I never claimed that there was a problem with travelling I-40 in NC with a Tesla. It’s not whining to point out that you’re arguing against something that I never said in the first place. I do see the problem with claiming that all of the stations that serve I-40 are directly off of exits from I-40 when that’s demonstratably not true, and I also see a problem with treating I-40 as the only major route in NC and glossing over routes like ‘state capital to popular beach’.
Oh, I see. A Supercharger not on I-40, but is instead just off the exit of another freeway, is in your uninformed opinion seeekritly serving I-40.
It’s possible… just possible mind you… that battery technology might have some room for improvement in the future. I mean, it is entirely within reason that we might not have developed the best possible battery for EV’s that will ever be made.
There are lots of examples out there - but I just came across this one:
Free of Heavy Metals, New Battery Design Could Alleviate Environmental Concerns
Now, it IS by some new-fangled startup called “IBM”, so who knows if they are legit or not. But they say that:
Also:
Ah, but probably won’t work for EV’s. Oh wait:
Certainly you won’t be getting an EV with this battery tomorrow, or probably not even in a couple of years. But eventually, this battery (or something like it) will enable us to have EV’s that are cheaper than gas cars, and quick and easy to charge.
But I guess EV critics will find some other hill to die on.
Pro-tip; you might want to start divesting your portfolio if you have oil stocks.
It occurs to me that progressive states could promote EVs and make some profit$ too by installing credit-card-fired superchargers at highway rest areas and roadside facilities. Jurisdictions could also subsidize charger installations in apartment parking lots, and cities could electrify parking meters on downtown streets. Such would still depend on reliable power infrastructures, lacking in California. Texas has its own grid - start there.
I yet expect a long wait before locals in my remote village acquire EVs. Folks in the greater SF Bay Area making 2-3 hour commutes each way likely won’t want EVs until their jobsites provide charging. It won’t happen soon.
You might find this article from Car and Driver interesting. It’s about the different approaches taken by Volkswagen and Honda on electric cars. VW is betting big on EVs, expecting to sell a million in 2023 and perhaps 1.5 million in 2025. Meanwhile, Honda is planning to sell more hybrid gas-electric vehicles, betting that people want high fuel-efficiency vehicles. The CEO of Honda said “he wasn’t sure there are any buyers who actually want an EV, given the infrastructure and hardware challenges. He said he doesn’t expect this to change in the near future.”
Seems pretty short-sighted on Honda’s part. In not too many years, you won’t be able to drive an ICE at all (hybrid or not) in many city centers.
And has been demonstrated, automakers have not as of yet hit it out of the park when it comes to their first long-range EVs. I’m sure that the second-gen e-tron, I-Pace, etc. will be more competitive with Tesla due to learning from experience. Honda should be starting now with a serious EV program (not just <100 mi models) if they want to be competitive in the long run. Simply waiting means they will enter a market with highly refined Nth generation models from other companies.
The thing is, Honda will probably be right in the short term. VW’s big push will likely stumble a bit, as any big program would, and in the meantime Honda will be happy to sell a cheaper hybrid. And for Honda buyers specifically, who are on the hyper-practical end of the spectrum (no one ever bought a Honda because it was cool or fast), hybrids will make sense for a longer period. But eventually this is going to catch up with them.
It’s pretty dumb to say “Are there really customers who truly want them?”, at any rate. It’s one thing to believe EV growth projections are optimistic, but another thing entirely to deny the existence of EV enthusiasts.
A friend went to business school at the University of Michigan, where a couple of the professors had a pet theory about core competency; that companies that succeed identify what they’re really good at and concentrate on that. One of the examples was Honda. The idea is that their main core competency isn’t building cars but producing internal-combustion engines. Note that many of the products besides Honda automobiles are things like generators, lawn mowers, outboard boat motors and so forth. Various products that leverage an expertise in engine manufacturing.
So if you believe that theory, perhaps one reason Honda is shying away from EVs is that it’s not in their wheelhouse, so to speak. (Note that I’ve driven Honda cars for 25 years straight, and like them. So I would look seriously at any EV they produce.)
Minor nitpick wrt Honda’s being slow. There’s legions of Civic R, NSX and S2000 owners who may disagree with that statement.
Who said anything about Hondas being slow?
I wouldn’t say Honda is shying away from EV’s. They’re making them. Clearly they have skin in the game. But it makes sense not to put all your eggs in one basket until you’ve demonstrated a viable product. If their EV’s show promise they can alter their car mix.
Not too many years in geological terms; we’re decades away from that happening. Currently they’re niche vehicles & the rosiest of projections don’t have them outselling ICEs for many years; couple that with the fact that people hold on to cars for years, a decade or more in many cases & one of the last group to get EVs will be people who live in cities & don’t have dedicated parking/charging now & you’re way off the mark of it happening soon.
You can see a list here of phaseout plans. 2030 seems to be the year most are shooting for, though the scope varies slightly. And in case you hadn’t heard, 2030 is only *one *decade away these days.
Will all of these bans happen? Probably not. But it won’t be zero, either.
Tesla has built their Supercharger network in 8 years. That’s one company, starting from scratch, and with almost all the growth happening in the last few years. I think cities can figure out street and apartment charging in the next decade.
Well, I did say that no one bought a Honda because it was fast. It’s a fair nitpick, but still–Honda’s core customer is definitely more on the practical side. Also, the S2000 hasn’t been produced in years, and the NSX sold 170 units in the US 2018…
Looks like the fastest Honda, the Civic Type R, is as zippy as the slowest Tesla, and costs the same. (Shrug)
I was responding to a portion of Dr.Strangelove’s quote:
<snip> And for Honda buyers specifically, who are on the hyper-practical end of the spectrum (no one ever bought a Honda because it was cool or fast)… <snip>
But I would agree that that is the exception not the rule. Toyota has made some pretty fast cars as well but that’s not the main customer base.
FWIW, my first car was a CRX and it was a blast…
Hyundai has started an EV carsharing service in a rural area of Spain. Sorry, I can’t find anybody who’s translated it to English.
Carsharing services tend to have the issue of being limited exclusively to the largest cities: not even the largest metro areas, if you live anywhere except in the main city for a metro area you don’t have access to the carsharing programs (pretty stupid, when so many metro areas have half their population or more on the “belt towns”). And one of the main obstacles to EVs is “how do I get this thing charged?” The project aims to break those two barriers.
Honda’s never really made a “balls out” performance car (NSX aside.) They’ve made a number of quick, sporty cars (Civic Si, S2000, etc.)
Which means they’re only proposals.
According to your link, “A partial ban enacted in 2012 by California, requiring that 15% of new vehicles offered for sale between 2018 and 2025 must be Zero Emission Vehicles ZEVs) in order for the automaker to sell any vehicles in the state, has yielded 8% compliance.” & they’re probably the most progressive state in terms of EVs & only demanding 15% of sales be EVs 5 years earlier than some of the bans.
Also, the average age of a car is 11.8 years; that means the vast, vast majority of cars sold today would need to be EVs to meet the 2030 target.
2030 is wishful thinking but I don’t see it as a realistic date to ban vehicles. Do long distance EV tractor-trailers even exist yet?
Tesla’s is still at the “reserve yours” stage. Nothing concrete ( though a few performance numbers) unless it’s in the 35 minute video.
Upthread someone referred to the mandate in California that a certain percentage of sales for each manufacturer be zero emission vehicles, so it may be that the EVs being sold by Honda are meant only to satisfy such requirements.