“Struggling” implies the American Auto industry is at least trying to keep pace. But really, they aren’t trying at all. They are content to sit back thinking their current flock of geese will lay golden eggs forever even as more and more of those geese drop dead from old age.
That‘s the main problem in Europe as well. I don‘t mind tariffs on heavily subsidized cars that are designed not to make profit but to destroy our industries. However, even then our manufacturers are in a constant crisis mode and unable to adapt. It‘s really pathetic.
But hey, when the car lobby is dead maybe that means more trains and cycling paths in the long run? Perhaps there‘s an opportunity here.
It’s all thanks to Germany though. They are the ones who have succeeded in scrapping the bill to ban new ICE vehicle sales after 2035
Isn’t profit supposed to bring prices down?
Looks like crapitalists are scared to shit of free market competition.
Tesla was definitely trying…
Ah Tesla… I too attempt to accomplish tasks by being a leader and going completely insane.
People only prefer BYD to Cybertrucks because the government is not adding ketamine to drinking water.
Spyware on wheels.
So the same as every American electric car
So the same as every
American electriccarI never understand people like the OP. It’s been proven that US and Japanese cars spy on you, but they then criticise China.
Only difference is where the data ends up. If it’s in China you probably have more privacy at home.
It’s amusing to me that the same folks to deride Chinese car manufacturers because they are somehow cheating by getting support from the government are the same people demanding that the US government artificially protect the US car industry by blocking Chinese imports. The point being that neither side actually objects to government participation in the market. But, one side uses it to make better products and service consumers, and the other does it to protect worse products from market forces.
“A free market is self regulating” until someone makes a better product for less money, I guess.
We tasted some of that self regulating ‘free market’ a while ago. Banks were having huge profits from the housing bubble until the subprime crisis hit, banks went into default, and the losses were picked up by public money.
My profit. Our losses.
The point both of you deliberately overlook is that China is not participating in a free market anyway. They never played by those rules so there‘s no point in treating them the same way as anyone who does. There is a lot of hypocrisy to be found in politics and economics around the world and China itself is a prime example of that. But a measure to defend yourself from an obvious case of economic warfare is the most understandable thing in history. Your criticism is misplaced and irrational. I mean do you seriously think a monopoly is desirable?
China defends its interests and follows what rules it deems advantageous. Just like everyone else does. It may upset you but they’re just better at playing this game than most countries nowadays.
We’ve had of ecocomic warfare already. It was just fine for US companies to hollow out domestic manufacturing so China could build the manufacturing infrastructure that could have been built in the US.
But now that a Chinese company is building things that undercut a US company, you want protections for US billionaires that weren’t afforded to US workers.
Are you ignoring the whole subsidies thing on purpose? This is not BYD attacking Tesla. This is the Chinese government attacking western industries.
If the Chinese government is losing money on each car they export, soon China will be bankrupt. It only makes sense to buy more China cars at cheap rates and bankrupt their country.
Also, there is no proof of subsidy, it’s just made up Western cope.
This is BYD selling cars for less than the billionaires you care about want to.
Nothing more.
If an American company badge engineered these cars and sold them in the US at US prices, you would be fine with it just like you’re fine with the economic warfare against the poor that US manufacturers and China have been allies in for decades.
After that it’s “unfair competition” and the state has to intervene
1,036 km (644 miles) on a single charge under China’s CLTC testing standard.
Does anyone know how realistic this range is? You can get some absurd range from a vehicle if you’re driving on a closed course at 60kmh with no air conditioning or entertainment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Light-Duty_Vehicle_Test_Cycle
The CLTC testing accounts for the country’s higher congestion levels with more frequent stop-and-go and lower speed limits, which lead to increased low-speed driving and longer idling times that benefits electric vehicles.
According to wiki
CTLC 509 km (316 mi)
EPA 390 km (242 mi)
So yeah take a solid 25%+ off
Right, so you’re not getting anywhere near that on the open road.
Right. Open road should be more around 770Km. I have a BYD Han 2023 that has a claimed range of 550Km, and I get just about 420Km realistically, at a steady 110Km/h with a few bursts of up to 150Km/h to get away from idiots doing 80 on a 100 (or just to show off the torque to other types of idiots like BMW and some Tesla drivers 😏). I do still get a bit over the claimed 550 if I don’t leave the city and drive as if I was afraid of tickets.
Came across this which I’ve not validated but does seem to make sense at a glance: Comparison of WLTP and CLTC
Based on that the WLTP range would be 828-900km (515-560 miles).
Real world, 6-700km at a guess?
Sounds about right. My experience in range difference is very similar.
The WLTP is pretty accurate to the actual range I get on my BYD.
Yeah, the EV range is frustrating.
270 miles? Pretty good. Except you shouldn’t drive it below 20% or above 80%, so really the range is like 170. Cold winter? Now it’s like 75.
No regrets on our EV, but I would feel a whole more more comfortable with 2x the capacity.
Too bad we can’t buy BYD here.
I can attest that the blade battery doesn’t seem to care if you take it all the way to 100% or drop it as low as 5% regularly. I’ve had my car for over 3 years now, and the battery degradation has been negligible. I’ve lost 1% over all this time, and both our cars (BYD HAN and Tang) are consistently allowed to drop under 10% before we decide to go charge them back to 100%. Granted, we live in the Caribbean, so we don’t have to deal with cold weather ever.
Never heard the “above 80%” thing. I’m pretty sure you’re wrong about this. With lead-acid batteries, this was optimal. I’m pretty confident that lithium ion batteries it’s best to keep the charge as high as possible. Ideally you’d only ever use it fully charged. It’s health is harmed by draining it low/fully.
I don’t own an EV, but I know enough about it that I’m pretty sure this is the case. You should look it up for your vehicle though. This advice also applies to phones and other lithium ion batteries too. Lead-acid was damaged by keeping the charge high, but lithium ion is damaged when low, and almost all devices are lithium ion now.
I’m pretty confident
confidently incorrect.
You could disabuse yourself with a quick search.
Lead acid batteries like to be kept fully charged all the time and don’t like to be discharged below 50% state of charge.
Lithium batteries like to be kept around half charged. They degrade quicker when kept at a high or low state of charge. Running lithium batteries from 20-80% does extend the lifespan, but charging to 100% is fine when you need to go on a longer trip. Just don’t keep it at 100% for long periods of time.
Lithium ion batteries have a sweet spot of around 60 to 80 percent charge where very little wear takes place to charge or discharge. If you could keep it to just that 20-30 percent usage in that range it would pretty much last ten thousand cycles.
Charging to 100 or discharging below 50-60 percent accelerates the wear on the battery, but it is still much better than the wear rate on lead acid batteries that are cycled in a similar manner.
Batteries also need to be balanced. If you constantly keep your battery packs in that small range they’ll drift out of balance over time.
You should charge to 100% occasionally to allow the BMS to balance all the packs.
Expect CLTC to be advertising the best possible range.
There’s a ceramic battery hitting the market that has a marginally higher density and nothing is stopping them from adding more batteries. There’s also a new hub-motor concept that has a lot less losses, but they’re not car sized yet.
Getting to 644 would be as easy as throwing more batteries at it, but i’d expect those numbers to come down a bit, or the price to be much higher.
Adding more batteries increases the weight, though, which in turn makes the motors work harder, and therefore makes them use more energy to do the same thing.
That’s not that big of a deal for long-range trips, on which you typically don’t have to accelarate often.
Keeping the car going at a certain speed depends on several types of resistance, most importantly air resistance, but not really on weight.
More weight plays a bigger role for energy consumption in urban ares, where the weight needs to be accelerated more often than on the highway, the mileage per kWh is yet typically higher than on the highway due to the lower speed and less air resistance.
What I’m trying to say: I’d pick the bigger battery any time over the smaller one, if the price is reasonable.
EVs are already heavy. The weight from some additional batteries don’t play a big role.Also, with breaking recovering energy, this negates some of the issues too. The inertia is used to recharge the batteries, so the losses are from friction and heat losses. Obviously lighter is better, but a lot of the issues of weight on efficiency can be reduced. Weight is bad for safety though, so there is that to consider.
It sure does. But we have to consider that recharging is less efficient than not spending the energy on acceleration in the first place, so heavier EVs are worse off than lighter ones; it’s not only losses from friction and heat losses - those come on top.
And you’re spot-on with the danger that comes from weight; being in an accident with a lot of kinetic energy that needs to be absorbed is not great.
Frequent acceleration/deceleration driving like city driving is also significantly more efficient in EVs because of regenerative braking. ICE just lose all that energy they spent accelerating when the have to stop 500m later, which destroys their efficiency.
I was comparing EVs with different weight and not comparing EVs with ICE vehicles, though.
And in that case the heavier EVs are less efficient than more leightweight versions even with regenerative breaking, because the process of accelerating and breaking cant’ regenerate all energy that was spent for accelerating.
I wish they would publish the battery capacity and fast charge rate. Assuming 4 miles per kWh I estimate it to be around 160kWh. If it can fast charge using a Megawatt charger then it could likely go from 20% to 80% in roughly 10 minutes gaining about 384 miles of range.
