Electric Vehicles - Information & Updates

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

I'll be sure to pass that along to my surgeon. Maybe he can do some of that health care stuff and fix me up!

Idiot.

Did you even do physical rehabilitation and then strength training for the knee? I betting you just ignored his advice.

You clearly know far more about biking, the area in which I live, and my physical health than I do. I bow to your infinite wisdom. I don't know what I was even thinking.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Did you even do physical rehabilitation and then strength training for the knee? I betting you just ignored his advice.

You clearly know far more about biking, the area in which I live, and my physical health than I do.  I bow to your infinite wisdom.  I don't know what I was even thinking.

It's about time /s

How did you mess up your knee so bad that therapy and strength training doesn't bring it back?

Some people already know everything, and we should be grateful when they bestow their awesome knowledge upon us. Fortunately, such people are rarely stingy with their input...

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/04/gm-overtakes-ford-in-us-ev-sales-still-trails-tesla.html

There is an interesting chart in this article. Tesla leads the rest 200k of sales to about 60k, though it isn't clear if the number for Tesla is for the US, as the others are, or globally.

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

You clearly know far more about biking, the area in which I live, and my physical health than I do.  I bow to your infinite wisdom.  I don't know what I was even thinking.

It's about time /s

How did you mess up your knee so bad that therapy and strength training doesn't bring it back?

What can I say? Always make sure your sex swing mounting points are properly torqued before using.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

It's about time /s

How did you mess up your knee so bad that therapy and strength training doesn't bring it back?

What can I say? Always make sure your sex swing mounting points are properly torqued before using.

lol, man that sucks.

So, no chance of any therapy and weight training will cause it to be serviceable for bike riding?

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

What can I say? Always make sure your sex swing mounting points are properly torqued before using.

lol, man that sucks.

So, no chance of any therapy and weight training will cause it to be serviceable for bike riding?

In the immortal words of Toby Keith, “I ain’t as good as I once was, but I’m as good once, as I ever was.”

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

lol, man that sucks.

So, no chance of any therapy and weight training will cause it to be serviceable for bike riding?

In the immortal words of Toby Keith, “I ain’t as good as I once was, but I’m as good once, as I ever was.”

Well an experienced rider like yourself might be okay, though not being able to do everything I might with one knee might concern me regarding safety, but that 14-year-old kid on the other ebike might not be as skilled, so be careful out there.

TravelinMan wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote: heard of them, but didn't know it was an actual thing.

I have, I believe, 6 bikes and not a single one is an electric bike. Seems like you would just get a moped or a motorcycle.

(unless they're the same thing as a moped.. I don't really keep up with what the folks are doing these days).

If you have 6 bikes, then I would assume you enjoy riding. You should check out an ebike sometime. Everybody gets older. Even the best of us are going to slow down at some point. These things are a real boost for older and/or physically challenged riders. Even with my bum knee I can ride like I could 20 years ago. And sure, I'm probably not getting the same physical benefit with a pedal assist that I would get if I were spinning them myself. But if the choice is go out and ride 20 miles of trails and get some partial benefit, or sit at home and get no benefit because I just can't do that anymore, I think the answer is obvious.

I'm glad it works for ya.

Also, this reminds me of a week or two ago when you were providing me with unsolicited financial advice.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

If you have 6 bikes, then I would assume you enjoy riding. You should check out an ebike sometime. Everybody gets older. Even the best of us are going to slow down at some point. These things are a real boost for older and/or physically challenged riders. Even with my bum knee I can ride like I could 20 years ago. And sure, I'm probably not getting the same physical benefit with a pedal assist that I would get if I were spinning them myself. But if the choice is go out and ride 20 miles of trails and get some partial benefit, or sit at home and get no benefit because I just can't do that anymore, I think the answer is obvious.

I'm glad it works for ya.

Also, this reminds me of a week or two ago when you were providing me with unsolicited financial advice.

TM sucked me into a good old fashioned Wells hissy exchange, sorry tBin, I'll try to be more careful.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote: I'm glad it works for ya.

Also, this reminds me of a week or two ago when you were providing me with unsolicited financial advice.

TM sucked me into a good old fashioned Wells hissy exchange, sorry tBin, I'll try to be more careful.

if he wants to talk bikes, I'm okay - the 3 things I know the most about are running/cycling, Springsteen and taking naps - otherwise, I don't indulge the crazy.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

TM sucked me into a good old fashioned Wells hissy exchange, sorry tBin, I'll try to be more careful.

if he wants to talk bikes, I'm okay - the 3 things I know the most about are running/cycling, Springsteen and taking naps - otherwise, I don't indulge the crazy.

So let's talk naps. 2 or 3 hour long ones every day. Plus 9 hours at night about right?

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

TM sucked me into a good old fashioned Wells hissy exchange, sorry tBin, I'll try to be more careful.

if he wants to talk bikes, I'm okay - the 3 things I know the most about are running/cycling, Springsteen and taking naps - otherwise, I don't indulge the crazy.

I do like naps!

Now on bikes I'm a bit dated.  My buddy & I rode our Swinn Varsities loaded with 50 pounds of camping gear from Bay City to Grand Maries and back in about 1970 & we have a couple of Damiler road bikes from 1978 and a couple of Trek mountain bikes from 1997.

Interesting article, not only for the anti-biking takes, but for the "pushing agendas" opinions, as well.

https://jalopnik.com/romney-e-bike-bike-lanes-height-of-stupidity-amc-pres-1850300027

Personally, I think both sides are attempting to force their way of life on to the other. We could argue which side might have the better view point - freedom of choice for women, clean air, gas stoves, lots o' guns, etc. - but I don't think there's any doubt it's happening.

TravelinMan wrote:Interesting article, not only for the anti-biking takes, but for the "pushing agendas" opinions, as well.



https://jalopnik.com/romney-e-bike-bike-lanes-height-of-stupidity-amc-pres-1850300027

Personally, I think both sides are attempting to force their way of life on to the other. We could argue which side might have the better view point - freedom of choice for women, clean air, gas stoves, lots o' guns, etc. - but I don't think there's any doubt it's happening.

IMO the "force a way of life" action has to be a restriction, not a freedom.

Pro-choice does not force people to have abortions, therefore it cannot be forcing a way on people.

Gun restrictions are forcing a way of life.

Subsidizing ebikes, is there such a thing, apparently, doesn't force people to use them.

The alternative to bike lanes is bikes and other vehicles coexisting, which we have done for a long time, and still do. Bike lanes are an attempt for segregation of bike traffic from other vehicle traffic, for safety, or convenience of motorized vehicle speeds? Not a forcing or an ebike issue.

In one sense we are forced to live where other people's freedoms infringe on our freedoms, which in many cases is unavoidable. In many cases other people freedoms are theirs and don't infringe on ours.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

if he wants to talk bikes, I'm okay - the 3 things I know the most about are running/cycling, Springsteen and taking naps - otherwise, I don't indulge the crazy.

So let's talk naps.  2 or 3 hour long ones every day. Plus 9 hours at night about right?

I get in about 3 naps/day.

usually one or two around 15-20 minutes, then more of a full-throttle, 1-2 hour experience. I go to sleep every night around 8:30 - 9:00, up around 5:00 - 5:30.

it's a good way to be.

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:Interesting article, not only for the anti-biking takes, but for the "pushing agendas" opinions, as well.



https://jalopnik.com/romney-e-bike-bike-lanes-height-of-stupidity-amc-pres-1850300027

Personally, I think both sides are attempting to force their way of life on to the other. We could argue which side might have the better view point - freedom of choice for women, clean air, gas stoves, lots o' guns, etc. - but I don't think there's any doubt it's happening.

IMO the "force a way of life" action has to be a restriction, not a freedom.

Pro-choice does not force people to have abortions, therefore it cannot be forcing a way on people.

Gun restrictions are forcing a way of life.

Subsidizing ebikes, is there such a thing, apparently, doesn't force people to use them.

The alternative to bike lanes is bikes and other vehicles coexisting, which we have done for a long time, and still do. Bike lanes are an attempt for segregation of bike traffic from other vehicle traffic, for safety, or convenience of motorized vehicle speeds? Not a forcing or an ebike issue.

In one sense we are forced to live where other people's freedoms infringe on our freedoms, which in many cases is unavoidable. In many cases other people freedoms are theirs and don't infringe on ours.

Yeah, totally agree, for the most part. Taking away a woman's right to choose and taking away people's angry death stick pew pew machines are obvious answers.

But there is something to the more subtle actions to force a view point. Banning ICE vehicles, banning gas stoves, banning books, banning drag shows - maybe there isn't an obvious infringement but there's definitely an agenda being pushed from a position of moral belief. And no, I'm not equating gas stove bans with abortion. But it's the small, insidious pushes that you need to watch out for.

Trapper Gus wrote:Now on bikes I'm a bit dated.  My buddy & I rode our Swinn Varsities loaded with 50 pounds of camping gear from Bay City to Grand Maries and back in about 1970 & we have a couple of Damiler road bikes from 1978 and a couple of Trek mountain bikes from 1997.

I have a Specialized mountain bike, along with a Giant and a Raleigh. The Specialized is the newest one - I believe it's around a 2015 model.

Road bikes, I have a Trek, an old school Bianchi (my first 'real' bike.. picked it up in 1987 and would never let it go), and a Cannondale.

I've never really wanted/needed the latest models with the high tech components, so I don't get too bent out of shape about stuff like that. I'm more interested in the engine that drives the machine, the fitness, the aerobic base, the anaerobic output.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

IMO the "force a way of life" action has to be a restriction, not a freedom.

Pro-choice does not force people to have abortions, therefore it cannot be forcing a way on people.

Gun restrictions are forcing a way of life.

Subsidizing ebikes, is there such a thing, apparently, doesn't force people to use them.

The alternative to bike lanes is bikes and other vehicles coexisting, which we have done for a long time, and still do.  Bike lanes are an attempt for segregation of bike traffic from other vehicle traffic, for safety, or convenience of motorized vehicle speeds?  Not a forcing or an ebike issue.

In one sense we are forced to live where other people's freedoms infringe on our freedoms, which in many cases is unavoidable.  In many cases other people freedoms are theirs and don't infringe on ours.

Yeah, totally agree, for the most part.  Taking away a woman's right to choose and taking away people's angry death stick pew pew machines are obvious answers.

But there is something to the more subtle actions to force a view point.  Banning ICE vehicles, banning gas stoves, banning books, banning drag shows - maybe there isn't an obvious infringement but there's definitely an agenda being pushed from a position of moral belief.  And no, I'm not equating gas stove bans with abortion.  But it's the small, insidious pushes that you need to watch out for.

Banning for no common good reason is wrong.  There has to be competing goods for it to make sense.  Even in the abortion debate there are competing goods, as in the gun debate.

The ICE's, and not just vehicles, lock up your lawnmowers and leaf blowers, & gas stoves are global common good issues.

Books are unique, an attempt to limit ideas.

Drag shows, I thinking it is coding that somehow people in drag are LBGQ+, so an attack on a group of people some disapprove of?

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

Yeah, totally agree, for the most part.  Taking away a woman's right to choose and taking away people's angry death stick pew pew machines are obvious answers.

But there is something to the more subtle actions to force a view point.  Banning ICE vehicles, banning gas stoves, banning books, banning drag shows - maybe there isn't an obvious infringement but there's definitely an agenda being pushed from a position of moral belief.  And no, I'm not equating gas stove bans with abortion.  But it's the small, insidious pushes that you need to watch out for.

Banning for no common good reason is wrong.  There has to be competing goods for it to make sense.  Even in the abortion debate there are competing goods, as in the gun debate.

The ICE's, and not just vehicles, lock up your lawnmowers and leaf blowers, & gas stoves are global common good issues.

Books are unique, an attempt to limit ideas.

Drag shows, I thinking it is coding that somehow people in drag are LBGQ+, so an attack on a group of people some disapprove of?

But "common good" or "competing good" is always in the eye of the beholder, isn't it?

I could make dozens of arguments for being pro choice and why it benefits society, and someone who believes that life begins at conception will call me a baby killer and ignore the rest.

I make arguments about gun control and the slippery slope of government infringement in our lives, and I get told I don't care about innocent childrenz.

Just because there's a counter argument doesn't mean people want to hear it.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Banning for no common good reason is wrong.  There has to be competing goods for it to make sense.  Even in the abortion debate there are competing goods, as in the gun debate.

The ICE's, and not just vehicles, lock up your lawnmowers and leaf blowers, & gas stoves are global common good issues.

Books are unique, an attempt to limit ideas.

Drag shows, I thinking it is coding that somehow people in drag are LBGQ+, so an attack on a group of people some disapprove of?

But "common good" or "competing good" is always in the eye of the beholder, isn't it?

I could make dozens of arguments for being pro choice and why it benefits society, and someone who believes that life begins at conception will call me a baby killer and ignore the rest.

I make arguments about gun control and the slippery slope of government infringement in our lives, and I get told I don't care about innocent childrenz.

Just because there's a counter argument doesn't mean people want to hear it.

Which is where an agreement on the basic principles is needed.  If there isn't agreement on the methods of managing the conflicts, typically what we call government, it becomes difficult.

Also, both sides become emotional and "hit back" with emotionally loaded words, which are blowing off steam, and to be avoided if reasonable discussions are to take place.

All in all it is very complex

https://www.thedrive.com/news/2025-ram-1500-rev-electric-pickup-targets-500-miles-of-range-14000-lb-max-tow

Ram is the last of America's Big Three to announce an electric truck, but despite its timing, it's gone all-in on the specs of the 1500 REV. The automaker is not only promising the most range in its class at 500 miles or more but also seriously impressive towing at 14,000 pounds. The battery necessary to achieve these figures is immense.

https://apnews.com/article/ram-rev-new-york-auto-show-electric-90c212695070e2947efc7ba239bf4ab7

Don't care bout ebikes.

AvgMSUJoe wrote:Don't care bout ebikes.

I'll make a note of it.

Was at a local bike shop today.

In general, how much does an ebike cost?

Just wondering.

TravelinMan wrote:

AvgMSUJoe wrote:Don't care bout ebikes.

I'll make a note of it.

Point being, there will be no licensing and regulation until a major publicized wreck with death and stuff. No one cares.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:Was at a local bike shop today.

In general, how much does an ebike cost?

Just wondering.

If you were at a bike shop, wouldn't you know that already?

For anything above complete Chinese garbage, you're probably looking at $2,000 and up. You can get fancy pants versions for many multiples of that figure. Just depends on what you want.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
I'm glad it works for ya.

Also, this reminds me of a week or two ago when you were providing me with unsolicited financial advice.

TM sucked me into a good old fashioned Wells hissy exchange, sorry tBin, I'll try to be more careful.

Love ya, Trap.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

TM sucked me into a good old fashioned Wells hissy exchange, sorry tBin, I'll try to be more careful.

Love ya, Trap.

Back at you, dude.

https://jalopnik.com/biden-announce-toughest-vehicle-emissions-target-us-epa-1850309447

TravelinMan wrote:https://jalopnik.com/biden-announce-toughest-vehicle-emissions-target-us-epa-1850309447

will propose

These still have to go through the regulation making process.

Despite the historic clampdown on vehicle emissions, the Biden Administration will not be banning the sale of internal combustion cars like our European counterparts who will ban the sale of new cars powered by gasoline in 2035 (with an exception for synthetic fuels). California wants to implement its own sales ban by 2030, but the state still needs the federal government’s approval and has yet to file a formal request.

DETROIT (AP) — Tesla cut prices on its entire U.S. electric vehicle model lineup for the third time this year in an apparent effort to lure more buyers amid rising interest rates.

The cuts that appeared Friday on Tesla’s website ranged from $5,000 per vehicle for Tesla’s slower-selling more expensive models, the S large sedan and the X big SUV.

The company lopped $2,000 off the price of the Y small SUV, its most popular model, and added a lower-cost dual-motor version priced at $49,990. The 3 small sedan saw a $1,000 price cut.

https://apnews.com/article/tesla-price-cut-electric-vehicles-6d08686ea442ea7e54dc494e07ff6961

It is probably time to note that Tesla has a huge labor cost advantage, partly due to being a new company with much lower pension costs, if Tesla even has a fixed benefit pension system.

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:https://jalopnik.com/biden-announce-toughest-vehicle-emissions-target-us-epa-1850309447

will propose

These still have to go through the regulation making process.

Despite the historic clampdown on vehicle emissions, the Biden Administration will not be banning the sale of internal combustion cars like our European counterparts who will ban the sale of new cars powered by gasoline in 2035 (with an exception for synthetic fuels). California wants to implement its own sales ban by 2030, but the state still needs the federal government’s approval and has yet to file a formal request.

Yeah. I read the article. Just thought it was in line with the discussions within this thread.

50% still seems pretty aggressive.

TravelinMan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:



These still have to go through the regulation making process.

Yeah.  I read the article.  Just thought it was in line with the discussions within this thread.

50% still seems pretty aggressive.  

The idea is to get many of the ICE vehicles off the road, for sure, without closing them out entirely.

This all is predicated on EV tech improving and/or "refeuling" habits changing.  We are seeing tech improvements with 800 plus volt batteries and reduced charging times and increasing range.  I already post too many articles about tech, but only about 10% of what I read gets posted.  There are dozens of companies with battery concepts being developed, some for lower weight to kWhr storage, some with less expensive materials, some with hybrid tech, such as combination battery/super capacitor tech for fast charging time.  Then there is motor development, sort of surprising that, since electric motors are already 80% plus efficiency, but researchers are aiming for 95% plus and to cut the weight of the motors by up to 90%.

I posted the link to a series of articles from the IEEE, by far the major electrial/electronics technical society which was pretty skeptical of everything happening, everywhere, all at once in a clean fashion, but even they said it is all moving forward.

Honestly I am surprised that things are happening as quickly as they are, edit - even though I have been saying it will for years.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Many Americans aren’t yet sold on going electric for their next cars, a new poll shows, with high prices and too few charging stations the main deterrents. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults are at least somewhat likely to switch, but the history-making shift from the country’s century-plus love affair with gas-driven vehicles still has a ways to travel.

The poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago shows that the Biden administration’s plans to dramatically raise U.S. EV sales could run into resistance from consumers. Only 8% of U.S. adults say they or someone in their household owns or leases an electric vehicle, and just 8% say their household has a plug-in hybrid vehicle.

Even with tax credits of up to $7,500 to buy a new EV, it could be difficult to persuade drivers to ditch their gas-burning cars and trucks for vehicles without tailpipe emissions.

AP Story

The goal is laudable. The implementation, however, could be a multi-car pileup. It’s hard to think of an era of forced technology adoption anything like what Biden supposedly has in mind.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/hold-on-tight-to-your-gas-powered-car-193629839.html

TravelinMan wrote:

The goal is laudable. The implementation, however, could be a multi-car pileup. It’s hard to think of an era of forced technology adoption anything like what Biden supposedly has in mind.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/hold-on-tight-to-your-gas-powered-car-193629839.html

The Biden administration plans to tighten car-pollution standards in a way that's meant to dramatically speed the adoption of electric vehicles, or EVs. On April 12, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed new rules that would cut the allowable pollution from cars by more than half by 2032.

This "Karan" is having a fit over something that will not be in place for 9 years and which has not gone through the regulation review process. To compare, 9 years ago, 2014, BEV's had about 40 miles of range, maximum and public charging was non-existent.

Trapper Gus wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/hold-on-tight-to-your-gas-powered-car-193629839.html

The Biden administration plans to tighten car-pollution standards in a way that's meant to dramatically speed the adoption of electric vehicles, or EVs. On April 12, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed new rules that would cut the allowable pollution from cars by more than half by 2032.

This "Karan" is having a fit over something that will not be in place for 9 years and which has not gone through the regulation review process. To compare, 9 years ago, 2014, BEV's had about 40 miles of range, maximum and public charging was non-existent.

But as an industry guy, you should know that incremental performance gains become increasingly more difficult.

Nine years isn't that far away. I think the only "Karen" thing about this is that it will all be for naught when the next administration nullifies it in February 2025.