Electric Vehicles Continue To Cost Less Per Mile Than ICE Vehicles, Says Analysis
137
Sponsored Links
GM is pushing for zero tailpipe emissions from its light-duty vehicle lineup by 2035, with plans to introduce a wide variety of new electric vehicles over the course of the next several years. Now, a new analysis indicates that electric vehicles actually cost less per mile to operate than equivalent internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles.
The analysis was released by the Zero Emission Transportation Association (ZETA), a federal coalition pushing for 100 percent EV sales by 2030.
The new ZETA analysis examines the cost-per-mile for both electric vehicles and gasoline-powered vehicles, finding cost estimates for a handful of different vehicles spanning several segments, including the Ford F-150, Rivian R1S, Ford F-150 Lightning, Toyota RAV4, Tesla Model 3, and Honda Civic. ZETA also averaged data pulled from 22 U.S. states during the month of March, 2023. The recent report also includes data from a series of ZETA analyses released since December 2021.
The report lists four major takeaways, the first of which is that electricity is not only cheaper than gasoline, but it is more price-stable as well. Whereas the price of gasoline is dependent on global oil and gas markets, and thus subject to volatility, electricity that is domestically produced and increasingly renewable provides a more stable operating cost for electric vehicles.
ZETA also indicates that nationally, gasoline-powered vehicles can cost upwards of 4.5 times more to drive per mile than equivalent electric vehicles. However, as ZETA points out, cost can vary significantly between states, but on average, electric vehicles are still less expensive to run.
The report also indicates that electric vehicles are less expensive to maintain than equivalent gasoline-powered models. The report states that electric vehicles require less maintenance and can save owners between $1,800 and $2,600 annually in terms of operating and maintenance costs, citing Consumer Reports.
Finally, the report states that the recent EV tax credit expansion and manufacturing incentives included in the Inflation Reduction Act will help to significantly reduce electric vehicle sticker prices, while also incentivizing supply chain “onshoring” and creating millions of new jobs here in the U.S.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM electric vehicle news, GM technology news, at around the clock GM news coverage.
- Sweepstakes Of The Month: Win a Corvette Z06 and 2024 Silverado. Details here.
Sponsored Links
How about taking into account the resale value of the EV vs ICE? How much would say a Tesla model Y be worth after 10 years and 150K miles vs my GMC HD with same number of years/mileage? I think the loss on the resale of the Tesla would far negate any perceived cost benefits over 10 years of operation vs the GMC. Also, how much will electricity cost after they put us all on wind power to replace our reliable natural gas power?
Reliable natural gas power? That’s a joke, surely. The huge and sudden spikes in cost for one thing, such as the Texas power crisis in February 2021 that propagated itself all over the country. A diversified zero emissions system, wind, solar, nuclear, tidal etc. will be far more stable.
As far as EV depreciation is concerned, the big variable there is the battery. But TFLEV on YouTube has some interesting new data up that shows it’s really only a problem with much older Tesla Model S and Nissan Leaf cars which had bad degradation in their first two or three years on the road (they sugarcoat the Leaf situation a bit much for my taste but the rest of the data seem solid). Anything coming out the past seven or eight years — GM/Hyundai LG-related recalls excepted — has been very stable. I suspect it’s going to come down to whose electric motors, electrical systems and cooling systems last the longest and who has the best after-sales service. In the end, not that much different from gasoline cars.
No, a diversified zero emission system the way you explain it will not be more stable (except for nuclear power and perhaps tidal). Hmmm, how much electricity is generated when the wind doesn’t blow?? So what happens to our power supply when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining…there are no significant advancements coming any time soon on large-scale battery storage systems for the electrical grid. By far the best way to backup wind and solar is with natural gas powered plants, as they are the only source than can be cranked up and shut down quickly. Have you read about Germany’s power production problems recently? Last year a full 30% less wind power was generated than anticipated because of unanticipated lower wind speeds. Maybe they shouldn’t have retired their nuclear power plants? How much does it cost to replace a Tesla battery system when it dies, about $25k…so it doesn’t matter if the rest of the components are good…after 150k miles, current EV’s will be worth far less proportionally to their ICE counterparts.
Always a slanted view to TRY to sing the praises of EV. I the government subsidized my ICE vehicle it would be much cheaper.
It’s amusing to me the “gas subsidy” crowd conveniently forgets about the ~25% tax on gas at the pump, the refinery taxes, the oil company income taxes, etc, etc, etc. I don’t care to go through all the math, but I am nearly certain when all costs are compared, the “EV” market subsidized magnitudes more. (if gas is even “subsidized” at all)
Fake news. Frozen wind turbines caused Texas blackout. Nuclear and fossil plants didn’t freeze at all, they were just overloaded from the massive loss of wind power.
Frozen gas plants caused those blackouts. Only a few turbines went down, but that was because the utilities didn’t want to spend money on winter proofing them.
It was also a reasonable assumption given the winters there are mild. Why waste 100’s of thousands of dollars to “winterize” when you see like 3 days below 32?
I find the biggest partisans are ones going around claiming “x” network is “lying to you”. Yeah, buddy, ALL the networks lie. There are court docs to prove it. Move along, kid.
Severe winter weather is not an unknown in Texas and happens.
They were prioritizing profits over grid reliability and safety.
@corporategreedkills – There is no corporate greed in Cuba or North Korea.
You’re absolutely correct and your username says it all. All those anti-EV comments come from Fox News and other hardcore conservative propaganda sources. Big Oil owns the Republican party and admittedly many in the Democratic. The nation is going to become mostly electric in the future and it will benefit everyone. Cleaner air and end reliance on foreign oil. The main reason this will happen is because electric cars are simply better.
Yah, who needs water? Right? You think cobalt mining comes without environmental damage? You people are hilarious. Seriously. “buht de teeveee said, drrrrrr”. Do just a miniscule amount of research.
Brandon, you might have missed this in your own research. Your point about the use of cobalt in batteries is quite dated and misleading as you have failed to account for the recent dramatic advancements being made in battery technology that do not require the use of rare element materials such as cobalt. Cobalt-free batteries are becoming increasingly popular in electric vehicles due to their improved energy density and shorter range compared to lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries. Companies such as Samsung, Panasonic, Sparkz and Texpower are all working on cobalt-free battery chemistry breakthroughs in response to the rapidly rising price of nickel. Tesla is probably the furthest along as they confirmed last year that nearly half of all its vehicles produced are already using cobalt-free iron-phosphate (LFP) batteries. While iron phosphate (LFP) batteries, which don’t use nickel or cobalt, are traditionally cheaper and safer, they offer less energy density, which means less efficient and shorter range for electric vehicles. That being said, they have improved enough recently that it now makes sense to use cobalt-free batteries in lower-end and shorter-range vehicles. It is expected that within the next 3-5 years that cobalt will no longer be required for usage in batteries as other alternatives are integrated into future designs.
So somehow, replacing the evil “big oil” with “big electric” which can and will be monitored and controlled (as in rolling blackouts) is going to soothe your concerns. Good grief.
Big electric will just ban solar roof connections to the grid and then the libs will have no way to charge their cars!
LOL!!!!!
Wind/solar/batteries can never replace the fossil fuel-generated power the we have and need. Nuclear is the only viable source that could replace 100% of our current fossil fueled power. That’s not going to happen anytime soon. Complete wind solar replacement is a green dream.
Very sensible comments! With Fusion based Nuclear power available on the horizon, that should be the direction we gravitate towards. Wind and solar are not baseline power and baseline power should be roughly 80% of the power mix.
Again, this whole panic movement towards green energy is kind of a joke anyway, since as the ‘west’ moves towards carbon emission reductions, that will be more than offset by only two countries in the ‘east’. If we follow through with the overall green agenda here, most of the manufacturing will just be moved to the east, with an overall increase in greenhouse gas emissions…but nobody seems to even talk about that (or even care), we are supposed to just bury our heads in the sand and charge forward, no debate…
I don’t know why people keep coming up with Phoney Baloney information about the Texas Blackout… Everything I’ve ever read here from others is wrong…
– Item: Solar and Wind did fail.
– Item: Natural Gas supplied to some gas plants did fail – caused by frozen compressor stations – themselves a victim of wokeness… IN NY State of all places, we have natural gas driven ICE compressor stations that always have too much heat and if they are running, can never freeze… Of course, due to wokeness, they are getting rid of those fine machines too – but I claim this will be temporary due to lack of juice.
-Item: The relatively small problem avalanched due to working natural gas central power stations having no gas from the recently converted dopey ELECTRIC compressor stations which either froze – or had no electricity themselves – making MORE widespread outages.
– item: Even with all of the above Brain-Dead nonsense, the outage in Texas was needless in that there was sufficient existing Nuclear and Coal fired electric production (about 105 % of the maximum loading assuming no failures) .
– *BUT* the EPA wouldn’t allow a temporary ‘greenhouse gas’ exclusion during an emergency so few coal plants were allowed to run.
– *AND* the Texas governor didn’t have enough ‘stones’ to OVERRULE the EPA.
So a dozen or so people died… No one in Texas apparently cared.
Fusion Power? Man you have a LONG WAIT ahead of you…..
The “BIG DISCOVERY” was making a few watts of power for a seemingly split second while
using thousands of watts in support equipment to make it happen.
Rather like saying I made 1/10th of a cent of electricity and it only cost me $1,000.00 to do so !!
A big practical advance of Nuclear Energy is in the production of BREEDER Reactors – which the RUSSIANS (amazingly, now the world’s foremost nuclear experts) have two
800 megawatt (BN-800) , along with 4 planned under-construction BN-1200 (1.2 gigawatt) central station sized plants running, which run on ‘spent’ Nuclear Fuel, and require overall 1/100th the Fresh Uranium to run….
There is enough ‘waste’ or ‘depleted’ Uranium stored at current US Nuclear central stations that they could fuel any new breeder reactors for at least a decade, or more practically – at the rate new nukes are built , hundreds of years at the current rate, before any new fuel is needed. The Russian designs run primarily on ‘useless’ Spent Fuel Rods from other Russian Reactors.
So if you are looking for a PRACTICAL source of essentially limitless power, this is it…..
Of course – if Nuclear safety concerns you , the USA has about 200 years of coal remaining…. Russia has 300 years remaining of coal, and Britain has about 5,000 years of coal remaining, – but we can’t have ‘Dirty Carbon’ !!!! So the idiot WEST collectively is just quarantining their perfectly fine resources for future generations who will successfully exploit them.
I am sure you are right about the long wait, probably 20 years or longer, but my real point is that if folks actually care about producing carbon-free electricity (and do it in a reliable way), then nuclear energy should be a big chunk of that power mix. Wind/solar are in no way baseline power, and baseline power should be somewhere near 80% of the overall power mix if we don’t want to live in something resembling a third-world country.
Yes, we are idiots for not going with breeder reactors at this point, agreed on that. We should probably look a lot harder at thorium nuclear power plants as well.
I’m just not on board with just wiping out our existing power infrastructure at some ridiculously fast pace, as I personally feel that we are going in the wrong direction. If folks want wind/solar, then realistically that needs to be backed up by natural gas plants.
About the only thing we will achieve with quickly moving towards wind/solar/EV’s is transferring much of our manufacturing to the eastern hemisphere, as we will be pricing ourselves out of the market (the biggest polluters from the east will be building more coal power plants than we are eliminating here in the west). I’m not convinced that moving carbon emissions from the west to the east really achieves anything.
Biden is responsible for the outsourcing that Trump reversed.
France’s nuclear industry incorporates a breeder reactor to “burn” down the “waste” nuclear materials from uranium reactors. They don’t need a Yucca Mountain storage. Carter killed the US breeder reactor at Savanah River which has crippled the US nuclear industry.
Nuclear power is so cheap you don’t have to meter it.
Strauss (Atomic Energy Commission chief) knew that was a bald-faced LIE when he said it.
Fred, first of all you can’t compare a truck vs a crossover SUV as a truck naturally depreciates slower due to its real world utility. But, as someone with a GM truck and a Model Y, I’ll take a stab at it – My 2020 Duramax with over 60k has already cost me several thousand just for scheduled maintenance (tires, oil, trans, etc.) not counting the fuel, while my Model Y has cost $0. According to Edmunds, expected maintenance/repair costs for a gasoline GMC truck is $9k vs $5k for the Model Y over 10 years while the EPA estimates that the Model Y will save $12k in fuel costs over a comparable SUV over 10 years (obviously the truck will have worse fuel economy, but we’ll go with this number). Simple math shows there is a clear $16k Tesla advantage. so, even if the Y depreciates faster you still come out ahead with the Tesla. Tesla batteries in the S and X only lose 12% at 200k while the 3 and Y lose about 14% at 200k. But, you could even take your savings and replace the battery for $10k at today’s price (expected to be <1/2 in 7 years) and still come out ahead.
How many miles on the Tesla, that data is missing.
Also, more like $15K for a battery replacement on a Model Y
What services are you doing to the transmission on the Duramax at 60K?
I would need to know more details, are you doing the service or being smoked by the dealer?
He’s lying. There are far too many inconsistencies in his “story” to believe a word he is saying. Hell, he claims he paid nothing for electricity. Which is a complete and total fabrication. If he/they are lying about that, then they are definitely lying about the rest.
Lets go B – Don’t care what you think – I’m stating facts from what I own and what I’ve paid. The numbers I provided are directly from Edmunds and the EPA with a gas GMC truck and a Model Y – look them up yourself. Owning a diesel requires more scheduled maintenance – I’ve done the trans fluid changes, fuel filter and synthetic oil changes add up, plus tires aren’t cheap. I never did that ‘optional’ stuff on my other GM cars, but I knew this ZR2 diesel option would never come back and I plan on driving it into the ground.
No, you *claimed* you spent “several thousand”. Which is it. Also, you lied about “not paying for electricity”. Regardless of having solar or not, *YOU DID AND/OR ARE PAYING FOR IT*. So you made up a complete fabrication for a point. Why? Next, I use syn in my 1500. I have 32k miles and have not spent more than 500 on maintenance. My oil changes are about 110 with a tire rotation. So where did the other “several thousand” come from? Even if I double the number for mileage purposes, that’s still far less than “several thousand” out of thin are you claimed to have spent. Even if I put tires on it in the upcoming year, that puts me at about 1250+500. Far from “several thousand”. Also, tires are part of *ALL CARS* maintenance. This applies to EV’s as well. In fact, as stated, EV’s are well documented to use more tires due to their increased weight. So why do you lie to explicitly make an invalid point?
Also, screw you and your bs mockery. This is my actual name, and I don’t care about your stupid politics.
I will spell this out for you one more time as you are easily confused with written language – I have personally paid several thousand in scheduled Duramax maintenance costs at my dealership which includes new tires – it has 63k, while paying exactly $0 on my Tesla – YES I have solar panels. The other numbers that I referred to were in reference to the question posed by another commenter on whether the cost of ownership of an EV offsets potential resale values of BEVs, specifically the Model Y. So, I looked up the average maintenance/repair cost of a GASOLINE GMC truck and a Tesla Model Y at Edmunds.com (a site that specializes in this information) – these numbers were then added to what the EPA (part of our government) estimates the fuel cost savings of a Model Y and a comparable gas SUV (not a truck which would get even worse fuel economy) over 10 years. That is where the numbers I mansplained 5 times above come from and I can say personally, that since October 2019 I’ve already spent several thousand on GM recommended maintenance – I don’t care that you don’t do the recommended maintenance on your GAS truck and that you have 1/2 as many miles. And the maintenance numbers for the Modedl Y DO INCLUDE the tires – its from Edmunds, not me. Keep your head in the sand.
*LIAR*. Either lay out what you paid for the alleged cost, or STFU. There is no confusion here, it is you that are lying. So name call all you want because you were busted on your lies, but that doesn’t change the fact, you lied.
The cost of solar is not *ZERO*, unless you stole the panels. The fact you equate that to zero, proves you are an 1d10t. But sure, I’m the one that is confused here…. Right……
I do actually do the recommended maint on my truck. You are a liar. Just own that you lied. Period. What, you want me to include the cost of the wipers I bought too? Sure, add 20 bucks to that. I don’t GAS, you !mbc!l3. What’s funny is you down this road instead of admitting what most here saw.
I think that anyone such as Brandon here, who is even attempting to make the argument that an ICE vehicle is somehow NOT more expensive than an EV is either clearly not paying attention to what is FACTUALLY happening in the real world and the larger global picture of EV growth, is willfully ignorant and making debates such as this “political”. The Chevy Bolt has NEVER made GM any money; it lost money from day and was built upon an inferior battery and technology platform that has quickly become extinct in the rapidly evolving space of battery improvements. Also, spontaneously combusting batteries did not help GM’s cause either. Those are all FACTs. Whether GM’s Ultium platform, upon which the next generation of EVs that GM will be allegedly releasing “soon” remains an open question. Whether you want to agree or not, the price and margin war launched by Tesla by dropping their prices and forcing everyone else in the market to follow suit, with even further negative margins was the coup de grace that ended the Bolt sooner than later, notwithstanding my earlier point about the inferior platform and charging experience, which by the way, do matter to consumers. There is losing money, then there is bleeding it to the point where it becomes fatal to the overall business. It is a fact that Tesla enjoys the highest margins in the sector and has the ability to drop prices even further to make OEMs like GM and others bleed their existing negative margins even further and faster, making their ability to use proceeds for the ICE business to fund their transition to EV that much more difficult. The writing is on the wall for ICE boosters like Brandon. The current innovation and battery improvement curve favors EVs pure and simple, and anyone wasting time making spurious arguments about the “cost of electricity” or “tires” and such has lost the plot. Fewer moving parts, means fewer things that break. Better manufacturing, software, a reliable and expansive charging infrastructure… I could go on and try to explain to you the fundamental and real cost differences (parity in acquisition price, well documented superior TCO from ongoing maintenance and operation) between ICE and EV vehicles, but I’ll leave you to do that should you choose. Oh, and fun fact: you know what vehicle was the best selling in ALL of Europe in Q1 2023? The Tesla Model Y. GM delivered approximately 20,000 vehicles in that time, while Tesla delivered 422, 875 in the same time period. You can Google that. And the facts that you’ll discover have nothing to do with politics.
Do you legitimately know what point you are trying to make? You go from “EV’s not being profitable” to “ICE are extinct” in one swoop. Make a point and stick to it. Or don’t, I really don’t care.
I’ll break it up into really small sentences to help you understand, ok Brandon?
In your prior threaded discussion with mvb, you essentially called into question his assertion that when he looked at the operational costs of the vehicles that he owned – the Model Y and his Duramax gasoline GMC vehicle (stated another way, an internal combustion engine, aka ICE) you claimed that he was lying, and you brought up all sorts of points about oil changes, tires, etc. Let me repeat the specific section in mvb’s comments that you took exception to.
“My 2020 Duramax with over 60k has already cost me several thousand just for scheduled maintenance (tires, oil, trans, etc.) not counting the fuel, while my Model Y has cost $0. According to Edmunds, expected maintenance/repair costs for a gasoline GMC truck is $9k vs $5k for the Model Y over 10 years while the EPA estimates that the Model Y will save $12k in fuel costs over a comparable SUV over 10 years (obviously the truck will have worse fuel economy, but we’ll go with this number). Simple math shows there is a clear $16k Tesla advantage. so, even if the Y depreciates faster you still come out ahead with the Tesla. ”
I have to confess it was hard to follow your train of thought as you seemed set on raging away, going on and on about him “lying”, etc. etc.
Do I have that right Brandon?
My response then, was to take a step back to challenge the very premise of your argument, that in fact EV maintenance costs were NOT lower than that of an ICE vehicle. And to make that point, I pointed out that there are numerous credible third party studies that clearly show that owning an EV is far cheaper than that of a comparative ICE vehicle. My point Brandon, is that at this stage, in 2023, anyone who is attempting to make the argument that this is not the case is misinformed, as you appear to be. No amount of rage arguing about oil change and maintenance schedules, or even charging costs (typically done overnight at home at off-peak hours when prices are lowest ) that you were citing have any validity.
An additional fun fact for you Brandon. Did you know that in July of 2023, in the largest global car market in the world, where GM is having its behind handed to it by a slew of Chinese EV companies, like BYD as well as the US based Tesla, that those ICE based vehicles will no longer be able to be sold? Why is this relevant, you ask? Well, getting creamed in the largest car market in the world isn’t a good thing for future profitability and viability, Brandon. ICE vehicle sales, in a global car market that is contracting, are declining while the percent share of EV sales is growing and have nowhere to go but up. As this plays out over the next decade and into the 2030s, it is not inconceivable that ICE vehicles will drop off. Hence, my “extinct” comment. Do you remember what happened to BlackBerry, where everyone swore that nobody would use an iPhone? Do you carry a Nokia phone? The analogy that I am making Brandon, is similar. Missing key inflection points as technology evolves have consequences. I believe that GM has missed it completely. My opinion, of course. We’ll see how that plays out.
My second point, that you took issue with.
“The Chevy Bolt has NEVER made GM any money; it lost money from day and was built upon an inferior battery and technology platform that has quickly become extinct in the rapidly evolving space of battery improvements. ”
Allow me to explain to you why I made the statements that the Chevy Bolt platform is now “extinct.”
First, the production volumes of the Chevy Bolt, at best, amounted to 0.2% of GM’s total vehicle output. Were you aware of that fact? There is now way that with production numbers that low, coupled with the R&D, marketing, SG&A and other costs that the Bolt made GM any money.
That’s basic economics 101, Brandon.
With respect to battery related issues, the battery pack in the first-generation Chevrolet Bolt, which was introduced in 2017, had several architectural and performance flaws compared to batteries in current generation electric vehicles. Some of the major issues with the Bolt’s battery pack were:
Thermal management: The Bolt’s battery pack had a liquid cooling system that was prone to failures and leaks. This could cause the battery to overheat, reducing its performance and lifespan. Allegedly, the current generation batteries (Ultium, as I had referenced) have improved thermal management systems that use advanced cooling and heating techniques to keep the battery at the optimal temperature.
Energy density: The Bolt’s battery had a lower energy density compared to the batteries in current generation electric vehicles. This meant that the Bolt had a shorter driving range on a single charge compared to some of its competitors.
Charging speed: The Bolt’s battery was not designed to support fast charging rates, which meant that it took longer to charge the battery compared to some of its competitors. The current generation batteries have higher charging rates, which enable faster charging times.
Safety concerns: In 2020, GM issued a recall of all Chevy Bolts due to a battery defect that could cause fires. This defect was related to the battery cells produced by LG Chem, which supplied the battery cells for the Bolt. The current generation batteries have improved safety features and are designed to reduce the risk of fires.
So Brandon, I hope that having broken the components of my argument into more easier chunks, hopefully you can process them more easily and better understand the point I was making – my response to your factually incomplete pattern of thinking and the rage based arguments that you were fomenting. Take it easy Buddy. Enjoy these facts! I enjoyed our dialogue.
I get you are slow and special, but I did not, once, refer to mvb prior to his lies about spending “thousands of dollars” on regular maintenance of a vehicle with 60k miles. I don’t really care to read the rest of your word vomit that had nothing to do with the topic at hand. I’m sure this is just mvb’s alter and you can’t handle being wrong. Personally, i don’t gas.
I get reading is complicated for you, so here is the specific exert. Read it, don’t, I really don’t care, mvb.
“My 2020 Duramax with over 60k has already cost me several thousand just for scheduled maintenance (tires, oil, trans, etc.) not counting the fuel, while my Model Y has cost $0”
Tires….. hmmmm, I guess the fandango tesla’s don’t have tires? Interesting. Never knew that. Oh, and the “several thousand”, yeah, that is complete and utter bs. Funny how everyone else here seems to understand this simple fact….. ‘cept, you…..
Furthermore, tchotchke, please point to the argument I made about ICE being cheaper to maintain than EV’s? I’ll wait. I do actually want to see this. Again, reading is complicated for some, namely you. I too exception to the fact that you, mvb, claimed that their “solar” was “free”. I took exception to you, mvb, claiming that a truck (ICE) with 60k miles was equivalent to a tesla with 15k miles. I took exception to you, mvb, claiming that “thousands paid” for a truck wouldn’t be the same for an “EV”. NO sh….t. The tires alone cost more. It’s a truck. Compare apples to apples or stfu.
No offense to you Dave, just to be clear, I don’t really disagree with your points. But, for us, we like the ability to go on road trips, in fact, we just did one that was a 3,000 mile round trip. EV’s just don’t work out well for things like that (not saying they can’t work at all, just can be quite inconvenient in comparison to ICE at this point). Also, we like to tow our trailer, sometimes even more than the 85 miles or so range that I can get out of a Ford Lightning while towing. So, we won’t be making the EV switchover anytime soon, but in a few years we may go with a PHEV as our runabout vehicle (if they are still around), so that it can match our lifestyle better.
What few folks seem to talk about, with all of this panic about switching over to EV’s and all the other green initiatives asap, is that while the US and Europe are cutting back our ICE’s and phasing out our coal power plants, is that one country in the eastern hemisphere that already uses a lot more coal than we do, has more coal plants on the books to be built between now and 2030, than we still have operating in total here in the US. Not only that, but their neighbor will likely be building almost as much new coal power plant capacity at the same time. So overall, I’m not convinced that we are even doing the right thing, since a lot more manufacturing will be moved away from the US and Europe as we will be pricing ourselves out of the manufacturing industries, while some other countries that pollute far more than we do will then be producing those same products.
Agree with you. Really the strategy should be “hey buy an EV for your small commute and getting the groceries and we have an ICE truck for your toys and weekend activities”. I have a Suburban, Bolt, and Aztek. Only puT 3k on the miles since that’s the work truck/hunting van and the suburban will prob get 9k miles in a year. Bolt however gets 15-20k in a year since it is the commuter and trips around town. That’s 20k miles off the road and SUV tailpipe emissions to please the greenies and keep the people who want ICE vehicles happy. Good happy medium. Fuel diversity!
Nobody should “need” two+ cars for to get by. That was unnecessary with ICE. It can be unnecessary if we had good PHEV’s
Some people do have use for three vehicles. We have 4 kids so need a Suburban to haul us all around. We thought about getting rid of the Aztek but doesn’t cost all that much to maintain and allows me to go to on-site to work once a week, my wife can still go to work, and whichever family member watches the kiddos has the suburban. It keeps 3 of my kids out of daycare which has huge financial savings among other benefits. I’m also coming up on a situation where I’m taking 2 of the kids camping. Going to try to take the Bolt but not sure if I can fit all the camping gear in it so I have the Aztek to fall back on. Plus it has a cooler and Tent! And I don’t have to move car seats or take them out when I need to load 20 bags of mulch to my house and not trash my family hauler. All three are tools and serve their purpose.
Good points, but like many, you conflate tesla global numbers with GM US numbers.
You believe Edmunds and the biased EPA?
‘Feel-good’ and agenda make them do it…
Agreed, not really comparable, but I can’t really compare to say a Tesla Cybertruck at this point. I did see on caredge resale value estimates that the GMC HD should hold 42% of it’s resale value after 10 years, while the Tesla Y should hold 26% of its value. The operating costs of course really depend on where you live, as some areas have very high electricity rates, that are likely to go much higher still (think most areas of NY, CA, MA, NJ, VT etc). I’m not personally against electric vehicles, in fact, I am glad other people are buying them, I just won’t be one of them anytime soon, though I might get a PHEV in the next few years so that I can still have some freedom of easy travel when I want it.
15k on the Y and I do have solar panels – but the data regarding fuel costs include US average electricity costs. Google it – its 10-12k for 75-83 kWh battery. My truck maintenance is going to be higher as its a diesel – also did the fuel filter – yes everything is through my dealer. I normally don’t do all of the recommended stuff, but I overland in remote areas and plan on keeping it til it dies. Its also a Colorado 2.8 ZR2. I used a gas truck for comparison.
Did you pay $100,000 for your solar panels so you can claim you paid nothing for electricity in your EV? Cool story bro.
In the first 60k miles for my gas Silverado, the only maintenance items were oil changes every 5k (12 x $40), wiper blades each year $25 x 5), two air filters ($15 x 2), and probably ready for tires ($150 x 4). That’s a grand total of $1235 over 5 years/60k miles. You can deduct the wipers and tires because the EV needs them too. That leaves $510 more for the ICE truck, not counting fuel. I concede that my gasoline fill up is more expensive than the battery charge (today and maybe always) but I can justify that by the convenience of ICE fill up compared to charging. But the big unknown is residual resale value, my pickup has very good value retention but I have no idea about the EV due the the high cost of battery replacement which will weigh heavily on the EV’s residual value. I will also product that electricity prices are trending higher in the future while liquid fuel prices will trend downward as more people switch to EV’s. I’m staying with ICE and will even predict that ICE vehicle resale values will trend higher as the government/corporations force more people into EV’s. The ICE diehards and rural dwellers will keep ICE vehicle demand alive for a long time.
That doesn’t even make sense. Slightly different, but my 2021 1500 has cost me about 500 dollars (oil changes) in 32k miles. So, I’m not exactly sure what you are spending thousands on, unless you are lying. Also, tires are part of any car, and it’s well known due to weight that BEV’s burn through tires faster than an average ICE.
Also, your “Y” hasn’t cost you “0” for fuel. Unless you are stealing electricity. The fact that you specifically lie about that, tells me how much to trust the rest of your word vomit.
Tesla chargers were free for Teslas, not sure if that is the case anymore, he could be one of those people I see sitting at a WaWa playing on their phone while their Tesla “refuels” while I drive by in my “inferior” ICE car getting things done….
Not sure why anyone would use the “free superchargers” over not visiting a store and just charging at home. That’s the only way he could possibly not be lying. They did stop offering that a good while ago. I think before the model y came out. I could be wrong, though. Either way, he is still “fudging” the numbers to try and make them look better than they were.
Just looked it up, the Model Y was never part of the “free supercharging” program. Only the S and X were. I think it ended, per quick google search, in 2017. I’ll gladly admit limited knowledge on this particular subject.
I have never used a Tesla Super charger as I charge at home – the Edmunds numbers include paying for charging. I will take a trip to California in 3 weeks and will use them for the first time.
You *claimed* one thing, and now are falling back on the “Edmunds” numbers, why? Comparing like for like, EV’s cost more. Both in initial costs, and by all accounts, even “fueling”, according to the Anderson group. I’m not an EV hater. I would personally LOVE a PHEV truck with 60-80 miles of range. I will not, now, or anytime in the near future go all EV. It is stupid until infrastructure is added to support it.
He keeps lying but he’s good at it.
IIRC, superchargers were free for very early Model S customers and for those who made use of the intermittently-available referral program. Otherwise, Tesla owners pay.
A lot of EV chargers are powered by diesel generators. I even saw a photo.
I saw a photo of Mitch McConnel in drag. Doesn’t mean it’s real.
The Edmunds numbers provided include tires, maintenance,etc for both vehicles – based on reported averages. My personal experience includes a Duramax which requires more ‘scheduled’ maintenance – At some point you will reach various mileage thresholds where GM recommends things like trans fluid change, fuel filter, etc., (it all adds up fast) in addition to the routine synthetic oil changes – I’ve been doing those ‘recommended’ things as I was occasionally pulling a heavy trailer and doing some overlanding in the mountain west where I live. I have a lot of miles since I bought it in October 2019 and drive it hard. You can hate BEVs, but they are cheaper to maintain, especially when you have solar panels.
Where I see an issue with this comparison is you’re comparing a vehicle that you’ve driven more, 60K vs 15K, a vehicle that you have admitted you “drive it hard” and use for towing and overlanding, 2 things you really can’t do and aren’t doing with the Tesla.
The costs of the solar panel installation, maintenance and any insurance surcharge for having them should also be factored into the costs somehow, even if you are getting other benefits from the solar panels.
How much did the solar panels cost? Those are a scam except maybe for people in a perpetually sunny climate (not most of the US).
Solar panels and wind turbines have to be replaced every 30 years and land filled because they can’t be recycled.
double your mileage and you will be at $1000 for oil changes and you will need new tires by 50-60k, add those in and your sitting at $2k without even doing GMs recommended maintenance. math isn’t hard
Math clearly is for you. 2k isn’t “several thousand”. Also, you are then trying to compare a car with 15k not needing new tires yet, to a truck at 60k whose make cost driver was tires. I guess EV’s, in your mind, don’t need tires? I guess that’s the same math that “electricity” is “zero”. Just admit you lied to make a BS point. It’s not hard.
It’s also funny you keep claiming “reeee, you aren’t doing your recommended maint”. When the only added things between now and 60k are a trans fluid flush at 45k (note, not there yet) for ~250, and a air filters ~20 a pop every 20k miles, then tires, as applies to your precious EV, and a possible fuel filter (inspect and replace as needed) again, ~250. So 20*3+250+250+1000(OC) is not “several thousand”. As claimed. Tires are to be changed REGUARDLESS, unless you have some special tesla tires that never need replacement.
“Chevy Silverado Maintenance Every 7,500 Miles
One of the most critical Chevy Silverado maintenance items is the routine oil change. Every 7,500 miles, the oil needs to be fully drained and replaced with fresh oil, and the oil filter needs to be replaced so it can effectively filter out contaminants. It is unwise to skip this service because dirty oil or a clogged filter can damage the engine.
In addition to an oil change, your truck’s tires will be rotated every 7,500 miles. Additionally, wheel balancing and alignment might be performed if your technician deems it necessary.
Chevy Silverado Maintenance After 22,500 Miles
After 22,500 miles on the roads and highways near Rock Hill, SC, it’s time to bring your truck in for some filter replacements. First, the cabin air filter will be replaced so you can enjoy fresh air inside your truck. Next, the fuel filter will be examined. The fuel filter will be replaced if it’s dirty.
Chevy Silverado Maintenance After 45,000 Miles
The engine air filter needs to be replaced at least every 45,000 miles. If you experience poor acceleration or you find yourself fueling up more often, these are signs the engine air filter needs a change. Trucks with automatic transmissions will also need to have their transmission fluid replaced at this point.” Nothing beyond this until 97,500 except OCs.
Liberals delude themselves with lies. Conservatives free themselves with facts.
Why don’t you use your mangina and have trump’s baby.
I bet that Tesla requires tired too just like the GMC.
In markets where EVs are more prevalent than the U.S., ICE resale values have plummeted.
No, they plummeted because of Biden’s price hikes causing a recession and nobody is going to work so they don’t need cars.
Biden has nothing to do with car prices Norway or China, dude.
It’s called globalism dude, and it started 47 years ago under Biden when he was a senator pushing for more taxes and regulations to drive up costs in America.
Just wait until the road tax gets added to electricity. Right now most of the tax on fuel goes to fund road maintenance. Once all these heavy EV’s (assuming everyone actually buys them) dominate sales, they’re going to need to get funds to fix the roads from somewhere. It won’t be cheaper for long.
Plus it’ll be more expensive to keep the lights on in your home too.
Also, who spends $1800-$2600 on oil changes every year?!!
That is a good point on the mileage tax, right now for many people there is no ‘road tax’ when you have an electric vehicle, while gas tax averages close to 50 cents a gallon, depending on where you live. In the people’s republic of oregon, they are trying to implement a mileage/weight tax with a device on your vehicle that let’s them know how far you have driven, and can possibly track everywhere the vehicle is at any given moment. I know many people trust big brother with this kind of information, but, being the dinosaur that I am, I would prefer just to pay my gas tax at the pump, than have one of these devices on my car.
EVs do way more damage to roads than gas cars because of their battery weight and they should pay the price for that. And we have to spend a lot more money subsidizing electricity for them. They should be paying twice as much as everybody else is. Gas cars don’t get any subsidies and give everybody cordless freedom.
Gas and oil get a lot of subsidies related to production. And fed gas tax hasn’t been raised in 30 years, so that’s a form of keeping gas prices artificially low. Add to that the trillion of dollars spent by the US military to protect oil resources.
Add to the that the externalities related to pollution and health. WHO estimates the externalities of burning a gallon of gas to be about $5/gal.
How much is the federal ‘road tax’ for electric cars again? Federal gas taxes haven’t been ‘raised’ in 30 years, and these factors are keeping ICE operating costs relatively low compared to EV’s? How much is electricity being subsidized for wind/solar??
Who pulls the strings at the WHO??? Personally, I trust the WHO about as much as I trust the WEF or the CCP or ZETA.
I trust Vladimir Putin more than I trust the WHO. At least he’s honest about why he’s doing something.
Gas tax only funds like 50% of the cost of roads. The rest is from other tax sources that most people pay.
And many states have implemented an annual EV fee to cover the lost gas tax revenue. But as a flat fee, isn’t even between those that don’t drive much and people that far exceed avg annual miles.
A per mile fee for everyone would be a bit more equitable.
A per mile fee, can only really be assessed by putting on a device on your vehicle that tracks your vehicle’s every move (and at any time). NO THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A per-mile fee will only discourage driving. That will result in less getting out, less spending, less tourism, and likely less money to the government who thought this would pay for the roads (but I’m sure they’ll find another way).
A per-mile fee will damage the economy, and trucking agencies in particular who have to pay this fee (don’t doubt they won’t when it comes to the so-called good intentions of our government) will pass it on to the consumer making everything more expensive.
A true economy crusher waiting to be implemented…
The feel-gooders on this topic will have to have a reckoning about what their green pipe dreams are versus reality, which will no doubt smack them in their faces, like it will for everyone else.
Besides the greenies/feel-gooders, who can’t see this coming from a mile away?
A lot of states are already adding an EV fee at annual registration to cover the lost gas tax revenue.
Also, while it may vary by state, typically gas tax only funds about 50% of the cost of road maintenance and construction. The rest is covered by other tax sources, like property tax, income
tax, sales tax, business taxes, etc.
So all those people not driving or that drive low miles subsidize the cost of maintaining roads. Of course, even if you don’t drive or own a car, you get benefits from having a decent transportation infrastructure.
So it’s not fair to say EV owners/drivers don’t contribute to road funding.
Then stop stealing gas tax money to pay for public transit.
Ferrari owner’s clubs spend bigger bucks because they fly over a certified tech to the clubs group and have to do first drop 12 quarts of used oil, then add 12 fresh quarts. Run engine and then drop that oil and replace with another 12 quarts of fresh oil. Discounted for club members!
This country is still not ready to make long travel trips yet. Planning a trip based on charging stations and long stops charging is a deal breaker. I still think the Hybrid /Gas car is the best of both worlds right now. Local driving on electric and long mileage trips on gas.
Which is funny, because that is the only thing they refuse to build anymore. It shows we are run by the dumbest of society. One could drive down alleged “carbon emissions” significantly with a good PHEV with all the benefits of long range gas. But no….. He we are with the neckbeards running the show.
I agree with you, PHEV’s make a lot of sense at this point and I wish they were building a lot more of them. I thank the being upstairs that I don’t live in California, but I can imagine living there when they turn your power off because the planet-saving windmills can’t keep up with power demands (which if memory serves me correct, has happened more than a few times), with a PHEV I could then switch to ICE power in my car, or if I want to go on a long road trip, I can switch from EV to ICE to allow me to do so without being severely inconvenienced. I am happy there are electric cars, so that those who want one, can buy one…I just won’t be one of those buying one anytime soon. What a dinosaur I am, I still actually value freedom of choice.
Texas is becoming liberal too. They have Tesla factories and the space x scamming the taxpayers. And their frozen wind turbines caused their blackout. That’s what’s next for the rest of America.
Nothing preventing automakers from making PHEV. And they get the same subsidies as full BEV. So not sure your argument?
But, PHEV just aren’t selling as well as BEV. Market is driving where the technology is going.
Correction: Government is driving where the market is going. You are right that the demand is less for PHEV’s, but part of that is the lack of availability of PHEV models. It would be difficult to meet the EPA CAFE requirements in the future without a significant chunk of sales being EV’s, so the manufacturer’s aren’t investing in PHEV’s because it costs too much $ to develop them as well as the EV’s. Thankfully, Toyota is still investing in PHEV’s to at least give us some freedom of choice, but I wish GM would have kept the VOLT and kept improving it.
“The analysis was released by the Zero Emission Transportation Association (ZETA), a federal coalition pushing for 100 percent EV sales by 2030.”
This reads like those 50’s smoking “research studies”
“Cigarettes are 100% safe and pose no long term harm, this analysis was released by the American Tobacco Manufacturers association….”
Now lets see Paul Allen’s analysis….
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA……
You mean a writer from the Southern Cali bubble would lie to us with propaganda research? Never…….
I smoke cigarettes and I’m not going to stop just because of a mandate, I’ll just grow my own tobacco. Same with gas. I’ll grow my own biodiesel if they mandate gasoline. Or drill deep enough and hope I hit oil.
Best news I’ve heard from you, keep puffing!
“The report lists four major takeaways, the first of which is that electricity is not only cheaper than gasoline, but it is more price-stable as well.”
It may be this way in North America, but this is not the case in Europe. I recall reading an article last year in which it noted that the diesel was cheaper to run compared to the electric version.
The majority of North American electricity is produced from fossil fuels whose prices are moving higher due to Brandon’s policies.
What’s that EV worth after 10 years or 100k miles? Will anyone buy it knowing that the battery is near the end of its life and the replacement cost is tens of thousands of dollars or maybe not even available? Whereas a gas or diesel Silverado would still have a fairly high residual resale value.
If the EV crowd doesn’t recognize this, just look at past and current Hybrid resale data.
I have no problem with hybrids, but the same logic applies to them: who wants a used hybrid that is staring down a $10,000 battery replacement?
I care less about the monetary cost of EV’s. It is part of solution to reducing our ‘carbon footprint’ so there will be a planet left for living beings for our future generations. On a side note, it sucks all the tailpipe carbon I inhale when riding my bicycle on roads. A mask does help, however not as much as I like.
No way this is a real person…….
Brandon – I agree with you, I think ‘Arnold’ was just illustrating absurdity by being absurd, I thought it was actually pretty funny!
Fred: I’m for ‘real deal’ and one of Greta Thunberg’s favorite fans. Can’t put a price of planet earths future generations habitat.
Arnold – I’ll reiterate one of the most important points that I made: Maybe if we all just sit real still and consume less oxygen, then we will all exhale less CO2 and that will help. That combined with some good solid climate lockdowns (similar to the pandemic lockdowns, but more stringent), should really help mommy earth. I think with the previous lockdowns, carbon emissions were down somewhere around 20%…wow, just think, we only had to reduce our carbon emissions by 80% more to save the planet!
Greta Thunberg? “How dare you” pull our legs….
EV’s just transfer the emissions from the tailpipe to the smoke stake and you can be sure that today’s tailpipe emissions are cleaner than what’s coming from the power plant smokestacks.
Scam
First off, I am in the queue for an AWD 2024 Lyriq. I am buying an EV now because I think they are cool and will work well as my in-town car. I will retain my 35 mpg diesel Audi Q5 TDI for long distances. Bottomline is that Brandon and Cadillac made the Lyriq too good of a deal to pass up.
Second, yes, EVs should have less maintenance than ICE cars, though tire usage may be more. The battery issue is red herring because even though capacity does degrade with time, it tends to level off. So 10 or 20% off of 300 mile range may not be that big a deal, given that many expensive EVs are being sold today starting with only 240 or so miles of range.
The real issue is that EVs are being overhyped in the reduction of CO2 emissions. We will never get to zero emissions until we get our collective heads out of the dark spot and go nuclear like France did. France has the lowest electricity rates in the EU and does not have energy shortages.
EVs have a much larger CO2 manufacturing footprint than ICE, and we all know the child labor abuses due to cobalt mining. Here is an article from Polestar that did an honest assessment on both the manufacturing CO2 emissions and the payback time in miles driven to offset what an ICE emits.
I believe Argonne National Labs has done some comprehensive studies on those topics if you want to look it up.
So it is not all rainbows and unicorns with EVs. The issue today is that there is no comprehensive plan to transition economically to zero emissions. Let me say that the previous administration, through fracking and the abundance of natural gas, had the most per capita reductions in CO2 without any new restrictions. I would hope we could go back to using our natural gas (NG) abundance to switch most coal plants to NG and then invest in the next generation of nuclear plants to replace fossil fuel plants for the baseline in our electrical grid. Solar and wind can then be used when available to augment the grid and for personal home power.
Good points Ray. I am not against EV’s at all, really. I am however completely against what many greenies want to do with our electrical grid, their ideas of going wind/solar only are just plain idiotic (especially when concurrently eliminating natural gas power plants, which are by far the best way to back up wind/solar…you know when the wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining). If people were serious about actually addressing greenhouse gas emissions, while still maintaining our comfortable lifestyles (which includes having reliable electric power), then we should go primarily nuclear. As you pointed out earlier, France has gone with breeder reactors, which is exactly what we should have done many, MANY years ago…that way the nuclear waste could go down around 80%!
Compare an HD Diesel pickup with a Tesla Y.
Why not Lizzo with Britney Spears ?
btw, I wouldn’t have either one.
Good points Arnold S, people seem to forget that if we do nothing, Florida will be under water in 2030, New York City will be under water in 2014, and there will be no more low land snow after 2014. If we don’t do anything, that sea level rise at the current rate of 7″ per century will kill us all in no time. It is worse than we thought, we have to do something, maybe if I just sit real still and consume less oxygen, then I will exhale less CO2 and I will help a little bit.
In the meantime, as we reduce our carbon emissions, two countries in the eastern hemisphere will be increasing their emissions more than we are reducing ours in the west. This just means we have to act even faster.
Hate to be stereotypical, but Arnold has me not hating it to reach this extremely likely scenario:
Riding around in a Prius by him/her/they self wearing a cheap, ineffective mask to forever fight off the latest MSM-hyped virus/contagion scare.
I don’t mind if NY is underwater by 2030. But Red states are smart enough to build sea walls.
What’s with you guys and walls?
Ask your buddy Nancy while she was speaker of the house. Remember the fencing and security guards around Congress?
I was just pointing out some of the stupid things greenies have said in recent years (Florida under water in 2030) and in the early 2000’s (New York City under water and no more low land snow by 2014). Now that we have already past the ‘turning point’ for the 14th time (where we were all going to die if we didn’t act immediately), maybe we should be going back and seeing just what these folks have said in the past if we didn’t immediately stop using ‘evil’ fossil fuels.
The “sky is falling” approach by the greenies over the last several decades has not helped their cause, nor has the screaming at the sky.
…between the ‘sky is falling’ and ‘up is down and down is up’ campaigns of recent years, I basically take everything they say with a grain of salt anymore…
Yep…the lefties/greenies daily hysteria is exactly that.
Little of it actually bears any useful fruit, but they “want”, just like a 5-year-old, and they’ll do just about anything anymore to get it.
lord have mercy,ii have just one thing to say Be part of the problem or be part of the solution
How exactly do you know when you’re being part of a real solution?
The EV “solution” IS the problem. They causes so much more carbon emissions to make and power.
@iROC Z – You may be right about that, but, as with all things these days, ‘feelings’ are more important than reality. Many people will ‘feel’ good about the ‘solution’.
Hillary already said that I am deplorable so I guess I am part of the problem! Oh well.
Which Hillary?
The one who’s family had more people killed than Putin.
Which Hillary? In case u say Clinton, then I would say which Hillary Clinton
Finally got my 2023 luxury Lyriq earlier today.
Sticker shows estimated cost of equivalent gas vehicle to be $8000 per year gasoline vs $4000 in electricity at 14 cents per kWh, which is what I pay here.
Figuring a ten year life, the $40000 savings mostly pays for it.
How much is the battery replacement when the warranty is over?
$49.99 @ Harbor Freight.
Two things:
1). The much larger than average Lyriq costs half to refuel than the average 28 mpg vehicle. A vehicle this size if a plain ICE might get 20 mpg. I have a large garage and am surprised how huge it is, but I wanted a much larger vehicle.
I’ve had the vehicle just over a day now, and I probably dislike driving it more than any vehicle I’ve driven in decades. It is quiet and peppy, but GM’s new dashboards are beyond Gawd-Awful.
It goes far on a full charge, and I will probably grow to tolerate the vehicle, but I will never like it.
But to me, it is a 21st century Edsal. I can say though that most will absolutely love it but for me the dashboard kills the driving experience. The buttons and switches and touch screens are for me, horrible.
2). ICE drivers think GM batteries quickly fail. That historically has been absolutely false. You will need a new tranny in a GM before you need a battery.
I could be wrong, but those savings sound perhaps a little exaggerated. $8000/3.5 dollars per gallon = 2285 gallons of gas per year? 2285 gallons x 25 miles per gallon = 57,125 miles driven per year??? If the EPA really put these numbers on the sticker of the vehicle, they are even more f’d up than I thought.
Fred sorry you are right. These are 5 year savings.
So $8,000 in savings over ten years, and probably just enough to pay for the cost increase over an average ICE vehicle.
But, as I say, this vehicle is quite huge.
I don’t like the thing since it is so hard to drive.
Bill – I appreciate your short-term review of your new car, hopefully it will grow on you over time. I am starting to feel somewhat ‘forced’ to consider an EV for our next car, just because I know they are going to make it more difficult/expensive to continue to operate ICE’s over the longer term. That being said, the Lyriq could sort of replace our Suburban if we were going EV, so again, I appreciate the feedback on that. I hope to hear more of what you think about your new Lyriq going forward.
We are buying a new vehicle too, it just came in to the dealer, and should be ready sometime early next week. It is a 24′ GMC Sierra Denali HD Diesel, and will likely be our last full ICE, the way things are looking.
Okay Fred since you want more, here goes:
A 2023 Luxury Lyriq is $3,000 more than the promised Debut models of which they’ve only made a few. Mine is just over the 3,000 cars made last week.
So what you get with a 2023 Luxury over a Debut is lighted interior running boards for the front seats, and Gesture operation of the hatch back.
Only color available for the past year has been $625 plus sales tax optional Black .
The car has all the wet-dream stuff GM engineering team could fantasize.
Really goofy and juvenile, and personal security threatening arrival and departure light shows, inside and outside the vehicle.
If you live in a house with a nearby attached garage as I do, the car will continuously perform a and d light shows all the time since you are always getting nearer or farther from the car. I’ll have to report back on how much a continually flashing garage drains the batteries. Non defeatable of course.
I guess I’ll have to start leaving my key ring in the refrigerator.
The vented seats seem kinda okay, but the massage is a useless joke.
Switches are either too difficult to operate mechanical or others are almost impossible to operate membrane with zero tactile feedback..
Whereas all other gm electrics had 4 tire individual pressures on a single screen this joke has Lyriq spinning around on a screen only showing one tire at a time, and you have to spin the car picture around to see only tire #2.
Everything else is like that creepy crap.
But u get the idea.
Thanks for the detail, sounds like I would not appreciate many of those features you mentioned. I had not really paid any attention to the Lyriq before you mentioned it, but have since noticed it had kind of the right size at a decent starting price. Anyway, I hope you end up liking it better over time.
You’re more than likely right. Anybody who continues to think that the future isn’t going to be electric can have the Blackberry 8700 sitting in a box in my home office with the keyboard for free. Now let’s see what GM can do to ramp production up in a meaningful way as to take share. That’s the outstanding challenge that remains to be seen. We are at the very beginning of a fundamental inflection point in the slow and gradual move from ICE to EV. Deny this at your peril and go the way of the dinosaurs.
Yes Dave Roberts: We no longer have horse and buggy, nor steam engines any longer as main power to transportation.
If we did, we wouldn’t have to import oil or damage the environment to make EVs.