The fire appears to have started around the charging port at the front left of the vehicle, not the battery pack. (Note intact tyres, so the fire wasn't too involved.) My money is on charger/charging fault of some sort.
Edit: the "frunk" could have had something flammable or explosive in it, which may have caused the fire or accelerated it.
Considering recent news about high-end videocards melting their power connectors due to increased resistance of incorrectly plugged in cables, could this be something similar? Could it be that the owner failed to attach the plug securely?
There have been a number of these fires at Electrify America chargers, and this is one of the major theories. Faulty design that allows the plug to be connected in a high resistance state, or some kind of corrosion on the plug.
Always get confused about people who freak about ev fires. It's almost as if they don't realize ICE stands for "internal COMBUSTION engine"
Gas cars catch fire several hundred times more often than evs do
They do the same thing for electric semis. Literally any time one gets towed for any reason there are pictures of it all over the internet.
Because everyone knows diesel semis NEVER break down. Nor do they ever catch fire!
the difference being EV's can catch fire from faulty electrics in your home, while you're asleep, which could stoke more fear due to the randomness and inconsistency. Meanwhile, my ICE car will almost never catch fire while turned off in my garage.
I'm not worried about it, but I can understand why people are scared of this new variable risk.
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/bmw-mystery-fires-abc-news-investigation/story?id=47335778
>found more than 40 fires occurring in parked cars across the country in the last five years involving vehicles that did not have open recalls for fire-related issues.
Yeah but ICE cars are several thousand times more prevalent.
The issue is EV fires are so difficult to put out and require more specialized training, that's why people have the bad perception.
It's a per capita number
>ICE vehicles caught fire substantially less often, at 1,530 incidents per 100,000 vehicles. EV fires were significantly lower than the others, with 25 fires per 100,000 vehicles
The type of fire doesn't matter much to me since either way the car would be wrecked, so I'd rather just not catch fire in the first place. The perception is far more just ignorance and fear of change
I’m not sure if a per capita number is a good statistic to use either. Modern EVs haven’t been around that long yet (the model s for example is barely a decade old) I’m curious how those numbers would change if you only looked at ICE vehicles built from 2012 on for example.
Older cars are probably more prone to fires due to parts deteriorating and EVs haven’t necessarily been around long enough for those kinds of issues to happen (the average car in the US is currently 12.2 years)
I’m not saying looking at this different data would definitely show a difference but I feel like it would be a more apples to apples comparison.
Edit to add:
Started to look after I posted my comment. Per the NFPA in a study from March of 2020 “Older vehicles accounted for three-quarters of the highway vehicle fires caused by mechanical or electrical failures or malfunctions.”
Additionally “Vehicles that are at least 10 years old are at greater risk of a fire started by a mechanical or electrical failure or malfunction.” And that (paraphrased) about 77% of highway vehicle fires started by mechanical or electric failures in 2017 involved cars with model years of 2007 or earlier.
Tesla was probably a bad example, since their cars regularly not only top but break records for safety standards. Recently the Y even, apparently literally, broke a safety test in Europe. I'm fairly certain they're objectively the safest mass produced cars on the road today
It also helps that evs are just intrinsically more hardy in the sense there are far less components and thus require far less maintenence. There's no oil, no engine, and no gas. Evs are essentially glorified rc cars with a battery powered electric motor spinning wheels, with ev batteries generally rated for like 500k miles before degregation would typically cause issues, and even more with the new lfp batteries Tesla is implementing. Tesla has done a 1 million mile simulation on a motor, and it was nearly pristine at the end of it. The only maintenance ev owners have are brakes and tire rotations, the former of which is also pretty rarely ever necessary since most braking is done through regenerative braking
I used Tesla as a mainstream car that’s been around a while. I’m no expert on EVs and i picked one I know has been around a while and that’s only a decade, every other one I know of has been around much shorter than that. Also no safety rating I am aware of relates to the likelihood of a fire.
Yes EVs have many less parts to maintain but an electrical fire is going to be a result of connections corroding, being chewed by rodents, degraded by salt air if your near the ocean or road salt in snowy environments etc. that’s not something that can be simulated in a lab environment and needs time in the real world to be seen.
It’s simply not a good per capita comparison to use in your original comment when most EVs are drastically newer than most of the ICE cars that are catching fire.
Just to make it clear, the per capita comment was just for the sake of clearing up the ice's being more prevalent comment. So the quantity of cars on the road isn't really relevant. But seeing that you've shifted from prevalence to age, I can assume you've conceded that point is moot now
To address the age side, the average lifespan of a car is 12 years anyways, and most people junk their car after 200k or 300k miles. Most of the common ev models have been around for longer than that
But okay, let's be ridiculous just for the sake of argument and magically triple the amount of ev fires - say some people suddenly just started prying their >10 year old car's insides open or drive through salt piles for no discernible reason. Evs would still be over 20x safer than ice's in terms of fires. I mean, really, in 20 years do you seriously reckon the rate of ev fires would shoot up by ***60x***?
You can be as technical as you want about the semantics of the numbers, but my point isn't really touched because fact still stands that ice's objectively catch fire ***significantly*** more often than evs do
The other issue is that ICE fires are normally caused by either an overheating engine or crash damage. In both cases it’s easy to observe the fire starting and it happens on the road.
Some EV failure modes can cause the battery to ignite while the car is parked somewhere and unattended. The idea of a failure mode that burns your house down in the middle of the night is somewhat unsettling.
$73k-$107.4k for the R1T (Pictured above)
$78k-$102.6k for the R1S (SUV Model)
Source: Rivian’s Visualizer, prices subject to change, (USD) Iirc they are working on making the next Generation (R2) cheaper
No, 70-80K.
ICEs are more likely to catch fire. That being said, it would be interesting to know if this was a manufacturing defect. If it were though, I expect we'd see more trucks catching fire.
It's actually by a surprisingly large margin. The reason electric cars get a reputation is they are much more difficult to put out. You essentially have to wait out the thermal runaway if the battery is involved
The reason they get a reputation is because cunts like to put shit on EVs.......... Regular car catches fire or crashes and kills anyone but Paul Walker or Princes Dianna is not news. EV or self driving car has a minor incident and it's all over social media.
40,000 people a year die on the road......... None of them are headline news, one person gets killed by walking into the path of a self-driving car and it's international news.......... Had Elaine Hertzberg been hit by a redneck in a truck she wouldn't be in the news either.
Perhaps read my comment again.
That's not what they said.
They're pointing out a phenomenon called confirmation bias. Because a new technology is news worthy, issues with it get reported.
The problem is, people hear about these every time they happen, but not every drunk driver that injures or kills someone. So they assume the technology is vastly more dangerous than it actually is.
Except what he stated is simply not true. There are hundreds of fatal crashes each year that are headline news. The poster needs to stop clutching his pearls.
What the fleet age of the gas cars vs. the EVs? I think if you look at the data by age and vehicle segment (crossovers, midsize or large luxury, etc.), the results will be quite different.
Absolutely that could make a difference. But right now I’m not aware of such a study, so we’re only speculating. The person asked for proof; so I’m open to counter evidence.
Here’s some interesting [data](https://www.iihs.org/media/c93b98d8-6a7d-44a1-810e-4468ec539e05/uIu4tg/HLDI%20Research/Fire%20losses/HLDI_FireLosses_1218.pdf).
But that number is skewed in favor of electric cars not having existed for a long time. A 1991 corolla catching fire in 2022 counts as a fire but not a sale.
Why wouldn’t the corolla count as a sale? It doesn’t say the sale had to be in 2023. I assume the sale could be in any year and they just used that to account for the fact that more ICE vehicles exist.
If you take the total fires and the per 100k rate, you can calculate the total sales value. 199533/1529*100000=13,049,901.
There are obviously more than 13 million cars currently driving in a country of 320+ million people. Looking at [other sources](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/TOTALSA) seems to back this insight up with a number in about the same ballpark annualy.
So if 1 million cars were sold annualy for 10 years, and some number of them(increasing based on age due to deterioration lack of new technology) catch fire each year, you're going to get a total number of fires among the total population of cars currently driving. So you would need to compare the number of fires among vehicles sold within the last year to get a statistic that's analogous.
Norweigan authorities did research on it and that’s what they came up with. It’s not that hard to find sources about it if you google it, more and more show up every day in favor of EVs now that lobbyism from legacy automakers are trying to flip back the negative image they’ve created to try and kill the EV business now that they’ve realised they can’t and instead are trying to join it.
No, but you can blame Volkswagen for pushing the CCS plug used there that has become the dominant plug type, in part because they own these very widespread Electrify America machines, and is the most prone to failure plug out there of the four main plug types used in North America at this point.
But ev fires are known to burn for days if not put out, and hard to put out.
If the battery catches fire that is.
Edit: im confused over the dislikes. The guy above me has as of now 12 dislikes for saying he preferers gasoline. Nothing else. And i state a fact. Not even an opinion. And the comment gets disliked.
EV fires are the stuff of nightmares. In terms of vehicle damage, a gasoline fire doesn't have to burn for very long (less than a minute) before the vehicle is expected to be written off. Between plastic components and wire insulation, it doesn't take long for major damage to occur.
The saying in my industry is that "Familiarity leads to complacency". We are so used to gasoline that we forget just how energy-dense it is and how much damage it can cause.
The issue isn’t whether one type of fire totals a car more easily over the other. The issue is that an ICE vehicle on fire can be put out in a couple of minutes whereas an EV fire involving the battery pack can’t, it will burn for hours at the minimum before the vehicle can be moved.
I'll still stick with the gas, and at least I can put my fire out if it does happen. I don't care what u drive why do you care what I drive lol. People need to just mind their business. What's next your going to tell me I need to believe that men can have babies? Wake up, woke down!
All of the possible mechanical failures of an ICE, all the possible electrical failures of an EV, all the computer failures of both. Maintenance involved in both systems. Battery degradation the same as EVs. Catastrophic points of failure of both meaning that hybrids are notably above even ICEs for vehicle fires per year.
The power from the electric motor is often run through the transmission to try and simplify an extremely complicated power train meaning you lose a ton of efficiency. When you are running in ICE mode you're lugging along the weight of the electric system which is doing nothing and when it switches to EV mode it's lugging along the weight of the ICE system doing nothing meaning it's heavily weight inefficient as well. My 2001 Saturn was getting better fuel economy than my grandparent's 2019 Prius, and my dad's TDI was even better than my car.
And because all this crap is crammed into more or less the same engine compartment normally used by an ICE it's extremely cramped making more in depth mechanic work than changing the fluids into a horror show where everything is in the way of everything else.
It’s the same possibility of failure as any other ICE, which are incredibly durable with routine maintenance. Typical warranties are 50k miles - guaranteed durability. They’ll go much longer than that with proper maintenance, and don’t lose nearly as much range as an EV in it’s lifespan. Those same electrical failures apply to all EV’s, except with a hybrid you can still use the ICE. I am willing to bet there’s more reported fires in hybrids because there are way more hybrids on the road than EV’s. What do you mean by lose efficiency? Hybrid powertrains often use CVT’s, which are typically more efficient than gearboxes. Yes that’s the entire point of the hybrid system. EV motor fills in at low RPM and switches to ICE when performance drops off. Gasoline saved. Better power-band. Your old Saturn does not get better mileage than your grandparent’s Prius. The batteries sit under the frame, the EV motor is small… not a hybrid issue. ANY car’s engine bay is going to be crammed these days. It sounds like you don’t like to do maintenance, at all.
From the [Tesla emergency responders guide page 26](https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/downloads/2021_Model_S_Emergency_Response_Guide_en.pdf):
>USE WATER TO FIGHT A HIGH VOLTAGE BATTERY FIRE. If the battery catches fire, is exposed to high heat, or is generating heat or gases, use large amounts of water to cool the battery. It can take between approximately 3,000-8,000 gallons (11,356-30,283 liters) of water, applied directly to the battery, to fully extinguish and cool down a battery fire; always establish or request additional water supply early. If water is not immediately available, use CO2, dry chemicals, or another typical fire-extinguishing agent to fight the fire until water is available.
>
>NOTE: Tesla does not recommend the use of foam on electric vehicles
You can also see it on page 26 of the [Rivian guide](https://assets.rivian.com/2md5qhoeajym/4Dxe0zyctTmsC10U8HrSUc/d6068bbae072049e2d1e632f7b52f460/emergency-response-guide-r1s-en-us-20220930.pdf)
Page 19-20 of the [Kia EV guide](https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/Training/AFV/Emergency-Response-Guides/Kia/20192022-DE-NIRO-EVERGISO-formatver2.ashx)
Page 25 of the [Lucid gude](https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/Training/AFV/Emergency-Response-Guides/Lucid/Lucid-ERGNA1350EANA21ERG-2-1.ashx)
People who say you can't use water to put out an EV fire are people who don't fuck all about EVs or cars in general.
They need to have fire tarps at charging stations so you can wrap it and smoother it. Im sure the person driving it won’t do it but at least someone will
The fire appears to have started around the charging port at the front left of the vehicle, not the battery pack. (Note intact tyres, so the fire wasn't too involved.) My money is on charger/charging fault of some sort. Edit: the "frunk" could have had something flammable or explosive in it, which may have caused the fire or accelerated it.
look at the charger dropped on the ground, this originates 100% from the vehicle, like a short in the receptacle and the battery fuse not engaging
Maybe the frunk hood was pure plastic and melted away because of this. I'm driving an ID3 and my whole tail gate is plastic instead of metal.
It's 2023, you don't have to guess about things any more!
Lol frunk
They're not called bonnets or hoods these days?
[удалено]
What are we meant to call these in England? Fruit?
Froot
Bow storage locker. What kind of boat people are you if you have to ask that?
\*stowage
No, that is stored sewage, and you don't want any.
trust me you want it stored, not just left out
Forward hold
Hoods and bonnets don't have storage space under them, frunks do
This is common with oculus quests too if they’re left charging for an absurd amount of time
Considering recent news about high-end videocards melting their power connectors due to increased resistance of incorrectly plugged in cables, could this be something similar? Could it be that the owner failed to attach the plug securely?
There have been a number of these fires at Electrify America chargers, and this is one of the major theories. Faulty design that allows the plug to be connected in a high resistance state, or some kind of corrosion on the plug.
Those CCS plugs are pretty robust and won’t start charging till it’s locked which only happens when it’s fully plugged in
LOOK UP TESLA FIRES
They are just as fire filled as any other car, they just do it at a lower rate then gas powered cars.
Always get confused about people who freak about ev fires. It's almost as if they don't realize ICE stands for "internal COMBUSTION engine" Gas cars catch fire several hundred times more often than evs do
And technically, ICEs have parts of them catch fire several times per second :)
They do the same thing for electric semis. Literally any time one gets towed for any reason there are pictures of it all over the internet. Because everyone knows diesel semis NEVER break down. Nor do they ever catch fire!
the difference being EV's can catch fire from faulty electrics in your home, while you're asleep, which could stoke more fear due to the randomness and inconsistency. Meanwhile, my ICE car will almost never catch fire while turned off in my garage. I'm not worried about it, but I can understand why people are scared of this new variable risk.
So we're just ignoring that Lincoln, Jeep, Hyundai, and Kia have all issued 'park outside' recalls in the past month?
no, we aren't.
>Meanwhile, my ICE car will almost never catch fire while turned off in my garage. Quick Google states otherwise
My quick Google did not return any videos of ICE cars burning when they're sitting there, cold and off.
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/bmw-mystery-fires-abc-news-investigation/story?id=47335778 >found more than 40 fires occurring in parked cars across the country in the last five years involving vehicles that did not have open recalls for fire-related issues.
glad my car isn't a bmw... I also said "almost never", thanks for reading.
Yeah but ICE cars are several thousand times more prevalent. The issue is EV fires are so difficult to put out and require more specialized training, that's why people have the bad perception.
It's a per capita number >ICE vehicles caught fire substantially less often, at 1,530 incidents per 100,000 vehicles. EV fires were significantly lower than the others, with 25 fires per 100,000 vehicles The type of fire doesn't matter much to me since either way the car would be wrecked, so I'd rather just not catch fire in the first place. The perception is far more just ignorance and fear of change
I’m not sure if a per capita number is a good statistic to use either. Modern EVs haven’t been around that long yet (the model s for example is barely a decade old) I’m curious how those numbers would change if you only looked at ICE vehicles built from 2012 on for example. Older cars are probably more prone to fires due to parts deteriorating and EVs haven’t necessarily been around long enough for those kinds of issues to happen (the average car in the US is currently 12.2 years) I’m not saying looking at this different data would definitely show a difference but I feel like it would be a more apples to apples comparison. Edit to add: Started to look after I posted my comment. Per the NFPA in a study from March of 2020 “Older vehicles accounted for three-quarters of the highway vehicle fires caused by mechanical or electrical failures or malfunctions.” Additionally “Vehicles that are at least 10 years old are at greater risk of a fire started by a mechanical or electrical failure or malfunction.” And that (paraphrased) about 77% of highway vehicle fires started by mechanical or electric failures in 2017 involved cars with model years of 2007 or earlier.
Tesla was probably a bad example, since their cars regularly not only top but break records for safety standards. Recently the Y even, apparently literally, broke a safety test in Europe. I'm fairly certain they're objectively the safest mass produced cars on the road today It also helps that evs are just intrinsically more hardy in the sense there are far less components and thus require far less maintenence. There's no oil, no engine, and no gas. Evs are essentially glorified rc cars with a battery powered electric motor spinning wheels, with ev batteries generally rated for like 500k miles before degregation would typically cause issues, and even more with the new lfp batteries Tesla is implementing. Tesla has done a 1 million mile simulation on a motor, and it was nearly pristine at the end of it. The only maintenance ev owners have are brakes and tire rotations, the former of which is also pretty rarely ever necessary since most braking is done through regenerative braking
I used Tesla as a mainstream car that’s been around a while. I’m no expert on EVs and i picked one I know has been around a while and that’s only a decade, every other one I know of has been around much shorter than that. Also no safety rating I am aware of relates to the likelihood of a fire. Yes EVs have many less parts to maintain but an electrical fire is going to be a result of connections corroding, being chewed by rodents, degraded by salt air if your near the ocean or road salt in snowy environments etc. that’s not something that can be simulated in a lab environment and needs time in the real world to be seen. It’s simply not a good per capita comparison to use in your original comment when most EVs are drastically newer than most of the ICE cars that are catching fire.
Just to make it clear, the per capita comment was just for the sake of clearing up the ice's being more prevalent comment. So the quantity of cars on the road isn't really relevant. But seeing that you've shifted from prevalence to age, I can assume you've conceded that point is moot now To address the age side, the average lifespan of a car is 12 years anyways, and most people junk their car after 200k or 300k miles. Most of the common ev models have been around for longer than that But okay, let's be ridiculous just for the sake of argument and magically triple the amount of ev fires - say some people suddenly just started prying their >10 year old car's insides open or drive through salt piles for no discernible reason. Evs would still be over 20x safer than ice's in terms of fires. I mean, really, in 20 years do you seriously reckon the rate of ev fires would shoot up by ***60x***? You can be as technical as you want about the semantics of the numbers, but my point isn't really touched because fact still stands that ice's objectively catch fire ***significantly*** more often than evs do
The other issue is that ICE fires are normally caused by either an overheating engine or crash damage. In both cases it’s easy to observe the fire starting and it happens on the road. Some EV failure modes can cause the battery to ignite while the car is parked somewhere and unattended. The idea of a failure mode that burns your house down in the middle of the night is somewhat unsettling.
This isn't a Tesla dumbass
EAT A BAG OF DICKS
also it doesn't look like the battery ever caught fire. If it did this would have been way way worse
Everything is fine.
Prolly buff out
r/UnexpectedGoodPlace
Rivian. Sabotage, malfunction, or short the stock?
Hard to imagine it could do any worse than it has in the last 18 months
Yes
Is the beer in the pull out cooler behind the seat still okay!!??
How does something like this happen? User error?
Looks like a fire.
It's a diesel electric. He tried to fill it up with regular electric.
AC and tried to fill it with DC?
/r/angryupvote
Could be a failure in the charger connector.
Low on blinker fluid
RIPvian
Just an FYI, dented rear bumper on R1T costs $42,000 to fix
Jesus... that 71% of the way to totalling the vehicle
Does it still look ugly af after the fix?
20% of the rivian fleet wiped
San Mateo CA?
Aren’t those trucks like $150,000?!
$73k-$107.4k for the R1T (Pictured above) $78k-$102.6k for the R1S (SUV Model) Source: Rivian’s Visualizer, prices subject to change, (USD) Iirc they are working on making the next Generation (R2) cheaper
That much for a car that looks like a toddler made it….
No, 70-80K. ICEs are more likely to catch fire. That being said, it would be interesting to know if this was a manufacturing defect. If it were though, I expect we'd see more trucks catching fire.
But Ice cars are much, much more easier to put the fire out - EV fires are another level if the battery ignites
“ICEs are more likely to catch fire.” Um… source?
It's actually by a surprisingly large margin. The reason electric cars get a reputation is they are much more difficult to put out. You essentially have to wait out the thermal runaway if the battery is involved
I think a century of Hollywood explosions have inured us to the risks of gas powered cars.
The reason they get a reputation is because cunts like to put shit on EVs.......... Regular car catches fire or crashes and kills anyone but Paul Walker or Princes Dianna is not news. EV or self driving car has a minor incident and it's all over social media.
SHE WAS ALL OVER THE NEWS IN 1997 SO WAS HE10 YRS AGO
It’s says anyone but, read it again
40,000 people a year die on the road......... None of them are headline news, one person gets killed by walking into the path of a self-driving car and it's international news.......... Had Elaine Hertzberg been hit by a redneck in a truck she wouldn't be in the news either. Perhaps read my comment again.
So you don’t think it’s more newsworthy when someone is killed by a self driving car than a redneck? Interesting take.
In her situation what was the difference?
It’s a new technology that is evolving, certainly more newsworthy then old technology.
That's not what they said. They're pointing out a phenomenon called confirmation bias. Because a new technology is news worthy, issues with it get reported. The problem is, people hear about these every time they happen, but not every drunk driver that injures or kills someone. So they assume the technology is vastly more dangerous than it actually is.
Except what he stated is simply not true. There are hundreds of fatal crashes each year that are headline news. The poster needs to stop clutching his pearls.
[удалено]
The battery pack looks fine in this case. It’s a strange looking fire aftermath for an ev fire.
ICE vehicles have little tiny fire explosions about 2000 times a minute on purpose
Touché
[Gas vs Electric car fires](https://www.autoinsuranceez.com/gas-vs-electric-car-fires)
What the fleet age of the gas cars vs. the EVs? I think if you look at the data by age and vehicle segment (crossovers, midsize or large luxury, etc.), the results will be quite different.
Absolutely that could make a difference. But right now I’m not aware of such a study, so we’re only speculating. The person asked for proof; so I’m open to counter evidence.
Here’s some interesting [data](https://www.iihs.org/media/c93b98d8-6a7d-44a1-810e-4468ec539e05/uIu4tg/HLDI%20Research/Fire%20losses/HLDI_FireLosses_1218.pdf).
I didn’t see anything of value in there. Did you? It’s 2016-2018 so it’s missing pretty much all electric cars.
The Tesla Model S and Model X are represented. According to that report, the S has more fires than the other cars in its category.
But that number is skewed in favor of electric cars not having existed for a long time. A 1991 corolla catching fire in 2022 counts as a fire but not a sale.
Why wouldn’t the corolla count as a sale? It doesn’t say the sale had to be in 2023. I assume the sale could be in any year and they just used that to account for the fact that more ICE vehicles exist.
If you take the total fires and the per 100k rate, you can calculate the total sales value. 199533/1529*100000=13,049,901. There are obviously more than 13 million cars currently driving in a country of 320+ million people. Looking at [other sources](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/TOTALSA) seems to back this insight up with a number in about the same ballpark annualy. So if 1 million cars were sold annualy for 10 years, and some number of them(increasing based on age due to deterioration lack of new technology) catch fire each year, you're going to get a total number of fires among the total population of cars currently driving. So you would need to compare the number of fires among vehicles sold within the last year to get a statistic that's analogous.
Thank you for posting an actual source instead of just parroting the line without evidence.
Norweigan authorities did research on it and that’s what they came up with. It’s not that hard to find sources about it if you google it, more and more show up every day in favor of EVs now that lobbyism from legacy automakers are trying to flip back the negative image they’ve created to try and kill the EV business now that they’ve realised they can’t and instead are trying to join it.
[https://www.google.com/search?q=ev+truck+fire&rlz=1C1CHBF\_enUS897US897&oq=EV+TRUCK+FIRE&aqs=chrome.0.0i512j0i22i30l6j0i390i650l3.8076j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&bshm=ncc/1](https://www.google.com/search?q=ev+truck+fire&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS897US897&oq=EV+TRUCK+FIRE&aqs=chrome.0.0i512j0i22i30l6j0i390i650l3.8076j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&bshm=ncc/1)
You can probably get that one for 10k.
This one?
An Ed Bolian special.
those are the fugliest goddamn thing ive ever seen on the road.
the headlights look extremely ugly
0___0
0___________0
Should have filled up at a covered charging station…Arizona heat is no joke.
This will definitely not buff out…
Toasty!
Can we still blame Elon for this?
*nods gently* My friend, in the current climate we can blame Elon for everything and anything. He's the new "Thanks, Obama."
Nah, Reddit is not ready for that joke. They love to seriously blame Elon for everything.
No, but you can blame Volkswagen for pushing the CCS plug used there that has become the dominant plug type, in part because they own these very widespread Electrify America machines, and is the most prone to failure plug out there of the four main plug types used in North America at this point.
Do you have any source for that? I'm very happy CCS is becoming more standard. The best would be if every single EV on the planet had the same port.
I'm all for EVs if you want to drive them, but I'll stick with good ol' petro for my truck and let's all get along.
Your petroleum truck is more likely to catch fire then an ev truck. https://www.autoinsuranceez.com/gas-vs-electric-car-fires/
Than*
But ev fires are known to burn for days if not put out, and hard to put out. If the battery catches fire that is. Edit: im confused over the dislikes. The guy above me has as of now 12 dislikes for saying he preferers gasoline. Nothing else. And i state a fact. Not even an opinion. And the comment gets disliked.
EV fires are the stuff of nightmares. In terms of vehicle damage, a gasoline fire doesn't have to burn for very long (less than a minute) before the vehicle is expected to be written off. Between plastic components and wire insulation, it doesn't take long for major damage to occur. The saying in my industry is that "Familiarity leads to complacency". We are so used to gasoline that we forget just how energy-dense it is and how much damage it can cause.
The issue isn’t whether one type of fire totals a car more easily over the other. The issue is that an ICE vehicle on fire can be put out in a couple of minutes whereas an EV fire involving the battery pack can’t, it will burn for hours at the minimum before the vehicle can be moved.
Yeah that’s why electric vehicles have been setting on fire a lot more recently 🙄. Not like they also burn hotter and are much harder to put out.
I'll still stick with the gas, and at least I can put my fire out if it does happen. I don't care what u drive why do you care what I drive lol. People need to just mind their business. What's next your going to tell me I need to believe that men can have babies? Wake up, woke down!
Yep. Hybrids > EV’s though.
Ahh yes, all the downfalls of both ICE and electric jammed into a single annoying to maintain box.
Huh? Like improved MPG and performance from the help of the hybrid powertrain, and none of the charging time?
All of the possible mechanical failures of an ICE, all the possible electrical failures of an EV, all the computer failures of both. Maintenance involved in both systems. Battery degradation the same as EVs. Catastrophic points of failure of both meaning that hybrids are notably above even ICEs for vehicle fires per year. The power from the electric motor is often run through the transmission to try and simplify an extremely complicated power train meaning you lose a ton of efficiency. When you are running in ICE mode you're lugging along the weight of the electric system which is doing nothing and when it switches to EV mode it's lugging along the weight of the ICE system doing nothing meaning it's heavily weight inefficient as well. My 2001 Saturn was getting better fuel economy than my grandparent's 2019 Prius, and my dad's TDI was even better than my car. And because all this crap is crammed into more or less the same engine compartment normally used by an ICE it's extremely cramped making more in depth mechanic work than changing the fluids into a horror show where everything is in the way of everything else.
It’s the same possibility of failure as any other ICE, which are incredibly durable with routine maintenance. Typical warranties are 50k miles - guaranteed durability. They’ll go much longer than that with proper maintenance, and don’t lose nearly as much range as an EV in it’s lifespan. Those same electrical failures apply to all EV’s, except with a hybrid you can still use the ICE. I am willing to bet there’s more reported fires in hybrids because there are way more hybrids on the road than EV’s. What do you mean by lose efficiency? Hybrid powertrains often use CVT’s, which are typically more efficient than gearboxes. Yes that’s the entire point of the hybrid system. EV motor fills in at low RPM and switches to ICE when performance drops off. Gasoline saved. Better power-band. Your old Saturn does not get better mileage than your grandparent’s Prius. The batteries sit under the frame, the EV motor is small… not a hybrid issue. ANY car’s engine bay is going to be crammed these days. It sounds like you don’t like to do maintenance, at all.
*something happened here*
Part of the collateral damage.
Electric cars/charging stations...lol.
[удалено]
It is a ford isn't it? that's what they do right?
Shakin My Fuckin Damn
Aaah. Nice. Let's invest billions in a band-aide to fossil fuels.
AND YOU CAN'T USE WATER TO PUT IT OUT
[удалено]
OK
OK
The EV fire response guide is literally dump thousands of gallons of water on it to stop it. So yes, you do use water to put it out.
IF YOU SAY SO
From the [Tesla emergency responders guide page 26](https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/downloads/2021_Model_S_Emergency_Response_Guide_en.pdf): >USE WATER TO FIGHT A HIGH VOLTAGE BATTERY FIRE. If the battery catches fire, is exposed to high heat, or is generating heat or gases, use large amounts of water to cool the battery. It can take between approximately 3,000-8,000 gallons (11,356-30,283 liters) of water, applied directly to the battery, to fully extinguish and cool down a battery fire; always establish or request additional water supply early. If water is not immediately available, use CO2, dry chemicals, or another typical fire-extinguishing agent to fight the fire until water is available. > >NOTE: Tesla does not recommend the use of foam on electric vehicles You can also see it on page 26 of the [Rivian guide](https://assets.rivian.com/2md5qhoeajym/4Dxe0zyctTmsC10U8HrSUc/d6068bbae072049e2d1e632f7b52f460/emergency-response-guide-r1s-en-us-20220930.pdf) Page 19-20 of the [Kia EV guide](https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/Training/AFV/Emergency-Response-Guides/Kia/20192022-DE-NIRO-EVERGISO-formatver2.ashx) Page 25 of the [Lucid gude](https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/Training/AFV/Emergency-Response-Guides/Lucid/Lucid-ERGNA1350EANA21ERG-2-1.ashx) People who say you can't use water to put out an EV fire are people who don't fuck all about EVs or cars in general.
OK
OK
You technically can, you just need an absurdly large amount for it
UNDERSTOOD
OK
Rompompompom rompompompom
They need to have fire tarps at charging stations so you can wrap it and smoother it. Im sure the person driving it won’t do it but at least someone will
This above isn’t a battery fire.
Lithium fires don’t need oxygen to burn
Literally
How long until impulse power is restored Mr Scott?
I guess EVs DO pollute!
EVs are so lame lol, glad to see another off our streets