Are EVs Tunable?

[afadeev]

Originally Posted by JerseyM3

Op here...
I mean by "tuned" is can EVs be manipulated in some way to extract more power out of them from stock. Some have answered my question.

Found the link to Candian EV "tuner" Ingenext.
$695.00 gets you +150HP and a bunch of other features including blocking TPMS warning lights. Not bad:

https://ingenext.ca/products/boost50-to-ghost

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by afadeev

Except you are wrong on your data points, and consequently wrong with your conclusions.
Corvette's 6.2L V8 gets 16.0 MPG city and 25.0 MPG highway, or 19.0 MPG combined. Far short of 30+ mpg you exhausted, and frankly kinda abysmal for modern times.

Not terrible for a track car (we all get single digit MPG on track anyway), but nowhere near F80 or G80 ///M3 gas consumption, both of which got 400+ HP decades ago.

From power / efficiency perspective, you picked a very poor example to support your position.

https://www.chevrolet.com/shopping/c...&zipCode=01234
.


I don't see any logical or political reason for that to happen.
EVs are already getting taxed during registration to pay for roads upkeep (as opposed to gas surcharges).

a

I don't really care what Chevy says. I've owned them. I got 27mpg.in .y 2010 Grand Sport automatic cruising at 100mph. It didn't drop below 25mpg until 125. At 75-80 highway speeds, that did 30+ easily. That was on wide ass 275s and 325 tires. And it also blows away all the German competition at the time

Logical reason? It's government, they don't need a logical reason. They just want more money, and that's an easy one to sell.the masses on.."We are only taxing rich people who have these EVs with hugely inefficient power guzzling EVs. We need to tax them more because they guzzle.too much power and are too large a drain on the electric grid, so it's only fair that they pay more.

Gas guzzler taxes make no logical sense either, and yet we have those.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by JerseyM3

Op here...
I mean by "tuned" is can EVs be manipulated in some way to extract more power out of them from stock. Some have answered my question.

In general yes, but to varying degrees based on the architecture and software. The more extreme you want to go with your "tune" the more you end up usually changing.

[jaffles]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

Logical reason? It's government, they don't need a logical reason. They just want more money, and that's an easy one to sell.the masses on.."We are only taxing rich people who have these EVs with hugely inefficient power guzzling EVs. We need to tax them more because they guzzle.too much power and are too large a drain on the electric grid, so it's only fair that they pay more.

Gas guzzler taxes make no logical sense either, and yet we have those.

And let the rich pay as money usually comes by far easier for the effort involved.
High end powerful cars are generally little more than tax minimalization in the first place for almost every one of them. But if we're using lots of energy what about pool heaters, underfloor heating, or people who have the aircon cranking but leave the sliding doors wide open to the pool. Plenty of the public use energy in a "me" only kind of way. I even had a cashed up client crank the aircon to 16, then start the fire in some BS attempt to recrate some winter holiday they went on. This is in the middle of summer in Australia.

But yes like ICE cars EVs need bigger motors/batteries due to all the crap put in them because the "market" asked for it apparently. Where as its just manufactures perusing what the next rich guy will pay to be different.

600km + range to address supposed range anxiety was not pushed by Mum who only needs 100 to drop the kids at school and go to work, nor Dad generally. Its rent an anti crowd to sling shit at EVs to bluster ICE sales.

In yet another truly human way we miss the forest for the trees.

As for governance, they usually follow rather than lead, taxation is easier rather then design. Like tobacco, taxation thinned the crowd but really it was for the governments responsibility to the health system. Fossil fuels will follow suit eventually due to the Governments responsibly around disaster recovery. Fires and droughts, flood and storms just cost to much to keep going as is. At present governance need to catch up with energy and the grid because they don't do design.

[Phillies8008]

Originally Posted by jaffles

600km + range to address supposed range anxiety was not pushed by Mum who only needs 100 to drop the kids at school and go to work, nor Dad generally. Its rent an anti crowd to sling shit at EVs to bluster ICE sales.

I have an i4 and love it to pieces, so I'm by no means an anti-EV guy. Perhaps this is an American thing, but the first objection I hear from virtually every ICE owner I talk to about EVs is range. Be it logical or not – and oftentimes it really isn't – it's the primary concern that's holding back EV adoption, at least in the US.

Over time, as batteries get better and the charging infrastructure improves (access to Tesla's chargers really helps this), range anxiety will be less and less of a thing. But right now it definitely is one, and a big one at that.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

I have an i4 and love it to pieces, so I'm by no means an anti-EV guy. Perhaps this is an American thing, but the first objection I hear from virtually every ICE owner I talk to about EVs is range. Be it logical or not – and oftentimes it really isn't – it's the primary concern that's holding back EV adoption, at least in the US.

Over time, as batteries get better and the charging infrastructure improves (access to Tesla's chargers really helps this), range anxiety will be less and less of a thing. But right now it definitely is one, and a big one at that.

The problem is that when you build a 100 mile range car for mom, of your use ever changes you've got a brick of useless.

EREVs and PHEVs make far more sense for most people than a BEV. But the (financial) industry wanted BEVs, not PHEVs and EREVs.

If someone made a large 3 row PHEV or EREV like a Wagoneer or an X7 with 50-60 miles of range for my wife, it would probably save us $150 a month in gas. I dunno that it would ever really break even for us on e charging and purchase price are favored in, but it'd be more likely to break even vs a 500 mile range battery.

[Phillies8008]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

The problem is that when you build a 100 mile range car for mom, of your use ever changes you've got a brick of useless.

EREVs and PHEVs make far more sense for most people than a BEV. But the (financial) industry wanted BEVs, not PHEVs and EREVs.

If someone made a large 3 row PHEV or EREV like a Wagoneer or an X7 with 50-60 miles of range for my wife, it would probably save us $150 a month in gas. I dunno that it would ever really break even for us on e charging and purchase price are favored in, but it'd be more likely to break even vs a 500 mile range battery.

IMO, PHEVs make sense only as stop-gap measure until battery & charging infrastructure catch up. They're overly complicated, and one of the big selling points of EVs – the lack of maintenance – is out the window. They're better than nothing, but overall, meh.

I agree that 100 mile range cars aren't the answer for most people – I certainly wouldn't buy one. But 250ish to 350ish mile ranges – where most EVs are at the moment – is more than good enough for a lot of peoples' every day needs. Once we get to ~400 to 500 miles with a good, ubiquitous charging infrastructure, there's really little reason (outside of aesthetics and unusual use-cases) to buy an ICE vehicle.

And just to be clear, while I'm a pro-EV guy, it doesn't follow that I'm an anti-ICE guy. I'm definitely not – I have a Z4MR that I passionately love, and will be the first to admit that there's a certain something about the beautiful sounds that a six or eight cylinder engine produce, as well as the joy of a manual transmission. However, it's undeniable that there are a lot of practical ways that EVs are better than ICE as a daily driver. But who said that practicality is the only important thing in life? If you love ICE for whatever reason, stick with it.

I don't think EVs fit everyone right now, and it'll be a good while until they do. I'm absolutely not in favor of any sort of deadlines for EV-to-ICE transitions, etc. That's dumb.

[HeelToeShift]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

IMO, PHEVs make sense only as stop-gap measure until battery & charging infrastructure catch up. They're overly complicated, and one of the big selling points of EVs – the lack of maintenance – is out the window. They're better than nothing, but overall, meh.

I agree that 100 mile range cars aren't the answer for most people – I certainly wouldn't buy one. But 250ish to 350ish mile ranges – where most EVs are at the moment – is more than good enough for a lot of peoples' every day needs. Once we get to ~400 to 500 miles with a good, ubiquitous charging infrastructure, there's really little reason (outside of aesthetics and unusual use-cases) to buy an ICE vehicle.

And just to be clear, while I'm a pro-EV guy, it doesn't follow that I'm an anti-ICE guy. I'm definitely not – I have a Z4MR that I passionately love, and will be the first to admit that there's a certain something about the beautiful sounds that a six or eight cylinder engine produce, as well as the joy of a manual transmission. However, it's undeniable that there are a lot of practical ways that EVs are better than ICE as a daily driver. But who said that practicality is the only important thing in life? If you love ICE for whatever reason, stick with it.

I don't think EVs fit everyone right now, and it'll be a good while until they do. I'm absolutely not in favor of any sort of deadlines for EV-to-ICE transitions, etc. That's dumb.

I right there with you. The you can be pro-ICE and pro-EV at the same time. Having a decent amount of experience now with them, I do think Tesla is still the clear leader when it comes to the tech. They managed to get like 30-40 more miles on the Model Y Juniper just through optimization, as opposed to Porsche who got 'more' range on the Macan EV which was only due to adding KwHs...
Beyond that, Tesla has only gotten better with their build quality as opposed to most manufacturers who are getting cheaper here.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

IMO, PHEVs make sense only as stop-gap measure until battery & charging infrastructure catch up. They're overly complicated, and one of the big selling points of EVs – the lack of maintenance – is out the window. They're better than nothing, but overall, meh.

I agree that 100 mile range cars aren't the answer for most people – I certainly wouldn't buy one. But 250ish to 350ish mile ranges – where most EVs are at the moment – is more than good enough for a lot of peoples' every day needs. Once we get to ~400 to 500 miles with a good, ubiquitous charging infrastructure, there's really little reason (outside of aesthetics and unusual use-cases) to buy an ICE vehicle.

And just to be clear, while I'm a pro-EV guy, it doesn't follow that I'm an anti-ICE guy. I'm definitely not – I have a Z4MR that I passionately love, and will be the first to admit that there's a certain something about the beautiful sounds that a six or eight cylinder engine produce, as well as the joy of a manual transmission. However, it's undeniable that there are a lot of practical ways that EVs are better than ICE as a daily driver. But who said that practicality is the only important thing in life? If you love ICE for whatever reason, stick with it.

I don't think EVs fit everyone right now, and it'll be a good while until they do. I'm absolutely not in favor of any sort of deadlines for EV-to-ICE transitions, etc. That's dumb.

PHEVs make sense because they can do everything. It can be a road trip car (infrastructure isn't the problem, stopping every couple hours for extended periods of time is the problem) and burn gas, or it can be an around town car and just use electric.

The all or nothing mindset is the problem. We long ago turned away from "simplicity" as a selling point, so why invoke.it here? If we cared about that we would be using OHV motors without cylinder deactivation that would run for 400k miles.

I think the reality is that different things work for different people. A pure BEV would never ever be cost effective for me, I don't drive far enough to ever break even, and one with a high quality interior (not the cheap empty junk peddled by Tesla and copied by others) costs much more than an ICE equivalent. Same goes for my wife. We both do under 100 miles a week, and so it'd take us nearly the entire ownership to cover the cost of a charger install, let alone the increased purchase price.

That said, I recognize there's people who do a lot more miles than us where it works out economics wise for them. There's also people who value not ever pumping gas, and people who want 600+ miles of range in their truck because their bladders hold gallons. Choice in the market is good.

[jaffles]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

I have an i4 and love it to pieces, so I'm by no means an anti-EV guy. Perhaps this is an American thing, but the first objection I hear from virtually every ICE owner I talk to about EVs is range. Be it logical or not – and oftentimes it really isn't – it's the primary concern that's holding back EV adoption, at least in the US.

Over time, as batteries get better and the charging infrastructure improves (access to Tesla's chargers really helps this), range anxiety will be less and less of a thing. But right now it definitely is one, and a big one at that.

I hear you. I am the lost black sheep (fucking lefty) who married into a conservative family. Its been an interesting observation how much they believe media outlets like Murdoch, SKY, The Australian etc who pedal anti EV like gospel on a Sunday.
These people are good people but read and believe all the fears they can find around EVs, batteries, renewables, climate. For them climate decline is BS, rather its earths evolution which is weird coming from a group of faithers. Then they all have solar too to save money. The hypocrisy is nauseating.

The Chinese will solve it, well they have already. 600km in 9 minutes and getting longer and faster by the month it seems. It will be no different to a gas stations soon for charging. Yes Tesla's charging system is the leader, but if the world lest the Chinese in they will better that. Elon has taken a sharp turn after his nazi thing, so has given opportunity for the Chinese to beat him on that also. Few of us can afford or care to fly into space, so Elon and his rich mates can have that.

The biggest hurdle is supply of energy. If the US is like AU our governance have ignored scientist and the future, enjoying the donations of fossil energy and done little about expanding the energy grid. Rather they argued for 30 years on energy policy ignoring population let alone industry and the draw of the new way of life. I wanted to buy a EV semi. I needed a 150w charger min but really wanted 300 to expand. The energy company didn't even reply to their own energy application service. I applied twice. But then you can't buy a truck anyway, no manufacturer who has set up shop in Aus will sell one. They to have done no training, implemented no infrastructure, or any preparation for the future, rather its all BS so just buy a diesel. Even Elon is yeh yeh...na

Don't get me wrong, I love EVs. I love charging them from the sun. I love the house, pool, and heater all running from the sun then functioning overnight by battery; but I have given up on Evs. Oil, coal/gas, politicians, 50% of population being conservative are all against it for their reasons. The existing is too ingrained, too anti change, and making too much money from it. I have accepted the Earth will trundle along in it slow decline and that's my slot. I live in a spot that seems to miss the best of natural disasters so I won't be that affected. Rainforest or whole towns can burning down, towns flood 3 times in 2 years has done little to change much. Let the money win, I'm bunt out being optimistic.

[Phillies8008]

Originally Posted by jaffles

I hear you. I am the lost black sheep (fucking lefty) who married into a conservative family. Its been an interesting observation how much they believe media outlets like Murdoch, SKY, The Australian etc who pedal anti EV like gospel on a Sunday.
These people are good people but read and believe all the fears they can find around EVs, batteries, renewables, climate. For them climate decline is BS, rather its earths evolution which is weird coming from a group of faithers. Then they all have solar too to save money. The hypocrisy is nauseating.

The Chinese will solve it, well they have already. 600km in 9 minutes and getting longer and faster by the month it seems. It will be no different to a gas stations soon for charging. Yes Tesla's charging system is the leader, but if the world lest the Chinese in they will better that. Elon has taken a sharp turn after his nazi thing, so has given opportunity for the Chinese to beat him on that also. Few of us can afford or care to fly into space, so Elon and his rich mates can have that.

The biggest hurdle is supply of energy. If the US is like AU our governance have ignored scientist and the future, enjoying the donations of fossil energy and done little about expanding the energy grid. Rather they argued for 30 years on energy policy ignoring population let alone industry and the draw of the new way of life. I wanted to buy a EV semi. I needed a 150w charger min but really wanted 300 to expand. The energy company didn't even reply to their own energy application service. I applied twice. But then you can't buy a truck anyway, no manufacturer who has set up shop in Aus will sell one. They to have done no training, implemented no infrastructure, or any preparation for the future, rather its all BS so just buy a diesel. Even Elon is yeh yeh...na

Don't get me wrong, I love EVs. I love charging them from the sun. I love the house, pool, and heater all running from the sun then functioning overnight by battery; but I have given up on Evs. Oil, coal/gas, politicians, 50% of population being conservative are all against it for their reasons. The existing is too ingrained, too anti change, and making too much money from it. I have accepted the Earth will trundle along in it slow decline and that's my slot. I live in a spot that seems to miss the best of natural disasters so I won't be that affected. Rainforest or whole towns can burning down, towns flood 3 times in 2 years has done little to change much. Let the money win, I'm bunt out being optimistic.

Yeah, I think it's kind of pathetic that a method of fueling a vehicle has somehow become a political statement. For me, at least, it couldn't be further from it. I just like not buying gas, paying for oil changes, worrying about gaskets, rods, VANOS, etc., etc., etc. And oh yeah, EVs have massive torque, ride super-smooth, and are extraordinarily quiet. But I get it if someone doesn't want one – that's fine. I don't particularly care what car anyone other than me drives.

As far as the EV market goes, as long as it remains strong enough for them to continue to be produced – and I think we're already well past that point – I'll happily keep buying them. What the other 50% or whatever of the market does doesn't really concern me, outside of the environmental concerns. But as you point out, that ship has sailed and I can't personally make it turn around.

[Phillies8008]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

PHEVs make sense because they can do everything. It can be a road trip car (infrastructure isn't the problem, stopping every couple hours for extended periods of time is the problem) and burn gas, or it can be an around town car and just use electric.

The all or nothing mindset is the problem. We long ago turned away from "simplicity" as a selling point, so why invoke.it here? If we cared about that we would be using OHV motors without cylinder deactivation that would run for 400k miles.

I think the reality is that different things work for different people. A pure BEV would never ever be cost effective for me, I don't drive far enough to ever break even, and one with a high quality interior (not the cheap empty junk peddled by Tesla and copied by others) costs much more than an ICE equivalent. Same goes for my wife. We both do under 100 miles a week, and so it'd take us nearly the entire ownership to cover the cost of a charger install, let alone the increased purchase price.

That said, I recognize there's people who do a lot more miles than us where it works out economics wise for them. There's also people who value not ever pumping gas, and people who want 600+ miles of range in their truck because their bladders hold gallons. Choice in the market is good.

PHEVs are the jack of all trades, master of none. When did we turn away from simplicity being a selling point? If anything, it's the opposite. If simplicity saves me thousands of dollars a year, sign me up. I love lots of things about ICE cars – so much so that I purposefully own one along with my i4 – but I have zero nostalgia for gas, oil changes, and all of the associated mechanical parts that fail on ICE.

In terms of a BEV working for you, maybe it doesn't. If not, stick with ICE – no problem, and no argument from me. I'm definitely not arguing an all-or-none mindset; there are no one-size-fits-all solutions. But that being said, I am definitely of the opinion that BEVs would be a great fit for a lot of people. But certainly not everyone, at least at this point.

[jaffles]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

The problem is that when you build a 100 mile range car for mom, of your use ever changes you've got a brick of useless.

EREVs and PHEVs make far more sense for most people than a BEV. But the (financial) industry wanted BEVs, not PHEVs and EREVs.

If someone made a large 3 row PHEV or EREV like a Wagoneer or an X7 with 50-60 miles of range for my wife, it would probably save us $150 a month in gas. I dunno that it would ever really break even for us on e charging and purchase price are favored in, but it'd be more likely to break even vs a 500 mile range battery.

The idea of a 100km EV is they are light and cheap. a city run around. That is meant to be supported BUY THE GRID.

So mum starts her day dropping the kids at school. Her car is full because it charged over night from the house battery. She gets to work and sells 70% of her charge to the grid making some pocket money. She does so knowing her house battery is charging for free from the sun and will charger hers for free again over night. But hubby calls and requests a roast for dinner, so being the good wife she is now needs to detour out of here day before picking up the kids. She is not overly concerned as its not a deal breaker.

Because the shopping center has installed charging posts like an old school drive in, or in rows like parking meters under shaded parking which complements the vast solar array on the shopping center itself, she can get a quick top up charge while shopping. It could also be at the butcher or bottlo for arguments sake. She shops there because she gets a discount on charge, just like when she had a petrol car and got 4c off per liter of gas. She shops, tops if needed, and picks up the kids before going home

Dad is different, his hung like a bull and needs 600+ range. He wants 2T to go 0 to 100 in 2.5 seconds. He drives his weapon to work and charges it for free as some bribe from his workplace. On the weekend, or once and a while the family go camping and use its range. He needs a fast charger way out in the woods to get home again. It draws lots of energy because its heavy, has lots of battery, but goes like a shower of shit. He loves all the testosterone, but doesn't like it as its too hard to find fast chargers that work, or where mass infrastructure doesn't exist.

Like I said humanity as classically missed the forest from the trees.

Power always has and always will sell cars. Manufacturers are selling cars on their own using old school marketing. Governance, grid, industry, and manufacturers have not worked out how to work together and sell power.

[W2k]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

PHEVs make sense because they can do everything. It can be a road trip car (infrastructure isn't the problem, stopping every couple hours for extended periods of time is the problem) and burn gas, or it can be an around town car and just use electric.

But they only make sense in a "lowest common denominator" sort of way. Lugging around two whole separate drivetrains only one of which is really needed is hugely wasteful, and there's more things that can go wrong, more things that will need servicing and repair eventually, more complicated engineering. And these typically don't feel as nice to drive as pure BEVs, nor do they perform as well (obviously there are outliers like the BMW M5, but I'm talking about run-of-the-mill PHEVs here).

I would disagree that "stopping every couple hours for extended periods of time" is not an infrastructure problem. It definitely is. When you have 400+ km of range even under less than ideal conditions, and can charge at 200 kW, then we're talking about a ~15 minute break every 3 hours or more. This is perfectly fine, anyone who says otherwise is just being fussy. And that is with the current gen BMW tech (e.g. my G60). Newer cars are even better!

[jaffles]

Originally Posted by Phillies8008

PHEVs are the jack of all trades, master of none. When did we turn away from simplicity being a selling point? If anything, it's the opposite. If simplicity saves me thousands of dollars a year, sign me up. I love lots of things about ICE cars – so much so that I purposefully own one along with my i4 – but I have zero nostalgia for gas, oil changes, and all of the associated mechanical parts that fail on ICE.

In terms of a BEV working for you, maybe it doesn't. If not, stick with ICE – no problem, and no argument from me. I'm definitely not arguing an all-or-none mindset; there are no one-size-fits-all solutions. But that being said, I am definitely of the opinion that BEVs would be a great fit for a lot of people. But certainly not everyone, at least at this point.

When was an ICE car simple? 1910?

If I could buy an EV prime mover the amount of moving parts drops to about 10.
Then I can save 50K (50%) a year in diesel at $1.90 p/l and energy at 33c per KW. If I can trade or source that energy down to 16-20c, then I can make/save money. I can not do that with diesel. But I'm confident people will seek cheaper energy to charge if its available to them.


I also save 25-30K a year in servicing, plus have no oil, filters, or consumables to chuck into land fill. I say that because who knows where all the used oil goes?

Plus I get a quite truck, smooth delivery of power (no factory programmed jerky gear changes under load), and toque like never seen. No egr or dpf teck at the end of it evolution.

The kicker, EV trucks cost double what a diesel does, so negates the fuel saving largely.
Charging, either needs to be plates on various motorways, unloading docks, truck stops etc.
Or a universal battery change stations that work on a click clack swap like a battery power tool.
Or copious amounts of energy sitting around to charge batteries in <10 minutes.
Time is money in transport.

EVs are the future, just the future is lagging somewhat.

[zx10guy]

Discussions about the infrastructure is a whole topic that require specific attention from the power generation to transmission to the charging stations themselves. The charging stations outside of what I've seen with Tesla still need to be more pervasive and reliable. A number of accountings of trying to get a charging station to work to find out that the charging station is just broken or there's a firmware issue preventing a proper handshake.

Also, in my opinion, everyone in the EV world needs to sit down and start setting standards. Standards on the communication handshake between EV and charger, the charging recepticles, and the battery pack interfaces. Why ICE has remained so sticky is that an ICE car from decades ago can still run on the gas available today. Can't say that with an EV.

I'm also in a weather zone where I have to take into consideration cold temps which affect range and charging.

I drive a lot. I average about 30,000 miles a year. Along with that time is money for me. I can't afford to sit and wait for an EV to charge the necessary amount of time to get any decent range out of it. The Toyota C-HR I have has done pretty much everything I need from it. It's about to cross 180,000 miles. I haven't had any major break downs with the car. Just routine maintenance. For the total cost of purchase and operating the car for the 6 years I've owned it, I'd venture to say it's still cheaper than had I gotten an EV.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by W2k

But they only make sense in a "lowest common denominator" sort of way. Lugging around two whole separate drivetrains only one of which is really needed is hugely wasteful, and there's more things that can go wrong, more things that will need servicing and repair eventually, more complicated engineering. And these typically don't feel as nice to drive as pure BEVs, nor do they perform as well (obviously there are outliers like the BMW M5, but I'm talking about run-of-the-mill PHEVs here).

I would disagree that "stopping every couple hours for extended periods of time" is not an infrastructure problem. It definitely is. When you have 400+ km of range even under less than ideal conditions, and can charge at 200 kW, then we're talking about a ~15 minute break every 3 hours or more. This is perfectly fine, anyone who says otherwise is just being fussy. And that is with the current gen BMW tech (e.g. my G60). Newer cars are even better!

15 minutes every 3 hours is going to add at least another hour tons trip to go see my family from stopping. And that's best case, assuming we are able to charge at the max speed and no wait for chargers. Moreover, why on earth would I pick that experience if I could get something with a gas motor that cuts that time down to 5 minutes?

PHEVs aren't the lowest common denominator at all, they're the most versatile tool. They're the QB who has a cannon, can run the ball, and is smart enough to run the whole team from the field, plus has eyes like a hawk. They can do whatever you need. Want an EV for cheap around town? No problem. Want to fill up and have super long range that's refilled quickly? It does that too. And you don't need to "lug around two separate drivetrains", you have a modest sized battery, a small EV motor located in the transmission, and whatever motor you choose. FWIW, the X5 45e (PHEV) is about the same weight as the oX, up to 200 pounds lighter. Batteries are very heavy.

All that said, I recognize that to BEV people PHEVs and EREVs are abhorrent because they make BEVs look.pointless to 90% of consumers.

At the end of the day, American consumers aren't as easily pushed around as those overseas. And they don't want to transition to EVs yet. The automakers are in for dark times if they don't listen to what consumers want (or don't want).

[ShocknAwe]

I can turn my toaster from heat levels 1-10...

[NickyC]

Teslas, Plaids in particular, basically destroyed any desire I ever have to make my ICE cars faster.

[jaffles]

Originally Posted by NickyC

Teslas, Plaids in particular, basically destroyed any desire I ever have to make my ICE cars faster.

Very true, once you have had a burn in an EV, its hard to get excited over ICE. No mods required, it just goes like a rocket.

[zx10guy]

Except if you've ever experienced throwing a leg over what many nickname crotch rockets. Any desire I've had to mod any 4 wheeled caged ICE vehicle died when I got into superbikes. They're still ICE powered that don't need any mods to have the fear of God put into you when you crank that right wrist. Plus, the performance can be repeated as many times as you want without having to worry about some battery pack overheating or waiting for the battery pack to recharge.

[W2k]

Originally Posted by zx10guy

Discussions about the infrastructure is a whole topic that require specific attention from the power generation to transmission to the charging stations themselves. The charging stations outside of what I've seen with Tesla still need to be more pervasive and reliable. A number of accountings of trying to get a charging station to work to find out that the charging station is just broken or there's a firmware issue preventing a proper handshake.

I don't disagree with you at all but this will all be fixed, it's only a matter of time. Obviously being a smaller country we don't have the same issues of scale, but over here, you literally just plug in, tap your (BMW Charging) contactless card and go. No per-station or per-vendor account or registration needed. No apps needed. Broken stations extremely rare, and the status is updated realtime so I can see through the in-car navigation that it'll be free and working by the time I get there. So the tech is perfectly mature, it just needs to be deployed.