Mexican government unveils a prototype for a new homegrown, ultra-affordable EV

Post by rsynnott » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 9:28 AM UTC

dsr_ wrote: post #47

floxy wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you own more than vehicle. Plenty of families own multiple vehicles, and they don't all need to have tons of range.

At $8500, I could justify having a 77 mile range electric car with a top speed of 30ish mph. That would take care of every in-town trip, but I couldn't do a full commute to work with it because the most sensible way of doing that involves a highway. If it could manage 50mph for 15 minutes, it could go on the highway and I could recharge at or near the office. The cheapest EV currently available in the US is the Chevy…

Post by rsynnott » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 9:32 AM UTC

gwbas1c wrote: post #145

thelastgallon wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

28% of trips are under a mile, 52% under three, 64% under five, 79% under ten, 93% under twenty-five, and 98% under 50 miles.

This is the kind of misleading fact that motivated me to make my post. (Former 2014 Leaf leaseholder.) Americans buy the car for the 1% trips. In my case, most of my car trips are short, but most of my milage is from long-range trips. What's more informative is this post that explains Mexican driving behavior: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48634740

Post by intended » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 12:10 PM UTC

robomartin wrote: post #173

jackb4040 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US didn't go from #1 in global auto manufacturing to nearing extinction on accident. The companies shifted production abroad because they didn't want to pay for US labor. We can't just pray for "development" to spark a chain reaction that gets us back on track - we were the most developed and consciously chose to squander that advantage. Onshoring can be done, but it will have a real cost someone will have to bea…

> The companies shifted production abroad because they didn't want to pay for US labor. That's not true. Reality is far more nuanced than that. Sadly, it is the equivalent of a bunch of Dodo birds falling off a cliff. And this applies to every industry, not just automobiles. The simplified version goes something like this: Three companies manufacture forks and knives in the US. They share the market equally. Each has…

Post by HeyLaughingBoy » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 12:51 PM UTC

rsynnott wrote: post #192

HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a significant segment of the US population, that thing wouldn't get them to work and back, so they'd have to charge it both at home and at work. And in many cases, forget running any errands, picking up kids from daycare, etc. And minimum speed on US interstates is typically 40mph, so that reduces its usability even more.

> For a significant segment of the US population, that thing wouldn't get them to work and back, so they'd have to charge it both at home and at work. What does 'significant' mean here? I find it hard to imagine that a _large_ number of people have a round-trip of like 100km to work; that would be horrendous.

Post by stackedinserter » Tue, Jun 23, 2026, 1:35 PM UTC

budman1 wrote: post #171

stackedinserter wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But two weeks after the war starts, countermeasures will be created. The vehicles will be changed to make them harder to find, and harder to kill. A small drone will be rendered ineffective by small countermeasures Where did you get this? Nobody solved FPV's in four years, why do you think US or any other country will solve it in two weeks? "small drone will be rendered ineffective by small countermeasures" – only…

Not solved. Made less effective. So it takes 100 of them to make any military effect. The thousands and thousands of FPV drones being used have not been decisive on the battlefield. The war is a slog, and resembles WWI more than WWII.