Hybrid cars- anyone have one?

[matzesu]

I dont have one, and i find these Technic Quite Absurd:
You have a big heavy Monster SUV, but you can Greenwash it whit an Tiny Electro Engine which make the thing much more heavy ..
In Germany, Hybrid Cars did get also this "E" on the License Blade like Full Electric Cars, but they have some times up to 4 Exhaust Pipes that smokes too ..

On the other side: When you need an Towing Car but also an City Electro Car, it might be a good inbetween solution as long as the Long Range Electric Cars are still struggle whit Trailer Range,  ..

My next Car will be for shure an Real Electric Van whit a good Range, i think they will be available then,  until then i stick to my Fiat Doblo, its a real Diesel Engine but at least as its no "Fake EV" its dosnt have a heavy batterie and weights still 1600 kg ..

[Don Pablo]

How things have changed since I started this thread.   

I am still driving my Jeep and I don't get anywhere near as good as 12L/100kms anymore.  I am getting about 14.4L/100kms on a good day now.   

At a current gas price of $1.89/L, that means I am paying about $.27/km to drive my Jeep. 

I've been drooling over the electric F-150 (called the Lightning) for some time now and with recent government discounts, they are quite reasonably priced. 

Given our current pricing of $.16/kwh, and the estimated range of the F-150, it would cost me about $.04/km to drive a full sized pickup, which is WAY better than the $.27/km it costs me to run my Jeep.   

Even assuming that the range estimates are somewhat generous, even a 50% reduction is a significant improvement over my Jeep.

For me and the mileage I do, that works out to somewhere around $500/mth in fuel savings, even after paying the power bill.  That's significant, and so I think once I get a few things sorted out, I may just have to sign up for a new truck.

Considering I brought my Jeep home in January 2013 with 4kms on the odometer and I am now sitting at just a hair under 300,000kms, I think it has done quite well.  And, there's still lots of life left in it, I just can't afford to feed it!   

Def

It does sound like a cool truck.
Pity Ford doesn't seem interested in making it cheaper.
Starting at $60k CAD  is that expensive for a truck in Canada compared to what trucks used to cost when you bought the jeep?

[matzesu]

I have about 8,5 l /100 km on my 2015 Build Fiat Doblo whit the 135 hp Diesel Engine (Euro5) Our Unimog from 1974 would consume about a bit under 20 l / 100km at longer range drives,  ..

[Don Pablo]

Our Tesla Model Y costs €2-3 in electricity per 100 km if we charge it from 2am to 5am
 An equivalent petrol or diesel would be at least €10 per 100 km

Hybrids would still be cheap, but ehhh

[matzesu]

Its depents on your usecase: if you only drive longrange then you have the batterie and the electrics as unused ballast as the benefits of the Electro Engine are not needed, if you are driving mostly in city and can charge the Batterie whit the Joice of your Photovoltaic from you Roof, then it might be a good alternative to an big Diesel Car ..

The most Fuel is burned in this Stop and Go Travic in Citys where you have to break and then need energy again to get it to roll .. therefor these Hybrid Cars are good

But the peaple think that an Hyprid Car is automatically more envroiment friendly as an Euro6 Diesel

The best where to have an full electric car for your every day city needs that can get charged from your own Solar or Wind Plant, and maybe an Euro7 Diesel Towing Car that gets used only once in a few months..

[Grant Lamontagne]

It does sound like a cool truck.
Pity Ford doesn't seem interested in making it cheaper.
Starting at $60k CAD  is that expensive for a truck in Canada compared to what trucks used to cost when you bought the jeep?

My Jeep was $40,000 CDN when I bought it.  Nowadays, to buy the same Jeep is well over $70,000 CDN.

The electric versions of the F-150 are similar in price to the gas ones.  On the Ford Canada site you can see that the F-150 starts at $50,000 but there will be very few, if any trucks produced and sold at that price.  Most people will add the extra doors, 4WD etc, which will increase the price quickly.  4x4 alone will add $4500 to the price, and it is a necessity in Canada, at least in my opinion.  Otherwise your rear wheel drive truck will slide all over the place in the winter.

Def

[powernoodle]

My experience with buying a new Honda hybrid and a Toyota hybrid in 2023 was that both companies keep the supply artificially low, and you have to wait for the next available vehicle - 3 months for a CR-V and 8 - 12 months for a Sienna.  That vehicle will invariably be loaded with packages and accessories that you probably don't want, and you either buy it or you don't.  This drives the price up thousands over the vehicle that you wanted, and maximizes profit.  Gone are the days of full car lots, price negotiation and ordering a vehicle exactly how you want it.  I think that manufacturers figured out this business model during Covid, when supply was low and profits were high.

Maybe Ford and other manufacturers are different, and it may depend on the vehicle.  With high-demand vehicles, they are like the Soup N@zi on Seinfeld.  You take it or you leave it, and you better be happy about it.

 

[matzesu]

The big issue whit Electric and Hybrid at all is that the Companys think they can make envroiment friendly cars when they put an Electric Engine in .. but lots of Electric Cars, like the Cybertruck or the Ford F150 (which is an Monster Pickup for European Peaple: There are even Germans here in my City who drive whit the American Pickups Around (at least you pay lot more on tax and gazoline in Europe then in USA for these, as they are licenced as "Cars", not as "Trucks" ..

These Tesla Cars are packet whit lots of Electronical Toys, and they are quite big and heavy..

An ideal Electric Car in my Opinion have to be lightweight,  you would need less batterie for the same range, when the car itself would be something around 1000 kg and not 2500 kg ..

My first car was an Peugoet 205 gr, it had a quite low fuel consumtion, and was around 880 kg  ok there was no airbag so maybe give it 200 kg more for modern savety features and you can drive it quite far whit joice

[Vidar]

Having driven an electrical car for some time now I've had time to experience what factors matters most for range. That would be air resistance, temperature and deep snow. A few hundred kg more or less of passengers and luggage makes very little difference in comparison. That said lighter is better of course - and for many other metrics too.

As for environmentally friendly or not I can only speak for us - we bought the best car available for our use within our budget. It just happened to be electric.

I'd also mention that while we do save lots of money on electric vs gasoline prices (savings of about USD 2500 per year) the key cost of cars tend to be depreciation. (With the exception of old cars which are done with that).

[Grant Lamontagne]

The big issue whit Electric and Hybrid at all is that the Companys think they can make envroiment friendly cars when they put an Electric Engine in .. but lots of Electric Cars, like the Cybertruck or the Ford F150 (which is an Monster Pickup for European Peaple: There are even Germans here in my City who drive whit the American Pickups Around (at least you pay lot more on tax and gazoline in Europe then in USA for these, as they are licenced as "Cars", not as "Trucks" ..

These Tesla Cars are packet whit lots of Electronical Toys, and they are quite big and heavy..

An ideal Electric Car in my Opinion have to be lightweight,  you would need less batterie for the same range, when the car itself would be something around 1000 kg and not 2500 kg ..

My first car was an Peugoet 205 gr, it had a quite low fuel consumtion, and was around 880 kg  ok there was no airbag so maybe give it 200 kg more for modern savety features and you can drive it quite far whit joice

You may be interested in a company called Aptera.  They are working on bringing a three wheeled, ultra efficient EV to market that will (supposedly) have a thousand mile range per charge and generate around 40-60 miles of range per day with the built in solar panels.

I would be very interested in it myself, except that I have legitimate need of a truck.

Def

[Don Pablo]

I saw that, it's cool, definitely lightweight, but it's wider than a normal car. Could be a pain to drive on standard roads.
I blame the splayed out front wheels, and the big centre console space between driver and passenger.

[Vidar]

Futuristic looking thing. Interesting.

Anything with a third wheel leaving a third track in the middle of the road will face issues in snow conditions though. Chances are other traffic has only flattened two tracks. (And being very low is fine for aerodynamics but similarly worse in windy snow as the sight is far worse closer to the ground). I guess it isn't really meant for around here though.

[Grant Lamontagne]

No, it is designed for life in California, which may not equate well to the rest of the world!  Still, it is an excellent concept, and I'd like to see if it goes somewhere.  I'd certainly buy one.

A company called Lightspeed is also coming up with a more typical, four wheeled sedan with solar integration, and it looks interesting as well.

That having been said, I'd probably buy the Aptera if it was available.

Def

[Grant Lamontagne]

As an addendum to the California Trip thread I have a bit more EV experience than I did a week ago.

We ended up with a Kia Niro as a rental car for a couple of days (I'll post the story in the California thread since it's more appropriate there) and I did enjoy the opportunity to drive it- even though I really dislike Kias in general.  That having been said, this was a nice enough car.  I didn't care for the driver assist crapola, but that's a problem in most modern cars and not just EV's. 

If I owned it, I'd have gone to the effort to learn how to shut it all off!   

But I don't, so no worries.  It was a decent enough car in it's own right, and the all digital dash was neat.  I wish it had a few mre hardware buttons, particularly for the climate control, but again, that's not an EV specific problem.

As with most EV's, I never felt it was lacking for power, and despite picking it up at only 60% charge, I really didn't feel any range anxiety, even though I knew I would have to drive it from Sonoma to San Francisco, and I'd already seen SF traffic up close.   

We did have a bit of faffing about getting it charged though- the first EV station we found actually offered free charging, but it was only a Level 1 charge.  If I had known it was there, I'd have charged the car while we went out for breakfast, rather than going for breakfast and a walk before deciding to charge the car.   

Not a serious problem, just need a bit of better planning in the future.

We decided to go find an Electrify America charging station, knowing that I'd have to pay for charging, but it would be (at least) a Level 2 charger.  It was also only a block away, so it's not like we had far to go.

When I plugged in at the EA station the car was reading 50% charge already, which is no surprise as we hadn't driven that far/much since picking it up the day before.

We decided to go for a walk, and one thing lead to another and we came back a while after charging was completed.  I know this is a big no no, but I did it anyway and paid the price.  What should have been a $15 charge was about $30 as I paid a hefty penalty for "camping."   

Again, better planning would have avoided that.

What gets to me is that the car we had before that (VW Passat) had cost us $83 to fill from 1/4 tank to full. 

The EV, a bigger, heavier car, cost less than half as much to charge (admittedly slightly less since it was a half charge vs 3/4 tank), even considering I paid twice as much out of my own stupidity. 

Looking at the math, and removing my idiot charges they compare like this:

$83.00/3= 27.67 for a quarter of a tank
$15.00/2= 5.00 for a 25% charge

And, that was at a public charger- if I was to charge a vehicle at home I could seriously get much cheaper charging.  Currently here at home I am paying $.17/kwh in Canadian dollars, while we were charging at $.54/kwh in US dollars.

Converting for convenience:

$0.17 CAD = $0.12 USD
$0.54 USD = $0.74 CAD

So, the $15 I spent on charging works out to (roughly) 27.78kwh, and if charged at home would have been $3.34.

That is a massive savings.

For the fun of it, I also looked at the cost of road tripping to my father's house, about 2300km away from here.

Using the same Jeep vs Ford Lightning numbers I did in my post above, I calculated the cost at just over $640 to drive from my house to my father's, or almost $1300 round trip in my Jeep.

The same trip in the Lightning, using the stated numbers from Ford (yes, yes, I know that's under ideal conditions, I'll never get those numbers blah blah blah- I'll get to that) the same trip would cost about $96 one way or less than $200 for a round trip.   

That number isn't entirely accurate though, as the cost is based on home charging, and I don't have an extension cord long enough for the whole 2300km journey, so figure it costs several times as much to charge at a station.

But, it would have to be six times more expensive just to break even, and I doubt very much the difference is that great.

What's also an interesting factor is that in order to get there, I have to drive through the Appellation mountains (yes, that range goes through Canada too) which means lots of up and downhill driving, which is hard on an internal combustion engine.  I know, I have driven them many times, with and without fully loaded trailers.   

I feel like the EV, not having to build up power (instant torque) would likely handle the uphill sections better, and recharge on the downhill sections, while the ICE has to burn gas both ways. 

Do any of you EV drivers have any experience with that specifically?  I'd like to hear if that's true or not.

All in all, I am really thinking the Lightning is the way to go.

On my trip I spotted a number of Rivians, both the pickup and SUV versions and I really like them.  That is absolutely a beautiful vehicle, but Rivian is facing some financial issues right now, and I hope they aren't circling the drain.  That's the main reason I am leaning towards the Lightning rather than the Rivian.

I also finally saw a Cybertruck in real life.

I thought it was extremely hideous in the photos and videos I have seen of it, but now that I have seen it in real life, in the flesh, I no longer think it's hideous.

I think it is an affront to every God there ever was.   

And not in a good way. 

I was also finally able to ride in a regular Tesla model (an Uber in SF) and I was really impressed with it.  The side scanning sensor was really cool. I really liked the Tesla, and yet I'd still rather take a ball peen hammer to my soft bits rather than drive a Cybertruck.   

I don't care how awesome the tech is, that item should never have been allowed off the drawing board. 

I don't even want to call it a truck.  It is (at best) the gaudiest man jewelry you can get.  It is an oversized gold bracelet for the man bun crowd.

And, as an added bonus, it will cut you.   

The best I can hope for is that it fails despite the vast amounts of $$ behind it, and Rivian continued to falter despite having the first and probably best electric truck on the road, and Tesla buys them out, installs their software and features into Rivian's truck and starts producing something nice.

They'd be unstoppable.

Def

[powernoodle]

Yeah, I would definitely take a Cybertruck - just as a very expensive and very fun toy.

It took me a long time to get on board (<<pun), with hybrids.  I was just not accepting that the tech would be durable, and I keep my vehicles 12 - 15 years.  Forgive me if I have mentioned this already (I'm too lazy to look  ), but I started watching carcarenut on Youtube, who was a certified Toyota mechanic.  He changed my mind about hybrids.  Hybrid brakes last almost forever; there is no starter, no belts (on my Sienna), no alternator, gas mileage doubles, etc.  Plus you can get all wheel drive with the rear wheels operated by an electric motor that does away with the weight and complexity of a mechanical connection to the engine.  Once I embraced reality, I was totally into hybrids and will never go back.  The way things are going, I may never have the opportunity to go back anyway.  All Siennas and Camrys (starting in 2025) will be hybrid only. 

Of course, hybrids will disappear when hydrogen vehicles fueled solely by municipal water hit the market.   

[Farmer X]

I also finally saw a Cybertruck in real life.

Are you supposed to drive that...thing or split wood with it? Man alive, is it fugly!

I re-read all of my posts in this thread, so I don't think I've made these points previously. That said, I don't think "electrification" (to use a current buzzword in my area's dominant industry) is the answer.

I have heard of people buying used EVs for $11,000 US (let's say that's fair market value) and being quoted $14,000 to replace the battery. What is going to happen when we have huge numbers of EVs that are beyond economical repair? Abandoned vehicles are a big enough problem in my area as it is. Not only are they eyesores, all that abandonment is no good for the environment. I'm sure that EVs abandoned en masse would be even worse.

There is also the worry about thermal runaway, which can cause firefighters to use much more water to extinguish a burning EV than they would on a burning ICE vehicle. EVs are also much more susceptible to refresh after they've gone up in flames.

I can't help but think that this technology was approved for mass production while it was still in beta.

Then there's the matter of the grid. Most folks are connected to it. The electrical grid is the one most likely to quit out. That's bad enough. Even worse: it's in dire need of upgrading as it is. If everybody and his brother is charging an EV on the existing grid, we need not worry about foreign powers doing nefarious things to it. We'll FUBAR (Google that one at your own risk) it ourselves, all in the name of getting rid of that "nasty" internal-combustion engine.

If ever the internal-combustion engine or fossil fuels are outlawed, I'll give up driving and get a horse. Yes, I'd prefer a creature that I'm allergic to, and who leaves big piles of dung everywhere, to an EV.

[Vidar]

I have heard of people buying used EVs for $11,000 US (let's say that's fair market value) and being quoted $14,000 to replace the battery. What is going to happen when we have huge numbers of EVs that are beyond economical repair? Abandoned vehicles are a big enough problem in my area as it is. Not only are they eyesores, all that abandonment is no good for the environment. I'm sure that EVs abandoned en masse would be even worse.

This is indeed a problem currently. Electric cars are being scrapped for some relatively minor issues. Some due to lack of parts and some due to lack of educated mechanics/ electricians who can work on them without electrocuting anyone. Over time both are likely to improve, but right now insurance companies respond with higher rates. Once these issues have been worked out I'm not too worried about EVs making more scrap the ICE cars. Both batteries and motors have high value materials and thus value for recycling.

There is also the worry about thermal runaway, which can cause firefighters to use much more water to extinguish a burning EV than they would on a burning ICE vehicle. EVs are also much more susceptible to refresh after they've gone up in flames.

If an EV do catch fire it will do so with gusto and they are difficult to put out. Surprisingly though EVs catch fire far less than ICE vehicles pumping flammable fuels around while making sparks and explosions.. The difference according to Pinfa (and Tesla) is that it is about 10 times more likely for an ICE car to catch fire. So my personal conclusion is that EVs are less likely to catch fire - but if they do the problem will be significantly bigger.

I can't help but think that this technology was approved for mass production while it was still in beta.

Yes and no I think - both batteries and motors are proven technology, and electrics cars have been around in some volume for 12-13 years or so. What I do get annoyed by is over the air upgrades. Not so much for actual upgrades, but more because this often seems to be abused for selling products that aren't quite ready yet and hope to fix it sometime later. I like to buy fully functional products from the start.

Then there's the matter of the grid. Most folks are connected to it. The electrical grid is the one most likely to quit out. That's bad enough. Even worse: it's in dire need of upgrading as it is. If everybody and his brother is charging an EV on the existing grid, we need not worry about foreign powers doing nefarious things to it. We'll FUBAR (Google that one at your own risk) it ourselves, all in the name of getting rid of that "nasty" internal-combustion engine.

The average daily drive is about 40-50km. An EV will use about 10-15 kWh of electricity or so to drive that distance. So average daily electric use is less than having a small panel heater on throughout the day. (Say 750W for 24 hours = 18 kWh). The electric grid also have to be dimensioned to handle the maximum spikes that occur when most people wake up and come home to make dinner after work. If EVs can be charged at other times, when there is more capacity in the infrastructure, then that would help minimize the issue. Chargers are indeed often optimized for that as power is less expensive during slow hours. (There has also been talk about using the EVs batteries to even out the grid spikes by powering houses from the EV during spikes and charging up at less intense times).

If ever the internal-combustion engine or fossil fuels are outlawed, I'll give up driving and get a horse. Yes, I'd prefer a creature that I'm allergic to, and who leaves big piles of dung everywhere, to an EV.

I don't see ICE cars going away anytime soon. Far less new ones being sold around here, and supposedly no new ones after some year - but I reckon that just means used ICE cars will hold their value better.

That said, you must have driven some horrible EVs if your experience make you prefer creatures you are allergic to and dung everywhere. 

[Vidar]

I feel like the EV, not having to build up power (instant torque) would likely handle the uphill sections better, and recharge on the downhill sections, while the ICE has to burn gas both ways. 

Do any of you EV drivers have any experience with that specifically?  I'd like to hear if that's true or not.

That is true. It does recharge going downhill so the effect of height differences are lessened - exactly how much I'm not sure but it is certainly enough to be a factor. As for power most EVs seem to have enough that up or down doesn't really matter. What I appreciate is the max torque even at low speed - it is like having a low reduction gear. I've actually once hooked up to a Subaru Forester, which was in gear and had its parking brake on, and I just dragged it along with 4 locked wheels along a gravel road. That was an eye opener for me.

Edit: I think I would have liked a Rivian very much. There was actually a large signature campaign here in Norway to convince them to sell them here. Hasn't happened yet though. Hopefully they will work out whatever issues they have and keep delivering good stuff.

[Farmer X]

Electric cars are being scrapped for some relatively minor issues.

Early retirement is a problem with all manner of relatively new vehicles. They are saddled with all manner of electronic garbage that is very expensive to replace or repair when it gives up the ghost. My experience has been that for durability and ease of repair, manual and mechanical wipe the floor with automatic and electric/electronic every time.

My personal conclusion is that EVs are less likely to catch fire - but if they do the problem will be significantly bigger.

I would agree with that conclusion.

That said, you must have driven some horrible EVs if your experience make you prefer creatures you are allergic to and dung everywhere. 

The only electric vehicles I've ever "driven" were scale models and toys.

That said, I've owned two Ford F-150s, a '91 and a '93. Both had a rear fuel tank with a capacity of 18.2 gallons. The '91, being a long bed, had a 19-gallon front tank. (A short bed, as the '93 had, was equipped with a 16.5-gallon front tank.) Let's take the '91 as a theoretical example. I could have been on a long trip with an empty front tank and just 0.2 gallons remaining in the rear tank. I would have pulled off the freeway and found the closest gas station. Gasoline pumps in the States are limited to a flow of ten gallons per minute. So, even with having to transfer the hose between tanks, that process would take less than five minutes. Assuming I don't pick up a soda and Pilot pizza or make a head call, I'd be back on the road in about ten minutes, ready to drive another ~650 miles. (Of course, that assumes the good ol' 300 cubic-inch inline six was delivering the economy Ford claimed it would.) I'd also have the ability to carry a fuel can just in case I wouldn't have made it to a gas station.

EV technology has made significant leaps and bounds over the last 120 years. I'll give it that. The internal-combustion engine won out because it was more practical than electric power when the automobile was in its infancy. Steam power was also around in those early days, and it's probably not difficult to understand why that lost out to the internal-combustion engine as well. Yet I'm doubtful that I can go from a nearly dead battery to full range in ten minutes. And that's a massive battery to be topping up with the equivalent of a fuel can. Even with the advances in EV technology, there are still those things (and a few more, I'm sure) to work out. I'm just too distrustful of EVs, and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

There is another pitfall of EVs: seeing to it that their operators contribute to upkeep of public roadways. That's an easy enough thing to do with ICE vehicles. If the government properly uses revenue from fuel taxes, it goes to upkeep of the road network. I can only see one way to ensure that EV operators contribute: install a device that computes mileage driven, transmits that data to the relevant regulatory body, and adds a fee to the annual registration. An EV is heavier than its ICE equivalent, and that weight means additional wear and tear on the roads, so that would have to be factored in.

One other thought: one of my favorite local news anchors recently gave a report about EVs causing a surge in demand for copper. Per that report, an electric Honda Accord used four or five times as much copper as a gasoline Accord. And the process of getting a copper mining permit approved is lengthy: 20 years.

I stand behind my previous assertion that electrification en masse is not the best option.

[Vidar]

My experience has been that for durability and ease of repair, manual and mechanical wipe the floor with automatic and electric/electronic every time.

We can certainly agree on that. And less gadgetry and less things to go wrong would also cause reliability to increase. On the flip side people often prefer and pay extra for comfort and automatics over long term reliability and ease of repair.

To the EVs credit there are fewer parts that can fail. Last time our car was at the biyearly checkup the feedback from the mechanic was that the car would live forever. Apart from wear parts that might be truish mechanically, but I fully do expect electronics to cause issues at some point in the future. I aim to get 10 good years out of the car, and so far it is looking good. Any good life after that I'll consider bonus.

So, even with having to transfer the hose between tanks, that process would take less than five minutes. Assuming I don't pick up a soda and Pilot pizza or make a head call, I'd be back on the road in about ten minutes, ready to drive another ~650 miles. (Of course, that assumes the good ol' 300 cubic-inch inline six was delivering the economy Ford claimed it would.) I'd also have the ability to carry a fuel can just in case I wouldn't have made it to a gas station.

Before we got the electric car range and recharge times were big concerns for us. It has turned out though that those factors are almost irrelevant for us. The range is more than enough for all our normal driving needs (say 98%), and extra range would for the most part only mean that we would charge once per 6 days instead of say once per every 8 day. We charge at home overnight so it makes no difference at all. (And compared to our old car we save time by not having to stop at petrol stations). When we do go far enough that we need to charge at charging stations we combine that with shopping, eating or sleeping. In short our experience is that range and charging speeds aren't really issues for us.

Of course others might have different driving needs and experiences. My personal gripe with media though is that when it comes to electric cars they are disproportionally focused on range, charging speeds and acceleration. In daily life I can't say any of those make any difference to me - the actual driving experience though puts a smile on my face.

There is another pitfall of EVs: seeing to it that their operators contribute to upkeep of public roadways. That's an easy enough thing to do with ICE vehicles.

Taxation would be different in different countries and there are so many different ways to do it. If it is one thing I trust though that it is that politicians will add taxes as needed and then some. I have no worry that EVs will not get to pay their share. 

One other thought: one of my favorite local news anchors recently gave a report about EVs causing a surge in demand for copper. Per that report, an electric Honda Accord used four or five times as much copper as a gasoline Accord. And the process of getting a copper mining permit approved is lengthy: 20 years.

Only four or five times? I would have guessed more. Either way I expect recycling will help so the resource isn't as much "used up" as "borrowed".  (I can confirm those 20 years to start a copper mine from a local project here).

I stand behind my previous assertion that electrification en masse is not the best option.

We can agree on that. People have different needs.

[Farmer X]

I went back and found the report about EV vs. ICE vehicle copper content. A clip with just that report wasn't posted, so you'll need to skip to 9:14. You may not want to watch in your wife's presence, and I will not be held responsible for missing teeth or broken jaws.

[Vidar]

No worries about that - we don't take copper very personally. 

It is a classic by now - the world needs more copper but few wants the copper mines nearby. It is not a lack of copper as such as the discovered deposits are many times larger than the need. (5-6 times or so larger than all mined copper so far - then there is all the copper remaining to be discovered). And with prices having doubled in some years and continuing to rise many of these will now be lucrative for mining. Thus many want to reopen old mines or get new ones going.

But as you say that isn't very easy from a regulatory or society viewpoint - at least not in our countries. The area around here is old copper mine territory and all mines closed down when prices were low. There is still major deposits left though. Now, when prices are lucrative, it has proven very difficult to get them going again for a variety of reasons. They have been going at it for around 15 years already, and it might easily be 20 years and still nothing happening. For better and worse.

(I believe the windmills now require about 30 tons each. They keep getting bigger I guess).

If I'm to take a guess the higher copper prices will be met by more mines in countries with faster bureaucracy or fewer restrictions. Like here they have probably been working at it for quite some time already so supply will increase if prices keep up or increase even further. The blessings and curse of market economy at work.

And if the prices aren't high enough yet it is worth considering that those 80kgs of copper in an electric vehicle isn't a critical part of the overall cost. EVs could still pay a lot more for it without the price to the end user changing much. I'm more worried about other industries and infrastructure and the increased costs there.

Either way it will be a gradual change, and it will likely go slower and likely not as far reaching as politicians plans for a variety of reasons.

Anyway we didn't buy an EV for environmental reasons, green change, idealism or anything. We bought it because it was the best car for our use within our budget. If it is greener then that is nice, but we would happily have bought an ICE car if that had been competitive in those respects. Environmentalism or copper reserves had no influence on our choice of car.

[Grant Lamontagne]

Environmental issues aside, I am ready to buy a new vehicle and the dramatically reduced costs are of significant interest to me.

Def

[Vidar]

Environmental issues aside, I am ready to buy a new vehicle and the dramatically reduced costs are of significant interest to me.

Def

Or - as we did - keep the budget and get more car. Or anywhere in between.

The tax incentives here for EVs are quite significant so you would have to pay seriously much more for an equivalent ICE car. I have no idea if that is thing elsewhere?

[Grant Lamontagne]

Well, the Lightning is similarly priced to the ICE version, both being reasonably well equipped for about $70k CAD.

The government is offering almost $20k in rebates to buy the electric version, which is significant.

Then, considering the significantly reduced operating costs (ie, four cents per km vs twenty seven cents) and you see that there is a significant savings to be had all around.

As I said, I'd likely save enough each month in fuel costs alone to make at least half the monthly payment.

Def

[Vidar]

I took a look online here and the Lightning is about $140k CAD here. They only bring one model and that seems to have bells and whistles, and as big pickups isn't really a thing here they might expect sales to be moderate anyway. Looks quite practical though!

Its shape will catch lot of wind resistance, so I assume it will use more per mile than a lower and more streamlined car. If you just charge at home with home prices then maybe not a big deal, but on fast chargers the prices can be quite high.

[Grant Lamontagne]

Currently here in Nova Scotia the power rates at a public charging station are $15 CAD/hr for a level 3 fast charging station (up to 50kwh) or $1.50/hr at a level 2 station.

Given the standard Lightning battery is 98kwh, that's $30 to completely charge it (oversimplified I know) while it currently costs me around $120 (ish) to fill my Jeep, which I do at least once per week.

That's $90/week at least that I am saving with the big, clunky Lightning.  No doubt I would save even more with a Tesla Model 3 or Nissan Leaf, but my lifestyle and needs really do require a truck of some sort.

I'd considered an SUV (the Mustang Mach E is remarkably nice) but few, if any, are rated for towing, and that is an absolute necessity for me.  I use my utility trailer far too much to purchase a vehicle that can't tow.

Def

[Farmer X]

We didn't buy an EV for environmental reasons, green change, idealism or anything. We bought it because it was the best car for our use within our budget.

.com
Pragmatism is an admirable quality.

The Lightning is similarly priced to the ICE version, both being reasonably well equipped for about $70k CAD.

The Lightning is about $140k CAD here.

Probably it is worth noting that I can be a very cheap smurf. That is especially true when it comes to vehicles. The five-figure mark (in US dollars, of course) is the point that I consider an asking price for a vehicle that has no collector interest to be absolutely extortionate. Factor in depreciation (it was traditionally said that a vehicle loses a third of its value once the ink on the sales contract is dry) and what seems to me like a rather high likelihood of premature scrapping, and purchase of a new vehicle just doesn't make sense to me. Instead, I'll try my luck with older rigs that are gaining collector interest. Even with our bad rust issues, there are surprisingly large numbers of GMT 400s and OBS Fords that still take to the roads.

[Vidar]

I'd considered an SUV (the Mustang Mach E is remarkably nice) but few, if any, are rated for towing, and that is an absolute necessity for me.  I use my utility trailer far too much to purchase a vehicle that can't tow.
Def

Yes, that is the single thing I miss the most. We can tow a trailer of 750kg, but sometimes that just isn't enough. Many EVs will do 1500kg or 2000kg though which for many here will be a license limit anyway.

Pragmatism is an admirable quality.

A similar ICE car would have been 2-3 times as much, so those were never real considerations. Similarly the alternative ICE cars at the same price point had EV counterparts available for a far lower price. So basically EVs have become the default choice here regardless of environmental considerations. These days 90% of all new sold cars here are EVs. (And many of the rest are hybrids).

Probably it is worth noting that I can be a very cheap smurf. That is especially true when it comes to vehicles. The five-figure mark (in US dollars, of course) is the point that I consider an asking price for a vehicle that has no collector interest to be absolutely extortionate. Factor in depreciation (it was traditionally said that a vehicle loses a third of its value once the ink on the sales contract is dry) and what seems to me like a rather high likelihood of premature scrapping, and purchase of a new vehicle just doesn't make sense to me. Instead, I'll try my luck with older rigs that are gaining collector interest. Even with our bad rust issues, there are surprisingly large numbers of GMT 400s and OBS Fords that still take to the roads.

You can get lots of good cars within a five-figure mark, and I've never crossed that myself either. The depreciation is just sure losses, and I have other areas of life to spend on which are more interesting and important to me. As long as the car is reliable and safe (including winter conditions which I'm particular about) then I'm ok with it - if it is comfortable too that is even better. I've come to appreciate the latter more with the years so I am willing to spend a bit extra on that. No regrets so far - driving stopped being a hassle and became enjoyable again. I'm ok paying for that.

Driving around in future collector cars? I've never really though about that - it sounds sensible. How do you pick what will be collectible sometime in the future? (And how far into the future do you need to go? If that future is 50 years from now I see a slight issue with the plan on a personal level  )

[Grant Lamontagne]

The Mustang Mach E is rated for (I think) 5000lbs in the UK and the US, which would be adequate for my needs, but sadly Ford Canada has not bothered to publish a towing spec.

While I would likely still be covered if I had an accident while towing (not 100% certain, and as a former insurance investigator I know how easy it is for insurance companies to weasel out of things) I can also see Ford not honoring any warranty issues for the same reason.  It's unlikely, but it's also not a risk I am willing to take.

If Ford Canada would publish a towing capacity in Canada, I'd very likely opt for the Mustang, despite the annoyance of the "It's not a real Mustang, why would Ford do that, Ford ruined Mustangs by putting the name on that thing blah blah blah" type conversations it is likely to bring up constantly.

For the record, I agree- it's not a Mustang, Ford shouldn't have named it that, Mustangs don't have four doors, they aren't SUV's and so on.  I believe there is space in the Mustang world for EV's mind you, having seen some EV conversions that will empty your bladder the second you hit the accelerator.  I see the Mustang styling on it and I love the look of it, but I agree, it shouldn't be called a Mustang.  It is, however, a very nice vehicle- if you get past the name.

It's also a goodly sum cheaper than the Lightning.   

Def