Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
It's the same reason why people are not buying new ICE vehicles- they cannot afford to. Sales of diesels have dropped 20% year on year according to the most recent statistics.
Also interesting is where the growth of EV sales is taking place, and it is not the private buyers who probably reflect real-life views rather than the corporate ‘toe-the-line’ view, and dealers and manuacturers are having to self-register a lot of vehicles.
Year on year changes:
private EV sales of 59,500 are 3.8 per cent down
true fleet registrations of 142,174 are only 1.6 per cent up
dealer registrations which are up 12.8,
manufacturer registrations which are up 27.8 per cent
demonstrator cars up 37.7 per cent
Motability registrations of 48,750 are 110.4 per cent up.
It is clear that it is the private motorist who is not enamoured with EVs, or else they do not suit their livestyle. If EVs are to be the vehicle of choice, something has to change, and I believe that there is still room for the technology to improve, so that the downsides of running EVs, purchase price, recharging, range etc are as good as that in ICEs.
3.1 miles per kWh sounds quite low but I couldn't see what the equivalent average MPG rate was for the petrol or diesel equivalent.
Plus there are numerous schemes that give discounts, with Tesla supercharger sites often down to 25-50p even without membership. Not always at a motorway services but never far from a motorway.
If you had an EV you'd surely look for the better deals just as no fool fills up with petrol or diesel at a petrol station on a motorway, at least not unless someone else is paying (and the same could be said for the EV chargers).
Assuming that's a response to the article I posted. They do state that 3.1 miles per kWh is an average from the ones they've tested.
Working backwards from the price of petrol listed gives roughly 43mpg. Which doesn't sound outrageous for a modern medium sized car.
I agree that there are almost certainly cheaper options, but the claim was that even charging expensively was cheaper than ICE.
Why are all the comparisons here based on only purchase cost and marginal costs?
There's also maintenance where there's a huge difference between IC and EV costs. And what about the relative consumption difference between rural, motorway suburban and motorway driving. IC vehicles may give slightly better practical range on the first two, but the slowing/accelerating shorter journeys with colder engines and gear changing certainly worsens their fuel consumption and brake/clutch wear compared to EVs. Much as most drivers would prefer to spend their driving hours cruising along quiet country roads, for the majority of motorists, life certainly isn't anything like that.
Probably because those are the easiest numbers to find? They do have a bad rep from manufacturers trying to fiddle them, but the average mpg or kWh/mile figures should be taking account of what an average driver does in order to be comparable.
A quick google for articles on maintenance costs comes up with https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/electric-cars/running/ev-maintenance-service-and-repairs-guide/
Renault’s Zoe electric car service plan costs £299 for three years and 30,000 miles, compared to £499 for a petrol or diesel car over the same period.
For Audi’s range of E-tron models, service plans start with an upfront cost of £299.25. This includes one service, one brake fluid change and one pollen filter change. A service plan for a 2.0-litre combustion model starts at £449.25.
Probably because those are the easiest numbers to find? They do have a bad rep from manufacturers trying to fiddle them, but the average mpg or kWh/mile figures should be taking account of what an average driver does in order to be comparable.
That's something that the critics of EVs vs IC vehicles seem to leave out. The motor industry has always put an over optimistic version of their wares' economy, so the WLTP figures provide a similar bias for all modes of vehicles. Stragely, EV detractors only tend to quotes EVs' range figures as false as they use them to trigger range anxiety.
When I'm on the motorway I always see everyone driving super economically to achieve those MPGs!
I can get 40-50mpg on a motorway but otherwise it's usually nearer 35-40 and for short trips to the shops with a cold engine then it's nearer 25-30. Plus the wear that comes with it.
Of course many EV owners charging at 7p at home may well drive in sport mode than eco.
Assuming that's a response to the article I posted. They do state that 3.1 miles per kWh is an average from the ones they've tested.
Working backwards from the price of petrol listed gives roughly 43mpg. Which doesn't sound outrageous for a modern medium sized car.
I agree that there are almost certainly cheaper options, but the claim was that even charging expensively was cheaper than ICE.
Probably because those are the easiest numbers to find? They do have a bad rep from manufacturers trying to fiddle them, but the average mpg or kWh/mile figures should be taking account of what an average driver does in order to be comparable.
A quick google for articles on maintenance costs comes up with https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/electric-cars/running/ev-maintenance-service-and-repairs-guide/
Just checking my car app for recent trips and thanks to the colder weather I've been averaging 27-31mpg (petrol 1.2 litre, around 80bhp) around town but got 51.1mpg doing 55ish on the motorway earlier today (keeping with traffic in bad weather) but normally it's nearer 45mpg as I'm likely cruising at 70mph.
I haven't really changed my driving style so I have to assume the drop is down to the weather, which we've always known and yet these days it only seems to be electric cars where people say the winter/cold reduces range...
If EVs routinely gave a range of 400 miles, so lack of charges, queues for chargers cost of public charges, range anxiety will no longer be a problem. If costs came down and matched ICEs (not just hybrids), then you will have a saleable, practical product. This is why the technology still needs to be improved.
I don‘t think that’s right. Anecdote alert - but those I know with low range EVs are those that never (or very rarely) need to drive more than 100 miles. They never get close to running down to the wire.
Regardless, something like 90% of EVs sold now have a range over 200 miles, and 75% over 250 miles.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
If EV battery range increases, you would not need to expand the number of chargers - drivers would not need to top up so often. You would not have 'bank holiday queues' for chargers - the experience would be more akin to ICE when it comes to needing to add resource.
They wouldnt need to ’top up’ as often, but all things being equal they will still need to charge for the same amount of time.
When I get my 400mile range EV (2026 I think) and driving to Scotland, I will still be charging it every 200 miles or so as that is when I’m stopping anyway for half an hour. No point stopping at 200 miles for half an hour, not charging, driving another 200, and having to wait an hour for a (near) full charge, when I only need a 30 min stop.
Gridserve is effectively a motorway services, often a grudge purchase, priced accordingly. Waitrose is for convenience, charge while shopping. I am surprised that the convenience factor commands the higher price.
(I am aware other charging options are available, no need to go through them all again.)
Gridserve is effectively a motorway services, often a grudge purchase, priced accordingly. Waitrose is for convenience, charge while shopping. I am surprised that the convenience factor commands the higher price.
(I am aware other charging options are available, no need to go through them all again.)
Currently location makes very little difference to cost, virtually all charge point operators (Tesla being one that does have variable pricing) have a flat flee irrespective of whether the charger is in a garden centre or motorway services.
You have to be desperate, an idiot or having it paid for through a business card to use Shell. There are plenty of places where rapid charging is in the 60-70p bracket. Most folk who do a lot of private rapid charging sign up to a subscription scheme, which as far as I‘ve seen are never discussed when price comparisons with fossil fuels are made.
Currently location makes very little difference to cost, virtually all charge point operators (Tesla being one that does have variable pricing) have a flat flee irrespective of whether the charger is in a garden centre or motorway services.
An old banger often comes with high, unexpected, bills so it's often best to get rid than start throwing money at them. Clearly there are exceptions.
I wonder how the second hand market and concept of keeping a car until it breaks will work with EVs, as they should last far longer. And if they do, how will that impact the sales of new ones?
People are now keeping their mobiles for far longer than they did and it has had a big impact on sales of new sevices.
My bold - i have found that be being careful (usually) about what car I buy secondhand I get very good reliability.
My second Vauxhall Carlton had to go because of ULEZ but it was getting to the stage where jobs were required. With hindsight I should have kept it given the number of trips per month I do means the ULEZ charge was a small factor.
Depends on the car, and while you obviously have tyres, suspension, brakes and some fluids, it's still a LOT less than engines, gearboxes and clutches etc. Dedicated EV tyres are pretty much a scam by the industry to sell you more expensive tyres (newsflash; they say themselves that any tyre will work on an EV!) and brake pads will need changing far less often. I don't know about the cooling systems, but expect that's pretty maintenance free.
More fool people who buy cars that have such expensive parts, especially when the industry tries to do everything to stop you repairing your own car or sourcing your own third-party parts (especially if such parts need to be paired with the car).
Increasingly, people are finding that car dealerships are requiring expensive (£100-200) diagnostics to be carried out on a car before they can do a repair, even if you (and they) know the fault already.
I will admit that with EV servicing being needed less often, and far cheaper (like £40-60), you're going to see prices likely rise for parts to compensate. Hopefully the EU, and then the UK, will actively work towards forcing manufacturers to allow car owners to repair their own vehicles and have access to parts - that won't be £3,000 for a wing mirror (if that is an actual price, not just hyperbole).
My main outlay is on things that an EV also uses up (tyres and to a lesser extent brakes).
Exhaust is the main ICE cost I have incurred.
That is probably because of my low annual mileage.
Means for me that the higher purchase cost of an EV is not recovered in lower running costs. Especially if the battery did need replacing - I do not think there is such a big ticket item on an ICE like the battery on an EV.
You are right that there are big differences in parts costs between manufacturers and even within a model (a 2.2 litre Vectra has an American engine with American reliability and American parts costs).
Yes newer ICEs and EVs seem to require the black art of diagnostics and replacing expensive parts to see if that cures the problem. My ocal Vauxhall dealer quipped that the skip out the back has probably 50% of the rubbish in it being usable !.
Two posts which fail to read what I was responding to. It was a statement quoted that EVs 'last longer'.
EVs are no different to ICE vehicles. They will only last as long as someone is willing to keep spending money on repairs, any vehicle will last for decades, but it needs constant spending to do so, EVs will be no different.
There will come a time in all vehicle's life when the list if repairs required due to a fault or to get it through an MOT (and MoT failures are generally structural, safety, or electrical, not engine or gearbox components as apart from emissions these aren't tested) will far exceed its value and that's when it gets turned into bake bean cans.
It wasn't £3k for the mirror, it is £3k for the camera system which replaced the mirror. Eqully it could be £1500 for a new LED intelligent headlamp unit. The irony is with such expensive components a low speed accident could result in a relatively young EV being written off as uneconomical to repair.
I find I am willing to spend a little more on repairs than some people. But this is tempered by a view of depreciation vs maintenance. I have usually spent less on maintenance on my reliable 10 year old cars than someone has spent on repairs to a lot newer car of an unreliable make/model.
People change their car at differing ages depending on how paranoid they are of age vs reliability but also image.
That might be an Isle of Man thing or perhaps just regional generally. I always fill up to the top at the first sensible* opportunity once the needle dips below a quarter. I don't believe I've had the light on in the last 20 years.
I suspect people who are OK with ranges under 200 miles are those who accept running down to the wire. I don't and will continue the policy as "charge at the first sensible opportunity on going below one quarter" when I eventually switch, and would not even consider an EV with a real world range of under 200 miles.
A second-car run around is of course different. If a car never leaves town a range of 50 miles (e.g. a used Leaf) is fine.
* Ridiculous motorway prices not classing as "sensible" of course.
I always fill up. Usually roughly when there is 25% left in the tank or if a long journey is coming up. I am not wasting my time on part fills.
For me I want enough range to be well away from the motorway at the far end before I need to buy petrol. I have never bought petrol at a motorway service station - rip off. I try to avoid stopping at motorway service stations so would not be there for long enough to charge a battery. I usually have sandwiches and drink from home so only need the loo.
If EV battery range increases, you would not need to expand the number of chargers - drivers would not need to top up so often. You would not have 'bank holiday queues' for chargers - the experience would be more akin to ICE when it comes to needing to add resource.
I don‘t think that’s right. Anecdote alert - but those I know with low range EVs are those that never (or very rarely) need to drive more than 100 miles. They never get close to running down to the wire.
Regardless, something like 90% of EVs sold now have a range over 200 miles, and 75% over 250 miles.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
They wouldnt need to ’top up’ as often, but all things being equal they will still need to charge for the same amount of time.
When I get my 400mile range EV (2026 I think) and driving to Scotland, I will still be charging it every 200 miles or so as that is when I’m stopping anyway for half an hour. No point stopping at 200 miles for half an hour, not charging, driving another 200, and having to wait an hour for a (near) full charge, when I only need a 30 min stop.
That might be me. If stopping somewhere cheap - so not a motorway services.
If I am making a proper stop it is usually for fish and chips or other takeaway. So chargers need to be in the street or little parking area / hard standing in front of the takeaway.
The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) figures for November were just released and EVs were the only car type that showed a rise in numbers (which is very strange cos the media keep telling us EV sales are falling?). The % change on the previous year was 58% up and overall market share for the year to date is almost 18%.
Just checking my car app for recent trips and thanks to the colder weather I've been averaging 27-31mpg (petrol 1.2 litre, around 80bhp) around town but got 51.1mpg doing 55ish on the motorway earlier today (keeping with traffic in bad weather) but normally it's nearer 45mpg as I'm likely cruising at 70mph.
I haven't really changed my driving style so I have to assume the drop is down to the weather, which we've always known and yet these days it only seems to be electric cars where people say the winter/cold reduces range...
I'm assuming you're meaning the gearbox oil hasn't (there are no service parts inside gearboxes of modern cars). However even replacing gearbox oil is not a thing on cars under about 20 years old other than some high performance models. They are filled at manufacture with the oil designed to last for life.
There is, and it’s called the engine. But I don’t know where people get this idea that the battery is going to need replacing in full. It will happen to a very, very small percentage of vehicles, much the same as the need for an engine replacement.
This is not a new thing. I had an ICE that spent a total of about 2months out of the 2 years I owned it in the garage (under warranty) having diagnostic issues. That was 22 years ago.
The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) figures for November were just released and EVs were the only car type that showed a rise in numbers (which is very strange cos the media keep telling us EV sales are falling?). The % change on the previous year was 58% up and overall market share for the year to date is almost 18%.
The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) figures for November were just released and EVs were the only car type that showed a rise in numbers (which is very strange cos the media keep telling us EV sales are falling?). The % change on the previous year was 58% up and overall market share for the year to date is almost 18%.
There have been a few news stories suggesting that dealer registrations of EVs are up massively as a proportion of sales. I.e. the manufacturers are fiddling the figures to avoid the fines from the mandate.
There have been a few news stories suggesting that dealer registrations of EVs are up massively as a proportion of sales. I.e. the manufacturers are fiddling the figures to avoid the fines from the mandate.
@Noddy marvellous data there, thanks.
There is one measure I've yet to see - and which I think EVs will always fall foul of, versus ICE.
Not a measure I'd considered, until recent arrival of a young German Shepherd into our fostering-care.
The measure? "How long [in minutes] for an inquisitive toothy canine to find amd chew through a domestic charging cable."
But that range would allow them to easily get back home after a long trip and charge at cheap, non public rates. Plus, there will be less demand at public chargers, so fewer queues. And if you wanted to travel 400 mlles from home, you don't have to queue and recharge twice en route.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) figures for November were just released and EVs were the only car type that showed a rise in numbers (which is very strange cos the media keep telling us EV sales are falling?). The % change on the previous year was 58% up and overall market share for the year to date is almost 18%.
And this would not have anything to do with manufacturers holding back on ICE sales and heavily discounting EV sales so as to hit arbitrary government Mandate targets?
There is, and it’s called the engine. But I don’t know where people get this idea that the battery is going to need replacing in full. It will happen to a very, very small percentage of vehicles, much the same as the need for an engine replacement.
a US report on 20,000 users from a few months ago. It says:
There have been two major battery recalls in recent years, both related to similar battery pack flaws in the Chevrolet Bolt EV and EUV and the Hyundai Kona Electric. The remedy for both of these recalls was a sweeping battery replacement program covered by the manufacturers. Other than these two recalls, though, battery replacements in the Recurrent community remain rare.
Across all years and models, outside of big recalls, only 2.5% have been replaced. This increase from last year is entirely due to older cars. For cars older than 2015, replacement rates are 13%, but under 1% for cars from 2016 and newer.
Car batteries don't underperform by that much these days, and if it is commonly used in a city at 20-30mph then it will quite possibly match or beat the quoted figure. If it has a heat pump, it should do a lot better in the winter too.
My Hyundai has 38.3kWh and realistically/actually does do around 200 miles of mixed motorway and ABC road driving in fair conditions. This is based on a 180-mile round trip we actually do fairly often - without an enroute charge.
The Ionic is very efficient in part because of its shape. The Puma is a brick in comparison.
I think the Ionic is about the only car with better than Tesla Model 3 efficiency in the real world.
The later Hyundai EVs are less slippery and much less efficient.
A fuel price of 135p/litre is 613p/gallon which is about 41mpg.
A 41mpg average for a petrol engine sounds like the sort of mileage you'd get advertised from the manufacturer. Something like a Fiesta will achieve that, yes, but bigger cars won't. And that's certainly one fair criticism of the current EV market: lots of massive EV SUVs but not so many smaller city cars.
As for the cost of charging, the public chargers here all charge about 35p/kWh. I'm sure some of the ultra high-speed chargers do charge more, especially at motorway service stations, but then again the fuel at motorway service stations is similarly much more expensive.
My 2012 Fiesta, with the 1L turbo (ecoboost) engine, does that. My 2019 Qashqai, with the most recent iteration of their 1.3L turbo, does not. The difference really is the extra weight on the Qashqai. Both cars are mainly used on short urban journeys, as you'd expect given where I live.
But that also illustrates my point about range. I do about 10 miles a day- 3 to work, 3 back home, 4 to Tesco- and so a 400 mile range is irrelevant to me. I know I live on a small island- the furthest I can drive in a straight line is 32 miles- but I can say I wasn't driving much more on a daily basis when I lived in Whitley Bay.
A fuel price of 135p/litre is 613p/gallon which is about 41mpg.
A 41mpg average for a petrol engine sounds like the sort of mileage you'd get advertised from the manufacturer. Something like a Fiesta will achieve that, yes, but bigger cars won't. And that's certainly one fair criticism of the current EV market: lots of massive EV SUVs but not so many smaller city cars.
As for the cost of charging, the public chargers here all charge about 35p/kWh. I'm sure some of the ultra high-speed chargers do charge more, especially at motorway service stations, but then again the fuel at motorway service stations is similarly much more expensive.
Depends on the "normal petrol".
My 2012 Fiesta, with the 1L turbo (ecoboost) engine, does that. My 2019 Qashqai, with the most recent iteration of their 1.3L turbo, does not. The difference really is the extra weight on the Qashqai. Both cars are mainly used on short urban journeys, as you'd expect given where I live.
I'm mostly doing short journeys from cold. If I take the Qashqai up the south then I get up to 40-45mpg, maybe 50mpg. But pottering around town, from cold, there are days when it barely gets over 20mpg. It's cold and wet and hilly here...
I'm mostly doing short journeys from cold. If I take the Qashqai up the south then I get up to 40-45mpg, maybe 50mpg. But pottering around town, from cold, there are days when it barely gets over 20mpg. It's cold and wet and hilly here...
Same for me. I mostly do low mileage so the engine is started cold and can't make the advertised mpg. If I drive 100+ miles then I can start getting mid 50s.
I suspect a lot of people with ICE cars are being economical with the truth on what they're achieving, especially as many people don't drive such that they get the best possible fuel economy.
It's just like the people who compare a flight booked six months ago on a low cost airline with a walk up rail ticket.
Obviously someone with an EV might have a heavy right foot too of course.
I'm mostly doing short journeys from cold. If I take the Qashqai up the south then I get up to 40-45mpg, maybe 50mpg. But pottering around town, from cold, there are days when it barely gets over 20mpg. It's cold and wet and hilly here...
A fuel price of 135p/litre is 613p/gallon which is about 41mpg.
A 41mpg average for a petrol engine sounds like the sort of mileage you'd get advertised from the manufacturer. Something like a Fiesta will achieve that, yes, but bigger cars won't. And that's certainly one fair criticism of the current EV market: lots of massive EV SUVs but not so many smaller city cars.
As for the cost of charging, the public chargers here all charge about 35p/kWh. I'm sure some of the ultra high-speed chargers do charge more, especially at motorway service stations, but then again the fuel at motorway service stations is similarly much more expensive.
Depends on the "normal petrol".
My 2012 Fiesta, with the 1L turbo (ecoboost) engine, does that. My 2019 Qashqai, with the most recent iteration of their 1.3L turbo, does not. The difference really is the extra weight on the Qashqai. Both cars are mainly used on short urban journeys, as you'd expect given where I live.
But that also illustrates my point about range. I do about 10 miles a day- 3 to work, 3 back home, 4 to Tesco- and so a 400 mile range is irrelevant to me. I know I live on a small island- the furthest I can drive in a straight line is 32 miles- but I can say I wasn't driving much more on a daily basis when I lived in Whitley Bay.
41mpg is not bad for what I assume is effectively urban driving with maybe less stopping and starting but still short trips. Up and down hills would be a killer and there an EV would be a benefit going back down hill similar to stop start driving in London. My 2 litre Vauxhall Carlton from the 90s would just scrape 40mpg on a long motorway run but around town sub 30mpg.
When EVs are cheap secondhand then I will be tempted but I do such a low mileage that I cannot justify the depreciation of a new vehicle. I will wait to see on battery reliability for older EVs and things are getting better there. I will have to wait and see for at least ten years given I never buy new. Given I live in London with its plethora of buses and trains it means beyond walking distance I often do not consider the car. It is only the trips involving heavy stuff, a group or my odd longer trips that the economy of ICE vs EV gets to be a consideration - but that is dwarfed by the fixed costs regardless of mileage (tax, insurance, maintenance and barely-depreciation).
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
ev-database.org
www.smmt.co.uk
