Detroit 3 are in serious trouble...

[wcanl]

As a Prius enthusiast, we hear all the myths all the time (the influx of misinformed trolls has slowed down considerably though). On other message boards, I and others have a hard enough time convincing people to buy the midsized Prius (which starts at ~$23K) that has no range limit or other hybrids, as it is. You think those same people will be willing to spend more on an EV w/limited range and not knowing squat about charging, infrastructure, etc. while possessing a whole bunch of FUD?

The limited hybrid sales, many years after their introduction, is related to the fact that the cost benefits to the buyer of reducing gas use by about 20-25%, verses the higher initial purchase price, never produced financial (and arguably environmental) cost benefits for most car buyers, including myself.

I believe BEVs may be far more successful in gaining market share, since the huge ownership cost benefits (and hopefully, the environmental benefits, also) of reducing gas use by 100%, will eventually become obvious, to the greater car buying public.

Of course, this will only occur, if The market operates on a relatively “level playing field”.

IF the government policies that distort current energy markets, that obscure the true comparison cost of electricity vs. petroleum fuels, which currently subsidize gas more than electricity (IMO) are changed to increase the relative subsidy level to gasoline, BEVs will never replace ICEVs as the standard passenger vehicle in the US market.

I think you meant to start your last paragraph with 'until'.

Careful saying hybrid and Prius in the same breath. Another strong year at 135k Prius sold in '11 in US. #10 of all cars / trucks in US was Civic at 220k units. So, 135k is far from limited sales and Prius has been pulling 100k plus since 2005.

You need to worry about the nearly 1 million F-series and Silverado's sold in US in 2011, especially if they're not used for work or hauling. Chart gallons / mile vs. MPGs, watch the inverse function ramp up with sub-20 and 20 ish MPG vehicles. That's what we need to get the soccer moms out of.

Lot of Prius drivers will migrate to Leaf, so don't pooh-poo hybrids. They introduce many to 'some' electric propulsion.

 

[wcanl]

Dr.Rocket, exactly why do you think the big-3 are in trouble? All I can tell you is that if they are in trouble, it is not from a lack of EV sales. At this stage in the game, EV sales are probably not profitable to any manufacture. I'm willing to bet even Nissan has not seen a profit yet. It will take many years. However, I do see a time coming in the next 5 to 10 years that may very will spell trouble with the Big-3 if they don't get their act together. At some point gasoline prices will rise again, and EVs and hybrids will dominate the market. Not sure when that will happen, but it is only a question of when, not a question of if.

This is more like it. Although Ford seems to be making the best go of changing. Focus electric, C-max / energi / Fusion hybrid. Chysler is in the worst shape. I looked over a Jeep Liberty rental car recently. OMG, what a turd. console underneath steering wheel like 3" from shins. Potential leg crusher in accident. Rear seat cushions edges could not have been cheesier.

If too many Americans pooh-poo advanced technology cars, when the need comes for them, we might mostly be buying foreign 'made' models like we do with, for example, any peice of home stereo equipment.

 

[wcanl]

I don't know where you get your statistics of "reducing gas use by about 20-25%" from but the reduction is a lot greater than that. To do an unfair comparison of a compact '11 automatic Corolla w/a combined EPA mileage of 29 mpg

Yes, it is an unfair comparison. That is why I'm very glad that Nissan did not make the same mistake that Honda made with their Civic vs. Civic hybrid. It is too easy to do a price comparison and work out what the cost difference is for the hybrid powertrain. Which, by the way, I don't think it is a fair comparison because I suspect they are taking on extra cost on top of it to make up for the smaller sales of the hybrid vs. the non hybrid. Much like they do with the Civic CNG. I think Ford made the fatal mistake of taking an existing vehicle (the focus) and turning it into an EV and charging a lot more for it. I guarantee you will start seeing people compare costs of driving the gasoline vs. EV version of the focus. Toyota and Nissan got it right when they created an entirely new vehicle that is easily recognizable on the street. Lets face it, a lot of people who have $30K or $40K to spend on a car do not want a car that looks just like a $15K counterpart driving all around town. They want to stand out with their expensive car.

SUVs like Tahoes, Yukons, Escalades, Expeditions, Suburbans and extended length the Escalade ESV, Yukon XL, etc. being driven around solo or w/minimal cargo and passengers. It doesn't seem like those folks would be an interested in an EV either (see my earlier sales stats too) as they could seem to care less about fuel economy or oil consumption.

I've truly never been able to comprehend this. While it is true that many of those wealthy people that drive these tanks don't seem to bat an eye at the fuel cost, many of them do. I've seen countless examples of where gasoline drops down very low and people start buying these huge vehicles. Then they start acting like a crybaby when gas climbs back up again. It is hard to imagine that after all of these years people don't realize that gasoline prices rise and fall regularly.

Yeah, $39k for Focus electric, yikes. Good luck with that.

As for SUVs, watch any movies where the big dogs roll in with Black (and they're always Black) Escalades and all. Ooooh, the little commoners want to be like the CIA, etc .... in the movies too. :roll: In many cases, those super-sized things seem to be status symbols. But, they turn the tables and say Prius is status symbol also. yeah sure.

 

[wcanl]

"cwerdna"

The limited hybrid sales, many years after their introduction, is related to the fact that the cost benefits to the buyer of reducing gas use by about 20-25%, verses the higher initial purchase price, never produced financial (and arguably environmental) cost benefits for most car buyers, including myself.
...
Of course, this will only occur, if The market operates on a relatively “level playing field”.

IF the government policies that distort current energy markets, that obscure the true comparison cost of electricity vs. petroleum fuels, which currently subsidize gas more than electricity (IMO) are changed to increase the relative subsidy level to gasoline, BEVs will never replace ICEVs as the standard passenger vehicle in the US market.

I don't know where you get your statistics of "reducing gas use by about 20-25%" from but the reduction is a lot greater than that. To do an unfair comparison of a compact '11 automatic Corolla w/a combined EPA mileage of 29 mpg vs. a mid-sized 50 mpg Prius yields a far greater reduction than 25%. As for "never produced financial (and arguably environmental) cost benefits", many (like Consumer Reports and Intellichoice) have done calculations that show you are ahead after 5 years w/a Prius (vs. the unfair comparison of Corolla) in terms of total cost of ownership (includes financing, depreciation, maintenance, etc.), usually based on 12K miles driven annually. As for your environmental claims, please cite your sources. 75-90% of the energy consumption in the lifetime of the car is from operation...

"To do an unfair comparison..."

Do a fair comparison. In fact, there are many drivers, like myself, who do so little “city” driving, that the the most efficient hybrid, a Prius, would probably provide less than 20% fuel use reduction over a 42 mpg rated Cruze Eco. But I’ll admit I probably should have used 20%-30%, which would likely cover a higher percentage of small car drivers, with a more fair representation of the average.

"As for your environmental claims, please cite your sources."

You mean my statement that environmental benefits are "arguable" ?

I'd think it would be up to you to prove the assertion that the environmental benefits of driving a hybrid over the life of the vehicle are indisputable. I think the environmental benefits of BEV operation over ICEVs are arguable also, BTW, just a much weaker argument than there is for hybrids.

The question can only be determined after we assess environmental costs for different types of environmental damage, most crucially CO2 pollution.

Of course, that is the question that we, as a species, seem to most want to avoid considering.

"...many (like Consumer Reports and Intellichoice) have done calculations that show you are ahead after 5 years w/a Prius (vs. the unfair comparison of Corolla) in terms of total cost of ownership (includes financing, depreciation, maintenance, etc.), usually based on 12K miles driven annually."

I you want a reply, please give specific sources.

well, ekokandrum (?) You don't need to be preaching to the choir, right? Pretty much only green people hanging around here, and guess what? ....

Lot of people driving 'lowly' Prius' right now might make a BEV or PHEV their next car.

So, relax, why waste your energy capping on hybrid drivers. Deal with the people buying millions of 25- ish MPG cars being purchased now, every year, that will be on the road for the next 10 years or so.

 

[wcanl]

We are set to get some 60 CHAdeMo chargers installed in the next couple of months in the Seattle Metro area. I predict this will radically change the forecast for EV's once people start using the
Quick chargers and relaxing about cold whether range loss. Even in the worst whether with the Climate control blasting, EV's are many times more efficient and cost effective than any other vehicle type on the road today. With over 10,000 miles on our car for less than $300 in electricity, it's just a matter of time till the next wave surges forward. Until there is an EV F-150, we just won't be able to make a fair comparison with the gas version... it's going to take a while before there is a comparable EV for every gas type vehicle out there today.

And what if someone is using that charge station as you roll up? How is that convenient? If someone is in front of you at the petrol station, you wait just a few minutes. Is someone going to wait a half hour...and then ANOTHER half hour to charge?

There's nothing quick about quick chargers. And it doesn't matter how many charge stations there are. To the average consumer, as someone mentioned, $30+ for an electric car will be the deal killer right there.

Do you really think someone who goes 65 mph on the freeway with several grade changes is going to pull over every 50 miles and say "Let's charge again! Gee, this Leaf is so efficient!" How is that going to square with efficiency in their mind? Are they going to be thinking about cost effectiveness when their two kids are in the back and you have to wait yet another 30 minutes to go every 50 miles? How is that efficient? How does this make anything but a negative statement about electric vehicles?

I've heard it said over and over again how you can stop to shop or eat when it's charging. How does that save you money? You just spent the money you thought you saved on a movie, clothes, sit down meals, Starbucks or whatever. I know don't need to eat every 50 miles.

The fact is, people's time is worth more than that.

There is NO comparable EV to any type of gas car because fuel efficent four door sedans can be had for $20,000 or a little more. That have a 300-400 mile range. That take only a few minutes to fill for another 300-400 miles. And EV's that have anywhere near the range of a petrol vehicle will cost what, $80,000? Is that Tesla S going to get 200 miles per charge going 70 mph?

We know Leafs can be sold to enthusiasts. But the idea that Joe or Joanne Cardriver will take the numerous down sides of an EV (very limited range, long charge times, high MSRP, decreasing battery life, additional money for a 220V home station, battery replacement cost, and at this point a mediocre heating system in winter that further reduces range) just so they don't have to put petrol in the car anymore strains credulity.

Electric cars may indeed be part of the future someday. Right now, to the average consumer, hybrids make far more sense and are much more practical.

Good reality check. seems key points are

1) BEV can be a great 2nd car if you have the means to keep it charged for your needs (have an EVSE at home, etc..)

2) You can front the money now and are willing to earn it back over years (many people like to spend less up front for given size car)

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

one of the biggest points not brought up is when would it be considered "too late" for an auto manufacturer to seriously invest into and start producing an electric Vehicle?

because my impression of their reaction to this question is; "We are not sure that EV is the way to go at this time"

or "We have not finished introducing ways of make our current ICE technology more efficient"

"we have not determined how we can get additional revenue to our dealers for EV's to replace normal maintenance revenue from a typical ICE, other than to offer them larger incentives on sales price"

this is the impression i get from the US Auto makers. what i dont get from them is

"we dont know what consumers want" or "we cant figure out how to make an EV"

 

[GRA]

EVs are in the early adopter phase. Geoffrey Moore's book, Crossing the Chasm, talks about technology adoption curves, and the chasm is the jump between early adopters and progressive adopters (not sure of the exact phase Moore calls this but it is a much faster adoption as the technology becomes a safer bet). So, on a bell curve, there's a quick early adoption with a large chasm between early and progressive. There are a lot of technologies that never make it across the chasm and electric cars and the technologists providing support for them probably won't make it, unfortunately. I would argue that hybrids have crossed the chasm (virtually every large auto manufacturer has a hybrid strategy) and hybrids are a safe bet now. It's too early to tell with EVs.

Moore calls the highlighted group the 'Early Majority'. He divides the curve into five groups, which from memory are:

Innovators (serious techies who are willing to play with the technology to see what it can do and don't mind the bugs, but want it cheap and early); Visionaries aka Early Adopters (Steve Jobs being the most prominent example of this; these are people who have a vision of using technology for disruptive change - Elon Musk etc. would probably fall here); - - - <Chasm> - - - Early Majority (pragmatists, who want support structure in place); Late Majority (everyone else is doing it, more price sensitive than the Early Majority); Laggards (often technophobes, price is critical for them, and they are skeptics when it comes to the latest greatest thing).

Depending on the specific technology I may be a member of the early or late majority, or a laggard. I lack the income to be an early adopter, and the technical knowledge to be an innovator.

 

[Herm]

one of the biggest points not brought up is when would it be considered "too late" for an auto manufacturer to seriously invest into and start producing an electric Vehicle?

I would say by the time 50% of all cars are either hybrids or BEVs it may be too late.. the again the latecomer may get the best tech.

 

[hill]

one of the biggest points not brought up is when would it be considered "too late" for an auto manufacturer to seriously invest into and start producing an electric Vehicle?

because my impression of their reaction to this question is; "We are not sure that EV is the way to go at this time"

or "We have not finished introducing ways of make our current ICE technology more efficient"

"we have not determined how we can get additional revenue to our dealers for EV's to replace normal maintenance revenue from a typical ICE, other than to offer them larger incentives on sales price"
. . . . . . . . . . . . . snip

or - "gas hasn't hit $7/gallon yet
or - "we haven't completely drained every single well dry yet"

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Getting tweet on new Ford products including 47mpg Fusion!!

competition is heating up

 

[cwerdna]

Does this OP still believe his first post is true?

Only 478 Leafs were sold in the US for Feb 2012. Unfortunately, this is not a good direction for Leaf sales to be moving to.

Compare that to the rest of the US car market (http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false of >1.1 million units last month and the top 20 sellers. 20,589 of the Prius family were sold last month (http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/toyota-motor-sales-reports-increase-in-february-2012-sales-141064693.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false, up 52.1% from the same period last year.

 

[Roadburner440]

I certaintly would contest the "Volt is a joke" statement. I drive one EVERYDAY, and it works as advertised. 5038 road miles (with 4348 of those EV, and 638 of the 691 gas miles driving it from Florida to Virginia) the car works 100% the way I expected it to. Unfortunately bad press, and falsehoods have ruined the reputation of ALL these cars.

I will say when we were in the Nissan dealer the other day lack of sales is not for lack of people wanting to buy cars, but we were the only ones to walk in the door that day that they could get credit approval to sell a car to. People do not think of things like that until it is to late. There are a lot of people I know who wish they could have a Volt or a Leaf, but simply cannot get approved and do not have the cash up front to pay.

 

[Herm]

Only 478 Leafs were sold in the US for Feb 2012. Unfortunately, this is not a good direction for Leaf sales to be moving to.

a handful of fast chargers in every major city would remove a lot of the range anxiety issues.. one fast charger per 1 million people would probably do it.

 

[hill]

Does this OP still believe his first post is true?

Only 478 Leafs were sold in the US for Feb 2012. Unfortunately, this is not a good direction for Leaf sales to be moving to.

Compare that to the rest of the US car market (http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false of >1.1 million units last month and the top 20 sellers. 20,589 of the Prius family were sold last month (http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/toyota-motor-sales-reports-increase-in-february-2012-sales-141064693.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false, up 52.1% from the same period last year.

Not that one month's sales really show a trend ... but from what I'm reading, there has been a huge effort to get demo Leafs to all their dealerships, and that's a large chunck of Leafs. In addition, because the fake U.S. paper doller continues to be printed and printed in the ad nausium / trillions, Nissan takes a HUGE loss selling in the U.S. ... lower than other countries (consider how much they cost in Canada, for instance). Because of the hideous yen to dollar exchange rate, it's prudent for Nissan to make as many Leafs as it can for other countries, rather than the U.S. right now. If the Leaf demo issue is true, next month will tell. As for the OP, the post was in 2010 - prior to any production whatsoever. I'd base my thoughts of that OP on that.

 

[TomT]

And then there are dealers like the one near me that has three Leafs for sale, each with an added expensive alarm system and an $8K dealer markup. Good luck to them on that! PT Barnum must love it!

Not that one month's sales really show a trend ... but from what I'm reading, there has been a huge effort to get demo Leafs to all their dealerships, and that's a large chunck of Leafs.

 

[Roadburner440]

$8k markup, sheesh. Someone will pay it though... I already told my dealer if they try to charge me a penny over MSRP I am walking out. I didn't try to pull games on them, so they better not pull any games on me. Would not be the first time I have walked out of a finance managers office, and probably wont be the last.

 

[cwerdna]

Does this OP still believe his first post is true?

I'm still wondering the same thing, given the story I posted at http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=202800#p202800" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and more importantly the figures there and Leaf sales figures for 2012 YTD.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Ford just announced that they have paid off their $23B loan taken out 6 years ago. They basically put up the Ford name and all their trademarks as collateral. IOW, they Betty the farm...and won

 

[cwerdna]

"To do an unfair comparison..."

Do a fair comparison. In fact, there are many drivers, like myself, who do so little “city” driving, that the the most efficient hybrid, a Prius, would probably provide less than 20% fuel use reduction over a 42 mpg rated Cruze Eco. But I’ll admit I probably should have used 20%-30%, which would likely cover a higher percentage of small car drivers, with a more fair representation of the average.

Not everyone lives and works right next to a highway. Even those that do who end up having to travel during rush hour in many major metro areas end up on terrible stop and go traffic that's far closer to the city cycle than anything resembling highway. I can speak to that from having lived in the SF Bay Area, Seattle area and Los Angeles area.

It seems like you've fallen prey to GM's marketing (and that of others for their econoboxes). See http://detnews.com/article/20111020/OPINION03/110200355/40-mpg-claims-grab-headlines--miss-mark" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. That "42 mpg" rated Cruze Eco is on the EPA highway cycle w/a manual transmission. The '11 Cruze Eco 6MT is EPA rated at 33 mpg combined. Really want an manual when hardly anyone buys one in the US? Have fun driving in stop and go, city traffic or on hills. The '11 automatic Cruze Eco is EPA rated at 30 mpg combined.

I just realized this discussion included the Cruze Eco. Well, CR finally finished their tests of the Cruze Eco. They had an automatic. I have the print issue but per http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2012/05/video-are-the-high-mpg-versions-of-the-chevrolet-cruze-ford-focus-and-honda-civic-worth-the-money.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, it got an unremarkable 27 mpg overall which wasn't enough to make http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/02/the-most-fuel-efficient-cars/index.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; or http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/05/best-worst-fuel-economy/index.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. To be more specific, they got 17 city/40 mpg highway.

The 27 mpg compares to the 44 mpg that the Prius liftback got.

The champ amongst the 3 "high efficiency" models they tested was the Civic HF.

The Civic HF saw a 3-mpg gain in overall fuel economy over our previously tested and similarly equipped Civic LX, to 33 mpg. City and highway mileage improved to 21 and 49 mpg, respectively. The Civic was our highway fuel economy champ of this group.

Also:

But you don't have to spend extra on special models to get good fuel economy. For example, the larger Hyundai Sonata family sedan equals the price of our tested Cruze Eco and gets the same 27 mpg overall. And the Mazda3 i SkyActiv and Toyota Corolla cost less and get 32 mpg overall.