Depends on your needs and typical traffic you have to deal with. In Texas, I have to deal with an endless horde of bullies in duallies and SUV Karen’s. It’s nice to have some passing power in certain situations… If I lived somewhere more rural, or with generally more kind people in traffic, I’d be fine with less.
Highlanders are awesome! It’s basically a rav4 with a camry drivetrain. I want one!
I think you’re right, I side-stepped the point a bit. I was pointing out the similar complexity of modern ICE cars with the relative simplicity of EV hardware. EV’s are so much more simple, down to a component level. An electric motor is a single spinning shaft with a couple bearings involved.
I’m really only speaking on current technology that consumers have access to. Planned obsolescence and ransom-ware software that locks everyone out of doing repairs, except for a certified dealer technician, are issues that are affecting most vehicles being made these days. So, to criticize new technologies over software issues like that just seems ignorant, or disingenuous to me. Further than that, IMHO, most of the legitimate issues with EV’s come down to systemic or political issues that essentially boil down to some human minds not keeping pace with overall human imagination and advancement, and unchecked industry leaders/monopolies throwing down constant road blocks to protect their current profit schemes.
To your point, with the way things are now, generally speaking, someone in a very rural area is probably better off with a 90’s era 2.4L Toyota T100. At least until the infrastructure and auto industry standards catch up.
From a mechanical standpoint, this is a silly argument. I’ve worked on cars for approx. 15 years as a hobby/side hustle, owned a mobile mechanic business for 2.5 years, and worked at a auto shop for a time as well. Trust me, EV’s are far more simple, hardware-wise. You could argue they’re not simple, software-wise, for the average consumer to work on themselves, but that would ignore the relative complexity of modern CANbus systems in new cars, with dozens of subsystems feeding multiple computers, all of which can malfunction and cause problems for the whole system. Such as when an led tail-light breaks and that bricks the whole car, leaving the owner potentially stranded.
ICE vehicles have to rely on and maintain multiple pressurized systems (with dozens of specialized seals), vacuum, dozens (sometimes hundreds) of sensors, relays, and valves, not to mention rapid heat differentials, all of the moving parts with bearings and added weights to counteract various forces…
I love the idea of only having to work on suspension/steering/brakes from time to time. Have a motor issue? Unplug it, undo a few bolts, and put a new one in over a single beer. Sounds awesome to me…
Except, in all cases, there were a lot of dead doctors, teachers, and children. The UN investigated each instance and found war crimes. The aid convoys were with registered international aid organizations and, upon investigation, they were found to be legitimate, had no weapons, we have footage of the attacks happening, they were not entering legitimate Israeli territory, and Israel has not shared any evidence of hamas operating out of these locations or via aid convoys.
If I take the time to back this up with sources, would you be receptive to the information? Don’t want to waste my time if you’re not willing to assess evidence that disproves your currently held beliefs.
We have footage of them bombing schools, hospitals, shooting up aid convoys… What is there to deny?..
In your example, there is clear, observable evidence of genocide occurring. They are killing civilians and demolishing critical civilian infrastructure. So, saying Israel is committing genocide has a certain amount of truth/accuracy in it, and the intent isn’t to smear Israel, it’s to point out what they are actively doing, while the world is receiving constant updates. In other words, there is objective evidence behind the claims.
Hate speech is the opposite. It has no objective evidence behind it, and the intent is to make specific people/groups look a certain way. We can typically infer the intent of hate speech by the words they choose to use, and the way they frame their “argument”. We employ critical thinking to do this. This process can also be peer reviewed for further accuracy.
Oh, for sure! In modern cars, absolutely! Wish I could afford something with that kind of power and mpg’s… lol