3 ms·
As a rule of thumb, I believe that a plug-in hybrid typically has 1/10th the battery of an EV, and a non-plug-in hybrid has 1/100th. This is something I don't
by vba616 4y ago
As a rule of thumb, I believe that a plug-in hybrid typically has 1/10th the battery of an EV, and a non-plug-in hybrid has 1/100th.
This is something I don't think people take into account when they say or assume that having two power sources is wasteful and that anyway, batteries are getting cheaper.
You could also infer the relative cost by the unsubsidized price, but there are many rationalizations that blind people to that.
The paradigm where an EV must have enough battery range for the maximum daily trip is like the paradigm where an ICE must have enough HP for the maximum daily acceleration. The virtue of hybrids is that they don't have to have either.
Regarding exhaust fumes, you perceive any difference with a catalytic converter operating?
- magicalhippo 4y agoFor someone like us, which "only" needs 250km range, a hybrid just doesn't make sense I think. For someone who needs to regularly drive long distances it might be different, though there's something to be said for the reduced mechanical complexity of a BEV. > Regarding exhaust fumes, you perceive any difference with a catalytic converter operating? It's better when it's operating, but it's still noticeable in my experience. After a couple of years of being used to not smell fumes when sitting in the car, it becomes very noticeable when there's even just a tiny bit. If I lived up north where 250km is a short trip, I'd probably have a different view on things. But given that there's plenty of BEVs that fit our need, we definitely won't go back.