EEVblog #1337 - I Bought An Electric Car

[SilverSolder]

Typical government, well meaning but poorly thought through regulations bringing unintended consequences that outweigh the good they were meant to accomplish.

You are being generous; I think it is deliberate and very well thought out if only for protectionism.  The good the CAFE rules are meant to accomplish is rent seeking at the expense of economics.

Yeah, can't have $2,000 cars imported from other parts of the world when we the US average price for a new car is $38,723 (as of September 2020)...   So let's introduce a whole bunch of hoops that they have to jump through to justify it!

[james_s]

Yeah, can't have $2,000 cars imported from other parts of the world when we the US average price for a new car is $38,723 (as of September 2020)...   So let's introduce a whole bunch of hoops that they have to jump through to justify it!

You can't import those cars because people who claim to know what's best for you will insist that they are unsafe and they don't want you to get hurt. In reality I think some people just have an innate need to be in control, some people just love rules and regulations, just find out who is in charge of the HOA at any condo or fancy housing development and you'll find exactly that sort of person.

[Monkeh]

Yeah, can't have $2,000 cars imported from other parts of the world when we the US average price for a new car is $38,723 (as of September 2020)...   So let's introduce a whole bunch of hoops that they have to jump through to justify it!

You can't import those cars because people who claim to know what's best for you will insist that they are unsafe and they don't want you to get hurt. In reality I think some people just have an innate need to be in control, some people just love rules and regulations, just find out who is in charge of the HOA at any condo or fancy housing development and you'll find exactly that sort of person.

If you've never seen the way cheap cars from 'developing countries' fold up in collisions, especially the sort your lot is obsessed with at 4-way junctions, you might want to go do some research.

That said, your cars are absurdly expensive and inefficient.

[NiHaoMike]

By that logic, might as well also ban motorcycles which are even less safe.

[SilverSolder]

Yeah, can't have $2,000 cars imported from other parts of the world when we the US average price for a new car is $38,723 (as of September 2020)...   So let's introduce a whole bunch of hoops that they have to jump through to justify it!

You can't import those cars because people who claim to know what's best for you will insist that they are unsafe and they don't want you to get hurt. In reality I think some people just have an innate need to be in control, some people just love rules and regulations, just find out who is in charge of the HOA at any condo or fancy housing development and you'll find exactly that sort of person.

If you've never seen the way cheap cars from 'developing countries' fold up in collisions, especially the sort your lot is obsessed with at 4-way junctions, you might want to go do some research.

That said, your cars are absurdly expensive and inefficient.

I visited the UK recently and rented a car, the fuel prices were CRAZY high (I think I paid $75 to fill up an average sized car) so you would have to be brave to drive a big car (many still did!).

American cars have shrunk over the last few decades.  It is hard to find what our ancestors would have called a "full sized" car nowadays...   Contrary to popular opinion, most people in urban America do not seem to choose big pick-ups or the biggest SUVs.  The most popular cars seem to be compact cross-over SUV sized or smaller...    Go out in the countryside, and the picture changes, obviously.  (It does in the UK too, it seems!)

[james_s]

By that logic, might as well also ban motorcycles which are even less safe.

That's my observation too. As long as motorcycles are available and accepted, then any safety argument is invalid. If I choose to drive a deathtrap that is my choice, you are free to choose not to ride in it with me. If safety is a person's primary concern then there are plenty of cars on the market that cater to that desire, some people have different priorities and they should be able to make that choice and not have it made for them by people who believe they know better what's good for them than they do. If I can buy a motorcycle brand new, why can't I buy a lightweight compact car without all the safety bloat brand new? There are even some 3-wheeled cars to exploit that loophole, legally they are motorcycles, adding a 4th wheel would make them safer but then they would classify as cars and couldn't be sold.

That said, several years ago I was in a serious accident in the 1987 Volvo 740 I was driving at the time. I got creamed by a double trailer fuel tanker truck that slammed into the car behind me at 60 mph while I was stopped in traffic on the freeway. The Volvo was totaled but I walked away without so much as a scratch or bruise. In its day the Volvo was legendary for its safety and in my very real world experience it lived up to that reputation fully, the crumple zones and safety cage performed exactly as designed. I bought another one as soon as I could locate it, there may be safer cars on the road today but I don't care, this one is safe enough for me and I love everything about it.

[Monkeh]

By that logic, might as well also ban motorcycles which are even less safe.

That's my observation too. As long as motorcycles are available and accepted, then any safety argument is invalid. If I choose to drive a deathtrap that is my choice, you are free to choose not to ride in it with me. If safety is a person's primary concern then there are plenty of cars on the market that cater to that desire, some people have different priorities and they should be able to make that choice and not have it made for them by people who believe they know better what's good for them than they do. If I can buy a motorcycle brand new, why can't I buy a lightweight compact car without all the safety bloat brand new? There are even some 3-wheeled cars to exploit that loophole, legally they are motorcycles, adding a 4th wheel would make them safer but then they would classify as cars and couldn't be sold.

And you genuinely believe the average company, let alone car manufacturer, would bother to make vehicles to high standards of safety if they could make a bigger profit selling only flimsy trash?

I have a 4TB USB stick to sell you. For $15.

[timelessbeing]

usually at the most inopportune time, messing with a hose and stinky liquid, filling up and then going on to where I'm going...

You sound like a night-time infommercial for useless gadgets with people acting like just got a frontal lobotomy.

[timelessbeing]

"I worked with a technology company in southeast Michigan about 10 years ago, constructing lithium-ion test cells for the major automotive companies.  The company provided and sold battery technology to numerous automotive companies.  One thing I learned is the you can not extinguish a lithium-ion battery fire. But technology might have changed over the last ten years or so. I had the local fire chief into the plant to educate them on this fact.  You can only let it burn itself out.  With the battery test cells, we controlled the fire and exited the heat, smoke and flame through the roof with fire/heat proof fans and fire rated construction.  I was quoted, at this point in time, that one cell out of about 16,000 would or could be prone to failure and fire.  Depending on the number used in vehicles, models varied, but could fail. Most engineers I got to know were much more positive about fuel cell technology and considered batteries just temporary until fuel cells were better developed. "

-Stephen Hall

[james_s]

You sound like a night-time infommercial for useless gadgets with people acting like just got a frontal lobotomy.

If that's a joke I don't get it, you'll have to explain. I hate the smell of gasoline, when I pull into a gas station I can smell the stink before I even get out of my car. More often than not my hands smell like the stuff when I leave. I love my car but I'd love to not have to deal with gas.

[timelessbeing]

No thanks!

[timelessbeing]

I hate the smell of gasoline, when I pull into a gas station I can smell the stink before I even get out of my car. More often than not my hands smell like the stuff when I leave. I love my car but I'd love to not have to deal with gas.

I know! Can you believe people actually POUR it out of containers into lawnmowers and stuff. So icky!
Sometimes when I change my BBQ tank some of the propane gets out and I can SMELL IT! I thought I was gonna DIE.

 

[james_s]

I hate the smell of gasoline, when I pull into a gas station I can smell the stink before I even get out of my car. More often than not my hands smell like the stuff when I leave. I love my car but I'd love to not have to deal with gas.

I know! Can you believe people actually POUR it out of containers into lawnmowers and stuff. So icky!
Sometimes when I change my BBQ tank some of the propane gets out and I can SMELL IT! I thought I was gonna DIE.

 

Haven't done that in years, I have an electric lawnmower. I tolerate gasoline because there is no better alternative for my little boat or my generator but I hate the stuff. Propane doesn't bother me, I don't like the smell but it doesn't give me a headache and it dissipates quickly.

Are you done being a dick yet? Are you satisfied that you have demonstrated your vast superiority in that the smell doesn't bother you? What an idiot.

[james_s]

No thanks!

I'd post an article about a house burning down due to a gasoline fire in the garage but it happens so often that it doesn't even make the news. If you're worried about charging a car burning down your house but you aren't worried about flammable liquids in your home starting a fire then you utterly fail at calculating risk. Cars catch fire all the time, houses catch fire all the time. An EV causing a house fire is such a rare event that it makes the news. What is your point?

[Monkeh]

Should see the number of candles which burn houses down. The things are terrifying, cold-blooded murderers.

[nctnico]

I hate the smell of gasoline, when I pull into a gas station I can smell the stink before I even get out of my car. More often than not my hands smell like the stuff when I leave.

Use a disposable glove. Over here almost every gas station offers those for free right at the pump. Beats dealing with a cable drenched in dog sh!t and cat wee.

[james_s]

I hate the smell of gasoline, when I pull into a gas station I can smell the stink before I even get out of my car. More often than not my hands smell like the stuff when I leave.

Use a disposable glove. Over here almost every gas station offers those for free right at the pump. Beats dealing with a cable drenched in dog sh!t and cat wee.

More trouble than it's worth, I've never seen gloves provided at a station here and would have to carry my own. I just deal with it like I deal with going to the dentist or doing the dishes, it's a chore I don't like doing but has to get done and like I said before, I like my car and don't want to replace it. It's only if I were already planning to buy a modern car anyway that I'd go electric but for how little I drive and how much I hate the styling of modern carts I don't see that happening. I don't have a dog and my cats are indoor only, I use hoses and cords outside all the time and don't remember the last time I had to deal with bodily fluids. Complete non issue.

[NiHaoMike]

Perhaps a solution to not being able to charge at the parking spot is to make the battery removable and give it its own set of wheels and motor? It could be of similar size to a wheelchair so that it can make use of paths designed for wheelchairs. Probably have to split the pack into multiple modules for particularly long range.

And you genuinely believe the average company, let alone car manufacturer, would bother to make vehicles to high standards of safety if they could make a bigger profit selling only flimsy trash?

Rather than ban them, just require them to show the poor crash test scores. I wonder if insurance companies charge motorcycle riders a lot more for personal injury coverage as compared to car drivers. That could also happen with unsafe cars making them not so economical in the long run.

I'd post an article about a house burning down due to a gasoline fire in the garage but it happens so often that it doesn't even make the news. If you're worried about charging a car burning down your house but you aren't worried about flammable liquids in your home starting a fire then you utterly fail at calculating risk. Cars catch fire all the time, houses catch fire all the time. An EV causing a house fire is such a rare event that it makes the news. What is your point?

I think the solution is to install fire sprinklers in the garage, cheap insurance even for gasoline cars. Anyone remember when Ford had a problem with cars randomly catching on fire when parked because of bad wiring?

[james_s]

Rather than ban them, just require them to show the poor crash test scores. I wonder if insurance companies charge motorcycle riders a lot more for personal injury coverage as compared to car drivers. That could also happen with unsafe cars making them not so economical in the long run.

They've had crash testing and crash safety scores for decades, both the government and the insurance companies and the results are publicized, widely available and manufactures that score well brag about their ratings. Volvo built their entire reputation on building safe cars and they were very successful at it. They were decades ahead in the 1960s, already offering 3 point seatbelts front and rear, crumple zones, steel safety cage, side impact protection, padded interior parts, all many years before anyone was required to provide these things. They have always been quite expensive cars and yet they were very popular, my area was crawling with them in the 70s-90s before they tried to become a luxury brand and handed nearly their whole market to Subaru. Not everybody is as stupid and helpless as a few people here seem to think they are, not all of us need to be treated like a small child and have these choices made for us by the nanny state. The free market works, government regulations largely make things worse, not better. They take away choice and stifle innovation. Maybe some people would prefer to live in a world where the government controls every aspect of their lives and makes all of the important decisions for them but I do not, to me that is the description of a dystopian hell. I HATE regulation, I HATE rules, I HATE being told what to do, and I will aggressively push back against anybody who tries to control me.

[nctnico]

Perhaps a solution to not being able to charge at the parking spot is to make the battery removable and give it its own set of wheels and motor? It could be of similar size to a wheelchair so that it can make use of paths designed for wheelchairs. Probably have to split the pack into multiple modules for particularly long range.

And you genuinely believe the average company, let alone car manufacturer, would bother to make vehicles to high standards of safety if they could make a bigger profit selling only flimsy trash?

Rather than ban them, just require them to show the poor crash test scores. I wonder if insurance companies charge motorcycle riders a lot more for personal injury coverage as compared to car drivers. That could also happen with unsafe cars making them not so economical in the long run.

That doesn't work because vehicle safety is not only about protecting the people inside but also protecting pedestrians and cyclists. There is no way around that other than enforcing it by regulations. People won't buy cars which are better at protecting pedestrians because people are too short sighted to recognize that it actually is an improvement.

The free market works, government regulations largely make things worse, not better. They take away choice and stifle innovation. Maybe some people would prefer to live in a world where the government controls every aspect of their lives and makes all of the important decisions for them but I do not, to me that is the description of a dystopian hell. I HATE regulation, I HATE rules, I HATE being told what to do, and I will aggressively push back against anybody who tries to control me.

Well, the food you eat and products you use are safe because of regulations. Without regulations you'd die at an age where your life span is most beneficial to the big corporations. Do you really want to live in a world where every aspect of your life is controlled by companies that want to suck every hard earned penny from you? That is your beloved 'free market'. I wouldn't want that because that is worse than your dystopian hell!

[David Hess]

Well, the food you eat and products you use are safe because of regulations. Without regulations you'd die at an age where your life span is most beneficial to the big corporations. Do you really want to live in a world where every aspect of your life is controlled by companies that want to suck every hard earned penny from you? That is your beloved 'free market'. I wouldn't want that because that is worse than your dystopian hell!

You are presenting a false dilemma between government control and corporate control.

Through regulatory capture, those big corporations determine the regulations anyway, except now they are enforced through the monopoly power of government violence.  How was that an improvement over the situation you describe?

A few posts ago I pointed out how exactly what you describe made vehicles less fuel efficient (and more expensive) in the US.  Was that the desired outcome to protect people from corporations?

[james_s]

Well, the food you eat and products you use are safe because of regulations. Without regulations you'd die at an age where your life span is most beneficial to the big corporations. Do you really want to live in a world where every aspect of your life is controlled by companies that want to suck every hard earned penny from you? That is your beloved 'free market'. I wouldn't want that because that is worse than your dystopian hell!

I don't actually want NO regulations, but there is a balance, and we are far past that balance point in my opinion. The fact that regulations make our food safe to eat doesn't mean that more regulations are better. The products we use being "safe" that depends, all too often I have found safety features like interlocks and guards that get in the way to be annoying, I typically remove/defeat that stuff of course if it gets in my way, which at least I'm able to do. If you want a safety feature that makes a product harder to use or less effective then buy one that offers that feature, don't require them all to come with it. My life is not controlled by the corporations, the corporations are controlled by me, and by every other consumer. I am not obligated to give them my money, they must earn it by offering a product that I'm willing to purchase, and I do that less and less all the time. These days I mostly seek out older stuff and buy used or build it myself. What happened to personal responsibility? People used to accept that certain things were dangerous and exercised caution when using them, now there is this bizarre attitude where people somehow expect someone or something else to protect them from every possible source of harm. If they do something stupid and hurt themselves it's someone else's fault. Somebody should have told them that fire is hot, that power tools can cause bodily harm, that a lightweight sports car may not offer much protection in a crash, that some things should be put away where children can't access them. That is frankly very strange to me, I really don't understand at all why anyone would expect someone or something else to protect them from any possible source of harm how how a person could possibly believe that taking away choices for their own good is a positive thing. I can choose for myself, why can't you or anyone else?

[nctnico]

Well, the food you eat and products you use are safe because of regulations. Without regulations you'd die at an age where your life span is most beneficial to the big corporations. Do you really want to live in a world where every aspect of your life is controlled by companies that want to suck every hard earned penny from you? That is your beloved 'free market'. I wouldn't want that because that is worse than your dystopian hell!

You are presenting a false dilemma between government control and corporate control.

Through regulatory capture, those big corporations determine the regulations anyway, except now they are enforced through the monopoly power of government violence.  How was that an improvement over the situation you describe?

Well, some people live in countries where politicians are elected by the people and take a stance against large companies gaining too much control.

[David Hess]

Well, some people live in countries where politicians are elected by the people and take a stance against large companies gaining too much control.

Our politicians are elected by the people; they are just selected ahead of time for us.

How many politicians do you need to bribe to control the government?  Both of them.

[james_s]

That doesn't work because vehicle safety is not only about protecting the people inside but also protecting pedestrians and cyclists. There is no way around that other than enforcing it by regulations. People won't buy cars which are better at protecting pedestrians because people are too short sighted to recognize that it actually is an improvement.

They don't recognize it as an improvement because it is not an improvement. Frankly I don't give a damn about protecting pedestrians and cyclists in terms of car design. The way to protect them is to make cars that have good visibility, an area where the vast majority of modern cars fail miserably, and to avoid distracting gadgets, another area where modern cars fail miserably, and generally smaller and lighter cars, yet another area where modern cars fail miserably. Beyond that it is the responsibility of the driver to watch where they are going and the responsibility of the pedestrians and cyclists to be aware of their surroundings and not step out into traffic. I'm not going to drive a blob mobile just to avoid injuring the pedestrian I shouldn't hit in the first place and as with the occupant safety argument, this one is invalid at least in the USA where a growing majority of cars are actually gigantic trucks. Pedestrian safety is yet another useless automotive regulation I would eliminate given the chance.