Xiaomi is literally trying to make everything from phones, cars, electronic tooth brushes, air fryers, soap dispensers, etc. It's astonishing.
I've had a few Xiaomi electronics including a dust mite vacuum and an air purifier. Both well designed and worked well for the price.
Allowing in Chinese EVs into markets where there are important domestic auto manufacturers will be very bad for those domestic manufacturers. (US, Germany, France, S.Korea, Japan, etc.) Outside of Tesla, none have EV brands competitive with the Chinese firms and if customers in those non China markets migrate to Chinese brands en masse, it would be tremendous disruption and the failure of many storied domestic brands.
It is important that the US have strong auto companies. Same is true for Germany, France, Japan, S. Korea, etc.
China should have strong car companies for their domestic market. The problem comes when they end up destroying other/outside markets.
Look at solar panels, drones, batteries, for similar comparisons.
It is. But the reality is that those companies are complacent fossils who have lost all their vigor, and only threat of extinction would force them to innovate. Which they’re not under because legislators agree with you (in no small part thanks to their lobbyists).
Like many things, we’ll realize the extent of how badly we messed up when it’s way too late.
I agree in principle but I can’t fail to notice what is to me the obvious parallel with the subprime crisis.
We, as the general public via the state, are once again saving companies which badly failed according to the market due to their shortsightedness and inability to properly invest. It shows that the current system, which its proponents - generally profiting tremendously from it - like to frame as meritocratic, is a charade. It exists as long as the same wins and suddenly stops to apply when they don’t.
It’s hard for me to support intervention to save some companies while not doing anything to curb the rising inequalities and the overall lack of contribution of the richest. I think people are not blind to that and it partially explains while extreme political parties are on the rise.
The problem is not that Chinese EVs are entering other markets, BMW and others have done that for decades. The problem is that China is making car manufactoring a commodity.
The margins have been high for car manufacturas. China rolls that complelty over with lower laber costs (normal car has only a few thousand dollars in labor costs), end to end supply chain, cheap energy, higher automatisation level, simplified stack and lower margins. Significant lower margins.
Btw. USA and Europe got as rich as they are because of being manufactoring powerhouses previously. Was that fair ever to the rest of the world? Probably not. Now China is doing the same thing and suddenly everyone needs to protect their markets? A little bit ignorant and short sighted eh? Btw. China was smarter then us. They stoped allowing this and made it mandatory to have chinese people invovled in the expansion of american and europeon companies.
And they are buying companies around the globe too while we all watch and let it happen.
U.S. and European dealer, maintenance, even government models are in for a shock when ev percentages approach 50% and even 25% (only continued adoption models away)
Totally agree. The problem is that it instead has General Motors and Ford.
And this has made the US more wealthy than ever with easier lives.
Tariff them so they're super expensive! Or set import quotas, so they can't displace too much demand. Either way, letting some of them through gives Americans visibility into what others are building while continuing to largely protect domestic manufacturers.
Politically problematic - the illusion of China as a peasant state manufacturing little more than knock off rubber dog turds would be shattered.
America was synonymous with competition. To see protectionism championed, is to really see the end of an empire.
China has supported key industries (like EVs, batteries, solar, semiconductors) that it views as strategic. Each country should do the same for their own situation. There is no such thing as pure capitalism- and what you see is 'protectionism' is to a lawmaker a way to ensure that the local company survives and provides jobs for the local region/state, etc.
And as the other commenter mentioned, auto manufacturing plants were retooled to make tanks and jeeps in WW2 and so no country that cares about their own military survival should cede auto manufacturing to another country, let alone China.
Agree. However, those other companies in other markets didn't just destroy themselves overnight when China's industry decided to magically will itself into existence.
You know what did? Worthless companies who backed themselves into corner after corner by ignoring market trends, new technologies, and dissing consumers who didn't want oversized trucks or SUVs. Those same companies got multiple bailouts after being mismanaged for decades. Those same companies STILL refused to get with the times, and tried to force crappy oversized vehicles down our throats. Most people have zero need for trucks, yet GMC, Ford, etc tried to market them as the quintessential American vehicle. Yuck.
Folks, rip on the CCP as much as you damn well please. But don't fault them for picking an industry that they viewed as a future necessity, subsidizing its growth, and reaping the rewards of their investment.
Car manufacturers serve many purposes. Aside from keeping the UAW membership onside, they are a strategic buttress for an emerging future war risk.
Australia maintained subsidies to Ford and GM for onshore production precisely because of this. And they stopped when a strategic realignment made successive governments decide the risk didn't justify the expense. A decision they may now be regretting.
It's similar to the logic behind anti-trust actions against monopolists. If the playing field isn't level, then the USA government steps in to level it.
(Whether BYD is subsidised or not is another question, but the above is the logic of protecting local industry.)
I want a level playing field/market competition. Allowing China's illegal subsidies and anti-market tactics to dominate the global EV industry is very dangerous, which is why they are already countervailed in many developed countries.
Subsidies aren't necessarily bad, but it's become China's choice of blunt instrument to price out/drive out foreign competition.
Subsidies are not the reason why China's EVs are cheap. The reason is that China has a much more competitive EV market than the US or EU. There are many manufacturers that are competing with one another, the charging infrastructure is much better than in the West, and Chinese cities heavily discourage internal combustion engine vehicles.
> Subsidies aren't necessarily bad, but it's become China's choice of blunt instrument to price out/drive out foreign competition.
China specifically encouraged foreign car companies to enter its market, most recently Tesla (which has done very well in China). Allowing foreign car companies to compete in the Chinese market was a major part of China's strategy to improve its own domestic manufacturing.
https://www.fcai.com.au/new-brands-surge-in-strong-august-sa...
BYD made electric busses for US transit agencies. They were the worst buses that I have ever ridden. Today, no U.S. transit agency still uses BYD busses, because none of them managed a service live longer than about a year.
BYD vehicles seem really nice for the first few hours, until you start discovering all the corners they cut to make their price point.
Is that true today? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-09-26/us-cities... (discussion in HN https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45386578) gives another reason: “Federal Transit Administration rules that prohibit using federal dollars to purchase buses made by Chinese companies”
On the other hand they seem to be getting a lot in in London, mostly for short less busy routes far from the center. Here's some youtube shot in one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaHZufvD_C4 They do look a bit cheaply made compared to usual London busses.
On 13 routes with 16 more scheduled https://bus-routes-in-london.fandom.com/wiki/BYD_BD11#Routes...
The problems seem to be mostly the batteries running out. Maybe they've improved?
(update - went and tried one in Canary Wharf https://postimg.cc/XBJ2zXvX https://postimg.cc/D8SjQWDM - was fine really)
Gonna need a source for this.
However, they start to break down and over a while, you can see the corners they cut.
This is a fascinating data point. This should be more prominent.
They always look OK but when you really use them is when it becomes obvious why they are cheaper. In the end I doubt the lower cost of labor is that meaningful considering the level of automation. China has been successfully stealing industries by selling lies...
I also don’t like Tesla, but at least they have a nicer screen. Tesla also has big gaps between their parts looking from outside.
I’m fine with tariffs that keep around industries that are needed during wartime. That’s why there are tariffs on cars, no other reason is even remotely important. It has zero to do with GM and Ford making profits and everything to do with keeping GM and Ford around so they can pump out war materiel if needed.
...because they don't do model years? Most cars are like that too, except they increment the model year annually, whether or not there are substantive changes.
Edit: Sigh. I wish people would actually travel to China and try a BYD and then go to Australia and try BYD. it’s like 2 different cars. The China BYD is trash. BYD in Australia is actually quite nice and feels like really good value.
But then I look at the electric BYD buses in London that seemingly have no issues at all (that I've heard of).
We all know about the corrupt tofu dreg projects etc but that seems like more of a domestic problem.
Looks like US is using tariffs to compete.
The subsidies to Chinese EV companies isn't direct anymore. Most of it is in the form of tax refunds. The biggest "subsidy", though, is the incredible pipeline China has built to feed the industry. Their industrial policy has created an huge ecosystem capable of feeding batteries and components into their EV industry at a price point and scale that no other country can compete with. It's been an incredibly effective industrial policy.
I get what the OP means about the destruction of our auto industry but we can only hide behind that for so long. An ineffective and noncompetitive auto industry won't be able to scale up during a war either. I hope our industrial leaders and politicians are using tariffs and other trade barriers to the US car industry only as a temporary reprieve while we scale up our ecosystem too. Otherwise we run the risk of becoming one of those countries that keeps outdated domestic companies alive just to say we have those companies. Without export discipline and the ability to compete effectively on the global stage, domestic companies are just zombies kept alive by domestic subsidies. They won't be able to help us in the event of a war with a peer adversary.
China's NEV subsidies were/are illegal and Chinese EVs are countervailed in many developed countries (eg, the EU, Turkiye, Canada, US) because they are misapplied in three key ways.
i. forced tech transfer: no subsidies or market access unless hybrid/BEV/batteries tech transfer to China since 2011; violates China's 2001 Accession Protocal (see Section 7, Non-Tariff Measures); litigated before the WTO by the EU (WT/DS549)
ii, local content requirement: no subsidies or license/permit to operate in China unless automakers' EVs used Chinese batteries made by Chinese local "champions" only, namely CATL, since 2015; all foreign battery producers effectively banned and all EV producers forced to switch to local battery suppliers; violates Article 3(a) Prohibition of the Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM) Agreement
iii, export subsidies: subsidies given to MIC exporters to under price/under cut foreign competitors in markets abroad; EU Commission's counter measures: 2024/1866 and 2024/2754.
Tesla China benefited significantly from China's NEV subsidies and is likewise also countervailed in the EU, at the import tariff rate of 7+%. Tesla no longer imports EV from China in the US/Canada.
Asking for other companies: Ford $9 billion, Chevy $11 billion
No idea if this is made up and no idea how to compare them but without knowing better it seems like both sides are subsidized
It's an AI generated answer. That's always the problem so you shouldn't be using it as a factual information source.
That top power draw would drain the 80kWh batteries in around 2 minutes, though I'm guessing you'd hit thermal throttling or catastrophic failure before that. The batteries are allegedly rated to 30C, meaning 2 minutes to full discharge at max current.
I'm curious how the heat dissipation of EVs compares to ICE vehicles. You have much higher efficiency vs combustion and get to split the power between 4 motors instead of one engine, but you don't get the heat capacity of a massive engine block, or the convection of cold air intake + hot exhaust out the tailpipe.
Xiaomi Su7 Ultra had a 400W twin fan, 530W liquid pump and a 28kW heat dissipation for powertrain.
It's not unexpected for a record-attempt car to have severely decreased range at top speed, they're pushing up against all the limiting factors at once, hard. I seem to recall reading something about the Bugatti Veyron only having 15 minutes of tyre life at full throttle, but this not being an issue because it only carried 12 minutes worth of fuel. :)
The majority of the lemans (or any endurance race) challenge is not from the electric drivetrain (or regenerative braking) but from the ice drivetrain and friction braking. This is reinforced by the ease that WEC and IMSA have had in implementing electric hybrid drivetrains with relative ease over the last 10 years (by most measurements making the endurance more achievable).
same car doing Nürburgring Lap https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=td_c1zeEn2Q
> The U9 was developed by German car designer Wolfgang Egger, who previously served as a head designer for Alfa Romeo, Audi and Lamborghini, and began working for BYD in 2017. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yangwang_U9
But honestly, ther are a Lot of production cars that went considerably faster. And the non-production Porsche 919 Hybrid EVO did it in 5:19, which is an entirely different league.
If anyone hasn't seen this, I highly recommend it, even if you're not a car fan.
For performance applications. None of these cars are great daily drivers.
There is a “car” in my hometown in Coventry that goes (I think) 700 mph, but I can only do it in a straight line because it’s powered by two turbo jet engines
Sabine Shmitz did the 19,100m length in 10:08.49 using the ford transit van.
That's a far cry from 7:14
However, this year a Ford SuperVan 4.2 made the Nordschleife in 6:48.393, so even without Sabine Schmitz a van was faster than the BYD.
There is some indication that putting rapidly accelerating cars on streets is leading to a proliferation of accidents.
Putting this level of performance (and better) into boring suburban SUVs bought by ambivalent consumers is negligence.
I just had the numbers run to check this. About 650,000 fewer people would have died over my short life so far, if the US had the vehicle fatality rate of my home country.
We hit a wall there for a while. Cars were actually becoming less powerful and slower on average for a couple of decades as governments tightened emissions and safety requirements. It took Tesla to blow the walls off EV production and consumer acceptance. It's a good reminder that progress doesn't happen in a straight line.
- 6:59.127 Lap Time - The first lap record on the Nürburgring
- 496.22 km/h - The Fastest Car on the Planet
- 1200v - World's first series-production model with ultra-high-voltage platform
- Over 3000 HP - Global horsepower record for production cars
- 30000 rpm - Global fastest motor rpm - 4 motors
There's a reason why all the world's land speed records since the 1930s [1] get set at the Bonneville Salt Flats or similar flat desert terrain. FWIW, the speed listed in this article was exceeded in 1937. The hard part is not necessarily going fast, it's going fast in a street-legal vehicle.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_land_speed_records
It is an impressive feat of engineering to get to a vmax record in a BEV.
I suspect theres inductance and capacitance enough that even if the motors can't handle the voltage, it can be "clipped" until the pack comes down. (Especially since fmu these are 3phase AC motors, the motor driver is already regulating voltage and current to produce whatever the optimal waveform is)
(https://youtu.be/z6q7du1q2U8)
It's also interesting that the fastest time on the Nürburgring at 5 min 19 was from a Porsche hybrid with 900 hp, a fair bit quicker than the BYD which took 6:59 I think. The Porsche had a lot more downforce than the BYD.
"The tires on the Veyron can only last 15 minutes at top speed, but that's ok because the fuel tank only has capacity for 7 minutes at top speed." (From memory, IIRC, Top Gear on the Veyron)
> the tires will only last for about 15 minutes but it's okay because the fuel runs out in 12 minutes
You're talking about the non-production Porsche 919 Hybrid Evo race car. A Corvette ZR1X did 6:49 with a third of the HP
The question is also how much power the battery can continuously output, if it's the 3000hp for 15 seconds that won't be of much use for a max speed test.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev6DiHOidcg
While I agree with your statement in broad strokes - I'd reframe it as the same amount of engineering takes you much further in an EV than an ICE car. Considering this, the Chinese really swung for the fences, and what they made here is quite impressive
The hard bits are connecting that power with the ground long enough to reach speed safely, and storing enough energy to do so. EVs don't solve that.
The closer ICE comparison would be Koenigsegg (447 kph/278 mph), Hennessy Venom GT (435/270) and SSC Tuatara (455/283, no shenanigans). SSC have reached 295, they were clearly aiming for 300. It's no 308 but it's reasonably close.
All these are also relatively small companies with relatively low budgets -- none of the big manufacturers seem interested in top speeds anymore.
Nope, probably too busy faking emission results, lobbying at the EU parliament , or designing overpriced mid tier cars in the US
One thing many car channels are pointing out is that the car could've reached even better numbers looking at how easily it reached its record pace. I wonder if the bottleneck is the battery. Hell, it supposedly discharges at full power in 2 minutes.
(Edit: noting they did the ring)
VW ID.R
Xiaomi SU7 Ultra
Lotus Evija X
F-150 Lightning SuperTruck
Nio EP9
Ford Transit SuperVan
Cars built for straight line speed are rarely fast in a track – you won’t find the Bugattis breaking any fastest lap records either.
ICEs have more above it.
The regular 9X costs about US$236,000 before Trump tariffs. About half of a Ferrari. Also jumps potholes, can do tank turns, and has some autonomous capability.[1]
There's also the Yangwang U8, which is an hybrid off-road SUV. Does tank turns, and floats.
It's really a promotion for their other cars, but these things are sold in the UAE, Kuwait, and China, at least.
The only benefit combustion engines have is the current faster refuel and run time. Everything else about electric motors is far superior to combustion. If and when F1 can hot-swap battery packs efficiently, combustion engines will be dead in that sport.
This is despite dramatically reduced performance design and slower tracks.
Formula E is so much more fun than F1 though, because it doesn't have all the BS drama that F1 has adopted to buoy viewership. They do have silly gimmicks though. Before a race, viewers vote on which driver they like the best, and that racer gets a boost they can use during the race!
Also they use tires that are basically road ready, so that's fun.
Outside of Formula or Nascar or other monocultures, that would be interesting, though.
But they don't make false claims about them.
(1)
https://insidechinaauto.com/2025/02/11/byd-rolls-out-autonom...
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/02/11/cars/china-byd-smart-driv...
plays out.
I haven't tracked LeMans much, I know the Toyota hybrids have been dominating it, but is it unrestricted hybrid drivetrains? Can builders make any kind of hybrid / regen / battery size / recharge drivetrain?
If not, I'd love to see what builders can do with go-nuts hybrids: wankel compact recharging, max-solid-state chems, etc.
Why ? You "just" need a car that can steer and brake, what's the problem with steering and braking ? Need a steering wheel, good brake pads and tires
TBH the complexities are not even comparable, track engineering for a car is probably a few orders of magnitude more complex than straight line speed.