Cycling UK Forum

Bonefishblues wrote: 9 Sep 2025, 2:18pm BTW, there's a very very good lease offer on Ford Puma EVs at the moment - Ford's underpriced it and is completely swamped (for anyone who was thinking of making the leap) I am not a Ford Salesman

I wonder why they would do such a seemingly silly thing? Maybe there’s logic in there, when you have to sell a percentage of BEV’s within your overall sales figures you’d be stuck if the customers didn’t want them then. Maybe it’s just another form of discounting to shift unwanted products, and they might sell better later

For example, I propose that e-cars will last a lot longer than ICE cars because they have less moving/wear parts. Can you/ do you want to, refute that?

^^ Credit Cugel

imho that’s a bit of a silly proposition . The problems with BEV’s are their batteries, whilst batteries have no moving parts they still degrade to the point of not being fit for anything but restricted use.

There's an original 2011 Leaf parking in the carpark of our leisure/community centre. It looks like new and still goes like new, according to the owner, who I swim with and chat with whilst getting changed. Only his battery is now an issue as it was small to begin with so the gradual depletion of its ability to hold a charge means that its range is now only 30 - 40 miles between full charges.

^^ Credit Cugel

Whatever, you have a position and will fight for it regardless. The more helpful discussions on this forum use facts to debate a point and sometimes, due to the quality of comment and supporting data, people even change their mind about something.

Has anyone got anything interesting to say about emerging battery technology? I hear that the Chinese are implementing their own legislation about battery combustion, and that that with force a change in battery materials and construction. Here’s a search link for anyone who wants it: https://www.google.com/search?q=china+b ... nt=gws-wiz

Carlton green wrote: 9 Sep 2025, 6:27pm
For example, I propose that e-cars will last a lot longer than ICE cars because they have less moving/wear parts. Can you/ do you want to, refute that?
^^ Credit Cugel

imho that’s a bit of a silly proposition . The problems with BEV’s are their batteries, whilst batteries have no moving parts they still degrade to the point of not being fit for anything but restricted use.

Everything degrades with time. The issue is, at what pace, in what way and how easy/costly to replace. And with what side effects?

Many recent studies show that current car batteries will last 15-20- years in normal use - and that the car itself will last that long because it has a design involving far less wear parts than ICE cars. Look them up yourself and judge whether the authors are persuasive and/or of good reputation.

Batteries in cars can be replaced now albeit it can be costly. Better battery design (even using current chemistry in the batteries) could be improved easily to make their replacement much easier and cheaper than it is now.

These are facts, really, not mere opinions. BTW, can you tell me yet how you yourself differentiate the two?

Will the capital spend on an ICE car and a gas/oil/wood boiler do as well as the e-stuff, then? On the contrary - it'll cost a lot more to run - and cost a lot of people's health as the various associated pollutions increase.

If you try it, you'll also find that an e-car or other electricity-based tech for this and that is far nicer to use than a similar thing burning hydro-carbons, with their complex technology, inefficient energy wastages and toxic exudations.

Forum members might be interested in this BBC article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy8d4v69jw6o

In 2024, 17 million battery and plug-in hybrid cars were sold worldwide, 11 million of those in China.

So roughly two-thirds of world wide electric car sales were in China; it is clearly the dominant user - maker too- and we’d be wise to take more interest in what is happening there. China will almost certainly dictate the pace and direction of EV technology.

At long last!

“Millions of Europeans want to buy affordable European cars, so we should also invest in small affordable vehicles, both for the European market and to meet the surge in global demand,” said von der Leyen in her State of the Union address. “That is why we will propose to work with the industry on a new Small Affordable Car initiative.”

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/3677 ... ctric-cars

That (^^) should have been the earlier direction of travel, but a decent range (multiples of the proposed 70 miles) allowing longer journeys is pretty much essential to a large percentage of the buying population. That said (when new) the original 24KwH Leaf had a range of about / approaching 80 miles, the Gen 1 Leaf did sell and they were usable too - some were even pressed into remarkable service. I don’t think Gen 1 Leafs would sell again today, but on the other hand the Dacia Spring is doing OK and it’s not greatly better on range and battery size.

Maybe a heavily discounted Spring is worth having as a second vehicle? A secondhand Spring will be affordable - not that much cost to write-off and other vehicles will depreciate more than its purchase price - they’re very fuel efficient, one would likely last long enough to see me out, and whilst compact and basic they still do a useful job for personal transport. There’s a lot to like but the Spring’s range isn’t great (some restrictions that might be mostly worked around) and the battery type (MNC) isn’t the most long lived - however the massive battery changes ahead will turn everything upside down. Is the Spring too good to be true? I think it likely is, a good idea that’s been so built down to a price such that what you’re left with is cheap but so compromised that it doesn’t offer value. At the moment I’m more inclined to think of the Citroen e-3 - with its bigger battery capacity, better (longer life) battery chemistry, and better build - as being a sensible choice. There’s such a thing as too cheap and he who buys (too) cheap buys twice. H’mm, Vimes boots.

I wonder what the common future battery chemistry / chemistries will be. We should remember that the Chinese are moving away from Battery chemistry that more readily self combusts but also question whether Europe will follow, I think that Europe will follow because that’s the chemistry that their Chinese suppliers will offer and will be developing. LFP (lithium ferrophosphate) has its drawbacks but I suspect that it’ll be increasingly used, and - the in some ways superior - NCM (Nickel Cobalt Manganese) will completely loose its once held market dominance. As a general comment there’s quite a bit to try and understand around this subject, and as some start point I recommend the following article about battery chemistry and game changing legislation in China :
https://evcurvefuturist.com/2025/04/ev- ... -standard/

Market Behavior:

Tesla has shifted its base Model 3/Y to LFP
Ford, VW, and Stellantis have announced LFP adoption
Chinese giants (BYD, CATL, Gotion) are expanding LFP/LMFP capacity rapidly
Sodium-ion pilot production is ramping up at CATL, Farasis, and HiNa Battery

After reading some of that author’s other articles (well worth a look) I’d suggest that for BEV’s the near term future is large capacity LFP batteries. What will happen with sodium-ion is hard to sensibly predict, but it might be well suited to grid storage.


The next article (to read but I don’t quote it just now) isn’t quite up to date, but it does predict battery costs and (future) common chemistry in use, it points in what I think is near the correct direction : https://www.goldmansachs.com/insights/a ... nt-by-2025


Moving back to the EU, Von der Leyen’s actual words were:

The third example I would like to highlight is cars.

It is a pillar of our economy and industry.

A European pride.

Millions of jobs depend on it.

Earlier this year, we gave the sector more flexibility to reach their 2025 targets.

This is working.

And with respect for technology neutrality, we are now preparing the 2035 review.

And millions of Europeans want to buy affordable European cars.

So we should also invest in small, affordable vehicles.

Both for the European market, but also to meet the surge in global demand.

This is why we will propose to work with industry on a new Small Affordable Cars initiative.

I believe Europe should have its own E-car.

E for environmental – clean, efficient and lightweight.

E for economical – affordable for people.

E for European – built here in Europe, with European supply chains.

Because we cannot let China and others conquer this market.

No matter what, the future is electric.

And Europe will be part of it.

The future of cars – and the cars of the future – must be made in Europe

^^ , found in: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/pressco ... 25_2053Via

See here for a report of the Chief of Renault saying that BEV’s need to be less expensive! https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new- ... -ev-prices

“The fact is that EV prices now are far too high for people – right now – and because of that, we are producing more carbon than we need to. We must make it clear that the industrial logic in Europe is wrong. What is needed is less regulation, which would allow car prices to be more affordable. Technology neutrality that pushes EVs forward should be the way.”

Asked what he was doing to push that message, Provost said: “First, I will focus on what I can control, so I’ll keep working on costs. Then I will go to the European authorities with my colleagues [other industry leaders] to enhance their sense of urgency. They should know that the job of stimulating the EV market cannot fall on car manufacturers alone: as well as the wrong European logic, we have issues with charging infrastructure and the price of electricity across Europe.”

Carlton green wrote: 14 Sep 2025, 6:30pm See here for a report of the Chief of Renault saying that BEV’s need to be less expensive! https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new- ... -ev-prices

“The fact is that EV prices now are far too high for people – right now – and because of that, we are producing more carbon than we need to. We must make it clear that the industrial logic in Europe is wrong. What is needed is less regulation, which would allow car prices to be more affordable. Technology neutrality that pushes EVs forward should be the way.”

Asked what he was doing to push that message, Provost said: “First, I will focus on what I can control, so I’ll keep working on costs. Then I will go to the European authorities with my colleagues [other industry leaders] to enhance their sense of urgency. They should know that the job of stimulating the EV market cannot fall on car manufacturers alone: as well as the wrong European logic, we have issues with charging infrastructure and the price of electricity across Europe.”

" ....... We must make it clear that the industrial logic in Europe is wrong. What is needed is less regulation ....... ".

Well, he would say that. The mode today is to spend the least on making whilst charging the most when selling. All that regulation may save lives, prevent pollutions or otherwise ensure the car isn't a ticking timebomb of some sort but it interferes with the prime directive of MAKE A VAST PROFIT.

Another such report from elsewhere apparently suggests that what may be needed primarily are small cars not SUVs, which would make e-cars much less expensive, safer (especially for those they hit) and generally less damaging. Whilst we're at it, how about a lot more regulations along those lines; and others that cut out all the driver distractions and opportunities to drive like a loon?

Should such things appear, they might sell in their millions, enabling even the well-regulated manufacturer to make a profit ..... without causing vast harms that "someone else" must pay for, in money, misery or manglement.

It looks like Renault - and likely linked companies like Nissan and Dacia - might be considering more adoption of LFP batteries and less use of MNC. As a punter - and assuming that this is actually correct - I’d rather accept lower power density (of LFP, about 75%) in exchange for a longer life and greater resilience. Obviously (?) LFP batteries are cheaper than NMC - about 20% cheaper for the same power capacity.

The Renault Group is changing its policy of installing only NMC batteries in its electric cars. Instead, the French company is becoming more open to LFP technology. The first models with LFP batteries from CATL or LGES will launch at the beginning of 2026.

https://www.electrive.com/2024/07/02/re ... batteries/

Another interesting comparison of battery chemistries : https://ecotreelithium.co.uk/news/lithi ... s-lifepo4/
It appears that the full range of charge and discharge can be used in an LFP battery without damage, I don’t think that that’s true of MNC. It also appears that the materials used in LFP batteries are ‘significantly greener’ than those used in MNC.

What of the longer term future? Well, CATL (who are massive) have recently developed and announced Sodium batteries, they’re: incredibly cheap, have an acceptable power density, work well in low temperate settings, and have a particularly long life. Where’s the catch? Well, whatever it is that CATL are doing isn’t easy and they have been working at it for a while. CATL have mass production scheduled to start in December 2025.
https://www.catl.com/en/news/6401.html
https://www.catl.com/en/news/665.html

At the moment Sodium batteries (which are made from relatively cheap and plentiful material) appear to have the potential to undercut fossil fuel vehicles on price; of comparable cars it looks like it will become cheaper to purchase an electric (sodium) rather than a fossil fuel one. That would be a completely game changing situation, but what the rollout and market prices will be remains to be seen. Other substantial companies are also pursing Sodium battery technology too: https://www.ess-news.com/2024/11/28/new ... yd-huawei/

When will Sodium batteries go into mass produced electric cars? It might be some time before we see them used here but in China they already have: https://www.electrive.com/2024/01/02/fi ... -in-china/

With battery development what is the direction of travel? I’m not sure but what I’m reading of the near future is about reductions in battery pack capacity costs via changes in battery chemistry to cheaper if less energy dense types, but the weight and volume of those cost efficient packs might rise to hit limits on physical practicality. Of course for (stationary) battery energy storage systems (BESS) size and weight aren’t necessarily issues but for transport applications they can be and mostly are.

To be more efficient battery cars need to loose battery weight and regain volume taken by large batteries. Solid state batteries will have high power densities, but they’re somewhere in the future so for now high performance batteries are (the bit more expensive) MNC type. In the longer term aircraft will use batteries too, but for that to happen the best batteries available today need to be circa three times as energy dense. There are also issues in the rate at which energy can be moved into and out of batteries, with some chemistries being better at that than others. One might reasonably conclude that the topic is far from simple and that a very wide range of chemistries will be in use as cost, life and performance figures interact with the needs of the application - and then there will be technical advances which alter ‘everything’.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 6824000729

Thanks for the battery chemistry posts. As I've said before, I bought an MG4 with an NMC battery by mistake, not realising the standard range (200 mile) model used LFP whilst the long range (270 mile) was NMC. The long range gives 70 miles more for about a 30 Kg increase in weight.

However, I'm happy with my choice. The charging regime for NMC is straightforward, you just don't leave it outside 10%-80% capacity for extended periods. I leave charging until it gets below 30% then I charge to 80% usually, or to 100% if planning a long trip the next day. The range meter is very reliable. I have on three occasions driven with the battery dropping to 7%. I can rely on having at least 20 miles left when it warns me that the charge has dropped to 10%.I expect the battery to outlast the car. 1000 charges from 30% to 80% is 130,000 miles. I'm sure it will do more charge cycles than that.

I had my first week long holiday in the car last week, Portsmouth to Wrexham, exploring Cheshire, Birkenhead and the North Wales coast before returning. Maybe 650 miles. I took my type 2 cable for AC charging just in case but didn't use it. I had no problem finding and using the faster DC chargers. That may not be true for more remote areas though.

UpWrong wrote: 20 Sep 2025, 2:36pm Thanks for the battery chemistry posts. As I've said before, I bought an MG4 with an NMC battery by mistake, not realising the standard range (200 mile) model used LFP whilst the long range (270 mile) was NMC. The long range gives 70 miles more for about a 30 Kg increase in weight.

However, I'm happy with my choice. The charging regime for NMC is straightforward, you just don't leave it outside 10%-80% capacity for extended periods. I leave charging until it gets below 30% then I charge to 80% usually, or to 100% if planning a long trip the next day. The range meter is very reliable. I have on three occasions driven with the battery dropping to 7%. I can rely on having at least 20 miles left when it warns me that the charge has dropped to 10%.I expect the battery to outlast the car. 1000 charges from 30% to 80% is 130,000 miles. I'm sure it will do more charge cycles than that.

I was glad to find and then share some details of the different chemistries and suspect that there will be major advances over the coming decade. However, being older, I might not live to see them and it’s less likely again that I’ll live long enough to buy the coming clever stuff second hand. Such is life, it is only in later life that one realises how limited our window of existence is.

To my mind you didn’t make a mistake choosing NMC but rather ended up with one of two reasonable enough functional choices offered by a recognised high volume supplier - as an aside, in a competitive marketplace, companies don’t get to be and then remain recognised high volume suppliers by selling stuff that fails customer expectations. As to how long any battery will last for and (then) what to do if it fails that’s anyone’s guess, and its is so almost regardless of vehicle brand. My own ICE car is fifteen years old and I wouldn’t be surprised if it did the same service again. However, batteries degrade and they currently can’t be restored to as new; it seems to me that new battery parts simply aren’t available and all that’s possible is to source second hand (battery) parts from salvage yards.

Will a battery outlive the mechanics of a well cared for car? I’m not yet seeing batteries that’ll both retain a high charge capability (say 80%) and last twenty plus years, but don’t doubt that they will come eventually. However, for the older driver that’s all rather academic, for many here on the forum a decent BEV will last long enough to either see us out (dead) or retired from driving (decrepit in old age). Considering one’s limited lifespan ahead is rather sobering.

Given such logic (above) one can but monitor what’s available and then seek some sensible choice from what’s within budget when the time to change finally arrives. Smaller cars are coming onto the market and eventually some will be good enough, but ‘eventually’ might exceed what time we have left. What’s good enough? Well Mrs Green will want to do at least four hours of winter driving without refuelling and at the motorway speed limit, so a guaranteed three hundred plus miles of UK winter range. I would prefer that we only ran one car, but would settle for an ICE car for Mrs G and a second car that’s a BEV with a moderate range. Of course, when that time (to change) does arrive then what needs to be secured first is a home charger (as otherwise day to day refuelling charges could match or even exceed using fossil fuel).

LFP batteries are definately more desirable from an environemental POV.

I think 4 hours of winter motorway driving to cover 300 miles is rather an extreme requirement. During my week long holiday, I plugged the car in 4 times. The shortest charge was a 6 minute splash and dash to get home. This added 40 miles to my range. My biggest charge took 28 mins, which got me from 7% to 86%. I waited in a hotel and bought a drink at the bar. The other 2 occasions were 39 mins at a Sainsbury on the outward leg (40% to 90%), using the time to buy provisions. And 32 mins in a long-stay car park in Rhyl whilst waiting for my wife to finish shopping. The charge there was rather slow but it was cheap, adding about 20% to the battery

I didn't need to detour at all from my planned routes in order to charge.

UpWrong wrote: 22 Sep 2025, 9:45am LFP batteries are definately more desirable from an environemental POV.

I think 4 hours of winter motorway driving to cover 300 miles is rather an extreme requirement.

I’m also of the view that LFP batteries are relatively (compared to NMC) better for the environment. As an aside there’s useful information here and, via its other articles, from that organisation:
https://www.apcuk.co.uk/news-events/new ... batteries/
https://www.apcuk.co.uk/wp-content/uplo ... 4-9-24.pdf
But the timescales of development outlive my own likely remaining years.

Mrs G would regard four hours of winter motorway driving to cover three hundred plus miles as essential for her particular use, cars capable of doing greater distances between recharges are finding buyers so she’s not alone in her expectations. Others might not find a three hundred plus mile range essential and might have their own ways to manage range limitations. I’d do a limited recharge / top-up charge during a comfort stop, but Mrs G has her own ways of doing things and I’ve found that they are best accepted.

My biggest charge took 28 mins, which got me from 7% to 86%

Changes in charge acceptance rates and the much greater availability of very high Kw chargers are game changers, the presence of which will filter through to users over time. Well, they’re game changers just so long as those high currents really are acceptable / accepted without any battery degradation. I don’t think that my Mrs would take opportunity to use such chargers on her motorway journeys, well not on my suggestion but see below,

It’s taken me a long time to discover this truth: it’s virtual always best not to argue with wives / loved others and instead just let them get on with doing what they’re happy with. Given time and conversations with their pals our wives usually work out better solutions for themselves and solutions that they have ownership of. Happy wife, happy life .

______________________________________________________________________________________________

Some very interesting points being made here :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itCrrA9ju0g

Jules59 wrote: 22 Sep 2025, 4:46pm Some very interesting points being made here :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itCrrA9ju0g

Watched, thank you. Harry makes a raft of good points and we’ll have to see what the EU decides to do. To me it’s a no brainer to take a close look at what the Chinese are doing (commercially and with their engineering too) and learn from them - they are now leaders rather than followers. On a personal level I’d be looking towards a small to medium sized car with an LFP battery that I can charge from my domestic supply and get supported by my local garage, simplicity and support from the manufacturer are essential too. Once the will to use EV’s is there people will manage range limitations; provide them with the right car, at the right price and with the right support and they’ll buy EV’s and manage the downsides.

Edit. For manufacture in Europe those LFP cars are coming. The Citroen eC3 is here with its stable mate the Fiat Grande Panda, a version of the Renault 5 will have / has an LFP battery and the later (to come) UK made Nissan Micra will be much the same car with a different badge on it. VW have announced that future models will use LFP batteries and some current ones will change to them, they also predict significant falls in battery prices. If a made in China car can be tolerated (I might just put a peg on my nose and cross my fingers in the hope of spare parts when needed) then the standard MG 4 has been available for a while. The range of those (group of) cars is a bit short of 200 miles, but if the price and running costs are right then imho folk will work around that seeming limitation - as demonstrated by the utility that folk extracted from Gen 1 Leafs. Later models of those same cars will doubtless be fitted with improved versions of their original batteries.

https://www.schmidtmatthias.de/post/vol ... 20-by-2029

Owning and running a car is about convenience and affordability,both in it's use and it's cost,when it doesn't meet both criteria it isn't a popular choice for the ordinary wo/man on the street.
BEVs aren't convenient enough presently other than for certain applications such as short hop use,those that are popular for long haul use are expensive,in fact from what I've seen almost all BEVS are relatively expensive.
For those reasons they aren't as popular as the powers that be would wish,when convenient charging infrastructure is in place and the cost to buy is convenient they'll be popular,until then they'll remain relatively niche.
My 2d's worth.