Why 200 miles??

[evnow]

This is the reason I want a 200 mile BEV.

I want my wife to use it without range anxiety in winter - with full blast heater running all the time. Now, I can't go to places in winter that we regularly go in summer. 200 miles (EPA) BEV means > 100 miles in winter driving without having to look at the SOC.

I'd say my wife is like the majority of people. If we want wide adoption of EVs, 200+ miles is where we need to start.

 

[Deleted member 14724]

This is the reason I want a 200 mile BEV.

I want my wife to use it without range anxiety in winter - with full blast heater running all the time. Now, I can't go to places in winter that we regularly go in summer. 200 miles (EPA) BEV means > 100 miles in winter driving without having to look at the SOC.

I'd say my wife is like the majority of people. If we want wide adoption of EVs, 200+ miles is where we need to start.

Agree. The 200 mile thing is more than just psychological. It is the difference between constantly having to think about transportation and not having to think about it. The importances of the difference between these two states cannot be emphasized enough.

 

[nerys]

For me the optimal range is 200 miles.

you see I need 75 miles. to get 75 miles I need 200 miles range. why?

winter. 200 becomes 150. turn on the heater 150 becomes 100.

see?

150 would be 110 winter and 60 or 70 with heater on

doing delivery this is even worse as the heater "cools down" between runs and has to amp up again each run (the heater running constantly uses a lot less power overall)

then you have battery degradation.

assume 30%

with 200 miles I still get 70 75 miles in the winter with the heat on even after I lose 30% of the battery capacity.

perfect. this is why 200 is perfect.

 

[TimLee]

...
It IS possible to drive very long distances in a Leaf....our own Tony Williams has done so long before there was any sort of QC network. Whether or not you wait to take the time necessary to do so is of course a different story.
...

Yes, but Tony is in that extreme end of the distribution curve.
Very few people with a LEAF do that.

And after having two LEAFs , Tony abandoned the LEAF as unacceptable for his needs and went with a RAV4 EV :!: :!: :!: :!:

 

[mdjones]

Tesla's own site confirms that 170 miles can be done in 30 minutes. They also confirm that full charge takes 75 minutes. And not to push my point but looking at the numbers again it would take me 3 stops in a Model S85 at a SC station to make the trip, so now we're nearly at 4 hours of charging time alone. At that rate I could stop and fill my gas tank 40 times on the same trip and not be a second later than a Tesla. And just as an aside, there isn't a single SC station between me and my destination for the Dec 2013 trip I used as my model. In fact, looking at the map there isn't one at any of the destinations I'm considering going to in the next couple of years at all. (http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false

170 miles in 30 minutes is still a far cry from an hour of charging every 60 minutes of driving like people often suggest.

It's still a car that is out of most people's price range and from my overall intake of knowledge here I'm pretty much lead to believe that in an EV that I can afford I will be dealing with roughly 4 hours of charging for every hour of driving. For the most part that doesn't bother me too much but I'm not the one who wedge the question of a 70k USD car into this conversation on a board that is dedicated to a 35k USD car.

And what Tesla might be able to do in three years makes no difference to the car buyer today. Elon has already pushed that date back once. And for today the reality is that unless you shell out more than the average family makes in about 16 months (pre-tax) you're not getting a Tesla.

Why is that a problem? The average car buyer today can lease an electric smart car for less than what most gas cars cost (even ignoring the savings from running the two vehicles) in order to handle some 80-90% of all daily commuting needs. A Leaf, similarly, is less expensive than most hybrids. Even many one-car families could become a two-car family with the right EV, when replacing a long enough commute. By the time that lease is up, a company definitely will have an affordable 200 mile range vehicle for the middle class.

Why is it a problem that a car that doesn't do what you claimed it does would cost me nearly two full years of income? I'll let you figure that one out.

I'm not in a situation where two cars is reasonable. Almost not even feasible, to be honest. I'm going to be putting a good deal of trust in whatever car I buy next that it'll be able to fit 98% of my driving needs. Renting a car 10-20% of my total driving needs is unreasonable. As I said in my original post, I have no problem with renting an ICE from time to time. I don't expect to do the 1000 mile trip in any EV offered today or in the next decade. I'm not the one who tried to make the impression that it was doable within a reasonable fashion by the current technology.

And my understanding is that the range problem with cold weather in a Leaf isn't a long term problem and the range will mostly come back in warmer weather. Have I been lead astray on this or is this another attempt to defend Tesla? Now you have me wondering more about what I'm getting into here. Do other EVs also suffer the "If you want to make 90 miles on a charge you need to do 40 MPH" kind of problems? As I said, I did just shy of 900 miles in one day. Doing 40 MPH simply wasn't an option even if the might Tesla only needed three charges on the way.

I'm getting a sinking feeling that most EVers don't even know what EVs can (and can't) do at this point. It seems that the glories of the EV wunderkind known as Tesla doesn't even live up to the hype that we've been fed. I like to trust the people here but I'm really taken an aback by claims like these.

I was discussing the point that many Leaf owners make about how the range doesn't fully come back every summer. That particular problem doesn't exist in other EVs outside the MIEV and Leaf. It may not exist with the new Leaf battery chemistry, but that is highly doubtful as they don't provide active temperature control for excess heat.

(For your information, a lot of other non-Leaf, non-MIEV EVs suffer far less range degradation than the Leaf in cold weather. Many people report still hitting 70 city miles in 30-40 F degree weather on smart EVs, for example, and only see the sub-40 mile range when temps hit -10 F and below ignoring heater use).

I expect some degradation of a battery over 6 months of use regardless of weather conditions. The way you originally stated it (" Teslas (along with most every other EV out there with proper temperature control, besides Leaf/iMiev) do not suffer any substantial long-term battery degradation.") made me believe that the problem was more significant than what most around here made it seem... as if the Leaf had substantial degradation above and beyond the normal losses that one would expect to see over a 6 month period. How most people around here make it sound is that the winter range loss is temporary (ie. not long-term) and that the range will go back to normal as the weather improves. I tend to lean that way in my thinking too, it was simply a matter of terminology that made me wonder if your situation was different.

In any case, the current technology at the current price points simply don't work for my situation. The whole Tesla thing simply shouldn't have been interjected into the conversation. Sorry for continuing to take this where it shouldn't have gone in the first place but I'm seriously troubled by how much hype there is on Tesla at this point.

 

[apvbguy]

That might be the model for people using DCFC "quick charge" stations. But it works differently for Superchargers. Those charge more quickly up to about 50% SOC, from Tesla owner reports, so when doing long distance trips Tesla drivers try to get to the next station with a low SOC plus a buffer of perhaps 25 miles. A larger battery speeds things up by allowing more of the charging in the bottom 50% of the battery. Supercharger stations tend to be about 80 to 120 miles apart, depending on the terrain. The idea is to charge just enough to get to the next one, plus that buffer, and to monitor energy usage so that you can slow down a bit if you guessed wrong. It requires some planning at each stop for the next one (I would find that sort of thing fun and am looking forward to doing it someday).

That's why a 200 mile range is pretty much the minimum to make long distance Supercharger network trips practical: it allows for significantly faster charging and shorter stops because most of the charging is done in the lower half of the battery SOC. It is somewhat different from a typical QC pattern of trying to get 80% or so at each stop.

I mention this because a lot of people with QC experience don't seem to be familiar with Supercharger network strategies.

his remarks are quite accurate and mirrors my experience on my last trip from FL to NJ and back. while I did do some 1 hour + full charges on the trip those were built into meal stops and eliminated a need for a short charging stop. it is either stop every 125 miles or so, about 2 hours of driving, for a 20 minute charge or charge for an hour and drive almost 250 miles, 4 hours or so. either way as long as you keep to the SC routes long distance driving is a snap in the Tesla. FWIW, 1/3 of my driving in my year of owning a Tesla has been long distance trips.

 

[eloder]

This is the reason I want a 200 mile BEV.

I want my wife to use it without range anxiety in winter - with full blast heater running all the time. Now, I can't go to places in winter that we regularly go in summer. 200 miles (EPA) BEV means > 100 miles in winter driving without having to look at the SOC.

I'd say my wife is like the majority of people. If we want wide adoption of EVs, 200+ miles is where we need to start.

Agree. The 200 mile thing is more than just psychological. It is the difference between constantly having to think about transportation and not having to think about it. The importances of the difference between these two states cannot be emphasized enough.

200 miles is not a set number, though.

I would not even think about transportation on an EV, either. My round-trip commute is about 20 miles. I very rarely need to drive more than 15 extra miles in a day. Even in worst winter days, I wouldn't have to worry about my range.

I'll be moving over to an EV with no other forms of transportation by the end of the year.

Even with how little I drive, I would still save money in an EV over my current 42 mpg vehicle.

The thing is, people whose optimal range is 200 are in a minority. People who think their optimal range is 200 is the majority. Many, many studies have shown that something like 80% of American drivers drive less than 30 miles each day (don't have exact statistics offhand, but it's close). People *think* they need 200 miles (or as you put it, 100 miles in winter with full AC running on max), but very, very few actually need it. If you really 100% truly need 200 miles of range on an EV, then you could buy a Tesla right now and you would end up saving money because you clearly are spending many hundreds of dollars on gas monthly.

Here are the facts of the matter:
Most people don't drive more than the winter range of an EV in a day on the vast majority of days
Most people have more than one car in a household, making any arguments about an EV impeding the ability to make longer trips outside of normal commutes null and void.
Most people have access to regular home charging

There are many legitimate people who can't use EVs now, who couldn't use EVs at 200 miles, and even fewer who could use EVs in 10-20 years time. But that minority is shrinking, greatly, each and every year.

People are just stuck with range anxiety anxiety, when the reality is that most EV owners (from many surveys and studies done) get by fine on 110v charging, don't charge nightly, and end up treating their electric car just like a gas car.

As others said, people don't have private jets for the 1-2 times a year they would have to drive any half-substantial amount of time. I don't own a U-Haul van for the times I have to move. As an electric car owner, I'll have more than enough money saved to rent some pretty classy high-end vehicles the times I did have to take a long trip, just like it's very easy for me to rent a pick-up truck the once in a blue moon I actually have to haul something somewhere.

 

[minispeed]

This is the reason I want a 200 mile BEV.

I want my wife to use it without range anxiety in winter - with full blast heater running all the time. Now, I can't go to places in winter that we regularly go in summer. 200 miles (EPA) BEV means > 100 miles in winter driving without having to look at the SOC.

I'd say my wife is like the majority of people. If we want wide adoption of EVs, 200+ miles is where we need to start.

If we want widespread adoption we need to market and label the cars with a winter and summer test from the EPA. Someone in Miami can choose to ignore the winter numbers and someone in Buffalo can choose to ignore the summer ones.

There's no point the EPA giving us an average if that causes the Miami owner to go on the internet and rave out his EV that goes 125% of the EPA range and have the person in Buffalo doing research and choose to buy the same car as the Miami guy and find he only goes 75% of the range. Then he tells everyone he knows how bad EVs are.

There will be someone who buys a 200 mile EV when they come out cheap that plans to drive 190 miles a day year round in a place like Buffalo.

 

[nosuchthing]

Do they make ICE cars with 5 gal tank? No.

 

[minispeed]

Do they make ICE cars with 5 gal tank? No.

original mini cooper 5.5 gal.

Cooper S had a twin tank option for rally use.

 

[GRA]

Gee, the exact same discussion between the early adopters who are willing to alter their behavior to suit the car, and the pragmatic mainstream who aren't, as we had here two or three years ago. Some arguments just cycle around endlessly; I guess this cycle is a new generation of owners. I think I'll sit this round out with a bag of popcorn :lol: (From a member of the pragmatic mainstream as far as this technology goes - I did my early adopter stint 25 years ago with AE)

 

[eloder]

Do they make ICE cars with 5 gal tank? No.

My gas smart has an 8.X gallon tank.

That's not the best example though, because that's maybe $50 more at most for a larger tank, versus a battery where doubling that capacity can add 5-20k+ to the cost of the car. I can't imagine that battery ranges will keep increasing after hitting the 200-300 mile range, and a focus will be put on cost on other premium car features.

 

[knightmb]

Do they make ICE cars with 5 gal tank? No.

My gas smart has an 8.X gallon tank.

That's not the best example though, because that's maybe $50 more at most for a larger tank, versus a battery where doubling that capacity can add 5-20k+ to the cost of the car. I can't imagine that battery ranges will keep increasing after hitting the 200-300 mile range, and a focus will be put on cost on other premium car features.

The focus would be scale of economics on whatever battery tech does the 200-300 mile range so that it becomes cheaper to the point where it might even under sell a gas car for cost. Then the deluxe version (insert Car company) cost more for the 400-500 range version.

 

[nosuchthing]

I can't imagine that battery ranges will keep increasing after hitting the 200-300 mile range...

Don't bet the farm on that. Within a decade we'll see 500-mile ranges or more that charge in minutes.

I'd like to see anyone saying no to that, and instead prefer the degraded 50-mile Leaf because "most people drive on average only 40 miles per day."

Think of your Leaf as Apple II of yesteryear. You would not want one today because it's good for a door stop and not much more.

 

[knightmb]

I can't imagine that battery ranges will keep increasing after hitting the 200-300 mile range...

Don't bet the farm on that. Within a decade we'll see 500-mile ranges or more that charge in minutes.

I'd like to see anyone saying no to that, and instead prefer the degraded 50-mile Leaf because "most people drive on average only 40 miles per day."

Think of your Leaf as Apple II of yesteryear. You would not want one today because it's good for a door stop and not much more.

That's silly because the Leaf can ride the technology wave. If the battery technology exist that double or triples range, the Leaf only need upgrade the battery to take advantage of it. The Apple II comparison is about the entire industry of computers where you couldn't put 4 GB of RAM into an Apple II to make it faster, the entire architecture needed an upgrade.

The Leaf isn't an Apple II, it's a modern desktop PC that you bought with 2GB of RAM to get started and everyone else is zooming by you with 32GB of RAM until you later upgrade one day. :mrgreen:

 

[mbender]

Think of your Leaf as Apple II of yesteryear. You would not want one today because it's good for a door stop and not much more.

And you can get much more recent with your analogies than that. Think of LCD screens replacing CRTs. It started slowly, and then snowballed. Who in their right mind would choose to buy a CRT (monitor or TV) now, even if they were still made!?

Maybe it won't happen quite as fast with EVs, but it could (and, I suspect in most of our not-so-humble opinions ;-), should)!

 

[DanCar]

Think of your Leaf as Apple II of yesteryear. You would not want one today because it's good for a door stop and not much more.

Funny and so true in my mind. I know that battery tech isn't advancing as fast as computers, but cars are expected to last much longer.

 

[RonDawg]

Within a decade we'll see 500-mile ranges or more that charge in minutes.

2 or maybe 3 decades. But a single decade? No way. It's been half a decade since the Leaf's introduction and things have not progressed that much since in regards to either the price of the battery or the speed in which it can be charged.

 

[RonDawg]

The thing is, people whose optimal range is 200 are in a minority. People who think their optimal range is 200 is the majority. Many, many studies have shown that something like 80% of American drivers drive less than 30 miles each day (don't have exact statistics offhand, but it's close). People *think* they need 200 miles (or as you put it, 100 miles in winter with full AC running on max), but very, very few actually need it. If you really 100% truly need 200 miles of range on an EV, then you could buy a Tesla right now and you would end up saving money because you clearly are spending many hundreds of dollars on gas monthly.

Here are the facts of the matter:
Most people don't drive more than the winter range of an EV in a day on the vast majority of days
Most people have more than one car in a household, making any arguments about an EV impeding the ability to make longer trips outside of normal commutes null and void.
Most people have access to regular home charging

There are many legitimate people who can't use EVs now, who couldn't use EVs at 200 miles, and even fewer who could use EVs in 10-20 years time. But that minority is shrinking, greatly, each and every year.

People are just stuck with range anxiety anxiety, when the reality is that most EV owners (from many surveys and studies done) get by fine on 110v charging, don't charge nightly, and end up treating their electric car just like a gas car.

As others said, people don't have private jets for the 1-2 times a year they would have to drive any half-substantial amount of time. I don't own a U-Haul van for the times I have to move. As an electric car owner, I'll have more than enough money saved to rent some pretty classy high-end vehicles the times I did have to take a long trip, just like it's very easy for me to rent a pick-up truck the once in a blue moon I actually have to haul something somewhere.

QFT.

I have a second vehicle, a 2006 Audi A3, but in all of 2014 I've only put 2,000 miles on it, mostly on just a half-dozen occasions where the Leaf would not have been practical. If it were to break down catastrophically tomorrow, I don't know if I would immediately replace it. Even on long road trips, I'd prefer renting a new-ish car than risking a breakdown in the middle of nowhere in a 9 year old car with 120k miles. It's an Audi and its reliability even when new was questionable :lol:

 

[apvbguy]

Do they make ICE cars with 5 gal tank? No.

original mini cooper 5.5 gal.

Cooper S had a twin tank option for rally use.

when was the last of those cars built and sold?