• 0 Posts
  • 359 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 6th, 2023

help-circle
  • You are correct on many of those points. But lets look for edge cases - people living in apartments, they can’t charge their cars when there are no garages, so they need to do what normal people do with gas cars - go to the gas station to charge.

    That’s a problem, I agree, but you don’t design a new car model around edge cases.

    So if you have a 600 miles car and drive 35 miles per day that’s enough to supercharge once per week for 30+ minutes and be good for the rest of the week - good for the battery, good for wait times, good for not pissing off the person buying the car as they don’t have to waste multiple hours per week.

    True.

    If your point is that it’s inneficient to carry heavy batteries around I would agree, but isn’t it less efficient to use gas, to have 2 cars instead of 1, to have to rent a car, etc. I think it balances out and with new battery technology you’ll see that they’ll start competing more fiercely with range, but there is a sweet spot and I think it’s 600 miles, if the battery drain is not affected by cold/hot weather 360 miles would be a good sweetspot.

    Again, it depend on the target market. In EU it was relatively common to have 2 cars: a small one for the day by day commute (where other options are not available) and other tasks like taking the kids to/from school, small trip to the grocery store and so on, and a bigger one for the long travel.

    It is still true outside the big cities, where services maybe are not that near and normally there are very few options for public transportation. And I don’t think that having a small car for the day by day and rent a bigger one for longer trip is really that bad.

    Also, consider that often a really big car it not an option in places where street are really narrow to the point you are forced to buy small car (common outside most of the big cities)

    I hope the market appreciates this new model, but highly doubt it - most of the other things I suggested in the original post also affect if the buyer would decide to spend their money on the car. I don’t think it’s unrealistic for VW/Audi to make something like this at a competitive price of $120k - same as the starting price for a BMW M5.

    I think you are out of price range. I don’t know is US (given the use of dollars), but in EU a 120K car is not a common car, I mean, the big cars like the Renault Espace are in the range of 50/70 k, a 120K car is an entry level luxury car here.





  • The problem is that the battery degrades, so it’s a good idea to keep it charges to 60-80% so that it last way longer. If you have 600 miles of max range then that means you can easily have 360-480 miles for your driving. This is overkill as well right ? Wrong, if you live in a cold climate it practically gets halved so now you have 180-240 miles of driving.

    Fine, but you still fail to look how the car is used. A battery that big also mean more weight (and thus more energy needed) and it can make sense if you use the car almost always for longer trips. For shorter drive it make more sense to have a smaller battery and recharge more often.,

    Let’s say it’s summer though, now you want to drive 600 miles to your nearest ocean/sea and want to sightsee along the way.

    Here you fail to consider the target market. EU and US are very different geographically. In US a car with bigger batteries can make sense, in EU probably not that much.
    VW simply design a car for the market where they want to sell it, which make sense in my opinion.

    With a battery that big you might have to charge once and not even fully to have enough confidence driving to places where charging might be limited.

    That would be a problem anyway, with limited charging options you could arrive at the sea but then have problem returning home (but this is a problem that is slowly going away)

    That’s why smaller batteries make sense only if you use the car for daily commuting, now you need to rent or buy a proper long range gas car or ev car - which now costs you quite a bit more or adds inconvenience. With tesla the problem is almost solved, but they have problematic political views and minimalistic interiors and a max battery of 402 miles. So yeah I think it’s worth it to make a car that costs 3x what VW are pushing, but is useful to everybody.

    I don’t know how may miles you need to drive for your daily commute that need to have such big battery but in the supposed target market of the VW even a 180 miles battery can easily cover your weekly commuting.

    So yes, you are right that a bigger battery is usefull but it really depend on where you plan to sell your car. Not everywhere you need that kind of mileage daily and you need also to consider other factors like the weight and size of the car.


  • I don’t get thesr automakers, who is this made for, don’t they see that tesla is killing it with their largr batteries.

    It is made for people living in places where you maybe don’t need to drive 50 miles to go to the nearest mall… a car with 600 miles autonomy would be an overkill if you just need to drive about 10/20 miles a day while commuting.

    Why can’t they put a 600miles battery

    because they are useless for the target market.
    If you don’t need to drive that long distance for everything, you don’t need big batteries with all the associate problems (weight, dimension and so on) that in the end don’t give you any real bonus if not the fact that maybe you can recharge it less often.


  • I get what you’re saying but the forgetful customer is explicitly what they said they want, which is dumb any way you look at it.

    I don’t disagree on that.

    Many times you’re forced into signing up for subscription, or coerced under the guise of a free trial. Now this wouldn’t be as bad if they came back and were like, “hey we see you haven’t used our service in a while, do you still need it?”

    Maybe, but at this point I doubt that a forgetful customer would pay attention to it. What would really make the difference would be to renew the subscription explicitly. This way you could be forced to sign for a false free trial, but you would also need to confirm a subsequent subscription.

    rather than just leeching money from the user. The system is designed to purposely allow the user to make these errors and that’s wrong any way you want to shape it.

    Yes, this is another way to see it. But the solution in my opinion is not to eliminate the concept of subscriptions. The solution is to educate the customer.







  • I don’t trust them considering their enthusiasm over it and the comments about Finnish history.

    If, as it seems to emerge, they are “forced” to do it under legal advise, it is completely irrelevant that you (or anybody else for that matter) trust them or not.

    About their “enthusiasm”, all I can see is that after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Russia is not sees as that friendly and trustworthy anymore: they had a signed treaty with Ukraine to preserve Ukranian integrity in exchange of the nuclear weapons (from URSS), we see how much Russia valued their own word. I cannot blame someone from a country which share a border with Russia for not having simpaty for Russia.
    True, someone innocent will pay, but it is not that different from having Russian scientist turned away from CERN or any other situation where there was a collaboration. It is sad but on the other hand it is a consequence.

    Go read “Finnisu Civil War: History, Memory, Legacy” by Tepora and try to laugh at the comments about history. Impossible.

    As you cannot laugh to any other memory of any other war.