Owner of hydrogen-powered Hyundai quoted $175,000 to replace fuel cell
drive.com.au
drive.com.au
The dealership quoted me $25,000 for a new battery, plus labour, plus they said I had to manage the recycling of the old battery. They estimated that at $6,000. My head was spinning.
Eventually through a few Facebook groups I was able to find a battery technician. He happily opened up the battery, checked the cells, found the failed cells, repaired them and then had to do some work on the vehicle diagnostics to get it to forget there was ever a problem.
Voila, it was working just fine. Took him 90 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAHaYXBFnJo
We need more right to repair and requirement to make things repairable regulations. The balance is in the wrong spot right now.
There is some progress being made, like https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64206913 - but absolutely, legislating RtR is the way to go.
400V or 800V at those amperages can easily be fatal even through a pair of rubber gloves.
They are mostly car repair, maintenance, and modification. No real theme, just whatever he happens to be doing and find interesting.
My 11 year old has watched his oil change video at least a hundred times. We opened the hood on my truck and he was able to find various parts that Chris had mentioned in his videos. My older two (driving age) have no clue.
I'm very hesitant to buy a hybrid that's so complex only highly specialized mechanics can repair them (specially certified mechanics at the dealership) and the repair ecosystem is 1% the size.
If it wasn't unsafe I'd prefer a Willys jeep that I can fix myself with chewing gum.
The biggest problem right now is that the training/retraining costs on those different specializations aren't current always economically worth it because overall EVs have fewer parts and need fewer maintenance cycles. That's likely going to be economic factors that will keep the repair ecosystem smaller in the long term, too. Not because the knowledge is "tougher" and "more certified" (existing work had certifications, too, just different ones), but because it is overall going to involve fewer supply chain "partners" and fewer, less frequent customers.
Of course, they'd rather take the 25K, or take in the car for scrap / resale themselves.
Either the dealership is (1) incompetent, (2) this is a profit model (they quickly refusbish the old battery and resell it), or (3) it is a liability issue.
Perhaps the original vehicles were subsidized by Hyundai, but this part is “actual price “ with the expectation that we’re it ever to be used, it would be under warranty.
Could just be on the wrong side of accounting gimmicks that companies use, especially on experimental development vehicles.
Total repair/replacement estimate: €103,764.17 ($113,262 USD)
Archive (in German): https://archive.is/w0Dq5
Original article (in German): https://www.autobild.de/artikel/hyundai-ix35-fcev-mit-defekt...
I mean there's a project out there that monitors the battery capacity and lifetime of electric cars, tracking those of Tesla's Model S from over ten years ago now; those seem to be holding up all right.
But it will cause more trash. 100 year old cars can still run today because the parts can be replaced, or worst case, engine components can be machined.
That said, maybe over time there will be new generations of battery tech that will make it viable to replace and even upgrade old electric vehicle batteries. It's not likely in the near future though. And I think it'll be suppressed by existing battery manufacturers, Tesla being foremost - I'm not convinced cars are Tesla's long term goal, it'll be battery tech and charging infrastructure.
The recycling rate on lead acid batteries is over 99%. Li ion batteries will likely end up with a similar number.
That exists in limited capacity today. There are shops that have replaced older Leaf model batteries with upgraded batteries. That's a big deal for some of the earliest Leaf models because they had tiny batteries by today's standards (or Tesla's) and get double or triple range compared to when they were new. There aren't going to be as many models today that will benefit in quite the same way as those early Leafs, but it will probably still be a niche thing once we figure out what the average lifecycle of a car battery is. (As you mention, it is certainly greater than ten years we're seeing from Tesla batteries and others. Based on current data, it seems like it may be close to 20 years or possibly more that batteries last in their "first use" in cars.)
Also, there's a bunch of companies working on electrifying old ICE cars today, which uses similar skills. I think it's fun to watch decades old cars with very new life as EVs. Some of those cars drive better than they ever did before.
Electric bikes are cheap, efficient, fast enough, safe, good for your health, and good for the environment.
Live somewhere that isn't bike friendly? Do the right thing instead of the easy one and campaign for better infrastructure.
And in the mean time, buy those Teslas, i4s, Mach-Es and Leafs.
Bikes are dangerous, even in places with good infrastructure.
Bikes are no good for carrying your shopping, or your kids, or taking your partner to dinner, or when the weather is inclement, or if your physical condition doesn’t permit it.
At best they’re an auxiliary option for when circumstances permit. In economics terms they’re not a substitute good for cars.
I love cycling and wish my city had better infrastructure. But let’s keep it real.
I've been biking for everything for over about 15 years (we don't have a car). With two bags on the back, enough to shop. With kids. Taking my partners for dinner. For works, vacation, errands, everything. When there's rain and when there's snow.
My physical condition improved thanks to biking. Idem for my finances.
Do you even ride a bike?!
Am I reading too much subtle failure here?
I've been biking for everything for over about 15 years. With two bags on the back, enough to shop. With kids. Taking my partners for dinner. When there's rain and when there's snow.
My physical condition improved thanks to biking.
Have you tried riding a bike?
Plus, cycling is normalized - drivers are cyclists and more aware of the damage they can do by texting or driving dangerously.
Bikes are only dangerous when they are mixed with high-speed auto traffic. On dedicated paths, they're pretty safe. More so when the bikes are lower-speed townie bikes (dutch style or similar, vs a "TdF race bike") and helmets are worn.
Cargo bikes exist. Racks and bags are available for most normal bikes. Some cargo bikes have platforms that can be used as a seat (similar to a motorcycle). No such thing as poor weather, only poor clothing choices. Yes, there are people who will never be able to ride a bike and we need to build with them in mind as well.
The US, in general, is terrible at building for an array of transportation alternatives. It's basically cars, cars, cars. Are bikes (or scooters or buses) a 100% substitute for cars today? No. Could they be for a large portion of the population? Absolutely, we just need to push for it. In the long run, we'll be better for it. Cars have massive costs - not just buying the car, but maintaining it, fueling it, building roads, opportunity costs related to parking spaces, environmental impacts, etc.
Even if we get to the point where a typical 3-4 person family has one car instead of 2-3, we'll be better off.
I know people will cycle in the snow and ice, but I don’t recommend it.
I agree that bikes are great, when the infrastructure supports them, and reducing usage of petrol cars is sensible for the planet. But they still can only supplement a car for most families in most places.
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2021/01/22/meet-the-bike-...
Like I said, even if we get from 2-3 cars/family to 1 car/family, we're WAY ahead in resource use, health, space usage, etc.
This is the only part of your comment that I can really agree with.
Aside from weather and physical conditions the rest is simply not true. I used to live in San Francisco and had both a pickup truck and an electric assist cargo bike. I could get anywhere in the city on that bike, and typically was able to get door to door even quicker than I could by car because I didn't need to spend an extra 10 minutes finding a place to park a motor vehicle.
The bike served as the mini-van. I'd drop my kids off at their two different schools, each in different parts of the city, and then head to work, doing all of that in less time than I could in a car.
I also used it to help people move households. It's carried a full size refrigerator from the top of Potrero Hill (one of the steepest in SF) across town to Outer Sunset. It wasn't even difficult, and probably took less time getting it from one house to another because it was easier to load (the "deck" of the bike is less than a foot off the ground) and moved just as quick as a loaded truck through the city. I've used it to tow a friend's broken Honda Accord a similar distance as well. Getting rolling was challenging, but only because the bike tires lacked the traction needed and would do burnouts unless the bike had a lot of weight, so we solved that by also moving a small motor cycle at the same time.
I don't have data to back this, but it's safe to say that I've moved more cargo (in weight) with that bike than the pickup truck I'd owned for 10 years prior to getting the cargo bike.
My experience may be unique, but it's totally within the ability of anyone who can afford even a cheap used car to do today with ready built models shipped overnight via Amazon Prime.
In other words, the people who need transport now can have it in a very non-hypothetical world.
All this coming from someone who does not believe simply advocating for people to use public transit is a fix-all solution. Use it when the weather isn't great, or when you sprain your ankle, or when you don't want to fuss with finding parking.
A bus out to my subdivision will always be a worse experience than driving to work, even if they made a custom bus line straight from my house to there. I can't always schedule when I need to go home, and no one else would be riding with me. I assume by "better infrastructure" you really mean everyone should give up any free space they have and move into high-rise apartments or densely-packed townhouses?
It's not going to change overnight.
Electric bikes are a very positive direction. Society should be doing a lot to push them as a primary choice.
I used to commute 20+ miles on a road bike (not electric). I don't have a commute anymore but if I did I'd have an electric bike and it would probably increase my tolerable range at least to 50 miles.
For longer distances I don't want an EV car. I've had them, too much hassle with the charging and range limits. I feel the sweet spot is an electric bike for 90+% of local travel and a regular car/truck for when the distances are big and/or need to tow and carry heavy things. Which is rare, so most usage can be the bike. EVs fill a niche that doesn't exist for me.
It’s likely in this Hyundai story that Hyundai doesn’t want to lose additional money on this fuel cell vehicle and that’s why they quoted the astronomically high price.
= $AU 175,000
= US$ 113,650
EVs are still 'unusual' technology. (That includes all varieties of EVs)
When they become as ubiquitous as petroleum-powered internal-combustion vehicles, that might change. Prices might fall.
He bought the car in 2015 so he’s lucky to get 8 years. Especially since Hyundai only provided a 5-year warranty. That seems pretty crazy to spend US$100k on a vehicle with a new technology.
When the Prius first came out they offered an 8 year warranty (or maybe 12) on the hybrid system. And that’s more familiar to mechanics than this fuel cell tech.
Tl:dr; don’t do stuff like this unless you’re ready to lose all your money. The owner got 8 years of utility out of the vehicle.
But I'm sure they'd throw in free oil changes.
Well now I understand why manufacturers say transmission has lifetime oil in there... because some people think that 8 years old car is... an old car that could as well be done?
I could afford buying new car and paying xxx/€ per month, but I choose to buy ~10 year old car and if I'm lucky it has <200k km on odometer. But then I'm debt free.
If I'd be paying xxx/€ per month and having a broken vehicle after 8 years, I'd be very disappointed to say the least.
1. Your car is easier to repair
2. It is easier to find mechanics for repair
3. You get the treasure trove of pre-existing repair videos/guides in case something goes awry and you want to DIY.
I disagree with eight years being adequate for a modern car. I'd argue 10 to 15 years is more reasonable. I know it's unique system but even so it should last at least a decade.
Years ago cars were crap past three or four years. Any cars I had in the 80s as a teenager were bought used since cars four years old were very rough (rust, general wear and tear, electrical, carb issues, leaks). Anything 10 years old was ancient. Now my Mom had a 10 year old Toyota Camry and it's like a three year old car.
In addition a lot of the parts that wear out can be manufactured locally with a manual lathe/milling machine/welding, or simply be replaced with a similar enough part that you make fit with a bit of elbow grease.
Cars that will survive decades in California will rust out in a few salty, winter years in Canada.
He bought the car for US $55,074 (inflation adj:$71,805 per article)
If you're the type of person to treat a car as a pet and replace major subsystems anyway; this kind of prototype thing can be great fun. I'm trying to get my nephew the e-scooter builder interested in redoing this car's heavy electrics from the engine back; it's got 300k miles on it but it can burn another transmission off at least, i think. If the wife lets me (its her car) I'm so tempted to explore the madmax weapons opportunities offered by that big chonky battery pack just sitting there.
This is a new product line from a brand that, although getting better, doesn’t have a great reputation for quality or longevity.
I think it’s unpleasant, but is part of my critical thinking skills for not buying fancy, unproven tech from Hyundai. Especially for $100k. If I bought that, I would treat it like buying a baseball card or a kayak or something.
Halo vehicles are usually focused on performance, and any car enthusiast can tell you that they can be a nightmare of compromises, unique-to-the-model low-volume (and thus very expensive) parts, and so on. Enough to look good and work well for the press and the first owners. The high development costs are a write-off, but that doesn't mean they'll eat the cost of the parts outside warranty.
For example, the first Audi RS6 had a biturbo V8 shoved into a mid-size engine bay. The battery was relocated, almost as an afterthought, to sit smack dead-center in the back of the trunk, just bolted down in a carpeted box.
Sounds like it’s working exactly as planned.
WHat is so expensive? Cost of labour? Cost of the part? If you literally have to take apart most of the car, than can end with hundreds of human-hours of labour and depending on the price per hour, can get very very expensive.
On the other hand, I agree that parts costs should be regulated, where a sum of all parts should not exceed eg. 3x the cost of a new car (some overhead is of course needed in selling separate parts). But we don't know that either.
It's possible you just have poor taste. Personally, I think the reasons for the repair cost aren't relevant, same is pretty obvious. It's an unconventional car that had limited production. I'm sure they're adding in the cost of parts (they'll likely have to buy another insurance of this car to rip the parts out of, or they'll have to fabricate it themselves. Which could require hiring an engineer to make sure they don't get sued if the car bursts into flames) and labor that comes with learning how to repair a complete unknown for them, plus a good helping of uncertainty.
The most relevant part of this story is that there's a guy who bought into a new tech, and who is being unreasonable when it didn't work for as long as he had hoped. And that comes through fine in the article.
FYI, many repairs require taking apart most of the car. For example, replacing gaskets requires taking apart the entire engine. And yet, garages aren't charging 100,000 euros to do so. More like 500 to 1000