6 states ban high-end gaming PCs

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19319683
.

Well of course I am talking about charging times. . What else would I mean? . I cannot imagine the inconvenience of having to wait half an hour for a car to recharge. . Sheesh!

I'm sorry, but I had no idea what you could mean. We can't read minds here. Given that you can't afford an e-car now, you would only be able to buy one in the future, when the technology has improved, which includes fast charging time and increased range.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19319683
.

Given those budget constraints, when do you think electric cars in reliable condition will come down to the level I can afford? . 6 years? . 10 years? . 12 years?

I don't know that. Too many variables- economic, technology, etc. There's also the question of your particular needs, which are unique.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19319683
.

By continually downplaying the disadvantages of electric cars, it seems that you are hell bent on convincing me that electric cars are right for me and my usage / demands. . Can you please just accept that they are not as good for me as my current car, all things considered? . You do realize that not all people are the same, and that not everyone wants the same things in a car, don't you?

Why don't you take your own advice and read what I have written?

Capn Jack wrote in post #19319369
Of course it wouldn't work for you- that's very unusual driving. 1000 miles in 24 hours?

Of course people want different things in a car, otherwise there wouldn't be so many makes and models.

But there have been very little improvement to current cars in the past 20 years. They've gotten more frills, but the engine and drivetrain haven't changed. There are lots of improvements available to e-cars with respect to charging time and range that we'll probably see in the next 2 to 7 years. And you are in a unique situation that is likely to be addressed in the future. Most people, as you wrote below, won't see what you term "disadvantages":

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19319297
.
That seems okay for the kind of "normal, day to day" driving that people with structured lives and regular jobs do.

I won't need to worry about the disadvantages of an internal combustion engine- gasoline that goes bad if it sits too long without an additive, drive home and simply plug the car in, no oil changes even if the car isn't used, no transmission. In some ways, I'm the opposite situation. I bought a new car 3 years ago and it still has less than 7000 miles on it, and I'll probably keep that car 15 or 20 years, like my last one. I go to a lot of distant places via air. I realize I currently drive my vehicle very little compared to most people, but current e-cars would work for most people if the acquisition price were lower.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19319297
.
That seems okay for the kind of "normal, day to day" driving that people with structured lives and regular jobs do. . Could never work for me, as when I road trip my goal for each day is usually to cover 850 miles or thereabouts. . Then another 850 the next day. . Several times I've even topped 1,000 miles in a single day, and it feels so satisfying to cover that much ground so quickly, as it gives me more time to shoot when I get to my photography destination. . I'm always pushing to get to the shooting destination ASAP, so as to not miss any of the good light or good wildlife activity.

I mean, for summer deer photo trips, when I leave my place here in the morning, I MUST get to Aurora, Colorado, no later than 4 o'clock the next afternoon, so that I get the evening shoot in with the deer. . I need time to find the deer, and then still have enough time to photograph them for a couple hours while there is still enough light. . Just don't see how I could do that if I have to stop every 300 miles. . Ditto for southern Arizona wildlife trips.

And for summer Yellowstone trips, when I leave around 6 in the morning, I sure as heck better be in Yellowstone by 4 or 5 that afternoon, so that I can have a nice evening shoot with the Elk or Bears or Pika or whatever I find.

Can you carry an extra battery in the car, so that when the first runs down, you can just put the spare in? . You know, like we do with cameras? . If that's possible, then I could see such cars as viable, as long as it is feasible to carry a few fully charged spares around all the time. . Otherwise, you're bound to be inconvenienced at some point, sooner or later.

.

Tom, you may be wrong about that, as electrification of the whole system
may finally be coming to fruition.

Consider this: My wife and I are looking at a 10-to-12-year replacement of our vehicles,
simply because replacement costs so much.
But considering ICE replacement costs and the timeframe, we'll likely be looking at electric
when the time comes. Why? Because it's what the world demands.

Personally, I'm excited for the future of electric vehicles.
It's gonna be a helluva ride before my first, while I'm genuinely looking forward to
my first drive and ownership of an electric.

I think we've got a lot to look forward to.

SkedAddled wrote in post #19320057
.
Tom, you may be wrong about that, as electrification of the whole system
may finally be coming to fruition.
.

.
I am not sure what part of my post (the one you quoted) is the part that you think is wrong. . Could you please let me know what it is, specifically, you think I may be wrong about?

Thanks


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19320064
.
I am not sure what part of my post (the one you quoted) is the part that you think is wrong. . Could you please let me know what it is, specifically, you think I may be wrong about?

Thanks

.

It appears you may not understand where it's going, and how quickly.

Electrics have proven themselves; we just need a solid recharging infrastructure, right?
It'll get there, but it'll take time.

There are already vehicle makers that claim 80% charge on just
a 20- or 30-minute recharge time, while mileage per charge
continues to increase.

Battery cell and charging technologies continue to be refined and improved upon.
And as the infrastructure of charging grows, combined with the constant
improvements to the technologies, I just don't see electric travel being
the big hindrance you seem to indicate for yourself within another
10 to 15 years' time.

SkedAddled wrote in post #19320391
It appears you may not understand where it's going, and how quickly.

Electrics have proven themselves; we just need a solid recharging infrastructure, right?
It'll get there, but it'll take time.

There are already vehicle makers that claim 80% charge on just
a 20- or 30-minute recharge time, while mileage per charge
continues to increase.

Battery cell and charging technologies continue to be refined and improved upon.
And as the infrastructure of charging grows, combined with the constant
improvements to the technologies, I just don't see electric travel being
the big hindrance you seem to indicate for yourself within another
10 to 15 years' time.

The first thing they should have done was to develop a universal changing system. They still haven't done it. They won't get my money until I don't have to worry about finding the right charger and having the right app to charge it charge at more than 10 miles of range per hour.

mike_d wrote in post #19320400
The first thing they should have done was to develop a universal changing system. They still haven't done it. They won't get my money until I don't have to worry about finding the right charger and having the right app to charge it charge at more than 10 miles of range per hour.

You can get adapters for most systems. The main thing about electric car adoptance is that fast charging stations first see their way in urban areas. But there are maps for showing where electric car charging stations are, or RV camps (which EV drivers use with rural driving, as it's a more widespread source of 215V electricity). This video is very informative about the types of electric systems and charge times. With this being a computer thread, some may also recognize the channel: he makes pretty cool videos on old 8 bit PCs (and new software/hardware still being developed for them).

SkedAddled wrote in post #19320391
It appears you may not understand where it's going, and how quickly.

Electrics have proven themselves; we just need a solid recharging infrastructure, right?
It'll get there, but it'll take time.

There are already vehicle makers that claim 80% charge on just
a 20- or 30-minute recharge time, while mileage per charge
continues to increase.

Battery cell and charging technologies continue to be refined and improved upon.
And as the infrastructure of charging grows, combined with the constant
improvements to the technologies, I just don't see electric travel being
the big hindrance you seem to indicate for yourself within another
10 to 15 years' time.

This is all true, but it is likely that manufacturers will build for the majority of users, leaving an outlier such as Tom less than happy with his car.
Another potential issue is paying for roads, now funded by gasoline taxes in many places. Less gasoline sold = less tax money for the roads.

I think people will be forced to change over as there are more electric cars, gasoline stations will become less sustainable and will close; perhaps some of them will become charging stations.

mike_d wrote in post #19320400
The first thing they should have done was to develop a universal changing system. They still haven't done it. They won't get my money until I don't have to worry about finding the right charger and having the right app to charge it charge at more than 10 miles of range per hour.

Who should have done it? And the batteries are still evolving. The current rapid-charge will be too slow for upcoming batteries that can charge in 10 minutes or less.

SkedAddled wrote in post #19320391
.
It appears you may not understand where it's going, and how quickly.
.....

And as the infrastructure of charging grows, combined with the constant
improvements to the technologies, I just don't see electric travel being
the big hindrance you seem to indicate for yourself within another
10 to 15 years' time.
.

.
Well, just like with cameras, the real factor that will determine when I will be able to adopt the new technology is cost. . It doesn't matter one bit how fast they come up with much better electric cars and charging. . All that matters is when the price of this new technology will fall to extremely low levels so that someone like me can afford it.

In order for me to switch to an electric car, I will need to be able to get one for around $5,000 and have it last about 6 years, at 30,000 to 35,000 miles per year, with no more than a total of $1500 in maintenance and repairs over that time (besides tires). That is what I currently spend on my cars, and my budget is stretched to the absolute limit. . I have no reason to think that I will have any more income in the future than I do now. . Hence, I will need to be able to buy and operate a car at the same cost that I do now, in order to do as much travel as I am accustomed to doing.

Given that, when do you project that an electric car that meets my needs will fall all the way down to my piddly little acquisition and operating budget? . I could easily see that taking 10 or 15 years ..... or even longer. . Do you really think I am wrong about that?


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19320470
.
Well, just like with cameras, the real factor that will determine when I will be able to adopt the new technology is cost. . It doesn't matter one bit how fast they come up with much better electric cars and charging. . All that matters is when the price of this new technology will fall to extremely low levels so that someone like me can afford it.

In order for me to switch to an electric car, I will need to be able to get one for around $5,000 and have it last about 6 years, at 30,000 to 35,000 miles per year, with no more than a total of $1500 in maintenance and repairs over that time (besides tires). That is what I currently spend on my cars, and my budget is stretched to the absolute limit. . I have no reason to think that I will have any more income in the future than I do now. . Hence, I will need to be able to buy and operate a car at the same cost that I do now, in order to do as much travel as I am accustomed to doing.

Given that, when do you project that an electric car that meets my needs will fall all the way down to my piddly little acquisition and operating budget? . I could easily see that taking 10 or 15 years ..... or even longer.

.

It's all going to depend on the batteries. Electric cars are relatively simple compared to gas or diesel cars. It's the batteries that make them expensive and they don't last forever.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19320470
.
Well, just like with cameras, the real factor that will determine when I will be able to adopt the new technology is cost. . It doesn't matter one bit how fast they come up with much better electric cars and charging. . All that matters is when the price of this new technology will fall to extremely low levels so that someone like me can afford it.

In order for me to switch to an electric car, I will need to be able to get one for around $5,000 and have it last about 6 years, at 30,000 to 35,000 miles per year, with no more than a total of $1500 in maintenance and repairs over that time (besides tires). That is what I currently spend on my cars, and my budget is stretched to the absolute limit. . I have no reason to think that I will have any more income in the future than I do now. . Hence, I will need to be able to buy and operate a car at the same cost that I do now, in order to do as much travel as I am accustomed to doing.

Given that, when do you project that an electric car that meets my needs will fall all the way down to my piddly little acquisition and operating budget? . I could easily see that taking 10 or 15 years ..... or even longer.

.

I would think for your conditions, the main factor is price. I notice previously you mentioned you've never paid more than $5,000 for a car. For my lifestyle, that seems foreign to me. I do know other people that buy used cars thinking buying a new car doesn't make sense with depreciation....but I'm one to buy a new car and run it to the ground. I'm 43 and on my 3rd car in my life (and with my current Prius, I've had it for over 10 years).

For longevity, actually there are factors that make hybrids/electric cars better than conventional cars. I've seen that taxi services prefer Priuses because of less maintenance costs (there's less wear on brake pads because of regenerative braking for example). They're a company that sees the initial investment in acquisition for savings with operating costs. Your situation, though, is living off of a second hand market. While I do think there are many areas of the country that can be electric in 10 years (the populous ones), I'm sure there will be others that are still running on gas. It is going to take the longest to have a second hand electric car in a less populous area that has fast charging.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19319637
.
As long as that increased efficiency eventually results in getting places more quickly, with no inconveniences at all, and cheaper price of entry and also cheaper cost of operating, then I'll be all for it. . But until we reach that point, it'll be better for me to stick with what I have.

Just like with cameras, most folks are not willing to accept a disadvantage or two in order to gain many new advantages. . I mean, mirrorless cameras didn't really take hold until ALL of the disadvantages were overcome. . So as long as there is even a single, small disadvantage with the electric car technology, don't expect people to embrace them entirely. . It is human nature to want all of the pros and no cons whatsoever. . We want it all!

.

When mirrorless really took hold: that is debatable, but in the past according to your statement and I agree.
All disadvantages have not been overcome, that is a fact.
Mirrorless have reduced battery life. I think it's fair to accept that some users don't mind but it is a disadvantage.
For an absolute direct comparison, the R3 and 1DXIII share the same battery and the 1DXIII will last longer.
Reduced battery life is what is often experienced for DSLR users though. 5D4 depletes batteries faster than 5D3.
So, most folks are willing to accept this particular disadvantage.

I'm almost a full Sony shooter now but I keep my 1DXII. The reason is that I like to photograph Owls at night.
I think it's clear that Canon provides a better user experience with EVFs despite Sony beating them on the spec sheet.
No current EVF though can give me what I need to photograph owls in the dark. The EVF displays a very noisy mess while the OVF at least gives me a clean view, even if it's very difficult to actually see just the silhouette of the subject.
What I do with my Sony is set up at dusk, achieving focus then switching off AF so that when it get's dark, if the temperature change is not severe, I can shoot with preset focus. With 1DXII, I can use AF long after the Sony becomes unusable. I can also use very dim torch light to help the DSLR.
I have to use a much brighter torch with the Sony bt AF is not as reliable and then I disturb my subjects.

The third disadvantage is lockups. A little flexibility in thinking is required here.
The 1DXIII provides the closest to Mirrorless experience of any DSLR, just without an EVF.
It also shares a Mirrorless feature: lockups.

Mirrorless cameras lockup. R5 lockup reports are numerous. 1DXIII less so, but I'm sure less have been sold.
Sony A1s are locking up.

How many reports of 1D, 1D2, 1D3, 1D4, 1DX, 1DXII locking up? Extremely rare.

Rolling shutter: Sony A9 was the first big sensor camera to use a stacked sensor which reduced rolling shutter enough that most users did not experience any problems. So still a disadvantage, even if most users did not see it. The R5 provided the same 20fps but rolling shutter was much more of a problem. Definite disadvantage. The rest of the Sony models do not have stacked sensor so have obvious rolling shutter problems.
Obviously, mechanical shutter can be used but then, in the case of the R5, max fps is reduced to 12.
A9, while used mostly in electronic shutter, can only do 5 fps with mechanical shutter.

Flash! R3 and Sony A1 can use electronic shutter with flash but they are the first.

There is room for some debate on these points I say are remaining disadvantages with Mirrorless, but "ALL disadvantages overcome" has not happened yet, let alone when Mirrorless really took hold.

Maybe a thorough consideration of EVs could show that disadvantages, just as experienced with upgrading camera gear, are in fact worth accepting. For example, once the EV reaches a remote destination, even with an almost completely depleted battery, if staying at the destination for a couple of days or more was the plan, a cheap solar panel could completely recharge the battery for free, effectively providing more range than the fuel burner.

You’re in my neck of the Woods Tom.
Wallingford in DELCO and State College as well.
We were in Yellowstone in October, but we flew.

Choderboy wrote in post #19321287
... a cheap solar panel could completely recharge the battery for free, effectively providing more range than the fuel burner.

Am I the only one for whom solar panels integrated to the roof and hood are the obvious part which is missing in EVs?

Nick5 wrote in post #19321342
.
You’re in my neck of the Woods Tom.
Wallingford in DELCO and State College as well.
We were in Yellowstone in October, but we flew.
.

.
Hey, neighbor!

State College - passed through there a few times back in September and October, on my way to photograph the rutting Elk in Benezette.

I'll be back in the Philly 'burbs in April, and I'll be sticking around until mid June. . Southampton / Willow Grove / Hatboro / Doylestown area, in Bucks and Montgomery counties.


.