4 ms·

You should also consider lifespan. I'm a broken record on this but automotive gasoline engine is basically toast after 5000 to 8000 hours. That more than anythi

You should also consider lifespan. I'm a broken record on this but automotive gasoline engine is basically toast after 5000 to 8000 hours. That more than anything else defines the lifespan of a car. Electric motors and fixed gears can go 25,000 to 50,000 hours before they need a rebuild. And they can be rebuilt multiple times. And the industry is talking about EV batteries that will last a million miles. Factor that into the capital cost of owning an EV and it changes everything. Now consider that the usual finance term for car is about a third it's expected life. Typical car lasts 15 years, typical finance is 5 years. If an EV's expected life is 30 years, vs 15 above. Then the reasonable finance term can double to 10 years.

bumby 6y ago
If you’re talking specifically about the drive train, that’s one thing. But the reliability of electrical components will likely not come close to approaching 30 years. That’s especially relevant in cars that combine everything into a single display and everything is electrically controlled. The old school vice grip solution to roll down windows won’t work with most new cars :-) There are anecdotes of displays costing $7k, and designed for planned obsolescence after 5-7 years. Ironically, this is the same timeframe where the car depreciation makes a stronger case for buying a new vehicle rather than paying that kind of money on fixing an older one. Point being, I don’t think we can plan on a 30 year EV life anymore than we can count on using the same personal computer for decades.
- Gibbon1 6y ago
  > designed for planned obsolescence after 5-7 years The big three tried that in the 1970's. I have a thoery why it doesn't work. It's because resale value matters. Price out how much people are willing to pay for a Mercedes-Benz Sprinter. Now look at the price of a used sprinter with a 150k miles on it vs a random Ford or Dodge van. It's about $20k vs under $10k Companies that play the planned obsolesce game with EV's are going to find themselves in a quality vs price corner coffin. Because customers rightly perceive the companies cars as shoddy. The company can't charge enough to build quality cars. They get stuck just the way GM did 40 years ago. And is still stuck today.
  - bumby 6y ago
    So I didn’t want to give the company name because it’s just an anecdote, but it’s from a company that is usually in the top off people’s minds when asked about car manufacturers who are synonymous with quality. I don’t think the Sprinter vs Transit example is a very illustrative one. Personally, I’d rather have a used Ford or Dodge simply because the life cycle cost of a Sprinter is insane where I live due to maintenance costs. They have similar base prices new but with any features the Sprinter quickly outpaces (ha) a similar American van in initial cost as well. I don’t think they are apples to apples. It didn’t work for the Big Three because at the time, Japanese were trying to differentiate themselves and they did it on the quality front. I tend to think it was more about complacency than planned obsolescence. I think people generally look at mechanical and electronics very differently. People often look at simplicity in mechanical designs as a feature, where I think the opposite is true in electronics. I’m skeptical that people will be buying EVs expecting to drive the same one for 30 years, but we’ll see.
    - Gibbon1 6y ago
      > So I didn’t want to give the company name because it’s just an anecdote, but it’s from a company that is usually in the top off people’s minds when asked about car manufacturers who are synonymous with quality. I'll take this as a non answer then.
      - bumby 6y ago
        I’m sorry, I don’t think you asked an actual question. I know speculation is a hobby on forums but I don’t think the precise name adds much to the discussion in this case
        Gibbon1 6y ago
        You the one dismissing that a drive train that lasts two to three times longer than a conventional gasoline one will have no effect on cars lifespan. And thus no effect on capital expenses. That seems to go against what I know about basic accounting.
ogre_codes 6y ago
Plus dual motor electric cars (most Teslas) can run on one motor. So in the unlikely event one of your motors fails you can still limp home without worry about blowing your head gaskets.

bumby 6y ago

If you’re talking specifically about the drive train, that’s one thing. But the reliability of electrical components will likely not come close to approaching 30 years. That’s especially relevant in cars that combine everything into a single display and everything is electrically controlled. The old school vice grip solution to roll down windows won’t work with most new cars :-) There are anecdotes of displays costing $7k, and designed for planned obsolescence after 5-7 years. Ironically, this is the same timeframe where the car depreciation makes a stronger case for buying a new vehicle rather than paying that kind of money on fixing an older one. Point being, I don’t think we can plan on a 30 year EV life anymore than we can count on using the same personal computer for decades.

Gibbon1 6y ago
> designed for planned obsolescence after 5-7 years The big three tried that in the 1970's. I have a thoery why it doesn't work. It's because resale value matters. Price out how much people are willing to pay for a Mercedes-Benz Sprinter. Now look at the price of a used sprinter with a 150k miles on it vs a random Ford or Dodge van. It's about $20k vs under $10k Companies that play the planned obsolesce game with EV's are going to find themselves in a quality vs price corner coffin. Because customers rightly perceive the companies cars as shoddy. The company can't charge enough to build quality cars. They get stuck just the way GM did 40 years ago. And is still stuck today.
- bumby 6y ago
  So I didn’t want to give the company name because it’s just an anecdote, but it’s from a company that is usually in the top off people’s minds when asked about car manufacturers who are synonymous with quality. I don’t think the Sprinter vs Transit example is a very illustrative one. Personally, I’d rather have a used Ford or Dodge simply because the life cycle cost of a Sprinter is insane where I live due to maintenance costs. They have similar base prices new but with any features the Sprinter quickly outpaces (ha) a similar American van in initial cost as well. I don’t think they are apples to apples. It didn’t work for the Big Three because at the time, Japanese were trying to differentiate themselves and they did it on the quality front. I tend to think it was more about complacency than planned obsolescence. I think people generally look at mechanical and electronics very differently. People often look at simplicity in mechanical designs as a feature, where I think the opposite is true in electronics. I’m skeptical that people will be buying EVs expecting to drive the same one for 30 years, but we’ll see.
  - Gibbon1 6y ago
    > So I didn’t want to give the company name because it’s just an anecdote, but it’s from a company that is usually in the top off people’s minds when asked about car manufacturers who are synonymous with quality. I'll take this as a non answer then.
    - bumby 6y ago
      I’m sorry, I don’t think you asked an actual question. I know speculation is a hobby on forums but I don’t think the precise name adds much to the discussion in this case
      - Gibbon1 6y ago
        You the one dismissing that a drive train that lasts two to three times longer than a conventional gasoline one will have no effect on cars lifespan. And thus no effect on capital expenses. That seems to go against what I know about basic accounting.

ogre_codes 6y ago

Plus dual motor electric cars (most Teslas) can run on one motor. So in the unlikely event one of your motors fails you can still limp home without worry about blowing your head gaskets.