<< At some point in the future it will become easier to charge a car than fill it up. >>

Probably, but I think it will be longer before it is as quick !

.

Ordinary people will not buy second hand EVs when they cannot charge them at home because they either don't have the space ot money to fit such facilities and cannot rely solely on the (still inadeqaute public charging facilities that are far less organised, widespread and reliable/convenient as ICE filling stations.

There's no way that the better off will accept dropping their asking prices to well below that of ICE equivalenst (in size, not performance, given that the average Joe doesn't car about an EV doing 0-30 in 3 seconds but does about how long it takes to charge up and its range), especially when the true lifetime cost of ownership is factored in, i.e. expensive battery replacements for one.

.

I get that but you must see that basic economics will mean demand for filling stations drops and many will become uneconomical. At some point in the future it will become easier to charge a car than fill it up. I don't know when that'll happen, it will not be for some time, but the tipping point will occur.

I'm not convinced battery replacements are or will become a "thing" any more than engine replacements are. Early EVs are holding up well and as the technology matures it has the potential to become cheaper and more reliable than ICE. Have you taken a modern ICE apart? They are horrendously complicated.

Many may be complicated, but the tech generally is VERY mature and often so well done that the fundamental tech - especially the really expensive bits - will last the physical lifetime of the car itself. The other big difference is that ICE engines and their sub-components are far more modular in nature than those of electric vehicles.

Now it's true that ICE is going the same way, but mainly on electric components like power steering or lights, where you have to now replace whole units rather than just a small sub-componet like a lens, bulb or small electrical part.

The problem with EVs as I see it is that they have fwere but vastly more expensive components, many of which are 'sealed for life' and thus unrepairable, or as with the battery packs, difficult to get to and also can cause knock on issues when damaged in an accident (battery packs are now often part of the structural integrity of the car) - like thermal runaway after an accident.

If an EV's electric motor (one of them) or significant number of batteries failed in an older car, it would likely cost several £0000s to replace, making it likely the car would either be written off for scrap or sold for peanuts at a significant loss to the current owner. This risk would thus need to be factored into second hand pricing as such cars age.

At the moment, there's not enough publicity or numbers affected for such things to affect the market - yet. With time, I think it will, where second hand values will drop considerably unless and until the tech matures sufficiently where replacement parts of that nature are as cheap as ICE equivalents.

This is why I still strongly maintain that the forced move to EV from ICE is a bad one, because that maturity is at least 2 decades away, perhaps a lot longer.

It would highly unlikely for an ICE equivalent's entire engine to fail, so the cost of replacement bits could therefore be spread over a number of years and owners.

Just because EVs have a way to go and the infrastructure isn't there yet means little for the future. Which is good news, because right now you don't have to worry about it.

The problem is that many ordinary people, and especially those on incomes below the 40% tax bracket, will not be able to afford EVs once the law prohibits the sale of new ICE cars, because the cost of owning an ICE car will be forced up as evidenced by current events and governmental / internation pressure to stop their use, despite there being yet no viable, cost-effective alternatives for the less well-off.

Synthehtc fuels willalso only be the preserve of the wealthy (and why manufacturers of sports cars have been lobbying for an exemption) because of their inherrant high cost and how they take away land vital to the production of food, never mind the energy needed to make them anyway.

No doubt shortly an e-fuel to enable rich private jet owners to keep using them will be found and an exemption made for them too whilst us Plebs can't go abroad on holiday any more.

If an EV's electric motor (one of them) or significant number of batteries failed in an older car, it would likely cost several £0000s to replace, making it likely the car would either be written off for scrap or sold for peanuts at a significant loss to the current owner. This risk would thus need to be factored into second hand pricing as such cars age.

At the moment, there's not enough publicity or numbers affected for such things to affect the market - yet. With time, I think it will, where second hand values will drop considerably unless and until the tech matures sufficiently where replacement parts of that nature are as cheap as ICE equivalents.

True, but if an engine or gearbox fails how much does a new one cost? Probably £8000 for a new engine and often £5000 for a new gearbox, even a manual one. And don't kid yourselves they don't fail - because they do. I've had 3 engines fail on cars passing through and 1 (regular manual) gearbox in the last 2 months. One engine was on a relatively new Volvo which had a cracked block. It is relatively rare but happens. Let's not forget even a wear part like a clutch is £1000 now before you look at the flywheel.

Of course, on a 10-15 year old car no one would put in a new engine. They'd put in a used one from a breakers. However, there is always that awkward period where a car is old enough to be out of warranty but a new enough design that there aren't sufficient crashed/scrap ones to supply cheap parts. Maybe that's where EVs are at.

At some point there will be piles of EVs being dismantled providing cheap parts just as there are with current cars. There will also be a continuing industry fixing electronics just as there is now (in many cases fixing the exact same parts). The only way there won't be is if EVs turn out to be so reliable there is no economic case for such an industry developing. I doubt we'll be that lucky.

I think if car manufacturers can be bold and develop their vehicles along a similar way to computers (desktop PCs) with standardised component fitments and housings, just changing certain variables and performance, then, as you say, once enough are made, then a 'scrapyward' industry might take over and thus help reduce the cost of ownership for people who currently buy cars at the 10year mark or more.

The problem really comes with the way electronics has gone over the last 40 years, moving further and further towards completely integrated equipment (which saves on the original cost of manufacture [and thus cost] and improves reliability) but at the significant expense of being able to repair faults without changing out large swathes of the equipment at great expense and/or requiring very intricate work by highly trained people.

I remember when my old 1990s mini hifi developed a fault on the double cassette deck - one of the motors had failed - it cost £75 to diagnose and replace it, and that didn't include my travel to the repair shop (£15), and that was nigh on 20 years ago. I shudder to think what something similar would cost me today.

Even on ICE cars, the cost of parts replacements is horrdenous - my car's front fog lamp lens is broken and I'll have to get an enture new unit - housing, lens, bulb and local wiring connection, when in days gone by, something similar would just need the removal of the lens via a couple of screws/bolts and a £5 - £10 replacement that likely I could fit myself in just a few minutes.

This latest repair is going to cost me £180, and that's after my dealership relented after apparently misquoting by forgetting to add on the labour charge, which in this case would be around £90.

I hear similar things when LED light clusters or their bulbs need replacing. There's no need for this - costs could be kept down if standarisation and a bit of thought went into the designs, and where the styling wasn't compromised to any significant degree, if at all.

Sorry for going rather off topic Mods.

Manufacturers design cars to sell to people who can afford them new. They need to sell sufficient volumes to manufacture parts efficiently and sell the car at a competitive price.

As most new cars are functionally competent, the only way to differentiate products is through the way they are designed and marketed.

Manufacturing costs are minimised by building sub-assemblies which are then fitted as a unit to the car.

Manufacturers are concerned about trade in values affecting lease costs for the first owner. Thereafter they have little interest - making replacement subassemblies expensive maximises their profit from a captive market and reduces spare parts stock holding costs and complexity.

The days of standard components used by a range of manufacturers are largely gone - eg: 5" and 7" round headlamps, fuel pumps, alternators, wiper motors etc.

I wasn't advocating for a return to the 1970s with old round Hella headlamps, etc, but more like PCs with parts that are interchangeable whilst still being visually different to some degree - that's the whole point of 'pattern parts, which seemingly are harder and harder to come by nowadays apart from clutches and bulbs.

It seems to me that car manufacturers are deliberately making unique parts (including how they fit) so that potential pattern parts manufacturers cannot make any reasonable profit from anything other than the biggest volume makes and models of car like the Focus or Golf.

Soon, mnay of these 'volume' sellers will no long be made because owning a car will be the preserve of the wealthy, who represent a small share of the overall market. Just like it was 80-100 years ago, as I predicted. Isn't progress great?