Perhaps this battery's maximum rate of discharge is so low that such a massively oversized pack is needed to get sufficient momentary power to the electric motors?
* You can't use the bottom 10% without going against recommendations
* You shouldn't charge above 85-90% to avoid going against recommendations
* If you drive over 65 mph, the drain is above average.
* If you tow a trailer, your range is halved.
* If you install a little storage roof rack, you lose 20-30% of range
* You experience 10% battery degradation in the first couple years of ownership.
* 20% loss to cold weather (Thanks to a comment for this one)
I really don't want a reply to this comment to be "Well...gas engines..."
Right now, electric cars have improved and the ones being sold are in the 300km battery range.
That's already overkill for most of the normal usage. People have a warped idea on how they are using their car and think they are doing way longer trips than the statistics tells you.
I'm using an EV myself and I changed nothing to my behavior, everything is alright.
We like our road trips and while they're rare, they're important and we don't want to rent or have a second car in order to do that.
EVs need to be comparable with gas cars in realistic scenarios and that means a real 3-400 miles. Not 400 miles but with a giant list of can't do's
The last couple of decades have shown what happens if you warn people about some imperceptible (to them) danger and tell them sacrifice personally, even in minor ways, to stave it off.
Frighteningly little happens. The change that does happen has been frequently coming in on a wave of technical innovation making greener options superior to old ones.
Once you drive an EV you realize that the range is less of a concern than you though it would be.
One thing though:
> You shouldn't charge above 85-90% to avoid going against recommendations
Daily driving this doesn't matter much. Longer drives you can charge to 100% as long as you depart within a reasonable time frame of say within 6 hours, probably longer. More annoying is the charging curve after 80% at fast charging stations. In my experience you usually won't want to spend the time to get that last 20% unless absolutely necessary.
Except the roof rack one is bogus. I installed the cross bars of a roof rack on my Bolt EUV (it came with the rails), and afaict it affected my mileage not at all. I still get 320 to 330 estimated miles (against the EPA's 247 estimated miles).
And the don't charge above 85--90% one is bogus too; there's talk about that on forums, but the manufacturer says nothing about it.
And I wouldn't want to go below 10% on a gas powered car either...
Running your car to zero fuel may potentially damage your fuel pump while running your Tesla or electric car to 0% constantly will completely destroy the battery. Much more expensive issue. Someone can easily bring you a small Jerry can of gas if you run out while it's day near impossible to do the same thing for an electric car. It'll need to be towed.
Toyota, at least historicity, is targeting mass market, where they can make affordable and reliable car. Current EV works for you? Great! But it doesn’t for many others.
I have EV and PHEV, and I won’t abandon my PHEV (big car) till battery is significantly better - I need a second big car, with a big range, that comes without any asterisks.
Every positive aspect to a battery (lacking some novel miracle) means a tradeoff. Faster charges? More weight. More capacity? Physically larger. Better heat management? More expensive materials. (Obviously just hypothetical examples)
To the point of the root comment, 700+ miles of range is outrageous when you can refuel in nearly the same time as an ICE vehicle just doesn't make a lot of sense. So why bother accepting the other tradeoffs? Make a battery that's 500 miles and doesn't eat through tires nearly as fast due to weight. Make a battery that charges in 20 minutes instead of 10 and make the trunk a normal size. What technical challenges painted them into this specific corner that they're not talking about?
90% of people don’t need SUVs and trucks, yet they still dominate sales.
And, 700 miles in EV, after you add all asterisks can easily become 350 miles.
It's not about being "triggered", it's asking the legitimate question of whether (and specifically, which) technical problems led them to these battery properties. I think we can all agree that this battery isn't going to be a miracle innovation, or they'd have hyped its lack of downsides. That being the case, we must admit that the battery has problems (acceptable to some consumers or not) and that the regular re-hyping of this vaporware is indeed an admission of technical failure in some way.
If someone invented a battery great in all dimensions except a low discharge rate, it would just be paired with a regular lithium battery to provide brief bursts of power for acceleration.
In fact, thats the way most fuel cell vehicles work (fuel cells are expensive, so you use one as small as possible and use it at full power all the time, storing any excess in a regular battery)