Hacker News

points by dotancohen 1 day ago | 0 comments

So the EV still beats the ICE vehicle threefold (2 units vs 6 units), it just _feels_ worse (half as efficient as without a trailer) so you declare it _is_ worse.

With that type of reasoning, let me guess, the competitor you work for is General Motors?

[–] nextaccountic 1 day ago

EV beats ICE in isolation but without just as much charging stations as petrol stations the advantage is theoretical. Also you need faster charging too (I heard BYD latest tech can do this, can Tesla just license?)

A federal law could easily fix this though, but you would need an administration that cares about climate change or at least about EV

[–] kraig911 1 day ago

I think the whole thing about climate is kind of disingenuous but that's another topic. Mining the minerals for EV's is utter strip mining and terrible. China is selling it's future away. Look at the story of Mountain Pass Mine in California and do 20-50x that in China at less efficiency.

[–] hansvm 1 day ago

Efficiency was brought up to explain the real problem, range. I didn't fill up between Reno and SF in my F350 towing a massive trailer and still had plenty of fuel to spare. A cybertruck would've barely made it past Sacramento with a much lighter load and would've taken much longer to fill up.

[–] mikeryan 1 day ago

Actually from Tahoe to Sac is probably one of the better stretches to pull that off, it’s all downhill.

That doesn’t change the gist of your comment however - which is correct. (I’m a happy Bay Area Rivian owner who’s made that trip often)

[–] hansvm 1 day ago

Tahoe to Sac for sure isn't bad. The uphill section before that adds 2-3 gallons by itself when I'm towing though (compared to a flat route the same distance and speeds). IIRC net fuel economy winds up being similar to a flat stretch (even the downhill stretch burns a lot of energy in your brakes and has enough flat and uphill segments -- slightly ameliorated with regenerative braking, but I don't think it moves the needle enough).

How is your Rivian by the way? Is it in any way comparable to a cybertruck or is it just far and away better?

[–] kraig911 1 day ago

IMO it is worse. And I thought I said where i worked in my original comment. You just can't get the range to work on EV's and towing (my personal opinion) large pickups have big gas tanks and it's quick and easy to fill up. It's all about ergonomics. Yes an EV with a full battery vs a ICE with a full tank EV will always be more 'efficient' but day to day it doesn't add up.

Ergonomics and ease of use are why people get cars. Ergnomics right now to me are reason why EV's in America don't sell well. Infrastructure. If every apartment complex and shopping mall had chargers or we had a novel way to charge a battery like an ICE engine then yeah it will take off. Culturally though I think we just love gas stations, emissions and pollusion.

[–] rootusrootus 1 day ago

> Ergonomics and ease of use are why people get cars.

It's why I got my EVs, for certain. It would be hard to convince me to go back to the inconvenience of a gas vehicle at this point. I'm hooked.

[–] cwel 1 day ago

They put the competitor they work for in their comment, it was not edited, it was there when you posted this reply.

Excellent sleuthing, either way.

[–] dotancohen 1 day ago

Yes, it was a dig at GM.

[–] mahboi 1 day ago

The topic is a now-discontinued EV truck, or two of them if you're counting the Lightning, and a real measured range drop when towing. And GM makes EV trucks too. So can we please make this honest and not a fanboy fight?