Car buyers should have 'long, hard think' about diesel

[nilagin]

He's making the same argument, buy the car that suits your normal journey rather than for once a year trips.

I buy cars that suit me for every journey, not just some or most.

 

[wyx087]

if you are just trying to poke me into a side discussion to divert attention away from your original nonsense, sorry, not playing that game.

I do however know for a fact that in the UK you are not allowed to fly civilian planes without a pilot on board, if that helps you out, why should cars be different?

I'm sorry. I think you never understood the original point before going onto a tangent. I have never tried to move into a side discussion. But FYI, you only revealing small slices of information when asked, telling people to Google is never a good method of communication.

My point is that plane autopilot name does not suggest the plane can be flown autonomously without pilot monitoring, it's an assistive tech. Only an idiot would take Tesla Autopilot as full autonomous vehicle. Plane autopilot aim is to assist the pilot to reduce workload, same function for the Tesla Autopilot assistive technology.

I buy cars that suit me for every journey, not just some or most.

There's no such thing. For a car to be suitable for your every journey, you'd have a very inefficient large car to account for every eventuality. (one of reason for rise of generic SUV's?)

You've honestly never wished you had a bigger boot in your Fiesta? (or Focus? sorry, I don't recall)
You've never wished you had a few more seats on odd occasions?
You've never wished the car had more ground clearance?
You've never wished the car is more relaxed for long motorway drives?
I guess you've never wished the car is more economical.

My family runs 2 cars, Skoda Octavia for people/stuff carrying needs, occasional second car duty and long distance drives (also winter, I've fitted all-season tyres). Leaf EV for everyday use due to economy.
When I had a coupe, I'd rent large estate car for a weekend when needed to move stuff or had relatives around that needed 5 seats. My parents rented 8 seat MPV a few times when relatives came to visit. (via long distance plane)

A colleague of mine have a 20+ years old Espace for people/stuff carrying needs. He drives a much smaller old car for daily commute. His wife recently bought a Smart EV for her commute.
Another colleague has an old estate and a daily coupe, you get the idea.

 

[nilagin]

My point is that plane autopilot name does not suggest the plane can be flown autonomously without pilot monitoring, it's an assistive tech. Only an idiot would take Tesla Autopilot as full autonomous vehicle. Plane autopilot aim is to assist the pilot to reduce workload, same function for the Tesla Autopilot assistive technology.


There's no such thing. For a car to be suitable for your every journey, you'd have a very inefficient large car to account for every eventuality. (one of reason for rise of generic SUV's?)

You've honestly never wished you had a bigger boot in your Fiesta? (or Focus? sorry, I don't recall)
You've never wished you had a few more seats on odd occasions?
You've never wished the car had more ground clearance?
You've never wished the car is more relaxed for long motorway drives?
I guess you've never wished the car is more economical.

My family runs 2 cars, Skoda Octavia for people/stuff carrying needs, occasional second car duty and long distance drives (also winter, I've fitted all-season tyres). Leaf EV for everyday use due to economy.
When I had a coupe, I'd rent large estate car for a weekend when needed to move stuff or had relatives around that needed 5 seats. My parents rented 8 seat MPV a few times when relatives came to visit. (via long distance plane)

A colleague of mine have a 20+ years old Espace for people/stuff carrying needs. He drives a much smaller old car for daily commute. His wife recently bought a Smart EV for her commute.
Another colleague has an old estate and a daily coupe, you get the idea.

Flying an plane is a lot more involved that's why they have Autopilot and sometimes co pilots.
Cars aren't complicated to drive assistance is down to laziness and poor driving habits.

My boot space is plenty big enough, if I need more I can fold down part or all of the back seat, but never had to yet. It will easily swallow 4 large camping chairs, a couple of coolboxes, coats and 2 or 3 medium rucksacks
Car sits 5 people comfortably, it only has to seat 4 people at most so does that just fine. I have no need for more.
Doesn't need anymore ground clearance, it actually sits higher than the Mondeo I had a few years ago, even considering fitting some lowering springs to drop it lower.
Car is perfectly relaxed on motorways, can quite easily frighten the life out of the wife, leaving her stomach behind and just at home driving around busy London roads and easy to park without encroaching into other parking spaces due to being to big.
Quite happy with the 30mpg+ or 250 miles per tank I get on average. If I want more I don't lean on the loud pedal so much and reduce my max cruising speed from 70 to 60-65. I then manage around 380-390 miles per tank.
So yes it is possible to buy a car that easily fits all my purposes.

 

[nilagin]

There has been a lot of recent speculation that with Tesla production and deliveries improving over the past 6 months that they would be announcing a profit for Q2.
However
https://amp.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jul/24/tesla-elon-musk-earnings-report-shares-loss

 

[PaulF]

I'm sorry. I think you never understood the original point before going onto a tangent. I have never tried to move into a side discussion. But FYI, you only revealing small slices of information when asked, telling people to Google is never a good method of communication.

My point is that plane autopilot name does not suggest the plane can be flown autonomously without pilot monitoring, it's an assistive tech. Only an idiot would take Tesla Autopilot as full autonomous vehicle. Plane autopilot aim is to assist the pilot to reduce workload, same function for the Tesla Autopilot assistive technology.


There's no such thing. For a car to be suitable for your every journey, you'd have a very inefficient large car to account for every eventuality. (one of reason for rise of generic SUV's?)

You've honestly never wished you had a bigger boot in your Fiesta? (or Focus? sorry, I don't recall)
You've never wished you had a few more seats on odd occasions?
You've never wished the car had more ground clearance?
You've never wished the car is more relaxed for long motorway drives?
I guess you've never wished the car is more economical.

My family runs 2 cars, Skoda Octavia for people/stuff carrying needs, occasional second car duty and long distance drives (also winter, I've fitted all-season tyres). Leaf EV for everyday use due to economy.
When I had a coupe, I'd rent large estate car for a weekend when needed to move stuff or had relatives around that needed 5 seats. My parents rented 8 seat MPV a few times when relatives came to visit. (via long distance plane)

A colleague of mine have a 20+ years old Espace for people/stuff carrying needs. He drives a much smaller old car for daily commute. His wife recently bought a Smart EV for her commute.
Another colleague has an old estate and a daily coupe, you get the idea.

I could understood your point quite easily, I was pointing out that the 'evidence' you used to back up your opinion displayed a complete lack of understanding of aircraft autopilot systems making your original point some what mute. After all, if the underlying knowledge is flawed at best you can luck into the correct conclusion, which it appears you did in this case or you could come to a completely incorrect conclusion!

FYI If you just stated your opinion without the need to post made up facts there would be no need for anyone to correct you, as this is what you actually posted "In fact, plane autopilot is akin to standard cruise control + steering lock: you set direction and speed." or do you still think that statement is correct.

With regard "I buy cars that suit me for every journey, not just some or most. " as nilagin posted and your reply above stating "There's no such thing. For a car to be suitable for your every journey, you'd have a very inefficient large car to account for every eventuality. (one of reason for rise of generic SUV's?)"
More nonsense in my opinion..

My car is suitable for every journey I have had to make from the moment I bought it. I have never had a need to hire any other vehicle. Now, you may have the opinion that my current car is not the most efficient at every type of journey I make but that does not change the fact that it is capable and therefore suitable in my view. It's not economically viable to run an additional car just because it may be more efficient at a particular type of journey when my current car is capable of all journeys I take, from doing the food shopping to driving to Belgium on a family holiday with the boot fully loaded!

My wife has her own car, a smaller sporty petrol Citreon DS3, she only really uses that to go to work though, for a couple of reasons, she gets nervous driving places she is not familiar with, she does not like driving in the dark (due to the trend of every b****r having their headlights pointing up to the sky these days!) and as I have a fully expense'd fuel card through work it literally costs me nothing to fill my car with diesel so at the weekend we take mine.
I am trying to get her to have an EV when she changes her car but it's an uphill struggle as her main criteria is how the car looks, seriously, she got the current one not for the way it drives nor the fuel economy but solely because it kind of looks like the cover of one of Gary Numan's early albums, she's a bit of a fan! All the current EV's are, in her opinion, ugly.

You workmates are right polluters aren't they! all those old cars still running about. Why doesn't the chap running an old Espace not get shut, save the insurance/tax and just hire a suitable vehicle when needed.

 

[MatBin]

Did he though?

I understood the latter sentence as spark plug is one of the things that could go wrong in ICE but not present in EV drivetrain.


Running cost - The quoted example where Leaf £14k for 2016 model, or £29k for 2019 model. 3 years about half depreciation, looks on par with other cars.
Tax - apart from Tesla, majority EV models are under the tax bracket. Your argument only stands if this tax only gets applied to EV.
Reliability - I agree. There is also a case to argue that EV are relatively new, so callouts could be less serious issues.
Insurance - no one said his opinion is a fact........ but he has a point, EV is a relative unknown so insurance companies decided to charge more to mitigate their risks.

His point about buying a suitable car for your daily journey isn't just for London though. Would you buy a sports car like TVR's as your only car because you enjoy driving it to Spain once a year, if you live on a farm with muddy track? No, you'd buy a suitable SUV. He's making the same argument, buy the car that suits your normal journey rather than for once a year trips.

Running costs - total car ownership will cost more if purchase price is more than equivalent ICE and depreciation is similar in percentage terms, which apparently it is.
Tax - a similar EV to an ICE will cost more and invariably get you into the 'luxury' bracket and therefore pay more road tax than an equivalent ICE car.

My wife also thinks all current "affordable" 2nd car EV are ugly.

 

[Mr Perceptive]

My family runs 2 cars, Skoda Octavia for people/stuff carrying needs, occasional second car duty and long distance drives (also winter, I've fitted all-season tyres). Leaf EV for everyday use due to economy.

Yet again this is a stuck record pedaling the 'usual' guff!!!

The Leaf is only economical if you run it for many tens of thousands of miles, its initial purchase price compared with an equivalent ICE car means that it takes many years of motoring (and not changing the car) for it to be actually cheaper than the ICE equivalent. We've been through all this before.......

Please take your head out the sand regarding this. You haven't got depreciation on your side now either as in your own words the depreciation on the Leaf is at the same percentage rate as an ICE car, and remember that 50% of £30K is actually £15K in hard cash - in depreciation terms, whereas a typical small car ICE car (£20K RRP) will only depreciate £10K in hard cash in this period (50% over 3 years) - and that £5K is 47K miles in a 55mpg ICE car ((£5000/1.3) /4.5 to get gallons 854.7 * 55 = 47K)

 

[wyx087]

FYI If you just stated your opinion without the need to post made up facts there would be no need for anyone to correct you, as this is what you actually posted "In fact, plane autopilot is akin to standard cruise control + steering lock: you set direction and speed." or do you still think that statement is correct.

Opinion is not worth much these days. I always try to post as factually correct as possible, in order to back up my reasoning.

But if you want my opinion, I feel I was not wrong with my statement you've quoted, afterall, that is exactly what the first autopilot did. But could have worded it much better to say that it is a very simplified passing description, and focusing on the pilot involvement instead of trying to make the description sound like a factual definition. I'm sorry for causing the confusion.

With regard "I buy cars that suit me for every journey, not just some or most. " as nilagin posted and your reply above stating "There's no such thing. For a car to be suitable for your every journey, you'd have a very inefficient large car to account for every eventuality. (one of reason for rise of generic SUV's?)"
More nonsense in my opinion..

I respect your opinion, but it is my opinion that there is no such thing as perfect car that does everything all the time.

Not the Ford Focus or Fiesta, its boot is not big enough.
Not the Volvo V50 (?), it is not sporty enough.
Not my Skoda Octavia, it is not economical nor sporty enough.
Not my Nissan Leaf, its range is not large enough.
Not the Tesla Model 3, it isn't a hatchback

You workmates are right polluters aren't they! all those old cars still running about. Why doesn't the chap running an old Espace not get shut, save the insurance/tax and just hire a suitable vehicle when needed.

As I understand, one of them is looking to replace their old economical Jazz with an EV when a suitable becomes available. The old Espace and old estate doesn't get driven often, only when needed in the similar fashion as my Skoda.

If they have the ability to run 2 cars, I don't see why not. The manufacturing pollution has already been done. They drive it very little so tailpipe pollution is low. In this sense, it is better for the enviourment if the cars are kept by them rather than someone who just-about afford to buy the bangers and drive loads of miles. It's the daily car that we should be focused on, this car could be an EV for most people.

Running costs - total car ownership will cost more if purchase price is more than equivalent ICE and depreciation is similar in percentage terms, which apparently it is.
Tax - a similar EV to an ICE will cost more and invariably get you into the 'luxury' bracket and therefore pay more road tax than an equivalent ICE car.

My wife also thinks all current "affordable" 2nd car EV are ugly.

Running cost - we've been through this....... fuel savings alone off-sets the increased absolute depreciation amount for new EV. Used EV price premium is lower, so you'll be sure to be spending less to run the used EV.

Tax - similar EV to an ICE car will cost more. But they all fall on this side of luxury tax: e-Niro, Kona EV, Ioniq EV, Leaf, Zoe, i3, MG ZS EV, e-Golf.
Out of EV 16 listed, only 6 are above luxury tax band because they are luxury brands: 3 Tesla, 3 other luxury branded, highly spec'd cars: https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/electric/best-electric-cars-and-evs/
Try and spec up F-Pace to similar as I-Pace and see whether it's over luxury tax band.
Try and spec up Mercedes GLC to similar as EQC and see whether it's over luxury tax band.
Audi Q5 are already over luxury tax band.



The conspiracy theorist in me say the ugly EV syndrome is due to ICE manufacturers don't want to sell those early EV's. Continue selling ICE is too profitable. What does your wife think of Tesla's?

 

[wyx087]

Yet again this is a stuck record pedaling the 'usual' guff!!!

The Leaf is only economical if you run it for many tens of thousands of miles, its initial purchase price compared with an equivalent ICE car means that it takes many years of motoring (and not changing the car) for it to be actually cheaper than the ICE equivalent. We've been through all this before.......

Please take your head out the sand regarding this. You haven't got depreciation on your side now either as in your own words the depreciation on the Leaf is at the same percentage rate as an ICE car, and remember that 50% of £30K is actually £15K in hard cash - in depreciation terms, whereas a typical small car ICE car (£20K RRP) will only depreciate £10K in hard cash in this period (50% over 3 years) - and that £5K is 47K miles in a 55mpg ICE car ((£5000/1.3) /4.5 to get gallons 854.7 * 55 = 47K)

Let's re-examine the price of EV compared to similar spec'd ICE cars:

https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/assets/common/pdf/pricelists/golf-pricelist.pdf
VW Golf pricelist lists e-Golf as £30,340 OTR and Golf GTD auto (which doesn't have CarNet, does have LED headlight and digital dashboard) OTR price is £30,775.

Now let's talk depreciation: I bought £9100 for my Leaf. Look online and see how much for a '64 reg Leaf 24kWh Tekna with now 35k are selling, not far off my purchase price. WBAC gave me £8000 valuation. So that's £1100 car depreciation for 18k miles, 1.8 years of ownership. Don't need to own it really long time / loads of miles to see the benefits.

 

[dod]

There has been a lot of recent speculation that with Tesla production and deliveries improving over the past 6 months that they would be announcing a profit for Q2.
However
https://amp.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jul/24/tesla-elon-musk-earnings-report-shares-loss

Which makes absolutely zero difference to the impact on the market they've had. History is full of examples of early adopter or disrupting companies going bust. It'll be a shame if they do as I doubt that we'd have seen as much change without them to be honest

Also been watching the discussions about autopilot etc and getting more convinced that fully autonomous vehicles will, sooner or later, become the norm. There's no reason why not. The argument about safety is quite simply laughable. Look at the deaths on the roads at the moment with "safe" human operators. A lot of those human mistakes will be programmed out, the machine will never be caught texting as a starting point. Adaptive cruise control is scary as hell first time you use it but you very quickly learn to trust it. The systems will only get better, I can see it becoming like a big scalextric game in the future

Now I'm waiting for "one death because the technology fails is too much". It may well be, but I'm willing to bet there will be more lives saved.

 

[dod]

My wife also thinks all current "affordable" 2nd car EV are ugly.

That's now the biggest issue for me. The affordable ones really aren't that desirable, the desirable ones aren't affordable

 

[Mr Perceptive]

Let's re-examine the price of EV compared to similar spec'd ICE cars:

Now let's talk depreciation: I bought £9100 for my Leaf. Look online and see how much for a '64 reg Leaf 24kWh Tekna with now 35k are selling, not far off my purchase price. WBAC gave me £8000 valuation. So that's £1100 car depreciation for 18k miles, 1.8 years of ownership. Don't need to own it really long time / loads of miles to see the benefits.

I'm not going to trawl through new car specs to find like for like ICE v EV prices. You are welcome to,

So you have spent just about the whole thread explaining the economics of buying a new EV, when your 'economical' case rests on a second hand car bought 18 months ago (which you possibly got at a bargain price)...... its really not comparing apples with apples. What was your car when new? pushing 30K (and then a 5K government subsidy available) so say cost 25K, after just over 3 years its now worth 9.1K (whoosh your 50% depreciation has just gone out the window.....), that's a depreciated value to 36% - (9.1/25)

Please stop telling us that buying a new EV is a more economical case, it might be in some instances, but in the vast majority of typical car buying/lifecycle choices it is not. You really have to consider the overall costs and the availability of funds to actually buy that more expensive vehicle.

 

[Nod]

A lot of those human mistakes will be programmed out,

One of the problems facing the programmers is who to kill in some situations where some death is unavoidable.

 

[dod]

One of the problems facing the programmers is who to kill in some situations where some death is unavoidable.

That's going to be a tricky one but the chances of a "good outcome" will presumably be no worse than they are now. It also assumes that the computer will allow that situation to develop in the first place. Humans say it was totally unpredictable, a computer may assess the hazards within a preset radius and adapt accordingly before the situation actually occurs.

 

[nilagin]

I respect your opinion, but it is my opinion that there is no such thing as perfect car that does everything all the time.

Not the Ford Focus or Fiesta, its boot is not big enough.

Too small for what exactly?
I have never had any trouble fitting everything I need in my boot. Even with the RS boot being a couple of inches shallower than the ST that I had before it due to the rear drive unit. As I said I have never yet had to put the back seat down for more space.
Drive it around town and it is just as docile as any other medium sized hatchback. A nice easy cruiser on motorways, eating up the miles with no trouble.
I could do any of the following, take it down the drag strip and it will beat a Lamborghini Countach, take it to a race track for a track day, take it drifting.
Quite simply the car can do everything I need and more, so it is possible to buy the one car for all uses.

 

[nilagin]

Which makes absolutely zero difference to the impact on the market they've had. History is full of examples of early adopter or disrupting companies going bust. It'll be a shame if they do as I doubt that we'd have seen as much change without them to be honest

But they aren't an early adopter or disrupted. There have been many Ev's long before 2008 when Tesla sold their first cars. Their impact on the market hasn't been that great, they manage to sell worldwide what some manufacturers manage with just one model in one country. The only thing that has created change is the drive to lower emissions. If Tesla had actually made some affordable cars, then yes they would have been a game changer. Tesla are still building cars that were pre ordered last year, let alone new orders. Tesla have lost a lot of their staff to other companies over the past 6 months.

 

[dod]

But they aren't an early adopter or disrupted. There have been many Ev's long before 2008 when Tesla sold their first cars. Their impact on the market hasn't been that great, they manage to sell worldwide what some manufacturers manage with just one model in one country. The only thing that has created change is the drive to lower emissions. If Tesla had actually made some affordable cars, then yes they would have been a game changer. Tesla are still building cars that were pre ordered last year, let alone new orders. Tesla have lost a lot of their staff to other companies over the past 6 months.

Tesla was the company who really brought it out there and publicised it. They are definitely a disruptor. The traditional companies would still be saying it's too difficult, too expensive, need to build factories etc.

 

[nilagin]

Tesla was the company who really brought it out there and publicised it. They are definitely a disruptor. The traditional companies would still be saying it's too difficult, too expensive, need to build factories etc.

The requirement for only hybrid or fully electric cars in 10 to 20 years time is the only reason other manufacturers are developing electric vehicles. It is still expensive, that is why Tesla cars are way over priced and have only made 2 quarterly profits in 11 years. That is hardly the work of a disruptor. Everything Tesla has done, other manufacturers have already done but expense and lack of demand for EV in the past has seen them discontinued. The only reason Tesla are still in existence is down to Musk ploughing his own money into the company when he fails to find investment by other means.

 

[viv1969]

You've honestly never wished you had a bigger boot in your Fiesta? (or Focus? sorry, I don't recall)
You've never wished you had a few more seats on odd occasions?
You've never wished the car had more ground clearance?
You've never wished the car is more relaxed for long motorway drives?
I guess you've never wished the car is more economical.

Personally, I can honestly answer no, with my current (diesel) car, to all of those questions.

 

[Mr Bump]

Personally, I can honestly answer no, with my current (diesel) car, to all of those questions.

never wished I didn't cause more lung disease with my choice?

 

[nilagin]

never wished I didn't cause more lung disease with my choice?

I have sussed it. You have a deap routed fear that you will get lung disease in the next 3yrs and someone else will get to enjoy all that pension money instead.

 

[viv1969]

never wished I didn't cause more lung disease with my choice?

Not even on my radar.

Hey, did you sell your ice car yet?

 

[nilagin]

Seems some Ev's are really cheap to run.
https://insideevs.com/news/361845/tesla-owner-charges-steals-electricity/amp/

 

[dod]

The requirement for only hybrid or fully electric cars in 10 to 20 years time is the only reason other manufacturers are developing electric vehicles. It is still expensive, that is why Tesla cars are way over priced and have only made 2 quarterly profits in 11 years. That is hardly the work of a disruptor. Everything Tesla has done, other manufacturers have already done but expense and lack of demand for EV in the past has seen them discontinued. The only reason Tesla are still in existence is down to Musk ploughing his own money into the company when he fails to find investment by other means.

Disruption has very little to do with profit. Look at Uber, Amazon, Twitter/Facebook. AI will be the next area, we don't even know yet how that will change things.

 

[Jelster]

You've honestly never wished you had a bigger boot in your Fiesta? (or Focus? sorry, I don't recall)
You've never wished you had a few more seats on odd occasions?
You've never wished the car had more ground clearance?
You've never wished the car is more relaxed for long motorway drives?
I guess you've never wished the car is more economical.

I drive a 2017 Clubman JCW. I've never needed/wished:

For more luggage space - there is only 2 of us, so we have a lot of space with the rear seats down.
More seats - I've had 5 adults in the car for a business trip without issue
Ground clearance - Why? I don't drive off road
The car is perfectly relaxed for long motorway journeys, we've driven to Europe, Scotland (twice), North Wales (twice) the Lakes all from around the Heathrow area. If I want to, I can hit the eco mode, use the cruise control etc.
Economy - it's a performance 2.0 turbo, I still get 38-40 on a long trip. I bought it to drive it, not to look at (although I've have been known to look back at it as I walk away)....

I think you are confusing YOUR requirements with those of other people.

 

[wyx087]

Everything Tesla has done, other manufacturers have already done

Show me a desirable (not ugly), performance EV made by traditional car manufacturer before 2017.
5 years after Tesla Model S came out, a desirable, performance EV.

Seems some Ev's are really cheap to run.
https://insideevs.com/news/361845/tesla-owner-charges-steals-electricity/amp/

Nice, this is a news, very worthy of posting as negative press for EV's. Glad you posted it.

I'm not going to trawl through new car specs to find like for like ICE v EV prices. You are welcome to,

So you have spent just about the whole thread explaining the economics of buying a new EV, when your 'economical' case rests on a second hand car bought 18 months ago (which you possibly got at a bargain price)...... its really not comparing apples with apples. What was your car when new? pushing 30K (and then a 5K government subsidy available) so say cost 25K, after just over 3 years its now worth 9.1K (whoosh your 50% depreciation has just gone out the window.....), that's a depreciated value to 36% - (9.1/25)

Please stop telling us that buying a new EV is a more economical case, it might be in some instances, but in the vast majority of typical car buying/lifecycle choices it is not. You really have to consider the overall costs and the availability of funds to actually buy that more expensive vehicle.

You don't have to trawl through specs, I had already listed it for you pages ago. See the quote in the post you've quoted. If you don't want to believe the information I've posted, it's fine, but please stop posting numbers you came up in your head using old information and not have any source to back it up.

My economics case for today's EV rests on EV being cheaper to run. The purchase price may be slightly more expensive (gap disappearing in next few years), but overall monthly cost, including depreciation, is going to be similar.

The cost of my particular EV could be less than £18k, as seen in this deal posted in Nov 2014: https://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/ni...-battery-bought-17390-at-drivethedeal-2063755
Me buying it for £9100 means there may had been less than 50% depreciation over 3 years for my particular car.
I agree it's a very particular case, not representative of everyone everywhere. Just posting of my positive experience with EV's

I'm not telling people to buy a new EV based on economics alone. I'm saying it is an equal option as petrol/diesel and should be considered, chances are, you may find the EV to be more economical, quicker yet more relaxing to drive. EV should certainly be under strong consideration as second car for a family with driveway.

 

[wyx087]

Too small for what exactly?

A few very simple examples I had to do, first 2 saw me rented a larger car:
5 adults in the car for a long drive to midlands.
Moving stuff for someone going to university.
Picking up in-laws, who had brought 4 large suitcases to stay for a few months.
Going away for a long weekend with a baby.

I think a small car like Fiesta could work for the last one, if the front is made available for storage, the front of the car looks big enough for a travel cot and soft bags. Freeing up the rear for a travel system and other stuff.

I drive a 2017 Clubman JCW. I've never needed/wished:


I think you are confusing YOUR requirements with those of other people.

See, the key is there's only two of you.

For vast majority of people over 20 years of their lives, they'll need a bigger car on a regular basis. But that car is not really appropriate for daily use: burning fossil fuel to transport 1 single person to work a small-medium distance away.

 

[dod]

I've been thinking about this affordability thing and it struck me that most car sales nowadays are done on leases, PCP's etc and it made me wonder what the costs were actually like.

So, having a look at an e-golf and a 1.0 TSi Golf I got a couple of quick prices. Looking at the deals on 10,000 miles a year, 4 years, petrol at the price I got this morning 1.329 per litre, diesel at 135.9, electricity at 14 p per kWh I got the following. Also used VW mpg figures for the consumption but we know they won't likely be as good as claimed.


Edit: Costs are calculated to include fuel costs over the four year period and ignore inflation/deflation

e-golf
Contract costs £14334.
Running cost £1388(VW figures based on 14p per kWh)
Total cost £15722

1.0 TSi Golf
Contract costs £12151.44
Runnning cost £4920
Total£17071

Diesel 1.5 Match
Contract costs £13215
Running cost £3612
Total cost £16827

What am I missing here? That certainly looks competitive for the electric golf?
I know I haven't included VED here but I'd expect that to favour the EV, not sure about insurance?

edit: anyone wants to check those figures source is here

 

[Mr Perceptive]

You don't have to trawl through specs, I had already listed it for you pages ago. See the quote in the post you've quoted. If you don't want to believe the information I've posted, it's fine, but please stop posting numbers you came up in your head using old information and not have any source to back it up.

OK I'll bite

https://www.autovistagroup.com/news-and-insights/bevs-need-lower-list-prices-gain-mass-appeal

Says costs are broadly similar (in your favour slightly to EV) but skewed because of EV government discount (giving EV an advantage), but as you would say that's the on the road price so comparable, then the article points out that the ICE model is available with a negotiated dealer discount, swinging it back to the ICE vehicle costing less over a 3 year period and typical annual mileage.

So taking your second car consideration, unless you exceed typical annual mileage in the vehicle the ICE is cheaper to run than the EV, unless as I said before, you keep the vehicle for quite a time.

1.0 TSi Golf
Contract costs £12151.44
Runnning cost £1230
Total£17071

£12151 + £1230 = £13381, several thousand less than £17071 !!

 

[dod]

£12151 + £1230 = £13381, several thousand less than £17071 !!

Ooh, thanks, I just spotted my mistake, will update post

 

[wyx087]

I've been thinking about this affordability thing and it struck me that most car sales nowadays are done on leases, PCP's etc and it made me wonder what the costs were actually like.

So, having a look at an e-golf and a 1.0 TSi Golf I got a couple of quick prices. Looking at the deals on 10,000 miles a year, 4 years, petrol at the price I got this morning 1.329 per litre, diesel at 135.9, electricity at 14 p per kWh I got the following. Also used VW mpg figures for the consumption but we know they won't likely be as good as claimed.

e-golf
Contract costs £14334.
Running cost £1388(VW figures based on 14p per kWh)
Total cost £15722

1.0 TSi Golf
Contract costs £12151.44
Runnning cost £4920
Total£17071

Diesel 1.5 Match
Contract costs £13215
Running cost £3612
Total cost £16827

What am I missing here? That certainly looks competitive for the electric golf?
I know I haven't included VED here but I'd expect that to favour the EV, not sure about insurance?

edit: anyone wants to check those figures source is here

A few points I think worth pointing out for a balanced view:

Insurance will be ever so slightly more expensive on EV's.

I'm not sure about VW Servicing. If they are like Renault or Nissan, main dealer service for EV will be priced lower than ICE cars. Of course, if you go independent with ICE car, you could get service done even cheaper.
https://www.nissan.co.uk/ownership/nissan-services/service-care.html
(it's outrageously expensive, I know)

Finally, the e-Golf is due to be replace by ID 3. So e-Golf may had been discounted. But, VW have said starting price for initial "Plus" version of ID 3 (not poverty spec) will be around £30k, similar price to current e-Golf list price.

OK I'll bite

https://www.autovistagroup.com/news-and-insights/bevs-need-lower-list-prices-gain-mass-appeal

Says costs are broadly similar (in your favour slightly to EV) but skewed because of EV government discount (giving EV an advantage), but as you would say that's the on the road price so comparable, then the article points out that the ICE model is available with a negotiated dealer discount, swinging it back to the ICE vehicle costing less over a 3 year period and typical annual mileage.

So taking your second car consideration, unless you exceed typical annual mileage in the vehicle the ICE is cheaper to run than the EV, unless as I said before, you keep the vehicle for quite a time.

See @dod post. The costs are broadly similar for 3 powertrains. This is on lease, so should be after the lease provider have negotiated the best discount price.

Your article did state the ICE Golf they've used is not as well equipped. They have also forgot to mention the virtual cockpit that is fitted as standard on the latest e-Golf. On the pricelist, I saw only GTD and more expensive trims get virtual cockpit as standard. So in essence, like all car ownership, you pay for the extra equipment.

The e-Golf offers LED headlights, air conditioning and a navigation system as standard and is therefore comparable to the Highline trim level offered with the petrol 1.5TSi. However, the 1.6TDi is not offered with this trim level and so the e-Golf is both more powerful and better equipped than the Comfortline diesel variant considered here.

Second car: one second hand short range EV for the longer daily commute, second petrol car (if you family needs one) for shorter daily commute and family holiday. Economics will work itself out.

 

[Jelster]

See, the key is there's only two of you.

For vast majority of people over 20 years of their lives, they'll need a bigger car on a regular basis. But that car is not really appropriate for daily use: burning fossil fuel to transport 1 single person to work a small-medium distance away.

The car is more than capable of supporting a family, although when we go to Scotland, we do manage to fill it up with all the photography gear, all the walking gear (including the wet weather stuff) plus food etc as we tend to go self catering. In fact, the Clubby JCW is perfect, it's a family car one day, a long distance cruiser the next, and it's damned good on those damp twisty B roads in Wales

My wife also has a 2011 Mini and currently does just 1,000 miles a year. Perfect for an electric replacement we thought, until we looked at the real cost of ownership. Her Mini has a fuel & service bill far lower than any electric car we could buy once you factor in purchase costs.

 

[wyx087]

The car is more than capable of supporting a family, although when we go to Scotland, we do manage to fill it up with all the photography gear, all the walking gear (including the wet weather stuff) plus food etc as we tend to go self catering. In fact, the Clubby JCW is perfect, it's a family car one day, a long distance cruiser the next, and it's damned good on those damp twisty B roads in Wales

My wife also has a 2011 Mini and currently does just 1,000 miles a year. Perfect for an electric replacement we thought, until we looked at the real cost of ownership. Her Mini has a fuel & service bill far lower than any electric car we could buy once you factor in purchase costs.

1000 miles although sound perfect for EV, it unfortunately will not work out financially.

This is the achilles heel of EV economics argument. You have to be driving at least average mileage for fuel saving to be large enough to off set initial purchase price, currently. Luckily, EV purchase price is coming down.

If your commute is 10k or more annual, you can get a second-hand first-gen Leaf or battery-owned Zoe. Have your wife drive your "estate" version of modern Mini for her short commute.
Fuel: you'll save ~£750 a year for 10k, more saving the more you drive the EV.
Servicing: Apart from cooling fluid every 5 years, everything else can be done at any garage, only need brake fluid and air filter every 2 years, inspection every year.

 

[nilagin]

Disruption has very little to do with profit. Look at Uber, Amazon, Twitter/Facebook. AI will be the next area, we don't even know yet how that will change things.

I never said it did. To disrupt the traditional ice industry they would need to be able to manufacture affordable vehicles with good build quality. All they have managed thus far are expensive poorly built vehicles. So where is the disruption? As I have said before Tesla is akin to the Emporers New Clothes, people get all caught up in the hype and want to be seen to believing it to be the new thing when it isn't anything new, just a new version.

 

[MatBin]

Have your wife drive your "estate" version of modern Mini for her short commute.
Fuel: you'll save ~£750 a year for 10k, more saving the more you drive the EV.

I wouldn't advise that at all, ICE have to be driven a decent number of miles or you risk messing up all sorts of engine management things, especially on BMW based vehicles, plus you will constantly be worried about the battery not getting enough charge.
Small mileage cars should be exactly where an EVscores but sadly they do not, tbh nothing is really suited to doing less than about 5K miles per annum.

 

[MatBin]

Running cost - The quoted example where Leaf £14k for 2016 model, or £29k for 2019 model. 3 years about half depreciation, looks on par with other cars.
Tax - apart from Tesla, majority EV models are under the tax bracket. Your argument only stands if this tax only gets applied to EV.
Reliability - I agree. There is also a case to argue that EV are relatively new, so callouts could be less serious issues.
Insurance - no one said his opinion is a fact........ but he has a point, EV is a relative unknown so insurance companies decided to charge more to mitigate their risks.

His point about buying a suitable car for your daily journey isn't just for London though. Would you buy a sports car like TVR's as your only car because you enjoy driving it to Spain once a year, if you live on a farm with muddy track? No, you'd buy a suitable SUV. He's making the same argument, buy the car that suits your normal journey rather than for once a year trips.

Depreciation - you have constantly stated that EV depreciation is less in % terms, and therefore create a cheaper running cost situation, now you are agreeing that they will be the same, make your mind up.
Tax - Disagree, you can get a decent spec BMW 3 series 2.0 Diesel at 30/yr road tax, a comparable car surely is a Tesla 3 and that's in the "luxury" bracket, so a lot more tax per year (3890/yr)
Reliability - you agree, progress
Suitable car - You can buy something that is generally suitable in ICE version and can be pressed int doing a reasonable job on odd occasions, mainly because there is so much choice, not the same with an EV. If you buy something as your primary car to do a 30 mile commute (each way) it will just about suffice in winter, ask it to do a trip to Cornwall or Scotland and the logistics become awkward, yeah it might do it but you'd be anxious. And yes I'd buy a TVR for a once a year trip to Spain and suffer it for the rest of the year, would I buy an EV for my commute and then accept and suffer range anxiety on a long trip, no, not a chance in Hell as things currently stand.
But I know ICE days are numbered, of course they are, and the old dinosaurs on here (me included) will have to join all you young things in using EV, doesn't mean we'll like it or accept things have improved, just another example of humanity going backwards.

 

[dod]

I never said it did. To disrupt the traditional ice industry they would need to be able to manufacture affordable vehicles with good build quality. All they have managed thus far are expensive poorly built vehicles. So where is the disruption? As I have said before Tesla is akin to the Emporers New Clothes, people get all caught up in the hype and want to be seen to believing it to be the new thing when it isn't anything new, just a new version.

The requirement for only hybrid or fully electric cars in 10 to 20 years time is the only reason other manufacturers are developing electric vehicles. It is still expensive, that is why Tesla cars are way over priced and have only made 2 quarterly profits in 11 years. That is hardly the work of a disruptor. Everything Tesla has done, other manufacturers have already done but expense and lack of demand for EV in the past has seen them discontinued. The only reason Tesla are still in existence is down to Musk ploughing his own money into the company when he fails to find investment by other means.

Looks like you did but we can agree to disagree

Tesla were the first as far as I can see to offer a vehicle that was desirable and had reasonable range. Just a pity it wasn't affordable. It's my opinion that if they hadn't the traditional manufacturers would simply have continued to ignore the market, but I'll quickly concede, it's an opinion. Prior to that the only vehicle which was remotely in the public eye was the Prius.

Using build quality is a cheap shot. Every manufacturer has issues occasionally. Here's a few

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1140355/Ford-recall-Explorer-F150-Lincoln-US-check
https://www.evanshalshaw.com/focusrecall/
https://www.cars.com/research/ford/recalls/

 

[nilagin]

Show me a desirable (not ugly), performance EV made by traditional car manufacturer before 2017.
5 years after Tesla Model S came out, a desirable, performance EV.


Nice, this is a news, very worthy of posting as negative press for EV's. Glad you posted it.


I'm not telling people to buy a new EV based on economics alone. I'm saying it is an equal option as petrol/diesel and should be considered, chances are, you may find the EV to be more economical, quicker yet more relaxing to drive.

My reference to Tesla doing stuff that has been done before was in reference to all the "tech" and features they have on the cars. A Tesla Model S falls square in the ugly to non descript category of cars. There is nothing desirable in its appearance. It is a non descript vehicle you would see in the street and not even give a second glance, other than taking up more room than an average car on the road or a parking space, it wouldn't even warrant a second look let alone look at it with any sort of admiration.
To provide equal performance to my car, I would have needed to have spent a lot more money on an EV. I am not interested in economy, if I was I wouldn't have bought a performance car. I really couldn't have cared less if it only returned 15-20mpg.
I can't see how an EV could be any more of a relaxed drive than an ICE. Even my wife's Ka which produces just 82PS is a relaxed drive, even at 70mph on a motorway or dual carriageway and it doesn't even have cruise control.

 

[nilagin]

Looks like you did but we can agree to disagree

Tesla were the first as far as I can see to offer a vehicle that was desirable and had reasonable range. Just a pity it wasn't affordable. It's my opinion that if they hadn't the traditional manufacturers would simply have continued to ignore the market, but I'll quickly concede, it's an opinion. Prior to that the only vehicle which was remotely in the public eye was the Prius.

Using build quality is a cheap shot. Every manufacturer has issues occasionally. Here's a few

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1140355/Ford-recall-Explorer-F150-Lincoln-US-check
https://www.evanshalshaw.com/focusrecall/
https://www.cars.com/research/ford/recalls/

You have taken the quote out of context. Tesla's are overly expensive, if the cars were worth it and truly desirable they would sell in greater numbers and Tesla would be in profit. But they aren't worth the money and they are poorly built. The link you have provided about Ford Explorers and Lincoln SUV's is nothing to do with build quality and how a vehicle is put together, that is component failure something completely different. As I have mentioned in this thread before the industry average for vehicles requiring rework before they leave the factory is just 14%. Around 85% of Tesla vehicles however require rework before leaving the factory and even then there are complaints about the way the cars are poorly screwed together once customers finally get them.

Traditional manufacturers have ignored the market because the market was so small it barely existed.
Unless the market is big enough the prices will always be high as the cost of development will never be realised through sales and losses will be made. Traditional manufacturers have their traditional sales to fall back on Tesla don't. If Tesla were a disruptor they would have found a way to make affordable cars and make a profit. To add insult to injury it is looking increasingly like they have chosen the wrong battery too as recent developments in solid state batteries will mean smaller lighter more energy dense batteries.

 

[dod]

You have taken the quote out of context. Tesla's are overly expensive, if the cars were worth it and truly desirable they would sell in greater numbers and Tesla would be in profit. But they aren't worth the money and they are poorly built. The link you have provided about Ford Explorers and Lincoln SUV's is nothing to do with build quality and how a vehicle is put together, that is component failure something completely different. As I have mentioned in this thread before the industry average for vehicles requiring rework before they leave the factory is just 14%. Around 85% of Tesla vehicles however require rework before leaving the factory and even then there are complaints about the way the cars are poorly screwed together once customers finally get them.

Traditional manufacturers have ignored the market because the market was so small it barely existed.
Unless the market is big enough the prices will always be high as the cost of development will never be realised through sales and losses will be made. Traditional manufacturers have their traditional sales to fall back on Tesla don't. If Tesla were a disruptor they would have found a way to make affordable cars and make a profit. To add insult to injury it is looking increasingly like they have chosen the wrong battery too as recent developments in solid state batteries will mean smaller lighter more energy dense batteries.

Okay, I accept what you're saying even though we have a different view of it. But there you go again, linking disruption with profit. Profit has absolutely nothing to do with it