New poll: 65% of Americans unlikely to buy EV's; 29% likely

[jp10558]

The comment about power consumption is absolutely valid - even Musk's MP3 (Master Plan 3) clearly indicates that electrification of the fleet, along with electrification of other areas, will ultimately require 3x current power generation - which is why Musk has repeatedly stated that we need major investments in solar, wind, nuclear, geothermal, etc, to make this transition possible.

Yea, we need a lot more power generation, and it needs to work out to cheaper. And/or we need to stop gas subsidies, but even someone who generally likes newer technologies will be heavily swayed on purchase price and convenience. While I fully expect it's likely that EVs will eventually end up more convenient - getting over a several thousand dollar upgrade to my house to support anything more than 110 charging needs to really show ROI somehow. 110v charging requires enough additional potential planning to hurt vs very occasional trips to a gas station for someone currently needing fill ups on the order of 1-2 times a month. I don't have to plan in the same way to swing by a gas station for 5 minutes.

And with the electric prices going up lately vs gas prices staying steady makes me concerned. I really do not want to ever buy a new car to then pay more for the energy propulsion without getting something BIG in return like way more room or towing say. Saving me a trip to a gas station once a month isn't doing it.

There's also still the ... maybe FUD adjacent, but not really FUD of people just wanting any major change to be obviously better than their existing choices / way of doing things. When we're talking about $200 to try something new, it's pretty easy to get people over a hump in many cases, but when we're $60k there's a lot more fear of making the wrong choice. Hell, I have that just switching from Subaru to Honda in conventional gas vehicles. I'm really hoping there's not some gotcha with Honda that'll make me really regret this choice.

 

[HitchHiker71]

Yea, we need a lot more power generation, and it needs to work out to cheaper. And/or we need to stop gas subsidies, but even someone who generally likes newer technologies will be heavily swayed on purchase price and convenience. While I fully expect it's likely that EVs will eventually end up more convenient - getting over a several thousand dollar upgrade to my house to support anything more than 110 charging needs to really show ROI somehow. 110v charging requires enough additional potential planning to hurt vs very occasional trips to a gas station for someone currently needing fill ups on the order of 1-2 times a month. I don't have to plan in the same way to swing by a gas station for 5 minutes.

Yes, IMHO one of the primary advantages of owning a BEV is tied to at home charging. Whenever anyone asks me about BEV ownership, this is what I tell them, don't buy one unless you can reliably charge from home. For most folks, that means one of two things, either having a dedicated EV home charger installed on a dedicated circuit - we have a Tesla Wall Connector installed in our garage - or having a NEMA 14/50 outlet available to use for charging. For most people, using a 110v outlet isn't going to cut it unless they don't drive much (less than 30-40 miles a day maximum). We charge overnight at rates well under 10 cents/kwh for example - via our utility provider. Not everyone has rates this low though - it's very dependent upon location. A lucky/fortunate few have full blown solar arrays that can charge their BEVs - that's the ideal - but not many people can swing this as it's expensive to throw a large solar array onto most homes and, again, dependent upon location as to whether it makes financial sense to do so.

And with the electric prices going up lately vs gas prices staying steady makes me concerned. I really do not want to ever buy a new car to then pay more for the energy propulsion without getting something BIG in return like way more room or towing say. Saving me a trip to a gas station once a month isn't doing it.

Electric utility rates are heavily regulated - so unlike gas prices - which are market based - price increases have to be approved via a lengthy regulatory process in most states/counties/cities. The electric price increases we're seeing now - are really a reflection of supply side cost increases due to inflation over the past 2-3 years. It's a delayed reaction to market price increases for power generation on the supply side primarily (as opposed to transmission prices).

There's also still the ... maybe FUD adjacent, but not really FUD of people just wanting any major change to be obviously better than their existing choices / way of doing things. When we're talking about $200 to try something new, it's pretty easy to get people over a hump in many cases, but when we're $60k there's a lot more fear of making the wrong choice. Hell, I have that just switching from Subaru to Honda in conventional gas vehicles. I'm really hoping there's not some gotcha with Honda that'll make me really regret this choice.

Yes it's a major purchase decision without a doubt. For most consumers, vehicles constitute the second largest component of our budget expenditures over time, so people tend to put more due diligence into vehicle purchases given it's a much larger slice of our budget than everything else except for our real estate purchases. Specific to your recent decision - we've owned Hondas for years - my wife's prior three cars before her Tesla were all Honda Accords for example, and my son still owns one of our hand-me-downs - a 2013 Honda Accord EX-L with over 200k miles on it now - still runs great - all original equipment. I've never had a bad ownership experience with Honda personally. They are just as reliable as Toyota - both of which are consistently rated as more reliable than Subaru from a statistical standpoint.

 

[dannybaker]

It is all marketing. Saving the world by buying more stuff, doesn’t really work.

However for us, I'm selling myself:
In CA the carpool sticker has some value in that it saves some of us 1/2 hour a day.
The EV tax rebate of $7,500.
Manufacturer Dealer incentives of $6,000+.
VW Free charging for 3 years ($5,000?).
Trade In/Sell the Volt $15,000.

It can pencil out like a TIMESHARE!

Not free, but a hell of deal if you play their game.
Bought a 2018 Volt for $28,000 and received $7,5000-ish back if memory serves me correctly. In my mind I call it $20,000 and can sell for about $15,000 6 years later. There are worse things than a well-timed car purchase.

My Tesla model s was bought for 128,999 in December 2016 and my car was worth 28k when totaled.

 

[4TimeAway]

Not sure what you mean? The SAE standardized on the NACS J3400 standard - that's not the Tesla standard. It uses the same NACS connector port as part of the SEA NACS J3400 standard - but the J3400 communication protocol is a CCS based protocol - i.e. it's not the native Tesla NACS protocol originally programmed by Tesla. This is why Tesla had to swap out circuit boards on all 16000 V3 SC stalls over the past year to make their V3 stalls compatible with the SAE NACS J3400 standard so that third party BEVs can use Tesla SC stations. Tesla, by far, has the best and most reliable public charging network here in the US, I would not buy a BEV that didn't have access to the Tesla SC network personally. It's literally plug and play easy to use.

I read this to mean Tesla gets a royalty for the connector tech. Not sure though, and thanks for the insight.

Seems like the Mach-E will have/has an adapter. Had not looked into that.

https://www.motortrend.com/features/tesla-nacs-charging-port-automaker-compatibility/

 

[DrQ]

My Tesla model s was bought for 128,999 in December 2016 and my car was worth 28k when totaled.

Not unusual for luxury cars.

 

[Mongoose]

At least some of what you're claiming is FUD IMHO - particularly the statement about subsidies - at least specific to consumer subsidies - as there are other subsidies you may be referring to - that's really too general a term to use. For example, Tesla enjoyed massive sales increases from 2019-2023 with zero consumer subsidies since they had exhausted all 200k vehicle maximum volume based previous subsidies in 2018. Go look at the sales numbers from Tesla during that span of time - then explain to me how your claim about the only reason sales are what they are is due to the massive subsidies - those were in fact the heady good days for Tesla in reality (unlike now - when we're seeing Tesla EV sales growth stall in 2024). The consumer subsidies were changed starting in 2023 with the IRA, yet while sales are still rising, the rate of acceleration/adoption has been falling for the past several months now. The reality is that the subsidies - at least for consumers - don't have much impact on adoption IMHO. The issues of range anxiety, charging times, real world range, etc., have far more impact than any subsidies do, as is clearly evidenced by the fact that though subsidies were renewed effective 1/1/2023, they have stricter qualification requirements, and the rate of adoption has been slowing after the subsidies were renewed.

This is likely because the early adopters, which typically are the first 10% of mass market buyers, have been saturated, and now the more normative/traditional consumers in the next tranche of buyers is up next, but this subset of buyers is more skeptical and cares more about the above listed issues than the early adopters - which itself is divided up into two tranches - the alpha early adopters - the true believers in the mission (eco orientation), and the beta early adopters - like me - who need to see real numbers and enough technological progress to consider a purchase - and tend to be the ones that are more openly critical of the overall shortcomings of the emerging technologies in scope. I frequent various EV forums and I'm generally categorized as a "Debbie Downer" type because while I understand the mission and am a beta early adopter - I'm also openly skeptical that EVs are currently good enough to promote mass adoption by traditional consumers - and I'm definitely skeptical of the late stage skeptics doing so.

Regarding the useable elements and such, batteries are 99% recyclable - and there are already recycling plants built and running that recycle all types of batteries. We don't need limitless supplies (unlike with gas/oil) because we can re-use the same materials repeatedly over time. Anyone interested in how this recycling process actually works at a real world recycling plant here in the US, here's a decent video to watch on this topic:

The comment about power consumption is absolutely valid - even Musk's MP3 (Master Plan 3) clearly indicates that electrification of the fleet, along with electrification of other areas, will ultimately require 3x current power generation - which is why Musk has repeatedly stated that we need major investments in solar, wind, nuclear, geothermal, etc, to make this transition possible.

Even the EU is hoping to reach only 65% recycling by 2025. It is massively labor intensive and costly. 99% is just not realistic. https://newrepublic.com/article/164148/lithium-battery-recycling-electric-vehicles It’s also a very hazardous process and even the EPA classifies it as Hazardous Waste under RCRA. https://greencitizen.com/blog/lithium-ion-battery-recycling/

My biggest complaint is with the delusional that think EV’s are somehow green because they plug in and ignore all the issues with mining, manufacturing, charging, maintenance and disposal. If you want one, good for you, but don’t fool yourself thinking you are doing something good for the planet. And certainly don’t force it on me.

 

[DrQ]

Even the EU is hoping to reach only 65% recycling by 2025. It is massively labor intensive and costly. 99% is just not realistic. https://newrepublic.com/article/164148/lithium-battery-recycling-electric-vehicles It’s also a very hazardous process and even the EPA classifies it as Hazardous Waste under RCRA. https://greencitizen.com/blog/lithium-ion-battery-recycling/

My biggest complaint is with the delusional that think EV’s are somehow green because they plug in and ignore all the issues with mining, manufacturing, charging, maintenance and disposal. If you want one, good for you, but don’t fool yourself thinking you are doing something good for the planet.

At least the battery material has a hope of being recycled. Not so with petroleum. You use it and it's gone. You have to keep poking holes in the ground and then even if you seal them up correctly after you are done, that seal has a life span.

When the wells start leaking, who cleans up the mess?

“Nobody really knows what you’re supposed to do”: Leaking, exploding abandoned wells wreak havoc in West Texas

The Texas Railroad Commission is tasked with plugging wells. But the state regulators say their scope is limited.

www.texastribune.org

 

[Mongoose]

At least the battery material has a hope of being recycled. Not so with petroleum. You use it and it's gone. You have to keep poking holes in the ground and then even if you seal them up correctly after you are done, that seal has a life span.

When the wells start leaking, who cleans up the mess?

“Nobody really knows what you’re supposed to do”: Leaking, exploding abandoned wells wreak havoc in West Texas

The Texas Railroad Commission is tasked with plugging wells. But the state regulators say their scope is limited.

www.texastribune.org

Hmmmm, I agree on the well pollution issues. However, EV’s are charged by burning petroleum and petroleum is used to manufacture them. EV’s use 775 lbs of petro products. They weigh 40-80% more, tearing up the roads at a much higher rate and excessively wear out petro based tires. But hey, I guess after all that, there is some hope that some of them might get recycled someday. I the meantime, the hazardous waste storage is exceeding dangerous.

 

[easyrider]

You use it and it's gone.

Not really. About 40% of oil is used for other than fuel products. Much of the 60% of oil that is fuel is absorbed into the environment, the largest molecule being co2 which does benefit the earth as a plant food.

Bill

 

[T_R_Oglodyte]

I think a lot of this EV stuff is wet dreams of the rich.

It's possible that in conducting the survey, they didn't just survey new car buyers, but they included a representative sampling of lower income and ordinary working stiffs for whom the prices of new cars were out of reach in the first place, and for which EVs are unattainable. The people who are struggling to make ends meet, and whose primary concern is a vehicle that will get them reliably to and from work, and who never enter the new car market. The people who don't have the money to hire an electrician to install a charging station in their garage to accommodate an EV. The people who are smacked the hardest by the super-regressive "carbon taxes" that have become policy in various states, such as mine.

I think there is a huge chunk of the population who see EVs as the toys of the rich, the way that we looked at owners of Cadillacs when I was a kid. In the world where I grew up, if you asked people if they were likely to buy a Cadillac or a Lincoln, the answer would have been well under 5%. In my world, people aspired to being able to buy a Pontiac or Oldsmobile instead of a Chevrolet, or a Mercury instead of Ford. If you were well off, those were realistic options for a new car. Meanwhile, most of the families I was around balanced whether they wanted to buy a new Chevrolet or a used Pontiac or Oldsmobile, if they were able to buy a new car at all.

 

[DrQ]

Not really. About 40% of oil is used for other than fuel products. Much of the 60% of oil that is fuel is absorbed into the environment, the largest molecule being co2 which does benefit the earth as a plant food.

Bill

Of the 40% "other", the story of plastic being recyclable is another "big lie":

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/11/897692090/how-big-oil-misled-the-public-into-believing-plastic-would-be-recycled

Of that 60%, with deforestation, there is less of a "sink" for that CO2.

 

[Mongoose]

I think a lot of this EV stuff is wet dreams of the rich.

It's possible that in conducting the survey, they didn't just survey new car buyers, but they included a representative sampling of lower income and ordinary working stiffs for whom the prices of new cars were out of reach in the first place, and for which EVs are unattainable. The people who are struggling to make ends meet, and whose primary concern is a vehicle that will get them reliably to and from work, and who never enter the new car market. The people who don't have the money to hire an electrician to install a charging station in their garage to accommodate an EV. The people who are smacked the hardest by the super-regressive "carbon taxes" that have become policy in various states, such as mine.

I think there is a huge chunck of the population who see EVs as the toys of the rich, the way that we looked at owners of Cadillacs when I was a kid. In the world where I grew up, if you asked people if they were likely to buy a Cadillac or a Lincoln, the answer would have been well under 5%. In my world, people aspired to being able to buy a Pontiac or Oldsmobile instead of a Chevrolet, or a Mercury instead of Ford. If you were well off, those were realistic options for a new car. Meanwhile, most of the families I was around balanced whether they wanted to buy a new Chevrolet or a used Pontiac or Oldsmobile, if they were able to buy a new car at all.

My son and DIL just loved EV’s, that is until they rented one for the first time and drove from Louisville to Chicago. The next day in Chicago, they ret it for a, “gulp” internal combustion engine vehicle. Funny how that happens. For me, I would buy a hybrid again or a plug in hybrid that got at-least 50 miles.

 

[DrQ]

... and petroleum is used to manufacture them. EV’s use 775 lbs of petro products. ...

The only additional petroleum is the mining and transportation of the lithium used for the batteries. Assuming that we still used lithium base chemistry for batteries, technology will evolve to repair battery packs or recover lithium from expired batteries.

We no longer make automobile bodies/components from iron that is freshly mined from the ground. We are in the build phase of EV technology build up. As it matures, we will see more recycling and recovery.

However, EV’s are charged by burning petroleum ...

Not true. EV's are MOSTLY powered by petroleum, but they can be powered by petroleum, nuclear, solar, wind, hydroelectric ...

This is not the case with ICE technology. While it is possible to capture CO2 and combine it with hydrogen to reconstitute a hydrocarbon, the energy cost is a huge loss to make it not economical. I guess you could create wood gas generators as the Germans did during WWII during petroleum shortages.

Even H2 powered cars: The most economic source of H2 is catalytic cracking of hydrocarbons (usually natural gas).

 

[easyrider]

Of the 40% "other", the story of plastic being recyclable is another "big lie":

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/11/897692090/how-big-oil-misled-the-public-into-believing-plastic-would-be-recycled

Of that 60%, with deforestation, there is less of a "sink" for that CO2.

I agree. Plastic bags should be bio-plastics, imo. So should other disposable plastics. It would be funny if it wasn't true that we went from paper bags to plastic bags to save trees and then back to paper bags from plastic bags to save the environment. All the while allowing the world forests to be mismanaged and allowing degradation to the planet in the name of progress. I guess we have to pick your poison. Mines going to be ICE over EV until EV makes financial sense even if EV is worse than ICE in the long run.

Bill

 

[DrQ]

.... It would be funny if it wasn't true that we went from paper bags to plastic bags to save trees and then back to paper bags from plastic bags to save the environment. All the while allowing the world forests to be mismanaged and allowing degradation to the planet in the name of progress. ...

Most people don't see trees as crops.

 

[easyrider]

Most people don't see trees as crops.

Most people are blind. Metaphorically.

Bill

 

[dannybaker]

We bought a BMW X30E which is a combination plug in and gas and really love the car. We’re currently getting 123mpg and the car has an electric range of about 20 miles and it cost about .33 cents to charge. We have solar so it really is free To charge. On long trips we simply don’t charge the vehicle but in town we plug it in when we get home.

 

[jp10558]

Even the EU is hoping to reach only 65% recycling by 2025. It is massively labor intensive and costly. 99% is just not realistic. https://newrepublic.com/article/164148/lithium-battery-recycling-electric-vehicles It’s also a very hazardous process and even the EPA classifies it as Hazardous Waste under RCRA. https://greencitizen.com/blog/lithium-ion-battery-recycling/

My biggest complaint is with the delusional that think EV’s are somehow green because they plug in and ignore all the issues with mining, manufacturing, charging, maintenance and disposal. If you want one, good for you, but don’t fool yourself thinking you are doing something good for the planet. And certainly don’t force it on me.

I believe the line is (and I also kind of agree with this) that it's easier to change thousands of power generation nodes across new technologies than it is to change hundreds of millions of end use cars. So by changing cars over to EV we can go over to solar as we upgrade power plants. This seems reasonable to me, but I'm not interested in getting a worse vehicle out of the deal.

I think in many ways we're in the 1G motorolla car phone level of mobile phones with EVs, maybe just starting to get to the 1.5G hand held boxy phones, while all the proponents want to pretend we're in the iPhone release stage. I wanted my next car to be an EV, but my needs changed and major vendors aren't yet making quite the EV I would want at a pricepoint I can stand.

I kind of hope that things get less early adopterish over the next 7-10 years I hope this new car to last. All trends point that way from a standard for charging to me actually seeing at least ads for fast charging stations just along a superhighway without me having to specifically set a location in my GPS.

 

[dannybaker]

My biggest issue with our Tesla was range during long road trips. The car had a range of 278 miles and could barely make it 180 miles. This was in 80 degree weather so the cold theory doesn’t work. We don’t drive fast and set the cruise control to 75 for trips. We had several three thousand mile trips and the range really made the trip incredibly long. My wife loved the more frequent stops and it’s the first car she had zero anxiety driving. It was a complete dream to drive cross country with the only issue range. The new Tesla model s has increased its range to 405 miles and charges about 25 percent quicker. The other incredible thing about the car was storage tons of storage.

 

[HitchHiker71]

I read this to mean Tesla gets a royalty for the connector tech. Not sure though, and thanks for the insight.

Seems like the Mach-E will have/has an adapter. Had not looked into that.

https://www.motortrend.com/features/tesla-nacs-charging-port-automaker-compatibility/

AFAIK Tesla makes zero monies on any/all patented technologies. Most folks don't realize that Tesla has made almost every patent they have available to the public. Anyone out there can literally use their designs with no costs involved and with no fear of reprisal. A key part of Tesla's mission is to accelerate the transition to sustainable energy technologies - this has been the case in all three Master Plans and has never changed. Tesla, IMHO, is one of the few companies that puts mission ahead of profits and competitive advantage (patents) - put another way - they put their money with their mouth is - whereas most other companies talk a good game - but it stops there.

Yes, any current Ford Mach-E and/or F150L owner can receive the CCS to NACS adapter for free - you simply have to apply for it. It's a months long wait due to demand, but you do have to apply for the free adapter before 6/30/2024, after which Ford will charge for this accessory. Starting sometime in 2025, Ford EVs will start shipping with a native NACS port - after which NACS adapters will no longer be necessary.

 

[easyrider]

I'm not a fan of Ford EV's after working on an Escape Hybrid. I can only imagine the a Ford Ev being more difficult to work on than the hybrid.

Currently, we have a 2016 Prius in the shop. It's an insurance salvage that my son wants to use for around town. The process of restoring a car in Washington is long because of paperwork. All it needed was a front bumper and left fender. It's a I'm bored project. So bored that I polished the mags on the Lincoln which turned out mirror finish.

Bill

 

[HitchHiker71]

Hmmmm, I agree on the well pollution issues. However, EV’s are charged by burning petroleum and petroleum is used to manufacture them. EV’s use 775 lbs of petro products. They weigh 40-80% more, tearing up the roads at a much higher rate and excessively wear out petro based tires. But hey, I guess after all that, there is some hope that some of them might get recycled someday. I the meantime, the hazardous waste storage is exceeding dangerous.

EVs - regardless of where they exist - are charged solely by electricity - so I don't understand what you mean when you say that EVs are charged by burning petroleum? Here's the IEA's current data on electricity generation here in the US. Couple of noteworthy items on this chart. One, that really little light green line - that has been decreasing and is almost gone - that's petroleum. IT's almost non-existent in other words. This is another popular myth/FUD item used by skeptics. Two, wind/solar/hydro combined - is now a greater portion of national electricity generation than coal - this trend will continue - despite the naysayers. Natural gas and nuclear make up the majority of electricity generation here in the US. Battery recycling is taking place today - in the real world - packs are being recycled and those materials are being reused for other battery applications and in some cases even reused for net new vehicle battery packs. It's still a work in progress - but the point is - this technology is already scaling to meet demand, unlike fossil fuels - which cannot be recycled once burned into our atmosphere.

 

[HitchHiker71]

I think a lot of this EV stuff is wet dreams of the rich.

It's possible that in conducting the survey, they didn't just survey new car buyers, but they included a representative sampling of lower income and ordinary working stiffs for whom the prices of new cars were out of reach in the first place, and for which EVs are unattainable. The people who are struggling to make ends meet, and whose primary concern is a vehicle that will get them reliably to and from work, and who never enter the new car market. The people who don't have the money to hire an electrician to install a charging station in their garage to accommodate an EV. The people who are smacked the hardest by the super-regressive "carbon taxes" that have become policy in various states, such as mine.

I think there is a huge chunk of the population who see EVs as the toys of the rich, the way that we looked at owners of Cadillacs when I was a kid. In the world where I grew up, if you asked people if they were likely to buy a Cadillac or a Lincoln, the answer would have been well under 5%. In my world, people aspired to being able to buy a Pontiac or Oldsmobile instead of a Chevrolet, or a Mercury instead of Ford. If you were well off, those were realistic options for a new car. Meanwhile, most of the families I was around balanced whether they wanted to buy a new Chevrolet or a used Pontiac or Oldsmobile, if they were able to buy a new car at all.

Granted, used car prices aren't new car prices - but it's worth pointing out that the average new MSRP vehicle price for a BEV is now equal to the average MSRP ICE price - and this doesn't include tax credits. When we take tax credits into account - BEVs are now cheaper than the average new ICE vehicle. Chinese manufacturers already have BEVs under $20k USD. Those will eventually be coming to US shores - it's simply a matter of when. Tesla will be introducing a $25k BEV in 2025/2026 timeframe - other manufacturers are racing to introduce many new BEV models in the $30-40k range - again - some $8-18k less than the average ICE MSRP. With state tax rebates - many consumers can now buy a new BEV for under $30k net price. Used Tesla's are now going for under $20k in some cases and between $20-30k for low mileage well equipped models.

All that said, you're absolutely right that there's a lot of misinformation/disinformation about BEVs out there, and it negatively impacts consumers that are not well informed. Here's a chart that drives home your point:

 

[HitchHiker71]

I kind of hope that things get less early adopterish over the next 7-10 years I hope this new car to last. All trends point that way from a standard for charging to me actually seeing at least ads for fast charging stations just along a superhighway without me having to specifically set a location in my GPS.

With self-driving - GPS is required - otherwise the car doesn't know where to go. Tesla just released their first non-beta version of FSD - FSD (Supervised), last week (FSD 12.3.3). It's no longer a beta program in other words. This is huge news - that isn't being covered. It's night and day better than the older versions (we use it almost every time we drive our Tesla now). The other reason that you always set your GPS destination to a charger is that the vehicle needs to precondition the battery pack for fast charging. If you skip this step - you'll only get about 50-75% of the desired performance when fast charging - because the first thing the battery pack has to do when you plug into a fast charger is to ensure the pack is ready to take a fast charge. This is one of those things that every BEV owner comes to know, just like every ICE owner knows that a cold start engine isn't going to provide any heat into the cabin until the engine warms up for example.

 

[HitchHiker71]

I'm not a fan of Ford EV's after working on an Escape Hybrid. I can only imagine the a Ford Ev being more difficult to work on than the hybrid.

Currently, we have a 2016 Prius in the shop. It's an insurance salvage that my son wants to use for around town. The process of restoring a car in Washington is long because of paperwork. All it needed was a front bumper and left fender. It's a I'm bored project. So bored that I polished the mags on the Lincoln which turned out mirror finish.

Bill

Hybrids are the worst for reliability overall due to having the most complexity - both ICE and battery tech under one hood - along with a hybrid drivetrain. That's why the fire rates for hybrids are notably higher than BEV and ICE vehicles. BEVs are by far the simplest from a design standpoint - many fewer moving parts and considerably less complex than ICE. That's why their maintenance costs tend to be much lower over the long term. That said, because BEVs don't have much of a third party parts market, they are considerably more expensive to repair and to insure. Our Tesla MY LR was 50% more expensive to insure compared to my wife's old Honda Accord for example.