Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV) owners may now take comfort in new research suggesting that EVs can match or even surpass combustion engine vehicles in long-term reliability. This is based on studies done both in Europe and even in Southeast Asia.
The first study, published in the journal Nature Energy, covered 29.8 million vehicles, including 15.1 million petrol models, 14.7 million diesel cars, and 41,600 BEVs.
Conducted by researchers at the University of Birmingham, London School of Economics, and University of California San Diego, they analyzed the results of 264 million annual MOT (Ministry of Transport) tests, the compulsory annual roadworthiness test of cars over three years old in the UK.
Researchers measured the longevity of cars by recording their age and mileage when they had their final MOT, on the assumption that when they were no longer subject to this test they had been scrapped.
This led the researchers to conclude that the average vehicle lifetime is 17.8 years, during which it traveled about 138,000 miles (220,000 kilometers). Digging deeper, a gas-powered vehicle survived on average for 1.9 years longer than a diesel but covered 44,000 fewer miles (70,400 kilometers). The analysis forecasted that BEVs have an average lifespan of 18.4 years and will drive farther than an average petrol vehicle.
These findings are backed up by international leasing and fleet management company Arval, which systematically conducts a battery health certificate for BEVs when remarketing them to the used car market.
Arval analyzed the battery health certification results of 8,300 electric vehicles (77 percent BEVs, 23 percent PHEVs) from 30 brands, which it sold in different European markets between March 2023 and November 2024.
The results showed that the average battery health of these end-of-lease vehicles, which had covered 70,000 kilometers, was 93 percent—based on the original battery capacity being 100 percent when the cars rolled off the production line in the factory. Even when these EVs had driven beyond 200,000 kilometers, Arval found the battery health to be close to 90 percent.
Closer to home, an automotive research group at Hanoi University of Science and Technology presented similar findings at the International Conference on Manufacturing and Production Technology in Malaysia.
Their study is based on both maintenance records and performance data from nearly 5,700 vehicles operating in Vietnam between 2020 and 2024. The dataset included 1,047 EVs (primarily VinFast EVs) and 4,620 gasoline vehicles from multiple brands.
The first approach used reliability modeling to estimate the probability of failures. Researchers found that EVs and gas-powered vehicles performed similarly in the early years. However, after 12 years of operation, the curves began to separate. The cumulative failure probability for gasoline vehicles rose above 81 percent, while electric vehicles remained around 63 percent. By year 15, gasoline cars approached a 98 percent probability of failure, compared with about 86 percent for EVs.
The second approach looked at real-world maintenance records. Once vehicles passed roughly 40,000 kilometers, electric cars began showing fewer faults than gasoline models. Between 80,000 and 125,000 kilometers, EV fault rates ranged from 0.021 to 0.029 incidents per 1,000 kilometers, compared with 0.025 to 0.034 for internal combustion vehicles.
The third method involved mechanical testing. In repeated downhill braking tests, brake disc temperatures in gasoline vehicles climbed from about 36.8 degrees Celsius to 147.6 degrees Celsius. Electric vehicles, using regenerative braking to convert kinetic energy back into electricity, showed almost no change, rising only slightly from 33.4 degrees Celsius to around 38.4 degrees Celsius.
“Electric vehicles demonstrate durability both in theory and in real-world conditions. The findings offer a scientific and objective view of long-term vehicle reliability,” said Dr. Dam Hoang Phuc, Associate Professor of Automotive Engineering at Hanoi University of Science and Technology and leader of the research team.
For the Philippines, where EV adoption is gradually gaining momentum, insights like these may help address one of the biggest hesitations among prospective buyers: whether electric vehicles can endure years of daily driving under real-world conditions.
Rising fuel costs have already prompted many Filipino motorists to explore alternatives to traditional gasoline vehicles. As more EV models enter the local market and charging infrastructure continues to expand, studies highlighting the durability of electric vehicles may further strengthen consumer confidence in the technology.
For VinFast drivers, the Hanoi University of Science and Technology findings are relevant given that it included more than a thousand EVs from the brand. The analysis therefore reflects how the company’s EV platforms perform over tens of thousands of kilometers, not just theoretical models.
Durability, however, is only part of the equation for motorists considering the shift to electric mobility. In the Philippines, VinFast complements these advantages with programs designed to address common concerns among first-time EV buyers. Its battery subscription program helps reduce upfront vehicle costs while ensuring batteries are maintained and replaced if performance falls below a specified threshold. The company also offers a Residual Value Guarantee (RVG) program, allowing eligible owners to sell their vehicle back to VinFast at a predetermined value based on a fixed depreciation schedule, providing added confidence in long-term vehicle value.
The ego of combustion fanatics could never!!! :D
ReplyDeleteAs evidenced by the other comments here; you're absolutely right π
Deleteit’s funded and run by woke environmentalists entities. its very biased, Trump wont believe it. Here in ph jeepneys last more than a century
ReplyDeleteGet out and go to your Trump's USA. We have enough stupidity here. Thank you.
DeleteStudies shows that Journal energy nature who conducted this studies is a woke environmentalists entities. They always magnified climate change effectst. They compared lifetimes of 30M diesel and petrol cars to 41k EV’s ha ha ha BS. Longevity study E 5 years ago palang ata naging mainstream ang EV’s
ReplyDeleteThe Tesla Model S, which is widely considered to be the first mainstream EV, was launched in 2012. The Nissan Leaf, the very first mass produced EV, came out in 2010.
DeleteLinks to your 'studies'? Recently mainstream yes pero this shows that even the earliest EVs (going back to the Nissan Leaf in 2010 - how many years ago is that now?) show na over the years they have proven more reliable. Too bad that people like you can't accept that. π
DeleteYou can google guys - Controversies sorrounding Journal nature energy
ReplyDeleteYou seem to have difficulty separating the actual researchers (the Universities the article mentions) and the platform the study was published in.
DeleteWhat about hybrids?
ReplyDeleteIt's not just reliability issues, there's range anxiety too. That's why here many go for hybrids. And hybrids aren't included in this study.
ReplyDeleteThe Philippines is small, like very small, more so Luzon. Unless you travel to Ilocos every so often, you won't get the advantage of hybrids. Heck, a BEV with decent range (500-600km) can get you to and from Baguio on a single charge.
DeleteStudies only. Like people, there are a lot of people who graduated with honors but outperformed by people who did not graduate with honors or even by people who did not graduate.
ReplyDeleteUhhh. This study you're downplaying is literally the "who outperformed in the real world" results.
DeleteAuthored by Madam Auring.
ReplyDeleteIts forecast and probabilities, which at best is true at average, but even then the difference isnt significant.
ReplyDeleteThe prior comments highlight the education crisis in the country. No wonder the best scientists and researchers leave and rather worked abroad far from their families, in which they are well viewed and much appreciated.
LOL at this attempt to try and sound intellectual but actually showing how shallow (and wrong) your understanding is.
DeleteThe studies aren't forecasts they are based on ACTUAL maintenance records spanning YEARS (and decades in the case of the MOT records) going back in the past. These are the numbers, plain and simple.
There definitely is an education crisis here when you have people like yourself so ironically misguided.
You made my head hurt with your "at best is true at average", like... WTF? Do you realize what you're even saying (or trying to say)? LOL
Its a forecast that ALL BEVs will last based on the vehicles they had studied. Are all BEVs made equal?
DeleteSurely you remember the study pre-pandemic that predicted EVs will take over? Manufacturers reshaped their entire lineups for that and started promises of going EVs only by 2030. Most, if not all, had reverted their lineups and retracted those statements.
You can read it slowly again and again if your brain fails to comprehend.
I see why you are confused, he used an awkward preposition in this context, should have been “on average” instead of “at average”. Means the same thing though.
DeleteComparing speculative market forecasts to studies done on data based on years of maintenance records is stupid and is another example of grossly misunderstanding what studies are versus what forecasts are.
DeleteYou CAN make forecasts BASED ON studies which would make it a scientifically-based deduction but your example is a forecast based on MARKET TRENDS (trends go up and down) and not the same as the studies based on hard data (like maintenence records) so your example of a forecast is more of an educated guess and if an educated guess ends up wrong it's not really surprising since your basis was flimsy to begin with.
Please. Go. Back. To. School.
Also, learn what the word 'average' means because this article and the studies use it several times.
DeleteYour "are all BEVs made equal?" question makes me want to face-palm.
That forecast was not based on market trends lmao. Stop preaching on things you didnt know.
DeleteSome of the most important data sets used were the cost of lithium ion batteries, ownership history (total cost etc), and government policies throughout the world.
Imagine explaining things you do not even know, cringe.
What’s that again, go back to school? Face palm? Lmao.
Between us, there is only one trying to sound intellectual, and I’m sure as hell its not me.
Battery prices have been going down for decades and are still going down. Using that as an example of why companies have stepped away from making EVs is another example of talking about something you don't understand. Perhaps you did not see a problem with many companies making ONLY premium and expensive EVs first? Because the ones that had affordable options (like Renault and Hyundai/Kia, to name a few) were more favorably received by the market and are still heavy into EVs right now.
DeleteOwnership cost? Price parity na nga sa ICE as compared to before when EVs were so much more expensive. Maintenance costs were predicted to be lower even then and these studies back that up.
And you still don't understand what 'trends' mean do you? Ihip ng hangin. Government policies are textbook examples of trendsetters. If one country starts doing something other countries may follow. If one country starts reversing their subsidies anytime other countries will think they should too. If competing with China is too hard now, band-aid muna with tariffs. Geopolitics and economics are topics I suggest you read up on.
Forecasts based on PRESENT trends: based on what we CURRENTLY see in the market we THINK EVs are going to take over soon.
^ this was shown as wrong or speaking too soon
Forecasts based on PAST data: based on nearly 15 years of maintenance records EVs have on AVERAGE shown to be slightly (did you even read this part of the article?) more reliable than ICE cars.
Yes, do please at least retake a logic class or something. If you're a recent graduate then you have my sympathies as the education system has clearly failed you π₯Ίπ«
You should tell the researchers that, not to me lmao. By writing this long explanation says you've completely lost the plot.
DeleteThe researchers haven't misunderstood anything. Their conclusions aren't wrong. Unless you're talking about those who made the forecasts about the future EV market? They don't need to be told anything either. They knew they could've been wrong, because, again, they were making an EDUCATED GUESS.
DeleteThe whole point of my explanation was to make you understand that you were making a completely wrong interpretation/comparison... And you continue to not understand where you went wrong π
The fact that you can't reply with details when someone calls out your bluff about a subject is very telling about you and it's sad that you don't see that.
So does that mean BYD will oitlast the common toyota?
ReplyDeleteThe numbers being talked about are averages across many brands. Toyota likely is on the higher end of the scoring and is being pulled down by other brands' ICE cars. Making a brand vs brand comparison is hard to do unless you isolate the data purely for the brands you want to compare.
Deleteif you will dig deeper you’ll find out that most woke environmentalists entities have been funded or received funding from china connected entities. Solar , wind turbines, EV’ business all points to china. That’s what happened in California which now has the highest fuel prices in US almost double the national average.and that’s because of woke environmentalists funded by china, Go woke go broke, china business wins. But now not with TRUMP
ReplyDeletePakialam namin sayo Trumpista? Go away.
DeleteRegardless of this article, people are flocking to showrooms that offer EVs/PHEVs because of very high prices of oil. Another P20 per liter hike on diesel and more than P10 on gasoline is expected next week. Showroom traffic is almost triple since this Monday.
ReplyDeleteJapanese and Korean offer HEV but if you want PHEV, only Chinese is available or Germans and like Vietnam too.
Deletethis doesnt really matter. Nobody keeps their car for 10 years anyway. either ICE or EV. Most people change cars after 6 or 7 years.
ReplyDeleteThis is still useful to know since people buy old second/third-hand cars that are already 5, 10 or more years old.
DeleteCan you cite your source on this?
DeleteAre you sure? Nobody keeps it for 10 years? That sounds wasteful. That also sounds like people who can’t take of their cars
DeleteLet's talk again when solid state batteries arrive.
ReplyDeleteWill internal combustion engines really be phased out in the future?
ReplyDeleteI prefer to be prudent about this. Hybrid is still the best way to go for now.
ReplyDelete