Honda throws cold water on electric cars

Subscribe to Remove Ads
KentuckyKen

KentuckyKen

Well-Known Member
Well this article is not encouraging for us Clarity owners or EV promoters. At least it starts off with a picture of a Clarity which is rare enough in publications today. Looks like according to Honda, we’re all ahead of our time.
EB352FA1-4877-4AD4-B4D3-041C8F04C4F4.webp


https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2...ow-are-the-brands-dedicated-green-cars-doing/
 
I fear Honda will lose me (bought my first Honda over 20 years ago) to the Toyota RAV4 PHEV if it makes it to market in all 50 states in late 2020 or early 2021. My wife is already excited about the Audi Q5 PHEV due late next year in N.A. Electrification of the small-medium AWD SUV is coming, whether Honda’s CEO thinks there’s a market or not. I know Honda makes a great PHEV drive system (Clarity!); bummer the CEO doesn’t believe in it.
 
The RAV4 PHEV, if it has good battery/gas range, and I fit in it, will likely replace our 2008 Sorento.
 
It does (look better with age) :)

As for Mr. Hachigo thoughts on BEVs- I think he is fundamentally wrong. Tesla is an obvious case in point. The Clarity is a fine car functionally for a driver that drives predominantly in its EV range- offering value, comfort, hopefully low maintenance costs and apparent safety at a bargain price (with dealer incentives)- however, its tech is no match for Tesla's automotive technology- whether it is in the area of battery/motor tech, autonomous driving, safety, handling, power, etc. And if the Clarity is a loss leader- Tesla is finally making a profit.

Non-plugin hybrids may keep Honda within CAFE standards- but despite the anachronism of the current US Administration- countries will be forced to force BEVs and public transport on their citizens- unless society continues its wanton neglect of the climate crisis- always a possibility as coastlines sink.
 
Well, Mr Hachigo could always start the next WeWork if he wants to make a billion dollars running an unprofitable company.

ICE vehicles are profitable and Honda is neck deep in Bitcoin, er, Carbon Credits. They will be in compliance without making EV’s for years, so why make a money loser?

They have the technology filed away for now, and can use it when necessary.
 
It’s hard to believe a CEO in the auto industry could be so clueless as to say this, “I do not believe there will be a dramatic increase in demand for battery vehicles, and I believe this situation is true globally.”

Has the CEO of Honda heard of the Tesla Model 3? Good grief, they’re selling as many as they can churn out. In some countries it’s the most popular car of any sold. I guess after we’re done with the Clarity, it’s time to move on from Honda.
 
4sallypat said:
So after comparing the Audi Q5 PHEV, Toyota PHEV, and Prime PHEV; I am very glad I chose the Clarity.

The competition can't beat the EV miles of the Clarity!
Click to expand...
Yup! When we bought Clarity a year and a half ago, it was for sure the best choice for us. However, if Honda does not respond to market demand (as suggested in the report), a year and a half from now it will be a very different story.
 
I don't anticipate ever buying gas-only again after owning a Clarity. Driving electric is simply too awesome to not want it available. I believe a lot of people feel the same way, once you experience the quiet of sitting at a light or driving through a country rode on electric...it's hard to go back from that.

If Honda doesn't have an option in 3 years when my lease runs out I will move on to something else. In all honesty I am disappointed with the options coming out recently, seems no one understands that 30-40km range is simply not enough for PHEV. Hopefully someone fills this gap before then.
 
We owned a CRV for 5 years. That class, including the Rav4, is very attractive for us. We like the sitting position of a taller vehicle, and the large cargo space. Taking the best from Clarity PHEV and blending it with a CRV or Rav4 would be cause for us to buy a new car. However I agree with others that a PHEV with 20-30 miles of EV range simply isn't enough. My ideal car would be a PHEV Rav4/CRV with about 50 miles of EV range.
 
jdonalds said:
We owned a CRV for 5 years. That class, including the Rav4, is very attractive for us.
Click to expand...

And we still own our 2005 stick shift Honda Element - a great, solid, reliable car. Anything at all like an EV Element would be highly attractive for us down the road.
 
Ken7 said:
It’s hard to believe a CEO in the auto industry could be so clueless as to say this, “I do not believe there will be a dramatic increase in demand for battery vehicles, and I believe this situation is true globally.”

Has the CEO of Honda heard of the Tesla Model 3? Good grief, they’re selling as many as they can churn out. In some countries it’s the most popular car of any sold. I guess after we’re done with the Clarity, it’s time to move on from Honda.
Click to expand...

I don't think that they are clueless at all, I think it's highly intentional and strategic. I think they know they need a lot of time to shift their factories and systems over to produce more electric vehicles, and to avoid being last in the race they will claim that EV adoption is fringe and unimportant until they reach enough capacity to generate an inflection point, at which time they will start pushing their EVs. Toyota has been doing this as well, while working behind the scenes on solid state batteries, etc. It's a way to help bide more time to catch up, while maintaining ICE vehicles sales.

What traditional manufacturer CEO could stand up and say "ICE are going to go the way of the dodo" when 99% of their sales are ICE? They would be torn to shreds by shareholders.
 
BeMurda said:
I don't think that they are clueless at all, I think it's highly intentional and strategic. I think they know they need a lot of time to shift their factories and systems over to produce more electric vehicles, and to avoid being last in the race they will claim that EV adoption is fringe and unimportant until they reach enough capacity to generate an inflection point, at which time they will start pushing their EVs. Toyota has been doing this as well, while working behind the scenes on solid state batteries, etc. It's a way to help bide more time to catch up, while maintaining ICE vehicles sales.

What traditional manufacturer CEO could stand up and say "ICE are going to go the way of the dodo" when 99% of their sales are ICE? They would be torn to shreds by shareholders.
Click to expand...

That is correct, EVs are at the moment a small but meaningful share of the market in terms of sales, but they are nothing in terms of profits. There is no rush to introduce EVs, as long as they develop the technology to be competitive when they decide to enter the market.
 
Agzand said:
There is no rush to introduce EVs
Click to expand...
Only in N.A. Globally, in which Honda is definitely a player, there is definitely a rush to introduce EVs. I think the move from ICE to electric motors for propulsion is the most significant change to transportation since cars were invented and Honda downplays that at their peril.
 
Ken7 said:
It’s hard to believe a CEO in the auto industry could be so clueless as to say this, “I do not believe there will be a dramatic increase in demand for battery vehicles, and I believe this situation is true globally.”

Has the CEO of Honda heard of the Tesla Model 3? Good grief, they’re selling as many as they can churn out. In some countries it’s the most popular car of any sold. I guess after we’re done with the Clarity, it’s time to move on from Honda.
Click to expand...

I’d imagine that a CEO of an automobile manufacturer has access to a few more clues than the average internet poster. Sure, they’ve all made mistakes, particularly CEO’s of US manufacturers. At the end of the day, they need to be profitable in order to pay their employees, who in turn go out and buy things, like new cars.

Before attacking a statement that includes a fabulously vague term such as “dramatic increase” it would be interesting to know exactly what Mr Hachigo considers a dramatic increase. Would going from 2% to 4% of global sales be considered a dramatic increase? That’s a 100% increase, but still represents a very small portion of overall sales. Is there value in directing resources and capital on such projects?

Interestingly, 2 related articles at the bottom of the above linked article describe how Honda plans to develop battery technology with GM and release EV’s into the market and that they plan to focus on hybrid models to meet CAFE standards. So why dwell on perceived negatives of one article while ignoring some positives in 2 other articles?

For many BEV’s fall short on what is expected from a vehicle. Not everyone has the resources or desire to drop $40-80 grand on a vehicle that has such limitations. Yes, a BEV with a theoretical, best case scenario range of 85-150 miles will make a great commuter car. It will not be so great on a 500-600 mile trip or a 14 day driving vacation.

The Clarity is an ideal combination, electric for commuting and errands, hybrid for longer trips. It is far more versatile than a BEV. I put 4 gallons in yesterday and have driven the past 3000 miles on 10 gallons of gas. That would have taken at least 80 gallons in the old car.
 
Chris Messer said:
I don't anticipate ever buying gas-only again after owning a Clarity. Driving electric is simply too awesome to not want it available. I believe a lot of people feel the same way, once you experience the quiet of sitting at a light or driving through a country rode on electric...it's hard to go back from that.

If Honda doesn't have an option in 3 years when my lease runs out I will move on to something else. In all honesty I am disappointed with the options coming out recently, seems no one understands that 30-40km range is simply not enough for PHEV. Hopefully someone fills this gap before then.
Click to expand...

I agree with you - the Clarity has spoiled me by not having to fuel up much at all.

As for the lease end, I am waiting to see how this car performs and so far it's been perfect for 1 year.
If that holds at the end of the lease, I am going to buy it out and keep her since the battery warranty is good for 10 years / 150,000 miles.
Plus, Hondas retain their values so well, by the time I am ready to trade in or sell, I won't have to worry about losing value...
 
Lowell_Greenberg said:
It does (look better with age) :)

As for Mr. Hachigo thoughts on BEVs- I think he is fundamentally wrong. Tesla is an obvious case in point. The Clarity is a fine car functionally for a driver that drives predominantly in its EV range- offering value, comfort, hopefully low maintenance costs and apparent safety at a bargain price (with dealer incentives)- however, its tech is no match for Tesla's automotive technology- whether it is in the area of battery/motor tech, autonomous driving, safety, handling, power, etc. And if the Clarity is a loss leader- Tesla is finally making a profit.

Non-plugin hybrids may keep Honda within CAFE standards- but despite the anachronism of the current US Administration- countries will be forced to force BEVs and public transport on their citizens- unless society continues its wanton neglect of the climate crisis- always a possibility as coastlines sink.
Click to expand...

As a previous Mazda owner, I vividly remember the company official declaration a couple of years ago that their philosophy was to rely in increasing the ICE efficiency and fuel economy to a maximum and dismissed and didn't "believe" in electric cars. Now, as the same article points out, Mazda is partnering with other Japanese automakers for developing electric cars. As with anything anyone says today, I would take Mr. Hachigo's words with a few grains of salt. Everyone lies without remorse these days if it fits to their agenda, which we usually have no trustful information about.
 
Subscribe to Remove Ads
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top