Autonews: "Battery suppliers face capacity crunch"

cros13

As was bleedin' obvious to everyone bar the traditional automakers.....

http://www.autonews.com/article/20171021/OEM10/171029927/battery-suppliers-capacity-lg-chem-samsung-electric-cars

And it's only got worse since.....

It doesn't help that the raw materials are not readily available either:
https://www.ft.com/content/297d7d4a-b002-11e7-aab9-abaa44b1e130

thierry14

EV market is in a bad state

Its sad

Big auto have no intenions of making EV's, they don't want to spend the money, reading about this supply daily, wtf like.

If Tesla go under

Its finished for a decade at least in Europe and the States

Western world will have to get used to ICE

China have some balls and will force it through and make big auto make them there

Alot of people are waiting for this 2020 holy grail of EV's coming from all big auto, how when no batteries?

2020 will become 2022 and so on.

Thargor

samih wrote: »

It doesn't help that the raw materials are not readily available either:
https://www.ft.com/content/297d7d4a-b002-11e7-aab9-abaa44b1e130

Hmmm I wonder why they failed to secure that supply?

The carmaker put off miners by suggesting a price that was well below current market prices, which have jumped by more than 80 per cent this year, the people said.

Irrelevant story, the raw materials are readily available, they just have to ramp up supply which takes about 3 years, plenty of producers coming on stream in the next 6 months, have a read of the Lithium thread over in investing, now is the time to be buying Lithium and Cobalt miners.

There's no putting the EV market back in the box now, the worst thing that could happen is the West hands the whole thing to China through corruption or incompetence.

Thargor

Thargor wrote: »

samih wrote: »

It doesn't help that the raw materials are not readily available either:
https://www.ft.com/content/297d7d4a-b002-11e7-aab9-abaa44b1e130

Hmmm I wonder why they failed to secure that supply?

The carmaker put off miners by suggesting a price that was well below current market prices, which have jumped by more than 80 per cent this year, the people said.

Irrelevant story, the raw materials are readily available, they just have to ramp up supply which takes about 3 years, plenty of producers coming on stream in the next 6 months, have a read of the Lithium thread over in investing, now is the time to be buying Lithium and Cobalt miners.

There's no putting the EV market back in the box now, the worst thing that could happen is the West hands the whole thing to China through corruption or incompetence.

For the expected vehicle releases in 2020 the makers are cutting it a bit close if they are only planning the factories and supplies now.

Water John

This study says its cheaper to run an EV. More importantly is the claim that EV sales could pass out other cars in 18 months, if supply was available.


https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/01/electric-cars-already-cheaper-to-own-and-run-than-petrol-or-diesel-study

jackofalltrades

Water John wrote: »

This study says its cheaper to run an EV.

Because of subsidies, it' going to be a few more years before they're cheaper to run without subsidies.
I'd also expect taxes on electric cars to rise once tax revenue starts to suffer.

More importantly is the claim that EV sales could pass out other cars in 18 months, if supply was available.

Not to be pedantic, but the article talks about Alternative Fuel Vehicles(AFV's) which includes electric cars, as well as hybrids.

Thargor

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Because of subsidies, it' going to be a few more years before they're cheaper to run without subsidies.
I'd also expect taxes on electric cars to rise once tax revenue starts to suffer.

No its overall way cheaper to run an electric car, electricity even at the most expensive rate ignoring the free charging on offer is way cheaper per km than petrol or diesel. Maintenance etc is basically non-existent compared to ICE aswell apart from tyres and a few other basics (dont even need to change brakepads anymore with regenerative braking).

unkel

^^^

That. I saw a vid of a Dutch Tesla Model S going for it's NCT. It had 400k km on the clock and its original brake disks were about half worn. And that's a very heavy car.

Thargor

I dont know why people even bother making those arguments anymore, and thats with the tech and infrastructure in its absolute infancy, the advances every year are already massive, what are we going to be looking at in 10 years time?

A Tesla Model S hits 300,000 miles in just 2 years – saving an estimated $60,000 on fuel and maintenance

cros13

Thargor wrote: »

Hmmm I wonder why they failed to secure that supply?

That would be down to them looking for more than the market could supply for substantially less than current market rate.

server down

Lithium may not be the future.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-03/tech-guru-bill-joy-unveils-a-battery-to-challenge-lithium-ion

jackofalltrades

Thargor wrote: »

No its overall way cheaper to run an electric car, electricity even at the most expensive rate ignoring the free charging on offer is way cheaper per km than petrol or diesel.

No it's not, if it was then there would be no need for subsidies.
The article Water John linked to backs this up.

Maintenance etc is basically non-existent compared to ICE aswell apart from tyres and a few other basics (dont even need to change brakepads anymore with regenerative braking).

The old non-existent maintenance myth again.
EV's don't have a combustion engine, but they still have a load of other systems that can go wrong and have to be looked after.
Just like petrols and diesels they still have a brakes, tyres, drive shaft, bearings, a coolant system, suspension components and many other internal electrical systems.
In my years of looking after cars myself the engines were the one part the caused the least amount of trouble.
The fact that you have a regenerative braking system still means that the brake system needs regular maintenance.
And IME these systems need more work because the lack of use of the hydraulic system seems to lead to more problems.
I prefer changing cheap brake pads, rather than trying to remove seized guide pins or replacing calipers expensive calipers.

cros13

server down wrote: »

Lithium may not be the future.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-03/tech-guru-bill-joy-unveils-a-battery-to-challenge-lithium-ion

Nah.. lithium's the future... followed by one of the metal air chemistries once we get the kinks worked out (longevity related).

Even if Bill Joy's battery works at scale (a massive "if"), contrary to their claims they will be unable to match the energy density of lithium ion and will almost certainly be unsuitable for transportation use due to weight.

There have been dozens upon dozens of "promising" and "breakthrough" chemistries since lithium ion first left the testbench (around 40 years ago) and none of them so far has panned out as a general purpose battery.
The odd few have gone into specialised applications.

It took twenty years from the first lithium ion prototype cells to the first commercial production cells, and a further twenty for lithium ion cell production to scale to the point where automotive-scale batteries were practical and affordable.

The day one of these "breakthrough" chemistries is good enough that Samsung or Apple pick it up for the tiny 2/3 cell battery in their next €1000 smartphone is the day I start taking that chemistry seriously.

server down

cros13 wrote: »

Nah.. lithium's the future... followed by one of the metal air chemistries once we get the kinks worked out (longevity related).

Even if Bill Joy's battery works at scale (a massive "if"), contrary to their claims they will be unable to match the energy density of lithium ion and will almost certainly be unsuitable for transportation use due to weight.

There have been dozens upon dozens of "promising" and "breakthrough" chemistries since lithium ion first left the testbench (around 40 years ago) and none of them so far has panned out as a general purpose battery.
The odd few have gone into specialised applications.

It took twenty years from the first lithium ion prototype cells to the first commercial production cells, and a further twenty for lithium ion cell production to scale to the point where automotive-scale batteries were practical and affordable.

The day one of these "breakthrough" chemistries is good enough that Samsung or Apple pick it up for the tiny 2/3 cell battery in their next €1000 smartphone is the day I start taking that chemistry seriously.

Well, yeah but that would be pretty obvious proof.

I don’t know enough about the science here to disprove your theory one way or the other re energy density but I do know that bill joy is a smart guy and he believes it will. Also it’s partially an old technology - alkaline batteries.

Remember the cost will be way cheaper and the materials more easily extracted. By and large products that depend on rare earth materials will move to more common materials, if that’s economically and technologically possible.

Thargor

cros13 wrote: »

That would be down to them looking for more than the market could supply for substantially less than current market rate.

Well yes I know that, I was being sarcastic as per the line I quoted?

jackofalltrades wrote: »

No it's not, if it was then there would be no need for subsidies.
The article Water John linked to backs this up.

Its far cheaper to run an electric car day to day, and maintenance costs are a fraction of ICE, I really dont understand how anyone can disagree with this. This is just at the absolute beginning of their rollout aswell, figures will only improve every year from now on.

cros13

jackofalltrades wrote: »

No it's not, if it was then there would be no need for subsidies.

It's getting to the point where subsidies are no longer needed, yes.
Depending on the battery capacity, EV production cost is substantially below hybrids already and dropping fast.
In 5-6 years average 50kWh EV production cost will be below non-hybrid petrol/diesel vehicles even if their costs do not increase due to regulatory requirements (which they will in many markets).

jackofalltrades wrote: »

The old non-existent maintenance myth again.
EV's don't have a combustion engine, but they still have a load of other systems that can go wrong and have to be looked after.
Just like petrols and diesels they still have a brakes, tyres, drive shaft, bearings, a coolant system, suspension components and many other internal electrical systems.

The drive shafts and bearings are under less stress due to the differences in the way power is applied, there's always a kick to the drivetrain from the combustion stroke in an ICE (even though it's not perceptible to the driver) but an EV applies power smoothly.
Tires certainly have increased wear due to the extra weight and the torque.
Those coolant systems present have far less demands on them than in combustion vehicles and there's nothing to do until ~250k km.

jackofalltrades wrote: »

The fact that you have a regenerative braking system still means that the brake system needs regular maintenance.
And IME these systems need more work because the lack of use of the hydraulic system seems to lead to more problems.
I prefer changing cheap brake pads, rather than trying to remove seized guide pins or replacing calipers expensive calipers.

There is the possibility of the odd issue with the brakes caused by lack of use, yes. I have yet to experience any though.

There are maintenance items such as transmission fluid for the diff (if present) and reduction gear (but not for at least a decade).

There are a lot less moving parts and most are sealed and lubricated from the factory. Power steering and AC are all electric. 12V battery gets a little less use and can cause trouble as a result.

In terms of regular maintenance... there really is very little. Scheduled "maintenance" on my i3 is a visual inspection, change of brake fluid and cabin air filter every two years. And after nearly three years doing 60,000km/year in mine I've never had any drivetrain issue and just the first scheduled "service". It's been the same on the Leafs, except it's an annual visual inspection.

No engine oil, fuel filters, oil filters, spark plugs, engine air filters. No particulate filters, usually no clutches (and they have negligible wear if present due to the lack of slip), no head gaskets, exhaust systems, belts, no complex multi-ratio transmissions, drive shafts are usually shorter, no alternator (just a solid-state DC-DC). Heck even the electronics are simpler on an electric car because things like traction control are provided by the motor controller and motor (instead of involving ABS in traction control for example). There's actually way fewer sensors required too.

It's really hard to see how, at worst, maintenance costs on an EV could be any more than half that of a combustion car. And we have more than a million EVs on the road worldwide proving that out.
With the exception of design faults, there are enough EVs out there with high mileage (some production EVs now in excess of 600k km) and the tiny maintenance bills to match.

jimmycrackcorm

jackofalltrades wrote:

The old non-existent maintenance myth again. EV's don't have a combustion engine, but they still have a load of other systems that can go wrong and have to be looked after.

...

I prefer changing cheap brake pads, rather than trying to remove seized guide pins or replacing calipers expensive calipers.

Just compare the videos on YouTube regarfing the complexity of ice to ev. Sure there are commonalities that still stay the same. Electric windows will fail on both but your example of brake calipers isn't in the same league.

J.pilkington

I recently did a bit of work for one of the German premium brands when they were building a multi million euro showroom and their business model is that servicing pays the running costs / overheads of the site(including the sales division wages(ex commission) etc), any profit in sales represents the sites profit. The Irish operations are ran from the uk and owned by the marque itself so same business model in the uk. This business model is not in any way sustainable / achievable with electric cars, hence the site / marques poor attitude to selling electric cars.

It’s clear that the big German manufacturers are reluctantly making electric cars just so not to be left behind. Their products are expensive and making a tiny % of the profit (if any at all) which their ice cars are making. As a clear example of their attitudes to electric cars check out the recent golf ecar event thread, I got the feeling that it was a token gesture and the attitude I got from vws head of Group Communications who posted on the thread was a bit meh (tiny handful of posts, several of which were one liners with zero details of any of their offerings - eg who knew there was an e Passat?), in that I’m organising a few cars for a select few but beyond that I’m not interested and I’m not interacting with you in any way, a real missed opportunity to engage with the wider electric car community. In fact I would go as far as calling it a basic marketing exercise fail, the cost of being able to directly reach out to your target audience and promote your products is high so blowing such an opportunity is a bit silly / unforgiving in my opinion.....

thierry14

cros13 wrote: »

It's getting to the point where subsidies are no longer needed, yes.
Depending on the battery capacity, EV production cost is substantially below hybrids already and dropping fast.
In 5-6 years average 50kWh EV production cost will be below non-hybrid petrol/diesel vehicles even if their costs do not increase due to regulatory requirements (which they will in many markets).



The drive shafts and bearings are under less stress due to the differences in the way power is applied, there's always a kick to the drivetrain from the combustion stroke in an ICE (even though it's not perceptible to the driver) but an EV applies power smoothly.
Tires certainly have increased wear due to the extra weight and the torque.
Those coolant systems present have far less demands on them than in combustion vehicles and there's nothing to do until ~250k km.



There is the possibility of the odd issue with the brakes caused by lack of use, yes. I have yet to experience any though.

There are maintenance items such as transmission fluid for the diff (if present) and reduction gear (but not for at least a decade).

There are a lot less moving parts and most are sealed and lubricated from the factory. Power steering and AC are all electric. 12V battery gets a little less use and can cause trouble as a result.

In terms of regular maintenance... there really is very little. Scheduled "maintenance" on my i3 is a visual inspection, change of brake fluid and cabin air filter every two years. And after nearly three years doing 60,000km/year in mine I've never had any drivetrain issue and just the first scheduled "service". It's been the same on the Leafs, except it's an annual visual inspection.

No engine oil, fuel filters, oil filters, spark plugs, engine air filters. No particulate filters, usually no clutches (and they have negligible wear if present due to the lack of slip), no head gaskets, exhaust systems, belts, no complex multi-ratio transmissions, drive shafts are usually shorter, no alternator (just a solid-state DC-DC). Heck even the electronics are simpler on an electric car because things like traction control are provided by the motor controller and motor (instead of involving ABS in traction control for example). There's actually way fewer sensors required too.

It's really hard to see how, at worst, maintenance costs on an EV could be any more than half that of a combustion car. And we have more than a million EVs on the road worldwide proving that out.
With the exception of design faults, there are enough EVs out there with high mileage (some production EVs now in excess of 600k km) and the tiny maintenance bills to match.

Those high mileage Teslas get alot of press

Alot of them are on second and third drive trains which would cost the price of a new Golf if not fixed under warranty

Tesla forum members have even posted of new battery packs being put in under warranty which would have cost near 20k too

There will be no second hand market for out of warranty EV's if that's widespread

Leaf in fairness seems well made except that awful battery degradatation you see in phones

Rest are untested

Even your i3 has had alot of issues under warranty Cros

Maybe cause its just a BMW though, which have made alot of unrealible cars last decade

cros13

thierry14 wrote: »

Those high mileage Teslas get alot of press

Alot of them are on second and third drive trains which would cost the price of a new Golf if not fixed under warranty

Tesla forum members have even posted of new battery packs being put in under warranty which would have cost near 20k too

Well in fairness the Model S and 1st gen Leaf were the first volume production EV for both their manufacturers and both the first EVs of their class in the modern era.

In both cases, new designs were developed that fixed some fundamental design issues and existing owners under warranty got the new design (sometimes with an intervening replacement from old stock) and the issues did not recur (regardless of the mileage/dut cycle after the replacement).

thierry14 wrote: »

Even your i3 has had alot of issues under warranty Cros

Maybe cause its just a BMW though, which have made alot of unrealible cars last decade

In terms of EV drivetrain related stuff I've had nothing beyond a BMS reset. No issues. None.

True that I've have the usual amount of BMW issues with things like sunroofs and mirror folding motors... i've had those kind of issues with every BMW I've owned.... but the EV drivetrain has been faultlessly reliable.

jackofalltrades

Thargor wrote: »

Its far cheaper to run an electric car day to day, and maintenance costs are a fraction of ICE, I really dont understand how anyone can disagree with this. This is just at the absolute beginning of their rollout aswell, figures will only improve every year from now on.

If you think EV's are cheaper to run overall and don't require subsidies then fell free to show us subsidy free TCO figures.

cros13 wrote: »

It's getting to the point where subsidies are no longer needed, yes.
Depending on the battery capacity, EV production cost is substantially below hybrids already and dropping fast.
In 5-6 years average 50kWh EV production cost will be below non-hybrid petrol/diesel vehicles even if their costs do not increase due to regulatory requirements (which they will in many markets).

So long story short you agree that subsidies are still needed.

There is the possibility of the odd issue with the brakes caused by lack of use, yes. I have yet to experience any though.

I've experienced this on two different hybrids. And AFAIR another user on this forum has had a similar issue.

It's really hard to see how, at worst, maintenance costs on an EV could be any more than half that of a combustion car.

From looking at Hyundai's 5 year service plans there doesn't seem to be a huge difference between the cost of servicing an Ioniq(€420) and an I40(€500).
And from looking at UK figures of Nissan EV servicing costs, they're still not less than half of a Petrol/Diesel.

cros13

server down wrote: »

Well, yeah but that would be pretty obvious proof.

I don’t know enough about the science here to disprove your theory one way or the other re energy density but I do know that bill joy is a smart guy and he believes it will. Also it’s partially an old technology - alkaline batteries.

Remember the cost will be way cheaper and the materials more easily extracted. By and large products that depend on rare earth materials will move to more common materials, if that’s economically and technologically possible.

Forgot to post this last night...

Most lithium ion chemistries have very common materials like aluminium, copper and graphite as their cell's primary constituent materials by weight. There are also chemistries like Lithium Iron Phosphate (which BYD use) that avoid the use of the main materials that are primary supply constrained (Nickel and Cobalt).
While chemistries exist that use rare earths like lanthanum, as far as I am aware none of those are used in any production EV.

There's really not a lot of information out there on what Ionic Materials are actually doing. And no information to speak of at all about their plans for alkalines. But in general alkaline chemistries yield poor current per unit weight. And in terms of energy density, the best case scenario we have for rechargeable alkaline chemistries isn't any better than what's already achievable on the bench for lithium ion (Yadav et al. https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14424)

Don't get me wrong.... every battery chemistry is welcome. It would be great to have rechargable alkalines or flow batteries for grid storage (like https://redflow.com/). But it's a good bet neither will ever make it into a series production car.

cros13

jackofalltrades wrote: »

If you think EV's are cheaper to run overall and don't require subsidies then fell free to show us subsidy free TCO figures.

Well it's a widely acknowledged fact, not an opinion, that EVs are cheaper to run. The only question has been TCO because of the high production cost for the EV.

Sure let's dig in anyway...

Let's take the US price for the 2018 Leaf as that's more representative of the current production situation than the launch edition here, the older EV models (2016 Leaf, 2016 i3) or conversions/multi-powertrain (Ioniq/eGolf).

The Irish market is way too distorted by taxation and spec differences to fairly represent the situation with each powertrains TCO.

2018 Leaf base price is $29,990 with no subsidies
Comparable model in spec and passenger/luggage capacity is the Altima starting a $23,140 (Nissan USA has no hatchbacks in that segment)

Both on the EPA cycle (which is realistic, includes motorway driving, AC use)

Altima does 31 US mpg combined ( in real money 7.6L/100km )
2018 Leaf numbers not yet available, so I'll use the previous model's numbers (which are worse than the 2018) - 112 MPGe which is 30kWh/100 miles ( in real money 18.65kWh/100km )

Average unit price for electricity is $0.13/kWh
Average unit price for petrol is $2.53/US gallon (~$0.67/L or 56 cents a liter)

Assuming 50% urban/motorway split, 15,000mi annual mileage (24,140km), cash purchase, 10 year term:


So, even excluding the lower maintenance costs of the EV, TCO is the same after 10.8 years looking at capital cost and fuel alone.
Any increase in mileage changes that picture substantially. At my primary EVs annual mileage (60,000km) the payback is at four years.


And the reason is:


If you want I can show you Irish TCO for the Leaf and Pulsar (Hint: the electricity is cheaper and the petrol more expensive here).

jackofalltrades wrote: »

So long story short you agree that subsidies are still needed.

I agree they are needed as an incentive because people are slow to change and there are other factors (like the hundreds of millions in fines for failing to meet our 2020 emissions targets), not because of TCO.

Most people don't do TCO calculations, they look at retail prices and lease/HP payments.

jackofalltrades wrote: »

From looking at Hyundai's 5 year service plans there doesn't seem to be a huge difference between the cost of servicing an Ioniq(€420) and an I40(€500).
And from looking at UK figures of Nissan EV servicing costs, they're still not less than half of a Petrol/Diesel.

Service plans are a product with a highly variable margin and especially for EVs often have no relationship to the actual costs.

For example the three year service inclusive pack on the i3 was ~€350, the service inclusive plus pack was ~€1000. The difference? Service inclusive plus includes brake pads (which no i3 to my knowledge has ever needed in the first three years) and wiper blades (a €50 part in the BMW order system).

cros13

Here... I did you a spreadsheet so you can understand the chasm in efficiency:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MJoCKPU1T2k2ERLTLLd5TBCwGhquWZRSGAFHKKBWNB0/edit?usp=sharing

There's a lot of assumptions in favor of the petrol/diesel there.

I converted back the EV numbers too to show a NEDC UK MPGe. Even if the taxes on electricity and petrol were equalised the efficiency difference would mean EV running costs equivalent to a combustion car that actually achieves 1 - 1.5L/100km (~130-170 mpg) in real world mixed driving.

It's worth noting that the Leaf is bigger, heavier and better equipped than the pulsar and has better performance.

jackofalltrades

cros13 wrote: »

If you want I can show you Irish TCO for the Leaf and Pulsar (Hint: the electricity is cheaper and the petrol more expensive here).

I don't really want you to do all these calculations.
This originally kicked of with the posting of this article, which draws it's finding from this study.
It's what I'm basing my claims on, on the presumption that it's accurate.

The Guardian wrote:

Pure electric cars receive a sales subsidy of about £5,000 in the UK and Japan and £6,500 in the US. “The subsidies are reasonably expensive at the moment but they are expected to tail off,” said Tate.
He estimates that an electric car such as the Nissan Leaf will become as cheap to own and run as a petrol car without subsidy by 2025. Renault expects this to happen in the early 2020s.

cros13 wrote: »

I agree they are needed as an incentive because people are slow to change and there are other factors (like the hundreds of millions in fines for failing to meet our 2020 emissions targets), not because of TCO.

Most people don't do TCO calculations, they look at retail prices and lease/HP payments.

Subsidies are needed because the current range of EV's wouldn't be given a second thought by motorists without them.

cros13 wrote: »

Service plans are a product with a highly variable margin and especially for EVs often have no relationship to the actual costs.

For example the three year service inclusive pack on the i3 was ~€350, the service inclusive plus pack was ~€1000. The difference? Service inclusive plus includes brake pads (which no i3 to my knowledge has ever needed in the first three years) and wiper blades (a €50 part in the BMW order system).

Regardless of your criticisms, they're still the prices motorists will be paying if they buy an EV and want it serviced at the dealer. Which IME is most people who buy new cars.
Posters can make all the vague claims they want about how much cheaper they are to service, but these are the kinds figure that buyers will be paying.

cros13

jackofalltrades wrote: »

I don't really want you to do all these calculations.
This originally kicked of with the posting of this article, which draws it's finding from this study.
It's what I'm basing my claims on, on the presumption that it's accurate.

The study has a number of issues. The biggest issue is the period of time the study examines, 1997-2015.

Just to give an idea on how fast the EV market is moving, from 2008 to 2015 alone lithium ion cell price per kWh dropped by over 80%. The consequent drop in production cost meant that Nissan was able to cut the RRP of the Leaf by over $10,000 over the period. We're dealing with a market that's changing rapidly with lots of different factors impacting depreciation and capital costs.

The estimates on TCO payback terms for BEVs have dropped study after study after study because of these changes in the fundamentals.

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Subsidies are needed because the current range of EV's wouldn't be given a second thought by motorists without them.

The vast majority of motorists have never driven or lived with an EV and don't have an accurate picture of the pros and cons of EV ownership. Most people don't know about DC rapid charging, the convenience of home charging and creature comforts like cabin preconditioning.

There is rising EV adoption across the world even in markets where EV purchase is not subsidised or (as in the case of australia and several others) is financially penalised.

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Regardless of your criticisms, they're still the prices motorists will be paying if they buy an EV and want it serviced at the dealer. Which IME is most people who buy new cars.
Posters can make all the vague claims they want about how much cheaper they are to service, but these are the kinds figure that buyers will be paying.

It's again not a small difference in term of maintenance cost.

If you remove the distortion of the service plans (which have mileage limits) and look at the actual cost of a service/inspection over 10 years.

Assuming 30,000km/annum. Just scheduled maintenance. Excluding tires, brake pads, timing belts & wipers (using nissan's fixed price servicing for the Pulsar from the UK as there is no similar pricelist in Ireland):

Car|Year 1|Year 2|Year 3|Year 4|Year 5|Year 6|Year 7|Year 8|Year 9|Year 10|Total
Leaf 24kWh|€100|€140|€100|€140|€100|€140|€0|€140|€0|€140|€1000
Leaf 30kWh|€100|€140|€100|€140|€100|€140|€100|€140|€0|€140|€1100
Pulsar Diesel|€240|€360|€240|€360|€240|€360|€240|€360|€240|€360|€3000
Pulsar Petrol|€215|€300|€215|€515|€300|€215|€515|€300|€215|€515|€3305


After the warranty expires there's no point in getting an EV looked at any more often than bi-annually, unless there is reason to believe there is something wrong.
Heck on my i3 the servicing is officially bi-annual. My 151 had it's very first scheduled service in Jan 2017 at over 100,000km and the next scheduled service is in Jan 2019.
The basic BMW service plan at the time I purchased my car was limited to three services over three years and the 5-series diesel service interval is 15,000-25,000km (it's CBS, with my driving I'd be at the 15,000km mark). At my mileage had I purchased a 5-series instead I would be paying for services in the 2nd year.

Let's take a look at that 60,000km/annum duty cycle (used my service pack price and pricing from the UK for the i3 / used bmwservice.ie for the 520d):

Car|Year 1|Year 2|Year 3|Year 4|Year 5|Year 6|Year 7|Year 8|Year 9|Year 10|Total
BMW i3|€320|€0|€0|€250|€0|€250|€0|€250|€0|€250|€1320
BMW 520d|€320|€1418.16|€1764.82|€1764.82|€1764.82|€1764.82|€1764.82|€1764.82|€1764.82|€1764.82|€15856


Now I realise the 520d owner would have given up on main dealer servicing the day the warranty ran out...but still.... that's before any exceptional maintenance or tire and brake wear. Not mad servicing either, just the usual oil services and air and fuel filters once a year.
And that's for a pretty crappy experience, a base 520d isn't as fun to drive or as well equipped as a base i3.

KCross

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Regardless of your criticisms, they're still the prices motorists will be paying if they buy an EV and want it serviced at the dealer. Which IME is most people who buy new cars.
Posters can make all the vague claims they want about how much cheaper they are to service, but these are the kinds figure that buyers will be paying.

I think you are generally correct here. If you buy new and want to maintain the warranty the service costs are similar because the dealer forces you to get an unnecessary service every year but that doesn't change the fact you are right in that regard.

At least when you get your ICE serviced they change oil and filter. In EV all they do is inspect and stamp the book!


However, the distinction that most people on here make is maintenance vs servicing particularly outside warranty. A lot of EV owners on here have bought 2nd hand and so paying a main dealer €100+ to simply look at the car and stamp it, is not required. In that case you don't have to service the car at all as there is nothing to service and much less to go wrong.

We've all experienced the failures on ICE which are significant fixes (catalytic converters, DPF, dual mass flywheels, starters, turbos etc etc). These routinely give trouble in ICE. None of these even exist in EV so if you buy secondhand the maintenance savings are there.

Brakes, suspension, tyres require maintenance on both so not much in the difference there. Brakes are cheap and easy to replace anyway, so any saving there is minimal.

umbauk

I was surprised to hear when I spoke to Tesla that you don't need to have the car serviced for the warranty to stay valid. First time I'd seen that from a car manufacturer.

unkel

jackofalltrades wrote: »

The old non-existent maintenance myth again.
EV's don't have a combustion engine, but they still have a load of other systems that can go wrong and have to be looked after.

ICE has 2000 moving parts. EV has 20 moving parts. Which do you think needs more maintenance?

jackofalltrades wrote: »

If you think EV's are cheaper to run overall and don't require subsidies then fell free to show us subsidy free TCO figures.

No point in arguing with you there. No need to do up any sums. You are right. Even next year, a brand new generation EV like the 2018 Leaf will only save you money TCO (without subsidies) if you do a huge mileage

But the subsidies are a given. They are here. The only reason I bought a new EV was that it came with a €10k subsidy, making it cheaper TCO than any similar size petrol or diesel car. And I do only about average miles.

thierry14

unkel wrote: »

ICE has 2000 moving parts. EV has 20 moving parts. Which do you think needs more maintenance?



No point in arguing with you there. No need to do up any sums. You are right. Even next year, a brand new generation EV like the 2018 Leaf will only save you money TCO (without subsidies) if you do a huge mileage

But the subsidies are a given. They are here. The only reason I bought a new EV was that it came with a €10k subsidy, making it cheaper TCO than any similar size petrol or diesel car. And I do only about average miles.

It has to have more than 20 moving parts?

Leaf I drove had more than 20 moving parts

I dont believe that number

Would like to see a breakdown

unkel

I'd like to see a breakdown too. And you need to go drive a proper modern EV. Ioniq, Tesla Model S, eGolf, i3. Your opinions based on just driving a Leaf (which is now ancient and very much outdated) don't count for much. You are not helping your credibility on this forum by banging on about your experiences with the first generation Leaf.

thierry14

unkel wrote: »

I'd like to see a breakdown too. And you need to go drive a proper modern EV. Ioniq, Tesla Model S, eGolf, i3. Your opinions based on just driving a Leaf (which is now ancient and very much outdated) don't count for much. You are not helping your credibility on this forum by banging on about your experiences with the first generation Leaf.

Whatever about my credibility

20 moving parts in an EV is a load of bollox

One door would have that

goz83

the 2000 v 20 moving parts comes from here

An exaggeration no doubt, but I doubt it's far off the mark.

I would think the reference is in relation to the Motor v ICE. So door handles, hinges etc not included

cros13

The motor itself has only one moving part. A few moving parts in the reduction gearbox in addition to the two moving parts of the main gear to provide reverse then the three moving parts in the differential and finally the two driveshafts.

20 isn't far off.

Generally when these numbers are mentioned it's only talking about the powertrain because the rest of the car is just standard parts common to both.

KCross

umbauk wrote: »

I was surprised to hear when I spoke to Tesla that you don't need to have the car serviced for the warranty to stay valid. First time I'd seen that from a car manufacturer.

Good reason for that. Tesla don't have to worry about supporting a dealer network and they know everything going on with the car anyway as it "calls home" with its telemetry data.

The traditional manufacturers impose this unnecessary yearly service interval just to maintain the warranty, but its really just to prop up the dealer network, pay for salesmen, parts shop, mechanics etc.

BoatMad

There are of course still people arguing that smoking doesn't kill you , so it nots surprising to see a few arguing against EVs

Mod Edit: for sanity

Wibbs

thierry14 wrote: »

Whatever about my credibility

20 moving parts in an EV is a load of bollox

One door would have that

Well consider the source; A cheerleader and investment Barnum type for "green" energy development. Of course such a source is going to exaggerate. No doubt the usual SoCa Tesla acolytes on YouTube played with themselves while searching the entire web for anyone dissing Tesla/Musk, ready to drop that ratio and vent bile. And as usual with the increasing polarity(no pun) across much of modern discourse exaggeration and plain BS doled out to the generally misinformed and/or partisan is the order of the day on all sides of any argument one cares to mention. As it is with this one.

However, it's pretty clear even with the most passing glance that electric motors have far fewer moving parts than internal combustion engines. No reasonable debate on that score. Never mind moving parts, they have far fewer parts moving against one another requiring lubrication to stop them eating each other away in seconds. The largest moving part in an electric motor doesn't even touch another part.

They're also - and this is an obvious one - far less dirty than the internal combustion engine. I mean physically rather than in the usual "green" sense*. Combustion is a dirty process. It's why I'm near insane(well, when I say near...) about oil changes at 3000-4000 kms. Less to do with the oil breaking down itself, but more about all the "dirt" transferring into the oil. And because of this insanity my 20 year old engine(and a design commonly thought of as an oil burner) has compression just above ex factory and returns 30-40PPM HC's in the NCT at high revs. Dirt increases wear, as do the constant heating and cooling cycles.

Mechanical complexity increases wear and rate of failure in general and the internal combustion engine has more complexity going on even over the last twenty years(not always to the bad of course). A Model T engine was a Newcomen engine with pretensions and what came out the back was akin to blowing cigar smoke in a toddlers face, while forcing them to eat coal, but basic as hell and you can be sure a few will be still chugging along when current [insert fave modern car/marque here] will be long in retirement as manhole covers. Basic is good and electric motors are of a similar basic design and there are electric motors still working that are over a century old. They're also simpler to rebuild if they do fail.

What would be of far more concern for me would be the rest of the electrics and the batteries themselves. There's increasing levels of complexity in the former and the reuse/recycling of the former is still nebulous. Never mind the concern that they become even more like an IT appliance and the churn that brings with it. EG a ten year old petrol car is essentially the same car as a new one, but with the pace of change and people's need to get "the Latest Thing" the car ownership churn could well go up. At least within then current car ownership narrative. How many of you reading still use an original iPhone? Or run a ten year old laptop?



*Green and electric cars in the same sentence I still harbour serious doubts over BTW and TBH, but much of that is reflected in the consumer churn and obsolescence inherent on our current economic models, not just leccy runabouts.

bk

Wibbs wrote: »

What would be of far more concern for me would be the rest of the electrics and the batteries themselves. There's increasing levels of complexity in the former and the reuse/recycling of the former is still nebulous. Never mind the concern that they become even more like an IT appliance and the churn that brings with it. EG a ten year old petrol car is essentially the same car as a new one, but with the pace of change and people's need to get "the Latest Thing" the car ownership churn could well go up. At least within then current car ownership narrative. How many of you reading still use an original iPhone? Or run a ten year old laptop?

I know lots of people still using 10 year old laptops!

Electronics are actually very reliable once you get over the initial bed in period. I've got computers that are 25 years old in my office which I could plug in and would work as well as the day I bought it.

Electronics have high churn, not because they are unreliable, but because people want the latest gadgets and features.

Depends what you use the 10 year old Laptop for, for most people it would be painfully slow and probably have crap battery life and roast your nuts as a lot of older laptops ran very hot.

bp_me

Wibbs wrote: »

EG a ten year old petrol car is essentially the same car as a new one, but with the pace of change and people's need to get "the Latest Thing" the car ownership churn could well go up. At least within then current car ownership narrative. How many of you reading still use an original iPhone? Or run a ten year old laptop?

]

It's pretty clear from both cell phone and laptop/tablet markets that they have essentially stabilised. The EV market will get there too in another cycle or two and then it will be into the small incremental improvements though I wouldn't expect much change in the release cycle pattern.

Wibbs

bp_me wrote: »

It's pretty clear from both cell phone and laptop/tablet markets that they have essentially stabilised.

Yes PC's are less subject to yearly churn than they once were, but phones and tablets aren't. People are constantly upgrading their phones. Ask the average person on the street how many phones they've owned in the last five years and you'll get your answer. So not clear at all, unless you define stabilised as annual upgrades for new phones.

The EV market will get there too in another cycle or two and then it will be into the small incremental improvements though I wouldn't expect much change in the release cycle pattern.

Another cycle or two? I suppose again it depends on what one defines as the length of a cycle, but it would be my humble that what you're expecting is quite a long way off yet. The tech is maturing, but it's not mature yet and that's before we look at worldwide EV sales percentages or get into areas like autonomy, less private ownership and so on and increments there.

unkel

Wibbs wrote: »

What would be of far more concern for me would be the rest of the electrics and the batteries themselves. There's increasing levels of complexity in the former and the reuse/recycling of the former is still nebulous. Never mind the concern that they become even more like an IT appliance and the churn that brings with it. EG a ten year old petrol car is essentially the same car as a new one, but with the pace of change and people's need to get "the Latest Thing" the car ownership churn could well go up. At least within then current car ownership narrative. How many of you reading still use an original iPhone? Or run a ten year old laptop?

It's a 10 year old car we're talking about. Not a laptop or a phone. Plenty of people hang on to their cars past that age. Your own car is 20 years old. It's not as comfortable or safe as a new car, but it still gets you from A to B in a way you enjoy. Makes no difference imho if a car is electric or not. The only major improvements in electric cars (as opposed to any cars) in the future is the range and the time it takes to charge. But even a modest 2016 EV that has a 200km range and can charge up in 30 minutes is more than plenty for most people. 200km per day is 70k km per year, I bet over 90% of our cars do less than that.

Wibbs

unkel wrote: »

It's a 10 year old car we're talking about. Not a laptop or a phone. Plenty of people hang on to their cars past that age.

Oh they certainly do U, which is itself quite the "new" thing. I remember as a kid that a three year old car was pretty old, 100,000 miles was big milage and a 10 year old car was rare to see. What my concern is that with more of a leasing/PCP trend going on that encourages people to trade up to new and increasing features in EVs that the personal tech model may apply more and churn will get worse and all that brings with it.

On the other hand EV's can be and arguably are more future proof and should last much longer as far as basic tech goes(an electric motor should last a million miles without much issue), people may hang onto them for even longer. Which is what I'd hope, because that would be actually environmentally green.

Though I can't see vested interests in the motor manufacturing biz being happy with that. Indeed the rise of the PCP was on the back of the last recession and overproduction of cars in the market so they had to shift the stock.

Another option might be "everlasting" chassis with scalable upgrade paths for the rest of the car.

Your own car is 20 years old. It's not as comfortable or safe as a new car,

In fairness U it wasn't when it was a new car.

But even a modest 2016 EV that has a 200km range and can charge up in 30 minutes is more than plenty for most people. 200km per day is 70k km per year, I bet over 90% of our cars do less than that.

Oh I'd agree 100% on that score. My driving latterly has been very local, a milk float on truck batteries would probably get me where I needed to go and when I was driving on a daily basis to various jobs, I'd still not have come close to 70,000kms a year.

unkel

Wibbs wrote: »

I remember as a kid that a three year old car was pretty old, 100,000 miles was big milage

Same here. My father bought a brand new car every 4 years throughout the 70s and 80s and he'd only do 5-6k miles per year. And the car was garaged every night (and aftermarket rust treated). Back then all cars were brutally unreliable and rusted to fook and his view was that only by buying a new car and keeping it "as new" was making it reasonably dependable.

KCross

KCross wrote: »

I think you are generally correct here. If you buy new and want to maintain the warranty the service costs are similar because the dealer forces you to get an unnecessary service every year but that doesn't change the fact you are right in that regard.

At least when you get your ICE serviced they change oil and filter. In EV all they do is inspect and stamp the book!


However, the distinction that most people on here make is maintenance vs servicing particularly outside warranty. A lot of EV owners on here have bought 2nd hand and so paying a main dealer €100+ to simply look at the car and stamp it, is not required. In that case you don't have to service the car at all as there is nothing to service and much less to go wrong.

We've all experienced the failures on ICE which are significant fixes (catalytic converters, DPF, dual mass flywheels, starters, turbos etc etc). These routinely give trouble in ICE. None of these even exist in EV so if you buy secondhand the maintenance savings are there.

Brakes, suspension, tyres require maintenance on both so not much in the difference there. Brakes are cheap and easy to replace anyway, so any saving there is minimal.

I've a flywheel starting to go on a santa fe. Fix cost will be closing on a grand. This is just after replacing the timing belt and pump

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

What would be of far more concern for me would be the rest of the electrics and the batteries themselves. There's increasing levels of complexity in the former and the reuse/recycling of the former is still nebulous. Never mind the concern that they become even more like an IT appliance and the churn that brings with it. EG a ten year old petrol car is essentially the same car as a new one, but with the pace of change and people's need to get "the Latest Thing" the car ownership churn could well go up. At least within then current car ownership narrative. How many of you reading still use an original iPhone? Or run a ten year old laptop?

Electrics now days (from reputable producing plants) are very reliable.

My PC is from 2011 and has all original parts barring power block, which is the most old school part in it.
I've added RAM and Drives but the original MB, CPU, GPU (God I need an upgrade), HDD, RAM are all present and working fine.

Original Wii, N64, Mega Drive, Gameboy, Atari 7800 all good.
Donated the PS2 to children's hospital and it worked brilliantly until stolen (who the **** steal from a children's hospital) and I broke my PS1 myself.

Finally recycled a 20+ year old Sanyo 12" portable CRT a few years back.

Have 2x Galaxy S1 working fine at factory settings. Modern software updates will kill its performance but the electronics are sound.

Electrical products do not fail easily (outside of manufacturing failures XBox RRoD and PS3 MB failure come to mind). People mistreat knowing that they are going to upgrade in a year or so anyway.

thierry14

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Electrics now days (from reputable producing plants) are very reliable.

My PC is from 2011 and has all original parts barring power block, which is the most old school part in it.
I've added RAM and Drives but the original MB, CPU, GPU (God I need an upgrade), HDD, RAM are all present and working fine.

Original Wii, N64, Mega Drive, Gameboy, Atari 7800 all good.
Donated the PS2 to children's hospital and it worked brilliantly until stolen (who the **** steal from a children's hospital) and I broke my PS1 myself.

Finally recycled a 20+ year old Sanyo 12" portable CRT a few years back.

Have 2x Galaxy S1 working fine at factory settings. Modern software updates will kill its performance but the electronics are sound.

Electrical products do not fail easily (outside of manufacturing failures XBox RRoD and PS3 MB failure come to mind). People mistreat knowing that they are going to upgrade in a year or so anyway.

Thats makes a good anology

For me the people that bought EV's ( bar Tesla) are like the ones who bought 720p Tvs or original Iphone/smartphones when they came out

Sure they were great for the time, but quickly became dated

They will probably be on there 5th TV/Phone at this stage and spent a ton changing

While general consumers still have there decent 1080p panel and iphone 4/5 and might just change now to a TV and phone that will last years again

Thats where we are headed with EV's imo

By 2020/2021 they will be good enough like 1080p Tvs that you can keep for 10 years, with no compromises

Its not far off, will come around very quickly

Leaf 2018 is the last of the 720p Tvs

Start of 1080p is coming with Tesla Model 3, but still a bit over priced, have to wait it for it to mature a small bit

J.pilkington

unkel wrote: »

Same here. My father bought a brand new car every 4 years throughout the 70s and 80s and he'd only do 5-6k miles per year. And the car was garaged every night (and aftermarket rust treated). Back then all cars were brutally unreliable and rusted to fook and his view was that only by buying a new car and keeping it "as new" was making it reasonably dependable.

Strangely enough it’s not recommended to garage a daily driven car in Ireland over the winter in a typical single car garage. Typically the car will be driven into the garage in a very damp state and as there is generally no air circulation due to tight space (assuming standard garage) it does more damage to the car than leaving it outside.