In praise of EV'S

Andy_W

Well-known member
To be fair I didn't name anyone. Just saying certain folk 'love EVs'.

I have no doubt some people are listing to outdated myths about EVs.

I'm just saying it's still very much a choice and EVs simply don't suit everyone. It's not as black and white as 'ICE bad' 'EVs amazing'. It's all about opinions and not as simplistic as telling people they are wrong for not wanting an EV.
I don't think it's a love of EV's, not for me, it's more the reality that they're just cost/ spec beneficial on newish/ like for like cars, for quite a few markets, but certainly not all.

I think the vast majority of people that have had many ICE cars and who now have an EV, will chose an EV going forward. I think the opinion of those is probably worth a bit more, as they've had the experience, which will have enabled them to dispel some of the myths, or exaggerations. Some could dispel those without owning an EV if they thought about it, which is what I did before I got my first one.

If my cost benefit of the EV had not been a reality, or it had been a let down in any way, then I would have simply just got another ICE, and would be bashing EV's. My next car will be an EV though, and I'm probably changing the missus car to an EV once I've done the full numbers. The mini and ID3 look like good buys. Wouldn't have don e that 3 years ago, as they didn't exist. But there will be 3-4 year old ones in 3 years, for people to buy second hand.

Some like 5-10 year old cars, which is fine, EV's have not filtered down much into that, to cover most specs, so in that case an ICE is probably a better choice for them. In 5-10 years it probably won't be, other than for nostalgia. I wouldn't buy an old leaf or an I3 for example, as I think they're hideous, but they're not the spec of car I'd chose anyway.

There might be some who buy 3 year old cars, but they might find that a new EV could save them a lot of money, or could be the same effective price, but they get a newer car (which most would like). Some may still choose ICE as they're scared of the tech, fair enough. Some won't be scared, which is again fair enough.

There's a massive chuck of people who either can't do the maths (the total maths), or couldn't compare the electric v fuel savings, which is what I've tried to help out with. If people want to ignore that, then that's fine of course, ignorance is bliss.

The range thing is annoying, as in people thinking they need massive ranges. In reality anything with a 200 mile range will result in less time spent at service/ fuel stations, than an ICE would. I do 10k miles a year and have only had 3/4 uses of public chargers, for maybe 2-3 hours in total, but each of those I was going to stop for a bite to eat anyway. A 300 mile range would be better, but I think this is pointless for most people.

I wouldn't get an EV if I didn't have my own charger though, some could easily get away with this, but most probably wouldn't or wouldn't want to.
 

Andy_W

Well-known member
My next car due to arrive in January is petrol but I think I would get an EV after that. There's some good looking ones coming through and the ranges are getting better all the time.
I was having some second thoughts though after the recent storms.Some people have been cut off for a week and could be facing a further week without electric. Not good for those with a home charging point and an EV.
For anything with a range more than 200 miles I would look at what the max charging speed is of the car, if you would be doing a lot of public charging. The charging speed is the key if you do lots of miles. Most people stop every 200 miles or so anyway, the charging isn't "lost time" then, as it's topping up whilst you're otherwise occupied anyway. Nobody really needs a 300 mile range, unless they don't have a home/ work/ supermarket charger. There's not many driving 300 miles in a day, twice a week, without eating etc.

Depends where you live I suppose. If you live very rural, and the grid is largely fed through overhead lines through trees etc, then that's a small consideration I think. For anyone in a town or near a town, where all cables are underground, then it won't matter. The fuel crisis (although largely a myth also) caused quite a lot of issues, as will fuel prices as they're only going to go one way (through tax, not necessarily through barrel costs).
 

Blf

Well-known member
For anything with a range more than 200 miles I would look at what the max charging speed is of the car, if you would be doing a lot of public charging. The charging speed is the key if you do lots of miles. Most people stop every 200 miles or so anyway, the charging isn't "lost time" then, as it's topping up whilst you're otherwise occupied anyway. Nobody really needs a 300 mile range, unless they don't have a home/ work/ supermarket charger. There's not many driving 300 miles in a day, twice a week, without eating etc.

Depends where you live I suppose. If you live very rural, and the grid is largely fed through overhead lines through trees etc, then that's a small consideration I think. For anyone in a town or near a town, where all cables are underground, then it won't matter. The fuel crisis (although largely a myth also) caused quite a lot of issues, as will fuel prices as they're only going to go one way (through tax, not necessarily through barrel costs).
Yes I think an EV would be ideal for me. Retired and most of my journeys are between 1 and 12 miles with around 4 journeys a year with a 240 mile return to visit my son ,we stay all day or overnight so charging wouldnt be a problem (except for his bill 😁). Other than that a few 50 mile trips.
I was really thinking of getting one this time but the deal on changing my used car for new one of the upgraded model was superb. Used car prices are going through the roof.
 

Andy_W

Well-known member
Yes I think an EV would be ideal for me. Retired and most of my journeys are between 1 and 12 miles with around 4 journeys a year with a 240 mile return to visit my son ,we stay all day or overnight so charging wouldnt be a problem (except for his bill 😁). Other than that a few 50 mile trips.
I was really thinking of getting one this time but the deal on changing my used car for new one of the upgraded model was superb. Used car prices are going through the roof.
Sounds that way, you could probably even get away without a home charger, if you take the same car to supermarkets etc, but I'd advise anyone who can get a home charger to get one, especially if there are grants for them, they just make life so easy. I only plug mine in maybe once or twice a week, half the time my car is sat on half charge with zero concern.

The 240 mile return visit won't be an issue for you, but it might take about 12 hours to top the battery up from half to full using a 3 pin plug (they're not great). The car might do it in hone hit, but I wouldn't do it that way. What I do for trips like that is just top up on the way there, or on the way back, or top up whilst you're there at a supermarket or restaurant or whatever you do. 3 pin plugs aren't the way to go.

The 120 miles is probably only 30-40kWh of used battery so will be only £4.5-£7 for the charge, get him a couple of pints (y)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blf

Randy

Well-known member
Yes I think an EV would be ideal for me. Retired and most of my journeys are between 1 and 12 miles with around 4 journeys a year with a 240 mile return to visit my son ,we stay all day or overnight so charging wouldnt be a problem (except for his bill 😁). Other than that a few 50 mile trips.
I was really thinking of getting one this time but the deal on changing my used car for new one of the upgraded model was superb. Used car prices are going through the roof.
They are definitely.

A few weeks back a friend of the wife's traded sold her Clio to a dealership for £300 less then what she paid for it from another dealer.

She'd had the car 4 years!
 

SmallTown

Well-known member
The F8 then?
You haven't been following the thread have you? Still your crazy and ridiculous contribution was funny/ I'll give you that.

You keep being you but maybe duck out of the adult conversations if they are over your head!
 

Randy

Well-known member
You haven't been following the thread have you? Still your crazy and ridiculous contribution was funny/ I'll give you that.

You keep being you but maybe duck out of the adult conversations if they are over your head!
Crikey ST have you got the decorators in this week? It was an innocent question surrounding the fight between saving money and driving pleasures.
 

Andy_W

Well-known member
Crikey ST have you got the decorators in this week? It was an innocent question surrounding the fight between saving money and driving pleasures.
Yeah I thought your post was that way too, a light-hearted question, I think everyone would pick the Ferrari if it was in the budget!

There's no EV reasonably comparable to that I don't think, other than maybe the Tesla Roadster coming out. The suped up Taycan is probably quicker and cheaper but the Ferrarri is a different class of car altogether.
 

SmallTown

Well-known member
Crikey ST have you got the decorators in this week? It was an innocent question surrounding the fight between saving money and driving pleasures.
It wasn't an innocent question and you damn well know it. It was a pathetic and asinine wind up. I don't mind stupid joke posts but don't try and take the moral high ground when you make one and get laughed at
 

SmallTown

Well-known member
Yeah I thought your post was that way too, a light-hearted question, I think everyone would pick the Ferrari if it was in the budget!

There's no EV reasonably comparable to that I don't think, other than maybe the Tesla Roadster coming out. The suped up Taycan is probably quicker and cheaper but the Ferrarri is a different class of car altogether.
TBf I didn't mind the first post, it was funny. It was the follow ups that I didn't like. Made Randy look like he was trying to be clever. Which isn't really his forte
 

Randy

Well-known member
Yeah I thought your post was that way too, a light-hearted question, I think everyone would pick the Ferrari if it was in the budget!

There's no EV reasonably comparable to that I don't think, other than maybe the Tesla Roadster coming out. The suped up Taycan is probably quicker and cheaper but the Ferrarri is a different class of car altogether.
The Tesla roadster (the new one) does look pretty awesome I'll admit. Much nicer than a Renault ZOE. 😉
 

JustTheGent

Active member
I've got 3 cars at a time personally, and maybe 5-10 other vehicles through the company at any one time, doesn't take long to rack the numbers up. Someone may just have one car, for 3 years, over 30 years that's 10 cars.
I've got a budget TCO, I'm happy to pay, and this budget has gone up and up over the years and additional to this if I buy wisely I can change more often. I change more than most, probably because my budget has gone up and circumstances/ requirements change more than most.
Yes, as we've already established - you change your vehicles regularly. I'm not sure what those changing requirements could be, considering you're using 3 or more vehicles at a time. You'd think you'd have all bases covered. I suspect the real reason you keep increasing your budget is because you're never satisfied for long and always want a new or more expensive model. Or maybe you can't really afford these vehicles and you're hanging on month by month?

I've been pretty satisfied with every car I've owned, just like I was satisfied with a phone from 15 years ago, or internet speed from 10 years ago etc. You can live your life in the past if you like, your choice. If there's better around for similar cost, then I'll do that.
It's a tricky one. It flies in the face of satisfaction if you're regularly changing and swapping out. That behaviour points to not being satisfied. You'll say it's due to a change in circumstances, but the evidence doesn't suggest that. You might actually tell yourself you're satisfied, because you need to believe that in order to keep repeating the process, i.e. changing your vehicle. If you admitted you were never satisfied, it would detract from the buzz and thrill of a new purchase. You'd be buying more insatisfaction. So there's certainly a level of you playing games with your own mind here, probably without you even knowing it.

If you're happy with a 10 year old car, then why not 20 or 30 years old? They do the same thing, right? You could pick one up for 1k, rather than the 10k you might spend.
But for balance, I've I've just above compared two 2020 cars, the EV worked out far cheaper, and is clearly better and higher spec. I notice that nobody took apart the spec comparison or numbers in any way, probably as the numbers were largely correct and people don't have the EV experience to work it out, which is understandable.
When buying a vehicle, there's a sweet spot where its age will mean you're getting the best of the modern and the best of the old. You'll get the best value and quality because you make a series of judgements. This can range from vehicles around 3-20 years old. But of course, doing the research and homework is essential. There's lots of differences from brand to brand and model to model. Finding a good example of a 20-30yo car isn't easy. Also, big steps in safety advancements were brought in around the early 2000s and things like better rust protection came in. When buying used and a bit older, you want to take advantage of the significant steps in advancements whilst not being too concerned with many of the small steps and unneeded technology. For example, DCTs were brought in to much acclaim and have been littered with faults for over a decade. It took a good few years for manufacturers to accept there was a problem and they still wouldn't admit to it fully in terms of warranties. Of course, there's always compromises to be made, there's no perfect vehicle.

New cars of similar class (on average) will be better than old cars, it's a fact, it's effectively evolution. There's a lot more that can go wrong in an ICE, and like we've mentioned the EV warranties are far superior anyway. The manufacturers wouldn't put good warranties on them, if they thought otherwise, and they know more than you or me. They know where the market is, and where it is going, and I agree with them.
The thing is, the whole point of doing research and making an informed decision is not being an average buyer. All cars need fixing, but many of the mostly costly things are related to technology. Then of course you have EV batteries. These issues can cost more than a new engine and more than the vehicle would be worth. We'll see how these warranties work out over time. If you stick an EV vehicle on a fast charger that it doesn't like and it fries some components - will the manufacturer play ball? I wouldn't be so sure, a lot of this technology is going to be open to interpretation in terms of faults.

I wasn't talking about £50-£150, I was talking about £10-50, which is why I mentioned £10-50. There would be a lesser quality difference in a £50-150 pair, which is why I didn't mention that. The same reason why I wouldn't advise many people to spend 100k on an EV, if they have a budget of £300 a month TCO. Some might earn double, or triple, for them they could look at the higher price ranges. They're getting less value, through the law of diminishing returns, but if they've got the money, then why not. They're still probably saving half their wage each month. I wouldn't be advising anyone to blow a massive chunk of their wages on a car.
£10-£50 isn't really an accurate range for shoes, £50-£150 would be more typical. But the point is that something considerably cheaper isn't necessarily that much inferior in quality. It could be very similar. Just to note, I tend to shop smart rather than shop the cheapest. My judgement has been honed through research and experience. For e.g, I'll generally buy footwear for around £70 in genuine end of season sales if I can get my size. Around 5 years ago I bought a pair of handmade Italian brogues that fit perfectly. They were around £150 and had been £500 at full retail. I thought the cost to benefit ratio made sense. They were probably discounted so much because they weren't seen as on trend at that time (they prob actually are now) But I'm a contraian buyer and do like that type of purchase if it makes sense.

To me, it seems like you're someone who is attempting to derive meaning through their spending. You earn a certain amount so a certain percentage of that has to be spent. You're effectively on a ladder system of purchases. You might need to be to get up in the morning. But at the end of the day, everyone makes their own decisions. I'm just trying to warn people about spending big money and getting contracted to significant monthly payments.
 

Andy_W

Well-known member
Yes, as we've already established - you change your vehicles regularly. I'm not sure what those changing requirements could be, considering you're using 3 or more vehicles at a time. You'd think you'd have all bases covered. I suspect the real reason you keep increasing your budget is because you're never satisfied for long and always want a new or more expensive model. Or maybe you can't really afford these vehicles and you're hanging on month by month?

It's a tricky one. It flies in the face of satisfaction if you're regularly changing and swapping out. That behaviour points to not being satisfied. You'll say it's due to a change in circumstances, but the evidence doesn't suggest that. You might actually tell yourself you're satisfied, because you need to believe that in order to keep repeating the process, i.e. changing your vehicle. If you admitted you were never satisfied, it would detract from the buzz and thrill of a new purchase. You'd be buying more insatisfaction. So there's certainly a level of you playing games with your own mind here, probably without you even knowing it.

When buying a vehicle, there's a sweet spot where its age will mean you're getting the best of the modern and the best of the old. You'll get the best value and quality because you make a series of judgements. This can range from vehicles around 3-20 years old. But of course, doing the research and homework is essential. There's lots of differences from brand to brand and model to model. Finding a good example of a 20-30yo car isn't easy. Also, big steps in safety advancements were brought in around the early 2000s and things like better rust protection came in. When buying used and a bit older, you want to take advantage of the significant steps in advancements whilst not being too concerned with many of the small steps and unneeded technology. For example, DCTs were brought in to much acclaim and have been littered with faults for over a decade. It took a good few years for manufacturers to accept there was a problem and they still wouldn't admit to it fully in terms of warranties. Of course, there's always compromises to be made, there's no perfect vehicle.

The thing is, the whole point of doing research and making an informed decision is not being an average buyer. All cars need fixing, but many of the mostly costly things are related to technology. Then of course you have EV batteries. These issues can cost more than a new engine and more than the vehicle would be worth. We'll see how these warranties work out over time. If you stick an EV vehicle on a fast charger that it doesn't like and it fries some components - will the manufacturer play ball? I wouldn't be so sure, a lot of this technology is going to be open to interpretation in terms of faults.

£10-£50 isn't really an accurate range for shoes, £50-£150 would be more typical. But the point is that something considerably cheaper isn't necessarily that much inferior in quality. It could be very similar. Just to note, I tend to shop smart rather than shop the cheapest. My judgement has been honed through research and experience. For e.g, I'll generally buy footwear for around £70 in genuine end of season sales if I can get my size. Around 5 years ago I bought a pair of handmade Italian brogues that fit perfectly. They were around £150 and had been £500 at full retail. I thought the cost to benefit ratio made sense. They were probably discounted so much because they weren't seen as on trend at that time (they prob actually are now) But I'm a contraian buyer and do like that type of purchase if it makes sense.

To me, it seems like you're someone who is attempting to derive meaning through their spending. You earn a certain amount so a certain percentage of that has to be spent. You're effectively on a ladder system of purchases. You might need to be to get up in the morning. But at the end of the day, everyone makes their own decisions. I'm just trying to warn people about spending big money and getting contracted to significant monthly payments.
Strange where you have to base your opinion on incorrect assumptions to justify your comments. :unsure:

But to clarify, I've probably changed my main car on average every 2-3 years, but gone through many earnings changes and many changes in requirements, that happens for younger folk. Some cars I've had 5-10 years. For that I don't think it's a lot, but hey, you seem to think you know more about me and EV's than I do, but actually you don't unsurprisingly. My total outlay on my main car (TCO) is typically <5-10% of my wage, and I save/ invest >50% I reckon I'm ok thanks.

A 20k earner with no kids may be satisfied with a 10k sporty hatch, then over the course of 10 years they might end up as 100k earner with a 50k on a convertible, then they might then have kids and spend 50k on a SUV or whatever. Lots of changes in lifestyle, lots of changes in circumstance, in a short period of time. If each time they have a car (or shoes, clothes, house etc) for a set budget then the budget will change, and then again for circumstance changes. For their age Younger people probably swap more, if they can afford too. Some old guy in his 60's likely won't change circumstances as much, so might keep a small car and run it into the ground, which for them is probably sound, that's what I may end up doing one day.

Of course I don't have to explain myself, nobody does. All I'm here to do is compare the numbers on newer cars, which are like for like, and this will be my last response to you, as it's clearly a waste of time. The only reason I've responded up to now is to help others passed your narrative.

Some buy a car to drive and enjoy, or at least not hate, some get the cheapest thing they can get their hands on to just get from A to B. Each to their own.

I agree on the sweet spot, for 2-3 year old cars, this is often the case, but in a time of demand and in a time of a switchover, that conventional thought can change. For ICE cars that probably still applies, more than EV's. But like I keep saying, I'm talking largely about comparing to EV cars 0-2 year old, as this is when EV's have started to come into the market to a reasonable level. I've no interest in comparing anything before then, as EV's largely were not even remotely mainstream, and the infrastructure wasn't great. But a lot has changed. The fuel, tax, maintenance savings on a new EV, can offset that of buying a 3 year old ICE. Plus the ICE will likely depreciate more, especially a new or 0-2 year old one.

I don't have the same concern about batteries and motors as you do, largely as the warranties are massive. A performance engine for a BMW, Audi or whatever would cost an absolute fortune (I've had to pay this once), and the warrenty on it would expire in half the time/ miles. I would expect the engine to be fine for a lot longer mind, but maybe not the fan belt, clutch, auto gearbox, discs, pads etc. Obviously an EV is covered for all of those (doesn't have most of them), and won't likely even need a set of discs and pads ever (certainly not in my timeframes).

You can get shoes for £10-£30 very easily, but I wouldn't buy them. You could even get some good ones which are 3-5 year old? You seem to think a bit smarter when it comes to shoes though, I'll give you that. But with shoes it's simpler, the TCO is the shoes and shoes only. There's 20 things which decide the TCO of the car, it's more complex, which is why ticket price is not the be all and end all.

Not really, I know what I can easily afford, and certainly wouldn't buy a car more than 10% of my monthly wage now TCO, don't think I ever have spent more than 20% when I was much younger, but that was mainly fuel and insurance. I'm probably spending a lesser percentage now than most I expect. If you do alright, you want nice things, if you do medium you get medium things. To some people that's a watch, a fishing rod, a season ticket or whatever, and some blow their budget on one or two things. I spread mine out, like most do I expect. Still manage to save half my wages, and have done for a long time. I could save more and just buy the cheapest gear, but I'd rather enjoy what I have/ use often.

You still have liabilities to fuel, maintenance, being outside warranty, tax etc. If you don't pay them you don't go anywhere.
Again, I'm only talking about 0-2 year old EV's, most cars in that range might be out of peoples budgets (ICE or EV), that's fine, I'm not really talking about them, and most reading this thread or considering an EV probably aren't either. Maybe a 3 year old ICE v a new EV is probably the furthest comparison I could do. But a new EV is around 10-20% more than a new ICE, will practically win every time, for a comparable car. That's not your market, that's fine, but for many others it is.
 
Last edited:

Andy_W

Well-known member
The Tesla roadster (the new one) does look pretty awesome I'll admit. Much nicer than a Renault ZOE. 😉
It looks class, but that $200k price tag is a bit naughty for such a small car. They will probably go up in value or hold extremely well though, for a good few years. Not like a 200k Aston martin or Bentley, which would be worth peanuts comparatively.

The Zoe is hideous, but each to their own! This is one of my EV problems though, for some of the older ones they tried to make them look a bit whacky, which I felt was a bit unnecessary, and puts people off. Although for the Tesla they could have maybe had a different shape one for non-US markets, and made that look a bit more sporty. They maybe went for aerodynamics though, at the expense of looks.
 

JustTheGent

Active member
Strange where you have to base your opinion on incorrect assumptions to justify your comments. :unsure:

But to clarify, I've probably changed my main car on average every 2-3 years, but gone through many earnings changes and many changes in requirements, that happens for younger folk. Some cars I've had 5-10 years. For that I don't think it's a lot, but hey, you seem to think you know more about me and EV's than I do, but actually you don't unsurprisingly. My total outlay on my main car (TCO) is typically <5-10% of my wage, and I save/ invest >50% I reckon I'm ok thanks.

A 20k earner with no kids may be satisfied with a 10k sporty hatch, then over the course of 10 years they might end up as 100k earner with a 50k on a convertible, then they might then have kids and spend 50k on a SUV or whatever. Lots of changes in lifestyle, lots of changes in circumstance, in a short period of time. If each time they have a car (or shoes, clothes, house etc) for a set budget then the budget will change, and then again for circumstance changes. For their age Younger people probably swap more, if they can afford too. Some old guy in his 60's likely won't change circumstances as much, so might keep a small car and run it into the ground, which for them is probably sound, that's what I may end up doing one day.

Of course I don't have to explain myself, nobody does. All I'm here to do is compare the numbers on newer cars, which are like for like, and this will be my last response to you, as it's clearly a waste of time. The only reason I've responded up to now is to help others passed your narrative.

Some buy a car to drive and enjoy, or at least not hate, some get the cheapest thing they can get their hands on to just get from A to B. Each to their own.

I agree on the sweet spot, for 2-3 year old cars, this is often the case, but in a time of demand and in a time of a switchover, that conventional thought can change. For ICE cars that probably still applies, more than EV's. But like I keep saying, I'm talking largely about comparing to EV cars 0-2 year old, as this is when EV's have started to come into the market to a reasonable level. I've no interest in comparing anything before then, as EV's largely were not even remotely mainstream, and the infrastructure wasn't great. But a lot has changed. The fuel, tax, maintenance savings on a new EV, can offset that of buying a 3 year old ICE. Plus the ICE will likely depreciate more, especially a new or 0-2 year old one.

I don't have the same concern about batteries and motors as you do, largely as the warranties are massive. A performance engine for a BMW, Audi or whatever would cost an absolute fortune (I've had to pay this once), and the warrenty on it would expire in half the time/ miles. I would expect the engine to be fine for a lot longer mind, but maybe not the fan belt, clutch, auto gearbox, discs, pads etc. Obviously an EV is covered for all of those (doesn't have most of them), and won't likely even need a set of discs and pads ever (certainly not in my timeframes).

You can get shoes for £10-£30 very easily, but I wouldn't buy them. You could even get some good ones which are 3-5 year old? You seem to think a bit smarter when it comes to shoes though, I'll give you that. But with shoes it's simpler, the TCO is the shoes and shoes only. There's 20 things which decide the TCO of the car, it's more complex, which is why ticket price is not the be all and end all.

Not really, I know what I can easily afford, and certainly wouldn't buy a car more than 10% of my monthly wage now TCO, don't think I ever have spent more than 20% when I was much younger, but that was mainly fuel and insurance. I'm probably spending a lesser percentage now than most I expect. If you do alright, you want nice things, if you do medium you get medium things. To some people that's a watch, a fishing rod, a season ticket or whatever, and some blow their budget on one or two things. I spread mine out, like most do I expect. Still manage to save half my wages, and have done for a long time. I could save more and just buy the cheapest gear, but I'd rather enjoy what I have/ use often.

You still have liabilities to fuel, maintenance, being outside warranty, tax etc. If you don't pay them you don't go anywhere.
Again, I'm only talking about 0-2 year old EV's, most cars in that range might be out of peoples budgets (ICE or EV), that's fine, I'm not really talking about them, and most reading this thread or considering an EV probably aren't either. Maybe a 3 year old ICE v a new EV is probably the furthest comparison I could do. But a new EV is around 10-20% more than a new ICE, will practically win every time, for a comparable car. That's not your market, that's fine, but for many others it is.
I have no issues with people spending what they choose. But you've already stated that you prefer new cars and tech, which probably means you're attempting to justify new purchases under the guise of changing circumstances. I think you stated before that you'll probably only hold onto your next vehicle (the one you're waiting for) for 2 years. So actually, you're already aware that you're not going to be content or satisfied for long. This is a £80-90k vehicle I believe? So your spend to satisfaction ratio isn't great. That is something you might want to look at moving forward.
 

SmallTown

Well-known member
It looks class, but that $200k price tag is a bit naughty for such a small car. They will probably go up in value or hold extremely well though, for a good few years. Not like a 200k Aston martin or Bentley, which would be worth peanuts comparatively.

The Zoe is hideous, but each to their own! This is one of my EV problems though, for some of the older ones they tried to make them look a bit whacky, which I felt was a bit unnecessary, and puts people off. Although for the Tesla they could have maybe had a different shape one for non-US markets, and made that look a bit more sporty. They maybe went for aerodynamics though, at the expense of looks.
Completely agree with you on the Tesla. It's so bland. it's essentially 14 feet of "car". I think that's the problem with EV: People incorrectly think Tesla = EV and base they prejudices accordingly.

When I think EV I think of insane Rimacs and Evijas of this world or the pretty and Brilliant Taycan, or the quirky and cute Honda e. Cars with personality. Tesla have done a lot for EV admittedly but they also have come up with some staggeringly bland designs. They even managed to make the elise look more boring with the original roadster.

I don't think the Zoe is THAT bad is it? In the supermini category I guess the Peugeot e-208 is a lot nicer and the e MINI and Fiat e500 have the "style" but I would put the Zoe on a level with the Corsa e. Just a generic city trolley but not hideous. Maybe that's just me.
 

Andy_W

Well-known member
I have no issues with people spending what they choose.
Really? That's not how it seems. It seems like you want to dictate peoples choices.

But you've already stated that you prefer new cars and tech, which probably means you're attempting to justify new purchases under the guise of changing circumstances.
I think you've got a problem. You're acting like an amateur psychologist and getting it all wrong, despite me giving you the answers. :LOL: My circumstances have changed quite a lot, which I'm aware of a lot more than you are thanks. :rolleyes:

I prefer things which are better, for their role, most people do. You maybe don't so much, great, your choice, crack on, or not as the case may be.

I think you stated before that you'll probably only hold onto your next vehicle (the one you're waiting for) for 2 years. So actually, you're already aware that you're not going to be content or satisfied for long. This is a £80-90k vehicle I believe? So your spend to satisfaction ratio isn't great. That is something you might want to look at moving forward.
Yeah, the one I maybe really want doesn't exist yet, but who knows, it's not even out yet, and is probably a long way off. I don't know what I want in two years, or my circumstances, so you certainly don't. So, I'm happy to go for something in the meantime which I forecast to retain quite a lot of it's value, whilst also being a considerable upgrade in performance, and class to my current car, and will take full advantage of the current incentives and tax breaks.

The Taycan Cross is more like 100k, with a few addons. Seeing as there is practically none on the road yet, and the normal Taycan is going about 20k over list, I don't think I'll be down much at all in 1,2 or 3 years. The new one is more fun than the one I've got, but maybe the one after that a bit tamer and slightly more practical. Keeps me entertained, and for a set budget way less than I would be paying for a new or comparable 0-2 year old ICE.

Well I've been driving a 75k car which has worked out about £500 a month all in TCO, for the last year and a half (not including the tax breaks). To say I'm satisfied is a massive understatement. My previous car was 1/3rd the value and worked out more TCO per month, and wasn't as fast, new, practical or fun.

You really need to cut out the amateur psychological crap, you're really not very good at it, and it's coming across to me like jealousy.
 

Andy_W

Well-known member
Completely agree with you on the Tesla. It's so bland. it's essentially 14 feet of "car". I think that's the problem with EV: People incorrectly think Tesla = EV and base they prejudices accordingly.

When I think EV I think of insane Rimacs and Evijas of this world or the pretty and Brilliant Taycan, or the quirky and cute Honda e. Cars with personality. Tesla have done a lot for EV admittedly but they also have come up with some staggeringly bland designs. They even managed to make the elise look more boring with the original roadster.

I don't think the Zoe is THAT bad is it? In the supermini category I guess the Peugeot e-208 is a lot nicer and the e MINI and Fiat e500 have the "style" but I would put the Zoe on a level with the Corsa e. Just a generic city trolley but not hideous. Maybe that's just me.
Some days I like it (the model 3), some days I don't, but I'm not a fan of the looks of the Model S, X or Y to be honest. As a car though, for performance and tech, they post incredible numbers.

The Evija is mental, but mental cost too, but I wish they would do an electric Emira, that car looks incredible for the cost. I would even contemplate going back to ICE for that, it looks a steal for 60k. When I first saw it I was expecting it to be 150k :LOL:

The Zoe looks like a Fly to me, but I suppose for what it is, most cars in that class don't look all that great. But thinking about it, they're only about 2-5k less than an ID3, and the same price as a Mini EV, so I know what I would pick there.
 

SmallTown

Well-known member
Some days I like it (the model 3), some days I don't, but I'm not a fan of the looks of the Model S, X or Y to be honest. As a car though, for performance and tech, they post incredible numbers.

The Evija is mental, but mental cost too, but I wish they would do an electric Emira, that car looks incredible for the cost. I would even contemplate going back to ICE for that, it looks a steal for 60k. When I first saw it I was expecting it to be 150k :LOL:

The Zoe looks like a Fly to me, but I suppose for what it is, most cars in that class don't look all that great. But thinking about it, they're only about 2-5k less than an ID3, and the same price as a Mini EV, so I know what I would pick there.
Fair points. And in the defence of my car. From side on the front wing does look nice. But it's only certain angles. And from the front it looks so ungainly
 
Top
X