A lot of people that like cars have been emotionally connected to the internal engine. These "car enthusiasts" enjoy everything about cars, albeit frequently do not analyze emerging technologies with a long-term vision. They like the sound the engine makes and the thrill of acceleration. That is nice and I can respect their decisions. That sentiment of connection to the internal engine has been challenged first by Tesla Roadster.
What I view as auto fans mistake in judgement is to portray electric cars through the lens of mistrust in the new design. Someone who has only driven IC cars will keep trying to find fault with a one that is not. Tesla is the new toy a boy can play with. Clarkson has been living with old habits and 'old' cars to question his own assumptions about car technology. This is what I had found when speaking with people in the automotive industry.
Yet, electric cars require a lot of future development to meet the high standards that they will be judged by.
People must really hate cars. I like to drive and be in control of the vehicle. Often I go for drives in the country for a couple of hours. It's not about speed it's just fun to drive a nice car.
Sure I like EVs but range (for now), lack of control, the sound of them are many things that ruin the art of driving. Pretty soon mechanical cars will be like expensive mechanical watches, rare.
It's especially bad when you consider one of the main selling points of an EV is simplicity and reliability. Or at least that's one of the main arguments I've heard over the years (there are lots of other reasons obviously).
I can't figure out what his point is? Is it that the Mustang a decent car with a lot of power and a weird UI? seems like a reasonable review, but this is not a review. This is a dude with a blog passing judgement on a lot of other people - a guy who admits he doesn't like cars things other people also shouldn't? Sure, walking is great, and so would better urban design be, but it doesn't have anything to do with electric cars or not.
He theorizes that more fun driving means more driving...I don't know...there's a lot of fun gas cars that get driven rarely. Also, almost any car might be more fun that a 2000s honda odyssey. Not a high bar.
I think the point this misses is that EVs are, in the long run, a MUCH better option than gas cars, despite any drawbacks.
Tbh I see the opposite. Try not cheerleading EV's, and point out that yes, while they bring some advantages overall the 'progress' is incremental rather than revolutionary, and you'll get branded a 'Petrol addict' or an 'oil shill' on HN.
My nr.1 beef with cars is the noise pollution and the excessive space taken by them. Neither of those are changed by EV's. (An EV makes just as much noise above 35 km/h, and now they have them even making fake noises below that speed).
The point is that people aren't buying EVs because of feel-good environmental sentiment. They are buying them because the cars fit well into their lifestyle.
I've expressed the same sentiment before. The problem is that even talking about electric cars gets people's knickers in a twist; they need to be able to drive for 1000 miles straight while towing an apartment on wheels behind them and any vehicle which can't do that just isn't good enough. They'd rather be dead than have to drive one of these.
Exactly. And, with very few and very expensive exceptions, electric cars are useless at this. Electric cars have objective selling points, but I cringe every time I hear someone describe them as having "good performance".
It appears we have a not-argument against a not-argument. I'm not claiming TG fans are interested in electric cars. I'm claiming that TG fans are interested in cars with awesome performance whether they're electric or not. As you correctly pointed out, most TG fans would jump at the chance to own a Tesla. The equation becomes less clear when you thrown a more traditional super car in to the mix, but that's all besides the point, because very few of these people can afford to actually buy one.
I'm rebutting this:
"I think your average Top Gear viewer is as far from a potential customer as you can get given the general stance the show takes on such matters"
Well, come to think of it, you're right in many respects. The average TG viewer simply can't afford a $110k automobile. I think you slightly misinterpret the TG editorial view though. They're not opposed to electric cars. They're opposed to slow, ugly, uninspiring cars. The net effect of environmentalism is that efficiency is put before all of these other factors. There wasn't one jab at the green aspect of the Tesla Roadster in that episode. It was all about the performance and the trade-offs.
In my local EV forum there are a lot of people who join just to come and say: EV's are wrong because: "it doesn't stimulate my hearing, just no feeling without the engine growl", "charging something something", "what about road trips", yadayada.
I guess people who don't want to change their habits feel threatened somehow? Because deep inside they understand that the change is correct? I don't know, this is all super weird.
Actors buying electric cars typically do so to appear fashionable or environmentally conscious. The exception would be the legitimate car enthusiasts/gear heads/petrol heads who buy electric cars because of their engineering possibilities.
(Or Londoners like the author of The Guardian piece who can avoid the congestion charge by driving an EV or hybrid.)
"It doesn't sound like a car" is exactly what makes EV good.
reply