Yes. The total of the two is around $.14, then a baseline credit of $.08 is applied. It is a three-tier plan, but the baseline credit is applied against all three tiers. We have a small (2K) solar system, so we rarely exceed baseline, even in the summer.
Why is no one challenging the Clarity?
- Thread starter Chris Messer
- Start date
- Replies 48
- Views 7K
craze1cars
Well-Known Member
RAV4 prime. Not only will it “challenge” Clarity, it’ll flat out defeat it real quick like. 300+ hp acceleration/performance, AWD, SUV format, substantially larger fuel tank allowing double the range on a fill up, 1500 lb trailer towing capacity, heads up display, sunroof, and anyone who has driven Toyota’s recent ACC and driver control systems knows it all works better and smoother than Honda’s does, 10 year 150k battery warranty, from a company that has considerably more experience in the hybrid world than Honda does. So IMO it clicks all the boxes that Clarity doesn’t and bests it in every way. On paper anyway. All that at a cost of only 5 miles less electric range, 42 vs 47. Good enough for me! I ain’t one of those people who gets upset when my gas engine starts...it’s just doing its job! And with the success of Prius, I bet it sells in large numbers and gets great dealer and service support for decades to come.
I can see me buying a 2022 model and dumping our Clarity after it’s proven...
This all assumes they can get enough batteries to meet demand...which I believe is kinda doubtful...and Covid didn’t help that issue any...
I can see me buying a 2022 model and dumping our Clarity after it’s proven...
This all assumes they can get enough batteries to meet demand...which I believe is kinda doubtful...and Covid didn’t help that issue any...
Last edited:
petteyg359
Well-Known Member
Texas, with several choices of provider to get it at that rate (not including TDSP fees).
Or you put solar panels on your roof and the cost approaches negative infinity (or, at worst, simply zero if you have no net metering option) no matter your location.
US allocation is 5,000 units, probably 90% to CA with the balance to a couple of other Section 177 States. Claiming battery supply constraints. This is less than 50% of the Clarity 2019 sales (when they were hard to find for most)
Also worth noting that it carries a price that is likely to effectively be 50% (or more) higher than the Clarity (no discounts, many dealers adding a "Market Adjustment", MSRP is $41K to $49K)
Mowcowbell
Well-Known Member
Good luck finding a RAV4 Prime. The few that will be at dealers will be significantly marked up above MSRP. And if it rides as rough as the standard RAV4, count me out.
That’s a good rate. We rent a house in So Cal for work but there’s been no work since mid-March, so it is almost a daily discussion as to how much longer we’ll keep renting. Our SCE rate is around $.20/kW.
In Oregon, our Pacific Power rate is around $.11/kW. Our solar produces roughly 40% of our consumption so the actual monthly cost on an annual average is between $.06-.07/kW. Solar isn’t cheap and it certainly wasn’t 8 years ago even with all the incentives and credits. I don’t know if or when we’ll get “free” electricity and I don’t really care. We installed it with a battery back up to run the well pump and keep the food cold. The money has been spent. The reduction on the bill is a nice bonus.
craze1cars
Well-Known Member
Indeed if Toyota doesn't/can't build enough to meet demand, then it will not be much of a challenger. I certainly can't dispute that.
I think this sort of answers the original question. It's apparently still a royal PITA for manufacturers to build PHEV's, in quantity, profitably. So they don't. Instead they choose to crank out easier to build, more profitable, and in more demand ICE vehicles...in large quantity, and take their profits to the bank. Captialism.
Large manufacturers have no interest in satisfying a small niche market that makes no money. They want and need to satisfy the profitable mass market instead. Mass market seems to not want PHEV's, ESPECIALLY if you pull out any government incentives. Same old argument that gets rehashed, and disputed, and re-worded, and challenged, in EV/PHEV forums regularly. Certainly most of us here on this forum like and want the cars. But the remaining 99% of the automobile market? Ha. For a multitude reasons, most customers simply don't want to purchase what is being offered, so a mfr occasionally tries to test the market for and function of the cars by trickling them out in small experimental quantities. Many forget that the 2018 model year of Clarity was distributed widely across dealers all over the nation...and the cars sat and rotted on dealer lots for many months because very few customers wanted to buy them. It would be considered a poor business decision to try to compete in such a small market...
All above comments reference the US. I have no idea about other countries. And I do consider California to be another country LOL.
I still say we need completely different and better battery technology for PHEVs and EV's to really take off. IMO lithium-ion just doesn't compete well enough with gasoline in many ways.
If I really can't/choose not to obtain a Toyota RAV4 Prime in 2022 or maybe 2023 model years due to battery shortages/excessive markup/lack of production/minimal distribution outside of CA/whatever? And if I'm kinda done with my Clarity as it ages some more by then? I'll probably get rid of it and just purchase another ICE vehicle instead...if only for the wide variety of choices in vehicles it opens up.
I think this sort of answers the original question. It's apparently still a royal PITA for manufacturers to build PHEV's, in quantity, profitably. So they don't. Instead they choose to crank out easier to build, more profitable, and in more demand ICE vehicles...in large quantity, and take their profits to the bank. Captialism.
Large manufacturers have no interest in satisfying a small niche market that makes no money. They want and need to satisfy the profitable mass market instead. Mass market seems to not want PHEV's, ESPECIALLY if you pull out any government incentives. Same old argument that gets rehashed, and disputed, and re-worded, and challenged, in EV/PHEV forums regularly. Certainly most of us here on this forum like and want the cars. But the remaining 99% of the automobile market? Ha. For a multitude reasons, most customers simply don't want to purchase what is being offered, so a mfr occasionally tries to test the market for and function of the cars by trickling them out in small experimental quantities. Many forget that the 2018 model year of Clarity was distributed widely across dealers all over the nation...and the cars sat and rotted on dealer lots for many months because very few customers wanted to buy them. It would be considered a poor business decision to try to compete in such a small market...
All above comments reference the US. I have no idea about other countries. And I do consider California to be another country LOL.
I still say we need completely different and better battery technology for PHEVs and EV's to really take off. IMO lithium-ion just doesn't compete well enough with gasoline in many ways.
If I really can't/choose not to obtain a Toyota RAV4 Prime in 2022 or maybe 2023 model years due to battery shortages/excessive markup/lack of production/minimal distribution outside of CA/whatever? And if I'm kinda done with my Clarity as it ages some more by then? I'll probably get rid of it and just purchase another ICE vehicle instead...if only for the wide variety of choices in vehicles it opens up.
Last edited:
Tek_Freek
Active Member
At my house.
I checked with my (accountant) wife and she said yes, the total is $.06. During the summer that holds true from 7:00pm to 1:00pm. Between 1:00pm and 7:00pm it's $.42 (iirc) so we start charging at 10:00pm. In the winter (and summer weekends) it's $.06 24 hours a day.
Right now we take our house temp to 68 and shut off the air at 12:59 and coast until 7:01pm. The highest it's ever been in the house is 82, which, for us, is no big deal.
Last edited:
Sloanhoo
Member
I have had my 2018 Clarity since March, 2019, and with every passing month, I am more of a genius for buying it. Here is why PHEV is not going away yet:
When I wanted to transition to EV, my husband was VERY worried, worried about the battery technology, worried that no one would know how to repair it, worried that it wouldn’t have “enough range”, worried about long trips where we would shift back and forth from EV to HV, etc. The Clarity provided a great way to overcome his worries with the backup of tech he was familiar with. I do about 95% of my driving on battery alone, so now he worries about the gas “getting old.” Honestly!
Anyway, other people who have asked about my big cushy economical eco-friendly car are starting to do the math, and if PHEVs had more range, they would be more in demand. I Truly hope car manufacturers embrace EV because even hybrid ain’t going to save the planet.
Sloanhoo
Member
In the Portland area, with electricity costing $.12/kwh for peak hour and $.04/kwh for off-peak (generally after 10 pm), I charge from 11pm as needed, 7 days a week. The most I ever use is about 7kwh, so the cost is $.28/charge. I did sign up for time-of-use pricing as opposed to the default residential plan. I guess the takeaway is it pays to understand all that gobbledygook on the back of your utility bill.
How much more range do you need? You’re doing 95% of your driving on electric that used to be done with gas.
If reduced carbon emissions is a concern, wouldn’t it be more beneficial to get everyone in a car that had a 20kWh battery with 60 miles of range and an ICE for longer trips, rather than 20% of drivers in a BEV with with a 100kWh battery and a 300 mile range that rarely gets used?
The same lithium battery capacity would accomplish either task. The former would reduce every drivers tailpipe emissions by, 60%, 80% or perhaps 95%. The latter would reduce 20% of drivers tailpipe emissions by 100%.
Sloanhoo
Member
Well, we would always like more range... I do think DucRider’s point about the tradeoff between battery range and weight makes sense. As for me I prefer what would reduce emissions the most IN TOTAL, but I don’t like ICE in principle if there is another workable alternative. Meanwhile, I am gonna drive my Clarity for quite a few more miles happily no matter what the manufacturers do.
Here is a question I can’t find the answer to: On long trips when I am about to exceed the battery range, I generally switch to HV Charge mode until the battery gets to the ridiculous 29-ish mile limit of charge, then switch back to EV. Do I need to do this for max overall range, or is this something the computer is already set to manage? Thanks for whatever insight you may have.
Here is a question I can’t find the answer to: On long trips when I am about to exceed the battery range, I generally switch to HV Charge mode until the battery gets to the ridiculous 29-ish mile limit of charge, then switch back to EV. Do I need to do this for max overall range, or is this something the computer is already set to manage? Thanks for whatever insight you may have.
On such long trips it's probably more efficient to switch to HV (non-charge) mode at whatever battery level you prefer. Arguably, each discharge/recharge transaction has substantial inefficiencies in both directions. If you use HV mode on the highway, you're involving the battery much less and mostly just letting the engine power the wheels.
There is nothing ridiculous about HV Charge providing an estimated 29 mile range. It is designed and programmed to bring the batteries to a ~60% SOC. 60% of a stated 47 mile range is 28.2 miles.
By default the car will operate in EV mode until the battery is depleted and then it will switch to HV mode. It could be argued that this is the most efficient way to operate the vehicle. Once we start pushing buttons, we are altering the way the vehicle was programmed to operate.
I believe that if it were more efficient to run a continuous loop of, deplete EV range-enable HV Charge-deplete EV range, that would be the default operating mode. Some owners do this as a cost saving measure where the price of gas is low and electricity rates are high. It may be cost effective, but is also must create more tailpipe emissions than using L1 or L2 charging.
What produces the maximum range may always be a mystery and will differ from one owner to the next.
Using the EV first/HV second, HV first/EV second, EV to 50%/HV/EV to 0% and HV Charge loop methods, it would be interesting to send 4 Clarities out on a 300+ mile stretch of road to see which one covers the greatest distance.
Sloanhoo
Member
Thanks for your thoughts. I would like to see the results of that experiment.
Regarding the RAV4 PHEV or whatever, my husband (the former EV worrier) took a look at the Portland Auto Show back before C19 and thought it would be a) less comfortable than our Clarity, and b) he was underwhelmed by the HV mileage, especially given the very respectable results we get in the Clarity when in full HV mode.
By the way, he has to replace his ancient ICE Honda Accord next year, and he told me he is thinking about buying an “only electric.” I suspect that our experience of overcoming fear of new tech then diving in the deep end is pretty normal. For that reason alone, the PHEV has a place in the EV car universe, and the Clarity is just about the best value of the lot.
Regarding the RAV4 PHEV or whatever, my husband (the former EV worrier) took a look at the Portland Auto Show back before C19 and thought it would be a) less comfortable than our Clarity, and b) he was underwhelmed by the HV mileage, especially given the very respectable results we get in the Clarity when in full HV mode.
By the way, he has to replace his ancient ICE Honda Accord next year, and he told me he is thinking about buying an “only electric.” I suspect that our experience of overcoming fear of new tech then diving in the deep end is pretty normal. For that reason alone, the PHEV has a place in the EV car universe, and the Clarity is just about the best value of the lot.
Our cars were a 2011 Toyota Prius and a 2013 Chevrolet Volt. When the Volt got totalled last summer, with no immediate way to get a Clarity equipped the way I wanted, I stumbled upon a 2017 Nissan LEAF for just a couple of thousand more than the insurance check from the Volt. I bought it with the intention of keeping it for 6 or 7 months, until I could get a Clarity.
A year later, my Clarity hasn't quite arrived yet (supposedly in port now, to be unloaded and shipped from the west coast) and we're planning to sell the Prius instead and keep the all electric LEAF. With 101 miles of EPA battery range, the LEAF isn't really practical for long trips but it proved more than up to the task of getting me to and from work in comfort, year round.
Sloanhoo
Member
We have noticed on our neighborhood walks (the only time we get out) that at least two of the folks in our area have Nissan Leafs (Leaves?) in their driveways. Have had a couple socially-distanced conversations about them—owners prefer them enthusiastically. However, the usual rejoinder about my Clarity is, “I thought it was an Accord until I saw the charging cable.” LOL
Believe it or not, LEAF is an awkward Japanese/English acronym: Leading, Environmentally-friendly, Affordable Family car.
I was very lucky to find a healthy, inexpensive used LEAF exactly when I needed it. Suffice it to say, they're pretty scarce in metro Detroit.
Perusing the used car listings, I see many that haven't fared well, battery-wise (simply based on the instrument panel displays). They are notoriously vulnerable to high temperature degradation and the car's user interface offers no convenient means of limiting the charging level to less than 100%.
I wouldn't recommend purchasing a used one without much research in advance. I also don't believe that a new one is a very good value proposition.
Sloanhoo
Member
Thanks for the intel. I don’t think my husband would buy a used EV. With the federal credit and Oregon’s rebates, new EVs and PHEVs (not Toyota) are very competitively priced. Even without the incentives, the savings in operating costs are attractive and the safety features are always evolving, sort-of. What he REALLY would like is an EV pickup truck. Dream on, Mr Sloan.
One of Oregon's rebates applies to used as well, so I would pay attention to the price difference between new and used.