Rethinking EV’s?

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

But was this a review, or their reliability ratings? They're two different things. Unless I'm mistaken, the post you replied to was referring to their reliability rankings.

Reviews are by nature subjective, so what's important to the reviewer may not necessarily be important to the reader/viewer. Reliability ratings are also somewhat subjective, but should be much less so than a review. And you wouldn't really even know since they're aggregated across all respondents.

Considering the review was nearly 40 years ago I honestly don't remember if it was a "reliability" rating or a "review" rating. Back then CR had the little orange circles in the various categories for ratings. The grocery bag comment was regarding the ease of entry/exit, so I'm not sure if that is a reliability rating or not. But is that any less of a reliability rating of modern-day infotainment system in vehicles. I'm not sure.

But my point is, who gives a crap how hard or easy it is to exit a car with two grocery bags in hand? Who does that? No one.

[Phillies8008]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Considering the review was nearly 40 years ago I honestly don't remember if it was a "reliability" rating or a "review" rating. Back then CR had the little orange circles in the various categories for ratings. The grocery bag comment was regarding the ease of entry/exit, so I'm not sure if that is a reliability rating or not. But is that any less of a reliability rating of modern-day infotainment system in vehicles. I'm not sure.

But my point is, who gives a crap how hard or easy it is to exit a car with two grocery bags in hand? Who does that? No one.

I'm not arguing the validity of the review or not – I don't care. What I'm saying is that a review and reliability ratings are completely different things undertaken in a completely different way, so using one to refute the validity of the other is pointless. It sounds like what you cited is a review. So whether CR has good reviews or bad reviews doesn't have any bearing on the quality of their reliability rankings.

[jaffles]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

Not that I don't necessarily understand the point, but I do find it funny that once even pedestrian EVs started smoking all but the highest of the high-end (and maybe even then) supercars off the line 0-60 suddenly became much less important to the anti-EV crowd. I guess you've got to know when to cut your losses, lol.


Forget environmental arguments, forget 0-60, forget torque, forget damn near everything else. I'd love to see EVs become more widespread (don't worry, we can still have ICE too) if for no other reason than to decrease our dependency on oil so that we can stop caring about the stupid Middle East. The only importance it holds is its oil, and I'm beyond tired of trying to referee conflicts that have been going on for thousands of years between a bunch of despots and will never stop, no matter how hard we try. Things would be so much better if we could just ignore the whole clusterfuck – I don't particularly care which people live on which particular mound of sand halfway around the world. Let 'em have at it.

I think if there is one single event that will dwarf a decade of trash talk on Evs, its Hurmuz straight. The Oil crises of the 70s and 80s didn't have EVs as an alternative. Nor the globe have a Nation that manufactures more EVs than the rest of the world combined, at a price most can live with.

Europe has proven E trucks work rather just needs a network to support it. And my Nation is just about to fall in a big hole as transport is handing on costs that are recessionary.

For me and its much larger clusterfuck is what growing behind the scenes. That Nation that makes all the EVs also requires oil, and I fear the real reason for the what we see in the foreground.

[RockCrusher]

Well, got a 220/240VAC charger outlet installed.

Tried it several times yesterday.

To add the same amount of charge using the 220/240VAC outlet takes about 1/4th the time it took using the 120VAC outlet.

Oh, later in the day I noticed the A/C charging current was set to "unlimited". I don't know how much current the charging was pulling but unlimited it could have been 40 amps even 48amps.

Curious I dialed the charging current limit down to 24 amps and a comparable charge session required 48 minutes to charge ~6kWh worth.

With the charging current set to unlimited a charge session required 54 minutes to charge ~9kWh.

So duh 220/240VAC charging is way faster than 120VAC charging.

Since April 6 I have put 283 miles on the car. I have used ~116kWh of electricity. Cost of 1kWh here is about $0.12 so it has cost me ~$14 in electricity. 283 miles at 18mpg -- the Ridgeline's average mpg -- would have required 15.72 gallons of gasoline and using 87 and at the cheapest price *last* month (March 7) of $2.292/g I would have paid ~$36 for gasoline.

Of course I'm in no way ahead making the change from ICE to BEV. But for me it was the opportunity to experience a BEV. I really like the i4. It is a fun car to drive. The reduced cost of "fuel" is icing on the cake. Admittedly a very thin layer of icing but it is what it is.

[Phillies8008]

Originally Posted by RockCrusher

Well, got a 220/240VAC charger outlet installed.

Tried it several times yesterday.

To add the same amount of charge using the 220/240VAC outlet takes about 1/4th the time it took using the 120VAC outlet.

Oh, later in the day I noticed the A/C charging current was set to "unlimited". I don't know how much current the charging was pulling but unlimited it could have been 40 amps even 48amps.

Curious I dialed the charging current limit down to 24 amps and a comparable charge session required 48 minutes to charge ~6kWh worth.

With the charging current set to unlimited a charge session required 54 minutes to charge ~9kWh.

So duh 220/240VAC charging is way faster than 120VAC charging.

Since April 6 I have put 283 miles on the car. I have used ~116kWh of electricity. Cost of 1kWh here is about $0.12 so it has cost me ~$14 in electricity. 283 miles at 18mpg -- the Ridgeline's average mpg -- would have required 15.72 gallons of gasoline and using 87 and at the cheapest price *last* month (March 7) of $2.292/g I would have paid ~$36 for gasoline.

Of course I'm in no way ahead making the change from ICE to BEV. But for me it was the opportunity to experience a BEV. I really like the i4. It is a fun car to drive. The reduced cost of "fuel" is icing on the cake. Admittedly a very thin layer of icing but it is what it is.

The thinness of that layer of icing is also largely dependent on how many miles per year you drive. Your EV refueling cost was 61% lower than gas – extrapolate that over a year and it's likely not such a thin layer any more.

For instance: in 2025 I put about 10,000 miles on my i4. Using the 430i as a comparison, which I think is fair since the i4 is basically the EV-version of that car, I would've used about 357 gallons of gas. According to Google the average price for gas in 2025 was ~$3.00 a gallon so we'll use that, giving us $1,071 in gas for the year.

I charged for a total of 2,425kWh at a cost of $0.13/kW,h for a total of $315 to refuel for the year. That's a 70% savings, which ain't bad, and 2026 is shaping up to be a considerably more dramatic difference. Admittedly this is a bit back-of-the-envelope, but I think it's close enough.

All this will give me about a $2,300 savings on fuel over the course of my three year lease; not Earth-shattering, but not bad either. There are certainly other variables to consider: you'll likely go through tires more frequently, so that's an additional expense. It's highly variable from person-to-person, but you might pay more for insurance. In my case the change was very negligible, about $140 per year. SC charges a $120 EV tax every two years, so I'll end up paying $180 in additional taxes. However, I'm paying less to lease the i4 than I otherwise would've for our comparable 430i so you'd need to figure that out as well.

But in all honestly I didn't decide to get the car for the savings, but rather the driving characteristics, the ride quality, and the QoL improvements, all of which I've been extremely happy with. For the criteria I use to evaluate a daily driver this car is the best I've ever owned, and it's not particularly close. But others might not use or agree with my criteria, so as always YMMV.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

I'm not arguing the validity of the review or not – I don't care. What I'm saying is that a review and reliability ratings are completely different things undertaken in a completely different way, so using one to refute the validity of the other is pointless. It sounds like what you cited is a review. So whether CR has good reviews or bad reviews doesn't have any bearing on the quality of their reliability rankings.

But that is my point though, I can't take CR's reliability ratings seriously if they take issue how easy or difficult it is to exit a 2-door big coupe with two bags of groceries.

[Phillies8008]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

But that is my point though, I can't take CR's reliability ratings seriously if they take issue how easy or difficult it is to exit a 2-door big coupe with two bags of groceries.

Except that the reliability ratings aren't their opinion – they're results based on the responses of the surveys they send their readership. All they're doing is reporting those results. So whatever they thought about whatever car, regardless of how silly, has no bearing whatsoever on the reliability rankings they publish. They're two entirely different and unconnected things.

[ubercruise]

Since I already have a BEV I'd say this war nonsense is just reinforcing my decision to keep a BEV for my next car. I just did another road trip in the southwest and it was basically issue free. I prefer EA (or any other 350kW CCS chargers) to Tesla as the Tesla ones I've used have been quite slow in comparison, but they are a great fallback if you can stop at places that have both EA and Tesla since EA can have some reliability issues and they usually have a smaller charger count than Tesla. Though IME I haven't had many problems with EA stations yet.

My BEV charging at home costs about 1.5 cents per mile. A comparable gas SUV right now would be closer to 30 cents per mile. Obviously BEVs aren't for everyone but I love the cheap cost of maintaining the car, the quietness, ability to preheat/precool in enclosed spaces, etc., particularly for a DD. Of course, if I were tracking a car I would choose gas.

[jaffles]

Caught up with a customer yesterday who has 4 Tesla's in the family/business. For his money across 4 driving styles and 25 years in age, he thinks maybe 10,000km in tyre life for ICE to EV. For him its another argument clutching at questionable truths to slander new tech. Give tyre companies a bit of time and EVS will see similar milage to grip as ICE.

He wants me to buy an E truck which I'm bang up for, just there are none to buy down hear. Put aside servicing cost and consumables almost vanish, its currently costing $120 in diesel per 80km round trip. Peak day rate energy at 36c would be $13, and off peak small hours of the night energy at 11c, its a measly $4. That goes some way to the cost of delivery/living for everyone besides CEOs of oil companies.

I've worked it out my diesel runs at 2.2lt per km, so I have done 2.2kW per km but understand it could/should be smaller kW per km. With these figures the mind drifts to who starts al the EV slandering.

[m630]

Originally Posted by jaffles

ahh the romance of a Ferrari. What you say is true on one hand, but on the other its lacking paint in the engine bay, as you can see the primer. And the welding looks like the apprentice had a go. Radio still can't be fixed by Ferrari and ol mate is selling it for an Aston Martin as he feels the build quality is chalk and cheese. He also has a DB9.

Still everyone likes a Ferrari, I feel just you need to look at them through realistic glasses. I made the mistake buying a Bentley through rose coloured glasses and meh, its nothing special.

My prices were Australian so sorry for confusion. Think however, many what seeming are standard EVs will challenge tradition supercars for 0-100. They may or may not ever take precedence over ice, but I am installing a charger at home for the next car, and most likely the kids as well. Unless I'm driving more than 450+km and want to do it in a hurry, I am fading on the pros of ice.

A lot of it is drive by control of my destiny. This whole war BS and what oil companies or cashed up Arabs want/do is wearing thin. I can power the car for free from the sun for 99% of what I do with it. And I'd rather listen to silence or loud music then an engine when out and about.

Paint and welds? Again if u are using the rebraded maserati as the measure of quality of ferrari thats just misplaced. That car is not a valid use case for judgement, any real cavallino rampante owner will certainly agree. Race cars may not have the fit and finish of a commuter car and who cares even though thats likely very rarely the case on modern cars, ie those since the early 2000s. One could eat off my engine bay if i let them

and i dont have a radio by choice, all the sound i need comes thru loud and clear, i love music but that has nothing to do with race cars.


In terms of perceived performance of EVs, its just not fun for me. Driving without an engine singing and exhaust roaring is like watching a big production movie with no soundtrack. Sure u still hear the voices but that does not make a blockbuster film.
If u like it, enjoy it I dont want to ban EVs there just not the solution for everyone, we all should have the choices to make and choose what we desire on an even playing field, not by greenies edicts that are so misplaced. The crap it takes to make EVs when all things are considered are no better for the Earth than gas powered cars. Its just not true no matter what you may have been brainwashed to believing. But if thats what u like u should buy it and enjoy it. Its definitely not free though, theres a cost to everything just depends on how you want to look at the full lifecycles of all materials it takes to produce, power, and maintain EVs, it not free by a longshot. Enjoy

[midadami]

I hope EVs start coming with big speakers and vibration motors to mimic ICE vehicles haha. Even if only the people inside can feel it, it’d still be pretty cool. Trying to make it noticeable outside the car probably wouldn’t be worth the hassle.

It would fix one of the downsides of EVs compared to ICE vehicles and people wouldn't be able to bother others by making their car roar on the street.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

Except that the reliability ratings aren't their opinion – they're results based on the responses of the surveys they send their readership. All they're doing is reporting those results. So whatever they thought about whatever car, regardless of how silly, has no bearing whatsoever on the reliability rankings they publish. They're two entirely different and unconnected things.

How they structure the data collection is their opinion. That's the point of the video.

[Phillies8008]

Originally Posted by midadami

I hope EVs start coming with big speakers and vibration motors to mimic ICE vehicles haha. Even if only the people inside can feel it, it’d still be pretty cool. Trying to make it noticeable outside the car probably wouldn’t be worth the hassle.

It would fix one of the downsides of EVs compared to ICE vehicles and people wouldn't be able to bother others by making their car roar on the street.

The Dodge Charger Daytona does this. It was not well received.

Personally, I feel the same way I feel about vegetarian/vegan food: don't try to fake it and be something you're not. Just like bacon doesn't go on trees and IMO there's no point in trying to mimic it in vegetarian food, EVs don't make those sounds and should own it. Them being quiet is, IMO, a feature not a bug. Is it different than ICE? Obviously. But I don't think that necessarily makes it worse. Just different.

[Phillies8008]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

How they structure the data collection is their opinion. That's the point of the video.

Since this describes every survey ever, what you're really saying is that no surveys have any meaning. Which is fine if that's your opinion, but I don't share it.

Are surveys perfect? No. Are they the best tool we have for evaluating things like reliability? Yes, in my opinion they are. I have yet to see anyone come up with anything better.

[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by RockCrusher

Well, got a 220/240VAC charger outlet installed.

Tried it several times yesterday.

To add the same amount of charge using the 220/240VAC outlet takes about 1/4th the time it took using the 120VAC outlet.

Oh, later in the day I noticed the A/C charging current was set to "unlimited". I don't know how much current the charging was pulling but unlimited it could have been 40 amps even 48amps.

Curious I dialed the charging current limit down to 24 amps and a comparable charge session required 48 minutes to charge ~6kWh worth.

With the charging current set to unlimited a charge session required 54 minutes to charge ~9kWh.

So duh 220/240VAC charging is way faster than 120VAC charging.

Since April 6 I have put 283 miles on the car. I have used ~116kWh of electricity. Cost of 1kWh here is about $0.12 so it has cost me ~$14 in electricity. 283 miles at 18mpg -- the Ridgeline's average mpg -- would have required 15.72 gallons of gasoline and using 87 and at the cheapest price *last* month (March 7) of $2.292/g I would have paid ~$36 for gasoline.

Of course I'm in no way ahead making the change from ICE to BEV. But for me it was the opportunity to experience a BEV. I really like the i4. It is a fun car to drive. The reduced cost of "fuel" is icing on the cake. Admittedly a very thin layer of icing but it is what it is.

The max amount of current your charger can pull is a function of the gauge of Romex wiring that was installed in conjunction with the breaker at your main service panel. So if you want to get an idea of the max, go find the breaker for the charger in your service panel. But the rule of thumb is the load on a circuit shouldn't be up to the max rating for any significant period of time. I forget if it's 80% of the rating of the circuit is deemed acceptable.

As to your charging experience between 120 and 208/240, yes, 208/240 is much more efficient in delivery power than 120. To equal the same amount of power (W) between the two, 120 has to use a lot more current which carries a lot of issues versus 208/220. I have a mini data center in my basement due to the work I do. I installed a 208/220 30A circuit using an L6-30 outlet in the subpanel right next to the racks because of the power delivery efficiency of 208/240.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

Since this describes every survey ever, what you're really saying is that no surveys have any meaning. Which is fine if that's your opinion, but I don't share it.

Are surveys perfect? No. Are they the best tool we have for evaluating things like reliability? Yes, in my opinion they are. I have yet to see anyone come up with anything better.

The point of discussion of the video is specifically about the validity of CR's reliability data. The videographer delves into CR's methodology on the limited population of owners and vehicle models reported on. I see it as a closed environment of small subset of available automotive industry-related data points to collect.

On one of the three forums I hang out on I was in a discussion for several weeks about EV reliability as it relates to "moving parts". It may have been Bimmmer post or SlateEVforums, I'm not interested enough to go check. But the data pointed to came from the survey below, which is from the German roadside assistance company ADAC

https://emobilityonline.com/adac-bre...more-reliable/

https://www.adac.de/rund-ums-fahrzeu...nnenstatistik/

I think this is a better data collection method on automotive reliability as it is more random in automotive targets of evaluation.

[BenFenner]

I've been dreaming of EV ownership since the late 1980s.

I'm just waiting for someone (anyone!) to make one with the configuration I want.

Odds are very high I'll have to make my own.

[Car-Addicted]

Extended range Tesla the answer to your EV dreams?

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by BenFenner

I've been dreaming of EV ownership since the late 1980s.

I'm just waiting for someone (anyone!) to make one with the configuration I want.

Odds are very high I'll have to make my own.

What is the configuration you seek?

[Ohio Enthusiast]

Originally Posted by zx10guy

As to your charging experience between 120 and 208/240, yes, 208/240 is much more efficient in delivery power than 120. To equal the same amount of power (W) between the two, 120 has to use a lot more current which carries a lot of issues versus 208/220.

Twice. The difference is only x2 with 220 and even less with 208 (which is rarely seen outside of industrial). Power is voltage multiplied by amperage. Double the voltage, half the amperage.
Voltage drop is a bit lower at 220 than 110, but it's negligible in most residential situations (unless you're garage is on the extreme opposite end of a very big house from the electric panel, or you're putting a charging point at a detached garage that's 100s of feet away).

Specifically in the US, 220 is used for almost all high draw consumers (ACs, electric cloth dryers, electric water heaters, etc.), and 110 is used for mostly small draws. This makes it that the highest typical 110 V connection is 20 A or 2.2 kW, which is way less than a typical 220 V 30 A at 6.6 kW for a dryer hookup that most houses already have.

[BenFenner]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

What is the configuration you seek?

A manual transmission is my non-negotiable.

There has been at least one production EV with a manual transmission, but it is way too old (1982) to consider, and has other problems. There have been a handful of modern prototypes, but nothing that has been taken seriously.

Of course there are thousands and thousands of them custom made by owners throughout the past ~3 decades, to varying degrees of success...

I'm tired of arguing with people about the benefits of multiple gear ratios for EVs. They provide much better energy efficiency, and performance gains. Electric motors (both AC and DC) are more energy efficient at low RPM but most powerful at a higher RPM. This is the EXACT reason we have multiple ratios for internal combustion engines, and it only makes sense to do the same for EVs.

Porsche figured this out and has 3 gear ratios in their AWD Taycan. The rear axle uses a 2-speed automatic transmission for acceleration, and the front axle provides a 3rd (even taller) ratio for efficiency. Multiple ratios just make sense for EVs in many ways, and if we're going to have them (and we should!) then I insist on rowing my own.

The plug-in hybrid BMWs with pancake motors upstream of the traditional transmission get industry-leading range and efficiency. This is the closest thing we have to a proof of concept but is being ignored because everyone is more excited about self-driving, or bigger iPads on the dash, or in-car ads, or using their smart phone as a key, etc.

So I will be forced to make my own. Odds are I'll convert our 6MT E53. But that's a project for after we build a house and go off-grid solar. And for after I finish the E36/8 and other automotive projects.

[Turbanator]

One would think if having 4+ gear ratios in an EV made sense to maximize range, we would see that applied to most vehicles out there as opposed to packing as giant a battery as possible, which is both the single heaviest and most expensive part of an EV.