Thanks for illustrating the point.
EVs aren't for everything, but mine fits my use case perfectly.
The 2025 gas version's MSRP was about 30k, and the electric one was about 35k with a $7500 tax credit.
Does this factor in cost of ownership? Gas, oil changes, less complexity?
> worse range (lower, particularly for towing)
Towing reduces a gas powered car’s range, too.
Not true for EV.
Towing is also a bit of an edge case.
https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-siz...
> According to Edwards’ data, 75 percent of truck owners use their truck for towing one time a year or less (meaning, never). Nearly 70 percent of truck owners go off-road one time a year or less. And a full 35 percent of truck owners use their truck for hauling—putting something in the bed, its ostensible raison d’être—once a year or less.
Most road trip stops, according to the AAA, are 15 minutes anyway. Only on the Internet does everyone take 5 minutes to refuel.
No, I'm just talking about sticker price.
Lifetime EV costs are relatively unknown at this point, so that would be a relatively speculative comparison. You have to have a pretty optimistic view on long-term EV maintenance costs and charging costs to have EVs pencil out better with long-term cost of ownership.
If you want to talk about ongoing costs like oil and gas in ICE vehicles, you probably also need to be thinking about cost of charging (whether you can charge at home, or only at expensive DCFS) and perhaps relative cost of consumables like tires (EVs might require costlier higher load rating tires and the torquey motors might make it easier to chew through tires faster). E.g., in my area, fast charging has a per-mile cost roughly on par with gas prices (~4x home electricity prices). So if I couldn't charge at home, ownership would be somewhat costlier.
> Towing reduces a gas powered car’s range, too.
Yes, yes, but that's more acceptable when you're starting from 500 miles of non-towing range than 230, and filling up gas is still faster than filling electrons.
So a car that's free to operate - zero maintenance, zero fuel cost - that cost $10k more than a regular car would not be a financial win?
Sticker price is a silly metric to solely focus on. Doubly so considering people rarely actually pay sticker.
You're just throwing around fictional numbers. EVs don't have zero maintenance costs or zero fuel costs. Real numbers for fuel can be lower than gas (in particular if you have home charging), and you could certainly color an argument that maintenance costs are lower. But it's not zero. Brand new gas or hybrid cars also have very low maintenance costs.
> Sticker price is a silly metric to solely focus on. Doubly so considering people rarely actually pay sticker.
Pretend I wrote "average out the door price" instead of "sticker." This number is higher than comparable ICE/hybrid vehicles, and for pretty obvious reason -- high capacity batteries are still enormously expensive. This is why range+price tends to be worse than similar gas/hybrid cars. I expect battery prices to continue to fall in the future, which will improve the economics for BEVs. But that's in the future! Not today.
Most other parts of the world EVs are starting to be cheaper than the equivalent ICE in the same category.
Range often doesn't need to get better, the impression of range needs to change. That's where a lot of misconceptions play into effect, over-focusing on things like gas-station-like charging stations over at-home charging. Over-focusing on "zero to full tank/battery statistics" when no one keeps a gas vehicle with a full tank overnight every night. Over-focusing on high speed charging and ignoring boring but useful "Level 1" charging, which is "just about everywhere" because our society has been building electrical outlets for a long time. Sure, the experience changes in things like long distance trips, but experience changes aren't "worse" by default of being a change.