Re: [EVDL] Smaller is not really cheaper (was: Tesla slashes its car prices as much as 20% to prop up sagging sales, where?s the $30K EV? A Chevy Bolt?)
platform but not so much for the old automakers if the others want to follow and make some discount now they also have to spend millions of dollars on Advertising to make sure that people actually know about it but not Tesla the whole world already knows so just sit back relax and watch this play out I will bet you that even with the recession coming Tesla will have the best year ever both when it comes to unit sales but also how profitable Tesla will become and most people will wake up and see what is going on with all the profits coming from their storage business and software business and so on pushing up the stock to maybe even new highs here in 2023 because Tesla's rise will look even more scary as the old guys continue to fall even faster which will stand in very sharp contrast to Tesla's price whether Tesla is ever hugely successful or not I'll I'll always owe him a debt of gratitude for having kind of broken the ice and thank you for watching and until next time take care out there and be nice [Music] On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 1:18 PM Peri Hartman wrote: > Kindly summarize. At least for me, I will not spend the time to watch a > video. > Peri > > << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >> > > -- Original Message -- > From: "(-Phil-)" > To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" > Cc: "Peri Hartman" > Sent: 22-Jan-23 13:16:12 > Subject: Re: [EVDL] Smaller is not really cheaper (was: Tesla slashes its > car prices as much as 20% to prop up sagging sales, where?s the $30K EV? A > Chevy Bolt?) > > This video explains something I hadn't considered about Tesla's strategy > on the price cuts: > https://youtu.be/7ufNDm9hNXU > > On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 7:32 AM Peri Hartman via EV > wrote: > >> A heavier car will require a larger battery for an equivalent range, but >> I think that is over played. >> >> If you are concerned about city range, with lots of starts and stops, >> your battery range will be chewed up badly by a heavier car. But the >> real need for long range is freeway driving. And, there, if you drive >> reasonably carefully, acceleration and deceleration affect range >> minimally. The biggest factor is, of course, aero drag, where weight >> doesn't factor in at all. Rolling resistance does increase with weight, >> but I don't think it's increase plays a significant role. >> >> Another factor is the time spent driving the car. For city driving, >> speeds are slow and, yet, the HVAC system is consuming energy as well as >> all the other non traction activities. On the freeway, for the same >> amount of distance traveled, those non traction loads are cut >> dramatically, e.g. by a third if your average freeway speed is 60 mph >> and avg city 20. >> >> In other words, for a US consumer, EV range is all about the battery >> size, not about the vehicle weight. >> >> So, getting back to the cost of a luxury EV: here I'm just speculating >> and have no facts. Unlike an ICE car, the battery is by far the most >> expensive component of the car. An ICE vehicle has no comparable high >> cost element. So, to build an EV with adequate freeway range, at least >> for the US market, it takes a pretty expensive battery. That eats into >> profits. The best way to recoup those profits is to dress the car up and >> sell it as luxury. >> >> Someone posted that they question whether any of the traditional auto >> makers are making a profit on their EVs. If that's the case, imagine if >> they tried to sell a trimmed down EV with still an appealing amount of >> EV range. Financial disaster. >> >> As battery prices come down, the EV "economy" cars will appear. >> >> Peri >> >> << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >> >> >> ___ >> Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org >> No other addresses in TO and CC fields >> HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/ >> >> -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20230122/f8d55b3c/attachment.htm> ___ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
Re: [EVDL] Smaller is not really cheaper (was: Tesla slashes its car prices as much as 20% to prop up sagging sales, where?s the $30K EV? A Chevy Bolt?)
Kindly summarize. At least for me, I will not spend the time to watch a video. Peri << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >> -- Original Message -- From: "(-Phil-)" To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" Cc: "Peri Hartman" Sent: 22-Jan-23 13:16:12 Subject: Re: [EVDL] Smaller is not really cheaper (was: Tesla slashes its car prices as much as 20% to prop up sagging sales, where?s the $30K EV? A Chevy Bolt?) This video explains something I hadn't considered about Tesla's strategy on the price cuts: https://youtu.be/7ufNDm9hNXU On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 7:32 AM Peri Hartman via EV wrote: A heavier car will require a larger battery for an equivalent range, but I think that is over played. If you are concerned about city range, with lots of starts and stops, your battery range will be chewed up badly by a heavier car. But the real need for long range is freeway driving. And, there, if you drive reasonably carefully, acceleration and deceleration affect range minimally. The biggest factor is, of course, aero drag, where weight doesn't factor in at all. Rolling resistance does increase with weight, but I don't think it's increase plays a significant role. Another factor is the time spent driving the car. For city driving, speeds are slow and, yet, the HVAC system is consuming energy as well as all the other non traction activities. On the freeway, for the same amount of distance traveled, those non traction loads are cut dramatically, e.g. by a third if your average freeway speed is 60 mph and avg city 20. In other words, for a US consumer, EV range is all about the battery size, not about the vehicle weight. So, getting back to the cost of a luxury EV: here I'm just speculating and have no facts. Unlike an ICE car, the battery is by far the most expensive component of the car. An ICE vehicle has no comparable high cost element. So, to build an EV with adequate freeway range, at least for the US market, it takes a pretty expensive battery. That eats into profits. The best way to recoup those profits is to dress the car up and sell it as luxury. Someone posted that they question whether any of the traditional auto makers are making a profit on their EVs. If that's the case, imagine if they tried to sell a trimmed down EV with still an appealing amount of EV range. Financial disaster. As battery prices come down, the EV "economy" cars will appear. Peri << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >> ___ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20230122/efdcf9c2/attachment.htm> ___ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
Re: [EVDL] Smaller is not really cheaper (was: Tesla slashes its car prices as much as 20% to prop up sagging sales, where?s the $30K EV? A Chevy Bolt?)
This video explains something I hadn't considered about Tesla's strategy on the price cuts: https://youtu.be/7ufNDm9hNXU On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 7:32 AM Peri Hartman via EV wrote: > A heavier car will require a larger battery for an equivalent range, but > I think that is over played. > > If you are concerned about city range, with lots of starts and stops, > your battery range will be chewed up badly by a heavier car. But the > real need for long range is freeway driving. And, there, if you drive > reasonably carefully, acceleration and deceleration affect range > minimally. The biggest factor is, of course, aero drag, where weight > doesn't factor in at all. Rolling resistance does increase with weight, > but I don't think it's increase plays a significant role. > > Another factor is the time spent driving the car. For city driving, > speeds are slow and, yet, the HVAC system is consuming energy as well as > all the other non traction activities. On the freeway, for the same > amount of distance traveled, those non traction loads are cut > dramatically, e.g. by a third if your average freeway speed is 60 mph > and avg city 20. > > In other words, for a US consumer, EV range is all about the battery > size, not about the vehicle weight. > > So, getting back to the cost of a luxury EV: here I'm just speculating > and have no facts. Unlike an ICE car, the battery is by far the most > expensive component of the car. An ICE vehicle has no comparable high > cost element. So, to build an EV with adequate freeway range, at least > for the US market, it takes a pretty expensive battery. That eats into > profits. The best way to recoup those profits is to dress the car up and > sell it as luxury. > > Someone posted that they question whether any of the traditional auto > makers are making a profit on their EVs. If that's the case, imagine if > they tried to sell a trimmed down EV with still an appealing amount of > EV range. Financial disaster. > > As battery prices come down, the EV "economy" cars will appear. > > Peri > > << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >> > > ___ > Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org > No other addresses in TO and CC fields > HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/ > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20230122/7cdb0dd9/attachment.htm> ___ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
Re: [EVDL] Smaller is not really cheaper (was: Tesla slashes its car prices as much as 20% to prop up sagging sales, where?s the $30K EV? A Chevy Bolt?)
A heavier car will require a larger battery for an equivalent range, but I think that is over played. If you are concerned about city range, with lots of starts and stops, your battery range will be chewed up badly by a heavier car. But the real need for long range is freeway driving. And, there, if you drive reasonably carefully, acceleration and deceleration affect range minimally. The biggest factor is, of course, aero drag, where weight doesn't factor in at all. Rolling resistance does increase with weight, but I don't think it's increase plays a significant role. Another factor is the time spent driving the car. For city driving, speeds are slow and, yet, the HVAC system is consuming energy as well as all the other non traction activities. On the freeway, for the same amount of distance traveled, those non traction loads are cut dramatically, e.g. by a third if your average freeway speed is 60 mph and avg city 20. In other words, for a US consumer, EV range is all about the battery size, not about the vehicle weight. So, getting back to the cost of a luxury EV: here I'm just speculating and have no facts. Unlike an ICE car, the battery is by far the most expensive component of the car. An ICE vehicle has no comparable high cost element. So, to build an EV with adequate freeway range, at least for the US market, it takes a pretty expensive battery. That eats into profits. The best way to recoup those profits is to dress the car up and sell it as luxury. Someone posted that they question whether any of the traditional auto makers are making a profit on their EVs. If that's the case, imagine if they tried to sell a trimmed down EV with still an appealing amount of EV range. Financial disaster. As battery prices come down, the EV "economy" cars will appear. Peri << Annoyed by leaf blowers ? https://quietcleanseattle.org/ >> ___ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
Re: [EVDL] Smaller is not really cheaper (was: Tesla slashes its car prices as much as 20% to prop up sagging sales, where?s the $30K EV? A Chevy Bolt?)
Sure, I mostly agree, but EV's do change that more than ICE, because with a car and a given range and given wind resistance, the larger car will take significantly more batteries to achieve the same range, and since batteries are a major expense and more a commoditiy, it does cost significantly more to make a larger EV (if you want the same range) On Sunday, January 22, 2023, 12:57:48 AM PST, Bill Dube via EV wrote: Labor is the main expense in car manufacture. Materials for a larger vehicle add only an incremental cost. Luxury options cost just a tiny faction of what they consumer pays for them. It is not uncommon that the luxury option is just a change to the firmware and the additional cost to the manufacturer is actually zero. This is why there has always been a push for larger cars and SUV's. Larger = more profits. If you consider that all cars, regardless of size, have just four wheels, four brakes, four tires, one engine, one steering wheel, one engine management computer, etc. The labor is the same to assemble, not matter what size the car is. As the car grows in size, it is a larger shell of the same thickness, but the extra internal volume is air. The materials scale with the surface area, and not the volume. People are willing to pay considerably more a larger car, but they cost close to the same to manufacture. You perceive that you are buying a bigger banana, but you are in reality just buying a bigger banana peel. The edible/nutritious/useful portion is unchanged. People buy cars for emotional reasons, not for practical reasons. The automakers exploit that. Why wouldn't they? Bill D. On 1/21/2023 12:54 PM, Lee Hart via EV wrote: > Lawrence Rhodes via EV wrote: >> I keep hearing that Tesla might introduce a smaller, cheaper EV. >> That would >> open up EVs to a wider range of drivers, but would also cut into their >> profits. > > I continue to wonder why a smaller cheaper car would mean lower > profits. It seems like there are endless examples of cars (and many > other products) where profits *increased* when cheaper versions were > produced in higher volumes. > > A smaller car uses less materials, so can be cheaper to produce. ___ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20230122/db8cd05c/attachment.htm> ___ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
[EVDL] Smaller is not really cheaper (was: Tesla slashes its car prices as much as 20% to prop up sagging sales, where?s the $30K EV? A Chevy Bolt?)
Labor is the main expense in car manufacture. Materials for a larger vehicle add only an incremental cost. Luxury options cost just a tiny faction of what they consumer pays for them. It is not uncommon that the luxury option is just a change to the firmware and the additional cost to the manufacturer is actually zero. This is why there has always been a push for larger cars and SUV's. Larger = more profits. If you consider that all cars, regardless of size, have just four wheels, four brakes, four tires, one engine, one steering wheel, one engine management computer, etc. The labor is the same to assemble, not matter what size the car is. As the car grows in size, it is a larger shell of the same thickness, but the extra internal volume is air. The materials scale with the surface area, and not the volume. People are willing to pay considerably more a larger car, but they cost close to the same to manufacture. You perceive that you are buying a bigger banana, but you are in reality just buying a bigger banana peel. The edible/nutritious/useful portion is unchanged. People buy cars for emotional reasons, not for practical reasons. The automakers exploit that. Why wouldn't they? Bill D. On 1/21/2023 12:54 PM, Lee Hart via EV wrote: Lawrence Rhodes via EV wrote: I keep hearing that Tesla might introduce a smaller, cheaper EV. That would open up EVs to a wider range of drivers, but would also cut into their profits. I continue to wonder why a smaller cheaper car would mean lower profits. It seems like there are endless examples of cars (and many other products) where profits *increased* when cheaper versions were produced in higher volumes. A smaller car uses less materials, so can be cheaper to produce. ___ Address messages to ev@lists.evdl.org No other addresses in TO and CC fields HELP: http://www.evdl.org/help/
