Featured Organized Attempt to End Competition From Prius?

Son replaced his 200k+ mile Prius with a prime, now drives to work for free thanks to his solar and plug-in. So he only gets 100 MPG. Woe is he.

If the Prius was the car that persuaded people to buy a hybrid, for our family it has been a success. 4 Toyota hybrids based on the success of the first one. That doesn't even count the 2 we have sold. So that makes 6.

Now would I buy a Rav4 plug-in to replace my Rav4 hybrid? Not when the price is that of a Model Y. I can buy a lot of gas for the difference in what I paid for a max-optioned Rav4 hybrid compared to the same Rav4 plug-in.

 

Had a guy saying it was difficult to find a car that met Chicagoland gig rules for his side Hustle and was asking if anyone knew the ins and outs of said law.

My only thought was that I never knew doing a porn required a special car to meet regulations.

 

I enthusiastically bought 4 different Prius models. I then moved on to a Leaf and then a Tesla.

I guess you just don't get the math. Most drivers have a commute that is only 25 miles. So charging overnight gets them most of their daily miles. If they have electric rates that are lower than their gas prices its a win for THEM.
Note: 25 miles/day * 365 days is over 9000 miles per year.

Why would you have a 250 mile battery in a plugin hybrid? You'd be carrying around a gas tank and engine and almost NEVER be using it.

See above. If you charge just once per day (at night) you never have to "wait" and you get 9000 miles per year.
If you can also charge at work, while your car is otherwise just sitting in a parking lot, you get 18000 miles per year. Far above the average miles driven.

Of course this is a dumb statement. The hybrid battery is just a buffer. A good engineering solution, but it has nothing to do with providing the energy to propel the car. It all comes from gas.

Note that my 1982 Toyota pickup also charged its 12v battery continuously with no waiting. So what?

Mike

 

Considering the time to gather and organize those figures, they are likely two years old. Coal has dropped, and renewables have increased during that time.

Even with fossil fuels adding to the grid, EVs compete with, and even beat, the Prius in carbon emissions. In coal heavy regions, they still beat ICE cars.

New Data Show Electric Vehicles Continue to Get Cleaner - Union of Concerned Scientists

I'm hoping Toyota brings over the hatchback and wagon hybrid Corollas. My gen2 Prius was a great car, but the model's design is 'too much' for most car buyers. The Prius did well sales wise because of high gas prices and being the only real option for low consumption at the time. A portion of those that bought back then did so out of necessity, and switched back to a more 'normal' car when gas prices dropped.

Now there are more hybrid choices. They may not get the MPGs of the Prius, but they do far better than the ICE choices while being a car form the buyer wants.

For the balance of EV range and cost, 25 miles is plenty for most people. The Prius Prime is one of the cheapest PHEVs you can get. It is priced less than $4000 over a Prius. That is less than the hybrid premium for some cars in the early days of hybrids. With incentives, many have gotten it for less than a Prius.

EVs will do most of their charging at times when the owner is doing something else. As long as the car is fully charged by the time they get up, or finish work, the actual time doesn't matter.

Without the Prime, Prius sales would be far worse in the US.

The Rav4 Prime is rated 2mpg less than the Rav4 hybrid in combined fuel economy. Weight is only partly to blame. The rest of the blame is because the Rav4 Prime is the most powerful Toyota on the dealer's lot.

In a few areas, it could cost more to use electricity, but for many it will save money compared to gasoline. In addition, the plug means even less time spent at a gas station. The EV miles are likely cleaner.

 

Considering the surging prices of even old used high miles cars, could you even buy your 2005-G2 for that price today?

 

For starters, you failed to reference the specific DOE stats with a link so we can dig deeper into them. You also failed to look at the big picture of growth rates and instead referenced a quick snapshot of the current state of not sure which year it was from because you didn't clarify or post a link.

And I disagree with you premise entirely because it's an outdated fossil fuel industry argument that cherry picks facts to argue for continued destruction of the atmosphere that our lives depend on.

Specifically the point I disagree on is best summed up by some Google engineers recently admitting they were just as wrong as you regarding this:

"Seven years ago, we published an article in IEEE Spectrum titled “What It Would Really Take to Reverse Climate Change.” We described what we had learned as Google engineers who worked on a well-intentioned but ultimately failed effort to cut the cost of renewable energy. We argued that incremental improvements to existing energy technologies weren’t enough to reverse climate change, and we advocated for a portfolio of conventional, cutting-edge, and might-seem-crazy R&D to find truly disruptive solutions.

....Today, still at Google, we remain hopeful. And we’re happy to say that we got a few things wrong. In particular, renewable energy systems have come down in price faster than we expected, and adoption has surged beyond the predictions we cited in 2014.

Our earlier article referred to “breakthrough” price targets ( modeled in collaboration with the consulting firm McKinsey & Co.) that could lead to a 55 percent reduction in U.S. emissions by 2050. Since then, wind and solar power prices have met the targets set for 2020, while battery prices did even better, plummeting to the range predicted for 2050. These better-than-expected price trends, combined with cheap natural gas, caused U.S. coal usage to drop by half. The result: By 2019, U.S. emissions had fallen to the level that the McKinsey scenario forecast for 2030—a decade sooner than our model predicted." Engineers: You Can Disrupt Climate Change

 

Yeah... Like full coverage insurance on a Tesla... That would cost me more than how much I pay for rent every month...

 

25 electric miles per day is very useful to a very large number of American drivers. Providing it in a car that can fairly be expected to last 12+ years in daily service without drama and pricing it in the mid $20 kilobuck range is a huge deal. I'll say it again for emphasis: it is that raw automotive capability combined with Toyota reliability & warranty support, combined with a low price. As soon as you diminish any of those factors, it all comes down.

25 miles isn't terribly useful for many younger people who have, through pressures of one sort or another, have increased daily travel range demands relative to previous generations. That diminishes the automotive capability factor right off the bat, and then the car isn't appealing.

Yes, I'm saying that the problem is a bad balance of housing & employment conditions, and there's only so much you're going to fix with a car.

 

.


fuzzy1 ... You do ask a very good question.

I think maybe that because I bought my car almost 2 1/2 years ago the added time and the +/- 20,000 miles or so that I have put on it might negate the conditions today maybe making it still a +/- $5G purchase. I’d still do today what I did then; split the ave. wholesale and ave. retail prices and make that my ca$h offer otd.

 

Average Joe’s can get a 90% efficient house at the same cost of a ‘to code’ house.
Yes, I spent more to get to beyond 100%. And yes, I spent more to help raise climate awareness.
I put my money where my mouth is.

 

....ok ...I'm happy for you.

Like I said..I'm sure a Gen2 Prius is less than what you spent on the 'car wrap'. And let's not argue the 'carbon footprint' of large batteries. Pros and cons to everything...

And yes...it is easy to be 'carbon neutral' when you have the resources to do it....complete with your very own web site proclaiming how great you did. Ugh...

 

So what if the car wrap cost more than a used gen2 Prius. People here are spending money to personalise their Prius. Should we try shaming them for that frivolous spending, or do you have a spending threshold where it's okay?

@Zythryn was not prosetylizing about net zero homes in this thread. Just shared his opinion about paying for an EV than for gasoline. Don't see the why it was needed to bring up his general level of wealth?

Yes, many can't take the steps that he has, but the first steps of lowering your carbon footprint is improving your efficiency. Nearly everyone can make the choice to get more efficient lights, appliances, and insulation. There are used EVs for sale too, if they want to take that step. Leafs can be found for less than a gen2 Prius. Not enough range? Used Bolts go for around the same price as used Prius Primes.

Of course, those options are beyond some people's means, but then they couldn't afford a new Prius to help save the model.

 

There have been many stories of used cars selling this year for higher prices than they were purchased for a year to two ago. Though I haven't seen enough detail to know what portion are actually achieving that, 1% or 80% of similar sales or somewhere in between.

But no used Teslas are as old as your 2005 Prius. The first units were shipped in 2008, and not much over 100 units were shipped that year. And those would need to depreciate down about 95% to get to your target price. That seems unlikely just yet.

 

And hot on its heels: reducing usage (automotive example: drive less).

 

I bought my DC charging equipped Spark EV from Carvana almost 3 years ago for $10,000. Now on Carvana, they go for $2-3000 more without DC charging and $4-5000 more with. It may be the exception, but still.

 

fuzzy1 ... When I bought mine I don’t know exactly just how long but I do know it was on the lot for a good long time. That bugged me out of the gate but I have since decided that it was only a good thing for me. For 2 1/2 years and 20,000+ laps the only expensive thing I’ve paid for were new tires. It drives much easier than my wife’s over-engineered 3-letter pita German car that I bought used for the same $$$ as mine. Yeah ... it’s nice ... but still.

Changing the subject ... When I bought my car I didn’t know enough about or really have much respect like I do now for the Prius. I really wanted a used Volt. The $$$ however, were nowhere near what I paid because they were not out long enough to have any used available for cheap. I’m not at all sorry that was the case now.

 

1. If it was easy wouldn't everyone with those resources be doing it?

2. If those with the resources don't do it who will pay to jump start all the required industries to help get the costs down so the average person can afford it.

Mike

 

Yep, that's what I hear too... On the rare occassion I see a PriusPrime at a gas station I always ask them when the last time they had to fill up and the usual answers: It was months ago, so long ago I can't remembers, or one time a guy said 6 months ago.

As in Prius Prime does a great job at reducing emissions around town because you don't need more than 25 miles of range.

 

After various incentives, many people have ended up getting a Prime cheaper than a regular Prius.