"Even if you buy no options at all, this will still be an amazing car!"

[Red Sage]

Ford and Toyota are trapped the worst, because they both have incredibly profitable ICE vehicle lines (truck/Camry). And, as you see, they're two of the three companies (the other being Fiat-Chrysler who's utterly clueless) who have no real EV program to speak of.

Fiat-Chrysler is [FOULED] because their CEO is actively, adamantly, and vehemently in direct public protest of both zero emissions and high fuel economy vehicles. The philosophy of the company, on both sides of the Atlantic, is that burning gasoline & diesel fuel as quickly as possible equals 'efficiency'. They believe that their goal should be to sell cars that are fire breathing, smoke churning, rubber burning, and gas guzzling and that is what their Customers have come to expect from them. It is their fundamental belief that government regulatory agencies all over the world are being unfair to them in particular and unreasonable in general and meddlesome overall for imposing requirements that state they must build anything that does not fit that mold. Essentially, they feel that as long as they can find Customers that want their cars & trucks as they are, that validates the design and philosophy and should not be curtailed by outside forces as a matter of free trade and freedom of expression.

It isn't that General Motors and Ford, or even Mercedes-Benz and BMW, disagree with that philosophy. They just aren't as vocal and demonstrative of those points throughout their entire product lines. Prior to 2012, every BMW was a relative gas guzzler, all the way down to their least capable inline four cylinder powerplants.

GM, Ford, Toyota, and Volkswagen are all capable of manufacturing capacity on the order of 10,000,000 units per annum worldwide. Though the sales numbers are pitiful for their compliance cars, Ford and Volkswagen at the very least have managed to offer fully electric versions of their best selling passenger vehicles in recent years, Focus Electric and e-Golf. GM didn't make a fully electric version of the CRUZE or MALIBU, but at least they ventured forth to introduce the BOLT as a car capable of a substantial fully electric range above 200 miles.

Toyota, on the other hand, offers the single best selling vehicle of any configuration anywhere in the world, the Corolla, and there is no fully electric, plug-in hybrid, or hybrid version available in the U.S. or anywhere else in the world that I know of... As popular as the 'Prius Family' of cars has been the past twenty years, its sales are still dwarfed by the Corolla, both in the U.S. and worldwide. And despite what was at one time a close relationship with Tesla, Toyota has been openly reluctant to offer a battery electric vehicle of any sort in wide release. The RAV4 EV was an extremely limited edition compliance car, as was the first Prius plug-in, offered only in California to meet CARB regulations, and each disappeared once no longer needed. The Prius Prime is for now maintaining a hold on third place among 'plug-in' vehicles in the U.S. per InsideEVs. Though I really would prefer they make a distinction between pure electric and 'electrified' hybrid vehicles in their charts. Toyota seems committed to the 'use less gas' principle instead of adopting the 'use no gas' philosophy. But finally, it seems, Toyota has realized the folly of pursuing Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars with the Mirai -- there is simply no way for that technology to 'win' when it comes to zero emissions vehicles.

And, as we see, the German carmakers are all moving strongly toward EVs because they've been freed from their ICE heritage by scandal.

The Germans are strongly wording their press releases, but the cars that appear from them are primarily 'electrified' plug-in hybrids offered in low quantities. Compliance cars. ICE vehicles with a plug stuck on them: BMW X5 xDrive40e, AUDI A3 Sportback e-tron, BMW 330e, Porsche Cayenne S-E, Mercedes-Benz S550e, BMW 530e, BMW 740e, Mercedes-Benz C350e, Mercedes-Benz GLE 550e, Porsche Panamera S-E... All meant to artificially boost their respective Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) scores. Pitiful.

It's playing out exactly as one would expect. If Ford doesn't move on EVs, they'll be cornered into just being a truck company, and eventually that will be removed from them as well.

I doubt Ford much cares about 'just being a truck company'... Just as Porsche doesn't care that they are now just an SUV company. There is a philosophy that being #1 in a particular category is sufficient to maintain mindshare, marketshare, and profitability.

 

[SageBrush]

Toyota has been openly reluctant to offer a battery electric vehicle of any sort in wide release. The RAV4 EV was an extremely limited edition compliance car, as was the first Prius plug-in, offered only in California to meet CARB regulations, and each disappeared once no longer needed. The Prius Prime is for now maintaining a hold on third place among 'plug-in' vehicles in the U.S. per InsideEVs. Though I really would prefer they make a distinction between pure electric and 'electrified' hybrid vehicles in their charts. Toyota seems committed to the 'use less gas' principle instead of adopting the 'use no gas' philosophy.

This strikes me as a fair handling of Toyota although it seems fair to point out that the the Prius line is the only car sold in volume for below $25k profitably that has contributed to the AGW solution. The $27k USD (before subsidy) Prime works out to ~ 100 mpg for the fleet. That is nothing to sneeze at, and represents a move away from fossil fuels a lot faster than even California can manage with its grid.

 

[Red Sage]

If autonomous cars really are the future, autopilot will move from being regarded as a luxury or convenience feature to a safety feature pretty quick, and I assume most manufacturers will end up offering their versions of it as a standard feature sooner than later.

I strongly suspect that will come at the behest of insurance companies. They will love the fact that owners are still required by law to buy insurance, but that safer vehicles will prevent the accidents from happening in a wider range of instances. Meaning that the insurance company has to pay fewer claims, reducing their exposure. Autonomous cars will not be under the influence of drugs or alcohol, they won't be emotionally disturbed, and they will be less likely to endanger themselves or passengers during inclement weather. It is 'driver error' that causes accidents in those situations. Removing the human element will be a boon for insurance companies.

 

[Red Sage]

This strikes me as a fair handling of Toyota although it seems fair to point out that the the Prius line is the only car sold in volume for below $25k profitably that has contributed to the AGW solution. The $27k USD (before subsidy) Prime works out to ~ 100 mpg for the fleet. That is nothing to sneeze at, and represents a move away from fossil fuels a lot faster than even California can manage with its grid.

I am of the decided opinion that the entire 'MPGe' concept is a load of [BOLSHEVIK]. It seems to be calculated in precisely a manner to make sure that low mileage, low battery pack capacity vehicles from ICE manufacturers are awarded with 100+ MPGe, even when the total range is far below 100 miles. Further, it is designed to reward plug-in hybrid vehicles with 80+ MPGe ratings even when the majority of their complete range is achieved at only ~42 MPG running on gasoline the entire time. Like I said, I'm not a fan of the 'use less gas' principle of car design. Mostly because for every gallon of gasoline burned, no matter how efficiently per mile, you still get 100% of the emissions generated.

Look at it this way... A gallon of gasoline contains approximately 33.7 kWh of energy. With about a 9 or 12 gallon capacity fuel tank, that would work out to between 303 kWh and 404 kWh of energy reserve. If you'll remember, both the Prius and VOLT were originally marketed as 'an electric car that runs on gas' -- which was complete [BOLSHEVIK], of course. Each company dropped those tag lines very shortly after release, but I think the damage had already been done to the public psyche. If as much as 90% of the energy in gasoline was converted directly to electric drive, I'd have no problem at all with hybrids. But it is instead not even 40% efficient -- more than 50% less than what I would consider nominal. With around 273 kWh available for motivation, an electric car that runs on gas, would probably have a range not less than ~818 miles, and possibly as much as ~1,090. That would be an actual, real world observed fuel economy of anywhere from 90 MPG to 121 MPG.

 

[Alketi]

ICE manufacturers had planned to CRAWL toward pure EVs over a span of decades, slowly transitioning first to hybrids (to preserve their precious engine IP) and then eventually to BEVs. Telsa, of course, utterly disrupted that narrative.

However, make no mistake as to the coincidence that Ford and Toyota have no functional EV plans to speak of -- they're selling the most ICE cars in each of their categories. They're incapable of self-disruption. This is spelled out in the Innovator's Dilemma, to a tee.

The German carmakers, by contrast, have been freed by scandal. A scandal that's on-going, BTW, with news this week that Daimler, VW, Audi, and Porsche may have all intentionally colluded in diesel-gate. Additionally VW is being forced to build $2B worth of superchargers. Yes, many of their press-releases include hybrids and other nonsense, but they'll absolutely be the first to move to real EVs.

I mean, a 5,000lb family sedan accelerates faster than even Porsche's ultimate supercar. ICE supercars will be the first to die.

On the other hand, look at the implied bragging of the new Ford Mustang -- upgraded V8 engine, all new 10-speed transmission, 25 more HP, etc. etc.
2018 Ford Mustang adds power, reduces 0-60 m.p.h. time

How are these clowns going to obsolete all of this effort to buy off the shelf motors and direct-drive transmissions?? They'll die first.

 

[MXWing]

Speaking of Toyota bullshiat

THIS thing is an EV?

 

[SageBrush]

I am of the decided opinion that the entire 'MPGe' concept is a load of [BOLSHEVIK].

I'm no fan of MPGe either, but mostly because it is so poorly understood.

However, I was talking about MPG -- not MPGe

I own the Prius Prime, and I am going to swap it for a Model 3 because I can, because I love Tesla, and I enjoy EV driving but let me tell you my personal pollution story in the context of use and money:

I paid $8,300 for a used LEAF to be a local second car, and paid $25,500 for the Prime. Then I spent $7k on PV (all before tax credits)
Our household drives about 16,000 miles a year, most of them my 90 mile r/t commute to work where the Prime is outside of its comfort zone for impressive petrol economy. Between these two cars and electric for our home we burn and emit:

100 gallons of fuel a year
7.5 grams of Nox
No Sox

For context, an average Iced US household drives 24k miles a year and consumes about 10 MWh from the grid. That works out to around
1100 gallons of fuel a year
14,600 grams Nox
7,000 grams Sox

My point is that in a money constrained household the Prime is a great choice; and if it leaves some money left over for PV then it is gold. Only Tesla has a chance of making an environmental impact as significant as the Prius family. So while I look forward to Toyota joining the BEV revolution, I think their *EV approach is rational and complementary.

 

[Red Sage]

ICE manufacturers had planned to CRAWL toward pure EVs over a span of decades, slowly transitioning first to hybrids (to preserve their precious engine IP) and then eventually to BEVs. Telsa, of course, utterly disrupted that narrative.

However, make no mistake as to the coincidence that Ford and Toyota have no functional EV plans to speak of -- they're selling the most ICE cars in each of their categories. They're incapable of self-disruption. This is spelled out in the Innovator's Dilemma, to a tee.

The German carmakers, by contrast, have been freed by scandal. A scandal that's on-going, BTW, with news this week that Daimler, VW, Audi, and Porsche may have all intentionally colluded in diesel-gate. Additionally VW is being forced to build $2B worth of superchargers. Yes, many of their press-releases include hybrids and other nonsense, but they'll absolutely be the first to move to real EVs.

I mean, a 5,000lb family sedan accelerates faster than even Porsche's ultimate supercar. ICE supercars will be the first to die.

On the other hand, look at the implied bragging of the new Ford Mustang -- upgraded V8 engine, all new 10-speed transmission, 25 more HP, etc. etc.
2018 Ford Mustang adds power, reduces 0-60 m.p.h. time

How are these clowns going to obsolete all of this effort to buy off the shelf motors and direct-drive transmissions?? They'll die first.

Once again, at least (I use the phrase 'at least' quite a bit when describing the efforts of traditional automobile manufacturers) Ford made a fully electric Focus, their best selling passenger car in the world. Toyota didn't do that with the Corolla, their best seller, at all -- not even as a compliance car. No, Ford won't be releasing a fully electric version of the F-Series until they lose around 300,000+ units in annual sales to a Tesla full sized pickup truck... And Toyota didn't even bother to have a hybrid version of the Camry until they saw CAFE requirements were going to climb high enough to kill them with their TUNDRA pickup truck being included in the mix... And for both companies, each time they speak of hybrid technology being 'The BEST of BOTH Worlds!' they never use either the best electrical components nor the best ICE engine they have on hand... So, yeah, they are rather doomed. I'm just saying that between the two, Ford is slightly less doomed, as they at least (see?) intend to 'electrify' just about everything in their product line to some degree before 2020.

I think VW may be building CCS chargers and whatnot, but definitely not Superchargers. I still firmly believe that Porsche was blowing smoke about their intended charging speed for the Mission E. I don't believe that ICE Supercars/Hypercars will die exactly... They'll just end up becoming even more rare, even more 'exclusive', and will sell to fewer and fewer people than ever before in the past 25 years or so. Certain cars won't be seen on the road anywhere other than Los Angeles or Dubai going forward. For collectors and some with an 'elitist' perspective, this will be a 'good' thing, as they never believed companies such as Ferrari, Lamborghini, or Bugatti should become an 'everyman's car' to own anyway. There are some that would be perfectly happy if such brands cut back to only build 300 or fewer vehicles per year, and that each production run was capped at less than 1,000 units, with some as rare as perhaps three dozen units over three years maximum.

 

[Red Sage]

I'm no fan of MPGe either, but mostly because it is so poorly understood.

However, I was talking about MPG -- not MPGe

I own the Prius Prime, and I am going to swap it for a Model 3 because I can, because I love Tesla, and I enjoy EV driving but let me tell you my personal pollution story in the context of use and money:

I paid $8,300 for a used LEAF to be a local second car, and paid $25,500 for the Prime. Then I spent $7k on PV (all before tax credits)
Our household drives about 16,000 miles a year, most of them my 90 mile r/t commute to work where the Prime is outside of its comfort zone for impressive petrol economy. Between these two cars and electric for our home we burn and emit:

100 gallons of fuel a year
7.5 grams of Nox
No Sox

For context, an average Iced US household drives 24k miles a year and consumes about 10 MWh from the grid. That works out to around
1100 gallons of fuel a year
14,600 grams Nox
7,000 grams Sox

My point is that in a money constrained household the Prime is a great choice; and if it leaves some money left over for PV then it is gold. Only Tesla has a chance of making an environmental impact as significant as the Prius family. So while I look forward to Toyota joining the BEV revolution, I think their *EV approach is rationale and complementary.

Thanks for the explanation, but the way you posted before, it seemed you were speaking of the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) rating for the company, Toyota, not the environmental impact of a Family that owns one of their plug-in hybrids. My point is that in regard to CAFE, MPGe artificially inflates and supports the rating for ICE manufacturers far beyond where it should be, effectively granting them a disproportionate 'bonus' for cars that still burn gasoline. My further point is that the rationale of plug-in hybrids being a 'bridge' to EVs is flawed, because it is instead a roadblock deployed as an excuse by traditional automobile manufacturers who employ the 'use less gas' principle. If the volume of the vehicle that is occupied by the engine and its support systems were filled with batteries instead, it would likely weigh about the same, be less complicated overall, and have a decent fully electric range, instead of one that is so woefully inadequate it makes it seem that carrying a generator with you everywhere makes some kind of sense... 'just in case'. I despise such concessions to the concept of 'range anxiety', as if it is a given, and unavoidable.

 

[Red Sage]

Speaking of Toyota bullshiat

THIS thing is an EV?

View attachment 237774

It is the bare minimum negotiated POS that traditional automobile manufacturers requested of CARB so that they wouldn't have to worry about surpassing the Chevrolet VOLT's ~16 kWh battery pack capacity when building a plug-in hybrid. This version of the Prius made the 2014 Honda Accord Plug-In Hybrid look better though, with its paltry 13 miles of fully electric range. You'll notice that for each one, the theme continues that if you add a plug, you must pay more, but lose overall range compared to a regular hybrid version. But at least manufacturers gained the heightened MPGe rating to apply toward their CAFE.

 

[SageBrush]

Thanks for the explanation, but the way you posted before, it seemed you were speaking of the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) rating for the company, Toyota, not the environmental impact of a Family that owns one of their plug-in hybrids. My point is that in regard to CAFE, MPGe artificially inflates and supports the rating for ICE manufacturers far beyond where it should be, effectively granting them a disproportionate 'bonus' for cars that still burn gasoline. My further point is that the rationale of plug-in hybrids being a 'bridge' to EVs is flawed, because it is instead a roadblock deployed as an excuse by traditional automobile manufacturers who employ the 'use less gas' principle. If the volume of the vehicle that is occupied by the engine and its support systems were filled with batteries instead, it would likely weigh about the same, be less complicated overall, and have a decent fully electric range, instead of one that is so woefully inadequate it makes it seem that carrying a generator with you everywhere makes some kind of sense... 'just in case'. I despise such concessions to the concept of 'range anxiety', as if it is a given, and unavoidable.

I was being verbose. My opinion comes down to thinking that Toyota offers good, affordable cars that make a big dent in emissions, today.

 

[SageBrush]

THIS thing is an EV?

Replaced by the Prime with double the battery -- 8.8 kWh
That does not sound like much, and in practice it is actually only about 5.6 kWh usable.
But the car is very efficient and could reduce petrol use by ~ 75% if adopted widely*

* The lion's share of national daily car use is up to 50 miles a day. The Prime EPA is 25 miles EV and then 54 mpg. Even at 50 miles the Prime uses about 0.5 gallons of petrol so 100 MPG. That is a darned impressive "ICE" for $25k USD

 

[zenmaster]

I mean, a 5,000lb family sedan accelerates faster than even Porsche's ultimate supercar. ICE supercars will be the first to die.

If acceleration was everything, then one could simply build a custom car that had acceleration? No, people pay for an entire performance package when they buy a supercar, where acceleration from 0-60 is only a fraction of overall capability. Performance-striving BEVs still have a few years to match performance-oriented ICE cars.

 

[Alketi]

If acceleration was everything, then one could simply build a custom car that had acceleration? No, people pay for an entire performance package when they buy a supercar, where acceleration from 0-60 is only a fraction of overall capability. Performance-striving BEVs still have a few years to match performance-oriented ICE cars.

Yes, zenmaster, we know all about BMW's skid-pad numbers.

Tesla needed to dispel the myth of the golf cart and the Model S proved the ridiculous superiority of the electric motor. Others will take care of the rest. In the future, one can always listen to Panama by Van Halen to remember what a Lamborghini sounded like.

Kudos to Porsche for realizing this is an existential crisis.

Porsche changes its mind on electric vehicles, plans 50% of its production to be electric within 6 years

 

[Red Sage]

If acceleration was everything, then one could simply build a custom car that had acceleration? No, people pay for an entire performance package when they buy a supercar, where acceleration from 0-60 is only a fraction of overall capability. Performance-striving BEVs still have a few years to match performance-oriented ICE cars.

Heh. It may not even take a 'few' years. I suspect BMW 3-Series fans will find it has taken place... THIS year.

 

[Red Sage]

* The lion's share of national daily car use is up to 50 miles a day. The Prime EPA is 25 miles EV and then 54 mpg. Even at 50 miles the Prime uses about 0.5 gallons of petrol so 100 MPG. That is a darned impressive "ICE" for $25k USD

OK, so that calculation is not as ridiculous as when Chevrolet VOLT owners claim to have bought only six gallons of gas over the course of 12,000 miles driving and that means they get 2,000 miles per gallon... But it still irks me somewhat. Mostly because the Tesla Model S 85 had a 265 mile range, with an 85 kWh capacity battery pack, which equates to 2.5 gallons of gasoline energy, but it wasn't given a 106 MPGe rating... Instead it was given an 89 MPGe combined rating. Yet the Prius Prime is given a 133 MPGe rating, when it can only go 25 miles on electricity. This is the sort of thing that yields conspiracy theories and stuff.

 

[EinSV]

If acceleration was everything, then one could simply build a custom car that had acceleration? No, people pay for an entire performance package when they buy a supercar, where acceleration from 0-60 is only a fraction of overall capability. Performance-striving BEVs still have a few years to match performance-oriented ICE cars.

The Nio EP9 EV record lap for a production vehicle earlier this year at Nurburgring has already shown that EV superiority is not limited to straight-line acceleration. NIO EP9 Electric Supercar Nurburgring Record - Fastest Street-Legal Car at Nurburgring

It is game-over. An EV drivetrain is a much more efficient propulsion mechanism than ICE. Model S has already proven that in straightline acceleration and Model 3 will continue to build on that legacy in a vehicle that is more nimble than the S and more practical than the EP9. The new Tesla Roadster will be the nail in the coffin (it will be a bad day to be Ferrari or Lamborghini when the next-gen Roadster comes out). Within a couple years ICE will have better performance only in increasingly rare edge cases that are irrelevant to all but a handful of buyers.

 

[zenmaster]

we know all about BMW's skid-pad numbers

Lol, hyperbole aside it is a bit silly and naive to reduce supercar-level "performance" to mere drag racing capability (for which auto makers don't engineer supercars, and buyers don't buy supercars). However, many people are only interested in their favorite car's drag racing numbers and like to emphasize how it compares to that of usually more expensive cars. Seems the same exact drag racing championing is going on here as with old souped up, tiny-engine import or "sleeper" camp vs the big V8 muscle car camp of 30 years ago.

 

[zenmaster]

The Nio EP9 EV record lap for a production vehicle earlier this year at Nurburgring has already shown that EV superiority is not limited to straight-line acceleration. It is game-over.

At $1.5 million dollars each, really game over?

 

[EinSV]

At $1.5 million dollars each, really game over?

Yes, game over.

The Nio has a faster Nurburgring time than the Porsche 918 which has a base price of $845K. The tip top of the top end Bugatti Chiron ($2.3M) and Ferrari LaFerrari ($1.4M) have run at Nurburgring but to my knowledge haven't released their times -- draw your own conclusions but I think it's pretty obvious they can't beat the Nio EV. And this is a mere 5 years after the Model S was introduced and EVs first dipped their toes in the mainstream.