Am I the only one who thinks anything less than 400mi of range is legacy at this point?

[thebottomline]

Living in the northeast, cold climate, I won't buy an EV with less than 400 miles of range at this point. I just think it's too problematic especially in cold and especially as the car (batteries) age. Long drives in winter you get 30-50% range degradation, it's 2026, how is it that all batt packs aren't at least 400miles+?

Sponsored

 

[Dark-Fx]

I'd rather buy an EV that doesn't get such a bad winter time range penalty.

 

[DuoRivians]

To me, it’s a combination of range and charging speed. For the most part, it doesn’t feel like EV with 280-320 miles of range with 400V charging has materially changed from the 2018 Tesla Model 3 technology—something that was out eight years ago. Would have expected much more progress and/or cheaper EVs by now.

 

[sparked]

It comes down to cost and expanding the market with more affordable EVs. Batteries still make up too high of a percent of an EV cost with a limited domestic supply chain. Rivian/LG can keep chipping away with chemistry adjustments.

 

[jrmbadger]

I don't think EVs are going to increase range much from the 300ish they have now because even if the batteries improve on energy density, manufacturers are going to just use smaller batteries to lower costs. I think what's more likely to solve this issue is better fast charging. The BYD blade II battery can recharge from 10%-100% in something like 15 minutes using their fast chargers. I think the answer isn't more battery, but faster charging. Additionally, I've heard that solid state batteries don't lose nearly as much in cold weather.

 

[Zoidz]

Reasonable Cost
Battery Pack Size/weight to Achieve 400+ range
Optimized Design to meet customer expactations

Pick any two of the three, sacrifice the third.

 

[macb00kemdanno]

I have a Model 3 that has an EPA-rated range of 341 miles. My commute is around 50 miles per day round-trip (and that mainly involves taking my kids to school in the morning and picking them up in the afternoon). So, during the week, no, I don't need 400 miles of range—it's excessive.

And even on roadtrips, there are so many Superchargers around me that it's not even an issue. I can make it from my house in Central NC to Baltimore, MD without stopping during the summertime. During the winter, it's one 10-minute stop to recharge in VA along the way.

With faster charging speeds and the rapid proliferation of chargers, carrying around a big, expensive battery is less of a concern.

 

[TexasBob]

Living in the northeast, cold climate, I won't buy an EV with less than 400 miles of range at this point. I just think it's too problematic especially in cold and especially as the car (batteries) age. Long drives in winter you get 30-50% range degradation, it's 2026, how is it that all batt packs aren't at least 400miles+?

^^^ This. Range plus charging speed. I've been on too many EV road trips to buy another vehicle without 800V fast charging and 400 miles of range. Batteries are cheap - less than $100 per kwh. Bumping a mid-sized SUV like the R2 to a solid 400 miles requires an extra 20kwh - 25kwh or $2,000-$2,500. That is what Volvo did with the EX60 and BMW with the iX3. There is no substitute for more energy.

I especially appreciate Volvo's good-better-best approach of P6 (80 kwh) P10 (91 kwh) P12 (112kwh) just like Rivian did with R1 (and I had hoped they would do with R2).

View attachment 152833

 

[mkg3]

When I bought my first car as a kid, the range of most vehicles were just under 300 miles. Gas was cheap and engines were not efficient.

As years went on, the range of all vehicles increased due to more efficient engines and better technologies. The gas tanks size has stayed relatively the same. Most cars are somewhere between 17~20 gal tanks. Trucks more for a good reasons.

The EVs are doing the same as the energy density increases and the technologies improves, it is getting better efficiency resulting in longer range. The rub is, however, is the use-case affects the range significantly far greater than ICEV.

To say I won't consider less than 400 miles range is almost near meaningless because depending on how and where you drive, the actual range differs greatly from EPA's.

As @Dark-Fx and @DuoRivians points out, a better solution is to get a vehicle more robust to the temperature changes as well as faster charging architecture (i.e., 800V) is more important than the absolute range.

I don't drive for 400 miles, and most people do not either, without stopping somewhere so if can charge from 10%~80% in 10 mins, that's far more important than 400 mile rage.

 

[Mos Eisley]

Living in the northeast, cold climate, I won't buy an EV with less than 400 miles of range at this point. I just think it's too problematic especially in cold and especially as the car (batteries) age. Long drives in winter you get 30-50% range degradation, it's 2026, how is it that all batt packs aren't at least 400miles+?

Non-sequitur argument. What about 2026 means we suddenly should have solved physics and chemistry at a point that can also be affordable? If you’re waiting for a 400 mike range you can buy… a Lucid. And pray for perfect conditions whenever you drive.
the Chinese are getting there- by investing billions upon billions. Meanwhile, our leadership wants us to return to horse and buggies.

 

[dleepnw]

Legacy? Not sure I'd go that far. I understand the sentiment but for daily driving range over 50 miles is irrelevant for most. Most charge at home also making daily range irrelevant. For those with long commutes or regularly long drives, the charge speeds matter more than the range. Add those in very cold weather, then range is probably important on a more regular basis.
You have to consider cost and impact on the environment also when considering range. GM/RAM obviously dont care much about either since they just stick in as much battery (200 kWh+) as possible to get high range figures - efficiency is trash. Which makes the vehicle heavify inefficient and expensive. Tesla and Lucid are efficient so they can reduce the battery sizes. Rivian is somewhere in between - they want to be efficient but they also need larger batteries since they are making more rugged vehicles.

Any battery degradation over time is a myth. I think there's enough studies and research to show EV batteries don't degrade much even after 10 years.

 

[thebottomline]

All good points. Couple things, I am assuming not good conditions, thus it's not like you get 400+ miles ever, beceause of weather. Also, charging speed would help for sure, but as you go on long road trips, if you are in rural areas, charging spots aren't exactly plentiful. They are fine, but may be sub optimal if range is compromised.

 

[thebottomline]

Any battery degradation over time is a myth. I think there's enough studies and research to show EV batteries don't degrade much even after 10 years.

My 2018 Model S degraded a fair amount after 7 years.

 

[DuoRivians]

I remember buying my 2018 Model 3, which had 310 mile epa range and 400V charging speed. I think it cost somewhere in the low $50Ks.

8 years later, today, I’d argue it’d be hard to find a new EV with 300+ miles range and 400V charging that costs in the low $50Ks.

8 years later, why aren’t EVs cheaper for the core EV specs?

 

[shamoo]

Of course I can't find any references now, but I'm positive I heard more than one EV manufacturer explicitly state they don't really need to prioritize battery tech improvements for over 300 miles of range.

Car manufacturers are in the business to make money and you make money when you can satisfy 90% of the population. Batteries and innovation cost money (and weight), so it isn't profitable to delay things to please an extra 8-10% of car buyers.

I drive every single day, but the number of times I drive more than 200 miles in a day is maybe once a month. The number of times I drive enough where I need to charge outside my home....2-3 times a year.

EDIT: There was some talk about battery degradation. It may happen after 8-10+ years but again, let's remember the 90% where people change cars every 5-8 years. At that point, they are buying another new vehicle. Sure the preowned market does play a small role (if a manufacturer's used car is known to be terrible, their initial purchase market will decrease as well).

Do I wish I had more range in my 2023 Gen 1 R1S? Absolutely.

It is an overlanding/off road/adventure vehicle. If I want to drive out in the trails/desert, I run out of range quickly, especially when it takes 2+ hours to get there in the first place. But let's face it. Most Rivian drivers are daily driving it with their families and running errands, not exploring Moab.

It is why I'm seriously considering the Scout w/Harvester EREV. If it doesn't meet my expectations/needs, I will consider non-EV.

Sponsored