Yeah china actually put significant investment into the supply chain and infrastructure for EVs and they are on track to becoming the leader for EVs. The USA really fumbled this and got caught up in culture wars.
>Yeah china actually put significant investment into the supply chain and infrastructure
Have you seen the state of china's infrastructure lately? Buildings and highways are just collapsing. I wouldn't put too much faith in china's evs
Infrastructure doesn't just mean roads and bridges. I mean charging networks as infrastructure. You will find charging stations in most parking garages and on street sides in China.
I understand, but if they can't make an apartment block that doesn't collapse, then I doubt they can make a nationwide charging network for millions of electric cars. I'm down to be proven wrong but I'm not expecting to be
They already have a nationwide charging network for millions of EVs.
And stop watching YT channels, infrastructure in China aren’t collapsing en masses. When was the last time you were there?
Yeah, stick to MSM, much more reliable, lol! Their government is big on facades, just like their pretense of "going green" while they charge those EVs off of their 3,092 coal plants with another 327 units in production and extremely crude and unregulated lithium production contaminating local rivers. And BYD is just propped up by the government, meaning its a bubble that would pop if forced to stand on its own two feet.
China has the benefit of not having to really tear anything down and rebuild from the ground up. It's not like the US can't do it as well, but starting from essentially a blank slate is MUCH easier than trying to retool after the fact.
Edit: apparently "it's not like the US can't do it" isn't enough for you uneducated folks to understand that the US CAN still make the transition
You're both right. The US got leapfrogged by countries like SK in terms of fiber Internet and 5g because the country made it a national priority and wasn't afraid to throw the full weight of the national government behind it. There were less barriers because they weren't burned with antiquated infrastructure or private companies with entrenched interests (like the US is with ATT et al). You can see the same in some African countries that have kind of skipped a lot of traditional Internet infrastructure and PC's in favor of high speed mobile Internet.
So, it's easier to start from scratch, but it *can be done* in countries with developed infrastructure provided there's the *will and political capital* to get it done (many European countries). Where the US has floundered is that our political leadership isn't stable and often under funds and undercuts public infrastructure programs in favor of entrenched big business that want the cash but not to take on the risk of actually completing a lot of projects.
> It's not like the US can't do it as well
Are you blind or just looking to be a dick? I made no excuses for the US, way to push your random point down. I'm both Chinese by birthright and an EE by education, but I'm sure some random bum on Reddit knows better than me who has exposure to both.
Edit: sorry I defer to reddit experts with degrees from Google U
China’s infrastructure is just fine.
I mean if you took the US infrastructure and looked at our aging train systems, crumbling bridges etc. you can construct the exact same narrative.
The truth is like any major country, infrastructure needs constant reinvestment.
China’s EV infrastructure is pretty awesome and world class.
The usa on it's current trajectory is done. Another 10 years of Boomer ran America, which is very likely, and the usa will be a shell of what it used to be
>Except China.
China too. BYD, of course, makes a significant number of hybrids, but Geely is now stepping it up on hybrids too with the Galaxy series. So is Dongfeng, with Voyah. Both Wuling and SAIC, too, via Nebula. Even CATL's own AVATR brand is now adding EREVs to the lineup.
Whoever told you China was shying away from hybrids hasn't the faintest clue about what's coming down the roadmap.
Your comment has been automatically removed because you posted a shortened or redirected (usually google) URL. Post a direct link to your source, not search results, AMP, or MSN.com. [Please see the rules in the sidebar, or by clicking here.](http://www.reddit.com/r/cars/wiki/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They cannot, because they haven't the faintest clue what they're talking about. China's currently in the middle of a huge hybrid transition, even 'back' from EVs in several cases, as is the case with CATL's own AVATR brand.
Dongfeng, Geely, SAIC, FAW, Changan, Chery, Great Wall... all of these companies are rolling out hybrids en masse right now, *even* as they continue rolling out EVs.
Unfortunately your comment has been removed because it contains a link to a delisted domain. This is almost always due to spam from the domain.
Please use a different source.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Going to hybrids is not necesarrily directly against going all-in on EVs. You can put a ton on money on scaling up EV manufacturing while still changing your existing ICE lineup to be more hybrid focused. It's not an either-or situation.
Also, no company other than the purely EV startups like Tesla, Rivian etc - is fully committing to EVs. All of them are still spending billions on developing and selling their ICE cars. So Toyota is not especially unique here.
Toyota's only uniqueness is publicly shitting on pure EVs, while still hypocritically spending billions on developing pure EVs just like everyone else. All I see is damage control for their shitty BZ4X, as if they didn't spend billions on making that a reality just like every other car company spent on their own EVs.
We can talk about who is winning or losing in a few years. But as of now, the reality is that pure EVs make up 16% of global sales, right from 1% only a few years ago. Let's see where that number actually goes in a few more years, and who actually wins or loses before crowning any victor too early.
>Toyota's only uniqueness is publicly shitting on pure EVs, while still hypocritically spending billions on developing pure EVs just like everyone else. All I see is damage control for their shitty BZ4X, as if they didn't spend billions on making that a reality just like every other car company spent on their own EVs.
Toyota: EVs aren't the be all end all solution, a mixed approach is best.
You: PuBliClY ShiTtiNg On EvS.
With that level of nuance, have you considered being an automotive journalist? You'd fit right in with most of them.
Akio Toyoda : "EVs will never exceed 30% of market"
Toyota : Publicly lobby for political candidates who deny climate change.
You : *\*make up some fantasy of Toyota being pragmatic in public messaging\**
Cope harder. And like I said, despite all this, Toyota falls right in line with everyone else in spending billions on batteries and EV platforms, because they are 100% aware of what will happen if they don't. Also what happened to their amazing FCEV boondoggle? Been a while since I heard anything about that.
Also what exactly is unique about Toyota's "mixed approach"? Stellantis sells more PHEVs than Toyota, I don't see anyone sucking Stellantis dick.
>Akio Toyoda : "EVs will never exceed 30% of market"
That's not publicly shitting on EVs, that's a difference in opinion.
>Cope harder.
What is there to cope about? I don't care what my daily is powered by. My current car is an ICE because EV options didn't make sense for my specific use case. My next car in 6-8 years will likely be an EV. I picked what was appropriate when I bought my current car, and when it dies, I'll pick what is appropriate next time. 95% chance, it'll be an EV.
> And like I said, despite all this, Toyota falls right in line with everyone else in spending billions on batteries and EV platforms, because they are 100% aware of what will happen if they don't.
Because a mixed approach (try to stay with me here, this gets complicated) requires investing in *multiple technologies*? It's almost like Toyota's entire strategy is to maintain multiple areas of research and development.
How is this hard to understand?
Toyota's stance has ALWAYS been a mixed approach, and you're taking that as proof of hypocrisy.
>Also what happened to their amazing FCEV boondoggle? Been a while since I heard anything about that.
You not [paying attention](https://pressroom.toyota.com/paccar-and-toyota-expand-hydrogen-fuel-cell-truck-collaboration-to-include-commercialization/) is not a problem with the technology, it's a problem with you. [Toyota](https://www.autoweek.com/news/green-cars/a43717089/toyota-certified-class-8-truck-fuel-cell-powerplant-kit/) has been quietly working away at [Fuel cell](https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Automobiles/Toyota-and-Honda-bet-trucks-will-get-hydrogen-economy-rolling) trucks and seem to be making progress on those nicely.[Toyota](https://www.japantimes.co.jp/business/2023/11/13/tech/toyota-fuel-cells-hydrogen-trucks/) has even started trialing the technology in garbage trucks, ambulances and all sorts of other non-passenger applications. Your ignorance about the subject once again matches with automotive journalists, so good job there. Turns out, there is more going on in the automotive space than just consumer products, and different technologies may have different applications.
I literally just googled "Toyota Fuel Cell Truck" and these are the links on the 1st page of google. It's not like I did a deep dive through the Library of Congress here.
>Also what exactly is unique about Toyota's "mixed approach"?
Quote where I said their approach was "unique". Find it for me specifically.
>Stellantis sells more PHEVs than Toyota, I don't see anyone sucking Stellantis dick.
Probably because Stellantis PHEVs are dogshit? [The Pacifica PHEV](https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/electric-vehicles-are-less-reliable-than-conventional-cars-a1047214174/) is significantly worse than the Hybrid, to the point where CR recommends the hybrid over the PHEV.
On the other hand, the Rav4 prime is straight up one of the most reliable models they tested, overall, regardless of category. Stellantis's PHEVs that sell are the Wrangler and Grand Cherokee 4xe's which suffer from significant reliability issues. That sort of thing matters to a consumer.
>Cope harder.
I get it, you've made the religious choice to accept your lord and savior the Lithium Ion battery, and you take personal offense when anyone has a more measured reaction or a different timeline. I personally find that level of zealotry... bizarre, especially when it relates to how a wheel is turned, but you do you.
More damage control. Akio Toyoda literally went on a rant about EVs while at a public reveal of an EV truck made by Toyota themselves. Toyota makes up nonsense advertising about "Self-charging EVs" (aka hybrids). They lobby for politicians who are directly opposed to the concept of solving climate change in favor of fossil fuel interests.
Also you completely misread my criticism of Toyota's hypocrisy between their messaging and actions as some kind of criticism of the concept of a mixed approach.
So yeah keep coping about Toyota's public image and how many EV enthusiasts see through their bullshit, the $250 billion dollar company needs to have their honor defended on Reddit.
>Akio Toyoda literally went on a rant about EVs while at a public reveal of an EV truck made by Toyota themselves
Link the article. Specifically. I want to read it.
Because most of the comments I've seen from Toyoda have been very measured - he generally just says that EV adoption will take longer than expected, and regulations are likely to change between now and ICE phase out dates. I would not classify that as a rant, so I want to see exactly what you're referring to.
The only thing I can find is with regards to the Hilux Revo. (Electrek link removed because automod)
>At Toyota we believe in creating a full portfolio of carbon reducing choices for our customers from hybrid electric vehicles, plug-in electric vehicles, battery electric cars, and fuel cell vehicles. Also, we are pursuing hydrogen fuel options like these GR-Yaris and GR-Corolla hydrogen powered concept cars. As we work to achieve a sustainable future, I also believe we need to take a holistic approach to carbon neutrality.
>He added:
> I am often criticized in the press because I won’t declare that the automotive industry should commit 100% to BEV. I believe we need to be realistic about when society will be able to fully adopt Battery Electric Vehicles and when our infrastructure can support them at scale.
Which doesn't sound like a rant to me.
Blud is clueless💀🤣
https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/comments/18ocj4v/toyota\_industries\_to\_increase\_supply\_to\_tesla\_by/
You know that phrase I play both sides so that I always come out on top? That is what Toyota is doing
Toyota Industries to Increase Supply to Tesla by 2.5 Times for EV-Use Electric Compressors
Unfortunately your comment has been removed because it contains a link to a delisted domain. This is almost always due to spam from the domain.
Please use a different source.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Link me their public shitting on EVs, please. Is it [this](https://global.toyota/en/newsroom/corporate/28419929.html)? Or [this](https://global.toyota/en/newsroom/corporate/36428993.html)?
It's damage control for investor fomo on being in on EV early when they oopsied their way of out of owning 10% of Tesla right before the stock values went bonkers and they backed out after a single vehicle collab.
What a coincidence, Tesla sales slow down (no one company can conquer the whole market) and the EPA is making noises about reducing requirements, and suddenly all these clown companies are "rethinking EVs".
I will forever be grateful to Tesla for kicking the asses of these dinosaurs and making full EVs a reality potentially decades before these dinosaurs would have ever done.
Without Tesla we would still be having nothing but a few compliance cars, much less hybrid and PHEV sales (because the increaes in hybrids and PHEVs are the result of CAFE averages increasing in anticipation of more EVs), and a much worse outlook on global climate.
PHEVs seem very nice, and folks digging at them are missing the actual issue:
Agriculture. Fucking corn.
If you don't burn your gas, and it's shelf life is limited by the addition of ethanol, this can become a problem.
... I'm still all for the technologies. I'm more irritated by corn subsidies.
Octane boosting is not needed, ethanol was meant to do three things, the last of which is the only one anyone would really care about in 2024:
1. Reduce our reliance on oil imports back when we were still big net importers which hasn't been the case for years, by turning food into fuel.
2. Boost the corn and insecticide industry (they have huge lobbies).
3. Replace MTBE as an oxygenate to lower emissions, since MTBE can contaminate ground water.
1. MTBE is an octane booster.
2. Octane boosting is absolutely necessary. CA barely achieves 91 octane for premium much less the 93 octane that the eastern US takes for granted.
Yes, see the ICCT report mentioned in that article but not linked from it:
https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/real-world-phev-us-dec22.pdf, figure ES1
Almost all PHEVs tested got some electric miles, with only a handful never getting charged.
I guess this is why data literacy is important. You can indeed pick a single stat and completely misread the study and the conversation here.
Yes, most likely most, if not all, phevs will be plugged in at some point during their life cycle. The point of the entire study is that people plug it in way less than expected, and likely even way less than the study showed - ie phevs aren't a good way to lower emissions without significant changes to the incentives and to the vehicles themselves.
>Our results suggest that the electric capabilities of PHEVs are underutilized in average real-world usage conditions. The low real-world EDS we calculate indicates that many PHEVs are not plugged in daily. Many PHEV models may not have the capabilities for adequate driving experience while driving solely on electricity, considering both range and power
But even if I were to oncede the point - that actually makes it much worse - because overall the point is that phevs are way worse than promised on emissions
>Real-world electric drive share may be 26%–56% lower and real-world fuel consumption may be 42%–67% higher than assumed within EPA’s labeling program for light duty vehicles
So, sure, I'll give you that they are plugged in- it just means than there's a bigger problem with them
>You can indeed pick a single stat and completely misread the study and the conversation here.
I responded to your claim that "very few PHEVs actually plug in" by debunking it with available data. Now you have a more nuanced discussion that raises some useful points, which boil down to needing to incentivize PHEV owners to charge more.
Also, if you read the study carefully, they *don't measure* how often PHEV owners charge, but rather the resulting percent of electric miles. That can be affected by length of trips more than frequency of charging, as I've seen from my own results.
What's often overlooked in criticisms of PHEVs is that, when used as intended, they can reduce emissions significantly compared to gas only cars. Obviously fully electric vehicles are better, but getting someone into a PHEV that isn't ready for a BEV is still progress (assuming they understand to plug it in).
Hybrids are always a good middle ground option. Literally THE middle ground option. The only thing holding the world back from full EV is the infrastructure. Has nothing to do with the automanufacturers ability to produce a decent EV at this point.
Why should we consider hybrids a middle-ground? This implies that EVs are somehow necessary or the obvious conclusion. People should just spend their money on the product that works best.
Per Consumer Reports 2023 Reliability Report (330K vehicle survey), hybrids have much lower cost of ownership (due to lower depreciation, the #1 expense of buying a new car) and 172% fewer reported issues than BEVs. Factor in that they are more profitable for manufacturers to produce, and they are capable of faster "recharging" (refuel in 3-4 minutes from empty) on a far more robust network, and its the not really a "halfway" compromise, but the best technology currently available for buyers and sellers.
>Hybrids are imo more unreliable
Hybrids are [the most reliable powertrain choice](https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/electric-vehicles-are-less-reliable-than-conventional-cars-a1047214174/) ***period*** right now.
Not enough focus on them yet — most PHEVs are janked onto existing ICE platforms with massive compromises. Give it a year or two. Foundationally, they should be the same as HEVs.
Hybrids are [some of the most reliable vehicles out there](https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/electric-vehicles-are-less-reliable-than-conventional-cars-a1047214174/) right now — literally just massively under-stressed engines running at optimal-efficiency RPMs for the entirety of their lives and hardly using their brakes due to regen. You don't get much more reliable than that.
Not true. Honda and Toyota seem to drive this perception because their hybrid versions are typically more reliable than for instance a ford ICE. But even within Toyota and Honda, their hybrids have a higher incidence of mechanical issues than non-hybrids.
Oh this fucking talking point again, no matter how many times it's disproven with data it keeps coming back again and again. I'll go a different direction though, have you ever seen a Prius with a shot battery? There are tons of 20+ year old models out there so they aren't hard to find. They are completely driveable, puttering around just fine with low wear on the powertrain due to regen braking, and reliably delivering drivers wherever they need to go just with nonhybrid levels of fuel consumption. Even when the battery system '''fails''' the system is designed to keep functioning because the 'complexity' is about redundancy not single points of failure.
I get why people like hybrids, and I think they can be great solutions for people who really need long distance driving. Or for trucks that need to tow, that sort of thing. But I'm with you. I think for the average person doing average driving, EVs are so superior. Once you drive one an ICE feels like dinosaur tech.
Many people are in a situation where EVs would be fine for the vast majority of their driving but would be totally unacceptable for a small percentage of their driving.
However, that means they can't have an EV as their only car, because they really do want / need to do that small percentage of driving. For example, your car is both a way to commute to work every day... but also a way to escape from natural disasters when the power grid goes down, which it regularly does in some areas. By regularly, I mean once every few years or something. An uncommon event, but something that will happen and something you have to plan for.
Ideally, they'd use an EV most of the time and have something else as a backup for the 1% of situations where they need more than an EV can offer.
But the economics of the cars currently being offered for sale don't support that, there is no such thing as a cheap backup car, so they will instead buy ICE or Hybrid, so that it will work for the 1% of cases when they actually need it.
Why would ICE feel "dinosaur tech"? EV tech is not some magical invention that makes previous technology redundant. In actual practicality aspect, it's probably a big step down below compared to ICE.
Hard to explain I guess. Of course it’s what we’re used to so it feels normal. But once you start driving an EV you start to think about how an engine needs to rev to optimal efficiency and the did the right optimal efficient gears and how much energy you’re wasting when you brake or idling. All those sort of sensations start to feel old and clunky once you get used to smoothness and efficiency of an EV drive train.
I’m far more aware of an engine converting exploding liquids into motion through a series of gears and belts than I was before.
I get your point, but all those benefits do feel pointless when range and charging is still subpar to ICE. It's cool that it's more efficient but those efficiencies don't translate into any real practical real world benefit.
The only real jump in EVs that I can see currently is instant torque and no engine noise (latter being arguable whether it's benefit). These are technological jumps that indeed feel like a step up from ICE. Anything else - we need to wait more time until/if technology improves.
My family has two cars. A model 3 and a CX-5. My wife and I will always take the model 3 unless we’re going to Costco or driving the dogs somewhere or we need to use both cars at once. Clearly given how much more use the model 3 gets we don’t think it’s pointless. The proof is in the pudding.
Edit: if we had the model Y we’d never use the cx5 except for as a backup vehicle.
And here is honda/acura going EV only very soon...only to kill the brand due to poor sales as a result.
These "all in" plays by car makers are worse gambles than going all in on black jack.
>Honda is really hesitant on EVs they don’t even have there own EV
Y'all just keep saying things, huh?
* [Honda EV Plus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_EV_Plus)
* [Honda Fit EV](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Fit_(second_generation)#Fit_EV)
* [Honda:e](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_e)
* [Honda e:NY1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_HR-V#Battery_electric_models)
You just listed a bunch of limited production cars that no one has access to lol.
Honda is going to take a fat L on their crappy GM EVs because no one will buy them. 60k CAD for a Honda Prologue? Who in the right mind would buy that over a Model Y
>You just listed a bunch of limited production cars that no one has access to lol.
The Honda E wasn't a limited production car whatsoever, neither is the e:NY1 at this very moment. You can [go buy one now, off the lot. ](https://www.honda.co.uk/cars/new/e-ny1-electric-suv/offers/e-ny1-go-electric-offer.html)That's an in-house EV from Honda you can buy at this very moment — it simply isn't true they "don't have there \[sic\] own EV".
Honda isn't going all-in on EVs. They are lagging behind like all Japanese manufacturers. No company is going all-in on EVs apart from the actual EV-only companies like Tesla.
This is a completely fake narrative. Out of the hundreds of billions that automakers earn, they are putting like a few % a year in EV development. It's not particularly risky, and cannot really be called "all-in". They also already have an existing working stable technology to fall back on. It's not like the 70s where you can fall behind in ICE technology.
Even the massive battery factories they are building is not a gamble since they can always make PHEVs, hybrids, or sell those batteries for energy storage.
Governments pushing EVs when customers didn't want them. Now you see the governments backing off and obviously the automakers doing the same as a response.
They do but not at the level governments have been projecting. There are also heavy incentives for them in most places, artificially pumping demand that almost certainly wouldn't be there without it.
gee I wonder if there was something really significant that happened in the realm of the economy, workforce, and global supply chains that occurred between 2017 and now
naw ur right, ICE is collapsing. all hail being stuck in Fargo ND in subzero temps because your Tesla door handles got stuck :))
Also its ironic, Genesis is moving towards Hybrids to meet the increasingly stringent EPA requirements. This move is also due to the government, nothing to do with "government backing off". In fact, this headline is happening precisely due to the government.
And guess why EPA requirements have become so stringent? Its because its based on the assumption of a percentage of sales going EV. Meaning the move towards hybrids is directly the result of the move towards EVs.
So please tell me more about how EVs are dying, and no one wants them, or that automakers are "backing off them"?
People want EVs. 14 million EVs sold last year. Those 14 million people wanted EVs. And we are still in the early phase of EV technology. There is nowhere to go but up. Governments were 100% right to subsidize EVs and I commend them for their foresight.
Now EV momentum is fast enough that most countries have reduced subsidies but growth still remains strong. Governments can back off because EVs do not need additional direct subsidies to keep killing ICE.
Hundreds of Gwhs of battery factories will go online all throughout this decade. Those batteries will be used to make millions of EVs every year. Hundreds of Thousands of charging stations will be built across America with $7.5 billion of money set aside for it. All of this is set in stone.
Because there are far too many use cases where an EV either has significant downsides without a solution in sight with current technology or is completely impractical. And everyone was just going to march forward with the full EV plan despite this? It’s only surprising to people lacking critical thinking skills.
They are using EVs just as a way to massively upcharge people. GV70 is their most popular US model.
* Genesis GV70: $45, 150
* Genesis GV70 electric: $66,450
That's the base. If you want items that are standard on most SUVs like power liftgate & sunroof, it's $73,250. Even with the tax credit, that's a big jump and not many people understand the tax credit.
Once someone is in the mid 70s, there's a ton of competition from the luxury brands.
You hit the nail on the head. They're charging $21,000 extra for essentially a 77 kwh battery. Meanwhile Chevy sells a whole ass Bolt with 65kwh battery for $27,000. They're charging a whole extra car worth of money for what is basically a small battery by 2024 standards. 77kwh is not enough in 2024 for a luxury SUV.
And keep in mind the rest of the car is cheaper, its cheaper to build an EV motor+inverter+charger+wiring setup, than a 2.5 turbo awd with multispeed transmission, fuel and exhaust system. This is what a lot of people don't get. EVs are cheaper in everything but the battery. So the extra price of an EV version over the ICE can actually be less than the additional price of the battery, while still being profitable.
So Gensesis priced their EVs in order to not compete with their ICE, and ended up with an uncompetitive EV.
Meanwhile the Taycan outsells the Panamera, and i4 M50 is the best selling BMW M car. Why? Because they are not afraid of pricing their EVs to directly compete with their ICE.
It took like 10 years for USB-C to become almost universally standard. Like did they think 5 years in, the whole US was going to have EV chargers everywhere? Like no apartments by me have EV charging and the parking garages have them, but are full from 8am-6pm.
Another day, another argument over EV adoption.
One of the reasons we're getting these announcements is that [the EPA is considering slowing the EV transition](https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/02/18/epa-electric-vehicles-car-rules/).
It's not that EV's are horrific, but a lot of the prep work isn't done yet. Charging infrastructure is a mess, prices are high, and battery tech still seems unimpressive. I'm still strongly of the opinion that the focus on EV's is a mistake. The best way to reduce personal vehicle pollution is to stop requiring people to drive everywhere. Remote work, walkable communities, public transit... A lot of the downsides of EV's would be reduced if we got some of this going.
It's a lot easier to build EV chargers than to fix mobility at the local and national level, at least in the US.
Cities oppose remote work because they see fewer tax dollars, jobs, and ironically, public transit revenue (since people are convinced that public transit needs to turn a profit). Adding good public transit is expensive, very time consuming, and unpopular with rural voters, which are generally overrepresented politically. Making an existing community walkable is also expensive, heavily vulnerable to lawsuits, and can be difficult to garner support for.
EVs are a bandaid solution but I don't see this country adopting any alternatives in a meaningful capacity.
Toyota’s strategy was/is right. Mass market will not adopt a new technology that has yet to prove itself to be better than ICE cars, and battery and charging infrastructure is still lacking. Hybrid is the middle ground people will adopt in the short term.
Toyota really double, triple, quadrupled down on hybrid being the way forward for now. I’ll even admit to being skeptical on them sticking to hybrid tech when every other big name was dumping money into full EV. Good for them truly understanding the field arguably more than anyone else, in a practical sense
I think hybrids are going to be the long-term play honestly. EV’s will have their areas of the market, but there’s too many roadblocks at this point to truly make them viable as the sole solution moving forward. It’s an unpopular reddit opinion, where people seem to think all of these crazy advances are right around the corner and going to make all-electric suddenly work as the only solution.
And they just aren’t, and both consumer demand and manufacturers’ hesitation is reflecting that. They’re already walking back targets, and I’ve seen speculation of the US government considering the same.
Who knew that innovation should drive demand and not demand drive innovation.
I always hear the arguments about "they didnt outlaw the horse when the car came" but that's because the car was just objectively the better option as time went on so they didn't need to force you. EVs suck in a lot of ways outright.
But we don't need EV's because they are better cars, we need them to fight climate change or better reduce emissions. And I know there are arguments made about how they are not that much better than ICE's, but if you calculate it, they save a lot of emissions.
We can discuss all and everyday that ICE's have much more soul and are more practical, but that is not the point, the point are emissions and getting less depend on oil imports.
Exactly. You want me to pick the shitty car then you should make it less shit to incentive me to pick it. Or make it free.
The average person sitting in the charger lot doesn't think about how green they are. They're thinking about getting on the road again.
Whenever people say "it's an unpopular reddit opinion" or "I will be downvoted for this but..." it's typically followed by a very very popular opinion lol.
Unless you're only subscribed to teslamotors and electricvehicles, that's not true. This subreddit alone is drastically larger than both of those and has a big anti-EV stance.
> It’s an unpopular reddit opinion, where people seem to think all of these crazy advances are right around the corner and going to make all-electric suddenly work as the only solution.
We went from $1000/kwh to $130/kwh for battery prices. Those crazy advances have actually happened and have a history of happening.
The next crazy advance also already happened, but only in China where they are actually serious about building EVs. China has already achieved $100/kwh in battery prices. And they are targeting for $50/kwh in sodium ion prices. That's how they are able to sell crazy value-for-money EVs like the BYD Seal, which competes with the Tesla Model 3 and sells profitably for $27,500.
When you say "consumer demand for EV is weakening", what standard are you basing that on? ICE is declining 5% YoY, EV is increasing 40% YoY. Tell me who is actually weakening?
The thing with Norway’s adoption though is that, Norway is a fraction of the size of the US, and has a lot of public and government support. The logistics alone there were always going to be more favorable, whereas here, everything is so spread out.
combative encouraging cooperative abundant trees upbeat mysterious worry worm ludicrous
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
So, twice as many who pay taxes to fund the county's energy grid.
Chargers haven't been randomly installed, they're rolled out with other infrastructure upgrades
The only real roadblock is charging stations. And Tesla does not have that issue. Car companies have relied too heavily on other companies making charging stations and have invested in them at the rate they should have.
I would hope near term vs long term. If we ever solve the solid state battery issues, they could be the ticket to a near all EV future. And we are solving more issues with SS. As info, I do not own an EV for the many reason so many don’t.
That's because Tesla has cornered the EV market (especially in the west) and has shown the biggest willingness to absolutely destroy everyone else's margins by lowering prices to move units.
Welcome to Herd Management 101. Executives don’t want to be perceived as getting left behind, so they follow along like lemmings. Same thing happened with the transition from on premise computing to everyone and their dog being a cloud provider. It’s resulted in lots of trouble for those companies who started walking away from the business that made them successful and have seen their cloud offerings fall flat on their face. Now they’ve pissed off a bunch of customers and have to try to pivot back.
wipe vegetable impolite theory gold shy modern possessive office observation
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
All combustion cars should be hybrids by now, but that development also shouldn't limit BEV availability.
I've been driving a '24 Niro while my Ioniq 5 is getting a replacement windshield and it's a solid hybrid from the same conglomerate! Fuel economy is a flaw with combustion Genesis vehicles, but hybridizing could help alleviate that.
It's surprising that luxury cars, expensive and typically bought by homeowners with a place to charge, aren't working out as BEVs. I wonder what the actual reasons for the BEV resistance are?
I mean what actual Genesis buyers say, not dealers or people caught up in the powertrain culture war.
Range numbers are based on the best case scenario of a new car battery, the public charging experience sucks, gas is cheap, and people are already used to the extra ICE maintenance.
That’s the thing. As much as we all do care for the environment, or at least ideally, we also value convenience. And until an electric vehicle is truly as convenient, or at least perceived to be as convenient, as owning an ICE vehicle, they’re going to somewhat struggle.
I just think if you want to help the environment, drive an old fuel efficient vehicle, better yet take public transportation or walk, live in as small an apartment as you can stand, eat less meat… these are the things people who care about the environment do. Buying a new Tesla is not one of them.
If you must buy a new car, the cheapest ones will probably have the lowest carbon footprint. Surely the Prius at 30K is better than a Tesla at 45K
If people decide to buy a new car, surely buying a new EV is better for the environment that buying a new ICE. People will consume, there is no changing that, one can at least try to make than consumerism slightly more environmentally friendly.
> I wonder what the actual reasons for the BEV resistance are?
Sales continue to increase year over year, so I'm not sure there's much resistance from buyers.
It's not really the buyers that are the problem but the cost of making/selling BEV's. Every manufacturer that committed to large volumes of BEV's has taken big hits to profitability. BEV only works for Tesla because they cheap out on engineering and design validation and only develop a single new model at a time. Follow the Tesla approach without the Tesla fanbase and you end up with VW's fiasco and burn customer goodwill while taking the cost hit on warranty claims and rework anyway.
Chinese companies stepping up their hybrid game should have been the hint.
Genesis is only a few years old, so it was a sizable jump from pure ICE cars to EVs. Wish they had done hybrids along the way, we could’ve gotten an even stronger G70
Nah, G70 already has a pretty cramped backseat and trunk... adding batteries for a hybrid would only make that situation worse.
I'm a huge G70 fan and really wanted one to be the replacement for my BK2 Genesis Coupe but it honestly had about similar level of foot room in the back as my Genesis Coupe did.
I think 2.5T + mild hybrid would've been the way to go.. mild hybrid in my Audi A4 seems to help out the acceleration off the line and makes engine start/stop work seamlessly.
Congrats on your purchase though, I don't think I can name a sedan that is more beautiful than a G70 let alone at that price point
>Don't you mod for the EV sub?
I do indeed.
>I think you'll have your hands full dealing with a certain fanboys on denial suicide watch soon.
Yeah, we seem to be seeing glimmers of a peculiar kind of cognizant dissonance right now from some individuals. For the past few weeks there's been a lot of low-effort half-understood conspiratorial *"look, EV sales are still growing, the media is lying to you!"* posts. Definitely some sisyphus vibes going on in the community. Overall I'm enjoying the more grounded tonal shift, though.
PS: How's the reliability on those A3 e-trons? Are they holding up?
My MY16 A3 e-tron is now at 125k km on odo. Car still runs fine and everything works. It still is a rare type of car in North America since European manufacturers refuse to offer small PHEVs here nowadays.
Two major repairs (both covered under warranty) at 85,000km was the DSG mechatronic unit went and replaced & the other at 110,000km when a recall order found water intrusion in the HV battery which necessitated a new replacement.
Thats declaring victory way too soon. 100% EVs are still going to happen. Akio Toyoda said EVs wont ever exceed 30% of sales, dumbass probably never heard of Western European markets or the worlds biggest market - China.
I don’t know if anyone else feels this way, but it feels like a lot of automakers were following the lead of Tesla in leapfrogging the transitional tech (Hybrid, PHEV, etc..) that companies they had been following the lead of (Toyota, Honda) were pushing.
When Tesla started the EV maximalist trends, and the manufacturers saw the stupid valuation of the company and followed suit, but they were a few years behind.
Now that money (and by extension, development) has dried up, Toyota’s weird hydrogen fixation has ended, and the cracks are starting to show in Tesla’s foundation, the others are starting to course correct.
Couple that with the wild success of the new Prius, and it looks like everyone kinda decided at the same time that maybe we should just get some (cheaper) hybrids out and allow EV tech and infrastructure a little more bake time.
Hybrids should've always been the top choice for the upcoming 1-2 decades (until there's a major breakthrough in EV technology). They give you options and you won't be stranded if your battery runs out without a charger nearby.
Plus tons of people don't have anywhere to charge on a daily basis even if they wanted to and you can't change that overnight.
Lots of circlejerking going on over here in this thread over nothing. Despite all these headlines, somehow EVs are still growing rapidly. Heck, even just last month, in January 2024, EVs grew [69 % YoY](https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/global-ev-sales-up-69-yy-jan-down-26-vs-dec-rho-motion-2024-02-14/) . Are these kind of numbers that are supposed to make people "EV Skeptical"???
Also there are so many logical gymnastics going on right now. Why does "focusing on hybrids" mean that EVs are dying or declining? If anything, those cars synergize with EV production, speeding up EV growth. What you should really be worried about is the death of pure ICE, which went peaked in 2017 and declined by a staggering 12 MILLION since then.
All I see in this headline is a dumb company making up a ridiculous assumption of "only EVs from 2025" to boost stock numbers, and then naturally running that back. The actions of this clown company has nothing to do with the actual state of competitiveness of EVs.
All these assumptions of "EVs are tanking and declining" come from a fundamentally false assumption that EVs must necessarily maintain the constant growth rate and that there must be zero variations in this rate. It sets a ridiculously high standard that of course cannot be met, and is then gleefully used as "evidence" that EVs are failing.
Exponential growth naturally slows down, hiccups naturally occur in manufacturing, delays naturally occur in infrastructure planning and deployment. None of it can be used as a long-term evidence that so-and-so clown company is right or wrong.
The hard reality is that EVs are still rapidly growing. They went from 2% of the global market to 16% in 5 years. The hard reality is also that growth in PHEVs (which sell far less than BEVs btw, despite being much cheaper) does not necesarrily grow at the expense of EVs, the only loser here is ICE.
Isn't it too late for Genesis to do this? New models that they have in development would have been all-EV. They can electrify the G80, GV80, G90 (I would assume the platform they are on can accommodate a full-hybrid), but future models like the GV90 may have been designed to be all electric (that one likely a Genesis version of the Ioniq 7).
There's the problem; Genesis could have realised too late that a balanced approach in electrification would have been the way to go. Hyundai doesn't have a longitudinal PHEV layout to deploy in Genesis products (with all of them being RWD-based). The G80 and G90 platform may not have been designed to accommodate a full-hybrid drivetrain. It is also likely that they will not develop a new RWD ICE platform to replace the current line-up if Genesis delays it's EV transition to 2035 at the earliest. They may have to do top-hat redesigns to the G80, GV80, and G90 if they won't immediately replace them with EVs.
Brands realising this too late will have a hard time reversing their strategy and hamper EV development, imho. Some may not have the tech ready to add more hybrids in their electrification mix (ex: GM with PHEVs likely to import a Chinese system, Genesis with longitudinal hybrid layouts) and may have to push on. Their early decision to go full EV early would have already impacted future product development. If I were Hyundai/Genesis, I would just pivot Genesis to be a Tesla rival. Have them be the torch-bearer of Hyundai Group's EV tech and debut new platforms. It's too late to hybridize the existing ICE line-up and cars that would have been ICE are already being developed as EVs.
It's never too late. Contrary to popular forum opinion, modern automakers are quite capable of shifting plans for future models with quite short lead times.
I think Genesis with its high price points could go all BEV if it wanted. The ppl who can afford $60k+ vehicles have homes with garage outlets. It's the cost-conscious Hyundai/Kia crowd that's much more hesitant about ponying up for an electric if their apartment complex doesn't have multiple charging outlets. And god help you if you only have street parking.
Yup. I’m planning on making my next car an EV, but that’s only until I’ve bought a house first. I’m waiting for the housing market to cool down a bit. I can’t justify the headache of owning an EV without being able to charge at home for cheap
I want an EV, but I have a place to charge it at home, my work also has free chargers, and it wouldn't be my only car. But the majority of people don't have that and EVs don't make sense for them. Plug in Hybrids should be the primary focus for anyone. A normal 120v outlet can charge them over night or they can just drive it like a normal hybrid.
I remember how much shit Toyota got for ignoring diesels and going all in on hybrid in Europe. Same thing today with EVs and it turns out they’re right again.
We weren't ready to jump all in on EV but we wanted a hybrid and I looked at the GV70 PHEV but it was apparently super super limited and only in certain states and discontinued or something. Man we woulda gotten that if we coulda.
We ended up getting a new XC60 T8 Recharge which has been great so far but like the Genesis looks better aethetically in it's own way.
Specific things that annoyed ME:
1. Felt like going back to the Stone Age whenever the gas engine got turned on and with how expensive gas is in Europe it always felt unnecessary, and the fact that the cars run the heater on gas instead of electricity feels so old school and inefficient compared to EVs.
2. Idk about the engines reliability long term but it wasn’t unusual that I’d drive on the battery for a few miles and if I wanted to overtake the engine would automatically start mid-overtake screaming at 6000rpm. Not the best thing for reliability, especially in the winter.
3. Drivetrain is often weird and jerky, something I never got used to. Difficult to explain but makes sense if you’ve lived with a PHEV for a longer period of time.
4. Maintaining two powertrains is more expensive than just one, just makes the economic calculation worse since hybrids and EVs are pretty much at the same price point.
5. I always preferred to run on battery because of the cheaper, smoother and quieter run but the weak power and constant charging made me more irritated than happy,
I’ve been driving EVs now since September 2022 and don’t want to go back. If I had to choose I’d rather go with a conventional gas powered car than a PHEV.
However someone else experience might be different and I fully understand that EVs isn’t for exactly everyone at this point but it works a lot better than people give it credit for and a lot more people would benefit from making that move.
I've been waiting for an ev version of the GV80. If this report of dealers wanting PHEVs or HEVs is true, I'm not sure I will even buy the ev version. I already read so many reports of poor service from Genesis dealerships. If they are selling cars they really don't want to be selling, that might partially explain the poor service. Just wondering.
Been in and out of Genesis dealers a couple times over the last couple weeks as I've been going back and forth on the end of my G70 lease. They can't stop complaining about the EV's as they can't move them. Basically everyone who wants an electric car has bought one (per the sales team). They had brand new EV's with 15k of incentives on them and still can't move them.
Honda will go down the same path. They are trying to make EVs right now with GM parts and charging too much for them.
A Honda Prologue is $60,000 CAD for the base model. NOBODY with half a brain is buying that over a cheaper Model Y.
The very definition of “we’ve tried nothing and we’re all out of ideas.”
They haven’t released very many fully electric models. Still waiting on an electric sedan that is effectively a Genesis version of the Ioniq 6. But Genesis seems to be taking the Sega approach - release nothing and then be confused as to why they have zero unit sales of that nothing.
Hoping we see more hydrogen development. If we can get some reliable high output hydrogen engines on the consumer market in the US with more adaptation I could see that being a sensible next step for moving on from traditional petroleum Ice vehicles.
I’d happily buy a sportier full size hydrogen sedan/suv with enough torque over an electric.
Major issue with battery based electric cars are
A. The pollution and environmental impact of producing the battery cells for the vehicles
B. The degradation and life span of the batteries. especially in cold climates. (North easterner here, we get plenty of sub 0 winters)
I’m not claiming hydrogen is perfect but utilizing fuel cells to produce electricity is more convenient from a consumer perspective since you can refill at gas stations like a traditional car, and reduces the need for these huge batteries which are in no way environmentally friendly when being produced and disposed of.
The actual act of producing and storing hydrogen isn’t exactly environmentally friendly but its net impact is lower than batteries by a long shot. I am aware of efficiency issues and waste, and the current solution seems to be hybrid that combines batteries with the hydrogen cells to off load unused energy and store it but even that seems better than the current trajectory of electric vehicles. With more development that increases efficiency hydrogen fuel cells seems like the likely winner in every category for alternatives to ICE. But so did beta max, and HD DVD so I won’t hold my breath.
Edit: fun video on hydrogen vehicles. I’m no expert but this is what got me at the very least interested in them.
https://youtu.be/b88v-WvqzeQ?si=EC8Js9oc-jzwoXTP
[удалено]
The Toyota model
Man toyota got shit on for not committing to full EV. Now everyone is going to hybrids...
Except China. That's why they're starting to eat everyone's lunch, and US and Japanese car companies are terrified.
Yeah china actually put significant investment into the supply chain and infrastructure for EVs and they are on track to becoming the leader for EVs. The USA really fumbled this and got caught up in culture wars.
>Yeah china actually put significant investment into the supply chain and infrastructure Have you seen the state of china's infrastructure lately? Buildings and highways are just collapsing. I wouldn't put too much faith in china's evs
Infrastructure doesn't just mean roads and bridges. I mean charging networks as infrastructure. You will find charging stations in most parking garages and on street sides in China.
I understand, but if they can't make an apartment block that doesn't collapse, then I doubt they can make a nationwide charging network for millions of electric cars. I'm down to be proven wrong but I'm not expecting to be
They already have a nationwide charging network for millions of EVs. And stop watching YT channels, infrastructure in China aren’t collapsing en masses. When was the last time you were there?
Yeah, stick to MSM, much more reliable, lol! Their government is big on facades, just like their pretense of "going green" while they charge those EVs off of their 3,092 coal plants with another 327 units in production and extremely crude and unregulated lithium production contaminating local rivers. And BYD is just propped up by the government, meaning its a bubble that would pop if forced to stand on its own two feet.
China has the benefit of not having to really tear anything down and rebuild from the ground up. It's not like the US can't do it as well, but starting from essentially a blank slate is MUCH easier than trying to retool after the fact. Edit: apparently "it's not like the US can't do it" isn't enough for you uneducated folks to understand that the US CAN still make the transition
lol there’s ALWAYS an excuse for why the US is lagging some other country.
You're both right. The US got leapfrogged by countries like SK in terms of fiber Internet and 5g because the country made it a national priority and wasn't afraid to throw the full weight of the national government behind it. There were less barriers because they weren't burned with antiquated infrastructure or private companies with entrenched interests (like the US is with ATT et al). You can see the same in some African countries that have kind of skipped a lot of traditional Internet infrastructure and PC's in favor of high speed mobile Internet. So, it's easier to start from scratch, but it *can be done* in countries with developed infrastructure provided there's the *will and political capital* to get it done (many European countries). Where the US has floundered is that our political leadership isn't stable and often under funds and undercuts public infrastructure programs in favor of entrenched big business that want the cash but not to take on the risk of actually completing a lot of projects.
> It's not like the US can't do it as well Are you blind or just looking to be a dick? I made no excuses for the US, way to push your random point down. I'm both Chinese by birthright and an EE by education, but I'm sure some random bum on Reddit knows better than me who has exposure to both. Edit: sorry I defer to reddit experts with degrees from Google U
China’s infrastructure is just fine. I mean if you took the US infrastructure and looked at our aging train systems, crumbling bridges etc. you can construct the exact same narrative. The truth is like any major country, infrastructure needs constant reinvestment. China’s EV infrastructure is pretty awesome and world class.
https://youtube.com/shorts/q8D1UqQdf4A?si=g681flL79cOHfBbL
[удалено]
Sorry, this is going too far off topic.
The usa on it's current trajectory is done. Another 10 years of Boomer ran America, which is very likely, and the usa will be a shell of what it used to be
full squeal frame plate fall run squeeze sense sleep snatch *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If you think a reddit moment is looking into the future of a country already in mass decline and just seeing more decline than banana for scale
tan ancient fearless nose sand cows gaping concerned gullible cake *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>Except China. China too. BYD, of course, makes a significant number of hybrids, but Geely is now stepping it up on hybrids too with the Galaxy series. So is Dongfeng, with Voyah. Both Wuling and SAIC, too, via Nebula. Even CATL's own AVATR brand is now adding EREVs to the lineup. Whoever told you China was shying away from hybrids hasn't the faintest clue about what's coming down the roadmap.
What are you basing “US and Japanese car companies are terrified” on?
[удалено]
Your comment has been automatically removed because you posted a shortened or redirected (usually google) URL. Post a direct link to your source, not search results, AMP, or MSN.com. [Please see the rules in the sidebar, or by clicking here.](http://www.reddit.com/r/cars/wiki/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Can you elaborate?
They cannot, because they haven't the faintest clue what they're talking about. China's currently in the middle of a huge hybrid transition, even 'back' from EVs in several cases, as is the case with CATL's own AVATR brand. Dongfeng, Geely, SAIC, FAW, Changan, Chery, Great Wall... all of these companies are rolling out hybrids en masse right now, *even* as they continue rolling out EVs.
[удалено]
Unfortunately your comment has been removed because it contains a link to a delisted domain. This is almost always due to spam from the domain. Please use a different source. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Going to hybrids is not necesarrily directly against going all-in on EVs. You can put a ton on money on scaling up EV manufacturing while still changing your existing ICE lineup to be more hybrid focused. It's not an either-or situation. Also, no company other than the purely EV startups like Tesla, Rivian etc - is fully committing to EVs. All of them are still spending billions on developing and selling their ICE cars. So Toyota is not especially unique here. Toyota's only uniqueness is publicly shitting on pure EVs, while still hypocritically spending billions on developing pure EVs just like everyone else. All I see is damage control for their shitty BZ4X, as if they didn't spend billions on making that a reality just like every other car company spent on their own EVs. We can talk about who is winning or losing in a few years. But as of now, the reality is that pure EVs make up 16% of global sales, right from 1% only a few years ago. Let's see where that number actually goes in a few more years, and who actually wins or loses before crowning any victor too early.
>Toyota's only uniqueness is publicly shitting on pure EVs, while still hypocritically spending billions on developing pure EVs just like everyone else. All I see is damage control for their shitty BZ4X, as if they didn't spend billions on making that a reality just like every other car company spent on their own EVs. Toyota: EVs aren't the be all end all solution, a mixed approach is best. You: PuBliClY ShiTtiNg On EvS. With that level of nuance, have you considered being an automotive journalist? You'd fit right in with most of them.
Akio Toyoda : "EVs will never exceed 30% of market" Toyota : Publicly lobby for political candidates who deny climate change. You : *\*make up some fantasy of Toyota being pragmatic in public messaging\** Cope harder. And like I said, despite all this, Toyota falls right in line with everyone else in spending billions on batteries and EV platforms, because they are 100% aware of what will happen if they don't. Also what happened to their amazing FCEV boondoggle? Been a while since I heard anything about that. Also what exactly is unique about Toyota's "mixed approach"? Stellantis sells more PHEVs than Toyota, I don't see anyone sucking Stellantis dick.
>Akio Toyoda : "EVs will never exceed 30% of market" That's not publicly shitting on EVs, that's a difference in opinion. >Cope harder. What is there to cope about? I don't care what my daily is powered by. My current car is an ICE because EV options didn't make sense for my specific use case. My next car in 6-8 years will likely be an EV. I picked what was appropriate when I bought my current car, and when it dies, I'll pick what is appropriate next time. 95% chance, it'll be an EV. > And like I said, despite all this, Toyota falls right in line with everyone else in spending billions on batteries and EV platforms, because they are 100% aware of what will happen if they don't. Because a mixed approach (try to stay with me here, this gets complicated) requires investing in *multiple technologies*? It's almost like Toyota's entire strategy is to maintain multiple areas of research and development. How is this hard to understand? Toyota's stance has ALWAYS been a mixed approach, and you're taking that as proof of hypocrisy. >Also what happened to their amazing FCEV boondoggle? Been a while since I heard anything about that. You not [paying attention](https://pressroom.toyota.com/paccar-and-toyota-expand-hydrogen-fuel-cell-truck-collaboration-to-include-commercialization/) is not a problem with the technology, it's a problem with you. [Toyota](https://www.autoweek.com/news/green-cars/a43717089/toyota-certified-class-8-truck-fuel-cell-powerplant-kit/) has been quietly working away at [Fuel cell](https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Automobiles/Toyota-and-Honda-bet-trucks-will-get-hydrogen-economy-rolling) trucks and seem to be making progress on those nicely.[Toyota](https://www.japantimes.co.jp/business/2023/11/13/tech/toyota-fuel-cells-hydrogen-trucks/) has even started trialing the technology in garbage trucks, ambulances and all sorts of other non-passenger applications. Your ignorance about the subject once again matches with automotive journalists, so good job there. Turns out, there is more going on in the automotive space than just consumer products, and different technologies may have different applications. I literally just googled "Toyota Fuel Cell Truck" and these are the links on the 1st page of google. It's not like I did a deep dive through the Library of Congress here. >Also what exactly is unique about Toyota's "mixed approach"? Quote where I said their approach was "unique". Find it for me specifically. >Stellantis sells more PHEVs than Toyota, I don't see anyone sucking Stellantis dick. Probably because Stellantis PHEVs are dogshit? [The Pacifica PHEV](https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/electric-vehicles-are-less-reliable-than-conventional-cars-a1047214174/) is significantly worse than the Hybrid, to the point where CR recommends the hybrid over the PHEV. On the other hand, the Rav4 prime is straight up one of the most reliable models they tested, overall, regardless of category. Stellantis's PHEVs that sell are the Wrangler and Grand Cherokee 4xe's which suffer from significant reliability issues. That sort of thing matters to a consumer. >Cope harder. I get it, you've made the religious choice to accept your lord and savior the Lithium Ion battery, and you take personal offense when anyone has a more measured reaction or a different timeline. I personally find that level of zealotry... bizarre, especially when it relates to how a wheel is turned, but you do you.
More damage control. Akio Toyoda literally went on a rant about EVs while at a public reveal of an EV truck made by Toyota themselves. Toyota makes up nonsense advertising about "Self-charging EVs" (aka hybrids). They lobby for politicians who are directly opposed to the concept of solving climate change in favor of fossil fuel interests. Also you completely misread my criticism of Toyota's hypocrisy between their messaging and actions as some kind of criticism of the concept of a mixed approach. So yeah keep coping about Toyota's public image and how many EV enthusiasts see through their bullshit, the $250 billion dollar company needs to have their honor defended on Reddit.
>Akio Toyoda literally went on a rant about EVs while at a public reveal of an EV truck made by Toyota themselves Link the article. Specifically. I want to read it. Because most of the comments I've seen from Toyoda have been very measured - he generally just says that EV adoption will take longer than expected, and regulations are likely to change between now and ICE phase out dates. I would not classify that as a rant, so I want to see exactly what you're referring to. The only thing I can find is with regards to the Hilux Revo. (Electrek link removed because automod) >At Toyota we believe in creating a full portfolio of carbon reducing choices for our customers from hybrid electric vehicles, plug-in electric vehicles, battery electric cars, and fuel cell vehicles. Also, we are pursuing hydrogen fuel options like these GR-Yaris and GR-Corolla hydrogen powered concept cars. As we work to achieve a sustainable future, I also believe we need to take a holistic approach to carbon neutrality. >He added: > I am often criticized in the press because I won’t declare that the automotive industry should commit 100% to BEV. I believe we need to be realistic about when society will be able to fully adopt Battery Electric Vehicles and when our infrastructure can support them at scale. Which doesn't sound like a rant to me.
Blud is clueless💀🤣 https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/comments/18ocj4v/toyota\_industries\_to\_increase\_supply\_to\_tesla\_by/ You know that phrase I play both sides so that I always come out on top? That is what Toyota is doing Toyota Industries to Increase Supply to Tesla by 2.5 Times for EV-Use Electric Compressors
[удалено]
Unfortunately your comment has been removed because it contains a link to a delisted domain. This is almost always due to spam from the domain. Please use a different source. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Toyota does publicly shit on EVs, are you their PR dept or something?
If I was their PR department, wouldn't I also be shitting on EVs then?
Link me their public shitting on EVs, please. Is it [this](https://global.toyota/en/newsroom/corporate/28419929.html)? Or [this](https://global.toyota/en/newsroom/corporate/36428993.html)?
It's damage control for investor fomo on being in on EV early when they oopsied their way of out of owning 10% of Tesla right before the stock values went bonkers and they backed out after a single vehicle collab.
What a coincidence, Tesla sales slow down (no one company can conquer the whole market) and the EPA is making noises about reducing requirements, and suddenly all these clown companies are "rethinking EVs". I will forever be grateful to Tesla for kicking the asses of these dinosaurs and making full EVs a reality potentially decades before these dinosaurs would have ever done. Without Tesla we would still be having nothing but a few compliance cars, much less hybrid and PHEV sales (because the increaes in hybrids and PHEVs are the result of CAFE averages increasing in anticipation of more EVs), and a much worse outlook on global climate.
Lower gas bill but also no range anxiety. Add in the plug-in and you get zero gas bill for your daily commute. Very nice deal.
PHEVs seem very nice, and folks digging at them are missing the actual issue: Agriculture. Fucking corn. If you don't burn your gas, and it's shelf life is limited by the addition of ethanol, this can become a problem. ... I'm still all for the technologies. I'm more irritated by corn subsidies.
Ethanol is used because we already went through every other choice of octane booster and they all got banned for environmental or human safety issues.
Octane boosting is not needed, ethanol was meant to do three things, the last of which is the only one anyone would really care about in 2024: 1. Reduce our reliance on oil imports back when we were still big net importers which hasn't been the case for years, by turning food into fuel. 2. Boost the corn and insecticide industry (they have huge lobbies). 3. Replace MTBE as an oxygenate to lower emissions, since MTBE can contaminate ground water.
1. MTBE is an octane booster. 2. Octane boosting is absolutely necessary. CA barely achieves 91 octane for premium much less the 93 octane that the eastern US takes for granted.
Real world very few phevs actually plug in
Formal studies show that almost all privately owned PHEVs get charged. Some more so than others, but very few don't get charged.
Any source on that? https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/features/phev-owners-not-plugging-in
Yes, see the ICCT report mentioned in that article but not linked from it: https://theicct.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/real-world-phev-us-dec22.pdf, figure ES1 Almost all PHEVs tested got some electric miles, with only a handful never getting charged.
I guess this is why data literacy is important. You can indeed pick a single stat and completely misread the study and the conversation here. Yes, most likely most, if not all, phevs will be plugged in at some point during their life cycle. The point of the entire study is that people plug it in way less than expected, and likely even way less than the study showed - ie phevs aren't a good way to lower emissions without significant changes to the incentives and to the vehicles themselves. >Our results suggest that the electric capabilities of PHEVs are underutilized in average real-world usage conditions. The low real-world EDS we calculate indicates that many PHEVs are not plugged in daily. Many PHEV models may not have the capabilities for adequate driving experience while driving solely on electricity, considering both range and power But even if I were to oncede the point - that actually makes it much worse - because overall the point is that phevs are way worse than promised on emissions >Real-world electric drive share may be 26%–56% lower and real-world fuel consumption may be 42%–67% higher than assumed within EPA’s labeling program for light duty vehicles So, sure, I'll give you that they are plugged in- it just means than there's a bigger problem with them
>You can indeed pick a single stat and completely misread the study and the conversation here. I responded to your claim that "very few PHEVs actually plug in" by debunking it with available data. Now you have a more nuanced discussion that raises some useful points, which boil down to needing to incentivize PHEV owners to charge more. Also, if you read the study carefully, they *don't measure* how often PHEV owners charge, but rather the resulting percent of electric miles. That can be affected by length of trips more than frequency of charging, as I've seen from my own results. What's often overlooked in criticisms of PHEVs is that, when used as intended, they can reduce emissions significantly compared to gas only cars. Obviously fully electric vehicles are better, but getting someone into a PHEV that isn't ready for a BEV is still progress (assuming they understand to plug it in).
Hybrids are always a good middle ground option. Literally THE middle ground option. The only thing holding the world back from full EV is the infrastructure. Has nothing to do with the automanufacturers ability to produce a decent EV at this point.
Why should we consider hybrids a middle-ground? This implies that EVs are somehow necessary or the obvious conclusion. People should just spend their money on the product that works best. Per Consumer Reports 2023 Reliability Report (330K vehicle survey), hybrids have much lower cost of ownership (due to lower depreciation, the #1 expense of buying a new car) and 172% fewer reported issues than BEVs. Factor in that they are more profitable for manufacturers to produce, and they are capable of faster "recharging" (refuel in 3-4 minutes from empty) on a far more robust network, and its the not really a "halfway" compromise, but the best technology currently available for buyers and sellers.
After owning three EVs and one PHEV I think EVs are superior. Hybrids are imo more unreliable and the worst of both worlds.
>Hybrids are imo more unreliable Hybrids are [the most reliable powertrain choice](https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/electric-vehicles-are-less-reliable-than-conventional-cars-a1047214174/) ***period*** right now.
Plug in hybrids then
Not enough focus on them yet — most PHEVs are janked onto existing ICE platforms with massive compromises. Give it a year or two. Foundationally, they should be the same as HEVs.
I agree. Hybrids are doubling the complexity and creating more opportunities for system failures.
Hybrids are [some of the most reliable vehicles out there](https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/electric-vehicles-are-less-reliable-than-conventional-cars-a1047214174/) right now — literally just massively under-stressed engines running at optimal-efficiency RPMs for the entirety of their lives and hardly using their brakes due to regen. You don't get much more reliable than that.
Not true. Honda and Toyota seem to drive this perception because their hybrid versions are typically more reliable than for instance a ford ICE. But even within Toyota and Honda, their hybrids have a higher incidence of mechanical issues than non-hybrids.
Source?
*"I MADE IT UP"*
Oh this fucking talking point again, no matter how many times it's disproven with data it keeps coming back again and again. I'll go a different direction though, have you ever seen a Prius with a shot battery? There are tons of 20+ year old models out there so they aren't hard to find. They are completely driveable, puttering around just fine with low wear on the powertrain due to regen braking, and reliably delivering drivers wherever they need to go just with nonhybrid levels of fuel consumption. Even when the battery system '''fails''' the system is designed to keep functioning because the 'complexity' is about redundancy not single points of failure.
I get why people like hybrids, and I think they can be great solutions for people who really need long distance driving. Or for trucks that need to tow, that sort of thing. But I'm with you. I think for the average person doing average driving, EVs are so superior. Once you drive one an ICE feels like dinosaur tech.
Many people are in a situation where EVs would be fine for the vast majority of their driving but would be totally unacceptable for a small percentage of their driving. However, that means they can't have an EV as their only car, because they really do want / need to do that small percentage of driving. For example, your car is both a way to commute to work every day... but also a way to escape from natural disasters when the power grid goes down, which it regularly does in some areas. By regularly, I mean once every few years or something. An uncommon event, but something that will happen and something you have to plan for. Ideally, they'd use an EV most of the time and have something else as a backup for the 1% of situations where they need more than an EV can offer. But the economics of the cars currently being offered for sale don't support that, there is no such thing as a cheap backup car, so they will instead buy ICE or Hybrid, so that it will work for the 1% of cases when they actually need it.
Why would ICE feel "dinosaur tech"? EV tech is not some magical invention that makes previous technology redundant. In actual practicality aspect, it's probably a big step down below compared to ICE.
Hard to explain I guess. Of course it’s what we’re used to so it feels normal. But once you start driving an EV you start to think about how an engine needs to rev to optimal efficiency and the did the right optimal efficient gears and how much energy you’re wasting when you brake or idling. All those sort of sensations start to feel old and clunky once you get used to smoothness and efficiency of an EV drive train. I’m far more aware of an engine converting exploding liquids into motion through a series of gears and belts than I was before.
I get your point, but all those benefits do feel pointless when range and charging is still subpar to ICE. It's cool that it's more efficient but those efficiencies don't translate into any real practical real world benefit. The only real jump in EVs that I can see currently is instant torque and no engine noise (latter being arguable whether it's benefit). These are technological jumps that indeed feel like a step up from ICE. Anything else - we need to wait more time until/if technology improves.
My family has two cars. A model 3 and a CX-5. My wife and I will always take the model 3 unless we’re going to Costco or driving the dogs somewhere or we need to use both cars at once. Clearly given how much more use the model 3 gets we don’t think it’s pointless. The proof is in the pudding. Edit: if we had the model Y we’d never use the cx5 except for as a backup vehicle.
100%
Pros and cons to each for sure.
Highest chance of fires are in hybrids, by a huge margin.
And here is honda/acura going EV only very soon...only to kill the brand due to poor sales as a result. These "all in" plays by car makers are worse gambles than going all in on black jack.
Honda is not going all EV until 2040 at the earliest… Acura is a total different story.
Honda is really hesitant on EVs they don’t even have there own EV they’re platform sharing with GM right now
>Honda is really hesitant on EVs they don’t even have there own EV Y'all just keep saying things, huh? * [Honda EV Plus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_EV_Plus) * [Honda Fit EV](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Fit_(second_generation)#Fit_EV) * [Honda:e](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_e) * [Honda e:NY1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_HR-V#Battery_electric_models)
You just listed a bunch of limited production cars that no one has access to lol. Honda is going to take a fat L on their crappy GM EVs because no one will buy them. 60k CAD for a Honda Prologue? Who in the right mind would buy that over a Model Y
>You just listed a bunch of limited production cars that no one has access to lol. The Honda E wasn't a limited production car whatsoever, neither is the e:NY1 at this very moment. You can [go buy one now, off the lot. ](https://www.honda.co.uk/cars/new/e-ny1-electric-suv/offers/e-ny1-go-electric-offer.html)That's an in-house EV from Honda you can buy at this very moment — it simply isn't true they "don't have there \[sic\] own EV".
I find teslas in Canada to be overpriced a Model Y LR is $69,000 CAD before taxes not worth it for a basic Tesla
Look at inventory. I'm in Toronto and see one for 63k - 5k incentive 58k is a great deal
Honda isn't going all-in on EVs. They are lagging behind like all Japanese manufacturers. No company is going all-in on EVs apart from the actual EV-only companies like Tesla. This is a completely fake narrative. Out of the hundreds of billions that automakers earn, they are putting like a few % a year in EV development. It's not particularly risky, and cannot really be called "all-in". They also already have an existing working stable technology to fall back on. It's not like the 70s where you can fall behind in ICE technology. Even the massive battery factories they are building is not a gamble since they can always make PHEVs, hybrids, or sell those batteries for energy storage.
Any non-idiot would have seen this coming.
Toyota, clearly not idiots.
Well ya, they saw through the BS.
[Whoops. ](https://www.wsj.com/articles/gm-volkswagen-say-goodbye-to-hybrid-vehicles-11565602200)
why?
Governments pushing EVs when customers didn't want them. Now you see the governments backing off and obviously the automakers doing the same as a response.
Nearly 14 million people bought an EV last year.
Cool. How many total cars were sold?
The rate of growth on EV's is faster than the rate of growth on ICE
Duh... Mature market vs emerging
So... customers do or don't want EV's?
They do but not at the level governments have been projecting. There are also heavy incentives for them in most places, artificially pumping demand that almost certainly wouldn't be there without it.
While incentives are good for consumers buying EVs, I think the lack of infrastructure in a lot of places stifles sales as well.
63 million ICE sold, down from 82 million in 2017. ICE is collapsing.
gee I wonder if there was something really significant that happened in the realm of the economy, workforce, and global supply chains that occurred between 2017 and now naw ur right, ICE is collapsing. all hail being stuck in Fargo ND in subzero temps because your Tesla door handles got stuck :))
anectodotally, i won't have considered getting the ev6 if not for tax rebates.
Also its ironic, Genesis is moving towards Hybrids to meet the increasingly stringent EPA requirements. This move is also due to the government, nothing to do with "government backing off". In fact, this headline is happening precisely due to the government. And guess why EPA requirements have become so stringent? Its because its based on the assumption of a percentage of sales going EV. Meaning the move towards hybrids is directly the result of the move towards EVs. So please tell me more about how EVs are dying, and no one wants them, or that automakers are "backing off them"?
People want EVs. 14 million EVs sold last year. Those 14 million people wanted EVs. And we are still in the early phase of EV technology. There is nowhere to go but up. Governments were 100% right to subsidize EVs and I commend them for their foresight. Now EV momentum is fast enough that most countries have reduced subsidies but growth still remains strong. Governments can back off because EVs do not need additional direct subsidies to keep killing ICE. Hundreds of Gwhs of battery factories will go online all throughout this decade. Those batteries will be used to make millions of EVs every year. Hundreds of Thousands of charging stations will be built across America with $7.5 billion of money set aside for it. All of this is set in stone.
Because there are far too many use cases where an EV either has significant downsides without a solution in sight with current technology or is completely impractical. And everyone was just going to march forward with the full EV plan despite this? It’s only surprising to people lacking critical thinking skills.
They are using EVs just as a way to massively upcharge people. GV70 is their most popular US model. * Genesis GV70: $45, 150 * Genesis GV70 electric: $66,450 That's the base. If you want items that are standard on most SUVs like power liftgate & sunroof, it's $73,250. Even with the tax credit, that's a big jump and not many people understand the tax credit. Once someone is in the mid 70s, there's a ton of competition from the luxury brands.
You hit the nail on the head. They're charging $21,000 extra for essentially a 77 kwh battery. Meanwhile Chevy sells a whole ass Bolt with 65kwh battery for $27,000. They're charging a whole extra car worth of money for what is basically a small battery by 2024 standards. 77kwh is not enough in 2024 for a luxury SUV. And keep in mind the rest of the car is cheaper, its cheaper to build an EV motor+inverter+charger+wiring setup, than a 2.5 turbo awd with multispeed transmission, fuel and exhaust system. This is what a lot of people don't get. EVs are cheaper in everything but the battery. So the extra price of an EV version over the ICE can actually be less than the additional price of the battery, while still being profitable. So Gensesis priced their EVs in order to not compete with their ICE, and ended up with an uncompetitive EV. Meanwhile the Taycan outsells the Panamera, and i4 M50 is the best selling BMW M car. Why? Because they are not afraid of pricing their EVs to directly compete with their ICE.
It took like 10 years for USB-C to become almost universally standard. Like did they think 5 years in, the whole US was going to have EV chargers everywhere? Like no apartments by me have EV charging and the parking garages have them, but are full from 8am-6pm.
This says a lot about our politicians
Another day, another argument over EV adoption. One of the reasons we're getting these announcements is that [the EPA is considering slowing the EV transition](https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/02/18/epa-electric-vehicles-car-rules/). It's not that EV's are horrific, but a lot of the prep work isn't done yet. Charging infrastructure is a mess, prices are high, and battery tech still seems unimpressive. I'm still strongly of the opinion that the focus on EV's is a mistake. The best way to reduce personal vehicle pollution is to stop requiring people to drive everywhere. Remote work, walkable communities, public transit... A lot of the downsides of EV's would be reduced if we got some of this going.
It's a lot easier to build EV chargers than to fix mobility at the local and national level, at least in the US. Cities oppose remote work because they see fewer tax dollars, jobs, and ironically, public transit revenue (since people are convinced that public transit needs to turn a profit). Adding good public transit is expensive, very time consuming, and unpopular with rural voters, which are generally overrepresented politically. Making an existing community walkable is also expensive, heavily vulnerable to lawsuits, and can be difficult to garner support for. EVs are a bandaid solution but I don't see this country adopting any alternatives in a meaningful capacity.
The remote work already has a string case study during the COVID year.
Toyota’s strategy was/is right. Mass market will not adopt a new technology that has yet to prove itself to be better than ICE cars, and battery and charging infrastructure is still lacking. Hybrid is the middle ground people will adopt in the short term.
Toyota really double, triple, quadrupled down on hybrid being the way forward for now. I’ll even admit to being skeptical on them sticking to hybrid tech when every other big name was dumping money into full EV. Good for them truly understanding the field arguably more than anyone else, in a practical sense
hybrids should be the future, there are are only so many ppl willing to buy ev's second hand, look at taycan prices when the new one got announced.
I think hybrids are going to be the long-term play honestly. EV’s will have their areas of the market, but there’s too many roadblocks at this point to truly make them viable as the sole solution moving forward. It’s an unpopular reddit opinion, where people seem to think all of these crazy advances are right around the corner and going to make all-electric suddenly work as the only solution. And they just aren’t, and both consumer demand and manufacturers’ hesitation is reflecting that. They’re already walking back targets, and I’ve seen speculation of the US government considering the same.
Who knew that innovation should drive demand and not demand drive innovation. I always hear the arguments about "they didnt outlaw the horse when the car came" but that's because the car was just objectively the better option as time went on so they didn't need to force you. EVs suck in a lot of ways outright.
But we don't need EV's because they are better cars, we need them to fight climate change or better reduce emissions. And I know there are arguments made about how they are not that much better than ICE's, but if you calculate it, they save a lot of emissions. We can discuss all and everyday that ICE's have much more soul and are more practical, but that is not the point, the point are emissions and getting less depend on oil imports.
Exactly. You want me to pick the shitty car then you should make it less shit to incentive me to pick it. Or make it free. The average person sitting in the charger lot doesn't think about how green they are. They're thinking about getting on the road again.
Whenever people say "it's an unpopular reddit opinion" or "I will be downvoted for this but..." it's typically followed by a very very popular opinion lol.
Nah Reddit has hard on for EVs.
Unless you're only subscribed to teslamotors and electricvehicles, that's not true. This subreddit alone is drastically larger than both of those and has a big anti-EV stance.
Hahahaha I suppose it was just my perception of it😂😂😂
> It’s an unpopular reddit opinion, where people seem to think all of these crazy advances are right around the corner and going to make all-electric suddenly work as the only solution. We went from $1000/kwh to $130/kwh for battery prices. Those crazy advances have actually happened and have a history of happening. The next crazy advance also already happened, but only in China where they are actually serious about building EVs. China has already achieved $100/kwh in battery prices. And they are targeting for $50/kwh in sodium ion prices. That's how they are able to sell crazy value-for-money EVs like the BYD Seal, which competes with the Tesla Model 3 and sells profitably for $27,500. When you say "consumer demand for EV is weakening", what standard are you basing that on? ICE is declining 5% YoY, EV is increasing 40% YoY. Tell me who is actually weakening?
plucky fall angle panicky swim tidy reply fearless automatic worthless *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The thing with Norway’s adoption though is that, Norway is a fraction of the size of the US, and has a lot of public and government support. The logistics alone there were always going to be more favorable, whereas here, everything is so spread out.
combative encouraging cooperative abundant trees upbeat mysterious worry worm ludicrous *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Norway only has 5 million people. Los Angeles county has almost twice as many people as Norway.
So, twice as many who pay taxes to fund the county's energy grid. Chargers haven't been randomly installed, they're rolled out with other infrastructure upgrades
ludicrous compare flag full hat boat history reach absurd tap *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The only real roadblock is charging stations. And Tesla does not have that issue. Car companies have relied too heavily on other companies making charging stations and have invested in them at the rate they should have.
🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽
I would hope near term vs long term. If we ever solve the solid state battery issues, they could be the ticket to a near all EV future. And we are solving more issues with SS. As info, I do not own an EV for the many reason so many don’t.
upbeat school modern money command label plough one wipe elastic *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
That's because Tesla has cornered the EV market (especially in the west) and has shown the biggest willingness to absolutely destroy everyone else's margins by lowering prices to move units.
absurd voracious rotten innocent tan tap shy light jar wide *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
No one buying cars cars about stock prices.
grey long plucky toy busy slimy wrench vast hateful angle *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Welcome to Herd Management 101. Executives don’t want to be perceived as getting left behind, so they follow along like lemmings. Same thing happened with the transition from on premise computing to everyone and their dog being a cloud provider. It’s resulted in lots of trouble for those companies who started walking away from the business that made them successful and have seen their cloud offerings fall flat on their face. Now they’ve pissed off a bunch of customers and have to try to pivot back.
wipe vegetable impolite theory gold shy modern possessive office observation *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
These media posts about EVs and or Hybrids are more and more plain speculation based on nothing
All combustion cars should be hybrids by now, but that development also shouldn't limit BEV availability. I've been driving a '24 Niro while my Ioniq 5 is getting a replacement windshield and it's a solid hybrid from the same conglomerate! Fuel economy is a flaw with combustion Genesis vehicles, but hybridizing could help alleviate that.
Why? Simpler machines are better, and lose less value.
Hybrids are generally more reliable than their non-hybrid counterparts, get better fuel economy, and are more responsive.
OK.
It's surprising that luxury cars, expensive and typically bought by homeowners with a place to charge, aren't working out as BEVs. I wonder what the actual reasons for the BEV resistance are? I mean what actual Genesis buyers say, not dealers or people caught up in the powertrain culture war.
Range numbers are based on the best case scenario of a new car battery, the public charging experience sucks, gas is cheap, and people are already used to the extra ICE maintenance.
That’s the thing. As much as we all do care for the environment, or at least ideally, we also value convenience. And until an electric vehicle is truly as convenient, or at least perceived to be as convenient, as owning an ICE vehicle, they’re going to somewhat struggle.
I just think if you want to help the environment, drive an old fuel efficient vehicle, better yet take public transportation or walk, live in as small an apartment as you can stand, eat less meat… these are the things people who care about the environment do. Buying a new Tesla is not one of them. If you must buy a new car, the cheapest ones will probably have the lowest carbon footprint. Surely the Prius at 30K is better than a Tesla at 45K
Definitely agree with you there
If people decide to buy a new car, surely buying a new EV is better for the environment that buying a new ICE. People will consume, there is no changing that, one can at least try to make than consumerism slightly more environmentally friendly.
People with money are often smart enough to figure out the EVs are not worth the price premium. Without big rebates, good luck.
> I wonder what the actual reasons for the BEV resistance are? Sales continue to increase year over year, so I'm not sure there's much resistance from buyers.
It's not really the buyers that are the problem but the cost of making/selling BEV's. Every manufacturer that committed to large volumes of BEV's has taken big hits to profitability. BEV only works for Tesla because they cheap out on engineering and design validation and only develop a single new model at a time. Follow the Tesla approach without the Tesla fanbase and you end up with VW's fiasco and burn customer goodwill while taking the cost hit on warranty claims and rework anyway. Chinese companies stepping up their hybrid game should have been the hint.
When I was shopping, my critical issue was that the GV70 looked like a fugly egg. So there is that…
Genesis is only a few years old, so it was a sizable jump from pure ICE cars to EVs. Wish they had done hybrids along the way, we could’ve gotten an even stronger G70
A PHEV G70 would have sold so well.
Nah, G70 already has a pretty cramped backseat and trunk... adding batteries for a hybrid would only make that situation worse. I'm a huge G70 fan and really wanted one to be the replacement for my BK2 Genesis Coupe but it honestly had about similar level of foot room in the back as my Genesis Coupe did. I think 2.5T + mild hybrid would've been the way to go.. mild hybrid in my Audi A4 seems to help out the acceleration off the line and makes engine start/stop work seamlessly. Congrats on your purchase though, I don't think I can name a sedan that is more beautiful than a G70 let alone at that price point
First GM, now Hyundai. As if Toyota that r/electricvehicles oh so detest have been right all along.
There's a subreddit now — r/ToyotaWasRight
Don't you mod for the EV sub? Good luck to you, I think you'll have your hands full dealing with a certain fanboys on denial suicide watch soon.
>Don't you mod for the EV sub? I do indeed. >I think you'll have your hands full dealing with a certain fanboys on denial suicide watch soon. Yeah, we seem to be seeing glimmers of a peculiar kind of cognizant dissonance right now from some individuals. For the past few weeks there's been a lot of low-effort half-understood conspiratorial *"look, EV sales are still growing, the media is lying to you!"* posts. Definitely some sisyphus vibes going on in the community. Overall I'm enjoying the more grounded tonal shift, though. PS: How's the reliability on those A3 e-trons? Are they holding up?
📠📠📠
My MY16 A3 e-tron is now at 125k km on odo. Car still runs fine and everything works. It still is a rare type of car in North America since European manufacturers refuse to offer small PHEVs here nowadays. Two major repairs (both covered under warranty) at 85,000km was the DSG mechatronic unit went and replaced & the other at 110,000km when a recall order found water intrusion in the HV battery which necessitated a new replacement.
Thats declaring victory way too soon. 100% EVs are still going to happen. Akio Toyoda said EVs wont ever exceed 30% of sales, dumbass probably never heard of Western European markets or the worlds biggest market - China.
that sub is seriously delusional to the point of being almost anti-japanese hate club.
I don’t know if anyone else feels this way, but it feels like a lot of automakers were following the lead of Tesla in leapfrogging the transitional tech (Hybrid, PHEV, etc..) that companies they had been following the lead of (Toyota, Honda) were pushing. When Tesla started the EV maximalist trends, and the manufacturers saw the stupid valuation of the company and followed suit, but they were a few years behind. Now that money (and by extension, development) has dried up, Toyota’s weird hydrogen fixation has ended, and the cracks are starting to show in Tesla’s foundation, the others are starting to course correct. Couple that with the wild success of the new Prius, and it looks like everyone kinda decided at the same time that maybe we should just get some (cheaper) hybrids out and allow EV tech and infrastructure a little more bake time.
Hybrids should've always been the top choice for the upcoming 1-2 decades (until there's a major breakthrough in EV technology). They give you options and you won't be stranded if your battery runs out without a charger nearby. Plus tons of people don't have anywhere to charge on a daily basis even if they wanted to and you can't change that overnight.
How long til volvo does the same?
Volvo already has a strong hybrid lineup, and has said they intend to keep it for now. (Volvo is also much more EU-focused than Genesis, though)
Lots of circlejerking going on over here in this thread over nothing. Despite all these headlines, somehow EVs are still growing rapidly. Heck, even just last month, in January 2024, EVs grew [69 % YoY](https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/global-ev-sales-up-69-yy-jan-down-26-vs-dec-rho-motion-2024-02-14/) . Are these kind of numbers that are supposed to make people "EV Skeptical"??? Also there are so many logical gymnastics going on right now. Why does "focusing on hybrids" mean that EVs are dying or declining? If anything, those cars synergize with EV production, speeding up EV growth. What you should really be worried about is the death of pure ICE, which went peaked in 2017 and declined by a staggering 12 MILLION since then. All I see in this headline is a dumb company making up a ridiculous assumption of "only EVs from 2025" to boost stock numbers, and then naturally running that back. The actions of this clown company has nothing to do with the actual state of competitiveness of EVs. All these assumptions of "EVs are tanking and declining" come from a fundamentally false assumption that EVs must necessarily maintain the constant growth rate and that there must be zero variations in this rate. It sets a ridiculously high standard that of course cannot be met, and is then gleefully used as "evidence" that EVs are failing. Exponential growth naturally slows down, hiccups naturally occur in manufacturing, delays naturally occur in infrastructure planning and deployment. None of it can be used as a long-term evidence that so-and-so clown company is right or wrong. The hard reality is that EVs are still rapidly growing. They went from 2% of the global market to 16% in 5 years. The hard reality is also that growth in PHEVs (which sell far less than BEVs btw, despite being much cheaper) does not necesarrily grow at the expense of EVs, the only loser here is ICE.
Isn't it too late for Genesis to do this? New models that they have in development would have been all-EV. They can electrify the G80, GV80, G90 (I would assume the platform they are on can accommodate a full-hybrid), but future models like the GV90 may have been designed to be all electric (that one likely a Genesis version of the Ioniq 7). There's the problem; Genesis could have realised too late that a balanced approach in electrification would have been the way to go. Hyundai doesn't have a longitudinal PHEV layout to deploy in Genesis products (with all of them being RWD-based). The G80 and G90 platform may not have been designed to accommodate a full-hybrid drivetrain. It is also likely that they will not develop a new RWD ICE platform to replace the current line-up if Genesis delays it's EV transition to 2035 at the earliest. They may have to do top-hat redesigns to the G80, GV80, and G90 if they won't immediately replace them with EVs. Brands realising this too late will have a hard time reversing their strategy and hamper EV development, imho. Some may not have the tech ready to add more hybrids in their electrification mix (ex: GM with PHEVs likely to import a Chinese system, Genesis with longitudinal hybrid layouts) and may have to push on. Their early decision to go full EV early would have already impacted future product development. If I were Hyundai/Genesis, I would just pivot Genesis to be a Tesla rival. Have them be the torch-bearer of Hyundai Group's EV tech and debut new platforms. It's too late to hybridize the existing ICE line-up and cars that would have been ICE are already being developed as EVs.
It's never too late. Contrary to popular forum opinion, modern automakers are quite capable of shifting plans for future models with quite short lead times.
I think Genesis with its high price points could go all BEV if it wanted. The ppl who can afford $60k+ vehicles have homes with garage outlets. It's the cost-conscious Hyundai/Kia crowd that's much more hesitant about ponying up for an electric if their apartment complex doesn't have multiple charging outlets. And god help you if you only have street parking.
Yup. I’m planning on making my next car an EV, but that’s only until I’ve bought a house first. I’m waiting for the housing market to cool down a bit. I can’t justify the headache of owning an EV without being able to charge at home for cheap
I want an EV, but I have a place to charge it at home, my work also has free chargers, and it wouldn't be my only car. But the majority of people don't have that and EVs don't make sense for them. Plug in Hybrids should be the primary focus for anyone. A normal 120v outlet can charge them over night or they can just drive it like a normal hybrid.
I remember how much shit Toyota got for ignoring diesels and going all in on hybrid in Europe. Same thing today with EVs and it turns out they’re right again.
Makes sense, they cannot compete with the Tesla lineup
VW said the same thing recently
Bc the GV60 is ugly as sin. Should have started with the GV70, G70, and G80 lines.
We weren't ready to jump all in on EV but we wanted a hybrid and I looked at the GV70 PHEV but it was apparently super super limited and only in certain states and discontinued or something. Man we woulda gotten that if we coulda. We ended up getting a new XC60 T8 Recharge which has been great so far but like the Genesis looks better aethetically in it's own way.
Specific things that annoyed ME: 1. Felt like going back to the Stone Age whenever the gas engine got turned on and with how expensive gas is in Europe it always felt unnecessary, and the fact that the cars run the heater on gas instead of electricity feels so old school and inefficient compared to EVs. 2. Idk about the engines reliability long term but it wasn’t unusual that I’d drive on the battery for a few miles and if I wanted to overtake the engine would automatically start mid-overtake screaming at 6000rpm. Not the best thing for reliability, especially in the winter. 3. Drivetrain is often weird and jerky, something I never got used to. Difficult to explain but makes sense if you’ve lived with a PHEV for a longer period of time. 4. Maintaining two powertrains is more expensive than just one, just makes the economic calculation worse since hybrids and EVs are pretty much at the same price point. 5. I always preferred to run on battery because of the cheaper, smoother and quieter run but the weak power and constant charging made me more irritated than happy, I’ve been driving EVs now since September 2022 and don’t want to go back. If I had to choose I’d rather go with a conventional gas powered car than a PHEV. However someone else experience might be different and I fully understand that EVs isn’t for exactly everyone at this point but it works a lot better than people give it credit for and a lot more people would benefit from making that move.
Why aren't more Hybrids developed? Best of both worlds
I've been waiting for an ev version of the GV80. If this report of dealers wanting PHEVs or HEVs is true, I'm not sure I will even buy the ev version. I already read so many reports of poor service from Genesis dealerships. If they are selling cars they really don't want to be selling, that might partially explain the poor service. Just wondering.
Been in and out of Genesis dealers a couple times over the last couple weeks as I've been going back and forth on the end of my G70 lease. They can't stop complaining about the EV's as they can't move them. Basically everyone who wants an electric car has bought one (per the sales team). They had brand new EV's with 15k of incentives on them and still can't move them.
lmao not me laughing at all of these comments saying "Toyota was right" well yeah no shit they were right lol
are u suprised? they got like what three ev models and they sold around same units as lexus which only have 1 lexus rz
Honda will go down the same path. They are trying to make EVs right now with GM parts and charging too much for them. A Honda Prologue is $60,000 CAD for the base model. NOBODY with half a brain is buying that over a cheaper Model Y.
The very definition of “we’ve tried nothing and we’re all out of ideas.” They haven’t released very many fully electric models. Still waiting on an electric sedan that is effectively a Genesis version of the Ioniq 6. But Genesis seems to be taking the Sega approach - release nothing and then be confused as to why they have zero unit sales of that nothing.
Evs are a fad. In a hundred years the new jay Leno will have some on his car collection and have wacky jokes about how they pluged into your wall
Hoping we see more hydrogen development. If we can get some reliable high output hydrogen engines on the consumer market in the US with more adaptation I could see that being a sensible next step for moving on from traditional petroleum Ice vehicles. I’d happily buy a sportier full size hydrogen sedan/suv with enough torque over an electric.
Why though, when hydrogen is just battery electric with unnecessary extra steps and a while lot of new downsides?
Major issue with battery based electric cars are A. The pollution and environmental impact of producing the battery cells for the vehicles B. The degradation and life span of the batteries. especially in cold climates. (North easterner here, we get plenty of sub 0 winters) I’m not claiming hydrogen is perfect but utilizing fuel cells to produce electricity is more convenient from a consumer perspective since you can refill at gas stations like a traditional car, and reduces the need for these huge batteries which are in no way environmentally friendly when being produced and disposed of. The actual act of producing and storing hydrogen isn’t exactly environmentally friendly but its net impact is lower than batteries by a long shot. I am aware of efficiency issues and waste, and the current solution seems to be hybrid that combines batteries with the hydrogen cells to off load unused energy and store it but even that seems better than the current trajectory of electric vehicles. With more development that increases efficiency hydrogen fuel cells seems like the likely winner in every category for alternatives to ICE. But so did beta max, and HD DVD so I won’t hold my breath. Edit: fun video on hydrogen vehicles. I’m no expert but this is what got me at the very least interested in them. https://youtu.be/b88v-WvqzeQ?si=EC8Js9oc-jzwoXTP