Tesla is fast...

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 3:32:02 PM UTC+10, Flyguy wrote:

On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 8:53:50 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:
On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 10:50:38 PM UTC-4, rbowman wrote:
On 05/16/2022 08:30 AM, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 11:54:13 PM UTC+10, rbowman wrote:
On 05/16/2022 12:24 AM, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 3:25:13 PM UTC+10, rbowman wrote:
On 05/15/2022 02:22 PM, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:
On Sunday, 15 May 2022 at 00:04:22 UTC-7, Commander Kinsey wrote:

<snip>

> In your dreams. Batteries die of old age, but EVs haven\'t been around long enough to develop good statistics on that. One thing is certain: it will be uneconomical to replace the battery of an old EV (the battery costs more than the value of the car).

Flyguy is an idiot. Observing how long batteries last in actual use may be the most reliable way of working out battery life, but it\'s not much use when the technology is changing rapidly. Accelerated aging is widely used when you want find how long a novel battery design is likely to last in actual use.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[John Doe]

Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

RichD wrote:
Flyguy wrote:

And lithium mining is very environmentally unfriendly - when the tree
huggers find this out their love affair with electric cars will wain.
And, then, there is the issue of WHERE does the electricity come
from? Much of it is by burning coal.

They want to cover the Mojave desert with solar panels.

um, how\'s that going to affect the earth\'s albedo? The solar energy
currently bounced out to Mars, is going to stay earthbound.... drive
your car and coffeemaker... and at the end of the day... global
warming, hello!

Interesting point. Doesn\'t apply to something like solar roofing panels,
since that heat goes into the surrounding area if the sunlight isn\'t
converted into electricity. Reflective roofing panels would be rough on
aircraft.

The fourth law of thermodynamics: in the long run, energy efficiency
is zero, everything thermalizes -

Who exactly is \"they\"? Where did you see this about covering the Mojave
desert with solar panels?

I will say that it is clear you don\'t understand what global warming is
about. It has nothing to do with the efficiency of the energy
conversions required to provide power. It is about the CO2 released in
the process.

Trees consume CO2. The more CO2, the more trees. More trees for you to hug.

 

[rbowman]

On 05/16/2022 08:30 AM, Anthony William Sloman wrote:

On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 11:54:13 PM UTC+10, rbowman wrote:
On 05/16/2022 12:24 AM, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 3:25:13 PM UTC+10, rbowman wrote:
On 05/15/2022 02:22 PM, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:
On Sunday, 15 May 2022 at 00:04:22 UTC-7, Commander Kinsey wrote:
...
Then there is the issue that you are only talking about purchase price, not the life cycle cost. That\'s the talk of an ignoramus.
If you want to go that route, electric cars have that annoying habit of needing a new battery.

No they don\'t - no more than conventional cars need new engines.

My 1986 F150 doesn\'t need a new engine. Do you really think a battery is going to last 36 years?

How may miles have you put on it? If you had only bought it because you had a very small penis, it might not have done very many at all.

You seem to have quite the interest in penises.

Scarcely. It\'s a trite and cliched reaction to any ostentatiously bulky vehicle.

About 250,000 miles since you asked. It\'s been to all four corners of the continental US and a hell of a lot of places in between.

Why did you need an ostentatiously bulky vehicle to do that?

http://americanclassicscars.com/uploads/pictures/ford-f-150-4x4-low-miles-100646-wcamper-shell-4.jpg

Because for much of the time I was living in it. I don\'t think a Smart
Car would have worked. Or perhaps I like being ostentatious. If so, the
F150 at 3750# curb weight wasn\'t the proper choice. My Lincoln was about
5100#

But you still haven\'t addressed the basic issue, troll. My 36 year old
vehicle doesn\'t need a new engine. I wonder how many 36 year old Teslas
there will be outside of museums?

Now run along in your Kia Cerato...

 

[rbowman]

On 05/16/2022 11:58 AM, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:

On Sunday, 15 May 2022 at 22:25:13 UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
On 05/15/2022 02:22 PM, ke...@kwdes...com wrote:

My 1986 F150 doesn\'t need a new engine. Do you really think a battery is
going to last 36 years?

Probably not - but the great majority of conventional vehicles don\'t last that long either. The average lifetime of cars in the US is about 15 years.

Accident damage or some major failure (such as engine!) often results in a costly repair that causes it to be scrapped.

My last BMW was a great car until it was about 8 years old when failures started to become annoying and expensive.

kw

My Audi became annoying long before that. Admittedly it was a 100LS and
Volkswagen hadn\'t figured out front engine, front wheel drive, water
cooled vehicles yet.

 

[Ricky]

On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 10:50:38 PM UTC-4, rbowman wrote:

On 05/16/2022 08:30 AM, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 11:54:13 PM UTC+10, rbowman wrote:
On 05/16/2022 12:24 AM, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 3:25:13 PM UTC+10, rbowman wrote:
On 05/15/2022 02:22 PM, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:
On Sunday, 15 May 2022 at 00:04:22 UTC-7, Commander Kinsey wrote:
...
Then there is the issue that you are only talking about purchase price, not the life cycle cost. That\'s the talk of an ignoramus.
If you want to go that route, electric cars have that annoying habit of needing a new battery.

No they don\'t - no more than conventional cars need new engines.

My 1986 F150 doesn\'t need a new engine. Do you really think a battery is going to last 36 years?

How may miles have you put on it? If you had only bought it because you had a very small penis, it might not have done very many at all.

You seem to have quite the interest in penises.

Scarcely. It\'s a trite and cliched reaction to any ostentatiously bulky vehicle.

About 250,000 miles since you asked. It\'s been to all four corners of the continental US and a hell of a lot of places in between.

Why did you need an ostentatiously bulky vehicle to do that?

http://americanclassicscars.com/uploads/pictures/ford-f-150-4x4-low-miles-100646-wcamper-shell-4.jpg

Because for much of the time I was living in it. I don\'t think a Smart
Car would have worked. Or perhaps I like being ostentatious. If so, the
F150 at 3750# curb weight wasn\'t the proper choice. My Lincoln was about
5100#

But you still haven\'t addressed the basic issue, troll. My 36 year old
vehicle doesn\'t need a new engine. I wonder how many 36 year old Teslas
there will be outside of museums?

Now run along in your Kia Cerato...

Who gives a shit about your 36 year old car? You seem to be obsessed with the idea that it means something. What do you think your 36 year old car means in the transition to BEVs that is taking place in the world?

You do realize this is happening, and there\'s pretty much nothing you can do to stop it, right? In 10 years, virtually every car sold in the US will be a BEV. In 20 years, the vast majority of cars on the roads will be BEVs.. Gas stations will become the exception in 15 years and nearly extinct in 20 years. By 2042, if you aren\'t dead, you won\'t be driving your then, 56 year old car. You will either be driving a 20 year old ICE that you have to special order gasoline for, or you will be driving a pickup truck with a battery, very possibly made by Tesla.

This is a reality that you may not prefer, but it is your future, whether you decide to like it or not.

--

Rick C.

-++-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Flyguy]

On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 8:53:50 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:

On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 10:50:38 PM UTC-4, rbowman wrote:
On 05/16/2022 08:30 AM, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 11:54:13 PM UTC+10, rbowman wrote:
On 05/16/2022 12:24 AM, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 3:25:13 PM UTC+10, rbowman wrote:
On 05/15/2022 02:22 PM, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:
On Sunday, 15 May 2022 at 00:04:22 UTC-7, Commander Kinsey wrote:
...
Then there is the issue that you are only talking about purchase price, not the life cycle cost. That\'s the talk of an ignoramus.
If you want to go that route, electric cars have that annoying habit of needing a new battery.

No they don\'t - no more than conventional cars need new engines.

My 1986 F150 doesn\'t need a new engine. Do you really think a battery is going to last 36 years?

How may miles have you put on it? If you had only bought it because you had a very small penis, it might not have done very many at all.

You seem to have quite the interest in penises.

Scarcely. It\'s a trite and cliched reaction to any ostentatiously bulky vehicle.

About 250,000 miles since you asked. It\'s been to all four corners of the continental US and a hell of a lot of places in between.

Why did you need an ostentatiously bulky vehicle to do that?

http://americanclassicscars.com/uploads/pictures/ford-f-150-4x4-low-miles-100646-wcamper-shell-4.jpg

Because for much of the time I was living in it. I don\'t think a Smart
Car would have worked. Or perhaps I like being ostentatious. If so, the
F150 at 3750# curb weight wasn\'t the proper choice. My Lincoln was about
5100#

But you still haven\'t addressed the basic issue, troll. My 36 year old
vehicle doesn\'t need a new engine. I wonder how many 36 year old Teslas
there will be outside of museums?

Now run along in your Kia Cerato...
Who gives a shit about your 36 year old car? You seem to be obsessed with the idea that it means something. What do you think your 36 year old car means in the transition to BEVs that is taking place in the world?

You do realize this is happening, and there\'s pretty much nothing you can do to stop it, right? In 10 years, virtually every car sold in the US will be a BEV. In 20 years, the vast majority of cars on the roads will be BEVs.. Gas stations will become the exception in 15 years and nearly extinct in 20 years. By 2042, if you aren\'t dead, you won\'t be driving your then, 56 year old car. You will either be driving a 20 year old ICE that you have to special order gasoline for, or you will be driving a pickup truck with a battery, very possibly made by Tesla.

This is a reality that you may not prefer, but it is your future, whether you decide to like it or not.

--

Rick C.

-++-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

In your dreams. Batteries die of old age, but EVs haven\'t been around long enough to develop good statistics on that. One thing is certain: it will be uneconomical to replace the battery of an old EV (the battery costs more than the value of the car).

 

[John Doe]

Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

rbowman wrote:

http://americanclassicscars.com/uploads/pictures/ford-f-150-4x4-low-miles-100646-wcamper-shell-4.jpg

Because for much of the time I was living in it. I don\'t think a Smart
Car would have worked. Or perhaps I like being ostentatious. If so, the

F150 at 3750# curb weight wasn\'t the proper choice. My Lincoln was
about

5100#

But you still haven\'t addressed the basic issue, troll [referring to
Bill \"Bozo\" Sloman]. My 36 year old vehicle doesn\'t need a new engine.
I wonder how many 36 year old Teslas there will be outside of museums?

Now run along in your Kia Cerato...

Bozo has a Kia?

Who gives a shit about your 36 year old car? You seem to be obsessed
with the idea that it means something. What do you think your 36 year
old car means in the transition to BEVs that is taking place in the
world?

I wonder if it\'s taking place in Germany where electric power is a little
scarce these days thanks to them giving up nuclear and now being
sanctioned by Russia.

You do realize this is happening, and there\'s pretty much nothing you
can do to stop it, right? In 10 years, virtually every car sold in the
US will be a BEV...

This is a reality that you may not prefer, but it is your future,
whether you decide to like it or not.

Sounds like wishful thinking. Seems diesel engines are doing well now. My
next-door neighbor bought a fancy diesel pickup truck six months ago. Gets
great gas mileage.

Maybe when electric vehicles are made to use big batteries instead of a
billion small batteries...

 

[whit3rd]

On Friday, May 20, 2022 at 3:10:15 AM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:

> Trees consume CO2. The more CO2, the more trees. More trees for you to hug.

Where to begin? That\'s completely false. Firstly, forests are thermoregulating
and are efficient CO2 sinks because of their evaporative cooling (using
water from roots to keep leaves at optimum photosynthetic temperature).
So, it isn\'t \'trees\' you want, it\'s forests.
Second, more CO2 might change the growing conditions, but as it heats
the planet, that cooling might not work as well (it does need water). Fires
can take forests down to ash if weather cycles make flammable wood
faster than the deadwood can decay, so... warming climate threatens forests.

That means FEWER trees, unless some seeds in the soil survive the inferno.
One doesn\'t hug saplings.

 

[rbowman]

On 05/22/2022 11:02 AM, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:

On Sunday, 22 May 2022 at 09:50:38 UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
...
Proven reserve is a function of oil price. That chart was drawn when oil price was around $70. At $110 oil, there are lots more oil reserve now.
There\'s a lot of area and depth left to explore.
--
...

Yes, but the same arguments apply to the reserves of Lithium as there are at least a few hundred billion tons either as deposits or in the oceans.

As the technology of cars and mining evolves and the financial incentives stimulate exploration and development more is likely to be discovered or alternatives found. Probably enough for billions of cars.

kw

Will there be oil enough for billions of tires or to create the
plastics that are a large component of modern cars? Or are you trying to
put bandaids on an unsustainable system to eke out a few more decades?

 

[ke...@kjwdesigns.com]

On Tuesday, 17 May 2022 at 03:53:34 UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
....

Maybe when electric vehicles are made to use big batteries instead of a
billion small batteries...

And what difference does that make. The small form factor cells are chosen by some manufacturers for sound engineering and financial reasons.

The Ford F-150 Lightning uses large pouch cells.

kw

 

[Ed Lee]

On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 7:40:33 AM UTC-7, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:

On Tuesday, 17 May 2022 at 03:53:34 UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
...

Maybe when electric vehicles are made to use big batteries instead of a
billion small batteries...
And what difference does that make. The small form factor cells are chosen by some manufacturers for sound engineering and financial reasons.

The Ford F-150 Lightning uses large pouch cells.

GM uses large long pouch cells.
Tesla is moving to larger cylindrical cells.
But there are plenty of after market small cells (18650) for DIY hackers like me.

 

[John Doe]

Using a jillion tiny cells makes a difference because if any of those cells
fail, the whole car explodes and kills the driver.

It\'s to do with quality control.


\"ke...@kjwdesigns.com\" <keith@kjwdesigns.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 17 May 2022 at 03:53:34 UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
...

Maybe when electric vehicles are made to use big batteries instead of a
billion small batteries...

And what difference does that make. The small form factor cells are chosen
by some manufacturers for sound engineering and financial reasons.

The Ford F-150 Lightning uses large pouch cells.

kw

 

[Ed Lee]

On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 12:10:26 PM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:

Using a jillion tiny cells makes a difference because if any of those cells
fail, the whole car explodes and kills the driver.

Then the BMS is not doing it\'s job. Proper BMS should monitor each cell and alarm if they overheat.

 

[John Doe]

Ed Lee <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:

John Doe wrote:

Using a jillion tiny cells makes a difference because if any of those
cells fail, the whole car explodes and kills the driver.

Then the BMS is not doing it\'s job. Proper BMS should monitor each cell
and alarm if they overheat.

It\'s bad design. Even if it\'s the only possible design, that doesn\'t make it
good design.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 4:30:42 AM UTC+10, rbowman wrote:

On 05/13/2022 11:31 PM, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
Granting what Flyguy and Commander Kinsey have posted here, they are aren\'t the only people with that problem.

Tree-huggers are a fairly extreme end of the \"progressive\" spectrum, and the ones that feature largely in climate change denial propaganda seem to be more invented than real.

https://deepgreenresistance.org/
https://www.penttilinkola.com/pentti_linkola/ecofascism/
https://fs.blog/intellectual-giants/garrett-hardin/

Real environmentalists aren\'t even on the progressive spectrum.

Websites are cheap. Even I\'ve got one. The climate change denial propaganda movement is well funded, and could afford a few. Recruiting a few nutters who were silly enough to take the invented tree-huggers seriously wouldn\'t be all that expensive either. The environmental equivalents of Cursitor Doom and John Doe must exists, and they will be just as willing to believe in bogus nonsense as those two are. Different bogus nonsense, but equally bogus.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Flyguy]

On Wednesday, May 18, 2022 at 11:44:43 PM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:

On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 1:38:46 AM UTC-4, Flyguy wrote:
On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 5:50:55 PM UTC-7, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:
On Tuesday, 17 May 2022 at 12:10:26 UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
Using a jillion tiny cells makes a difference because if any of those cells
fail, the whole car explodes and kills the driver.
That is not true. The car is very unlikely to explode if a single cell fails. Even if multiple cells fail an explosion is also extremely unlikely.

From the NTHSA report - \"Lithium-ion Battery Safety Issues for Electric and Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles\".

\"Regarding the risk of electrochemical failure, the report concludes that the propensity and severity of fires and explosions from the accidental ignition of flammable electrolytic solvents used in Li-ion battery systems are anticipated to be somewhat comparable to or perhaps slightly less than those for gasoline or diesel vehicular fuels.\"
https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/12848-lithiumionsafetyhybrids_101217-v3-tag.pdf

A cell can overheat under exceptional circumstances but a small cell may in actual fact be safer than larger ones as the energy of a single cell failure might be contained within its own steel container and not affect the rest of the battery to the point of failure. The fuse or other disconnect for the cell would electrically isolate the failed cell from the rest of the battery. If the cell breaches its own enclosure it could spread the failure to other cells.

kw
They can \"anticipate\" until the cows come home. What that boils down to is an uneducated guess. Until you have decades of data to analyze you are just blowing smoke. Just look at airline accidents; the B747 had decades of flight experience when TWA flight 800 exploded. And these planes undergo far more rigorous testing and evaluation than EVs do.
You would seem to be blowing smoke as much as anyone. In the case of TWA flight 800, a fatal airliner accident due to design or construction issues is a very infrequent thing. These causes are much easier to minimize failure rates than the operational issues.

The bottom line is lithium-ion batteries are proving to be very safe in BEVs. The failures rates are comparable to the failure rates of fossil fueled vehicles which do burst into flame spontaneously as well. We are simply less worried by the relatively infrequent incidents which are dwarfed by the accident rates of automobiles caused by the operators. BEV issues get a lot of visibility, but are actually less likely.

You didn\'t anticipate that, did you?

--

Rick C.

-++-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

No comparison whatsoever - the average age of ICE cars is much older than EVs, and fires are much more frequent in old cars. Lithium batteries suffer from, among manner other things, shorts due to dendrite growth, which takes time to occur. Also, ICE car fires occur primarily when driven, while EVs can catch fire ANYTIME, and do. And when they do catch fire, the fire is impossible to put out and the car must burn to exhaustion at extremely high temperatures. Furthermore, airplanes undergo regular mandated inspection and periodic rebuilding, and MUST comply with all mandatory airworthiness directives - cars do not. Didn\'t anticipate that, did you?

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 15 May 2022 01:06:28 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 10:36:15 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2022 03:18:40 +0100, ke...@kjwdesigns.com <ke...@kjwdesigns.com> wrote:

On Thursday, 12 May 2022 at 08:38:18 UTC-7, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2022 07:32:34 +0100, Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wednesday, May 11, 2022 at 9:38:46 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, May 12, 2022 at 12:58:47 PM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
On Wednesday, May 11, 2022 at 7:34:43 PM UTC-7, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2022 02:46:24 +0100,...> wrote:

On Wednesday, 11 May 2022 at 15:42:36 UTC-7, Commander Kinsey wrote:
...
Why are they needed? What problem are you trying to solve?
The problem frequently in the news where people\'s houses catch fire due to a fault in a charger/torch/etc. Nickel batteries get very hot, Lithium ones explode in a fireball, setting everything around it alight. Liquid lithium at a few thousand degrees was once fired through someone\'s hands while typing on a laptop.

I seriously doubt there was any liquid lithium ejected from the burning battery. The lithium does not exist separately it is bound in the electrodes and there is less than a gram per 18650 cell.
Something hot and liquid came out.
The electrolyte is highly flammable and liquid or a paste that could cause burns.
Could have been it, the point is people get burnt and surrounding things catch fire. I\'ve even seen a video of someone falling down some concrete stairs outdoors in an icy winter, with his mobile phone in his back pocket, which erupted. These batteries are a piece of shit.
Do you think this feature is free?
The cost only adds 10% to the battery approximately.
I doubt it.

https://www.sanwulasers.com/product/18650

Unprotected: $15
Protected: $25
The difference in retail price hasn\'t got much to do with the cost of the extra hardware, and everything to do with what the customer will pay for it.

Of course nobody is paying $15 per cell, or it would cost $100,000 for each Tesla. I would think that Tesla\'s cost of production is around $5 and protection circuit would be more like 30% to 40% in addition cost.
Unless it magically gets cheaper, Lithium batteries are not economically viable for a car. You either have shit range, or the car costs triple what a petrol one would.

For some of portions of the car market the price is already competitive and the other features are similar or better. For example the Tesla Model 3 vs a BMW 3 series - https://www.motor1.com/reviews/378302/bmw-3-series-tesla-model-3-comparison/.
A BMW is not a sensible car. Now please look at cars that cost what they\'re worth. The cheapest petrol car brand new and the cheapest electric car brand new that go a decent mileage (a few hundred miles), are £6K and £25K. Electric is a nice idea, but it\'s nowhere near ready for the public to use. Lithium Ion is not suitable for such a massive amount of power storage.

What is your \"sensible\" car at £6K? Does it have four wheels? Three? Two? There are electric cars at lower prices than £25K. You do have to be willing to look for them though. I expect that\'s not going to happen since it is you we are talking to.

A Dacia Sandero is a basic petrol car. The electric cars under £25K have a shorter range than that.

Range is just not an issue for most drivers although it does take a different mindset from the traditional don\'t fill up until empty approach of conventional vehicles.
It\'s a problem for every single driver. Most people do not drive 2 miles to the post office. By the way that range drops like a stone as the battery ages. My petrol tank doesn\'t age.

This is the silly talk we typically get from this poster.

What\'s silly about what I said? Most people will drive a long distance to commute, go on holiday, etc. And I assume you realise batteries don\'t retain the range they had at manufacture.

When the fuel cost is included electric cars competitive on price even with average cars like a Toyota Camry. The average new car cost in the US has risen to about $47,000. The cost of a base Tesla Model 3 is $46,990.
WTF are you doing paying $47K for a petrol car? I could buy 6 cars for that.
The absence of regular servicing is very convenient - I have had mine for just about 4 years and it hasn\'t been to the dealer once. Whereas my Prius has required 8 services in that time according to the manual.
Ignore the manual. Take the car to the garage when it goes wrong.
The cost and energy requirement to manufacture the batteries continues to drop - it is below $100 per kWh now from many times that ten years ago.
Then I will wait another 10 years.

No, you should wait another hundred years. I want to see your grip on the steering wheel fossilized.

You don\'t seriously want self driving cars where you just act as a bored passenger do you?

> It is hard to find a more ignorant person, even in this group.

It\'s amazing you just insult me without any information explaining why you think your viewpoint is correct. But then you are a religious fuckwit of the third degree. Hang on, won\'t you go to hell for being nasty to me? You\'d better go say hail Marys or give the priest a blowjob or whatever nonsense goes on in there.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 1:59:20 PM UTC+10, Commander Kinsey wrote:

On Sun, 15 May 2022 01:06:28 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 10:36:15 PM UTC-4, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2022 03:18:40 +0100, ke...@kjwdesigns.com <ke...@kjwdesigns.com> wrote:
On Thursday, 12 May 2022 at 08:38:18 UTC-7, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2022 07:32:34 +0100, Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, May 11, 2022 at 9:38:46 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Thursday, May 12, 2022 at 12:58:47 PM UTC+10, Ed Lee wrote:
On Wednesday, May 11, 2022 at 7:34:43 PM UTC-7, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2022 02:46:24 +0100,...> wrote:
On Wednesday, 11 May 2022 at 15:42:36 UTC-7, Commander Kinsey wrote:

<snip>

Range is just not an issue for most drivers although it does take a different mindset from the traditional don\'t fill up until empty approach of conventional vehicles.
It\'s a problem for every single driver. Most people do not drive 2 miles to the post office. By the way that range drops like a stone as the battery ages. My petrol tank doesn\'t age.

This is the silly talk we typically get from this poster.

What\'s silly about what I said? Most people will drive a long distance to commute, go on holiday, etc. And I assume you realise batteries don\'t retain the range they had at manufacture.

Battery life has improved rapidly in the past few years.

When the fuel cost is included electric cars competitive on price even with average cars like a Toyota Camry. The average new car cost in the US has risen to about $47,000. The cost of a base Tesla Model 3 is $46,990.

WTF are you doing paying $47K for a petrol car? I could buy 6 cars for that.

Except that it looks as if you couldn\'t by 6 new cars for that.

The absence of regular servicing is very convenient - I have had mine for just about 4 years and it hasn\'t been to the dealer once. Whereas my Prius has required 8 services in that time according to the manual.

Ignore the manual. Take the car to the garage when it goes wrong.

More idiot advice from the wanker.

The cost and energy requirement to manufacture the batteries continues to drop - it is below $100 per kWh now from many times that ten years ago.
Then I will wait another 10 years.

No, you should wait another hundred years. I want to see your grip on the steering wheel fossilized.

You don\'t seriously want self driving cars where you just act as a bored passenger do you?

Bore drivers don\'t pay enough attention either.

It is hard to find a more ignorant person, even in this group.

It\'s amazing you just insult me without any information explaining why you think your viewpoint is correct.

You\'ve been spelling out your ignorance here for weeks. It has been noticeable.

> But then you are a religious fuckwit of the third degree. Hang on, won\'t you go to hell for being nasty to me?

Probably not. Warning other people about dangerous lunatics is a virtuous action.

> You\'d better go say hail Marys or give the priest a blowjob or whatever nonsense goes on in there.

More bad advice.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 15 May 2022 01:12:21 +0100, Ricky <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Saturday, May 14, 2022 at 12:50:26 AM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Saturday, May 14, 2022 at 12:53:02 PM UTC+10, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sat, 14 May 2022 03:43:47 +0100, Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 7:18:45 PM UTC-7, ke...@kjwdesigns.com wrote:
The cost and energy requirement to manufacture the batteries continues to drop - it is below $100 per kWh now from many times that ten years ago.

I don\'t think the Tesla (50kWh) battery cost below $5000.
Nothing made by Tesla is a sensible price, I\'m sure Musk is related to Jobs. It\'s the same Apple tactics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Search_of_Excellence

went into that tactic. Back in 1982, IBM and Hewlett-Packard were the leading exponents. If you had a reputation of for quality you could sell your stuff for three times the cost of production, rather than twice the cost which was less reputable producers had to settle for.

These days Apple and Tesla are relying on their prestige to sell good products at an inflated price in the same way.

That\'s not so much what is happening, as much as it is simply optimizing for the market. In electronics there are always early adopters who can justify a more expensive unit. Tesla was selling a $35,000 car they made virtually no money on. Then they stopped selling that version. As the market heated up they stopped selling the next lower priced version. I think there was a third version they stopped selling.

It is a well known fact that there is more profit in the luxury cars sold at higher prices. This is what Tesla is doing, rather than simply raising prices to make more money. It only costs a bit more to add the various features, but these features bring a lot higher price.

Especially when they can sell them multiple times, once to each owner. They\'re fucking criminals.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sun, 15 May 2022 01:42:53 +0100, ke...@kjwdesigns.com <keith@kjwdesigns.com> wrote:

On Friday, 13 May 2022 at 19:36:15 UTC-7, Commander Kinsey wrote:
...
A BMW is not a sensible car. Now please look at cars that cost what they\'re worth. The cheapest petrol car brand new and the cheapest electric car brand new that go a decent mileage (a few hundred miles), are £6K and £25K. Electric is a nice idea, but it\'s nowhere near ready for the public to use. Lithium Ion is not suitable for such a massive amount of power storage.

According to this the cheapest car in the UK is about £11.5k.

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/best-cars-vans/351901/top-10-cheapest-cars-sale-2022

Bullshit. I used to own a Dacia Sandero. It was £6K. The 4WD version my father still owns, the Duster, that was £10K.

> A couple million people a year buy BMWs that you describe as \"not a sensible car\" so Im sure many would disagree with you.

They\'re morons. BMW hasn\'t even invented FWD yet. And they\'re no better than a VW, at a fraction of the price.

Range is just not an issue for most drivers although it does take a different mindset from the traditional don\'t fill up until empty approach of conventional vehicles.
It\'s a problem for every single driver. Most people do not drive 2 miles to the post office. By the way that range drops like a stone as the battery ages. My petrol tank doesn\'t age.
When the fuel cost is included electric cars competitive on price even with average cars like a Toyota Camry. The average new car cost in the US has risen to about $47,000. The cost of a base Tesla Model 3 is $46,990.
WTF are you doing paying $47K for a petrol car? I could buy 6 cars for that.

You could not buy 6 new cars for $47k. And most people don\'t just buy the bare minimum car as can be seen from the average price. You also can\'t meaningfully compare radically dissimilar cars as much of the cost is not just in the propulsion system.

I\'m comparing the cheapest car I can get that will do a sensible range on petrol or electricity.

The absence of regular servicing is very convenient - I have had mine for just about 4 years and it hasn\'t been to the dealer once. Whereas my Prius has required 8 services in that time according to the manual.
Ignore the manual. Take the car to the garage when it goes wrong.

No oil changes?

No.

> No brake checking.

If the car stops when I press the pedal, why would it need checked?

> What about mandatory smog or MOT tests - do you ignore those as well?

Not exactly, but you can bend them a bit.

The cost and energy requirement to manufacture the batteries continues to drop - it is below $100 per kWh now from many times that ten years ago.
Then I will wait another 10 years.
That\'s your privilege.

It\'s called common sense. People who buy new tech are fools that fund it for the rest of us.