RTE article on EVs, WTF?

DrPhilG

https://www.rte.ie/lifestyle/motors/2017/0123/847067-driving-irelands-newest-electric-car-the-hyundai-ioniq/

Good grief where do you start with this balls.

And this is from the RTE motoring editor, not some tabloid pish.

axe2grind

Extraordinary ignorance :eek:

goz83

Just as well there is no comments section. 4 hours to fast charge :eek:

Shocking article.......pun intended

AMKC

DrPhilG wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/lifestyle/motors/2017/0123/847067-driving-irelands-newest-electric-car-the-hyundai-ioniq/

Good grief where do you start with this balls.

And this is from the RTE motoring editor, not some tabloid pish.

Ye he starts of ok but then when he starts to talk about the range the car is capable of and its styling he goes downhill quickly. Then putting in a picture of the Toyota C-HR,s dash instead of the Hyundai Ioniq,s dash does not help either.

I for one don,t think the Hyundai Ioniq is dull. It is a very good looking car in either of its 3 engine configurations and I also think him saying the that electric version is only good for city driving is a load of crap. Sure a long drive from Dublin to Cork or Galway etc might take a bit of planning and a little more time but it is perfectly possible and doable.

colm_mcm

Surely Hyundai will make them correct the article? Would do them serious damage assuming anyone actually reads those articles.

aliveandkicking

AMKC wrote: »

Ye he starts of ok but then when he starts to talk about the range the car is capable of and its styling he goes downhill quickly. Then putting in a picture of the Toyota C-HR,s dash instead of the Hyundai Ioniq,s dash does not help either.

I for one don,t think the Hyundai Ioniq is dull. It is a very good looking car in either of its 3 engine configurations and I also think him saying the that electric version is only good for city driving is a load of crap. Sure a long drive from Dublin to Cork or Galway etc might take a bit of planning and a little more time but it is perfectly possible and doable.

He does in his arse start off ok. The opening sentence of the article is this ffs!

Until now the Nissan Leaf was the only all-electric car on the market.

A couple of other gems in the article but my personal favourite is this:

Another thing to remember is the €16.99 a month you have to pay to for access to charging points and the fact that a fast charge will cost you about €9 a time.

Truly staggering that the motoring editor of the national broadcaster is this ignorant on EVs. Cros you better get that FAQ sticky up and running quickly :-)

colm_mcm

More misleading scaremongering here.
https://www.rte.ie/lifestyle/motors/2017/0105/842890-buying-a-second-hand-car-dont-get-caught-out/

cros13

aliveandkicking wrote: »

Cros you better get that FAQ sticky up and running quickly :-)

In progress. In addition I popped an email to Donal this evening:

Hi Donal,

I was glad to see a review of the EV version of the Ioniq pop up on rte.ie today.

I own both a BMW i3 and a Mark 1.75 30kWh Nissan Leaf (preceded by a Mark 1.5 24kWh Nissan Leaf).
I use the i3 to commute from Portlaoise to Dublin every day, a 187km round trip for a total of less than €2/day in electricity.
As an EV driver with just over 200,000km on the road in three EVs over the past three years, I was struck by the number of inaccuracies in your review.
I had a poke around one of the cars Hyundai brought in for Sales training at a rapid charger the first week of November.
And I test drove the Ioniq around the 15th November, handed one straight off the transporter by Fitzpatrick's Tullamore.

"Until now the Nissan Leaf was the only all-electric car on the market."

...apart from the BMW i3, Renault Zoe, Volkswagen eGolf, Tesla Model S (7 private imports before official sales started last December), Mitsubishi iMiEV (and Citroen/Peugeot varients), Renault Kangoo Z.E. (Pass.), Nissan eNV200 Evalia, Renault Twizy and the now discontinued Renault Fluence Z.E.

And of course excluding models available in RHD in the UK including but not limited to: Ford Focus Electric, Kia Soul EV, Mercedes B250e electric drive, Volkswagen e-Up, Citroen Berlingo Electric, Peugeot Partner Electric Pass., Smart ForTwo ED, Smart ForFour ED, Mahindra e2o and BYD e6. I'm not even going to list Japanese cars available for import.

The dominance of the Leaf in the Irish market is a result of lack of availability of the affordable alternatives, Volkswagen marking up the eGolf €2k above the superior i3, Renault stubbornly refusing to sell their cars without a battery lease (despite doing so in other markets), and poor planning by ESB that left half of the 100 or so rapid chargers with only the Japanese rapid charging connector not the standard european one (which led to EV owners recommending against purchasing CCS vehicles).

"If you regularly drive from Dublin to Cork, for example, an all-electric car is pointless."

I agree if it's more than once or twice a week. However it usually takes no more than 30-40 minutes more to do this journey than a petrol or diesel car. In a car with a 50kWh or higher capacity pack it requires no rapid charging at all and consequently can complete the journey in the same time as an ICE vehicle.

I've driven to Berlin (via the chunnel), Amsterdam, London and around Scotland in my EVs over the past few years... all using the rapid charger network with journey times not substantially dissimilar to a petrol/diesel vehicle. You'll find several Irish EV owners do similar trips. Jan-Bart Spang regularly drives his Zoe from Cork to the Netherlands, several EV owners have done driving holidays in France. I meet several UK registered EVs wandering around Ireland and Dutch, French and Norwegian EVs are a semi-regular sight on the Wild Atlantic Way.

"Another thing to remember is the €16.99 a month you have to pay to for access to charging points and the fact that a fast charge will cost you about €9 a time."

That's incorrect, officially those charges are on hold pending review by the Commission for Energy Regulation who had never authorised charges. The rates quoted by ESB are unlikely to be accepted by EV drivers in particular the monthly fee as a minority of EV drivers use the public charging network more than a few times a year.

"A domestic charge for the Ioniq will take about 12 hours"

No it doesn't. On a 32A home chargepoint (like my own) it will take about 4 hours. On a 16A, about 8-8.5 hours. And that's from a completely empty pack...which is a rare occurrence.

"four hours at a fast charging point"

A 50kW CCS rapid charger, which is what ESB eCars refers to as a "fast charger", will charge the Ioniq from 0-80% in just under 30 minutes. Despite advertised specifications for the Ioniq varying from market to market, the vehicle is actually capable of charging at up to 70kW on a suitable CCS rapid charger. At 70kW a 0-80% rapid charge can be accomplished in 15-20 minutes. It's interesting to note that CCS is the european standard for rapid charging and will be used by all battery electric vehicles due to launch between now and 2020. A version 2 CCS standard is now being finalised that will allow rapid charging at up to 350kW, this will be backwards compatible with CCS v1.

"The automatic gearbox makes the car run well"

In common with all modern mass-production EVs the Ioniq has a single fixed reduction gear, therefore it's not an automatic, it's not changing gears.

"The Ioniq is a little more expensive than the Nissan Leaf"

Actually when equivalent trims are compared it's around €1500 cheaper.

"Standard equipment includes....stop and start system"

By definition, not on the EV.

I agree with your general points about rear visibility, cargo space, styling and roughly agree with your assessment on real-world range (though I think the lower limit would be 150-160km).
Please, I beg you to do a bit more study before reviewing another EV. You're not making any friends among EV drivers by mis-informing the general public

DrPhilG

Good email.

To be honest I can't see the author caring much. He'll undoubtedly just shrug and not care.

I'd love to see Nissan, Renault, BMW and Hyundai take him and those higher up in RTE to task on it.

Your email ends with the fact that he's not making any friends among EV drivers. Let's be honest, that's a pretty tiny percentage of his target market so why would he give a hoot?

Marcusm

Your email is well written and very balanced, not at all evangelical. Irrespective of the journalist's personal interests, RTÉ has an obligation to report with a reasonable attention to accuracy which is clearly absent here. The writer can express his opinion as to the suitability or desirability of the cars but the howlers he has included need to be rectified.

pwurple

Appalling article. I found myself getting annoyed reading it.
I've emailed rte a complaint as well.

KCross

It smacks of him being told he needed to write an article about the Ioniq, knew nothing (literally nothing) about EV's and did a bit of googling and then reported on his googling. Where else could he have got the pricing structure from... that had to be a google hit... lazy, sloppy journalism at its worst. He obviously spoke to no one to fact check.

I'd agree with DrPhilG that he probably wont care much about an email to himself but I'm sure he will care about an email to his editor.

The government is supposed to be considering a media campaign for EV's... they better hurry up and start with educating the media first!

Satriale

KCross wrote: »

It smacks of him being told he needed to write an article about the Ioniq, knew nothing (literally nothing) about EV's and did a bit of googling and then reported on his googling. Where else could he have got the pricing structure from... that had to be a google hit... lazy, sloppy journalism at its worst. He obviously spoke to no one to fact check.

I'd agree with DrPhilG that he probably wont care much about an email to himself but I'm sure he will care about an email to his editor.

The government is supposed to be considering a media campaign for EV's... they better hurry up and start with educating the media first!

Also, if it was cc'ed to his peers in other organisations, other motoring journalists, it might focus his mind. Nobody want to be dunce in the class.

aliveandkicking

KCross wrote: »

It smacks of him being told he needed to write an article about the Ioniq, knew nothing (literally nothing) about EV's and did a bit of googling and then reported on his googling. Where else could he have got the pricing structure from... that had to be a google hit... lazy, sloppy journalism at its worst. He obviously spoke to no one to fact check.

I'd agree with DrPhilG that he probably wont care much about an email to himself but I'm sure he will care about an email to his editor.

The government is supposed to be considering a media campaign for EV's... they better hurry up and start with educating the media first!

I think you have it nailed. The photo of the Toyota interior is another clue that the article was done via Google. It's like as if he Googled interior photos of Ioniq and picked one at random without checking it. If he actually had test driven the car, he could have either took a photo himself or at the very least recognised the photo used in the article is from a different car.

Great email from Cros, will be interesting to see if it gets a reply.

isnottheword

This is RTE reporting on a subject that you all know plenty about and therefore, you spot the glaring misinformation. What about subject areas that you are not up to speed on that you do depend on them for information? I gave up on prejudiced (or downright wrong) coverage by RTE a long time ago. Have not watched it in years - gave away TV at Christmas - and no licence money handed over in a number of years. Don't support or be a victim of 'fake news'!

cros13

cros13 wrote: »

In progress. In addition I popped an email to Donal this evening:

Well said Mr Moderator !

This is shocking.

Is this man an actual Journalist ?

I'd hate to read any of his other articles !!!

Is any of this printed ?

KCross

aliveandkicking wrote: »

The photo of the Toyota interior is another clue that the article was done via Google.

OMG, I missed the interior pic as I havent been in an Ioniq so didnt look at it closely... the Toyota badge on the steering wheel should have been noticed by him even if it was from google.

This is well below journalistic standards from our national broadcaster.

I've sent a complaint as well. If anyone else gets a response please let us know. I'm sure Hyundai will be on to him anyway and ironically he said this...

I would insist on having the car for at least three days or even more to allow yourself get a feel for the car


He should have taken his own advice!

Unreal stuff !

Maybe someone should send him a link to this thread !

Maybe when he sees a public review of himself he'll do his research in future.

Isn't it a shame there is no comments section !

I think we should find out who to complain to and have the article removed from the site ?

slave1

What a <snip> dope, glad my licence fee get's efficiently spent

Scottie99

Deleted User wrote: »

Unreal stuff !

Maybe someone should send him a link to this thread !

Maybe when he sees a public review of himself he'll do his research in future.

Isn't it a shame there is no comments section !

I think we should find out who to complain to and have the article removed from the site ?

Done

liamog

Article has been updated, the Toyota pic has gone.

The charging for charges is still there but charging times have changed

A domestic charge for the Ioniq will take a few hours at least and less at a fast charging point, but you still need to calculate your driving carefully. Also, bear in mind that you will have to get used to using a cable to charge the car and you must have access to a charging point that is a practical proposition.

KCross

It's still a very poor article.

I mean, "a few hours at home and less at a fast charger".

He couldn't be any more vague and clearly knows nothing of EV's.

NIMAN

You have to remember than most of the people who read that site are the ClickBait generation.

They have no need for real facts or proper journalism. Broad statements and half truths will suffice.

colm_mcm

Take it to their social media pages?

And that's a problem when people read this crap, it's damaging to electric cars.

isnottheword

Deleted User wrote: »

And that's a problem when people read this crap, it's damaging to electric cars.

It goes far beyond electric cars. Stop watching it and stop paying the license fee.


As regards his 'corrections', if there was any transparency, he would have added a comment at the end of the article to clarify that he has edited the article and made changes due to errors. Has he done that?

Have any of you who complained or contacted him/them directly received an acknowledgement....or is this just default cover-up mode?

You think the public are being misinformed ref. EV's by RTE? This is just the thin end of the wedge.

Should have takes screen shots !

Should get onto Joe tomorrow !

isnottheword

Deleted User wrote: »

Should get onto Joe tomorrow !

The same 'Joe' that is paid €420K+ in license fees and taxes? There's something wrong with us as a country when we have to rely on an early afternoon radio show to try and resolve basic issues (and provide a talking shop but never resolve more fundamental issues).

Stop watching it, stop listening to it - and stop paying the license fee.

Yes I agree, the Joe Duffy show is just pure depressing. I don't listen to it or rarely watch RTE and to think I must pay for a license.

The salary Marian is on is crazy for a few hrs on a Sunday, mad country , RTE are hell bent on shutting down the LW 252 transmitter to save money even though a lot of Irish people listen to it in the U.K , and they even turned down the power so in the hopes people will just turn away from it so that when they do turn it of they'll be hoping no one notices and by then all listen to it on the internet but not everyone has the internet or wants to use an internet radio and you can't really listen to it too easy in most cars via a mobile phone and for a lot of people it's not practical. There's even people here that can't get RTE on FM in the sticks and find the LW signal not as strong as the MW one was.

So they should sack some people if they need money and hire people who can write an article with the proper facts, at the very least.

cros13

Can we lower the pitchforks for a minute lads?

I got a very polite response from Donal to my email and I had also popped a link to this thread in the original email.

We all know that media and motoring media doesn't cover EVs well, from mixing up basic units and specs to inability to think outside the reviewer's own use case to outright misinformation.

None of that is going to be improved in any way by getting peoples backs up, impugning their reputation or ridicule. And there's a lot to be gained by more constructive engagement.

isnottheword

Deleted User wrote: »

There's even people here that can't get RTE on FM in the sticks !

There's plenty of people in that scenario - they won't invest in that.

Deleted User wrote: »

So they should sack some people if they need money and hire people who can write an article with the proper facts, at the very least.

I've disagreed with you on many a topic but I agree with you all but completely on this one. The only caveat - you say that you are expected to pay a license fee. 1. Don't pay it - and secondly, don't expose yourself to prejudicial reporting (not an easy thing to do in this country - but expunging rte is a good starting point!).

cros13

I'm not sure what the TV license and Joe Duffey adds to this discussion.
Let's keep it to the contents of the review in question.

Yes Boss ! :pac:

I don't think we should lower the pitchforks just because Donal may have seen this thread. Seriously, he writes an article like that and makes it publicly available then he should accept the consequences, true, no one is going to get killed over it but the article is so badly written that it must be highlighted.

isnottheword

cros13 wrote: »

I'm not sure what the TV license and Joe Duffey adds to this discussion.
Let's keep it to the contents of the review in question.

I respect your opinion but the researching, editing and publication of that article was either financed by taxpayers money or the TV license fee. In that respect, it's highly relevant and it does add to the discussion.

KCross

cros13 wrote: »

Can we lower the pitchforks for a minute lads?

I got a very polite response from Donal to my email and I had also popped a link to this thread in the original email.

We all know that media and motoring media doesn't cover EVs well, from mixing up basic units and specs to inability to think outside the reviewer's own use case to outright misinformation.

None of that is going to be improved in any way by getting peoples backs up, impugning their reputation or ridicule. And there's a lot to be gained by more constructive engagement.

In general I would be of the same opinion in that aggression doesn't resolve much, if anything, but that article was beyond redemption!

A Toyota picture for an Ioniq interior was the icing on the cake!

He clearly put no effort into writing it and a polite response to you and a half hearted attempt at "fixing" it still doesn't cut it, imo.

Sometimes you do just have to pull someone up about incompetence.

He is a motoring journalist! It's his job and he should expect better of himself... don't you think?

colm_mcm

Isnottheword, It just comes across that you're on a crusade ref tv licence. We get it.

KCross

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Should have takes screen shots !

I saved it!

I figured it would be changed before they replied to my complaint.

isnottheword

colm_mcm wrote: »

Isnottheword, It just comes across that you're on a crusade ref tv licence. We get it.

We all bring our own views to the table. Yes, I initially had an issue with the license fee - before discovering that the content that is being delivered is far more damaging.

As per my post above, I don't apologise for this - it's very much relevant in terms of this particular article (the article being central to this very thread).

KCross wrote:

I saved it! I figured it would be changed before they replied to my complaint.

It's not unusual in these times of instant publication that material gets out onto the ether with the odd mistake. Most respected publications will add a note to acknowledge that an article has been updated to make a specific correction (or corrections). That's full accountability and transparency. No sign of it in this instance.

0lddog

isnottheword wrote: »

I respect your opinion but the researching, editing and publication of that article was either financed by taxpayers money or the TV license fee. In that respect, it's highly relevant and it does add to the discussion.

So you dont think the piece might have been cobbled together by some third party towards their own ends and provided to RTE ?

DrPhilG

cros13 wrote: »

I got a very polite response from Donal to my email and I had also popped a link to this thread in the original email.

Care to share the jist of it? Had he any explanation for the laundry list of errors?

isnottheword

0lddog wrote: »

So you dont think the piece might have been cobbled together by some third party towards their own ends and provided to RTE ?

Spell out what you believe to be at play here?

Otherwise, its an RTE article - they take full responsibility for it one way or another (as an aside, many of their 'presenters' work on a contractual/self-employed basis - but anything broadcast by organisation in whatever medium is their editorial responsibility).

Soarer

cros13 wrote: »

Can we lower the pitchforks for a minute lads?

I got a very polite response from Donal to my email and I had also popped a link to this thread in the original email.

We all know that media and motoring media doesn't cover EVs well, from mixing up basic units and specs to inability to think outside the reviewer's own use case to outright misinformation.

None of that is going to be improved in any way by getting peoples backs up, impugning their reputation or ridicule. And there's a lot to be gained by more constructive engagement.

Nah.

I know you're the moderator an' all, but I'm not having that.

If my 8 year old was to do a project on the Ioniq, he'd have failed if he'd handed up that tripe. The first sentence is so far off the point, it's untrue.

The whole thing is incompetent and lazy at best. At worst, it's agenda-ridden and full of lies.

The fact he ninja-edited it afterwards tells me all I need to know, irrespective of how nice an email he sent you.

If he'd any bottle, he'd come on here and explain things.

cros13

DrPhilG wrote: »

Care to share the jist of it? Had he any explanation for the laundry list of errors?

He's preparing another EV piece and is currently driving a Leaf to get up to speed. He's said he will take on the feedback received and will include it in his thinking on the next article.

isnottheword wrote: »

I respect your opinion but the researching, editing and publication of that article was either financed by taxpayers money or the TV license fee. In that respect, it's highly relevant and it does add to the discussion.

Agreed, that's a valid point. It sticks in my craw as well. But I do want to shepard things away from Joe Duffy and media bias, purely because this is the motors forum.

KCross wrote: »

He clearly put no effort into writing it and a polite response to you and a half hearted attempt at "fixing" it still doesn't cut it, imo.

Sometimes you do just have to pull someone up about incompetence.

He is a motoring journalist! It's his job and he should expect better of himself... don't you think?

Sure, and it's valid to pull him up on that. We've all seen "reviews" where the professional reviewers brought their own agenda and animosity toward EVs to a review of an EV. I don't think that was the case here, it was sloppy, lazy and inaccurate but not malicious. Personally this week I'm more offended by the hatchet job done on the i3 the grand tour, because that have evidence of mal-intent.

Soarer wrote: »

Nah.

I know you're the moderator an' all, but I'm not having that.

If my 8 year old was to do a project on the Ioniq, he'd have failed if he'd handed up that tripe. The first sentence is so far off the point, it's untrue.

The whole thing is incompetent and lazy at best. At worst, it's agenda-ridden and full of lies.

The fact he ninja-edited it afterwards tells me all I need to know, irrespective of how nice an email he sent you.

If he'd any bottle, he'd come on here and explain things.

Fair enough. You all know I wear my own opinions proudly and I give them only as just another contributor to this forum. In the same vein my correspondence with Donal Byrne was as an EV owner who let loose some colourful language of my own when reading the Ioniq review.

The moderator part comes into play keeping the discussion on-topic, within the bounds of boards rules and the motors charter.

I encourage anyone who wishes to use RTE's complaints process to do so: http://www.rte.ie/about/en/information-and-feedback/complaints/
And you certainly have every right to discuss it further on this thread.

unkel

46 posts and 1300 views and nobody has posted that the article doesn't mention the €4k scrappage deal on the Ioniq?

That's the one thing that makes the car a very attractive proposition. Without it, I wouldn't have bought it. And it's unlikely I'd have bought a new EV this year or maybe even in the next 3 years...

Satriale

Deleted User wrote: »

Should have takes screen shots !

The unedited page is still cached if you need it.

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:tY-Kj-aFX-cJ:https://www.rte.ie/lifestyle/motors/2017/0123/847067-driving-irelands-newest-electric-car-the-hyundai-ioniq/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ie&client=opera

colm_mcm

When are you taking delivery Unkel?

Soarer

colm_mcm wrote: »

When are you taking delivery Unkel?

Don't mention the war Col.

unkel

In about 4 or 5 weeks hopefully. I'll enquire this week.