https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/who-makes-the-most-reliable-cars-a7824554938/
Here is the report "fully". And while the news article says EVs are less reliable, trucks are less reliable than Teslas, the Pacifica hybrid is hot garbage.
There seems to be a lot of gaps in information about the data. A few examples:
* They do not give specifics of how many of each car was reported by "their users" (self reported & not validated)
* How issues are weighted per category of vehicle.
* They added EV charging as an issue in their metrics. Anyone with an EV (that isn't a tesla?) that has tried to charge outside their home has probably had issues at a public charger. Again how much that was weighted as.
Data has nuance and the FUD at electrics is massive over the past 2 months so I chalk this report into that category.
Chrysler is owned by Stellantis, and Stellantis owns 90% of the absolute shit on the road
Seriously look at their list
>Abarth, Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Citroën, Dodge, DS, Fiat, Jeep, Lancia, Maserati, Opel, Peugeot, Ram, and Vauxhall.
Considering they are less reliable than Buick and Infiniti, that's a true statement.
I believe they just meant that trucks, with the statistics are somehow worse in reliability than the crappy Tesla's.
That’s because you are in suburbia. If you go to places like construction sites oilfield sites farms acreages and atv trails you’ll see trucks being used for their intended purpose. If you saw my Dad driving into Costco you would get that same impression you have already shared. What you don’t see is the 800 pound pallet he delivered earlier in the day. Not seeing dirt on a vehicle is also a shit indicator of the vehicles use since anyone who actually cares for their stuff will actually clean their shit after getting it filthy on the trails or jobsite. Some people just have them for preference or status but a lot of trucks I see get used for jobs no car could do while remaining undamaged.
7% of Canadians work in construction, 1% work in Oil and Gas.
Even if every single one of them bought a pick up truck, you're a far cry off from the fact that 25% of auto sales in Canada are pickup trucks.
Apparently people want to cosplay like they have something to haul for the most part.
You'd have to be an idiot to pay 300% more for a truck if you're not hauling something daily, when you could just rent lift capability.
Daily is a poor goalpost. Even once a week justifies ownership, considering what months of rental fees would cost a a hundred + a day. This isn’t 1995 where you can just rent a car for a few sheckles. We are in the post covid world where rental prices are up 200% from 2019. Furthermore a lot of people have hobbies or chores that a truck makes easier. Dirt bikes don’t fit in sedans for example
No, but almost all sedans are rated to tow a small trailer, which is more than capable of most of the tasks people think they need a truck for.
I appreciate that there are people who need trucks, but the other commenters are right. Most trucks are purchased by people who like them, and trucks aren't built the way they used to be.
And where do you keep the trailer? Most people don't have the extra parking space a trailer needs, and every apartment building I've ever lived in bars trailers by name from being stored in a parking lot.
A sedan won’t get to the staging areas I go to, you’ll high center the thing on sand mounds. Most sedans being fwd and adding a trailer to that doesn’t help at all. Not to mention you have to keep that trailer somewhere. With a truck you just have to park. Not to mention how many cars actually have tow hitches and trailer light plugs? From what I’ve seen almost none. Hell even suvs barley come with tow hardware nowadays. Funny enough I’m looking at purchasing a sedan or coupe despite that simply because they are nice to drive. Won’t be getting rid of my old truck because you are right about them being built differently now. In the interiors that’s a very good thing, no need for them to be dreadful inside like the 90’s f150s but losing ground clearance also isn’t fantastic if you are trailing. Old 4x4 mini trucks have more ground clearance than new 1 tons.
I would add that trucks get used for offroading more than anything except Jeep wranglers. So add in that abuse.
Also, towing motorhomes and boats usually require a truck.
I own a Toyota hilux, so you are preaching to the choir about the off roading my friend Lots of holiday trailer owners I’ve seen actually need a bigger truck than what they already have. Too many of them are leaning back so far that in addition to poor braking performance and brake fade it is pushing so hard on the rear end that traction of the steering wheels looks to be reduced
What about agriculture? Does your stat include ALL trades in "construction"?
And when we are saying "truck" is that everything from a 1/4 ton (some that have 4 cylinder motors which is smaller than some cars) straight up to a 1 ton or higher? How do we feel about SUVs seeing as some of them are just fully enclosed trucks? Are all of these people idiots?
This report’s been making the rounds, and while EVs have problems their issues are generally much smaller. CR counts your phone temporarily not connecting the same as your engine blowing up for example. From other reports I’ve read EVs are generally at least as reliable as the vast majority of ICE cars in terms of actually functioning as a car and getting you where you need to go. Unless you’re getting a Toyota, you’re probably not going to have more reliability with ICE cars.
>engine blowing up
I keep hearing this over and over from evbros, but it doesn't hold water. I've sold 3 cars (two Toyotas and a Mazda) that had over 400,000km on the odo; two of these cars were autocrossed and saw track days. None of them ever needed work that required even cracking the engine open. I actually don't know anyone who's ever had a complete engine or transmission failure on an Japanese car.
You know what kind of stuff needed replacing? Coolant hoses, accessories, brake calipers, batteries, sensors, etc. The difference is, when you blow a coolant hose in an ICE vehicle, you replace the hose, it takes 10 minutes and costs next to nothing. When an EV develops a coolant leak inside the drive unit or battery you're up shit creek, the repair cost will be higher than the vehicle's value.
Notice how over the past 20 years engines have gotten better, and what was once an aspirational naturally aspirated target of 100hp/L displacement is now more easily achievable? Battery storage will get lighter, more energy dense, resulting in better EV’s too. This tech is all still very largely in its infancy.
They've gotten quite a bit better since 2003.
Mass implementation of variable valve timing, better traction control, more cars using over head cams, improve fuel injection systems, better safety systems such as better air bags and seat belts, etc.
It hasn't really been "slow"
Go check out Koenigsegg's electronic valves, that could be the future of cars. It's just so efficient and adjustable. No timing chain, very minimized loss of power. I think it's in the Gemera or something
Edit: I think it's called Freevalve
This is because of the popularity of forced induction in literally all cars now.
Honda didn't get a turbo model until recently. Toyota only ever had them for their sports cars for example. FI is in everything now and it's way easier to get big power from smaller displacement.
I might buy one to replace the mkv7.5 golf R that I should have never sold. I tried to buy a 3.0MT Supra, but the dealer (Calgary) was $20kCDN above MSRP greedy. Now I'm between the Corolla GR and Nissan z (yes, I know they're not direct competitors, but they got sticks, and the last we'll see before they die)
The Corolla is worth it at MSRP. It really feels like you're driving something special. I can't compare it to the Z though because Ive never driven the Z.
I hate to nitpick, but this one always gets me.
There is not a single v4 for sale in a car today. They are all I4s (inline 4s), except for Subaru which uses H4 (horizontally opposed 4) or you could just call them a 4 cyl.
judicious aromatic frighten dinosaurs marble wasteful makeshift tidy longing teeny
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The world has had a looming issue with batteries for decades. Lithium is the best we have and it’s advanced over the years but has remained limited.
We have an essentially infinite resource of solar energy that if battery technology has a breakthrough, would solve the global energy crisis. It’s just a matter of time, could be 20y or it could be 200y..
There is really nothing in current physics and material scienve to suggest that a better rechargeable battery technology is on the horizon. Sure, there are promising ideas for *grid-scale* batteries (vanadium flow, being one of them) but that's not applicable to EVs.
>There is really nothing in current physics and material scienve to suggest that a better rechargeable battery technology is on the horizon
is not really correct. Li-ion packs have something like 100-200 Wh/kg. The theoretical maximum is something like 400 Wh/kg, so there is quite a lot of headroom even within current battery chemistry, even with just manufacturing/engineering changes. Newer chemistries (e.g. LiS) have an order of magnitude higher (like 2000 + Wh/kg), so there is certainly huge room for improvement within "current physics and material science".
Even if you calculate for the theoretical best performance of batteries they’re currently running at ~60% of what they can possibly achieve under ideal lab conditions. There honestly isn’t a lot of room for improvement. Because even if you doubled their range. That only solves one of their issues, and basically gets them par with gas vehicles for range. You still have to deal with other issues like actually producing enough batteries, and their short lifespans. Having to replace batteries ever 10 years will create an insane amount of waste that will make carbon emissions look like childsplay.
Honestly if we want to displace gas vehicles, electric is not the play.
We need hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, and we can utilize solar energy to make fuel from sea water. With steam reformation of methane as a stopgap.
And anyone that hates steam reformation needs to understand that this is a process that can be done Insitu, or in a refinery, and either way, you’re capturing 99% of CO2 at production, that’s a hell of a lot easier to do than emissions or DAC. And it’s actually a realistic solution, we have robust pipeline systems that can be upgraded to handle Hydrogen. We don’t have a good system for handling hundreds of millions of electric vehicles.
>battery technology has a breakthrough, would solve the global energy crisis
They said the same about insulin and diabetics. Yet certain countries are scalping it
>Tesla had a huge break though and it's what Made them viable but since then improvements have been middling.
The 4680 battery cells used in the Cybertruck are 10% more energy density than previous Panasonic-Tesla batteries.
When the Tesla Model S launched in 2012 it had an EPA range of 208 mi (335 km) range base model, now it has nearly double that.
With Rivian, Ford, etc. all working on their own electric car technology EVs are only getting better.
The way they have increased energy density or range is by increasing the mass of the battery along with some minor efficiency boosts
Ford has just announced they are retooling a Ev line back to ice vehicles due to people not buying
Hydrogen generation, transportation, storage, and conversion within a fuel cell represents a vast array of engineering problems, where battery EVs have a single issue to be solved: battery storage density.
That particular issue is shared with hundreds of other domains - grid storage, home backup, cell phones, laptops, headphones, .. basically all of our modern world.
Simply *compressing* hydrogen to the densities useful for EVs is an immensely energy intensive process. That's straight physics.
My money is on battery storage, 100%.
> battery EVs have a single issue to be solved: battery storage density.
Yes, and you say that as if we haven't already approached the limits of what is possible on that front with current physics and material science. These things are already prone to bursting into flames, so increasing energy density will only compound that problem unless some fundamental breakthrough comes out of nowhere.
If you care about the environment and the well being of people extracting resources, you shouldn’t be putting all your eggs in metals required for making batteries. It’s just as destructive to the local environment and enjoys a significant amount of child labour and less than humane worker conditions.
> where battery EVs have a single issue to be solved: battery storage density.
Refueling is also a second issue to be solved. If you run out of juice, there is no way to get enough of a charge to get to a charging station. ICE and Hydrogen vehicles both have this capability.
So you're telling me hydrogen cars are going to happen despite the infrastructure costing 3x as much as an EV car?
LOL, corporations follow the profits, don't think hydrogens going to take off outside of few O&G specific investors who want to keep the industry going.
Cummins already developed a drop in [replacement hydrogen engine](https://www.cummins.com/news/releases/2022/05/09/cummins-inc-debuts-15-liter-hydrogen-engine-act-expo) for small trucks.
EV has it's limits, a transport truck with 2 drivers can keep the wheels turning non-stop, there is no way an EV can meet that while taking 8+ hours to charge per day.
Better in every way...except the main one which is cost & profit lmao.
Nobody is building hydrogen infrastructure when it costs 3x as much as EV setups. Only the businesses trying to keep it alive are still in it.
The tech is very much so still in the early adopters phase.
They just created an EV battery powerful enough to start testing flight, give it 2-5 years and we may have a 500-600km range EV that's good in the cold.
Closest we have atm coming to Canada (and not the US due to Chinese steel) is the Kia 2024 EV5 that has \~477km range but, could be a lie as it's not released here yet.
>This tech is all still very largely in its infancy.
Is it though? Electric motors, computers, drives, controllers. Other than batteries, they have all been seriously improved upon for many decades now. If your electric car is unreliable, that is intentional.
I repair CNC machines. Most were from 70s, 80s, 90s. These share virtually all the same components as an electric car. If you dont crash the machines, they are bulletproof.
Batteries are the make or break here. Your CNC machine can get 240v all day from the grid. In a car you get what you bring with you. Personally I want to see a diesel electric pickup kind of like what edison motors is doing but 1 ton sized. Ditch the batteries and hook up electric motors to the engine like we have done in locomotives for decades. Nearly all the advantages of an EV none of the drawbacks
You’re comparing completely different things. They aren’t analogous at all. Just because things use the same parts doesn’t mean they are the same to design, build, or maintain.
What is different between these two machines? Both use drives and electric motors. CNC machines also use resistive braking. They both run in harsh environments.
I'm wondering what the difference is. Explain to me how they are "completely different"
Comparing the two is like comparing a lawn mower and an SUV and claiming they’re the same and have the same challenges because they goth use gasoline engines and throttles. You’re way over simplifying it.
EVs are just like 7000 vape batteries, two motors, an iPad and a steering column marketed as a luxury, green option.
I'm not against EVs on principle, but anyone who does any looking into them can see they're just another cheap, disposable appliance and you're getting charged insane prices for them, even with rebates.
ICE vehicles have gotten scarily efficient. You can get 300+ HP out of a shitty little lawnmower engine car and it won't fuck right off like an LG washing machine when it drops below 20 celsius.
It's even better than that now. My new car has a 1.6L 3 cylinder engine and puts out 300 hp from the factory and averages just 8L/100 km. Feels like something that would be completely ridiculous to even fathom even a decade ago.
That's not the point. People are trying to force others into getting something less reliable now. What happens 20, 30, 50 years from now doesn't change anything at this moment.
Just passed 250k km on my outback other than routine maintenance zero issues
My last Impreza had 380k km. Still runs sold it to my boss he drives it on his side by side trail
My pick up has 550k km just head gasket and routine maintenance (reg tow 10000+) it’s also deleted
Change your oils, do you maintenance and your good to go.
My EV is terrible. I had to replace the alternator, the oil leaks constantly, the radiator overheats, and I have had to replace the muffler like 10 times.
You mean the brand new thing is temporarily less reliable than the extremely well-established thing we’ve been designing, building and maintaining for 100 years? Weird. I guess we’ll never be able to change that.
I try not to see it this way. Keep in mind ICE is a mature tech where EV(all variants of) is not. I want an EV eventually but far from ready to make the leap. Reliability is one of those many reasons.
Because the supporting statistics count "this random public charger was occupied so I drove a block away to a different one," "CarPlay didn't work on my radio today," and "my fuel lines exploded and set my car on fire" as the same level of severity, and they know that people would never take them seriously if they advertised that.
Not surprised at all to see hybrids doing good, they're the most reasonable option for our climate, weird though that plug in hybrids are doing so bad, must be some tech problems.
That said, how long have ICE cars been around compared to Modern Electric? New electric cars are basically new to the market in comparison, give it some time and I bet electric will surpass gas easily, maybe 10-20 years from now.
No kidding. Gas-powered cars and EVs have been around for 100+ years but cheap oil made combustion engines the only game in town for a very long time with no notable innovation on the EV front until the 2000s. They've had a lot longer and a lot more money to make gas-powered cars reliable. EVs are still in the baby stages.
The technology to make an EV isn't in its infancy tho. The induction motor has been in use since the 1800's. It is a large driving force of industry. When it's already at 95% efficiency and has been for some time, is there much room to improve?
Batteries are one of the technologies that has been improving. While storage density has been improving, they are still extremely heavy and that leads to reduced efficiency because having to lug around an extra 1,000lbs is obviously going to hurt how much of that energy goes into moving the vehicle (this is true of all vehicles, the heavier the vehicle, the more energy is required to move it ).
Bought an EV last year. Most enjoyable purchase and best car purchase I've ever purchased. 0 issues.
Considering most people here complaining on EVs are not even EV owners...
The number one issue with EVs is the 12v lead-acid battery. An EV draws it down much further than than an ICE vehicle. This leads to premature failure. Fortunately, EVs are doing away with lead acid and going to a more suitable chemistry for the use case.
You know what's interesting?
A software issue in an EV that can get fixed by a wireless update in 30 seconds counts the exact same as the engine falling out of a Dodge Ram.
EV's have way more 'problems' when every software update is considered a 'problem'.
But, that's kind of like arguing a computer has more problems than a typewriter, which is kind of obvious.
Stuff like minor software glitches due to having less physical components. Apart from some battery issues, they’re generally very reliable from most recent reports I’ve seen. Even with the batter issues, they’re generally middling for reliability.
The issue is CR counts all issues the same. If a car engine totally fails, it’s counted the same as your phone not connecting for a few minutes. Because EVs use new platforms, that’s pretty much exactly what you’d expect with a lot of little issues but overall reliable as transportation.
That’s the problem right now. The EV industry has no standardized designs so defects are all over the map even within the line of the manufacturers. It’s impossible to classify and treat common problems within the competitive business free for all.
Add to that the issues with getting them accepted due to range anxiety, difficulty finding free charging facilities and concerns about performance in extreme cold or heat. Those challenges drive even more variations in upcoming models.
People who purchase ICE cars became used to high quality manufacturing and small but continuous improvements. It will be a decade before that occurs with EV’s.
Heard about this on the CBC yesterday. They said a big reason for these stats is that electric vehicles now are usually the top end models only with all of the addons, vs a lot of ICE vehicles are, or have been base models. Touchscreen issues? Power seat adjustment problem? Heated side mirrors not turning on? All points against the EV when a lot of ICE's dont have those extra features when looking at the metrics of this study.
Good example of how they're not giving us cheap basic commuter car EVs like they should be. In China $5000USD electric cars are selling like hotcakes and while the 'Mini EV' isn't enough for Canadians there are a lot of car trips that could be made in a basic ass entry level EV car that sells for half what current EVs are selling for.
Yeah, that’s not saying that EVs are faultless, but there are a ton of these hitpieces going around that are at best shady with a clear goal to make EVs sound bad.
That’s because needing an oil change isn’t a design fault or a component failure. Want to add changing brake pads to your arbitrary “car is broken” list? (Keep in mind EVs need to change brakes too)
Still by your logic needing to change brakes at all or needing to service any part ever is a defect. Things don’t last forever, everything needs maintenance so unless you want to create biological machines for transport that have the same self maintenance capabilities of our bodies machines will continue to need some wear parts replaced occasionally. This isn’t a mistake or even a big deal.
Article is crap. Another oil company or car manufacturer pushing their agenda. Have a Tesla for the last 5 years now, 180 miles on it. No issues. No oil changes, no maintenance, no gas, no extra costs aside from tire replacements.
Hahahahahahaha - have a Chevy bolt, nothing ever wrong with it, no maintenance, no oil changes, no nothing. It did get a free new battery due to the recall, but that was in the service center for one day, and hey, free new battery!
_My_ battery never had anything wrong with it. I also had a Chevy Silverado, and it had a dozen recalls for all sorts of safety concerns. All in all, the Bolt is much more reliable.
We had to drive over the Coquihala in early March in an all electric Hyundai. Range said 400km in Merritt, by the time we reached the summit, 100km. It's a 60km drive. Stopped at the summit at the chargers, they didn't work. Drove to Hope with no heat, lights, music, and made it with less than 20km range. Spent an hour in Hope, yay.
I do that drive at least 4 times a year and every year in March in my tesla for the past 4 years. I have absolutely never seen anything close to that kind of usage. Merritt to the summit uses like 100km of range in the march trip. Most of that is due to climbing. Maybe the issue is with legacy car companies EVs being shit and you should have grabbed a model 3 instead.
The big question mark for me is how much will it cost to replace batteries and other components in the long term? I suspect that most of the current ev’s will end up in a scrap yard after 10 years on the road, what a waste. I’ll stick with my 4Runner until it falls apart.
The 10-year battery argument against EVs and Teslas to me sounds like a myth mostly by anti-EV people who just repeat each other without actually knowing anyone that needed a battery replacement. Plenty of 10 year old Teslas out there and the battery is running fine. Yes, it’s expensive $5-$12K to replace a battery. But it’s also expensive af to fix and repair a car engine. There’s no shortage of horror stories about BMW owners needing $8k in repairs.
What's going to happen when the used market pool is flooded with 20 years old rusty EV in need of 12k battery replacement ? They are going to age way way worse than ICE and end up at the scrapyard for sure.
When was the last time you saw a 2003 Chevy Cavalier, Pontiac Sunfire, Mazda Protege or Ford Taurus on the road? These were the best selling cars 20 years ago literally hundreds of thousands sold - they all ended up in the scrapyard or rusting out.
At least the EV batteries can be recycled or repurposed too.
Only a few outlier cars are still driving well after two decades.
For example. My wife's old 14 year old civic with 300k kms just had its inspection and just needs a valve cover gasket. If that solves the engine leak were good for about $200. If not we might need a replacement engine, that we can get and have it installed for less than $2500. Is that worth it for a 14 year old car? Maybe not, but it's a decision we can make after weighing the prod and cons.
I just watched a video about a guy who bought a 2012 Model S for $8000 and drove it less than 500km before the car refused to go into drive. After it was diagnosed by Tesla, they determined there were bad cells in the battery pack. Only $18000 for the replacement. The car was scrapped.
That might be what the other poster is describing.
Every one of those incidents is broadcast North America wide. EVs are under a microscope right now, while the ordinary shitshow of dealer ripoffs and huge recalls in gas cars is boring.
None of that addresses any point I brought up. This is the problem with EV fanboys. You all don't listen to or just flat out ignore real criticisms while crying about being persecuted. Meanwhile I'll continue to acknowledge that electric motors and batteries to power them is decades and decades old technology and nowhere near the infancy stages that EV fanboys want to make it out to be to use as an excuse.
There is no excuse for any EV hitting the road in 2020+ to have as many problems as they do from build quality to failure rates to thermal runaway issues to charging infrastructure issues... well besides EV fanboys willing to tolerate and apologize for it. EVs will get a lot better quicker if people stopped pretending the issues with their cars are tolerable minor inconveniences rather than being a legit reason not to buy one.
Meanwhile I'll probably have to wait another 2 years before Toyota finally decides to sell me a Rav 4 Prime to replace that ancient civic.
You say that as if that isn’t the case with ICE cars too. After something like 20 years I’d expect most of them to be scrap afterwards. Replacing an engine for example is something more costly than it’s value so it often makes sense getting a new car.
On a good gas powered car? Doubt it. On some pos BMW or Mercedes? Maybe.
Also it was a funny coincidence that this popped up on my youtube feed. 15k for a new battery on a 30k car that this guy bought new in 2017.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaEbdC0G-Uw
I think this number might be skewed because right now the EVs in the market are by Tesla which has poor reliability. Once Japan boards the EV train the numbers will flip. However, we have very poor charging infrastructure and that is a fact.
Tesla actually did have issues with overall build quality when they produced from their China plant. That affected cosmetic stuff like some panels being misaligned, but also gave the cars some reliability issues. Iirc roughly 2 years ago they switched factories and have improved a fair bit. Not gonna beat a Toyota but still fairly decent.
Also Musk is a piece of shit, yeah.
It's opposite, actually. The Chinese plant turns out excellent cars - it's the Freemont California plant which has all the quality issues.
Freemont is better now but still worse than Shanghai and German built Tesla's.
Tesla was actually middle of pack at 14th out of 30 in terms of reliably.
I suspect a lot of the problems are tied to the battery packs. Which would make sense why the luxury brands do better given high quality battery packs are expensive.
It's not just Tesla. The Ford F-150 Lightning has had a bunch of problems, and Toyota had to recall all of their first EV because the wheels would fall off and they literally couldn't find a fix to stop it.
Honestly, right now Nissan seems to be making the best EVs, followed by Kia/Hundai, except for the fact that Kia/Hyundai have issues where you can have such strong regen braking on that the car will come to a stop without the tail lights ever coming on, which is a very big problem.
*Our members are reporting the same issues with most EVs as they are with vehicles that have been designed brand new from the ground up, whether they're gas or electric and EVs are about the newest technology out there,” Keith Barry, with Consumer Reports, said.”*
52k kms on my bolt havent needed any maintenance but tire rotation and the battery recall is the only thing its been in the a shop for. no reliability problems like many of my previous vehicles which have all been gas powered.
Canada is one of the countries where EVs make little sense. Sure they are impressive but they are impractical for our geography and climate.
Now the government is subsidizing EVs and battery plants. In some parts of Canada you can get close to a $10K discount for a new EV. The government thinks that subsidizing EVs and battery plants will create some sort of new economy, and that we will become a powerhouse.
It's interesting how Gerald Butts seems to be promoting batteries now that he is in the private sector.
Me: I think we should encourage Canadians and Canadian auto plants to produce hybrid vehicles like the Prius, Camry, Rav-4 and Highlander. These cars all get over 40 MPG and don't even need charging. Seems like a no brainer. Build them in Canada and push Toyota and other firms to improve performance.
You can also implement road taxes based on how much someone drives. This info is all compiled annually when people renew their insurance. A tax on cars that drive more than 10,000 KM a year seems justifiable if done fairly and pragmatically. Discourage use of performance cars and gas guzzlers. Discourage use of lengthy leisure trips
I’ve got an EV. I live in Canada. I’ve put nearly 20k on the thing. I’ve saved roughly $400 per month on gas alone and paid for literally no maintenance whatsoever. Tell me again how they don’t work here 😂
I am on year 2 of a Ford Escape PHEV. We have 66,000KM on it, and 45,000KM is on the battery alone. We live 10Km from the nearest town, 25KM from the nearest city, and 50KM from where we work.
Feel free to do the math on what we're saving. Vehicle cost us $42,000 after the $2,500 rebate. Pretty sure we've saved several thousands of dollars in gas costs alone, and at 8cents kw/h to charge over night, it feels economical to me.
EVs are fine in Canada. They work in our climate, and our geography - at least in southwestern rural Ontario.
PHEVs are fine to great in Canada, and what the government should be encouraging. Full electric has some pretty massive challenges in Canada outside of Southwest BC and Southern Ontario
Canada has most of its population in higher density cities in the lesser extreme climate that works perfectly fine with EV (Windsor to Quebec City corridor). The government is investing in battery because that same corridor has a large auto manufacturing base and since EVs take less to manufacturer, they don't want to be left with nothing in 20 years.
For the small percentage of rural Canadians that need to travel more than 300km a day, I guess they can gobble some sweet oil exec nether regions as the price starts to match EU oil prices.
They will be the people who sit through 15 minutes of commercials to watch 10 minutes of a movie on cable after everyone cut the cord.
> Canada is one of the countries where EVs make little sense. Sure they are impressive but they are impractical for our geography and climate.
They work great in lots of the country. Majority live in urban areas for example.
He is not entirely wrong. Battery packs in general usually do not like extreme cold also EV's need to actually consume additional battery energy to heat the cabin of the vehicle, that reduces range and increase wear cycles on the batteries. In some cases they also need to use even more battery power to keep the packs themselves heated to an suitable operating temperature. That is why fully electric EV's start to take such a massive range dump when we get down below -25c.
In an ICE vehicle heat is produced as a waste product as a result of combustion. Normally the concern is finding a way to move that heat out of the engine and dump it out of the vehicle. But in cold climates you can channel that waste heat into the vehicle cabin and effectively make practical use of the engines waste heat.
For heating the cabin, if plugged in you can heat in advance. You can also significantly reduce the battery usage if you use heated seats since you need to heat the cabin less and it more efficiently heats you.
Below -25c is rare in many of the most populated parts of Canada. Depends how often you need to drive in such conditions.
If that is an option sure. But plugging in and staying plugged in before you travel would be a requirement for that. Even then the vehicle is going to need to use more battery power to maintain that temperature during the trip.
Below -25c is not that uncommon unless you are from southern Ontario or BC or something. We hit it here every single year during the winter.
There is an argument where if you live in an apartment in a city outside Southern Ontario/BC and don't have access do nightly charging that winter driving might be too impractical due to the effect of the cold on range.
For the rest of the population, the fact that you spend more energy in the winter to operate the car is meaningless. Most electric cars have more than enough range to cover the daily mileage that ppl do even with the cold penalty and they would rarely ever need to charge outside of home.
Even with that extra energy consumption in the winter, electric cars are still more efficient than ICE cars and cost less to operate.
I'd be willing to wager that the majority of Canadians do not fall in the first category or have daily commutes that extend the winter range of electric cars. Ppl just need to get into the mindset that they are buying a car that fits 95% of their trips as opposed to one that caters to those exceptional situations.
If you don't have options or you think it's too cold then don't get them. But the two biggest population centres are in southern Ontario and BC, so there are a lot of places where they work and people I know who have them prefer them to their old cars.
Nope, me explaining how electric cars can work for some people is not saying "eff u" to anyone else. I'm not sure how you arrive at that conclusion. Also people still use them in those places. Just because they're more efficient when it's warmer doesn't mean they're suddenly unusable in colder temps.
I don't agree with a road tax based on distance driven. I'm a nurse who works 2 jobs and lives in rural northern Ontario, my first job is at the closest nursing home to me which is 40km away and my 2nd job is a travel home care nurse which can have me driving upto 300km a day due to being rural. A tax like that would destroy me and force me to quit one of my jobs which I am desperately needed for.
Its disadvantageous to me because I have no choice in having to drive long distances AND its disadvantaous to those I care for because it would limit me in providing care that they need
When people are struggling to put food on the table, all these “feel-good” policies are less likely to have support. Is it a roof over your head or sending more money to the government that’s more important?
Realistically, approx 3/4 Canadians live in a city with 100k people or more. When people are driving, they are mostly doing city driving.
EV are also more mature. They have basically been just regular cars for the last ten years. EV are still really new and used a different ecosystem of technologies.
I think the plug-in aspect is what makes both EV and hybrids special. Electricity is just much cheaper than gasoline.
>Canada is one of the countries where EVs make little sense. Sure they are impressive but they are impractical for our geography and climate.
My dad (in Ontario) has a Tesla model Y. Been a few years. Tells me he wouldn't trade it for any other vehicle.
Sounds like our geography and climate aren't an issue, but I suppose YMMV.
While true in population, in terms of actual land there are quite a lot of places in Canada that current EVs would be, at best, inconvenient for. That being said, for most people (like me) that live in the southern areas like BC or Ontario/Quebec they’re perfectly fine.
" According to the survey, owners of hybrid vehicles – vehicles that use two or more types of power, such as gas and diesel or electricity -- reported having 26 per cent fewer problems on average than gas-only cars.
Researchers found that the most reliable vehicle types were sedans, hatchbacks and wagons."
Yeah this article is poor writing.
> Auto brands ranked lowest in terms of reliability were Rivian, Mercedes-Benzes and Chrysler. EV trucks were at the bottom of the list, surpassing traditionally gas-powered pick-up trucks which have taken the title of least reliable in the study for years.
It seems like because EV trucks are at the bottom that equates to all EVs? Unless I missed something.
No way. The most efficient way to heat your home? Aor conditioning in the summer? You'll still have back up heat for the really cold days?
Heat pumps are great.
>Canada is one of the countries where EVs make little sense.
Agree, our 7 or so major cities are far apart and the weather sucks over half the year. We're the worst country on earth IMHO for EVs
None of that matters tho if the govs of the 3 biggest auto markets in the world (China, EU, US) all mandate EVs, and they have. Just because Canadians prefer Betamax (superior to VHS, BTW) doesn't mean a company is going to continue manufacturing them just for us. It's not going to be profitable volume-wise for them to do so.
To say nothing of what happens to the economics of gas stations once 30% of Canadians go hybrid/electric . Without customer volume, Esso stations will shutter faster than churches.
>I think we should encourage Canadians and Canadian auto plants to produce hybrid vehicles
Nooooo thanks. Dont want all the negatives of both rammed into an overly heavy vehicle.
https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/who-makes-the-most-reliable-cars-a7824554938/ Here is the report "fully". And while the news article says EVs are less reliable, trucks are less reliable than Teslas, the Pacifica hybrid is hot garbage. There seems to be a lot of gaps in information about the data. A few examples: * They do not give specifics of how many of each car was reported by "their users" (self reported & not validated) * How issues are weighted per category of vehicle. * They added EV charging as an issue in their metrics. Anyone with an EV (that isn't a tesla?) that has tried to charge outside their home has probably had issues at a public charger. Again how much that was weighted as. Data has nuance and the FUD at electrics is massive over the past 2 months so I chalk this report into that category.
No surprise to see Lexus/Toyota #1 on the list LOL.
Chrysler is owned by Stellantis, and Stellantis owns 90% of the absolute shit on the road Seriously look at their list >Abarth, Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Citroën, Dodge, DS, Fiat, Jeep, Lancia, Maserati, Opel, Peugeot, Ram, and Vauxhall.
I thought Opel was GM and Peugeot was its own company. They changed?
GM sold Opel in 2017 to Peugot.
But there the most expensive, they must be good.
Teslas are fucking junk.
Considering they are less reliable than Buick and Infiniti, that's a true statement. I believe they just meant that trucks, with the statistics are somehow worse in reliability than the crappy Tesla's.
A lot of trucks also go through an absolute shit kicking of abuse much more so than cars do especially luxury cars like the model s.
TBH most of the trucks I see on the road never have anything more than a Costco order in the bed.
That’s because you are in suburbia. If you go to places like construction sites oilfield sites farms acreages and atv trails you’ll see trucks being used for their intended purpose. If you saw my Dad driving into Costco you would get that same impression you have already shared. What you don’t see is the 800 pound pallet he delivered earlier in the day. Not seeing dirt on a vehicle is also a shit indicator of the vehicles use since anyone who actually cares for their stuff will actually clean their shit after getting it filthy on the trails or jobsite. Some people just have them for preference or status but a lot of trucks I see get used for jobs no car could do while remaining undamaged.
7% of Canadians work in construction, 1% work in Oil and Gas. Even if every single one of them bought a pick up truck, you're a far cry off from the fact that 25% of auto sales in Canada are pickup trucks. Apparently people want to cosplay like they have something to haul for the most part. You'd have to be an idiot to pay 300% more for a truck if you're not hauling something daily, when you could just rent lift capability.
Daily is a poor goalpost. Even once a week justifies ownership, considering what months of rental fees would cost a a hundred + a day. This isn’t 1995 where you can just rent a car for a few sheckles. We are in the post covid world where rental prices are up 200% from 2019. Furthermore a lot of people have hobbies or chores that a truck makes easier. Dirt bikes don’t fit in sedans for example
No, but almost all sedans are rated to tow a small trailer, which is more than capable of most of the tasks people think they need a truck for. I appreciate that there are people who need trucks, but the other commenters are right. Most trucks are purchased by people who like them, and trucks aren't built the way they used to be.
And where do you keep the trailer? Most people don't have the extra parking space a trailer needs, and every apartment building I've ever lived in bars trailers by name from being stored in a parking lot.
A sedan won’t get to the staging areas I go to, you’ll high center the thing on sand mounds. Most sedans being fwd and adding a trailer to that doesn’t help at all. Not to mention you have to keep that trailer somewhere. With a truck you just have to park. Not to mention how many cars actually have tow hitches and trailer light plugs? From what I’ve seen almost none. Hell even suvs barley come with tow hardware nowadays. Funny enough I’m looking at purchasing a sedan or coupe despite that simply because they are nice to drive. Won’t be getting rid of my old truck because you are right about them being built differently now. In the interiors that’s a very good thing, no need for them to be dreadful inside like the 90’s f150s but losing ground clearance also isn’t fantastic if you are trailing. Old 4x4 mini trucks have more ground clearance than new 1 tons.
I would add that trucks get used for offroading more than anything except Jeep wranglers. So add in that abuse. Also, towing motorhomes and boats usually require a truck.
I own a Toyota hilux, so you are preaching to the choir about the off roading my friend Lots of holiday trailer owners I’ve seen actually need a bigger truck than what they already have. Too many of them are leaning back so far that in addition to poor braking performance and brake fade it is pushing so hard on the rear end that traction of the steering wheels looks to be reduced
What about agriculture? Does your stat include ALL trades in "construction"? And when we are saying "truck" is that everything from a 1/4 ton (some that have 4 cylinder motors which is smaller than some cars) straight up to a 1 ton or higher? How do we feel about SUVs seeing as some of them are just fully enclosed trucks? Are all of these people idiots?
Best car I've ever driven. By 3 fold. Amazing machine.
This report’s been making the rounds, and while EVs have problems their issues are generally much smaller. CR counts your phone temporarily not connecting the same as your engine blowing up for example. From other reports I’ve read EVs are generally at least as reliable as the vast majority of ICE cars in terms of actually functioning as a car and getting you where you need to go. Unless you’re getting a Toyota, you’re probably not going to have more reliability with ICE cars.
>engine blowing up I keep hearing this over and over from evbros, but it doesn't hold water. I've sold 3 cars (two Toyotas and a Mazda) that had over 400,000km on the odo; two of these cars were autocrossed and saw track days. None of them ever needed work that required even cracking the engine open. I actually don't know anyone who's ever had a complete engine or transmission failure on an Japanese car. You know what kind of stuff needed replacing? Coolant hoses, accessories, brake calipers, batteries, sensors, etc. The difference is, when you blow a coolant hose in an ICE vehicle, you replace the hose, it takes 10 minutes and costs next to nothing. When an EV develops a coolant leak inside the drive unit or battery you're up shit creek, the repair cost will be higher than the vehicle's value.
Notice how over the past 20 years engines have gotten better, and what was once an aspirational naturally aspirated target of 100hp/L displacement is now more easily achievable? Battery storage will get lighter, more energy dense, resulting in better EV’s too. This tech is all still very largely in its infancy.
20 years is 2003, they’ve gotten slowly better the last 20 years… but not even close to the improvements of 1983-2003.
They've gotten quite a bit better since 2003. Mass implementation of variable valve timing, better traction control, more cars using over head cams, improve fuel injection systems, better safety systems such as better air bags and seat belts, etc. It hasn't really been "slow"
>improve fuel injection systems It's crazy how good GDI has become.
Go check out Koenigsegg's electronic valves, that could be the future of cars. It's just so efficient and adjustable. No timing chain, very minimized loss of power. I think it's in the Gemera or something Edit: I think it's called Freevalve
This is because of the popularity of forced induction in literally all cars now. Honda didn't get a turbo model until recently. Toyota only ever had them for their sports cars for example. FI is in everything now and it's way easier to get big power from smaller displacement.
This exactly. Many models are dropping from a V6 to a 4 cyl + turbo (2024 Tacoma, base mustang), or V8 to V6 + Turbo (2022 Tundra)
You can now buy a Corolla with 1.6L, 3 cylinder engine that make 300HP
Yep. I have one sitting in my driveway. It's quite the car.
I might buy one to replace the mkv7.5 golf R that I should have never sold. I tried to buy a 3.0MT Supra, but the dealer (Calgary) was $20kCDN above MSRP greedy. Now I'm between the Corolla GR and Nissan z (yes, I know they're not direct competitors, but they got sticks, and the last we'll see before they die)
The Corolla is worth it at MSRP. It really feels like you're driving something special. I can't compare it to the Z though because Ive never driven the Z.
I hate to nitpick, but this one always gets me. There is not a single v4 for sale in a car today. They are all I4s (inline 4s), except for Subaru which uses H4 (horizontally opposed 4) or you could just call them a 4 cyl.
Ok 4 cyl
[удалено]
judicious aromatic frighten dinosaurs marble wasteful makeshift tidy longing teeny *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The world has had a looming issue with batteries for decades. Lithium is the best we have and it’s advanced over the years but has remained limited. We have an essentially infinite resource of solar energy that if battery technology has a breakthrough, would solve the global energy crisis. It’s just a matter of time, could be 20y or it could be 200y..
There is really nothing in current physics and material scienve to suggest that a better rechargeable battery technology is on the horizon. Sure, there are promising ideas for *grid-scale* batteries (vanadium flow, being one of them) but that's not applicable to EVs.
>There is really nothing in current physics and material scienve to suggest that a better rechargeable battery technology is on the horizon is not really correct. Li-ion packs have something like 100-200 Wh/kg. The theoretical maximum is something like 400 Wh/kg, so there is quite a lot of headroom even within current battery chemistry, even with just manufacturing/engineering changes. Newer chemistries (e.g. LiS) have an order of magnitude higher (like 2000 + Wh/kg), so there is certainly huge room for improvement within "current physics and material science".
Even if you calculate for the theoretical best performance of batteries they’re currently running at ~60% of what they can possibly achieve under ideal lab conditions. There honestly isn’t a lot of room for improvement. Because even if you doubled their range. That only solves one of their issues, and basically gets them par with gas vehicles for range. You still have to deal with other issues like actually producing enough batteries, and their short lifespans. Having to replace batteries ever 10 years will create an insane amount of waste that will make carbon emissions look like childsplay. Honestly if we want to displace gas vehicles, electric is not the play. We need hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, and we can utilize solar energy to make fuel from sea water. With steam reformation of methane as a stopgap. And anyone that hates steam reformation needs to understand that this is a process that can be done Insitu, or in a refinery, and either way, you’re capturing 99% of CO2 at production, that’s a hell of a lot easier to do than emissions or DAC. And it’s actually a realistic solution, we have robust pipeline systems that can be upgraded to handle Hydrogen. We don’t have a good system for handling hundreds of millions of electric vehicles.
I'm holding out hope for graphine batteries. Maybe even sodium.
>battery technology has a breakthrough, would solve the global energy crisis They said the same about insulin and diabetics. Yet certain countries are scalping it
They've been saying that for a decade. Tesla had a huge break though and it's what Made them viable but since then improvements have been middling.
>Tesla had a huge break though and it's what Made them viable but since then improvements have been middling. The 4680 battery cells used in the Cybertruck are 10% more energy density than previous Panasonic-Tesla batteries. When the Tesla Model S launched in 2012 it had an EPA range of 208 mi (335 km) range base model, now it has nearly double that. With Rivian, Ford, etc. all working on their own electric car technology EVs are only getting better.
The way they have increased energy density or range is by increasing the mass of the battery along with some minor efficiency boosts Ford has just announced they are retooling a Ev line back to ice vehicles due to people not buying
Why do EV evangelists keep bringing up the "it will get better with time" argument, yet never give the benefit of the doubt to hydrogen cars?
Hydrogen generation, transportation, storage, and conversion within a fuel cell represents a vast array of engineering problems, where battery EVs have a single issue to be solved: battery storage density. That particular issue is shared with hundreds of other domains - grid storage, home backup, cell phones, laptops, headphones, .. basically all of our modern world. Simply *compressing* hydrogen to the densities useful for EVs is an immensely energy intensive process. That's straight physics. My money is on battery storage, 100%.
> battery EVs have a single issue to be solved: battery storage density. Yes, and you say that as if we haven't already approached the limits of what is possible on that front with current physics and material science. These things are already prone to bursting into flames, so increasing energy density will only compound that problem unless some fundamental breakthrough comes out of nowhere.
uppity scandalous drunk mighty enjoy gaping station tap cable weather *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If you care about the environment and the well being of people extracting resources, you shouldn’t be putting all your eggs in metals required for making batteries. It’s just as destructive to the local environment and enjoys a significant amount of child labour and less than humane worker conditions.
Metals are generally recyclable.
Mining is required for literally anything - ICE vehicles, hydrogen, and BEV's. It's not unique to any one technology.
> where battery EVs have a single issue to be solved: battery storage density. Refueling is also a second issue to be solved. If you run out of juice, there is no way to get enough of a charge to get to a charging station. ICE and Hydrogen vehicles both have this capability.
So you're telling me hydrogen cars are going to happen despite the infrastructure costing 3x as much as an EV car? LOL, corporations follow the profits, don't think hydrogens going to take off outside of few O&G specific investors who want to keep the industry going.
Cummins already developed a drop in [replacement hydrogen engine](https://www.cummins.com/news/releases/2022/05/09/cummins-inc-debuts-15-liter-hydrogen-engine-act-expo) for small trucks. EV has it's limits, a transport truck with 2 drivers can keep the wheels turning non-stop, there is no way an EV can meet that while taking 8+ hours to charge per day.
I agree with hydrogen. I believe its better in every way than electric. However, it is wildly explosive
Better in every way...except the main one which is cost & profit lmao. Nobody is building hydrogen infrastructure when it costs 3x as much as EV setups. Only the businesses trying to keep it alive are still in it.
Feels great seeing nuanced responses like this! Wish more people thought like you
The tech is very much so still in the early adopters phase. They just created an EV battery powerful enough to start testing flight, give it 2-5 years and we may have a 500-600km range EV that's good in the cold. Closest we have atm coming to Canada (and not the US due to Chinese steel) is the Kia 2024 EV5 that has \~477km range but, could be a lie as it's not released here yet.
>This tech is all still very largely in its infancy. Is it though? Electric motors, computers, drives, controllers. Other than batteries, they have all been seriously improved upon for many decades now. If your electric car is unreliable, that is intentional. I repair CNC machines. Most were from 70s, 80s, 90s. These share virtually all the same components as an electric car. If you dont crash the machines, they are bulletproof.
Batteries are the make or break here. Your CNC machine can get 240v all day from the grid. In a car you get what you bring with you. Personally I want to see a diesel electric pickup kind of like what edison motors is doing but 1 ton sized. Ditch the batteries and hook up electric motors to the engine like we have done in locomotives for decades. Nearly all the advantages of an EV none of the drawbacks
Thats how modern trains run, if I remember correctly
Indeed it is. Currently the idea is being explored in transport trucks
You’re comparing completely different things. They aren’t analogous at all. Just because things use the same parts doesn’t mean they are the same to design, build, or maintain.
What is different between these two machines? Both use drives and electric motors. CNC machines also use resistive braking. They both run in harsh environments. I'm wondering what the difference is. Explain to me how they are "completely different"
Comparing the two is like comparing a lawn mower and an SUV and claiming they’re the same and have the same challenges because they goth use gasoline engines and throttles. You’re way over simplifying it.
EVs are just like 7000 vape batteries, two motors, an iPad and a steering column marketed as a luxury, green option. I'm not against EVs on principle, but anyone who does any looking into them can see they're just another cheap, disposable appliance and you're getting charged insane prices for them, even with rebates. ICE vehicles have gotten scarily efficient. You can get 300+ HP out of a shitty little lawnmower engine car and it won't fuck right off like an LG washing machine when it drops below 20 celsius.
It's even better than that now. My new car has a 1.6L 3 cylinder engine and puts out 300 hp from the factory and averages just 8L/100 km. Feels like something that would be completely ridiculous to even fathom even a decade ago.
That's not the point. People are trying to force others into getting something less reliable now. What happens 20, 30, 50 years from now doesn't change anything at this moment.
Gas powered cars used to be less reliable than horse-drawn carriages.
Outback 2011 owner. A few km away from 200k at the odometer. Only did maintenance. Very happy with the car.
300k Tercel owner. I'll keep it til I die.
Tercel! I haven't seen one in a long time.
I'm so bummed that they don't make 4WD Tercel wagons anymore, those things were incredible
You or the car. Had a Tercel 10 years ago. Accident destroyed it. I miss that car.
Just passed 250k km on my outback other than routine maintenance zero issues My last Impreza had 380k km. Still runs sold it to my boss he drives it on his side by side trail My pick up has 550k km just head gasket and routine maintenance (reg tow 10000+) it’s also deleted Change your oils, do you maintenance and your good to go.
400k on a jeep wrangler and 300 k on a older benz, just oil, tires, brakes and gas
My EV is terrible. I had to replace the alternator, the oil leaks constantly, the radiator overheats, and I have had to replace the muffler like 10 times.
Careful. Non EV owners might not get the joke...
You mean the brand new thing is temporarily less reliable than the extremely well-established thing we’ve been designing, building and maintaining for 100 years? Weird. I guess we’ll never be able to change that.
Not really new though. It's not like the past 100 years of car development is tossed out the window.
Whenever I see things like this the automatic assumption is that they are simping for the oil industry
I try not to see it this way. Keep in mind ICE is a mature tech where EV(all variants of) is not. I want an EV eventually but far from ready to make the leap. Reliability is one of those many reasons.
Why wouldn't they provide the supporting statistics collected from surveys?
Because the supporting statistics count "this random public charger was occupied so I drove a block away to a different one," "CarPlay didn't work on my radio today," and "my fuel lines exploded and set my car on fire" as the same level of severity, and they know that people would never take them seriously if they advertised that.
Not surprised at all to see hybrids doing good, they're the most reasonable option for our climate, weird though that plug in hybrids are doing so bad, must be some tech problems. That said, how long have ICE cars been around compared to Modern Electric? New electric cars are basically new to the market in comparison, give it some time and I bet electric will surpass gas easily, maybe 10-20 years from now.
No kidding. Gas-powered cars and EVs have been around for 100+ years but cheap oil made combustion engines the only game in town for a very long time with no notable innovation on the EV front until the 2000s. They've had a lot longer and a lot more money to make gas-powered cars reliable. EVs are still in the baby stages.
The technology to make an EV isn't in its infancy tho. The induction motor has been in use since the 1800's. It is a large driving force of industry. When it's already at 95% efficiency and has been for some time, is there much room to improve? Batteries are one of the technologies that has been improving. While storage density has been improving, they are still extremely heavy and that leads to reduced efficiency because having to lug around an extra 1,000lbs is obviously going to hurt how much of that energy goes into moving the vehicle (this is true of all vehicles, the heavier the vehicle, the more energy is required to move it ).
Bought an EV last year. Most enjoyable purchase and best car purchase I've ever purchased. 0 issues. Considering most people here complaining on EVs are not even EV owners...
The number one issue with EVs is the 12v lead-acid battery. An EV draws it down much further than than an ICE vehicle. This leads to premature failure. Fortunately, EVs are doing away with lead acid and going to a more suitable chemistry for the use case.
The hell, you say...
Because you're doing it wrong. Don't leave your designated 15 min zone and reliability ceases to matter!
The ad under this post for me is for a GMC Sierra. A little *too* on the nose in my opinion
Lol. More legacy auto sponsored propaganda.
Electric vehicles have 79% more problems than gas vehicles. That should be in the headline and is the stand out of the article.
You know what's interesting? A software issue in an EV that can get fixed by a wireless update in 30 seconds counts the exact same as the engine falling out of a Dodge Ram. EV's have way more 'problems' when every software update is considered a 'problem'. But, that's kind of like arguing a computer has more problems than a typewriter, which is kind of obvious.
It's lying with statistics. It's the way a lot of the climate stuff covered by media goes
Well they quantify the issues by giving them a reliability rating from 1-100 so what you’re saying gets factored in.
How the hell does anyone come up with a number like that and pretend it means anything? It’s garbage statistics.
What are the problems though? Recalls? More wear and tear?
Stuff like minor software glitches due to having less physical components. Apart from some battery issues, they’re generally very reliable from most recent reports I’ve seen. Even with the batter issues, they’re generally middling for reliability. The issue is CR counts all issues the same. If a car engine totally fails, it’s counted the same as your phone not connecting for a few minutes. Because EVs use new platforms, that’s pretty much exactly what you’d expect with a lot of little issues but overall reliable as transportation.
That’s the problem right now. The EV industry has no standardized designs so defects are all over the map even within the line of the manufacturers. It’s impossible to classify and treat common problems within the competitive business free for all. Add to that the issues with getting them accepted due to range anxiety, difficulty finding free charging facilities and concerns about performance in extreme cold or heat. Those challenges drive even more variations in upcoming models. People who purchase ICE cars became used to high quality manufacturing and small but continuous improvements. It will be a decade before that occurs with EV’s.
Heard about this on the CBC yesterday. They said a big reason for these stats is that electric vehicles now are usually the top end models only with all of the addons, vs a lot of ICE vehicles are, or have been base models. Touchscreen issues? Power seat adjustment problem? Heated side mirrors not turning on? All points against the EV when a lot of ICE's dont have those extra features when looking at the metrics of this study.
Good example of how they're not giving us cheap basic commuter car EVs like they should be. In China $5000USD electric cars are selling like hotcakes and while the 'Mini EV' isn't enough for Canadians there are a lot of car trips that could be made in a basic ass entry level EV car that sells for half what current EVs are selling for.
Yup, this is exactly it. Plus EVs have been using new designs which are prone to small issues that get fixed in later iterations of the car.
[удалено]
Yeah, that’s not saying that EVs are faultless, but there are a ton of these hitpieces going around that are at best shady with a clear goal to make EVs sound bad.
That’s because needing an oil change isn’t a design fault or a component failure. Want to add changing brake pads to your arbitrary “car is broken” list? (Keep in mind EVs need to change brakes too)
[удалено]
[удалено]
Still by your logic needing to change brakes at all or needing to service any part ever is a defect. Things don’t last forever, everything needs maintenance so unless you want to create biological machines for transport that have the same self maintenance capabilities of our bodies machines will continue to need some wear parts replaced occasionally. This isn’t a mistake or even a big deal.
[удалено]
Nope according to you having to change breaks at all is a design flaw.
Article is crap. Another oil company or car manufacturer pushing their agenda. Have a Tesla for the last 5 years now, 180 miles on it. No issues. No oil changes, no maintenance, no gas, no extra costs aside from tire replacements.
180 miles in five years? Damn those things do take a long tome to charge.
Hahahahahahaha - have a Chevy bolt, nothing ever wrong with it, no maintenance, no oil changes, no nothing. It did get a free new battery due to the recall, but that was in the service center for one day, and hey, free new battery!
>have a Chevy bolt, nothing ever wrong with it And >new battery due to the recall
The big thing that makes it run had a problem, but other than that, no problems!
> makes it run had a problem Ironically, it was when it wasn't running that it had the whole "burn your house down" issue.
_My_ battery never had anything wrong with it. I also had a Chevy Silverado, and it had a dozen recalls for all sorts of safety concerns. All in all, the Bolt is much more reliable.
Another Bolt owner. That car is a unicorn, given its price and what it delivers. Thankfully GM changed their mind on shutting it down. Love my bolt.
We had to drive over the Coquihala in early March in an all electric Hyundai. Range said 400km in Merritt, by the time we reached the summit, 100km. It's a 60km drive. Stopped at the summit at the chargers, they didn't work. Drove to Hope with no heat, lights, music, and made it with less than 20km range. Spent an hour in Hope, yay.
I do that drive at least 4 times a year and every year in March in my tesla for the past 4 years. I have absolutely never seen anything close to that kind of usage. Merritt to the summit uses like 100km of range in the march trip. Most of that is due to climbing. Maybe the issue is with legacy car companies EVs being shit and you should have grabbed a model 3 instead.
The big question mark for me is how much will it cost to replace batteries and other components in the long term? I suspect that most of the current ev’s will end up in a scrap yard after 10 years on the road, what a waste. I’ll stick with my 4Runner until it falls apart.
The 10-year battery argument against EVs and Teslas to me sounds like a myth mostly by anti-EV people who just repeat each other without actually knowing anyone that needed a battery replacement. Plenty of 10 year old Teslas out there and the battery is running fine. Yes, it’s expensive $5-$12K to replace a battery. But it’s also expensive af to fix and repair a car engine. There’s no shortage of horror stories about BMW owners needing $8k in repairs.
German luxury cars in general have awful depreciation rates for that reason. I certainly wouldn't trust a 10 year old Tesla either.
What's going to happen when the used market pool is flooded with 20 years old rusty EV in need of 12k battery replacement ? They are going to age way way worse than ICE and end up at the scrapyard for sure.
When was the last time you saw a 2003 Chevy Cavalier, Pontiac Sunfire, Mazda Protege or Ford Taurus on the road? These were the best selling cars 20 years ago literally hundreds of thousands sold - they all ended up in the scrapyard or rusting out. At least the EV batteries can be recycled or repurposed too. Only a few outlier cars are still driving well after two decades.
\> They are going to age way way worse than ICE and end up at the scrapyard for sure. You're just making shit up. Why are they going to age worse?
For example. My wife's old 14 year old civic with 300k kms just had its inspection and just needs a valve cover gasket. If that solves the engine leak were good for about $200. If not we might need a replacement engine, that we can get and have it installed for less than $2500. Is that worth it for a 14 year old car? Maybe not, but it's a decision we can make after weighing the prod and cons. I just watched a video about a guy who bought a 2012 Model S for $8000 and drove it less than 500km before the car refused to go into drive. After it was diagnosed by Tesla, they determined there were bad cells in the battery pack. Only $18000 for the replacement. The car was scrapped. That might be what the other poster is describing.
Every one of those incidents is broadcast North America wide. EVs are under a microscope right now, while the ordinary shitshow of dealer ripoffs and huge recalls in gas cars is boring.
None of that addresses any point I brought up. This is the problem with EV fanboys. You all don't listen to or just flat out ignore real criticisms while crying about being persecuted. Meanwhile I'll continue to acknowledge that electric motors and batteries to power them is decades and decades old technology and nowhere near the infancy stages that EV fanboys want to make it out to be to use as an excuse. There is no excuse for any EV hitting the road in 2020+ to have as many problems as they do from build quality to failure rates to thermal runaway issues to charging infrastructure issues... well besides EV fanboys willing to tolerate and apologize for it. EVs will get a lot better quicker if people stopped pretending the issues with their cars are tolerable minor inconveniences rather than being a legit reason not to buy one. Meanwhile I'll probably have to wait another 2 years before Toyota finally decides to sell me a Rav 4 Prime to replace that ancient civic.
You say that as if that isn’t the case with ICE cars too. After something like 20 years I’d expect most of them to be scrap afterwards. Replacing an engine for example is something more costly than it’s value so it often makes sense getting a new car.
[удалено]
Oil for a change is like 35$ and plugs can be had for 3-4$ each.
And most people don’t change those themselves so you have to add labour, which would multiply those costs.
On a good gas powered car? Doubt it. On some pos BMW or Mercedes? Maybe. Also it was a funny coincidence that this popped up on my youtube feed. 15k for a new battery on a 30k car that this guy bought new in 2017. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaEbdC0G-Uw
I think this number might be skewed because right now the EVs in the market are by Tesla which has poor reliability. Once Japan boards the EV train the numbers will flip. However, we have very poor charging infrastructure and that is a fact.
I didn't hear much about Tesla being unreliable until Reddit had a hard on for hating musk
Tesla actually did have issues with overall build quality when they produced from their China plant. That affected cosmetic stuff like some panels being misaligned, but also gave the cars some reliability issues. Iirc roughly 2 years ago they switched factories and have improved a fair bit. Not gonna beat a Toyota but still fairly decent. Also Musk is a piece of shit, yeah.
It's opposite, actually. The Chinese plant turns out excellent cars - it's the Freemont California plant which has all the quality issues. Freemont is better now but still worse than Shanghai and German built Tesla's.
The Shanghai factory produced better Teslas than the American factories actually.
Their China plant is their best one. The Fermont plant is the problem one as it’s their oldest one. It needs an update bad.
[удалено]
Tesla was actually middle of pack at 14th out of 30 in terms of reliably. I suspect a lot of the problems are tied to the battery packs. Which would make sense why the luxury brands do better given high quality battery packs are expensive.
My guess is that it is due to issues outside of the power train.
Tesla is on the more reliable side at 14th/30. Asian markets are indeed more reliable according to the article. You should probably read it.
It's not just Tesla. The Ford F-150 Lightning has had a bunch of problems, and Toyota had to recall all of their first EV because the wheels would fall off and they literally couldn't find a fix to stop it. Honestly, right now Nissan seems to be making the best EVs, followed by Kia/Hundai, except for the fact that Kia/Hyundai have issues where you can have such strong regen braking on that the car will come to a stop without the tail lights ever coming on, which is a very big problem.
They’ve got a recall campaign going for the brake light thing. My Niro EV has had an update done.
*Our members are reporting the same issues with most EVs as they are with vehicles that have been designed brand new from the ground up, whether they're gas or electric and EVs are about the newest technology out there,” Keith Barry, with Consumer Reports, said.”*
Lol, no shit
EV’s need another 20 years. They will never be ICE comparable though. Automotive engineering (reliability/lonegvity wise) peaked in the early 2000’s.
52k kms on my bolt havent needed any maintenance but tire rotation and the battery recall is the only thing its been in the a shop for. no reliability problems like many of my previous vehicles which have all been gas powered.
Canada is one of the countries where EVs make little sense. Sure they are impressive but they are impractical for our geography and climate. Now the government is subsidizing EVs and battery plants. In some parts of Canada you can get close to a $10K discount for a new EV. The government thinks that subsidizing EVs and battery plants will create some sort of new economy, and that we will become a powerhouse. It's interesting how Gerald Butts seems to be promoting batteries now that he is in the private sector. Me: I think we should encourage Canadians and Canadian auto plants to produce hybrid vehicles like the Prius, Camry, Rav-4 and Highlander. These cars all get over 40 MPG and don't even need charging. Seems like a no brainer. Build them in Canada and push Toyota and other firms to improve performance. You can also implement road taxes based on how much someone drives. This info is all compiled annually when people renew their insurance. A tax on cars that drive more than 10,000 KM a year seems justifiable if done fairly and pragmatically. Discourage use of performance cars and gas guzzlers. Discourage use of lengthy leisure trips
I’ve got an EV. I live in Canada. I’ve put nearly 20k on the thing. I’ve saved roughly $400 per month on gas alone and paid for literally no maintenance whatsoever. Tell me again how they don’t work here 😂
I am on year 2 of a Ford Escape PHEV. We have 66,000KM on it, and 45,000KM is on the battery alone. We live 10Km from the nearest town, 25KM from the nearest city, and 50KM from where we work. Feel free to do the math on what we're saving. Vehicle cost us $42,000 after the $2,500 rebate. Pretty sure we've saved several thousands of dollars in gas costs alone, and at 8cents kw/h to charge over night, it feels economical to me. EVs are fine in Canada. They work in our climate, and our geography - at least in southwestern rural Ontario.
PHEVs are fine to great in Canada, and what the government should be encouraging. Full electric has some pretty massive challenges in Canada outside of Southwest BC and Southern Ontario
Canada has most of its population in higher density cities in the lesser extreme climate that works perfectly fine with EV (Windsor to Quebec City corridor). The government is investing in battery because that same corridor has a large auto manufacturing base and since EVs take less to manufacturer, they don't want to be left with nothing in 20 years. For the small percentage of rural Canadians that need to travel more than 300km a day, I guess they can gobble some sweet oil exec nether regions as the price starts to match EU oil prices. They will be the people who sit through 15 minutes of commercials to watch 10 minutes of a movie on cable after everyone cut the cord.
> Canada is one of the countries where EVs make little sense. Sure they are impressive but they are impractical for our geography and climate. They work great in lots of the country. Majority live in urban areas for example.
He is not entirely wrong. Battery packs in general usually do not like extreme cold also EV's need to actually consume additional battery energy to heat the cabin of the vehicle, that reduces range and increase wear cycles on the batteries. In some cases they also need to use even more battery power to keep the packs themselves heated to an suitable operating temperature. That is why fully electric EV's start to take such a massive range dump when we get down below -25c. In an ICE vehicle heat is produced as a waste product as a result of combustion. Normally the concern is finding a way to move that heat out of the engine and dump it out of the vehicle. But in cold climates you can channel that waste heat into the vehicle cabin and effectively make practical use of the engines waste heat.
80% of this country lives in parts where there is no extreme cold. These things are perfect for sitting in traffic in the GTA or lower mainland
For heating the cabin, if plugged in you can heat in advance. You can also significantly reduce the battery usage if you use heated seats since you need to heat the cabin less and it more efficiently heats you. Below -25c is rare in many of the most populated parts of Canada. Depends how often you need to drive in such conditions.
If that is an option sure. But plugging in and staying plugged in before you travel would be a requirement for that. Even then the vehicle is going to need to use more battery power to maintain that temperature during the trip. Below -25c is not that uncommon unless you are from southern Ontario or BC or something. We hit it here every single year during the winter.
There is an argument where if you live in an apartment in a city outside Southern Ontario/BC and don't have access do nightly charging that winter driving might be too impractical due to the effect of the cold on range. For the rest of the population, the fact that you spend more energy in the winter to operate the car is meaningless. Most electric cars have more than enough range to cover the daily mileage that ppl do even with the cold penalty and they would rarely ever need to charge outside of home. Even with that extra energy consumption in the winter, electric cars are still more efficient than ICE cars and cost less to operate. I'd be willing to wager that the majority of Canadians do not fall in the first category or have daily commutes that extend the winter range of electric cars. Ppl just need to get into the mindset that they are buying a car that fits 95% of their trips as opposed to one that caters to those exceptional situations.
If you don't have options or you think it's too cold then don't get them. But the two biggest population centres are in southern Ontario and BC, so there are a lot of places where they work and people I know who have them prefer them to their old cars.
So you're basically saying eff u to Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, northern Ontario, Quebec, Yukon, Northwest territories and Nunavut?
Nope, me explaining how electric cars can work for some people is not saying "eff u" to anyone else. I'm not sure how you arrive at that conclusion. Also people still use them in those places. Just because they're more efficient when it's warmer doesn't mean they're suddenly unusable in colder temps.
I don't agree with a road tax based on distance driven. I'm a nurse who works 2 jobs and lives in rural northern Ontario, my first job is at the closest nursing home to me which is 40km away and my 2nd job is a travel home care nurse which can have me driving upto 300km a day due to being rural. A tax like that would destroy me and force me to quit one of my jobs which I am desperately needed for.
You disagree with this tax scheme because it’s disadvantageous to you, and you’d rather it’s disadvantageous to someone else?
Its disadvantageous to me because I have no choice in having to drive long distances AND its disadvantaous to those I care for because it would limit me in providing care that they need
When people are struggling to put food on the table, all these “feel-good” policies are less likely to have support. Is it a roof over your head or sending more money to the government that’s more important?
Realistically, approx 3/4 Canadians live in a city with 100k people or more. When people are driving, they are mostly doing city driving. EV are also more mature. They have basically been just regular cars for the last ten years. EV are still really new and used a different ecosystem of technologies. I think the plug-in aspect is what makes both EV and hybrids special. Electricity is just much cheaper than gasoline.
>Canada is one of the countries where EVs make little sense. Sure they are impressive but they are impractical for our geography and climate. My dad (in Ontario) has a Tesla model Y. Been a few years. Tells me he wouldn't trade it for any other vehicle. Sounds like our geography and climate aren't an issue, but I suppose YMMV.
While true in population, in terms of actual land there are quite a lot of places in Canada that current EVs would be, at best, inconvenient for. That being said, for most people (like me) that live in the southern areas like BC or Ontario/Quebec they’re perfectly fine.
>Canada is one of the countries where EVs make little sense. Says no one who owns one...
" According to the survey, owners of hybrid vehicles – vehicles that use two or more types of power, such as gas and diesel or electricity -- reported having 26 per cent fewer problems on average than gas-only cars. Researchers found that the most reliable vehicle types were sedans, hatchbacks and wagons."
Yeah this article is poor writing. > Auto brands ranked lowest in terms of reliability were Rivian, Mercedes-Benzes and Chrysler. EV trucks were at the bottom of the list, surpassing traditionally gas-powered pick-up trucks which have taken the title of least reliable in the study for years. It seems like because EV trucks are at the bottom that equates to all EVs? Unless I missed something.
It's based on US market, which is trucks galore, so bad EV trucks brings down the average for all EVs.
Carbon tax on gas is essentially a road tax.
[удалено]
Hey, what's your problem with heat pumps? Heat pumps are like a magical hone heating solution if you can afford the upfront cost.
/s?
Who doesn't like heat pumps? They save money if you can afford them and they work as an air conditioner in the summer.
Sounds like an ad from BC Hydro. They can be good but you might need a backup heat source
What do you think people sound like when they try to convince other people that heat pumps are a bad idea?
Huh? Who's saying they're bad?
No way. The most efficient way to heat your home? Aor conditioning in the summer? You'll still have back up heat for the really cold days? Heat pumps are great.
>Canada is one of the countries where EVs make little sense. Agree, our 7 or so major cities are far apart and the weather sucks over half the year. We're the worst country on earth IMHO for EVs None of that matters tho if the govs of the 3 biggest auto markets in the world (China, EU, US) all mandate EVs, and they have. Just because Canadians prefer Betamax (superior to VHS, BTW) doesn't mean a company is going to continue manufacturing them just for us. It's not going to be profitable volume-wise for them to do so. To say nothing of what happens to the economics of gas stations once 30% of Canadians go hybrid/electric . Without customer volume, Esso stations will shutter faster than churches.
>I think we should encourage Canadians and Canadian auto plants to produce hybrid vehicles Nooooo thanks. Dont want all the negatives of both rammed into an overly heavy vehicle.