Looking at current prices of used tesla's and brand new tesla's quiet a huge drop in price from new to old.
I know by owning an EV you save on fuel….but buying them brand new and losing $20,000-$25,000 after 3 years of ownership makes little sense or does it? So my question is.
What do you exactly save?
Are you just making one of the greatest scammers Elon rich or you are actually saving money?
So, to access the car's features, it needs to be tied to a person's personal details, right ?
I was just trying to clarify this part.
I was trying to find out, if there's any part of the process of owning/operating a Tesla car, is there is a need to link an identity to the car and the company.
I didn't think about EVs at all last week, but I went to the EV auto-show last weekend, and just curious about such things, but I forgot to ask questions at the Tesla stand and ran out of time.
@whyisave: My understanding is that you technically don't need an account to own and drive the car.
You would miss out on a lot of useful features though.
@klaw81: Yeah,…the process of electrifying everything in one's life, is ultimately giving up "control" and exchanging convenience for this.
Having something always tethered or 'connected' for software, or permission to use money, or just plugged into something ALL of the time, is just a concern of many….but maybe, we can all be like Neo and download kung-fu skillz in 30-seconds soon enough !
the process of electrifying everything in one's life, is ultimately giving up "control" and exchanging convenience for this
This is crazy conspiracy theory talk.
There is nothing unique about electrification that allows greater control of the population. These features can and have been added to ICE vehicles.
I understand that some are concerned about the loss of privacy associated with greater connectivity, but it's absolutely unrelated to electrification and is merely a coincidence.
There is nothing unique about electrification that allows greater control of the population
Yes, you are right.
I meant, the internet connectivity aspect of it, and not uniquely 'electrification'.
I use cassette decks and drills, … and none of them are connected to being data harvesting, even though they are powered by electricity !
Nowadays, a person's movement, the medications, the financial expenditure, the items spent on, the communication, the habits, the conversations, what the eyeballs dwell on, etc. etc… are just being captured, analyzed and strategised. So, it's just getting dystopian.
I'm positive you are making a big mistake.
You never save anything buying a car, they're an expense that depreciates.
You never save anything buying pants either, but sometimes you need to spend money to get through life. The question is whether it makes more sense than other cars. I assume OP knows if they need a car or not.
Also it's an asset that depreciates. Expenses you spend and are gone (unless it's Homer's giant sandwich).
I just saying you don’t save money buying cars. It an expense not a saving.
For a daily driver, yes. But for a weekend/enthusiast car, no.
Purchased a 2004 Mitsubishi Evolution 8 MR for $29,000 in 2012. It's got genuine 43,000km on it and you tell me how much it's going for now. $70k+
Yeah that’s different. OP is talking about boring mass produced cars. I made money selling my SS commodore. I shouldn’t have sold my old HSV….
Yep. All HSVs have gone up in value. A friend of mine has the VZ with Walkinshaw supercharger which he bought for $25k some 8yrs ago. It's worth a lot more now.
@Brick Tamland: I remember when I was a kid on a school bus in the mid to late 90s, I used to think they were the coolest cars. There were plenty at the time but now it's like finding a unicorn. As we always say, could've, should've etc. life goes on.
@gezza90: Even VF SS commodores have disappeared off the roads, people are keeping the locked up now. VR/VS was one of the best looking HSV's ever made. Different enough from stock SS but not too over the top
brand new tesla's quiet a huge drop in price
Sssh 🤐
It's nice to own brand new things. But if Teslas in Australia really are overvalued, then there are other EVs you can choose from these days.
They were definitely a rip off before. However, with the latest price drop to $61k, they are a fair price for electric cars now. I doubt BYD's Sealion 7 could do much better next year, maybe $58k or so given that their plug in hybrid car is $52k drive away. Regardless, all EVs are too expensive if you are looking to save money. Unless you drive 50,000km+/year with no mortgage, there's no way you're going to save money vs buying an equivalent ICE/conventional hybrid car.
You forgot about novated lease…
buying them brand new and losing $20,000-$25,000 after 3 years of ownership makes little sense or does it?
Ever bought a new car? This isn't a Tesla thing
I can buy a lot of petrol with $20k for the car that I already own and runs perfect.
Amazing deduction there, Sherlock.
Generally speaking, yes, the cheapest car is the one you already own.
Lmao you're a genius
The thing is once you daily drive a Tesla or any other decent ev you don’t want to drive an ice car again. An ice car are terrible to drive. I can go on.i would only drive an ice car once a week on a Sunday.
There's nothing wrong with ICE cars, especially hybrid ones which offer the best of both worlds. EV cars are over priced and inferior if you want to drive on the highway, tow anything or drive off road. You'll never recoup your money vs buying an equivalent hybrid car unless you drive 50,000km+/year.
There's nothing wrong with ICE cars,
Except the noise, heat, fumes that come out the back and waste oil every 6-12 months.
As for 50k er year to break even, you havent done your sums.
Except the noise, heat, fumes that come out the back and waste oil every 6-12 months.
That's describing the equipment and effort to dig holes in the ground for all minerals needed (eg. lithion, cobalt, rare earths, etc.)
If you are not digging for coal, you are still digging for something, which itself is an energy-intensive and "polluting" activity.
@whyisave: While its true that digging for materials for EVs is not great for the environment, the materials are largely recyclable. Fossil fuels are single use only. Dig em up and burn em.
IF you are buying a new car, an EV is better for the environment in the long term. The layback for additional energy to create it is as little as 2 years depending on a bunch of factors. Probably closer to 4 years. After that, an ICE will continue to pollute. an EV can be run on renewable energy, but an ICE never can be.
In Australia particularly, the energy grid is becoming increasingly provided for by renewables that create very little pollution.
@Euphemistic: Yeah usually after the 20k-60k mark the EV starts to pollute less in terms of overall emissions.
The only issue I have with recycling is when you factor in cost, even though materials are 100% recyclable, they usually aren't (yet) - like how we used to ship our recyclables to China and when they stopped accepting, we started shipping to Indonesia and when they stopped accepting, we started to store our recyclables in massive warehouses. REDcycle and others closed shop.
China's been on the EV path for longer than most countries and they massive car graveyards where materials are 100% recyclable but in reality they just sit there.
The only issue I have with recycling is when you factor in cost, even though materials are 100% recyclable, they usually aren't
I think we can expect this to be changed by legislation in Australia and Europe in the near future. There are already proposals to enforce recycling of solar panels etc.
@klaw81: Yeah but it still needs to be economically feasible - Government can subsidize but that's just passing costs onto the younger/next generation.
If you are not digging for coal, you are still digging for something, which itself is an energy-intensive and "polluting" activity.
Digging for coal and oil are the 2nd and 3rd largest mining activities in the world. Extracting and purifying these 2 commodities use a vast amount of energy. Transporting fossil fuels accounts for over 40% of all shipping worldwide. The sheer scale of this operation cannot be overstated, especially when you consider that almost every gram of fossil fuels will disappear in a puff of smoke, creating air and water pollution, and is 0% recyclable.
In comparison, the level of mining required to create batteries and electric motors for EVs is absolutely miniscule. And the materials required for these items are ~97% recyclable and can be re-used a near-infinite number of times.
That this is even being highlighted as a potential negative is deeply dishonest.
That this is even being highlighted as a potential negative is deeply dishonest.
What is 'deeply dishonest' about saying this ?
If you are not digging for coal, you are still digging for something, which itself is an energy-intensive and "polluting" activity.
There's no dishonesty, and it can't be deep, because it wasn't dishonest to begin with.
I wasn't even bad-mouthing EVs to begin with,…because I admire the engineering behind it.
I just don't like the loss of privacy, anonymity, dependence of apps, screens,…etc…. and also for Australia, there are still some current risks for driving long distance, etc.
What is 'deeply dishonest' about saying this?
This was directed at the oft-repeated claims about the scale of mining activities required for EV batteries, and the environmental impact of these activities.
It's obviously true that mining is required to build EVs, and that minerals need to be processed, refined etc before manufacturing, and that these processes require energy. That claim is not dishonest in itself. However, the scale of mining associated with EV manufacturing is vastly overstated, and it absolutely pales in comparison with enormity of extraction, refining and transport supply chain for oil that is the lifeblood of every ICE.
It is fundamentally dishonest to express concern about the environmental impact of EVs, without considering the much larger environmental impact of the oil industry that EVs are replacing. Such concerns are crocodile tears at best, when the end result is such a large and significant improvement.
In fairness to you, you didn't make any false claims yourself; you only alluded to those claims. I have addressed them many times, pointing out how wrong they are, and it's a little frustrating to see such falsehoods persisting.
In fairness to you, you didn't make any false claims yourself; you only alluded to those claims.
Geez,…upon receiving your judgement of 'fairness' towards me, even I don't know what claims I only alluded to, in spite of having made no false claims myself.
I mean, even humans digging and unsettling the environment, changes the environment, but I guess humans have been changing, polluting and 'disturbing' their environment since Adam & Eve.
That's a moot point, as it's a claim that cannot be proven.
The thing about oil and all of the direct by-products of oil, is that it's in so many facets of our lives.
Bitumen on the road, comes from oil.
The plastics inside a car (steering wheel, dashboards, etc. etc.), comes from oil.
Oil is powering all of the industries needed to produce the steel for the car, the bridges, road barriers, traffic lights, street lights. Other industries are mining for silica for the glass needed for windows, windscreens, etc.
Decoupling from oil is going to take a long time, as well as lowering the intensity of the energy required in those industries.
Energy still needs to be harnessed from from somewhere.
I'm not promoting oil either. This is the as-is, post-industrial revolution.
Another thing is that OPEC are a powerful cartel, ie. their "power" comes from the resources they hold and how this sways the geo-politics in the world.
So, for countries XYZ that don't want to be beholden to demands of such blocs of 'resistance' for any ideological or political setbacks at the UN, Security Council, etc… those XYZ countries would want to weaken the demand for oil, and over time, wish that these OPEC countries become less 'powerful'.
One could say XYZ would love to lobby and create propaganda, where their 'enemy' country becomes weaker, and maybe promoting anti-oil solutions is in that game-plan.
Maybe the OPEC countries also know their oil will run out, so they are pivoting and trying to beat this, by investing in different forms of energy technologies, and they themselves want EVs to be popular, because these OPEC countries have already invested EV shares or EV technologies, and they want their investments to pay dividends.
I don't know.
I'm just openly surmising.
I just know that energy is transferred from state to state, and nothing is ever "non-polluting", because there will be disagreements of what pollution is and the levels of pollution tolerated, eg. would polluting waterways from EV battery production be causing less pollution than driving ICE cars ?
Everything we need is coming from this Earth, via a hole in the ground or chopping down what's above the ground.
It all requires energy.
Replacing the 'type' of energy for a car, may not resolve the limitless appetite for energy, because humans are basing their entire existence on electricity more and more (eg. data-centres, Internet redundancies, EVs, etc.)
I mean, look at all the smug commenters who use chopped trees to wipe their exit-hole and then talk about ICE cars, EVs, the environment.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
What do you exactly save?
Tough one.
People will make all kinds of excuses to buy something they like. It is like DJT media worth billions in market cap when it only have $3m pa of revenue.
People will make all kinds of excuses to buy something they like
Yep. I personally know a lot of Tesla owners who say it's for the "environment aspect" but then don't do anything else environmentally friendly in their lives.
Lol you just described my family members will drive to the cafe that's a 5 minute walk away, meanwhile going on about 'the environment'.
buying them brand new and losing $20,000-$25,000 after 3 years of ownership
Most new cars in the $60-80k range have a similar drop after 3 years of ownership. So while it looks crazy, cars are a depreciating asset.
What do you exactly save?
Tesla is fuel costs if you can charge at home cheaply and servicing costs.
Are you just making one of the greatest scammers Elon rich or you are actually saving money?
If the product is good enough for you to part $60k plus on and you're happy with, is he really a scammer?
All new cars lose value… You save a bit on convenience with being able to charge at home and Tesla does offer a seamless experience with their charging but there is a lot of downsides since they're cost cutting - no indicator stalks, no proper gear selector, no ultrasonic sensors, and people complain of them being cheap. In terms of energy efficient EVs, they're the top contender.
Ideally, you should get the long range version which comes with the NCM battery versus the standard range LFP battery.
NCM batteries the ones that catch fire rather than the very stable LFP batteries
yeah, thanks for the extra info. I got distracted with other things when I drafted that. Same size, but more energy dense and less charge cycles with NCM.
NCM supposedly only charge to 80% regularly to avoid degradation, but LFP battery ok to charge to 100% - so the less charge cycles is negated. Unless you are regularly doing long trips and need the full 100% charge of the NCM battery, the LFP battery is a better choice for a daily driver.
Real talk - neither of them catch fire, statistically. EV fires are mostly a meme and are extremely rare, regardless of chemistry.
But yes, LFP batteries are supposed to be even less prone to fire.
Generally speaking, the plastic housing for a LFP prismatic cell is more flammable than the cell itself.
Agree it was a cost decision, but the Tesla argument is LESS parts = higher reliability.
That statement is correct and relates to all EVs.
Drivers of the new model 3, say it takes a very short time for the brain to adapt, and don't miss the stalk whatsoever. Some even prefer due to the AUTO cancelation built into the software.
Personally I would prefer a stalk, and don't recall having any reliability issues with stalks.
I don't understand why people become so obsessed with these questions - you can literally find extended discussions on every single Tesla-related thread here addressing all of your questions.
To summarise:
Looking at current prices of used tesla's and brand new tesla's quiet a huge drop in price from new to old. I know by owning an EV you save on fuel….but buying them brand new and losing $20,000-$25,000 after 3 years of ownership makes little sense or does it? So my question is.
This sort of price drop is not remarkable for a car that is around the price of a Tesla. Have a look at any other car which is priced around the $60-70,000 mark, and you will find that them being $45-50,000 after 3-4 years is not uncommon.
Yes, depreciation on a Tesla is high, but you would have been paying an early adopter tax over the past few years, and increased competition (e.g. from BYD and others) have forced prices down.
High depreciation is not necessarily a bad thing - if you were after a Tesla, you could get a 2021-ish Model 3 for < $40,000 which represents fantastic value.
Also other benefits which people may value aside from purely financial - e.g. convenience of not having to go to petrol stations, being a very smooth and quiet car to drive…etc.
What do you exactly save?
Depends on your own personal situation, including how much you pay for electricity and how much you drive.
If you can take advantage of solar where you practically have zero feed-in tariffs these days, then it could be a huge savings. I used to pay around $90 per week for fuel (so around $5,000 per year).
I now charge my EV for free by using solar, so that is already a $5k savings per year.
Are you just making one of the greatest scammers Elon rich or you are actually saving money?
Who cares about Elon Musk - you should buy the product that works best for you. If his antics bother you that much, then it's not like there is a shortage of other EV brands to consider.
What car did you use to have and how many kms did you drive/year in order to rack up a $5k/year fuel bill? I drive 10,000km/year and it only costs me $860/year in petrol with premium 95. I'd have to drive 60,000km/year in my Haval H6 Ultra hybrid to rack up a $5k fuel bill annually lol? My car is $19k cheaper than a Tesla and it'll save me $2k/year if I leave the difference in my mortgage offset account which gives me free fuel for life.
What a dumb ass post. This is just "why do people buy new cars?" With some Tesla rage bait. Go outside, touch grass.
You're just frustrated that he sniffed your rage bait post buddy. At least gitgud if you really want to be a hater for example by pointing out he's recent $20 billion net worth surge and many more to come after lobbying Trump with $125 million.
Yeah this is a silly rage bait post going off your comment history. What’s really funny though is just how mad you’d genuinely be Trump won and that Elon has more success in the poops he takes than you’ll have in your entire life. I’m happy knowing how upset you’re going to be for the next 4 to 20 years. No need to reply. You’ve already lost.
You are part of a larger group of sheeple?
sheepla
You become another minion to Elon!
you can start a youtube channel and start praising tesla with clickbait thumbnails
The depreciation part is expected. It is the RRP falling every couple of months that isn’t usual compared to other brands.
Thinly veiled Tesla hate post. Nobody’s forcing you to buy a new car, or a new Tesla mate. Just buy what you want.
People say Tesla owners are insufferable. It’s actually the reverse - people who hate on Elon, hate Tesla, hate on EVs find any excuse to tell you their point of view.
PS cars are a depreciating asset. And in same price bracket the drops are similar.
I don't hate EV.
I actually like the idea, no fuel to pay for ever again.
No fuel is a bonus, the biggest benefit is the limited maintenance required. As someone with real bad luck with second hand petrol cars, the lack of car related stress has been the greatest benefit by far. Novated lease optimizes the fiscal benefits. But its a luxury, don't kid yourself any other way.
Dont give Elon Musk your money. They buy batteries from BYD, i would rather buy that - it is cheaper.
They buy batteries from different companies depending on region
I've driven Teslas, Polestars and BYD Attos, the BYD was by far the worst driving experience.
What do you think of Polestars ?
buying them brand new and losing $20,000-$25,000 after 3 years
Pretty sure buying a brand new Tesla today, you won't be losing that much in 3 years.
maybe not today, maybe. but in the past they have due to RRP dropping significantly for new buyers.
That is why I said today. Other cars in similar price brackets lose similar amounts of money over three years
yep, they don't seem unusually bad in normal times without price drops.
Nothing.
I would say that Tesla not supporting the upcoming V2H and V2G standards in Australia is a big negative if you want to use your car as a giant battery to power your house with solar.
You can always come up with a justification to buy a Tesla, BYD, MG……just depends if it is based upon your head or your heart.
I always find it baffling that people fret about depreciation, resale value etc on cars. These things lose value, and lots of it. Make your peace with that, assume whatever you buy will be worth $0 by the time you get rid of it, and just buy one you enjoy driving rather than one that you think might end up with better resale value.
You should see people talking about installing solar. If you don't get payback within 5 years it is like you are lighting your money on fire for some people
many people lease vehicles with the intention to resell it at the end of the lease and as such depreciation rates for various vehicles are critically important. But yeah apart from that all vehicles depreciate and if you plan on selling rather than driving it till dead you should include that for any car in your calculations if cost is an important factor
Easily identified as a cuck
I think you meant "simp"…
Tell Me Some Positives of Buying a New Tesla
They've improved the fire detectors.
They've improved the fire detectors.
Again with this shit?
So, just for the record, jv, just how many "Tesla" vehicle fires were there, "in Australia", in the last 220+ years?
Your comments are literally the reason the government needs to look into implementing shit like the Misinformation and Disinformation bill to parliament.
off-topic…
Oh, it’s very on topic. In fact, it couldn’t be any more on topic.
Talking about Tesla vehicles, in a Tesla thread and you once again making references to “Tesla fires”… in a Tesla thread about Tesla vehicles.
So, for everyone playing at home, please, jv, cite your source on how many “Tesla fires”there has been in “Australia” from the past 220+ years.
Or, better still, to make it more “on topic”, can you point to an article anywhere that states that Tesla has improved the “fire detectors” in their vehicles??
can you point to an article anywhere that states that Tesla has improved the “fire detectors” in their vehicles??
My neighbour told me. They bought one recently.
@jv: That evidence is anecdotal and not from a reliable source…
Again, please point to a “reputable source” that Tesla “improved” their “fire detectors”… maybe you have the press release from Tesla? An Elon tweet, perhaps? Maybe a YouTube blog video from an EV review site?
@jv: Then it's basically hearsay. I cant verify your neighbour nor can I verify their source and it was passed down from them to your neighbour without any vetting of this information before it was passed onto you… Or what most like to call "unsubstantiated bullshit".
So, I'll ask again, please cite a reputable source that Tesla improved their fire detectors in their vehicles that I can cross reference and verify. Or, I would even accept findings on the decrease in fires and fire related deaths in Tesla vehicles in Australia over time. If you can show me that there has been a marked decrease in these fires and deaths with the introduction of these "improved fire detectors", I will also accept that as evidence.
@pegaxs: “Tesla fires”
After careful consideration and investigation, Willowbank Raceway has decided that we can no longer allow road-registered Fully Electric Vehicles to race or test at Willowbank Raceway
https://www.thedrive.com/news/dragstrip-bans-evs-citing-fire…
@Loot N Plunder: Ok, and to that I ask… How many "Tesla fires" has there been at "Willowbank Raceway" in the past 220+ years? Got a link to the numbers? Any news articles about these "Tesla fires" at Willowbank?
Hell, I will accept how many Tesla fires there have been, Australia wide, at ANY race track in Australia. Just cite me that source and maybe an article or two…
Here is my example of a bunch of ICE cars on fire at a "raceway"… Sparked by a hot ICE vehicle. that torched around 20 other vehicles that the firefighters couldn't put out.. Maybe Willowbank needs to look at banning ICE vehicles as well?
Here is a link to an ICE race car "exploding" on the strip and putting a guy in hospital. Maybe Willowbank needs to look at banning ICE vehicles as well?
Here is another ICE race car catching fire at Phillip Island raceway… Maybe Willowbank needs to look at banning ICE vehicles as well?
The list of links I can provide for "fires" resulting from ICE cars at any racecourse in Australia just keeps going… but weirdly enough though, I cant find any "Tesla fires" at any race tracks in Australia. You seem to be on top of it, post me a link, I would love it for my archive…
@pegaxs: I used to spend a lot of time at Willowbank Raceway - they would see some kind of car fire at every second meet. Usually just some leaking oil or petrol that was quickly extinguished - the team was very prepared for these situations. I have seen 2 bad crashes on their drag strip which included fires that substantially damaged the cars involved.
I suspect Willowbank simply isn't prepared to upgrade their safety equipment and training to accommodate EVs, and found it easier to simply ban them. Or perhaps their insurance company wanted to jack up their premiums based on their own assessment of risk.
Either way, there are plenty of other drag strips in Australia that have no issues with EVs. Sooner or later, Willowbank will have to upgrade their gear because EV racing isn't going away.
@klaw81: Failure to adapt coupled with ignorance and misinformation. It just sounds like a bunch of old anti-EV boomers trying to protect "loud noise go vroom!" rather than looking at the safety aspect of it.
This ban has more to do with their lack of knowledge on EV's than it does on promoting safety. EV's at race tracks would probably be safer than ICE vehicles based on when they crash, there isnt flammable liquid sprayed about and you dont need to keep spare fuel in drums in the pits and that EV fires take much longer to get to a critical point that most times it allows more time to escape a vehicle…
I do agree with them on one point is that battery fires can be particularly nasty and not easy to fight… but so can a fuel fire when 2 or 3 cars are on fire and there is liquid fuel spreading around the pit or concourse areas…
This is just Willowbank pandering to the "race car need make loud noise" knuckle dragging bogans and their inability to embrace change, it's more of an "appeal to tradition" than it is a "safety measure."
@pegaxs: I am just the messenger
I think it has more to do with not being able to put a battery fire out and not batteries being more dangerous
I am just the messenger
Then your message was flawed. It's off topic and irrelevant. You cant use a "sound bite" from a single racetrack in Qld. banning EV's as a basis for proving "Tesla fires" exist when they have had none. This isnt "proof" of anything and it's just their "opinion". Again, it sounds more like the Chicken Little screaming "the sky is falling!!" than it does based on "facts". It sounds like it has more to do with "protecting tradition" dressed up as "safety concerns".
So, because you are the "messenger", back up your source… How many fires have there been at Willowbank that were a direct result of racing a Tesla?
I think it has more to do with not being able to put a battery fire out and not batteries being more dangerous
Something I mentioned in my reply above. But again, thousands of litres of highly flammable liquid fuel in cars and containers vs no liquid fuel and battery fully contained within the vehicle. I think "safety concerns" is a piss poor excuse when you really consider it. They would have no more ability to put out 2 or 3 cars on fire with a few 44 gallon drums of fuel close by…
What EV's dont do…. is this So, again, I will ask… Why is Willowbank not banning ICE vehicles? This seem FAR more dangerous than an EV fire (You can literally see a 10kg~ish cylinder head on the left of the photo that has come flying off…) You know what does "explode"? Nitro fuel.
@pegaxs: I don't think you understand about me only being the messenger
And you clearly didn't read the article that mentions other race tracks also banning electric cars and it also mentioned that there are racetracks that haven't banned electric cars
If you have a problem with that racetrack take it up with them not some random passing on a news article
Also i cant see why couldn't you just get around it by installing a small generator in the boot wouldn't that be called a hybrid?
@Loot N Plunder: You are not "the messenger", you are an "interjector", these are different. You tried to justify what jv was saying by interjecting some non-sense unrelated article about some random raceway in Qld banning EV's for an unrelated reason to what we are talking about.
You went for a "got-cha/well akshully" and it didn't work. Your link is as helpful a link to what we are talking about as what jv's link was, that stated; 1 in every 6.3 Tesla Model S cars have caught on fire and that the US road toll each year is "209" deaths.
They are not banning these EV's based on "actual incidents, facts or studies", just on "what-ifism" and "appeal to tradition". It's a ban on EV's because they are EV's, not because of the risk. If it was a ban on "risk", there are WAY more risks involved in ICE drag racing… (namely 1000's of litres of fuel required to run these events.)
And you clearly didn't read the article that mentions other race tracks also banning electric cars
I did, and it mentioned two other tracks… OVERSEAS… ON OPPOSITE SIDES OF THE PLANET. USA and Wales. Irrelevant to "Australia" and "fire detectors" fitted to Teslas. The article doesn't even clarify ANY events that involved a "street legal EV" and "catching fire while racing" at either of these tracks. I am almost certain that this has more to do with a guy in a stock $80k Tesla smoking Gary "Gazza" Smith in his $200,000 souped up shitbox '79 Torana while not making a sound.
If you have a problem with that racetrack take it up with them
I dont have a problem with them. My "opinion" of them is that the raceway committee are a bunch of ill-informed (fropanity) (fropanity) anti-ev (fropanity) heads. I dont race there, so I DGAF what they do with their "raceway" (there are other options EV owners can use). I just think that their logic for doing what they did, was flawed.
And the irony here is they allow "hybrids"… which have both a LiIon battery AND liquid fuels, so they cant be that worried about "battery fires"… Not with all that nitromethane stored in the cars and pit area and ICE vehicles spitting flames out the exhausts.
@pegaxs: Ok hows this
"Unfortunately recovery operations for EVs take a long time due to risk of fire to the batteries,"
https://www.9news.com.au/national/chaos-as-tesla-mounts-anot…
Ohh No the hysteria over battery fires something that doesn't happen. Maybe you should inform everyone about this myth/misinformation starting with the news outlets
Cant wait to see you in the news
@Loot N Plunder: Ok… Let's work on this one…
Was the Tesla on fire?
Did it even catch fire?
Was there fire involved at all?
Was the fire determined to be at the fault of the Tesla or any part of the Tesla's battery system?
Did this fire, if caused by the Tesla, spread to any surrounding vehicles?
How did they determine that the Tesla battery was the risk here but not the 40~60 litres of "liquid" fuel the Holden may have had?
If the roles were reversed and the Holden had mounted the Tesla and was leaking fuel and oil, would it have been treated in the same "increased safety risk" fashion, or would safety crews just have said "lol! it's just oil and petrol, stooooooge!"
How about this fire. You think the fire crews went in and said "(fropanity) it, dont stress, it's just diesel"?
Or how about this fire. Not dangerous?
This one isnt dangerous either…
Yep, these ICE vehicle crashes dont need any extra precautions. Petrol/diesel is WAY safer.
Ohh No the hysteria over battery fires something that doesn't happen.
And then you literally post a link to a car crash where there was NO fire and you have yet to link to a single car fire in Australia that was the direct result of a Tesla vehicle battery catching fire…
Want me to keep posting links to petrol and diesel vehicle fires?
Maybe you should inform everyone about this myth/misinformation starting with the news outlets
You do realise how modern media works, yeah? They pump "stories" out that are clickbait and play on human stupidity and biases. They print what "sells" not what is "correct". They print whatever it takes to get eyeballs on pages full of advertising. They want your eyeballs and your outrage. Outrage and disinformation sells because of weak minded gullible idiots who buy into it. It isnt "news" any more, it's opinion pieces dressed up as "information". It's whatever the Rupert Murdochs of the world want it to be.
Stop getting your bullshit information from Rupert and start looking at more neutral sources or direct sources. Stop buying into the media disinformation juggernauts who are manipulating you for advertising revenue, start reading university papers, independent reviews and peer reviewed papers. Stop getting your information from anti-EV shills like Cadogan and those (fropanity) wits from Drive, etc who are paid off by car manufactures to shit-can EV's. Hell, just apply logic… if it sounds like bullshit… chances are…
@pegaxs: tick
tick
tick
BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
hook line and sinker
LMFAO you took all the bait
Where is this information coming from that everyone says batteries are dangerous
Not me
I post news links And what do you know they are all sprouting Danger Danger Will Robinson
Like i said you are more than welcome to correct them all, start with the police then the media then to the masses you must go
Looking forward to your endeavor, don't forget to report back ill be waiting on your progress
Maybe you should inform everyone about this myth/misinformation starting with the news outlets
Everyone already knows that the conservative media has been making clickbait articles about EVs for years now. The article you linked is a prime example of the kind of misinformation that's common:
The "police warning" was simply to warn people to navigate around the scene of a traffic incident, not because there was a fire. There is always a risk of fire when a vehicle is elevated in this way - it's not exclusive to BEVs.
The "chaos" the headline refers to is also associated with the road being closed by the traffic incident, and needing to safely separate and tow away the cars involved.
The end of the article suggests a tenuous link between BEV batteries and e-bike / e-scooter fires, which is highly misleading. The cause of fires in small consumer devices is poorly protected cells and cheap, under-rated charging circuits, neither of which are factors in BEVs.
So well done on falling for the clickbait and highlighting the exact problem. This stuff needs to be called out, because it's harmful and stupid, and it shows just have low our media standards have fallen.
@klaw81: The article you linked is a prime example of the kind of misinformation that's common:
And whose fault is that?
Why haven't they been called out?
I was just showing what is being fed to the people but its my fault so i am to blame
First thing in the morning i will be down to Willowbank Raceway to sort this sh!t out whose with me
@Loot N Plunder: Yeah, see, now you’re just acting childish. This is usually the sign that someone is in over their head and resorts to saying childlike garbage and trying to back out with “I was just trolling… you ate the bait… lol” because you actually have no defence for your stance.
Instead of mouthing off and doubling down on your ignorance, sometimes it pays to listen when adults are talking.
Sticking with a “belief” based on some inane inability to accept new information, no matter how obviously right the new information is, is usually the sign of someone with a fairly low intellect, think “cookers” for example.
And whose fault is that?
Yours for not fact checking and just gobbling up Murdochs lies like chocolate cake.
Why haven't they been called out?
They have, numerous times in this thread alone. But I am just one person against a huge multi billion dollar media empire.
I was just showing what is being fed to the people
No, what you are doing is “backpedaling” to try and save face. You posted it as a “gotcha!” that has backfired on you spectacularly and now you’re trying to PR spin your way out of it by claiming you were showing us an “example” of bad media… yeah, nah.
but its my fault so i am to blame
Absolutely, because you didn’t fact check it. You just accepted it because it backs up the confirmation bias you were seeking. You “are” a part of the problem, not part of the solution.
@pegaxs: Your so triggered that you have to resort to this garbage response
I don't see you making waves in the media or anywhere to correct any of them
So have you been in contact with Willowbank Raceway ? I doubt it.
Excuses excuses. How about you back your belief with actions against this misinformation or Is it all to hard for you.
tick
tick
tick
https://people.com/4-killed-after-tesla-crash-sparks-fire-in…
Both phone and account are optional, although warranty registration might be tricky without an account.
The standard key is a card. An account is necessary for accessing Supercharger and for cloud features.