Jump to content

Electric Cars Will Beat Older Cars on Cost Surprisingly Soon, Analysis Says


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, akirby said:

 

Geez, nobody said that hasn’t happened in the past or that it will never happen again.   The question is how much of a premium are they willing to pay?  Big difference between a $3K premium and a $20K premium.

Agreed. IMO, GM screwed up with the Bolt and Volt by not amortizing the engineering across enough years and total volumes.  Those price tags were not reflective of just increased manufacturing cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, J-150 said:

Agreed. IMO, GM screwed up with the Bolt and Volt by not amortizing the engineering across enough years and total volumes.  Those price tags were not reflective of just increased manufacturing cost.

That's part of it but the battery cost is also a big difference when you're talking about a 200-300 mile range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even Tesla is avoiding building the $35K version of the Model 3 as it hurts profitablity too much, Musk saying as much.

So if the pin up company for mass production EVs is struggling with costs, you can bet this is going to take a while..

and battery companies anchoring to lithium tech doesn't help the cause either, much better battery chemistry is emerging but the incumbents want to juice Lithium Ion for all its worth. We need another player to come in and force battery development to advance and kill the price of batteries..then you'll see much broader uptake of BEVs.

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

But there are more factors then just that-Diesel has lost any cost advantage over gas engine due to fuel cost, upfront cost and additional maintenance costs.

I was poking around with pricing-The Bolt starts at 40K and a Cruze starts at 23K..to get the same options, a Cruze would be 26K. 
The federal tax credit helps close the gap in pricing, but your still paying $9K more for a Bolt, which is a smaller car then the Cruze.

https://www.truedelta.com/Chevrolet-Bolt-EV-vs-Chevrolet-Cruze-price-comparison,1369-1008,2018&pc=6583229&price_feature=3&personal_feature=

The other issue, is that according to Fuel Economy.gov, your only saving $550 a year or so going electric vs gas
https://fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=39786&id=39143

So that extra $9K up front can pay for roughly 7-8 years worth of gas for the Cruze...

 

And this is only part of the analysis.  How much do people pay for luxury options which basically have a zero ROI?  What is it worth to someone to never have to go to a gas station and to be able to simply charge every night in your garage?  Some people believe in climate change and are willing to pay extra to reduce their carbon footprint.  Some people will pay for the extra performance of an electric vehicle- Tesla has shown that and that is the emphasis Ford is making with the new Lincoln Aviator PHEV.  I have solar and it is a great ROI.  But then I just added a heat pump water heater with a long "payback" just because I wanted to use less natural gas.  To reach the masses the price is going to have to come down - but electric is where it is all headed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, msm859 said:

And this is only part of the analysis.  How much do people pay for luxury options which basically have a zero ROI?  What is it worth to someone to never have to go to a gas station and to be able to simply charge every night in your garage?  Some people believe in climate change and are willing to pay extra to reduce their carbon footprint.  Some people will pay for the extra performance of an electric vehicle- Tesla has shown that and that is the emphasis Ford is making with the new Lincoln Aviator PHEV.  I have solar and it is a great ROI.  But then I just added a heat pump water heater with a long "payback" just because I wanted to use less natural gas.  To reach the masses the price is going to have to come down - but electric is where it is all headed.

That is the problem-what your talking about makes sense as a luxury or high end vehicle-what it doesn't make sense is as value play for the sub $30-40K market.  The Average cost of a new car is roughly $32K or so. 

If you had only $40K to spend, would you rather "suffer" with a subcompact car like the Bolt (which wouldn't be useful as a primary car in most cases) or buy a Cruise and have a shit ton of $$$ for gas?

If your spending $50K+ on a Tesla 3, I don't think your worrying too much about "value" for your dollar-you get what your talking about. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/23/2019 at 7:47 AM, akirby said:

Diesel truck buyers pay a premium for long term durability and power, not lower fuel costs.

In a manner of speaking, they are paying the diesel premium for MPG. For a large percentage of 3/4- and 1-ton drivers, a gasser would haul the same load, but the diesel's economy drops far less under load.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SoonerLS said:

In a manner of speaking, they are paying the diesel premium for MPG. For a large percentage of 3/4- and 1-ton drivers, a gasser would haul the same load, but the diesel's economy drops far less under load.

That's probably true but you are also getting twice the power with the 6.7L diesel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/23/2019 at 8:47 AM, akirby said:

With gasoline engines the fuel cost is the same so it's easier to make up the difference in fuel costs over a few years of ownership.  And the cost premium is usually small.

With diesels the upfront cost is a lot higher AND fuel is more expensive making it much more difficult to justify based solely on costs especially after the diesel software scandals have lowered fuel economy ratings to where they should have been all along.

Diesel truck buyers pay a premium for long term durability and power, not lower fuel costs.

When I bought my F-250, everyone (including the dealers) was pushing the diesel. I figured that the V-10 would suffice for my loads (8,000 lb car trailer) and I wouldn't have to deal with the worry of driving a diesel 4 miles round trip to work. I also wouldn't have to plug my truck in during cold weather. Add to that, 6 qts of Mobil 1 & an 820S filter are way cheaper than 15 qts of Rotella and a 2016 Oil filter. Then add in the $58 fuel filter every 10k miles vs a $7 fuel filter every 30k miles.

 

In the end, based on fuel prices in 2004 and servicing differences, it would have taken me 210,000 miles to break even on the cost of ownership with the diesel. This research was done before the woes of the 6.0L were known.

 

I have 145,000 on my truck and would absolutely do the same again.

Edited by 351cid
fix spelling errors
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SoonerLS said:

In a manner of speaking, they are paying the diesel premium for MPG. For a large percentage of 3/4- and 1-ton drivers, a gasser would haul the same load, but the diesel's economy drops far less under load.

Sort of, but the 40% extra fuel cost isn't recovered by the 20-30% increase in fuel economy.

1 hour ago, akirby said:

That's probably true but you are also getting twice the power with the 6.7L diesel.

It's not so much the power as it is the gosh durn torque! :)

Seriously, though, if you tow very heavy very far, the diesel is just a much more relaxed tow than the gasser.  Fuel economy be damned, it's just so relaxing to let the diesel do it's job and cruise up and down hills without needing to do anything but steer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

Sort of, but the 40% extra fuel cost isn't recovered by the 20-30% increase in fuel economy.

Only 40%? Back in December, I was seeing gas prices as low as $1.60-ish in the Lubbock area (I think it was Lubbock; I've been all over Texas since Thanksgiving), while diesel was still hovering around $3/gal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SoonerLS said:

Only 40%? Back in December, I was seeing gas prices as low as $1.60-ish in the Lubbock area (I think it was Lubbock; I've been all over Texas since Thanksgiving), while diesel was still hovering around $3/gal.

Right now it's $1.95 regular, $2.65 diesel here, so about 35% higher for diesel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

It's miniscule in the grand scheme of things.  In 15k miles, I've spent less than $50 for DEF in my SD.  It's really a non-issue.

If the engine and system are functioning properly, DEF usage is about 2% of fuel usage. If you can find DEF at the pump, it's even less expensive. Most major truckstops sell it for $2.79-2.88 per gallon. One truck stop near me has DEF for $1.79.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 351cid said:

If the engine and system are functioning properly, DEF usage is about 2% of fuel usage. If you can find DEF at the pump, it's even less expensive. Most major truckstops sell it for $2.79-2.88 per gallon. One truck stop near me has DEF for $1.79.

I buy it at Wally World in the 2.5 gallon jug, and I think it's about $7 or so.  I think I've dumped 6 in my truck, so that calculates out about right.  I did buy the Ford nozzle to put on the jugs to keep it from overflowing and dumping that $hit pi$$ down the side of my truck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...