where will we be in 3 years time?

[btc1k]

While I've no issue with people very sensibly taking advantage of it, isn't providing an incentive for EVs through BIK very unfair. A discount that applies to us with good stable employment with established companies. The sooner it stops the better, allow everyone to access any incentives equally.

Depends what the objective is.

Tax incentives let consumers react in different ways and they are, therefore, cost-effective.

Fleets have the purchasing power to purchase EV's, much more so than Joe Public. Company car market is 65% ish.

So incentivise the biggest buyers to get EV's into the mainstream.
Fleets have a short ownership period so large numbers of second hand cars entering in the market for mainstream buyers in 3 years.
Big fleet buyers will ensure the market responds and invests in charging infrastructure, for example.

Difficult to see how you would craft a policy with the same impact that applies to "everyone".

But they did that as well by offering the grant on new EV purchases.

The only fair tax for many seems to be the one that someone else is paying.

 

[GRiLLA]

Fleets have the purchasing power to purchase EV's, much more so than Joe Public. Company car market is 65% ish.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 'fleets' generally means leasing companies, many of these will therefore not be owned as company cars with the BIK benefit. There are 800K people the HMRC say are liable for some kind of BIK, if we say half of these changed car last year that would be 25% of new sales.

Difficult to see how you would craft a policy with the same impact that applies to "everyone".

But they did that as well by offering the grant on new EV purchases.

So we already have a more equal mechanism through the EVZE grant, and that applies to company car as well as any other types of purchaser.

 

[Stranger Dings]

I was Interested to read more on the Merc EQXX concept over the past couple of days.

It is estimated to have the drivetrain in production by 2024 and that the 1000km / 620 mile range is a real world estimate, with the WLTP range significantly higher.

Mercedes EQXX Electric Powertrain Will Make Production, Company Promises — Car and Driver

Anything with over 400 miles real world range would definitely be of interest to me in a couple of years time when I look to change my M3P. That is basically as good as an ICE.

 

[Adopado]

Anything with over 400 miles real world range would definitely be of interest to me in a couple of years time when I look to change my M3P. That is basically as good as an ICE.

It's all about efficiency... which is good, but I'm surprised that you would look at a 7 second 0-62 and 87mph top speed car when your present choice is a M3P ... unless you already drive in Chill all the time. The car embodies some great ideas and styling but some of those ideas appear to be very far away from current mass production capabilities. Do many (any?) of these concepts see the light of day in the form they are first presented?

 

[GRiLLA]

It's all about efficiency... which is good, but I'm surprised that you would look at a 7 second 0-62 and 87mph top speed car when your present choice is a M3P ... unless you already drive in Chill all the time. The car embodies some great ideas and styling but some of those ideas appear to be very far away from current mass production capabilities. Do many (any?) of these concepts see the light of day in the form they are first presented?

If a Tesla put a 100KWH battery, 200BHP motor in an impractical shape with a 0.20 drag coefficient, I wonder if it would do 1000kms today? It was pretty hard to understand if Mercedes had really anything revolutionary, rather than just putting together a peculiar combination.

The claim to have halved the weight of a 100KWH battery, if that's real then surely it's an enormous development. I'm just a little bit cynical that Mercedes have revolutionized battery technology to have twice the energy density of anyone else.

 

[pgkevet]

It's all about efficiency... which is good, but I'm surprised that you would look at a 7 second 0-62 and 87mph top speed car when your present choice is a M3P ... unless you already drive in Chill all the time. The car embodies some great ideas and styling but some of those ideas appear to be very far away from current mass production capabilities. Do many (any?) of these concepts see the light of day in the form they are first presented?

Personal views. I think that concept shape looks rather smart. 7second time is for a single motor and likely there will be a dual motor option if it ever gets made. 7 seconds isn't slow. Yes I'd like it a tad quicker but apart from bragging rights less than 5 seconds and top speed over 87 mph? Well if folk are using such specs regularly UK they need their cars crushing and licence revoking.

 

[QuanTim]

I was Interested to read more on the Merc EQXX concept over the past couple of days.

It is estimated to have the drivetrain in production by 2024 and that the 1000km / 620 mile range is a real world estimate, with the WLTP range significantly higher.

Mercedes EQXX Electric Powertrain Will Make Production, Company Promises — Car and Driver

Anything with over 400 miles real world range would definitely be of interest to me in a couple of years time when I look to change my M3P. That is basically as good as an ICE.

You do realise that they created this concept car.... in a literal simulation, right? Like, all the breakthroughs with battery technology, manufacturing, material science, etc., were breakthroughs IN A SIMULATION. I mean, maybe this simulation is so life-like, they may have actual sentient beings living inside; therefore, the simulation they created sounds like the real breakthrough here...

I jest, of course, simulations have been used for decades to develop planes, cars, boats, etc.... but one cannot forget that there is currently no replacement for the simulation we call reality. So lets wait and see how they do in the real-world with their so-called "simulated breakthroughs".

 

[GeorgeSymonds]

You do realise that they created this concept car.... in a literal simulation, right? Like, all the breakthroughs with battery technology, manufacturing, material science, etc., were breakthroughs IN A SIMULATION. I mean, maybe this simulation is so life-like, they may have actual sentient beings living inside; therefore, the simulation they created sounds like the real breakthrough here...

I jest, of course, simulations have been used for decades to develop planes, cars, boats, etc.... but one cannot forget that there is currently no replacement for the simulation we call reality. So lets wait and see how they do in the real-world with their so-called "simulated breakthroughs".

You say it as if Tesla don’t do the same. The roadster was an Model S with a different skin and a spec sheet Musk drew up that had nothing to do with the car sitting on the stage. I’m not sure which is better, a metal version of a clay model wrapped around a donor chassis or a detailed computer simulation of internals (if they exist).

 

[SpareHeadOne]

The claim to have halved the weight of a 100KWH battery, if that's real then surely it's an enormous development. I'm just a little bit cynical that Mercedes have revolutionized battery technology to have twice the energy density of anyone else.

There was a story recently of a battery tech company called ONE replacing the battery in an MS with one of their own that roughly doubles energy density, the story said they had added almost 100kWh along with 300kg of weight for a pack that was the same physical size as the one that came out of the Tesla.

Given that the Tesla 100kWh battery weighs 625kg it looks like they have done that in about 300kg, so Mercedes claim isn't outlandish.

Of course the problem isn't really the concept tech, it's things like mass production, safely, reliability and tolerance for repeated charging. F1 engineers can get 1000hp from a 1.5 litre engine, but it only lasts a few thousand miles and has to be fully rebuilt every couple of hundred - not ideal for Joe Public; a battery that's half the weight for the same energy that can only be recharged ten times is useless.

Edit:
Here's one of the pieces covering the story: ONE Doubles Tesla Model S Range to Over 700 Miles With Gemini Battery

 

[Stranger Dings]

It's all about efficiency... which is good, but I'm surprised that you would look at a 7 second 0-62 and 87mph top speed car when your present choice is a M3P ... unless you already drive in Chill all the time. The car embodies some great ideas and styling but some of those ideas appear to be very far away from current mass production capabilities. Do many (any?) of these concepts see the light of day in the form they are first presented?

You are indeed correct. I want blistering performance AND a 400 mile range. And don’t forget decent handling and excellent interior too. Then when they announce It is £150k, I’ll complain it is too much.

Life Is all about compromise and I struggle with that

 

[cryo]

Unfortunately all these claims generally prove to be vastly expanded vapor ware. Example-Hyundai Ioniq 5, concept 400+ miles, pre release 300+ miles, post release large battery 298 (in your dreams) actual 245 miles. All these firms promise the earth and generally supply something that bears no relation to the hype but its good advertising pre release I just chose the Ioniq 5 as an example because it was on my list to buy until I noticed their severe reluctance to state the milage pre release. Something to bear in mind a lot of BEV firms do not like the various national government milage tests but it is a legal requirement to state them in their advertising even though they bear little relation to reality and upset the punters when compared to the post purchase real life milage.

 

[Battpower]

Unfortunately all these claims generally prove to be vastly expanded vapor ware. Example-Hyundai Ioniq 5, concept 400+ miles, pre release 300+ miles, post release large battery 298 (in your dreams) actual 245 miles. All these firms promise the earth and generally supply something that bears no relation to the hype but its good advertising pre release I just chose the Ioniq 5 as an example because it was on my list to buy until I noticed their severe reluctance to state the milage pre release. Something to bear in mind a lot of BEV firms do not like the various national government milage tests but it is a legal requirement to state them in their advertising even though they bear little relation to reality and upset the punters when compared to the post purchase real life milage.

I can't speak for the latest model releases, but as I've posted previously, I am more than happy with real world range and for me the more important efficiency level.

Even now in Peak District winter I'm getting 4.5+ miles per kWh. On a run I am seeing summer 310+ actual miles at steady 60mph, and winter (not many long drives) may be 265 to 275. The claimed range for my model is around 280.

Most of my journeys start with a 1mile downhill drive. Except for at 100% SOC, regen is good right from the start even around freezing and without any preheating.

And that is with a 64kwh battery.

I would agree that DC charging is not as good as my Model S, but I am reluctant to supercharge unless essential. Also, the only way to get fastest DC charging with Tesla requires heating the battery.

 

[GRiLLA]

There was a story recently of a battery tech company called ONE replacing the battery in an MS with one of their own that roughly doubles energy density, the story said they had added almost 100kWh along with 300kg of weight for a pack that was the same physical size as the one that came out of the Tesla.

Given that the Tesla 100kWh battery weighs 625kg it looks like they have done that in about 300kg, so Mercedes claim isn't outlandish.

Of course the problem isn't really the concept tech, it's things like mass production, safely, reliability and tolerance for repeated charging. F1 engineers can get 1000hp from a 1.5 litre engine, but it only lasts a few thousand miles and has to be fully rebuilt every couple of hundred - not ideal for Joe Public; a battery that's half the weight for the same energy that can only be recharged ten times is useless.

Edit:
Here's one of the pieces covering the story: ONE Doubles Tesla Model S Range to Over 700 Miles With Gemini Battery

Mercedes casually claimed to have halved the weight and size of a 100KWH battery, ONE demonstrated/claimed that they had reduced the weight of 200KWH by 25%.

 

[Battpower]

Mercedes casually claimed to have halved the weight and size of a 100KWH battery, ONE demonstrated/claimed that they had reduced the weight of 200KWH by 25%.

How can we as mere observers tell if f any of these claims are more than marketing hype?

My understanding is that battery design (as with most things) is a fine balance right at the edge of battery electro-chemical behaviour. For example, early Tesla cells were pushed to 4.15v iirc, while current ones charge to 4.2v, but the cell technology can withstand 4.4v under test conditions.

When Tesla were concerned about battery performance with aging cars one response was to lower the max permitted cell voltage along with max charge current.

So getting a one off test case to prove what's theoretically possible is possibly a long way from achieving the same performance in a rugged, safe, long lasting production design.

 

[Nujec]

In 3 years time we'll have more information on the long term reliability of EV batteries as a lot more of the first generation of EVs will be out of battery warranty. If it turns out that they don't last much beyond warranty that will cause media headlines as owners are presented with huge battery replacement bills. This could have a severe effect on EV adoption, depreciation and leasing costs.

 

[Battpower]

don't last much beyond warranty

1st gen EV’s really struggled. Renault gave a 1 year extra grace year on wty because batteries were so close to the lower performance limit set in wty terms.

IMO the used market is where increased battery capacity (range) becomes most important. A car that started off with claimed 300 plus mile range may be adequate for many owners when new, but the real world performance at say 6 years (that many owners feel is still new car territory for ICE vehicles with 300 plus real mile per tank range) could easily be 100 to 150 and no guarantee how long even those limits will persist.

In the next 3 years we won't even have seen the ’bulge' of recent EV adoption hit the 6 year old car market. That will be a very challenging time. Infrastructure needs to be in place for competitive replacement of traction batteries unless we are going to scrap cars purely because of expired batteries. Talk of battery tech that will extend beyond the life of the car is somewhat moot if we are working with car manufacturers view of EOL. ICE cars are often viable 20 and more years into their lives as our 1995 RAV 4 bares testament. If it needed a £10k replacement battery even after 10 years it would have gone to scrap years ago.

 

[Nujec]

Another poster made the good point that if battery failure is uncommon then what we really need is insurance against the rare but high costs of battery replacement. The manufacturers themselves have the best data to provide such insurance but whether they'll actually want to or not is another matter. Perhaps they may be pressured into it to minimise bad PR if large numbers of cars are scrapped when their batteries need replacing. This will take many years to play out in the marketplace. In the meantime it's the early adopters that will potentially get burned the worst (as often happens).

If battery failure is truly rare then the warranties could be longer with bigger mileage limits but that's probably not doable until there's much more data on longevity.

 

[Adopado]

Another poster made the good point that if battery failure is uncommon then what we really need is insurance against the rare but high costs of battery replacement. The manufacturers themselves have the best data to provide such insurance but whether they'll actually want to or not is another matter. Perhaps they may be pressured into it to minimise bad PR if large numbers of cars are scrapped when their batteries need replacing. This will take many years to play out in the marketplace. In the meantime it's the early adopters that will potentially get burned the worst (as often happens).

If battery failure is truly rare then the warranties could be longer with bigger mileage limits but that's probably not doable until there's much more data on longevity.

I suppose the long warranty is effectively your insurance. 8 years is a great reassurance. As you say, with more data perhaps they will be able to go longer.

 

[bingbongbing]

at least we all agree FSD still won't be here!

 

[Battpower]

at least we all agree FSD still won't be here!

That's funny! Was FSD even mentioned in this thread yet?! I've certainly marked it off my 'realistic dream list' a while back. Probably around the time rear lights started to be visualised as traffic lights in the middle of the M1.