The Future Of Muscle Cars (Electric Muscle Cars, etc.)

[SavageOrange]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I'm simply embracing the inevitable. Nothing, and I mean nothing, can stop the impending demise of gas powered vehicles. However what should we do? Sit around and mope all day and cry and complain about how some meaningless metric will be missing when we'll have faster better cars? I'm taking a different approach. I choose to weigh in all the factors, look at the pros and cons, and pick the better of the two.

Ultimately, what is better? Looks, sound, feel? Or performance? Remember back when the GT350R got it's behind toasted by the ZL1 in every performance category but MT gave Ford the win because the GT350R "sounds better", has some kind of "special feel" to it, "looks better", and other meaningless BS they shouted that has nothing to do with anything? I didn't care because the ZL1 hands down whupped the GT350R. The ZL1 outperformed the GT350R despite the made up fairy-tale crap those editors drummed up. That's how I look at the future of this industry. Sound, looks, and imagining some non-existent feel or a car means nothing to me if I'm staring at tailights. So yea I'll miss certain aspects of gas enignes. But ultimately what drives me is the performance.

EVs are coming whether we like it or not. Maybe to some of you this will be the dark ages. But to me, I see the bright side. I welcome it.

EVs are coming no doubt, but they won’t take off like the manufacturer’s think*. (*Hell, they are basically being forced to do it).

ICE’s won’t go away for A LONG TIME.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by SavageOrange

EVs are coming no doubt, but they won’t take off like the manufacturer’s think*. (*Hell, they are basically being forced to do it).

ICE’s won’t go away for A LONG TIME.

Seems to me like they are all tripping over each other to announce spending billions of dollars on new plants to build them and to announce when they will be x% zero emissions. Nobody’s forcing them to make those announcements.

[snizzle]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Seems to me like they are all tripping over each other to announce spending billions of dollars on new plants to build them and to announce when they will be x% zero emissions. Nobody’s forcing them to make those announcements.

Maybe forced is a bad word. No doubt they're being coerced, let's say "encouraged," by local/federal policy/regulation and the threat of even stricter guidelines. Of course they see advantages post investment. To survive in this economy, they are projecting future state and responding. Adapt or die. If we had a true free market economy though (we don't), would things be different? I think so. Would the <2% EV market share encourage them to build more?

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by snizzle

Maybe forced is a bad word. No doubt they're being coerced, let's say "encouraged," by local/federal policy/regulation and the threat of even stricter guidelines. Of course they see advantages post investment. To survive in this economy, they are projecting future state and responding. Adapt or die. If we had a true free market economy though (we don't), would things be different? I think so. Would the <2% EV market share encourage them to build more?

I would characterize it as “being strongly influenced”. Local and Federal policy and regulation have often changed and the automakers have used the power of their strong lobby (The Auto Alliance) to squash or at least temper impending legislation. That’s how we got the footprint based fuel economy curves that resulted in more SUVs and CUVs over sedans. This time the automakers aren’t even putting up a fight. Several are getting ahead of the regulation. I am NOT trying to make this political so PLEASE don’t take it that way, but the move of companies making broad declarations hit full pitch during the Trump Administration while there were active efforts to roll back fuel economy standards and ZEV Mandates. GM’s zero emissions declaration was made in Oct. 2017 when the Trump Administration was pushing the fuel economy rollbacks via the SAFE legislation. Why? They must have seen something on the horizon that was more important than rolled back regulations.

I think that two things happened. Either they saw first hand the science behind climate change and the influence of transportation industries on the climate, or they saw the potential for properly developed skateboard platforms to reduce the significant expense of developing multiple vehicle platforms to support their vehicle portfolios. GM will use two platforms for their entire portfolio. Two. And they will use Lego set combinations of three electric motor types and two or three drive units and a modular battery scheme.

Compare that to at least 6 ICE platforms, about 9 or 10 engine platforms and about 4 transmission platforms. There is significant long term cost savings to move to BEV platforms. The upfront investment is huge. The tens of billions of dollars that I have often referred to, but you make that investment once. With the 6 ICE platforms currently in play, GM makes incremental billion dollar investments every 3 - 6 years.

[snizzle]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I think that two things happened. Either they saw first hand the science behind climate change and the influence of transportation industries on the climate, or they saw the potential for properly developed skateboard platforms to reduce the significant expense of developing multiple vehicle platforms to support their vehicle portfolios. GM will use two platforms for their entire portfolio. Two. And they will use Lego set combinations of three electric motor types and two or three drive units and a modular battery scheme.

I agree in part. They used the always changing climate science as a springboard to get them to a simpler/reduced platform set. Long term benefits given the chips fall where expected.

Btw, do you happen to know if the VSS platforms were cancelled? It seems to be the case.

[Martinjlm]

Saw this earlier today. I’ve never seen it laid out this way, but it tracks to what my company sees in the EV data.

[Iron Lung Jimmy]

At current electric rates. Those will go up.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Iron Lung Jimmy

At current electric rates. Those will go up.

As will gas. Especially as demand declines.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by snizzle

I agree in part. They used the always changing climate science as a springboard to get them to a simpler/reduced platform set. Long term benefits given the chips fall where expected.

Btw, do you happen to know if the VSS platforms were cancelled? It seems to be the case.

Good question. Trailblazer is on the smaller VSS-F set. I think it’s called VSS-B/C, but I’m not sure on that. I think that there is still time for large CUVs on Chi platform to transition to the larger VSS-F set. I’m pretty sure the VSS-R set is toast, because it was primarily Cadillac and Alpha 2 just launched. Seeing as how Cadillac is to be all EV by 2030, it doesn’t really leave enough time to get a second cycle off of Alpha 2 and a first cycle of VSS-R.

[Iron Lung Jimmy]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

As will gas. Especially as demand declines.

Usually when demand declines, so do prices. But if the drop in demand leads to less production (I don't think it will) you may be right.

What is being forgotten, or ignored, is that when the price of electricity inevitably rises it will cost more not just to run your car, but everything else in your household. I know that my monthly electric bill is way, way more than my monthly gasoline bill. If my gasoline bill went to zero, but my electric bill went up 20-30% I'm at a net loss.

So people who drive a lot and have low household utility bills will come out way ahead, but everyone else (most people) will not. Ironically, people who don't own a car will be hit the hardest.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by Iron Lung Jimmy

Usually when demand declines, so do prices. But if the drop in demand leads to less production (I don't think it will) you may be right.

What is being forgotten, or ignored, is that when the price of electricity inevitably rises it will cost more not just to run your car, but everything else in your household. I know that my monthly electric bill is way, way more than my monthly gasoline bill. If my gasoline bill went to zero, but my electric bill went up 20-30% I'm at a net loss.

So people who drive a lot and have low household utility bills will come out way ahead, but everyone else (most people) will not. Ironically, people who don't own a car will be hit the hardest.

I think that what is more likely to happen is the price of electricity won't go up as much as you might think, because in the grand scheme of things, the average household electric use won't go up that much. I've heard estimates that the average cost to operate an EV charged at home is the equivalent of having an extra refrigerator. That's not going to send the electric companies into predatory pricing mode. $0.010 might become $0.012.

[raptor5244]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I think that what is more likely to happen is the price of electricity won't go up as much as you might think, because in the grand scheme of things, the average household electric use won't go up that much. I've heard estimates that the average cost to operate an EV charged at home is the equivalent of having an extra refrigerator. That's not going to send the electric companies into predatory pricing mode. $0.010 might become $0.012.

Agreed, most EVs will have a battery between 50-100kWh. The cost of electricity in my area is 10.8 cents per kWh. So, let's take a Model 3 SR+ with a 50kWh battery, which gets around 250 miles of range on a full charge. Assuming a full charge, from 0 to 100%, which never happens in an BEV by the way. If you want to treat the battery kindly, you are supposed to charge before you go below 20% and keep the max charge at 90% except for longer trips.

Anyway, 50kWh x 10.8 cents per kWh = $5.40 for a full charge, or 250 miles of range. Normally was happens in an EV is you "top off" each night, like charging a cell phone, so the amount of daily charge would be less. For reference, our gas bill would average $225 per month with a GMC Acadia, when we switched to the Tesla Model 3 SR+ our electric bill increased about $20 per month. Assuming electricity costs stay relatively flat, this will be one of the biggest drivers for folks to move to an EV. Then you factor in no oil changes or any other fluid changes, reduced brake pad wear due to regen braking, charge at home convenience, etc. and it becomes clear that EVs make for great daily drivers. As for enthusiasts, that remains to be seen. My take is there is more work that needs to be done to make BEV more exciting to drive. Instant torque is great but that is only one driving dynamic. Newbies to EVs will be impressed at first by the torque of an EV motor but as time passes I think many will find that will not make up for all the other attributes of what makes a car fun to drive. Interesting times ahead for sure.

[90503]

Originally Posted by Iron Lung Jimmy

At current electric rates. Those will go up.

They are always being increased with no end in sight. California is still extending power plant permits that are overdue to be shut down. About four on the coast and the last working nuclear plant are all slated to be shut down, regardless of the impact on available electricity. No new plants will ever be built here. Solar and wind have dubious futures and are far short of replacing the soon to be shut down plants.

The cheap money savings cost of EVs is now. It will only get costlier as time goes on. The tiers, rates, etc., are all in place and all subject to change. To me the biggest pit-fall in EVs will be the cost to charge them especially over the next few years ahead. Environmentalists want the old plants shut down now regardless of the impact to consumers. They will have their way soon enough. Rates for all electric use, if it's even available, will go sky high.

If you care to see what's going on with SoCalEdison and their billing, rates, etc., here's a link to their web-site.

https://www.sce.com/residential/rate...-vehicle-plans

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Saw this earlier today. I’ve never seen it laid out this way, but it tracks to what my company sees in the EV data.

The tax component of gasoline and diesel needs to be factored into the EV cost. State and Federal are not going to go unpaid. It will be transferred to a mileage tax.

18.3 cent/gallon Federal
32.9 cent/gallon in Wisconsin

Betcha that the Federal will want to take more rather than let you pocket annual savings