Those ten minutes per fill up session add up after a while. And that's assuming you don't happen to pull into a gas station just as 5 other people are waiting as well. I'll gladly spend the 5 seconds it takes me to plug and unplug my Volt in my garage over that. I don't know, Honda is a little bit more committed to plug-ins than Toyota will be: BREAKING: General Motors & Honda Partner To Develop Future Plug-In Hybrids
will be, or is? it would appear that honda has given up on their own technological development abilities, or they need something fast for epa.
Like the proposed Tesla 3, the Bolt still caters to a limited use market, though less limited than the current EV offerings. However...that up to $7,500 tax CREDIT scam only works for some, not all. Now if you give that $7,500 off at the time of purchase instead...then everyone benefits...as long as the Dealerships don't pull the mark up crap they did when the Volt first came out.
I thought cars with the inflater and goo still came with a jack. Guess it depends on the model. IMHO, Honda is just taking advantage of political and market trends. They have been in the H2FCEV game for awhile, and semantics aside, they and Mercedes were the first to give private individuals a chance at driving and living with such a car. The Fit EV was favorably reviewed with a range longer than most of its competitors and available in a few states outside of California. Its only downside was being lease only. I think if CARB had not favored H2FCEV for ZEV credits as they did, Honda would have just brought a BEV to market instead of focusing on the next Clarity. Their 2 motor Sport Hybrid system in the Accord already appears capable of being a decent base for a PHEV. The limited range of the Accord PHEV could have simply been due to costs and Honda being cautious over battery abuse after their handling of NiMH in the Civic hybrids. The Honda and GM partnership for FCEVs has been in place for a few years now. After the amount of money both spent on the technology, and still nothing ready for market, getting a partner to share the expense makes sense. With the drive train between a FCEV and BEV being the same, extending the partnership is just logical. The iQ is a better car than a smart fortwo if you need to bring along a second passenger, but the US was supposed to have gotten the eQ before the Fit and Spark EV showed up in showrooms. A few arrived for fleets, but Toyota's idea that a 50 mile range was plenty for the price meant it had no chance in the market, and they correctly canceled it both selling the first to an individual. That's one of the reasons a lease is a popular option for plug ins at this time. Most roll the credit into lease, passing the benefit to the customer. From another thread where the Bolt came up. Ask Chrysler, they had a push button shifter in 1956. The only cars with one now are the Lincoln MKZ and the RAM with 8 speed transmission. When will Toyota finally abandon the nub of a shifter lever in the Prius? 5 New Car Features That Aren't Really New Chrysler dropped the first push button shifter because it made it harder to sell cars to buyers from other brands, even though their own customers liked it. Most BEVs and all hybrids use a lever shifter for the same reasons. The Caravan at work has a smaller, dash mounted shifter, so that isn't unique to the Prius. I think a lever would make a better control interface than a set of buttons for times I want to 'downshift', whether that controls engine or regen braking. But I'm used to the lever. With proper egronomics and/or paddle shifters, there is no reason why buttons couldn't replace the lever. I think the current generation growing up won't care if their car has a lever or buttons, but then they might not have to drive their car at all. The Magic Seats are a big reason for the Fit's cargo flexibility, and I think Honda managed to retain them in the Fit EV. If only think gave us the Fit hybrid. That bothers me more about Honda than whether they use a FCEV or BEV for CARB compliance. But the Prius has a 6 inch longer wheel base and is 10 inches longer overall than the Bolt's platform mate, the Trax. It is at least one size class larger. Might as well compare the Prius to a Crown Vic, which is probably a better choice for hauling bodies anyway. Its trunk has 3cu.ft. less cargo space than the Prius, but it's trunk. No blocked rear view as if you stuffed the Prius hatch all the way up. Plus, the 20cu.ft. of extra passenger space means you can stuff a few bodies there without anybody noticing, including your passengers. Compare Side-by-Side The Trax has 18.7cu.ft. of cargo space, and 48.4cu.ft. with the seats down. The Bolt appears to lose some of that space to streamlining. Even with the 200+ mile range, I don't see GM pushing it as a full replacement to an ICE car. The space is a bit smaller than my Sonic, but I've had no problem getting stuff into it. The only time we should have taken a larger car was soon after I got it, and we decided to take it out for black Friday shopping with my parents, and then people needed to hold some bags in their laps.
agreed. that's why i said buyers, and not manufacturers. people are sometimes an obstacle to progress. i'm only comparing it to a prius, because it's the smallest car i want to drive. and i think the majority of american public feels the same way.
While the new Corolla did get bigger and hit the midsize mark, the old, smaller one was still outselling the larger Prius.
...or price. Equally equipped, the Corolla still has a lower TCO for the average "let's buy a new car every 4-5 years" owner. Owning a 2010 Prius, 2014 Corolla and a 2015 Prius is my qualifier. Your usage may differ.
If the Prius is the smallest car people want, then why did the old, smaller Corolla outsell it? All these cars have about the same space for the front seats, which is really all that is important for a family's second car.
i said the prius is the smallest car i want. the majority of the american motoring public do not drive corolla's. but it is a very popular vehicle. it does have a decent trunk. but people mostly buy it for value, and tco.
Starting at $37,000. $30.000...after up to tax credits...than not all buyers may qualify for base on income/tax status. Sounds like the same Volt advertising BS again. Sorry...this is not my idea of saving money.
The price with tax incentives has been batted around forums for over a year. No smoke and mirrors/BS going on. The price is very competitive with its EV competition. No need to jump into the saving money rabbit hole as that horse is beyond beaten.
right. again, these cars are not about saving money. they are about moving away from fossil fuels. this will be a nice addition for the 4% of americans who believe in this cause. and when gas prices go up, popularity will increase.
Not by me it hasn't. The fabulous machines Tesla has given us are for the rich, but admittedly the price of development. So now the Bolt and "3" are coming out so regular folks can afford an EV with less travel/infrastructure limitations, but why buy one if it still cost to much? Sorry, I still see these cars as "warm and fuzzies" for the "well to doers".
I don't think the total cost of ownership would really differ by that much. Keep in mind that fuel cost, even in a Prius, is still a good chunk of TCO. How much did you pay for your 2015?
For you, that is fine, although I am curious why you have a Prius that costs as much as it does? Why not buy a $15,000 car? Luckily, there are a lot of people that buy $30,000 + cars. The more they switch to electric the better. Electrics offer a lot more than "warm fuzzies". They offer improved performance, improved drive quality, increased convenience for many, lower fuel bills for most. For those only interested in personal up front costs, there are lots of lower priced options.
