I picked up through my work an Audi E-tron 50. It was a second car, so I wasn't riding everything on it. What surprised me is that I am going to resist ever buying a car with an ICE now. People complain about range, but the issue is really availability of fast charging points, which will change. The smooth constant acceleration, quiet ride, not needing to visit petrol stations, long service intervals and lack of particles coming out the back has converted me. If I was running a car company, I would not be throwing any R+D at the ICE range.
EDIT: Just to add that the reviews didn't really represent to me the car that I got. They largely compared it to performance Teslas, and noted that it was slower, shorter-ranged and less efficient than Teslas. But I think a lot of reviewers miss the point. A fast Tesla (LR models, let alone performance) is so fast it beats my motorbike, which is normally faster than most performance ICE cars. I think the general public haven't quite grokked that yet, so have no idea just how fast 300hp with torque available all the time actually is.
"People complain about range, but the issue is really availability of fast charging points, which will change" - so .. you're admitting it's not in the state it needs to be, and you're hoping that changes in the future? I'm moments away from heading out on a backcountry trip in the desert east of the cascades - how long would you estimate it would take for fast charging points to exist even within even a hundred miles of where I'm about to go? I'm also able to just strap on extra gallons of fuel if I want to extend my range even further.
"The smooth constant acceleration" - Not really sure how this is a benefit at all, unless you're comparing sports cars.
"quiet ride" - I've never once in my life wished that the interior of my vehicle was quieter, this is such a superficial benefit to consider.
"not needing to visit petrol stations" - I guess this is a benefit, of course it's offset by needing charging infrastructure both in your house and wherever you go, neither of which exist for me, but what does exist are millions of gas stations which are incredibly convenient to get to and spend 5 minutes at in order to be able to drive hundreds of more miles. There will be a gas station in the tiny towns on my route today, there won't be charging stations, let alone fast charging stations.
"long service intervals" - There's some benefit here, although you still have regular maintenance that still has to be done, it doesn't eliminate it. Even still, it's a trivial amount of time to do basic maintenance on my vehicle.
"lack of particles coming out the back" - As long as the electricity you power it with didn't come from a dirty source, like most are, sure.
In general, if all you use your vehicle for are little trips around the area of a major city, then yeah you can make it work. If you actually use your vehicle as a vehicle, it still doesn't remotely make sense.
One size does not fit all, your counter makes sense.
FWIW, my personal observations after putting 80k miles on a BEV:
- Range: I haven't visited the White Mountains in Eastern CA yet because I haven't been able to confidently solve the charging situation. Otherwise, I've ranged from Mendocino to LA to Tahoe with no concerns.
- Acceleration: It's more the punch for me. It's just fun to hit the accelerator and be instantly thrust back into the seat. My 328i was awesome, drove it for 20 years. My BEV is more fun.
- Quiet: Music is important to me while driving. The very quiet ride enhances listening.
- Charging: I did pay ~$2,000 to put a 90 Amp drop into the garage. I'm paying 12 cents/KWh. The only time I need to use a charge station is on long drives.
- Long Service Intervals: It's not the time. It's the cost. By 80k miles on the BMW, I'd spent $5k on brakes, oils changes/tune ups, a radiator and thermostat. The BEV cost about $1k for a windshield. $0 for anything else. Thanks to regen braking, I've got 85% of my original brake pads left.
The range thing depends on your use case, and clearly it isn't going to suit you. I have a pretty long commute - 60-70 miles each day, but this is easily swallowed by an electric. Most people use their cars to commute and do errands in. We occasionally do a longer trip, and here in the UK, that would need planning to work around where the fast (>50kW) chargers are.
Smooth acceleration is more a comfort thing. I normally use a manual, but even with an automatic, you're probably used to the shifts and the loss of torque - it's more comfortable on your neck to not have this.
Re: quietness - I do an hour commute each way, and I've done it in cars that aren't sound proofed well - I've had my ears ringing slightly on arrival. However, above 50mph noise is more to do with tyres and wind than the engine. A quieter car means I can listen to the radio and my music without hurting my ears, and conversations in the car can be casual without me shouting.
To add to long service intervals - less things to go wrong. An electric engine is simple. Don't need to change oil, don't need to worry about a gearbox, don't worry about the exhaust going, or the clutch, or the timing belt, or the fuel injectors.
Your last point - car engines are less efficient than a power station at converting fossil fuels into energy. I don't know whether they produce less particulates (my guess would be they do as our country burns natural gas which is simpler than petrol/diesel), but they don't push it out into the faces of people walking, or the air intake of the car behind.
> "quiet ride" - I've never once in my life wished that the interior of my vehicle was quieter, this is such a superficial benefit to consider.
It's FAR from superficial. Go for a test drive in a luxury car. You'll notice that you can listening to the radio even at high speeds is much easier, taking calls, same, heck, even talking.
It's one of those things you only notice in reverse: if you've never had it, you don't know what you're missing, but once you've experienced, for sure you're going to hate going back.
Of course, you can get used to everything, some people don't even riding in a horse drawn carriage with solid wheels and no suspension :-p
> "quiet ride" - I've never once in my life wished that the interior of my vehicle was quieter, this is such a superficial benefit to consider.
This is for me the single biggest reason I will never go back to an ICE car, after driving a Model X for 4 years now. My wife drives a small petrol car (Renault Clio) and I hate the sound of the engine so much.
Do you have experience driving an electric car as a daily? Or just countering all arguments as an exercise?
Smooth acceleration is due to no gearing, which means no transmission. Which goes into the next point about maintenance. ICE cars are extremely complicated due to how they transmit power to the wheels. 90% of this is eliminated in electric cars because the motors are at the wheels.
And it's a lot easier to capture pollution at the source of centralized power generation vs hundreds of million of cars, but I am just stating the obvious here.
If anything, your "counter points" -- while acknowledging the tech isn't perfect, are actually making a strong argument for electric cars.
As far as gas vs electric infrastructure it's genuinely perplexing that someone would argue for the former over the latter. For one thing, electricity is a lot more useful than gas! It's also safer, easier and cheaper to transport.
It also exists basically everywhere, even if the current infrastructure is not up to spec, you can still charge an electric car with a regular outlet with no special considerations.
Every thing you are saying is a detraction is really just pointing out solutions that are still in the early stages, but absolutely will get here vs problems we have just accepted from ICE.
I'm actually curious about this. I imagine that we're not at that point, and for now electric motors are probably placed somewhere close to the axles, but soon I guess we'll have true 4-wheel drive?
As in, a smaller electric motor right next to the wheel?
From what I’ve read, its cheaper to recycle certain materials from old EV packs than it is to mine new material from the earth. If this is true and continues to be the case, it seems like one of those problems that will luckily solve itself because it is economical.
> In general, if all you use your vehicle for are little trips around the area of a major city, then yeah you can make it work. If you actually use your vehicle as a vehicle, it still doesn't remotely make sense.
You had some pretty good points until this dismissive part. Believe it or not, but there are millions of people who don't ever need or want to travel more than 100 miles both ways. And don't really need a truck either.
Just because your use case isn't the same as theirs, you don't get to decide whether what they have is a "vehicle" or not.
> "lack of particles coming out the back" - As long as the electricity you power it with didn't come from a dirty source, like most are, sure.
The only power stations that are producing a bunch of particles similar to an ICE car are coal plants and even with Trump doing his whole "Trump digs coal" nonsense these plants didn't make any economic sense any more. They made less than a quarter of America's electricity in 2020 and that fraction has been falling for years.
Also, unlike your car exhaust, which is literally where your car is, the coal plant's exhaust is typically over 100 metres above the plant. It's still filthy, but at least it isn't, for example, right outside a primary school, or arm's length from a passing jogger.
It sounds like an ICE vehicle is the best fit for you, but also that your needs are quite unique. 99% of even SUV owners are never taking their vehicle backcountry anywhere. A dirt parking lot at a redwoods park an hour out is the most off grid they’ll ever get.
And the acceleration and quiet ride are nice. It’s just one of those things you don’t appreciate till you have for a while. Like backup cameras.
"on a backcountry trip in the desert ... strap on extra gallons of fuel" -- Since you are going into a desert, would a portable solar charger work in place of extra fuel? The downsize is that it is only usable in daylight and it might not be able to charge fast enough, but solar panel is not flammable like gasoline so safer. It is probably more realistic to have solar charging stations in desert, independent of electric grid; at least we don't have to run wires into desert just to charge cars.
Smooth acceleration will help prevent someone getting car sick. Similarly, absence of car exhaust helps, too.
It’s a challenge to get enough solar panel area to rely on for charging unless you were camping for a few days every few hundred miles or something. Someday I hope it’s viable but it’s really not a great solution right now compared to ICE.
If you have electricity at this remote location you can charge your vehicle from a standard 120 volt outlet and get something in the range of 30 miles a day. So if the nearest fast charge is around 150 miles away and you are going to spend a few days at your destination, you can make that trip today with an EV that has 200+ mile range like previously mentioned Audi. There are also Teslas today that have well over 300 miles of range and could make that trip even without the 120v destination charging.
FWIW, I've seen these really low charge rate numbers for 120V outlets repeated over and over, but in my experience, if you let it run at max continuous speed (12 amps), the Model Y generally gets 5 miles of charge per hour on a standard 120/15 amp household plug in the 20%-80% state of charge range. Not amazing if you need to charge the entire battery, but quite adequate for day-to-day.
How often do you go on long road trips? I'd imagine most people do their commute and stuff around town like groceries and grabbing a bite to eat with friends and maybe once or twice a year go somewhere that actually hits the range limit. And I'm betting that's mostly visiting family in another city rather than backcountry camping. And for that? Renting an ICE car would be a option.
Having to rent for even bimonthly trips would get old in a big hurry IMO. What probably will be a common scenario for couples is a small EV and a larger ICE/PHEV. I used to actually have a small two-seater with great gas mileage and a larger SUV. But the two-seater got old, I stopped commuting in general, and it just didn't make sense to keep a second vehicle.
It's very common in non-urban areas of US West such as around huge National Forests to have very limited infrastructure. And it's not 0.00001% of the population that goes to places like that.
I suspect that there will be some substantial subset of users and use cases where PHEVs will make sense for a very long time.
No. (Although some who are really into driving in remote areas do.) At least today, gas range is still longer. For my SUV, it's about 450 miles. And gas stations are certainly more common than fast charging EV stations.
The better measure is whether it is 0.00001% of trips? This argument is similar to me (a European) deciding not to buy a sedan because I can’t drive it through the Sahara desert. If I want to do that I’ll rent a fit for purpose car because I sure am not doing it often (or even twice in a decade).
If it's really really rare, it's one thing. If it's renting a car that won't be set up the way I like it and that I'm often not even supposed to drive on non-paved roads even once or twice a year, it's something else.
With regard to smooth acceleration and quiet ride, it sounds like you’ve never actually driven an electric vehicle before, you should at least try it before offering your opinion about it
One downside -- an Audi Etron starts at about $70,000. At least its a downside if you don't have a lot of extra money laying around. Average cost of used car in the US is about $7000 -- thats what many of us drive. Until us unwashed can get a safe, reliable electric car in that range (and one that I can service myself), the electic car will just remain a rich mans status symbol.
All the cost savings in the prices of battery packs seem to be eaten up by marketing departments of companies, and in general seem to never propagate to the end consumer.
Tesla's $35,000 car was a lie, but even if it wasn't, for real mass market adoption, it needs to be hitting low-mid $20's range.
The average price of a new car in the US is now over $40,000[1].
My theory is that the rise of EVs will coincide with a rise in pricing for all vehicles. Instead of EVs getting cheaper, ICE cars will get more expensive.
Yes, but it's changing rapidly. Our other family car was about $10000 when we got it, I'm not keen to spend too much more. But I'm holding on to when it needs replacing that a second hand electric will closer to this cost than the E-tron.
The Audi e-Tron CCS implementation is apparently really bad at talking to charge points. Just because it won't work for your car doesn't mean it is broken. The car itself is deficient.
Glad you are otherwise happy with the car. I went electric nearly three years ago, and it has been great.
>Audi would stop introducing new fossil fuel burning cars by 2026. Additionally, their lineup will only consist of “e-” branded cars by 2028.
If I read this correctly, they will not introduce new product lines starting 2026, and, stop selling ICE cars entirely in 2028. Is that the correct reading?
If so, it seems monumental(?) that a company like Audi would endeavor to transform their company from ICE (97% in 2020) to 100% BEV (3% in 2020) [0] over 8 years. The manufacturing supply chain and employee composition (including sub-tier suppliers) will endure a period of major change.
Well the world in 2000 compared to 2010 was vastly different, I'd say, so there's precedent for such a big conversion.
Can't really think of 2010 to 2020 being that transformative.
But yeah, it'll require a huge investment in charging infrastructure and the resources to generate the energy for those.
From a Southeastern Europe perspective - the charging infrastructure just doesn't exist here - I don't know how much that region is worth for Audi, but they probably don't want to lose all of that - same for a lot of regions around the world.
The thing is, Audi is just one brand that is part of the VW conglomerate. Its their luxury brand, just below their Porsche brand.
They could easily turn Audi into their Tesla-competing luxury brand and have it pure EV, while still having VW (and Skoda in Europe) pump out ICE vehicles like crazy, and impact nothing in terms of overall CO2 emissions.
Audi will be their compliance electric cars. They will use it to build up the technology and industrial base, then shift the rest of the VW brand over to electric when there is sufficient Government pressure (regulation/taxes).
There are upcoming European regulations that limit the CO2 output of cars, but on a fleet level. These Audi cars will go electric so that the rest of the fleet can formally stay not-electric.
So, for example today you can buy an Audi A3 TFSI e.
That's a petrol engined car, but it's a PHEV, if you plug it in to the wall in my country in about six hours (so overnight or while at the office) you've got 40 miles manufacturers range on battery.
In many countries that are banning new sales of pure ICE cars over the next decade or so, PHEVs remain legal. So yes I can see these variants still existing in Audi's range in 2030, while the plain Petrol variants are now end-of-line.
Meanwhile Audi has other models which are actually BEVs with a much larger range (300+ miles between charges) of course, and those would definitely continue to be refined under this policy.
That's quite a badly written headline and article - are they saying they won't sell new gas cars by 2026 (but still resell 2nd hand ones) or they won't create new gas models by 2026 - I guess the latter.
I've checked the original source [0]: You've guessed right. They specifically said they won't be introducing/creating new gas models. Nowhere do they say that they won't sell old inventory.
"Editor‘s note: A previous version of this article stated Audi would stop making gas cars by 2026. Instead, Audi will no longer bring new gas cars to market by 2026. This has been corrected."
I personally wish they would just continue selling gas cars, but with a lifetime fuel emissions offset built into the price. That would rapidly improve the maturity of carbon offset markets, which is needed for decarbonization across many industries (not just automotive) and has been slow going.
Random math:
200e3miles/(30miles/gallon)*8.89kg/gallon*$100/(1000kg) ~= $6000
That's my opinion too. Excise taxes on gas cars are better than carbon taxes applied to gasoline and diesel. Because what you want is people to stop buying gas cars, not revenue.
Bonus can use the excise tax revenue to fund buyback and down payment assistance programs. Helping someone replace their older gas car with a new(er) electric also results on a lot less political blow back than raising the gas tax.
There's also dealing with the issue of federal and state losses from taxes from fuel, these will need to be offset. Between state and federal, it's anywhere from .40c or more per gallon in taxes now lost. That's money put towards roads and maintenance (somewhere). I imagine we're going to end up seeing a mileage use tax on EV's as well.
One of my side thoughts is ordinary people drive a lot more than they want to. The reason being is we don't ding businesses and housing developers directly for the commuter traffic they generate. Instead we focus on cars MPG and not on workplaces forcing their workers into 50-100 mile commutes.
You end up with the bosses live five minutes away from work (convenient). And their employees live 30-50 miles away. And the boss never sees that cost on the corporate balance sheet.
Does it make sense to buy a traditional vehicle these days? It seems the trend is moving towards hybrids and all electric. We get a lot of snow where I live, I mean a lot of snow, and I’ve always wanted a jeep, or a nice big SUV. But I’m afraid of spending money on a combustion engine, when we may be heading in a completely different direction and I may be stuck with a clunker essentially.
Yeah, we moved to the country following the COVID Tech Exodus from cities and there are no charging stations reasonably conveniently located. We are at end of life for our ICE car and are looking at options to purchase in the next 12 months. We may look at a hybrid, but will likely get a traditional vehicle. That calculus will likely change in a decade.
Your question is really assuming everyone has the money for the practical EV vehicle they need and that they live in or near enough locations for charging. That is only the case for a small but growing portion of society.
How about people without dedicated charging spaces, let alone parking spaces? I would want an electric car, but I can't charge it where I park it. So I wont buy one.
Oh gosh you hit the nail on the head. We have very few charging stations in my area. I’ve seen a few Ev’s coming that are on he lower end, but I’m feeling resigned to an ICE car, maybe something used, as a stop gap until I can save up for a hybrid.
Avoid the clunker mild-hybrid Jeep is selling right now. It's very complicated, and a temporary patch until they get the all-electric into production. By the time it's fully debugged (it took about 3 years to get the JK right) it will be obsolete.
In related news - if you ever wanted the S series, now is the time to pick one up. I went it to look at their e-trons and tfsi-e (hybrids), because that’s what responsible adults do nowadays, and ended up leaving with an S6, because it was just a complete no-brainer of a choice.
Hybrids are basically a joke, something just to make you feel good about yourself. Slow, boring behemoths.
Audi’s electrics are lagging behind Tesla by several years. In the absence of Tesla it could’ve been an option if you were after an e-car, but as it stands now it’s like buying an upscale SVGA card instead of a GPU.
And then you look at what Audi does the best and realize that a fully loaded S6 is cheaper than Tesla AND it comes with a round steering wheel! Bah, I’ll take two.
I just bought an RS7 recently, had an RS5, and I owned a p85D (years ago). The fit and finish of the Audi is miles ahead of the Tesla. I love what Elon does with them, but when I compare my neighbors Model S and my RS7 which were similarly priced, it's not in the same ball park.
The S Series is the best of them all, practically priced, all the enhanced features, and an enjoyable ride.
All that said, I do look forward to another EV. The best part of Audi / Porsche and other higher end manufactures with experience in building more luxury vehicles, is that it will put pressure on Tesla.
Cheers, thanks. Not my first Audi, not my first S either, so I know it’s going to be an excellent car (still being fabricated).
IMO you are spot on with the quality remark, especially compared to Teslas. In that aspect Teslas were underwhelming - from the quality of the materials used for the interior, to the infamous door gap issue, to the paint job that causes detailers to charge extra for Teslas, because they require “special handling”.
Apparently they improved the material quality in the 2021 model S, but they then had to shoot themselves in a foot with the yoke and the removal of the gear shifter. These two changes make as much sense as putting driver seat backwards and mounting a TV screen in front of them. Yes, looks dope. Yes, can be done. No, shouldn’t be the default, leave alone the only option.
Imagine in 2021 thinking HN would be positively receptive to someone boasting about choosing a $75k S6 ICE, polluting over the next 20 years at 22mpg, over an EV. Money is not an issue and yet there's no mention of climate change, only that it was a "no-brainer."
60% of US electricity still comes from Coal and Natural Gas [0], which are polluting. So, an EV is nothing more than an increase in mileage - it's not like it's suddenly Zero polluting, unless of course you're charging from at-home Solar.
Now of course I don't know the efficiency, or amount of pollutants (CO2 and other) released compare between gas engines and coal/natural gas power plants, so the actual increase in mileage and environmental benefit might be different, but it is certainly not 100%.
Has anyone come across any study that compares the two?
Public transport, remote working and so on have a much much larger impact IMHO.
Of course, and I never meant to imply an EV is a complete reduction of emissions. Even a solar-at-home EV still has tire emissions and all the carbon spent to manufacture and ship it.
My condescension comes from this being a simple choice at the dealership, rather than the many harder, but still worthy, decisions to reduce emissions in transportation altogether.
Every car is a decision to pollute and use excess resources, it’s just a matter of scale. Even if you are lucky enough to have a clean source of electricity, you’re still contributing to the problem. Asphalt is made from oil and concrete releases co2, both of which are used to make the roads necessary for you to drive this vehicle around. Then there are the energy and resource inputs into the vehicle itself, the infrastructure built bigger for car driving distances, etc.
The better option is to not own a car at all, and walk/bike/transit your way around.
I feel like, in the near term, this has created a bit of a ‘buy a v8 while you can’ mentality with negative environmental effect. It’s part of why I just bought a 500hp SUV that averages 9 mpg when my foot gets heavy. (I do feel a little guilty.)
Electric motors are better at being a big V8 than a big V8 is. Its like God came down and said "In fact there is a replacement for displacement! behold!"
A model X has about that same power, goes faster for it, and you can put a dead body in the front where the engine isn't.
But what about places where electricity is expensive? Places, where charging infrastructure is uncommon (I've seen maybe 2 dedicated charging stations in my country), or maybe even places where the supply of electricity is not reliable? Also, in my country the used car market is about 95% ICE vehicles and most people can't really afford to buy completely new cars or import them.
I do think that electrical vehicles have a lot of potential, but there are certainly lots of things that should be addressed.
However, i also fear that more and more electrical components will eventually make cars harder to maintain and operate. For example, a Nissan Patrol was an exceedingly simple car (had a 3rd generation one). I fear we'll never see that sort of simplicity again.
My SUV is as fast as a long-range Model X, cheaper than the plaid Model X, and doesn’t require a non-existent charging infrastructure on the long trips I take. Also the body panels aren’t out of alignment and I don’t have falcon wing doors that are still having functional and reliability issues.
Once it deteriorated, workable electric infrastructure should be there.
Right. Ford has had fake F-150 engine noise since 2014. Here's a video on how to disable it.[1] The V-6 with twin turbos has plenty of acceleration, but it doesn't sound like a big engine. So the software is generating fake engine noise through the sound system. The Mustang also uses this system.
Depends on the car. You can have speakers, valves,... anything to make a modern, powerful 4 cylinder turbo engine sound like a Group B rally car. The more upmarket and sportive the car, the more likely.
Can't you just hold your cellphone up to your ear? Use the cellphone accelerometer to figure out what noise to make. I'm sure this app would make at least dozens of dollars.
Owning a almost 40 year old V8I totally see the benefits of EVs. Matter of tact, once we have again need for a second daily, we are very likely to go EV. That old V8 is more a hobby thingy.
You live in a country where people modify their vehicles to deliberately cause more pollution - and not just CO2 emissions, but local particulates that do immediate damage to your community.
It’s more that I think responsible way to write about these changes is to write about all the awesome EVs in development instead of pointing out a nearing scarcity of what people like and are used to.
I am aware of the ethics of my choices, and they are not always good, particularly eating meat. Where I live, fossil fuels still make most of the electricity anyway, and while electric vehicles allow for taking advantage of a cleaner grid, we’re not there yet.
Further, when saying ‘created,’ I am talking more about a market effect on a larger section of the population.
I own two vehicles, One is a cheap base model Kia Soul that I got used for very little. I also own an F-350 Dually Super Duty King Ranch edition. I used to use the truck to tow my house (42 foot fifth-wheel). It's somewhere in the 500HP range, but I needed it for what I was doing at the time. Got about 8 MPG highway pulling the fifth-wheel.
Nowadays I use the cheap Kia for almost everything, because I don't need 500 ponies under the hood and parking that monster sucks as well.
I get that a cheap Kia maybe isn't a fun car for most people, especially when they can afford a lot more car, but you don't need to get a giant SUV just to spend a lot of money on a nice/fancy car.
Do you have literally any specific need for that vehicle other than the fear you won't be able to get one later? I just don't get it. It isn't like electric is lacking in power either.
I mean......I find that you can have both power and practicality, but you don't get there by buying a massive V8 SUV.
I got a Volvo XC60 T8 last year, a plug in hybrid. Rated at 400bhp total. Silly amount of power, way more than anyone needs. But.....I very rarely use it. The electric range of about 25 miles means I complete 95% of my daily journeys on electric power alone. My long term efficiency is about 120mpg(imperial). But that power is still there if I need it - it had absolutely no problems accelerating to and going 140mph on the autobahn, it was great for a 800 mile drive across Europe. It's spacious, comfortable......and the fuel economy is great in daily use.
But I feel like I grew out of a stage where a supercharged Range Rover V8 or a GLE63 AMG would have been the dream - my next car will be full EV if anything.
You are the exception. A ton of these cars are hybrids for nothing more than tax reasons and returned to the dealership after a 3y lease with the charging cable still wrapped in the back.
I know, it's shocking. According to Volvo's own statistics something absolutely insane like 70% of all owners never even plug them in. You should lose the tax exemption entirely if you do that if you ask me. Funnily enough I didn't get any tax benefit as it was a private purchase, but here in UK if you buy it as a company vehicle the taxes on it are very low(used to be zero I think).
It's not just tax, of course - we can't excuse Volvo either, they make these cars for regulatory credit knowing fully well people won't use the electric part.
(And of course we need to blame the regulators that allow this, also knowing fully well what is happening.)
This combo has its pluses. I used to have a 5l x6 (550hp or thereabouts?) and its 0-60 kmh time from a red light was a very big bonus in the morning rush traffic ^__^
It seems exceedingly dangerous to be going from 0-60 form stoplights in morning rush traffic. It’s fine if it’s a danger to you, but you would eventually kill someone who didn’t sign up for that.
By accelerating from 0-60 quickly in your 500hp vehicle in rush hour traffic. A vehicle with high horsepower means you can do that very quick, and rush hour traffic means there are lots of people around. Lots of acceleration + lots of people around means significantly higher risk of grevious injury or death. It’s irresponsible and I don’t mind if people disagree with that.
I'm not sure I agree with you about this - I think your absolute speed is the main safety concern. If you're accelerating hard to the same speed, I don't see much added danger to that. You reach the road speed earlier, but you'd be traveling slower than someone going through the junction on a green light. The danger is people doing slightly higher than the speed limit in residential areas, which makes accidents harder to avoid and the speed of hitting a pedestrian higher increasing their risk of death.
The only situation where I see fast acceleration being dangerous is where other cars are pulling out and seeing you are traveling slowly but not expecting you to accelerate fast. They are likely to pull out on you. I think if you're accelerating hard you have to be aware of this and not do it before junctions or be prepared to ease off.
It’s smaller than the minivan it replaces and is more comfortable with less road & wind noise. It often switches to four cylinders for whatever effect that gives.
Seating and cargo capacity, smaller than the minivan it replaces, comfortable ride if I want it, reassuringly fast acceleration onto the uncontrolled highway intersection by my home, fun, bumpers align with all the trucks and other SUVs, solid quality AWD (unlike the Volvo hybrid.) Might be worth noting there are heavier and less efficient cars, it’s not at the top of the list for either of those things.
I currently own a 2007 diesel station wagon, mostly by accident. It's a hand-me-down from my parents. Fuel consumption is 4.25l/100km (~55 mpg).
It's plenty comfortable to me. It has the safety features that matter (ABS, airbags and whatnot). I've never ended up in an unsafe situation due to a lack of acceleration either. It's got plenty of cargo capacity on its own. In the unlikely event I need more, I can easily hook up a trailer. Which is exactly what I plan to do on the way to the holiday house this summer. Plenty of rather rough unpaved roads there, and yet hardly an SUV to be seen.
All of this fits well with a personal strategy:
- frugal. I try not to spend more than the median unskilled labourer reasonably can.
- political. I try to make sure as little as possible money goes to Russian (48%), Saudi (~20%) or other middle eastern (~5%) oil firms of vey questionable ethical reputation. Just thinking of Mohammed Bin Salman is stomach turning enough for me to lower my speed to the fuel efficiency optimum.
- ecological. Used car, fairly clean burning engine, using it as little as possible, driving it at optimal speed ~90km/h (~56mph) .
My significant other is on board with this. The tradeoff was between owning a car or not. She absolutely wants one. I absolutely want what we own to be frugal, aligned with our political choices and ecological.
I can really appreciate the engineering that went into a massive engine, very much so. Same for a friend's custom leather car upholstery rework. True work of art. An acquaintance of a friend's converted an old Volvo 240 to run on wood (!) [0]. To me, the comfort and fun you described sound bland, hollow, empty even in comparison.
Why go with the boring highly polluting v8 when you can get something similarly boring with more positive externalities instead?
"Your fun is bland, hollow and empty" is so hilariously self-righteous, presumptive and condescending that it sounds like you're trying to convince yourself.
I enjoy translating poetry from Japanese and Spanish. I enjoy playing classic and modern music on piano-- I played violin in an orchestra when I was younger. I enjoy learning to read various writing systems. I love watching films new and old, including those of Kieślowski & Roy Andersson. I have fallen in love and been loved. I have eaten a Liège waffle in a park watching the sunset. I have arrived in Paris at 6pm and walked around with a camera until my train left at 10am. I have sat on the grass outside a Mexican airport drinking beer with other travelers and employees waiting for the massively delayed single flight of the day. I enjoy sailing, swimming, cycling.
In addition to those other bland, hollow and empty pursuits and experiences, I also have a passion for driving and autosport.
Every trip I make by car requires me to, from a stop sign with no ramp, enter or cross a 65 mph divided highway that is often busy. It's happened many times where I've pulled into an empty lane and a car going faster than 70 switches to my lane and closes in at a dangerous rate behind me as I'm still accelerating. Sometimes cars accelerate spontaneously after I've entered a gap that is normally plenty of room. Other times, drivers behind me rage with horns or dangerous maneuvers if I don't enter when they feel it's safe. All those are solved (save for errant hypercars) with a simple sub 4 second 0-60 time and the stability of all wheel drive.
In addition, on road trips, I can close the exhaust valves, raise the ride height and soften the suspension. Then, I can talk to other people in the car without shouting, and I don't have tinnitus ringing in my ears for hours after. Those two things are definitely not boring.
Hooking up a trailer ramps up the inconvenience significantly if you're just driving to a beach condo or attempting to park in a normal lot. That said, my vehicle can tow around 4 US tons if I wanted to go that path.
EDIT: Just to add that the reviews didn't really represent to me the car that I got. They largely compared it to performance Teslas, and noted that it was slower, shorter-ranged and less efficient than Teslas. But I think a lot of reviewers miss the point. A fast Tesla (LR models, let alone performance) is so fast it beats my motorbike, which is normally faster than most performance ICE cars. I think the general public haven't quite grokked that yet, so have no idea just how fast 300hp with torque available all the time actually is.