Ford will release three version of their Escape in 2020 from what I understand
Ford Escape ICE
Ford Escape hybrid
Ford Escape plug-in hybrd
I would be disappointed if Toyota's PHEV RAV4 only has a 25 mile range, and wouldn't consider it either
Honda throws cold water on electric cars
- Thread starter KentuckyKen
- Start date
- Replies 103
- Views 16K
-
- Tags
- article honda out cars the truth ab ttac
Ford Escape ICE
Ford Escape hybrid
Ford Escape plug-in hybrd
I would be disappointed if Toyota's PHEV RAV4 only has a 25 mile range, and wouldn't consider it either
Big problem with all electric in my view is the infrastructure isn't really there yet, and if one wants to travel outside their normal area, they have to be always on the alert where charging stations are. The cars like the Clarity PHEV and Volt filled that issue with a transition vehicle
That is the same issue with fuel cell vehicles.
People are paying a premium price for those cars right now, and the rebates help offset that, but in the meantime a lot of folks aren't equipped to pay that premium price, and will instead opt for a much less expensive ICE
That is the same issue with fuel cell vehicles.
People are paying a premium price for those cars right now, and the rebates help offset that, but in the meantime a lot of folks aren't equipped to pay that premium price, and will instead opt for a much less expensive ICE
Another factor that a lot of folks don't factor in is the premium cost you pay for all electric and even PHEV.
Some argue that Tesla's are selling so well, but I would argue that depends where one lives. I am in California, and yes you see a lot of Tesla's on the road, but I would also argue that most of those folks driving those Tesla's are more affluent. 40 - 75K is a lot of money for people to go from point A to point B. Even factoring in the rebates, those are being phased out, unless they change the law.
Straight hybrid vehicles are considerably less expensive, and not only are very environmentally clean vehicles, but also get good mileage
Arguably, the Tesla infrastructure in conjunction with the on board navigation and trip software to negate most of your "always on the alert" concern.
Is Tesla travel as convenient as gasoline? No, but Rome wasn't built in a day.
To your concluding thought, I agree that people aren't willing to pay the premium price for any alternative to a conventional car.
Last edited:
No, I’m not saying I’m intolerant. The reason I said what I did was that your post seemed quite misleading. If that was unintentional on your part, that’s fine, but I have little tolerance for posters who deliberately mislead people to make their point. It serves no purpose and is actually very detrimental to those coming here to learn about the pros & cons of BEVs vs PHEVs. Again, if that wasn’t your intent, no harm no foul. However even your alluding to BEVs as 'ranging from a glorified golf cart to a super car...' shows your disdain. I guess then that ICE vehicles must range from glorified amusement park go carts to Detroit muscle cars.
In the end I simply find myself in a more objective position than most here because I do own both a Clarity and a Tesla. I know the pros & cons of both. I have no axe to grind one way or the other and can point out the pros & cons without disdain or sarcasm.
Last edited:
When I first got my Clarity I checked out all of the charging stations near my home and work out of curiosity. Some of them are inoperable and have been for months. Some are just a cord attached to a normal parking space where ICE vehicles park unhindered. Most of the chargers are single stations which means capacity is a problem. I would hate to have to rely on getting a charge in my BEV from most of the chargers near me. Which makes buying a Tesla the compelling choice if I wanted a BEV, they have a charging network that seems to actually work with the capacity and locations to service their customers.
Last edited:
Fast Eddie B
Well-Known Member
We have a Whole Foods not too far from us near Knoxville with two EV charging slots. Last two times we've tried charging there while shopping, the Clarity starts to charge then stops in about 10 seconds, same behavior exhibited on both stations. I've mentioned it to the manager, but didn't get the idea he was terrible interested.
interestedinEV
Well-Known Member
Here is the simple fact. ICEs. HEVs and possibly PHEVs make money for companies today, BEVs are not money makers yet. . Where the governments have encouraged it (Norway and may be places like China), the volumes have grown. In others places like the US, the market is still small. There are many reasons for that and they have been discussed above. Hence the manufacturers are not seeing the hype and reality match.
Further, the current administration clearly does not believe that BEVs are to be supported and that oil should be the dominant energy source. There is also, among certain demographics, a skepticism of both the need for BEVs and its ability to replace the ICE. If you do not believe in climate change, why would change from a Chevy Silvarado. If you are the type of person who wakes up on a Saturday morning and decides on a whim, to take a 200 mile trip, you may not like a BEV. So for a variety of reasons, the market is not growing the way that people in this forum anticipate. BEV adoption may not crack 10% for at least in the next 4-5 years.
Japan similarly has its own problems with BEVs. Technology break troughs have still not eliminated the disadvantages of BEVs (long charging times) and higher initial costs. Low gas prices do not help either.
Each Automotive manufacturer has look at what they will do in one year, five years and say 10 years. Some may say, "forget about 1 year, I am going to prepare for 10 years away". Others may say, "I want to concentrate on the here and now and if things change, we will change then". That could be because of Wall Street (Or Shinjuku or whatever in Tokyo or in Frankfurt), or it could be because of their internal problems (Nissan) or the countries' problems (Japan) or because of the buyers of that brand are not the BEV types etc. In other words, decisions are particular to each company. Honda may be confident that if they have to move to BEV's they are nimble and agile and can turn on the dime. So there is no need to risk their resources, when they are confident they can catch up if they need to.
Some people look at Tesla and its volumes and believe that represents the future. It is possible that the Honda market research says the market will not grow very much and that there is room for may be, 1-3 players only, of which Tesla is the first and VW the second and may be that Nissan, GM, Rivian etc are fighting for third place. In that case, why muddy the waters and try to be the fifth or seventh player. Why not wait till the market actually shows that is it bigger? An earlier poster alluded to this.
18 million vehicles were sold in the US last year. Do we realistically expect that by 2022 there will more than 800,000-1,000,000 BEVs sold per year? Let us assume for arguments sake, that in 2022 the actual demand is 1,200,000 but the actual capacity is 1,000,000 (between Tesla, Rivian, VW, GM etc) and BEVs are being sold at a premium. That would be a sign for Toyota, Honda and other fast followers to jump into the market. If the reality is that actual demand is less than capacity, this will vindicate Honda's strategy.
Bottom line, Honda has made an informed decision. Only time will tell if Honda made the right or wrong decision, it is too premature to write them off.
Further, the current administration clearly does not believe that BEVs are to be supported and that oil should be the dominant energy source. There is also, among certain demographics, a skepticism of both the need for BEVs and its ability to replace the ICE. If you do not believe in climate change, why would change from a Chevy Silvarado. If you are the type of person who wakes up on a Saturday morning and decides on a whim, to take a 200 mile trip, you may not like a BEV. So for a variety of reasons, the market is not growing the way that people in this forum anticipate. BEV adoption may not crack 10% for at least in the next 4-5 years.
Japan similarly has its own problems with BEVs. Technology break troughs have still not eliminated the disadvantages of BEVs (long charging times) and higher initial costs. Low gas prices do not help either.
Each Automotive manufacturer has look at what they will do in one year, five years and say 10 years. Some may say, "forget about 1 year, I am going to prepare for 10 years away". Others may say, "I want to concentrate on the here and now and if things change, we will change then". That could be because of Wall Street (Or Shinjuku or whatever in Tokyo or in Frankfurt), or it could be because of their internal problems (Nissan) or the countries' problems (Japan) or because of the buyers of that brand are not the BEV types etc. In other words, decisions are particular to each company. Honda may be confident that if they have to move to BEV's they are nimble and agile and can turn on the dime. So there is no need to risk their resources, when they are confident they can catch up if they need to.
Some people look at Tesla and its volumes and believe that represents the future. It is possible that the Honda market research says the market will not grow very much and that there is room for may be, 1-3 players only, of which Tesla is the first and VW the second and may be that Nissan, GM, Rivian etc are fighting for third place. In that case, why muddy the waters and try to be the fifth or seventh player. Why not wait till the market actually shows that is it bigger? An earlier poster alluded to this.
18 million vehicles were sold in the US last year. Do we realistically expect that by 2022 there will more than 800,000-1,000,000 BEVs sold per year? Let us assume for arguments sake, that in 2022 the actual demand is 1,200,000 but the actual capacity is 1,000,000 (between Tesla, Rivian, VW, GM etc) and BEVs are being sold at a premium. That would be a sign for Toyota, Honda and other fast followers to jump into the market. If the reality is that actual demand is less than capacity, this will vindicate Honda's strategy.
Bottom line, Honda has made an informed decision. Only time will tell if Honda made the right or wrong decision, it is too premature to write them off.
Pushmi-Pullyu
Well-Known Member
*Pushy scratches his head*
I don't see any opinions there, just facts. The current president only won that election by a very narrow statistical fluke, and with even less popular support this time -- his support among independents is dropping like a rock -- any chance of his re-election is nearly a mathematical impossibility. Again, not opinion... facts.
As far as calling the current presidential administration's environmental policies "backwards"... I toned that down quite a bit from my initial impulse. I could have used much harsher language, like "science denier", and still would have been factually accurate. We are, after all, talking about someone who claims global warming is a "Chinese hoax".
Last edited:
Based on most statistics, in the US the adults have (these are approximate):
1/3 college degree
2/3 home owners
2/3 people with credit card balance
1/2+ living paycheck to paycheck
That says most people don't have money to buy vehicles beyond their budget, due to job opportunities based on their situation, etc... So if people have difficulty paying bills and generally don't prioritize the environment, they will choose the least costly option when buying a vehicle. Of course many will buy used but if buying new the costs are still much lower than BEV or even hybrids.
In places like Japan and other heavy urban areas, parking is an issue itself (you may have to rent a parking space that is away from your home), and public transportation is widely used. Much less considering locations to park and charge.
It’s called the Electoral College and we’ve been using it to elect Presidents longer than any of us have been alive. As recently witnessed, it is possible for a President to be elected without winning the popular vote.
A prediction about an election a year in the future is not a fact, it is just a guess. I’d bet your prediction 3 years ago proved to be inaccurate.
If I remember my 8th grade history class, there was a time when the person who received the most votes became President and the one who received the second most votes became Vice President. I’d go for that.
Could we please keep politics out of this. Some here may not agree with you, your political assessment or opinion of the electoral college.*Pushy scratches his head*
I don't see any opinions there, just facts. The current president only won that election by a very narrow statistical fluke, and with even less popular support this time -- his support among independents is dropping like a rock -- any chance of his re-election is nearly a mathematical impossibility. Again, not opinion... facts.
As far as calling the current presidential administration's environmental policies "backwards"... I toned that down quite a bit from my initial impulse. I could have used much harsher language, like "science denier", and still would have been factually accurate. We are, after all, talking about someone who claims global warming is a "Chinese hoax".
My intent was not to be misleading. I still maintain that $40-80K and 85-150 miles are middle ground prices and realistic ranges for EV’s.
A Smart EQ is $30K with a range of 58 miles, the Fiat 500e is $33K with an 84 mile range and the Mini, $37K and 114 miles, BMW i3, $45K and 153 miles. Those are the golf carts.
Chevy Bolt and Hyundai Kona, $36K/38K and 238/258. In one review of actual driving in cold weather they only went 160/140.
Nissan Leaf Plus, $40K 226 miles.
Audi eTron $75K 204 miles.
Mercedes EQC $70K 220 miles.
Jaguar I Pace $81K 234 miles.
Yes, that is only a partial list. All prices are starting prices.
People looking to buy a BEV should know that it isn’t all rainbows and unicorns. They most likely will not get the stated range even with fresh batteries in warm weather, particularly if they opt to zip around like a NASCAR driver. Range will diminish over time. If we tell them otherwise, we are misinforming them.
I can be sarcastic and I will poke fun at clown cars, both gas and electric. Your presumptions are incorrect, as I do not have disdain for BEV’s. They are simply not the car I choose to own.
Can you provide additional information to support your simple fact?
Sure you can quote cars & prices that support your argument, but so can I:
* For $79,990 (factoring in no rebates that are likely available) you can buy a Tesla Model S with a range of 373 miles. That’s a lot of range my friend with a lot of room and a lot of storage. No golf cart. Further, based on my own Model S, I can tell you that the stated range IS realistic. Of course range is temperature dependent, but I can tell you my Model S range is impacted by cold temperatures FAR less than my Clarity. I own both, so I don’t need to conjecture.
Additionally, Tesla batteries deteriorate over time at a far slower rate than other batteries due to their unique chemistry. This is well documented. After 2 years, I’ve lost less than 3% of my range.
* For less than $50,000 (again factoring in no rebates) you can get a Tesla Model 3 with 322 miles of range. A smaller car than the S, but still very comfortable. If I was buying a car today, I’d buy a Model 3 in a heartbeat.
I will add that both Teslas are far more fun to drive than the Clarity. They handle better, are far faster and due to significantly more regenerative breaking, you can use one pedal driving most of the time. As a result I find the Model S far less tiring to drive in heavy traffic than our Clarity.
The Clarity is a great family car that offers better value than either Tesla.
I’m glad you’re happy with your Clarity, we are too. But I will say that when I want a more enjoyable car to drive, I will always reach for the Tesla. That may not be important to you and that’s fine. This is not meant to offend any Clarity owner, but they are two very different cars.
Last edited:
MINI USA has set the base price for the MINI Cooper SE at $30,750 (including destination and handling charge) and the EPA range has yet to be revealed, although it's possible that range could be 114 miles (I just wanted to accurately position this car in the your EV spectrum).
Robert_Alabama
Well-Known Member
I think that a lot of Clarity owners can't easily see going back to a gasoline only car after driving the Clarity (and/or other PHEVs or BEVs). For my own use and preferences, I am very pro PHEV, if the PHEV has an electric range in the 50 mile range. It just fits my needs so well and I get 80-90% of the benefits of a BEV without ever worrying about range anxiety and keep the benefit of having the choice to burn gasoline if electricity is the more expensive option or an inconvenient option on trips. So far, 3 of the 4 cars in our immediate family are PHEVs (2019 Volt, 2018 Clarity, and 2017 330e). The 330e doesn't fit the 50 mile range criteria, but it is my son's and he can charge both at work and at his apartment for free so he makes it work pretty well. Our remaining vehicle is a 2002 Tahoe with about 230k miles on it. We've put off replacing the Tahoe until we find the PHEV SUV we really want. We were holding out hope for the Honda Pilot PHEV, but now it looks like a no-show. We are now leaning toward either the BMW Xdrive45e or the Mercedes GLE 350de. Both of these cars should get here in mid 2020 as best I can tell. Both will be pricey, but they should be really nice PHEV SUVs, both with at least 50 miles of electric range. Anyway, for me, once that choice is made, we should be pretty well set for most of the duration of this transition away from gasoline (unless one of them gets totaled) and we should have shrunk our gasoline usage to about 10-20% of what it was pre Phevs. By the time we're in the market again, hopefully BEV will have become the default we all would like without any shortcomings of insufficient/inconvenient charging infrastructure, and will be the obvious best overall option for new vehicles. I applaud those who are BEV drivers now, but I value the flexibility offered by PHEVs for now.
interestedinEV
Well-Known Member
Yes, BEVs and hybrids are much costlier than their ICE siblings and the savings in gas costs (electricity vs gas) may not be as significant as made out. Even if it were, it takes a long time to pay off. For example, MINI is bringing out the MINI SE BEV at about $31,000, while the lowest ICE version is about $22,000. A clear increase of $8-9000 and the expectation is that MINI SE buyers will get a tax credit of $7500, so the MINI SE is only around $24,000 net. How many people have federal tax liabilities of more than $7500 in one year (also this tax credit has to be taken in one shot, you cannot take part credit this year and part next year)?
As per the calculations shown below, the family income has to be around $113,000 for a person to avail of a tax credit of $7500. So that is one reason for manufacturers to keep the price high and the volumes low, so that make more profit and the buyer gets the taxpayer subsidy.
https://ttlc.intuit.com/community/t...ax-credit-i-file-married-and-have-2/00/471761
For 2018 taxes
1) Assuming your 2 dependents qualify you for the full child tax credits:
2) Assuming you are using just the new 24,000 standard Deduction (not itemizing)
3) Assuming both parents have only W-2 income, (no self-employment income)
Total W-2 salary for both parents + interest, no capital gains to declare:
~$60,000 or less = no taxes...cannot use the $7,500 credit
~80,000 = ~$2,300 taxes to use against the $7,500 credit
~100,000 = ~$4,700 taxes to use against the $7,500 credit
~113,000 = ~$7,500 taxes to use against the $7,500 credit
Hence Honda could have looked at their demographics and decided that their buyers are not the typical BEV buyers and therefore not worth the effort right now.
(Also going back to the Mini Example, if a person can save $100 per month in gas, and the differential is $9000, it will take 7.5 years to recover the additional investment. )
interestedinEV
Well-Known Member
Here are two articles addressing the topic.
A recent research publication from the Mckinsey the consulting company, who work with many of the worlds leading brands.
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries...-insights/making-electric-vehicles-profitable
Most OEMs don’t profit on selling electric vehicles. But addressing elements of the product and business model can put them on a better path. We have a clear roadmap for EV profitability.
The future looks bright for electric-vehicle (EV) growth. Consumers are more willing than ever to consider buying EVs, and sales are rising fast. Most major markets have consistently registered 50 to 60 percent growth in recent years, albeit from small bases. More new models from a growing cadre of automotive OEMs make finding a suitable EV easier: in 2018 alone OEMs launched about 100 new models and sold two million units in total globally. Likewise, performance improvements continue with respect to range, performance, and reliability. Regulations in major car markets—namely China, the European Union, and the United States—compel OEMs to produce more EVs and encourage consumers to buy them.
However, there is a problem: today, most OEMs do not make a profit from the sale of EVs. In fact, these vehicles often cost $12,000 more to produce than comparable vehicles powered by internal-combustion engines (ICEs) in the small- to midsize-car segment and the small-utility-vehicle segment (Exhibit 1).
This second article is about a year old but is reemphasizes the same topic
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/08/23/electric-cars-will-any-auto-company-make-money/
UBS analysts estimate that General Motors loses $7,000 on every one of its new Bolt battery electric cars. The Bolt battery pack costs about $10,000‒$12,000, or up to one-third of the Bolt price tag. Daimler, Peugeot, Honda, and other auto makers warn of looming electric car losses.
A few semi-random thoughts related to previous posts.
- Much of the savings with a BEV is also in your time, lack of maintenance, time getting gas, etc.
- Very little charging is done at public stations - like less than 10%.
- The 2020 Hyundai Ioniq has 170 miles of range for $30K (before incentives)
- The median income for a married couple with kids in Seattle is $161K
- If you drive 15K miles a year, that's only 41 miles per day
- Electric cars take 30 percent less time to assemble than current passenger vehicles
- The switch to electric cars puts 75,000 engine and gearbox manufacturing jobs at risk, a study commissioned by German trade unions and the auto industry showed.
- Dread over the prospect that plug-in cars (which have fewer parts and require less labor to build) will doom auto jobs helped spark the first UAW strike against General Motors in over a decade.
- The cost of developing even slightly more efficient ICE's is huge. The cost of electric power trains is dropping, but has yet to hit the volume.
- VAG will produce 1.4 million electric drive units annually beginning in 2023