Make no mistake, EVs are the way of the future. There’s simply no two ways about it. Us as consumers have been increasing our demands of the humble old internal combustion engine for over 100 years now. And it’s near breaking point. 50 years ago Ford’s flagship F-100 (we’ll use them as an example as they’re one of the longest-running models so easy to reference through time periods) was commonly fitted here with a 302 Cleveland V8 petrol. It produced around 164kW and used roughly 20L/100km. That was pre-emissions systems too, when they were introduced consumption went up and power went down. By comparison, an Aussie-delivered F-150 now has a 3.5L Ecoboost V6 producing 298kW (that’s up 81%). It uses 12.5L/100km in stock form, down 37.5%. We’re getting more for less. But why is that bad?
Are EVs simpler?
Peer behind the veil and you’ll find a lithium battery pack, a complex battery management system, an electric motor, various sensors telling a computer everything from each individual wheel speed to throttle position and even precise steering angle. Of course, that’s just a 15-year-old dual cab ute with a dual battery system, starter motor, and stability control. The reality is, even the trusty old diesel dual cabs of 15 years ago are far more complex than the average driveway DIYer can reasonably repair. Our hunt for more power and better economy has made even simple diesel 4X4s far more complex than they ever have been before, so are EVs really more complicated?
Gone are the days of winding a little more diesel into the injection pump for more power. Modern internal combustion engines have multiple computers running them, near on 100 sensors throughout the vehicle, complex fuel, turbocharger, and engine management systems. By comparison, an EVs battery, a motor or two, and some electronic hardware to connect the two seems rather simple, not exactly DIY friendly, but you’d be hard-pressed to say they’re more complicated.
Can they be charged in the outback?
Sure, electric motors produce more horsepower and torque with a simpler design than an internal combustion engine, but they need to be charged still. So how does that hold up to outback touring?
In short, not well. At least at the moment anyway. That ’74 F-100 from before? It’d have a 72L tank stock for a realistic 300km range before you’d start getting real nervous. There were easy fixes though, a second tank was a common upgrade bumping your range out closer to 600km. Throw a few jerry cans in and you could just eek your way from Birdsville to Mt Dare, and could fill up at literally any roadhouse you’d come across. Seems simple enough.
Ford have recently put an all-electric F-150 Lightning on the market which will make for a neat comparison. It packs up to a 131kWh battery pack and an advertised range of around 500km per charge with the extended range version. If you’re using it like a tradie, plugging into a dedicated home charger for 8 hours overnight would give you around 250km of charge to use every day for around $20 of electricity. The same distance in an internal combustion engine version would cost around $70 in comparison. Not bad. But what if you wanted to take it across the Simpson Desert?
Let’s assume you managed to meander your way across the outback to get to Birdsville, sweet talking caravan park owners into letting you charge up for a day to keep moving, could you actually get across once you got there? A realistic figure for the F-150 Lightning with mud tyres, driving in sand, and loaded with camping gear is probably around 350km, if we’re being generous, leaving you 150km shy of your destination when the lights turn off. Not ideal.
“It’d be terrifying, but doable, in theory at least”
To make it that last 150km you’ll need 47.25kWh of electricity. For argument’s sake, let’s throw a pair of REDARCs top-tier solar panels on. With 360W combined output they’d need 131hrs of sunlight to give you the charge. If you’re planning on spending three weeks on the crossing you might be able to do it?
What about a generator? The biggest offering you’ll get realistically will produce around 3.5kWh and chew a litre of fuel to do it. That generator would, in theory at least, get you enough charge after 13.5hrs of run time. If you ran it for 6hrs an evening and were in the desert for three nights you could expect to roll into Mt Dare with around 50km left in the tank and having spent $36(ish) on fuel. It’d be terrifying, but doable, in theory at least. If you spec’d up to a heavier-duty generator (around 120kg worth) you could give yourself around 150km of charge running it for 6hrs. That same larger generator could move you around 200km a day through the desert burning about $40 worth of petrol a day.
Great, but are they reliable?
Okay so there’s no denying the performance of EVs. And their practicality is either amazing if you do predominantly commuting, or disastrous if you want to travel and slow charge (although apparently throwing a little petrol into this mix fixes it?). But what actually goes wrong with them?
The common trope you hear is the batteries are toast after 8 years and end up in landfill but that’s fundamentally untrue. It’s often based off a misunderstanding of warranties. The LC200 was delivered with a 5-year unlimited kilometre warranty, the Hybrid Prius’ battery had a 10-year unlimited kilometre warranty. You wouldn’t expect to have to buy a new $22,000 engine for the LC200 at the 5 year mark. Just like you shouldn’t expect to have to buy a new battery pack at the 10 year mark for the Prius, both won’t be as efficient as they were new, although there are aftermarket packs available for the Prius for just $1500. Many batteries are repairable on an individual cell level when they fail, although newer Teslas for some reason are one sealed unit. That said, there’s plenty of EVs with half a million kays on the original unopened battery so maybe it’s not a deal breaker.
“there’s plenty of EVs with half a million kays on the original unopened battery”
But that doesn’t mean they’re clear from woes. A recent study by U.S. based CONSUMER REPORTS has found that despite EVs being simpler than internal combustion engines, their reliability still lags behind. The report found full electric vehicles have had 79% more issues than internal combustion engine systems, while plug-in hybrids have had 146% more problems than ICE vehicles. Common problems are electric motors, charging systems, and batteries. Although a report out of the U.K. lists 30% of EV breakdowns as more mundane – flat 12v batteries and tyres. The largest failure’s on Teslas are often non-drivetrain based. Components like dodgy door handles, glitchy stereo screens and computers that fail rather than battery or motor failures. Strangely enough, parallel hybrid systems have had on average 26% fewer problems than ICE setups, although with 20 years on the market, it’s safe to say the kinks have been ironed out.
Do EVs make sense?
Not really, not for an outback tourer, not yet anyway. There’s simply no denying they stand tall when it comes to performance, running costs, maintenance, and total cost of life. But when you’re beyond the glimmering lights of the city, range anxiety and reliability do raise some serious concern. Sure, both of those points are constantly improving and will look vastly different 10 years on. But for now, an EV makes a whole lot of sense for a daily driver, family weekender, or tradie ute. But as for outback travel? We’ll be burning the dyno juice for at least a few more years yet.
