Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Cheaper? Not sure how. While an ICE engine does have cooling systems and fuelling systems, water pumps and fuel pumps are relatively cheap and simple devices.

An EV generally has a battery cooling system along with regenerative braking.

EVs have roughly the same mechanical things as an ICE vehicle too, HVAC, suspension, brakes, in car entertainment, heated seats. Lighting. An entire 12v subsystem to power all that stuff as well.

A good old ICE car will be cheaper to make than an EV because the powertrain is cheaper when you account for batteries. Even taking into account the gearbox you don’t need in an EV.





> A good old ICE car will be cheaper to make than an EV

How much of that is the result of the relatively maturity of the technology? We've been continuously improving ICE based transportation for well over a hundred years. It's been a lot shorter for electric vehicles.

I suspect that there are bigger strides to make with electrics that may eventually turn that around.


>How much of that is the result of the relatively maturity of the technology?

that's a real effect though, it's not something something you throw overboard, it's the bouyancy that keeps you from sinking.


> I suspect that there are bigger strides to make with electrics that may eventually turn that around.

After many more billions are spent.

Is the American consumer going to eat that cost? The government clearly lost its appetite as it isn't subsidizing EVs anymore.

The US has cheap fuel and it isn't a strategic issue to develop EVs except to keep US auto internationally competitive.

US consumers are still really into big SUVs and trucks and almost all of the models are ICE instead of EVs. The EV manufacturers don't really fit the shape of the American consumer that they haven't already sold to.

China jumped on EVs because they wanted to start an automotive sector for (1) heavy industry, (2) adjacency to national defense, (3) strong new domestic and export market they could corner, (4) it's adjacent to their other manufacturing industries. Critically, they had a deep reservoir of Chinese citizens who were first time car buyers that they could nudge into buying domestic auto. No other nation on earth has the outsized advantage of having such a deep bench of new customers to subsidize a new industry. The stars aligned for China.

America has neither the interest nor the capital to chase EVs or force them down American consumer throats.


> America has neither the interest nor the capital to chase EVs or force them down American consumer throats.

Ok so dont, but take the tariffs off batteries, and allow foreign EVs to compete fairly. We'll get affordable EVs, and then we'll see what the american consumer actually wants. No? Oh, i guess its about something other than consumer choice after all.


>America has neither the interest nor the capital to chase EVs or force them down American consumer throats.

But America always has the interest and capital to protect oil interests and supply chains worldwide by being the biggest spender on military, funded by taxpayers.


The rest of the world is continuing to move to EVs, and while the US has a different taste in vehicles than most of the world, the underlying tech is the same, so they'll benefit from the advances made in Europe and Asia.

> America has neither the interest nor the capital to chase EVs or force them down American consumer throats.

Only if you see the market continue to be dominated by human drivers. We are potentially moving to self-driving cars like Waymo, Tesla etc then they will get the choice to force what car they like.

> The government clearly lost its appetite as it isn't subsidizing EVs anymore.

More like "the current" government. It can always change.


That potentially is doing an awful lot of heavy lifting for fifty to one hundred years.

> for fifty to one hundred years

Ballmer in 2007 also said the iPhone was not going to get any significant market share. It didn't even take close to fifty years, did it?


No conflict of interest there.

It did take a few years after 2007 before it became obvious to pretty much everyone that the iPhone was going to be a huge hit but took a little while before some oddities in the original software were corrected and people adjusted to not having a physical keyboard which some thought was going to be a dealbreaker out of the gate.


I don't understand this comparison. An EV's battery cooling system is a cooling system. Regen braking isn't more complicated than an alternator.

The rest, yeah. The chemical stacks in the batteries are expensive, and dealer markup was a problem (now they're 47-56k new). But the energy costs! $7-12 for a fill-up on home power overnight instead of $75-85 at the gas station.

And maintenance. So little maintenance. For local non-towing fleets these would save a lot.


Only if you have a home or some other super convenient always available spot. I don't and EVs are non-existing to me for another decade at least, simply too much hassle even if ignoring all other downsides (I don't buy new but mildly used for 25-30% of price of new which for ICE means 95% of the car, I do sometimes family 1500km drives like another one in 2 days - PITA with overcrowded electric cars, in cold which is normal here they become fraction of their capacity and drain battery continuously when parked and so on).

Its future but its coming/will come at very different time for various folks


> Regen braking isn't more complicated than an alternator.

Either disingenuous or ill-informed. one is ~1KW for a few seconds a day, the other is > 100KW of power for dozens of seconds, multiple dozens of times a day. completely engineering



China subsidises electric car companies to the tune of billions of dollars[0], as well as providing some tax breaks, so that's not a useful comparison.

[0] https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/china-...


Sounds like the batteries are worse in China. How does that affect the range?

They're not worse, China has (arguably) the best batteries in the world.

NMC and LFP (of the same cost) are about even, but pricier NMC packs can add maybe 10% more range for the same weight. Which is why most EV companies offer a "long-range version" that's just the same car with an NMC pack swapped in. It's mostly an irrelevant gimmick.

The truth is that range isn't limited by batteries, it's limited by weight and cost - a bigger battery weighs more, which means the car (frame) needs to support more weight, which means the car (frame) costs more. Most EVs have a range of ~300 miles (~500KM) and any battery gains don't go into extending the range, they go into reducing the weight (and therefore cost) of the car. Lighter frame, fewer battery cells. Because most people don't care past 300miles (500KM). Not enough to pay an extra $5k, at least.


Thank you. That's interesting. The infographic calls them cheaper which I assumed (incorrectly?) meant worse. 10% does seem gimmicky, though I am seeing claims on a number of sites that NMC is around 50% better per unit of weight (but way worse for longevity), so I don't know what to think.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: