Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I agree 100% Bill. This EV thing is a flash in the pan. Our electric grid in the US could never, ever handle it! Can you imagine if 50% of the cars in the southern part of the US had EV’s during this summers heat wave? Take your pick, A/C to stay cool and survive or charge your car to go to work and/or the store for food! Can’t produce enough power for both!
Your thoughtful post reflects a pragmatic view that also has a bit of optimism I chose not to mention. I agree, there is a small and largely fleet focused market for electrics. The current aggressive and unrealistic mandates and goals do more disservice to reality and choice autonomy than my deliberate narrow minded posting. We agree, there is no future for Dodge and its market niche with all electric. I elieve and hope that the Charger Daytona Banshee is a success, it has merit, but it’s market is so small, it joins the Demon 170 as nothing more than a halo model, a curiosity as opposed to a volume vehicle that Dodge needs to sustain itself. Reality and market forces will prevail and gas power vehicles will remain the mainstays of Dodge and most brands for decades. That is, my friends, reality.
I absolutely 100% agree. The major issue with the way this EV movement is being done is the government is trying to remove the lack of choice and trying to force us to accept things. Granted this goes along with the major theme of the world for the past several years but I'm not going to get into that here. This EV movement is honestly a knee-jerk reaction to a problem that they can't figure out how to solve, although the answer shouldn't be that hard to figure out. Me personally, I'm all for a cleaner environment and reducing the carbon footprint of vehicles. But that statement brings about a question. With all of the vehicles running around with catalytic converters, just how high is the "carbon footprint" to begin with? It doesn't make a whole lot of sense when you really think about it and if there is a carbon footprint issue, why only attack one facet of the problem when anything that uses fossil fuels should be being looked at? Why arent all of the residential and commercial properties that use fossil fuels to source their electricty being converted to solar, wind and hydro-electric power sources? Like I said I'm all for a cleaner environment but its not just the auto industry that contributes to the problem. Funny enough, the countries with the worst air polution are overseas in the Indian area, not the US. Granted we're not the cleanest but we are certainly on the cleaner side. So what is really the issue? Granted I have my thoughts on this but, they are more political so again I'll refrain from posting them here. But the truth of the matter is that there is something else behind this and it's not what is being told. But Back to the car itself, I'm still very excited to see what the new hurricane powerplants can do and I hope that the Mopar brands will continue to push forward and be successful for years to come.
Can we skip this discussion every time there is news on an EV from Mopar.
NO the REALITY IS.... the 18 State that contain over HALF the US population have passed or just plain executive dictates that make the sale and marketing of ICE powered impractical in model year 28' and plain illegal by 35'. You can post the same complaint over and over and over again, but it is misplaced here, it is a political issue. FCA is only responding to regulatory environment they are inheriting from ignorant voting decisions.
2035 is a long way off. By that point, if the infrastructure is in place then yes, there is a good chance the ICE powered vehicles will be a thing of the past. Hopefully we will have found a way to switch over from using fossil fuels for electricity to solar, wind and hydroelectricity for our main sources of power for residential and commercial needs as well as for where we get the electricity to charge EVs. The problem isn't the switch to EVs, the problem is having the supporting factors in place to switch everything to having the world run off of clean electric power. The other issue is the cost of repairs on EVs when something goes wrong. Going from replacing a belt or an alternator to replacing an entire drive unit is a big jump and it isn't something that most people are financially prepared for and there's no option of going to Auto Zone for a part for these things so there are alot of other aspects the industry (and government) need to think about before passing these mandates. The problem is, most of these people dont have to worry about this because all of this is taken care of for them so they don't even realize what the cost of something like this is. As it stands CURRENTLY, a complete switch to EVs is immensely impractical and would be devastating to the economy. However, properly thought out, managed and executed, it's not the most terrible idea. I for one, believe that a balance of hybrids and full BEVs would be a better way to go about doing it, especially if Hydrogen hybrids ever become a thing because that offers the best of both worlds in alot of ways, but either way, a cleaner world is a great idea but this needs to be better thought out and it's not going to happen with the current state of our government until it's too late.
Take 4 to 7 year to develop a car SO NO 35' is not a long way .
Is it going to be the Plug-in version out of Jeep’s 4Xe or the eBooster version out of Maserati?
Hmmm so no fleet or value vehicle ..... ODD.
Look this is not your concern... just go along with the mandates. Until these problems are shown as real people will not change the voting habit. For sure the most densely populated area are CARB areas.
