Always the danger when working in what is a new industry. Leapfrogging happening all the time, makes it take major money to even just stay relevant. Many of us out here is rooting for these startups, personally enough to invest in some of these startups.
No surprise that news media is, again, looking for the controversial headline to push viewership numbers. If readers are lucky, or watch this channel, the story will go on to mention their headline is purely clickbait. Thanks to the TE staff for your hard work and ethics.
One of your best videos, and there are many to judge against. The problem with technology is explaining the interaction of the tech, manufacturing, economics and marketing related to the final product.
I think the EV industry is still in the very early stages of development and major manufacturing companies won’t see EV’s in their full potential for quite a few years. Anything like the EV effort is a huge undertaking with far more technology to come. Solid state fast charging, high range batteries will be a major shift when that happens. Great perspective all around. This channel is one of the best concerning EV’s. Thank you
All of this, or at least most, was foreseeable. And no doubt this is why auto executives dragged their feet for so very long. The inability of the political system to push harder, sooner, and with the necessary resources, has cost more than two decades. Now, we face a time crunch that will put the human species' long term viability to the test. Here's hoping we make it.
Everyone is right and everyone is wrong. I like luxury EVs and they are the most profitable for manufacturers to sell. Where basic EVs are concerned, potential customers look at them and buy ICE for the better bang for the buck. I looked at the Mach e, Hyundai and KIA and found that the better equipped models were no longer for an entry level price, so I went luxury. Not everyone has that option.
Thank you for this video. I think you are spot on what we need is a great Electric grocery getter local driving around town which is so area that EV can strive.
The tech is changing so rapidly that it contributes to massive depreciation. So, EVs are quickly getting better but more and more people feel that it is better to let others be the ones that get cut by the "bleeding edge" of the new tech, and sales drop. It is not so much that we don't want EVs but that we are risk averse when it comes to a large investment. Solution? Simple, start at the bottom of the price range. Make inexpensive and reliable entry level models. That is what allowed Toyota and Honda to break into and dominate the auto market 50 years ago. The BYD Seagull and similar European entries have it right. At a low $10k cost for a reliable and practical 2nd vehicle a lot of people might consider it a reasonable way to get into EVs, because even if the insurance premiums are high they will be vasltly lower than a $50k car's, and if it gets totalled in a minor accident because it lost half of its value in a year... the amount lost from a $10k EV is so low that it might be worth the risk and possibly compensated in fuel savings. So, instead of fighting low-cost EVs, western manufacturers need to join the party. And maybe get congress to pass some personal data privacy laws like the EU's GDPR to prevent the stealing and selling of our private data. Otherwise it is obvious what BYD will do... they will setup a Seagull plant in Mexico and capture the market due to lack of competition, if necessary under a Franchise agreement to avoid anti-Chinese tariffs. And something equivalent in Eastern Europe for access to the EU market. The major manufacturers need to wake up or they will be displaced. In the meantime we are being economically forced to stick to ICEs even as we would prefer EVs if what we want was available. Myself... I ended up buying a new home with a type 2 charger, to be ready for when I could buy the right car, but... I just bought a low cost, high fuel efficiency and reliable compact ICE that I will keep for 10-20 years. BTW, thanks for all of your videos. I very much look forward to the day you'll cover a $10k (with A/C) EV available for purchase in the US. Even better if it gets shipped directly to the consumer, bypassing the nightmare that are US auto dealers.
No Chinese. Never. Not with their history. Those chinese evs are mobile surveillance and hacking units, paid for by the chinese government. They can be remotely shut off, or worse, remotely detonated, when the war finally comes. Hell no.
The efficient, compact vehicle market isn't necessarily the lowest cost market, as Tesla's success indicates, but I largely agree with you. We'll likely never see a $10k Seagull in the U.S. even if the U.S. lifts its chicken taxes, but EV prices are falling. They may never reach the sub-20k level at retail, but they're more and more affordable, and some used EVs are a bargain now.
One reminder, yugo. The cheap part is easier than the reliable part. I do not follow Chinese cars closely but seems they have a lot of builders not making a profit yet. If the corporate sponsor or other investors bail out who gets hurt when there are no parts (again - Yugo ) EVs also don’t have the repair infrastructure in place for most people to be able to ‘afford’ an EV. The guys that support repair of old affordable ICE cars are not up to speed on EV tech. If the EV supporters/enthusiasts push things too fast it will all collapse and kill off any hope of affordable EVs for maybe decades even with the government mandates . Think Cuba
And will unions let cost of building a car fall enough to allow for a $10,000 car. Last new car I bought was around $15,000. They sell nothing like that anymore- some of that is ‘greedy’ corporate villains, but not all of it.
As a Millennial I bought that 25K USA equivalent car but it's Chinese and so not allowed in the USA. I think the European automakers have finally got the message and started making smaller more affordable EVs, Renault 5, VW ID2, Citroen E-C3, Dacia.
Absolutely, my sub £25k Chinese EV does a realistic 140-150 miles on a run and I only do a long trip once or twice a year. I would go for a 2nd hand Kia if getting one now.
There is quite a number of smaller BEVs available in Europe: VW e-Up, Opel Corsa-e, Peugeot e-208, BMW i3, Renault Zoe, Fiat 500e, Dacia Spring, Mini Cooper SE. To name just a few. Renault 5 and Citroen e-C3 are still some time away, VW id.2 probably more like 2 years away.
I think it's great that Europe offers smaller evs. The reasons for that are at least three-fold: One, older, much tighter city streets and similarly tight geographic distances mean that smaller vehicles have always been the more practical, even totally necessary, option for Europeans, whereas the relative wide open spaces of North America promote the opposite sentiment in consumers. EVs in particular, so far need to be somewhat larger dimensions to accommodate battery packs capable of spanning those greater North American distances. Two, much more expensive petroleum fuel in Europe has contributed psychologically to Europeans seeing the economic practicality of smaller vehicles, long before evs were a widespread option. Therefore car companies are assured that smaller vehicles already have a receptive market in the EU. Three, the lamentable U.S. politics of vehicle efficiency standards policy (lobbied massively by manufacturers) has created equally massive incentives for those same manufacturers to shift their product lines to more massive, literally heavier, much more profitable, "light" trucks and even to replace efficient small hatchbacks and wagons with heavier, less aerodynamic crossover models. Consequentlly, manufacturers have spent the past 40+ years tirelessly campaigning in their advertising to convince consumers to think that we want bigger vehicles, especially trucks. They have never let up the push to convince us the falsehood that trucks are safer(they're not,) more useful(they are not, not for the average person's lifestyle purposes,) sportier(Ha!,) and "best" of all "cooler" than smaller cars. Those ad campaigns have been wildly successful. Consequently, in 40 years' time, the U.S. saw the top selling model go from being the little Ford Escort to now the Ford F-150, and even at that, the F-150 is much bigger and heavier than it was back then in the 1980's. (Sigh) I just remembered a fourth reason small evs are psychologically an easier choice for European consumers: Europe has far superior long-distance rail transit infrastructure for travelers, giving confidence to those travelers that they have reliable options for travel throughout the EU without having to count on a car with long range capacity to get where they are trying to go. This gives Europeans peace of mind that buying a small, modest-range EV is indeed a sensible option that will not leave them stranded. In the U.S.??? Not so much. Thanks to massive lobbying by both our petreleum and automotive industries, the once competitive rail systems we had have been thoroughly neglected in favor of building the world's most massive interstate highway system AND massive network of airline routes. The U.S. "could" begin to change all of this infrastructure, but there are powerful capitalist/corporate forces that profit from the status quo and will fight hard to maintain their own selfish advantage. 😮💨
Batteries were expensive in 2012, so that maybe why, as some of the models are quite old as well as starting by making a small car and expanding from there. E.g. the BMW i3 launched in 2013 with a small battery pack which was later expanded to 33 kWh and later 46.5 kWh.
@@Loanshark753 And the i3 was discontinued in Australia just as the EV market started to lift. As all the current electric BMWs are pretty big by comparison, one has to wonder about the thinking that led to that.
They need gas cars. Most people don't have all the extra time, space and money required for a completely redundant extra vehicle with limitations. That's an expensive hobby.
@@brunoheggli2888 Below the median income (half the population), most people buy used cars. The new car market is not "the average American" even at Nissan Versa or Mitsubishi Mirage level. It's the more affluent Americans. A few lower income people buy a new car, and they'll buy a Mirage or similar vehicle, but most lower income people prefer a used pickup or SUV. We don't see Versas everywhere because only the wealthiest of the least wealthy buy them new, and most of these people prefer a used car. The least wealthy of the least wealthy will buy a used Versa.
Another aspect of vehicle cost is so many additional parts. Tesla has a famously sparse interior, but it also has a very simple exterior as well. No fancy light bars and lit emblems, no added lights on the trunk, no additional parts for fake grilles, air intakes, etc. that's a ton of investment savings from a simpler design. Add in that you're keeping that fascia for many more years than a legacy automaker does because they do do "model year" updates like clockwork, which often changes those added parts and adds more tool cost/assembly complexity.
The reasons discussed here for why EVs are not more popular are valid. However, when I interact with someone who does not own an EV and they ask questions about my EV, the cost of EVs is rarely an issue. Most of the people are just not interested in changing to something new. They generally don't care about the environment and will continue to buy ICE vehicles as long as those vehicles are the ones that car companies are selling. It is also frustrating that FUD about EVs seems to get more traction with ICE vehicle owners than the truth. Personally, I will never buy another ICE vehicle, but I have become discouraged when I try to convince others that the kind of car I drive is a better choice.
I don't now if you watch the UA-cam channel of Rich Rebuilds but what he showed a problem with the insurance company make harder on the person buying the EV. Yes I thinking you find out what Rich point out would help if the insurance could change and poeple buying the EV
There are insurance companies , they compete for customers. They know how to assess Risks . If the type of car has high risk they charge an appropriate policy premium . Go ahead, try to talk all the companies down to lower the policy price.
I was surprised that my auto insurance actually went down when I switched from an ICE to an EV. I'm thinking that lots of factors, aside from just EV-related, go into an individual's policy price, and yeah, shopping around is a good idea.
I recently bought an original 2011 Leaf. It is not due for it's first coolant change yet. (200,000km or 15 years, whichever comes first). On the other hand they stopped selling: Nav system maps (5 years after last production puts it at around 2020) passenger seat cushion assemblies (the airbag presence sensor can fail) Service manuals (was able to find the PDF versions online).
A recent article examined Canadian vehicle choices and found that 80% of them were either trucks, SUVs or cross-overs, with tendencies toward even larger and heavier models. Weight is not exclusively an EV problem. In the rush to personal security, heavier vehicles are more dangerous for pedestrians, cyclists and compact owners. Obviously, they pollute more as well. Both electric and internal combustion vehicles are prone to the same marketing strategies which are based on convincing folks to pay more for bigger and bigger vehicles. Of course trucks get a pollution pass since they are supposedly work vehicles. The North American market may be the worst of the lot for its oversizing practices, which are not just an EV problem.
100% agree on less tech. My env200's touchscreen has lost response on two thirds of it, and things like music playlists shuffle only have access via the touch screen. My next EV will be an older ICE conversion so I can get the best part of an EV (electric drive train and zero CO2 at the tailpipe) and keep the more robust analogue systems.
The automaker that makes the 25K EV, will corner the market in USA. As a result of our administration taxing the mess out of Chinese EV’s. But, great information and I totally agree with your views.
I don't think so. There have been sub 25k USD EVs in the past in the US, like the Mitsubishi i-Miev (starting price below 24k USD in 2016). Still, it was no success in the US. So, it does not depend on price alone. The majority of US customers have a certain view, where "a proper passenger car" begins in terms of size, capacity, range, charging. Only when it meets these expecations, and provides proper quality, sales and service, it will be a market success if below 25k USD. In addition, 25k is an unclear point whether meant before or after incentives and rebates. And whether it necessitates any costly digital services after purchase.
Excellent video. The constant flood of stories on UA-cam, etc. trashing EVs is not helping and in fact has been very effective in putting off people from acquiring an EV.. I am going to guess a lot of this is quietly being funded by the fossil fuel industry. They wield enormous power in the USA and do not want to lose it. Personally I have owned an Ioniq 5 for two years and will never go back to an ICE car. I recently drove my wifes low mileage 2022 Subaru Outback and felt it was something dragged out of an auto museum. On several occasions I had to accelerate, but the car did nothing for about a second or more. That alone I will never own an ICE car. As to the tech is evolving, not sure I understand that one. My Ioniq 5 is quiet, smooth riding, well built, room for five adults, terrific acceleration when needed and the instrumentation is clear and right at eye level where it should be. Sure I would like 400 miles of range, but for my use I am fine with 300 miles. There were a few minor annoyances that me and many Ioniq 5 owners did not like, all have been addressed in the 2025 model to be built in Georgia. As to reliably, I have had zero problems with the car. Much is made justifiably about apartment owners and where they can charge, and that is a good point. However, 70% of American families live in a home and probably can have a L2 charger installed in their garage. It would be nice to emphasize to the public, not just that an EV will help the country to switch to a green energy future, but how nice it is to have almost no maintenance needed, the roomy interior, the silent ride, the responsive acceleration, and a battery that will probably last 100 to 200 thousand miles and will never have to visit a gas station again.. Just for the record, the typical ICE car reaches the end of its life in a junkyard at about 150,000 miles.
I believe it's time for a movement to nationalize the oil companies. This would bring its own problems, but the problems it would solve are truly existential.
I get what you are saying, but I have to say that the problem is more the reverse. Influencers, investors and fans of the EV movement have hyped EVs for years to the point where its become nothing more than gaslighting. People know that their properly maintained ICE vehicle will last pretty much forever and will be almost completely recycled. Junkyards are one part of that recycle stream. They provide serviceable parts that can be reused in other cars. So when a first timer goes to buy an EV the first thing they find out is that there are downsides and inconveniences to EV ownership. EVs work for some but not everyone
@@jasjordan1 The question is not, will a gas car be just fine for those who own it. Sure it will. The question is, will keeping gas cars on the road cost your great grandkids more money than they can afford to pay? The answer to that is yes. So ultimately, it's a question of whether or not you can or will give two hoots about the welfare of your great grandkids. Or is it all about "us," here and now? If you give two hoots, then now is the time to start thinking about how you can stop burning gasoline. Maybe it will take time to reach that goal, but that should be the goal. And, time is of the essence.
2024 will be the first year oil demand will not increase since oil was being used as fuel. That is why the industrialist are panicking , the fall in demand of oil is happening too quickly.
Keep going guys!! I just can’t understand those people that are so nasty, watch your channel and comment when they are completely against it… surely do/watch something else… 🤷♂️
Ah yes the carmaker marketing paradox. Just as they created the demand for SUVs out of thin air back in the 80s, they could likewise create demand for EVs. The car companies are totally controlled by their marketing departments when it comes to new models and direction, but they still have CEOs who can lay down the law. If any US car compnay had a CEO who truly understood what is going on re the climate, they would have ordered their marketing departments to "make EVs popular" a long time ago. It once appeared that Musk fit this description, but we now know that was all BS.
Hyundai looks to have a good strategy. They are leveraging what they know how to do: build dependable practical chassis, suspension and interiors, and adding the new EV stuff on top of that. Too many manufacturers seem to think they have to out-Tesla Tesla to compete... or think they can just reuse ICE platforms tp build EVs. The first adds unneccesary redevelopment costs, and the second is a false economy because there is still a ton of development cost to make what is essentially a compromise vehicle... and the efficiency stats and price tags prove it. If Hyundai can use this strategy to bring a real economy EV to market they should do really well.
Tesla's most popular models (by far), the Model 3 and Model Y, are aerodynamic, compact cars with relatively small batteries. The Bolt EV and EUV are similar and might have been much more successful without the battery fire debacle. I drive a 2020 Bolt EV that I picked up for half its retail price with only 8k miles in 2023, and I still love it. The range is more than adequate, and even with 50 kW charging, the charging time on long road trips is acceptable. I charge at home 95+% of the time anyway, so I spend a lot less time fueling even with half hour stops on long road trips, and I spend a lot less on the energy. The demand for this type of vehicle is far from exhausted while the F150L, Cybertruck and large SUVs often disappoint consumers because they suck at towing and similar uses, and they're slow to fully charge. I couldn't fully charge one overnight with my 40 kW home charger, and charging on the road is also slow if the public charger only supports 50kW (still often the case for CCS). So instead of trying to sell everyone an EV, including all of the pickup and large SUV drivers in the U.S., legacy auto should focus on the market for which EVs are well suited at this point. They'll have plenty of time to sell larger vehicles when the battery tech and charging infrastructure supports them.
The Model 3 and Y are big cars by the standards of the world outside the US. Why so much space has to be occupied to transport what in most cases is only one person is the crux of the reason cars, regardless of energy source, will not solve any real environmental problems. The normalization of massive amounts of public space being allocated for people to store their cars everywhere they go, to the point most people don't even question that arrangement is another absolute head scratcher.
@@rp9674 Most of the pickup market seems to be assholes cosplaying at being working class, which leaves the people that have actual use for them unable to get suitable trucks either.
What a breath of fresh air, common sense only seems available to "normal & rational" human beings. Thank You... Low tech, easy & cheap to maintain is the key... Have you noticed most new gen ICE engines have high failure rates & inflated prices to support the EV race? Mind you, I am convinced we are about to see car batteries in land fill very soon...especially here in Australia...I am keeping all of my dinosaur powered cars...just regular Des love. All 5 cars have between 160k to 350K kilometres...same engines & drive trains and easy to maintain & going strong...
EVs are a bit like politics. There are big decisions to be made and we don't know what is going to happen. All kidding aside, thanks for putting some of it into perspective as always Nikki.
Curb weight doesn’t seem to have much effect on efficiency. Bjorn Nyland and others have tested it and concluded that, so long as you have good regen, weight doesn’t much affect net efficiency. Extra weight hurts during acceleration, has a negligible effect during cruising speed, and helps during regen. So the net effect is minimal.
I live in Chicago and it's literally hardly any charging stations for the population. When I go to my girlfriend house in the suburbs, there are tons of them, all unused. The real killer is that she lives near a major road.
Don't get me wrong, I do like my ID4 and for me it has been a great car for around town (i.e. DC metro area). That being said I do have a garage, but I have to time share my outlet with my dryer as I did not have space in my panel to add a dedicated 30+ amp outlet just for the car. The main issue I have with the government mandates is that the infrastructure is not there to support those who live outside a major city or a major highway. When I go and visit relatives in upstate NY where I travel has very few DCFC along the way and where they live the closest DCFC is around 30 miles from their house. Their houses run on gas/oil for the most part and their houses are from the 1930's or older and only have at best a 100 amp service to the house. I can't park the car for days in order to charge on a L1. This is often made worse in winter with my range being cut from 220 to being around 130-150 which is less than the 170 between scranton and harrisburg on I-81. There is also the huge issue with EV's still being 10-20k more expensive upfront then their ICE counterparts and then the fact that as with phones, no one wants yesterday's electronics which make leasing expensive when compared to the ICE counterpart. With high prices those who could afford an EV went out and got one and the stall seems to be that the government tried to push demand on the adoption curve to early and may have actually hurt adoption. Also there is the issue and question is BEV the best option (maybe it is), but government coming and interfering in market by choosing the technology causes major issues. It may have been better to stick with increasing EPA ratings and let the markets figure out the solution. That solution may have been more public transit, people moving to more urban areas, etc - not forcing rural people to buy an EV when it does not fit their needs - the needs of 50% of the US population BTW
The infrastructure is building out very rapidly. Including in NY state. The number of fast chargers along your route will be greater next year. And the following year, it will be greater again. The problem you describe is real, but temporary.
@@davidmenasco5743 I am not saying it won't be fixed or get better, I am saying that for now (within the next 10 years) I'll likely go with a plug in hybrid vs a pure EV.
Your well reasoned discussion is appreciated. My opinion is that generally people in the luxury car market are conservative and that the members of that class that are liberal and care about the planet are a small minority. That wealthy liberal market is saturated prettty much for electric cars. Definitely EV manufacturers need to focus their efforts on a less afflluent demographic. I also think the focus on long range is a mistake made because of previous experience with ICE cars that have to be topped up periodically, the less frequently the better. Smaller, lighter cars and batteries are fine with daily plug ins, and if fast, reliable, 10 minute charging anywhere were available there would be no issues.
Another good video! So, here's the issue. We now know it was the Daily Mail, which falsely reported that EV's cause potholes. (By the way, my Ford Mach-e weighs 1500 lbs. less than my prior Chevy Avalanche.) However, the oil company mantra has been gaining traction. First, my 81-year-old mother, who drives about 4,000 miles per year, needed a new car recently. I attempted to convince here that she should gett a new EV like the Kia Niro or EV6. She retorted that she might run out of power and wouldn't know how to charge on the road and that the tech is "too new" for her. Nevermind that she bought a Kia Sportage, which has the exact same infotainment screen. As for size, we normal people at 6'4" don't want to drive a subcompact like the Model 3 or Nissan Leaf. I would love a Model S.
Model 3 a subcompact? I'm 6'2" & there is plenty of room in there. A taller person might squeeze another taller person in the back seat, but you'd need to be considerably taller than me to not fit. A Model Y is not much more & is higher off the ground if low seating is the issue.
@@jpg0927 I rented a M3 for two weeks while my Mach-e got some body work done after getting sideswiped. I had the seat all the way back and had decent legroom for me, but there would be no one able to sit behind me. I also had to squeeze my head down to get in and out of the car. It drove nice, but is just too small.
With legacy automakers balking at scaling up production, no wonder they don't reap the benefits of economies of scale. It is impossible to produce affordable EVs at a profit when treating them as low-volume products. Poor planning, poor implementation. Complaining while trying to play both sides is inefficient - the ICE side has no future, but they are STILL, in 2024, pushing full-speed ahead on that front.
Keep up the good work yall!!! I’m a mostly conservative middle aged guy but guess what I love earth and I have a full EV and plug in and I try to get everyone to switch. I think all the issues boil down to mainstream automakers and their pressuring on politicians and the politicians corrupting love of money. I don’t agree with forcing by legislation, EVS will win on a somewhat even playing field. THEY ARE BETTER PERIOD. I was shocked how “green” politicians have backtracked on the push to ev also. Quit flopping around like fishes lol
By the way, in the USA most people think about 2 things: money saving and convenience. That is why lots of folks avoid EVs not being able to see convenience of charging at home vs filling the gas tank in minutes which is more important for them then slight saving by charging EV at home. Besides most car owners in the USA use pre-owned cars which in order to be affordable HAVE to be ICE based, unfortunately. Perhaps with better charging infrastructure, previous generation EVs coming on pre-owned market the idea of owning an EV would get normalized as a car which happens to be electric.
the 'losses' on EVs are being calculated based on the cost the develop the vehicle. which is pretty much how all vehicles costs are developed. usually also not just brand new, but updated too. just not many pay attention that, as almost no new vehicles can make a profit in the first year on the market, in some ways because the auto maker can come close to how much they have invested to design the new vehicle, but early production usually isnt as much as the number of vehicles will be made. and if you watch how the industry introduces new or updated vehicles you find they tend to produce the most expensive versions first. the lower cost versions will come later. problem those first models tend to make it appear that all of this model will be expensive. it will take an automaker a long time to figure out how much the model will make, since the early ones are just trying to pay for development and some profit. and in follow on models automakers tend to make minor changes just to keep sales going and to keep buyers attention. but in the end almost no 'new' models make much if any money. course lots of automakers need their ICE sales to fund the EV business, and while there is a lot of noise about how slow EV sales are, take a peak the ICE sales, and you would see ICE sales are falling off a cliff, in part because of how dealers treated their customers 2020-2023, and how interest rates arent helping either
I am confused by the battery platform comments. I'll have to read up more on e-gmp, but the "unifying platform" approach to EVs was popularized by GM's Ultium if I remember right and that platform underpins a wider variety of vehicles (blazer ev, Equinox ev, Silverado ev, Cadillac celestiq, upcoming Boltium) than e-gmp (I know of the Ioniq 5 and 6, ev6, and gv60).
Eventually all governments will switch from carrot to stick. The UK is ahead of the game with the ZEV mandate with 15K/ICE penalty for missing your quota. Next will be road pricing to replace fuel duty. I guess only the rich can afford the fees. Bring on the 15min prison?
Sounds like you fundamentally or willfully misunderstand what a 15 minute city is. Imagine not needing to get in your car for every trip you need to take everywhere because there are easier, faster and more enjoyable options available to you instead. A car that's not being used for every trip a family needs to take every day is already way less of an environmental burden regardless of fuel. Where I live is effectively a 15 minute city, so my car stays where it is while i go about my daily life, only ussing it for intercity type trips or carrying cargo. It would be actively bad for the environment for me to swap my low annual mileage dieselgate car for an EV as the massive environmental cost to make the battery would never be recouped over the life of the EV with the amount it would get used.
I think it's great that Europe offers smaller evs. The reasons for that are at least three-fold: One, older, much tighter city streets and similarly tight geographic distances mean that smaller vehicles have always been the more practical, even totally necessary, option for Europeans, whereas the relative wide open spaces of North America promote the opposite sentiment in consumers. EVs in particular, so far need to be somewhat larger dimensions to accommodate battery packs capable of spanning those greater North American distances. Two, much more expensive petroleum fuel in Europe has contributed psychologically to Europeans seeing the economic practicality of smaller vehicles, long before evs were a widespread option. Therefore car companies are assured that smaller vehicles already have a receptive market in the EU. Three, the lamentable U.S. politics of vehicle efficiency standards policy (lobbied massively by manufacturers) has created equally massive incentives for those same manufacturers to shift their product lines to more massive, literally heavier, much more profitable, "light" trucks and even to replace efficient small hatchbacks and wagons with heavier, less aerodynamic crossover models. Consequentlly, manufacturers have spent the past 40+ years tirelessly campaigning in their advertising to convince consumers to think that we want bigger vehicles, especially trucks. They have never let up the push to convince us the falsehood that trucks are safer(they're not,) more useful(they are not, not for the average person's lifestyle purposes,) sportier(Ha!,) and "best" of all "cooler" than smaller cars. Those ad campaigns have been wildly successful. Consequently, in 40 years' time, the U.S. saw the top selling model go from being the little Ford Escort to now the Ford F-150, and even at that, the F-150 is much bigger and heavier than it was back then in the 1980's. (Sigh) I just remembered a fourth reason small evs are psychologically an easier choice for European consumers: Europe has far superior long-distance rail transit infrastructure for travelers, giving confidence to those travelers that they have reliable options for travel throughout the EU without having to count on a car with long range capacity to get where they are trying to go. This gives Europeans peace of mind that buying a small, modest-range EV is indeed a sensible option that will not leave them stranded. In the U.S.??? Not so much. Thanks to massive lobbying by both our petreleum and automotive industries, the once competitive rail systems we had have been thoroughly neglected, ...even dismantled,... in favor of building the world's most massive interstate highway system AND massive network of airline routes. The U.S. "could" begin to change all of this infrastructure, but there are powerful capitalist/corporate forces that profit from the status quo and will fight hard to maintain their own selfish advantage. Ultimately, efficiency is not the leading force in the U.S., Corporate Profit is. That profit currently derives from ice vehicles. Shareholders are pressuring manufacturer leadership to demonstrate profitability on a short-term basis, typically quarterly. That creates a conflict of goals. How does a company shift away from its still-profitable ice lines of product, toward the uncharted waters of evs, with all the RnD expense that requires? 😮💨 Personally? ...I can hardly wait to get my hands on my very own base model aptera! Talk about practical economy and efficiency!!!
Glad I got a Blazer EV before all is lost! I got sick of undersized EV’s or settling for a Tesla! The Blazer is huge with usable controls although I wish there were more regular controls! The easiest to drive was my 2013 Focus EV but range was minimal esp in winter it had all regular controls with no touch screen! The Blazer will work forever but I wish I could have supercruise which was not available now! I have now had 3 EV’s and will never buy a gas car again! Range has been tested at 2 different sites as 315-320miles which I don’t need! No maintenance means all service centers have never seen my face and don’t like EV’s!
One of the reasons why the auto industry and dealerships are having so much trouble right now is that they're trying to sell Americans expensive cars, trucks and SUVs at a time when most of us are so strapped by the cost of housing and food that they can't afford to go into debt for high end vehicles. This isn't just an EV thing, look at the crapshow that is the full sized pickup market. If manufacturers want to connect with buyers, they need to focus on affordability. Oh, and less tech would be nice too.
But how much CAN you share between an EV and ICE car besides the outsides. Drive train and computers and whatnot, maybe 3/4 of the car, is not able to be shared. Maybe if we have someone clever enough figure out a way to share 3/4 of the parts we can get enough volume to keep EVs affordable and repairable to make sense for people that just want transportation. But suspect that is still a more like a Hybrid and not a true EV some insist we must have. .that would be a great thing if it ever happens.
@@_xyzyz_ Actually, I was primarily referring to separate and duplicate staff, oddly enough the guesstimate of 3/4 would probably be about right on the physicality of the vehicle. Where is it written that a manufacturer can't have common parts across models, or taking that a little further an EV and ICE version of a model that are all but identical; the practice of completely redesigning nearly everything from one model to another is comparatively recent and needlessly increases production and service costs.
I have to be honest. I have had three EV’s. I recently purchased a used Ford fusion hybrid. And while I think EV‘s are good for the short distances, the hybrid is far more superior. Recently, I drove my Genesis EV for a couple of hours, and while I got better range than expected, I drove my hybrid, the same distance and still had a full tank of gas. I work for a hospital network in which I have to travel around and at times I have to charge my EV‘s times a day. My hybrid, however at the driving for 4 1/2 hours it only used one and a half gallons of gasoline. The range meter on the hybrid showed that I still had 520 miles of range after driving 4 1/2 hours. The hybrid is far superior. Especially at long distances. I would highly recommend EV’s for a short distance trips and short distance trips only. But for every day life, a hybrid is much better.
I agree with a lot of this. But as for what we need in evs for them to sell at scale the research shows that over 50% adoption occurs at 3 metrics: yes price below $36k, then charging at 30 min or less, but then range above 300 miles. Another study showed price below $50k, charging at or under 20 minutes, with range over 350 miles. Now that's the Equinox and Ioniq 6 respectively, and they totally have the ability to revolutionize things if the word gets out about them. That said, this needs to become the standard, not the exception. We need every major automaker to have such vehicles in their lines. Heck, even as variants, a standard range vehicle should be low 300s at under $36k while an extended range should exceed 350, with a price in the 40ks. But if you must make a vehicle with a range that starts with a "2", the price needs to start with a 2 as well. This is what the market needs to look like to sell at scale. And we CAN do it with current levels of tech. It just needs to be the conscious aim of every ev maker.
Maybe in EVs, the electric motors are equivalent to the ICE gas tank (both light-weight, reliable and cheap), and the batteries in an EV are equivalent to the ICE engine (both large, heavy, costly, prone to aging, and less reliable). In other respects, there shouldn't be that much difference between EVs and ICE, so if batteries and motors become more commodity, why shouldn't EVs be as cheap as ICE vehicles? Tesla should have developed the "model 2" before the Cybertruck - they missed out on a golden opportunity to ride the mass adoption curve and flood the U.S. market.
I’m saving up for the Renault 5 ev but if it’s price in the UK is gonna have me paying over £300 a month for a small polo sized hatchback I can’t justify it. Automakers really need to focus on making them affordable. Also some brands need to remember they aren’t Porsche. I’m not paying 30k for a Renault sorry that’s just insane
My ID4 will be going to the shop. For the second time LG battery modules will have to be replaced. Not giving up on EVs but I will never buy another one with a battery made by that company. Oh and a door lock will have to be replaced for the second time.
4 місяці тому
That's the same company that made the batteries that failed spectacularly in the Chevy Bolt. Let's hope they've finally gotten their act together.
Regarding the Chevy bolt, it wasn’t affordable car and they sold plenty of them, but it also had a big problem with its battery pack. As a result, GM had to lose quite a bit of money on repairs, replacement, etc. Given that it was such an affordable car, that meant that the cost for all of that was more because there were more of them on the road. They navigated this issue relatively well to keep the name of the car valid, but they felt the pinch of not having fully baked their workflow. Thus, it’s not unreasonable for GM to not want to go back down that road so quickly. What’s more, I believe it was LG who provided the batteries, and it seems as though the way LG handled their end of the issue wasn’t great, Kia and Hyundai, who also used LG batteries, had the same issue. As a result, I’m willing to bet that GM didn’t want to be dependent on LG anymore. Thus, they moved to a new platform that would hopefully avoid both the actual problem of the batteries, as well as the administrative problems caused by working with LG. As a result, both GM and other manufacturers are hedging their pets early because if you only sell a few expensive vehicles to people who are wealthy and getting electric vehicles as an extra car, while they will still expect the car to work, it means that if something does go a little sideways, it’s not as expensive to take care of it, the margins give you the ability to absorb those costs more easily, And it’s far more likely that the customers will not be as heavily impacted by similar problems occurring because they can more easily not use the car while waiting for the issues to be resolved.
While electric vehicles generally have less maintenance cost when they work properly, they also have potential for new issues that other cars don’t have. Therefore, it’s almost irresponsible to make a cheap mass market version of such a car too early. For instance, the Chevy volt Was generally pretty good, however, it was an unusual combination for a hybrid for GM, in that if memory serves, the electric drivetrain did most of the traction work. This was different from other hybrids in their range. As far as I know, there were no significant problems with this part of the vehicle. However, I know two people who each had more than one volt and they were constantly having issues with the infotainment system. I’m not sure why this would happen again again, and I don’t know if it happened in other GM hybrids, But based on this my guess Is that there was a combination of different things that brought the volt to an end. The main one being that the bolt was on its way, and would do a better job of fulfilling whatever café requirements there were.
I agree and I’m definitely one of the ones in the comments who has said I would love for an electric vehicle that didn’t have complex infotainment and extra tech. For me, the only thing that I need from infotainment is the ability for my phone to pipe audio Into the speakers. Separating Turn by turn directions and audio from the vehicle means that if my phone gives up the ghost, I don’t lose the essential functions of the car. I very much enjoyed driving the pole star 2 which has Built-in Google maps and Audio. It works very well. However, when it doesn’t work, it creates a very concerning and strange situation. At a certain point during a rental that I had for a few weeks (ironically while waiting for my Fiat EV to be repaired), the sound stopped working that was an annoyance with regards to listening to a podcast while driving, but because of the way it was integrated, it also meant that I didn’t have vehicle sounds anymore. Thus, turn signals, warning chimes, and any other sound that you would expect from the vehicle except for the horn were no longer functioning. That’s quite disconcerting, and while it turned out it was the only thing that was wrong, since the system didn’t know it had a problem, it didn’t give me a message telling me you had a problem, and I didn’t know to what extent I should worry. What’s more , I could not find within the system a way to debug the issue. I had to go to my phone to find information about this happening. Of course, I didn’t have time to sit in the garage and figure it out, I had somewhere to go. I had tried restarting the car, and that didn’t help. Partly because that vehicle doesn’t really ever shut off if you’re in it. I had to hard, but not factory, reset of the infotainment. That took a half an hour to figure out, and then it took another 15 or 20 minutes to work out exactly how to accomplish it, because the manufacturer hides it as they don’t want the user to do this by accident. It was at that point that I very much wished that the car was not so tightly integrated. It would’ve been preferable for my phone to have been doing all the work, and have a confidence that there wasn’t anything else wrong with the car just because I couldn’t hear a podcast.
I do think that there is a false understanding of the business of automobiles both today and in the past. Early electric, steam, and gas vehicles, when having an automobile wasn’t even a thing that people understood, were pretty expensive. It wasn’t until Henry Ford worked out the early assembly line for the model T that any car was affordable to the general worker, and he famously went out of his way to pay his workers more so they could buy his product. What’s confusing today is that the automobile is well understood, and it’s assumed that an electric car Will benefit from all that. To an extent, it’s true, wheels and tires, suspension, body panels, and some aspects of the frame of automobiles are well understood, and with some math, you ought to be able to leverage all of that knowledge to reduce the cost of electric vehicles. The problem is that the major portion, the drivetrain and specifically the batteries, are, as Nicki mentioned, fairly new. That means that the only way to affectively develop those systems is to charge a lot for the vehicles they come in. It’s worth noting that back in the early days of gasoline vehicles, a lot of things changed very quickly, and the cars were expensive, because determining the exact technology and needs a customers were still being worked out. Early transmissions were leather belts, the first automobiles used a tiller. Even the model T still had a fairly complicated control system, and you could break your arm or even die trying to start it. Contrast, what took two or three decades for gas vehicles, has only taken a little over a decade for modern electric vehicles. And the last, in addition to the Chevy bolt issues, which were also felt by the Kia Hyundai group, the Nissan leaf, a poster child for affordable electric vehicles, has had its share of issues as well. they’ve done a relatively good job of providing support for a platform that honestly is not good for long-term vehicle sales. They went with air cooling, which while functional enough, meant that the batteries did not last very long. That’s why Nissan had a whole program for either upgrading batteries, or replacing them if the bat didn’t last the minimum warranty. It’s one of the reasons why the current platform is about to die. The air cold system simply doesn’t have the longevity that is necessary for a modern automobile.
It’s also worth noting that cars in general are pretty expensive. There are very few vehicles under $20,000 today of any type companies have tried to exclusively make an expensive vehicles, and they pretty much of all gone out of business. They are some European manufacturers who have affordable small cars still,but one of the reasons why they’re popular is because of how small streets in European cities can be it’s not because people necessarily prefer a small car. Additionally, the structure of Europe and European cities means that the likelihood that you’re going to need to drive over 150 miles in a given day is relatively small. It’s just not the case in the United States.
One might then bring up the cost of Chinese vehicles, both within China, and being sold currently in the EU. The issue there is that instead of paying living wages, charging what the vehicle should cost, and then perhaps domestically giving rebates the way European countries and the United States does, China is subsidizing electric vehicle development and sales in the same way that the United States subsidizes corn and soy production. As a result, the price of those vehicles is not an accurate representation of the actual cost of producing them. You might make the argument that that should be what other countries should do, but keep in mind that China isn’t doing environmentalism because they are environmental. The political reasons for China to subsidize electric vehicle production is similar to the political reason why the United States essentially subsidizes military production. Both countries have a desire to influence around the world, the United States has chosen to do so through military contractors and military force, China is doing so by undermining economic standards to essentially try to put the industries of other countries out of business. I would accept the argument that one more friendly than the other, and certainly I would support our spending less money on military, especially given how much money is wasted, but as far as day-to-day life, I prefer to live in the political system of the United Statesrather than the political system of China, surveillances King.
In this video, you mention _Portland_ but don't say which one. There are 18 Portlands in the U.S. alone. And numerous other cities named _Portland_ in at least six other countries. As usual, I don't "get" this channel specially the context you are talking about....
Well, they tried, and it's too fast of a transition? 20 or 30 yrs sounds good to them??. Are they really trying?. I dont think so!. It's too hard to try. The US Government just made it easier for US car makers, by taking away the Chinese compatition part. Dealerships making trade-in values horrible is another reason. But that is really helping make used so affordable, I bought my second 2022 Bolt euv for half price:) If people look hard enough. they can make an edge case of why an ev doesn't work for them.... I just want to ask the US car manufacturers: WHY is it so hard to make a profit off an easier to make vehicle? Gas cars are HARD to make!! Not EV's
Parts suppliers have billions of $ worth of manufacturing facilities dedicated to ICE parts which have been paid off (depreciated) years ago, thus can have very low development costs vs having to add new tooling and processes for EV specific parts.
i suspect that had GM started their Ultium journey with Cadillac and later added say Buick to their EV lineup, followed by maybe GMC, and eventually Chevy, they might have had the EV transition go smoother. but Chevy has the bigger development budget. and probably make the money too. course they sort of tried that with the Lyriq, but had they gotten that vehicle straightened out before doing Buick and then GMC and finally Chevy, with the Chevy being the lower cost version of same. course Chevy isnt known for cheap vehicles, after all they sell Vettes, Surburban's and Tahoe's, they arent exactly cheap. but then the $18,000 vehicle is now very hard to find, and while there are some in the OEMs offerings finding one is just about like finding the golden goose.
EV sales are in very small numbers in the USA vs ICE vehicles, unfortunately. The latter are profitable since are produced in large numbers having economy of scale. The number of dollars spent on R&D is spread on a lot of cars produced vs in EVs. That is second point of savings in ICE vehicles. Legacy automakers are very inefficient in software developing thus losing money with their half baked products. They never managed to get to the point of over the air updates. Therefore they lose money in upgrading software at dealerships. There is a mess in wiring done in EVs of legacy automakers making their manufacturing slow, inefficient, labor intensive. They never perfected the efficiency of their motors making the sales unattractive due to slow charging and poor range requiring serious incentives to sell already produced cars. They have poor vertical integration needing to buy components from suppliers on a non competitive high prices instead of developing in house.
One Platform -- yes its good, but can be very poisonous for ionnovation, especially in early years of low hanging fruit. Tesla has basically gone through 6+ major platforms Original Roadster, Original Model S, 2nd Gen Model S, Model 3, New Model S, Cybertruck. All of this has allowed them from have very 'compromised' car in 2013 to unmatched vehicles in 2014.
well, i like the 4.5.4.7m long (big) electric SUV's. just the price is to much, and that is for many people, for example, i love how the new Peageout E 3008 looks, but my budget is 40% of its price tag.., so while i would like to get a car like that, i am limited to smaller cars, cos i cant afford to buy what i want..
I'm not sure if EVs are the best choice for overall carbon dioxide reduction. In the current world where grid and charging infrastructure are limited using batteries for the home to supplement local solar and wind production might be a better use.
Yes, when you do low volumes, you will lose money. True with EVs. True with a pair of scissors or desktop PCs. Scale is critical (as well as lowering costs of batteries of course). Ideally someone will build a great EV that costs ~$40-45,000, with decent range and great charging speed. Chicken or the egg issue though. The manufacturer is going to need about 250,000 or more of unit sales to make it work. (Higher would be better).
If they would be less arrogant and "know-it-all" they would produce Teslas or very similar products and rake the same profits as Tesla. Stupidity costs.
Carbon fiber is a dead end for cars. Making carbon fiber is an expense labor intensive process using expensive materials. Hence the i3 was a dead end. Probably the best weight savings option for the future would be magnesium instead of aluminum.
❤😊 thank you Nicky 🙂 I think the fact that toxic car manufacturers and the toxic fossil fuel are attacking electric cars? is a good thing. I think they're actually getting worried... no doubt it was Tesla it broke this cartel ice is dead 😅 🎉 I'm about time to Thank you and keep up the excellent work buzz #buzzofftoxic #tiedamew
The tech, infrastructure and legislation are still 5-10 years of development short of where they really need to be for BEVs to go mainstream. I personally wouldn't want to buy an EV until standards are made for EV batteries so perfectly good EVs don't become scrap metal from single cell failure once the battery is out of warranty or the manufacturers declines a warranty claim. Until then, EVs will have a hard time shaking off the "disposable electronics" vibe. There are few to no reasons to mechanically change the battery pack. Electrically, there isn't really any reason other than changing the max compliance voltage either. For the rest, the EV should be able to adapt to whatever the BMS says the battery pack is capable of. The EV shouldn't care what the battery chemistry is or what the pack structure is, as long as output voltage remains within operating limits and the pack is able to provide enough current to accelerate. Slap a 300-800V Na-ion battery into an EV originally shipped with a 550-800V NMC battery, it should work mostly the same in the 550-800V range, may be power-limited by pack voltage/current below that. If EV manufacturers don't want to deal with heaps of tech, then there always is the option of going low-tech with the least amount of non-essential stuff. I've seen at least one compact EV that was little more than a box with four wheels, AC/heat and used an app on a phone/tablet as the extra display for navigation and non-essential functions. I like that. You can upgrade the "in-car display" to whatever you want, whenever you want instead of being locked into whatever the car manufacturer says you can have when and where you can have it, likely having to pay a subscription fee as you do so.
MG aren’t losing money on PHEV. Toyota probably are but I don’t have a reference. I still can’t buy a Toyota PHEV anything where I live unless it’s a 10 year old Japanese import
3:14 "Poor Choices" is not really apropos. More like "Smart Business Choices", ie, blow with the political winds, pump and dump, profit taking, greed, rip off your customer. I hope this vid improves from here...
all automakers lose money on cars at the start of production. It costs billions to bring a new car to market. Those costs have to be paid up to make a penny. Once the cars have been on the market for 2-3 years you start making money. Ridiculous. Look at the true profits down the road not today or tomorrow. Thats the way it has worked and will always work.
The big problem is traditional auto just isn't used to actual change. EV are disruptive technology, and a disruptive technology just hit an industry that hasn't had major changes in nearly a hundred years. While Tesla is no longer a startup, an in my opinion should adopt some of the practice of the other automakers, it had created the key template of what an electric car should be. But it's growth process was rocky decade long struggle, that without having old baggage. Hyundai and Kia are rather new automakers so they were more adaptable to these changes. But the others are struggling to figure out how to incorporate their generations of experience into a new technology is difficult, and expensive.
That major change 100 years ago was when IC technology replaced EVs. Hundreds of EV makers who could not make the transition to ICE went bankrupt. We are seeing history repeat itself. Toyota was ahead of the game turning away from EV and towards more ICE, other large auto makers are following.. but very difficult for EV only makers. Producing a competitive modern engine isn't like wiring up some batteries to a motor, it's very advanced technology.
Unsure why consumers would want to get involved in ‘fixing’ something being mandated to make your life harder( for now). If EVs are ready for mass market sale , car builders would make money as the buyer would see some benefit to buying the EV and pay enough for buyer and seller to both be happy with the transaction. Even better if that can happen without government rebates or other incentives but we can not expect that. Normal people will buy EVs if and when they make sense to buy. A lot more basic development needed to get to that point for many people. With no mandates I wouldn’t even care about EVs until I WANTED to buy one. And if I don’t have multiple cars I need one that can work in the city and for longer trips. Not everyone can afford multiple cars. Or are you saying “ let them take public transportation” ?
Fords Mach Es started increasing in sales because of massive discounts bring their 75K msrp's down to 25K. Fords losing massively on every EV they sell.
Market overall was more diverse than it seemed few years ago for some. Ev's aren't still suitable for every use. EV's are still more expensive than ice cars. As food and housing has gone More expensive, buyers aren't as willing to take loans (which has higher interest too) Unreliability and higher insurance fees won't help EV's either. In general, EV's should be competitive, without subsidies or mandates. There will be always people who see EV's as lame option. It is better to accept fact that car market and buyers are more diverse group than people deep in bubbles see.
You seem to be forgetting the reason why EVs are important. The failure to stop burning fossil fuels would impose a VERY HIGH COST on everyone. If governments were allowed by their sponsors (the oil companies) to do the right thing, they would do something like the following: Calculate the cost associated with the failure to transition, then tax ICE vehicle sales enough to cover this cost. Problem solved. Now, the real cost of internal combustion is covered, whether we transition or not. Of course, this would cause a very quick transition to 100% EV. The "externalized" costs of ICE (the costs which you and others pay, but not at the time of sale) are enormous. In the grand scheme of things, EVs are a very small fraction of the cost of ICE.
I have an idea: build appealing sporty cars that people can actually afford. Station wagons/shooting brakes are practical and fun. Also, build batteries that do not degrade and have ranges that are comparable to ICE cars And the BMW i3...that thing was as ugly as their newest obnoxious and ugly SUVs
No sweetie it's a very simple answer to that question, it's fool some of the people all the time,, then fool some of the people some of the time but not the same people all the time and fool most of the people no time at all!
The US auto manufacturers won’t change. I remember when they said no one wants Japanese cars or when they said no one wants front wheel drive cars. Europe had padded dash,disc brakes and side impact protection years before the US and now no one wants EV cars lol they deserve to fail
Keeping stuff compatible... Your talking to much sense. If they do that then modern Ev's like the ICE counter parts will last to long and other than the oh it's shiny people they will struggle to sell cars. On the plus side of the ev gives up the ghost you can keep the battery pack for home storage lol
tax the hell out of ICE vehicles to fund incentives to buy EVs. the cost to buy was made close to equal then the market would probably reflect that. then have a cash for clunkers in 2040 (keep this part quiet).
11:26 Tesla is far from doing big cars with big batteries. The most sold model 3s and model Ys in Europe have a 60 kWh battery. Tesla understood a long time ago that with a wide reliable fast charging network the car does not need a big battery. Maybe the EV market would be in a better shape without Tesla bashing.... And regarding the need of cars smaller than a model 3, it is just an assumption. I do not use my car in my city, but public transportation and my bicycle, and for long distances at "high speed" a model 3 is more efficient than many smaller cars less aerodynamic. Not to mention a model 3 is not too big when traveling especially with your family, and when you are alone or a couple the train can be a better option. I am not saying the model 3 is the perfect car, just that arguing we need small cars for cities is far from being clear. Furthermore, if Tesla is not doing a small car it is probably because it would not be possible to sell it in high volume at the price people want a small car, and Tesla cannot afford to lose money on EVs. I assume Tesla will just sell a more affordable model 3 by removing what people don't need, or by locking some functionalities that the owner will eventually buy latter (a bigger battery, more power, AWD, heated seats, autopilot and FSD, games and apps, connectivity, etc.). But I bet then TEN will find a way to complain , eg the fact that locking functionalities is bad and anti-repair, etc.
You must be too young to know the history of hybrids. Toyota started hybrid research in 1975 during the Oil Crisis. It was a concept born out of necessity due to extremely high gas prices and economic challenges. But Toyota was only able to start developing a realistic commercial product in 1992 with the advances in rechargeable batteries. (Japanese electronic companies developed and perfected rechargeable batteries in the late 1980s and early 1990s for usage in portable electronics such as laptops, cellphones, and walkmans.) With the usual development cycle of 5 years, Toyota introduced the Prius hybrid in Japan in 1997. Toyota lost money for the first 10 years with the Prius project, but they fully understood the significance of hybrid technology so they continued their improvements regardless, which is why today's hybrid cars are reliable and affordable. They believed in the technology so much, they also made 24,000 hybrid-related patents available to all competitors free of charge. Nissan Leaf and Tesla only used highest-grade batteries from Japanese companies for reliability. EVs are essentially batteries on wheels. The quality and production cost highly depends on the quality of the batteries. South Korean and Chinese EVs are cheaper because they use lower quality and cheaper South Korean and Chinese batteries. Even then, most Korean and Chinese EV makers are also losing money for each EV sale. Consumers may find EVs expensive, but the reality is EV business is unsustainable if it continues to lose money for automakers.
Your channel is the only one I watch multiple times a week. Please don't go anywhere. The information you provide is very valuable!
As someone who works for an ev automaker that makes electric trucks, it is scary in this industry. It seems like layoffs are always around the corner.
Always the danger when working in what is a new industry. Leapfrogging happening all the time, makes it take major money to even just stay relevant. Many of us out here is rooting for these startups, personally enough to invest in some of these startups.
No surprise that news media is, again, looking for the controversial headline to push viewership numbers. If readers are lucky, or watch this channel, the story will go on to mention their headline is purely clickbait. Thanks to the TE staff for your hard work and ethics.
One of your best videos, and there are many to judge against. The problem with technology is explaining the interaction of the tech, manufacturing, economics and marketing related to the final product.
I think the EV industry is still in the very early stages of development and major manufacturing companies won’t see EV’s in their full potential for quite a few years. Anything like the EV effort is a huge undertaking with far more technology to come. Solid state fast charging, high range batteries will be a major shift when that happens. Great perspective all around. This channel is one of the best concerning EV’s. Thank you
All of this, or at least most, was foreseeable. And no doubt this is why auto executives dragged their feet for so very long.
The inability of the political system to push harder, sooner, and with the necessary resources, has cost more than two decades. Now, we face a time crunch that will put the human species' long term viability to the test.
Here's hoping we make it.
Everyone is right and everyone is wrong. I like luxury EVs and they are the most profitable for manufacturers to sell. Where basic EVs are concerned, potential customers look at them and buy ICE for the better bang for the buck. I looked at the Mach e, Hyundai and KIA and found that the better equipped models were no longer for an entry level price, so I went luxury. Not everyone has that option.
I was disappointed that there were no more BMW carbonfiber cars however they still make evs.
Rich Rebuilt talked more how they appraised one accident how fast the insurance company totalled the EV
Thank you for this video. I think you are spot on what we need is a great Electric grocery getter local driving around town which is so area that EV can strive.
Young people shouldn't even be LOOKING at new cars. Buy used! You will save a ton of money on price, taxes, insurance and depreciation.
As a bonus: the GSM 2 modem is no longer able to let the car spy on you!
The tech is changing so rapidly that it contributes to massive depreciation. So, EVs are quickly getting better but more and more people feel that it is better to let others be the ones that get cut by the "bleeding edge" of the new tech, and sales drop.
It is not so much that we don't want EVs but that we are risk averse when it comes to a large investment.
Solution?
Simple, start at the bottom of the price range. Make inexpensive and reliable entry level models. That is what allowed Toyota and Honda to break into and dominate the auto market 50 years ago.
The BYD Seagull and similar European entries have it right. At a low $10k cost for a reliable and practical 2nd vehicle a lot of people might consider it a reasonable way to get into EVs, because even if the insurance premiums are high they will be vasltly lower than a $50k car's, and if it gets totalled in a minor accident because it lost half of its value in a year... the amount lost from a $10k EV is so low that it might be worth the risk and possibly compensated in fuel savings.
So, instead of fighting low-cost EVs, western manufacturers need to join the party. And maybe get congress to pass some personal data privacy laws like the EU's GDPR to prevent the stealing and selling of our private data.
Otherwise it is obvious what BYD will do... they will setup a Seagull plant in Mexico and capture the market due to lack of competition, if necessary under a Franchise agreement to avoid anti-Chinese tariffs. And something equivalent in Eastern Europe for access to the EU market. The major manufacturers need to wake up or they will be displaced.
In the meantime we are being economically forced to stick to ICEs even as we would prefer EVs if what we want was available. Myself... I ended up buying a new home with a type 2 charger, to be ready for when I could buy the right car, but... I just bought a low cost, high fuel efficiency and reliable compact ICE that I will keep for 10-20 years.
BTW, thanks for all of your videos. I very much look forward to the day you'll cover a $10k (with A/C) EV available for purchase in the US. Even better if it gets shipped directly to the consumer, bypassing the nightmare that are US auto dealers.
No Chinese. Never. Not with their history. Those chinese evs are mobile surveillance and hacking units, paid for by the chinese government. They can be remotely shut off, or worse, remotely detonated, when the war finally comes. Hell no.
The efficient, compact vehicle market isn't necessarily the lowest cost market, as Tesla's success indicates, but I largely agree with you. We'll likely never see a $10k Seagull in the U.S. even if the U.S. lifts its chicken taxes, but EV prices are falling. They may never reach the sub-20k level at retail, but they're more and more affordable, and some used EVs are a bargain now.
One reminder, yugo.
The cheap part is easier than the reliable part.
I do not follow Chinese cars closely but seems they have a lot of builders not making a profit yet.
If the corporate sponsor or other investors bail out who gets hurt when there are no parts (again - Yugo )
EVs also don’t have the repair infrastructure in place for most people to be able to ‘afford’ an EV.
The guys that support repair of old affordable ICE cars are not up to speed on EV tech.
If the EV supporters/enthusiasts push things too fast it will all collapse and kill off any hope of affordable EVs for maybe decades even with the government mandates . Think Cuba
And will unions let cost of building a car fall enough to allow for a $10,000 car. Last new car I bought was around $15,000. They sell nothing like that anymore- some of that is ‘greedy’ corporate villains, but not all of it.
A Nissan Versa ICE, manual transmission is still $15k, and it is a very decent, fuel efficient and reliable.
As a Millennial I bought that 25K USA equivalent car but it's Chinese and so not allowed in the USA. I think the European automakers have finally got the message and started making smaller more affordable EVs, Renault 5, VW ID2, Citroen E-C3, Dacia.
Absolutely, my sub £25k Chinese EV does a realistic 140-150 miles on a run and I only do a long trip once or twice a year. I would go for a 2nd hand Kia if getting one now.
There is quite a number of smaller BEVs available in Europe: VW e-Up, Opel Corsa-e, Peugeot e-208, BMW i3, Renault Zoe, Fiat 500e, Dacia Spring, Mini Cooper SE. To name just a few. Renault 5 and Citroen e-C3 are still some time away, VW id.2 probably more like 2 years away.
I think it's great that Europe offers smaller evs. The reasons for that are at least three-fold:
One, older, much tighter city streets and similarly tight geographic distances mean that smaller vehicles have always been the more practical, even totally necessary, option for Europeans, whereas the relative wide open spaces of North America promote the opposite sentiment in consumers. EVs in particular, so far need to be somewhat larger dimensions to accommodate battery packs capable of spanning those greater North American distances.
Two, much more expensive petroleum fuel in Europe has contributed psychologically to Europeans seeing the economic practicality of smaller vehicles, long before evs were a widespread option. Therefore car companies are assured that smaller vehicles already have a receptive market in the EU.
Three, the lamentable U.S. politics of vehicle efficiency standards policy (lobbied massively by manufacturers) has created equally massive incentives for those same manufacturers to shift their product lines to more massive, literally heavier, much more profitable, "light" trucks and even to replace efficient small hatchbacks and wagons with heavier, less aerodynamic crossover models. Consequentlly, manufacturers have spent the past 40+ years tirelessly campaigning in their advertising to convince consumers to think that we want bigger vehicles, especially trucks. They have never let up the push to convince us the falsehood that trucks are safer(they're not,) more useful(they are not, not for the average person's lifestyle purposes,) sportier(Ha!,) and "best" of all "cooler" than smaller cars. Those ad campaigns have been wildly successful. Consequently, in 40 years' time, the U.S. saw the top selling model go from being the little Ford Escort to now the Ford F-150, and even at that, the F-150 is much bigger and heavier than it was back then in the 1980's. (Sigh)
I just remembered a fourth reason small evs are psychologically an easier choice for European consumers: Europe has far superior long-distance rail transit infrastructure for travelers, giving confidence to those travelers that they have reliable options for travel throughout the EU without having to count on a car with long range capacity to get where they are trying to go. This gives Europeans peace of mind that buying a small, modest-range EV is indeed a sensible option that will not leave them stranded.
In the U.S.??? Not so much. Thanks to massive lobbying by both our petreleum and automotive industries, the once competitive rail systems we had have been thoroughly neglected in favor of building the world's most massive interstate highway system AND massive network of airline routes.
The U.S. "could" begin to change all of this infrastructure, but there are powerful capitalist/corporate forces that profit from the status quo and will fight hard to maintain their own selfish advantage.
😮💨
Batteries were expensive in 2012, so that maybe why, as some of the models are quite old as well as starting by making a small car and expanding from there. E.g. the BMW i3 launched in 2013 with a small battery pack which was later expanded to 33 kWh and later 46.5 kWh.
@@Loanshark753 And the i3 was discontinued in Australia just as the EV market started to lift. As all the current electric BMWs are pretty big by comparison, one has to wonder about the thinking that led to that.
With high rents and housing costs, the average American needs a basic, affordable EVs.
They need gas cars. Most people don't have all the extra time, space and money required for a completely redundant extra vehicle with limitations. That's an expensive hobby.
Wrong again!Americans dont need or want a simple cheap car!If that would be true,you would see basic Nissan Versa for 18k everywhere!
@@brunoheggli2888 Below the median income (half the population), most people buy used cars. The new car market is not "the average American" even at Nissan Versa or Mitsubishi Mirage level. It's the more affluent Americans. A few lower income people buy a new car, and they'll buy a Mirage or similar vehicle, but most lower income people prefer a used pickup or SUV. We don't see Versas everywhere because only the wealthiest of the least wealthy buy them new, and most of these people prefer a used car. The least wealthy of the least wealthy will buy a used Versa.
They need a decent transit system and electric bikes that don't get stolen.
@@michaeloreilly657 Average age in US is 39, not 19!
Another aspect of vehicle cost is so many additional parts. Tesla has a famously sparse interior, but it also has a very simple exterior as well. No fancy light bars and lit emblems, no added lights on the trunk, no additional parts for fake grilles, air intakes, etc. that's a ton of investment savings from a simpler design. Add in that you're keeping that fascia for many more years than a legacy automaker does because they do do "model year" updates like clockwork, which often changes those added parts and adds more tool cost/assembly complexity.
Wrong!
@@brunoheggli2888very insightful. Please elaborate.
@@10lawngnomes37 🤣😂🤣
This is what makes the Tesla Model 3/Y the people's car. It is the Volkswagen of our generation.
You can add fake dual exhausts to that list. I don't know if they're going for irony or the just plain stupid market.
Stick around! We need you. ❤🎉😊
The reasons discussed here for why EVs are not more popular are valid. However, when I interact with someone who does not own an EV and they ask questions about my EV, the cost of EVs is rarely an issue. Most of the people are just not interested in changing to something new. They generally don't care about the environment and will continue to buy ICE vehicles as long as those vehicles are the ones that car companies are selling. It is also frustrating that FUD about EVs seems to get more traction with ICE vehicle owners than the truth. Personally, I will never buy another ICE vehicle, but I have become discouraged when I try to convince others that the kind of car I drive is a better choice.
Like everything, it became political, which isn't helping either.
Even a lot of EV channels are afraid to talk about environmental concerns, or they don't care
I don't now if you watch the UA-cam channel of Rich Rebuilds but what he showed a problem with the insurance company make harder on the person buying the EV. Yes I thinking you find out what Rich point out would help if the insurance could change and poeple buying the EV
There are insurance companies , they compete for customers. They know how to assess Risks . If the type of car has high risk they charge an appropriate policy premium . Go ahead, try to talk all the companies down to lower the policy price.
I was surprised that my auto insurance actually went down when I switched from an ICE to an EV. I'm thinking that lots of factors, aside from just EV-related, go into an individual's policy price, and yeah, shopping around is a good idea.
the fact that nissan has does absolutely nothing for the leaf in 20 years is the reason nissan might be the first of the old timers to disappear.
I recently bought an original 2011 Leaf. It is not due for it's first coolant change yet. (200,000km or 15 years, whichever comes first).
On the other hand they stopped selling:
Nav system maps (5 years after last production puts it at around 2020)
passenger seat cushion assemblies (the airbag presence sensor can fail)
Service manuals (was able to find the PDF versions online).
I am looking into buying a lightning. My main reason is because with all the incentives the negative equity I have in my suv would be eaten up
A recent article examined Canadian vehicle choices and found that 80% of them were either trucks, SUVs or cross-overs, with tendencies toward even larger and heavier models. Weight is not exclusively an EV problem. In the rush to personal security, heavier vehicles are more dangerous for pedestrians, cyclists and compact owners. Obviously, they pollute more as well. Both electric and internal combustion vehicles are prone to the same marketing strategies which are based on convincing folks to pay more for bigger and bigger vehicles. Of course trucks get a pollution pass since they are supposedly work vehicles. The North American market may be the worst of the lot for its oversizing practices, which are not just an EV problem.
Transport Evolved does a lot of great things. I think debunking dumb EV myths is something they are especially great at.
100% agree on less tech. My env200's touchscreen has lost response on two thirds of it, and things like music playlists shuffle only have access via the touch screen.
My next EV will be an older ICE conversion so I can get the best part of an EV (electric drive train and zero CO2 at the tailpipe) and keep the more robust analogue systems.
The most intelligent discussion of this "issue" that I have ever heard.
Great advice for legacy auto... unfortunately they are clueless.
The automaker that makes the 25K EV, will corner the market in USA. As a result of our administration taxing the mess out of Chinese EV’s. But, great information and I totally agree with your views.
I don't think so. There have been sub 25k USD EVs in the past in the US, like the Mitsubishi i-Miev (starting price below 24k USD in 2016). Still, it was no success in the US.
So, it does not depend on price alone. The majority of US customers have a certain view, where "a proper passenger car" begins in terms of size, capacity, range, charging. Only when it meets these expecations, and provides proper quality, sales and service, it will be a market success if below 25k USD. In addition, 25k is an unclear point whether meant before or after incentives and rebates. And whether it necessitates any costly digital services after purchase.
Cant be done and even if it could be, no demand.
Chevy already did it with the Bolt.
Few US carmakers provide 25k ice cars. They prefer more profitable models.
Another excellent video, keep up the good work
Excellent video. The constant flood of stories on UA-cam, etc. trashing EVs is not helping and in fact has been very effective in putting off people from acquiring an EV.. I am going to guess a lot of this is quietly being funded by the fossil fuel industry. They wield enormous power in the USA and do not want to lose it.
Personally I have owned an Ioniq 5 for two years and will never go back to an ICE car. I recently drove my wifes low mileage 2022 Subaru Outback and felt it was something dragged out of an auto museum. On several occasions I had to accelerate, but the car did nothing for about a second or more. That alone I will never own an ICE car.
As to the tech is evolving, not sure I understand that one. My Ioniq 5 is quiet, smooth riding, well built, room for five adults, terrific acceleration when needed and the instrumentation is clear and right at eye level where it should be. Sure I would like 400 miles of range, but for my use I am fine with 300 miles. There were a few minor annoyances that me and many Ioniq 5 owners did not like, all have been addressed in the 2025 model to be built in Georgia. As to reliably, I have had zero problems with the car.
Much is made justifiably about apartment owners and where they can charge, and that is a good point. However, 70% of American families live in a home and probably can have a L2 charger installed in their garage.
It would be nice to emphasize to the public, not just that an EV will help the country to switch to a green energy future, but how nice it is to have almost no maintenance needed, the roomy interior, the silent ride, the responsive acceleration, and a battery that will probably last 100 to 200 thousand miles and will never have to visit a gas station again.. Just for the record, the typical ICE car reaches the end of its life in a junkyard at about 150,000 miles.
I believe it's time for a movement to nationalize the oil companies.
This would bring its own problems, but the problems it would solve are truly existential.
I get what you are saying, but I have to say that the problem is more the reverse. Influencers, investors and fans of the EV movement have hyped EVs for years to the point where its become nothing more than gaslighting. People know that their properly maintained ICE vehicle will last pretty much forever and will be almost completely recycled. Junkyards are one part of that recycle stream. They provide serviceable parts that can be reused in other cars. So when a first timer goes to buy an EV the first thing they find out is that there are downsides and inconveniences to EV ownership. EVs work for some but not everyone
Nationalize giant global corporations that incidentally own Congress. Tail wagging the dog?
@@davidmenasco5743 Norway did that from day one.. they have a wealth fund of about 1.4 trillion dollars used for the people of Norway.
@@jasjordan1 The question is not, will a gas car be just fine for those who own it. Sure it will. The question is, will keeping gas cars on the road cost your great grandkids more money than they can afford to pay?
The answer to that is yes.
So ultimately, it's a question of whether or not you can or will give two hoots about the welfare of your great grandkids. Or is it all about "us," here and now?
If you give two hoots, then now is the time to start thinking about how you can stop burning gasoline.
Maybe it will take time to reach that goal, but that should be the goal. And, time is of the essence.
2024 will be the first year oil demand will not increase since oil was being used as fuel.
That is why the industrialist are panicking , the fall in demand of oil is happening too quickly.
That's why oil is down right now
The environmentalist in me says demand isn't falling nearly fast enough.
Its such a complex topic. Alot of things need to come together to make mass adoption possible and affordable.
Namely billions in tax payer money and severe restrictions put on any other option. That's how they did it in Norway.
Great episode. Same arguments in Aust.
Keep going guys!! I just can’t understand those people that are so nasty, watch your channel and comment when they are completely against it… surely do/watch something else… 🤷♂️
Ah yes the carmaker marketing paradox. Just as they created the demand for SUVs out of thin air back in the 80s, they could likewise create demand for EVs. The car companies are totally controlled by their marketing departments when it comes to new models and direction, but they still have CEOs who can lay down the law. If any US car compnay had a CEO who truly understood what is going on re the climate, they would have ordered their marketing departments to "make EVs popular" a long time ago. It once appeared that Musk fit this description, but we now know that was all BS.
Hyundai looks to have a good strategy. They are leveraging what they know how to do: build dependable practical chassis, suspension and interiors, and adding the new EV stuff on top of that. Too many manufacturers seem to think they have to out-Tesla Tesla to compete... or think they can just reuse ICE platforms tp build EVs. The first adds unneccesary redevelopment costs, and the second is a false economy because there is still a ton of development cost to make what is essentially a compromise vehicle... and the efficiency stats and price tags prove it. If Hyundai can use this strategy to bring a real economy EV to market they should do really well.
Tesla's most popular models (by far), the Model 3 and Model Y, are aerodynamic, compact cars with relatively small batteries. The Bolt EV and EUV are similar and might have been much more successful without the battery fire debacle.
I drive a 2020 Bolt EV that I picked up for half its retail price with only 8k miles in 2023, and I still love it. The range is more than adequate, and even with 50 kW charging, the charging time on long road trips is acceptable. I charge at home 95+% of the time anyway, so I spend a lot less time fueling even with half hour stops on long road trips, and I spend a lot less on the energy.
The demand for this type of vehicle is far from exhausted while the F150L, Cybertruck and large SUVs often disappoint consumers because they suck at towing and similar uses, and they're slow to fully charge. I couldn't fully charge one overnight with my 40 kW home charger, and charging on the road is also slow if the public charger only supports 50kW (still often the case for CCS).
So instead of trying to sell everyone an EV, including all of the pickup and large SUV drivers in the U.S., legacy auto should focus on the market for which EVs are well suited at this point. They'll have plenty of time to sell larger vehicles when the battery tech and charging infrastructure supports them.
The Model 3 and Y are big cars by the standards of the world outside the US. Why so much space has to be occupied to transport what in most cases is only one person is the crux of the reason cars, regardless of energy source, will not solve any real environmental problems. The normalization of massive amounts of public space being allocated for people to store their cars everywhere they go, to the point most people don't even question that arrangement is another absolute head scratcher.
They should have done 7 seaters before pickups
@@rp9674 Most of the pickup market seems to be assholes cosplaying at being working class, which leaves the people that have actual use for them unable to get suitable trucks either.
@@peglorfunny!
You have stated well what to most of us is so very obvious. Hopefully, some corporations can tune-in their hearing to this day-to-day reality.
What a breath of fresh air, common sense only seems available to "normal & rational" human beings.
Thank You...
Low tech, easy & cheap to maintain is the key... Have you noticed most new gen ICE engines have high failure rates & inflated prices to support the EV race?
Mind you, I am convinced we are about to see car batteries in land fill very soon...especially here in Australia...I am keeping all of my dinosaur powered cars...just regular Des love. All 5 cars have between 160k to 350K kilometres...same engines & drive trains and easy to maintain & going strong...
EVs are a bit like politics. There are big decisions to be made and we don't know what is going to happen. All kidding aside, thanks for putting some of it into perspective as always Nikki.
Curb weight doesn’t seem to have much effect on efficiency. Bjorn Nyland and others have tested it and concluded that, so long as you have good regen, weight doesn’t much affect net efficiency. Extra weight hurts during acceleration, has a negligible effect during cruising speed, and helps during regen. So the net effect is minimal.
I live in Chicago and it's literally hardly any charging stations for the population. When I go to my girlfriend house in the suburbs, there are tons of them, all unused. The real killer is that she lives near a major road.
Don't get me wrong, I do like my ID4 and for me it has been a great car for around town (i.e. DC metro area). That being said I do have a garage, but I have to time share my outlet with my dryer as I did not have space in my panel to add a dedicated 30+ amp outlet just for the car. The main issue I have with the government mandates is that the infrastructure is not there to support those who live outside a major city or a major highway. When I go and visit relatives in upstate NY where I travel has very few DCFC along the way and where they live the closest DCFC is around 30 miles from their house. Their houses run on gas/oil for the most part and their houses are from the 1930's or older and only have at best a 100 amp service to the house. I can't park the car for days in order to charge on a L1. This is often made worse in winter with my range being cut from 220 to being around 130-150 which is less than the 170 between scranton and harrisburg on I-81. There is also the huge issue with EV's still being 10-20k more expensive upfront then their ICE counterparts and then the fact that as with phones, no one wants yesterday's electronics which make leasing expensive when compared to the ICE counterpart. With high prices those who could afford an EV went out and got one and the stall seems to be that the government tried to push demand on the adoption curve to early and may have actually hurt adoption. Also there is the issue and question is BEV the best option (maybe it is), but government coming and interfering in market by choosing the technology causes major issues. It may have been better to stick with increasing EPA ratings and let the markets figure out the solution. That solution may have been more public transit, people moving to more urban areas, etc - not forcing rural people to buy an EV when it does not fit their needs - the needs of 50% of the US population BTW
The infrastructure is building out very rapidly. Including in NY state.
The number of fast chargers along your route will be greater next year. And the following year, it will be greater again.
The problem you describe is real, but temporary.
@@davidmenasco5743 I am not saying it won't be fixed or get better, I am saying that for now (within the next 10 years) I'll likely go with a plug in hybrid vs a pure EV.
Rural is only 17.9% of the US population. If anything they’ll still have ICE after the cities and suburbs have largely moved to EV’s.
Your well reasoned discussion is appreciated. My opinion is that generally people in the luxury car market are conservative and that the members of that class that are liberal and care about the planet are a small minority. That wealthy liberal market is saturated prettty much for electric cars. Definitely EV manufacturers need to focus their efforts on a less afflluent demographic. I also think the focus on long range is a mistake made because of previous experience with ICE cars that have to be topped up periodically, the less frequently the better. Smaller, lighter cars and batteries are fine with daily plug ins, and if fast, reliable, 10 minute charging anywhere were available there would be no issues.
Another good video!
So, here's the issue. We now know it was the Daily Mail, which falsely reported that EV's cause potholes. (By the way, my Ford Mach-e weighs 1500 lbs. less than my prior Chevy Avalanche.) However, the oil company mantra has been gaining traction. First, my 81-year-old mother, who drives about 4,000 miles per year, needed a new car recently. I attempted to convince here that she should gett a new EV like the Kia Niro or EV6. She retorted that she might run out of power and wouldn't know how to charge on the road and that the tech is "too new" for her. Nevermind that she bought a Kia Sportage, which has the exact same infotainment screen.
As for size, we normal people at 6'4" don't want to drive a subcompact like the Model 3 or Nissan Leaf. I would love a Model S.
Model 3 a subcompact? I'm 6'2" & there is plenty of room in there. A taller person might squeeze another taller person in the back seat, but you'd need to be considerably taller than me to not fit. A Model Y is not much more & is higher off the ground if low seating is the issue.
@@jpg0927 I rented a M3 for two weeks while my Mach-e got some body work done after getting sideswiped. I had the seat all the way back and had decent legroom for me, but there would be no one able to sit behind me. I also had to squeeze my head down to get in and out of the car. It drove nice, but is just too small.
With legacy automakers balking at scaling up production, no wonder they don't reap the benefits of economies of scale. It is impossible to produce affordable EVs at a profit when treating them as low-volume products. Poor planning, poor implementation. Complaining while trying to play both sides is inefficient - the ICE side has no future, but they are STILL, in 2024, pushing full-speed ahead on that front.
You're so right about unwanted tec .
Keep up the good work yall!!! I’m a mostly conservative middle aged guy but guess what I love earth and I have a full EV and plug in and I try to get everyone to switch. I think all the issues boil down to mainstream automakers and their pressuring on politicians and the politicians corrupting love of money. I don’t agree with forcing by legislation, EVS will win on a somewhat even playing field. THEY ARE BETTER PERIOD. I was shocked how “green” politicians have backtracked on the push to ev also. Quit flopping around like fishes lol
I disagree, in that they (the Politicians ) are listening to the 90%of us who don't want to be legislated into one.
By the way, in the USA most people think about 2 things: money saving and convenience.
That is why lots of folks avoid EVs not being able to see convenience of charging at home vs filling the gas tank in minutes which is more important for them then slight saving by charging EV at home.
Besides most car owners in the USA use pre-owned cars which in order to be affordable HAVE to be ICE based, unfortunately.
Perhaps with better charging infrastructure, previous generation EVs coming on pre-owned market the idea of owning an EV would get normalized as a car which happens to be electric.
The suck, squeeze, bang, blow thing? I recommend a different description, as suck, squeeze, bang, and blow sounds pretty positive, actually. ;-)
It was a shout out to to "Fully Charged" show host Robert Llewellyn.
Great video, smart and enlightening 🤗
the 'losses' on EVs are being calculated based on the cost the develop the vehicle. which is pretty much how all vehicles costs are developed. usually also not just brand new, but updated too. just not many pay attention that, as almost no new vehicles can make a profit in the first year on the market, in some ways because the auto maker can come close to how much they have invested to design the new vehicle, but early production usually isnt as much as the number of vehicles will be made. and if you watch how the industry introduces new or updated vehicles you find they tend to produce the most expensive versions first. the lower cost versions will come later. problem those first models tend to make it appear that all of this model will be expensive. it will take an automaker a long time to figure out how much the model will make, since the early ones are just trying to pay for development and some profit. and in follow on models automakers tend to make minor changes just to keep sales going and to keep buyers attention. but in the end almost no 'new' models make much if any money. course lots of automakers need their ICE sales to fund the EV business, and while there is a lot of noise about how slow EV sales are, take a peak the ICE sales, and you would see ICE sales are falling off a cliff, in part because of how dealers treated their customers 2020-2023, and how interest rates arent helping either
I am confused by the battery platform comments. I'll have to read up more on e-gmp, but the "unifying platform" approach to EVs was popularized by GM's Ultium if I remember right and that platform underpins a wider variety of vehicles (blazer ev, Equinox ev, Silverado ev, Cadillac celestiq, upcoming Boltium) than e-gmp (I know of the Ioniq 5 and 6, ev6, and gv60).
Whatever the car, 360° camera is really nice and should be an option on any car whatever the chosen trim level.
Talking about the smaller cars, Toyota is bringing an electric Yaris to market later this year (in Belgium at least)
Eventually all governments will switch from carrot to stick. The UK is ahead of the game with the ZEV mandate with 15K/ICE penalty for missing your quota. Next will be road pricing to replace fuel duty. I guess only the rich can afford the fees. Bring on the 15min prison?
I guess it will be something like debtor's prison. No EV, go to jail?
Sounds like you fundamentally or willfully misunderstand what a 15 minute city is. Imagine not needing to get in your car for every trip you need to take everywhere because there are easier, faster and more enjoyable options available to you instead. A car that's not being used for every trip a family needs to take every day is already way less of an environmental burden regardless of fuel. Where I live is effectively a 15 minute city, so my car stays where it is while i go about my daily life, only ussing it for intercity type trips or carrying cargo. It would be actively bad for the environment for me to swap my low annual mileage dieselgate car for an EV as the massive environmental cost to make the battery would never be recouped over the life of the EV with the amount it would get used.
Loved my Volvo 240. In the past I’ve owned 6 of them. Plus 1 850. Love Volvo. Sadly now they are so not affordable for me.
I agree with your comments
I think it's great that Europe offers smaller evs. The reasons for that are at least three-fold:
One, older, much tighter city streets and similarly tight geographic distances mean that smaller vehicles have always been the more practical, even totally necessary, option for Europeans, whereas the relative wide open spaces of North America promote the opposite sentiment in consumers. EVs in particular, so far need to be somewhat larger dimensions to accommodate battery packs capable of spanning those greater North American distances.
Two, much more expensive petroleum fuel in Europe has contributed psychologically to Europeans seeing the economic practicality of smaller vehicles, long before evs were a widespread option. Therefore car companies are assured that smaller vehicles already have a receptive market in the EU.
Three, the lamentable U.S. politics of vehicle efficiency standards policy (lobbied massively by manufacturers) has created equally massive incentives for those same manufacturers to shift their product lines to more massive, literally heavier, much more profitable, "light" trucks and even to replace efficient small hatchbacks and wagons with heavier, less aerodynamic crossover models. Consequentlly, manufacturers have spent the past 40+ years tirelessly campaigning in their advertising to convince consumers to think that we want bigger vehicles, especially trucks. They have never let up the push to convince us the falsehood that trucks are safer(they're not,) more useful(they are not, not for the average person's lifestyle purposes,) sportier(Ha!,) and "best" of all "cooler" than smaller cars. Those ad campaigns have been wildly successful. Consequently, in 40 years' time, the U.S. saw the top selling model go from being the little Ford Escort to now the Ford F-150, and even at that, the F-150 is much bigger and heavier than it was back then in the 1980's. (Sigh)
I just remembered a fourth reason small evs are psychologically an easier choice for European consumers: Europe has far superior long-distance rail transit infrastructure for travelers, giving confidence to those travelers that they have reliable options for travel throughout the EU without having to count on a car with long range capacity to get where they are trying to go. This gives Europeans peace of mind that buying a small, modest-range EV is indeed a sensible option that will not leave them stranded.
In the U.S.??? Not so much. Thanks to massive lobbying by both our petreleum and automotive industries, the once competitive rail systems we had have been thoroughly neglected, ...even dismantled,... in favor of building the world's most massive interstate highway system AND massive network of airline routes.
The U.S. "could" begin to change all of this infrastructure, but there are powerful capitalist/corporate forces that profit from the status quo and will fight hard to maintain their own selfish advantage. Ultimately, efficiency is not the leading force in the U.S., Corporate Profit is.
That profit currently derives from ice vehicles. Shareholders are pressuring manufacturer leadership to demonstrate profitability on a short-term basis, typically quarterly. That creates a conflict of goals. How does a company shift away from its still-profitable ice lines of product, toward the uncharted waters of evs, with all the RnD expense that requires?
😮💨
Personally? ...I can hardly wait to get my hands on my very own base model aptera! Talk about practical economy and efficiency!!!
Glad I got a Blazer EV before all is lost! I got sick of undersized EV’s or settling for a Tesla! The Blazer is huge with usable controls although I wish there were more regular controls! The easiest to drive was my 2013 Focus EV but range was minimal esp in winter it had all regular controls with no touch screen! The Blazer will work forever but I wish I could have supercruise which was not available now! I have now had 3 EV’s and will never buy a gas car again! Range has been tested at 2 different sites as 315-320miles which I don’t need! No maintenance means all service centers have never seen my face and don’t like EV’s!
One of the reasons why the auto industry and dealerships are having so much trouble right now is that they're trying to sell Americans expensive cars, trucks and SUVs at a time when most of us are so strapped by the cost of housing and food that they can't afford to go into debt for high end vehicles. This isn't just an EV thing, look at the crapshow that is the full sized pickup market. If manufacturers want to connect with buyers, they need to focus on affordability.
Oh, and less tech would be nice too.
Flaw with separate EV division = redundancy leading to higher development and production costs.
But how much CAN you share between an EV and ICE car besides the outsides. Drive train and computers and whatnot, maybe 3/4 of the car, is not able to be shared.
Maybe if we have someone clever enough figure out a way to share 3/4 of the parts we can get enough volume to keep EVs affordable and repairable to make sense for people that just want transportation.
But suspect that is still a more like a Hybrid and not a true EV some insist we must have.
.that would be a great thing if it ever happens.
@@_xyzyz_ Actually, I was primarily referring to separate and duplicate staff, oddly enough the guesstimate of 3/4 would probably be about right on the physicality of the vehicle.
Where is it written that a manufacturer can't have common parts across models, or taking that a little further an EV and ICE version of a model that are all but identical; the practice of completely redesigning nearly everything from one model to another is comparatively recent and needlessly increases production and service costs.
Half consulting, way less UA-cam, but better UA-cam content highly appreciated.
I have to be honest. I have had three EV’s. I recently purchased a used Ford fusion hybrid. And while I think EV‘s are good for the short distances, the hybrid is far more superior. Recently, I drove my Genesis EV for a couple of hours, and while I got better range than expected, I drove my hybrid, the same distance and still had a full tank of gas. I work for a hospital network in which I have to travel around and at times I have to charge my EV‘s times a day. My hybrid, however at the driving for 4 1/2 hours it only used one and a half gallons of gasoline. The range meter on the hybrid showed that I still had 520 miles of range after driving 4 1/2 hours. The hybrid is far superior. Especially at long distances. I would highly recommend EV’s for a short distance trips and short distance trips only. But for every day life, a hybrid is much better.
I agree with a lot of this. But as for what we need in evs for them to sell at scale the research shows that over 50% adoption occurs at 3 metrics: yes price below $36k, then charging at 30 min or less, but then range above 300 miles. Another study showed price below $50k, charging at or under 20 minutes, with range over 350 miles.
Now that's the Equinox and Ioniq 6 respectively, and they totally have the ability to revolutionize things if the word gets out about them. That said, this needs to become the standard, not the exception.
We need every major automaker to have such vehicles in their lines. Heck, even as variants, a standard range vehicle should be low 300s at under $36k while an extended range should exceed 350, with a price in the 40ks.
But if you must make a vehicle with a range that starts with a "2", the price needs to start with a 2 as well.
This is what the market needs to look like to sell at scale. And we CAN do it with current levels of tech. It just needs to be the conscious aim of every ev maker.
Maybe in EVs, the electric motors are equivalent to the ICE gas tank (both light-weight, reliable and cheap), and the batteries in an EV are equivalent to the ICE engine (both large, heavy, costly, prone to aging, and less reliable). In other respects, there shouldn't be that much difference between EVs and ICE, so if batteries and motors become more commodity, why shouldn't EVs be as cheap as ICE vehicles? Tesla should have developed the "model 2" before the Cybertruck - they missed out on a golden opportunity to ride the mass adoption curve and flood the U.S. market.
I’m saving up for the Renault 5 ev but if it’s price in the UK is gonna have me paying over £300 a month for a small polo sized hatchback I can’t justify it. Automakers really need to focus on making them affordable. Also some brands need to remember they aren’t Porsche. I’m not paying 30k for a Renault sorry that’s just insane
My ID4 will be going to the shop. For the second time LG battery modules will have to be replaced. Not giving up on EVs but I will never buy another one with a battery made by that company. Oh and a door lock will have to be replaced for the second time.
That's the same company that made the batteries that failed spectacularly in the Chevy Bolt. Let's hope they've finally gotten their act together.
Give me an 85% version of the Ioniq 6 with the same range...
Regarding the Chevy bolt, it wasn’t affordable car and they sold plenty of them, but it also had a big problem with its battery pack. As a result, GM had to lose quite a bit of money on repairs, replacement, etc. Given that it was such an affordable car, that meant that the cost for all of that was more because there were more of them on the road. They navigated this issue relatively well to keep the name of the car valid, but they felt the pinch of not having fully baked their workflow. Thus, it’s not unreasonable for GM to not want to go back down that road so quickly.
What’s more, I believe it was LG who provided the batteries, and it seems as though the way LG handled their end of the issue wasn’t great, Kia and Hyundai, who also used LG batteries, had the same issue. As a result, I’m willing to bet that GM didn’t want to be dependent on LG anymore. Thus, they moved to a new platform that would hopefully avoid both the actual problem of the batteries, as well as the administrative problems caused by working with LG.
As a result, both GM and other manufacturers are hedging their pets early because if you only sell a few expensive vehicles to people who are wealthy and getting electric vehicles as an extra car, while they will still expect the car to work, it means that if something does go a little sideways, it’s not as expensive to take care of it, the margins give you the ability to absorb those costs more easily, And it’s far more likely that the customers will not be as heavily impacted by similar problems occurring because they can more easily not use the car while waiting for the issues to be resolved.
While electric vehicles generally have less maintenance cost when they work properly, they also have potential for new issues that other cars don’t have. Therefore, it’s almost irresponsible to make a cheap mass market version of such a car too early.
For instance, the Chevy volt Was generally pretty good, however, it was an unusual combination for a hybrid for GM, in that if memory serves, the electric drivetrain did most of the traction work. This was different from other hybrids in their range. As far as I know, there were no significant problems with this part of the vehicle. However, I know two people who each had more than one volt and they were constantly having issues with the infotainment system. I’m not sure why this would happen again again, and I don’t know if it happened in other GM hybrids, But based on this my guess Is that there was a combination of different things that brought the volt to an end. The main one being that the bolt was on its way, and would do a better job of fulfilling whatever café requirements there were.
I agree and I’m definitely one of the ones in the comments who has said I would love for an electric vehicle that didn’t have complex infotainment and extra tech.
For me, the only thing that I need from infotainment is the ability for my phone to pipe audio Into the speakers. Separating Turn by turn directions and audio from the vehicle means that if my phone gives up the ghost, I don’t lose the essential functions of the car.
I very much enjoyed driving the pole star 2 which has Built-in Google maps and Audio. It works very well. However, when it doesn’t work, it creates a very concerning and strange situation. At a certain point during a rental that I had for a few weeks (ironically while waiting for my Fiat EV to be repaired), the sound stopped working that was an annoyance with regards to listening to a podcast while driving, but because of the way it was integrated, it also meant that I didn’t have vehicle sounds anymore. Thus, turn signals, warning chimes, and any other sound that you would expect from the vehicle except for the horn were no longer functioning.
That’s quite disconcerting, and while it turned out it was the only thing that was wrong, since the system didn’t know it had a problem, it didn’t give me a message telling me you had a problem, and I didn’t know to what extent I should worry.
What’s more , I could not find within the system a way to debug the issue. I had to go to my phone to find information about this happening. Of course, I didn’t have time to sit in the garage and figure it out, I had somewhere to go. I had tried restarting the car, and that didn’t help. Partly because that vehicle doesn’t really ever shut off if you’re in it. I had to hard, but not factory, reset of the infotainment. That took a half an hour to figure out, and then it took another 15 or 20 minutes to work out exactly how to accomplish it, because the manufacturer hides it as they don’t want the user to do this by accident.
It was at that point that I very much wished that the car was not so tightly integrated. It would’ve been preferable for my phone to have been doing all the work, and have a confidence that there wasn’t anything else wrong with the car just because I couldn’t hear a podcast.
I do think that there is a false understanding of the business of automobiles both today and in the past.
Early electric, steam, and gas vehicles, when having an automobile wasn’t even a thing that people understood, were pretty expensive. It wasn’t until Henry Ford worked out the early assembly line for the model T that any car was affordable to the general worker, and he famously went out of his way to pay his workers more so they could buy his product.
What’s confusing today is that the automobile is well understood, and it’s assumed that an electric car Will benefit from all that. To an extent, it’s true, wheels and tires, suspension, body panels, and some aspects of the frame of automobiles are well understood, and with some math, you ought to be able to leverage all of that knowledge to reduce the cost of electric vehicles.
The problem is that the major portion, the drivetrain and specifically the batteries, are, as Nicki mentioned, fairly new. That means that the only way to affectively develop those systems is to charge a lot for the vehicles they come in.
It’s worth noting that back in the early days of gasoline vehicles, a lot of things changed very quickly, and the cars were expensive, because determining the exact technology and needs a customers were still being worked out.
Early transmissions were leather belts, the first automobiles used a tiller. Even the model T still had a fairly complicated control system, and you could break your arm or even die trying to start it.
Contrast, what took two or three decades for gas vehicles, has only taken a little over a decade for modern electric vehicles. And the last, in addition to the Chevy bolt issues, which were also felt by the Kia Hyundai group, the Nissan leaf, a poster child for affordable electric vehicles, has had its share of issues as well. they’ve done a relatively good job of providing support for a platform that honestly is not good for long-term vehicle sales. They went with air cooling, which while functional enough, meant that the batteries did not last very long. That’s why Nissan had a whole program for either upgrading batteries, or replacing them if the bat didn’t last the minimum warranty. It’s one of the reasons why the current platform is about to die. The air cold system simply doesn’t have the longevity that is necessary for a modern automobile.
It’s also worth noting that cars in general are pretty expensive. There are very few vehicles under $20,000 today of any type companies have tried to exclusively make an expensive vehicles, and they pretty much of all gone out of business. They are some European manufacturers who have affordable small cars still,but one of the reasons why they’re popular is because of how small streets in European cities can be it’s not because people necessarily prefer a small car. Additionally, the structure of Europe and European cities means that the likelihood that you’re going to need to drive over 150 miles in a given day is relatively small. It’s just not the case in the United States.
One might then bring up the cost of Chinese vehicles, both within China, and being sold currently in the EU. The issue there is that instead of paying living wages, charging what the vehicle should cost, and then perhaps domestically giving rebates the way European countries and the United States does, China is subsidizing electric vehicle development and sales in the same way that the United States subsidizes corn and soy production.
As a result, the price of those vehicles is not an accurate representation of the actual cost of producing them. You might make the argument that that should be what other countries should do, but keep in mind that China isn’t doing environmentalism because they are environmental. The political reasons for China to subsidize electric vehicle production is similar to the political reason why the United States essentially subsidizes military production. Both countries have a desire to influence around the world, the United States has chosen to do so through military contractors and military force, China is doing so by undermining economic standards to essentially try to put the industries of other countries out of business.
I would accept the argument that one more friendly than the other, and certainly I would support our spending less money on military, especially given how much money is wasted, but as far as day-to-day life, I prefer to live in the political system of the United Statesrather than the political system of China, surveillances King.
In this video, you mention _Portland_ but don't say which one. There are 18 Portlands in the U.S. alone. And numerous other cities named _Portland_ in at least six other countries. As usual, I don't "get" this channel specially the context you are talking about....
How many of the increase in sales are in China?
I was hoping we'd get carbon fiber production scaled up by now
CF is impossible to recycle outside of using it at a fuel
Well, they tried, and it's too fast of a transition? 20 or 30 yrs sounds good to them??. Are they really trying?. I dont think so!. It's too hard to try. The US Government just made it easier for US car makers, by taking away the Chinese compatition part. Dealerships making trade-in values horrible is another reason. But that is really helping make used so affordable, I bought my second 2022 Bolt euv for half price:)
If people look hard enough. they can make an edge case of why an ev doesn't work for them.... I just want to ask the US car manufacturers: WHY is it so hard to make a profit off an easier to make vehicle? Gas cars are HARD to make!! Not EV's
Parts suppliers have billions of $ worth of manufacturing facilities dedicated to ICE parts which have been paid off (depreciated) years ago, thus can have very low development costs vs having to add new tooling and processes for EV specific parts.
i suspect that had GM started their Ultium journey with Cadillac and later added say Buick to their EV lineup, followed by maybe GMC, and eventually Chevy, they might have had the EV transition go smoother. but Chevy has the bigger development budget. and probably make the money too. course they sort of tried that with the Lyriq, but had they gotten that vehicle straightened out before doing Buick and then GMC and finally Chevy, with the Chevy being the lower cost version of same. course Chevy isnt known for cheap vehicles, after all they sell Vettes, Surburban's and Tahoe's, they arent exactly cheap. but then the $18,000 vehicle is now very hard to find, and while there are some in the OEMs offerings finding one is just about like finding the golden goose.
EV sales are in very small numbers in the USA vs ICE vehicles, unfortunately. The latter are profitable since are produced in large numbers having economy of scale. The number of dollars spent on R&D is spread on a lot of cars produced vs in EVs. That is second point of savings in ICE vehicles. Legacy automakers are very inefficient in software developing thus losing money with their half baked products. They never managed to get to the point of over the air updates. Therefore they lose money in upgrading software at dealerships. There is a mess in wiring done in EVs of legacy automakers making their manufacturing slow, inefficient, labor intensive. They never perfected the efficiency of their motors making the sales unattractive due to slow charging and poor range requiring serious incentives to sell already produced cars. They have poor vertical integration needing to buy components from suppliers on a non competitive high prices instead of developing in house.
One Platform -- yes its good, but can be very poisonous for ionnovation, especially in early years of low hanging fruit. Tesla has basically gone through 6+ major platforms Original Roadster, Original Model S, 2nd Gen Model S, Model 3, New Model S, Cybertruck.
All of this has allowed them from have very 'compromised' car in 2013 to unmatched vehicles in 2014.
What about byd?
well, i like the 4.5.4.7m long (big) electric SUV's. just the price is to much, and that is for many people, for example, i love how the new Peageout E 3008 looks, but my budget is 40% of its price tag.., so while i would like to get a car like that, i am limited to smaller cars, cos i cant afford to buy what i want..
I'm not sure if EVs are the best choice for overall carbon dioxide reduction. In the current world where grid and charging infrastructure are limited using batteries for the home to supplement local solar and wind production might be a better use.
Yes, when you do low volumes, you will lose money. True with EVs. True with a pair of scissors or desktop PCs. Scale is critical (as well as lowering costs of batteries of course). Ideally someone will build a great EV that costs ~$40-45,000, with decent range and great charging speed. Chicken or the egg issue though. The manufacturer is going to need about 250,000 or more of unit sales to make it work. (Higher would be better).
If they would be less arrogant and "know-it-all" they would produce Teslas or very similar products and rake the same profits as Tesla. Stupidity costs.
Carbon fiber is a dead end for cars. Making carbon fiber is an expense labor intensive process using expensive materials. Hence the i3 was a dead end. Probably the best weight savings option for the future would be magnesium instead of aluminum.
❤😊 thank you Nicky 🙂 I think the fact that toxic car manufacturers and the toxic fossil fuel are attacking electric cars? is a good thing. I think they're actually getting worried... no doubt it was Tesla it broke this cartel ice is dead 😅 🎉 I'm about time to Thank you and keep up the excellent work buzz #buzzofftoxic #tiedamew
The tech, infrastructure and legislation are still 5-10 years of development short of where they really need to be for BEVs to go mainstream. I personally wouldn't want to buy an EV until standards are made for EV batteries so perfectly good EVs don't become scrap metal from single cell failure once the battery is out of warranty or the manufacturers declines a warranty claim. Until then, EVs will have a hard time shaking off the "disposable electronics" vibe.
There are few to no reasons to mechanically change the battery pack. Electrically, there isn't really any reason other than changing the max compliance voltage either. For the rest, the EV should be able to adapt to whatever the BMS says the battery pack is capable of. The EV shouldn't care what the battery chemistry is or what the pack structure is, as long as output voltage remains within operating limits and the pack is able to provide enough current to accelerate. Slap a 300-800V Na-ion battery into an EV originally shipped with a 550-800V NMC battery, it should work mostly the same in the 550-800V range, may be power-limited by pack voltage/current below that.
If EV manufacturers don't want to deal with heaps of tech, then there always is the option of going low-tech with the least amount of non-essential stuff. I've seen at least one compact EV that was little more than a box with four wheels, AC/heat and used an app on a phone/tablet as the extra display for navigation and non-essential functions. I like that. You can upgrade the "in-car display" to whatever you want, whenever you want instead of being locked into whatever the car manufacturer says you can have when and where you can have it, likely having to pay a subscription fee as you do so.
Are they losing money on hybrids? No? Weird.
MG aren’t losing money on PHEV. Toyota probably are but I don’t have a reference. I still can’t buy a Toyota PHEV anything where I live unless it’s a 10 year old Japanese import
It took Toyota several generations of Prius before they are now profitable
3:14 "Poor Choices" is not really apropos. More like "Smart Business Choices", ie, blow with the political winds, pump and dump, profit taking, greed, rip off your customer.
I hope this vid improves from here...
When you look at the Tesla is history revisited
all automakers lose money on cars at the start of production. It costs billions to bring a new car to market. Those costs have to be paid up to make a penny. Once the cars have been on the market for 2-3 years you start making money. Ridiculous. Look at the true profits down the road not today or tomorrow. Thats the way it has worked and will always work.
The big problem is traditional auto just isn't used to actual change. EV are disruptive technology, and a disruptive technology just hit an industry that hasn't had major changes in nearly a hundred years. While Tesla is no longer a startup, an in my opinion should adopt some of the practice of the other automakers, it had created the key template of what an electric car should be. But it's growth process was rocky decade long struggle, that without having old baggage. Hyundai and Kia are rather new automakers so they were more adaptable to these changes. But the others are struggling to figure out how to incorporate their generations of experience into a new technology is difficult, and expensive.
That major change 100 years ago was when IC technology replaced EVs. Hundreds of EV makers who could not make the transition to ICE went bankrupt. We are seeing history repeat itself. Toyota was ahead of the game turning away from EV and towards more ICE, other large auto makers are following.. but very difficult for EV only makers. Producing a competitive modern engine isn't like wiring up some batteries to a motor, it's very advanced technology.
Unsure why consumers would want to get involved in ‘fixing’ something being mandated to make your life harder( for now).
If EVs are ready for mass market sale , car builders would make money as the buyer would see some benefit to buying the EV and pay enough for buyer and seller to both be happy with the transaction. Even better if that can happen without government rebates or other incentives but we can not expect that.
Normal people will buy EVs if and when they make sense to buy. A lot more basic development needed to get to that point for many people. With no mandates I wouldn’t even care about EVs until I WANTED to buy one.
And if I don’t have multiple cars I need one that can work in the city and for longer trips. Not everyone can afford multiple cars. Or are you saying “ let them take public transportation” ?
If the big three want to sell EVs, they shouldn't be building $70-100K vehicles that the majority of us can't afford and don't want.
21:14 a car targeted at millenials. Does that mean people are going to live in it?
1.3 trillion dollars are in loans for new and used cars in America?
Fords Mach Es started increasing in sales because of massive discounts bring their 75K msrp's down to 25K.
Fords losing massively on every EV they sell.
Market overall was more diverse than it seemed few years ago for some. Ev's aren't still suitable for every use. EV's are still more expensive than ice cars. As food and housing has gone More expensive, buyers aren't as willing to take loans (which has higher interest too) Unreliability and higher insurance fees won't help EV's either. In general, EV's should be competitive, without subsidies or mandates. There will be always people who see EV's as lame option. It is better to accept fact that car market and buyers are more diverse group than people deep in bubbles see.
You seem to be forgetting the reason why EVs are important.
The failure to stop burning fossil fuels would impose a VERY HIGH COST on everyone.
If governments were allowed by their sponsors (the oil companies) to do the right thing, they would do something like the following:
Calculate the cost associated with the failure to transition, then tax ICE vehicle sales enough to cover this cost.
Problem solved. Now, the real cost of internal combustion is covered, whether we transition or not.
Of course, this would cause a very quick transition to 100% EV. The "externalized" costs of ICE (the costs which you and others pay, but not at the time of sale) are enormous.
In the grand scheme of things, EVs are a very small fraction of the cost of ICE.
I have an idea: build appealing sporty cars that people can actually afford. Station wagons/shooting brakes are practical and fun. Also, build batteries that do not degrade and have ranges that are comparable to ICE cars
And the BMW i3...that thing was as ugly as their newest obnoxious and ugly SUVs
No sweetie it's a very simple answer to that question, it's fool some of the people all the time,, then fool some of the people some of the time but not the same people all the time and fool most of the people no time at all!
The US auto manufacturers won’t change. I remember when they said no one wants Japanese cars or when they said no one wants front wheel drive cars. Europe had padded dash,disc brakes and side impact protection years before the US and now no one wants EV cars lol they deserve to fail
Keeping stuff compatible... Your talking to much sense. If they do that then modern Ev's like the ICE counter parts will last to long and other than the oh it's shiny people they will struggle to sell cars.
On the plus side of the ev gives up the ghost you can keep the battery pack for home storage lol
tax the hell out of ICE vehicles to fund incentives to buy EVs. the cost to buy was made close to equal then the market would probably reflect that. then have a cash for clunkers in 2040 (keep this part quiet).
11:26 Tesla is far from doing big cars with big batteries. The most sold model 3s and model Ys in Europe have a 60 kWh battery. Tesla understood a long time ago that with a wide reliable fast charging network the car does not need a big battery. Maybe the EV market would be in a better shape without Tesla bashing.... And regarding the need of cars smaller than a model 3, it is just an assumption. I do not use my car in my city, but public transportation and my bicycle, and for long distances at "high speed" a model 3 is more efficient than many smaller cars less aerodynamic. Not to mention a model 3 is not too big when traveling especially with your family, and when you are alone or a couple the train can be a better option. I am not saying the model 3 is the perfect car, just that arguing we need small cars for cities is far from being clear. Furthermore, if Tesla is not doing a small car it is probably because it would not be possible to sell it in high volume at the price people want a small car, and Tesla cannot afford to lose money on EVs. I assume Tesla will just sell a more affordable model 3 by removing what people don't need, or by locking some functionalities that the owner will eventually buy latter (a bigger battery, more power, AWD, heated seats, autopilot and FSD, games and apps, connectivity, etc.). But I bet then TEN will find a way to complain , eg the fact that locking functionalities is bad and anti-repair, etc.
You must be too young to know the history of hybrids. Toyota started hybrid research in 1975 during the Oil Crisis. It was a concept born out of necessity due to extremely high gas prices and economic challenges. But Toyota was only able to start developing a realistic commercial product in 1992 with the advances in rechargeable batteries. (Japanese electronic companies developed and perfected rechargeable batteries in the late 1980s and early 1990s for usage in portable electronics such as laptops, cellphones, and walkmans.)
With the usual development cycle of 5 years, Toyota introduced the Prius hybrid in Japan in 1997. Toyota lost money for the first 10 years with the Prius project, but they fully understood the significance of hybrid technology so they continued their improvements regardless, which is why today's hybrid cars are reliable and affordable. They believed in the technology so much, they also made 24,000 hybrid-related patents available to all competitors free of charge.
Nissan Leaf and Tesla only used highest-grade batteries from Japanese companies for reliability. EVs are essentially batteries on wheels. The quality and production cost highly depends on the quality of the batteries. South Korean and Chinese EVs are cheaper because they use lower quality and cheaper South Korean and Chinese batteries. Even then, most Korean and Chinese EV makers are also losing money for each EV sale. Consumers may find EVs expensive, but the reality is EV business is unsustainable if it continues to lose money for automakers.
We are all a bit conservative?
Back pockets being filled by big oil backers me thinks.
The simple fact is....... there are very few to no affordable EVs available...period.
...in the US.