Hacker News Reader

Comment by nostrademons | Hacker News Reader

Causality could be reversed here. In markets where technology advances quickly and prices drop, there is very little market for used goods, because why would you buy a 4-year-old whatever when you can get a new one that's twice as good for half the price? You see this in computers, smartphones, TVs, and solar panels (outside of the U.S, where prices are kept artificially high by tariffs). People almost never buy used because there's no reason to. You can just buy new, for the same or lower price, and get something way better.

Instead of threatening to derail the EV transition, lack of resale value might be evidence of the EV transition, particularly when coupled with quickly growing overall sales of EVs globally.

View on HN

> You can just buy new, for the same or lower price

But, like the article says, new EVs are selling for about twice as much as a 2-year-old used vehicle of the same make and model. That's a very very far cry from "same or lower price".

Its a matter of perspective.

EV are progressing fast so they lose value quick, like a laptop of the late 90s. Not quite as bad, but in those times, your computer was worth next to nothing in less than a year.

ICE are stagnant. They retain their value because they're not improving at all.

> EV are progressing fast so they lose value quick,

Are they really, though?

A 2021 Model 3, Mach-e, Polestar 2, Model Y, F-150 Lightning, e-Tron, or ID.4 (to name just a few) are not too different from the ones sold today. Aside from software updates and minor refinements (mostly DFM), I don't see much progress. That's not a problem, since they're all competent vehicles for single-car households.

Several 2025/26 models have even been de-contented compared to their 2021 selves.

Trying to steel-man your argument a little, the only models I can think of with significant progress are the bZ4X/Solterra (widely panned due to initially uncompetitive specs and pricing), Leaf (which has been getting small, incremental improvements for more than a decade) and the now-discontinued Bolt (which was the cheapest road-tripable EV).

I think you really have to be looking compliance cars that entered the market before the Model 3 and/or models that were acknowledged as uncompetitive when new to find significant/fast progress.

No, the real problem is that the true market-clearing price for most of these vehicles was $7500-$10000 less than MSRP (which was set knowing the regulatory environment), combined with the false calculation of depreciation based on MSRP instead of market price.

> No, the real problem is that the true market-clearing price for most of these vehicles was $7500-$10000 less than MSRP (which was set knowing the regulatory environment), combined with the false calculation of depreciation based on MSRP instead of market price.

This seems like it. If you paid $29,000 for something with a $36,500 MSRP because of a $7500 credit and a few years later it's worth $22,000, the amount of depreciation you're calculating by starting from MSRP and the amount that the buyer actually experienced are off by more than a factor of two.

Meanwhile the credits caused more new sales than there would have been otherwise, which means more cars of that model available in the used market, and supply and demand is still a thing.

It's not evidence that people don't want them, it's evidence that if you subsidize something the price comes down.

Don't know about the us but all models mentioned were well over 50k (most nearing 75k+) with incentives where I live and thus fall in the top 1% income bracket range. And expensive mass produced cars lose value faster than cheaper models as they have to be sold second hand to the next lower income bracket which is an exponential curve hence the high dropoff. This used to be the same for ice cars.

Of course both can be true as well.

I wonder if COVID distorted the market enough to show up here?

I have anecdotes of friends/family/coworkers who bought cars (or second cars for the household) to avoid public transport.

And 2nd hand prices for cars gere (Australia) went batshit insane for a while during and as we chose to pretend that COVID was over - and those artificially inflated prices are mostly over now.

Oh, you're in for a surprise. An ID.7, the updated Model 3, Ford Explorer/Capri, plus all the ones you don't have in the US - Nio, Zeekr, BYD, Renault, Skoda, Volvo, Cupra - are significantly better than the EVs of five years ago.

In what way? Specifically, in what way compared to a Tesla from 5 years ago? (Most other makes were not great 5 years ago.)

What makes them better?

Presumably you’re in the US, given the models you list. Don’t look there, because the best EVs are not available in the U.S. because of trade barriers. Look at what BYD and Toyota are doing in China.

How does that impact depreciation in the US?

Ok, I'll bite: what are BYD and Toyota doing in China?

Electric vehicles are improving at the rate that batteries are improving. That is faster than you may think.

If you look just at Teslas, they go further and charge faster on smaller batteries (higher energy densities). These batteries cost less and will last far longer. And Tesla uses an older battery tech than Chinese companies use so, in fact, batteries have improved far more. And with sodium ion, there is about to be a massive improvement over the next few years.

>Are they really, though?

Yes, if you look beyond progress within a specific model line. For instance, there is a marked difference between the range and towing capacity of a 2023 Chevrolet Silverado EV and the Ford Lightning. The Kia EV9 offered a substantial price advantage over existing 3-row EVs when it was introduced in 2023. I think you're right that actual pricing vs MSRP is probably the biggest factor, but real and rapid improvement in the products also contributes. I know I've put off buying an EV van because I know that better options will be coming within the next 18 months.

> the now-discontinued Bolt (which was the cheapest road-tripable EV)

FYI the Bolt is back, at least for a limited run. [1]

1: https://news.gm.com/home.detail.html/Pages/news/us/en/2025/o...

I can’t speak for the rest, but I believe in 2023 Tesla’s all moved from HW3 to HW4.

I went from a 2020 Model 3 to a 2025 and the self driving experience is dramatically better. I’m one of those “I will never use FSD” people and I honestly love driving…but it’s so good I find myself using it constantly and just being awestruck.

tesla's cars literally just got remodeled what on earth do you mean bz4? toyota? yes they made their terrible impractical car actually practical in its latest form.

the teslas are newish, with new parts and better sound suppression. they also improve marginally in efficiency every year. so the 2023 will have slightly better mechanicals than the 2021 etc.

not too different ... they are very different. much improved. go read a review comparing them.

how much different is today's durango from last year's or here lemme remind you durango hasn't been updated in 15 (count them!) FIFTEEN years. other zombie gas models are out there too.

Personally I chose a new over a used Model Y this year because the Juniper release includes a new front bumper camera which could prove crucial in certain unlikely scenarios, and improve overall self-driving. It’s important enough that there are rumors they’ll offer the option of retrofitting it onto earlier versions: https://evannex.com/blogs/news/how-to-identify-your-model-y-...

Also HW4 likely unlocks significant self-driving performance that the earlier hardware stack cannot accommodate, and will support features that are yet to be released for a longer period of time.

Which is all to say: looks to me that the progress is significant.

> Which is all to say: looks to me that the progress is significant.

Assuming you care about self driving enough. That's a big premium to pay for that alone. Fine if that works for you but I can't imagine that being a reason for many.

Getting a new battery or newer design battery is probably much more of a driving factor

I'm looking at getting a used F-150 lightning, with the caveat that towing anything absolutely decimates your range.

The new redesign coming out next year addresses this with a huge battery size increase.

Does real progress matter? What about the perception of progress?

Cars don’t need to be better, customers only need to think so.

Just look at the smartphone market.

I'm sure for newer EV models makers cut down on production costs but they may also cut down on quality as well.

Disagree; I drive a 40 year old Mercedes-Benz turbo diesel sedan for the exact opposite reason that nothing made today is as effective and reliable with comparative economy and comfort. My huge tank of a vehicle is safe, comfortable, and economic. Runs entirely on plant based biofuels and delivers an experience that no modern machines can rival. The cost of these old sedans steadily increases despite being 4 decadea old. Mine has 550000km on the odometer and rising. Simple and affordable to maintain, and can be worked on with standard hand tools. No computers on-board.

> Runs entirely on plant based biofuels

You forgot, "and pollutes like crazy."

The environmental calculus of driving a new car, versus driving a 40 year old diesel engine is challenging, I admit. Moreso if you are distilling your own fuel. I would bet that a gross polluter (as California calls them) from 40 years ago are probably a net loss compared to a 20 year old ICE today.

What’s the cost of biofuel, and what economy does the car get? And have you looked at how it’s crash test ratings actually stand up against a modern vehicle?

> And have you looked at how it’s crash test ratings actually stand up against a modern vehicle?

My first thought for sure. Especially because vehicles are getting demonstrably larger and heavier again in the US.

You also get a steering column pumped through your skull in an accident, but that's another discussion I suppose.

>vehicle is safe

Sure if you ignore all the safety improvements made to driving over the last 40 years...

agree here

vehicle safety improvements are one of the primary motivators (for me) to drive new cars. driving is dangerous and i want the best odds when the inevitable occurs

My favorite aspect of biofuels is that allows for the machine-energy economy to compete with the human-energy economy. It allows for first world folks to use their buying power to compete with food in the 2nd and 3rd world.

What’s extra great about it is that we use fertilizer to grow the biomass to be converted to fuel. And by some measures the energy cost of doing so is higher than just burning the fertilizer (which I’m sure everyone knows is a petroleum product) directly.

Kind of the worst of all worlds sort of technology

markets are good

Whats the model may i ask?

> in those times, your computer was worth next to nothing in less than a year.

> ICE are stagnant. They retain their value because they're not improving at all.

This doesn't make sense. As already pointed out, the reason computers lose value is because the same money can buy something that does the job better (faster, lighter, etc). ICE don't retain value because they're not improving; they retain value because they still do the same job X years later.

EVs, meanwhile, are losing value even though the same money as a used EV can't buy anything that actually does the job better, as pointed out earlier in the thread. So there must be something else in play (such as battery degradation lowering value of EVs quicker than engine wear & tear lowers value of ICEs).

There is a lot of fear around battery degradation. People don not like EVs that have come off warranty.

So, while the batteries may last 800,000 km, people start to discount the replacement cost before they even hit 200,000 km.

Consumers do not have even experience yet to value used EVs properly. It is a great time to be a used EV buyer.

ICE and EV are two market segments. They are partially substitutable, but for many ICE customers an EV is a non-starter because of charging infrastructure, which means that if one of those customers needs to replace their ICE vehicle, they need to replace it with another ICE vehicle, and cannot take advantage of price drops in new EVs. (I ran into this personally; I wanted to get an EV, but my garage does not have a charger, none of the circuits near it could support a charger, and so I need to rewire my house and get a main panel upgrade to do more than L1 charging.)

Likewise US and rest-of-world are different markets because of trade barriers.

Within the EV market segment, the resale value may be plummeting because new car prices are declining because of improved technology and higher volume. Someone who is replacing their EV or looking for a new one already has the required charging infrastructure, otherwise they wouldn't be looking. But this price drop affects only other EV buyers, because ICE buyers cannot take advantage of it.

This insulation lasts only as long as the price differential between them remains less than the capital costs of getting a L2 charger and associated electrical upgrades.

And there are a lot of other less rational reasons why people don't want to buy a standard electric car or a standard ice pick up truck.

Why is charging at slow speed at home such an issue for you?

At some stage, "improvements" become nothing more than marketing buzzwords.

I'd argue one reason ICE are "stagnant" are because they're "good enough" and any potential improvements required expensive R&D and manufacturing changes, for results that purchasers won't change their buying decision for. Maybe Toyata could make an ICE for the Camry that was 5% more efficient, but few people who were about to buy someone else's equivalent car will choose a Camry instead based on such a marginal improvement.

I think phones are a good current example of this. I have felt zero need to upgrade from my iPhone 13, because the "improvements" since it was new are of zero interest or value to me. I'm quite likely to do a battery replacement on this one instead of upgrading to a new iPhone any time soon. (And the only reason I bought the iPhone13 was to get the backside lidar, I was perfectly happy with the XR I used before that.)

Isn't that a different way of saying the same thing?

There's no denying that ICE Engines have been around for a long time, relative to EVs. A mature technology means that any low-hanging fruit for performance improvements was found a long time ago. Remaining gains require the expensive R&D for marginal improvements that you mention.

It's not that they're "good enough" - any consumer who can do the sums would prefer a 20% better price/performance, always. It's just that such improvements are not there to be had in ICE vehicles. There is no rush to improve them, as you said.

And therefor the performance of a new ICE vehicle, 5 year old vehicle or 10 year old vehicle is well-understood, predictable. Both in terms of what the tech was when it was built, and how it has aged. EVs are less so in both of these dimensions. e.g. I would have reasonable confidence in the durability of an EV battery for a 2025 model, but much less so for a 2015 model. They're just not the same.

Most people don’t want to lose tens of thousands of dollars in value to progress for progress sake… I just bought a car and went ICE in no small part to resale value.

Meanwhile, I don't really care much about resale value because when I buy a car I typically intend to drive it until it dies.

In this sense, EVs depreciating faster than ICEVs is exciting, since if my current Tacoma prematurely gives up the ghost (or I buy a second car) I can add “snag an EV for cheap” to my list of available options.

That's still depreciation, just deprecation until it dies (down to near $0 value from new) vs depreciation until you sell it. If it dies fast, the depreciation is still high.

I feel like this shows a change in mindset these past couple decades.

More and more people buy things for the purpose of reselling them. Houses are now more investments than places to actually live in. Rubbing alcohol was bought up during Covid so people could resell. Cryptocurrency is bought with the goal of selling for double a few months later and nobody really believes in the "currency" aspect of it. Pokémon cards, originally made for kids and to play in a card game, are now all scooped up by cart load by adults so they can resell them on eBay, and those buyers hope to resell later. The 2020s has people trying to sell used cars for equal or more than their new value. Strange times.

> The 2020s has people trying to sell used cars for equal or more than their new value. Strange times.

Not wanting to eat 50% of a car’s value in depreciation in 2-3 years is a sane decision.

Expecting to sell a used car for a profit without a shortage of used cars is not sane.

I bought a Toyota RAV4 in 2021 and it’s depreciated about 20-25% in 4 years. I could’ve saved a couple thousand bucks and got a Nissan Rogue instead, but that model has depreciated about 50% by now, and I’d be worse off.

Just pulling this from thin air, but it may be the combination of rising costs of living + lack of options which were available in the bad old days (subsistence farming, sending children to work (although some idiots are advocating for letting that happen again), highway robbery,...).

But the overwhelming trend is the exact opposite of that. Maybe what you see is more a minority counter culture. It offers more feelings of control when people are still a couple of missed cheques away from bankruptcy.

If you don't resale you don't lose anything.

Just drive it till it's no longer operational or gift it away to a family member at some point and you get full value of what you paid for without a care in the world about second hand market.

I care about the second hand market because that's where I'm going to get the car - the phenomenon of rapidly depreciating electric vehicles is all to the good for me! Resale value, though, is not something I care about at all.

Cars don't just "stop working" with no residual value, so this isn't how it works. They start to require very expensive repairs and maintenance and it gets tough to determine what you should get done. And why would you give a family member a car that's giving you problems and not good enough for you? "Here, take this EV that's likely to require repairs costing 10x the value of the car."

A lot of people clearly are willing to spend lots of money for irrational reasons in cars. I

Aside from battery longevity is there really anything better about a new model S compared to a 5 year old model?

I have a 5 year old Model S and it's still like new. And it has a wheel instead of a yolk.

The problems with used cars are usually:

1. The previous owner abused the car

2. There is known damage which is being kept hidden from you

And those might be particularly poignant problems for used EVs because EVs are notoriously expensive to repair.

Battery technology in general.

And, Tesla is an outlier here. Other EVs are progressing MUCH faster.

that is a bold statement that needs to be backed by an example... while Tesla is certainly the dinosaur with the most outdated lineup of cars others aren't that much better (unless we venture into super-luxury 6-figure price zone...)

I can't tell you about Tesla, but BMW for example did shoot themselves right in the foot by announcing literally at the launch of the iX that they are going to bring a new model with updated 800V architecture within couple years. So........why would you buy that first one, knowing that a much improved model is literally right around the corner. Consequently prices of the iX cratered, and you could have it on a lease for the same cost as a VW golf, despite being (at least in theory) 3x more expensive. The first gen cars are now so laughably cheap it's actually stupid to not buy one because they are still perfectly good very capable vehicles - but yeah, why would it keep value if it was immediately replaced by a much better model. With EVs we're in the GPU area where each model immediately displaces the last generation and within few years your top of the line flagship card is worth close to nothing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect

The GPU, sensors, trim, motors, and batteries have improved in those 5 years. I have a 2020 X and I am considering when to update. While the S and X haven’t gotten a significant improvement like the 3 and Y have they are still substantially better than before. Despite the memes I’ve consistently tried the other options, and have tried the BYD, Zyker, MG, etc available in Asia, and the Tesla are still far and away the best cars especially if you consider them in combination with the supercharger network. I think they have slowed their pace of improvement surely through a lot of Musks self inflicted fault, but the competition hasn’t yet surpassed them.

For those boosting BYD, etc, the finish is shiny but low quality, and is rife with safety red flags - an example being by in large you can watch YouTube and movies and sturr on the central screen while driving. (It’s scary in Asia with grab drivers watching videos while weaving in and out of traffic) - but the price is good.

I have a 2020 model X as well and I love it. I have no plans on upgrading which oddly is because it doesn't have the interior review mirror cam for FSD to yell at me for silly things like looking at a passenger to talk while on FSD and it still drives like it did on day 1 (60k miles ago, have only done tires and minor warranty calls). Honestly a fantastic car and now that it's paid off I'm like yep I'll keep this for years more. Keep the car it's great!

Actually to edit this comment - the main (only?) reason I bought the car is because if I'm in an accident I want to try to be in safest car possible and if my sig other is driving I want them to be in the safest car I can find. I thought that paying a premium at release in model X 2020 was well worth the premium if people I love are in it.

You seem oblivious to just how mature the tech is for petrol and diesel so you shouldn't say anything about them really.

How are EV's progressing fast?

> ICE are stagnant. They retain their value because they're not improving at all.

They aren't degrading either, though

They are definitely degrading.

Complex driver aid/“safety” systems, outrageously complicated “infotainment” systems that are also used to interact with system functions, sealed/un-serviceable transmissions, exhaust gas filtration and recirculating systems, these are all additional points of failure that represent a degradation on modern ICE cars.

These cars won’t be around 20 years after manufacture in the same way Toyota Camry and Corolla are.

I recently bought a fancy muscle car with all that crap integrated into the infotainment system. I explained to the sales guy that I WANTED to keep this car for the rest of my life but was concerned that wouldn't be possible. In 10 years it may literally be impossible to find a phone that will connect via the USB/bluetooth to the infotainment system. We may all be using something completely different. Not to mention, no one will be manufacturing replacements for that infotainment system if it ever craps out.

You can go buy a 50 year old muscle car and upgrade the radio to something kind of modern. But that won't be possible with my car 50 years from now. It's too integrated.

The sales guy had clearly never considered this issue before.

Those complaints are really orthogonal to the EV vs ICE debate, though.

Somebody could claim driver aids and infotainment EVs are "degrading" in EVs in the exact same way - in fact they're even more integrated in EVs.

And although EVs don't have the same transmissions and exhaust gas systems, they have their own unique complexities and points of failure, like batteries and regenerative braking systems.

10 years is when you really should do a heavy refresh in the engine bay. Stem the tide of oil leaks, replace perished rubber hoses, tuneup (plugs & leads) because lets be honest you never replaced those unless one was obviously broken, fix exhaust leaks, pray cat is not dead and you didnt luck out on a model with factory defects like for example Ford EcoBoost wet belt disintegrating into rubber debris in oil pickup ($10K job). Tons of brands went for lower tension piston rings in the name of ecology and gas mileage, GM EcoTec, Stellantis Tigershark, even Toyotas end up burning oil like crazy and need full engine rebuilds/new engines. Obligatory they stopped making them like they used to :) 10 years is a very dangerous age for a used car right now.

ICE cars are practically falling apart between service windows when compared to EV.

This is not normal. I have a 10 year old budget ICE car and nothing is wrong with it. When I change the oil every 10k miles, the same amount I put in still comes out. It has about 240k.

My ICE SUV has nearly 200,000 miles on it and is worth almost the exact same as when I bought it ten years ago. FJ Cruisers are popular.

There's no way I'm buying an EV. I can't charge it where I live, it won't easily refuel where I'm going, and I hate infotainment centers over knobs and buttons.

If I do buy a new car - and I really don't have to - it'll be an ICE without an annoying screen in the middle console.

Well they are, it’s a common complaint about modern cars.

https://roadwarriornews.com/autoenshittification-allows-car-...

But 10 year old ICE is still a perfectly good car, yet 10 year old Tesla is trash. Not because there's a better Tesla now, but because it's no repairable and will soon require a new $20k battery.

Funny. My Tesla has proven itself to be repairable. And has needed fewer repairs than my ICE car. As for the "will soon require", as https://www.motortrend.com/features/how-long-does-a-tesla-ba... verifies, at 200,000 miles a Tesla still averages being able to hold 90% of original charge. The average ICE car does not survive to 200,000 miles.

While some do need batteries sooner, some ICE cars need new engines sooner. It's a wash. Average lifespan is comparable.

(Electric would win hands down if Tesla had better manufacturing quality though.)

The reason the average ice car doesn't last 200k miles is because car purchases are amazingly irrational. Other than a few unlucky models, basically any Toyota or Honda will go over 200k miles. I own two 250k mile Toyota/Lexus vehicles and expect another 100k from them easily. But people buy Dodge sedans and vans, jaguars and range rovers, Audis and Kias.... Because they basically don't care for getting 200k miles. Realistically if you buy a ice car that is known for lasting 200k, it will easily do it.

"The average ICE car does not survive to 200,000 miles"

That's a fair amount of misinformation in your post.

1) Any reliable ICE brand goes well above 200k miles with basic maintenance. There's a long history here of reliability and why so many drivers choose boring yer reliable brands like Toyota, Honda, Mazda, etc. If you choose brands that do not prioritize reliability then that's on you. (i.e. Mercedes drivers switching into Tesla)

2) Mileage (distance) is not actually the determining factor here in longevity, car age is. Average age of ICE cars is around 12 years in the USA. That's average, which means there are many cars that are much much older than that. Battery cars will be lucky if they average out 8 years as a fleet. Probability is 75%+ you're looking at a battery replacement at the 12 year mark if not sooner. Vast majority of drivers will not replace said battery making the car a throw away due to cost (no one financially competent spends $10k-$20k on a battery for a car worth less than $10k). This will absolutely drive fleet age down, resulting in a younger fleet and more disposable cars. Replacement batteries are not plentiful or cheap and there's no reason for that to change due to the industry strategy.

"Tesla still averages being able to hold 90% of original charge"

3) Lucky you. It's well known in the community first year degradation is typically 5%-10% and there after 1-2% per year till a major failure. Do you know how to measure your original charge? Have you driven the car from 100% to 0% to verify total battery capacity or you just going of the BMS hoping it knows the true capacity. BMS is regularly off by 5%+ so for all you know your true capacity is already nearing 80%. If you know Lithium battery science then you know after 80% the capacity hits a cliff rate of degradation accelerates. Few people drive their cars below 10% battery so they don't really know.

a lot of this data on battery health comes from california. Not everywhere has California's climate and lithium ion battery packs do not do well in the cold.

Also, the link you shared is just a collection of anecdotes. It doesn't provide evidence of a trend.

Knowing several people driving 10+ year old Tesla's, I have to disagree with you.

1. Yes, the range is a little less. One person got their battery replaced by a 3rd party specialist. Runs great.

2. They certainly are repairable, just take it to Tesla service or a 3rd party mechanic.

3. Even if the battery is $20k, now you essentially have a new car for only $20k.

> Even if the battery is $20k, now you essentially have a new car for only $20k.

By this logic, I get a new car every time I fill up my tank.

Not really convinced the logic is right here. If the battery dies there’s still options before replacing it with a new one from the manufacturer at retail price.

Even then, batteries in EVs don’t have a 100% failure rate. There are still many 15 year old Leafs driving around on the original battery, and I’m not sure the out-and-out failures (I.e. not including gradual capacity loss) are a high number either.

Modern EVs (2016-present) have even lower failure rates again (below 1% within 200k miles including those replaced due to capacity loss)

I love my Chevy Volt. But I can't recommend a $5k volt to any of my friends wanting a cheap car. Because when you buy a $5k Toyota, it's basically never a random sensor glitch away from costing you $5k+ even at an independent. But volts are inside their battery pack.

That's not the reason why I'm personally not into EVs, but significant capacity loss == failure to me.

So true!

My dad had to make the same decision and he was too vary because of the battery. He talked about his phone and that it doesn't last a day anymore while at 84% health after three years and translated it 1to1 to the car. Its hard to argue with people if they have a reference point but don't understand the differences. I guess most people just want that initial warranty for now. Are there any manufactures that give long warranties on the battery yet?

A very rough estimate for phone batteries is that they last 1000 recharge cycles. If on average you recharge every day, that's 300+ charges a year, and there you go, an expected life of 3 years. That phone is up for a battery replacement. Just like oil or wheels need to be replaced in a car.

Now, how many charges does a car battery do, and how frequently it tends to need one? The same calculation from phones can indeed be translated to cars, the only mistake is translating the end results of the calculation. Maybe that helps with your father?

Yeah, pretty much all of them have long battery warranties. Tesla for example garuntees >=70% capacity for 8 years or 100k miles.

> Tesla for example garuntees >=70% capacity for 8 years or 100k miles.

If you're used to buying used vehicles - that's not sufficient.

For context, all the cars I've bought in the last 20+ years have been at least 8 years old when I bought them. I can get an 8 year old Toyota/Honda and know I'm good for the next 5-7 years.[1]

Buying an 8 year old used Tesla with only 75% capacity? No way.

[1] Likely a lot longer. I'm right now driving a 22 year old vehicle that only started showing issues a year ago.

Oh yeah, my daily driver is a 20-year-old vehicle. It has cost literally just a couple $thousand in maintenance/repairs in the time we've owned it (probably around 10 years? I forget). It's getting kinda rough, but like... at least it doesn't have a battery replacement looming around the corner that would cost more than the entire price we paid for the vehicle.

I want an electric vehicle, but I'm not willing to pay the insanely high prices they go for. I typically don't want to spend more than $10k on a vehicle and I only have once (and that one got totalled in an accident literally a month or two after I finished paying off its loan). The times I've found a used EV in that price range, it's old enough that it will need a new battery soon, instantly ~doubling the price of the vehicle for me.

I'm in the same boat, or was until I finally caved last year and got my wife a 5 year old vehicle, everything else has had >150k miles and >10 years.

I will say that my '03 Pontiac Vibe GT, at 280,000 miles, no longer has all the horses it did when it was younger. There's still a kick from 6000 to 8200 RPM, but I'm increasingly reluctant to hit that redline once a month to "keep it fresh" like I used to. The gradual compression loss and increased leak-down rate aren't that bad, but it might be 25% fewer horses, I guess. Man, I love that car and that engine. I ought to get it a new set of rings, get the cylinders bored out smooth, and give it fresh bearings. Sadly, the rust that's appearing on the body like a cancer probably makes that not worthwhile...

The good news for electrics is that those older motors will remain almost exactly as powerful as they day when they were new for decades.

Obviously, the fuel tank is still the same size it's always been, but range is not as much of a concern on a gas vehicle because gas stations are everywhere and you can fill up rapidly.

I personally hope that this becomes less of a concern as charger density improves year over year - in particular, as EVs become ubiquitous, landlords will start including L2 chargers in apartment parking complexes. Once everyone can charge in a garage overnight, range anxiety is hugely less important.

> 03 Pontiac Vibe GT

So a Toyota :)

This. We have two cars.

One is 8 years old. That's old right? The other is 18 years old.

Neither have had major issues.

TCO is way important than range. You'll likely spend thousands less on maintenance on an EV.

The few oil changes on my recently out of warranty 2021 Toyota have already cost more than the entire maintenance spend on my 2017 Bolt.

> You'll likely spend thousands less on maintenance on an EV.

I don't spend many thousands on maintaining an ICE to begin with.

I've kept track of all car expenses since 2008 for 3 different cars. My average per year is $445. This is repairs and maintenance.

I'm not a gearhead. I know little about cars. I do whatever repairs my mechanic suggests. Things just don't break down much with reliable ICE cars.

TCO calculators are, in my experience, off by an order of magnitude. Ignore them.

> The few oil changes on my recently out of warranty 2021 Toyota

Are you doing them at the dealer? You're likely paying too much. And are you doing them on the manufacturer schedule or have you fallen prey to the "Every 3 months or 3000 miles" propaganda?

Most cars need it every 6 months. And unless your car needs some high quality oil, it's typically about $40 to get a regular mechanic to change it. So $80-100/year.

I have a car over 20 years old. I don't spend much money on maintenance. I don't have a car payment, taxes are very low, and insurance is decently cheap. Had it for a few years, have replaced brakes and some minor things. Didn't spend much on the vehicle, either.

Having a car payment would automatically be more expensive than my current vehicle. More taxes, more money each month, and so on. For electric cars, I won't get the incentives here in Norway for much longer, as they are being (mostly) phased out in the next few years.

To be fair, though: I walk a lot. I have a 5-10 minute walk to work (depending on snow). Driving takes longer. The car is used a few times a month. Realistically, my car is a luxury item and I'm lucky to live in a place that makes it so.

Range is often a hard requirement, it isn’t optional. The TCO is infinite if your vehicle can’t take you where you need to go.

The people you're discussing with most likely change the oil on their own.

Fuel efficiency on an ICE can drop up to 30% after 10 years... the end result is the same. But that's not on anyone's mind when buying a used car.

I have a 2013 CRV with a EPA combined mileage of 25 mpg (AWD):

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2013_Honda_CR-V.shtm...

I get combined mileage of 26 mpg. That's a short daily commute and a couple trips a month to a town ~70 miles away.

I haven't taken particularly stellar care of it.

> the end result is the same.

Absolutely not.

This completely ignores the relatively high initial range of ICE (especially hybrid), and the poor real world state of the EV charging infrastructure, compared to petrol.

A 30% drop in range would be an extra 5 minutes at the nearest gas station, almost guaranteed to be within a couple miles.

And, that 30% is usually cheap to get back, usually just by some combination of changing the spark plugs, running a bottle of carbon removal/fuel system cleaner through, or changing the fuel injectors.

I have an electric, but I also understand why people are avoiding electric, and why 96% of people with EV also have an ICE car [1] (including me, with my newest being ICE)!

[1] https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2023/11/10/the-stat-that-say...

> Fuel efficiency on an ICE can drop up to 30% after 10 years.

Source? Both of my first 2 cars got a good 38 mpg on the highway (no AC) after their 10 year mark. 38 mpg is the same as brand new.

"Fuel efficiency on an ICE can drop up to 30% after 10 years"

Complete nonsense. Every 15+ year old ICE car I've known or owned was within 5% to 10% of original fuel economy, the reliable brands actually maintained their original fuel economy or surpassed it as fuel economy improves as engine wear in completes at the 20k-40k mile mark.

If your ICE car dropped by 30% then share the brand and your maintenance history.

The warranty doesn’t suggest the battery will be at 70.00001% on the first day of year 9. It says if it goes below 70% it will get replaced.

That 8 year old Toyota you bought came with a 6 year/60k mile warranty. If you are comfortable driving that to 2.5x the initial warranty then a used Tesla should be good to 250k and 20 years.

> The warranty doesn’t suggest the battery will be at 70.00001% on the first day of year 9. It says if it goes below 70% it will get replaced.

The point is that they're not confident enough to say it won't be in that range. Put another way, why don't they just make the warranty 80% instead of 70%?

If Tesla's not confident in it, I definitely am not.

> That 8 year old Toyota you bought came with a 6 year/60k mile warranty. If you are comfortable driving that to 2.5x the initial warranty then a used Tesla should be good to 250k and 20 years.

We hope so, but we don't know, which is the point. Toyota has a track record. Tesla hasn't been around long enough to have a track record.

That aside, the real point is that ICE cars don't have any particular component that costs that much to replace. How much will a new EV battery cost me? Sure, on occasion you may have to rehaul your whole engine, but that's really rare. I've only known one Toyota owner who had to do that, and it cost (in today's dollars), about $6K.

When I buy an 8 year old car, I don't expect perfection. I know things will break - soon. I buy it with the confidence that repairs will not be too expensive, and even after all the repairs I'll still save a ton of money.

The other blocker is the private party market. So far I've never bought a car from a dealer. I always go private party. The standard procedure with that is you take the car to a trusted mechanic who will examine it and inform you of any potential problems. With electric vehicles, those mechanics can't do much. I've asked them. They can look at a few things like the brakes, but stuff related to the engine is beyond their ability. So whereas I may be comfortable spending a lot of money buying an ICE car from private party, I'm not for EVs.

Why doesn’t Toyota make their powertrain warranty 80k miles? Or 200k?

The warranty is there to cover failures. If a pack has a defect it will drop under 70%. If it doesn’t then it will continue working beyond the warranty term.

You’re assuming linear decay and that Tesla has fit the warranty coverage tightly to that line. It seems more likely to me that Teslas warranty is designed to address unexpected exponential decay. This is consistent with ICE powertrain warranties.

Batteries don't work like that and you know they don't.

I'd rather they guarantee a fairly inexpensive replacement. When electrics can already give you range anxiety, 70% capacity is a deal-breaker.

Batteries are getting cheaper, and I think there is a perception issue here as well as perhaps a real issue of used parts availability.

A brand new Model 3 battery pack, for example, is in the neighborhood of 10 or 11K installed. Or at least it was about a year ago, I don't closely track prices. Blow up an engine, and you won't be far off that in an ICE car. I know someone who just dropped $18K because they blew up both the engine and the transmission in a single shot. Oops.

But the ICE car has cheaper used options, for sure, where you can probably fix a 15 year old car by dropping in a reman or used engine for under five grand. Options for used Tesla battery packs definitely exist but are nowhere as plentiful. Yet!

There are heaps of scrapped Tesla's and used batteries are absolutely an option.

100k isn't all that many for a modern used car and that's a pretty sizable hit on the range given that it's by far the biggest limitation of an EV. Given those numbers it's reasonable that a used Tesla with say 125k miles might not be able to do a 150 mile round trip on a full battery. That's a pretty big limitation for some people.

You're going off the minimum for a warranty replacement, which is pessimistic. Most Teslas with 125K miles have not lost anywhere even close to 30% of the capacity. Typical will be more like 15% or a bit less. And even less than that for the LFP cars, IIRC.

Some cars I expect to do much better, due to manufacturer decisions. Ford, for example, put a pretty big battery in my Lightning, and then made the top 10kWh or so unusable. So far, this means that Lightnings with 100K miles (there aren't a huge number of them yet, but they do exist) often have 0 apparent degradation, or very low single digits.

8 years or 100k miles is bare minimum I would expect a car to last without major repair work.

These cars are not worth a lot after the warranty ends because the battery replacement cost exceeds the value of the car.

100k is a regulatory minimum. E.g. Toyota had to certify the original Prius traction batteries for 100k because they were considered part of the emissions control system.

>long battery warranties.

My 2009 Prius is still running at 231k, for reference.

A Prius with only 50% of its battery capacity available is in much better shape than a Tesla with only 50% of its battery capacity.

And an early Leaf with 50% of its battery capacity is almost useless.

With ICE cars, typically manufacturer warranties only are valid for the original purchaser.

That's never been my experience...

I just got a repair on my 2023 Camry that I bought used. It was covered under the 36,000 mile bumper to bumper warranty.

I have had previous cars repaired under manufacturer warranty and I always buy used.

I just take it to the nearest certified dealer for that brand of car and they take care of it.

That must be a US specific thing, because that sounds demented.

It is untrue in the US. Manufacturer warranty follows the car. And it does so automatically, it is tied to the VIN and not whoever has the title.

That perception means you can get a good deal on a used EV.

Tesla has an 8 year battery and motor warranty.

All well and good but 8 years isn't that old for a car. I don't even look at cars that new. I start at 10+ years old. The drivetrain on any car should last 20 years if it's not abused and given reasonable care and even if you end up needing to replace the engine or transmission that's a few thousand dollars on an older car. What would a new battery on a 10 year old Tesla cost you? Can you even buy one?

Average lifespan of a car in the US is 16 years, warranty covers half of that.

Given the lowest acceptable threshold for capacity under some warranties (70%) and assuming linear degradation, a 16 year old EV would have 40% capacity (worst case). Given a typical range of 250 for EVs today, that would put you at ~110 miles on a charge.

Seems like it would be a fine car to me given the age. I'd also expect battery swaps to become more common as the industry ages, which will drive prices down.

> Can you even buy one?

I would like to think 1) that the answer is yes and 2) that the price in fact come down over time as battery tech gets cheaper, markets of scale, etc.

Maybe some startup needs to go into the battery replacement market for specific popular models of 8+ year old EVs.

> and get something way better.

The last part of OP's statement is the key. In a field that's rapidly advancing technologically, used prices are depressed because the new product is that much better than the used product.

Think back to the early smartphone days - every year phones multiplied in performance, in screen resolution, etc. In that environment a used item is less attractive because you feel like you're missing out on features/capability. This keeps used prices down. Nowadays used smartphones are more competitive because the rate of advancement (that buyers care about at least) has slowed.

For example there's another post later in this thread that points out that the Nissan Leaf has been the same price forever - except the current-gen Leaf has literally double the range of the last one. Effects like this depress used prices.

> ... because the new product is that much better than the used product.

This starts reading like a hallucination after a while. How much in a Tesla had changed over past 5 years or so that makes 2020 model completely obsolete and unappealing relative to 2025 model?

The range hasn't doubled, internal volume hasn't, acceleration or braking hasn't. They may have changed implementations under the hood, but none has been clearly communicated to potential customers, so they might as well be the exact same car.

Meanwhile, 2020 Prius is that ugly one with quirky dashboard, and 2025 is that mustard yellow thing with the HUD-like dash.

So what in an EV is so "rapidly advancing technologically" so much that it perfectly rule out much more simpler explanation that people just aren't interested in EVs, in favor of more hand-wavy one that the newer EVs are just constantly enormously more appealing to the customers that older ones tend to lose the appeal faster?

Look to BYD instead of Tesla if you want to find rapid advancement. Tesla has not been well managed for a few years, BYD recently passed them to become the biggest EV seller

I bought Hyundai, which charges 2x faster than the Tesla

Another thing to consider is the Tesla likely makes up the majority of the used EV inventory, and Tesla has become a toxic brand

Sweet Jesus 1000 miles of range per hour is incredible. It might not technically solve the road trip problem but that's fast enough to make a not even five minute pit stop to get you home. Any range anxiety for intra-city travel is just gone.

> BYD recently passed them to become the biggest EV seller

Well when your government subsides every sale, and your the cheapest product on the market this is a natural outcome.

Mass strikes by workers (in china). Fires (a lot of them). Recalls (several this year). And now massive tariffs for them in a lot of markets don't paint a picture that they have a sustainable business.

We all know that subsidized growth is a great way to build a business (see ridesharing, delivery, in the US) but it doesn't make consumers happy in the end when prices go up and service quality goes down.

Having ridden in a lot of BYDs when traveling overseas I think you paint too bleak a picture. They're everywhere and reliable enough to seemingly be the preferred cars for uber drivers. Some markets might tax them out of existence but I expect others will gladly take perfectly serviceable cars on the cheap.

Tesla is still kicking and they had all the same problems at one time or another. I mean until this year we also massively subsidized every EV sale so pot calling the kettle black.

> I mean until this year we also massively subsidized every EV sale so pot calling the kettle black.

There is a big difference between domestic subsidies and export subsidies.

One is a policy to promote adoption the other is akin to economic warfare.

> I bought Hyundai, which charges 2x faster than the Tesla

Your Hyundai charges at 500 kW?

There's more to charging than peak kW, notably sustained throughput

The amount of range you can put into the EV, per unit of time, is a better metric.

https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-charging.html

Hyundai has been on the 800V arch for a while with their E-GMP platform, Tesla's first entry is the 25th spot.

Huh...that is interesting. TIL.

I wonder why the Tesla is not able to maintain the high charging rate? Both peak at about the same kW.

Maybe the car is more efficient and it's twice the rate in "driveable distance-charged" per unit of time?

I've seen more lamborghinis than privately owned BYDs at this point. Maybe it's just where I'm from, but consumers definitely aren't switching to BYD, around myself.

Recently in Singapore and Hong Kong. Roughly as many BYD as Teslas there.

> Maybe it's just where I'm from

I mean it's pretty obviously this. You don't become the worlds largest EV seller if nobody is buying.

I think it's also fair to argue that it's probably more perceived, than actual.

People are obsessed with EV range, and massively concerned that used EV have degraded batteries.

Most likely there are some market inefficiencies here. Good for you, buy a cheap used EV ;)

Also many EVs are still not attractive to price sensitive consumers. And the price insensitive ones, won't buy used EV.

> The last part of OP's statement is the key. In a field that's rapidly advancing technologically, used prices are depressed because the new product is that much better than the used product.

And 2 years old EV is not twice as bad as current one

> For example there's another post later in this thread that points out that the Nissan Leaf has been the same price forever - except the current-gen Leaf has literally double the range of the last one. Effects like this depress used prices.

The previous gen is 8 years old. It took 8 years to "double" the quality, not 2

Listen, I'm literally just describing basic market dynamics here - my post is not intended as an endorsement of plainly observable phenomena.

The depreciation/utility curve has always been aggressive no matter what product you're buying. Is a 2 year-old ICE car twice as bad as a new one? Is a 2 year-old TV? Clearly not, yet they are all worth that in the open market.

For EVs the depreciation curve is especially aggressive because of perceived advancements. Are the advancements worth buying new? I dunno! You tell me - but this is clearly being reflected in the market.

From a strict utilitarian standpoint, optimizing your depreciation/utility function should mean you're buying almost every single thing used. But yet lots of people don't do that. Humans are empirically not very good utilitarians!

>For EVs the depreciation curve is especially aggressive because of perceived advancements.

And many comments disagree with this statement. There are few perceived advancements. Used EVs are not trusted, particularly because the used battery fear.

> And 2 years old EV is not twice as bad as current one

The new-vs-used price difference in equipment comes from multiple factors, of which "better features" is one part.

Consider what would happen if you gave someone this choice:

1. Keep your 10-year-old car. (No major upgrades from stock.)

2. Pay $X to trade it for its identical factory-sibling which was made the same day but was stored in a timeless stasis-bubble until today, so that it still has its original new-car smell.

I can't imagine anyone saying: "Well, there are zero new features, so I'll swap them for $0."

P.S.: The issues are even more obvious if the person is choosing between buying someone else's 10-year-old car versus paying an extra premium for the time-warp one, because there's uncertainty about the first vehicle's history and maintenance.

Yeah, because a car has tens of thousands of parts that age with both time and usage. The core drivetrain is just a tiny bit of that.

Everything is falling apart and that makes and old, used car... Used and old. Now queue the people who show up to say they haven't changed a tire or wind screen wiper blade on their 2012 Model S/Camry and can't perceive a single difference to when they were new from factory.

Range though is only one aspect to take into account when quantifying the "quality".

What part of EVs is "rapidly advancing technologically"? The battery is the only thing that comes to mind and they should be replaceable if that was the bottleneck. Self-driving is also advancing, but that hasn't stabilized as a feature yet. EV motors have been around for a long time and the rest seems like general car stuff that would be common with ICEs.

Following that logic it seems to come down to old batteries which aren't as good both due to technological advances and battery aging. If so, why aren't used dealers just including a battery swap in the price?

> If so, why aren't used dealers just including a battery swap in the price?

I think that is the main thing that needs to be figured out. I suspect the problem is that you need to get OEM battery replacements for older model cars and those aren't yet readily available or cheap. We are going to need aftermarket batteries to drive price competition in the market. The current car manufacturers aren't incentivised to support a secondary market when they are still focused on primary sales. Also not in the ICE market there is much more ability to scale capacity. The supply chain constraints for EVs, and batteries are much tighter, though that keeps getting better.

Battery swaps are never going to be a thing long term, even with Nio rolling it out in areas. It adds huge amounts of weight and complexity. You have to build electrical and coolant connectors which can handle large amounts of connects and disconnects, in areas that get mucky and interact with rain, salt, snow and ice. You have to build a chassis strong enough to take an impact but also support the additional weight and space that a removable battery takes up - think of how much bigger phones with removable batteries.

I have done 900 mile road trips in EVs with 150Kw charging (low by standards of newer EVs) and charging has been a complete non problem. In fact I have more problems with plugging my car in, going to the toilet and coming back finding that I've put more power into the car than I wanted.

Batteries are lasting 200k+ miles with 85-90% original capacity in so longevity is not a problem and charging is becoming a solved problems in an increasingly large portion of the world too.

You put this in the wrong place. "Battery swap" in this context should be read like "transmission swap". Hours of work replacing a permanent part. Nothing to do with detachable batteries.

Hybrids keep their value remarkably well. If each engine isn't spinning half the time they will obviously last longer. They could have a small enough battery that make hot swapping a lot more realistic.

Why not just have more rapid charging and do away with the ICE engine and small hybrid battery altogether.

> "What part of EVs is "rapidly advancing technologically"?"

Battery capacity, motor efficiency (getting more range out of the same battery), charging rate (800V architectures for example that let you charge > 150kW), battery chemistry (wider operating temp envelope, affects charging and driving efficiency depending on environment)... the list goes on.

The batteries are also getting cheaper - which is to say for the same $ you're now (generally) getting a larger battery.

> "If so, why aren't used dealers just including a battery swap in the price?"

Because the batteries are in fact not swappable from one gen to the next, because the power electronics around them are different, peak current draw is different (and that depends on the motor it's mated with!).

Like I know it's tempting and attractive to imagine EVs like regular cars with some giant-ass AA batteries installed on them, but that's not how they work! The battery is specced as a unit with the entire electrical system and drive motor options!

The battery electronics aren't necessarily all that complicated:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZHN3fjDtpc

The precharge resistor has to be reasonably matched with the devices connected to the battery though.

And of course there could be additional converting electronics for charging or whatever.

If you look at EPA efficiency in 2020 and 2025, it hasn’t really moved that much for the same class of vehicle.

> Like I know it's tempting and attractive to imagine EVs like regular cars with some giant-ass AA batteries installed on them, but that's not how they work!

Come on, we all know the big Christmas toys would always use those fat C batteries that we never had enough of.

Batteries need to be split into several replaceable modules, so the entire car isn't a write-off if there's a fault or damage affecting the battery

Ideally, these battery modules would be standardised and used across a wide range of vehicles.

This has always been the case for Maseratis.

> new EVs are selling for about twice as much as a 2-year-old used vehicle of the same make and model

There's a saying that a new car loses 50% when you leave the lot. It's presumably still true for EVs.

The 50% off the lot was always exaggerated, but it is nearly not true now at all - used prices for all cars have skyrocketed such that buying used is not nearly the deal it used to be.

In fact, buying new is almost always the way to go now over lightly used (e.g., less than 5 or even 10 years old).

Even 20 years ago after I got out of college the advice to "buy a couple year old Honda Civic for cheap" had stopped working because everyone knew those cars were solid so the lightly used ones already barely cost less than new and the new ones often had cheap financing deals.

A brand new 2026 Corolla is $25k (asking price!)

2024 Corollas around me are like $20k. If you need financing, the rates can often be worse for a used car than a new one. You then also have less warranty time left.

Cash for clunkers destroyed mountains of cars which increased pollution and forced a bunch of people up the food chain with regard to competition for used cars.

A big part of it began there, and Covid just made it even worse by constraining new car supply for a while.

Not to mention, all the excess dollars means that almost any older car has increased value for nostalgia seekers and enthusiasts.

The higher cost of financing making people hold the cars they have has further reduced the supply.

I recently bought a used 2023 Camry with 29K miles fully loaded, for 29K. New for the same features which I wanted comes out to 42.6K according to the Toyota configure website, and I assume there might even be some extra fee on top of that possibly...

Basically this - https://www.carmax.com/car/27550586 ?

The 2026 is a hybrid, was the older one?

However, saving more than a dollar a mile is pretty good, in favor of used. It's when you're saving less than 25 cents a mile that used probably isn't worth it.

Almost. Mine has the premium sound system which I really wanted, and ventilated seats, and the 360 camera view, front cross traffic and rear cross traffic monitoring, full lane centering for the full speed cruise control.

It's not hybrid but I don't want hybrid. That's more parts to have issues and I keep for 10 years and the hybrid batteries don't usually last that long, and I don't drive enough for the gas mileage to really make a meaningful cost difference.

> There's a saying that a new car loses 50% when you leave the lot.

New cars in no way lose half of their value when you drive them off the lot. The saying is that a new car loses ~10% of it's value when you drive it off the lot [1].

[1] https://www.carfax.com/buying/car-depreciation

Right or wrong, the _saying_ is that "a new car loses half its value as soon as you drive off the lot." I've heard that repeated from many people across multiple regions in regards to buying a new vehicle. I've always heard half, never 10%, even if 10% is the more demonstrable amount.

That saying has always been a huge exaggeration, though. The price of a barely-used car is usually single-digit percentage points lower than an actually new one.

Until recently, for EVs it was more like 50%+$7k

This entire argument relies on new EV prices declining like other technologies, but this doesn't seem to be the case. E.g. the Nissan Leaf is ~$30,000 and has been for almost a decade. (Guess you could make a case with inflation... but nowhere near the technology price curves.)

It is the case globally. BYD sells EVs starting at $7800 [1][2], and Toyota sells an EV for $15,000 in China [3].

This may also be why Teslas are holding their value better than any other EV. Teslas are usually bought by U.S. consumers, who are forbidden from buying any of the cheaper global EVs by import restrictions. For fleets that buy models that are sold globally, they compete in the global market and are subject to global price declines.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs5h6R2jLUQ

[2] https://insideevs.com/reviews/769113/byd-seagull-good-video-...

[3] https://motorillustrated.com/toyota-launches-15000-bz3x-its-...

Tesla's are also mostly made in China now.

The Chinese Tesla's are also dropping in price if you live in a country that hasn't got massive tariffs on Chinese made cars which is basically everywhere in the world except North America and Europe. Tesla literally won't sell you a Model S in Australia for example since it's made in the USA and there's no way they can sell it for a reasonable price.

It's a little damning for the US car market since Tesla's seen as a success of US manufacturing. Globally they are a Chinese made car.

The actual reason why you can't get a Model S in Australia is that Tesla does not manufacture a right hand drive version any more. You're equally out of luck in Japan, the UK, etc.

Why did they stop making the RHD version?

Because it was too expensive inRHD markets that have access to global EVs

Also ironically their Chinese made car is said to have better build quality than the US made one.

Maybe not that surprising, in large part the Germans built up the Chinese auto industry, and Tesla went to China to tap into that manufacturing knowledge/talent and backported it to their US factory.

> Teslas are usually bought by U.S. consumers

More than 62% of Teslas are sold outside of the US.

I think they meant the reverse. The majority of US EV sales are of Tesla's: https://cleantechnica.com/2025/04/15/auto-brands-leading-the...

If we want to get nitpicky, Tesla no longer has the majority of US EV sales. Their market share has fallen to 42.3%. They still have a huge lead on the next closest brand however.

The 2012 Nisan leaf had a 73 mile range. The 2025 leaf has a 300 mile range. 4x range at the same price (~30% less with inflation) is a pretty good improvement.

We've reach a point of price stabilization and longevity for smartphones now that didn't exist for the first 10 year ramp. When every new model added fundamental capability, you always want to upgrade, with the sweet spot often being every other year. But now, with better build quality, batteries, and stabilization of features people will keep their phones for much longer. Or buy "new" models that are of older versions since the price/features have been acceptable to run most of the apps they care about for years now. Plenty of people still want the top end for similar reasons to why people buy design clothing, but we've reached a feature plateau. We hopefully are getting close to that with EVs. Seems like around 300 mile range standard was the key thing. Though improved AI driving could change that again.

The main issue with smartphones is software support, as it essentially acts like a built-in time bomb.

Buying an older-generation flagship model to get better features than a current-generation midrange model of the same market price isn't very attractive when it'll have to be replaced after 2 years instead of 5 years.

The only reason US doesn't have an EV cheaper than that is a >100% tariff on Chinese EVs.

Could be part of it, but the US just doesn't have cheap cars anymore. The days of the Geo Metro and the Dodge Neon with a 5 speed and crank windows is over. Car companies have decided to relegate people (in the USA) with either low income, or who cant stomach the type of depreciation every car suffers from, to the used market.

The reality is that there's no margin in cheap cars. You need to look at numbers instead of vibes.

The difference between 4 crank-up window regulators and 4 power window regulators is less than $100. 4 power lock actuators cost less than $20. Switches for all the above are, what, maybe $10?

The same math applies to power mirrors, auto climate control, heated seats, cruise control, and all the rest.

The production cost of a car with "power everything" vs. "manual everything" is a few hundred dollars at most. But consumers expect a much bigger discount for the inconvenience of missing those features (or, conversely, are willing to pay a much larger premium to add those features to a baseline car).

That the US doesn't have cheap cars is simply the reality of what the market demands. Cheap (new) cars don't sell (for more than what it costs to produce them).

I wasn't implying that throwing manual window regulators on a 2025 model car would be a significant cost reduction. It was just 2 examples that I could think of to back up my point that there are fewer affordable cars than there used to be.

My (admittedly very, very limited) personal experience owning cars actually suggests cars are getting cheaper over the past couple decades. Specifically, my data looks like this:

- A new Honda Accord LX in 2003 was ~$19k

- A new Honda Accord LX in 2020 was ~$23k

In today's dollars, that's roughly $33k and $29k, respectively. These numbers are very approximate, but it means the same car model in 2020 was about 12% less expensive than the one in 2003. And the new version has a whole lot of improvements and features the old one didn't. (They cheaped out and removed the lock from the glove compartment though!)

Stepping back and thinking about the complexities that go into manufacturing a modern automobile, it's wild to me that they can cost so little compared to what you get. It's a machine that can travel 200+ thousand miles and last for decades with barely any maintenance.

Commercial-scale vehicles (semi trucks, busses) cost an order of magnitude more than personal vehicles, yet share many of the same complexities. Like, how are cars so cheap for what they are? Manufacturing volume, I guess.

> Like, how are cars so cheap for what they are? Manufacturing volume, I guess.

That, and externalising a lot of the const on society, the environment, and third world countries.

2026 Corolla is $25k.

I saw a manual transmission Nissan Versa for $17k.

How much cheaper can they get?

A friend of mine bought a used car in 2007 for ~$4500 in 2025 dollars.

In my mid-20s I bought a 3-year-old Accord for $16k (using a $12k loan) and that was a big stretch for my finances at the time, despite having a good early-career tech job.

Your $17k figure is a lot of money for most folks in the US.

MSRP of an internal-combustion-powered Civic or Corolla is up 30ish percent in the same time period. The 2025 Nissan Leaf is a lot better than the 2015 model too. Range has nearly doubled for one.

No, you completely missed the point. The new model is still ~$30,000 but it has better range/charges faster/drives better.

That doesn’t really happen as dramatically with gasoline cars. The powertrain and driving experience of a 5 year old gas car isn’t noticeably different than a current one.

If you buy a 5 year old EV you might get one that charges slow, doesn’t have a heat pump, has worse battery chemistry, battery health management, and the list goes on.

Heck, the Leaf is a perfect example because you’re stuck with chademo fast charging charging instead of CCS or NACS. I wouldn’t touch one with a 9 foot pole unless I planned to exclusively charge at home.

Also, don’t take my comment to mean that I think used EVs are a bad choice, many of them can work very well for many years and use cases as long as you are properly informed.

This argument seems right to me. Old ICE cars are basically the same as new ones. EVs are getting better quickly, so fast depreciation makes sense.

I avoided a used Leaf for exactly the reason you cited...2.5 years ago, and have been very happy with a last-of-its-generation 2023 Chevy Bolt (~ $22K new after tax credit).

But if you don't care about new features, e.g., really fast charging, a used Bolt (55kW max) is a great option!

>>Old ICE cars are basically the same as new ones.

I'm not sure that's totally true. The rate of change might be lower, but new ICE vehicles have higher efficiency (directly correlating to longer EV range) and are safer, more comfortable, and quieter.

I am definitely on the pro-EV side, nearly an evangelist I suppose, but ICE vehicles do improve.

> That doesn’t really happen as dramatically with gasoline cars. The powertrain and driving experience of a 5 year old gas car isn’t noticeably different than a current one.

Depends. I recently went from a manual car to a mild hybrid with an eCVT. Feels pretty different to me.

Hybrids with eCVTs existed 5-15 years ago. You just happened to not be driving one.

This isn’t what’s happening though.

I see Tesla Highland models (<1 year old, current gen) selling at significantly larger depreciations than nearly new gas cars. This holds across other EV manufacturers.

This makes a ton of sense considering the recently expired tax credit. The moment you drive an EV off the lot in September or earlier it’s worth $7,500 less than the normal depreciation.

I think if we give the used market a few years without the tax credit it’ll start to look more normal.

Indeed, and didn't even mention ~30% inflation over the last five years.

I don't think that's a realistic transaction price for the Nissan Leaf. For most of that decade they were all but giving them away on leases as low as $79/mo. There are probably streaming video channels that cost more than a Nissan Leaf.

What are the ranges across that decade. If the inflation adjusted price is lowering and the main technical limit is improving, it’s exactly what you’d expect from a technology improvement.

Car prices are tough too because how much subsidies, tariffs etc play into it.

But theoretically if you used a US made car you could limit some of that bias.

I'm an upper middle class person who could buy everything new if I wanted, but I still choose to acquire many things used. I have a new TV but my AVR and most of the speakers are second hand. I bought a four year old car. My CPU and RAM are new, but the motherboard and GPU are from FB marketplace. My monitors are new but my desk and office lights are cobbled together. My laser printer is almost twenty years old. I buy a lot of my clothes and almost all of my sporting gear second hand.

I partly don't own an EV because even used they still cost a lot upfront and I'd rather maintain the personal incentive to take mass transit or ride my bike, but when I do eventually go electric, it'll almost certainly be preowned, assuming I can get a reasonable discount off of new.

Depending on how far back you want to look at electric cars you can find them for pretty cheap. Sub $5k versions from 10 years ago were tempting recently when my partner needed a repair on the current (ICE) car. It looked like sub $15k there were many options. For use around the city it would be a good fit, but I ditched the ideas since we're in the process of dealing with partial house rewiring. That might be an update for later.

I don't get your angle; EVs cost more than the comparable car new, cost way more to repair and depreciate faster. More electrical waste, but not cheap to begin with? Cars (in my mind at least) should last 15, 20 or more years; that doesn't seem to be happening here.

EV maintenance costs are way lower. There's hardly non-recycleable electrical waste in EVs. And they absolutely can last 15 years: depreciation doesn't mean they fall apart.

I am concerned about EV maintenance outside of warranty. My family has routinely gotten even American cars above 200,000 miles, or at least kept them going for 15 years or more.

This has gotten harder over the years. Cars from 2010 rust a lot less than cars from 1985. But they have more computers, and the computers die. These computers are often hard to replace. Even good mechanics tend to recommend going to the dealer. It's rarely less than a $1500 replacement.

And EV cars? They often have an extra half-dozen critical computers beyond what's in a gas car. So I worry that well-maintained Honda and Toyota EVs will fail sooner than their conventional models.

Perhaps this worry is misplaced. We'll see.

Our Leaf is still going fine after 12 years. But a 2013 budget EV is hilariously low spec by today standards. So yeah if you're looking for family heirloom qualities in a car it's a wrong choice. Most people don't drive old cars for sentimental value though.

Maybe $30k or $40k are nothing for the average car owner in the USA but that's 3 or 4 times what a small car used to cost here in Europe, even 5 times. Small cars are going extinct or their price doubled because they are transitioning to electric too. The result is that they are selling few EVs and a lot of used combustion engine cars. The EV transition is derailing here because of price, not because of second hand market value.

Exactly. There is such a gap between brand new EV and regular cars that for someone doing 10000km per year it needs on average 8 years before breaking even to account for the price gap. It’s too expensive right now it does makes sense to invest in an EV, except if money isn’t a problem

There's also a whole lot of people without the option of charging at home, especially here in the UK (relying on on-street parking or living in flats)

Green tech is great if you're upper-middle class with a nice big detached home, plenty of space to install solar, a heat pump, and EV charger. But a large percentage of people just don't have a 'compatible home' even if they had the cash available to invest in such tech.

Or it could be the simple explanation:

That current EVs just depreciate faster than ICE cars (in the US).

The article's chart is about used ICE vs EV prices in the US...

New EVs are definitely not 2x as good as a few years ago at half the price. Not sure if you've seen the price of new EVs in the US without subsidies.

ICE cars don't have a ~20% range depreciation after 5 years. EVs do. One would expect them to depreciate faster, until there's a solution for that.

That's not really a problem if they depreciate faster if the total operation cost is lower - which it almost certainly is for the Chinese EVs (relevant to most of the world).

The data in the article is kind of all over the place. But also at least one big distortion is that

* these are rental cars, which are used much more intensely than normal used cars

* a big chunk of the (US) stats are Hertz dumping Teslas, specifically. It had to dump 30,000 of them (which is a huge amount of Teslas to just flood the market with all at once); and Tesla specifically has people trying to sell their cars due to the brand of their CEO.

What EVs have 20% range depreciation after 5 years? That seems atypical for any car with modern battery temp management.

Mine is 2 years old, battery still reads 99% health and I regularly exceed the EPA range estimate. I've seen ones with hundreds of thousands of (fast charging!) miles that still only have 10% degradation.

I think it’s hard to draw any conclusions about the auto market. The cost escalations of cars and the bizarro economy have changed the market fundamentally.

The weird gaps of supply in model years because of the pandemic and prices are just nuts. The value of my 2016 SUV has gone up $4000 since last year. EVs are super volatile — my brother has netted profit from trading them. My girlfriend sold her 14 month old Subaru for $1000 under her cost - the pretax value appreciated.

Hard agree. A drunk driver hit our parked 2015 Mazda CX-5. We paid about $27,000 for it in 2016. The car was totaled and we received about $17,000. That figured out to just about $1100 in depreciation per year for 9 years.

Exactly ^^^ This situation reminds me of the 90s with the PC market, where PCs were changing so fast, and getting cheaper every day - I think Weird Al put it best: "My new computer's got the clocks, it rocks / But it was obsolete before I opened the box".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpMvS1Q1sos

What a reference. Thanks for taking me back to the 90s. I have fond memories of memorizing Running with Scissors :)

Yeah, tech for this stuff is moving super fast. It's hard to know what will endure, what will be upgradeable, and what will be cast aside.

I recently bought a low mileage used EV for relatively cheap. I'm hoping I'll be able to drive the battery into the ground. Then I'm betting that, in 6-8(10?)yrs when I need a new one, there will be better battery chemistries so I can extend the car's life even further.

I don’t think it’s that EVs are getting that much better year-over-year. I think it’s more that people are scared to buy a used EV, because they don’t know how long batteries will hold up and what to look for. To anyone who hasn’t done a bunch of research (most people) it seems much more risky.

You are spot on. New car EV prices are dropping and tech is advancing.

EVs inherently depreciate less; they're simpler, few moving parts. The motor is sealed. Batteries are lasting longer than expected.

So 'depreciate' in the title is misleading. It may be technically true in that they lose resale value, but they are definitely not less road-worthy than a similarly aged combustion vehicle.

I would absolutely buy a second hand Tesla, they're great value. Probably other EVs too.

You're right, but it still sucks that my car now depreciates as fast as my Macbook. I don't think batteries will ever hold their value though, and those things constitute at least $10k of an EV's sticker price.

Hopefully as EVs become less ugly-looking, the body and interior hold their value, even if the value of the battery depreciates rapidly.

If somebody made an EV that looked like a 1980s Rolls Royce Corniche- something tasteful- I would buy an EV.

But _why_ would the battery depreciate so much? My 4 year old EV can drive the same distance as it could when it was new. The data we have on EVs just doesn’t support the idea that their range drops a cliff at some point. And if they do, you’re mostly able to have it fixed by swapping the faulty cell module. Which more and more places are able to do. And even when it reaches the end of life, it’s still good for grid applications.

So the way I see it, the EV resale value is really due to two factors. One being that, yes, the typical EV buyer is able to buy new. And the other being knee jerk reaction to used EVs that’s mostly emotion-based.

I expect the resale value become better in some years. And I fully expect end of life EVs costing more than end of life ICE cars, because the battery will definitely be more valuable than a scrap pile.

The EV car market is rapidly evolving which tends to make people skittish about purchases and tend to the latest innovations. I decided to lease my first EV because I figured it would be outdated pretty quickly.

I was wrong. In reality the main innovation driver is the battery. The car is great and EVs are much less maintenance. I think used sales would be better if there were better aftermarket options for batteries.

This really doesn't make sense. Cars have intrinsic value - they can take you from point A to point B. If that's not why people buy them then they're a luxury good, like a Prada bag, so it's kind of silly to talk about resale value.

It's more likely EVs have poor resale value because the batter is the car, from a value perspective. Once the car reaches a certain age, if the battery needs to be replaced the car is essentially worthless. This is also true of ICE cars, but not to the same extent.

Its probably more to do with demographics for EVs. Currently EVs and infrastructure around it cover mostly higher income brackets that do not want to bother too much with used cars, so the market around used cars is fairly small compared to ICE that cover both high and and lower end incomes. If you are in a bottom 50% and need a family car EV is still a significant financial risk. Once EVs cover lower income brackets we will see a much healthier used car market.

Also, tax incentives on new EVs push the used market lower, creating a false sense of depreciation.

I expect the market to reconcile the difference now that EVs subsidizes are ending.

Another possible alternative is that the consumer has to be educated that buying used EVs is not like buying a used cellphone, and that EV batteries do last 10+ years.

They dont seem to actually last 10 years though. Sure, in an old Prius you only care about the battery not being completely shorted out, and the price of battery degradation is slightly worse fuel economy.

However, every time I look at renting a Tesla on Turo, each and every example has reviews with stories about not making 100 miles to the next stop on their trip. These are cars that are only 3-4 years old, not 10.

I think it's also in large part due to the demographics of ev buyers today. Still a lot of wealthy early tech adopters who specifically want the newest thing. Not yet driven by utility value ( not that cars ever really are, lower end but ICE vehicles are much closer to that)

This isn't car specific, it's new technology specific.

I agree (just made an analogy to DSLRs in another comment)

> smartphones

Smartphones aren't getting cheaper and generally aren't getting better for the last 3-5 years. In fact, I hated replacing my 4-year-old perfectly functioning smartphone just because its battery degraded and the charging socket wore out.

The replacement was about 15% more expensive, inflation-adjusted, BTW.

If that were true than the market would value used goods as essentially free, so there wouldn't be a reason to buy anything new. The reason there is not a huge used market for technology is because they are no longer supported or are deprecated on purpose by the producer.

Old cell phones and computers are fine from a performance and features point of view. The lack of support, repairability, and durability affect the resale value more than anything.

Tires, summer and winter, are also very expensive. ICE weighs a lot less and generally have much cheaper tires.

It's 100% a reparability issue. When it breaks it will become a brick, that's why.

There are close to zero shops that will work on the powertrain of an EV. The only exceptions are enthusiasts like Rich Rebuilds, etc.

I actually think that the used market for EVs just is going to have more apartment dwellers (who lack home charging infrastructure) and people who only have access to one car (and thus more strongly prefer something that can easily do long trips without much planning). New EVs are new cars which are expensive as hell and primarily going to be purchased by well off people that have houses. And as you said, these people probably aren't getting much work done at the dealership even if we assume the dealership services EVs.

I've noticed in discussions about EVs a lot of people feel range anxiety if overblown, which is probably true. But the "I have nowhere to charge it at night because I don't own a house" problem is usually just ignored even though it seems like a much bigger problem to me.

That’s what I always thought, not having the proper infrastructure is a greater problem because not every apartment has private garage with electricity. In the hyper center of big towns they will never dig the streets to install chargers for every few parking spots and superchargers are rare for the amount of cars there is compared to 3min for gas with ubiquitous infrastructure. Where I live there is often parkings with 50+ cars and no or 2 chargers

Rich runs a youtube channel not a repair shop. There are independent EV repair shops, but you are right that there are not many.

Most people just see ‘old, meh’.

> Instead of threatening to derail the EV transition

Looks like the wish is your thought’s father.

Currently the transition of EVs is a transition of cars from long lasting, repairable items into throwaway e-waste (like TVs, computers and smartphones).

And somehow this is more eco-friendly of course.

I buy used all the time. It is way cheaper and new things are usually not much better (sometimes new things are worse).

For example a lot of new TVs are worse than old TVs, because new TVs have ads in their UIs, and increasingly new TVs don't even come with remotes anymore.

I'm pretty sure it's a mixture between this and the fact that EVS don't really break down. You have the same amount of them for sale a few years later. Versus gas cars. You have half of them around being parted out. So they do go up in value oddly.

They've pretty much just saturated their own market. Everyone needs a car. Not everyone needs an EV. If you have a garage then yes it makes perfect sense to have an EV. But if you don't and you live in an apartment or you live in a shared house. It's not really going to work for you. People who have their own house don't want old cars. So they basically just have a bunch of older car sitting around that nobody really wants even though they technically do have better value. A $30,000 Tesla and a $30,000 BMW? You'd have to be biased to think that it makes logical sense for the BMW. Sure! It's 40. It's fun but the cost of maintenance. The reliability.... It's not really a family car in the same way. It appeals to more people, but it's not more logical. However, you don't need a garage to charge your BMW. I don't care how fast the car charges. I don't want to go to a charger. I've had my car for 4 years and I've only been to a supercharger twice.

But I fully understand why not everyone has them. Every time I pass by a mechanic shop an oil change place like gas station. I just think of how much wasted time that people use on their cars thinking that it's more convenient.

But but for them in fact it may actually be. Imagine sitting at a charger for 20 mins 2x a week if you drive a lot and use sentry.

Actually EVs break down a lot, more so than ICE or hybrid cars. It turns out that having fewer moving parts doesn't compensate for incompetent engineering and shoddy manufacturing.

https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2025-us-vehi...

PHEVs break down more than full electric BEV or normal ICE vehicles.

Hybrids (ie not plug in) have the least defects, but basically equal to normal ICE vehicles.

But BEV is improving YoY relative to ICE.

I don't think this is true for smartphones anymore, new models bring only marginal improvements to the last ones, and buying a used model in almost new condition allows you to save around 50%.

Agree with everything here.

Anecdote:

I purchased an EV this year, my highest priority was range per dollar, and the vehicle I selected happened to be new because of current market conditions. (Equinox EV for under 25k otd after incentives)

Consequently, why are used sellers so out of touch, for cars or anything else? I love the idea of buying and selling used, but people ask too much relative to the new price.

There are multiple reasons.

1) A large segment of people make purchase decisions based on payment schedules rather than the total cost of driving or even residual value.

2) Today 2/3 of car loans are are 72 months, meaning that even for lower depreciation rate cars, private sellers are often under water, and may not have the resources to pay off the gap with current market value. [0]

3) Banks have responded with 1/5 new-vehicle loans being 84 months or longer, adding to the problem

4) For around the ~40 years I have been paying attention, private sellers almost always think they should get the dealer price and not the private party price.

There are other reasons, but we are in a situation where it would be amazing of we avoid another 2009 like crash in the market.

[0] https://www.edmunds.com/industry/press/underwater-and-sinkin...

If they are out of touch, then the cars aren't selling, right? Because if they are selling for that price, then by definition you are out of touch and the sellers know what the market will bear.

My friend told me that his in-laws absolutely refuse to buy a new car, as their whole lives they’ve been told it’s an awful deal. Instead, they’ll get something a couple of years old and save maybe a few thousand dollars on a $40,000 vehicle.

It drives him batty.

So, I’d say there’s a potential the used buyers are the ones out of touch, and that people like those in-laws probably aren’t buying EVs.

I've told this story before, but I like telling it, so here goes.

I once went shopping for a Mustang Cobra, back when they were cool and I was young and into those kinds of cars. The local Ford dealer had their new car lot next door to the used lot, literally separated only by a driveway.

I went to look at the 2004 Cobras they had a half dozen of, and they were marked down (IIRC) $8000 off MSRP. I thought "Cool, the 04 is no different from the 03, so I wonder what I can get one of those on the used lot for." And walked over to look. The 03s were priced higher than the marked-down price on the 04s a couple hundred feet away. At the same dealer.

I brought it up with the used car manager, incredulous at what he was asking for the used ones. His response was "Yeah, go buy one of the new ones, these will sell just fine." I asked why and he said there is a whole class of buyer that won't even look at new cars. That the new car market and the used car markets are not in fact sharing the same space, even if it seems like it would make sense for people to cross-shop. So he priced his used cars at whatever the market would bear, which turned out to be higher than Ford would unload the new ones for.

Does this happen often? Perhaps not. But over the years I've bought new cars on several occasions where the used equivalent was going to save me a whopping $3-4K for a car that was two or three years older and with some miles. It did not make any financial sense whatsoever to buy the used one for such a small discount.

I was literally in this situation this year. My parents needed an upgrade, and as I was researching it, the 2 year old used cars were just 1-2k EUR cheaper than the same model new with a slight discount. Of course we got the new one, if only for having the full warranty period.

> Instead, they’ll get something a couple of years old and save maybe a few thousand dollars on a $40,000 vehicle.

A used 2 year old Ioniq 5 is selling for about $15-20K less than MSRP.

Some years ago, a friend bought a 2 year old Forester - for a full $10K less than MSRP.

It's not a "few thousand dollars".

(Oh, and personally, if you buy a 2 year old car - you're paying way too much. 6-8 year old cars are a good value).

>> people like those in-laws probably aren’t buying EVs.

> A used 2 year old Ioniq 5 is selling for about $15-20K less than MSRP...It's not a "few thousand dollars".

The Ioniq 5 is an electric vehicle. The whole point of this article is that EVs depreciate significantly faster than Internal Combustion Engine vehicles. A brand new ICE vehicle depreciates quickly but not to the point of losing 50% in 2 years.

>6-8 year old cars are a good value

Agree.

I did point out another ICE car that lost $10K.

In general, particularly for higher priced cars, how many do you know that don't lose about $10K in value after 2-3 years?

>It's not a "few thousand dollars".

It is if you're buying a 4Runner or top of the line diesel pickup or some other meme car that people buy because of how great the internet says it is.

But in the general case I agree with you.

There was a big change in the used market after Covid, that may not have fully worked itself out yet.

Your in-laws are correct and your friend is wrong. Historically the largest depreciation hit on new cars is in the first few years. Getting a low mileage used car that's a few years old is typically the sweet spot for value. You have to price out new and used to understand where the best deals are but generally it's true.

That did go strange for a while during COVID but has mostly become true again.

Have you bought or sold used recently? You can find a fair price, but it's a big time commitment, and stressful.

Plenty of people must find this worthwhile, otherwise sellers wouldn’t be able to find buyers and they’d be forced to reduce price if they want to sell.

Plus, the listed price is often aspirational. Savvy buyers will typically negotiate the price down.

I have to admit that I’m not a savvy buyer and always buy new though. But I know people who do this very successfully.

That's how it goes in my experience with the used market, for anything, really. People go online, browse around the listings to get a feel of the prices, and post a price based on that. That's a mistake. The prices that are easy to find and most common are for the items that aren't moving. When someone finally posts an item at a price that buyers are willing to pay it usually gets sold in a few days, if it's something in demand.

I've only ever found good deals on used stuff by pure chance or by watching the market over weeks. It takes both patience and decisiveness, otherwise someone else swoops in before you.

All of this is just a way of saying that the market does not agree with someone's personal opinion on value. "That's a mistake" sounds right but if the market is willing to pay, then was it really a mistake?

> I've only ever found good deals on used stuff by pure chance or by watching the market over weeks. It takes both patience and decisiveness, otherwise someone else swoops in before you.

That sounds like it is exactly how things are supposed to work. If the average price were a good deal, it would by definition not be a good deal. It should take some work or some waiting, if you want that price.

>"That's a mistake" sounds right but if the market is willing to pay, then was it really a mistake?

But it's not willing to pay. That's my point. That's why those postings sit unsold.

>If the average price were a good deal, it would by definition not be a good deal.

Let me clarify: I mean "good deal" in comparison to just buying new. Take headphones, which is something I've bought used a few times. I found a pair of SHP9500s for like 20% of the price of new ones; they had some visible wear, but they weren't broken and they sounded perfect. That's what I'd call an excellent deal. Another time I found a pair of HE400ses for 60-70% of the price of new, and they looked mint. That's a good deal and how the used market should work. The buyer pays a little less with the risk that the item might have some latent defect that's building up, and the seller gets to recoup some of his money.

A bad deal is paying 90% for that same risk and uncertainty, which is what I see most often. Yeah, maybe the product is even verifiably in good condition, but at that point the difference is so small that why would someone even bother?

I felt like my new factory order car buy recently was a big time commitment and stressful to get a fair price.

>why are used sellers so out of touch

Math.

You don't see what sells because it's no longer on the market.

A vehicle that sells in 1mo is on the market 30x longer, seen by 30x more people, etc, etc, than one that sells in 1d and only takes 1/30th as many of them on the market to fill up your FBMP feed.

Now, not a lot of cars are priced to sell in 1d, but also 30d is a comically low upper bound as well. Adjust the numbers as you see fit.

Sellers might be out of touch with your sensibilities but they are not out of touch with their own market. Used sellers ask that much because buyers are willing to pay that much.

It's difficult to decouple your knowledge of how much you paid for something. Even if you intellectually know the fair market value of something is now 0.1x what you paid for it, it can still feel like you're just losing all that money by accepting that price.

Yeah. This is called "anchoring" in behavioral economics research. People can't let go of the price they last paid for the good as the "correct" price, and so are reluctant to drop to the true market-clearing price.

This is also why cereal makers rely on shrinkflation to raise prices, and why home prices are sticky downwards, and why companies resort to layoffs rather than wage cuts. In an individual consumer's mind, prices should stay the same.

I think this is also a baby step away from one basis for hoarding behavior. The hoarder cannot see the many cases where the loss of value has already happened whether you retain the item or discard it. They think the full loss is realized the moment it is discarded.

That would make leasing the better option because at the end of the lease the leaser has to take them card back....no worry about selling something on one wants to buy.

> You see this in computers, smartphones, TVs, and solar panels

3D printers!

I think a lot of that is economies of scale. The parts needed are not cheap in small quantities, but we finally got to the point that they are popular enough that they are made en masse.

Yeah at the top end there is still a ton of progress, but on bottom end it just recently turned into commodity, to the point they are sold in more general stores.

The bottom end are still incredibly impressive. For $200 you can buy something that just five years ago would have made for good science fiction.

> Instead of threatening to derail the EV transition, lack of resale value might be evidence of the EV transition

People buying new EVs might be bad for environment though.

It's not like those used EVs are getting thrown away—they're just going further down-market than they otherwise would.

yup. and there are a lot more people in America who can buy a 2-3-year-old $20,000 EV than the insane prices those cars were fetching when new!

Hopefully EVs are being purchased to replace existing ICE cars, in which case the falling price is a good thing since it makes them more available at lower price points. Replacing a car with one that is cheaper to run and produces less emissions is usually a good thing.

If people are buying (and storing, and fueling) EVs in addition to their collection of ICE cars, that's probably a separate issue about overconsumption.

A significant fraction of consumers are going to purchase ICE cars (including hybrids) to replace EVs.

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/25/ev-owners-want-to-buy-gas-ca...

Is a new EV twice as good as a four year old one?

Does it go twice as fast? Does it have twice the range? Is it twice as comfortable? Is it twice as safe?

My data point: old Kona Electric vs new Ioniq 6. Acceleration is faster, but not twice as fast. It does charge 40-50% faster though, and that is life-changing. Not twice the range but 360 mi vs 220 mi is a huge improvement. More than twice as comfortable, and that’s switching from the top of the line to the base model. Mostly due to better climate controls and a huge amount of legroom. Both have 5 star Euro NCAP scores. But now the lane keep assist now works at any speed and there are more warnings about cars and other obstacles, so there’s a safety improvement. And it’s not twice the price: the MSRP was cheaper!

The value isn't there to justify double the price, but yes a new EV is gooder than an older EV in every single category.

The new Model Y surely is safer, more comfortable and has a longer range and a better battery.

Might is doing a lot of heavy lifting in your last sentence. I’m genuinely curious, what odds is this evidence of transition versus not?

> when you can get a new one that's twice as good for half the price?

That's the premise. Is that the actual reality?

Wait solar panels?? No one is buying used solar panels. They degrade rapidly and the cost of the panel is a small piece of the overall install

That's just not true. Lots of people buy used solar panels to do cheaper DIY installs.

Solar panels do degrade, but its not anywhere near "rapid". Go look at the lengths of warranties on panels these days

Sorry- yes there’s a used market, but the pricing is essentially handling and refurb cost. used panels are sold by the pallet for the price of a new single panel. Vastly different from a used car industry.

That being said… I might buy a pallet

I keep saying that in a few years cars will not be that much expensive than a big refrigerator...

It is scary that if cars get this cheap what it will mean environmentally (they physically can't last that long) and socially (everybody will be able to afford cars, flooding communities who are not built for it)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com