Yeah a company called Hertz pushing DC powered cars is absurd
Global EV production is so focused on making and meeting the demand for more vehicles on the road that the after market is handled as an after thought. This is partly offset by EVs being mechanically simpler and more reliable (mechanically) but that is little comfort when you do have an issue that needs parts to fix. And for Hertz it hurts when a car is out of commission for an extended period, so this is a very reasonable action in my opinion.
The problem isn’t the mechanics, the problem is getting repair parts. Tesla is the only one who makes Tesla parts and they’ve decided that those parts are going toward new Teslas, not repairs. (My Tesla was in the shop for 11 MONTHS thanks to this fun state of affairs.)
While EV’s that share a platform with ICE cars are generally worse than ground-up EV’s, the nice thing is there are plenty of repair parts available.
they are just too expensive to maintain… would you like to rent a BMW?
Sounds like a boost to the second hand market
Amended title: Rental giant to take a huge step back in climate change fight and generate more GHG to protect their bottom line.
Alternate alternate title: EVs’ cost of ownership too high compared to ICEs.
EV cars have a lower cost of ownership than ICE cars, especially for high-use cars like taxis and rentals. Hertz is just pushing the cost to the customer here.
I’m not even sure it’s just that. A guy i know had to wait a couple of month until he could get his tesla windshield replaced. I still don’t really know where all these tesla owners around here go to service their cars, because i only know of a dealership, but that’s no garage. The only people i know with a teala bring their car there and they bring it somewhere from there. And service and shit takes for ever.
Took 11 months to get my Tesla repaired because they were waiting for suspension parts from Tesla. There are only three Tesla certified repair shops in my whole city (of 2 million people) but that wasn’t the issue. The issue was Tesla.
If the EV’s they’re talking about in the article are Teslas, then I can understand why they would want to get rid of them.
And to be clear, I love my Tesla, but nobody should be buying one until they get their supply chain shit together. I already passed on buying a Tesla when I had to replace my second car recently. (Went with a PHEV because I need to road trip regularly and non-Tesla charging is still pretty terrible in that area.)
“Likelihood of crashing” is part of the cost of ownership (regardless of engine type). For example, suppose a particular model comes with certain features that are more likely to distract the driver, thus increasing the rate of highway collisions, thus either increasing the cost of repairs over the life of the vehicle or just shortening the life of the vehicle—all else equal, this vehicle has a higher cost of ownership than a different model with fewer distractions, collisions, repairs, etc.
