Unfortunately you are as equally biased towards EVs as the EV detractors are against. Until the investigations are complete your comments are no more accurate than Jeff buys cars or anyone else for that matter. It's far easier to just rebuff comments that were made at the time, isn't it. You can cherry pick your headlines in a weak attempt to reinforce "your facts" but your comments don't convince me whether or not I should be purchasing an EV car. None of the reports stated that EV cars are a ticking time bomb waiting to catch fire. but the inconvenient truth that neither you are anybody else wants to address is once an EV catches fire there is no current method or procedure to put the fire out or perhaps you have some facts that you want to explain? Let's face it this is TH-cam so I'm not going to find a balanced view on EVs because it doesn't make good clickbait does it
I am sorry I didn't convince you but per one EV fire there are thousands of ice fires you just don't hear about them. I hope the report that the diesel vehicle caused fire in Luton was convincing enough 😁
@@LatutaEV but you were selective as to which TH-cam posts you wanted to rebuff. If you had read through their updated posts more concisely, you would have known that some of the posts had been updated and they had changed their original view.
@@IncognitoChild The points he was making are 1. EV's catch fire LESS often, not more often as the press often claim and, 2. The press in general love to hate on EV's so the question is why. Perhaps because It generates more clicks and therefore revenue is one reason. Nobody will click on a headlines saying "Diesel car catches fire", it's just not news. So they ignore facts or just don't bother looking for them and call the car an EV and hey presto, loads of clicks.
@@alibro7512 while I would totally agree that the press (these days) are more interested in being the first to break a story rather than actually checking for its accuracy, they are reflecting the underlying anxiety with regards to these vehicles. 40 years ago when governments started to incentivise diesel as the engine and fuel of the future, you still had a choice. Now we're being told that you will be buying one of these vehicles because the choice is going to be taken away from you. The facts, as they are known today may not be the facts tomorrow. If you are going to call out somebody on the facts you should at least make sure the accuracy of what your reporting is up to date otherwise you're no better than the people you are trying to debunk. One of the most obvious reasons why I am reluctant to buy one of these vehicles is that even after 10 years of having these cars on public roads the infrastructure is simply insufficient to support them let alone the fact that the numbers are growing. The charging network is like the wild wild west where companies are allowed to charge what they like and in some cases you're charging your vehicle without even knowing what it is costing - that legally should not be allowed. I would be happier listening to people who use their vehicles in the service industry than I would be listening to people who are clearly retired and are using them as recreational vehicles to do short journeys to the supermarket or or anywhere else for that matter where time doesn't matter.
Great video. I have watched 'Geoff Buys Cars' coverage of EV fires who ironically owns Tesla.
Does he, really I can't believe that!
Nice to know that you have an ID3 will there be a review?
I was thinking about this but there are many reviews there already. Is this something you would like to see?
What's the scoop on the causation for the fires? Any association with like outside temp or other factors to aggravate the cause?
Apparently EVs were all on a different level that burned. Some of them were covered in smoke but not actually burned at all
Thank you for topic summary video. Your video is peaceful and credible.
Thank you 👍
@@LatutaEV YOU'RE SITTING IN YOUR VOLKSWAGEN ELECTRIC JESUS VIRTUE SIGNALING WOKE SHITBOX WAITING FOR THERMAL RUN AWAY
Unfortunately you are as equally biased towards EVs as the EV detractors are against.
Until the investigations are complete your comments are no more accurate than Jeff buys cars or anyone else for that matter.
It's far easier to just rebuff comments that were made at the time, isn't it.
You can cherry pick your headlines in a weak attempt to reinforce "your facts" but your comments don't convince me whether or not I should be purchasing an EV car.
None of the reports stated that EV cars are a ticking time bomb waiting to catch fire. but the inconvenient truth that neither you are anybody else wants to address is once an EV catches fire there is no current method or procedure to put the fire out or perhaps you have some facts that you want to explain?
Let's face it this is TH-cam so I'm not going to find a balanced view on EVs because it doesn't make good clickbait does it
I am sorry I didn't convince you but per one EV fire there are thousands of ice fires you just don't hear about them. I hope the report that the diesel vehicle caused fire in Luton was convincing enough 😁
It is easy to rebuff comments especially if they are false
@@LatutaEV but you were selective as to which TH-cam posts you wanted to rebuff. If you had read through their updated posts more concisely, you would have known that some of the posts had been updated and they had changed their original view.
@@IncognitoChild The points he was making are 1. EV's catch fire LESS often, not more often as the press often claim and, 2. The press in general love to hate on EV's so the question is why. Perhaps because It generates more clicks and therefore revenue is one reason. Nobody will click on a headlines saying "Diesel car catches fire", it's just not news. So they ignore facts or just don't bother looking for them and call the car an EV and hey presto, loads of clicks.
@@alibro7512 while I would totally agree that the press (these days) are more interested in being the first to break a story rather than actually checking for its accuracy, they are reflecting the underlying anxiety with regards to these vehicles.
40 years ago when governments started to incentivise diesel as the engine and fuel of the future, you still had a choice. Now we're being told that you will be buying one of these vehicles because the choice is going to be taken away from you.
The facts, as they are known today may not be the facts tomorrow.
If you are going to call out somebody on the facts you should at least make sure the accuracy of what your reporting is up to date otherwise you're no better than the people you are trying to debunk.
One of the most obvious reasons why I am reluctant to buy one of these vehicles is that even after 10 years of having these cars on public roads the infrastructure is simply insufficient to support them let alone the fact that the numbers are growing.
The charging network is like the wild wild west where companies are allowed to charge what they like and in some cases you're charging your vehicle without even knowing what it is costing - that legally should not be allowed.
I would be happier listening to people who use their vehicles in the service industry than I would be listening to people who are clearly retired and are using them as recreational vehicles to do short journeys to the supermarket or or anywhere else for that matter where time doesn't matter.