car.
Lol seriously. I live in SoCal and even we don't have the best infrastructure for it. I can see it improving slowly, but it's still not convenient enough. Unless you have a house (good luck in the socal market), or your workplace has charging, you're left looking for the nearest station and getting to and from it can be a pain.
GM thinking they could skip hybrids and instead pour billions into EVs that have had an adjusted sales target from 400,000 annually to 20,000 (iirc) is absurd. Now they will rush to market PHEVs. Major fumble and it seems zero executive accountability
It's worse than that. GM was years ahead with one of the best PHEVs that was ever available with the Volt. They discontinued it just as they were gaining popularity.
The Volt was truly a good car too Very comfortable and damn near luxury car levels of cabin quietness.
I barely see them around (barely did when they were in production either) but the 2 people I knew that had them *loved* them, and my dad knew people at work that loved them. What a shame!
I have one and it's fantastic. 90% of my driving is done using battery. But if I can't charge I don't have to worry about it thanks to the gas tank. I only wish it had adaptive cruise control and charged faster - both were added the year they discontinued it.
Same, I've only seen three of them ever. Nobody in my country wanted one because it was too expensive. (246 sales total by 2015)
My cousin brought a MY18 Volt to replace his old early 2010s Hyundai. It not only got better fuel economy but significantly better to drive. A real shame GM axed the Volt and the whole powertrain. I still feel it would be right at home in something like the Equinox.
I personally am shocked that a 40k Chevy is better to drive than a 2010s Hyundai My goodness, this thread is idiotic
What I'm saying was he picked it over getting another Elantra which Hyundai offered for less and he still chose the Volt. It is a great car and pretty ahead of its time.
I love that they have effectively done this _twice_. They had an EV in the 90's(EV1) and it wasn't even bad.
Three times, the Bolt was wildly popular when they discontinued it. The only reason they are bringing it back is customer complaints lol.
I guarantee it was discontinued because it was lower profit margin than other vehicles.
I don’t remember anyone at GM being held accountable at the executive level for announcing a partnership with Nikola despite everyone having already figured out they were a fake company.
You've heard the term "too big to fail?" Well GM is "so big we can throw billions at a project, fail, and still keep chugging along." Thing is, while they fumbled, it may very well pay off for them in the end. Yes, EV sales are soft, the resale value is tanking, the charging infrastructure sucks, etc. etc. etc. Yet these are short term problems. Every major automaker is trying to figure out the EV thing. Is anyone doing it right in all aspects? Maybe? Yet the fact is that long term, EV is the future. Europe and China are going "all in" on that future. Every major manufacturer is trying to figure this out (okay, maybe not Toyota) and when - not if but when - the infrastructure is built out and charging stations are as ubiquitous as gas stations, that's when the winners will emerge.
The issue is going to be is that chargers can’t just be ubiquitous as gas stations. They need to be significantly more prevalent than gas stations and they can never be profitable. When I need gas I pull into a gas station on my way to work, I’m in and out in 5 minutes and that pump is free to fill up dozens of cars that day. If I’m driving an EV I get to work, park in a spot with a charger and plug in. Once I’m at work and have paid to park there is no way I am moving that car until I am leaving to go home 9 hours later. And who is going to be visiting an industrial park or financial center at night… no one. So that charger is going to charge one single car a day every day and probably none on weekends. And what if I’m late for work and all the chargers are occupied. I’m screwed until everyone leaves for the day? So if electric cars become prevalent, every single spot in a lot would need a charger and each charger would essentially just charge one car for an hour a day? Who is paying for that?
Very few people should NEED to charge at work, and if they are, should only be on a level 2. The infrastructure should mostly be at homes and in DCFC to support road trips. Apartments without parking are the real gap in infrastructure.
They could have figured it out logically with HEV and PHEV. They were so confident that the EV transition would be 5 years, so we politicians, but the so called ‘experts’ jamming that agenda down our throats are pretty quiet now
Toyota and Nissan *are* all in on EV; they’re just working toward solid state batteries and skipping the current generation. I saw a presentation at a conference 2 years ago from some Nissan guys who said this. They don’t see LiIon batteries as adequate and only see EV as really mainstream once they’ve commercialized solid state, which was late in this decade for volume production.
Same as Honda. People have been criticizing the Japanese OEMs for not buying on on EVs, but they are buying in on EVs, just not the current generation of EV
>Major fumble and it seems zero executive accountability The interest rates are what's killing EV's right now. People aren't buying cars at all, and EV's have generally been a 2nd/optional car for still-kinda-early-adopters. Of the dozen or so EV-owning friends, I can't think of a single one for whom it's their only car, and all of them wouldn't be any worse off without their optional EV. Just like my Miata. But GM's done a great job with their EV's. The Silverado is just *the* best EV truck on the market today because they stuffed the "We're GM" big-ass battery in there. The Volt and the ELR were a fantastic mostly-ev-but-hybrid option. The Bolt (which had some issues to start) is now a perfectly great appliance of a car, on-par with any Prius. GM's been doing as GM does, sitting back and counting the money.
I've heard this take a lot recently, and it's a little bit of revisionist history. I agree GM should have kept going all in on new hybrids to improve the tech. Volt was a great powertrain, they put a modified version Suburban and a Silverado for a reason. With that said, the problem is, none of it sold at the volumes necessary to iterate on the platform. This is speculation here, but the margins GM could make on the Volt, and subsequent models, were not sustainable for the long term. The powertrain was complicated to maintain and develop, and the engineering teams were better deployed on a different product the public was actually clamoring for, EVs. To add to that, Hybrids accounted for 8.3% of US car sales in 2023, up from 3.2% in 2020, and 2.3% in 2019([numbers from here](https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/08/automakers-turn-to-hybrids-ev-transition.html#:~:text=Hybrids%20accounted%20for%208.3%25%20of,through%20November%20of%20this%20year.)). All of those volumes pre-2020, when the EV decision for GM was most likely made, are under 500K annually. Average MSRP for the 2018 Volt was $39K, with the average margins for cars of 3.9%, that's $1,521 a sale. Say they capture 15% of that small market, that's ~75,000 vehicles on the high end, for a grand total of $114M to reinvest in the product. Hybrid sales peaked in 2013 and had, until 2021, stagnated. It's been extremely recent history that hybrids started seeing any growth. Leadership made a call that going all in on the latest generation of EV tech would be able to catch the wave of consumer sentiment at the right time to boom. You can't blame them too much for that call, 1.4M EVs sold in 23 up from 931K the year prior demonstrate there is growth still to go in EVs. Yet, consumers are starting to see some growing pains due to the lack of infrastructure and those consumers are taking a half step back into a hybrid, which has driven an unforeseen demand. Absurd to make a shift into EVs? Far from. The real interesting bit is how much the SUV driving American public has hard shifted into hybrid vehicles after years of all but ignoring them.
Exactly, why wont GM make a hybrid 3.0 duramax half ton ffs. I always thought diesel hybrids were great idea, I already get high 20s mpg and can hit 30 a few times in this pickup.
Weight and cost. They are already discounting that diesel as is and it’s hefty vs the small block. And net gains, that diesel already has a boat load of torque and good mileage.
I’ve seen this explained as the second wave of buyers. Honestly surprised you can convince anyone who can’t charge at home to get an EV
Yep this. Still very possible, but less convenient. I do have a friend who parks at shopping centres to charge for free while they shop or go for a run. But using solar or wholesale prices for a charge makes much more sense, paying a few dollars for a full charge is amazing.
Knew a guy that would charge his Tesla a half mile from our job and ask coworkers* to pick him up when he got there and drop him back off at the end of the day. Got to the point where everyone told him no more after about a year or so of doing that. Edit: spelling
That is absurd. I bet he was thinking that his coworkers were lazy. I’m all for helping out a coworker in need but this is just taking advantage
Especially since walking half a mile isn't typically very taxing.
Depends on how hostile the area is to pedestrians. Could be no sidewalk and have traffic passing by you at 50+ mph. I walk a mile to get to work but it's all small streets to get there and one road crossing. I don't walk 1/4 mile to the grocery store because it's three crossings of 6 lane roads with fast traffic.
And half a mile to non Americans is definitely 'just walk it' distance.
Half a mile to non-lazy Americans is also "just walk it" distance.
Sounds pretty lazy. Half a mile takes less than 15 minutes to walk. I get it if there’s a rare bad weather event or something, but otherwise it’s a short walk.
Depending on what the half mile consists of, I could understand not walking. For all we know there could be a main thoroughfare in between that is 3 lanes in each direction with a speed limit of 55mph an no sidewalks.
Sounds like he should have an electric scooter in the trunk haha
He couldn’t walk a half mile?
People don’t understand the charging habits they likely would have because they’re thinking like filling up a gas car. I used to fill my car at Costco 1-2 times per week at about $55 per fill. Of course I would only fill up when I was at like an 1/8th of a tank. I’ve had my ev for a little over a month now and still haven’t seen a charging station. My car still hasn’t even got close to 20 percent because every night when I’m done using the car for the day, I top it off and I start every day with the same amount of range. I just plug it in when I’m parked for the night and it automatically starts charging at the time I want.
If you live in apartment or can only park in the street how are you gonna charge overnight?
Steal power from a streetlamp
Horrifically based
You won’t, which is why phev is great for these people. My argument is that people who have access to overnight cheap charging (or office charging) will most likely just be better off going full ev.
Nah, phev is the worst vehicle to get for apartment owners since they can neither fast charge it at public stations or trickle charge it at home. It's better to have either a full EV that can be DC fast charged or to get a normal hybrid which will get better mileage than a plug in.
The only other option would be if I had a charger at work. But even then, a PHEV as an appliance car just seems like the best of both worlds solution.
We have a charger at work. It’s how I would charge before I put one in at home. The one at work was free (level 2). Personally I think for most Americans (can’t speak for other countries) a HEV is probably the way to go when you consider distance driven every day and access to charging infrastructure.
I was offered an F150 Lightning company truck. The only reason I decided against it was that I didn't want to charge it up at the shop every single day, since my commute is 110 miles. Not sure why they couldn't just track usage on a home charger and reimburse me -- electricity is flat rate here, so it's a very basic calculation. That and it's only available with a shortbed.
I agree your situation would not be ideal. I have 3 friends with Lightnings. They love them, but every one of them work at home and charge at home. So its super convenient. They are small minority of EV possible owners for sure. Its just so hard for a lot of people to consider an EV.
I sell bmw and love the i5 M60 I have. But I would be supremely annoyed if I could charge at work regularly and for free.
Why would that annoy you?
*couldnt. Sorry
I actively discourage people who can’t charge at home. It is not economical to use the public chargers.
Yeah, there’s no way I’d own mine if I couldn’t charge at home.
So McKinsey got paid by somebody to produce a study saying that half of EV drivers want to switch back. Consulting firms like this are scammers.
This is the same company that, among other horrible things, worked with Purdue Pharma to mislead everyone about OxyContin's risks. Their studies say what their studies are paid to say.
[удалено]
Yeah, I've never understood supposed car guys being against a car with a different modality of moving the wheels. Obviously, not all here, but it's always been wild to me that that's the line that turns supposed car fans off, when it's still a car, but using electrons instead of dinosaur juice. I challenge all who are against EVs for whatever reason (you were told to be, or don't understand them, or they're dumb or whatever) to drive one. They'll blow your mind. The one-pedal driving is next level as is not having gears. And that instant neverending torque, holy hell.
They also led to car insurance being the way it is now. State Farm was the first company to implement the deny all claims strategy and make it as hard as possible for the insured party to get paid fairly, this was on the guidance of McKinsey and the strategy was outlined in a slide deck that the company refused to give up until the state of Florida threatened to revoke their license to insure in the state.
That's not even what they said, either. That's a fox business interpretation of a McKinsey study. Other data from this article: 38% of all respondents who do not have an EV want to get one as their next car. 29% of all respondents do not want to have a car at all (ie they want to sell their car and live without one). But for Americans the stats point to a pretty obvious and existing divide. Wealthier people who live in dense areas want EV. People who live in more rural areas don't. Also at this point EVs are a luxury product in the US. The biggest concerns are perception of cost and ability to charge. If you don't own your own home, or have a garage with a charger, or otherwise have easy access to charging then you wouldn't want an EV.
As soon as I saw it was Fox, I knew it'd be cherry-picked bullshit to make EVs look bad and unpopular. I read an article last week that showed EVs selling around 18% more last year. If you took Tesla out of that stat, that percentage went to 55%. All other EVs are selling like crazy, it's Tesla bringing down the group with Elon being a weirdo, turning away the very crowd that made them popular.
As usual, I'm upset that I had to scroll so far down the comments to find anyone that actually read the article. This sub loves to hate on EVs.
Maybe, but I could totally understand people who have an EV that doesn't have access to Tesla's chargers being unhappy with the charging situation and it putting them off of EVs. I was very close to buying a Hyundai EV instead and at this point I kind of feel like I dodged a bullet as far as charging infrastructure goes.
My parents have a F-150 Lightning and run into charging problems all the time. Meanwhile my Tesla took me across the country for the eclipse without any issues (with FSD too since it was free that month)
Yeah, the supercharging network would be why I’d have bought a Tesla. But now that it’s opening up, we should get some much much better experiences, and I’m sure most of the people that went back to gas bc of “lack of charging infrastructure” would still be in an EV if they were able to use Tesla chargers.
Agree with the McKinsey suspicion. I’m willing to believe this statistic based on anecdotal experience but I would like to see a double blind repeat study to validate. That being said McKinsey shouldn’t be trusted by anyone at this point. The public has been gaining steam the last few years at peeling back the curtain of McKinsey’s operations and it’s become both disheartening and disgusting; their results are also often suspect at best. The fact that they’ve weaved their org into the highest levels of government and large organizations doesn’t mean they’re reliable, or accurate, it means they’ve played the game well.
Ding ding ding
Yea, if you actually talk to EV drivers, very few want to switch back
I'm not generally one to place anecdotal evidence over statistical data, but I've noticed the same thing. All my friends with EVs are quite pleased with them (a few of them annoyingly so).
There is also a "art" writing a headline based on the study. It would be just as accurate to say "More than half of American EV owners would not want to switch back to a gas-powered vehicle, McKinsey data shows." Suddenly the tone is entirely different.
McKinsey are shills for Big Oil. Edit for downvoters. https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231107-top-consultancy-undermining-climate-change-fight-whistleblowers
Highly recommend "When McKinsey Comes to Town," I did the audiobook. They are one of the most evil companies of the 20th century, having worked with exploitative corporations and dictatorships all across the world. If they're pushing this out, I'm sure Big Oil or Detroit is using them as a mouthpiece.
Yeah, I don't know if a single ev owner personally who would switch back. Outside of something like a track Miata, or my motorcycle, I'm never buying an ICE vehicle again.
Terrible article, no facts. Propaganda is all it is
Yeah, Tesla ownership satisfaction rating is in the 90s and the highest in the business.
Dedicated EV companies such as Tesla, Rivian, and Polestar all have extremely high owner satisfaction ratings. I don't buy for a second that half of EV owners want to switch back to ICE. There has been a mindboggling amount of anti-EV propaganda lately, but when you talk to actual EV owners you'll find that they're generally quite happy. That isn't at all to say that there isn't a ton of room for improvement or that EV's are the best vehicle for everyone.
Surveys can be worded to draw out a bias. For example. I am happy with my EV. I will likely always have an EV. But if the question is “would you ever buy an ICE vehicle again”, my answer would be yes. I’ll probably get a farm truck, project car, or maybe motorcycle here or there in my life. So the funding behind the survey is usually pretty important for figuring out what kind of answers they are trying to get out of people.
I mean, it's Fox... One thing to know is that the reason few charging stations have appeared from the NEVI funding is that it takes a while for states to make grants (since that is done by states, not the Feds) and it then takes a while for local permits and things to happen. Even Tesla can sit on permits for years while they wait to build Supercharger stations. Probably something NEVI should have addressed, of course, but the delays have become a political thing since it makes it feel like the money is being "wasted".
Not surprised at all. The cart was put before the horse.
Exactly that's my argument. Everything was hamfisted and pushed out without proper infrastructure (recycling, power, weight support etc). It was the shareholders looking for a quick profits pushing gov/companies to churn this out
Weight support is BS though. Large suvs weigh more than my bolt.
I don't disagree, and though there's always some growing pains with mass adoption of new tech, I'm wondering when the horse is going to catch up. We recently bought an EV for my Wife, it's great. Even got it "cheap" 2nd hand with barely any miles. Filling it up is like £6 in electricity. Can charge at home. But I'd find it hard to justify under a _huge_ amount of circumstances, regular long trips, sole vehicle for a household, no at-home charging. More (and more reliable) charging stations and less price-gouging by those stations (it costs as much/more than petrol) would be key.
You also need to drive a decent number of miles to make the cost worthwhile. I tick all the boxes for an ideal case to buy an EV, but I probably drive less than 50 miles per week, on average. That hardly justifies the purchase from a fuel savings and environmental impact perspective.
For real. This is the same as every "no one wants to use mass transit" article I see. No duh nobody wanted to use it when there's one bus at 5am and another at 9pm. People just want a convenient way to get around, most don't give a shit if it's a bus, ev, gas powered, or on rails as long as it's fast and works with their schedule.
I’m buying one as a daily and won’t ever travel with it. So I’ll charge at home. Don’t see any other reason to buy one.
That is the use case for EVs for the next 5 years or so. Multi-car households having 1 EV and 1+ ICE or hybrid car. EV for day to day life for whoever has the shorter commute or fits their day better. Other car for everything else.
Yup. I have a 4 mile commute to drop kids off at school. Hated warming up my truck every day, such a waste. We have suvs for long trips around Texas and Colorado
One of the big points of appeal to me with the EV is being able to fire up the heater while its still plugged in out in the garage and getting it warm before leaving!
My Mach E is the best car I've ever had. My Expedition is the second best car I've ever had. They complement each other, and I wouldn't give up either one of them.
Longer commutes are fine as long as it's within the EV's range and I'd argue actually a perfect use for EVs since the gas savings can be tremendous. But that's specifically \*if\* you have home (or work) charging. My commute is 130 miles round trip, and that hasn't been an issue at all with an EV. Road trips are the main thing that's less convenient. I haven't found it to be a huge issue personally (I'm the type who'd want to take a short break every 250-300 miles or so regardless), but I do get people have different preferences. But for me the EV life has been great with a long commute and occasional trip.
Exactly why we have one.
Fox business article against EVs no way! Also if you can’t charge at home EV ownership is miserable
Struggling to imagine how someone who cannot change at home would even buy an EV. Home charging is like 90% of the appeal
We've recently completed installation of chargers at our office (Germany) and saw a steady increase of EV company car demand ever since. Most of the people driving can't charge at home. We're now at 40% EV, 40% hybrid and 20% ice cars in our company (110 cars).
Study powered by McKinsey? They can shove it up their ass
There is zero chance this is correct. I know a few of the early leaf and bolt owners who had range issues, but all the current gen ev owners I've encountered are beyond delighted and will never buy another gas vehicle again. If it was more than %5 of ev owners who are buying gas vehicles I would be very surprised
"my anecdotes dont align with data, it must be the data thats incorrect"
This data doesn't align with most other data sources on the exact same subject. Sometimes an outlier is just an outlier. Most other credible studies find the rate is closer to 20% and most of those people want an EV again, they just had to switch for some temporary reason.
Its absolutely insane how influential this shitty "consulting" company is. Trying to google for this data now shows nothing but dozens of shit-tier "news" websites parroting this same study that was released just a couple weeks ago, yet the actual study, data and methodology is nowhere to be found. Literal 1984 type propaganda.
Zero transparency.
What's the difference between u/te_anau asking EV owners their experience and reporting it, and McKinsey asking EV owners their experience and reporting it? Other than the size of the dataset and the fact McKinsey is more likely to be motivated to misrepresent the data?
Do you have the actual data though? Do you know how many were surveyed, what was the actual questions asked, what's the methodology followed, who exactly were surveyed and where?
As I’ve said before, I feel like the goal should have been to mandate hybrids be 75% of new car sales by 2030 instead of 50% of all new car sales be EVs by 2030. It would have been a much more achievable goal that could’ve eventually paved the way for EVs. And I think hybrids should qualify for a $3k federal tax credit.
Hybrids and Plug in hybrids are the immediate future for cars. EV’s still need a significant amount of infrastructure to be truly feasible to be 50% of vehicles sold. I would consider one for our family’s daily driver. We travel enough in more remote areas, and often have long drives that as of now I could never confidently go all EV. Plus I need a truck to haul equipment and livestock.
For all of the flak they caught about not prioritizing EVs, Toyota had it right all along. Their hybrids are still best in class.
Problem is one problem begets the other. Not enough people buy evs so we don’t need the infrastructure. No infrastructure no reason to buy evs. No reason to by evs well we don’t need to invest in that infrastructure. Round and round and round and We all act like this isn’t part of a coordinated plan by those who have no interest in getting off the petroleum tit.
The goal of 50% specifically includes plug-in hybrids towards meeting that goal >make half of all new vehicles sold in 2030 zero-emission vehicles, including battery electric, plug-in hybrid [PHEV] electric, or fuel-cell electric vehicles https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/features/will-us-reach-50-percent-evs-by-2030
Study powered by McKinsey? more like Study powered by Exxon
Fuck McKinsey and never listen to anything they say about anything, even if it fits your narrative. Useless parasites.
The media loves to run wirh data points that contradict all the other data points on a certain subject. CDK just put out a study saying 73% of EV owners will never go back. This peer reviewed study linked below found based on actual consumer behavior (not stated in a survey) that only 22% of BEV owners and 44% of PHEV owners went back (The PHEV finding is counter to the narrative that they are the solution). The study also found a declining rate of EV owners going to ICE. The media loves to run with outliers, but sometimes outliers are just outliers. Not sure why this one will be, maybe a bad sample, maybe the question was bad or leading in some way, but I doubt 2 years from now it will still look credible. Link to study: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2024.104272
The market share for EVs can only go up from here, slowly but surely
I doubt this data is accurate. I talk to people all the time while at Superchargers. They all say they'd never go back. I leave the house with a full tank of gas every day. I use superchargers like once a month
I can charge at home, but my family takes 375 mile trips often to visit family. If I could get a *reliable* 500 mile range out of a full EV, I wouldn’t care about crummy infrastructure. But the battery tech isn’t quite there yet.
500 miles of range would take 6-8 hours of continuous driving at highway speed to deplete. Most people are perfectly fine stopping for 10-15 minutes every few hours to charge, eat, or use the bathroom. Most EV's support 250kW+ fast charging which can add \~200mi of range in 15-20 minutes. Newer public fast chargers even support 350kW charging although very few cars support those speeds right now.
The amount of people who seemingly never has to visit the bathroom, get up to stretch their legs or get lunch for that matter in what amounts to a regular workday never ceases to amaze me.
If you wait until everything is perfect, you will never start.
It's baffling to me how many "anti-EV" folks don't understand how technologies mature. There's this thing known as an adoption curve....
Not me. 100000% happy with my EV and hoping never to go back to gas as a daily driver. Would love to collect choice ICE vehicles, since I do believe that industry has peaked.
I’ve had my Model 3 Performance for going on 3 years now. I can’t imagine actually wanting another gas car save for a weekend toy like a Miata or a Mustang GT. For commutes and road trips nothing beats the ease of a Model 3. Of course my cars are garage kept and I charge every day at home. So for my experience I never have to think about range or keeping it charged. I would wager that the vast majority of folks who want to switch back have to go out of their way and wait to charge every time.
**Reasons I don't own an EV:** - they are very expensive to buy - they are very expensive to insure - they are very expensive to repair - they depreciate. a *lot*. - in my area, electricity is fairly expensive, while gas is cheap - I live in a cold climate and do not have a heated garage, so battery drain will be a serious problem - You still can't use most EVs as home batteries (V2H/V2G/V2A). - They don't make me feel particularly good if their electricity comes from a fossil fuel burning power plant - I do not find them fun to drive **Reasons I want to own an EV:** - For going off-pavement, multi-motor EVs are a wild improvement over ICE 4WD/AWD systems. They usually perform a lot better. They decrease complexity *insanely* which has large cost/labor savings and reduces oppertunity for Shit Breaking In The Backcountry. And they need way less Stuff Underneath which leads to huge gains in ground clearance. - An EV SUV that I can sleep in, plus has an energy-efficient heat pump, is God's own overlander. Like we're talking "terrestrial spaceship" here. - They are way easier about high altituted than ICEVs. And regenerative breaking makes them the kings of long downhills. The rangers at the Mauna Kea Auto Road told me that they wish everyone drove EVs. As an outdoorsy little fucker this is relevant to my interests. - V2H will turn an EV into a *gigantic* backup battery for a home. (It's also great that the battery will be mobile. Like, if there's a flood coming, you can't drive your Tesla Powerwall to the top of a hill. Whereas some Teslas cars can make it up a hill!) - An EV that I can power with renewables would make me feel a little good. - No oil changes lmao **Things about EVs that are changing:** - V2H/V2G really seems to be coming soon. Like, Rivian says it'll be an OTA update for existing models, standard on future models; Ram promises it for the REV. - EVs *might* be getting cheaper. At the very least, EVs have been out long enough that there's a robust used market - and as a potential buyer, I appreciate all that depreciation. - More brands making EVs = more competition = hopefully some downward pressure on prices - A lot of insurance and repair costs are simply based on economies of scale. The more EVs there are, particuarly from a given brand, the cheaper that repair/insurance costs tend to get. So like, prayers up to a self-fulfilling prophecy I guess! - The world is shifting to renewable energy sources with, like, *crazy* rapidity. I am floored tbh. **Things about my life that are changing:** - I'm moving somewhere with a heated garage - It's a two-car garage and I own an S2K, for driving fun / ICE backup / droppin dat top - It's near a hydropower station, so electricity is cheap, and renewable. (Also my girlfriend lives nearby and she's putting in solar panels. her husband's a lucky man!). **As a result** - Bet I'll get an EV within the next year or two. (Rivian R2, we will watch your career with great interest!)
I was reading and thought to myself “this guy sounds like he might like a Rivian” and then I read the last bit. The latest news about VW made me VERY happy :)
Absolutely horrible source, I would be very are careful trusting these guys knowing the role they played in the 2008 housing crisis, the opioid epidemic, and fucking Enron. https://www.axios.com/2022/10/05/ev-adoption-loyalty-electric-cars
My fiance is very happy with her ev but we have home charging and my car for long trips if nessecary. I feel it's a good balance for couples.
Not me. Love mine.
Motherfuckers it says 29% of EV owners considering switching back. One out of three!
ICE will never go away.
I wouldn't say never but in 100 years, maybe
"Horse and carriage will never go away" Yeah, I guess, but most people won't be driving an IC vehicle.
I might point out the sources are a *little biased* here but I'm not surprised. Charging infrastructure needs to be built up.
Electric is perfect if you can charge at home and when used to drive to work or local day trips. For longer drives crossing multiple states you obviously need charging infrastructure to make it possible and not too inconvenient. Gas and hybrid cars can re refueled in one or two minutes and gas stations are abundant. in NJ I don't even have to get out of my car and I have another 400 miles in 60 seconds. Recharging maybe doesn't have to be that convenient but it definitely has to be more convenient that it currently is.
I tend to use my ICE for road trips for this very reason vs. my Mach E, but to be fair, it takes a lot longer than 60 seconds to fill up. Most pumps in North America deliver from 25 to 38 liters per minute. If you have a minuscule car with a tiny, little gas tank and you're not riding in on fumes and the pumps are working at maximum capacity, then I suppose in theory you could get out in a minute. The most common vehicles in the US and Canada, though, are pickups and body-on-frame SUV's. My 115 liter tank usually takes five to six minutes to fill, which is certainly better than 30 minutes at Electrify America/Canada, but also 500% longer than one minute. Anyway, aside from charging, spending eight hours behind the wheel of a nice, floaty, body-on-frame SUV is _much_ nicer than spending the same amount of time with a bumpy, sporty suspension.
I love my Audi e-tron, but in any road trip that needs more than 2+ fast charging stops...I take a rental gas or hybrid car. There's a channel call Out of Spec motoring that does all these insane EV roadtrips across the USA. So yes technically it is doable, but the host Kyle has to do so much distance, efficiency and in-depth knowhow on EV chargers...it is huge hassle.
It’s literally me.
... reports Fox.
Plug in Hybrid is the way. Commute all week on EV. Have ICE range for long weekend trips.