• Welcome to Jetboaters.net!

    We are delighted you have found your way to the best Jet Boaters Forum on the internet! Please consider Signing Up so that you can enjoy all the features and offers on the forum. We have members with boats from all the major manufacturers including Yamaha, Seadoo, Scarab and Chaparral. We don't email you SPAM, and the site is totally non-commercial. So what's to lose? IT IS FREE!

    Membership allows you to ask questions (no matter how mundane), meet up with other jet boaters, see full images (not just thumbnails), browse the member map and qualifies you for members only discounts offered by vendors who run specials for our members only! (It also gets rid of this banner!)

    free hit counter

EV discussion - hate or love?

X5 seats are totally fixed. No sliding, and they're either up or down, they don't even have like adjustable reclining, lol.

I think the newest Cayenne S with the turbo V8 was not yet out at the time I was looking, or if it was they were just barely coming out. To be fair, I was stuck on the HC Durango, and the SQ7 and X5 were really choices of "it's cheaper and almost as fast" and I still question that decision, lol.
 
Interesting article from NPR came across my feed this morning.


In sticking with the thread title.....Looks like those that hate EV's likely weren't going to buy anyway.

I think most people don’t give two shits about the climate when it comes to cars. Consumer cars have minimal impact compared to commercials transportation.

Anyways…. This is a crap article. No data points plus this admission “Put differently: The idea that his work shows EVs are worse for the environment would make sense only if you ignore the existence of climate change.” - so the author admits EVs are worse for the environment as a whole and that they are only better for climate change.

Not only does the article not provide data around the argument, it purposefully omits it. It mentions certain data points (like around consumer opinion) and provides references to other articles supporting their argument, but does not link to anything that could be against. For example, “The researcher behind the original study”, going with the theme of the article “study” should be hyperlinked to the study but is not.
 
Last edited:
Adrian summed my thoughts up pretty well.

Another point that's often overlooked is longevity. While IN THEORY they have all this battery life and whatnot, I'm not convinced that will matter. We have seen all the automakers cheap out to try to hold down pricing. We have seen how poorly in car electronics age. We have seen that software bloat will render slightly older electronics paperweights. I think all of these factors are going to make EVs have a much shorter useful lifespan than the batteries would have you believe. And frankly, I think the automakers want that, because I think their executives get hard-ons when they see people swapping out phones yearly, or leasing phones. I think that's exactly what they want cars to be, swapped out early and often.

So I believe that in theory an EV is cleaner, but that in our reality, they're going to get totalled faster, bricked more, and have expensive repairs that make the economically unviable to repair them more often. To be fair, I don't think a lot of these are shortcomings of just EVs, and rather will occur with most new vehicles. But there's a larger number of people who can and will fix ICE vehicles than EVs. And there's a lot less ICE vehicles that can be totalled due to an electronics or software issue, as of right now.
 
I think most people don’t give two shits about the climate when it comes to cars. Consumer cars have minimal impact compared to commercials transportation.

Anyways…. This is a crap article. No data points plus this admission “Put differently: The idea that his work shows EVs are worse for the environment would make sense only if you ignore the existence of climate change.” - so the author admits EVs are worse for the environment as a whole and that they are only better for climate change.

Not only does the article not provide data around the argument, it purposefully omits it. It mentions certain data points (like around consumer opinion) and provides references to other articles supporting their argument, but does not link to anything that could be against. For example, “The researcher behind the original study”, going with the theme of the article “study” should be hyperlinked to the study but is not.
Lots of data points were in the linked articles. Beyond that, the point of the article wasn't to prove if they are or are not better (that's been exhaustively proven already), but to discuss how consumers feel about that aspect.

Your added bolded text contradicts the underlined part of the quote. I'm not sure how you got there. Are you saying climate change isn't real and you're ignoring it, or did you miss that the data was specifically examining brake and tire particles, which is pretty clearly NOT "as a whole"?

Lots of additional data linked in the other articles. I'm not sure what you're looking for here.

Again, the point wasn't to prove that EV's are or are not better for the environment, but to discuss consumer thought trends surrounding that premise.

Also, appreciate you guys proving my point here :D - "Looks like those that hate EV's likely weren't going to buy anyway."
 
Pretty sure Adrian used to have a Tesla? I dunno that I'd say he hates EVs except from maybe by experience with them lol.

Honestly I think consumers are tired of hearing about climate change being THEIR problem. Climate change isn't stopping our elite from using super yachts or private jets. Climate change isn't causing employers to say that remote work should be the norm. Climate change isn't stopping massive data centers and crypto miners and AI hubs from operating. Climate change has very quickly stratified people into those who have to change to save the planet, and those who are rich and can just buy tax deductions to say they're offsetting themselves.

I think the auto industry would be smart to never mention climate change or being clean again, and focus on EVs as the "low upkeep" option. You tell someone they can buy an EV Equinox and you never have to take it in for fluid service, and you just plug it in every night vs going to get gas, and it will just keep working indefinitely without you having a tondo anything and it's a much better value prop to consumers.
 
Correct, I’ve owned a Tesla Model 3 and a Jeep 4XE and now back to two full ice cars. I’ve discussed pros and cons of both in other posts.
 
Correct, I’ve owned a Tesla Model 3 and a Jeep 4XE and now back to two full ice cars. I’ve discussed pros and cons of both in other posts.

I wish the 4xe was made in GC L or Wagoneer.

What made you get rid of the 4xe?
 
I wish the 4xe was made in GC L or Wagoneer.

What made you get rid of the 4xe?
When I bought the 911 my wife told me to trade it in. Wasn’t my plan to trade it but we did. Wasn’t a bad car, only put like 15k on it. If we kept it, it’d probably be gone by now because the back door suck with a car seat. The PHEV idea is great concept and the 28 miles range is pretty good for local errands, though 100 would be ideal for longer trips. Rode better than typical Wrangler and was quieter as well.
 
Damn, interested to hear how you like it! I see these everywhere in Seattle now. Including one at the boat ramp the other week (pulling in a shiny new Axis).

I'm kinda looking at an R2 in 2026-2027ish to replace one of my two cars - assuming it can tow at least 5,000 pounds (since I may upgrade my boat to a heavier one before then)
 
Damn, interested to hear how you like it! I see these everywhere in Seattle now. Including one at the boat ramp the other week (pulling in a shiny new Axis).

I'm kinda looking at an R2 in 2026-2027ish to replace one of my two cars - assuming it can tow at least 5,000 pounds (since I may upgrade my boat to a heavier one before then)
I'll be quite vocal if I love or hate it.

I really wanted a '25 R1S with the Dual performance motors and Max battery, however that was over 40% more than this "leftover" 2024 R1T. First time I've bought a vehicle 100% online, so I'm curious to see how the purchase experience is.

R1T is rates at 11k lbs, R1S is rated at 7.7k lbs. Should be good either way on weight.
 
11k pounds... you could almost tow two Malibu 23 LSVs at once 🤣
 
Congrats! 1-6 weeks is a great time frame.

I see these everywhere down here, so I assume people are liking them. I also see Cybertrucks everywhere so who knows lol.

I see a lot of Rivians. I see less Cybertrucks, and every time I see those I cringe.
 
I see a lot of Rivians. I see less Cybertrucks, and every time I see those I cringe.
No joke - we were leaving my house and driving to the end of the block, probably 150 yards away.. in all seriousness... my wife asked if the people at the end of the block get a cybertruck? Nope - they just had a silver junk dumpster placed on the side of the road lol

Almost every one I see is a driving billboard. They are all wrapped with business names.
 
Congrats! 1-6 weeks is a great time frame.

I see these everywhere down here, so I assume people are liking them. I also see Cybertrucks everywhere so who knows lol.
That was part of the deal. A lot of these discounts are limited to the end of the month. '24's are showing up on the online store and getting bought in less than an hour. This one had only been up ~20min when I found it. The other two that came up at the same time were gone within the hour.

This is a '24 that's already built. Will have to be shipped to Cleveland where I'll pick it up.
 
Back
Top