If gas prices don't come down, there's something nefarious going on behind the scenes we don't know about. It's unconscionable for Big Oil to keep gas prices this high as the push towards EVs looms. Keeping prices high would only make the choice of going EV easier for people looking to purchase a new vehicle in the near future. It could be that Big Oil has a larger hand in EV than we know and the margins are more advantageous.

 

There are a lot of unknowns, I just dont want to be an early adopter. 😀

 

When you use the term "Big Oil" I assume you mean the large fossil fuel companies that provide gasoline at our nearest gas station..
They are not the only ones determining the price at the pump or home fuel. The oil producing nations (OPEC nations) also have a say. The petroleum commodities speculators who try to use any world event to raise prices have a huge impact on the price at the pump.

I agree that logically, Big Oil companies and OPEC nations should be trying to keep prices as low as possible so that the masses dont move away from using gasoline. Maybe there is more going on beside pure profits at OPEC. There probably a lot of nefarious stuff that goes on behind the scenes that we will never know about..

 

“Big Oil” are just private companies and they have a right to charge whatever price they want. Its called capitalism.

 

Well, there's THIS.

 

except they keep finding new locations and revising existing capacity. I dont think we really know how much is left

just read how much controversy saudis oil reserves have, nobody knows…

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-s...-idUSKCN0ZL1X6

 

Well, I won't be around in 47 years, so I guess I really shouldn't care, right?

Reducing consumption is the best way to extend capacity. I don't agree that completely abandoning ICE vehicles is the only solution, but the ball needs to start rolling sooner rather than later.

 

Oh, I have absolutely no problem with capitalism and the free market ... but you don't need to be an economist to see that keeping gas prices this high will only reduce demand down the road and push more people towards EVs. When people are paying $4-$6+/gal, the price disparity between an EV and ICE vehicle ownership shrinks rapidly, and may even give EV vehicles the cost advantage over just a couple years. And it's not just in North America, but across the world.

Maybe I'm just not smart enough to see the "master plan" ...

 

When EVs become a serious threat to “big oil” profits, I have a feeling that gas prices will start to go down…. Right now they charge big $ because they can.

 

Capitalism...what people call something that receives $11M subsidy per minute...I call it welfare.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/11...rt-11633555660

 

It depends on how much you drive. I am saving a few hundred a month with my C40 over my RDX, note and all, even though I put 0 down on the C40 and put like 5K down on the RDX. Also, the C40 is an absolute animal compared to the RDX.

 

C40 MSRP starts at $60k vs $40K. Its $20k difference, how long before you save $20k on gas?

 

4 years at current prices given the delta you provided above. I had a ASPEC ADVANCE, though.

Then there is the intangible of owning a vehicle that runs 12's right off the showroom floor, and that I don't need to visit the gas station in. That said, I'm trading it for an EV6 GT. Because I think it's a better vehicle overall, and way faster.

 

did you also factor electricity cost? Around here its $0.19 per killowatt. Charging 100kwatt battery with range of 300 miles will be roughly $20. Tank of gas at 3.70 gallon will be $55-60 around here, so its a $40 saving. With my driving of less than 10k miles per year, it will be minimum of 10 years, thats too long

 

I looked at my electric bill for the last 2 months, and compared it to these same 2 months last year. Average was about $60 higher and 500kWh more used. Delivered, it's 12 cents per kWh. With my RDX, I was filling up about 6-7x per month, and it was costing about $75/per. So no, I do not have an exact to-the-penny amount, but am pretty content with the quick and dirty method above. Also nice not to have to service the vehicle but once every 20K miles or so. First 2 services free, after that $350/450, alternating. My RDX was kindof needy, in that regard.

I drive @2500-3K miles per month. Currently have @6500mi on my C40. Bought it about 2.5mo ago or so.

When I punch in my avg kWh efficiency, however, I end up with $130/mo for my C40 for the 3K/mo. Still significantly cheaper/more savings, and less service fees.

If you're content with the level of performance you can get with a gasoline powered SUV, it sounds like it would make sense for you to stick with them. Ultimately I just found myself severely disappointed with anything even remotely affordable that is ICE powered. The cheapest thing I found that wasn't a total pud for acceleration was the GLC43 AMG, and no TY to maintaining an MB! The EV6 GT I'm getting would absolutely dominate a GLC43. Hell, it will flog a Urus.

 

I would not mind getting EV, but it has to make sense financially without waiting many years to get the benefits of saving. as more manufacturers bring EVs to market — we will have more competition and prices should come down.

 

Prices aren't coming down any time soon until they change battery chemistries. The price of lithium has actually driven multiple popular EV's UP.
https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/lithium

This is also why I'm investing in near production lithium companies with solid financials and good runway, as well as YOLO'ing it with a few upstarts that have good foundations.

For you, EV only makes sense if you want better performance. Otherwise, definitely ICE is cheaper.

 

Couple updates: Just placed a deposit for the Volvo EX90. Can’t really wait. Probably will get a Lexus RX500h in the meantime and trade in the Mach E GT as I’m moving out to west coast in a couple months and I won’t have a house there yet.

Very happy with my decision on the Mach E GT. I haven’t regretted it one bit. After some software updates, did not notice range drop significantly although temps have been in the 30s around here.

I’m still following Acura and will also wait what the ZDX offers as well.

 

I'd probably much rather the Blazer SS than the Acura version of it to be honest. Acura is just getting GM's scraps, and I've got to call it like I see it, the build quality of my 2022 RDX was worse than my GM's have been. The only redeeming mechanical feature was the Honda engine and transmission and SH-AWD. As to the EX90, my C40 will be the only Volvo I've ever owned or ever will own. Completely unimpressive. The Mach E GT seemed hamstrung by poor engineering to me. I am glad you liked it.

 

The reason why I considered the EX90 because it’s a three row suv that’s not Rivian and I didn’t like the way the Mercedes EQS SUV looked.

I’ve also reserved the Blazer EV as well as the Cadillac Lyriq as they were only $100 deposits couple months ago. We’ll see what comes out first for me.

C40 is not an EV I would’ve considered since the range is so poor.

The MDX is still an excellent vehicle. No issues as of yet.

 

The range really hasn't been a complaint for me honestly, which is what I thought would be the issue initially, as well. YMMV for sure.

I'd steer clear of MB. A friend of mine buys a decent amount of cars from them, G wagon, etc. every now and then, always in the latest S-class until recently when he went and tried their SUV smaller line. Anyway, he asked about them, and his sales rep said they've gotten back every EV they've sold. Shit's just buggy.

My next purchase is an EV6 GT as soon as they drop. Performance is where I want it to be (mid 11's@118-120mph), and it still has 6"+ ground clearance and the 800V charging architecture, etc. Slam dunk. yes it's rated at 206mi, but whatever.

 

Blazer....very interesting. I've seen three of the current Blazers on the road in the last few months and thought they were really nice looking, and the EV (at least the pictures) looks even better. It's just that damn charging infrastructure.

 

Good bye - I've been in that waiting line a few times over the last 8 months. Had two EV orders (VW ID4 Pro S AWD + Tesla Model 3LR). As the economy was in the free giving out money mode, shortages for political reasons and govt mantra to switch to EV's quickly. Add all the FOMO and fake hype into the equation - EV prices rose and lead-times were getting close to 9-12 months. Canceled both, as could see the car bubble was about to pop - and sitting on the sidelines for a bit would yield a much better deal and options.

I don't worry about gas prices, as know the more people who adopt EV's - the more the cost of electricity will increase quickly. Add to the loss of road revenue from the gas tax, and I foresee. a yearly tax on your ev by mileage in addition to you registration. So the disparity between the two fuel sources will be a very tight range in the next couple of years.

Thus - My RDX Aspec SHawd has been bullet proof, competent 700+ mile solo road tripper in a day, snow goat in deep snow that stopped others and built to an above average degree of assembly/workmanship (no panel gaps, paint issues or fit/finish of the parts). The issue for me is she is a super thirsty one and not very sporty. Bonus, was a bought the RDX in 12/20 - dealer lots were bursting of units and got 17% off of MSRP with robust negotiations.

Gladly just keep motoring with my RDX till quality of EV's increase, charging infrastructure increases and is more reliable + better offerings besides SUV, stationwaggon types and Trucks with zero range when loaded or towing.

 

$60K+ for a Kia that doesn't really outperform a Model 3 LR with acceleration boost... No thanks. I'd be curious what the real range will be in cold weather too, because it surely won't be whatever its being rated at.

 

I'd much rather have a Kia EV than a Tesla. I almost caved and bought a Model Y Performance until I went and looked at one. The quality is just completely lacking. The EV6's I've seen are way better cars. I do think Tesla has good battery and motor tech, though, but once you get into the EV6 GT, the main thing they have is a different battery. The inverters and motors are plus or minus comparable. 20,000rpm, etc.

As to performance...the Model 3 isn't in the same league as the EV6 GT unless you get the performance model. And then you're comparing a small sedan to an SUV, lol! The model 3 LR with Performance boost runs mid 12's at only 112 or so.

The EV6 GT performance is better than any Tesla until you get into the Model S or the Model X Plaid. The Model 3 Performance is slightly faster 0-60, comparable in the 1/4 mile for ET, and down on trap speed.

Then you have to take into account that Kia actually has physical dealerships around, and has an all around better car.

 

As for the 3 and the Kia...2 choices amongst a few others, but it seems like in the next 12 -18 months there are going to be so many more form so many manufacturers.. But...when if ever (in the reasonable near future) does technology change to get more mileage (personally I would like to see 400 plus)? And when does the infrastructure for charging get to a place of...confidence.

 

A M3 LR with AB is in the 11's so no idea where you are getting those figures. They are 12.2 without the boost. Regardless, I'd take the charging network and range of any tesla out there over an EV Kia at this point. Saying that they are better made is subjective and honestly their product hasn't been out long enough to judge the reliability.

I'll also admit I am so angry at Kia for producing vehicles without ignition immobilizers that I will never purchase one. They are getting stolen in record numbers by criminals around here and the company has not even attempted to show any responsibility. They've left many, many owners holding the bag for their crap product.

Anyway, with your track record of going through vehicles, I am sure you will find something else that is the holy grail in 7 months and will then proceed to crap on the EV6 at that point. Cheers.

 

Looks like I found more data on that.
I had previously just gone to a forum post with Draggy times shown. That said, here's a blog. It's almost as fast as the EV6 GT. Not bad for a car, nearly keeping up with an SUV, huh? lol!
https://insideevs.com/news/389521/te...nalysis-video/

Hopefully the EV6 GT does what I want it to do and I stick with it. The RDX did what I wanted it to do, right up until gas prices crested $3 and it became a bad decision because at that price, I was paying X3 M40i 2021 money to drive an Acura RDX in 2022. I look at "total footprint" of a vehicle, and the RDX priced itself outside of its class, by virtue of gas cost. Not the car's fault. That said, the body panel gaps were horrific. Everything on that car was crooked. Only complaint.

 

That's part of why I'm going EV6. The 800V architecture pretty well future proofs it for as far as one can foresee, although yes, I bet the tech advances, but kindof like buying the Z06 this year means you'll at least be equal to the next model of Z51 Corvette, so goes buying an EV6, especially the GT model. Kia uses a smaller battery than others to keep cost and weight down, and bolsters this with charging ability. Modeling different routes and comparing it to EV's with 400+ mile range (Lucid), it actually does just fine on simulated road trips. I have found ABRP to be within 5 minutes of accurate across my state (In the Midwest, not Rhode Island...),so I put decent stock in this.

According to ABRP, it took the EV6 (they don't have the GT model listed yet, but same 800v) 45 hours and 9 minutes to go from Boise, ID to Santa Rosa Beach, FL. When I re-did this trip in the Lucid Dream Edition Alpha, which has 470 EPA rated range, the trip took 41hr and 56 minutes. This a 2500+ mile trip, that I randomly selected on ABRP. The cost of having 270mi range vs near 500mi range over 2500 miles of road trip was a few minutes beyond 3 hours. If we cut this 2500 mi trip to 1000mi, say from Kansas City, Kansas to Dallas, Texas, the Lucid manages 8 hours and 17 minutes. The EV6, takes 9 hours and 2 minutes. 45 minutes longer to drive 496mi.

Getting 500+ mile EPA range out of an EV6 is only really meaningful on road trips, and as you can see, it's really not that big of a deal unless you are a fleet vehicle operator or cannonball runner or something.

What I have found is that people without an EV want range. People with an EV want charging speed. I used to want 500+ mi range myself, but after owning an EV, I know charging speed is more my priority. Would I LIKE more range? Sure! More is more. But I'm not stressing or paying for it, because the cost is money, and performance (weight). Anything with an EPA 200 miles+ is plenty for me.

Also keep in mind 59% of chargers were installed in the last 2 years. The infrastructure is improving at break-neck pace.

Conversely, if we use a slow charging EV, like a Mustang Mach E GT, our road trip times from Boise to our beach in Florida are 49 hours and 8 minutes and from KC to Dallas are 9 hours and 27 minutes.

Google Maps rates these trips as taking 35hr, and 8hr 8 minutes, respectively.

The takeaway here, is that for road trips, it depends on what your goal is. If you want the fastest A to B, EV probably isn't it. But if you plan to enjoy any of the food or views, EV won't make any difference at all except having a cheaper trip and a much more performance capable ride.

 

I forgot to mention, the Lucid Air charges faster than any other EV out there. If we plug in the slower charging MB EQS 450+, with a 350 mi range, and compare it to our 274mi range EV6 AWD above, we find that the extra 76 mi range...but slower charging of the MB EQS on 400V architecture gets us a whopping....45hr and 11 minutes on our Boise trip. This is 2 minutes WORSE than the vehicle with 76mi less range, because it charges faster than the EQS. On our "short" trip from Kansas City to Dallas, the EQS takes 9 hours exactly, or 2 minutes LESS than the EV6.

You can see here that the larger battery of the EQS only adds weight and expense. The actual real-world performance of the vehicle on a road trip is indistinguishable, because of the slow charge speed. The EQS 450+ is saddled with a 107+kW battery (107 usable, undisclosed total), while the EV6 gets by with about 77kw total. The result is that the EQS 450+ weighs a LOT more than it could, were it to charge faster and use a smaller battery like the EV6.

 

I like how you said all of this after you’ve been saying how you didn’t like EV’s because of poor range when I started this thread 8 months ago…how your opinions have changed, and yet you get a C40, which is one of the lowest range EVs you can buy.

Same with the EV6 GT. How times have changed. Your posts were all about crapping on EVs and how your Acura RDX was superior and made fun of my purchase decision for the first couple of months.

Then you come around and talk about the problems you had of the RDX and traded in for an EV.

And now, all you want is a low range EV with faster charging rate, which we all know degrades the battery much faster. If you’re looking to switch your EV every couple of years sure, but if you’re looking for long term use, fast charging is not a good option. I would not want to charge my EV at that high of a rate. My preference is level 2 over dc fast charging.

 

Yup. Absolutely. I used to be all about range, but having owned an EV, I realize it's not a big deal. Instead, charge speed is. To whit, you won't kill your battery DC charging the car on road trips a couple times per year. I think I've used a DC charger maybe 8 times or so total during the last 3 months. Only once when not driving cross-state. The only problems I had with the RDX were it went into limp mode in the rain (once), and the panel gaps were pretty bad. As to superior to EV's, I dug deeper into it, learned more, and evolved my opinions. Sorry to disappoint you, but those of us who are intelligent learn, alter thought processes, and continue in life. Those of us who aren't are still big mad that you can't buy a carbureted vehicle with points anymore from the showroom.

 

The only reason I bought an EV is because I don't want to have to drive to the gas station anymore and I can charge my EV at home without waiting long lines at Costco Gas Stations, especially as I like bigger SUV's more, which are notorious for lower range and less MPG per fill up. (My MDX only has 325 miles range per fill up.) I don't want to even wait 30 minutes for an EV charging station for each vehicle. That's why the EX90 interests me because big cars like those usually have poor gas mileage or fill-up range in general. If I were buying a smaller car, then an EV makes less sense since MPG's of small cars already reach almost 50 MPG and I can go over 500 miles per fill up and I wouldn't have to go to the gas station as often.

That, plus the $7500 tax credit which is pretty much gone due to the new tax credit implementation. Wouldn't apply to me starting 2024 though since I would make too much money by then to qualify for any EV tax credit.

I got the Ford Mach E GT because at the time, Ford unveiled the Ford Options plan, meaning that I only needed to finance half the vehicle at 1.4% interest rate for 4 years. I planned it out knowing that I would likely get rid of it well before the 4 year mark.

Now, looking into the future, I believe that PHEV is probably the best case scenario for the next several years. Our charging infrastructure is still too piss poor to even consider a low range EV that has faster charging capabilities. No point in thinking about that in the near future. I will probably change my cars out every 2-3 years or so as I can afford it, but if I were really trying to keep a car long term (and only own one car,) it would definitely be a PHEV or hybrid SUV. I would not get an EV as a solo car.

Also, your point about 'being intelligent' learn? I thought being intelligent is not just learning for yourself, but learning from other people's perspectives as well. So far, you've been just bashing everyone else's opinions.

 

So far, my C40 has not limited me on road trips except where other vehicles would, too. For example, the only thing that would make a trip I want to make, is a Lucid. Because as you say...infrastructure. I'm not worried though, I'll just rent an F150 from u-haul. It's for a deer hunt, anyway.

That said, I charge almost exclusively at home, and I miss driving performance vehicles. The EV is literally the only way I'm going to be driving a performance vehicle for under $2000/mo, including fuel. There is no car that's going to be smart year-round transportation to my house. SO SUV it is, and frankly, all of t he gas powered ones are total puds except for the Urus, Trackhawk, and some of the uber expensive MB/BMW's. That's my rationale for it. Range really isn't a thing that has come to be an issue in practice, for me in my area, anyway. YMMV of course.

 

Honestly, I thought this thread was over months ago as Unobtanium doesn't even own an Acura anymore, and I haven't been responding to it (although I still own an Acura- just not the RDX.) However, this thread seems to continue and it isn't even about Acura anymore. It turned from me saying goodbye to this portion of the forum to a discussion about every single EV out there.

 

You're just trying to find a performance car with fuel/electricity costs for under $2000/month which is actually very easily doable without some sort of down payment, even with ICE. A Volvo C40 is by no means a performance vehicle. Plus, the Mach E GT is a performance vehicle, and I'm only paying $600 a month for it after electricity and vehicle costs. It would've been a better option for you if performance is what you really wanted especially against the C40. It would've had significantly more range than your C40, as well as the performance you wanted 0-60 in 3.7 seconds.

No manufacturer recommends charging DC Fast frequently. Even Kia recommends minimizing use of this. Your battery life will significantly go down in two years if you constantly use fast charging. EV6 GT is a poor option if you have to fast charge your car everytime you drive 2.5 hours on the highway.
https://www.myev.com/research/intere...r-electric-car

EV's are not good if you're driving as much as you are driving that you're paying $500-600 a month in fuel costs (you claim this in your previous posts.) Even my MDX doesn't cost that much in fuel costs per month- around $180. If you have to fast charge an EV constantly that much, be prepared to also having to fast charge the car more as time goes on, and poorer battery life, which results in battery replacements that may cost you over $10k, which will negate your savings.

An EV fits my needs perfectly, as I drive about 1000 miles a month, sometimes less.

 

Interesting and informative. Thanks. Range in an EV....I'm not even sure what that means because of the variables. The worst example is the testing of the Lightening with a trailer that killed range. But to some extent, A/C, heater, lights, whatever...all drain at some level, some more then others...with what price to range? Yes, I am an old(er) giant V8 guy who is still trying to 'get' EV...and crypto too.

 

@Texasrdx21 Thank you for your post yesterday regarding your experience with your RDX. It was concise, objective and on point. My experience with my ‘22 A-Spec Advance has been wonderful, and thankfully living in the Great State of Texas has many advantages, one of them being low fuel prices. Using Exxon Synergy Supreme+ premium fuel coupled with my Apple Card with 3% cash back is paying nice dividends.

 

No problem. Like I said, my biggest gripe is she is very thirsty - even on the hwy in 10th gear. However, I purchased mine in Austin on 12/20, when gas prices were about $1.79/gal. Plus, Wish is was more sports, than sporty.

RDX is a super solid all around quality SUV. Lots of bashing the RDX lately on this forum, nothing is perfect - but has not left me ever stranded. Mine has been road-tripping for a year, in every weather one could imagine. Texas summer heat to 108, to -10 degrees and 18”+ of snow on unplowed roads - she keeps on motoring.

 

-I checked out the Mach E GT's, and the absolute fall off in power was a huge turn off for me. It may handle better than the C40, but the lack of sustained power was a big turn off. Also, they were completely unavailable to me while the C40 was easily had.
-I don't really drive 2.5 hours on the highway. It may see a dozen fast-charges per year or so. Also, this https://www.myev.com/research/intere...will%20decline.
-I drive 80mi per day typically. None of this requires fast charging.
-I drive 2500mi/mo typically. Sometimes more. EV's work great for me.