Stinsy wrote: ↑Sat Mar 22, 2025 7:19 am
EVs require very little maintenance. Basically just the pollen filter. EVs require much fewer repairs than an ICEV too, due to fewer moving parts. Most of the repairs can be undertaken by any mechanic (eg suspension), but companies (ec Cleevely) will repair the battery system on your driveway.
So if you’re worried about the cost of maintenance or repair don’t buy an ICEV.
(Why has this thread become a mouthpiece for FF industry disinformation?)
"Electric vehicles are more unreliable than their petrol and diesel counterparts and spend longer off the road according to a Which? survey."
I know it is a little dated. But my friend has the "most reliable" Kia and it spent a goodly time in the garage having the broken motor mounts replaced. So much weight is pared off everything to compensate for the battery.
As you said three years old and doesn’t breakdown the “faults” iirc there was a period where running out of charge was counted as a breakdown but not for ICE as this was nearly unthinkable.
The thing is we can all point to problems in either type of vehicle if we want to. The longer waiting time for repairs is linked to the slowly developing after market spares and manufacturers spares supply chains as mentioned earlier.
For myself if I were buying second hand I would buy BEV based on my own view that fewer moving parts equals less fault points than a conventional ICE, but that’s my own logic and preference there’s no right or wrong answer just what’s right for each person and their circumstance.
I think it mentions that software faults were a major contributer.
Not meaning to bash EVs, but more questioning this assumption that they have fewer moving parts so must be more reliable. They still have transmissions in most designs. They still have suspension, brakes (albeit used less), tyres, etc.
Petrol / Diesel engines can be amazingly reliable, they are well developed technology. When your FF car breaks down, it is (a) rare and (b) quite often an electrical fault !
"(Why has this thread become a mouthpiece for FF industry disinformation?)"
Realy?
4.0kw FIT PV solar SunnyBoy 4000tl & 7 x 570w JA solar panels
7.410kw 13 x 570w JA Solar panels & Sunsynk ECCO 3.6kw.
7 x US5000 Pylontechs.
2 x 3.5kw A2A
4500l RWH
Biomass heating
Iboost divertor
Full house internal walls insu
600min Loft insul
The fact of the matter is if the software (for example) goes the shape of a pear then its a very cheap for what you get, rather large looking ornament on your drive - Its totally false to claim that EV are anymore reliable than a cheap old diesel/petrol/hybrid etc etc.
Everything breaks and fails at some point.
Its just an opinion, not some sort of industry propaganda conspiracy theory. My industry is water.
4.0kw FIT PV solar SunnyBoy 4000tl & 7 x 570w JA solar panels
7.410kw 13 x 570w JA Solar panels & Sunsynk ECCO 3.6kw.
7 x US5000 Pylontechs.
2 x 3.5kw A2A
4500l RWH
Biomass heating
Iboost divertor
Full house internal walls insu
600min Loft insul
resybaby wrote: ↑Sat Mar 22, 2025 11:30 am
We'd all be driving these EV beasts, as they on the face of it, if the reliabilty was all its cracked up to be.
They are an absolute steal for the specification of what you get for your £25k. Who on earth would buy a Nissan Leaf instead?
The fact of the matter is if the software (for example) goes the shape of a pear then its a very cheap for what you get, rather large looking ornament on your drive - Its totally false to claim that EV are anymore reliable than a cheap old diesel/petrol/hybrid etc etc.
Everything breaks and fails at some point.
Its just an opinion, not some sort of industry propaganda conspiracy theory. My industry is water.
I don't know where you're getting this information. Maybe you read the Daily Mail?
Afuelnd both the EV pro side and the FF side are ignoring a"joint" solution.
Let's begin with the EV. The main issue is range. Not range for every day but the inability of the vehicle to go several hundred miles without LONG breaks. Please keep in mind that I live HERE where the range you might want to go in a day much longer than where most ofd ypu are. Also the cars best small, little haulage capacity. BUT -- they don't ever use any fossil fuel (except where is the electricity coming from? >>
A larger FF vehicle could handle those rare long trips. Using fossil fuel but only being used rarely. But a waste of resources producing that vehicle for such a short duty cycle (measured over a year). So tending to be used more often and so yes, a FF hog.
How about if we tried a different solution. How about if we had small travel trailers, with a motor-generator capable of just a little more than the average power requirement of the EV (say 2/3). Otto or Diesel* doesn't matter, both are quite efficient when operated at constant output. In other words, turns on say at battery half charged and off when 80% (and vehicle still operating). Likely plenty of storage space in there so solves that problem of the EV.Yes uses some FF but only as needed and it sitting idle no where near the cost of a largish FF vehicle sitting idle.
* We normally think of these by fuel type, but not really so. A function of RPMs. A tiny Diesel running at 10,000 RPM (think model airplane engine) would be running on high octane petrol and a gigantic Otto (they used to have, say fishing boat) running at 120 RPM might be running on #2 oil. The point is that petrol explodes/burns faster than oil but RPMs determines how much time it has to explode/burn in for either cycle.
There is no possibility of social justice on a dead planet except the equality of the grave.
MikeNovack wrote: ↑Sat Mar 22, 2025 2:30 pm
Afuelnd both the EV pro side and the FF side are ignoring a"joint" solution.
Let's begin with the EV. The main issue is range. Not range for every day but the inability of the vehicle to go several hundred miles without LONG breaks. Please keep in mind that I live HERE where the range you might want to go in a day much longer than where most ofd ypu are. Also the cars best small, little haulage capacity. BUT -- they don't ever use any fossil fuel (except where is the electricity coming from? >>
A larger FF vehicle could handle those rare long trips. Using fossil fuel but only being used rarely. But a waste of resources producing that vehicle for such a short duty cycle (measured over a year). So tending to be used more often and so yes, a FF hog.
How about if we tried a different solution. How about if we had small travel trailers, with a motor-generator capable of just a little more than the average power requirement of the EV (say 2/3). Otto or Diesel* doesn't matter, both are quite efficient when operated at constant output. In other words, turns on say at battery half charged and off when 80% (and vehicle still operating). Likely plenty of storage space in there so solves that problem of the EV.Yes uses some FF but only as needed and it sitting idle no where near the cost of a largish FF vehicle sitting idle.
* We normally think of these by fuel type, but not really so. A function of RPMs. A tiny Diesel running at 10,000 RPM (think model airplane engine) would be running on high octane petrol and a gigantic Otto (they used to have, say fishing boat) running at 120 RPM might be running on #2 oil. The point is that petrol explodes/burns faster than oil but RPMs determines how much time it has to explode/burn in for either cycle.
I remember decades ago when people were making ICEV push trailers for their homebrew EVs. Those days are long gone.
Anyone telling you that battery electric passenger cars don't fill every niche is lying to you. There is a trend umungst FF-funded MSM to pretend that "the technology isn't quite there yet" and convince people that their next car should be an ICEV and they should maybe consider an EV for the one after that.
The truth is that a 50kWh BEV is perfect for 99% of people. That is 200 miles of round-town range on a single charge, which is more than many people do in a week. And there is plentiful rapid-charging availability for the once-a-year pilgrimage to Cornwall. You're supposed to stop every few hours in anycase and it takes 15mins to add 100 miles of range.
If you're a service engineer or similar, and you do more than 250miles a day, 5 days a week, then a 75kWh BEV is probably a wise choice. But how many people these days do 40-50k miles a year?
12x 340W JA Solar panels (4.08kWp)
3x 380W JA Solar panels (1.14kWp)
6x 2.4kWh Pylontech batteries (14.4kWh)
LuxPower inverter/charger
(Artist formally known as ******, well it should be obvious enough to those for whom such things are important.)
resybaby wrote: ↑Sat Mar 22, 2025 11:30 am
We'd all be driving these EV beasts, as they on the face of it, if the reliabilty was all its cracked up to be.
They are an absolute steal for the specification of what you get for your £25k. Who on earth would buy a Nissan Leaf instead?
The fact of the matter is if the software (for example) goes the shape of a pear then its a very cheap for what you get, rather large looking ornament on your drive - Its totally false to claim that EV are anymore reliable than a cheap old diesel/petrol/hybrid etc etc.
Everything breaks and fails at some point.
Its just an opinion, not some sort of industry propaganda conspiracy theory. My industry is water.
I don't know where you're getting this information. Maybe you read the Daily Mail?
What's happened to this forum? We didn't have FF industry propaganda on here before!
We have a broad Base of individuals with all sorts of views. Let's enjoy that and respect them all, not insult each other.
That would be uncool and then it would be legit to question what has happened to the forum.
As to ff propaganda, I've not seen that but even then it is a view.
15kW PV SE, VI, HM, EN
42kWh LFPO4 storage
7kW ASHP
200ltr HWT.
73kWh HI5
Deep insulation, air leak ct'd home
WBSx2
Low energy bulbs
Veg patches & fruit trees
