Re: Electric cars and liberals’ refusal to accept science
 

"People comparing $40k BWMs to a $40k Chevy Cruze have got to be kidding."

Not nearly as much as comparing a Cruze to a Volt. It’s akin to comparing a 73 VW bug to a 73 Porsche 911.

Re: Electric cars and liberals’ refusal to accept science
 

OK lets try it this way a 1984 Chevrolet Cavalier to a 1984 Cadillac Cimarron.

The Cavalier started at $6200 and average nicely optioned model was around $8,500-$9,000

The Cadillac Cimarron Started at 12,615 and nicely optioned you were looking at $17,000.

Same car but $8,500 more because it had Cadillac badges on it.

Same applies to the Cruze vs Volt argument. No one with any common sense is going spend $17,500 (including $7,500 rebate/ credit) more for pretty much the same car with a big battery. I'm using a $20K for a loaded Cruze against the $45,000 the dealers around me are charging for a loaded Volt.

Even if you never bought gas for the Volt it would take you almost nine years to pay off the difference. Throw in a six tanks of gas each year for the volt and finance charges and you're looking at a minimum of a ten year payback. :(

The problem is, the cost spread can't be more than $10K to justify the additional cost of the Volt over the Cruze. Like Wayne and the rest of us have said the Volt needs to be priced around $32,000 to compete with a standard gasoline engined car.

Re: Electric cars and liberals’ refusal to accept science
 

+1

True - the price is not competitive yet.

Re: Electric cars and liberals’ refusal to accept science
 

Would you consider a Prius plug-in at $40k?, it does get good economy once the battery is empty.

Re: Electric cars and liberals’ refusal to accept science
 

With that commute, it will ALWAYS be a pipe dream for you. It will be decades (if ever) before an electric vehicle will make sense for you. You should drive an efficient diesel or hybrid and call it good.

But you are also not representative. For people with shorter commutes (but long enough that the difference in energy consumption is still fairly large), EVs may make sense -- and five years from now, they will make sense for a lot more people.

Re: Electric cars and liberals’ refusal to accept science
 

Disingenious how you say EVs and hybrids have been around for a century or more - therefore they are a mature tech.

How many man-hours over the past century have been put into perfecting the ICE vs. EVs and hybrids? To say it's weighted towards the ICE is an understatement. ;)

Re: Electric cars and liberals’ refusal to accept science
 

Shallow (and infrequent) depth of discharge.

Re: Electric cars and liberals’ refusal to accept science
 

My laptop battery is handy for occasional use but the most use it gets is when the power cord comes out.

It's also useful for registering a power outage with the electric company. We have the modem and router on a UPS. I need to replace the battery on that.

Re: Electric cars and liberals’ refusal to accept science
 

Disingenuous? Not quite. If the tech had ever proven even remotely viable, the market would have beaten a path to its door. Even now the government has to give out our tax money to rich hippies to get them to buy one.

And don't think I'm opining from the position of a hater. This is a picture of the EV we had in 1978. I wish they were better, but there is no viable market.



For reference, that monster had about a 20 mile range at 40 mph. So, you can extrapolate where we're headed and when.

Re: Electric cars and liberals’ refusal to accept science
 

I don't disagree with any of this.