Today, I am reminded of the famous saying in motorsports: “The best way to make a small fortune in racing, is to start with a large one.” Replacing “racing” with “electric vehicles” and you can describe Ford’s second-quarter results—which were still profitable overall even as the EV costs mount.
A happy Friday morning to you, Autopians, as we prepare to close out July and enter the final stretch of summer. (I hope you’ve done something fun with yours, I feel like I haven’t? I need to fix that with a road trip or something.) On today’s docket, we have that Ford Q2 news; some updates on how Tesla owners are feeling about the company vibes these days; some rays of light for AM radio; and General Motors wants to take new buyers to school to use all these fancy new tech features in cars. Let’s hit it.
Ford Has A Good Q2, Wall Street Still Unhappy
Here’s another saying that springs to mind today: “Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.” Considering various challenges like recall costs and supply chain headaches, Ford still managed what its executives called a solid Q2: net income of $1.9 billion.
However, it now projects to lose $4.5 billion this year on its nascent electric vehicle division, and revised down its production and sales goals on electrics through the end of 2023. Here’s Automotive News:
Citing consumer concerns with pricing, the company also scaled back EV output plans but vowed to continue on a path to earning 8 percent margins on EVs in three years.
Still, overall revenue in the quarter jumped 12 percent to $45 billion, and net income nearly tripled from a year earlier.
“It was a really strong quarter,” CFO John Lawler said in a call with media, noting it was “more evidence of what’s possible,” with the company’s Ford + growth plan.
Ford’s adjusted earnings before interest and taxes rose slightly to $3.8 billion. About $2.3 billion came from Ford Blue, the company’s gasoline-powered vehicle business. Ford made $2.4 billion on its commercial business, Ford Pro, and lost $1.1 billion on its electric vehicle business, Model e.
Ford Pro’s profit margins were 15 percent, while margins at Ford Blue were 9.2 percent.
Thanks, gasoline pickup trucks. But both Lawler and CEO Jim Farley were, like many in the industry after a year of ups and down, circumspect on EV stuff—yet Farley says Ford can afford to be cautiously optimistic here because it’s putting in the work now:
“The near-term pace of EV adoption will be a little slower than expected, which is going to benefit early movers like Ford,” Farley said in a statement. “EV customers are brand loyal and we’re winning lots of them with our high-volume, first-generation products; we’re making smart investments in capabilities and capacity around the world; and, while others are trying to catch up, we have clean-sheet, next-generation products in advanced development that will blow people away.”
Naturally, Wall Street analysts were skeptical. Here’s MarketWatch on that:
Share gains started to fade, however, as investors zeroed in on the shifted production goal, and ended the extended session down 1.2%. Ford said it expects to reach a production rate of 600,000 EVs in 2024; when it reported first-quarter earnings in May it said it would reach that milestone by the end of this year.
The company’s EV production growth has been “disappointing,” CFRA analyst Garrett Nelson said Thursday.
Nelson said he was “cautious” on Ford in light of the stock’s run so far this year and the possibility that “higher-for-longer” interest rates would weigh on sales after a strong first half of the year. Looming labor negotiations with the United Auto Workers are another reason for caution, he said.
All of those things in the last paragraph are fair, and the same kinds of headwinds facing many automakers right now. But I dunno, for all Ford’s challenges (and any legitimate criticism you could send its way over quality problems and such) it does seem like the company’s doing what it needs to be done to meet a more battery-driven future. And exactly what it said it would do: finance that with profitable gas trucks in the short term. Isn’t this what investors wanted?
By the way, Insider points out Farley thinks things are on the right track, and sees BYD, Tesla and Geely as its main EV competition, not GM or Volkswagen or BMW. That says a lot, I think.
Tesla Owners Love The Cars, But Elon Musk These Days, Not So Much
I have spent a lot of time inside Elon Musk’s head this year. Like, a lot, even for an automotive journalist who covers a lot of EV and emerging tech stuff. (It’s OK, I’m working through it, but I appreciate your concern.) And while there’s still endless respect for the guy in many corners for what he’s built at Tesla, there is a real loss of the superhero status he had, say, a decade ago when the Model S was challenging the best and proving the viability of EVs. He has no one to blame for this situation but himself.
Bloomberg recently revived a survey of 5,000 early Tesla Model 3 owners to see how they’re feeling about the cars, the brand and the man these days. They get high marks on the first one, but not so much on the other two:
Tesla’s most ardent early adopters have, to a significant extent, soured on the boss. Out of dozens of questions repeated verbatim from our 2019 survey, the steepest change of opinion was the drop in Musk’s approval. In total, the follow-up survey posed more than 130 questions; the lowest scores went to Musk’s 2022 acquisition of Twitter — which he renamed X — and to the divisive tweets that followed.
The survey comments were intense, and many felt conflicted. Model 3 owners still overwhelmingly loved their cars and had a lot to say about Tesla’s technology, which we cover extensively in this three-part presentation of the results. Most owners planned to stick with the brand. But they also reported feeling a sense of betrayal as Musk picked political fights online, downplayed the potential consequences of climate change and backed controversial figures and ideas.
“I love the vehicles but do not want to support someone who has such vitriol and low opinion of the very people who have made Tesla a success.”
There are also a good chunk of respondents who don’t care, say things like “Nobody doesn’t buy a Ford because they dislike Jim Farley” or “Hey, that’s what you get sometimes with billionaire genius innovators.” There are some other super interesting stats to parse here, including the fact that 96% of Model 3 owners say they would not want another gasoline-powered car again.
Also, these respondents claim that in terms of quality, their Model 3s have largely held up and proven to be reliable; in my own anecdotal experience I’ve seen those early cars to be pretty rough but I do think Tesla’s got build quality a lot more dialed-in these days. But on the Autopilot and “Full Self-Driving” front, results were a lot more mixed. “Some said it improved their safety with proper oversight. Others strongly disagreed. The general consensus was that FSD isn’t yet reliable enough for the average driver… FSD Beta is like my 15-year-old with her learner’s permit. You never know what it might do or why.” Sounds about right to me.
AM Radio Lives To Fight Another Day, Maybe
The august body that is the United States Senate is taking on one of the most crucial issues of our time as it undertakes the People’s Business: making it illegal for automakers to remove AM radio from cars. Here’s Automotive News:
The Democratic-led Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday advanced the bill, known as the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act, which directs the Transportation Department to issue a rule requiring automakers to keep AM radio receivers in new vehicles as standard equipment.
A modified version of the bill allows the department to establish an effective compliance date within two to three years of a rule being issued. Automakers that made 40,000 or fewer passenger vehicles in 2022 would have at least four years to comply, according to the text.
“Americans rely on a radio to provide them with safety alerts, news, talk radio and music. Unfortunately, several automakers have announced plans to take this important resource out of cars. That’s a big mistake,” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, told committee members.
Automakers have sought to remove AM radio functions from new cars, especially from EVs, as they claim the signals could come with annoying static thanks to electromagnetic interference from batteries. But I tend to think it’s more of a cost-savings issue; OEMs would rather not bother with this function because it adds cost and complexity when they’re trying to pare those things down, and AM radio is a declining format anyway. Still, many pro-EV and auto industry groups oppose the legislation:
If Congress were to pass the mandate, it would “impede domestic EV manufacturing by demanding significant drivetrain redesigns and signal interference paneling,” The Zero Emission Transportation Association, whose members include Tesla, Rivian and Lucid, wrote in a policy brief.
“In turn, this would add weight to the vehicle and cost the U.S. billions of dollars in decreased economic output and job loss,” the group said.
Billions of dollars! A looming economic crisis! America in a state of permanent decline! All because some people haven’t discovered podcasts yet. Anyway, great news for all you sports talk radio fans out there.
Hybrid Sales Way Up
It is true that EV demand has declined this year as customers balk at their prices. But one thing I have heard from those who pay attention to such things is that hybrid demand is way up. Maybe it’s environmental awareness as this brutal summer cooks us all; maybe they’re just sick of paying for gas, which nobody loves. Either way, we’re generally pro-hybrid (especially for Normal Cars) around here so we’ll take it as good news.
Also taking it as good news is Toyota, which had a very successful June, reports Reuters:
In the month of June, global sales rose 10 percent to 898,947 units, benefiting from growing demand, including for electrified vehicles such as hybrids, in key markets such as the U.S. and Europe, the company said in a statement.
China sales in June posted their first monthly decline in three months, falling 13 percent to 174,548 vehicles. China sales were down 2.8 percent for January-June.
Global sales of hybrid electric vehicles grew 38 percent year-on-year to 292,131 units, accounting for just under a third of the total number of vehicles sold worldwide last month.
In June, Toyota sold 10,191 battery electric vehicles worldwide, including its Lexus brand, with about 5,000 of those sold in China. That brought the total number of battery-powered vehicles sold in the first half of 2023 to 46,171 units.
This is why I wish more OEMs would invest in hybrids (especially PHEVs) rather than “skip a step” and go straight to EVs, but hey, they don’t put me in charge of such things.
Your Turn
How much do you care about the company behind the car you make? My wife won’t ever buy a Volkswagen after the diesel thing; I would not say no to GTI, myself, but I’ve been consistently overruled there. At the same time, she’s more pro-Tesla than I am. Everybody’s different. How do you feel about it?
I try to be careful about where I spend. Tesla is a non-starter. I was mad at Toyota for their political contributions, but I sort of can’t blame them. While they were worse about it than most, they were not alone. Hyundai’s child labor scandal makes me want to avoid Kiundais, though I’m guessing they are just the company that got caught. The VW emissions scandal was bad, but I mostly wasn’t looking at VWs anyway.
At some point, it becomes difficult to decide which companies are worse, because most are kind of terrible. No ethical consumption under capitalism and all that. So I try to make decisions based on which companies I can afford, whether they have improved, and whether I think they’ll pull crap again.
… so, take a bus. It’s what Basement Boy Biden would want you to do.
You’re just trying to be unpleasant, but I do really wish we had better public transit. I could have a fun car without gas mileage considerations and take the bus or light rail for things like boring commutes.
We all make decisions with our money, whether it’s which car to buy or whether to buy Bud Light. And we all make decisions regarding whether we want to be internet trolls, too.
*deep breath*
FUCK WALL STREET!!! IT’S THEIR SHORT TERM, QUARTERLY GAINS-FOCUSED THINKING THAT GOT US INTO THIS GODDAMN MESS IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!
I’m right there with you. Had to skip the second half of the story because I CANNOT. FUCKING. STAND THIS SHIT!!!
*panting after reading…. takes deep breath*
YOU FUCKING GOT THAT RIGHT! FUCK THOSE ASSHOLES AND THEIR RICH MAN’S GAME!!!!!!!!!!!
I wouldn’t buy VW or Tesla as I’ve worked on the former and known too many people who’ve had the bland POS, plus the emission scandal, and Tesla because of the entire anti-driving philosophy and I can’t stand the muskrat. Thankfully, neither company makes anything special that I want. If I hated, say Mazda, OTOH, and what I really wanted was a somewhat cheap, lightweight roadster, I’d be screwed as they offer the only option without going vintage. I suppose whether I’d eat my distaste for the corporation would come down to whether there was anything else at all available from a competitor that I liked or something that was so cheap to buy and run—say a stripped Corolla hybrid sedan—that I could at least know that I’m spending about the minimum and go through my life feeling miserable. This actually was kind of a thing for me a couple years ago as the engine in my Focus ST went thanks to Ecoboom cooling passage technology and the only warm hatch available was the GTI, but VW, so that’s a no go. Was going to settle for an unloaded hybrid Maverick (before I knew about the waiting lists), but then the GR86 came out and I liked the power, interior, and exterior looks much more than the first generation.
I vote with my wallet all the time. As compelling as some Teslas are, Musk makes them a non-starter. As for Volkswagen, I twisted my ethics and bought one of their Touaregs on the last day they sold TDIs. Volkswagen’s infotainment/current offerings means that I no longer have to try to justify buying another one.
I’m on the fence as to whether or not a full-blown act of Congress was necessary to keep the AM option on our nation’s dashboards. However, considering it’s likely part of a number of disaster-relief plans that have been written up, perhaps so.
Personally, I really enjoy having an AM radio handy. I still listen to WOI 640 in my Volt. AM is sometimes the only way I can pull it in. And, it comes in just fine in the Volt, even when I’m running in full-electric mode. If GM figured out how to do that in 2012, something tells me it can still be done without all that much fuss by other automakers today.
Well, Elon made it to the morning dump… again. Everyone take a shot.
We have two Toyota hybrids now (Rav4 leased, Prius AWD purchased) and have used them for a power source for when the power went out a few times to power the necessary things in the house. When the lease ends, we are seriously considering a PHEV Rav4. 90% of our driving is local, so the EV can handle all of our local driving, and the hybrid for our long jaunts to Lake Tahoe or Washington state (from California).
We’ve owned a Rav4 Prime for about 2 years now – it’s as good as it gets.
The only thing I don’t like about it, on the SE at least, is that the onboard charger is only 3.3kw – which is truly pathetic. So about ~10miles/hour. Not the end of the world, but faster charging would make a big difference in terms of adding electric range when you’re out and about.
The premium version has an option to go up to 6.6kw, which is better (but still on the low end). I think the premium also includes some 120v AC outlets, which would be nice.
But it’s a really great vehicle, can’t recommend enough.
We have a 1300w sine wave inverter to provide 120v to the house. We only used about a gallon per day during the winter storm power outage. A built-in inverter would be great!
We just recently added solar + a battery, so fortunately I don’t have to deal with it anymore (In Michigan we seem to be losing power for days on end at least 5x a year…and it’s only getting worse).
But I used a 1500w inverter hooked up to the volt/rav in the past, and it worked great.
Being able to just plug in would definitely be nicer!
I can agree that there are some good reasons to keep an AM radio in a car.
I don’t think this is something that needs to be regulated by the federal government. In fact, the last thing we need is more required equipment in cars.
Not everything good has to be legally required, and there are better avenues than an act of Congress to get most things done.
I get my emergency information from the broadcast alerts on my cell phone. I live in tornado alley and get several of them a year. It’s very handy since my cell phone is either always on me or somewhere in the house. Turning on a radio to get information sounds like something my grandparents would do.
More likely to lose Cell Service in an emergency caused by weather than to lose AM Reception
When I lose power at home, my 4-bar cell service goes into Emergency only mode. I guess the only cell towers nearby are on the same grid.
But the alerts get sent before the power gets taken out. We went through that in Tulsa on Father’s Day.
Turning on a radio for information does seem antiquated. I don’t even have an AM/FM radio in my house, and I don’t think I’m unique in that regard. It seems odd to view AM radio as a critical piece of safety infrastructure when it is a technology only commonly found in vehicles, and further, it is a technology that many people (most?) literally never use. It seems akin to demanding all homes have a traditional landline telephone since some people don’t have a cellphone to use to call for emergency services.
The thing about Musk’s antics is that he’s just so damn “in your face” about it. Like, I’m sure every CEO has some unpleasant inclinations, but most manage to keep it relatively private. The dude just can’t seem to shut the fuck up for even five seconds. Add to that the fact that he isn’t pushing ‘ol fashioned “pro-business, small government Republicanism,” it’s stuff like fringe anti-vaxx shit and unfounded conspiracies about the Paul Pelosi attack. I know that “there’s no ethical consumption under capitalism” or whatever but it’s just a bridge too far for me. I just hate Musk, his attitudes and dystopian vision for the future and wouldn’t be caught dead giving him a dime or even being an ambassador for his brand by buying a used Tesla. Plus the cars don’t appeal to me at all between the design, poor quality and lack of a service network. But that’s just, like, my opinion man. I’m not going to throw shade on anyone buying one.
I’d argue that giving Elon Musk a dime won’t affect literally anything ever because, like, he can afford to do whatever he wants, even without your money, even without everbodys money, because he was filthy rich before Tesla was even a thing.
Me not buying a Tesla won’t affect anything else in the world but it does mean that I won’t be reminded of that jackass every time I look in my garage.
It also means Tesla employees won’t be looking at you in your garage.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sensitive-images-recorded-by-customer-cars-2023-04-06/
Yeeeeeeep.
Teslas are fun to drive, but my gosh, the baggage of its most vocal public figurehead is too much for me. I want no association with that guy. (Also, I hate the lazy “slap everything on a screen” interiors. Those suck so hard.)
It feels like the supercharger network might be unavoidable because the state of public charging in the U.S. sucks so hard, but I don’t want to be mistaken for one of Elon’s fanboiz by owning one of his cars.
Totally, utterly & completely agree!
(& I would throw shade on anyone buying one)
CEO antics alone aren’t usually enough to keep me away from a company. I think Musk is an overgrown twelve-year-old, but that alone wouldn’t keep me out of a Tesla. (Those stupid touchscreens will, though.)
But when CEO bullshittery becomes corporate policy, then I have a problem. I’d go hungry before eating at a Chick Fil A, and I won’t set foot in a Hobby Lobby. You act like an asshole towards people I love, you don’t get my money, ever.
Copyright and trademark overreach will also prevent you from getting my money. Disney and Traxxas RC cars, I’m looking at you… Your products are fine, but they’re also widely available secondhand. So if I want one, that’s how I do it.
What did Traxxas Do? Only because I still have my Sledgehammer I dust off every now and then.
Apparently send cease and desist letters to the ISP’s hosting aftermarket parts sites and not the companies themselves. Which I can sort of see as fair when the companies involved are from mainland China and will ignore that letter anyhow.
That said a lot of aftermarket Traxxas parts are similar or identical to OEM but 1/3 the price. Some definitely are cheap for a reason.
did not know they were doing that.
They keep slapping patents on stuff they didn’t invent and then going after other companies for “infringement” too. Big tiff with Horizon a few years back, which is why you don’t see Traxxas stuff on Tower Hobbies any more.
Government requirements for AM radio??? What is next, will the CD or 8-track industry ask the government to force auto makers to put CD or 8-Track players back in cars? How about ashtrays? I don’t think I’ve tuned into AM radio in a decade. If you have to have AM radio, you can buy a portable player and put it in your car.
Its for emergency broadcast. They don’t care you don’t listen to the local sports talk show on it.
There is something about AM radio that messes with the electric cars so they tried to scrap it. All it takes is a part to isolate it, but in the favor of saving a few million over the production of a car, they tried to just take it away. Not a bad move per say, but the gov’t wasn’t ready yet.
I spend a lot of time driving in areas will poor or no cell coverage and I still can’t imagine trying to scan through the entire AM spectrum because I somehow think there is an emergency somewhere near. I guess I am just not the target audience for AM emergency broadcasts because I never listen to it and thus would not get any emergency message broadcast while I was driving. I’d be listening to an audio book, podcast, or music from my cell phone. 100% for the government mandating safety equipment and fuel economy. Not sure I want the government mandating what is available in my infotainment system.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/05/ev-advocates-join-tech-groups-and-automakers-to-oppose-am-radio-mandate/
they consider it safety equipment is my guess!
I am with you, no skin in the game on my end and I haven’t turned the AM radio on in a car I’ve owned since high school because I had to use those tape player connects to a mp3 player. I wouldn’t hear it either!
The idea is though, if you went home and everything was fucked, you COULD turn on your AM radio and it would probably be blasting out the latest “go here to live” information on most the channels. This will probably never happen, and most younger people (under 20? 15?) don’t even know what AM is, so it’s probably a waste. But it is the federal government we are dealing with, waste is name of the game.
That article you linked isn’t bad, but just as you will never listen to AM radio, I will never be able to open their hyperlink alert, because I have a dumb phone.
I don’t think relying on both options is a bad idea, and the cost of an AM radio isn’t much compared to everything else insane they are requiring in cars, like DUI and GPS shut downs coming our way soon in already passed bills.
Well, the emergency aspect is why the Senate majority is interested. Ted Cruz doesn’t care about that, he’ll always have Cancun. What he does care about is making sure that the right wing talk radio has a cheap platform to keep the common clay of the new West riled up.
Bingo
“OEMs would rather not bother with this function because it adds cost and complexity when they’re trying to pare those things down.”
Say what?
Ah but governments have thousands of AM transmitters and they don’t want to have to replace them. That is the only time I tune in the AM band and that is when that sign is flashing that the channel has information about the road ahead. Along the coast we have signs that talk about Tsunami and if they are flashing you tune to that channel for information. So this is as much about saving the gov’t money first and foremost.
Which seems reasonable. Which also makes me wonder if it’s correct? When does our government do something to save tax payers money?
The slippery slope argument is logically bogus.
I am about to buy a gmc and I don’t feel good about it at all. I own a Toyota and feel pretty okay-good about that, not that I am proud, but I don’t feel any negative feelings at all towards it or the company, just their new design team ha!
GMC I don’t like because they seem to in some ways have abandoned USA market for ruling China, and now that it backfired a bit with Chinese companies kicking ass over there, well, I didn’t forget but they would like me to. Not many car options in the large SUV size though, so here I am waiting on a Yukon.
I used to call people buying a GMC an idiot (VERY recently I might add), so I am learning to “never say never” as life changes and not every option can be a good one.
The real reason you should feel bad to buy a GM car is because in 2008 they were loaned many billions of your taxpayer dollars that they STILL HAVENT GIVEN BACK.
100% add it to the list. There are a few others I didn’t mention as well, like killing everyone with their ignition switches like another mentioned. Probably after I buy it we will find out they are running factories using Uyghur slave labor.
Eh, the ignition switch recall is a silly one imo. If losing power steering on your 2003 Saturn causes you to crash, you just need to hit the gym and learn how to actually pull on the steering wheel.
That’s hard to do when you are noshing on a cheeseburger in one hand and texting/making a tik-tok in the other while steering with your knees.
Well, electric power steering motor failure was another problem with that era, but separate from the ignition switch.
I assume if the switch falls out of the run position, there’s a chance the steering column could also lock, so you can’t steer. Someone can correct me, it may only be when the key is removed, been a while since I have used a keyed ignition on a GM car. The lack of power brakes would potentially be even more alarming to figure out in the moment.
Regardless, vehicle power failure is startling if you aren’t prepared for it (fortunately I haven’t but have family that has), and if it happens you typically want to know a fix for it, which in this case it was a design flaw.
I’ll be honest, I don’t care. The government lost $10B on the GM bailout. Seems like a bargain when you consider how economically devastating and costly the alternative would have been. A traditional bankruptcy restructuring was not an option during the once in a generation global financial crisis, it was either get involved or let them get liquidated.
Alternatively, think about how economically devastating it is to bail out a company that mismanaged itself into bankruptcy instead of letting it die and letting better newer companies take its place.
Company’s been consistently very profitable since the bailout and massive restructuring. Quality of the vehicles has drastically increased. I’d also argue that letting “better, newer” companies take its place is difficult in the automotive industry. With the exception of Tesla, automotive start-ups that are sustainable long-term are a rarity. There’s also an argument to be made that we have a strategic national interest in both a viable domestic automotive industry and the manufacturing footprint and expertise that comes with it.
Unfortunately, like in many other instances, the government feels it has the right to choose winners and losers, rather than letting them all figure out how to survive.
Yup, that’s the way it’s always been and always will be. Every government in the world chooses to prop up certain homegrown industries for strategic reasons, and not just automotive manufacturing. Again, GM and Chrysler could have reorganized under Chapter 11 and achieved largely the same result if the credit markets had not been completely frozen. This was not possible because the banks were seized up and the government was the only viable financier. Seems silly to let a viable (and the companies since the bankruptcy have proven themselves to be viable) industry die due to a once in a generation credit crunch, when they could’ve reorganized under normal circumstances.
I don’t think there’s a such thing as an ethical car company, for what it’s worth. Or frankly even an ethical corporation, especially in the US where they could essentially be drowning puppies on social media as their business and the government would still be tripping over themselves to give them more tax breaks. Something something, no ethical consumption, something something.
That being said, as a consumer you can still talk with your money, and I certainly try to avoid spending money on companies that are deplorable ethical wastelands or run by IRL Lex Luthors like Tesla, Amazon, et cetera. Do I feel great about owning a Hyundai?
Ugh. Tough question. Their customer experience outside of the dealerships (which are still a nightmare) is really great. All of their online stuff is amazing, they send service reminders via email, the 3 years of free maintenance is cool, they literally sent me flower seeds for the one year anniversary of getting my N, etc. Sometimes I’m a sucker who eats the marketing up to an extent.
But then there’s the um…whole child labor faux pas. That’s pretty hard to ignore. As are the significant QC issues they continue to have. So I’d say I feel…neutral to bad, I suppose. I bought my car before the child labor stuff came out, but it’s still horrible. I do love my car though and it’s already half paid off/cheap to own/I have a 2.75% interest rate which literally may never be a thing again, so I’m not going to seriously consider getting out of it until it’s paid off, and likely much later than that.
New enthusiast cars are already too expensive and I’m absolutely not taking out a car loan at 5% interest or more. It’s throwing money away on something I don’t need, and I got out of my GTI after only two years/before it was paid off and the hassle of switching from one financed car into another is a pain in the ass…not to mention there are lots of little extra costs as well. I don’t regret what I did because I love my N, my GTI was a mechanical shit show, and the equity I was able to use was significant.
But was it a financially prudent decision? Absolutely not lol and my wife and I don’t need any unforced errors while we’re trying to start the franchise.
With car companies, I figure you’re never going to please all the people all the time. There’s some pro/anti sentiment with every brand and with every region.
H/K is a good example, as someone who has bought from them before and has family who has as well, I admit that the makes me less likely to consider if I were shopping now (although not the only thing, with their other recently quality gaffes). Sure it’s a supplier, but then who’s to say they don’t supply to someone else too….
I remember when Dieselgate first happened there was a story about someone slipping notes onto VWs, maybe in the PNW, about how it was a cheating and polluting company and the owner should feel bad and they even threw VW’s *company origins* in there for good measure. Maybe it was all a fake story, but to your point, making a major financial change will only impact you, and not actually the corporation, because they’ve already gotten your money.
Like when people were dropkicking Keurigs out in their backyard or destroying their Nikes to make a point about politics or whatever. They’ve already got your money! Now you just have to buy a new coffeemaker and shoes and the other companies probably feel the same, they’re just quieter about it all.
Understatement of the day.
I don’t often listen to AM anymore, but it is still interesting to tune into some country or local news stations when I travel.
Wall Street: “Your quarterly net profits aren’t good enough, Ford.”
Ford: “We’re working hard to bring EVs to market, but we’re still net-negative on each one sold, so…”
Wall Street: “Also, you’re not producing enough EVs.”
Ford: *Jackie-Chan-WTF.gif*
I know people here say we need more PHEVs and they would work better for more people right now toward new car electrification, but I’ve been increasingly thinking think they really wouldn’t.
I’m not one to go so far as to say they’re the worst of both worlds, but they do weigh more than a regular hybrid counterpart – a Niro PHEV is 250-300 lbs more than the regular hybrid, a RAV4 Prime 400-500 lbs over a hybrid – and cost more. The typical electric range on PHEVs doesn’t seem to have substantially improved over the last ~10 years.
But even outside of those factors, “you can do most of your daily driving on electric” still only really applies to people who have access to chargers at home or work, which is not everyone. Even a short commute of less than 10mi each way, you might get 2 days worth on the charge (a 150 mi EV would at least just be maybe weekly). The PHEV isn’t as great a transitionary step then for the consumer, and if you’re not going to plug it in, just save the coin and get a standard hybrid.
Not anti-PHEV, just thoughts I’ve been chewing on over many of these stories and comments lately, as I do wish there were more hybrids from OEMs rather than skipping straight to BEVs – just think regular hybrids still make more sense than PHEV.
The solution is simple, if PHEV won’t work for you then don’t buy one. Lots of other folks DO have home and workplace charging options. Let them plug in. You can do your part with a regular fuel sipping hybrid.
Think you missed my point? I’m not asking to be sold on why I should buy a PHEV, and I even acknowledged a common criticism of PHEVs “worst of both worlds” as not being my view.
As I said, I see people here say we need more PHEVs as the shift to electrification. In that very section:
Do we need more hybrids? Sure. Do PHEVs offer that much more benefit for most people over a full EV in the transition to electrification? I’m thinking less so now.
“Not anti-PHEV, just thoughts I’ve been chewing on over many of these stories and comments lately, as I do wish there were more hybrids from OEMs rather than skipping straight to BEVs – just think regular hybrids still make more sense than PHEV.”
If you said otherwise it was elsewhere. This what I replied to. And that’s fine, if a regular hybrid makes more sense for you then buy one among the unfortunately limited number of options available. You vote with your dollars. Just keep in mind manufacturers have a deadline to electrify so BEVs and PHEVs (maybe REX) are the future, not ICE and hybrids.
I led with expressing doubt that PHEVs work better for most people in regards to electrification. Apologies if that last paragraph read too much like a critique of the actual vehicles to you. Do you have thoughts on any of the other aspects? The deadlines, if they don’t change, are all well and good, but you also need consumers to buy them and there’s factors that don’t necessarily pose a big benefit to many people at the moment.
If every reply that say, expressed concern about battery range was just “then don’t buy one” these would be rather quiet comment sections.
I’ve had 2 PHEVs and I’d say that they do offer much more benefit than EVs or Hybrids. Our current is a 22 Escape PHEV and on the current tank of fuel we are up to 800 miles and still have 3/4 of a tank of gas. It gets charged on a 110v outlet which yes is slow but it still allows us to start the day with a full charge if wanted or the 80% we normally charge to. Yes you need the ability to charge at home or at work, but if you don’t have that then an EV just isn’t right for you either. DCFC is the definition of highway robbery and driving an EV on public electrons is more expensive than a not so effecient gas car. I did the math on our first PHEV when gas was in the $3.25-$3.50 range and my 18 MPG car would be cheaper to drive.
That last part is exactly why we went PHEV. We are leaving later today on a ~1000 mi road trip and it will be cheaper than public charging an EV and a lot less hassle since gas stations are still everywhere. Meanwhile we haven’t use but a couple of drops of gas since it got home from its last road trip about 3 weeks ago. It really is far and away the best of both worlds if you want a vehicle than can do it all stress free.
I completely agree that it can definitely be a benefit over a regular hybrid. My comment is more directed at the idea that we need more PHEVs as part of the electrification shift. Like you said – if plugging in is an issue at all, it applies to PHEVs too.
Your Escape is a good example as that segment is now the volume segment for most OEMs. Toyota has been pumping out hybrid RAV4s, Honda is putting the CR-V mix at 50% hybrid, Hyundai/Kia have models too (and PHEV options). Mitsubishi has only PHEV option. Nissan, Mazda, Subaru, GM, no hybrid.
Smaller crossovers and larger 3-row segments above and below – much more slim pickings. It would be great to see more 3-row crossovers that could break 30mpg out there for example.
I would say most of the critiques for PHEVs also apply to EVs. Driving only an EV makes zero sense if you don’t have a way to charge it at home or work because rapid chargers can be even more costly than gasoline. But as the charging infrastructure is improved, so would the infrastructure for PHEVs.
Would I love a new 2024 Toyota Prius Prime? Yes, but I live in an apartment. State/federal action is desperately needed to build chargers at these kinds of locations, otherwise, the EV push is only a half measure. So for now, my Ford Maverick hybrid is more than good enough.
Unfortunately since everyone is of the straight to EVs mindset improving charging infrastructure won’t help PHEVs, or at least current ones. The problem is that PHEV batteries are too small for DCFC to be worthwhile and public AC charging isn’t getting any better as everyone focuses on DCFC stations.
Not an engineer or electrician, BUT, I have to wonder…can they have a PHEV outlet on those chargers that are capped and use a different plug? I know that would add cost, but it would make sense if possible otherwise.
I’m sure they could, EA has units with both CCS and CHaDeMo, but the reality is that since they charge by the KWh low charging speed means low profits. Around here some of the EA locations do have a single J1772 plug that is separate from the DCFC units.
Right, that’s my thinking as well. PHEVs mitigate the range anxiety issue, but still liable to the same infrastructure hangups as EVs.
And there’s brands without any hybrids really out there at all – Nissan and GM as a couple examples that have leaned into EV push, sure they didn’t have great success with hybrids in the past, but now we’re in a time when Toyota sells more hybrid RAV4s than they do Priuses.
No infrastructure hangs up with PHEVs, you plug them in at home, or the office and don’t care one bit about the public charging infrastructure. If you can’t charge at home or work then a PHEV or EV isn’t right for you. Yes, I do use public charging ocassionally with mine but only Volta stations that are located at or near a business I’m going to patronize. It isn’t that I need the charge per se, it is that it is that the business is giving me a few free miles while I’m in their store shopping.
That’s the thing – many articles/comments including this one emphasizes more PHEVs as part of the transition toward electrified future. But as it stands now, if you don’t have that charger access, it still has that limitation.
Quick search says that around 65% of Americans are “home owners”. The quotes because that is not the percent that don’t have a mortgage. Seems like that is a sufficient number to prioritize PHEVs to 1) use less gas and to 2) use less battery supply than a full EV does.
I looked up that number too, but not all homes may necessarily have appropriate parking or have appropriate electrical systems for charging to just assume 65% of people in the country are set up for a PHEV right away.
So even if it were 50% I’d say it’s a logical first step to get as many people as possible into PHEVs until the supply of charging infrastructure and batteries can be met first.
Let’s assume that’s the case – now what about the price premium? They currently cost thousands more than the regular hybrid counterpart, and those hybrids are only more recently reaching a nominal increase over a nonhybrid – or just the manufacturer making the hybrid the mandatory powertrain in some cases (ex. Sienna, some Accords).
Again, I’m not arguing against PHEVs as a concept or saying they are impractical – I literally acknowledged some of the typical critiques in my original comment. I just think more standard hybrids will do a lot in the interim too and be more accessible to more people, but several manufacturers make no hybrids at all right now.
You don’t really need a specialized charger for PHEVs, Level 1 charging with a 110v wall socket for 12 hours overnight usually does enough for commuting since the battery is so much smaller, and it’s not the end of the world if you run out of juice.
I think a critical miss about PHEVs is with larger vehicles (EG trucks) that really could help sell the next generation of vehicles. I’m a driver that uses a truck occasionally towing a camper 5x/10x per year on long trips. This usage eliminates all BEV trucks for me, as I am not making a 5 hour drive 7~8 hours to charge up a huge battery just to get another 100 miles down the road. A PHEV would be perfect in this case – commute on battery, long trips on gas or diesel. Unfortunately that half measure doesn’t sell on wall street, so I’ll be trying to keep my current truck as long as I can.
Oh, and spare me the “just rent one” argument. Take a look for one – rental trucks with brake controllers and hitches for a travel trailer don’t exist in any real large numbers and only a couple companies rent them. Many times even if a truck has a hitch, the rental agreements say don’t use it. That avenue is a nonstarter.
Ford originally stated that a PHEV version was going to follow the Hybrid F-150 but before that made it to market they decided to focus their energy on the Lightning instead. Hopefully CAs mandate will make them reconsider and give us a PHEV F-150 with the minimum required range of 50mi to make it legal to sell in CA and other states of Californication like mine.
I’d be interested to see if additional plug-in range could be eked out in a truck form too. Most are still in the ~30-40mi range, although now that I think about it that would be quite good for a truck.
I know I mentioned PHEVs still having weight gain over regular hybrids, but with the weight of the actual EV trucks out there, I’d think that wouldn’t be as dramatic an increase in a truck since the ICE is still there for necessary truck things.
Yeah lots of people tout the weight issue about PHEVs and certainly they weigh more than HEVs but in most cases they are still lighter than a similar EV. In the same configuration the Hybrid F-150 is about 1000lbs lighter than the standard range Lightning. I would expect that a PHEV with 40-50 miles of range would fall somewhere in between those two, may be closer to the Lightning than the Hybrid but still lighter. When the battery starts loosing range with the PHEV it doesn’t have a significant effect on road trip range while the same can’t be said for an EV.
I think the only people PHEV’s don’t work for are those that can’t charge at home or work. But even charging at 120v with a standard plug is enough – you only get 3-5miles/hour, but overnight it’s enough to charge overnight. That’s what I did with my Volt the entire time I owned it.
They aren’t all the same either, my Volt was almost like a BEV in the amount of maint it didn’t need, whereas our Rav4 prime still recommends 5k checkups.
I do agree that the cost is a big limiting factor. It’s about a $10k delta for a PHEV vs a hybrid…if economics are the only factor, the hybrid probably wins most arguments.
But being able to add 40-50miles of range every night is really nice.
Yeah, the cost is certainly part of it – I think the Santa Fe is on the lower end of that as far as they compare, where the plug-in is an 18% premium over the regular hybrid. For now, the economics are still a major factor, especially when tax incentives are so much a part of the equation of the purchase price (and no doubt OEMs could be pricing the plug-in higher to make more on their end because of that).
If it were a nominal increase it wouldn’t really be an issue. Remember in the 2000s every review of a hybrid was guaranteed to mention how long it would take you to pay back the cost of the hybrid over a nonhybrid model in fuel savings. That’s certainly narrowed now, a RAV4 Hybrid is maybe 10% premium over the standard RAV4, and less if you were going for AWD as that’s standard in the hybrid. Honda seems to be a smaller jump I think if you compare by trim levels (CR-V EX vs. hybrid Sport, or Accord EX-L hybrid is the same as last year’s 1.5T EX-L).
I’d call the senate more December than August these days. Because they all old AF
I care a lot about how the company’s actions will affect me personally. So I’ll never buy a VW or Land Rover because I don’t believe they care about reliability. I’ll never buy a Volvo or Buick made in China because I don’t think that’s a good long-term bet for myself.
But I simply don’t care what the CEO of a company whose product I own is tweeting every day. To sanely live in modern society requires closing ones eyes to an extent. Otherwise every trip to Walmart would be overwhelming. For all I know, the CEO of the cereal company whose product I ate for breakfast this morning is a raging racist. I don’t know, I don’t want to know. I just like cereal.
I won’t buy a Tesla because it doesn’t meet my needs, not because I have any feelings one way or another for the CEO.
“For all I know, the CEO of the cereal company whose product I ate for breakfast this morning is a raging racist. I don’t know, I don’t want to know. I just like cereal.”
… Which is why even the most minimally competent CEOs generally don’t publicly say anything to piss off one side of the political spectrum, or offend people in general.
Suppose the CEO of your favorite cereal company made statements confirming he is a raging racist. You didn’t know, you didn’t want to know, but now you do. Will you keep buying the cereal?
I don’t begrudge any consumer’s decision to buy a Tesla despite Musk’s views, or refuse to, but what this incredibly influential and powerful person says matters–and Musk isn’t merely tweeting hot takes on Marvel-vs-DC or pineapple on pizza.
Honestly, probably yes.
I know people who go through life holding grudges, who keep lists of which companies are “good” vs “bad” to buy from based on how they publicly present themselves vis a vis the politics of the moment or based on what someone who represents the company has said or posted. The whole thing seems tiring and inconsequential.
Is Chick-Fil-A bad? Is Walmart? Is Bud Light? Is My Pillow? Is the PGA? The NBA? etc etc etc. Are the people who depend on these companies for their livelihoods bad too, or is punishing them for the actions of their bosses immoral?
I place a pretty big distinction between peoples’ (or companies’) actions vs. beliefs or words.
You’re right, life’s too short to curate a list of good and bad companies and I’d rather spend that time doing something I enjoy rather than trying to keep score, but I’ll still never give Comcast a single cent in my lifetime 🙂
Comcast has personally treated me poorly, like VW has, and that I never forgive.
If the outcry over a publicly shitty CEO was so loud it that it affected profits at all, shareholders would throw that CEO out long before it was so bad it affected regular workers. But let’s be honest: my decision to not support a brand because I find the owners or leadership reprehensible will affect that brand exactly zero. Likewise, said brand will still be blissfully unaware of my existence if I buy their product. I am but one guy. So the idea that I or anyone as an individual should wring their hands over “the workers” before refusing to buy a sandwich from a brand that thinks some of my friends should be discriminated against … yeah, no, I’m just gonna go ahead and NOT buy that sandwich. I don’t care if it matters to the brand, it matters to ME.
Also, I’d feel like a real a-hole if I had to explain to my best friend Mike that I’m still getting my burgers at The Fuck Mike Burger Bar because I don’t want a total stranger to lose his burger flipping job.
“What about the workers” to me is just cover for “I don’t care.” But if someone doesn’t care, they should say that and own it.
I mean, Bud Light (InBev) is literally laying people off amid a sharp decline in sales. So yes, it can and does matter to people far below the CEO level.
I know most CEOs do not care about me or my views and I think most brand social media is cringey. I might adjust my purchase habits if I learn something about the company or its owner I dislike, but also I don’t have enough loyalty to any type of brand that my own personal boycott would be a large blip vs a small blip.
Tesla is not quite apples to apples with most companies IMO, because most brands don’t have their fans rallying around a member of the executive suite to make it its own subculture, amplifying most anything. On the other hand, I think a better part of Tesla owners are, as with most things, probably more moderate and like you say wouldn’t care what the CEO tweets. Tesla owners are also probably not off the grid people even if they don’t have social media, and will hear about it being in business and/or tech spaces. Even if you strip out anything related to social issues, there’s business implications. Imagine you own GM stock and Mary Barra tweets “we’ll produce 69,420 Bolts this year lol.”
When I buy something, I am paying the people who made it. I do not pay people on how racist or not racist they are. I pay people on how well they do their job. If the raging racist CEO makes a bangin cereal, I don’t care that he’s a racist, he still deserves my money for doing a good job.
And the thing is that you aren’t just paying that CEO/figure head you are paying all of the people who work at the company as well as people who work at their suppliers. So yeah boycott Bud Light and now we have people on the production line loosing their jobs.
I think that’s a really healthy attitude, and I try to have the same outlook.
I remember years ago when I was a kid at a family function, we were all talking about a new restaurant in town. A family member was adamant about never patronizing it because the owner is was known (according to her) for cheating on his wife. On the drive home, I recall my parents discussing how unusual it is to choose not to go to a restaurant because you don’t approve of the morals of the owner. Now, though, it seems that many people become very concerned about the opinions of company owners, even when those opinions are wholly unrelated to the running of the business. It’s the sort of thing that I have no time for.
It is not my responsibility to police other people’s opinions and ensure that they agree with me, and it’s much less stressful for me if I don’t even pay attention to irrelevant things like that.
I’m not religious myself, so I recognize the pot/kettle dynamic of what I’m about to say, but I think there’s a lot of truth to the idea that many people (on both sides of course) have replaced organized religion with politics. Political opponents are no longer people you can disagree with over a beer, they are heretics or anti-christs. Political debates about objectively inconsequential things take on the importance of holy crusades. It’s not to the point where I wish for religion to come back per se, but I have come to think more and more about how human beings require something larger than themselves to orient towards.
Elon Musk used the wealth he made off of Tesla to buy out Twitter and turn it into a cesspit where people can discuss their “final solutions” to the “transgender problem” — an accomplishment he seems quite proud of.
I cannot buy a Tesla because the proceeds are being used to hurt my family.
But at the same time, I cannot guilt-trip anyone else for buying one. Asking consumers to audit the companies they buy from is unfair. (1) It’s too much effort and stress, (2) corporations are too good at lying, and (3) voting with your dollars instead of voting with your votes hands the right to decide what’s an “ethical” business practice to those with the most money to spend.
The company behind the car definitely matters to me, I hesitate with any GM product due to the ignition switch thing a few years back where they made a conscious and intentional choice to allow it to kill people because it was cheaper than the recall, but I also almost bought a Bolt so it’s not the end of the world. I will say I have never considered a Tesla because of Elon though, his public advertisement of what a terrible person he is makes me unwilling to give him my money. On the flip side, I have been impressed with a lot of Toyota leadership, and have had more of them than any other car, but they are also just good cars so I don’t know that the leadership actually influenced that at all.
““Americans rely on a radio to provide them with safety alerts, news, talk radio and music. Unfortunately, several automakers have announced plans to take this important resource out of cars. That’s a big mistake,” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, told committee members.”
Wow I didn’t have agreeing with Ted fucking Cruz on my bingo card, but here we are. AM radios are SO CHEAP, and they are still an effective way of getting information out to all drivers in an area. Cell networks can go down, or get overloaded, or otherwise not work in an emergency situation, but a sign on the road that says “Tune to XXX AM for information” will always work.
I agree with you that AM is an effective way to broadcast emergency information but the issue is the environment the radio is going into. AM radios are cheap but they’re also extremely sensitive to EM interference. Have you ever driven an old 80s car with a bad ground somewhere in the electrical system and noticed a high-pitched whine from the AM radio that goes up and down with the RPMs? The cost that the EV manufacturers are balking at isn’t for the radio itself, it’s for all the other work they’ll have to do to prevent interfering with the AM reception. All of that extra work is a big ask when such a small percentage of their customers actually listen to AM. I know I haven’t in my past 3 cars.
Besides, it’s not like $10 handheld AM radios don’t exist for emergencies. I know I have one in my hurricane kit.
Who wants to deal with a hand held radio while driving down the road?
On the daily? Nobody. Once in a while for emergencies? You do what you have to.
Another advantage of AM radio is that the signal has much more signal range than FM. Granted there aren’t too many AM transmitters out there putting out higher power signals anymore, but you can still get an AM station in TX that is broadcasting out of the Chicago area, granted you have a good antenna and quality (SW transceiver base station like Icon, Kenwood, Yaesu) receiver.
Yeah the exact same thought here re: Tad the Nad.
For lots of folks am radio is their lifeline to the outside world. Really. Why fuck up something that is proven tech (old), a historically proven life saver, and a source of news, and a public service when needed in times of emergency.
I’m genuinely curious as to what percentage of people still use AM regularly. As a 30 something myself, I can count on one hand how many times I’ve used it and I think most of the time it was by accident!
It’s getting increasingly clear that sink Elon was carrying should’ve been a toilet.
I hope Congress puts in an exception for cars delivered without a sound system at all. The best possible unintended consequence would be the death of integrated infotainment and the return of double-DIN stereo slots and aftermarket car radio installers in every town.
AM radio is very important in rural areas. People listen to it to hear their kids sport teams game; they listen to it for the local weather; and they listen to it for local news. For them it’s not a dying broadcast and there are no podcast replacements.
Yeah I love podcasts and listen to several daily, but the idea that it’s any kind of replacement for live sports coverage is absurd. Even in large cities, AM is often the only free option for catching a game.
Where I live, a local AM station will broadcast regional motorcycle races. How cool is that?
I’m a model Y owner, and while honestly there isn’t yet a competitive option for those of us who roadtrip with a single vehicle (I do 800 mile one-way trips ~4x a year)…. I can’t pretend I wouldn’t be so happy to leave Elon behind. Space X is amazing, Tesla mainly just has the SC network and a litany of broken promises, and their solar is an absolute disaster.
**shrugs** its pretty hard to claim that existing automakers have clean hands either…
—-
Anyways, don’t think I’d ever buy a ICE car again, so I’m mainly waiting to see when non-tesla finally figures out charging infrastructure.