Embracing the extended-range car seems like the perfect answer to the future of mobility, and this idea is ingrained in many people's minds. After all, extended-range cars retain the convenience of cheap travel while avoiding the embarrassment of inconvenient charging.
However, as time goes by, many people begin to realize the difference between a range-extender car and a pure electric vehicle, and feel the sadness and practical considerations in it.
The ideal extended-range car, which can use pure electric power on short distances and switch to fuel mode at high speeds, sounds so wonderful. However, the reality is that the lives of most car owners do not require frequent long trips.
Their day-to-day driving is more confined to short distances within the city, which means they spend most of their time in electric mode. This lifestyle leads directly to an annoying result: always seems to be busy for the next recharge.
As a result, charging or going to a charging station becomes part of the daily life of the range-extender owner. The point is, once they get used to this lifestyle and the convenience of charging, many range extender owners are never willing to go back to fuel mode.
Because they found that instead of spending expensive gas costs, it is better to save some money and enjoy a good meal after arriving at your destination with half an hour of charging time.
In many service areas, one can even observe a strange phenomenon: pure electric vehicle owners are not the main users of charging stations, on the contrary, some range extender owners are competing for charging piles.
Although the cruising range of many pure electric models has reached 600-700 kilometers, which can even be calculated with a 20% fold range, for long distances that do not need to be recharged in the middle of the journey, there is no need to stay in the service area for charging.
In addition, battery issues are also a headache for pure electric vehicles. In short, due to cost constraints, vehicle manufacturers are unable to consider both fuel and electric systems, resulting in a mediocre performance on both fronts.
Therefore, people in the industry often criticize the "extended range" technology, believing that it is like a fuel vehicle carrying a power bank, which is a low-end technology. However, it is not always important whether the technology is advanced or not, it is more important to have stability and reliability.
But will a range-extender car be able to provide enough stability? This is not the case. First of all, in terms of cost, the battery of the extended-range car is not destined to perform the complex operation of pure electric vehicles, such as silicon carbide, 800V high-voltage charging in the whole range, and no thermal propagation technology.
As a result, range-extender vehicles lag far behind pure electric vehicles in terms of charging speed, power consumption, and safety. Another fatal problem is that extended-range cars essentially use small batteries to drive the motor, but in the absence of power, they can be supplemented by a fuel engine.
However, doing so results in an unusually frequent number of battery cycles. In short, other cars may cycle 50 times in a year, while extended-range cars may need 150 cycles or more. This high-frequency use is bound to greatly reduce the health of the battery.
Eventually, in less than five years, the battery may fail and the range of the all-electric mode will be significantly reduced. In addition, the economic benefits are also worrying. To put it simply, since there are two systems involved in a range-extender vehicle, its repair and maintenance costs are much higher than that of a pure electric or pure fuel vehicle.
The complexity of interaction design often raises a variety of problems. While the hybrid powertrain can theoretically provide a more flexible mode of travel, it can be a financial burden for car owners in practice.
When the vehicle needs to be repaired or maintained, the owner not only needs to deal with the battery maintenance of the ordinary electric vehicle, but also must consider the maintenance of the fuel system, which will undoubtedly increase the cost of use. In addition to the direct maintenance costs, the energy consumption of the extended-range vehicle in the process of use is also a challenge that cannot be ignored.
Although the range extender mode can theoretically reduce the dependence on fuel, in practice, frequent switching of power sources can lead to lower energy efficiency than pure electric vehicles. This means that at the same driving distance, a range-extender car may consume more electricity or fuel, further increasing the cost of travel.
As a result, many people find that instead of opting for this hybrid approach, they are moving to a more dedicated drive system. Whether it is a return to traditional fuel vehicles or a shift to pure electric vehicles, it is more economical and efficient than this choice between them.
To sum up, although the ideal range extender car tries to combine the advantages of gasoline vehicles and pure electric vehicles, the actual effect is not satisfactory. Suffice it to say, it makes up the drawbacks of both, which is really bothersome!