I'd think the batteries being replaced would be a bit more straight forward than an engine. Even if they aren't particularly accessible.
Electric car owners and enthusiasts, prepare yourself for the problem in your future.
- Thread starter abby97
- Start date
I'd think the batteries being replaced would be a bit more straight forward than an engine. Even if they aren't particularly accessible.
My takeaway from that was don't buy a Ford. Especially an old shitty Ford Focus with immature technology.
Last edited:
Engines don’t typically fail at 60,000 miles unless they were severely neglected. Engines don’t cost $14,000 to replace. I looked online and found that Tesla batteries can cost as much as $20-22k to replace.
I’ve driven well over a million miles and have never once had to replace an engine. I had a 1999 Honda Civic that went 377,000 miles before the engine block cracked and I sold it to a junkyard for $400. I had a 2008 Chevy Impala that went 403,000 miles before a deer totaled the car. I’m currently driving a 2012 Sienna with 245,000 miles and the engine is just as strong as the day I drove it home from the dealership.
And that’s just my 3 most recent vehicles. I’ve owned multiple cars that went well over 100k miles and I’ve never had to replace an engine.
So while replacing a battery in an EV might be more straightforward than replacing an ICE, it sounds like the frequency and expense (for now) vastly exceeds engine replacement.
I had a 1997 Ford Explorer which had the engine catch on fire. While my wife was driving it. With our then baby in the backseat. This was in the early/mid 2000s and I don't think it even had 100,000 miles on it.
Range should be the bigger concern ... but become less of one as the charging infrastructure continues to further develop. The picture is very similar as it relates to battery replacement too ... once there are more refurbished batteries available, the prices will get driven down.
I got one of the earlier short-ranged Tesla Model 3s ... love the car. Where I live, electricity is relatively cheap ... particularly compared to fossil-fuels. The car price was comparable to that of a combustion-engine Subaru.
I have a bad lower-back ... so I need to take breaks while driving anyhow ... so charging the Tesla at super charger stations works like a charm. However, I can understand how folks who like to "power through trips" might find the added breaks a little annoying.
As others have mentioned, the understated big advantage of all-electric cars is the lack of need for maintenance. Pretty much the only thing you need to worry about is changing tires. My car makes such little use of its disk brakes that the only reason to pump the brakes is to prevent them from falling entirely into disuse. I would surmise that I won't need brakes changed for the entire life of the car.
For folks used to combustion engines, it might be odd to think that there is no need for any fluids other than windshield-wiper fluid.
As for your question about range - cold weather arguable has the greatest impact on range because the battery actually needs to be somewhat warm in order for the chemistry to supply the appropriate EMF. If you drive before the battery is adequately warm, then the regenerative braking doesn't work (as well) because the chemistry is rate-limited (by the cold-battery).
If it's hot out and you crank the AC ... then yes, you can bleed through range pretty fast that way too. However, in that context, you don't have to "pay the overhead" for a warm battery. Of course, there is the inverse "cost" of preventing the battery from overheating. However, if you're in a pinch, you can open your windows to help preserve a bit more range.
Had a Durango for nearly 20 years, loved it, needed to replace the engine - $10,000.
Granted if you have replace the battery after 5-10 years, that's worse. But if the battery is the primary cost of the vehicle, like the engine, then get a new car
I'd like to sell you my Nissan Titan that started blowing blue smoke at ~50k miles, but I traded it in for 50 cents on the dollar to a dealer I knew who sold it at auction because Nissan wouldn't repair it under warranty.
If you understand the idea of "peak oil" and realize that human consumption of fossil fuels operates on a very short time scale, whereas petroleum deposits are "created" on a geological time scales .... no matter what form of fossil-fuel, you'll ultimately find yourself screwed once you hit the peak of the Hubbert curve. Thus, in the big-picture ... nobody is "making fuel so expensive" ... the price will automatically rise due to inherent reductions in supply vs demand.
The direction that has gained the most headway thus far has been electric-cars ... through a continued emphasis on battery technologies and their improvements. However, other directions have been explored (like hydrogen fuel-cells, etc).
Given that the scientific community is coming back around to being a bit more optimistic about the promise of fusion-driven nuclear energy ... that points to electric being one of the better long-term solutions.
I think for some, the transition must be much faster, almost immediate. People who advocate for a more orderly transition are unfairly labeled as being climate deniers, against EV's, and so on.
Even if it needed a complete engine replacement, I guarantee it would have been a hell of a lot less than $14,000.
What was Nissan’s reasoning for not repairing it under warranty?
A quick Google search showed remanufactured Nissan Titan crate motors for around $2500. Probably about that much to R&R. $350 - $500 core charge, and about that much for shipping. Still well under $10,000.
Electric is the future, but there are a lot of trade-offs right now that probably don't get enough attention. Tires wear out a lot faster, too.
Get your solar panels now boyz! Texas is warning consumers of rolling blackouts as we speak! Oh, and I might know a guy if anyone is shopping around😉.
https://www.newsweek.com/texas-power-outage-ercot-update-latest-1723362
https://www.newsweek.com/texas-power-outage-ercot-update-latest-1723362
It was a known issue within the communities. Early models were sucking exhaust back a scoring the valves. When I spoke with the local Nissan dealership they hinted that I should start calling Nissan early and often. It took me about a month and one snarky facebook post before I managed to get a call back from a customer service rep in the US. Until then I'd get someone in Asia who told me every day that I'd get a call back "within 24 hours." The lady who called me back then told that they would split the cost of the engine tear down, but not the repairs because "I didn't have records of my service." I had all work done at Nissan besides a few oil changes that I did myself. It ran full synthetic and this was under 50k miles.
I will never own another Nissan.
There are tradeoffs, right? Go too slow, then it doesn't encourage enough competition to drive down prices.
If I were to guess, we're past the analog to the betamax vs vhs (magnetic-tape stored video, for the young folk here) decision-point. Before that point, players for each technology was relatively expensive. Afterwards, once the vhs took over and it was no longer a manufacturing risk to back a particular technology ... the market veritably "blew up."
Given that Tesla is opening it's charging stations to all EVs ... we'll likely see continued standardization (or particular converters included as standard accessories).
As another poster indicated, range is still a valid concern. That's part of the reason why I'm a little surprised that plug-in hybrids don't own a more prominent niche in the market. Short-distance driving can be done entirely via electric-drive and the heat-engine could be optimized to recharge the battery. On top of all that, the electric motor could be an induction motor (like the Tesla motor) - so the performance of the car could still be stellar.
I don't think that the pace at which people adopt particular technologies pegs them too much one way or another. It's typically more of indicator of what they can manage and what they're comfortable with.
If they are "climate deniers" let their views be explicitly stated. Even then, all I'd do is point them in the direction of the raw climate data and have them try to explain it away. It's easily and readily accessible/available. People absolutely HATE looking stupid - so, in my experience, they immediately shut up about all their conspiracy theorist bullshit and dogmatic rhetoric - the vast majority of such folks are too quantitatively illiterate to analyze the data. The few who are quantitatively literate enough are usually unwilling to tackle the data for fear that it will undermine their accepted world-view.
Yep
Sounds like rightwinger/fossil fuel industry propaganda.
Most EV batteries will last for 300k miles, or longer. Equal to needing a full engine rebuild for most autos, with nowhere near the cost for maintenance over that period.
And battery tech will continue to get cheaper; as EVs age, you will see 3rd party industries setting up to replace/upgrade the batteries for a fraction of what they cost originally.
That sketch hit a little too close to home for me. I used to own a Dodge Stratus. Biggest piece of shit I've ever owned. I traded it in when I bought the Honda Civic and I'll never buy another Chrysler product again.
I see the 14 K number as a Fox News special. They are in thrall to fossil ads.
Granted, it is not the same as a full EV battery, but I replaced a hybrid battery a couple of years back. Bought the used Civic Hybrid as a commuter ride, and I treat it like a work truck. It gets put through its paces.
It was at 40K miles when purchased, needed the big battery at 210K. Service writer was surprised this was the first replacement, suggested 90-100K was typical replacement mileage. This was at the Honda dealership, with whom I have a fairly good understanding.
New battery was $2100, they gave me a $900 core credit for the old battery.
The batteries don’t go to the landfill.
The 14K number from OP is ka ka.
Batteries just keep gettin' cheaper and cheaper.
And more capable.
That's very very threatening to the industries which rely on ICE vehicles for their livelihoods...
I think that time is against a slow transition.
Mother Nature seems impatient and is showing her power vis a vis storms and changes in long term weather patterns.
The US west is a prime example.
Well said.
my son is at the DiiiD tokamak fusion reactor affiliated with UCSD right now doing research to try to sustain the reaction and make it feasible.
fossil fuels are killing us, driving wars, killing the planet. They are collective suicide.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,074
- 190,311
- 113
I am so pissed the government has banned gasoline cars!
hawkeyetraveler
HR All-American
Seems every few months we have a thread questioning the EVs.
I have owned my Tesla Model S since October 2015. My battery is still at least 90% of original capacity and still going strong. As to the grid, most of my driving is in Chicagoland - Nuclear power so not many concerns there.
I should be able to get at least 3 more years out of my battery if not more. I originally bought it hoping to get 6 years on the battery which I sailed through no problem!
I have owned my Tesla Model S since October 2015. My battery is still at least 90% of original capacity and still going strong. As to the grid, most of my driving is in Chicagoland - Nuclear power so not many concerns there.
I should be able to get at least 3 more years out of my battery if not more. I originally bought it hoping to get 6 years on the battery which I sailed through no problem!
Yes, but you've been taking it up the a** with all those "battery fluid" changes, battery "belts" that need replacement and tightening, battery valves that go bad, etc etc etc.
Just WAY too expensive to maintain, man...
Battery "head gaskets" are also known to go bad after 100k or so miles.... 😉
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,074
- 190,311
- 113
Just gotta offer a “tuned exhaust“ version that rolls coal.
Game changer.
Pretty fuggin much. Look, Im not going to get one of these cars, I think they look dumb and Id punch myself for driving them, but OP is a dolt and should not be allowed to post on here.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 94,074
- 190,311
- 113
Agreed, but Musk is too much of a wild card.
He is setting the hook, if you ask me.
The fact that they've discovered that the plasma isn't as limited by density as they originally thought allows for more power per cycle.
What's particularly exciting about fusion is that once we get down "conventional" nuclear fusion pathways ... all of which are still used to lend thermal energy to water in order to turn a turbine. The problem here is that you're stuck being rate-limited by the second law of thermodynamics because you're using the energy released by fusion to power a heat engine - in this context, you're only recovering something like 15 to 20% of the energy released (IIRC). Some higher energy pathways are known to eject charged particles (as a primary energy carrier). If you can tap into those ... via magnetic induction you can step up or step down the voltages as needed and put it directly to the grid (with very little loss).
