Featured CNBC: The Rise And Fall Of The Toyota Prius

The point of the video was to present how the Prius has fared in the market over time. Not to defend it, or try to sell it.

The range of the Prius is of little value to the thousands buying ICE cars. People with children in the back aren't going to be going 500+ miles between stops, and the places with limited gas station access may have ground clearance concerns. There are very few ICE power vehicles that have a range under 300 miles, and most of those are motorcycles. The two actual cars with such low gas range have enough EV range to go 47 or 97 miles. Concerns over the gas getting old can be an issue with them for many.

BEVs aren't for everyone, but PHEVs are an option. As the EV range of those increase, hybrid fuel efficiency has less impact over the car's annual fuel use. The Outlander PHEV is mentioned below. It was hugely popular in Europe and Asia despite having horrible fuel economy for a hybrid. The draw of EV miles is why the Prius is losing sales to the Prime.

Totally agree. HiHy sales were hampered in the past because of the high price for little gain in MPG. But I think Toyota's focus there was on the RDX. For those customers performance is more important. The Highlander got the hybrid system because it was a sibling. Without RDX hybrid sales to support it, the HiHy could have been dropped for poor sales.

The Rav4h sold more than the Prius last year, but Prius sales are about a third of their peak. The Escape should grow the segment some more, though the Fusion will likely be gone soon. The loss of actual car sales currently hurts the hybrid segment more than the rest of the market.

Toyota needs to expand their PHEV options in order to grow in the US. Simply expanding hybrid options to more models isn't going to help, considering the cost of their system.

Got a friend to look into hybrids, and his wife eventually replaced their Tahoe with a Rav4h, but we were tempted with a Rav4 ICE when looking for a replacement for the 2001 Sable. Even with AWD, the Rav was a 6mpg improvement over the old Mercury. If it hadn't been a top trim model, and above our price range, I'd be driving it now.

Your Prius pricing seems whacked. The L Eco here is about $600 more than the Corolla LE hybrid, which is about what the cost of a hatchback runs over a sedan, and the Prius LE is under $2000 more. Meanwhile, the Corolla LE is $3050 less than the hybrid.

And the next Tundra will have a hybrid option.

Hybrids aren't going away. They are doing great because of the backlash against diesel in Europe, and are growing elsewhere, but fuel prices make them a tough sell in the US. Plug in share is growing because they have appeal beyond just saving gas.

The video touched upon why the Prius sales are dropping, but the soundbite summary is that it's because it's a funky looking Corolla. Other markets can get that as a sedan, hatchback, and wagon, with hybrid option for each. Some even have a performance hybrid option for the car. The Corolla hybrid in the US is hamstrung by Toyota in order to protect the Prius.

The Prius refresh got some bits from the Prime.

 

@Trollbait you're never going to catch up with me and bisco, if you keep multi-quoting like that.

 

That analogy falls apart when you look at details. It's just a talking-point people throw around hoping no one will fact-check.

 

Then I have no chance whatsoever.....

 

No analogy is perfect.
Kodak, for example, started in the 80's...something like 1888, and the business model was different.
Eastman wanted to do what Epson did with printers which was to basically give away the hardware and profit from the consumables.
See also:
Razors.
However (comma!) I think that the part about revolutionizing a major industry....arguably twice each, and then failing to move and jink with changing markets and being overtaken by the very force that brought you to prominence is defensible.
If "fair and balanced" entities like CNBC have folks who basically share that opinion then it's not exactly group think.

If not?
Please enlighten me.
I'm HOPING that someone will fact check!!
Please.....go ahead!

 

"Half squeezed accordion". Now you've done it. Now that's all I will think of every time I look at my car. Gee thanx.

 

I'm going to give Toyota the benefit of the doubt here (for now). Look, Ford realizes it as well - we folks that aren't, or don't want to be, city folks have jobs or past-times that have us roaming countrysides and back-corners. Hybrids are the best at giving us the range, and speed of refueling, when we're out and about.

Granted, Toyota may be so large that it is suffering from Honda/Mitsubishi syndrome in management and movements toward progress. (Mitsubishi more so than Honda). It may, instead, also be so large that it's comfortable relying on hybrids while it develops a solid and economical myriad of all-electric vehicles. But when it does release them, they'll be priced such that Tesla will have issues with market-share.

I realize this forum is pretty much Toyota fan-boys/men, and that's fine - I am, too. But the tragedy/comedy/real losers are probably going to be General Motors, Mazda, maybe even Volkswagon, plus some of the boutique car companies (BMW). Toyota has so much of an advantage by having had partial-battery-powered / partially electric vehicles over the last 20 years, while the others basically whittled their thumbs, that I have no fear for Toyota in this regard. All it takes is the manufacturing of larger batteries, and larger electric motors, for which a manufacturing plant (or two) big enough needs to be made - then Toyota will have that market share.

I'm wondering what VW is thinking with putting their battery plant in China at the moment - won't that incur extra charges in the USA by being a Chinese product? Hell, there are a myriad of other able Asian countries to support and build within... why chance the country most likely to earn more sanctions, and possible war actions, in the near future?

 

Aren't you simplifying things just a bit? I was referring to EV recharge time not range. And I doubt EV drivers are so fastidious as to never miscalculate on a road trip, or never be forgetful, or always anticipate the unanticipated, especially with kids in the back! Under those conditions, some of us are lucky to get even ONE trip perfectly planned.

 

if Toyota can't Source millions of batteries? If they don't have a massive Nationwide high speed charging Network? That positively can't happen for at least another ½ decade minimum. At that Junction, one has to imagine Tesla will have long range pickups out by then ...... not to capture Tacoma Revenue, but to capture Ford F-150 Revenue.
.

 

tesla can't supply the worlds automotive needs. if charing networks don't increase with bev production,

bev's are doomed to remain a minority player.

 

I wasn't aware that you were following Toyota closely enough to know that they don't have a manufacturing facility being built - or improving on where-ever they are getting batteries now. I sure wasn't following them, but just assumed that such a large company - already vested with supplying more batteries for their hybrids than probably any other company - have growth plans in place and are acting on them. Edit: oh, you wrote Tesla ... sorry.

I can agree that they missed the boat with creating a Tacoma hybrid. If it comes to gasoline, then yes - I demand it to be powerful enough for the low fuel economy Tacomas get (the 4 cylinder Tacoma is a joke - a colleague rented a new one, and picked me up in it... that engine and transmission combo would have been par for the course 20 years ago, but was way too under-powered now) . But if the Tacoma were a hybrid, and giving me outstanding MPG while at the same time giving me the usefulness of having a bed in the back, hell, it wouldn't need to be 'fast' at all. I'd have readily accepted a utility hybrid pickup truck over the Prius.

 

nothing to be sorry about. Unless one keeps up with Toyota spokespeople interviews, one wouldn't otherwise know. But yes they have stated that Toyota is battery supply constrained, which is why it's to their advantage (for now) to only make hybrids .... because it doesn't require as huge a quantity.
Now, as of a few weeks ago, Toyota made a deal with Chinese battery manufacturers to try and cure their battery conundrum.
Toyota locks in more than a supply of EV batteries in deal with China’s CATL – TechCrunch
Whether or not that deal translates into deliveries to the usa or not is yet to be seen.
China is a massive market & has already put manufacturers on notice. No plug-ie no sell-ie.
.

 

To add to the discussion, from the Wall Street Journal today: "GM, Volkswagen Say Goodbye to Hybrid Vehicles".

"Two of the world’s largest auto makers say they see no future for hybrid vehicles in their U.S. lineups. Their view contrasts with Toyota and Ford, which are working on full electrics but also expanding their U.S. hybrid offerings."

Also from the WSJ: Meanwhile Germany's Continental, one of the world’s biggest car-parts makers is preparing for a future without the internal combustion engine—the machine that has been at the heart of the auto industry for well over a century. In a major strategy shift, Continental AG said Wednesday that it would cut investment in conventional engine parts because of a faster than expected fall in demand as major auto makers accelerate their shift to electric vehicles.

I don't subscribe, so I just read the intro to both articles. The are both on the WSJ main web page.

 

The reason Toyota never made a hybrid Tacoma or Tundra is because they couldn’t get it to tow like a normal truck without resorting to a more electric hybridization. They would have had to make a motor strong enough to tow, but they were/are in the middle of downsizing the motors to fit in all the other vehicles. And of course, comensurate with making a towing capable motor they would have had to produce a big battery to match. Again at a time they were/are shrinking their standard 6.5Ah NiMH cell. They would have had to produce much more capable cells and probably would have had to deviate from their air cooled stack. All in all too much change from the near universal, need I say ruthless standardization. This would have affected their economy of scale they desired from making standard parts.


iPad ? Pro

 

Your post was talking about the Prius' range advantage. I was comparing the Prius to other ICE cars, not BEVs, in that post, if it wasn't clear. The point with the kids was that the family will need to stop far before the Prius' longer range becomes and advantage.

And aren't you simplifying things by assuming the kids don't have phones, tablets, or other distractions these days.

It is just that what a hybrid provides, for the cost, isn't compelling enough for many car buyers in the US. The ICE model is an improvement over their current ride, and costs less. Plug ins are growing faster than hybrids did because they offer more for the price increase. Which is why the 2020 Escape and Aviator from Ford have a plug in option.

Honda got burned with their first hybrid foray. They are proceeding more cautiously now. Like Toyota, they are also stuck on hydrogen FCEVs.

Tesla has a big advantage in the Supercharger network. Toyota's stance in regards to hydrogen infrastructure doesn't have me thinking they'll be making large investments in growing a network that could support their BEVs.

GM has experience with the Volt and Bolt, and to lesser extant with the two-mode trucks, Malibu hybrid, and mild hybrids. The Volt drive train is in two models in China.

Mazda is a small company. they didn't have the resources to do a hybrid on their own, so they partnered with Toyota, with Toyota starting to become to them like Ford was. They have a hybrid in Japan, and are working on a rotary PHEV.

BMW, Mercedes, Volvo, etc. have PHEVs available. They are performance oriented, power hybrids, with low sales in the US, so don't get much discussion here. Most of them are working on mild hybrid system for non-plug ins. They don't get the improvement of a full hybrid like a Prius, but are low enough in cost that making them standard won't have customers rebelling.

It sounds like VW has been quietly working on EVs for some time. Dieselgate forced them to push ahead and accelerate on it.

They are thinking China is the worlds largest EV market, and their home market is Europe. Their first BEV built on a dedicated platform is already available for order in Europe. The US won't get one until 2022. Many manufacturers are focusing their EV plans outside the US, because of our low fuel prices, and concerns over battery supply bottlenecks.

Toyota only recently announced plans to build plants with Panasonic for plug in batteries. I think VW has started building their own. Other car companies may have large scale deals in place. But Tesla seems to be the only one with supply lined up to meet growing demand.

There will likely be a slow down in EV growth as production won't keep up with demand, but that will be short term.

The problem is that Toyota is forcing their hybrid system into roles it isn't suitable for. Their power-split system is great for efficiency, but it does not seem robust enough for truck duties. Despite being as powerful as, or more than, the V6 version, the RDX/Highlander had a lower tow rating, and only had it on the AWD model. The FWD versions could tow as much as a Prius, zero. The Tundra will be getting the system that is on high end Lexus. It is basically the power split with an automatic transmission on the backside. Sounds like unnecessary complication.

Ford was once partnered with Toyota on a truck hybrid system. It fell apart. The Escape and other hybrids from Ford also have a power-split system, but for the F150, they are using a parallel system. The new Explorer uses it, and is rated for 5000lbs vs the Highlanders 3500lbs, and the old Tahoe hybrid's 6000lbs. The Hyundai/Kia system is a parallel, as is many others. They may have a cost advantage over power-splits, but when Toyota was developing the Prius, the fine engine and transmission control needed for a consumer acceptable parallel system wasn't possible.

Well, for the US market, fuel prices make hybrid without a plug a tough sell. It was part of the reason Honda pulled stopped offering their hybrids here for a bit. There was even rumors of them bringing a non-hybrid CR-Z to market for that reason.

Can't recall who, but some major company said that they were stopping further investment into engine development. Might have been GM.

Toyota opted to use an automatic transmission fluid in the HSD instead of a gear case oil like a manual transmission would have. This likely helped with the systems over all efficiency, because the fluid is thinner, but it is also more susceptible to breakdown from heat. Their hybrid SUVs only get tow ratings when equipped with AWD, because this shifts the tow load off the transaxle at start ups. The system should probably have had a transmission cooler, like all other automatics, from the beginning, but the Prius didn't get one until the gen4. And the gen4 finally got a tow rating in Europe, but it is still lower than comparable cars.

 

And let's not forget the EV1, lots of research there.

 

hybrid tech is too complicated for most companies. bev's are simpler, but talk is cheap. they're all holding their fingers in the air to see which way the wind blows. in the meantime, they're tripping over suv and truck profits

 

Yes - here in the usa. But in Jie-nah?
China now has over 300 million vehicles ... that’s almost America’s total population | South China Morning Post
They nearly have as many vehicles as the usa has people. Best to sell smaller profit cars in China (& china now requiring EV's) at a smaller profit - rather than a puny by comparison, bunch of higher profit land barges to USA truck users.
.

 

well, that's a good question. where is profit higher? we'll never know