7 ms·

This will be neat if it works but really there isn't going to be a huge market for 500+ mile cars vs the cost savings of getting a 300-400 mile car. The excepti

This will be neat if it works but really there isn't going to be a huge market for 500+ mile cars vs the cost savings of getting a 300-400 mile car. The exception might be road-trippers and people who do a lot of towing but I suspect that is a much smaller population than people tend to think.

Bud 3y ago
Americans don't buy cars anymore, though; not really. They buy ludicrous gigantic heavy pickups and SUVs. So what we're really talking about is getting decent range into oversized pickups that their owners want to accelerate like sports cars and still have a nice air-conditioned interior even when it's 150 degrees on the pavement due to climate change.
- rendang 3y ago
  Americans also buy a lot of small to medium CUVs
- fragmede 3y ago
  https://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2023-us-vehicle-sales-figures-by-model/ https://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2023-us-vehicle-sales-figures-... The top 5 on that list are Ford F-series trucks by a large margin, followed by a Toyota small SUV and a Honda small SUV, before you get to the Toyota Camry, an actual car, followed by a Toyota truck. Americans just really like their F150's!
- Modified3019 3y ago
  You can thank the EPA for that. The gov mandates that vehicles achieve a certain calculated efficiency, or there’s an extra fee/fine attached to the vehicle. Reasonable enough, right? Unfortunately the way this is calculated is absolutely fucking retarded. Basically, the larger the wheelbase of vehicle, the lower fuel efficiency the vehicle can get away with. This is why these fucking things keep ballooning in size, have a dogshit turning radius, and are causing an epidemic of frontovers and backover accidents killing or injuring thousands of children every year because there’s no up close visibility. Video explanation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azI3nqrHEXM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azI3nqrHEXM Old small trucks can actually command a premium because of this bullshit. Very few people actually like these huge stupid boats, but there’s just nothing else to buy when you need an actual work vehicle. Please consider contacting your legislators and putting this on their radar, and keeping it there.
ultrarunner 3y ago
If it could only reduce the weight of current EVs that would be a win. Most electric vehicles weight 1000 lbs or more than their ICE counterparts, and in the extreme case of the Hummer, the total weight is over 9000 lbs. Vehicles seem to be continuously ballooning in size, so whether that continues or eventual legislation forces more reasonable sizes, higher energy density would be very welcome.
- warble 3y ago
  Yes this is the real win. Lighter smaller batteries. Better efficiency and easier to design around for safety and maintenance.
  - hnick 3y ago
    If it allows a smaller and cheaper battery (hopefully in the longer term, less size = less expense) then it should make lower capacity small city EV runabouts more attractive. Right now the price floor is unattractive. Many households have two cars, one for errands and one for work/travel, so if that's true it helps on both accounts.
- hamandcheese 3y ago
  When will this meme die? A Model 3 is very comparable in weight to an Audi S3. The Hyundai Ionic 5 is comparable weight and interior volume to a Toyota Rav 4. The Hummer is a monster either way and is not a good sample.
  - majormajor 3y ago
    Are there any EVs with Honda Civic or Accord or BMW 2 series weight? E.g. <3500lb? Even a Leaf seems to start at 3500lbs now.
    - qdog 3y ago
      The Mini Electric is down there. Weighs more than gas, and one of the reasons it isn't long range, would push up the weight too much. The current generation of battery tech is just a little heavier than would be competitive to ICE on weight. Gasoline holds a lot more energy than a battery can, but the engine is heavier. If/when battery density is able to double (and this solid state tech is 2x-3x current battery, so it would be a game-changer), you would have very similar car weights. This seems to be one of the reasons the big trucks are first, adding a thousand pounds to a 6000 lb. truck isn't as bad as adding that to a car half the weight. I expect we will eventually see vehicles that weight less than the ICE counterpart that get a reasonable range, but hard to say when battery tech advances that much.
lelandbatey 3y ago
Since it's a bit more than a doubling of energy density, it's less that you can get a 500+ mile car and more that you can drop the price & weight of a 300-400 mile car. Imagine cutting the weight of an EV battery by 500 pounds while maintaining its current capacity. All that weight savings will probably get you some additional range, and save you on cost of materials, meaning you could cut the battery down a bit more to save even more on materials while saving a bit more weight. All told, you could have the exact same EV, but manufacturing the battery just got ~50% cheaper! That's what's exciting about this as a possibility, not 500+ mile cars.
- dreamcompiler 3y ago
  ...provided the number of useful recharges is at least as high as Li-Ion, and preferably more like LiFePo or even better.
- barrkel 3y ago
  I doubt range is increased much by reduced weight. Only rolling resistance is reduced, but most resistance at speed is from air resistance. Since energy is reclaimed from braking, the extra mass for acceleration is balanced by the extra mass for stopping, so it doesn’t help much with stop start traffic. That’s how I mentally model it anyhow.
  - lelandbatey 3y ago
    It's true that it's not a huge savings, but there's some savings. The EPA estimates approximately 1% reduction in fuel economy for each 100lbs added, so you might get a few % from the the battery weight savings.
    - barrkel 3y ago
      Sure, for fuel economy, presumably without regenerative braking. When you're not in smooth traffic, a whole bunch of energy is lost in braking, and that energy is directly proportional to mass.
causi 3y ago
Also people who don't do all their driving in the city. That 250-mile battery shrinks a lot when your whole trip is at 80mph.
- coffeebeqn 3y ago
  Plus it’s not always 70° in most places so the estimate is almost always optimistic to begin with
  - causi 3y ago
    Yeah there's about three months of the year when I can set my AC to anything but maximum cold.
asdff 3y ago
People like having extra capacity even if they scarcely use that capacity. This is why the F150 is the best selling car in America. Not to mention its better in general to have extra battery capacity than you might reasonably need today, as it will degrade with age, or temperature.
- ninkendo 3y ago
  It's also why the F150 lightning appears to be an absolute flop: Its range goes to crap when you're towing, and people who want F150's at least think of themselves as people who want to be able to tow. (Actual towing with F150's is likely low, but most people who buy one, want to have the option.)
  - asdff 3y ago
    I wouldn't be surprised if people had resale value in the back of their mind. Tacomas are another popular truck but the top trims with the largest engines certainly command a premium and hold their used value better than the perhaps more economical 2wd 4 cylinder tacomas.
  - snoman 3y ago
    I thought it was a flop because it was basically impossible to actually buy one due to availability?
    - mrguyorama 3y ago
      And they had battery issues early on that gave EV skeptical people an easy out to ignore them.
  - _ea1k 3y ago
    > people who want F150's at least think of themselves as people who want to be able to tow I've only found this to be true on the internet. In the real world, it is much less common. Lots of people realize that their truck is just the commuter and home depot stuff hauler.
benrapscallion 3y ago
If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse. -Henry Ford This is analogous to how people thought nobody would need a 100 GB hard disk on their personal computer when 1 GB hard disks were the norm.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
Hankenstein2 3y ago
Agreed on the small market, what would move the needle is if it re-charged much more quickly than current batteries. EV owners really only want 500+ miles because charging the battery takes so long. Charging infrastructure is already changing and becoming more available so charging speed will be the real quest
MisterBastahrd 3y ago
I think you'll find that for many people, EVs are a non-starter unless they can mimic the same travel timelines you can get from a combustion engine. 500 miles is very close to what they'd be looking for.
lostlogin 3y ago
> I suspect that is a much smaller population than people tend to think. Pickup truck owners will die on that hill.
ru552 3y ago
500+ miles means I can just charge up on the weekend and not be bothered with it during the week. I'd pay for that convenience.
canoebuilder 3y ago
Given an innovation of this sort, there is not a single area of application, extending the range of electric cars. You could also make lighter weight electric cars. Which would have their merits. Think of the whole spectrum of EVs, lighter weight e-bikes, scooters, skateboards, or long range e-bikes. Electric aircraft start to become feasible. Much more flight time out of your toy drone, multi-day battery life for your phone or laptop. Energy storage in off grid setups becomes simpler, or more capacity in the same space. Etc. etc. All that provided this new design could function as a more or less slot in replacement, or better, for current lithium batteries in terms of manufacturing, cost, and what not.
molsongolden 3y ago
The additional capacity might be wanted in cold climates. The massive range drop when running the cabin heater plus slow charging in cold environments definitely makes me pause when considering an EV.
- Astronaut3315 3y ago
  I’ve found that the range of my EV is overkill in summer and about right in winter. I live in Minnesota, USA where the winters tend to be cold.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - nuancebydefault 3y ago
    First time I encountered range and overkill in the same sentence. Does your car contain breakthrough battery technology? Solid state maybe? Also, is electricity plenty cheap where you charge?
    - tomtheelder 3y ago
      I agree with the previous commenter. If you level 2 charge at home you have to drive a pretty preposterous distance to ever have range issues. Road trips are another story, but they are infrequent.
- oblio 3y ago
  Let's be real here. If you live in any kind of cold-ish climate (below 10C) and want comfort, imagine a super common scenario: - heating on - air temperature below 10C - highway speeds, so a steady speed of ~130kmph - car costing less than €30k Well, guess what, there are barely any EVs costing less than €30k in Europe, and even if there were, their range would be 200km or less under those conditions.
- myth2018 3y ago
  I believe that such additional capacity will also be very well received by the ongoing hybrid airplane projects.
jackmott42 3y ago
Just people who go on road trips with 2 or more mountain bikes need this. This is not theoretical, a Model Y has its range ruined with 2 or more mountain bikes attached to the exterior. Like ~140 miles max on our trip with 4 mountain bikes. And then you tend to go to more remote areas so that makes it even worse. So yes, our family is eagerly awaiting a 500 mile range ev
- _ea1k 3y ago
  That's fair, but a truck with the same payload and rated range will do much better at hauling bikes.
lowbloodsugar 3y ago
More energy doesn't mean longer range for me. It means I can pass other cars and drive the speed I want when I'm up in the mountains, instead of having to eke out every last mile. If I get 8MPG in my mustang because I'm enjoying my drive, there are gas stations every few miles, even in state parks. EVs burn "gas" just as quick if you drive them the same way, but there's no charger for 60 miles. The KIA EV6 GT just can't make use of its 580hp in the places I'd like to enjoy it because it only has 200 mile range to start with.
topper-123 3y ago
What are you on? Having battery with 3x battery capacity will be an absolute game changer. This will do a lot of good, if it gets into production. For one thing, it will make EVs competitive with diesel, which will be s huge win for getting us of oil.
- spacemadness 3y ago
  People will absolutely choose the longer battery span to rid themselves of range anxiety. I agree, it’s a terrible take.
  - topper-123 3y ago
    IMO people mostly want longer battery span because current batteries take a long time to charge. Toyota has claimed that this battery will charge very fast, in which case range will not be as important as it is now.
carabiner 3y ago
? Range is how often you need to recharge. For people like in apartments without home charging, this is huge, especially since homes are so unaffordable now.
VanillaCafe 3y ago
There are a lot of real world caveats that go into those range estimates. I just took my long range Tesla Model Y with an advertised 326 mile range on a multi-day road trip and I was stopping to charge about every 100 miles. I would love to get something with 3x the advertised range.
richardw 3y ago
Trucks, buses, planes, boats (eg ferries), smaller lighter cars, bikes, drones. Everything can benefit from smaller and lighter, or longer charge.
7speter 3y ago
Even if there is no demand for 500 mile range cars, solid state batteries are supposed to be twice the density of current batteries so a 3-400 mile car would still be something like 25% lighter than they would be with current batteries.
qball 3y ago
A gasoline car can charge from 0% to 100% of its range in 5 minutes. It usually takes longer to take the slight detour and line the car up with the charge port than it does to fully charge the car. Recharging this kind of car does not damage its most expensive part nor does its fuel tank shrink. The newest electric cars take a half hour to do this (a non-trivial amount of time) and only go about 2/3rds as far (less on the highway), so if you actually want to go somewhere you're taking on about an extra hour of charging for 6 hours of driving. Recharging this kind of car damages its most expensive part- the fuel tank- and it shrinks every time you charge it (whether quickly or slowly). Now, if the car had 1600 miles of range, then a half-hour charge time and the slow shrinkage of its gas tank is more acceptable because you're getting approximately the same rate of recharge per minute (as it would be if the 200-mile range electric cars charged as fast as a gas car does). With a range or charge time like that, the other inherent disadvantages to electric cars are muted to a massive degree (a 20% range degradation isn't as big a deal for a car that can still go 1200 miles, and a 30% range reduction in cold months isn't as big a deal if the car could be charged in 3 minutes). But neither of those things are currently true, and that's in large part why these kinds of cars don't really sell unless they're known to be rolling gimmicks or transformative in other ways (the electric trucks that let you run power tools off their batteries are the best example of this). Which is why Tesla's cars are the way that they are, and why every other major manufacturer who doesn't have a good idea of how to sell their inferior cars take the "look, we can do a massive screen in our car too just like Tesla" approach (and fail specifically because they aren't Tesla), or they just keep developing really good gas cars (an approach currently favored by the Japanese companies).
- oezi 3y ago
  The market for gas cars will be dead in 10 years. It has all the signs of a technology transition and it will be absolutely brutal for all car makers which aren't ready. The range argument won't matter because people rarely drive distances exceeding 200km/120 miles in a single day.
  - enigma20 3y ago
    Many people do. And even if they don't, charing a car every day if you don't have a charger at home or office will be very painful. Imagine that you have to tank theICE car every day, even this would have been irritating.
achiang 3y ago
Real world usage is you only get to use ~70% of the stated range on a road trip, so we're really talking about 350 miles of range, which is, as you say, what most people actually want. Why 70%? You obviously don't run the battery to zero, 10% is a common amount of buffer to leave. And then when you DC fast charge, the rate of charging drops dramatically around 80%, so people don't charge to full. These are for ideal conditions, add in any sort of weather and the range drops again as you run a heater, etc. Living in the Bay Area, driving to Tahoe in the winter without a mandatory recharge should be the gold standard. It's not an unusual use case, "only" about 180 miles, and yet there aren't any EVs that can do it confidently because going uphill in the cold with aerodynamic-destroying ski rack is really hard. A car with 500 miles of fair-weather range could probably do it?
- ytdytvhxgydvhh 3y ago
  Well the Lucid Air with the big battery could probably make that drive no sweat, but that’s out of reach to almost everyone.

Bud 3y ago

Americans don't buy cars anymore, though; not really. They buy ludicrous gigantic heavy pickups and SUVs. So what we're really talking about is getting decent range into oversized pickups that their owners want to accelerate like sports cars and still have a nice air-conditioned interior even when it's 150 degrees on the pavement due to climate change.

rendang 3y ago
Americans also buy a lot of small to medium CUVs
fragmede 3y ago
https://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2023-us-vehicle-sales-figures-by-model/ https://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2023-us-vehicle-sales-figures-... The top 5 on that list are Ford F-series trucks by a large margin, followed by a Toyota small SUV and a Honda small SUV, before you get to the Toyota Camry, an actual car, followed by a Toyota truck. Americans just really like their F150's!
Modified3019 3y ago
You can thank the EPA for that. The gov mandates that vehicles achieve a certain calculated efficiency, or there’s an extra fee/fine attached to the vehicle. Reasonable enough, right? Unfortunately the way this is calculated is absolutely fucking retarded. Basically, the larger the wheelbase of vehicle, the lower fuel efficiency the vehicle can get away with. This is why these fucking things keep ballooning in size, have a dogshit turning radius, and are causing an epidemic of frontovers and backover accidents killing or injuring thousands of children every year because there’s no up close visibility. Video explanation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azI3nqrHEXM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azI3nqrHEXM Old small trucks can actually command a premium because of this bullshit. Very few people actually like these huge stupid boats, but there’s just nothing else to buy when you need an actual work vehicle. Please consider contacting your legislators and putting this on their radar, and keeping it there.

ultrarunner 3y ago

If it could only reduce the weight of current EVs that would be a win. Most electric vehicles weight 1000 lbs or more than their ICE counterparts, and in the extreme case of the Hummer, the total weight is over 9000 lbs. Vehicles seem to be continuously ballooning in size, so whether that continues or eventual legislation forces more reasonable sizes, higher energy density would be very welcome.

warble 3y ago
Yes this is the real win. Lighter smaller batteries. Better efficiency and easier to design around for safety and maintenance.
- hnick 3y ago
  If it allows a smaller and cheaper battery (hopefully in the longer term, less size = less expense) then it should make lower capacity small city EV runabouts more attractive. Right now the price floor is unattractive. Many households have two cars, one for errands and one for work/travel, so if that's true it helps on both accounts.
hamandcheese 3y ago
When will this meme die? A Model 3 is very comparable in weight to an Audi S3. The Hyundai Ionic 5 is comparable weight and interior volume to a Toyota Rav 4. The Hummer is a monster either way and is not a good sample.
- majormajor 3y ago
  Are there any EVs with Honda Civic or Accord or BMW 2 series weight? E.g. <3500lb? Even a Leaf seems to start at 3500lbs now.
  - qdog 3y ago
    The Mini Electric is down there. Weighs more than gas, and one of the reasons it isn't long range, would push up the weight too much. The current generation of battery tech is just a little heavier than would be competitive to ICE on weight. Gasoline holds a lot more energy than a battery can, but the engine is heavier. If/when battery density is able to double (and this solid state tech is 2x-3x current battery, so it would be a game-changer), you would have very similar car weights. This seems to be one of the reasons the big trucks are first, adding a thousand pounds to a 6000 lb. truck isn't as bad as adding that to a car half the weight. I expect we will eventually see vehicles that weight less than the ICE counterpart that get a reasonable range, but hard to say when battery tech advances that much.

lelandbatey 3y ago

Since it's a bit more than a doubling of energy density, it's less that you can get a 500+ mile car and more that you can drop the price & weight of a 300-400 mile car. Imagine cutting the weight of an EV battery by 500 pounds while maintaining its current capacity. All that weight savings will probably get you some additional range, and save you on cost of materials, meaning you could cut the battery down a bit more to save even more on materials while saving a bit more weight. All told, you could have the exact same EV, but manufacturing the battery just got ~50% cheaper! That's what's exciting about this as a possibility, not 500+ mile cars.

dreamcompiler 3y ago
...provided the number of useful recharges is at least as high as Li-Ion, and preferably more like LiFePo or even better.
barrkel 3y ago
I doubt range is increased much by reduced weight. Only rolling resistance is reduced, but most resistance at speed is from air resistance. Since energy is reclaimed from braking, the extra mass for acceleration is balanced by the extra mass for stopping, so it doesn’t help much with stop start traffic. That’s how I mentally model it anyhow.
- lelandbatey 3y ago
  It's true that it's not a huge savings, but there's some savings. The EPA estimates approximately 1% reduction in fuel economy for each 100lbs added, so you might get a few % from the the battery weight savings.
  - barrkel 3y ago
    Sure, for fuel economy, presumably without regenerative braking. When you're not in smooth traffic, a whole bunch of energy is lost in braking, and that energy is directly proportional to mass.

causi 3y ago

Also people who don't do all their driving in the city. That 250-mile battery shrinks a lot when your whole trip is at 80mph.

coffeebeqn 3y ago
Plus it’s not always 70° in most places so the estimate is almost always optimistic to begin with
- causi 3y ago
  Yeah there's about three months of the year when I can set my AC to anything but maximum cold.

asdff 3y ago

People like having extra capacity even if they scarcely use that capacity. This is why the F150 is the best selling car in America. Not to mention its better in general to have extra battery capacity than you might reasonably need today, as it will degrade with age, or temperature.

ninkendo 3y ago
It's also why the F150 lightning appears to be an absolute flop: Its range goes to crap when you're towing, and people who want F150's at least think of themselves as people who want to be able to tow. (Actual towing with F150's is likely low, but most people who buy one, want to have the option.)
- asdff 3y ago
  I wouldn't be surprised if people had resale value in the back of their mind. Tacomas are another popular truck but the top trims with the largest engines certainly command a premium and hold their used value better than the perhaps more economical 2wd 4 cylinder tacomas.
- snoman 3y ago
  I thought it was a flop because it was basically impossible to actually buy one due to availability?
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    And they had battery issues early on that gave EV skeptical people an easy out to ignore them.
- _ea1k 3y ago
  > people who want F150's at least think of themselves as people who want to be able to tow I've only found this to be true on the internet. In the real world, it is much less common. Lots of people realize that their truck is just the commuter and home depot stuff hauler.

benrapscallion 3y ago

If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse. -Henry Ford This is analogous to how people thought nobody would need a 100 GB hard disk on their personal computer when 1 GB hard disks were the norm.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Hankenstein2 3y ago

Agreed on the small market, what would move the needle is if it re-charged much more quickly than current batteries. EV owners really only want 500+ miles because charging the battery takes so long. Charging infrastructure is already changing and becoming more available so charging speed will be the real quest

MisterBastahrd 3y ago

I think you'll find that for many people, EVs are a non-starter unless they can mimic the same travel timelines you can get from a combustion engine. 500 miles is very close to what they'd be looking for.

lostlogin 3y ago

> I suspect that is a much smaller population than people tend to think. Pickup truck owners will die on that hill.

ru552 3y ago

500+ miles means I can just charge up on the weekend and not be bothered with it during the week. I'd pay for that convenience.

canoebuilder 3y ago

Given an innovation of this sort, there is not a single area of application, extending the range of electric cars. You could also make lighter weight electric cars. Which would have their merits. Think of the whole spectrum of EVs, lighter weight e-bikes, scooters, skateboards, or long range e-bikes. Electric aircraft start to become feasible. Much more flight time out of your toy drone, multi-day battery life for your phone or laptop. Energy storage in off grid setups becomes simpler, or more capacity in the same space. Etc. etc. All that provided this new design could function as a more or less slot in replacement, or better, for current lithium batteries in terms of manufacturing, cost, and what not.

molsongolden 3y ago

The additional capacity might be wanted in cold climates. The massive range drop when running the cabin heater plus slow charging in cold environments definitely makes me pause when considering an EV.

Astronaut3315 3y ago
I’ve found that the range of my EV is overkill in summer and about right in winter. I live in Minnesota, USA where the winters tend to be cold.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- nuancebydefault 3y ago
  First time I encountered range and overkill in the same sentence. Does your car contain breakthrough battery technology? Solid state maybe? Also, is electricity plenty cheap where you charge?
  - tomtheelder 3y ago
    I agree with the previous commenter. If you level 2 charge at home you have to drive a pretty preposterous distance to ever have range issues. Road trips are another story, but they are infrequent.
oblio 3y ago
Let's be real here. If you live in any kind of cold-ish climate (below 10C) and want comfort, imagine a super common scenario: - heating on - air temperature below 10C - highway speeds, so a steady speed of ~130kmph - car costing less than €30k Well, guess what, there are barely any EVs costing less than €30k in Europe, and even if there were, their range would be 200km or less under those conditions.
myth2018 3y ago
I believe that such additional capacity will also be very well received by the ongoing hybrid airplane projects.

jackmott42 3y ago

Just people who go on road trips with 2 or more mountain bikes need this. This is not theoretical, a Model Y has its range ruined with 2 or more mountain bikes attached to the exterior. Like ~140 miles max on our trip with 4 mountain bikes. And then you tend to go to more remote areas so that makes it even worse. So yes, our family is eagerly awaiting a 500 mile range ev

_ea1k 3y ago
That's fair, but a truck with the same payload and rated range will do much better at hauling bikes.

lowbloodsugar 3y ago

More energy doesn't mean longer range for me. It means I can pass other cars and drive the speed I want when I'm up in the mountains, instead of having to eke out every last mile. If I get 8MPG in my mustang because I'm enjoying my drive, there are gas stations every few miles, even in state parks. EVs burn "gas" just as quick if you drive them the same way, but there's no charger for 60 miles. The KIA EV6 GT just can't make use of its 580hp in the places I'd like to enjoy it because it only has 200 mile range to start with.

topper-123 3y ago

What are you on? Having battery with 3x battery capacity will be an absolute game changer. This will do a lot of good, if it gets into production. For one thing, it will make EVs competitive with diesel, which will be s huge win for getting us of oil.

spacemadness 3y ago
People will absolutely choose the longer battery span to rid themselves of range anxiety. I agree, it’s a terrible take.
- topper-123 3y ago
  IMO people mostly want longer battery span because current batteries take a long time to charge. Toyota has claimed that this battery will charge very fast, in which case range will not be as important as it is now.

carabiner 3y ago

? Range is how often you need to recharge. For people like in apartments without home charging, this is huge, especially since homes are so unaffordable now.

VanillaCafe 3y ago

There are a lot of real world caveats that go into those range estimates. I just took my long range Tesla Model Y with an advertised 326 mile range on a multi-day road trip and I was stopping to charge about every 100 miles. I would love to get something with 3x the advertised range.

richardw 3y ago

Trucks, buses, planes, boats (eg ferries), smaller lighter cars, bikes, drones. Everything can benefit from smaller and lighter, or longer charge.

7speter 3y ago

Even if there is no demand for 500 mile range cars, solid state batteries are supposed to be twice the density of current batteries so a 3-400 mile car would still be something like 25% lighter than they would be with current batteries.

qball 3y ago

A gasoline car can charge from 0% to 100% of its range in 5 minutes. It usually takes longer to take the slight detour and line the car up with the charge port than it does to fully charge the car. Recharging this kind of car does not damage its most expensive part nor does its fuel tank shrink. The newest electric cars take a half hour to do this (a non-trivial amount of time) and only go about 2/3rds as far (less on the highway), so if you actually want to go somewhere you're taking on about an extra hour of charging for 6 hours of driving. Recharging this kind of car damages its most expensive part- the fuel tank- and it shrinks every time you charge it (whether quickly or slowly). Now, if the car had 1600 miles of range, then a half-hour charge time and the slow shrinkage of its gas tank is more acceptable because you're getting approximately the same rate of recharge per minute (as it would be if the 200-mile range electric cars charged as fast as a gas car does). With a range or charge time like that, the other inherent disadvantages to electric cars are muted to a massive degree (a 20% range degradation isn't as big a deal for a car that can still go 1200 miles, and a 30% range reduction in cold months isn't as big a deal if the car could be charged in 3 minutes). But neither of those things are currently true, and that's in large part why these kinds of cars don't really sell unless they're known to be rolling gimmicks or transformative in other ways (the electric trucks that let you run power tools off their batteries are the best example of this). Which is why Tesla's cars are the way that they are, and why every other major manufacturer who doesn't have a good idea of how to sell their inferior cars take the "look, we can do a massive screen in our car too just like Tesla" approach (and fail specifically because they aren't Tesla), or they just keep developing really good gas cars (an approach currently favored by the Japanese companies).

oezi 3y ago
The market for gas cars will be dead in 10 years. It has all the signs of a technology transition and it will be absolutely brutal for all car makers which aren't ready. The range argument won't matter because people rarely drive distances exceeding 200km/120 miles in a single day.
- enigma20 3y ago
  Many people do. And even if they don't, charing a car every day if you don't have a charger at home or office will be very painful. Imagine that you have to tank theICE car every day, even this would have been irritating.

achiang 3y ago

Real world usage is you only get to use ~70% of the stated range on a road trip, so we're really talking about 350 miles of range, which is, as you say, what most people actually want. Why 70%? You obviously don't run the battery to zero, 10% is a common amount of buffer to leave. And then when you DC fast charge, the rate of charging drops dramatically around 80%, so people don't charge to full. These are for ideal conditions, add in any sort of weather and the range drops again as you run a heater, etc. Living in the Bay Area, driving to Tahoe in the winter without a mandatory recharge should be the gold standard. It's not an unusual use case, "only" about 180 miles, and yet there aren't any EVs that can do it confidently because going uphill in the cold with aerodynamic-destroying ski rack is really hard. A car with 500 miles of fair-weather range could probably do it?

ytdytvhxgydvhh 3y ago
Well the Lucid Air with the big battery could probably make that drive no sweat, but that’s out of reach to almost everyone.