Featured Unlike Toyota, GM to build a US Battery Factory

Add "downplay" to the types of responses.

You continue to treat GM's failure to use the tax-credits as intended as it if was no big deal. They were squandered on conquest, rather than establishing a new technology for their fleet. It was a big waste.

Not only isn't Toyota doing the same thing, they haven't used up their tax-credits yet. In fact, they are positioning to take advantage of the phaseout stage just like Tesla did. That's a very, very big deal.

Again, it's about each manufacturer targeting their own loyal customers to advance their entire fleet to greener choices, not to earn trophies and gain praise.

 

Those are totally different funding projects, with different goals and different audiences.

Reality check is you are portraying the TAX-CREDIT FOR PLUG-IN VEHICLES as part of that and intentionally misleading about GM and Toyota status.

Again. GM wasted their chance. It over for them, phaseout is almost complete. Toyota did not. In fact, Toyota is preparing to take full advantage of their opportunity.

 

Sparkie the Volt with 470,000 miles ran on 100% RUG 87

there is an interview with the Volt engineer responsible for the Premium “requirement” and he says it’s not a requirement
and it was chosen over e85 due to time constraints and the improved fuel economy compared to 87.

I know a couple folks who average 28mpg in the Winter on their Gen II Prius,
winter is bad for everyone.

 

Another example of downplay, by being vague. Ugh.

A heat-pump is clearly more efficient that a resistance-heater.

 

That is using a red-herring to support a generalization.

Fact is, you're avoiding points being made. Toyota is pushing its fleet forward with Prime (PHEV) models and the topic is about battery production for plug-ins. Sighting data from the previous stage is misleading at best. You know all to well a 2020 Prius Prime delivers dramatically higher MPG under the same conditions. For that matter, so will a RAV4 Prime.

 

The usual suspects that rate car reliability gave the Volt high marks.

The premium fuel means it is a gen 1 Volt. Depending on year, it had an EPA EV range of 35 to 38 miles. 28 miles would mean a 20% to 26% reduction, which is in line what other plug ins see with winter weather. All cars take an efficiency hit under these conditions. Without an engine running to supply waste heat, EVs take a bigger hit than what people are use too.

The Prime has a heat pump that helps reduce the cold penalty. It came to market 6 to 7 years after the Volt. Car sized heat pumps likely aren't a common product, and they do cost more than an A/C unit. So if considered for the Volt, it was likely ditched because of cost. Besides, the gas in a PHEV's tank won't stay good forever, better to burn it for needed work, than just because computer decides it's time for fresh gas.

The only cars available today that actually need premium are bought by people that don't need to worry about the cost of premium, and US premium is probably the minimum octane they can take. Everything else is premium recommended, and should run fine on regular. They will just lose a little power and efficiency. For the Volt, it is to get slightly better numbers for the window sticker, and because it was the first PHEV. They weren't 100% sure how gas would age in a car tank in the real world. Gasoline loses octane as it ages, so premium was a safety measure. With the gen2, GM was fine with just calling for regular.

Where would Toyota's plug in program be without the Volt, Leaf, and Teslas driving the investment and innovation of batteries for EVs?

Didn't know my gen2 Prius had a heat pump.

Really, the comment was about how winter cold and weather drags down the efficiency of all cars. Yes, the amount of effect varies between models and drivers, but no car with the same driver and route is going to get the same efficiency as it does in the other seasons.

 

I use premium in my Volt because the gas sits in there most of the time.

 

Really? A distraction? From what?
Look at the numbers...they are the leader...by far. Everyone else is a distraction.

It relied upon lots of venture capital, money from green credits, and heavy utilization of subsidies... none of which could be sustainable.
[/QUOTE]

That argument about subsidies is old. Maybe you could have claimed that in 2018. But as the subsidies have dropped in half twice Tesla is still production constrained. Sure, anyone needing a car in Jan or Feb is probably moving the purchase up to Dec to get the subsidy, but after a couple of months it will even out.
About the only bad thing for Tesla is that Model S and X sales are down because so many have opted to get the Model 3 because of numerous advancements and lower price.
The real test will be China sales and the model Y.

Mike

 

Age of an argument doesn't make it any less relevant. In fact, that constraint doesn't even address the bigger problem. Being able to more easily supply 150,000 to 200,000 vehicles per year still very much means Tesla is trapped in the "EV Market" rather than moving to the next stage of sales... which is what this discussion is supposed to be about.

That next stage is being able to supply several vehicles annually at that capacity. In other words, the goal moving forward is to achieve greater penetration into the mainstream. That's why the tax-credit was such a feared barrier, no one wanted to discuss it. In fact, that's why so many "EV Market" arguments took place. People put on the blinders and didn't want to admit 200,000 per automaker over the course of 10 years was so tiny of a volume, it only served the purpose of proving the technology.

Tesla has very, very successfully proven the technology. Kudos to them for that. It's exactly what Toyota needed for them to take the next step. Because the business reality was, Toyota needed an endorsement from another major player for the entire industry to move forward. But now, it gets difficult for everyone. Each automaker must figure out how to reach out to a much wider audience, maintaining reasonable supply while also delivering a reasonable profit.

In other words, stating "old" means acknowledgement of what "new" represents. The big automakers sell several 150,000 to 200,000 vehicles per year. For perspective, there were 2,129,385 Toyota brand vehicles (which doesn't include Lexus brand) purchased in the United States last year. Think about how difficult selling plug-in models on any type of meaningful scale (representing noticeable change at dealerships) will actually be.

Put another way, upping the game is going to be far more challenging than just winning some online posting battle.

 

With Nissan, Renault, and Chinese makers already in that market, and VW, Ford, GM, and others moving to it, I don't think that being stuck in the EV market is a problem for Tesla.

The tax credit should be extended or ended.

 

I'll cheer for GM when I see some consistent, meaningful progress. Chronologically speaking: the revolutionary for its time Volt had failed to evolve and was euthanized after 9 years, its derivative ELR flopped, and the Bolt has become a compliance car. I don't know how GM's Chinese models are doing, though.

 

In this case it certainly does. This is because the Tesla full $7500 rebate ended last Dec 31. During 2019 the rebates have dropped and essentially given their (potential) competitors a pricing advantage. And yet, it seems that none of them have taken advantage of it. And the longer it takes Toyota, VW, GM and the rest to put together some competition the bigger Tesla's lead gets.
And Tesla's lead DOES amount to something significant, especially for the non-early adopters. This is the Supercharger network.
In theory any car maker could come out with a highly desirable EV with great tech and great specs. But they can't suddenly match the widespread Supercharger charger network.
Non-early adopters will be MORE concerned with range anxiety if they don't know where they will be able to charge than the early adopters, many of whom just bought on faith that there would be a fast charger where they needed it.

Mike

 

Like I said several times, not recognizing the bigger picture... Your use of "seems" is encouraging.

Toyota is very much taking advantage of the situation, it just isn't obvious to those still viewing sales from the "EV Market" perspective. That's a tough habit to break. Dealing with mainstream consumers is far more difficult than early-adopters, so the tendency to not realize you've walked into that trap is understandable. It's why so many have misidentified the stage as Innovator's Dilemma. Toyota is simply waiting for the cycle to end. After all, it was very predictable.

Tesla did a wonderful job of using the opportunity to their advantage. Once passing the 200,000 threshold and triggering phaseout, they worked hard to deliver as much supply as possible during the "unlimited" period. It clearly worked to their benefit too. But that is just about over and what comes next won't be easy.

GM simply just gave up. Almost all of their tax-credits were squandered on conquest. It was a terrible waste of opportunity. Rather than using the subsidy to actually change what happens at their dealerships, Volt was just used for attracting one-time buyers who have demonstrated no loyalty. Sales fell apart. There was no audience to focus on what their phaseout was triggered.

Toyota still has quite a few tax-credits available. They are setting the stage for dealer's wanting lots of Prime models to sell. RAV4 will lead the way with a very nice Prius following. It will be a chance for leadership which other automakers will feel sucker-punched for not preparing to join in for... except Ford, who sees strong potential plug-in hybrid SUV offerings.

The market is being primed (yes, I know) for a paradigm-shift and infrastructure just plain is not there yet for EV support. We see it everyday with shortcomings from existing charge-stations. Fortunately, that will change. It is quite realistic to get what's needed in place. The catch is, that will take a lot more time & money than the "EV Market" wants to recognize.

 

Toyota is very much taking advantage of the situation, it just isn't obvious to those still viewing sales from the "EV Market" perspective. That's a tough habit to break. Dealing with mainstream consumers is far more difficult than early-adopters, so the tendency to not realize you've walked into that trap is understandable. It's why so many have misidentified the stage as Innovator's Dilemma. Toyota is simply waiting for the cycle to end. After all, it was very predictable.
Agreed but perhaps not by a design I would choose.

Tesla did a wonderful job of using the opportunity to their advantage. Once passing the 200,000 threshold and triggering phaseout, they worked hard to deliver as much supply as possible during the "unlimited" period. It clearly worked to their benefit too. But that is just about over and what comes next won't be easy.
Yes and no. Tesla optimized their EVs for performance which makes the premium cost affordable even without incentives compared to the expensive hoops an ICE performance car has to jump through. To be competitive, the Youtube drag races show $50-$80k Teslas shaming ICE cars costing twice as much if not more. Then there is the ICE wear at high power compared to the extremely long life of an EV drivetrain at high power settings. Floor an ICE at each traffic light and the owner will soon have mechanical problems. In contrast, flooring an EV is reproducible with very little motor wear or battery capacity loss.

The EV durability and performance is a tell if a traditional manufacturer is serious. If their EVs equal or out perform their ICE vehicles, they are serious. If not, it is a compliance vehicle not worth anything.

GM simply just gave up. Almost all of their tax-credits were squandered on conquest. It was a terrible waste of opportunity. Rather than using the subsidy to actually change what happens at their dealerships, Volt was just used for attracting one-time buyers who have demonstrated no loyalty. Sales fell apart. There was no audience to focus on what their phaseout was triggered.
'If you can't say something nice, don't say nothing at all.' GM fails are legendary.

Toyota still has quite a few tax-credits available. They are setting the stage for dealer's wanting lots of Prime models to sell. RAV4 will lead the way with a very nice Prius following. It will be a chance for leadership which other automakers will feel sucker-punched for not preparing to join in for... except Ford, who sees strong potential plug-in hybrid SUV offerings.
Toyota hybrids are good but by-design, performance limited. Had they exploited the instant torque of their electric motors, we'd be having a different discussion. I well remember the scoot of our 03 across intersections.

The market is being primed (yes, I know) for a paradigm-shift and infrastructure just plain is not there yet for EV support. We see it everyday with shortcomings from existing charge-stations. Fortunately, that will change. It is quite realistic to get what's needed in place. The catch is, that will take a lot more time & money than the "EV Market" wants to recognize.
Comparing Tesla Superchargers to a CCS-1 charger is like compared a Tesla to a compliance EV. For example, my BMW i3-REx is a CCS-1 car with a 50 kW maximum charge rate and costs 4x on a commercial EV charger than running the range extender, gas engine. In contrast, Supercharging costs almost half the cost per mile of a Prius. Worse, the Electrify America network is notoriously unreliability (see Plugshare.com). ​

We agree more than disagree in part because I'm on the other side of the 'paradigm-shift' fence. If (when) Toyota increases the power of their EV motors and adds a high performance, well managed battery pack, I may cast my eye at a Toyota again. Regardless of what product Toyota comes up with, it will have to compete with my Standard Range Plus Model 3 and that is a high bar.

Bob Wilson

 

That's how rhetoric with Volt began. I pointed out the pattern emerging, how its approach resembled that of Two-Mode failure. Supporters became upset, turning a blind-eye to such information... becoming enthusiasts, enablers for history to repeat.

This is exactly why Toyota's schedule is the way it is. They went out of their way to avoid GM fallout. Every time the topic of adding a plug to Prius came up, there would be a hype reference to Volt. Despite lacking substance, it simply wasn't worth competing with propaganda.

Toyota simply refined the technology while waiting for that to playout and for the market to finally recognize that to keep their large & powerful vehicles, they must also embrace a practical means of making them far cleaner and much more efficient.

 

being on the 'other side of the paradigm shift' makes one an outlier, not mainstream. legacy makers cannot afford to cater to them.

many of us driving prius also feel that way.