EV Models Excluding Tesla models

GM has been touting their Ultium batteries for so long, that they were obsolete before the first Ultium battery was sold, and they still can't manufacture them reliably.
I was a little surprised to see that MotorWeek selected the 2025 Chevy Equinox EV as it's 2025 Best of the Year winner.
Yeah, Chevy with the Ultium batteries. I do watch Motor Week but find them to be more toward the "cheerleader" end of the spectrum (for all cars they test) rather than "just the facts, ma'am."
 
They don't have issues with the motors or gears (mostly). They have issues with the battery management systems, which are very tricky hardware and software. Ford had problems with their High Voltage Battery Junction Box (HVBJB) the first few years of the Mach-E. Hyundai Motor Group struggled with battery problems in the Ioniq 5 and EV 6 before finally recalling 150,000 cars for Integrated Charging Control Unit (ICCU) failures. GM has been touting their Ultium batteries for so long, that they were obsolete before the first Ultium battery was sold, and they still can't manufacture them reliably. But the trend seems to be positive for all manufacturers, new and legacy.

I think the traditional manufacturers are going to struggle with software to do the battery management and to control the displays as well as doing over the air (OTA) firmware updates.

VW for instance had problems with updates and cut a deal with Rivian, an EV startup, to do their software for VW Group, which includes brands like Audi, Porsche, Skoda and others.
 
Yeah, Chevy with the Ultium batteries. I do watch Motor Week but find them to be more toward the "cheerleader" end of the spectrum (for all cars they test) rather than "just the facts, ma'am."
They may be doing the "cheerleader" thing but I don't see many other manufacturers "touching" the 35k price with anywhere near the same features as the Equinox EV. Hard to argue with that. I think that's the main reason they picked the Equinox as their car of the year. What's wrong with technology that's not 100% completely cutting edge anyway? If you want the latest and greatest, you usually end up paying more for it....and that's why everyone else charges more for the most part, imo anyway.
 
I get a kick out of people bragging that their EV goes 0 to 60 in anything under 5 seconds....like when is that even that practical? Maybe when you're trying to merge onto the freeway? Or passing someone. But most of that extra acceleration power is pretty much not used most of the time....or not really needed. ...
Literal 0-60 is rare, assuming that we wish to stay legal. One scenario would be merging onto CA 110 from any of the on-ramps, north of Los Angeles and south of Pasadena. Cars come to a complete stop (stop sign), then have maybe 200' to accelerate to full highway speed. I see soccer moms in minivans floor-it, spinning their front tires, making maximum effort to accelerate into traffic. Anything less than absolute full throttle would be stupid and dangerous. And no, traffic won't relent and won't leave a gap... meanwhile 20 other cars are standing there further up the ramp, waiting.

Much more common would be poking-along at 15 mph, and needing to accelerate to 35 mph... because that's the speed limit. Why 15 mph? Somebody up-ahead is turning, merging, pulling into/out of something. Or maybe just a traffic jam that suddenly opens up. Again, it's absolute maximum effort to accelerate, Scotty telling the Captain that she's giving it all that she has... but only for a brief number of seconds... and no, not to exceed the speed limit.

This is where EVs particularly excel. What's needed is neither low 0-60 nor quarter mile times, but sudden, violent, brief, on-demand acceleration. Just a burst of "speed", and then back to lackadaisical and sedate cruising. Sometimes this burst is extremely brief... just adding 10 mph or even 5 mph; so, go from 20 mph to 25 mph, but in a fraction of a second. In heavy traffic, this might happen 2-3 times a minute, for an hour-long (or longer) commute.
 
Literal 0-60 is rare,
I agree. I'm pretty sure the OEM tires on almost any EV couldn't handle max acceleration 0-60 anyway. But it's a simple number that people understand better than Nm of torque.
 
They may be doing the "cheerleader" thing but I don't see many other manufacturers "touching" the 35k price with anywhere near the same features as the Equinox EV. Hard to argue with that. I think that's the main reason they picked the Equinox as their car of the year. What's wrong with technology that's not 100% completely cutting edge anyway? If you want the latest and greatest, you usually end up paying more for it....and that's why everyone else charges more for the most part, imo anyway.

Literal 0-60 is rare, assuming that we wish to stay legal. One scenario would be merging onto CA 110 from any of the on-ramps, north of Los Angeles and south of Pasadena. Cars come to a complete stop (stop sign), then have maybe 200' to accelerate to full highway speed. I see soccer moms in minivans floor-it, spinning their front tires, making maximum effort to accelerate into traffic. Anything less than absolute full throttle would be stupid and dangerous. And no, traffic won't relent and won't leave a gap... meanwhile 20 other cars are standing there further up the ramp, waiting.

Much more common would be poking-along at 15 mph, and needing to accelerate to 35 mph... because that's the speed limit. Why 15 mph? Somebody up-ahead is turning, merging, pulling into/out of something. Or maybe just a traffic jam that suddenly opens up. Again, it's absolute maximum effort to accelerate, Scotty telling the Captain that she's giving it all that she has... but only for a brief number of seconds... and no, not to exceed the speed limit.

This is where EVs particularly excel. What's needed is neither low 0-60 nor quarter mile times, but sudden, violent, brief, on-demand acceleration. Just a burst of "speed", and then back to lackadaisical and sedate cruising. Sometimes this burst is extremely brief... just adding 10 mph or even 5 mph; so, go from 20 mph to 25 mph, but in a fraction of a second. In heavy traffic, this might happen 2-3 times a minute, for an hour-long (or longer) commute.

Yeah, the acceleration to merge onto a freeway can be pretty handy when needed. I do notice my relatively slow Bolt EUV (compared to other EV's) the most in those situations....and it's definitely nice to have. :)
 
The charging rates are listed in terms of miles of range added per minute of charging. The rates start at 2.7 for a Nissan Leaf go all the way to 16.1 for a Tesla Model 3.
Not a useful metric because the charging rate changes as the battery gets full. You need to see the full charge graph to really understand how a car charges. If you want a simple number for comparison across car models, use minutes to get from 10% to 80% charge, which is how one is likely to charge on a real road trip.

Also, range per Kw is a highly variable number. The EPA permits car manufacturers to choose different mi/KwH numbers, so it is not possible to compare range numbers across models.
 
Nothing is free.
I didn’t say it was free.
I said it was “almost free”.

And it is.
Yes, there is some cost of tire wear. And a relatively minor cost of a more powerful electric motor.


The more batteries you have, the more range you get. This is the primary goal of most EV builders.
As a side affect, you also get lots of torque.

Put. A small motor in the car you get a moderate level of torque. Put a bigger motor in the car you get a lot of torque.

The cost difference is minor.
 
Not a useful metric because the charging rate changes as the battery gets full. You need to see the full charge graph to really understand how a car charges.
You may realize that Level 1 (120V) and Level 2 (240V) do charge at essentially the same rate throughout the charge period, though somewhat ambient temperature dependent. Level 2 is the desirable option for many at home and still common at many public “destination” chargers (hotels, grocery stores, etc.).

It’s only Level 3 fast chargers (480-1000V) that have a dramatic rate reduction from start to nearing full capacity. e.g. charging from 20% to 60% would take much less time than 60% to 100%. Most Li-ion EV owners rarely if ever charge to 100% though LFP EV owners can with less concern. Many manufacturers recommend charging to 80% for daily use Li-ion, and only go higher if necessary for long trips (not usually necessary for one brands…).

AC-and-DC-charging-curves.png

chevrolet-bolt-ev-dc-fast-charging-curve.jpg
 
Last edited:
Not a useful metric because

Also, range per Kw is a highly variable number.


so it is not possible to compare range numbers across models.
Apparently, Consumer Reports disagrees with you. They put their name and reputation on the data.

They don't give enough info to tease out the specifics that you mention. But knowing CR, I doubt they used dramatically different starting and stopping points in the battery charge level. The differences they note are, in any case "relative." They used a DC charger at 350 KW, so any differences ARE specific to the car.

I wish they had said "We started at 10% charge and went to 90% charge" - but they didn't. Knowing CR, they didn't do one car from 80% to 90% and another from 10% to 20 % which is where you would see dramatic differences in charge rate, car to car.

My guess is they did all the cars at roughly the same starting % and stopping % and they probably used the percentage most people would use when traveling on the road - not so much in town since most people charge at home when they are not on the road.

Accept or reject CR's data, but I doubt you'd find better (more realistic data) elsewhere though YMMV. I've found CR to be pretty reliable if a bit "preachy" sometimes.
 
Apparently, Consumer Reports disagrees with you. They put their name and reputation on the data.
I don't doubt that CR stands by its data. But according to this page on their website, they are using manufacturers' own numbers:
According to data provided by their manufacturers, all of these new vehicles add more than 10 miles per minute of charging under ideal conditions at a public DC fast charging station
(emphasis added) The EPA lets manufacturers choose one of two methods for rating EV efficiency. So I stand by my assertion that MPGe numbers are not comparable across models, especially because we usually don't know which of the two methods a particular car uses in its official EPA rating. In this end, this means CR's numbers are not reliably comparable across car models.

It is frustrating as a consumer, and I don't understand why the EPA does that. Fortunately, there are plenty of sites that do their own "real world" testing to allow prospective buyers find comparable numbers so we can make informed choices.
 
I don't doubt that CR stands by its data. But according to this page on their website, they are using manufacturers' own numbers:

(emphasis added) The EPA lets manufacturers choose one of two methods for rating EV efficiency. So I stand by my assertion that MPGe numbers are not comparable across models, especially because we usually don't know which of the two methods a particular car uses in its official EPA rating. In this end, this means CR's numbers are not reliably comparable across car models.

It is frustrating as a consumer, and I don't understand why the EPA does that. Fortunately, there are plenty of sites that do their own "real world" testing to allow prospective buyers find comparable numbers so we can make informed choices.
I'm shocked. Shocked! You don't believe the manufacturers! What is this world coming to?

By the way, I said nothing about (and the article I referenced in CR this month said nothing about MPGe). The article was only about miles of range added per minute of charging at a 350 KW Fast Charger.

Once more, I'll say: Believe it or don't.
 
I'm shocked. Shocked! You don't believe the manufacturers! What is this world coming to?
We're getting side-tracked, but to be clear, I never said I don't believe the manufacturers. I merely pointed out how we, the consumers, don't know which EPA method any particular manufacturer chose to report their car's efficiency. This makes it hard to compare car A with car B. And if you compute miles/charging-minute based on the EPA mi/kWH, it is hard to compare car A with car B.
 
I believe the EPA is transitioning from one method to the other. Hopefully, this will not be an issue in a few years.
There is a generalized ‘fudge’ factor applied to the simpler tests to give something close to the average real world results.

Theoretically, the simpler tests with the fudge factor should be close to the more involved tests.
That isn’t always the case though.

For what it’s worth, I agree with you. They should have a single test.
 
I'm considering getting an Aspark Owl. It can accelerate from 0-97 km/h (60 mph) in 1.72 seconds and can attain a top speed of 413 km/h (257 mph), which would make it the fastest accelerating production car in the world. Pretty cool!

1739236089344.png
 
I'm considering getting an Aspark Owl. It can accelerate from 0-97 km/h (60 mph) in 1.72 seconds and can attain a top speed of 413 km/h (257 mph), which would make it the fastest accelerating production car in the world. Pretty cool!

View attachment 54258
Ah, but where can you drive this car? Do you really want to pay for this? $3.5M, really?
 
I'm considering getting an Aspark Owl. It can accelerate from 0-97 km/h (60 mph) in 1.72 seconds and can attain a top speed of 413 km/h (257 mph), which would make it the fastest accelerating production car in the world. Pretty cool!

View attachment 54258

I would hold off. That is going to seem real slow in the near future. I here this will be available in 2027 and then 1985.

Back-to-the-Future-Delorean-Time-Machine-with-Flames.jpg
 
I test drove a Ford Mustang Mach E (Premium Long Range, AWD) today. Anyone have one? If so, likes and dislikes?
 
I test drove a Ford Mustang Mach E (Premium Long Range, AWD) today. Anyone have one? If so, likes and dislikes?
I got this as my car rental when my Lyriq was in the workshop. Worst car that I have ever driven, and I am not exagerating.

- The brakes went from moving to STOP in an instance. There wa no gradual braking. It was very abrupt.
- Tinny.
- Uncomfortable. Crammed on the inside.
- Noisy. Sounded like a bird was chirping everytime the car moved. It is not the quiet electric car engine sound. Just god awful.
 
Last edited:
We're getting side-tracked, but to be clear, I never said I don't believe the manufacturers. I merely pointed out how we, the consumers, don't know which EPA method any particular manufacturer chose to report their car's efficiency. This makes it hard to compare car A with car B. And if you compute miles/charging-minute based on the EPA mi/kWH, it is hard to compare car A with car B.
Gotcha! Thanks for the info.
 
I test drove a Ford Mustang Mach E (Premium Long Range, AWD) today. Anyone have one? If so, likes and dislikes?
I drive that car (2023 model year).
Pros:
  • One-pedal driving. One of the few cars to get it right. Set it once and leave it. You don't need to re-enable "iPedal" mode or anything silly like that every time you turn on the car or shift into reverse.
  • Driver profiles. My wife drives an ICE so on the rare situations when she drives my car, she doesn't want to use one-pedal mode. Her key fob is tied to her profile, so when she drives the car is not in one-pedal mode.
  • Frunk. Large frunk. To learn what I keep in it, see Cons.
  • Comfortable. I find the driver's seat fits me well.
  • Blue Cruise. On the highway, I can take my hands off the wheel. This is good for my arthritis, and by letting the car take care of the easy stuff, it lets me focus on the harder stuff, such as seeing farther down the highway, paying more attention to my sides and rearview than I would otherwise, etc.
  • Free NACS adapter from Ford.
  • Plug-and-charge on Tesla and Electrify America. Set it up once at home, and all my road trips have been smooth charging. I don't need the Tesla app, EA app, etc.
  • Stable. Ford has worked out the kinks in the earlier model years. I don't worry about the car suddenly stopping due to issues in the battery or charging system.
Cons:
  • Peak charging speed of 150kW.
  • No vehicle-to-load. I added my own inverter that I store in the frunk. I use it for camping but could use it to power the house in an emergency. I can get about 1.5kW peak, but keep the load below 1kW for sustained use (induction plate cooktop).
  • Glass roof. I hate glass roofs. Some people love them. Cost $1,700 to replace when it cracked.
  • No heated rear seats. When I go skiing, the passengers get cold.
  • Poor winter performance. Battery is not insulated and loses heat rapidly. I don't drive in very cold weather (-30 degrees), but from what I've heard, the heater cannot keep the battery and passengers warm at the same time.
  • No camp mode. That is, turn on car to connect HV battery but not to go anywhere. Turn off center screen. Turn of headlights. Leave AC/heat on. (When I camp, I must turn on car as though to drive, and cover center screen with a heavy cloth because it is too bright.)
  • Too many beeps and honks when camping. It makes a variety of noises, especially if I exit the car when it is turned on.
  • Driver display does not show power/regen. I mount a small phone and run the CarScanner app, which talks to an OBD II adapter so I can see this critical information when I drive.
Before purchasing the Mach-E, I considered other cars. I have a tiny garage and the Mach-E is already a tight squeeze. Rivian R1S is way too big for my garage. The Cadillac Lyriq would also be tight. Plus, it was brand new at the time, and I wasn't willing to be a guinea pig for a new car. I crossed the Ioniq 5 and EV 6 off my list due to subpar one-pedal driving. The VW ID.4 and Nissan Ariya don't even pretend to have one-pedal driving. The Blazer and Equinox were not yet on the market. BMW, etc., were too expensive for me.
 
Which EV did you choose Warbial?
 
I was holding out for the VW id.Buzz, but now that is it available...they must be kidding. $60-$80K, and the range in cold weather is reported by unbiased sources to be 120-150 miles at highway speed. A textbook case of designing a vehicle for European conditions and then trying to foist it on USA needs and desires. On top of that, VW service outside of urban areas is terrible.

I know people with Tesla, Rivian, Ford, Nissan, Hyundai and Kia EVs. They all have serious shortcomings.

I would love a Rivian, but the service model is terrible, you literally have to flatbed the vehicle to a service center in many cases, and they don't guarantee they will pay for that, even under warranty. The closest service center to me is 240 miles,. Think about that if you take one on a long trip. Also, minor fender benders can easily be over $10K to repair, due to the way they are built.

All EVs, every one, suffer from lack of serviceability and parts availability. I'm not paying $50K+ for a vehicle that has to sit for weeks or months waiting for service. I keep my vehicles 10 years or more. What will the situation be in 10 years, if you can't even get a part for a one year old vehicle?

The "Big Three" suffer from the same issues. My local GM and Ford dealers refuse to sell EVs, and can't service them. The VW dealer 50 miles away discourages you from buying one, because THEY can't service them. It is nuts.

You may have a great dealer right nearby that can service your EV, but trust me, once you get into the hinterlands, you are on your own. Why buy a car you can't take on vacation?
 
Dealers make more money from service than new car sales.

Yeah service and things like oil changes are money makers for dealers. Oh you don’t need to change oil, replace fuel pump, do tuneups?

Yeah no wonder they hate EVs and the dealers trade group are lobbying states to delay the end of new ICE registrations.
 
Back
Top Bottom