1 hour ago, rbkk said:

Why not Thai Engineers? (Stop sniggering!) Must it be Indian engineers  investigating MG incidents? Do Japanese engineers need to investigate Toyota malfunctions? 

In such events that might damage reputation they WILL send their engineers to investigate.

 

"Do Japanese engineers need to investigate Toyota malfunctions? "

Of course! You might remember the terrible news storm in the US about Toyota cars accelerating "without a cause". Toyota send their best to find out what happened.

It was a devastating PR disaster.

In the end it was some dimwits who could not distinct between gas and break pedal and some floor mats that might have obstructed the pedals.

26 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

If a Merc busts into flames on the expressway in BKK, I've never heard that German engineers are investigating the cause.????

That is because they never got paid for building the expressway.

1 hour ago, josephbloggs said:

I think it's pretty normal for the original manufacturer to investigate something of this nature.

Exactly. And BYD is just expanding into the Thai market (as they do in Europe) and don't need headlines like this.

35 minutes ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

Lots of fake EV propaganda is getting pushed on naive souls, but so far no solid data on EV vs. ICE fires.

In the above, you omit that it is per 100,000 SALES. Since EV sales are just taking off, that skew the balance about a factor of 20 in favor of EV cars.

Lots & lots of solid data, not least from the NTSB, Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), Recalls.gov and AutoinsuranceEZ.com who compiled statistics from these sources. More than a million EV's on the road in USA.

 

2 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

Lots & lots of solid data, not least from the NTSB, Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), Recalls.gov and AutoinsuranceEZ.com who compiled statistics from these sources.

 

I give you 56 fires ????per billion miles traveled for ICE.

Please provide the same number for EV.....if you can.

 

osvehiclefires.pdf

^ Apparently they auto combust while stationary so no billions involved.???? 

34 minutes ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

Lots of fake EV propaganda is getting pushed on naive souls, but so far no solid data on EV vs. ICE fires.

In the above, you omit that it is per 100,000 SALES. Since EV sales are just taking off, that skew the balance about a factor of 20 in favor of EV cars.

The comparison is 'like for like'....   

 

The information clearly outlines that any greater concern for the fire risk of E.V's compared to ICE's is flawed.

 

I agree there is 'propaganda' flooding the internet from both angles (pro and anti E.V.). 

 

In this example (this story) it highlights there is a risk that E.V's can catch fire, but many of the responses highlight a bias that completely ignores the reality ICE's can also catch fire and information suggests more so than E.V's. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

Lots & lots of solid data, not least from the NTSB, Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), Recalls.gov and AutoinsuranceEZ.com who compiled statistics from these sources.

 

But your EV won't catch fire, will it..........????

2 minutes ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

I give you 56 fires ????per billion miles traveled for ICE.

Please provide the same number for EV.....if you can.

 

osvehiclefires.pdf 3.65 MB · 0 downloads

Meaningless.

 

Please quote COMPARATIVE statistics, EV's to ICE, not ICE alone, it means nothing.

 

I quoted excellent COMPARATIVE data compiled by the US Government.

 

 

1 minute ago, transam said:

But your EV won't catch fire, will it..........????

Not yet, and were it legal, I'd be willing to wager you that it won't, would you take that wager?

6 minutes ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

I give you 56 fires ????per billion miles traveled for ICE.

Please provide the same number for EV.....if you can.

An excellent stat to get hold of...    

 

The information I can find (quickly) is...

 

- 55 fires per 1.6 billion kilometres in ICE cars

- 5 fires per 1.6 billion kilometres in EV's

 

https://www.straitstimes.com/life/motoring/electric-vehicle-fires-less-common-but-still-problematic#:~:text=The Phosphorus%2C Inorganic and Nitrogen,EVs for the same distance.

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

That would be an excellent stat to get hold of...    

With over a million Teslas on the road in the US, you could estimate their combined miles from a typical average of (say) 10k miles per year per car and be somewhere in excess of 20 billion miles.

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The comparison is 'like for like'....   

 

The information clearly outlines that any greater concern for the fire risk of E.V's compared to ICE's is flawed.

 

I agree there is 'propaganda' flooding the internet from both angles (pro and anti E.V.). 

 

In this example (this story) it highlights there is a risk that E.V's can catch fire, but many of the responses highlight a bias that completely ignores the reality ICE's can also catch fire and information suggests more so than E.V's. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have never had a fire in a petrol car, I have had a few instances where one could have happened, but each of those times I had plenty of warning to deal with it, but not in my fun ride with N2O in the boot....????

 

There is no hope trying to deal with an EV fire, no hope whatsoever, that is the difference between the 2 power sources..............????

4 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

Not yet, and were it legal, I'd be willing to wager you that it won't, would you take that wager?

No, I don't gamble, especially with fires in cars.............????

One other valid point: 

 

The difficulty of dealing with E.V. fires compared to ICE fires.

That said, E.V. fires start and spread more slowly apparently, allowing passengers time to get out (if / when that happens). 

 

But, if choosing a car solely on fire risk - it seems E.V. is the safer option, yet no one is worried about a fire in an ICE because that is a product we are extremely familiar with and due that familiarity may favour.

1 minute ago, transam said:

I have never had a fire in a petrol car, I have had a few instances where one could have happened, but each of those times I had plenty of warning to deal with it, but not in my fun ride with N2O in the boot....????

 

There is no hope trying to deal with an EV fire, no hope whatsoever, that is the difference between the 2 power sources..............????

I had a car fire once....oh hang on, correction it was a ham sandwich.

1 minute ago, transam said:

No, I don't gamble, especially with fires in cars.............????

Thought so

Just now, JBChiangRai said:

Thought so

Well done...........????

4 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

With over a million Teslas on the road in the US, you could estimate their combined miles from a typical average of (say) 10k miles per year per car and be somewhere in excess of 20 billion miles.

According to common reports..

 

1x tesla fire fire per every 205 million miles travelled.

 

 

14 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

Meaningless.

 

Please quote COMPARATIVE statistics, EV's to ICE, not ICE alone, it means nothing.

 

I quoted excellent COMPARATIVE data compiled by the US Government.

 

 

Fires per SALES are meaningless. Give us EV fires per billion miles....if you can.

15 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

An excellent stat to get hold of...    

 

The information I can find (quickly) is...

 

- 55 fires per 1.6 billion kilometres in ICE cars

- 5 fires per 1.6 billion kilometres in EV's

 

https://www.straitstimes.com/life/motoring/electric-vehicle-fires-less-common-but-still-problematic#:~:text=The Phosphorus%2C Inorganic and Nitrogen,EVs for the same distance.

 

 

 

I saw those numbers, now play along and find the same numbers for Chinese EVs. The heat ???? is on.

Just now, ExpatOilWorker said:

Fires per SALES are meaningless. Give us EV fires per billion miles....if you can.

Someone already has - twice

 

A few posts above here, one came out at 5 per billion miles, the other at 3.1

(you will need to ask them for the source)

22 minutes ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

I saw those numbers, now play along and find the same numbers for Chinese EVs. The heat ???? is on.

We can all hate the accurate statistics posted and ask for more and more meaningless and impossible to get statistics, but it's pointless.  

 

 

There are accurate stats out there and EV's are about 10 times less likely to catch fire than an ICE vehicle - period.

53 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

An excellent stat to get hold of...    

 

The information I can find (quickly) is...

 

- 55 fires per 1.6 billion kilometres in ICE cars

- 5 fires per 1.6 billion kilometres in EV's

 

https://www.straitstimes.com/life/motoring/electric-vehicle-fires-less-common-but-still-problematic#:~:text=The Phosphorus%2C Inorganic and Nitrogen,EVs for the same distance.

 

 

 

EV vs. ICE fires

1:61 (Sales)

1:11 (per billion km using Tesla numbers)

1:?? (Using all EV)

 

You see a trend???

Maybe EVs are not as fireproof as the evangelists are preaching ?????

23 minutes ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

EV vs. ICE fires

1:61 (Sales)

1:11 (per billion km using Tesla numbers)

1:?? (Using all EV)

 

You see a trend???

Maybe EVs are not as fireproof as the evangelists are preaching ?????

sorry but I don't see the trend

Being the car is still 'in tack', it obviously wasn't the battery pack.  Apparently brought under control fast enough.  

 

A wiring oops next to combustible material, maybe.

 

Will be get a follow and cause/origin of the fire ?

 

Maybe pg 23, next to the '2 free memory foam pillows w/bed purchase'  advert.

27 minutes ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

EV vs. ICE fires

1:61 (Sales)

1:11 (per billion km using Tesla numbers)

1:?? (Using all EV)

 

You see a trend???

Maybe EVs are not as fireproof as the evangelists are preaching ?????

Yep... the trend I see is you consistently applying your bias. 

 

In all of the reports I'm reading I do not see any that indicates EV's are a greater fire risk than ICE's.

 

I've applied some biased search terms such as googling: << EV's greater fire risk than ICE's >> and the results return information which contradicts and highlights ICE's are the greater fire risk. 

 

Now, you are arguing all the published stats with only your opinion without researched facts, yet you are suggesting that the published information is propaganda pushed on naïve souls.

 

This propaganda conspiracy you are suggesting seems world wide, the harder I try to look for information which states ICE's are less fire risk than EV's the more I'm faced with exactly the opposite. 

 

Perhaps you can find something which backs up your suggestions that ICE's are less of a fire risk than EV's (even Chinese EV's).

 

 

I need to reiterate - I'm neither pro nor anti EV....   I am merely interested in unadulterated non-bias facts. 

(actually, I am anti Chinese EV, or rather anti-Chinese car, simply because of my bias against build quality of Chinese cars which may well be flawed).

 

 

Even in this article (linked) which quotes an increase in Chinese EV fires (because of an increase in EV's on the road) the incidence is less than ICE vehicles. 

 

https://www.cjoglobal.com/2023/08/08/how-many-ev-car-fires-are-there-a-year/

 

 

1 hour ago, JBChiangRai said:

I had a car fire once....oh hang on, correction it was a ham sandwich.

There you go, and you post about EV stuff.......????

1 hour ago, JBChiangRai said:

I had a car fire once....oh hang on, correction it was a ham sandwich.

I thought since the anti-EV'ers were being ridiculous, I would join in.

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Hybrid cars had 3474 fires per 100,000 

isnt a hybrid partly an EV?