Anything you need to plug into a power source is doomed to fail. EVs are simply not designed properly which is why hybrids are the best of both world. A Camry hybrid has some genius technology as the EV part is used at low speed and ICE at higher speed. That is the perfect balance and you see why it's a success for them. Toyota make the best hybrid vehicles. Honda makes hybrids too so they're not throwing all their EV technology into the e-waste bin.
Hybrids makes no sense, but to the smallest of customer segments.
They need to carry two engines, batteries and a gas tank, that makes them pretty bad at being both an EV and a ICE vehicle. They are to heavy, have to little battery capacity to be a good EV. The batteries and electric engines make them to heavy to get good fuel mileage as a gas powered car.
I've meet exactly one person for who they made sense. He could get to an from work on battery alone, but not much more and he needed the combustion engine to haul a trailer every now and then. If he could have waited a few years, he could just have gotten an EV that did the same.
There might be locations where hybrids makes more sense, but now that the range of EVs have gotten much better I think that list is slowly shrinking.
The thing that's weird to me is the focus on getting rid of diesel, because EVs and diesel cars are not at all competing. EVs can replace gas powered cars, in most cases (depending on your location), but they can't replace diesel. Need to drive 500km a day? Diesel is probably your best bet and EVs are completely out.
Whether or not your analysis is correct (I'd say not), the root problem is Chinese manufacturing dominance and unfair competitive advantage when it comes to EVs. It saddens me to say it, but the legacy car companies are unable to pivot and are likely doomed.
> Anything you need to plug into a power source is doomed to fail.
Totally disagree. One of the reasons I drive an EV is so I _can_ plug it in and never go to a gas station again. What a useless exercise and waste of my time, especially for a penny-pincher like me who would wait in like for 20 minutes at Costco for gas.
Plugging it in is why it is so awful. It takes ages to charge it and you don't get very much range for a full charge. Battery technology is so incredibly poor right now and EV manufacturers are just plain dumb until they make the body of the car harness the sun's rays.
For me it likely won't matter 98% of the time. I charge at home and already cap out my existing circuit and it's plenty fast for me (around 10% of range per hour).
For those not with an overnihht charging parking spot I can see the appeal though.
I'll take the 30 seconds of plugging my car in when I get home than the 20 minute detour to the petrol station. Especially because my electric at nighttime is so cheap. But you do you.
> until they make the body of the car harness the sun's rays.
The surface area of a car usable for solar panels is about 3 square meters. At the absolute best, when the stars align just right, you're going to get about 1 kW of power out of these panels.
In other words, barely enough to offset the auxiliary systems in the car (cooling pumps, lights, computers, etc.)
Even the Intel MBP laptops had fans firing up the afterburners to keep the Intel CPU cool when monitors were plugged in. Intel CPUs of the past were just massive heating elements.
The more choice then the more procrastination occurs for buyers so they don't actually buy. Apple has made the Neo a two minute decision and you are not playing Russian Roulette with the specs as you know you'll get a uniform quality product, just one has double the storage than the other. Simple. Straightforward. Decisive.
The Neo is targeting the cheap laptop market for those people that DO need it. Again, another totally pointless comment by somebody who sounds clueless.
Who is going to do that except a nerd looking for a specific type of laptop? Buying two of them for the price of 3+ Neos at EDU discount. You are so off in the weeds with your comment that I had to point it out.
reply