EV Cost 162,000 Kms V 55 mpg diesel.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=97142612#post97142612

Toyotafanboi

Seems legit, the savings are there. The trip range and refuel timeframes are not.

challengemaster

It'd be great if you posted about something different every once in awhile :pac:

Oafley Jones

challengemaster wrote: »

It'd be great if you posted about something different every once in awhile :pac:

Ever wonder why the Electric Vehicles & Hybrid Forum is quarantined away from the rest of the Motoring stuff.

CIP4

Have you bought a leaf Mad lad ? I know you were talking about them for a while but didn't think you actually had one. If you did how do you find it what kind of range are you getting in the real world mixed driving ?

For Forks Sake

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Ever wonder why the Electric Vehicles & Hybrid Forum is quarantined away from the rest of the Motoring stuff.

Not far enough away, is there not a white goods forum they could stash it in?

CIP4

CIP4 wrote: »

Have you bought a leaf Mad lad ? I know you were talking about them for a while but didn't think you actually had one. If you did how do you find it what kind of range are you getting in the real world mixed driving ?

Yeah have a Leaf since about the 20th January and clocked up 20,000 Kms yesterday.

The feckers have upgraded the battery for 2016 model (optional) with bigger battery (extra cost), it's a real 100-107 (up to 120) mile car now but 70-90 odd miles does me fine, I don't drive that easy and stop in Naas for a 10 min top up at the free fast charge point. 100-110 Kph up and about 100-120 Kph home all of 134 Kms per shift.

So my figures above are real and based on the recorded efficiency by Nissan Motor Co of Japan themselves, this car reports every KM driven and the efficiency of each daily/monthly mileage so you can keep track. (handy also against clockers)

It took work 9 months to get the charge point in and now they have I could be leaving soon, haha anyway. The next place I might be working has a fast charge point across the road lol.

The 2016 Leaf would probably get me up and back with no charging but I'm happy until 2018. Stopping for QC in reality doesn't bother me, I used to charge at Newlands cross over Lunch but can't be bothered now so just pull into Naas for 10 mins on the way home.

But there are loads of threads over in the EV Hybrid section here on Boards.

Oafley Jones

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Ever wonder why the Electric Vehicles & Hybrid Forum is quarantined away from the rest of the Motoring stuff.

Well that's why I posted a link rather than have a discussion ! :pac:

I thought real life figures were worth reporting.

Toyotafanboi

:cool:

Deleted User wrote: »

Well that's why I posted a link rather than have a discussion ! :pac:

I thought real life figures were worth reporting.

Indeed they are, so i've done a few real world figures on why a Leaf wouldn't work for me.

A leaf has a claimed range of 135kms
So to do 162k kms it requires
1200 charges at
7 hours per charge
meaning 8400 hours (350 days) charging
(now I know you don't have to wait with the car overnight, really)

My Celica has a max range of 640kms
So to do 162k kms it requires
253 fill ups at
5 minutes per fill up
meaning 21 hours filling up

So by not driving a leaf I am saving 349 days of my life.

Even by the 80% fast charge rates it will take 1500 fast charges taking 750 hours (31 days), versus 21 hours in the Celica, so I am saving an entire callender month of my life by not going EV.

CIP4

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah have a Leaf since about the 20th January and clocked up 20,000 Kms yesterday.

The feckers have upgraded the battery for 2016 model (optional) with bigger battery (extra cost), it's a real 100-107 (up to 120) mile car now but 70-90 odd miles does me fine, I don't drive that easy and stop in Naas for a 10 min top up at the free fast charge point. 100-110 Kph up and about 100-120 Kph home all of 134 Kms per shift.

So my figures above are real and based on the recorded efficiency by Nissan Motor Co of Japan themselves, this car reports every KM driven and the efficiency of each daily/monthly mileage so you can keep track. (handy also against clockers)

It took work 9 months to get the charge point in and now they have I could be leaving soon, haha anyway. The next place I might be working has a fast charge point across the road lol.

The 2016 Leaf would probably get me up and back with no charging but I'm happy until 2018. Stopping for QC in reality doesn't bother me, I used to charge at Newlands cross over Lunch but can't be bothered now so just pull into Naas for 10 mins on the way home.

But there are loads of threads over in the EV Hybrid section here on Boards.

Nice to hear it's suiting you anyway definitely savings to be made. In terms of charging do you charge it at home. What's the situation with that do you plug it into a a normal 3 pin ~230v plug or did you have to get esb to fit some kind of charging point. Did you install a night meter as most houses don't have them not sure if any house can get a night meter. I'm assuming you have your own house with the above I suppose if your renting it would probably be up to the land lord to allow night meter charge point install.

sunnysoutheast

Does the comparison calculation include initial purchase cost, financing costs and retained value at the end of the analysis period?

Do you use the M9? I've often seen a leaf on that.

Toyotafanboi

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

:cool:

Indeed they are, so i've done a few real world figures on why a Leaf wouldn't work for me.

A leaf has a claimed range of 135kms
So to do 162k kms it requires
1200 charges at
7 hours per charge
meaning 8400 hours (350 days) charging
(now I know you don't have to wait with the car overnight, really)

My Celica has a max range of 640kms
So to do 162k kms it requires
253 fill ups at
5 minutes per fill up
meaning 21 hours filling up

So by not driving a leaf I am saving 349 days of my life.

Even by the 80% fast charge rates it will take 1500 fast charges taking 750 hours (31 days), versus 21 hours in the Celica, so I am saving an entire callender month of my life by not going EV.

I'm sure there is far worst things you do with your time over 365 days a year and I certainly don't charge every day of the year from a fast charge point and (for now I'll have work charging)

So I pull into Naas send a few e-mials browse a bit of the web check a few forum updates and reply do the stuff I do at home thanks to mobile internet. Next thing I know 20 mins have passed sometimes, woops ! Yeah major pain.

Got to say though waiting for someone to charge isn't as fun but the ESb will install more chargers once EV numbers grow, they haven't finished their current phase of installations yet. And I haven't had an issue at Naas in a long time.

And most car makers exaggerate mpg claims this is no different.

By the way we do have the diesel for the 150 + mile trips should we choose to take it and we do simply because 25,000 Kms isn't enough for my lease per year for my total mileage needs. The Leaf is still doing the most mileage.

I don't drive more than 134 Kms daily (usually) so I don't need to carry around a 100 Kwh battery for 300 miles range. 60 Kwh would be the most most people need for a real life 200 miles range.

Nissan will most likely have the option of different battery sizes, it will be interesting to see who pays for the largest battery.

I plug in at home at night, the 2016 Leaf with the 30 Kwh battery would mean I wouldn't have to charge on the way home but it's also going to cost more.

I also have to say that having the more powerful 6.6 Kw charger in the leaf has meant on several occasions I can go on a long trip plug in and after 2 hrs I can get from 20-90 % and after I'm finished in Town get back to the car and head home no heading to fast chargers this is why I always highly recommend the more powerful charger. I do move the car if it's finished charging also and don't take up a charging bay for longer than I need.

I never said the current Gen affordable electrics are perfect but I wouldn't go back to an ICE car again as my main car.

After 20,000 Kms since January I think I'm pretty well convinced.

Long Time Lurker

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/59305371.jpg

CIP4

CIP4 wrote: »

Nice to hear it's suiting you anyway definitely savings to be made. In terms of charging do you charge it at home. What's the situation with that do you plug it into a a normal 3 pin ~230v plug or did you have to get esb to fit some kind of charging point. Did you install a night meter as most houses don't have them not sure if any house can get a night meter. I'm assuming you have your own house with the above I suppose if your renting it would probably be up to the land lord to allow night meter charge point install.

Yes I charge at home and top up for 10 mins on the way home to drive 134 Kms, all the public charging I've done has been free so far which is to change in 2016 sometime.

I have a 16 amp charge point installed, using the granny cable plugged into an extension lead isn't meant to be the primary means of charging and is a lot slower.

I installed the night meter and you can also use the washing machine and dishwasher at night and immersion but need to take care whatever you've on doesn't exceed your supply to the house.

I use the old N9 until Kilcullen because there is actually no difference in time at 100 Kph than 120 Kph because the road is shorter and I know that because a lot of the NTL Vans that are in front of me turn off for the Crookstown/Athy exit and they catch up with me at the tunnel flying past. I then drive on the M7, N7.

The work charge point has been installed. (after 9 months)

Eric Cartman

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

:cool:

Indeed they are, so i've done a few real world figures on why a Leaf wouldn't work for me.

A leaf has a claimed range of 135kms
So to do 162k kms it requires
1200 charges at
7 hours per charge
meaning 8400 hours (350 days) charging
(now I know you don't have to wait with the car overnight, really)

My Celica has a max range of 640kms
So to do 162k kms it requires
253 fill ups at
5 minutes per fill up
meaning 21 hours filling up

So by not driving a leaf I am saving 349 days of my life.

Even by the 80% fast charge rates it will take 1500 fast charges taking 750 hours (31 days), versus 21 hours in the Celica, so I am saving an entire callender month of my life by not going EV.

It might save a lot more , Im pretty sure that car would make me suicidally depressed

Eric Cartman

Eric Cartman wrote: »

It might save a lot more , Im pretty sure that car would make me suicidally depressed

Then you got deeper issues !

Long Time Lurker

Cycling everywhere suits me and I love it. Everybody should cycle everywhere because its better. Its cleaner and I don't mind taking ages to get anywhere. I have many pie charts proving its statistically more efficient. Why doesn't everyone use a bike. I've proved you all wrong. (electric car driver logic)

Toyotafanboi

when EV technology has allowed for dramatically increased ranges and the vehicles themselves has fallen into the sub €10k price range, i will be all over one, definitely.

looks like i could genuinely save a stone cold fortune and i can use all the money i save to throw sugar at old Toyotas.

hognef

What's the significance of the 162,000 km?

Long Time Lurker

Long Time Lurker wrote: »

Cycling everywhere suits me and I love it. Everybody should cycle everywhere because its better. Its cleaner and I don't mind taking ages to get anywhere. I have many pie charts proving its statistically more efficient. Why doesn't everyone use a bike. I've proved you all wrong. (electric car driver logic)

I'd have to leave very early to cycle to work 64 Kms !

But yes I agree cycling is great but we need more dedicated cycle lanes away from traffic.

I don't consider a bus/taxi lane remotely suitable for bicycles.

Toyotafanboi

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

when EV technology has allowed for dramatically increased ranges and the vehicles themselves has fallen into the sub €10k price range, i will be all over one, definitely.

looks like i could genuinely save a stone cold fortune and i can use all the money i save to throw sugar at old Toyotas.

No I'm all for faster charging 200 miles range would do me, given the choice I think people would pay for 200 V 300 miles because why pay for more if you rarely need it ?

For instance, would I pay a few K more for the 2016 30 Kwh Leaf knowing a 10 min charge will give more range than I actually need in the current leaf because I like to get home with at least 18-25% left in the battery.

While I would like the extra range I don't think I would pay for it. 70-80 miles will do me fine until my lease is up and then see what's around.

The other question is will I pay for a 200 mile range when a real 100 would meed almost all my mileage ? especially if I can fast charge for the odd trip over 100 miles.

2018 will be a very interesting year for electrics. Just really happy to be driving electric now.

pwurple

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

So by not driving a leaf I am saving 349 days of my life.

Really?

And there I was thanking my good luck that I never have to waste my time driving into a stinking freezing filthy petrol station again. Never have to queue to pay a spotty teenager.

Drive into my garage, and plug it into my house. Chilling here with a beer watching some rugby while some unfortunates are out in the cold pouring expensive fuel into their car, watching those numbers spin up. I reckon I'm the one with the time saving tbh.

It is far faster to stick a cable into the car and walk away than it is to do all those faffy petrol station transactions.

Not only that but when I think about it, even if I wouldn't have to pay for dinosaur juice every day like I do to charge (when I'm on shift) (no longer with the work charge point), you can easily be 10 mins in a petrol station by the time you fill, queue and pay.

But yeah my main charging is at home when I'm in bed. I suppose it balances out not having to go the garage then ?

With the work cp then I won't have to visit a garage again, (as long as I'm there)

jprboy

Yup, bought a Leaf to replace my 11 year old 1.8L petrol car last April.

Our 2nd car is a diesel and I rarely drive it now but had to today and it needed a refill. The feckin smell of diesel from my hands afterwards after handling the dispenser :mad:

challengemaster

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd have to leave very early to cycle to work 64 Kms !

I'm sure there is far worst things you do with your time. :pac:

pwurple wrote: »

Really?

And there I was thanking my good luck that I never have to waste my time driving into a stinking freezing filthy petrol station again. Never have to queue to pay a spotty teenager.

Drive into my garage, and plug it into my house. Chilling here with a beer watching some rugby while some unfortunates are out in the cold pouring expensive fuel into their car, watching those numbers spin up. I reckon I'm the one with the time saving tbh.

It is far faster to stick a cable into the car and walk away than it is to do all those faffy petrol station transactions.

It also seems far easier to stick your head up your arse and blatantly ignore any and all issues other people have with EVs because they work for you. Careful though, that high horse only has a range of about 8 miles

DrPhilG

Why is it that people have to be "fanboys" for either side?

It's like Playstation vs Xbox (I've owned both) or Fifa vs Pro Evo (I've played both).

Live and let live. Although I must say there's an awful lot more scorn and mockery from ICE users towards EV owners than the other way around.

NIMAN

Because all EV owners have also been ICE owners.
Tiny tiny minority of ICE owners become EV owners.

I too can see a case for both.

I think maybe most of the anti-EV folk probably only have 1 car in the household, so are always looking for situations that an EV wouldn't suit? Even though the figures show that an EV would suit 80% of the population for their daily use.

Also think there is still the fear of being stranded with no power.

Next time we change an EV will be in serious consideration.

stesaurus

DrPhilG wrote: »

Why is it that people have to be "fanboys" for either side?

It's like Playstation vs Xbox (I've owned both) or Fifa vs Pro Evo (I've played both).

Live and let live. Although I must say there's an awful lot more scorn and mockery from ICE users towards EV owners than the other way around.

It's a weird one alright but you get in within the EV world also. Leaf is by far and away the most popular and there's been quite a few fanboys I've come across so far with the attitude of "you should have bought a Leaf, what's the point of the BMW."
I guess most people need that superiority complex where they feel they're right and the decision they made is the best. Happens in every walk of life really.

pwurple

challengemaster wrote: »

It also seems far easier to stick your head up your arse and blatantly ignore any and all issues other people have with EVs because they work for you. Careful though, that high horse only has a range of about 8 miles

Excuse me, but I was responding directly to the quote regarding spending time charging. The clue was in the line I quoted. You gotta problem with that? Or just a chip on your shoulder for some bizarre reason?

I am well aware EV's don't suit some people. Same as cars don't suit people who live by subway lines, and boats suit people who live on a canal. So what?

Soarer

hognef wrote: »

What's the significance of the 162,000 km?

Think it's 100,000 miles.

hognef

Soarer wrote: »

Think it's 100,000 miles.

To be pedantic, 1 mile is ~1.609 km so (rounded) that should presumably be 161,000 km.... Better again, don't mix the two: Use "100,000 miles" or "100,000 km".

There's a big difference between 100k miles and 100 k Kms.

hognef

[Deleted User] wrote: »

There's a big difference between 100k miles and 100 k Kms.

Eh? Yes... A ratio of ~1.609.

My point is that if you're actually talking about 100k miles, then use that--don't try (and fail) to convert it to metric.

Soarer

hognef wrote: »

Eh? Yes... A ratio of ~1.609.

My point is that if you're actually talking about 100k miles, then use that--don't try (and fail) to convert it to metric.

It's me that mentioned 100k miles, not mad lad. He's perfectly entitled to use 162k kms as the comparison value. It's as valid as any other.

hognef

Soarer wrote: »

It's me that mentioned 100k miles, not mad lad. He's perfectly entitled to use 162k kms as the comparison value. It's as valid as any other.

By all means. Don't think you'll find anybody else reporting figures over 162k km, though, so there won't be anything to compare with.

Done get me wrong - - Mad Lad's figures are intriguing nonetheless.

hognef

hognef wrote: »

By all means. Don't think you'll find anybody else reporting figures over 162k km, though, so there won't be anything to compare with.

Done get me wrong - - Mad Lad's figures are intriguing nonetheless.

But what are you trying to compare to ? 162,000 Kms is 162,000 Kms .

hognef

[Deleted User] wrote: »

But what are you trying to compare to ? 162,000 Kms is 162,000 Kms .

Never mind, I give up.

MojoMaker

Thank Christ.