Electric cars - How quick will mainstream adopt?


If it doesn’t have a V8 with rumble it isn’t a muscle or pony car. Period. It’s just a car. I never considered 4 or 6 cylinder versions as real offerings of those badges. Hell the best part of my mustang gt was cranking it up - hearing the motor fire up and feeling the car shutter as it came to life.

New electric versions might be faster and lighter and no doubt better, but it will fail to live up to the muscle/pony car lineage.


I think people will like the electric assist they are planning NWA. The key word in that story was “supplement”. Makes me think they’re gonna do the muscle car version of the Porsche 918 Spyder that came out a couple of years ago and Richard Hammond drove on the last season of Top Gear. That thing was an absolute beast. Clarkson said he loved it because they used a tech that was meant to improve fuel economy to make a beastly car even faster. Probably worth watching a clip:

To quote Hammond “the petrol engine, which sounds ungodly… 612 HP”


I think you are not hearing what I am saying about this and in general this topic. I am sure it will be a great car, I am sure the performance will be amazing. This has nothing to do with the performance of the car - which will be mind blowing. My point was the Mustang, Camaro the Challenger and Charger - those pony cars, muscles cars are built on a V8. Take away that rumble, that rumbling motor, and they are just another fast car. The joy of my Mustang wasn’t the 0-60 time, it was the feeling of the rumble and the rawness of it and feeling the car torque when you turned the key.

The new so called pony cars will just be nice fast cars - just as fast as the electric 4 seat grocery getter that mom drives or the electric truck dad drives. The only difference will be what skin do you want over it? The beauty of the electric motor will be the performance it brings to all models and for all drivers. The draw back is that exact thing - it will bring that level of performance to everything, negating the need or purpose to have things like a pony car with a seperate drive trains or power plants. Sure the Porsche and high end companies will continue to manufacture their stuff, but for the mass produced cars we all have it will be a homogenized cost managed platform with the same basics with the only options being various software changes, body styles and seating configurations.

The next generation already has a disconnection for buying cars and the driving experience and that will just continue.


No, I hear you just fine. I think the V6 or whatever they put in the challenger will sound like fiery death because it will be tuned and amplified to be as ridiculous as their other offerings. I think you’re showing your age NWA. Not all change is bad, and I don’t think Dodge is gonna give up its dedication to making ridiculous pony cars, just like that article says.


I don’t think it’s bad change. I get it, I can’t argue against it and it is a change that honestly needs to happen. Better for environment, better performance, easier maintenance - it is all the right way to go.

I am just saying it isn’t a pony/muscle car if it doesnt have an 8. A 6 is never an 8. Hell the ecoboost 4 Ford has in the Mustang breathes fire, has 310 hp, 0-60 in just over 5, but it still isn’t an 8. The 8 is THE hotrod engine. No amount of performance changes will change that. Just going to be nice fast cars - just like all the other ones.


The generation of drivers that willingly wait until they are 18-21 to get their license will never understand @NinerWupAss’ argument.


Wife and I were discussing the Kona. So, when you buy something that is a plug-in, does it include installation of a home charging station? Does it have to be in your garage and you able to park your car in there? Is it extra?


From what I have seen with the Tesla’s, you have to pay an electrician to add the outlet in your home. If you have the knowledge, I’m sure you could do it yourself.


Amazon has been partnering with some of these manufacturers to offer home recharge stations plus installation.

If you’re looking at the Kona, may wanna look at KIA e-niro too. Essentially the same car - same exact drivetrain. Differences are in cabin, Kia is a tad bigger, but also has halogens instead of LED headlights. Not saying either is better, but you may prefer one over other.

I think this is one of them, but honestly I didn’t really check.

ChargePoint Home WiFi Enabled Electric Vehicle (EV) Charger - Level 2 EVSE, 240 Volt, 32 Amp Electric Car Charger, UL Listed, Energy Star Certified, Hardwired Station, Indoor or Outdoor, 18 ft. Cable https://www.amazon.com/dp/B071YDJ1F6/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_8Q1rCbTDFYYFR


We are just talking generally. Her car only has 65k on it. We will probably get something else around 98k miles. My Jeep will be paid off by then too. Just checking out options. She lives the EV small SUV idea.


NC, it was overdue to post, but here’s a side by side of the Kona and E-Niro. I think this may be a gas version, but aside from the wheels and some blue trim pieces the gas models look the same:


Based off a quick google search there are over 270 million vehicles in the US, can our current power plants supply enough power to charge these vehicles or would the US need to build more power plants?


I’ve wondered this a lot too. I have to feel like the answer is absolutely not. But I don’t know the numbers.


moar jawbs


Ah sweet, sweet nuclear! The true clean energy source. Build baby, build!


One thing to keep in mind is most of the charging would be done at night when demand on the grid is much lower. I know some plants basically waste energy at night because its cost prohibitive to run the plant down - they just keep producing power, needed or not.

Also yes nuclear - watched a documentary on the production of solar panels, man wanna talk about something bad for the environment.


I’m a big proponent of wind & water power augmented by solar.

Until Cold Fusion is achieved, nuclear is not a sustainable option and produces too much waste.


Nuclear produces near no waste at all. Virtually no carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, sulfar, ash, hydro carbon emissions. It’s biggest waste products are heat and steam.

You will never supply the electricity needs of the United States on windmills and solar panels. There simply isn’t enough space for the amount you’d need to generate the power requirements. You could cover the nation twice over and still need an additional 50% source of energy.


Spent nuclear fuel.

My father in law has worked in the industry for nearly 50 years and we have discussed it at length for over a decade. He deals with the contamination that the process yields. It is not pure and clean, and it is most definitely non-renewable. There is a finite level of fuel, and it is dangerous to contain and dispose of.


You’re still going to need nuclear though, or coal, or gas, because renewables aren’t generally reliable and you can’t produce the power needed to cover peak times with them in the first place. You’re realistic options for base power load are to burn something or to split atoms. We know burning stuff is bad for the environment all the time, but you can store nuclear waste safely and it is infinitely little compared to coal ash ponds. Any realistic alternative is still 50 years or more away from producing reliable results.