“Automakers are really now only turning to affordable vehicles, knowing they’ve got to or they will lose out to Chinese manufacturers.” That’s the quote of the day. Maybe the quote of the month. It’s from an ex-Aston Martin CEO, which makes it even more amusing. It’s true, though — at least for European, American, Korean, and Japanese automakers.
Hey, it’s another episode of The Morning Dump where we talk about China and how China, after years of exporting profits to non-Chinese automakers, is now exporting worries. Chinese automakers, however, are doing quite well, with a lot of new players coming into the space.
Back here in the U.S., Stellantis is going to start laying off workers, and it’s blaming California’s “Underground regulatory scheme,” which is really giving rejected-DC-Comics-subplot vibes. And, finally, American Honda is quietly doing a lot better.
Maybe Just Make The Cars Cheaper?
It’s easy for me sitting here, listening to The Last Dinner Party (band of 2024, listen now and trust me later), to tell automakers they need to cut the costs of EVs. I’m not having to guess the spot price for lithium, deal with increases in union wages, or account for any of the million things an automaker has to do in order to achieve cheaper vehicles.
It’s an easy job telling someone they have a tough job, but someone has to do it. Also, I’ve been telling people this for months and it’s nice to see them start to catch on.
To clarify: Automakers generally know this and have been working diligently to build new platforms, open new battery plants, and do the sort of long-term things that are necessary to bring the price of their electric cars down (while also allowing the price of their gas-powered cars to rise).
I’m not talking about the future. I’m talking about now. As in… now now.
I’m painting with an Oldsmobile-wide brush here, but automakers have generally followed the Tesla playbook and assumed there’s this big audience for expensive EVs that can then, to some extent, help underwrite the cheaper ones. That could have worked if Tesla hadn’t gotten there first and released a bunch of cheaper EVs and then, just to fuck with everyone more, continue to lower those prices in most places.
Ok, here’s the quote, from a Reuters report on pricey EVs:
“Automakers are really now only turning to affordable vehicles, knowing they’ve got to or they will lose out to Chinese manufacturers,” said Andy Palmer, chairman of UK startup Brill Power, which has developed hardware and software to boost EV battery management system performance.
That’s ex-Aston Martin CEO Andy Palmer, FYI.
According to the report, Renault is looking to drop its costs 40% to find parity with gas models. This is way worse for Europe which, currently, has a more open-door policy when it comes to cheaper Chinese EVs.
The U.S. is a little more protected, but that’s only going to help for so long. From the same report linked above:
GM said it has saved billions partly by developing a more inexpensive battery pack with LFP batteries for its revamped Bolt EV, which will launch in 2025, two years earlier than planned.
Ford (F.N) said it will cut costs partly through a 50% increase in “in-sourcing” of parts like batteries and inverters.
Premium automakers want lower costs for EVs, too.
Michigan-based Our Next Energy (ONE) is developing an “Ares” battery pack with cheaper LFP technology that should give automakers the same electric driving range for half the price and a “Gemini” pack for customers including BMW (BMWG.DE) that offers extended range and should cost $75/kWh compared with an average today of $130/kWh, CEO Mujeeb Ijaz said
Two years is too far away. BOLT NOW. BOLT NOW! Start de-contenting these little shits. Squeeze those suppliers. Cheaper EVs now!
Chinese Price War Heats Up As Sales Grow
The Chinese economy may be on slightly shaky ground at the moment, but the car market continues to rebound in November with its fourth month of growth, up 25.5% year-over-year.
Automakers in China refer to both plug-in hybrids and electric vehicles as NEVs (new energy vehicles) and, according to the China Passenger Car Association, a record 40.1% of sales in November were NEVs.
Here’s something interesting, again from Reuters:
The association forecast that China’s passenger vehicle sales would hit 22.2 million in 2024, up 3% from this year, while growth could reach 5% if exports to Russia continue their robust rise.
BYD set another sales record in November, although there were only slight gains from October, and it is on course to become the first domestic automaker to hit 3 million vehicle sales annually.
EV upstarts including Li Auto (2015.HK), Xpeng (9868.HK) and Leapmotor (9863.HK) also achieved record deliveries in November. Huawei-backed EV brand Aito has shown rapid growth, delivering more than 10,000 of its revamped M7 cars for a second month in November.
That’s a lot of new brands. Tesla, it seems, is slightly more focused on margins and has slowly begun to raise prices in the country, but is still seeing increasing sales year-over-year.
CEO Elon Musk has said that in the future the largest automakers could be “Tesla and nine Chinese automakers” and that’s slightly hyperbolic as I think it would be more accurate to say “BYD, Tesla, and everyone else.”
Stellantis: “Blame Canad… California!”
Stellantis, the company that makes Jeep-brand vehicles, says it’s going to have to potentially lay off thousands of workers and cut back shifts at plants that make the Gladiator, Wrangler, and Grand Cherokee because of California.
Why California?
Here’s the company’s statement:
The California Framework Agreement was developed secretly with some competitors, in direct violation of the California Administrative Procedure Act. We are taking this action to relieve Stellantis of the competitive disadvantages arising from our continuing exclusion and to preserve our ability to best serve our customers by fairly allocating our products to all states. We strongly support emissions reduction to benefit the environment, evidenced by our Dare Forward strategic plan. However, our ability to achieve this vision is severely threatened by the current double standard, which also destabilizes our production schedules, the livelihoods of our 56,000 U.S. employees, and the thousands of spinoff jobs generated by our operations.
Uh, what?
This is a somewhat old story, because Stellantis already said it would stop sending gas-only vehicles to the 14 states, including California, that follow the state’s emissions guidelines. The catch here is that you can still order a vehicle, but the company isn’t just sending vehicles to dealerships.
Here’s a better explanation from The Detroit News:
The automaker takes issue with how CARB in 2019 and 2020 created separate, more flexible framework agreements with Ford, BMW AG, Honda Motor Co. Ltd. and Volkswagen AG for an alternative vehicle standard for model-year vehicles 2021-2026 concerning target carbon emissions, credit banking and reporting requirements. AB Volvo also later joined.
Stellantis says it was excluded from creating a similar agreement after wading into litigation concerning the revocation of CARB’s waiver from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to impose more stringent vehicle emissions standards than the federal government. The board violated state law by failing to give public notice about the framework agreements and by not requiring they undergo public comment scrutiny, the automaker argued.
“Ultimately, when determining whether an OEM may enter a Framework Agreement, CARB has classified OEMs according to whether they publicly agreed with CARB during a good-faith dispute, and created a parallel, underground regulatory scheme to place OEMs that did not actively agree with CARB at a competitive disadvantage,” Stellantis’ lawyers wrote in the petition. “This classification is not relevant to California’s objectives of reducing (greenhouse gas) emissions in California; rather, it is based on protected First Amendment expression.
This gets into a lot of legal wrangling and who knows whether or not California followed the correct procedures, but I do have to point out that every other automaker listed either sells an EV, a lot of efficient hybrids, or both.
American Honda And Acura Doing Nah Bad
The pandemic was particularly hard on Acura/Honda, which had to deal with a lot of supply chain issues and doesn’t sell pickup trucks in large volumes.
Honda is a super popular brand, obviously, and the company managed to have a 12.2% market share before the pandemic started. The Japanese automaker isn’t quite there yet, but it’s been a lot closer than the 7.1% it hit in September of 2022.
S&P Global Mobility is the provider of both the graphic above and this data, so let’s go ahead and see what the analysts have to say for the why:
The automaker can thank several factors for its 2023 turnaround, but a more compelling product line should be at the top of the list. The Honda brand has successfully orchestrated a product revival of sorts. The CR-V, Civic, Accord, and HR-V have all received significant updates in the last two years, and Acura revived the Integra nameplate to replace the ILX with much social media fanfare. As a result, while the production lines are cranking back up, sales demand is still greater than the number of cars arriving on dealership lots.
New Integra is good. Very good.
The Big Question
What’s the magic number for EVs to be competitive with gas-powered counterparts? Complete parity or can an EV have a slight premium? Should it be cheaper?
It either has to be 3/4 the price of a new gas vehicle or not be disposable after 10 years and 100K miles. Car manufacturers seem to forget / ignore that most of us are not buying a new car every 5 years. I am not dropping $45K on a car only to have it be worthless in 10 years.
But a Tesla can go 1 million miles with only 14 motor and 4 battery pack replacements….
They are already past the point of disposability, the public perception is just wonk
https://www.recurrentauto.com/research/how-long-do-ev-batteries-last
Battery degradation doesn’t work like how people seem to think it does where things get worse linearly until the battery dies. They degrade right at the beginning, and then extremely slowly. Ones that are going to die do so early in their lifespan.
Spot on! As long as they have a shorter practical life expectancy, it would take a significant discount for me to consider an EV.
Actually most new car buyers are buying a new car every 5 years, and that’s the kind of customer the manufacturers want
I think the biggest problem with the EV prices are that even the most modest compact EV’s are being loaded with bespoke interior and trick lighting and tons of tech…..all very cool! But maybe just give me a sub-compact to compact commuter with an electric drivetrain, standard infotainment and amenities, and that’s it. The interior doesn’t have to scream to me that I’m in a fancy new hi-tech EV. My lights don’t need to rival the Bellagio fountains peacocking abilities. I don’t care how much lighter the 3D printed dash insert is. Save that for later once you can effectively scale the new tech. Right now, just give me an EV that is on par with any other less expensive ICE compact.
I think the only one that matches your description is the Chevy Bolt EUV. You can jump from a Chevy Blazer or Cruze into a Bolt and everything looks familiar, same type of switches and controls. Do that from a Ford Fusion/Escape to a Ford Mach-E or F150 EV and its not the same.
Volt was the last GM vehicle I liked how it looked so these are out.
Hyundai and VW EVs look god.
Depreciation might be the short-term solution. I found a Polestar 2 with dual motors and the performance package at only 15,000 miles for only $30k. It’s seriously tempting and if I had an apartment complex with a charger (or lived in an affordable housing market), I would be buying it now to replace my SO’s aging 2015 Honda Fit.
Where?!
Click the link in my comment. Reddit seems to think it’s related to Hertz dumping its EV inventory and Tesla lowering prices (see: one of this week’s morning dumps). On a related note, it also might be time to cash in if you’re in Europe according to this Bloomberg report on Sixt phasing out its Tesla fleet.
Oooh – Void over Slate! How warm and inviting that sounds…
February in Sweden.
Look into 2017-19 e-Golfs. They are everything you describe, including cheaper than ICE Golf from the same years.
The e-Golf could only go 125 miles on a charge brand new. They’re in the same boat as the Leaf.
And not to nitpick, but thinking more of new options instead of relying on depreciation. To me that makes sense if you are trying to affordably go up market but that’s not what I’m looking for. I’m looking lower cost new options….
You’ll be waiting another 5 years (at least) because no-one selling EVs in the us wants to touch compact cars anymore. Well except the incoming 500e, but at over $30k its going to be atleast 50% more expensive than a 2019 e-Golf, and about 300% more expensive than a used 500e.
125 is a very safe estimate on the e-Golf. I get 150 miles after 4 years on a 2019. Also 4 years of battery warranty remaining. It is a second vehicle in our family, but if we are traveling less than 60 miles away with kids it gets used every time.
If a commuter does 15,000 miles a year – assuming only mon-fri (5 days) usage they would drive less than 60 miles a day. 125 mile epa range is more than enough. 14 -16 hours of 110v charging nightly works perfectly.
As someone who commutes 40 miles a day in the original 80 mil range egolf, the 125 mile range one would solve 90+ percent of most people’s needs. Particularly if you live near any major population center.
Good to find another e-golf owner here! The range is absolutely not worrying at all. in 8 months of ownership I have only ever charged from a 110 outlet. I do have Level 3 capability, but have yet to need to use it.
16 hours of charging? Do you work 6 hours a day and have a 10 minute commute? I’m glad that works out for you but that’s totally not feasible for what I’d guess to be 90% of people.
In practical terms, you almost never use the full battery. When I first got mine, it was (midwest 0f) winter, and I had to rely on level 1 charging to commute to my job the next city over. It was fine.
24-16=8. I was stating numbers based on the average annual miles for Americans. I also narrowed it down and assumed miles were only done for work. If 15,000 is the annual average then quite honestly many more than just 10% can live with it. There are caveats with this as there are with anything, like I have parking at my house and 110 outlet outside. If people aren’t able to charge for 12+ hours, then an additional $700 investment in level charging may be worth it. There is no 1 right car for everyone, but far more can be done with “only 125 miles of range” then most people actually consider.
The magic number for EV’s (in the US) might not be something like 10% higher purchase price over ICE, but other “numbers” that will make people think outside their normal frame of mind.
Some examples: a large hurricane (or hacker?) takes gulf coast refineries offline for months or more, and gas prices shoot up to levels more normal for Europe. Magic number $8/gallon?
Charging infrastructure is built out so that finding a charger is rarely ever an issue. If every manned post office, and National Park visitor center, in the US had public access to even a 50kW L3 charger, and a couple of L2 chargers, with 99.9% uptime, that would likely mean that a 200 mile range EV could travel basically anywhere in the country without getting stranded. Magic number is 99.9% reliable travel?
Another thing could be durability and reliability of EVs. If there were fairly simple EV’s (I’m still surprised that 6 years after buying a Bolt that it is still basically the only option in its class for price and usability) that would be expected to go 200,000 miles, with maybe 1 trip to the shop for a coolant flush, other than tires, and wiper blades and such, and retain 90% battery capacity, that would be huge (and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Bolt did that, ignoring the battery recall and a couple other non-EV related build issues). Another potentially magic number- 200,000 reliable miles with only 1 trip to a non-tire shop, almost no maintenance?
If gasoline goes to $8 a gallon a whole lot of other things will go up. I don’t think buying a brand new car is going to be top of mind for a lot of people. They will just drive less/be more efficient with their fuel use. We have to remember we drive a lot. Maybe too much. so, if you’re spending too much on gas/gas sky rockets; you can always just use less gas instead of spending $45K to spend less on fuel when maybe you should just drive less or find more cost AND fuel efficient means.
> If every manned post office, and National Park visitor center, in the US had public access to even a 50kW L3 charger, and a couple of L2 chargers, with 99.9% uptime
Meanwhile, some smooth-brained right-wing city councils are removing existing charging stations.
https://oviedocommunitynews.org/2023/11/15/winter-springs-votes-to-remove-all-public-electric-vehicle-chargers-in-city/
““I would be more in favor of just giving them back,” Deputy Mayor Rob Elliott said. “The city is not in the business of fueling gas cars, and I don’t understand why they should be in the business of charging electric cars. I mean, if someone chooses one or the other, there shouldn’t be an advantage.””
Chargers at USPS would be brilliant.
We have done this before, at least in Europe, with diesels. And automakers seem to have forgotten their own playbook.
In the 80s demand for diesels in Europe started going up as the technology improved and fuel prices went up. But gas cars were a lot cheaper to manufacture. So rather than charging insane premiums for diesel versions, they became as barebones as possible. You could tell the diesel version of any car without even hearing the engine because it would be the one on steelies. Diesels would still be slightly more expensive than the gas counterparts with more bells and whistles, but many people would pick the diesel for the reliability and savings.
With time, economies of scale made it so diesels could get fancier without breaking the bank, and they ended up outselling gas cars for quite some time.
Why we are not doing the same with EVs is puzzling. It has worked before! Rather than adding screens and fancy gizmos to sell the car only to a handful who can afford it, do the opposite: make the EV as barebones as possible and get the price close the ICE version. Then make the car fancier as manufacturing gets cheaper, without changing the price.
In theory I agree with you
A Major challenge is that EVs are Massively more different than gas cars, much more so than the difference between gas and diesel cars.
The technology difference is much more on the level of the switch from steam cars to ice cars.
The ev tech. stack (batteries, bms, etc inverters, internal on board chargers and ev motors are ALL brand spanking new* to legacy auto manufacturers. As such any legacy auto manufacturer is relying HEAVILY on their 1st and 2nd tier parts suppliers to basically provide the whole damn locomotive and energy storage solutions. This of course means it’s more expensive to make which means traditional auto has to start adding shinny additional tech. as standard instead of options bc not a lot of people (outside of some of us enthusiasts :-)), willing to buy a $$$ vehicle with $ base options.
Even with legacy auto selling at $$$ prices NONE of them are making a damn dime on Any of the ev models they sell.
Of course Tesla and BYD (the only 2 automakers in the whole world that Are making money on their EVs), Also didn’t make any damn money on the models they sold for many, many years. In Tesla’s case I think it was 16 years before they started to actually move in to the black. I HIGHLY doubt investors of legacy auto are going to show the same sort of lack of profits patience.
*Yes there Were evs sold by in the US and before 1920 evs actually made up 1/3rd of the auto market… still that was 100 years ago and any practical experience and supply chain from this time is long long gone
Oh and re the Tesla 16 years w/o profit…. Tesla was started in 2003 and I think it wasn’t until 2019 that they posted their 1st quarter that was cash flow positive
It will be interesting to see if the Chinese EV’s can translate their domestic success to the U.S. without all the government support they receive there.
…
“At a national level, China uses exemptions on consumption tax to help lower production costs for EVs and fuel cell vehicles. (In China, consumption tax is payable by producers of luxury and environmentally unfriendly goods, including cigarettes and cars.) At the same time, consumers have been spurred with purchase subsidies and relief from vehicle purchase tax. China also exempts car owners from vehicle and vessel tax, while providing infrastructural support to optimize conditions for EV usage.
Meanwhile, regional administrations can offer localised subsidies and other incentives to businesses and consumers, complementing central government support and making EV ownership even more attractive. The municipal government in Chengdu, for example, which wants 800,000 EVs on the road by 2025, awards up to 50 million yuan to any carmaker that develops and brings to market a new EV model, and also gives individual consumers 8,000 yuan for acquiring an EV.
…
There is also artificially boosted demand, at present because of planned reduction to tax breaks
…
“Support in the form of purchase-tax exemptions has also tailed off, having been extended three times since launching on 1 September 2014. Under the terms of the most recent of those extensions, the tax-free allowance for an electric passenger car purchased between 1 January 2024 and 31 December 2025 is a maximum of 30,000 yuan. For a vehicle bought between 1 January 2026 and 31 December 2027, purchase tax will be levied at 50%, with a maximum allowance of 15,000 yuan.
https://chinadialogue.net/en/business/life-after-subsidies-for-chinas-evs/
“The municipal government in Chengdu, for example, which wants 800,000 EVs on the road by 2025, awards up to 50 million yuan to any carmaker that develops and brings to market a new EV model”
Is this why there is such an insane plethora of different models of cars available in China? I assume Chengdu is not the only place with such an incentive program?
There is quite a lot of reporting on vast fields of unsold EVs in China apparently built by riding sharing companies to take advantage of subsidies; it’s said that the cars were registered as sold to obtain the subsidies, but never actually sold.
You might find this video interesting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SEfwoqKRU8&t=2s
There are also news reports confirming the story
https://www.indiatimes.com/auto/electric/china-electric-car-graveyard-how-thousands-of-evs-are-left-deserted-by-car-sharing-rental-firms-364315.html
BUT:
Some sources insist that the story is actually about the failure of car sharing, rather a failure of the viability of EV sales.
https://www.carscoops.com/2023/08/the-real-story-behind-chinas-graveyards-of-abandoned-evs/
I will allow you to draw your own conclusions, but I will ask one question-
Don’t Hertz, Avis et al sell vehicles they no longer need on the open market rather than take a total loss on them?
Those cars should be shipped around to everyone who wants one. Just pay shipping. I’d gladly take one.
Just one?
New EVs can be reasonably more expensive than the equivalent ICE vehicle; roughly the equivalent of choosing the top trim level of any given car with the extra $$$ spent made up for over time by energy and (probably) maintenance cost savings.
. However, used examples should be cheaper than their equivalent ICE vehicle because barring advanced durability of battery backs, many 5-10 year old used EVs will have considerably less range vs when new, especially considering the average future new EV owner is unlikely to give a hoot about driving and charging their vehicle in ways to maximize battery longevity.
They will not have considerably less range than new, this is an incorrect assertion. https://www.recurrentauto.com/research/how-long-do-ev-batteries-last
What about David Tracy? Anecdote or somewhat common occurrence?
Early gen leafs specifically have this problem because of bad design. They used passively air-cooled battery modules with a battery chemistry that cannot handle extreme heat (common in the American west and southwest.) Almost all other EVs use different chemistries, active cooling, liquid cooling, or some combination of the three. The I3 is a result of making every possible poor choice (high mileage, first model year, bmw, cheapest one in the country) all at once, lol.
If the objective is mass EV adoption, the magic number is considerably less than what gas cars are going for currently.
Like 2/3 of Americans are completely priced out of the new car market. People who can’t afford a $28k Corolla sure ain’t paying even a small premium of $33k for an electric car.
Electric cars will not outnumber gas cars on the road until there are a lot of good electric cars for under 10k, whether that be new or used. The issue being: it’s questionable whether a 60k Lightning or Tesla will ever become a good car under 10k.
This is an insane take, golf carts and electric mopeds are in that price range
..unless of course you’d like to drive around in a ChangLi 🙂
……whether that be new or used. Why did you respond to a comment you only partly read?
How “used”? You can find any “used” example of any car as long as you go low enough on the ‘shitbox meter’ to fit any pricepoint, which is why “used” doesn’t really mean much. OTOH “new” is a pretty well defined qualifier.
Which is why I said good used. A $2000 Nissan leaf is obviously not a good enough car to be a practical mods of transport for most people.
When there are used $8000 electric cars that are just as good as $8000 gas cars, then we will have mass electric car adoption.
That’s the real kicker and why complaints about ev prices seem to me to be premature. What is needed is enough volume and variety to build a reasonable used market, and we’ll just barely see the beginnings of that in 2027 at the earliest. It will be 2030 before these discussions are meaningful, because everything necessary (factories, supply chains) is being built now.
Side note, if you want to know who will survive the EV transition, looks who is building battery factories and getting ore contracts to support 2030 volumes.
Yup. People trying to save money on fuel do not look at vehicles $45000 or more.
We need the U.S. equivalent to the $14,000 BYD Seagull.
For $20-25k per unit, we could probably have a narrow-margined basic electric sedan with a 120+ mile city range and 200+ mile highway range(at 70+ mph), by making a sub-3,000 lb 5 or 6 seater car with a frontal area and passenger room comparable to a classic W123 Mercedes, and a drag coefficient somewhere around 0.16. If the rear needs to be narrowed to facilitate drag reduction, a 3-up-front, 2-in-the-back seating arrangement might be doable. Give it real buttons for everything(and not on the steering wheel for fuck’s sake), minimal features, and make it repairable with basic tools. A battery pack of no more than 30 kWh will be needed, and it could be a single string of LiFePO4 prismatic batteries designed to minimize the need for cooling and electrical complexity while keeping cost down and longevity/reliability high. Make it Tesla Supercharger compatible.
It doesn’t need heated seats, heated steering wheel, over-the-air updates, infotainment, or any of that crap. Give it the basics: AC, heating, radio, power steering, a place to plug in a smart phone, and maybe power door locks/windows. Have its comfort come from well-designed ergonomics, comfortable seats, and lots of passenger space, which by itself will go a long way to making it more comfortable to sit in than the vast majority of modern vehicles.
Such a vehicle could have both a trunk and a frunk. It needs to be able to fit a stroller in either, plus 2 weeks worth of groceries for a family of 5.
Performance is not important, but it would be stupid cheap to implement and would help the car sell, and not compromise the price above.
100% with everything except heated (and cooled) seats should be the primary source of heating and cooling bc it is much more efficient to heat/cool the people than it is the air even when using a heat pump 🙂
I’m thinking more about the cost added to the base price of the car. If heated seats can be added to the entire car for under $1,000, it might be worth it. Cooled seats aren’t very effective though on a hot summer day by themselves, and AC consumes a lot less energy than heat.
That’s fair. There is no way headed seating elementa are adding +$1k in coats to manufacture vs. regular seats.
I remember when Tesla switched from resistive heating to heat pump (for heating and cooling). Which made a Significant difference to the cold weather range.
Though Tesla at least still uses a resistive heater as a backup / in assistance to the heat pump which makes sense bc the heat pumps can’t provide enough heat when it is lower than -10(ish) F, which even in MN is only common for typically 3 weeks or so out of the year
I’d like to see a small 1-2 cyl hyper efficient steady speed REX engine that also provides waste heat.
Need heat but have a full battery? ICE kicks in on both cylinders to warm up, then cuts to single cylinder and/or hit and miss operation to maintain temperature and perhaps battery level with maximum fuel efficency. Ideally the planned trip and expected road conditions are part of the decision when use the REX. Even better if the car was plugged in prior to starting the trip so the cabin, its REX and all emissions systems were pre heated by shore power to lower emissions too.
I think the BMW i3 REX was on the right path but I don’t think the ICE was particularly efficient nor did it use deactivation techniques to stretch the fuel even further. Some of this might be doable with new programming though.
The Model 3 is getting pretty close now to the “magic number” in my opinion, it’s just above $35k at the moment in “base model” form, so in gray, RWD with the LFP battery. Even more so if you’re eligible for the full $7.5k federal tax rebate.
If you can live with an EV day-to-day, I think it’s a pretty good deal.
However, after renting one for a week, EVs still have some very significant compromises, which can add up real quick in certain circumstances.
For example, I have no garage and I’m up north in NH.
So I’d have to eat the significant cold weather range reduction for at least 1/3 of the year, and the high cost of electricity, and also, lack of service centers in this state (there is none).
I think a significant incentive to accept these compromises, is a lower EV price compared to a gas counterpart.
While other EVs (like VW or Ford) have a better dealership coverage, you trade that off for the hit-or-miss charging networks.
I would not want to rely on Electrify America on a winter road trip for example.
All in all, tradeoffs should mean cheaper vehicles.
A slight premium is fine. Dealers marking up Ioniq 5’s $10k over msrp last year is what ruined it for me. Not getting the the tax credit made it even worse. I guess I should thank them because I ended up saving money by opting to buy a Niro PHEV instead (which I was able to buy for a little over msrp).
The magic number is thirty-five thousand dollars.
“Two years is too far away. BOLT NOW. BOLT NOW!”
Why wait? I just bought one last week…
Should it be cheaper?
Absolutely they should be cheaper, and doable if some brave manufacturer will go against the grain, and ditch over-technified, and under accessible controls. KISS used to be an overused aphorism, time to bring it back.
A slight premium is fine. It’s only in the last few years for hybrids that the price premium over a comparable nonhybrid has narrowed, and sales continue to climb for hybrid variants. It’s not only that simple of course, because now the hybrids usually have other advantage like features or simply driving better than the nonhybrid, but it helps. It isn’t like it was years ago when every review was sure to mention how much money you’d have to just put toward gas instead by buying a Corolla instead of a Prius.
The price gap is still sizable in EVs, maybe even moreso. H/K are a good example, Hyundai bills the Ioniq 5 as a compact crossover, it’s almost 10k more than a hybrid Tucson. For midsize sedans – for 2024 Hyundai drops the base Sonata and cut the Ioniq 6 price and they’re still almost $10k apart, nearly $7k if you look at the hybrid Sonata. Even if you compare models that were designed to offer ICE and EV in the same model line, a Niro EV is 5k more than the PHEV, which is in turn thousands more than the standard hybrid even accounting for equipment. With the outgoing Kona, the EV starts a couple grand more than the most loaded ICE one, and is thousands more when you equip them comparably.
With something like the EV9 I think people find that more justifiable, even if it is $3k over where a Telluride tops out. The Telluride has proven that they’re already more willing to pay $50-60k for a Kia-badged SUV more than they are $40k for a sedan or hatchback with a Hyundai or Kia badge.
But it also doesn’t help that EV pricing is like Monopoly money right now – prices drop on a whim, may or may not be this specific tax credit available, and then there’s resale. And if stories continue to come out about how expensive it is to repair some EVs (like Teslas or Rivians getting totaled from small bumps), that isn’t going to help the cost of ownership argument and keep people away.
If 87 octane is $3.5/gallon you can drive 50MPG Sonata for 100,000 miles for $7000.
So you can buy a hybrid car and drive it for a decade, or just buy EV and then spend more on installing chargers, 220V to garage…
Right – I log my fuelups and I’ve averaged 28 mpg over 42k miles and spent just shy of $5k. Even some of the nonhybrids are going to average better than that and take longer to realize a saving.
+10-15% is probably the magic number right now.
It’s a premium, but one that people recognize what they’re paying for (early EV development costs and access) and will be willing to step up.
It’s tough though, yet it’s been done before. The first three generations of Toyota Prius were quite heavily de-contented. You were paying for the powertrain, and the car let you know it by being Corolla-if-not-Echo-esque in terms of interior materials, seat comfort, and other interior comforts. Yet, people gladly bought them in spades.
That’s what’s likely needed while R&D spend is still through the roof. De-content, squeeze suppliers, make the powertrain the primary focus until those R&D costs are paid for other otherwise amortized and powertrain costs are more in-line with ICE.
It’s been quite a long time since the Model S came out. A decade, in fact. The “I’m willing to pay a premium because it’s new” period is over now. Almost everybody who was willing already has.
10-15% is $33-34.5K vs $30K.
I’m not talking $80K+ vehicles.
I’m not saying EVERYONE is willing to pay it either, I’m saying “enough” people are willing to pay it now, while the rest wait for a $30K ICE to have a $30K BEV equivalent. A premium is going to exist the rest of the decade unless people want early 2000s level interiors in their new BEVs.
I know you’re not saying EVERYONE is willing to pay it. But I think that we’re reaching the end of the line for “enough.” There’s another two-ish years before the well of people willing to pay a premium to be electric dries up.
A premium is not going to exist for the rest of the decade because sales growth is going to (is in the process of) fall of a cliff and manufacturers are going to have to figure out how to lower prices. And they will.
And this is what will happen. Because this is what the remainder of people will be able to afford to pay for. And honestly, I think you’d be surprised how many people would rather drive a bare-bones cheap EV than a premium, expensive one.
I disagree that $33-34.5K vs $30K or $22-23.5K vs $20K is “premium”. It’s not premium. It’s just better than basic. We’re talking Corolla vs. Yaris or Camry vs. Corolla in terms of step change of interior quality.
I agree the average person is never going to do something like RAV4 vs. Lexus NX (or Highlander vs Lexus RX) in terms of step change. Moreover, sales numbers bear that out because of the price discrepancy, in the mainstream non-luxury models tend to sell 3-3.5 to 1 in terms of units sold.
However, note that with vehicles like the RAV4 and Camry going, “better than basic” in terms of their interiors, their sales numbers — really looking at the RAV4, as Camry has declined by not being a crossover — haven’t really budged. People have been willing to pay 10-15% more for a nicer every day experience compared to the previous generation RAV4. Heck, the CR-V is another quarter-to-half-step above the current RAV4, and I expect the next gen RAV4 (a year out?) to do the same with no sales impact.
People *are* willing to pay a modest 10-15% premium if the benefit is screamingly obvious to them. Again, we’re not talking about the 30-50% bump of going up to an equivalent Lexus model here.
Though I agree with you that a competent BEV power train that ticks everyone’s basic boxes with two-generations ago of Prius interior (which wasn’t great) will likely be a tradeoff a lot will make, and is the volume seller that’ll increase BEV adoption more than anything else.
Which BEV is $33k vs it’s $30k counterpart? An HR-V is $24k and a base model Y is $43k.
And the HR-V is quite arguably a more capable vehicle. And subjectively nicer inside too.
The Bolt EUV is $28k, but a Trax is $20k.
(Regardless, I think $3500 is more than enough to convince most people to stay ICE vs a $24k EV that they’re already on the fence about. Remember that $24k is already more car than the vast majority of people can responsibly afford, regardless of the value proposition.)
I didn’t say they were currently 10-15% premium. I said in my original post that would be the magic range.
If I Bolt EUV was $22-23K vs a $20K Trax, the Bolt would see more interest.
That the Bolt EUV is $28K vs $20K is why the range needs to come down to 10-15% from the 40%+ it is now.
OK. That makes more sense.
I still disagree though. More realistic is that the holdouts are going to need to see significant savings before they’ll take an EV over the ICE equivalent.
I mean, it’ll get there in time, but I wouldn’t expect it to get there in the next few years, if not this decade.
The math most people will initially have to do is if their operating cost is lower with a BEV over an ICE, even if the BEV is 10-15% more. People did this math with hybrids, and hybrids end up winning out for those who can afford the price bump for the long-term lower TCO.
Hybrids are a perfect example where they absolutely are 15% (if not more, if offered in premium trims only) more expensive than their ICE-only version, but people buy them in droves when the math works for their situation.
We have decades of precedence here. People will opt for long-term cheaper thing when math works, even if up-front price is higher. People who are sensitive to a $2-4K hike in acquisition cost would just be better served buying a slightly used car in general, whether ICE, PHEV or BEV.
SO why is Model S $80,000 when it has interior from early 2000s, but with $300 tablet installed
“unless people want early 2000s level interiors in their new BEVs.”
Buttons?!
Knobs?!
Switches?!
Levers?!
Gauges?!
OBD2 port?!
A double DIN hole in the dash?!
AWW HELLS YES!! PLEASE!!
> A double DIN hole in the dash?!
Seriously.
I know right? Is that so hard?
Even better if that DD hole has space for an even bigger than 7″ integrated touchscreen that can look good. The 7th gen Honda Accord is one such example; you can replace the stock CD changer and cubby for a 10.1″ aftermarket touchscreen and even bigger vertical ones if you don’t mind losing the cubby.
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/2WS8nDmlPnw/maxresdefault.jpg
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0009/1766/7958/products/O1CN01jgga3b1tdhE3Ymg5f__2200780555925_300x.jpg?v=1571717860
This is the way.
A few years ago I bought a used Toyota Aygo, just between 4 and 5 years old, for a THIRD of the new price. Smelled, looked and drove like a new car. And it was already very cheap as new, some on sale at times at around $10,000 – new!
It had AC, could carry 4 people and luggage, and go a lot faster than the speed limits. Even had remote locking and electric windows, and you could hear each other inside of it at motorway speeds, so all in all just an ordinary car… The small outer size only meant it was always very easy to find a parking space for.
I sure would like to be able to get on the EV bandwagon in sort of the same way. That would be great. So when the EV novelty wears off, and they are just generic cars, I’m in!
I’m not sure EV price matters all that much when looking at the saturation point for ownership. Unless they get down to “The Price Is Right prize on a regular Wednesday episode Nissan”, they will be relegated to the niche they are meant to be with the tech at current capability. Poor (and increasingly middle-class) people have no room for added complexity/scarcity in their lives, especially with all the drawbacks of repairs, charging, servicing, etc. As hard as it is to fathom, there is a huge swath of the public that don’t want or care about EVs, in my opinion.
As far as Stellantis is concerned, the whole mess is what happens when we let government have full reign over the regulation and manufacturing parameters of a whole new industry. All this convoluted mandatory legislation decrees wouldn’t hardly exist if EVs were implemented organically. Look at Tesla, for example. They were proactive about manufacturing them for the somewhat mainstream, and then the government stepped in and said, “Cool. We’ll take it from here.” Now we are dealing with the clusterfuck of letting that happen.
We’re not even close to the saturation point. There are millions of homeowners who would like an EV but have been largely priced out. There’s no “EV Corolla” yet.
I own a home. Make too much to qualify for tax credits, but don’t have enough disposable income to stomach a $35k+ new car. I am not alone, by a long shot
I didn’t say we are at a saturation point, so I agree with you. There are (probably) millions of people in roughly the same position as you, but even if it’s 20,000,000 more people, it’s still a niche market.
Not at all. About 9% of USA car sales this year were EVs. 20,000,000 people is another 9% of the market. About 1/5 of sales is not niche, and that’s during the adoption phase. Infrastructure will only continue to get built out. Your arguments sound so much like a horse and carriage lover dunking on ICE right before the Model T dropped
Ha! I’m not “dunking” on anything. The question is asking what price is feasible in order for an EV to make sense. My opinion is that for many more people it doesn’t make sense, regardless of price equity, as things stand today.
It has nothing to do an aversion to a wholesale fundamental change in transportation methods like a car v. horse.
Also:
niche
[ nich, neesh ]SHOW IPA
https://www.dictionary.com/0b29c1db2f0b1c9452c7.svg
adjective
20% of sales, while not nothing, is not mainstream adoption. As I have said repeatedly, as things stand, demand for EVs is most certainly its own market with limited (specific) appeal.
If you make more than $300,000, but can’t stomach a $35,000 new car, you are pretty alone.
The limit is $153k if you’re not married. There are also wildly differing costs of living in this country, which is why the federal government will scale per diem, but apparently forgot that when making tax credit laws.
Yeah, that income is still like 75th percentile among households (let alone single people) in San Francisco or Manhattan, and a $35,000 car is far below average.
I would have to remove sidewalk, dig a trench, run 220V to garage, pour concrete back for sidewalk, breakers, charges, cables…
Otherwise you charge 8 hours of 1 hour of driving
Can’t you just bore under the sidewalk?
I have almost no sympathy for Stellantis. They already had a great production ready BEV concept which was The First “Gen” Wrangler Magneto. I wouldn’t care if it could only do 35 miles to the charge, I would have bought several.
Instead they blew $800K+ on 2 one off custom prototype BEV Wranglers that have almost no chance of ever going into production, announced 3 different European 4 door unibody independent suspension having BEVs with Jeep badges and fake Jeep Grills slapped onto them, and delayed the BEV Wrangler till 2028. Which by the time the BEV Wrangler is in production I’ll be out of the new car market due horribly thought out mandatory self driving regs.
They also had an EV Chrysler crossover prototype that was said to be production ready, got decent feedback from dealers and the press, but then cancelled any plans to build it, claiming they had to go completely back to the drawing board and redesign it from scratch because of the positive reception (WTF?)
The thing about the higher margin EVs is that everyone went to that segment. Sort of like “off peak” charging, if everyone does it, there’s not really an off peak anymore. If everyone and their mom goes into the high margin segment, you’ll make massive investments in infrastructure and R&D only to sell fewer cars than expected, thereby boning any hopes of actually making a profit. The Bolt was selling well for a reason. The Model 3 sells well for a reason. First one to market with a decent sub-Model 3-priced vehicle is going to take that cake all the way to the bank
What the analysts said: “EVs are too expensive and in order to sell more, the gap between EVs and ICE vehicle prices need to close”
What the manufacturers heard: “In order to sell more EVs, the price gap between EVs and ICE needs to close up.”
Manufactures plan: “We will raise ICE prices to match the prices on EV models that we want to sell (i.e. $60K to $80K models/trims). Simple thinking and simple solutions. Narf!!”
“China can never make vehicles for the US market! This plan is flawless! We have no competition and capitalism only works in our favor!” – Legacy Manufacturers, probably
All car prices are too high, not just EVs. It’s all the fault of OEMs and Dealerships, plain and simple. I say let the Chinese in with their less expensive cars, maybe that will show the others they need to worry about more than wall street
Or maybe let us buy the chinese stuff?
If people won’t buy a Tesla because of Musk, nobody should be buying anything Chinese anytime soon.
Or, now bear with me here, How about American companies learn to be price competitive with their competition.
Of course, that’s hard when Chinese companies work their employees to death. Of course then they had to act, so to stop people committing suicide by jumping off the building at the employee dormitories (no need to home when you work 18 hours just live at the factory), they put nets up, how thoughtful.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-CJB-9896
EVs should be able to be slightly more expensive than gassers, since the efficiency and ability to charge at home should make up for that. That said, until such time as people feel like they can use their EV for everything without having to plan ahead or consider their route, they aren’t going to sell unless they offer more car, lower price, or both. Plus, there’s inertia to contend with. People are used to gassers, they trust them, and they feel comfortable with them.
As it stands, I think EVs would really take a bite out of gassers with about a 10-15% discount vs an equivalent ICE vehicle. And I don’t think we’re going to see that happen.
Don’t forget that there are many millions of people who live places that don’t allow for them to charge at home. Charging at home cannot be the solution for the EV charging network.
I’m not saying that it is the entire solution. I’m just talking about being competitive enough to get a large chunk of market share. If we want everyone on EV, that’s going to take a lot of charging being built in apartment parking lots and along street parking and such. It’s a lot, but it’s also not as insurmountable as some people think. The power grid is there (though it definitely needs some work in places), we just need to shore it up and tap into it (and maybe do some things with load balancing to ensure that a bunch of people plugging in for the evening doesn’t mean rolling brownouts).
But to just be competitive, EVs don’t need that to all be done. Enough people have garages or the ability to plug into an outdoor outlet that EVs could gain significant market share right now if they offered compelling products at prices slightly lower than equivalent gassers.
This is what I see as a big problem as well. Using myself as an example, even I bought one, I would not be able to conveniently charge it. I live in an apartment with no capability to charge, there are no chargers at or near my job, and both in the town I work in and the town (30 miles away) that live in, the only chargers that I know of are a few random chargers at hotels or grocery stores. I have literally never seen an EV-only charging lot.
And even for people NOT completely locked out of the housing market, installing a charger can be costly, especially in the northeast where most housing is old. My mom briefly thought about an EV for her next car, but when she learned that installing a charger would necessitate a costly upgrade to her circa-1920 home electrical system, she decided she’d get a hybrid for her next/last car.
Depends on how much you want L2 charging. Depending on your commute, a standard 110V AC outlet might be enough for most daily needs. And, while some old electrical may need to be upgraded, installing a 220V outlet should be a relatively affordable way to get faster charging without hardwiring in a L2 setup.
Yeah, I 110V charged my 500e I had on lease at home, and it was fine with overnight charging. L2 is nice but for many folks not necessary.
My brother-in-law charges his ID 4 on 110 via the included charger, and being plugged in overnight gets him 12 miles of range. He works about 35 miles away, so not really helpful. He has charging available convenient to his work, that’s how he handles it.
Don’t quote me on this, but I believe the electrician told my mom the current panel was maxed out, and adding a 220V would require an upgraded panel.
That’s very possible, and I’m sorry if it seemed like I was saying her situation was easily solved. It’s just one of those things I think a lot of people think takes more than it usually does. There are certainly people for whom it takes a lot more, like your mom.
That’s ridiculously bad. My Niro PHEV can easily recharge its full 26 miles overnight, and the EV6 I used for a couple weeks always charged to full on 110 (I think the most I did in a day with it was only about 40-50 miles, and I think I was still able to get home early enough to plug in for about 12 hours of charge, so I don’t know for sure how many miles per hour or anything). Your BiL might want to make sure the settings on both the car and the cable are right. I’ve heard of people struggling because the cable actually has a couple settings and it is not always clear you need to adjust them.
No worries, I didn’t take it that way. In some instances, you may be correct.
Thanks for the info on the charging, I’ll pass that along. I was pretty underwhelmed when he told me about the overnight charging too.
He had told me the dealer had recommended some settings to get max battery longevity, perhaps that has something to do with it.
Right, I think it gets assumed everyone that has a mortgage/is a homeowner automatically would have the option to charge at home, but there’s a few variables like you say – age of home/cost to upgrade, parking – if it’s even close enough to the house, that sort of thing. Thinking of townhomes in particular that are parking lots and not right close to the building itself. I’m sure some of it could be remedied with some education on safety and security measures, charging in the rain, if someone can break the charger/cord, that kind of thing, but that’s an initiative that needs to be undertaken too. And then surely some arguments will then pop up about like HOAs complaining about charge cords or something.
I’m also in an apt, but with a parking deck – there are a couple [PH]EVs that park that I have seen plugged into simple outlets, so a trickle charge, which may not be technically allowed but not like they’re really checking. But then actual charger installation would take some buy-in from property management companies too and that’s probably another battle.
Actually, the parking is a great point. I live in an old town, there are quite a few single-family homes that have no driveways and only on-street parking, which is never the same spot and can even be around the corner or down the street.
Townhomes, duplexes, and condos have the same issue.
Yeah, of my friends that do own homes, all 30somethings and open to an EV, few have a consistent parking situation that would work or at least make it as simple as throwing in a charger.
I think it’s a hurdle for PHEVs even more, they are considered a measure that works for everyone right now since you can go electric for most daily driving, but then you do need to charge those almost daily to really take advantage which would almost certainly mean at home. Plus those still have a price premium over a standard hybrid, if the difference were smaller then it wouldn’t feel like “paying for something you can’t use” – or maybe if PHEV ranged improve over the usual 30-40 miles most new ones still have.
That Acura with three ass-trumpets is about the dumbest thing I’ve seen today.
Quiet, you! Central exhaust that doesn’t have a stupid bumper cover cutout in some weird unnatural shape, and you’re discouraging it?! If you want some stupid chromed rubber rectangle at the corner of your bumper that pretends to be exhaust there are already a zillion cars on the market for you.
The solution to affordable EV’s (for many buyers, but not all) is to educate people that must of us do not need 300 miles of range. Especially in N. America, where multi car households are very common.
Lots of houses have a pricier and a cheaper car. The pricier one can have the big range, the cheapy needs work commuting and errands range only.
Yeah, I figure that I need about 160 miles of range. That allows us to make our frequent 80-mile-round-trip drive to the in-laws in the winter when our range is reduced. For road trips we have a hybrid.
But realistically? An EV with 80 miles of range would be fine. Anytime range is a concern we’d just take the hybrid anyway.
This is why a plug-in hybrid with 50 miles electric range is the perfect vehicle.
Yup and even CA sees that, as their current proposed ICE ban specifically allows PHEVs with a minimum 50mi range. I’ve got one with a rated 37mi range and we rarely use gas in our normal day to day driving.
The solution to affordable EVs is not to make shittier EVs and convince people to settle. That will not work out how you want, instead it will end EVs.
The solution is to get the costs and prices down. Start by changing the rules for any subsidy to require that prices drop by some percentage year over year. This is a solvable problem, but the regulatory market is discouraging a solution rather than encouraging it.