Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
* 'bad' is inclined to put people into emotional-reactional rather than rational thinking, as capitalized on in the 'behaviorism' psychology of the advertising industry.
* And Engineering Explained didn't do anyone any favors when they took the bait.
* If you want to see REAL RANGE ANXIETY and the dark underbelly of a RAM pickup or HUMMER, hitch them to that horse trailer, and redo the 75-mph 'test', except, give them a 'gas tank' the same size as the Tesla.
|
Bad is a universally known descriptor to encompass any number of reasons something is suboptimal, and not necessarily used to manipulate emotion. If you were about to take a bite of an apple, and I said "wait, that's a bad apple", you wouldn't need a scientific description of what is bad about it.
Engineering Explained explained the physics and showed his work, so there's no bait. We can counter his facts with other facts, but it's all out on the table.
Why would someone barely put any fuel in their ICE vehicle to tow? That's the point; that they don't have to experience range anxiety or limit the places they can go due to an inferior energy storage solution.
Imagination is necessary to advancement, but has to be tempered with reality (physics). Most ideas are bad. I criticize most ideas because of that indisputable fact, and I'm usually right. Simply proclaiming a new idea to be bad without even knowing what it is will result in being right most of the time.
You're essentially saying the evaluation of EVs as 'bad' at towing is a bad analysis itself, but without explaining why. Convince people of the reasons why EVs might be a good option for towing. I believe there are plenty of use cases that would be best filled by EVs, but that market segment is so small. It's like the use case where a motorcycle with a sidecar is the best option.