It is done, 4xe no more.

[THAW]

Fire risk and fire prone are two very different things. Gas is a fire risk and ICE vehicles are far more fire prone than the 4xe is. Numbers don't lie.

But people poorly and disingenuously analyze numbers, and that begets Internet lies.

As far as I've been able to tell, the ICE/EV fire stats commonly referenced on the Internet are exclusively from clickbait articles that badly distort numbers from inconsistent and limited data sets.

Sponsored

 

[Zandcwhite]

But people poorly and disingenuously analyze numbers, and that begets Internet lies.

As far as I've been able to tell, the ICE/EV fire stats commonly referenced on the Internet are exclusively from clickbait articles that badly distort numbers from inconsistent and limited data sets.

Possible, but the 4xe fires are well documented and publicized. I agree that the ICE numbers you'll find online seem awfully high, but I've yet to meet a single person who hasn't seen way more ICE fires than EV/hybrid fires. Battery fires once ignited are hard to control, but it's a contained pack with built in safety features. Look at the fuel system. Plastic tanks that hang low and in many cases have little to no protection, long plastic/ pressurized lines, cheap quick connect fittings that often leak if you aren't careful putting them in. A liquid fuel that's highly combustible and puts off vapors that are even more combustible. And it's all pumped into (or onto in a leak scenario) an engine that runs at combustion temps by design. We can argue the numbers and their accuracy but only an anti-EV person with blinders on actually thinks that battery fires are more likely than gas ones.

 

[THAW]

Possible, but the 4xe fires are well documented and publicized. I agree that the ICE numbers you'll find online seem awfully high, but I've yet to meet a single person who hasn't seen way more ICE fires than EV/hybrid fires. Battery fires once ignited are hard to control, but it's a contained pack with built in safety features. Look at the fuel system. Plastic tanks that hang low and in many cases have little to no protection, long plastic/ pressurized lines, cheap quick connect fittings that often leak if you aren't careful putting them in. A liquid fuel that's highly combustible and puts off vapors that are even more combustible. And it's all pumped into (or onto in a leak scenario) an engine that runs at combustion temps by design. We can argue the numbers and their accuracy but only an anti-EV person with blinders on actually thinks that battery fires are more likely than gas ones.

The tell the stats are bogus is hybrids (i.e. vehicles with ICE engines) are lumped with BEVs to "prove" EVs as a class are less fire prone than ICE as a class.

How can a vehicle with an ICE engine be less likely to catch fire than ICE vehicles as a whole? The "numbers" don't tell us.

 

[Zandcwhite]

The tell the stats are bogus is hybrids (i.e. vehicles with ICE engines) are lumped with BEVs to "prove" EVs as a class are less fire prone than ICE as a class.

How can a vehicle with an ICE engine be less likely to catch fire than ICE vehicles as a whole? The "numbers" don't tell us.

As noted earlier, a lot of ICE fires are due to wore out and poorly maintained rigs as well as shitty "shade tree"/ tweaker mechanics. The age and complexity of the hybrids pretty much eliminates all of those. Billy Bob might have 3 teeth but he can tune a carb by sound and "fix" your 1982 le Sabre for next to nothing, but nobody is handling him the keys to their modern hybrid. It's funny because everyone still believes that the batteries are the fire risk but you're butt hurt because the hybrids are lumped in with the EVs? If that fear was remotely based on reality wouldn't you want everything with a scary HV battery listed with the death trap EVs anyway? Or maybe the hybrids are less of a fire risk than traditional ICE vehicles because there's more engineering put into their safety just like the EVs because runaway battery fires are bad news and there's an irrational fear of change that is human nature?

 

[LAM]

Our 4xe’s have the combined benefit of both ICE fire risk and battery fire risk. Hadn’t thought of it quite like that. I’ve been worried a lot recently about earthquakes ……….. and over population …… and, lately, the dinosaur extinction.

 

[THAW]

Or maybe the hybrids are less of a fire risk than traditional ICE vehicles because there's more engineering put into their safety just like the EVs because runaway battery fires are bad news and there's an irrational fear of change that is human nature?

Your explanation is superior engineering of the ICE components in a hybrid? Do you have any examples?

I'd guess the ICE/EV fire likelihood might flip if vehicle age were factored. It seems like model year data would be pretty available for most/all vehicle fires, and yet I've not seen any stats that control for it.

 

[Zandcwhite]

Your explanation is superior engineering of the ICE components in a hybrid? Do you have any examples?

I'd guess the ICE/EV fire likelihood might flip if vehicle age were factored. It seems like model year data would be pretty available for most/all vehicle fires, and yet I've not seen any stats that adjust for it.

The data set isn't great from what's readily available. I still don't think the numbers would flip adjusted for age, but I'd bet the gap would be much closer. I'd still bet that EVs would be 2-3x less fire prone, but not the crazy gap you see in the total numbers.

 

[ag4ever]

I’ll bet many ICE fires are not reported because they are not noteworthy. At the same time I’ll bet almost all hybrid / bev fires are reported.

 

[ag4ever]

To close the loop on this thread, I went from this:

To this:

If Reign had not been offered and the 392 been offered at the same time, I would have kept the 4xe. But, when I bought the 4xe I was waffling back and forth between the 392 and 4xe. I convinced myself the 4xe was a good substitute, but in the end I really wanted the 392. It was a costly mistake, but “lessons are things you learn when you do something wrongs, and you remember those times much more than when you get it right!”

 

[DaltonGang]

Just something to add, from my experience. I have personally seen many many many ICE vehicles on fire, just before and shortly after the Fire departments arrive. They have all been put out with water, pretty fast. No biggie. I have seen +- 15 Diesel Truck fires. Same thing.
I have only seem a couple(due to scarcity or recent popularity perhaps) Hybrid/EV fires, but coworkers have seen several as well, which all add up. To the point, when the EV/Hybrid catches fire, it can be volatile, and very difficult to put out. Not to mention very dangerous for anyone around. So, the fire departments/police just back everyone up, and let it do its thing, until it burns itself out.
Who gives a crap what the numbers are. It is out there, the 4XE's are prone to catch on fire, spontaneously. The lawyers, Risk Assessment people, and Bean Counters have decided the risk isn't worth lawsuits.
As for ICE vehicles catching fire, almost every one that I have been to has a common denominator/denominators. They have either recently worked on the fuel system, or had been smelling gas for a short while.

 

[Zandcwhite]

Just something to add, from my experience. I have personally seen many many many ICE vehicles on fire, just before and shortly after the Fire departments arrive. They have all been put out with water, pretty fast. No biggie. I have seen +- 15 Diesel Truck fires. Same thing.
I have only seem a couple(due to scarcity or recent popularity perhaps) Hybrid/EV fires, but coworkers have seen several as well, which all add up. To the point, when the EV/Hybrid catches fire, it can be volatile, and very difficult to put out. Not to mention very dangerous for anyone around. So, the fire departments/police just back everyone up, and let it do its thing, until it burns itself out.
Who gives a crap what the numbers are. It is out there, the 4XE's are prone to catch on fire, spontaneously. The lawyers, Risk Assessment people, and Bean Counters have decided the risk isn't worth lawsuits.
As for ICE vehicles catching fire, almost every one that I have been to has a common denominator/denominators. They have either recently worked on the fuel system, or had been smelling gas for a short while.

I don't care that there's only 19 out of 400k that have caught fire they are firee prone because we make up our own definitions now? Cool story. The only fire prone definition I could find was for wild fires.... with risks in the 90% range. Only need ~360k more 4xe fires to meet that definition. Yes battery fires are harder to put out, but I've seen more than one gas vehicle burned to the frame as well. Once the fire reaches the fuel tank the fire department pulls back and watches it burn itself out too. Unlike an ICE rig where the fire can be everything from an oil leak to a transmission fluid leak to a fuel leak, the EV fire will always be the battery. Now if we start factoring in only fuel tank involved fires the ICE numbers will likely be very similar to the battery fires, but why would we ignore all the other ICE fires that simply cannot happen in an EV? ICE vehicles are far more likely to catch fire and probably equally as likely to burn to the ground. The world is fire prone by your made up definition and we should all stop driving immediately. Water heaters cause 3k-5,500 fires per year and none of us are afraid. Oven/stove related fires are 140k-170k per year. That could be called fire prone. 19 in 5 years? Laughable as far as fire odds. The recalls and stopped production are caused by the large number of failing batteries that Samsung can't seem to get right. Those failures come with a very slight risk of fire. That's not the same as being fire prone period.

 

[GinaC]

To close the loop on this thread, I went from this:

To this:

If Reign had not been offered and the 392 been offered at the same time, I would have kept the 4xe. But, when I bought the 4xe I was waffling back and forth between the 392 and 4xe. I convinced myself the 4xe was a good substitute, but in the end I really wanted the 392. It was a costly mistake, but “lessons are things you learn when you do something wrongs, and you remember those times much more than when you get it right!”

So true. I thought the 4xe was the way of the future, but I really wanted another 2-door. I told myself that I'd get used to it, but I hated it.

Also, I didn't love Tuscadero as much as I thought I would.

 

[DaltonGang]

I don't care that there's only 19 out of 400k that have caught fire they are firee prone because we make up our own definitions now? Cool story. The only fire prone definition I could find was for wild fires.... with risks in the 90% range. Only need ~360k more 4xe fires to meet that definition. Yes battery fires are harder to put out, but I've seen more than one gas vehicle burned to the frame as well. Once the fire reaches the fuel tank the fire department pulls back and watches it burn itself out too. Unlike an ICE rig where the fire can be everything from an oil leak to a transmission fluid leak to a fuel leak, the EV fire will always be the battery. Now if we start factoring in only fuel tank involved fires the ICE numbers will likely be very similar to the battery fires, but why would we ignore all the other ICE fires that simply cannot happen in an EV? ICE vehicles are far more likely to catch fire and probably equally as likely to burn to the ground. The world is fire prone by your made up definition and we should all stop driving immediately. Water heaters cause 3k-5,500 fires per year and none of us are afraid. Oven/stove related fires are 140k-170k per year. That could be called fire prone. 19 in 5 years? Laughable as far as fire odds. The recalls and stopped production are caused by the lake number of failing batteries that Samsung can't seem to get right. Those failures come with a very slight risk of fire. That's not the same as being fire prone period.

Ok

 

[Bleda2002]

Just something to add, from my experience. I have personally seen many many many ICE vehicles on fire, just before and shortly after the Fire departments arrive. They have all been put out with water, pretty fast. No biggie. I have seen +- 15 Diesel Truck fires. Same thing.
I have only seem a couple(due to scarcity or recent popularity perhaps) Hybrid/EV fires, but coworkers have seen several as well, which all add up. To the point, when the EV/Hybrid catches fire, it can be volatile, and very difficult to put out. Not to mention very dangerous for anyone around. So, the fire departments/police just back everyone up, and let it do its thing, until it burns itself out.
Who gives a crap what the numbers are. It is out there, the 4XE's are prone to catch on fire, spontaneously. The lawyers, Risk Assessment people, and Bean Counters have decided the risk isn't worth lawsuits.
As for ICE vehicles catching fire, almost every one that I have been to has a common denominator/denominators. They have either recently worked on the fuel system, or had been smelling gas for a short while.

Fire prone? Hyperbole much? That implies that it's a high probability, are you lightning strike prone? Its more likely to be struck by lightning over your life time than your 4xe catching fire

 

[THAW]

NFPA stats indicate 77% of automobile fires in 2017 were in vehicles 10 years or older. The average age of an EV on the road today is ~3.6 years.

So, older ICE are far more likely to catch fire.. But so are older, bigger, and more rapidly charged Lithium batteries.

Any ICE/EV fire rate statistic that doesn't control for vehicle age is essentially useless. The articles that promote the stats generally make age disclaimers, the stats pulled from them and parroted on the Internet generally don't include proper context.

Sponsored