Instead of threatening to derail the EV transition, lack of resale value might be evidence of the EV transition, particularly when coupled with quickly growing overall sales of EVs globally.
But, like the article says, new EVs are selling for about twice as much as a 2-year-old used vehicle of the same make and model. That's a very very far cry from "same or lower price".
EV are progressing fast so they lose value quick, like a laptop of the late 90s. Not quite as bad, but in those times, your computer was worth next to nothing in less than a year.
ICE are stagnant. They retain their value because they're not improving at all.
Are they really, though?
A 2021 Model 3, Mach-e, Polestar 2, Model Y, F-150 Lightning, e-Tron, or ID.4 (to name just a few) are not too different from the ones sold today. Aside from software updates and minor refinements (mostly DFM), I don't see much progress. That's not a problem, since they're all competent vehicles for single-car households.
Several 2025/26 models have even been de-contented compared to their 2021 selves.
Trying to steel-man your argument a little, the only models I can think of with significant progress are the bZ4X/Solterra (widely panned due to initially uncompetitive specs and pricing), Leaf (which has been getting small, incremental improvements for more than a decade) and the now-discontinued Bolt (which was the cheapest road-tripable EV).
I think you really have to be looking compliance cars that entered the market before the Model 3 and/or models that were acknowledged as uncompetitive when new to find significant/fast progress.
No, the real problem is that the true market-clearing price for most of these vehicles was $7500-$10000 less than MSRP (which was set knowing the regulatory environment), combined with the false calculation of depreciation based on MSRP instead of market price.
This seems like it. If you paid $29,000 for something with a $36,500 MSRP because of a $7500 credit and a few years later it's worth $22,000, the amount of depreciation you're calculating by starting from MSRP and the amount that the buyer actually experienced are off by more than a factor of two.
Meanwhile the credits caused more new sales than there would have been otherwise, which means more cars of that model available in the used market, and supply and demand is still a thing.
It's not evidence that people don't want them, it's evidence that if you subsidize something the price comes down.
Of course both can be true as well.
I have anecdotes of friends/family/coworkers who bought cars (or second cars for the household) to avoid public transport.
And 2nd hand prices for cars gere (Australia) went batshit insane for a while during and as we chose to pretend that COVID was over - and those artificially inflated prices are mostly over now.
In late 2020 and early 2021, Used car prices plummeted due to so many people trading in 2nd vehicles. I remember tire kicking a 2008 vehicle that was 2000$ then...
Whiplash on used cars started later in 2021, as people were starting to go back out more and in some cases beginning to RTO.
The combination of rising new car prices and rising interest rates in 2022 only further hurt the market. On top of that the newer cars are in many cases less reliable so people are holding on longer.
Fwiw I just double checked and For reference that same 2008/make/mileage is now more like 5000$...
I see from the EV my parents bought, they got for 22k euro, a car that does 240km on paper. Now a few years later, you can buy a BYD for 26k, that does 450km (ext version) on paper. That same BYD is WAY more fancy, tech gadgets etc...
But that is comparing a lower market segment where this effect is stronger.
On the higher end market, where the Tesla's used to dominate, we see less movement as those cars already came with tons of tech, and large batteries.
Thing is, i am still not buying a EV despite them being better. The same arguments we had with EV disadvantages is still present today. I rather buy a second hand gasoline engine simply because of the convenience of the default 600 a 700km range on most vehicles, the 5 minute tank job, the lack of charging in the city, the prices despite the heavier depreciation in the second hand market are still worse.
Ironically the gasoline car we bought 10 years ago, for 7.5k, still sells today for 8k in todays market (added 50k kms on the car). So even if we take a cut, the actual gasoline engine depreciation is strangely less strong. I track several gasoline cars where i had a interest in from years ago, same phenomenon.
For some reason you expect gasoline cars to drop more in pricing because now in EU 17% of new cars sales are EVs and 36% are hybrid. So more gasoline cars on second hand market? No ... because people are also buying less cars because of the economy, more work from home etc. Resulting in actually less second hand cars as people hold on to their vehicles longer, waiting out this transition periode.
Right, because the other $26k is being subsidized by the party. And much like the US found out with rare earths: once China has the market cornered, the price will rise and/or they’ll use access to their goods as a tool of war.
They’re playing the long game and western nations seem unable or unwilling to do the same.
And even if true, it doesn't follow for me that "therefor, batteries must become more expensive in general, despite the current trend".
I think you're implying lock-in and extractive profits, rather than rising cost of manufacture. It's an argument for diversity of key industries, and that batteries might become such. I agree with that. But as an argument that (in parent the comment's words) "so, battery prices will skyrocket", it seems a bit thin to me.
battery prices are expected to "Plummet" not "Skyrocket": https://cleantechnica.com/2025/10/15/plummeting-battery-pric...
Batteries are not a differentiated product. They're basically completely defined by 3 numbers: capacity (in watt-hours), power delivery (watts), and weight. Once those are optimized (which is the process going on now), the chemistry, construction, and manufacturing of batteries is basically a solved problem. Any barriers to entry are purely in the technology and manufacturing. About 200 years of industrial history shows that these are not durable barriers to entry: eventually, technology and know-how diffuses, and knowledge of how to make even very complex machines becomes a commodity. (See eg: power looms, memory chips, hard disks, agriculture, TVs, automobiles, drones.)
Durable competitive advantages usually take the form of either a.) complex consumer interface, eg. with software or CPUs b.) network effects, eg. telecommunications, payment networks, software again, utilities or c.) regulations, eg. payment again, airplane manufacturing, healthcare, and shortly software. These are industries where factors outside the company in question ensure that there will only be one or at most a small set of companies in the market.
When you have a commodity product, the only route to extractive profits is to form a cartel and lobby governments or consumers to believe the cartel is in their interests, eg. with oil or diamonds. But this is a hard sell because the cartel is not in their interests. You can generally only fool people for a decade or two before they decide they've had enough and legislate your monopoly out of existence.
People tend to overindex on the software industry when it comes to "maximizing profits" because that has been the big story of the 2010s, ignoring that Big Tech very carefully implemented every play in the "build a monopoly" playbook to get there, and that millions of indie software developers actually do not make a very good living because their products are commodities.
But the rest stands. The barriers aren't that high. How soon it is diversified, depends on how much attention the other countries and companies are paying.
Yes, we should not let one manufacturer or one country be the sole supplier. The scale is large and will only grow, and if the profit margins are large, then there is opportunity.
The past and future evidence is firmly on the side of batteries getting steadily cheaper. I'm not saying that the opposite is impossible. Just that to make that claim, there is therefor a substantial burden of proof to be met, and I don't see it at all in this thread.
Also chinese companies innovate better and have more efficient supply chains that western ones.
The push to ban chinese automakers is stupid because it punishes customers at the benefit of automakers. Crony Capitalism at its worse.
Yeah because they just steal and copy everything from Western companies and others worldwide. Why spend hundreds of millions and 10 years doing R&D when you can just hack in and steal it? It's the Chinese way.
Chinese hackers took trillions in intellectual property from about 30 multinational companies
- https://www.cbsnews.com/news/chinese-hackers-took-trillions-...
The annual cost to the U.S. economy of counterfeit goods, pirated software, and theft of trade secrets is between $225 billion and $600 billion.
China is the world’s principal infringer of intellectual property, and it uses its laws and regulations to put foreign companies at a disadvantage and its own companies at an advantage.
- https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/china-exec-summary-risk-...
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_intellectual_pr...
Salt Typhoon is an advanced persistent threat actor believed to be operated by China's Ministry of State Security (MSS) which has conducted high-profile cyber espionage campaigns, particularly against the United States.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_Typhoon
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aurora
Industrial espionage: How China sneaks out America's technology secrets
- https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64206950
etc etc etc
And the solution is to punish consumers and enrich GM's totally failed leadership and irrational shareholders by throttling competition chinese.
Here in europe cars have become so expensive compared to just 10y ago.
Some of it is because of stupid green policies, but most if because EU carmakers have been successful in reducing the competitive pressure from China by the use of tariffs on chinese firms.
Check the ownership of the different brands and you will discover from the dozens of brands in Europe, there are really only a few companies making cars. And the "mother company" then shares chassis between models, engines between models. So you can have a a Lada with a Renault engine, with a Dacia chassis. We see 3 brands, but in reality, its one brand.
* Groupe Renault's owned brands include Renault, Dacia, Alpine, and Lada.
But wait ...
* Stellantis was formed from the 2021 merger of two major auto groups: PSA Group (which included Citroën and Peugeot) and FCA (Fiat Chrysler Automobiles). Therefore, the brands Stellantis owns are now a part of Citroën's parent company, which include brands like Peugeot, Fiat, Jeep, Chrysler, Dodge, and Opel.
You see the issue very fast. If you own many brands, do you compete against each other, or do you "stabilize prices for max profit". Same issue with other brands...
Its like in the US, where if you trace back the brands, like 3 or 4 companies, own like 90% of the known US food brands. And when you have only a few companies, gentlemen's agreements about not competition too much are a thing.
Hey, why are HDD not dropping in prices for the last 10+ years. Well, there are only 3 brands left (with two that are huge). Hey, why did SSD/NVME prices suddenly skyrocket. Well, only a few brands make the stuff, and when one decided to increase prices, all of a sudden the rest also followed. Strange is it not...
We are in the age of monopolies again, and that is linked to a lot of the price issues.
They also hired a ton of european designers for their house brands. They have no need to copy anything.
Yes, the west let this happen, and it’s too late to cry about it, action needs to start happening (and I don’t mean import barriers or a trade war) if we don’t want to be dependent.
Current rates are BYD (17%), Geely (18.8%), and SAIC (35.3%).
> And much like the US found out with rare earths:
Rare earths is not rare at all. China has a cornered the market on processing those minerals for cheap. The problem is that we in the West have no appetite to actually support companies to process those "rare" earths.
And the US is really the last country to even talk about batteries, when the arrested 300+ Koreans that worked to get a US battery plant going.
> They’re playing the long game and western nations seem unable or unwilling to do the same.
Its not just a government issue, its a companies issue. You think that car companies in Europe do not get subsidies? Have you ever looked at how much subsidies they get opening new plants or renovating plants?
Reality is that a lot of car companies enjoyed their little monopolie positions in Europe. Sure, we got a lot of brands, but in reality its a illusion of competition, as most brands are owned by a few big companies.
China had a different situation, where yes, there was subsidies from the government (and a lot of misuse of those subsidies), but you had 100's of car manufactures entering the markets. I mean, we talk about BYD often but BYD was not even a car manufacturer until 2005 ... The result is a strong competition between car makers, what resulted in a lot of technological development and a push to be better then the next guy(s). Constant copy and innovation work. Work to reduces prices to be able to compete better, as remember, their competitor also go those subsidies.
We have this issue with our car industry only to thank to our own car industry. Frankly, i am happy to see the Chinese enter the EU market, for the simply fact that it pushed the EU car makers to actually start innovating again and offering more to the clients.
The issue with competition to dead was a issue in new upcoming industries, like solar. Because their both sides started with the same level vs +subsidies. The car industry is a totally different beast with deep pockets and manufacturing capabilities. So lets not act like "poor EU car makers".
This would be the killer for me. I have a private garage with plugs, and even at 120V, I can out-charge my typical driving needs. I work from home and only occasionally take trips beyond a few miles, with a few longer road trips a year.
My IONIQ 5 (USA) does 300 miles (480 km) on paper, but in practice, I've seen a fair bit less. That said, it does charge up 20->80% in under 20 minutes at a fast charger.
Was on a road trip last summer, around Norway, in VW id.Buzz. Charging time of 5min vs 20min doesn't matter. When you're on that long trip, you need time to eat, go to bathroom, walk a little so your legs/back doesn't hurt. In the whole trip there was maybe one forced trip to a shop, because we had time to burn (the only charger was too slow and needed a whole hour to charge).
OTOH have a friend with first gen Leaf and his max charging speed is pretty slow. He additionally can't charge at home and this makes the slow charging time a little off a nuisance.
However, where I live in Paris, there are three parking spots with chargers available around my apartment. Some apartment buildings have underground parking, for which I understand there's a push to set up charging infrastructure, but many buildings do not. Mine doesn't. If I had an EV I'd have to wait around for one of the three places to free up, wait for the battery to charge, then go move the car to a different spot.
Now, I don't particularly need a car, which is why I don't own one, but for my use case, an EV would be an all-around hassle to keep charged. I also mainly use vehicles to go on trips to remote places—I very rarely take highways. Hell, a few years ago I was in the mountains, and gas stations were so far apart that I was running on reserve when I got to one.
I'm not against EVs, and it's clear there are many situations where they're great. But I think we're still in a transition period with plenty of situations that aren't covered yet.
Very much a misconception; unlike in an ICE, you're not consuming energy idling in traffic, in fact your efficiency tends to go up with the lower speeds in traffic.
Also as far as Stop and go... its typically also lower speed; wind resistance is not linear based on speed, so 'crawling' is not that bad.
Im in the US and drive a hybrid rather than an EV, that said 'stop and go' is when I will often seem an MPG -increase-, so long as I gently accelerate (in severe stop and go, just letting my foot off brake and not touching gas).
That's also some of the justification for 'mild hybrids' that have an auto stop and maybe at best a 11kW/120Nm electric motor to kick things off. If you don't drive with a lead foot they can improve efficiency (but overcomplicate things compared to Toyota HSD)
I suppose main counter condition would be in low temperature conditions; AC is fairly efficient, Heating less so, and then in severe cases the batteries need to activate their own self heaters.
That is often the argument that i see but people forget a lot:
Fast charging if often 20 > 80% for 20min. If you want 80 to 100, its a lot less fast (think how your phone slows down).
While you can drive down to 5% of less, it can become a issue if you do not find a charger. When the summer vacation happened, a lot of north traffic goes south, over France ( and reverse).
What happened? People ended up waiting 15 a 25min at the chargers traffic jam in their cars. Then they charged up to 80% (because the stations had people to manage the flow), and needed to drive out (or pay more/fine).
This resulted that your range was already reduced by 20%. You ended up wasting 15 a 25 minutes stuck in your car. And with airco's on because its summer, so more battery drain. Aka, you did not really tank X km range, but X - waiting usage - 20% less limit.
Its always fun to compare a gasoline engine 5 min tank job, vs "not a issue, we need to stretch our legs", but when the reality of long trips that often coincide with vacation periodes... Yea, then the disadvantages of that statement come into play.
So the irony is that, a EV with a realistic 500km range, got hit with a 20% at chargers, then another hit from the waiting, o and you had no choice, it was fast charge or no charge.
I remember warning people to not see EVs based only on short trips or long "out of season" trips but also on those typical school vacation trips that many take. Ironic part, if you drove a hybrid, 5 min tank job for 100% fuel at the regular price.
Every EV route planner already assumes you'll only charge to 80% (and won't discharge below 10%), because that's the range where you can charge at high speeds. In practice, when compared to a combustion engine, a 2x 15m stop trip becomes a 3x 15m stop, or 2x 20m stop trip
It's not a big deal especially if your average stop is much longer than that. Or if you have a car with battery swapping, which only takes 3 minutes from 0% to 90%.
[1] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...
I think that’s only true if chargers are sitting idle. Otherwise you’re waiting longer in a queue before you can begin charging, and this delay compounds.
I'm honestly not that bothered by it. I'm very much a "type B" road tripper. I don't care if it takes me an extra hour or two to get there, as long as I'm having a good time. Heck, I might go down some random road named "Old Priest's Grade" and add an extra hour to the trip just because the descent has beautiful views.
Companies never buy used, so I think a lot of those sales are from buyers who wouldn't consider used. So those buyers are only now starting to create supply in the second hand market
The Highland revisions made the car much quieter, less rattly and boxy. The windows are two-ply for sound reduction. The suspension feels better and less rattly. The panels fit. Water doesn’t come up inside the doors now.
I don’t know if there’s any significant new EV tech in there, but they significantly upgraded the rider experience by improving their car-building.
Of course, VW, Audi, etc have been making doors that fit for a long time, so this could be a Tesla-specific thing.
Both versions are super fun to drive. Just whizzy and responsive. Fun. The new one also doesn’t suck on noisy highway cruising like the old one did.
This alone has a giant effect on the second-hand market (of Tesla, which again was the dominant brand years ago so it's also the dominant second-hand brand)
Yes, there are people traveling with Kona or Leaf but personally I would not do it.
For any given brand, the number of vehicles on the road isn't a function of the brand's popularity this quarter. Its the sum of popularities over the last decade or more. So, loss of reputation takes a long time to feed through. And people wanting to unload them won't make them less prevalent on second-hand markets, quite the opposite.
But also, the % of EVs that I see that are Teslas is slowly declining, as other brands proliferate and the EV market gets larger.
I discussed what I see, that's inherently local not global. There could be places where Tesla sales are slowing down, even if they're net growing globally.
Local is London, UK for me, btw.
I discussed Tesla's as a % of EVs total. A brand such as Tesla could still be e.g. growing sales at 5% per year, but if the EV market is growing at 10% per year, they're still becoming a smaller % of the total number of EVs on the road.
The more interesting trend to me is the proliferation of many different EV brands. Time was when Tesla was the only EV. Then there were a few challengers. Now it's all-in from traditional German brands such as BMW and VW, The Korean Hyundai-Kia group have a lot of new models, through to BYD and the other Chinese newcomers. Even Toyota and Skoda are there now.
I think that something like this Tesla "relative decline even as sales grow" is happening, and this is a natural consequence of the EV market diversifying and maturing. If you really want an EV it doesn't have to be either Tesla or Nissan Leaf any more. There are lots of options and ruling out one specific brand for whatever reason is not going to prevent that.
If you want records, I'll note that 1) The largest EV maker by worldwide volume is now BYD and 2) BYD is pushing hard into the UK market, and others. It's early days for them in the UK, more so for the other Chinese newcomers.
I'm sure you can understand local growth vs. global growth when you look at BYD: They are number 1 globally, but have negligible EV sales in the USA.
And BYD being number one globally underscores that, in a growing market, Tesla can have a record quarter and still be losing % share of the total market.
"Chinese EV giant BYD sees UK sales soar" : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3w5jl2jgqwo
I am fairly baffled when I come across positive vibes for modern cars. I'm not declaring those vibes wrong.
I'm saying I don't understand the lack of angst and resentment for
what vehicle owners have lost (full ownership - what they've
bought can no longer be assumed to be theirs. features and
operations can be [and are!] stolen by manufacturers.
whole vehicles have been effectively stolen when
a manufacturer declares a vehicle is no longer operational
[because something something violation].
other things owners have lost: safe tactile controls,
non-extortionate repair costs - which insurance companies
will pass on to every policy holder they can)
how drivers are mistreated by manufacturers (relentless surveillance,
driving data collected to exploit owners and empower other entities
[ex:insurance] to financially or otherwise mistreat them
- inc deeply personal data like mental health and other
personal trips. nothing is off the table.)
how drivers are forced to mistreat everyone around them (continually
blinding drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians.
continually robbing other drivers of critical distance visibility.
leaving inches on both sides of their parked car for passengers in
adjacent cars to exit)
how they are forced to be less-safe drivers (forcing eyes away from the
road to make routine adjustments to climate, etc - adjustments that
for generations were trivially done by touch)
This must supersede any TPM/copyright restrictions or other encumbrances.
2021 Tesla is on the Intel processor, so the software runs laggy and is missing some updates.
It would likely have the heatpump which was introduced 2020 but some markets only got it 2021 if I remember correctly.
You are also missing on cooled seats, have worse noise isolation & worse dampers, no lfp Batterie, 130km less range and so on
And that's just some low hanging fruit.
If you look just at Teslas, they go further and charge faster on smaller batteries (higher energy densities). These batteries cost less and will last far longer. And Tesla uses an older battery tech than Chinese companies use so, in fact, batteries have improved far more. And with sodium ion, there is about to be a massive improvement over the next few years.
Yes, if you look beyond progress within a specific model line. For instance, there is a marked difference between the range and towing capacity of a 2023 Chevrolet Silverado EV and the Ford Lightning. The Kia EV9 offered a substantial price advantage over existing 3-row EVs when it was introduced in 2023. I think you're right that actual pricing vs MSRP is probably the biggest factor, but real and rapid improvement in the products also contributes. I know I've put off buying an EV van because I know that better options will be coming within the next 18 months.
FYI the Bolt is back, at least for a limited run. [1]
1: https://news.gm.com/home.detail.html/Pages/news/us/en/2025/o...
the teslas are newish, with new parts and better sound suppression. they also improve marginally in efficiency every year. so the 2023 will have slightly better mechanicals than the 2021 etc.
not too different ... they are very different. much improved. go read a review comparing them.
how much different is today's durango from last year's or here lemme remind you durango hasn't been updated in 15 (count them!) FIFTEEN years. other zombie gas models are out there too.
I went from a 2020 Model 3 to a 2025 and the self driving experience is dramatically better. I’m one of those “I will never use FSD” people and I honestly love driving…but it’s so good I find myself using it constantly and just being awestruck.
The new redesign coming out next year addresses this with a huge battery size increase.
Also HW4 likely unlocks significant self-driving performance that the earlier hardware stack cannot accommodate, and will support features that are yet to be released for a longer period of time.
Which is all to say: looks to me that the progress is significant.
Assuming you care about self driving enough. That's a big premium to pay for that alone. Fine if that works for you but I can't imagine that being a reason for many.
Getting a new battery or newer design battery is probably much more of a driving factor
Cars don’t need to be better, customers only need to think so.
Just look at the smartphone market.
You forgot, "and pollutes like crazy."
The environmental calculus of driving a new car, versus driving a 40 year old diesel engine is challenging, I admit. Moreso if you are distilling your own fuel. I would bet that a gross polluter (as California calls them) from 40 years ago are probably a net loss compared to a 20 year old ICE today.
My first thought for sure. Especially because vehicles are getting demonstrably larger and heavier again in the US.
Sure if you ignore all the safety improvements made to driving over the last 40 years...
vehicle safety improvements are one of the primary motivators (for me) to drive new cars. driving is dangerous and i want the best odds when the inevitable occurs
Kind of the worst of all worlds sort of technology
EROI for biodiesel is well above 1:1 from what I can tell. Please elaborate on your sources.
> ICE are stagnant. They retain their value because they're not improving at all.
This doesn't make sense. As already pointed out, the reason computers lose value is because the same money can buy something that does the job better (faster, lighter, etc). ICE don't retain value because they're not improving; they retain value because they still do the same job X years later.
EVs, meanwhile, are losing value even though the same money as a used EV can't buy anything that actually does the job better, as pointed out earlier in the thread. So there must be something else in play (such as battery degradation lowering value of EVs quicker than engine wear & tear lowers value of ICEs).
So, while the batteries may last 800,000 km, people start to discount the replacement cost before they even hit 200,000 km.
Consumers do not have even experience yet to value used EVs properly. It is a great time to be a used EV buyer.
Likewise US and rest-of-world are different markets because of trade barriers.
Within the EV market segment, the resale value may be plummeting because new car prices are declining because of improved technology and higher volume. Someone who is replacing their EV or looking for a new one already has the required charging infrastructure, otherwise they wouldn't be looking. But this price drop affects only other EV buyers, because ICE buyers cannot take advantage of it.
This insulation lasts only as long as the price differential between them remains less than the capital costs of getting a L2 charger and associated electrical upgrades.
Why is charging at slow speed at home such an issue for you?
I'd argue one reason ICE are "stagnant" are because they're "good enough" and any potential improvements required expensive R&D and manufacturing changes, for results that purchasers won't change their buying decision for. Maybe Toyata could make an ICE for the Camry that was 5% more efficient, but few people who were about to buy someone else's equivalent car will choose a Camry instead based on such a marginal improvement.
I think phones are a good current example of this. I have felt zero need to upgrade from my iPhone 13, because the "improvements" since it was new are of zero interest or value to me. I'm quite likely to do a battery replacement on this one instead of upgrading to a new iPhone any time soon. (And the only reason I bought the iPhone13 was to get the backside lidar, I was perfectly happy with the XR I used before that.)
There's no denying that ICE Engines have been around for a long time, relative to EVs. A mature technology means that any low-hanging fruit for performance improvements was found a long time ago. Remaining gains require the expensive R&D for marginal improvements that you mention.
It's not that they're "good enough" - any consumer who can do the sums would prefer a 20% better price/performance, always. It's just that such improvements are not there to be had in ICE vehicles. There is no rush to improve them, as you said.
And therefor the performance of a new ICE vehicle, 5 year old vehicle or 10 year old vehicle is well-understood, predictable. Both in terms of what the tech was when it was built, and how it has aged. EVs are less so in both of these dimensions. e.g. I would have reasonable confidence in the durability of an EV battery for a 2025 model, but much less so for a 2015 model. They're just not the same.
In this sense, EVs depreciating faster than ICEVs is exciting, since if my current Tacoma prematurely gives up the ghost (or I buy a second car) I can add “snag an EV for cheap” to my list of available options.
How many years/miles does the average new ice cost and how much does it cost to own/operate.
I tend to buy the bottom of the market. My last cost £1100 and has lasted 3 years/9k miles so far and seems reasonable.
I didn’t buy electric because they are far more expensive. That’s seems to be at odds with the claim they deprecate more.
There are 57 electric cars under 3k for sale and 30,000 petrol ones on auto trader.
At any price the ratio is about 10:1 rather than 600:1.
Second hand EVs are more expensive than second hand petrol cars.
More and more people buy things for the purpose of reselling them. Houses are now more investments than places to actually live in. Rubbing alcohol was bought up during Covid so people could resell. Cryptocurrency is bought with the goal of selling for double a few months later and nobody really believes in the "currency" aspect of it. Pokémon cards, originally made for kids and to play in a card game, are now all scooped up by cart load by adults so they can resell them on eBay, and those buyers hope to resell later. The 2020s has people trying to sell used cars for equal or more than their new value. Strange times.
Not wanting to eat 50% of a car’s value in depreciation in 2-3 years is a sane decision.
Expecting to sell a used car for a profit without a shortage of used cars is not sane.
I bought a Toyota RAV4 in 2021 and it’s depreciated about 20-25% in 4 years. I could’ve saved a couple thousand bucks and got a Nissan Rogue instead, but that model has depreciated about 50% by now, and I’d be worse off.
Just drive it till it's no longer operational or gift it away to a family member at some point and you get full value of what you paid for without a care in the world about second hand market.
That's what I meant by stops working - stops working for you.
No longer operational meant broken and not worth repairing.
The problems with used cars are usually:
1. The previous owner abused the car
2. There is known damage which is being kept hidden from you
And, Tesla is an outlier here. Other EVs are progressing MUCH faster.
Kia and BYD are two prominent examples. They're outputting huge batteries and absolutely bonkers charging times.
But even US manufacturers have surpassed Tesla. What GM is doing is more impressive.
For those boosting BYD, etc, the finish is shiny but low quality, and is rife with safety red flags - an example being by in large you can watch YouTube and movies and sturr on the central screen while driving. (It’s scary in Asia with grab drivers watching videos while weaving in and out of traffic) - but the price is good.
Actually to edit this comment - the main (only?) reason I bought the car is because if I'm in an accident I want to try to be in safest car possible and if my sig other is driving I want them to be in the safest car I can find. I thought that paying a premium at release in model X 2020 was well worth the premium if people I love are in it.
I also bought it for the safety. Even the FSD I consider a substantial safety feature. I don’t take naps in the back seat when it’s ok - I pay attention. The joint probability of it or me noticing a drifting car or whatever is considerably better than me alone.
They aren't degrading either, though
Complex driver aid/“safety” systems, outrageously complicated “infotainment” systems that are also used to interact with system functions, sealed/un-serviceable transmissions, exhaust gas filtration and recirculating systems, these are all additional points of failure that represent a degradation on modern ICE cars.
These cars won’t be around 20 years after manufacture in the same way Toyota Camry and Corolla are.
You can go buy a 50 year old muscle car and upgrade the radio to something kind of modern. But that won't be possible with my car 50 years from now. It's too integrated.
The sales guy had clearly never considered this issue before.
This seems to happen far too often. I've come to the conclusion that salespeople pretend this is the case on purpose, since it benefits them for you to believe that you're the exception.
If it can happen to a $1500 phone or a $5k computer, I'm sure it will happen to a $20k car eventually.
Apparently a bunch of jeeps got bricked by a pop software update.
Somebody could claim driver aids and infotainment EVs are "degrading" in EVs in the exact same way - in fact they're even more integrated in EVs.
And although EVs don't have the same transmissions and exhaust gas systems, they have their own unique complexities and points of failure, like batteries and regenerative braking systems.
ICE cars are practically falling apart between service windows when compared to EV.
There's no way I'm buying an EV. I can't charge it where I live, it won't easily refuel where I'm going, and I hate infotainment centers over knobs and buttons.
If I do buy a new car - and I really don't have to - it'll be an ICE without an annoying screen in the middle console.
https://roadwarriornews.com/autoenshittification-allows-car-...
While some do need batteries sooner, some ICE cars need new engines sooner. It's a wash. Average lifespan is comparable.
(Electric would win hands down if Tesla had better manufacturing quality though.)
It's a bigger problem with a Tesla, as there is no sensibly priced repair network, and getting original parts has lead times that will lead to replacing the car.
The issue is that all those Kias got stolen and trashed by Kia Boys. :(
I had a 2011 Kia Soul that I was going to drive until it died. Someone else did the dying part for me.
not the 1.6L GDI one
The absurd warranty Kia used to have encouraged them to put out good products. I had incorrect oil put in my Soul (at an oil change place!) and Kia warranty replaced the entire engine.
Maybe, but an oil change & minor service for my Mom's off-warranty Mercedes is clsoe to $1000. You seem to be fighting yourself if you're after a long-term reliable driver and go Euro luxury.
That's a fair amount of misinformation in your post.
1) Any reliable ICE brand goes well above 200k miles with basic maintenance. There's a long history here of reliability and why so many drivers choose boring yer reliable brands like Toyota, Honda, Mazda, etc. If you choose brands that do not prioritize reliability then that's on you. (i.e. Mercedes drivers switching into Tesla)
2) Mileage (distance) is not actually the determining factor here in longevity, car age is. Average age of ICE cars is around 12 years in the USA. That's average, which means there are many cars that are much much older than that. Battery cars will be lucky if they average out 8 years as a fleet. Probability is 75%+ you're looking at a battery replacement at the 12 year mark if not sooner. Vast majority of drivers will not replace said battery making the car a throw away due to cost (no one financially competent spends $10k-$20k on a battery for a car worth less than $10k). This will absolutely drive fleet age down, resulting in a younger fleet and more disposable cars. Replacement batteries are not plentiful or cheap and there's no reason for that to change due to the industry strategy.
"Tesla still averages being able to hold 90% of original charge"
3) Lucky you. It's well known in the community first year degradation is typically 5%-10% and there after 1-2% per year till a major failure. Do you know how to measure your original charge? Have you driven the car from 100% to 0% to verify total battery capacity or you just going of the BMS hoping it knows the true capacity. BMS is regularly off by 5%+ so for all you know your true capacity is already nearing 80%. If you know Lithium battery science then you know after 80% the capacity hits a cliff rate of degradation accelerates. Few people drive their cars below 10% battery so they don't really know.
Also, the link you shared is just a collection of anecdotes. It doesn't provide evidence of a trend.
1. Yes, the range is a little less. One person got their battery replaced by a 3rd party specialist. Runs great.
2. They certainly are repairable, just take it to Tesla service or a 3rd party mechanic.
3. Even if the battery is $20k, now you essentially have a new car for only $20k.
By this logic, I get a new car every time I fill up my tank.
Even then, batteries in EVs don’t have a 100% failure rate. There are still many 15 year old Leafs driving around on the original battery, and I’m not sure the out-and-out failures (I.e. not including gradual capacity loss) are a high number either.
Modern EVs (2016-present) have even lower failure rates again (below 1% within 200k miles including those replaced due to capacity loss)
Losing 30% of 120 miles is a lot more significant to most people than losing 30% of 300 miles (which >99% won’t within the life of the car).
Someone has a 90 mile round trip commute and buys a car with a 120 mile range. Having it drop below 90 miles after a decade isn't working for them anymore, so they sell it. Works fine for someone with a 30 mile commute.
Now, how many charges does a car battery do, and how frequently it tends to need one? The same calculation from phones can indeed be translated to cars, the only mistake is translating the end results of the calculation. Maybe that helps with your father?
If you're used to buying used vehicles - that's not sufficient.
For context, all the cars I've bought in the last 20+ years have been at least 8 years old when I bought them. I can get an 8 year old Toyota/Honda and know I'm good for the next 5-7 years.[1]
Buying an 8 year old used Tesla with only 75% capacity? No way.
[1] Likely a lot longer. I'm right now driving a 22 year old vehicle that only started showing issues a year ago.
I want an electric vehicle, but I'm not willing to pay the insanely high prices they go for. I typically don't want to spend more than $10k on a vehicle and I only have once (and that one got totalled in an accident literally a month or two after I finished paying off its loan). The times I've found a used EV in that price range, it's old enough that it will need a new battery soon, instantly ~doubling the price of the vehicle for me.
I will say that my '03 Pontiac Vibe GT, at 280,000 miles, no longer has all the horses it did when it was younger. There's still a kick from 6000 to 8200 RPM, but I'm increasingly reluctant to hit that redline once a month to "keep it fresh" like I used to. The gradual compression loss and increased leak-down rate aren't that bad, but it might be 25% fewer horses, I guess. Man, I love that car and that engine. I ought to get it a new set of rings, get the cylinders bored out smooth, and give it fresh bearings. Sadly, the rust that's appearing on the body like a cancer probably makes that not worthwhile...
The good news for electrics is that those older motors will remain almost exactly as powerful as they day when they were new for decades.
Obviously, the fuel tank is still the same size it's always been, but range is not as much of a concern on a gas vehicle because gas stations are everywhere and you can fill up rapidly.
I personally hope that this becomes less of a concern as charger density improves year over year - in particular, as EVs become ubiquitous, landlords will start including L2 chargers in apartment parking complexes. Once everyone can charge in a garage overnight, range anxiety is hugely less important.
So a Toyota :)
One is 8 years old. That's old right? The other is 18 years old.
Neither have had major issues.
The few oil changes on my recently out of warranty 2021 Toyota have already cost more than the entire maintenance spend on my 2017 Bolt.
I don't spend many thousands on maintaining an ICE to begin with.
I've kept track of all car expenses since 2008 for 3 different cars. My average per year is $445. This is repairs and maintenance.
I'm not a gearhead. I know little about cars. I do whatever repairs my mechanic suggests. Things just don't break down much with reliable ICE cars.
TCO calculators are, in my experience, off by an order of magnitude. Ignore them.
> The few oil changes on my recently out of warranty 2021 Toyota
Are you doing them at the dealer? You're likely paying too much. And are you doing them on the manufacturer schedule or have you fallen prey to the "Every 3 months or 3000 miles" propaganda?
Most cars need it every 6 months. And unless your car needs some high quality oil, it's typically about $40 to get a regular mechanic to change it. So $80-100/year.
Having a car payment would automatically be more expensive than my current vehicle. More taxes, more money each month, and so on. For electric cars, I won't get the incentives here in Norway for much longer, as they are being (mostly) phased out in the next few years.
To be fair, though: I walk a lot. I have a 5-10 minute walk to work (depending on snow). Driving takes longer. The car is used a few times a month. Realistically, my car is a luxury item and I'm lucky to live in a place that makes it so.
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2013_Honda_CR-V.shtm...
I get combined mileage of 26 mpg. That's a short daily commute and a couple trips a month to a town ~70 miles away.
I haven't taken particularly stellar care of it.
Absolutely not.
This completely ignores the relatively high initial range of ICE (especially hybrid), and the poor real world state of the EV charging infrastructure, compared to petrol.
A 30% drop in range would be an extra 5 minutes at the nearest gas station, almost guaranteed to be within a couple miles.
And, that 30% is usually cheap to get back, usually just by some combination of changing the spark plugs, running a bottle of carbon removal/fuel system cleaner through, or changing the fuel injectors.
I have an electric, but I also understand why people are avoiding electric, and why 96% of people with EV also have an ICE car [1] (including me, with my newest being ICE)!
[1] https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2023/11/10/the-stat-that-say...
Source? Both of my first 2 cars got a good 38 mpg on the highway (no AC) after their 10 year mark. 38 mpg is the same as brand new.
Complete nonsense. Every 15+ year old ICE car I've known or owned was within 5% to 10% of original fuel economy, the reliable brands actually maintained their original fuel economy or surpassed it as fuel economy improves as engine wear in completes at the 20k-40k mile mark.
If your ICE car dropped by 30% then share the brand and your maintenance history.
That 8 year old Toyota you bought came with a 6 year/60k mile warranty. If you are comfortable driving that to 2.5x the initial warranty then a used Tesla should be good to 250k and 20 years.
The point is that they're not confident enough to say it won't be in that range. Put another way, why don't they just make the warranty 80% instead of 70%?
If Tesla's not confident in it, I definitely am not.
> That 8 year old Toyota you bought came with a 6 year/60k mile warranty. If you are comfortable driving that to 2.5x the initial warranty then a used Tesla should be good to 250k and 20 years.
We hope so, but we don't know, which is the point. Toyota has a track record. Tesla hasn't been around long enough to have a track record.
That aside, the real point is that ICE cars don't have any particular component that costs that much to replace. How much will a new EV battery cost me? Sure, on occasion you may have to rehaul your whole engine, but that's really rare. I've only known one Toyota owner who had to do that, and it cost (in today's dollars), about $6K.
When I buy an 8 year old car, I don't expect perfection. I know things will break - soon. I buy it with the confidence that repairs will not be too expensive, and even after all the repairs I'll still save a ton of money.
The other blocker is the private party market. So far I've never bought a car from a dealer. I always go private party. The standard procedure with that is you take the car to a trusted mechanic who will examine it and inform you of any potential problems. With electric vehicles, those mechanics can't do much. I've asked them. They can look at a few things like the brakes, but stuff related to the engine is beyond their ability. So whereas I may be comfortable spending a lot of money buying an ICE car from private party, I'm not for EVs.
The warranty is there to cover failures. If a pack has a defect it will drop under 70%. If it doesn’t then it will continue working beyond the warranty term.
You’re assuming linear decay and that Tesla has fit the warranty coverage tightly to that line. It seems more likely to me that Teslas warranty is designed to address unexpected exponential decay. This is consistent with ICE powertrain warranties.
Your ICE car will either continue working basically the same, or it will fail catastrophically. I don't have to worry about my gas tank getting smaller over time, and even if it inexplicably does, gas stations are plentiful and stops are short.
It also makes resale rough, as people are talking about. You can salvage a power train from another scrapped car of the same model (or not, a lot of that is shared nowadays). Salvaging batteries is a bigger issue because so many will be worn down and materially worse than new, and they can be re-used which keeps their value high. Very few people have a use for an engine out of a 1983 Silverado, but a lot of people have uses for lithium ion cells.
I could probably get 2 ICE power trains for a decade old car for less than the price of a new battery pack, and I'd wager they'll go farther.
This simply isn’t true. Fuel injectors decay. Catalytic converters decay. O2 sensors decay. Oil decays. Air filters decay. Spark plugs decay. Piston rings decay. All of these things affect fuel economy which directly translates to range.
Additionally the ICE related accessory pumps and sensors decay and fail and need replacement. Individually these are all cheaper than a battery pack but ICE vehicles absolutely have repair costs. They just spread those costs out across the entire complex powertrain.
My current car is 22 years old. I paid a whopping $3.5K for it, and have not spent much in repairs.
My prior car - used it till it was 17 years old. Would have used it longer but someone totaled it. I paid (in today's dollars), about $12K for it. Spent very little in repairs.
The car before that - used it till it was 16 years old. I know the person who bought it from me and he used it for another 3-4 years. I paid $5.5K for it (today's dollars). Spent very little on repairs.
So anyone who's buying a 6-8 year old EV needs the following answers:
1. How long will the battery be good for?
2. How much will replacing it cost?
3. Will the savings on gas more than compensate?
1. How long will the engine and transmission actually be good for?
2. How much will replacing it cost?
You don't actually know for any given car. You can look at analysis of failure rates over time and make some kind of guess about an average for that model, but who knows about that particular one. At least with a battery you can get some pretty detailed state of health readouts, BMS technology can tell you a good bit more about battery health than what your ICE will tell you about transmission and engine wear without tearing it down.
Fortunately, there's a ton of data out there. Some manufacturers/models are known to be reliable. Just hone in and buy those.
I've had to do repairs, but never that expensive. Never had transmission issues (keep in mind my cars are often over 10 years old - one over 20). For engine stuff, it's just a part replacement once in a while.
I posted elsewhere, but since 2008, my average car expense is about $450/year - that's repairs + oil changes.
> How much will replacing it cost?
Individual parts? Usually, not much. The whole engine? Dump the car. You got a lemon. Did you get it checked out by a trusted mechanic before buying?
> At least with a battery you can get some pretty detailed state of health readouts, BMS technology can tell you a good bit more about battery health than what your ICE will tell you about transmission and engine wear without tearing it down.
Fair point.
For pack replacements I don’t know, however it seems unlikely you’d really need to. The battery will almost certainly outlast the car. Range will be degraded but I don’t see a lot of 2005 vehicles doing cross country trips either. Even a degraded EV will be useful in town. Many people only drive a few tens of miles a day.
The cost per mile is a simple calculation. It’s a function of your local electricity prices.
This is 11-12 years in.
Granted, perhaps batteries were just crappier back then, but 17% is a scary high number for me.
Also:
"This is in line with data from Recurrent, a firm that analyzes and measures EV battery performance, which found that 13 percent of EVs older than 2015 needed battery replacements. By comparison, only 1 percent of EVs newer than 2016 needed new batteries. "
The source of some of the data. What happened with 2020 vehicles?!
https://www.recurrentauto.com/research/how-long-do-ev-batter...
What was the remaining range for those replacements?
> Granted, perhaps batteries were just crappier back then,
Tesla makes its own batteries right? When did that start?
> but 17% is a scary high number for me.
Is that high? I have no idea. How many ICE powertrains got replaced at the same time and what did it cost?
Who cares? Spending $15K on battery on a used car is a hard "No!", unless the car is under $10K.
I'm thinking of buying another car next year. $15K is my budget for an ICE car - and only if it has all the bells and whistles. Otherwise it's $12K. Spending another $15K on top of that is ridiculous.
> Is that high? I have no idea. How many ICE powertrains got replaced at the same time and what did it cost?
I'd love to know. All I have are anecdotes.
Well I do because I only need to drive at most 75 miles a day and even a car with 30 miles of range would satisfy my commute requirements.
> Spending $15K on battery on a used car is a hard "No!", unless the car is under $10K.
Can you get a better car for $25,000.00? Would you spend $15,000.00 on a $1000.00 car?
>> Who cares? Spending $15K on battery on a used car is a hard "No!", unless the car is under $10K.
> Well I do because I only need to drive at most 75 miles a day and even a car with 30 miles of range would satisfy my commute requirements.
The point is that when comparing dollar for dollar, I can likely get a used ICE for the same price that will work out better for me. If I already had an ICE car and was looking for a second car just for daily commutes, the EV may make sense. But the hassle of having to get a rental for longer trips - I don't know if it's worth it.
Also have to consider resale value - will people buy the (already used) EV from me if the battery has significantly reduced range?
(BTW, in my social circle, I don't know anyone who's bought a used EV - they all buy new ones out of fear)
> Can you get a better car for $25,000.00?
I have a list of things I want and need from a car. I can find plenty ICE for $15K that matches my requirements. $25K is the max I'll go for an EV, figuring that I may save $10K over about 8-10 years in gas based on the calculators I've used.
I can't find even one EV that matches my requirements for $25K. Each one has some problem - too little room or some other annoying problem (e.g. Ioniq 5 not having rear wipers).
I can get great ICE cars for $15K. I cannot get a single used great EV for $25K.
I average a little under 7000 miles a year of driving.
Based on charge/discharge cycles my EV battery should be good for roughly 20 years.
> Will the savings on gas more than compensate?
At $26k for a top of the line trim, my Bolt EUV cost me less than a comparable ICE car. I'll never save any money on gas, but I don't need to.
Not having any maintenance needs is nice though. Just an air filter.
For Tesla, the fastest capacity drop off is actually in the first couple of years. After that it plateaus quickly.
A brand new Model 3 battery pack, for example, is in the neighborhood of 10 or 11K installed. Or at least it was about a year ago, I don't closely track prices. Blow up an engine, and you won't be far off that in an ICE car. I know someone who just dropped $18K because they blew up both the engine and the transmission in a single shot. Oops.
But the ICE car has cheaper used options, for sure, where you can probably fix a 15 year old car by dropping in a reman or used engine for under five grand. Options for used Tesla battery packs definitely exist but are nowhere as plentiful. Yet!
Some cars I expect to do much better, due to manufacturer decisions. Ford, for example, put a pretty big battery in my Lightning, and then made the top 10kWh or so unusable. So far, this means that Lightnings with 100K miles (there aren't a huge number of them yet, but they do exist) often have 0 apparent degradation, or very low single digits.
These cars are not worth a lot after the warranty ends because the battery replacement cost exceeds the value of the car.
My 2009 Prius is still running at 231k, for reference.
Original Leafs were sold with a 24kWh capacity. Current ones have 48kWh for the same price, and 64kWh replacement batteries are available. So you can go from half of the crappiest range to 3× more range than when the car was brand new.
Old batteries with reduced capacity don't even have to be thrown out. There are projects that reuse old Leaf batteries for grid energy storage (any capacity is useful when they're sitting on the ground).
I'm betting that the current-gen mainstream cars will benefit similarly, especially that production volume is orders of magnitude higher now (lots of brands share the same platform and battery modules).
I just got a repair on my 2023 Camry that I bought used. It was covered under the 36,000 mile bumper to bumper warranty.
I have had previous cars repaired under manufacturer warranty and I always buy used.
I just take it to the nearest certified dealer for that brand of car and they take care of it.
Given the lowest acceptable threshold for capacity under some warranties (70%) and assuming linear degradation, a 16 year old EV would have 40% capacity (worst case). Given a typical range of 250 for EVs today, that would put you at ~110 miles on a charge.
Seems like it would be a fine car to me given the age. I'd also expect battery swaps to become more common as the industry ages, which will drive prices down.
I would like to think 1) that the answer is yes and 2) that the price in fact come down over time as battery tech gets cheaper, markets of scale, etc.
Maybe some startup needs to go into the battery replacement market for specific popular models of 8+ year old EVs.
The last part of OP's statement is the key. In a field that's rapidly advancing technologically, used prices are depressed because the new product is that much better than the used product.
Think back to the early smartphone days - every year phones multiplied in performance, in screen resolution, etc. In that environment a used item is less attractive because you feel like you're missing out on features/capability. This keeps used prices down. Nowadays used smartphones are more competitive because the rate of advancement (that buyers care about at least) has slowed.
For example there's another post later in this thread that points out that the Nissan Leaf has been the same price forever - except the current-gen Leaf has literally double the range of the last one. Effects like this depress used prices.
This starts reading like a hallucination after a while. How much in a Tesla had changed over past 5 years or so that makes 2020 model completely obsolete and unappealing relative to 2025 model?
The range hasn't doubled, internal volume hasn't, acceleration or braking hasn't. They may have changed implementations under the hood, but none has been clearly communicated to potential customers, so they might as well be the exact same car.
Meanwhile, 2020 Prius is that ugly one with quirky dashboard, and 2025 is that mustard yellow thing with the HUD-like dash.
So what in an EV is so "rapidly advancing technologically" so much that it perfectly rule out much more simpler explanation that people just aren't interested in EVs, in favor of more hand-wavy one that the newer EVs are just constantly enormously more appealing to the customers that older ones tend to lose the appeal faster?
I bought Hyundai, which charges 2x faster than the Tesla
Another thing to consider is the Tesla likely makes up the majority of the used EV inventory, and Tesla has become a toxic brand
Well when your government subsides every sale, and your the cheapest product on the market this is a natural outcome.
Mass strikes by workers (in china). Fires (a lot of them). Recalls (several this year). And now massive tariffs for them in a lot of markets don't paint a picture that they have a sustainable business.
We all know that subsidized growth is a great way to build a business (see ridesharing, delivery, in the US) but it doesn't make consumers happy in the end when prices go up and service quality goes down.
Tesla is still kicking and they had all the same problems at one time or another. I mean until this year we also massively subsidized every EV sale so pot calling the kettle black.
There is a big difference between domestic subsidies and export subsidies.
One is a policy to promote adoption the other is akin to economic warfare.
Nice goalpost shifting.
That isnt the government subsidizing an EV for export.
https://www.electrive.com/2025/08/22/china-discloses-subsidi...
I mean it's pretty obviously this. You don't become the worlds largest EV seller if nobody is buying.
Your Hyundai charges at 500 kW?
The amount of range you can put into the EV, per unit of time, is a better metric.
https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-charging.html
Hyundai has been on the 800V arch for a while with their E-GMP platform, Tesla's first entry is the 25th spot.
I wonder why the Tesla is not able to maintain the high charging rate? Both peak at about the same kW.
People are obsessed with EV range, and massively concerned that used EV have degraded batteries.
Most likely there are some market inefficiencies here. Good for you, buy a cheap used EV ;)
Also many EVs are still not attractive to price sensitive consumers. And the price insensitive ones, won't buy used EV.
And 2 years old EV is not twice as bad as current one
> For example there's another post later in this thread that points out that the Nissan Leaf has been the same price forever - except the current-gen Leaf has literally double the range of the last one. Effects like this depress used prices.
The previous gen is 8 years old. It took 8 years to "double" the quality, not 2
The new-vs-used price difference in equipment comes from multiple factors, of which "better features" is one part.
Consider what would happen if you gave someone this choice:
1. Keep your 10-year-old car. (No major upgrades from stock.)
2. Pay $X to trade it for its identical factory-sibling which was made the same day but was stored in a timeless stasis-bubble until today, so that it still has its original new-car smell.
I can't imagine anyone saying: "Well, there are zero new features, so I'll swap them for $0."
P.S.: The issues are even more obvious if the person is choosing between buying someone else's 10-year-old car versus paying an extra premium for the time-warp one, because there's uncertainty about the first vehicle's history and maintenance.
Everything is falling apart and that makes and old, used car... Used and old. Now queue the people who show up to say they haven't changed a tire or wind screen wiper blade on their 2012 Model S/Camry and can't perceive a single difference to when they were new from factory.
The depreciation/utility curve has always been aggressive no matter what product you're buying. Is a 2 year-old ICE car twice as bad as a new one? Is a 2 year-old TV? Clearly not, yet they are all worth that in the open market.
For EVs the depreciation curve is especially aggressive because of perceived advancements. Are the advancements worth buying new? I dunno! You tell me - but this is clearly being reflected in the market.
From a strict utilitarian standpoint, optimizing your depreciation/utility function should mean you're buying almost every single thing used. But yet lots of people don't do that. Humans are empirically not very good utilitarians!
And many comments disagree with this statement. There are few perceived advancements. Used EVs are not trusted, particularly because the used battery fear.
Following that logic it seems to come down to old batteries which aren't as good both due to technological advances and battery aging. If so, why aren't used dealers just including a battery swap in the price?
I think that is the main thing that needs to be figured out. I suspect the problem is that you need to get OEM battery replacements for older model cars and those aren't yet readily available or cheap. We are going to need aftermarket batteries to drive price competition in the market. The current car manufacturers aren't incentivised to support a secondary market when they are still focused on primary sales. Also not in the ICE market there is much more ability to scale capacity. The supply chain constraints for EVs, and batteries are much tighter, though that keeps getting better.
I have done 900 mile road trips in EVs with 150Kw charging (low by standards of newer EVs) and charging has been a complete non problem. In fact I have more problems with plugging my car in, going to the toilet and coming back finding that I've put more power into the car than I wanted.
Batteries are lasting 200k+ miles with 85-90% original capacity in so longevity is not a problem and charging is becoming a solved problems in an increasingly large portion of the world too.
Battery capacity, motor efficiency (getting more range out of the same battery), charging rate (800V architectures for example that let you charge > 150kW), battery chemistry (wider operating temp envelope, affects charging and driving efficiency depending on environment)... the list goes on.
The batteries are also getting cheaper - which is to say for the same $ you're now (generally) getting a larger battery.
> "If so, why aren't used dealers just including a battery swap in the price?"
Because the batteries are in fact not swappable from one gen to the next, because the power electronics around them are different, peak current draw is different (and that depends on the motor it's mated with!).
Like I know it's tempting and attractive to imagine EVs like regular cars with some giant-ass AA batteries installed on them, but that's not how they work! The battery is specced as a unit with the entire electrical system and drive motor options!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZHN3fjDtpc
The precharge resistor has to be reasonably matched with the devices connected to the battery though.
And of course there could be additional converting electronics for charging or whatever.
Come on, we all know the big Christmas toys would always use those fat C batteries that we never had enough of.
Ideally, these battery modules would be standardised and used across a wide range of vehicles.
There's a saying that a new car loses 50% when you leave the lot. It's presumably still true for EVs.
In fact, buying new is almost always the way to go now over lightly used (e.g., less than 5 or even 10 years old).
The 2026 is a hybrid, was the older one?
However, saving more than a dollar a mile is pretty good, in favor of used. It's when you're saving less than 25 cents a mile that used probably isn't worth it.
It's not hybrid but I don't want hybrid. That's more parts to have issues and I keep for 10 years and the hybrid batteries don't usually last that long, and I don't drive enough for the gas mileage to really make a meaningful cost difference.
New cars in no way lose half of their value when you drive them off the lot. The saying is that a new car loses ~10% of it's value when you drive it off the lot [1].
This may also be why Teslas are holding their value better than any other EV. Teslas are usually bought by U.S. consumers, who are forbidden from buying any of the cheaper global EVs by import restrictions. For fleets that buy models that are sold globally, they compete in the global market and are subject to global price declines.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs5h6R2jLUQ
[2] https://insideevs.com/reviews/769113/byd-seagull-good-video-...
[3] https://motorillustrated.com/toyota-launches-15000-bz3x-its-...
The Chinese Tesla's are also dropping in price if you live in a country that hasn't got massive tariffs on Chinese made cars which is basically everywhere in the world except North America and Europe. Tesla literally won't sell you a Model S in Australia for example since it's made in the USA and there's no way they can sell it for a reasonable price.
It's a little damning for the US car market since Tesla's seen as a success of US manufacturing. Globally they are a Chinese made car.
Because it was too expensive inRHD markets that have access to global EVs
More than 62% of Teslas are sold outside of the US.
Buying an older-generation flagship model to get better features than a current-generation midrange model of the same market price isn't very attractive when it'll have to be replaced after 2 years instead of 5 years.
The difference between 4 crank-up window regulators and 4 power window regulators is less than $100. 4 power lock actuators cost less than $20. Switches for all the above are, what, maybe $10?
The same math applies to power mirrors, auto climate control, heated seats, cruise control, and all the rest.
The production cost of a car with "power everything" vs. "manual everything" is a few hundred dollars at most. But consumers expect a much bigger discount for the inconvenience of missing those features (or, conversely, are willing to pay a much larger premium to add those features to a baseline car).
That the US doesn't have cheap cars is simply the reality of what the market demands. Cheap (new) cars don't sell (for more than what it costs to produce them).
- A new Honda Accord LX in 2003 was ~$19k
- A new Honda Accord LX in 2020 was ~$23k
In today's dollars, that's roughly $33k and $29k, respectively. These numbers are very approximate, but it means the same car model in 2020 was about 12% less expensive than the one in 2003. And the new version has a whole lot of improvements and features the old one didn't. (They cheaped out and removed the lock from the glove compartment though!)
Stepping back and thinking about the complexities that go into manufacturing a modern automobile, it's wild to me that they can cost so little compared to what you get. It's a machine that can travel 200+ thousand miles and last for decades with barely any maintenance.
Commercial-scale vehicles (semi trucks, busses) cost an order of magnitude more than personal vehicles, yet share many of the same complexities. Like, how are cars so cheap for what they are? Manufacturing volume, I guess.
That, and externalising a lot of the const on society, the environment, and third world countries.
I saw a manual transmission Nissan Versa for $17k.
How much cheaper can they get?
In my mid-20s I bought a 3-year-old Accord for $16k (using a $12k loan) and that was a big stretch for my finances at the time, despite having a good early-career tech job.
Your $17k figure is a lot of money for most folks in the US.
That doesn’t really happen as dramatically with gasoline cars. The powertrain and driving experience of a 5 year old gas car isn’t noticeably different than a current one.
If you buy a 5 year old EV you might get one that charges slow, doesn’t have a heat pump, has worse battery chemistry, battery health management, and the list goes on.
Heck, the Leaf is a perfect example because you’re stuck with chademo fast charging charging instead of CCS or NACS. I wouldn’t touch one with a 9 foot pole unless I planned to exclusively charge at home.
Also, don’t take my comment to mean that I think used EVs are a bad choice, many of them can work very well for many years and use cases as long as you are properly informed.
I avoided a used Leaf for exactly the reason you cited...2.5 years ago, and have been very happy with a last-of-its-generation 2023 Chevy Bolt (~ $22K new after tax credit).
But if you don't care about new features, e.g., really fast charging, a used Bolt (55kW max) is a great option!
I'm not sure that's totally true. The rate of change might be lower, but new ICE vehicles have higher efficiency (directly correlating to longer EV range) and are safer, more comfortable, and quieter.
I am definitely on the pro-EV side, nearly an evangelist I suppose, but ICE vehicles do improve.
ICEs have longer range, some of them are really fuel efficient, especially hybrids. But they drive relatively more poorly unless you opt for a sports car that is cramped and expensive. It isn't the worse thing in the world to drive an ICE, but it is noticeably less fun than driving an EV.
That wasn't the point being made. The point was that newer ICE cars are quieter than older models, and thus ICE vehicles have improved (at least to some degree) over the same period as EVs.
I think your second sentence answers your first. Car noise = tire noise + motor noise. EVs have very low motor noise compared to IC.
EVs also tend to have better cabin dampening on average, but that likely has to do with price-band consumer expectations, and not inherent to the method of propulsion.
But let's say ICEs were made as quiet, they would be demanded to make noise as well. Also, no one has done anything about tire noise yet, so at high speeds, EVs and ICEs are about the same.
Depends. I recently went from a manual car to a mild hybrid with an eCVT. Feels pretty different to me.
I see Tesla Highland models (<1 year old, current gen) selling at significantly larger depreciations than nearly new gas cars. This holds across other EV manufacturers.
I think if we give the used market a few years without the tax credit it’ll start to look more normal.
I think it’s a lot of things: demand is weakening because people are seeing that the attempt to force them on us faltering so we don’t have to switch, trust in reliability is lower, trust in battery durability too.
Also I think some of the myths of EVs advantages are being uncovered: the cost of batteries and tires takes a lot of the cost benefits away. EV charging stations are past 50% of gas station costs, when they used to be subsidized to be free. The complexity of battery, and the immensely complex heating and cooling systems means they aren’t as simple as many thought. There’s also environmental stuff - 2010s was peak climate change anxiety, you got a lot of social credit for an EV then, even more so because they were novel. The novelty factor and lack of cultural emphasis on environment both are degrading prices too.
1. It had fairly good charging, but only so-so range. 250 miles seems to be a big psychological barrier for a lot of people and the e-Tron is on the wrong side of that line.
2. It's a luxury car and should be expected to have luxury car depreciation as a baseline
3. It's a luxury car with luxury car maintenance costs
4. It's a luxury car that had (maybe has) some reliability issues which incur luxury car repair costs
5. Audi had very good lease deals when they were new ("trunk money" was a common phrase)
6. Fuel economy is fairly bad when compared to anything other than an EV pickup
All these combine to make it a used car that only appeals to a very specific buyer.
Car prices are tough too because how much subsidies, tariffs etc play into it.
But theoretically if you used a US made car you could limit some of that bias.
This has gotten harder over the years. Cars from 2010 rust a lot less than cars from 1985. But they have more computers, and the computers die. These computers are often hard to replace. Even good mechanics tend to recommend going to the dealer. It's rarely less than a $1500 replacement.
And EV cars? They often have an extra half-dozen critical computers beyond what's in a gas car. So I worry that well-maintained Honda and Toyota EVs will fail sooner than their conventional models.
Perhaps this worry is misplaced. We'll see.
I partly don't own an EV because even used they still cost a lot upfront and I'd rather maintain the personal incentive to take mass transit or ride my bike, but when I do eventually go electric, it'll almost certainly be preowned, assuming I can get a reasonable discount off of new.
Green tech is great if you're upper-middle class with a nice big detached home, plenty of space to install solar, a heat pump, and EV charger. But a large percentage of people just don't have a 'compatible home' even if they had the cash available to invest in such tech.
That current EVs just depreciate faster than ICE cars (in the US).
The article's chart is about used ICE vs EV prices in the US...
New EVs are definitely not 2x as good as a few years ago at half the price. Not sure if you've seen the price of new EVs in the US without subsidies.
ICE cars don't have a ~20% range depreciation after 5 years. EVs do. One would expect them to depreciate faster, until there's a solution for that.
That's not really a problem if they depreciate faster if the total operation cost is lower - which it almost certainly is for the Chinese EVs (relevant to most of the world).
Mine is 2 years old, battery still reads 99% health and I regularly exceed the EPA range estimate. I've seen ones with hundreds of thousands of (fast charging!) miles that still only have 10% degradation.
* these are rental cars, which are used much more intensely than normal used cars
* a big chunk of the (US) stats are Hertz dumping Teslas, specifically. It had to dump 30,000 of them (which is a huge amount of Teslas to just flood the market with all at once); and Tesla specifically has people trying to sell their cars due to the brand of their CEO.
The weird gaps of supply in model years because of the pandemic and prices are just nuts. The value of my 2016 SUV has gone up $4000 since last year. EVs are super volatile — my brother has netted profit from trading them. My girlfriend sold her 14 month old Subaru for $1000 under her cost - the pretax value appreciated.
Yeah, tech for this stuff is moving super fast. It's hard to know what will endure, what will be upgradeable, and what will be cast aside.
I recently bought a low mileage used EV for relatively cheap. I'm hoping I'll be able to drive the battery into the ground. Then I'm betting that, in 6-8(10?)yrs when I need a new one, there will be better battery chemistries so I can extend the car's life even further.
EVs inherently depreciate less; they're simpler, few moving parts. The motor is sealed. Batteries are lasting longer than expected.
So 'depreciate' in the title is misleading. It may be technically true in that they lose resale value, but they are definitely not less road-worthy than a similarly aged combustion vehicle.
I would absolutely buy a second hand Tesla, they're great value. Probably other EVs too.
Hopefully as EVs become less ugly-looking, the body and interior hold their value, even if the value of the battery depreciates rapidly.
If somebody made an EV that looked like a 1980s Rolls Royce Corniche- something tasteful- I would buy an EV.
So the way I see it, the EV resale value is really due to two factors. One being that, yes, the typical EV buyer is able to buy new. And the other being knee jerk reaction to used EVs that’s mostly emotion-based.
I expect the resale value become better in some years. And I fully expect end of life EVs costing more than end of life ICE cars, because the battery will definitely be more valuable than a scrap pile.
It's more likely EVs have poor resale value because the batter is the car, from a value perspective. Once the car reaches a certain age, if the battery needs to be replaced the car is essentially worthless. This is also true of ICE cars, but not to the same extent.
I was wrong. In reality the main innovation driver is the battery. The car is great and EVs are much less maintenance. I think used sales would be better if there were better aftermarket options for batteries.
Smartphones aren't getting cheaper and generally aren't getting better for the last 3-5 years. In fact, I hated replacing my 4-year-old perfectly functioning smartphone just because its battery degraded and the charging socket wore out.
The replacement was about 15% more expensive, inflation-adjusted, BTW.
I expect the market to reconcile the difference now that EVs subsidizes are ending.
Another possible alternative is that the consumer has to be educated that buying used EVs is not like buying a used cellphone, and that EV batteries do last 10+ years.
However, every time I look at renting a Tesla on Turo, each and every example has reviews with stories about not making 100 miles to the next stop on their trip. These are cars that are only 3-4 years old, not 10.
Looks like the wish is your thought’s father.
Currently the transition of EVs is a transition of cars from long lasting, repairable items into throwaway e-waste (like TVs, computers and smartphones).
And somehow this is more eco-friendly of course.
This isn't car specific, it's new technology specific.
For example a lot of new TVs are worse than old TVs, because new TVs have ads in their UIs, and increasingly new TVs don't even come with remotes anymore.
Tires, summer and winter, are also very expensive. ICE weighs a lot less and generally have much cheaper tires.
There are close to zero shops that will work on the powertrain of an EV. The only exceptions are enthusiasts like Rich Rebuilds, etc.
I've noticed in discussions about EVs a lot of people feel range anxiety if overblown, which is probably true. But the "I have nowhere to charge it at night because I don't own a house" problem is usually just ignored even though it seems like a much bigger problem to me.
They've pretty much just saturated their own market. Everyone needs a car. Not everyone needs an EV. If you have a garage then yes it makes perfect sense to have an EV. But if you don't and you live in an apartment or you live in a shared house. It's not really going to work for you. People who have their own house don't want old cars. So they basically just have a bunch of older car sitting around that nobody really wants even though they technically do have better value. A $30,000 Tesla and a $30,000 BMW? You'd have to be biased to think that it makes logical sense for the BMW. Sure! It's 40. It's fun but the cost of maintenance. The reliability.... It's not really a family car in the same way. It appeals to more people, but it's not more logical. However, you don't need a garage to charge your BMW. I don't care how fast the car charges. I don't want to go to a charger. I've had my car for 4 years and I've only been to a supercharger twice.
But I fully understand why not everyone has them. Every time I pass by a mechanic shop an oil change place like gas station. I just think of how much wasted time that people use on their cars thinking that it's more convenient.
But but for them in fact it may actually be. Imagine sitting at a charger for 20 mins 2x a week if you drive a lot and use sentry.
https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/2025-us-vehi...
Hybrids (ie not plug in) have the least defects, but basically equal to normal ICE vehicles.
But BEV is improving YoY relative to ICE.
Anecdote:
I purchased an EV this year, my highest priority was range per dollar, and the vehicle I selected happened to be new because of current market conditions. (Equinox EV for under 25k otd after incentives)
1) A large segment of people make purchase decisions based on payment schedules rather than the total cost of driving or even residual value.
2) Today 2/3 of car loans are are 72 months, meaning that even for lower depreciation rate cars, private sellers are often under water, and may not have the resources to pay off the gap with current market value. [0]
3) Banks have responded with 1/5 new-vehicle loans being 84 months or longer, adding to the problem
4) For around the ~40 years I have been paying attention, private sellers almost always think they should get the dealer price and not the private party price.
There are other reasons, but we are in a situation where it would be amazing of we avoid another 2009 like crash in the market.
[0] https://www.edmunds.com/industry/press/underwater-and-sinkin...
It drives him batty.
So, I’d say there’s a potential the used buyers are the ones out of touch, and that people like those in-laws probably aren’t buying EVs.
I once went shopping for a Mustang Cobra, back when they were cool and I was young and into those kinds of cars. The local Ford dealer had their new car lot next door to the used lot, literally separated only by a driveway.
I went to look at the 2004 Cobras they had a half dozen of, and they were marked down (IIRC) $8000 off MSRP. I thought "Cool, the 04 is no different from the 03, so I wonder what I can get one of those on the used lot for." And walked over to look. The 03s were priced higher than the marked-down price on the 04s a couple hundred feet away. At the same dealer.
I brought it up with the used car manager, incredulous at what he was asking for the used ones. His response was "Yeah, go buy one of the new ones, these will sell just fine." I asked why and he said there is a whole class of buyer that won't even look at new cars. That the new car market and the used car markets are not in fact sharing the same space, even if it seems like it would make sense for people to cross-shop. So he priced his used cars at whatever the market would bear, which turned out to be higher than Ford would unload the new ones for.
Does this happen often? Perhaps not. But over the years I've bought new cars on several occasions where the used equivalent was going to save me a whopping $3-4K for a car that was two or three years older and with some miles. It did not make any financial sense whatsoever to buy the used one for such a small discount.
A used 2 year old Ioniq 5 is selling for about $15-20K less than MSRP.
Some years ago, a friend bought a 2 year old Forester - for a full $10K less than MSRP.
It's not a "few thousand dollars".
(Oh, and personally, if you buy a 2 year old car - you're paying way too much. 6-8 year old cars are a good value).
> A used 2 year old Ioniq 5 is selling for about $15-20K less than MSRP...It's not a "few thousand dollars".
The Ioniq 5 is an electric vehicle. The whole point of this article is that EVs depreciate significantly faster than Internal Combustion Engine vehicles. A brand new ICE vehicle depreciates quickly but not to the point of losing 50% in 2 years.
>6-8 year old cars are a good value
Agree.
In general, particularly for higher priced cars, how many do you know that don't lose about $10K in value after 2-3 years?
It is if you're buying a 4Runner or top of the line diesel pickup or some other meme car that people buy because of how great the internet says it is.
But in the general case I agree with you.
That did go strange for a while during COVID but has mostly become true again.
Plus, the listed price is often aspirational. Savvy buyers will typically negotiate the price down.
I have to admit that I’m not a savvy buyer and always buy new though. But I know people who do this very successfully.
I've only ever found good deals on used stuff by pure chance or by watching the market over weeks. It takes both patience and decisiveness, otherwise someone else swoops in before you.
> I've only ever found good deals on used stuff by pure chance or by watching the market over weeks. It takes both patience and decisiveness, otherwise someone else swoops in before you.
That sounds like it is exactly how things are supposed to work. If the average price were a good deal, it would by definition not be a good deal. It should take some work or some waiting, if you want that price.
But it's not willing to pay. That's my point. That's why those postings sit unsold.
>If the average price were a good deal, it would by definition not be a good deal.
Let me clarify: I mean "good deal" in comparison to just buying new. Take headphones, which is something I've bought used a few times. I found a pair of SHP9500s for like 20% of the price of new ones; they had some visible wear, but they weren't broken and they sounded perfect. That's what I'd call an excellent deal. Another time I found a pair of HE400ses for 60-70% of the price of new, and they looked mint. That's a good deal and how the used market should work. The buyer pays a little less with the risk that the item might have some latent defect that's building up, and the seller gets to recoup some of his money.
A bad deal is paying 90% for that same risk and uncertainty, which is what I see most often. Yeah, maybe the product is even verifiably in good condition, but at that point the difference is so small that why would someone even bother?
Math.
You don't see what sells because it's no longer on the market.
A vehicle that sells in 1mo is on the market 30x longer, seen by 30x more people, etc, etc, than one that sells in 1d and only takes 1/30th as many of them on the market to fill up your FBMP feed.
Now, not a lot of cars are priced to sell in 1d, but also 30d is a comically low upper bound as well. Adjust the numbers as you see fit.
This is also why cereal makers rely on shrinkflation to raise prices, and why home prices are sticky downwards, and why companies resort to layoffs rather than wage cuts. In an individual consumer's mind, prices should stay the same.
3D printers!
Yeah at the top end there is still a ton of progress, but on bottom end it just recently turned into commodity, to the point they are sold in more general stores.
People buying new EVs might be bad for environment though.
If people are buying (and storing, and fueling) EVs in addition to their collection of ICE cars, that's probably a separate issue about overconsumption.
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/25/ev-owners-want-to-buy-gas-ca...
Does it go twice as fast? Does it have twice the range? Is it twice as comfortable? Is it twice as safe?
That's the premise. Is that the actual reality?
Solar panels do degrade, but its not anywhere near "rapid". Go look at the lengths of warranties on panels these days
That being said… I might buy a pallet
It is scary that if cars get this cheap what it will mean environmentally (they physically can't last that long) and socially (everybody will be able to afford cars, flooding communities who are not built for it)
Alternative take: "EVs now easy to afford for the 80% of Americans who don't have $50-90k to spend on an EV!"
This year I bought a 2022 EV with 16k miles. A luxury brand. The sticker price when new was $79,000. I paid $35k. It was an off-lease vehicle so if anyone took a bath, it was the bank. I would never in a million years spend 80 grand on a car but now I have a great EV.
Battery life is not a huge concern. Any more than timing belts/chains, transmissions, etc. can be dauntingly costly repairs for cars with 150k miles or more.
I also have a gas car which I love (spouse drives the electric for a much greater commute) so I'm no EV absolutist. But this whole premise is stupid. EV adoption has had 2 main blockers: 1. only rich people had justification to buy them until recently, and 2. Charging space for people who don't have their own private garage.
Now #1 is no longer a factor. This is a GOOD thing.
Thank you "Plummeting Resale Values"!
As deadlines get close you got really good lease deals on these cars.
They are doing it weekly. They know what sells at what price and how fast. So price discovery can work pretty well and mostly correct.
Now more questions can be asked why there is no demand? Is the initial price maybe too high? Or is there some other factors.
So far it has saved her approx 2k on petrol costs alone.
Then there is maintenance costs....No major issues. Less than 200 per year so far if you exclude the fresh set of tyres we put on it when she bought it.
99% of our journeys can be done in it. It's rare for either of us to need more than 80mi in a day.
It can get a full charge off a standard british plug socket over night too, so we dont have a fast charger installed or anything. Most days we only do 10mi, so it goes for an overnight charge once a week and thats fine.
The result? We have to remind ourselves to take the petrol car out for a spin every 2 weeks just to keep it healthy.
It seems to be a common misconception, maybe based on the limits set for warranty repairs and then a weird logical leap.
Even early EVs that didn't have great range to start with are still useful to someone when range is lower. To make a blanket statement that all 10 year old EVs are useless seems like motivated reasoning.
We took her 'useless' 80mi range for a 350mi day trip in the mountains this summer while the petrol car got repaired.
Sure it meant a few stops at fast chargers, +60mi in 15mins for quick stops.
We had 3 meals at places with chargers so it got 3 full charges while we ate.
It was still a great day out despite taking longer than it would in the petrol car.
IF those are available, that's great. For a lot of people that's just not an option.
I should note I'm all for EVs but they're not the "win" for everyone they could be until infrastructure catches up.
Instead people just post long-winded rants about how the highway EV charging shitshow made it too hard to roadtrip in their EV, or make strawman arguments suggesting that EV promoters are trying to force them to have only EVs.
A car you buy new and sell after a short amount of time or not many miles driven is going to cost you.
Toyota Prius Prime: 2023
There's about a dozen such offers on that one site that I checked and that's just Teslas.
But even if these were not factors: I'd rather no buy an used EV car, because I'd rather not have a vehicle that has its battery die immediately after me buying it with no manufacturer guarantee. An ICE vehicle doesn't do that after three years - I just fill up the gas tank, and off I go.
Will need tires but otherwise no maintenance... and no continuing depreciation because it still provides all the goodness it provided when new.
But I hear a lot of myths about EVs and used EVs that seem hard to shake from the mainstream groupthink. One person tried to argue with me that batteries are only good for 100K, and then you're in for a $20K repair. Others worry if you hit traffic, the battery will quickly drain to 0%.
I want to suggest that there are recent reasons why Tesla, as a brand, has specifically gotten a bit less popular that are unrelated to the entire EV category. (It's Elon. He's the reason.)
That said, to the extent the result holds true for the entire category, I'd suspect it's because EVs are still fairly immature. It's like "resale value of desktop PCs falling rapidly" back in the 90s, when the field was advancing quickly enough that buying used was genuinely a bad idea.
I suspect people don't really notice this as much because if you are familiar with regular manufacturers you are used to the price (well, the MSRP at least) staying rock steady for a year at a time. Tesla moves their prices around quite a lot by comparison, which can be very detrimental to the used market when it drops quickly.
But in 2024 I bought a brand new Model Y for about $33k, after factoring in all the incentives/rebates. So if anything that $33k used price sounds high.
Reality is, prices came down a lot, and also depending on how incentives/rebates are factored in, the "sale price" might be fiction.
Same with other brands too. Back then you saw some companies like Hyundai claiming their EVs were really worth like $60k MSRP, and then turning around and leasing them for $300/month with $0 down. In some states people were leasing brand new EVs for $100/month with $0 down, or less.
Now with the federal rebate gone and states removing at least some of their incentives, the numbers might start to look a little more normal.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1F5IQOynIawoXiJPVarLD...
This is definitely true, but it's funny how much hand-wringing is being done about those people, who already bought EVs and really don't need to replace them like 3-4 years into ownership (they might want to for vanity, but if so they're either rich or love wasting money).
"Destroyed resale value" is just another word for "provided amazing prices to a great used market." These "destroyed value" cars are great almost-new cars available at prices competitive with gas cars. In California with horrific electric rates, if I charge my used EV at the "non-peak" time it's like buying gas for my old car at 2.50/gal. In places with much better rates it's more like $1 a gallon. And these are cars that are now available for the same price as a comparable gas car. I'd say this is a huge win for everyone.
Electricity is around 18c/kwh overnight.
I can’t understand how gas cars get sold here anymore at all.
Most of EU cities have the same issues. Due to appartment density an EV makes sense only if you own your house, run a cable from your flat to the street, or win the charging lottery and/or fight for a spot at some shared location.
Alternatively you can make it a routine to charge at a public spot while you go shopping, but it means you're double annoyed when it doesn't work out for whatever reason (spots already taken etc)
It's true that I could choose more luxury or spaciousness on my ICE vs... well, everything else being better on the EV. But I wouldn't.
In the UK, you can get really cheap EVs because the china ev and battery market is open to them and their importers.
Further, because of the nature of both public transport and the city layout of the UK, there's much less of a need for long range EVs. Almost everything there is both walkable and within walking distance. It's very unlike the US.
I survived in the UK for 2 years on foot. It was really not that bad.
The Hyundai Kona Electric starts at £32,400. Which is ~$43,500 freedom bucks.
But there's very little reason why the majority of brits couldn't survive with the Dogood Zero which starts at £5,500 (and has a 50 mile range).
I ended up going with the RAV4. I just looked and the gas powered RAV4 is $29k, while the plug in hybrid model (toyota doesn’t do full EV) is $45k, so there is still a very big difference in price.
They do in other (non-US) markets, without subsidies.
PHEVs are a bad deal, always were. Only make sense if there's subsidies or tax advantages for buying them over pure combustion cars (unfortunately a thing in some markets). Most PHEVs are never charged and PHEV batteries are roughly 4x more expensive per kWh than EV batteries, so there is no cost benefit in the electric drivetrain.
Much cheaper if you get a much smaller EV (which are much more available in the UK).
For example, the Dogood Zero uses 95Wh/mile which means $0.02/mile.
Jan 2023 was when prices were slashed, and the $7,500 tax credit came in.
If I sell the car anytime soon it will definitely be the most I've ever "lost" on a car purchase. Oh well.
Fast forward to now it’s worth about 30% less but thats what I saved on fuel.
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/06/ev-sales-slump-hertz-dump-ta...
has TSLAQ ever been right? Maybe short term but never long term.
Any rational view of TSLA's business and future prospects suggests that TSLAQ is right, but that the timeline for proving it out may be extended (and there's a saying about that, right? Something about the market staying irrational longer than you can remain solvent). TSLA is a meme stock at this point. I wish it were not part of the S&P500, because I hate to be exposed to that volatility.
But I'm often wrong, so maybe this is yet another example.
I also love the excuse: “I’m right. I’m just not putting any money behind my conviction because the market might deviate from my truth.”
What is that “insight”, that “prediction” worth, if you can’t put money on it without going broke?
"Premium brands consistently retain higher resale value than mass-market brands, for both ICE vehicles and EVs. No one knows what entirely new Chinese marques will cost in the secondary market – for instance, what a 5-year-old Omoda will fetch"
Everything concrete in the article is about how Teslas, specifically, have precipitously declined in value, except for one paragraph about how nobody wanted to buy used vehicles from BluSmart (an Indian company that "collapsed in April amid financial fraud allegations").
I have been telling people, though, on the Model 3 forum that they should be leasing unless they are extremely sure they'll keep the car for a lot of years. Tesla's residuals have been way more optimistic than what the used car market suggested reality would look like. Only a problem if you sell at about three years, but maybe worth hedging your bets.
Don’t forget to also deduct tax incentives from the original retail price. It’s not surprising that the used market would require that the used price be below the net original price.
> A U.K.-based study found 3-year-old EVs lost more than half of their value compared with 39% for gas cars.
so the difference isn't so stark as the F150 comparison
I’m so glad I managed to sell mine during Covid frenzy for $74k lol, in 2021
I’ll never buy a Tesla again. Only Ferrari and Mazda for me.
The reason they are getting killed, is because their products are now worse than the competition. They had a huge lead on everyone for years, then everyone caught up. Now you can get a car with the same range, with a HUD, with massaging chairs, with swivelling 360 seats... or you can get the same tesla car they've been making for 10 years.
Basically everyone I am close with is in the demographic Tesla targeted pre-rightening-of-Elon. All of them would’ve considered a Tesla at that point in time.
Now, none would. And of those with Teslas - very satisfied with their cars - none are replacing them with Teslas.
I just bought an Honda Pologue and didn’t even test drive a Model Y or X. We recently got solar installed in our house (also the right demographic for that…) and didn’t even look at quotes for Tesla systems.
Sure, I live in a left wing bubble, but it’s that same bubble that was (enthusiastically) Tesla’s prime demographic ten years ago.
All the power to the people who love their Teslas, you do you.
Fortunately that has subsided a bit, I haven't heard as much chatter about it in the last few months. And anecdotally, there are still quite a lot of "just got my new Tesla" threads on the Model 3 subreddit -- I think sales totals have still been a disappointment, but they haven't tanked.
(hint: if even a small majority of them felt that way, there would have been many many orders of magnitude more incidents. more than any gap in reporting could cover. figure out where that narrative was born though.)
There a many (many) more people who are vocally anti-Tesla and not willing to damage cars, again, evidenced by the ratio of vocalized anti-Tesla sentiment to real incidents.
Resale value of EVs doesn't depend on mileage nowhere near as much as ICE cars. EVs are just much simpler machines and electric motors can do a million miles with no maintenance, and the only maintenance you have is the oil in the differential, which is often simpler because it is single-speed. Compare that to thousand different mechanical parts that all wear out in a ICE engine. Which is why ICE cars resale value is determined by the odometer.
What drives EV resale value is the health of the battery, which is influenced more by recharge cycles and straight up passage of time.
And the anecdotal evidence of a commercial fleet going bankrupt and not getting much for their EVs... Well yeah, would you buy from such a source? I wouldn't. They usually don't follow longevity advice for battery charging, because they have to optimize for time-in-use.
As an anecdote, I bought all my ICE cars second hand, and would usually sell them 3-4 years later just before major maintenance was needed. My EV is now 8 years old, runs like the day I got it and had 1 repair, when the motor that drives the window up and down broke and battery capacity is still the same, or if it changed it's such a small change I didn't notice. I don't expect to sell any time soon, if ever. I expect I will just do a battery swap in 5-10 years.
The resale value drops much faster than the battery health. Hyundai has been tracking the degregation rates of the batteries in their Ioniq 5 vehicles and they've been holding up surprisingly well. Most of them have >90% battery capacity at over 100k miles. Their data was sparse for 250k miles, but half of them were still over 90% capacity.
I had trouble finding the original video, but the data is included in this summary: https://youtu.be/s3DMd0e4loQ?t=17s
I’m not saying the article is wrong I’d just like to see broader representation (Chevy bolt, lucid air, etc).
I inquired about a battery swap and it's around $10->12k. I'm seriously considering it in the next couple of years as I see that as buying another 9->10 years of life for my car.
I might grab a used EV instead, though, as the one thing my car lacks is a heat pump, which kinda sucks in the winter.
An EV maker that sells parts at inflated prices including the battery will get less and less customers.
As those customers look at catalog prices for important parts including the battery before buying an EV.
Random web page on the topic:
https://www.recurrentauto.com/research/costs-ev-battery-repl...
Another listing price:
https://evshop.eu/en/13-batteries
Note the used LFP 55 kWh tesla pack at $4140 so ... $75/kWh.
If a dealer charges you between $10K to $12K for a swap out, that's the "fuck you for not buying a car that makes the dealership more money" price. Several third-party vendors refurbish and sell EV batteries for much less.
I know what you mean by not having a heat pump sucking. The Volt has resistive heating for wintertime, and it definitely drains the battery. I dress warm and use the seat heaters when I'm driving by myself.
Does it matter where you live, or where the vehicle was originally purchased/registered?
We can only dream of a day when battery packs are a standardized commodity, and as easy to change as motor oil. But modern industry is far too extractive.
No dice for me, I'm at 170,000 miles.
Assuming you averaged 30mpg, you also put $20k in gas through it. At the current US average retail electricity price of 17 cents per kWh and EV efficiency of 250Wh/mile, recharging would be $7,200 for that same distance. The fuel savings alone are more than the cost of replacing the battery.
That’s assuming DIY, but even if you’re paying $80 per change. If you do them every 7,500… you’re still $1,800 total.
$12k is plenty for a whole new engine, possibly a new engine and transmission on an economy car. For example, Ford will happily sell you a brand new 2.3 Ecoboost for a Mustang or Ranger or Explorer for $6k: https://www.trackey.ford.com/part/M-6007-23TA
In my previous vehicle I replaced the transition, engine, brakes, etc. but I sold it once the interior wasn't "nice" anymore.
This aspect does track between EVs and conventional vehicles.
If solid state batteries actually come out, they probably won't be retrofitted into existing EVs. That's a bummer, but I guess by the time I'm ready to change cars self driving will be a real thing (the Waymo kind, not the Tesla kind).
tbh, it's kind of baffling to me how it seems like nobody else is interested in offering software updates to infotainment without needing to take it to a dealer's service bay, if it's even offered at all.
When I bought my Tesla, at the time, "Streaming" (Which was silently powered by Slacker Radio) was the only music streaming integration, but Spotify was added shortly after my purchase. They've since added YouTube Music, Apple Music, and Tidal integrations.
Map data is fetched on the fly. No need to manually install updates. Hell, how many cars even make that an option? My in-laws have an old Prius (I think first gen, maybe second gen?) with built-in Nav, but has never received a map update. Their nav doesn't even know their home street exists.
It doesn't help that so many cars have lackluster infotainment systems. I had a Subaru BRZ in 2016 and was kinda stoked that I could play MP3s from a USB drive, since back then I actually somewhat maintained a collection. I figured I'd get a thumb drive with all my MP3s on it. But the interface completely flattened the directory structure and put them in alphabetical order. There'd be no way to play a single album in sequence if I had multiple albums by the same artist. My folder organization became worthless.
But I've digressed...yeah, more car manufacturers should offer software updates for their infotainment.
Though this is true of ICE vehicles as well although CarPlay has eliminated that to a significant degree.
Suspension and tires are the biggest items for EVs. The twist is cheap owner can neglect those and keep driving past service window with ripped bushings and clapped out tires until hitting that magic 3 year goal, then you buy used EV in need of 4 of everything.
So, either you were really lucky with ICE or extremely unlucky with EVs.
I don't see that I was especially lucky with the ICE components, I did all the scheduled maintenance plus some other misc things (water pump x2, bad transmission bushing, etc.) (Oil and filters just don't add up to all that much - I followed the maintenance schedule using high mileage synthetic and high-mileage filters and the total cost was under $100/year at a dealership.)
I also don't see that I was especially unlucky with the non-ICE components, I've got a 13-year sample size of steady, unremarkable maintenance to tires, paint, brakes (these always corroded from salt before they wore down, so no real EV savings to be had on brakes), misc trim pieces, etc. Looking at my Excel sheet of maintenance, I'd expect these costs to be higher on nearly any EV, just because the ICE was a cheap econobox with cheap parts (e.g. tires were small, TPMS sensors were cheap, only 4 lug nuts, etc.), and any newer vehicle is going to have more parts that need replacement/repair, and those parts are going to be more expensive.
2. The only thing left are tires and washer fluid. I’m not convinced that these make up 2/3 maintenance costs. All of the fluids — oil, coolant, transmission — plus components that wear down/need replacing (alternator, transmission) — there’s no way these are only 1/3 of all maintenance.
2. Oil/coolant/transmission just don’t add up to much. Oil was $100/year, there was like one other fluid-related and one transmission related service over 13 years. There are many things other than tires and washer fluids (though tires are a fairly large line item) checking my spreadsheet for non-ICE-specific costs, there’s paint maintenance, general cleaning costs, a seatbelt receptacle, a cruise control buttons, roof exterior rubber trim, a headrest, a window switch, washer fluid spray nozzles, lug nuts, wiper blades, shocks, struts, door weather stripping, rivets holding the front plastic splashguard on, headlight bulbs, headlight buffing, washer fluid reservoir cap, replacement speaker, turn signal switch, windshield repair, backup light switch.
My costs lines up with much of the available data, e.g. see https://www.motortrend.com/news/government-ev-ice-maintenanc...
“According to the office, internal-combustion-engine-powered (ICE) vehicles cost $0.101 per mile to maintain. [..] Full battery electric vehicles, on the other hand, are much, much less expensive to run and maintain, coming in at just $0.061 per mile.”
That lines up fairly closely to my experience - their EVs still have about 60% of the maintenance costs of ICE vehicles.
In my somewhat limited experience, Japanese cars often need brakes around the 40k mark, and German cars go more like 60k.
A lot of charging is influenced by convenience and lifestyle rather than miles, for example:
People charge at work from 68% to 75% because is convenient.
People always draining the battery because they don't have charging at home.
Commercial EVs being charged based on loading/unloading schedules etc.
...
Isn't that almost the best possible way to charge a Li-Ion battery?
I mean, keeping it closer to 50% might be better, but the returns are so diminished by that point that it's a rounding error of a rounding error.
I keep my limit to 75% unless I have a long drive planned, and nearly all my charging at home. I'll probably have <5% degradation after 100,000 miles.
I'd like to see them compare two similarly priced SUVs.
I am sure the ICE vehicle will still depreciate slower, but perhaps not as drastically different.
The buyers of these two vehicles used in the example are very different.
Another market failure to adequately assist us in making the best choice.
In a situation when we're being told to completely give up on apples (ICE cars) and switch entirely to oranges (EVs), I am afraid we'd have to make exactly the comparison you find so distasteful for some strange reason. They are both vehicles, sorry, fruits, after all.
It's fine to compare ICE and EV.
It's not fine to be shoddy with data.
I think Porsche has done a 2-speed EV transmission and Lucid moved the differential inside the motor and has two-reduction gear sets on either side, but those are both unusual designs.
ICEs have MANY wear-out-fast parts (where "fast" is relative) requiring lube, and lube itself suggests the risk of frictional degradation.
But on an EV, that's basically the only thing that needs somewhat regular "oil changes". Whereas ICE motors & transmissions also need fluid changes regularly.
The EV needs less regular maintenance because it has less fluids though.
Do you expect it will be an OEM part or a remanufactured battery?
I mean, that sounds quite poor on both counts TBQH. I bought a used 2002 Honda Accord in 2004 and drove it until last year with little more than regular oil changes. I expect to get the same kind of life out of the Mazda 3 I replaced it with. Anything less than 10 years out of a car sounds like something went terribly wrong to me.
Say the govt wanted everyone to buy more Rubik's Cubes (cause they help you become smarter).
Their plan to do this is not to pay the Rubik's company to make them cheaper, but instead to give everyone $5 spendable on Rubik's Cubes only. The cost of a cube prior to this was $8.
The day that decide that, the Rubik's company ups the price of a Cube to account for this incoming onslaught of buyers and get more profit. They can safely up the price without losing sales because A) everyone wants to get smart and B) The overall cost of a cube is still cheaper than before. You can get a $10 cube for $5, which is less than $8.
More cubes are sold than ever before.
Now the market is flooded with cubes.
Now the govt says "Great! Everyone has cubes. Let the intelligence revolution commence!" So they remove the subsidy.
$10 Cubes are now QUITE expensive, so the Rubik's company reduces the price back to the $8 it was before. But wait a second, now the market is flooded and people are used to paying effectively $5 for a cube.
This is what's happened with EVs.
Solving them is a question of knowing the algorithm and applying it. It makes you better at pattern matching.
> everyone wants to get smart
In most social situations people want to have fun. They'll intentionally consume substances which reduce their "smarts" in an effort to achieve this more easily. They will lie to your face about this because _appearing_ smart is all they actually care about.
> Now the market is flooded with cubes.
That are lower quality than what was being made prior to the subsidy.
> This is what's happened with EVs.
Inflation also halved the value of money. The story seems simple but it's obviously more complex than a simple analysis would allow for.
Looking at actual market data, the spread on used EVs is wild - a 2022 Tesla Model S ranges from $57 to $112k depending on trim/condition (https://cardog.app/tools/valuation/tesla/model_s/2022). That's a $60k spread on the same year vehicle. Compare that to ICE vehicles where the range is typically much tighter.
When buyers can't confidently price an asset, they discount heavily. The depreciation problem might actually be a data problem - we just don't have the standardized battery health reporting and historical comps that exist for ICE vehicles yet.
Now is probably the golden age for buying used EVs, because eventually this notion that the batteries are untrustworthy is going to go away (you can argue about whether this will occur because the technology improves vs. people will better realize where it already is, but it will happen).
If I buy a 5 year old Corolla with 50k miles on the clock, I have a pretty good idea of what maintenance is going to like for the next decade, and I know a mechanic who can do the work.
I have no idea at all what will happen with a comparable Tesla over 10 years.
Replacing the passenger occupant detection sensor for the airbag system in my 2007 Ford Fusion cost $2K. After a series of other issues with things like the transmission and fuel injector, I ultimately traded it in for $500.
I got a used Nissan Leaf with low mileage for $18K a few years ago and haven't taken it in for anything yet. Battery health is still at 90%, and I could get that replaced for around $6K if I needed to.
I feel a palpable sense of relief that the surprise maintenance bills have stopped.
Hard to get a real sense for total cost of ownership for electric vs gas cars from that sample.
Smaller pickups like the Ford Ranger and Chevy S-10 are in the "compact pickup" class. (And unfortunately these are not sold in the US anymore. For those with genuine need, we either have to resurrect some old heap headed for the scrapyard or import them on the gray market from Asian countries.)
By no means is it a compact truck any more.
Unibody might not be commonly used by truck makers, but using it doesn't mean it's not a truck.
A Tread Unibody bulk truck can haul 50K pounds and no one would call it a ute.
On a related note, we have some real candidates on the Lightning forums for being the modern "Danger Ranger" trucks -- turns out you can load a Lightning with well north of 2000 pounds and it still isn't squatting anywhere near the bump stops. Stiff suspension.
The shocking thing about light trucks with fuel economy in the teens is that most of the time they never haul anything. They're driven to the grocery store and to soccer practice where they have little value.
By number the median SUV is some sort of crossover or compact SUV built on a platform the OEM also builds sedans on.
The EV market is just weird, anyway. Manufacturers have to price to what the market will bear, which may have little resemblance to MSRP. So a good evaluation of deprecation has to figure out how to account for that. My Lightning had an MSRP of 72K but I got it for 51K, which was a very normal price that anyone could get. If I evaluate resale based on the MSRP, it looks pretty bad. If I use my out-the-door cost for comparison, it does not look bad at all (compared to any other new car purchase, of course, which are never going to be the most cost-effective choice for an individual).
In any case, individual buyers shouldn’t worry about it too much. The most financially prudent decision is to keep the car for a long time anyway. My 10 year old Tesla still drives just fine. Its value at the two-year mark wasn’t relevant.
The post says that Tesla hold their value better than Chinese newcomers but that absolutely isn’t the prices I’m seeing in Europe.
In Europe Tesla resale value has plummeted due to brand destruction. Tesla was super popular when they launched as the first realistic EV to hit the main time. But they quickly got a poor reputation for build quality and never delivering on self-driving, and that was before the political damage the owner did which seems never recoverable in at least a generation.
Meanwhile comparable Chinese entrants are so new they aren’t yet at the 3 year mark where fleets sell off to second hand market.
Another interesting thing about non-Tesla EVs is that there aren’t a lot being resold; if you got one, you likely hang onto it. Personally I’ve just not yet let go of my Kia EV6 even though it sailed past the normal trade in point recently.
Additionally there is a political drive to not trust Chinese manufactured products so those EV's are probably harder to maintain, get support for and in general it is socially considered less status to have a Chinese EV instead of a Tesla. Where in Europe this cultural drive is not as present in Tesla vs Chinese . In my experience in the EU the drive is more about is it EV and the Chinese EV's often offer more features/value for less money.
Not true at all. In 2023, before the brand became toxic, they sold more cars outside the US than internally. They were a huge percentage of the market in parts of Europe, especially Scandinavia. There was a lot of noise about the manufacturing centres in Germany as Tesla fought around labour laws and traditions, too.
They also bet big on China where they almost got to the point where they were selling as many cars as in the USA. Elon fell hook, line, and sinker for the classic Chinese government move to invite them into the market and then steal the tech and flood the market with domestic brands (this is not to say that they haven't improved on it, though).
Also didn't Elon famously open up the Tesla patents for other companies to use? I assume the Chinese EV manufactures where not looking the other way as other manufacturer probably also shouldn't have.
China learned how to make cars from European and US companies producing ICE vehicles, but the battery tech is more home grown.
They also invested heavily in robotics and manufacturing supply chains.
Korea has also invested into EV on top of their already big ICE vehicle manufacturing base.
But it's an open secret that there was a lot of "turnover" at the Chinese Tesla plants, both shortly after building and operating them, as the Chinese took a lot of the manufacturing processes, tech, etc. And yeah, it also wasn't just Tesla - but it did allow the Chinese to catch up (and eventually surpass) them. The fact that there was so much direct and indirect supports from the government was a huge benefit. This has happened multiple times (French fell for it with high speed rail, Germans and to a lesser extent Americans with cars, Apple/Koreans with mobile phones, everybody with microelectronics, etc).
Personally, I don't find anything particularly immoral or unethical about the Chinese actions. Respect for intellectual property regimes only applies with nations that have IP to protect.
Note that China has become more protective of IP rights as they advance to be a major player in the initial development of technology rather than "just" the manufacturing hub.
There a lot of them in the UK (although I haven't seen so many newly registered ones lately).
it's a good representative sample of affluent london commuters (mostly leasing via salary sacrifice)
I've seen close to zero new teslas in the past year
BYD seem to have entirely replaced them
Why would I pay a significant fraction of the original price for a 2020 EV if a same tier 2025 EV has better batteries and drivetrain that'll probably have a longer lifetime, almost double the range, heat pump and faster charging? That doesn't mean the 2020 is bad, but it's only worth it if you can get it at an enormous discount over the current model.
Meanwhile, a 2020 ICE is pretty much the same as a 2025 ICE aside from the wear and tear.
Once the tech stabilises, so will the resale market.
Fun fact, the 2020 model 3 would still have its battery under warranty. That's true for most model 3s with the exception of those that did more than 100K miles or the ones that were sold in 2017. Those would have just started coming out of the eight year warranty. But most of the second hand model 3s are still covered by warranty for their drive trains.
Mostly, second hand buyers can get some decent deals on their cars now and don't have to worry that much about their cars depreciating massively when they sell them on five years later. With EVs most of the depreciation happens in the first few years.
Otherwise there is no reason for old Porsches and 90s Japanese cars to demand the sticker price they do now.
The people who are willing to pay more for a used car down the road aren't interested in EVs or mass produced ICE cars, if unique enough will continue to be in demand over EVs
ex) New porsche EVs losing value against ICE cars
One would think and hope so, however numerous ICE manufacturers, even long-term reliability experts like Honda, have been adopting "wet belt" timing belts.
These run submerged/immersed in engine oil, which tends to degrade the belt, often resulting in clogged oil pickups, galleys, etc.
Buyer beware, unfortunately.
The first few generations of smartphones didn't last very long either (1-2 years). But now they last much longer (5-7 years). EV lifespans will expand in the same way as they mature as a product.
I bought a minivan when I had kids, and it's such a huuuuuuge step backwards on every front from the Model 3. There's so much ridiculous maintenance for a gas car, it really really sucks. And Toyota's build quality is absolute shit compared to Tesla, which supposedly gets dinged for build quality. All the plastic in the Toyota is falling out, the window seals are terrible, the whole thing is terrible in comparison to Tesla's supposedly bad build quality.
I've taken EVs on thousand mile road trips with an infant, and it was fantastic.
My EV is going to outlast my ICE by a long long time. The amount of fake FUD around EVs is mystifying to me. I can not understand why anyone would want a gas car wheee you have so much maintenance and always have to stop to fill up. So much wasted time and money on that BS.
But what is indisputable is that the maintenance load for a gas car is super high and involved so many trips into a mechanic or changing your own oil, etc. With EVs you just rotate the tires and that's it. Maybe some wiper blades. I'll never be buying another gas car if I can avoid it. They do not seem ready in comparison to the ease of an EV.
If you can get another 150,000 miles out of it with almost no maintenance or repair costs, it's a screaming good deal.
The latter is far more likely than the former, but people don't realize it yet.
https://www.p3-group.com/en/p3-updates/battery-aging-in-prac...
P. S. I will likely be buying a used EV soon.
What makes you think that you would have to do that?
1) that car would still be under warranty until it is older than eight years or drives more than 100K miles. So if it needs a replacement at 80K miles, you might get it for free because it's not supposed to fail.
2) There's a lot of data that suggests batteries last a lot longer than their warranty period both in miles and years. There are plenty of EVs with 150K or more miles on them that are still fine. And define fine, is it such a bad deal when the battery has 75% of its original capacity instead of 85%?
3) It's hard to get numbers on when they actually do fail on average for the simple reason that the overwhelmingly large majority of EVs ever made are still driving around with the original battery they left the factory with. They've only been on the market for about 15 years. And the majority of them is much younger than the eight years of battery warranty they left the factory with. Most of the EVs on the road have been sold in the last few years only.
I'm going to buy a used EV, and I don't expect to replace the battery.
Edit: Oh I see the confusion. I should have been more explicit in my original comment that the second case involved not ever replacing the battery.
— In the US, charging infrastructure is still quite poor, with a high amount of disabled or damaged chargers that aren't apparent on maps. Nothing worse than planning a route around the only charger within a few dozen miles and arriving to find it broken. The overall overhead of having to plan driving/parking around chargers is also too onerous for some people.
— Similarly, people underestimate how much harder long road trips are on EVs, especially when fast chargers are damaged and don't actually supply anywhere close to the advertised amount of current.
— People underestimate how much range degrades in cold weather. One person I know bought their EV in the spring, loved it until winter came around, and then promptly sold it the next spring. In a similar vein, people don't realize how poor and battery-hungry climate control can be in an EV, especially in models without a heat pump.
It would be interesting to rigorously study this, examining whether people buying EVs are more likely to sell them within the first couple years of ownership versus people buying comparably priced ICE cars.
Other chargers can definitely be a bit more hit-and-miss although they are improving.
These days if you stick to the big networks (Tesla, Electrify America, Rivian, IONNA, etc.) you're going to have a pretty good time. The one-off chargers in municipal parking garages are a different story, I don't really on those unless there is a recent PlugShare review showing that it actually works.
Now that basically every car can access Tesla Superchargers and vice versa for Teslas, this is really not a problem anymore. We’re at the « sometimes I’m grumpy the best stop for my car does not have the exact amenities I want » stage now.
I guess is worse than the « the stop with the exact amnenities I want is not the provider with the cheapest electricity that I wanted » stage that we are in say, France.
Oh for- who the fuck is putting resistive heating in an EV?! What brain-dead PM greenlit that pants-on-head jackassery? Was it GM? I can see an American OEM getting that close to the goal line only to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Really though, that's just disappointing; I had earnestly assumed every EV that made it to market (in North America at least) would be using a heat pump.
Heat pumps are expensive, complex, prone to warranty claims, and subject to additional regulatory control (refrigerants). Resistive heating is cheap and simple.
I'm guessing that the development costs for a heat pump that is good enough for automotive use is well into 8 figures, and would probably take at least a year to fully test.
Given all those constraints, it makes a tremendous amount of sense that many cars were built with resistive heating.
Though perhaps I'm simply blown away living in a colder climate. Resistive heating if it's only to defog windows in the morning, or similarly rarely used, is reasonable. Resistive when getting started (one major hurdle, ICE -> EV, resistive -> heat pump, at a time) is reasonable. I just thought the automotive world had moved forward more rapidly than it had.
The evidence is that engineers on greenfield projects at multiple companies on multiple continents all arrived at roughly the same solution.
Make of that what you will.
Yes they both use compressors and refrigerant, but essentially none of the expensive and hard to engineer parts are interchangeable.
If that was true you could just replace your broken fridge with a car AC system, or for that matter just use a fridge to heat your house. After all they all use the same “not magical” technology.
As it turns out the underlying concept/technology is pretty simple, but adapting it to be fit for purpose is where the complexity lies.
If it was that easy the car companies would have done it instead of designing a novel resistive heating system that can only be used in their lowest volume cars.
The real world evidence is that many manufacturers came to the conclusion that designing an entire separate system for resistive heat was a better solution than the obvious step of reversing the cycle on the AC.
[0] https://www.recurrentauto.com/questions/which-electric-vehic...
Tesla before 2021.
Traditional gas cars also have wear and tear with parts on the "consumables" spectrum, but these are considered more open to state inspection by a semi knowledgeable amateur, and the car's value is less tied to one specific black-box item.
https://www.p3-group.com/en/p3-updates/battery-aging-in-prac...
The issue isn’t that the batteries can’t be replaced, it’s that a new battery is quite expensive. Substantially more than a new motor for a typical ICE car.
No it won't. Road wear scales as the fourth power [0] in relationship to axle load, so even a modest increase in weight is still hugely outweighed by the damage done by a fully-loaded semi tractor-trailer (80k lbs). Cars, even EVs, are negligible in terms of road wear.
There are many road surfaces that semi trucks cannot drive on, even once. This comparison is really far out of reach. A better comparison would be to a Honda Civic or Ram 1500.
Versus the situation with dirt and gravel. Such a huge percentage of highway miles driven in proportion on gravel and dirt, everyone going to work and back home on gravel, yep.
EVs do cause more damage than most ICE by virtue of being heavier. But you know what causes even more damage? Heavy commercial vehicles. The overall proportion of damage is still vastly outweighed (heh) by a single heavy vehicle. Multiplied by thousands upon thousands of heavy semis day after day after day. The proportional amount is insignificant.
Source: a pavement engineer in my circle.
And I’d take issue with your point about surfaces that semis can’t drive on, even once. Which are those? Dirt mining and logging roads that one might immediately reach for? Those are traveled by loaded semis already. Worn paths in fields? Already driven by loaded grain trailers, but they’re only used a few times per year. Source for that: I grew up on farms during harvest time. Perhaps quaint covered wood bridges over creeks in the middle of nowhere? Oh, I know! Those rope bridges over rivers in Peru, I know I’m itching to drive my new Peterbilt over that.
I don’t know why I waste my time refuting contrarian “nuh-uh!” comments that are posted just for the sake of being contrarian. It’s like the only thing posted here.
Now you could just exchange battery as a module and replace NCA for Solid State in the future like HDD in the computer and car would be driving just fine.
You have to remember that the market for new cars skews heavily toward wealthier households. These households are generally the ones that can afford a place to charge a car at home.
The market for a used EV is much smaller than for a used gas powered vehicle. People buying used vehicles are much more likely to have housing situations where they can't charge a vehicle.
This factor doesn't apply to gasoline vehicles because everyone, rich or poor, fills up at a gas station.
We'll probably see a lot more adoption once infrastructure is equitably available to everyone.
Thanks, but I'm hanging in to my old Subaru.
Just saw the Audi etron gt has amazing deals on used cars. Then I saw a new model coming out with better battery, more power, better range, and more features. Suddenly last year’s model is way less compelling.
And, you know, there were these flip phones that worked pretty much everywhere that held a useful charge up to a couple weeks that you could use to call AAA in a pinch. They stood in quite handily in place of the integrated spyware present today.
To quote Corey Doctrow: Investors love the sound of a “software-based car” because they understand that a gadget that is connected to the cloud is ripe for rent-extraction, because with software comes a bundle of “IP rights” that let the company control its customers, critics and competitors:
A “software-based car” gets to mobilize the state to enforce its “IP,” which allows it to force its customers to use authorized mechanics (who can, in turn, be price-gouged for licensing and diagnostic tools). “IP” can be used to shut down manufacturers of third party parts. “IP” allows manufacturers to revoke features that came with your car and charge you a monthly subscription fee for them.
and then there are situations like: https://insideevs.com/news/723669/fisker-inc-bankruptcy-chap...
or the recent fiasco with e-Jeeps disabled by the side of the road by a freaking entertainment system update.
At least that's what happened in 2022-2023 when prices of EVs and ICE cars quickly converged. No surprise existing EVs on the road deprecated rapidly.
At least in the 4-5 years ago, there was not much of a used market, not much vehicle choice beyond Tesla that was good price/performance, and tough going on charging infrastructure (again outside of Tesla)
That landscape has not completely changed, but it is much different. There's a lot of actual vehicle choice (even if most are still some type of SUV/CUV), and charging situation is reasonable, especially with opening up of NACS
There's a big component of political action against EVs, solar, etc but I think it will just slow, not stop the momentum in the US. With 2 BEVs and a PHEV, I don't see our family going back to ICE vehicles. I miss manual transmissions, that's about it
Since owning my car I’ve had to service it only twice. My battery depreciation has been at least to me completely unnoticeable. I basically only charged on superchargers till late 2023 till I got a charger in my garage. I’m sure my battery has lost some small amount of range but honestly I would have to do the calculations to know what it is. It can’t be much.
I will say only this year have I even considered for even just a moment of getting something new. I’m pretty interested in the Lexus steer by wire technology that will come as an upgraded feature on the new RZ. I know that car is not on anyone’s radar and I can understand someone being very hesitant of steer by wire technology. I genuinely believe it’s an interesting feature though and could be a noticeable enhancement to every day driving. It actually makes a yoke style wheel make sense.
They compare the Model Y to an F150, but don't indicate if the 0-day prices are MSRP or actual sales (because F150s are usually discounted from list price and EVs have various subsidies). While each is best-selling by some measure, they're also different products - a truck VS a near-luxury wagon/crossover. I wouldn't expect them to depreciate at the same rate - they should have included a near-luxury gas-powered wagon/crossover as well (Lexus NX, maybe).
Their argument relies heavily on data from India, where a bankrupt ride-share service flooded the market. If Enterprise went out of business and flooded the US market with Toyota Camrys, I'd expect some pricing irregularity for that model.
Similarly, the US EV market (and probably some others?) is heavily impacted by federal and local rebates and tax benefits. Those surely skew the used car values as well - nobody actually paid $50,000 for a new Tesla (or whatever), they paid $50,000 - some subsidy (and that amount varied based on model, price, and the income of the initial buyer - my neighbor could by the exact same car as me for $7500 less than I could). Some of these subsidies also incentivized leasing vs buying, which then means more of those cars go on the market in 2-3 years (vs a typical ~8 year ownership for a new car).
Long story short, EVs are a nascent market, there's bound to be pricing issues. I'm not convinced we can extrapolate long-term used market values based on the last ~5 years of data.
My current car is a Kia EV6 AWD GT-Line S, pretty much the top-of-the-range car. It has 340 miles range (plenty when the longest trip I'll do is 220 once or twice per year) and although a lot bulkier than the old car, has enough oomph off the line that I don't care. I do miss the top-down experience, but here in the UK that's less of an issue due to weather, and at least there's a large sun-roof :)
Tesla would have been an option a few years ago. Glad I dodged that bullet.
I fully expect to get another 15 years or so out of the car, at which point I'll be in my dotage and be having other people drive me around, possibly in a golf-cart.. So depreciation really isn't a big deal for me.
As the battery tech and service infrastructure matures we probably will see less of this though.
These bikes are already illegal, so lets not introduce another silly regulation that adds expense and a point of failure just because teenagers do wheelies.
Also, teenagers doing wheelies on bicycles is not illegal, nor should it be. Let people have some fun!
Part of it is that a battery pack is legitimately dangerous at that scale (so lots of testing/safety certifications etc). But those are one-time design costs that should be amortized.
I would really like to see some standardization around battery packs for both cars and bikes, so that it could become a commodity market for packs.
That's before you even consider battery degradation. So much of the value of these cars is in the battery, to the point I almost wonder if they are making money, even selling them at these prices. I had to have my IONIQ 5 battery replaced under warranty within a month of buying the car, and the price that Hyundai charged themselves for the battery was more than the cost of the car brand new off the lot, even before incentives. Yes, that's the right hand charging the left, and they'll refurbish my failed pack (a single weak cell) and recoup most of the cost... but it was still a shock to see that.
I mostly agree, but not-at-fault collisions throw a real wrinkle into this.
There's a non-trivial chance that even if you were planning on keeping your car for 15 years, you get rear-ended after 5 years, your car gets written off, and you receive a low value from your insurer.
All of the extra care and maintenance that you put into your car to make it a car that would be nice to drive far 15 years also becomes wasted as your insurance won't compensate you for that.
The extra care and maintenance is something that can get factored into condition. If you disagree with a valuation, they typically will entertain an argument for a higher valuation, if it is grounded in reality and especially if you have comparables. They know that it is better to pay more when it is fair, than to get dragged into court, and be told to pay more and told to pay for lawyers, etc.
Not in jurisdictions with no-fault insurance.
> The extra care and maintenance is something that can get factored into condition. If you disagree with a valuation, they typically will entertain an argument for a higher valuation, if it is grounded in reality and especially if you have comparables. They know that it is better to pay more when it is fair, than to get dragged into court, and be told to pay more and told to pay for lawyers, etc.
Maybe, or they might win in court, and then it's you who should have known it was better to just accept less rather than get dragged into multiple appeals and be told to pay for lawyers etc.
e.g. https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/vehicles-insurance-accident...
"The judge awarded him $6,000 in damages but when the insurance company appealed, his award was cut to $1,500 and he was ordered to pay legal costs for the other side. In the end, he was $1,000 in the hole."
When a car is totaled, there is no argument for diminished value, since you are given the full pre-accident value of the car.
Your points are valid for some cases (albeit so rare that you found an article from over a decade ago about a single case that made the national news, in a province that has since had several major overhauls to their insurance regs.), but have nothing to do with your prior argument or the comments I made.
Leave the goalposts where you originally had them.
I’d expect any insurance company to ballbark the “full pre-accident value” towards the lower end of comparables, and while you might be able to negotiate that up, you’re never going to be able to recoupe everything you’ve spent on a highly-maintained car, because a lot of that simply has minimal effect on the resellable value of the car, or won’t be provable value - e.g. you can spend $1500 on top-end UV-protectant window film, but that’s pretty much never money you’ll get back in a sale or insurance claim.
Not that many people can afford a new car now at all, and of those who can, they're getting luxury end cars, generally. Luxury vehicles depreciate faster than non-luxury vehicles, generally. People who want used cars are frequently people who can't afford new cars, thus they want something that works in their area in their situation with their stuff as it stands. Many of these people live in places with poor charging networks or rent and cannot install a charger. Used EVs don't come with a free charger like new ones often do. EVs were also being priced and purchased based on the tax credit for quite a while, which meant that price was a little... soft? On top of that, many EVs that fit into this data are selling for less for real reasons, like the uninsurability of Cybertrucks and the range loss on the Bolt EV. This all drives demand down or shifts the curves and lowers prices. It's just a small market for now.
That doesn't really make sense. Cheaper new cars are more popular than new luxury cars. Plenty of people finance their new car buys.
We were well on a path to purchase a couple of EV's (Teslas, new) and even installed a large solar array to support them.
A couple of years later she learned about the cost of replacing the battery. And, just like that, the dream was over. No interest whatsoever.
Anyone who is married fully understands you cannot argue with wife logic. She has no interest in having to spend $20K to $30K ever on any vehicle, of any type, electric or not, a few years after you paid off the loan.
She would not even touch a used EV if it was almost free. In that case you are almost guaranteed to have to spend tens of thousands of dollars for a new battery at a random moment in time in the future. No deal.
Her logic is cemented in a reality of life that we have lived: There are good times and bad times. And, as things go sometimes, you often find yourself in bad times with no money. Vehicles being necessary for mobility and work, if you have an EV, hit bad times and need to spend tens of thousands of dollars to swap the battery, you are absolutely screwed.
So, I asked her: What would make you change your mind?
The answer: A battery swap should be $5,000 or less.
This is the job the 4dr Wrangler was built to solve.
"see honey, it's got a back seat for the kids".
"don't worry, we can get a hard top if it's too loud."
"there's a hybrid option available"
It's the world's worst 4dr SUV for kids and car seats and the like and it's still loud with a hard top and gets shit milage for a hybrid but you'll never figure it out until after you've bought the thing and the honeymoon period is over.
It's an absolutely brilliant exercise in checkbox engineering (and preventing couples from arguing in the dealership).
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/average-battery-cell-pric...
I get the "batteries will get cheaper" argument. If you read my comment, I said that that a guaranteed $5K battery replacement would likely convince loads of people, including my wife. Today, nobody will issue that guarantee. Today it is a lottery with a $25K hit if you have a losing ticket.
Nobody wants to buy a vehicle for tens of thousands of dollars and have a $25K surprise a couple of years later. With an conventional vehicle you would have to to launch it off a cliff to have to spend $25K in repairs. That's the problem.
I have been married for more than 20 year, have 4 children (3 teen-aged drivers), and two electric vehicles. I paid less than $25,000 out-the-door (including sales tax, etc.) for my brand new 2025 SV+ Nissan Leaf. Where I live in Washington state, gas is >$4/gal and electricity is less than $0.08/kWh. I get better than 4 miles/kWh. After 250,000 miles, a vehicle averaging 40 miles/gallon will have spent $25,000 in gasoline (at $4/gal). With my electric rates, electric "fuel" costs for the same 250,000 miles will be $5,000. So a $20,000 difference in fuel costs.
Looks like it is ~$8k for a 62 kWh Nissan Leaf battery:
https://vivnevs.com/products/62kwh-nissan-leaf-battery-pack-...
Every EV sold in the U.S. gets a federally mandated transferable battery warranty of 8 years/100,000 miles. Buying new or very lightly used and getting rid of it before the warranty expires is an option for those with infant-mortality battery anxiety. We are not in the early adopter phase with EVs anymore, so it is less of risky-new-thing-that-doesn't-pan-out. It is OK to be a late adopter. But it is a much nicer of an experience. And no oil-changes or going to the gas station (I wouldn't recommend getting an EV if you can't charge overnight at home). Have you ever test driven an EV? EVs pretty much sell themselves, once you get behind the wheel.
https://www.nissanusa.com/shopping-tools/search-inventory?mo...
So I mean I’m sorry your wife is irrational about it, but I don’t think that’s indicative of the market as a whole.
So do traditional vehicles. You need to have them serviced regularly, but otherwise they work fine for literally decades. My uncle has a Volvo 240 GL that car is 50+ year old.
> How much is an ice whole engine replacement in a semi modern car? Not cheap and happens more often than an ev battery dropping dead.
Engine failure is extremely rare. My 1997 Landrover Defender 300TDI is getting upto 300,000 miles and lets just say it hasn't had the easiest life (it was on a farm before I got it). Landrover's aren't known for their reliability.
My old Astra is still on the road (according to the DVLA) and that had well over 150,000 on the clock when I sold it.
> So I mean I’m sorry your wife is irrational about it, but I don’t think that’s indicative of the market as a whole.
His wife isn't irrational. I can get a mid-2000s Diesel that will have decent mileage for less than £4000 in the UK. I see people saying "I only paid $30,000 for this EV". I have never paid more than £10,000 for a car and they last for years and years as long as I get them serviced
It doesn't matter what the rates are compared to Petrol/Diesel cars, it is an unknown and large potential cost with an expensive initial purchase especially compared to a second hand vehicle that would fulfil the exact same function.
Saying that actually makes me wonder - surely insurance would cover a random battery failure fault, in the same way as an engine fire? I dont know if it does but it feels intuitively like it should.
It is something that I do not need to worry about with my current vehicle, in fact most Petrol/Diesel vehicles will last a very long time with basic servicing.
I don't understand why people on have such a hard time understanding potentially expensive unknowns are not an attractive proposition.
Most EVs batteries will outlast the lifetime of the car, with some acceptable loss of capacity. Some small number won’t, and that will be expensive.
It’s the same thing.
As far as most people are concerned that is just a claim that is made as they have no idea whether it is true. I am specifically talking about what is the perception.
Therefore it is seen as risky and for something like a car which most people see as a way to get from A to B, they don't want potential headaches.
> It’s the same thing.
No because one is already known and the other isn't as far as most people are concerned.
They also talk about whether these things are any good. They normally talk about the issues that other people have had. Any issue that seems like a PITA, will put them off when the existing vehicles typically don't have many of these issues.
I think we are still in the Early Adopter Stage for EVs and I don't know whether we will get out of it.
Even if it’s true that people have a “perception”, it won’t matter in the medium term, these folk are going to learn pretty quick that EVs are more reliable than ice cars. Much simpler, much less to go wrong. And soon cheaper, at least everywhere but the US. We’ll be into majority EV soon enough (not in the US, for reasons)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45631855
The original poster does a much better job than I explaining the issue.
> Even if it’s true that people have a “perception”, it won’t matter in the medium term, these folk are going to learn pretty quick that EVs are more reliable than ice cars. Much simpler, much less to go wrong.
When people make this claim I know they have never had to work on a vehicle. What you think is simpler (which I suspect is less moving parts) actually isn't. Mechanical systems can be diagnosed by simply prodding / wiggling them much of the time or a visual inspection.
EVs for the most part have a huge amount of electronics and computer software. Computer software is incredibly complex in its own right and I shouldn't need to spell that here.
Electronics can fail with moisture and dirt. Electronics are the most difficult thing to solve when repairing a vehicle and this includes working on older vehicles. Issues are difficult to diagnose and intermittent.
So while is mechanically it is simpler, that is dwarfed complex electronics and computer software which is many of orders of magnitude more complex.
It massively depends on the manufacturer, model and country. So it not entirely true.
Even if it was true it doesn't make EV simple or simpler which was your claim as they are completely reliant on a huge amount of electronics.
There is no such requirement really for Petrol/Diesel vehicles as I drive a vehicle with no ECU and no digital electronics.
> For better or worse, that’s all cars now.
It is obviously worse. Things are less reliable, less repairable and more proprietary.
> The days of simple engines you can fix with a wrench are in the past.
No quite true either.
You can still do a huge number of jobs with basic tools. You may need some sort of code reader to help diagnose. You can still physically inspect things, and prod things etc. The fundamentals of how the vehicle works hasn't changed.
For the benefit of others still arguing one the basis of specs, checkboxes, links to technical data, etc., here's my response in another branch that addresses the fact that some commenters are completely missing the point:
No, quite to the contrary. She is being far more rational than most fan boys.
I have driven IC cars 300K miles. The cost of maintenance over that period of time was in the <$5K range. Modern vehicles last a very long time without problems with very moderate maintenance. I can also swap out an entire engine and transmission for a few thousand dollars if necessary (which is never). I have personally rebuilt engines, transmissions, clutches and brakes for very little money.
She manages the family finances, and has exactly zero interest in taking a risk that nobody on this thread making an argument for EV's is willing to underwrite for my family. And that extends to the manufacturer as well.
So, while it might feel right to call someone irrational for not aligning with what I consider your fantasy, unless you are willing to issue my family a guarantee that the battery swap will not cost us more than $5K per vehicle you are taking advantage of being able to criticize someone while not putting your money where your mouth is going.
Yet another take: $50K invested in a good ETF (like VGT) will probably double in five years to $100K and over $200K in ten years. That's a shitload of money to waste on batteries. No, I think she is very far from being irrational.
I know batteries degrade over time. I know random failures do not happen unless, well, something random happens, which is generally rare.
As an engineer who has designed and manufactured dozens of products and then had to go sell them, what I am telling you is that the EV industry has done a shit job selling risk mitigation.
There are virtually no stories of IC cars requiring $25K repairs after N years. Nobody buying a new or used IC vehicle ever thinks about having to spend at those levels, because is just does not happen except for really freak circumstances (your engine and transmission commit suicide).
In the EV world the case is different. Someone (my wife and others) don't go from "Let's install a large solar array to get ready to buy a couple of Teslas" to "I am not touching an EV if it was free" out of nowhere.
That happened because the fear of the $25K expense per vehicle got planted into her head when reports of this happening surfaced. You never hear from happy customers who put 200K miles on an EV. You definitely do hear from cases where the manufacturer charged someone $25K or more for a battery replacement.
This is called "Positioning" and there's a very famous marketing book on the subject. Once your product or a concept owns a certain position in someone's mind it is incredibly difficult to change it.
You know exactly how positioning works. If I were to ask you who you'd call to fix your plumbing; where to go to get the best coffee, burger, steak, etc. You will typically answer that question instantly using whatever brand or company owns that positioning in your brain. That's how it works.
Well, the EV companies have managed to own the "$25K battery replacement" position. They should have come out of the gate with an aggressively low replacement cost, the kind that nobody would every object paying. In my post I proposed that this number is $5K. Why? Because I know that, if this guarantee existed, this would be the number that would put two Teslas on our driveway right now.
Don't send links about battery longevity and your personal anecdotal data. They are irrelevant. This is the equivalent of "Sell me this pen" for the EV question about batteries.
Maybe this example can drive the point further: I have a fear of going up on a tall ladder, you know, the kind you might use to get up on a roof. I get up past a certain point and my brain says "Hard stop! No f-ing way". Now, intellectually, I know that millions of people go up and down these things every day without a problem. I also know that, as long as I secure the bottom very well and make sure the top can't slide around, I'll be safe. I further understand that I have to keep the vertical projection of the center of gravity within the base of the triangle formed by the ladder against the house. I know these things. And I know that I will be perfectly safe. And yet, in my brain, the "tall ladders are unsafe" positioning has taken hold and that's that. I know I can fix it. And it will take a lot of work.
That's my point. Positioning. Not physics.
Or, what I suspect but have nothing but anecdotal data - the “25k replacement” positioned group is not that big, or not big enough for manufacturers to care. I’ve certainly never heard that as a fear or even mentioned from anyone I know. Manufacturers can probably just ignore these folk, sell to the rest of the market, and over time they’ll change their mind “for free” anyway as more mass market evidence comes in of it not being a real problem. Or not, and they never sell to those particular folk, but oh well, it’s still not worth it, it’s incredibly expensive to change a skeptics mind. These companies aren’t idiots, they do all kind of market positioning research. The fact that there’s no product/guarentee for your particular concern probably means it isn’t worth it to them. They’ll never get your $ but they don’t care.
I do idly wonder if there’s a market here for a specific insurance product for ev batteries, and then those that have the fear can buy it.
--
Many of the EV influencer/reviewers (that I binge watch) do advise leasing over purchasing. Misc reasons (at least in the US):
Continued high rate of improvement. So for EV enthusiasts (early adopters), who are likely to upgrade, leasing avoids eating the entire depreciation in value.
Manufacturer incentives for new purchases drive down used car prices.
Many of the models are simply too expensive. (Esp with the current overstock.) Their resale value will normalize once new EVs reach price parity with comparable ICEs.
With so many leases expiring, there's more supply than demand (for used EVs).
--
Anecdatally, I held off buying (or leasing) a new Kia EV9 this year. It's just too expensive; implicitly reflected in their generous incentives. Kia's software is still immature. Knowing I don't intend to keep the vehicle, with their turrible resale value, I wasn't able to stomach the depreciation.
FWIW, My future perfect vehicle is a Toyota Sienna EV, over 350mi range, fast charging, and equiv to Tesla's software.
I predict, based totally on vibes, that sales of city cars (eg Kia Kona, Nissan Leaf) will be just fine once their price is 1:1 with ICE. Ditto roadtrippers (eg VW ID.Buzz) once their range is over 300mi.
Assuming the bank's predictions are correct, that's not true. The lease agreement simply predicts a specific residual value and you pay the difference between that and the purchase price (in other words, the full predicted depreciation amount) in your payments. Of course, the less you drive the leased car compared to your mileage allowance, the worse you do, since the residual value prediction assumes you used all 10k miles a year or whatever.
Not saying leasing is bad, just that the opportunity for them to be a better deal strictly financially depends mostly on whether the bank overestimates the residual value (as I suspect happened with my off-lease used EV, which cost me less than half the sticker price, with 16k miles, at 3 years old).
> Battery-as-a-service models are emerging as a potential lifeline...
Not for consumers. Maybe for fleet vehicles.
The rate of innovation has to slow down before that kind of standardization can take hold. And battery tech, from the chemistry to the packs, shows no sign of slowing down in the immediate future.
In 2023 the car market was wildly overpriced due to the low interest rates and covid money combined with supply chain problems.
> For Tesla owners in the U.S., their 2023 Model Ys are worth 42% less than what they paid two years ago
If you’re picking a car betting on being able to recoup some of the price later on resale value then you’re doing it wrong.
Film bodies found their post-digital price floor quite quickly. DSLRs and mirrorless have only found secondhand price stability in the last three or four years and while a big part of it is the quality plateau at the end of the megapixel race (which might have some sort of analogue in the electric car industry, though I don’t know what it is —- range, perhaps), part of that was driven by pandemic component scarcity and inflation holding up the new camera market prices.
In short I think this depreciation will last for another decade until manufacturers feel confident they will sell enough volume to make cheaper cars.
I also suspect there simply aren't many used EVs I'd want right now. I generally "techie" cars with tons of software features, big ol' touch screens, and half-baked self-driving features. I'm still not even comfortable with keyless start on my current vehicle and I hate the adaptive cruise, which I am unable to turn off. For better or worse, EVs seem to always be at the bleeding edge of these kinds of technologies.
Its also turned into a mountain of problems recently. It was great until about a year ago, then the battery started acting up. With 10 miles of charge left it will drop to 0, go into limp mode, and require dealership software to disable the thrown code and restart the car. Now it has a phantom battery drain going on, killing the 12v battery after being parked for a few days.
I really liked the car until these issues cropped up. Now I wish I hadn't saved the ~$2,800 in gas while the car depreciated by 4x that amount.
I live in Canada where the distances are long and the weather is freaking cold. These are 2 circumstances very adverse to EVs.
But, still, I love my Kia Niro EV. It is the best car I've ever had. The driving experience is so good that it made me enjoy driving; I always hated driving before this car.
EVs run much smoother, are more stable and more powerful. Besides, if you charge them at home, they're far cheaper; even if you don't have solar panels (I do have them, too).
I'd happily buy one if I were a bit more comfortable with their use, but I'm a tech "dawdler".
Most EVs are luxury vehicles. Luxury vehicles depreciate much faster than regular cars. Luxury car buyers care if the car is new or not.
Tesla should be compared to BMW not Ford. Teslas depreciate at similar rates to BMWs.
EVs like the leaf are depreciating fast because their technology is becoming obsolete.
I think it is too early to be sure that EVs depreciate quickly.
On long trips, I plug in at bathroom breaks about once every 2-3 hours. I don't wait for a full charge because (surprise surprise), I'm going to need to pee before I deplete the battery.
Now that I've adjusted, I actually prefer it to gas, because I can just plug in and walk away instead of needing to babysit the car at the pump.
The flip side of this is a general over correction as the new car tax break ends used EVs are really compelling today. A slightly used Long Range Model 3 is a far better option than their new Base Model 3.
Eventually ICE cars were designed for their resale value so people buying a new car every 3 or 5 years could afford to spend more money. That’s coming for EVs as the technology improves battery degradation means the range sweet spot will be chosen to keep the used market happy not just new buyers etc.
The electricity and ICE fuel costs should be included if the battery is included. The battery is some sort of upfront fuel cost in a way the gas tank isn't.
Since mileage wear is proportional to fuel use anyway.
But we're discussing resale value specifically, and it doesn't matter if you spent $25 or $50 "filling it up" last week when you sell it.
https://www.kbb.com/car-depreciation/
When you factor that in, the difference between EVs and internal combustion engines looks like it's just a few thousand dollars...
Look at Nissan leafs. They “traditionally” depreciate.
I bought a used 2023 Model Y for about $36k (only 15k miles) it even came with upgrades like acceleration boost and an extra (unusable) back seat. This particular model was about $52k new in 2023.
I can't believe how much car I bought for my money. Autosteer is fantastic (FSD needs work). Early morning drive to the airport and the car was driving itself while I ate my breakfast and drank my coffee.
Used cars are usually sold to someone who can't afford a new car. It can also be cheaper to drive an EV than a gas car.
So I think the opposite - Used EVs will create an opportunity for normal people to switch away from gas cars.
As to low resale value - I think tesla was VERY aware of this problem and artificially propped up their used market when they were starting out by offering a buyback program.
People bought Model Ys during Covid close to 70k, of course it will show up as massive depreciation if manufacturer is selling the same shit for nearly half the price.
Also, all new cars have too much electronics and sensors, they all depreciate faster.
This article doesn't seem to mention those credits, but they are likely a large factor in the difference between the nominal sale price of a new EV and the used market price.
If you don't factor in those credits, it looks like someone paid $42k for an EV that a couple of years later was only worth $30k. When in reality they paid $35k for that new EV as a net purchase cost.
In which case: no it's not that they're amazing - it's that they are less desirable than ICE vehicles.
(I used to own a Tesla now I'm back on a hybrid, and delighted about it)
For the second one insurance companies could help alleviate the uncertainty, but I don’t see major vendors offering packages.
People don’t have 20k in a single shot to fix a battery failure. (Maybe cumulatively for a gas car one has to pay more, but it will be in small installments)
The question is rather whether this depreciation curve is going to normalize into that of Combustion Engine powered cars or if the „EV transition“ just means „transitioning cars into the E-waste category of smartphones and TVs“
Nobody profits from EV sales except Tesla (and 1/7 Chinese companies) [1].
[1] https://www.carscoops.com/2025/03/only-four-ev-brands-are-pr...
I like the direction of https://slate.auto. Module, bring-your-own-computer. We'll see if they allow affordable trade-in's for upgrading battery/motors.
They could also work with CommaAI for autonomy.
The newest vehicle reliability advances are _less_ reliability via:
- cylinder deactivation
- ubiquitous turbos
- gasoline direction injection
- more computers
- generally higher cost of repairs (eg: if a car from 2023 needed a headlight it would cost much more than a car from 1998 needing a headlight, and even if they both had the same failure rate the reliability of the new car would be worse from cost alone)
For example, for the longest time Nissan CVTs were "nonrebuildable, send it back and buy a reman" now any idiot can rebuild one for under a grand in parts.
4L60 and E4OD rebuilds were also $$$ for a long time now they're dirt cheap too.
I'm not writing about 50+ year old platforms, around which a huge market of suppliers and technicians has evolved. The ICE transmissions GM sells today are vastly more complex, with zero design commonality with the classic stuff, and enjoy none of the benefit of long adoption that make the classic stuff cost effective. Further, and this is the important part, because the lifecycle of everything ICE is much shorter now, measured in years as opposed to decades, they never will.
So ten years from now, when your circa 2020 10L60 dies, there won't be a transmission shop in every town that's equipped and stocked to deal with it cheaply. The cost will be greater than the value of the vehicle. And that's my point: these vehicles are not going to be economic to operate out of warranty.
My ass.
You can trace all these designs back forever. It's more "inspired by" than actual incremental revision in most cases. There is just about nothing but some vague shapes that look similar and maybe some bolt lengths that are common between a 4L60 and the TH350 era stuff.
>Further, and this is the important part, because the lifecycle of everything ICE is much shorter now, measured in years as opposed to decades, they never will.
The average car on the road is lasting longer as the years go on. People said the same things when fuel injection came out.
>So ten years from now, when your circa 2020 10L60 dies, there won't be a transmission shop in every town that's equipped and stocked to deal with it cheaply. The cost will be greater than the value of the vehicle.
I'll take that bet. Modern transmissions are stupidly easy to rebuild from a skills point of view because they replace all sorts of mechanical adjustment with "hurr hurr we just PWM the solenoid to make it go BRRT and if the BRRT is too rough the computer algorithm will turn it down". Yeah there's more components, but those are easi.
i don't agree, my friend has been driving the same Toyota LandCruiser for 20 years. I will have no problems handing my 2016 4runner down to my kid who turns 16 this December. The 4runner will last another 10 years easy.
Respectfully I specifically wrote "new." 20 year old SUVs predate the issues of new vehicles.
> my 2016 4runner
Even a 2016 vehicle predates what I'm pointing out. A 2016 4runner likely has a 270hp naturally aspirated V6 with modest power and a relatively basic 5 speed auto transmission. A 2025 4runner is a turbo charged 4 cylinder making nearly 2hp/cu in. and an 8 speed transmission. The former is much simpler and thus economic to maintain and repair compared to the latter.
ICE vehicle drivetrains have changed radically in only the last few years. They're almost universally using forced induction, integrated into unserviceable castings, to attain far higher volumetric efficiency, equivalent to high performance engines of not long ago. Gone are the 4-5 speed transmissions and transaxles: 8-10+ speed is the norm, and the complexity follows here as well. They are absolutely intolerant of neglect and abuse. Repairs are complex and likely to fail: manufacturers have taken to replacing major assemblies in leu of attempting repairs as they would have in the past. Part of that is due to the unserviceable nature of these components. Another part is the lack of dealer talent to deal with their own products. Another part is that the manufacturing lifecycle of major assemblies is now extremely short: only a couple years, whereas 10+ years was normal for common platforms as recently as the the 2010s.
What this means is: when these new products are no longer supported by manufacturers, who will drop their supply obligations rapidly as they legally can due to short lifecycles, parts will be fabulously expensive and difficult to obtain and the skills and tools necessary to repair them will be rarified and also expensive. Post-warranty ICE vehicles will be uneconomic, full stop.
- tons of sensors with limited lifespans
- more complicated transmissions with more gears
- auto start/stop
Pretty much all of these reliability reducers are manufacturers trying to eek a little more MPGs by throwing lots of complicated technology at the problem, which introduces a lot more failure points.
Headlights and taillights on my current vehicle are supposedly around $1500 each, mostly due to a bunch of sophisticated sensors being built in.
Back in the 80s headlights were standardized (in the US at least) - you either had rectangular or circular. They were available at every auto parts store. Now they're a special order item from the dealer.
There are oil tests that confirm this. Also, 10,000+ mile oil changes are not new, and there are tons of used vehicles on the market, running around with long oil change intervals, and high mileage.
But also, if you have a vehicle with a sealed headlight, you're probably not having to change it every other winter.
Perhaps you're not into cars much but if you compare top cars on track days etc. you will know there have definitely been huge changes. Though during the last 20 years repairability and reliability also took a hit.
But are they fun? My main experience of powerful cars is you hit the speed limit or a traffic jam within about 10 seconds.
I have more fun on my 1/3 hp ebike than my 200 hp car which suffers from the above.
I did the same mountain pass in my Subaru recently and didn't even notice I was going 20mph over the speed limit. The engine was silent and still responsive.
How about the transmission lol
And it'll only weigh 4,500 lbs.
How so? Are those not improvements?
Said no pedestrian hidden behind my A-pillar (just kidding I still drive a 1980s minivan, one of the poor people ones, not the hipster one, don't get your hopes up).
Yes we're doomed is what I mean.
Political? I'd say it's very, very personal.
This issue is for fleet operators overextending themselves buying too many cars, and probably collateralizing debt off of them
Additionally, resale market demand and price discovery is one thing, but it really sounds more like the primary market is overvalued
And this aspect just made me lol
> 3-year-old EVs lost more than half of their value compared with 39% for gas cars.
so around 50% as opposed to around 40%. wow. stop the presses.
In such case I suspect the impact is mostly on leasing companies with issues on viability and leasing costs (for consumers).
In UK/Europe this might also explain why depreciation after 3 years is so high: Leasing companies trying to dump EVs returned at end of leases.
> through "salary sacrifice" schemes from employers (which saves the whole income tax on payments)
I don't know if such a thing exists in the US. I'm not aware of it, but it could easily have escaped my notice.
The first hit of 'depreciation' is when this contradiction appears in the used price, after that they depreciate like normal.
What's more interesting from reading the discussion here is that the depreciation of EV goes beyond the battery and thermal/geographic tax its that there is nothing special from the car market point of view that suggests a mass produced EV should hold its value against some truly sought after ICE cars that offer a unique novelty.
Even the Porsche EVs have not held their value very well compared to their ICE cars. There is simply no appeal to taste when you have to generate ICE sounds via speaker and signals EVs aren't very fun to drive or offer much novelty beyond the fact that its an EV compared to ICE cars where each engine is unique to the maker and has ton of parts all synchronized into a controlled chaos.
I dont think all EV's are dropping equally.
Let's say (Chinese) EVs never appear in the world. Why do car prices keep increasing while only marginally better?
It’s just that the cars are aging like iPhones. Last years hardware package, hardware compatibility with latest software, etc are all people seem to talk about on Reddit. I think that’s a factor in the steep depreciation.
I just bought a new Corolla hybrid, it gets 60 miles per gallon and should last a good while. Maybe next purchase.
what is unique to electronic???? improving fast (more than peers), but sometimes in the future where innovation is "maxed out" like phone, we could see an "cheaper" EV depreciate not as fast
In Germany, you can buy used luxury cars at high discount due to being fuel inefficient for years now, and that is with barely a price increase for gas and barely 1 l/100km to through 3 l/100km cars taking up more market share.
Is BYD any different?
The expected repair cost was ~1/10 that: https://www.thedrive.com/news/41000-rivian-fender-bender-act...
My beat up truck got quoted 6k to replace a dent caused by a fender bender.
What?
https://parts.tesla.com/en-US/landingpage
https://epc.tesla.com/en-US/catalogs/dab210aa-2a7d-43b3-9e9b...
Anyone can by them directly from Tesla.
These EVs should be much cheaper. Either batteries are so outlandishly expensive that this will never be economically viable for the vast majority of the world outside of cities, or companies are playing accounting games.
In any case, when purchasing a used EV, you're essentially risking the entire purchase price if you get a battery lemon. Buying a Bolt or what have you for $15-$20k, and having to replace the battery at 60%+ of your purchase price, that's too much risk. Whereas if you bought a used ICE vehichle for $15-20k, and your engine fails, you might might need to spend $1500-5k for a repair, it's not all or nothing. And with a moderate amount of research, you can determine which makes or models are prone to early large repairs.
If EV manufacturers would sell a no-questions-asked insurance policy that guarantees the life of the battery to 250k miles, there would be no issue.
There aren’t many EV’s on the lots either as the configuration team doesn’t see a need to order them from manufacturers if people aren’t buying them.
Supply glut/low demand causes prices to go down.
Also, have you seen the out-of-warranty maintenance/repair costs for many EVs?
I assert that these 2 things contribute heavily to the rapid depreciation of EVs.
There are plenty of deals to be had from a used EV market.
ICEs are a stable technology. There’s little learning curve. Next years EV could be a step change up from last years at the same cost.
How is this a bad thing?
The only part that I think you might be trying to make this case for is the battery but even NMC batteries at 1,000 cycles and 200 mile range will by far exceed the scrap mileage of the average car.
LFP batteries with their higher cycle count will probably be transplanted to new cars.
Yes, look at the battery. You will see it has a long life.
Most people just don't want another after their first one. So there is not much demand. Dealerships are practically giving them away right now, which is how they snagged me.
Luckily, I can get out of this lease in a couple of years. Unluckily, I will have to spend more on a very quick ICE car now that I've experienced EV acceleration. Luckily, it'll still probably be cheaper than an EV.
ICE cars have way more things that break down and less reliable for the most part. As for always having to charge... most people driving an EV recharge every night at home and rarely require a charging station. Road trips are a different story but most people don't have regular road trips.
I wish the market had a wide selection of 40-50 miles electric range PHEVs ... but a 20 mile EV mode range PHEV will still electrify 80% of your city driving in lots of situations.
An electric car's miles per energy is not as relevant, because current electricity prices are sufficiently low such that people won't really care whether it's 3 miles per kWh or 5 miles per kWh. They will care about how far they can go on a single charge, hence range is a metric that is often advertised.
So the problem is already in the process of solving itself? Seems like standard first mover technology stuff.
This article seems not worth the pixels it’s printed on.
Plus, batteries will mostly last twice as long as the typical car is on the road before it gets scrapped for unrelated reasons.
The depreciation is mostly explained by market distortions caused by subsidies.
As someone who bought a 2023 Model Y 7 seat Long Range, I can tell you my desire to sell the car was 100% because of the negative brand value caused by Musk.
I’m not able to sell it because I’m currently $17,000 underwater on it and can’t afford to dump it, but I would if I had $17,000 to lose. I have a friend who did just that.
I love my Tesla (for the most part, it has some basic annoyances that remind me that building and testing a car for California is not the same as building it for everywhere), but as someone who tracked the depreciation of my own Tesla, it started plummeting when Musk decided to buy Twitter and spend his time exonerating the alt-right, and culminated with his foray into public policy.
Prices were high, then the credit came back and Tesla slashed prices. Those of us who bought a 2023 got hosed pretty hard.
Within very few years they will be like modern phones that you only update because they're worn down.
First of all I believe that the car manufactures (especially for electric cars) these days use planned obsolescence tactics to limit a car's lifespan at one side, while also promising the buyers that the car could last for far longer compared to their old ICE cars. However this promise often doesn't seem to hold up in the real world which will decrease confidence once the cars start breaking earlier. This is especially problematic when you are running an business calculating in the promised lifespan instead of the actual lifespan, once a business finds out (and does the math) often it will make economical sense to dump the fleet.
On top of that I think a big problem with certain cars on the second hand market is big onetime investments. You can see that already in certain internal combustion engine cars that are know to require a costly fix after x amount of miles. This is quite important in the second hand market since you often have to expect to do the "big maintenance" once you purchase a second hand vehicle as people like to sell slightly before this maintenance is due (and often not tell you).
Where EV's may run for a long time without problems they require costly repairs once they do break. Most EV's are build in a mostly non repairable way, like many modern vehicles, and you have to pray that the parts will be available after 10 years. Also a lot of maintenance on EV's can not easily be done by an enthusiast in a shed as it requires special equipment, certification and skills. Where with an ICE engine you may run into smaller maintenance earlier you are paying these fixes incrementally, and may be able to do a lot of the maintenance yourself.
On top of that I think there is a certain saturation in the electric car market where people that care about buying an EV increasingly have a EV and the people that don't care (or prefer ICE) don't want to invest the additional premium, or uncertainty to buy an EV. For example I don't buy an EV because it's very impractical to charge it where I live and I like the added flexibility (miles) that an economy ICE car can provide.
Tesla dropped their prices a lot after covid boom, that completely distorted the market.
And/or maybe it should have been the time of the PHEV first.
But where we live there is a huuge fanbase of veteran cars like Chevrolet, people are nuts about them and arrange day long cruising around the city a few times a year.
Considering the complexity and rapid technology changes of electric cars, I doubt we'll see many working VW ID.5 in 70 years cruising the streets.
We're still way too early in the shift to EV's to have a reliable metric of long term resale values, but theres basically nothing to suggest they would be lower than ICE vehicles once people stop believing the utter nonsense being pushed about EV's longevity by a select few.
Yes EVs are "depreciating faster"
But then EVs hold 40% of the market, ICE cars were obselete.
You can by brand new B-segment sedans in China for 10k.
To spread good FUD, there has to be truth in it, so that debunking it gets very difficult. Over the years I've seen so much FUD it's not even funny (see for example https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/factcheck/electric-vehic...).
This news story shows that the FUD has worked well (especially in the US), hats off to the fossil fuel industry. It's also a double-whammy: this story will spread, so people will be even more suspicious of EVs, which will cause their popularity to fall, which will cause their resale prices to fall…
It's quite sad, but also impressive.
They never pay off their cars and trade them in on another one and just keep making payments without really ever owning a car outright. And increasingly as prices have gone up they are trading cars in that they are underwater on, rolling old debt into the next loan!
If you're in this category of insane financial ignorance trying to appear rich but actually being "car poor" of course this resale is a huge problem. But for anyone who buys a car outright or pays off their loan and then drives the car for many years it's not a problem at all whether you bought new or took advantage of the massive depreciation and bought a lightly used one for a great price.
if more of the electorate knew they could use these ev batteries in second life applications to power their homes businesses or otherwise be recycled into functional power providing devices, perhaps the percieved value wouldn't be so low. but right now everyone is convinced that the batteries are expiring at a fast rate when in reality they maintain usability into the 100s of k-miles.
but again, this article is about india, which is about 10 years behind the west in electrifying anything. so ... why are we asking the new kids on the block about depreciation?
why don't you ask the norwegians (95% ev this year) about depreciation? their market is much more mature with many more advanced consumers that can appraise the depreciated batteries much better. but you don't ask them because you want to muck-rake EV.
don't go to the premier ev market for this information go to the most under-developed one.
why don't you go ask south africans what they think about depreciating batteries?
ugh. 400 points for this drivel. you people are literally inane.
As a result of the above, EVs that are ~three years old are flooding the used car market and you can pick up a Tesla for < £20k
> A U.K.-based study found 3-year-old EVs lost more than half of their value compared with 39% for gas cars.
40-50% depreciation is crazy, there is little reason why this should happen as cars do not change that much in such a short time. I bet they would not depreciate that hard if a new car was sold at 30k.
It's most likely a lie, they probably based the numbers on the original MSRP rather than the original out-the-door price.
They're objects that lose value when you use them. That's normal.
A bar of gold will hold value a lot better than a car, but that doesn't mean a car is a worse purchase.
I think we can say that EV and ICE has nearly same utility, perks on either side. Faster refuelling vs. being able to do it at home.
Now next we can compare operational costs, what is the cost of fuel/electricity and maintenance. With home charging yes EVs are ahead.
But if we take into account Purchase price minus price you get when selling. Well EVs are often more expensive to start with. And then they depreciate more so you get less as an percentage from original purchase price.
Now it can very well be that you come lot of ahead in scenarios where you replace car with new one every 3 or 5 years with ICEs.
So total cost of ownership does matter. And big chunk of that is depreciation. Unless you are one of the few who buy new and then drive it to junk yard.
If in 5 years, your EV (that had similar utility as an ICE when you bought it) has lost so much value relative to a new EV, then the new EV must offer much more utility over both the old EV and the old ICE, in which case your ICE should have lost a similar amount of value.
I.e, I've only bought cars that are 10+ years (exactly due to the depreciation factor!), but most other people buy or lease as new of a car as they possibly can afford. Doesn't make financial sense to me, yet it's done so very often.
Not sure why this would be hard to understand.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1F5IQOynIawoXiJPV...
It does not seem remarkable that a new product takes some time to find its market price, and COGS goes down as supply chain improvements are made.
And there was a $7,500 tax credit at time of purchase introduced in Jan 2023. At least the graph comparing Model Y to Ford F150 seems expected.
That can happen with a conventional car as well, which is why gap insurance exists. The regular insurance should still give you the replacement price (which would be the depreciated value).
If the value of your EV has dropped to $10k and you get paid out that much for an accident, then in theory you should be able to buy a similar condition EV on the used car market for $10k. What's the problem with that?
If you're trying to get people to switch en masse to EVs, it's not good for everyone to be in perpetual "ehh there's gonna be way better ones around the corner" mode.
> If the value of your EV has dropped to $10k and you get paid out that much for an accident, then in theory you should be able to buy a similar condition EV on the used car market for $10k. What's the problem with that?
The problem is when your loan balance is $20K and you're only getting a $10K payoff...
People make irrational decisions. That's a fact.
People "should" do things they don't. That's a fact.
The question is not, "What would a logically-driven being do?", but "What are people doing?"
But hey, that just means better used EV prices for the rest of us. You can get some high end gently used ones for a great price.
—
“ For Tesla owners in the U.S., their 2023 Model Ys are worth 42% less than what they paid two years ago, while a Ford F-150 truck bought the same year depreciated just 20%. Older EV models depreciate even faster than newer ones. ”
Why buy a car that depreciates hella fast?
It says that it deprecates faster than other type of cars which should be worse in this particular criteria
They're objects that disintegrate in the atmosphere at some point when you use them. That's normal, it even has a name: rapid unscheduled disassembly.
Moreover, EV batteries are recyclable. The main thing holding back lithium recycling has been the supply chain of used batteries, because the batteries are quite durable.
If the resale value of EVs is falling, that makes it easier to extract the batteries and use the raw material to build better batteries.
Buyers of new Teslas are basically the TSLA cult.
Used buyers... aren't.
Hm, what might have happened that might have destroyed the overall brand with sensible, probably-liberal buyers of used EVs? I vaguely recall some salute thing. Don't really remember the specifics. I just remember there was a bit of a hubbub.
UK and EU are defacto making Petrol/Diesel cars production uneconomical / illegal. California IIRC are also has a deadline for Petrol/Diesel cars IIRC.
> And why a massive downgrade?
The biggest ones for me are:
1) Range. I have a 700 mile range on my car. My old car before that could do 600 miles. I can travel from one end of the UK to another with 1/2 fuel stops. I have family I see regularly on the other side of the country. I can do the trip in 4 providing good traffic In an Electric vehicle that time is 5-7 hours due to the extra stops required. I know this because my mother and step father recently came to visit me and they have an electric vehicle. If you regularly do longer trips even 30 minutes off the road is a long time. I don't stop for anything other than a bathroom break when I do a long journey.
2) Charging time. I live in an apartment. I would need to charge the car away from home. That is a massive PITA IMO. I spend maybe 5 minutes in a petrol station, compared to 30 minutes at a charger.
3) Almost every modern vehicle car has a bunch of annoyances in the vehicle. The electric cars I have seen have this dialled up to 11.
4) Cost. Electric vehicles are really expensive IMO. I can get a cheap second hand diesel for a few thousand in reasonable condition.
> And why don't you change the channel off of Fox occasionally?
Snarky responses like this is why people become resentful. Just because people have a different view point to yours doesn't mean they have been brainwashed by someone.
A lot of us are happy with the vehicles we already have. I simply do not have an interest in ever owning an electric vehicle. I also prefer older vehicles and bikes because they are simpler and I prefer the way they operate.
A lot of these themes btw was explored by Demolition Man with Sly Stallone. The "resistance" figures to the "regime" are eating meat and driving a v8 muscle car.
I suggest you watch that, it is a fun movie and Sandra Bullock looks gorgeous in it.
Looking across fhe used car sites and KBB, I'm probably going to buy new instead.
There's a concerted PR effort to slander EVs out there, take all articles with a huge grain of salt.