3 ms·

> Teslas routinely do Isn't this just FUD? A quick google tells me that ICE cars catch fire much more often than electric vehicles do. Although I have no idea

> Teslas routinely do Isn't this just FUD? A quick google tells me that ICE cars catch fire much more often than electric vehicles do. Although I have no idea how often container ships catch fire.

slt2021 4y ago
the danger of EV is spontaneous fire. It needs only one faulty battery cell to short due to abuse/overcharge and lead to runaway reaction and burning of the whole thing down. Imagine you are sleeping at your house, parked your EV in garage and it catches fire and burns your whole house down. https://www.businessinsider.com/couples-tesla-caught-fire-charging-overnight-caused-a-house-fire-2021-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/couples-tesla-caught-fire-ch...
- morepork 4y ago
  You mean just like can happen in an ICE car? https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/08/business/hyundai-kia-fire-recall/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/08/business/hyundai-kia-fire...
  - slt2021 4y ago
    electric short is applicable to any electronics, not ICE specifically. ICE engine itself is old and proven tech
  - lelanthran 4y ago
    That's an electrical fire. ICE engines rarely spontaneously combust when parked in your garage. In fact, I cannot think of it ever happening. The most recent thing that matches your perception was a Ford model that was know for catching fire when overheating. It made news precisely because it is so rare.
lelanthran 4y ago
> Isn't this just FUD? A quick google tells me that ICE cars catch fire much more often than electric vehicles do. Although I have no idea how often container ships catch fire. No, the FUD is actually the other way around - fires in ICE models are always found to be electrical faults. The only exception I can think of is the Ford Kuga from 2019 or so; and even then, it was down to manufacturing/design defect in the turbo, not the engine itself.
- p1necone 4y ago
  Surely this is a distinction without a difference though? Nobody is driving a disembodied engine with nothing attached to it around, what matters is whether or not ICE cars have more faults. Also, electrical systems are pretty intertwined with any modern ICE engine - you'd have to go back to crank starts to remove that.
  - lelanthran 4y ago
    > Surely this is a distinction without a difference though? I don't think so - ICE cars are going to have much less wiring (that can catch fire) than electric vehicles. IOW, if you think poor wiring in cars is a fire problem now, you can't also claim that cars with more wiring will be a smaller fire problem. Hence I called it FUD - If cars are mostly catching fire due to electrical problems, putting more electrical components (like wiring) that carries more current (max in an ICE car is maybe 60A for starter cables, and 10A - 15A for everything else), it's pure FUD that increasing the wiring, and increasing the current carried in the electrical system will cause fewer fires. I just don't see how adding more fire-causing components, and increasing the current is going to result in fewer fires.

> Teslas routinely do Isn't this just FUD? A quick google tells me that ICE cars catch fire much more often than electric vehicles do. Although I have no idea how often container ships catch fire.

slt2021 4y ago

the danger of EV is spontaneous fire. It needs only one faulty battery cell to short due to abuse/overcharge and lead to runaway reaction and burning of the whole thing down. Imagine you are sleeping at your house, parked your EV in garage and it catches fire and burns your whole house down. https://www.businessinsider.com/couples-tesla-caught-fire-charging-overnight-caused-a-house-fire-2021-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/couples-tesla-caught-fire-ch...

morepork 4y ago
You mean just like can happen in an ICE car? https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/08/business/hyundai-kia-fire-recall/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/08/business/hyundai-kia-fire...
- slt2021 4y ago
  electric short is applicable to any electronics, not ICE specifically. ICE engine itself is old and proven tech
- lelanthran 4y ago
  That's an electrical fire. ICE engines rarely spontaneously combust when parked in your garage. In fact, I cannot think of it ever happening. The most recent thing that matches your perception was a Ford model that was know for catching fire when overheating. It made news precisely because it is so rare.

lelanthran 4y ago

> Isn't this just FUD? A quick google tells me that ICE cars catch fire much more often than electric vehicles do. Although I have no idea how often container ships catch fire. No, the FUD is actually the other way around - fires in ICE models are always found to be electrical faults. The only exception I can think of is the Ford Kuga from 2019 or so; and even then, it was down to manufacturing/design defect in the turbo, not the engine itself.

p1necone 4y ago
Surely this is a distinction without a difference though? Nobody is driving a disembodied engine with nothing attached to it around, what matters is whether or not ICE cars have more faults. Also, electrical systems are pretty intertwined with any modern ICE engine - you'd have to go back to crank starts to remove that.
- lelanthran 4y ago
  > Surely this is a distinction without a difference though? I don't think so - ICE cars are going to have much less wiring (that can catch fire) than electric vehicles. IOW, if you think poor wiring in cars is a fire problem now, you can't also claim that cars with more wiring will be a smaller fire problem. Hence I called it FUD - If cars are mostly catching fire due to electrical problems, putting more electrical components (like wiring) that carries more current (max in an ICE car is maybe 60A for starter cables, and 10A - 15A for everything else), it's pure FUD that increasing the wiring, and increasing the current carried in the electrical system will cause fewer fires. I just don't see how adding more fire-causing components, and increasing the current is going to result in fewer fires.