cwerdna
Well-known member
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/1-toyota-subaru-team-develop-053920291.html
https://global.toyota/en/newsroom/corporate/28377766.html
https://global.toyota/en/newsroom/corporate/28377766.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/37274797/...ubaru-barrels-through-recession/#.XPnCCVF97IUSubaru's secret is that it understands the customers who drive its cars and has gotten smarter and more aggressive about reaching out to new ones who would feel at home as part of that clan. The company has the type of customer base that's particularly attractive to carmakers. The average household income of a Subaru owner is $88,000, the same as Honda Motor and $10,000 more than Toyota, says Alexander Edwards, president of market researcher Strategic Vision. Plus, Subaru buyers are three years younger than the industry average and a quarter more likely to have a college degree.
They are a thrifty lot, traditionally buying less car than they can afford. Some 36 percent pay cash. Subaru has played to that frugal bent by cutting roughly $1,200 from the $26,342 average price of its cars in 2007. Those cuts haven't killed profit margins because the lower prices allowed Subaru to reduce sales incentives and rebates on its cars substantially. Currently, the company gives about $1,333 per vehicle in incentives — the lowest level of any major car brand, says Thomas Doll, chief operating officer. That's almost half the $2,310 in incentives Toyota currently gives its buyers.
Much of the automaker's marketing focuses on cementing its connection to customers. Subaru's research shows them to be an eco-friendly bunch who value the freedom to go where they want, when they want. Unlike luxury car buyers, Subaruers are "customers who are not buying things, but experiences," says Chief Marketing Officer Tim Mahoney. That meshes nicely with Subaru's all-four-wheel-drive lineup, showcased by TV ads that star one of its cars caked with road grit, being applauded by admiring spectators on a suburban Main Street.
Toyota's only building BEVs using current batteries because they have to owing to government mandates (particularly in China, the world's largest auto market), not because they think they are suitable for the mass market now. And how can they be foot-dragging with H2 when they've got one of only three production FCEVs on the market, with plans to considerably expand their production? Toyota doesn't work on the "5 years is an eternity" timescale of U.S. auto companies, which is why we have large numbers of HEVs around the world now.LeftieBiker said:Unless Toyota has a solid state battery ready to go, then they are essentially foot-dragging, as with hydrogen.
+1LeftieBiker said:Great. Two companies who have dragged their feet on BEV development (especially batteries) will now work together on a BEV. I can already hear all of the "You first - we insist" meetings...
And how can they be foot-dragging with H2 when they've got one of only three production FCEVs on the market, with plans to considerably expand their production?
BEVs have benefited from an even greater amount of government funding. And no, GM hasn't proven that they can make a long-lived battery pack, nor has anyone else, unless you ignore degradation. My 16 y.o. ICE has exactly the same range it had when new - can any BEV say the same, even if it sits unused for that entire time? The advantage of liquid and gaseous fuels for energy storage (aside from the speed of replenishment and the energy density) is that the durability of that storage isn't affected by how much or how little of that storage you use, something that can't be said for batteries. I can run my ICE or any FCEV's tank from full to empty as often as I want, with zero effect on the longevity of the engine or stack. Until batteries can do likewise for a similar length of time, they will lack comparable durability.LeftieBiker said:And how can they be foot-dragging with H2 when they've got one of only three production FCEVs on the market, with plans to considerably expand their production?
I'm sure you know this, but for the new people in the crowd: companies like Toyota and Honda are using (subsidized) research into hydrogen fuel cell vehicles as a way to appear to be making progress toward a zero emission fleet, while actually just milking what was always known to be a dead end - at least for cars - for the publicity and government funding. GM has already proven that they can make a viable, long-lived lithium battery pack, but still Toyota, Subaru, et all insist that lithium batteries just aren't ready (unlike hydrogen fuel cells!) to power fleets of cars.
+1, and increasingly the EU as well, which is to say mass BEV adoption is still dependent on government mandates and subsidies.SageBrush said:I'm interested in what Toyota and Subaru develop because I hold both companies' engineering in high regard. As for why now ? That is the Chinese market talking.
Which is to say that China and the EU have recognized the externalized costs of fossils.GRA said:+1, and increasingly the EU as well, which is to say mass BEV adoption is still dependent on government mandates and subsidies.SageBrush said:I'm interested in what Toyota and Subaru develop because I hold both companies' engineering in high regard. As for why now ? That is the Chinese market talking.
Sure. I'd love to see us take all the money we spend every year on Centcom and charge it proportionately to the oil companies, while simultaneously eliminating all energy subsidies, tax breaks etc. for all energy sources (to include PV and wind, of course). Then the flying monkeys appear, and I wake up. :lol:SageBrush said:Which is to say that China and the EU have recognized the externalized costs of fossil fuels.GRA said:+1, and increasingly the EU as well, which is to say mass BEV adoption is still dependent on government mandates and subsidies.SageBrush said:I'm interested in what Toyota and Subaru develop because I hold both companies' engineering in high regard. As for why now ? That is the Chinese market talking.
Probably necessary to get the Chinese government to allow them in at all, in a tech that China intends to dominate. ISTR China was making it very difficult for them to sell the LEAF (and other cars) there.SageBrush said:From my POV the only worrisome part of Toyota's plans is to source batteries from BYD and CATL. For now those are poor quality batteries for car use. Perhaps quality will improve in time.
The way you get to mass market BEV is by building a lot of them. Note that Tesla improved the EPA range of the refreshed model S by 10%. That is how costs come down for all of the components. Batteries are improving rapidly in cost and at least for Tesla retaining capacity longer. I know you don't believe this, but my six year old model S 85 kwh has almost 95% of its original capacity.GRA said:Toyota hasn't dragged their feet on batteries, they've put enormous resources into developing solid-state batteries, which they feel have the necessary characteristics to make mass-market BEVs mainstream without gov't subsidies and mandates. I tend to agree.
I'm under the impression that the improvement in the Model S range is due to a change in motor. I don't think the battery changed at all.Stoaty said:Note that Tesla improved the EPA range of the refreshed model S by 10%.
You get to mass market by building and selling a lot of something; if the market isn't there, building them just leaves you with a lot of unsold inventory. Or, as is the case now, you rely on subsidies and mandates to bribe/coerce people into buying that product. Toyota believes that batteries aren't where they need to be for BEVs to stand on their own yet for universal service with the necessary durability, and I agree, although they have reached the point where they are well-suited (if still too expensive) for local use, and can handle shorter (weekend) road trips okay.Stoaty said:The way you get to mass market BEV is by building a lot of them. Note that Tesla improved the EPA range of the refreshed model S by 10%. That is how costs come down for all of the components. Batteries are improving rapidly in cost and at least for Tesla retaining capacity longer. I know you don't believe this, but my six year old model S 85 kwh has almost 95% of its original capacity.GRA said:Toyota hasn't dragged their feet on batteries, they've put enormous resources into developing solid-state batteries, which they feel have the necessary characteristics to make mass-market BEVs mainstream without gov't subsidies and mandates. I tend to agree.
https://electrek.co/2018/07/17/tesla-model-s-holds-up-400000-miles-3-years/Here’s how a Tesla Model S holds up after 400,000 miles in 3 years
Enter your email address to join: