ICE vs. BEV

[hmp10]

One of my favorite YouTube channels, "Engineering Explained", recently posted a video diving into the brilliant engineering of Porsche's new 911 engine. It's the kind of power plant that 15 years ago would have sent me racing to a dealer to get into the order queue. But . . .

I have been driving high-performance EVs for the past nine years, and this brilliant new power plant now mostly elicits a big yawn from me. I admire it much as I admire the Sutton Hoo treasures -- amazing to behold but nothing I would want to wear for a night on the town.

When I look at the incredible mechanical and electronic complexity of this Porsche power plant it leaves me scratching my head why all automakers aren't doing everything they can to move the public toward EVs, including pulling out all the stops to build EV charging infrastructure so that charging issues recede into the annals of automotive history as quickly as possible. The engineering and manufacturing challenges of bringing internal combustion engines up to anything like the power output, energy efficiency, and manufacturing simplicity inherent in electric propulsion are incredibly daunting. In my view, it's only the force of habit and the sunk costs of continuing to engineer and produce what they've long produced that keeps the ICE manufacturers on their current path -- in other words, the organizational inertia that almost all large companies develop and why so many breakthroughs in every field come from start-ups.

Couple that with the growing political hostility, at least in the U.S., to transportation electrification, and we seem to be moving backward these days in automotive technology with more and more manufacturers turning from BEVs to hybrids, although efforts such as Porsche's may create the illusion -- by sheer engineering brilliance -- of forward motion in vehicle propulsion.

 

[Halodde]

I can't watch the video right now but definitely will later. And I agree with your sentiment about what's going on with electric vehicles. So my take on why Legacy auto manufacturers are still developing internal combustion engines is that they are trying to meet the demand of the public on all fronts. They're producing some electric vehicles for those of us that want to move that direction. But they also have to be producing internal combustion engines for the percentage of the population that are not ready for electric vehicles or simply don't want them for all of the reasons you mentioned and we've all discussed before.

 

[hmp10]

So my take on why Legacy auto manufacturers are still developing internal combustion engines is that they are trying to meet the demand of the public on all fronts. They're producing some electric vehicles for those of us that want to move that direction. But they also have to be producing internal combustion engines for the percentage of the population that are not ready for electric vehicles or simply don't want them for all of the reasons you mentioned and we've all discussed before.

I think this is mostly true. However, there is some actual pulling back from BEVs going on. For instance, Mercedes has ceased development of its large EV-specific platform and will now build its EVs on platforms shared with ICE models, bringing inevitable sub-optimization to EV design and engineering. BMW is doing the same with its BEV lineup. GM, after never really cracking open the market with its earlier hybrids, is moving back in that direction. Audi, after announcing in early 2023 that it was ceasing development of new internal combustion engines, announced in December 2023 that it was going to prolong the run of its ICE models which, I suspect, will inevitably mean getting back into the ICE development business lest they be left out in the cold.

 

[SaratogaLefty]

Having a son who has been in the "car business" for almost 30 years there is a key point that is being overlooked or at least not considered adequately. Car dealerships make more money on the "back end" providing service and repairs than they do on the initial sale of the vehicle. BEV's require very little service compared to ICE vehicles. At my annual service for my Lucid they change my windshield wipers, change an air filter, and perform some inspections. On my previous BMW 540i about 20 years ago, after 20,000 miles I needed a complete brake job, including new discs. Ran me over $2000 then; can't imagine what that costs now. Odds are I will never need a brake job on my Lucid as I almost never touch the brake pedal while "one pedal" driving. And on my Porsches, don't even ask how much an annual "tune up" service runs at a dealership. So the "back end" profit for the dealership is significantly less when they sell an EV vs ICE vehicle, so what is the incentive to rapidly change over??

 

[Lucken]

I don’t think it’s just politics, it’s a number of usability issues that many of us have simply acclimated to. There still is range anxiety. There still is a lack of charging infrastructure despite the huge spending that was earmarked to address this. There still is the length of time to recharge vs a fill-up with ICE vehicles (I spent 31 minutes the other day charging at an EA location that was outputting normally…that’s WAY too long for many people). There still are the very real charging issues for apartment dwellers. There are cold weather issues that are worse than those for ICE owners. I could go on.

So it’s well beyond political issues for most ICE owners I speak to. Many of their concerns are well founded and provide enough of a rationale to not go EV. We’ve got a long way to go.

 

[hmp10]

So the "back end" profit for the dealership is significantly less when they sell an EV vs ICE vehicle, so what is the incentive to rapidly change over??

Dealerships and auto manufacturers often have divergent interests. One of the chief pressures on most automakers is to keep engineering and manufacturing costs down, which EVs would help them do. In fact, dealers often sabotage manufacturers, as happened with the Mustang Mach-E. Every one that arrived at Ford dealers in our area came with $5K+ dealer markups. They are now the least-seen EV on our local roads. In an effort to reduce inventory, Ford cut the price by $8,100 dollars, but reports around the country indicate that many dealers are refusing to pass that price cut through to buyers.

I actually wonder if dealers' fears of losing repair revenues aren't a bit overblown. The throngs of cars in for service at the huge Tesla Service Center in Fort Myers, FL and the weeks-long wait to get an appointment there suggest EVs still need plenty of repair. My own and others' experience related on this forum indicate Lucids can keep a Service Center plenty busy.

Long gone are the days when ICE cars needed frequent tune-ups, spark plug replacement or gapping, carburetor cleaning and adjustment. Even oil change intervals have more than doubled for most cars. And much of that was done by non-dealer shops. The biggest thing in the service area of my Honda dealer is a large display board showing how competitive their service rates for particular items are compared to Walmart, Jiffy Lube, Midas, etc.

A lot of independent service shops will service many items on even a modern ICE car. Find one that will touch an EV. The EV will go to the dealer for service.

I don’t think it’s just politics, it’s a number of usability issues that many of us have simply acclimated to. There still is range anxiety. There still is a lack of charging infrastructure despite the huge spending that was earmarked to address this. There still is the length of time to recharge vs a fill-up with ICE vehicles (I spent 31 minutes the other day charging at an EA location that was outputting normally…that’s WAY too long for many people). There still are the very real charging issues for apartment dwellers.

I don't mean to minimize these issues. In fact, that's why I said that automakers need to ramp up their efforts to address charging infrastructure issues. And I don't mean just forming consortiums. I mean using their considerable influence with policy makers. If they were even half as successful as they have been with influencing federal policy on fuel consumption, environmental, and safety issues then they could move mountains with a full-on effort to get the government behind more support for charging infrastructure.

But pro-EV governmental policy is clearly coming under attack. Florida, the state with the second-highest EV adoption rate in the country and which actually had a pretty good roster of renewable energy measures, pulled back from that support in several areas as part of the recent "Don't Say Climate Change" bill that banned any law or state document from even referring to climate change. On other threads we've discussed other states that have moved in this direction, such as Wyoming's recent attempt to ban EV sales by 2035. A presidential candidate has reportedly promised the oil industry pretty much anything they want if they will contribute massively to his campaign.

 

[terrycs]

BEV adoption rate varies state by state. California appears to be switching over faster .... likely due to charging infrastructure and climate which is more BEV friendly.

https://www.gov.ca.gov/2024/02/22/c... in four new cars,highest share ever at 26.7%.

 

[terrycs]

Having a son who has been in the "car business" for almost 30 years there is a key point that is being overlooked or at least not considered adequately. Car dealerships make more money on the "back end" providing service and repairs than they do on the initial sale of the vehicle. BEV's require very little service compared to ICE vehicles. At my annual service for my Lucid they change my windshield wipers, change an air filter, and perform some inspections. On my previous BMW 540i about 20 years ago, after 20,000 miles I needed a complete brake job, including new discs. Ran me over $2000 then; can't imagine what that costs now. Odds are I will never need a brake job on my Lucid as I almost never touch the brake pedal while "one pedal" driving. And on my Porsches, don't even ask how much an annual "tune up" service runs at a dealership. So the "back end" profit for the dealership is significantly less when they sell an EV vs ICE vehicle, so what is the incentive to rapidly change over??

Interesting perspective.

 

[emoylv]

I think it's a combination of 5 factors:
First, the initial cost (price) of an EV is too high for a good part of the population. You can buy an ICE vehicle for far less money, and there are many more choices.
Second, for most of us Lucid Air owners, the cost of installation of EVSE is not a deal-breaker. Many if not most of us have homes with a large enough power panel to accommodate an additional 50A breaker. If you're in a development that's say 30 years old, your panel may or may not be sufficient. If not, that would require a Huge investment on top of the steep price you've just paid for the EV. If you don't have access to home charging, the cost of charging at a public station significantly lessens the attraction (aka savings) of EV ownership. As more new homes are built (with larger power panel capabilities), I think this problem will lessen.
Third, the lack of reliable chargers on Interstates requires planning and a leap of faith. Lucid owners have a "longer" safety net because our cars have more range than most EVs. I tend to charge at the next station rather than wait for the most optimum further down the road when I'm traveling - sure lessens the range anxiety. That will disappear if/when we reach our goal of a charge station every X miles on the Interstate.
Fourth, the charging algorithm seems conservative on the Lucid. I've witnessed Hyundais at EA charge way faster than my car. I spoke with an EA tech while charging. His opinion is that Hyundai's charge faster because the company doesn't care about the longevity of their batteries. They can always buy another replacement. He said he likes Lucid's philosophy of protecting the battery. I tend to agree on that one.
Fifth, education. Most of us understand that charging from 20-80% is way more efficient than charging from 80 to (God-forbid) 100%. Some of us have shared horror stories about owners charging to 100% while there's a queue of angry customers waiting. Courtesy and politeness would go a long way, but I'm not holding my breath on that one. More chargers, please.

I still think the game changer will be when we transition from lithium-ion to solid-state batteries. I hope I'm still around to purchase my second EV!

 

[Halodde]

I feel like legacy auto manufacturers have pulled back from EV development mostly due to the lack of apparent demand whether that is real or perceived. Obviously all EV manufacturers have cut prices at this point. That has to signal multiple things to legacy manufacturers including, most prominently, lower profit potential. They are building what people want to buy so they can make $. Yes, it might be short sighted. But, they have shareholders to answer to today.

 

[Leftlane]

Porsche is tremendously profitable and sells every car they make, often with a wait or and ADM. Not sure why they would change it up dramatically when they are easing into BEVs anyway. The Macan will sell a ton of electric versions, and they will still sell every 911 they produce.

 

[xponents]

Porsche is tremendously profitable and sells every car they make, often with a wait or and ADM. Not sure why they would change it up dramatically when they are easing into BEVs anyway. The Macan will sell a ton of electric versions, and they will still sell every 911 they produce.

I don't think @hmp10 was trashing Porsche specifically, rather he used them as an example of this.

 

[RockSports]

Being an EV-only household, I often wonder the same thing. EVs are better in almost every way, and the one way they aren't is almost a nonfactor already. Chargers are coming online daily, and some EVs' charging speeds are more than fast enough. Especially those on 800V architecture. As there is more interest and more investment, the technology will become cheaper. We see this already, but EVs will easily become cheaper than ICE vehicles once the batteries are streamlined. As efficiency goes up and cheaper chemistries become available, EVs will win the tech wars.

Just think about how long each technology has been around. ICE has been the standard for 100+ years, with every manufacturer inventing new and better combustion engines. Huge big blocks of the 1960s and 1970s didn't have the HP numbers that you can get from a 4-cylinder today. EVs are already outperforming these engines with today's tech that's had very little innovation time to mature and grow. Anyone with a place to charge an EV and the money to buy one is better off with one over an ICE vehicle. Before we got my wife's i4M50, we had an Audi Sq5. It was a 2021, so not old, and it had 400HP, but the thing felt slow as molasses compared to my Rivian pickup truck. I had a truck that could tow 11K lbs crushing my Audi sporty vehicle.

Apartment dwellers are going to need much more infrastructure for public charging before EVs become good for them but anyone with a house could have one now and they should like it more than their ICE vehicle. They are better driving, last longer with fewer problems and less maintenance and perform better. Plus one pedal drive is so much nicer than using the brake.

 

[Lucken]

I don't mean to minimize these issues. In fact, that's why I said that automakers need to ramp up their efforts to address charging infrastructure issues. And I don't mean just forming consortiums. I mean using their considerable influence with policy makers. If they were even half as successful as they have been with influencing federal policy on fuel consumption, environmental, and safety issues then they could move mountains with a full-on effort to get the government behind more support for charging infrastructure.

But pro-EV governmental policy is clearly coming under attack. Florida, the state with the second-highest EV adoption rate in the country and which actually had a pretty good roster of renewable energy measures, pulled back from that support in several areas as part of the recent "Don't Say Climate Change" bill that banned any law or state document from even referring to climate change. On other threads we've discussed other states that have moved in this direction, such as Wyoming's recent attempt to ban EV sales by 2035. A presidential candidate has reportedly promised the oil industry pretty much anything they want if they will contribute massively to his campaign.

But remember we still have the long charging time issues relative to ICE vehicles and many won’t tolerate that. We still have the cold weather battery issues that don’t impact ICE vehicles to nearly the same degree and that too doesn’t help. These issues are currently inherent in the technology and no legislation, left or right, will change that. Progress will occur over time, but it will take years. Yes, in the interim we can address charging infrastructure issues, but we’ve already thrown huge amounts of federal monies into it with amazingly poor results.

 

[Batteryman]

I think it's a combination of 5 factors:
First, the initial cost (price) of an EV is too high for a good part of the population. You can buy an ICE vehicle for far less money, and there are many more choices.
Second, for most of us Lucid Air owners, the cost of installation of EVSE is not a deal-breaker. Many if not most of us have homes with a large enough power panel to accommodate an additional 50A breaker. If you're in a development that's say 30 years old, your panel may or may not be sufficient. If not, that would require a Huge investment on top of the steep price you've just paid for the EV. If you don't have access to home charging, the cost of charging at a public station significantly lessens the attraction (aka savings) of EV ownership. As more new homes are built (with larger power panel capabilities), I think this problem will lessen.
Third, the lack of reliable chargers on Interstates requires planning and a leap of faith. Lucid owners have a "longer" safety net because our cars have more range than most EVs. I tend to charge at the next station rather than wait for the most optimum further down the road when I'm traveling - sure lessens the range anxiety. That will disappear if/when we reach our goal of a charge station every X miles on the Interstate.
Fourth, the charging algorithm seems conservative on the Lucid. I've witnessed Hyundais at EA charge way faster than my car. I spoke with an EA tech while charging. His opinion is that Hyundai's charge faster because the company doesn't care about the longevity of their batteries. They can always buy another replacement. He said he likes Lucid's philosophy of protecting the battery. I tend to agree on that one.
Fifth, education. Most of us understand that charging from 20-80% is way more efficient than charging from 80 to (God-forbid) 100%. Some of us have shared horror stories about owners charging to 100% while there's a queue of angry customers waiting. Courtesy and politeness would go a long way, but I'm not holding my breath on that one. More chargers, please.

I still think the game changer will be when we transition from lithium-ion to solid-state batteries. I hope I'm still around to purchase my second EV!

I don’t think solid state will happen for at least another decade, especially for mass production.

 

[hmp10]

In my original post I was really thinking about this issue from the manufacturer's perspective relating to the difficulties and costs to engineer and manufacture a power plant with an internal combustion engine at its core, not from the sales angle.

Both a modern ICE and a BEV require very complicated electronic control systems, so that's a wash. And an electric motor, inverter, and battery pack certainly require quite a bit of engineering. But just look at everything that Porsche had to deal with in its new 911 power plant that still falls considerably short of what one Lucid drive unit can deliver in terms of power and torque:

- all the mechanical components of a piston engine
- valve timing
- fuel delivery
- electric and exhaust-driven turbos
- multi-gear transmission
- electric motor
- exhaust plumbing and management
- emissions control

Forget sales figures, sunk costs, and customer views. If someone were to tell an engineer versed in both ICE and EV technology, "I want you to take a clean sheet and design and build the simplest and most energy-efficient high-powered automotive powertrain you can," which technology do you think he would choose?

 

[msaunders9430]

I think it's a combination of 5 factors:
First, the initial cost (price) of an EV is too high for a good part of the population. You can buy an ICE vehicle for far less money, and there are many more choices.
Second, for most of us Lucid Air owners, the cost of installation of EVSE is not a deal-breaker. Many if not most of us have homes with a large enough power panel to accommodate an additional 50A breaker. If you're in a development that's say 30 years old, your panel may or may not be sufficient. If not, that would require a Huge investment on top of the steep price you've just paid for the EV. If you don't have access to home charging, the cost of charging at a public station significantly lessens the attraction (aka savings) of EV ownership. As more new homes are built (with larger power panel capabilities), I think this problem will lessen.
Third, the lack of reliable chargers on Interstates requires planning and a leap of faith. Lucid owners have a "longer" safety net because our cars have more range than most EVs. I tend to charge at the next station rather than wait for the most optimum further down the road when I'm traveling - sure lessens the range anxiety. That will disappear if/when we reach our goal of a charge station every X miles on the Interstate.
Fourth, the charging algorithm seems conservative on the Lucid. I've witnessed Hyundais at EA charge way faster than my car. I spoke with an EA tech while charging. His opinion is that Hyundai's charge faster because the company doesn't care about the longevity of their batteries. They can always buy another replacement. He said he likes Lucid's philosophy of protecting the battery. I tend to agree on that one.
Fifth, education. Most of us understand that charging from 20-80% is way more efficient than charging from 80 to (God-forbid) 100%. Some of us have shared horror stories about owners charging to 100% while there's a queue of angry customers waiting. Courtesy and politeness would go a long way, but I'm not holding my breath on that one. More chargers, please.

I still think the game changer will be when we transition from lithium-ion to solid-state batteries. I hope I'm still around to purchase my second EV!

Just my 10 cents here:

I agree with factors #1 - #3. Factors #4 and #5 are somewhat related to #3.
Cost: The ultimate popularity of the Ford Model T was due to its low price, through mass production along with improvements in materials and design. As battery technology improves, resulting in lower cost and more efficient batteries, EVs should be more affordable for the masses. Once car makers can make more affordable EVs and can convince dealerships of the greater profit in EV sales over servicing aging ICEs, the public will take to them like teens to smartphones.

Infrastructure: Henry Ford had a developing infrastructure of gas stations (Standard Oil) to tap into. The road infrastructure responded to the range possiblities of a motorized car over a horse-drawn carriage. Look at our interstate system today. All a result of the potential range of a car over a horse-drawn carriage. Fast-forward to today; oil companies (not all) are probably reluctant to consider charging stations due to the cost, but once EVs go mainstream, they will jump on the profit-bandwagon. Until then, the government, individual companies, car maker consortia, etc. are needed to build out the charging infrastructure coupled with newer batteries requiring less charging time and lower degradation of battery health.

Who knows; if carmakers can follow the smartphone industry, they may be able to sell low priced EVs that come with charging plans like smartphones with data plans. That move might move consumers to home charging en masse.

One day we (I hope I'm around) will look back on this like we do with telephones/smartphones and radio/television.

 

[DeaneG]

In my original post I was really thinking about this issue from the manufacturer's perspective relating to the difficulties and costs to engineer and manufacture a power plant with an internal combustion engine at its core, not from the sales angle....

I watched that video for about ten minutes - it was just too grim to see how much engine engineering had to be done just to compete in making the right noises.
For me, it's like looking at digital circuit designs from the 1970's. It took so much mental effort in design, and so many components, to achieve very basic things.

 

[translux]

I’ve worked in a highly technical industry for most of my life. From my experience I have a couple opinions that may apply here.
1. When a technology reaches its apex I’ve seen what I believe is a marketing driven effort to spin what is old as new or to create a solution in search of a problem. Here we may be seeing both. What I don’t understand is given the incredible demand for anything with a 911 on it I’m not sure I understand the motivation. Surely they sell enough SUV’s with clean enough motors to satisfy emission requirements.
If I was Porsche I’d keep expanding my na motor options and bring back the Mezger engine and call it a day.
2. I think this old adage may also apply 'To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail'