LFP Potential.  The chemistry is getting more attention now.  I have been watching it for years.  A battery chemistry not using nickel or cobalt, supporting far more charging cycles, and being much safer was what should have been the magic-bullet needed for plug-in vehicle acceptance.  It wasn't though, even with improved energy-density.  It did gain support though.  I had really hoped Toyota had used that type for the AWD model of bZ4X here, since one of the biggest supplier of LFP just happened to be who they were getting cells from... CATL.  But upon checking my bZ4X for confirmation, I discovered when fully charged the reading was 4.1 volts.  That is indicative of NMC chemistry.  LFP is much lower... at least the supply I'm aware of.  Charging to only 95.3% max seemed to be the only other evidence needed.  So, I switched to watching how Tesla adoption was taking place.  Since so few really understand chemistry and so many fight solid-state without actually being clear why, it was good reason to pay close attention.  Others still don't, as this comment removed all doubt about: "Obviously, we don't see any 5-10 Year Data yet, let alone 15-20 Year Driver Experience!"  Keeping the mystery alive is an effective means of protecting Tesla from criticism about how poorly 4680 has performed.  Falling short on all 3 major objectives, celebration of progress has focused entirely on production volume.  That's a bad sign.  Too much of something inadequate is literally what I have expressed concern about countless times.  There is potential for premature lock-in.  You don't want to commit to something that made become outdated soon.  Making fun of Toyota for ensuring each step works well long-term, despite the risk of market share loss from taking too much time, doesn't seem wise.  The tortoise & hare situation can happen.  I kept my reply brief though, sticking to the basics:  The 20-year patent for LFP expired 2 years ago. EVs in China have been using them for quite a number of years now.  There is data.  In fact, when Tesla quietly starting using that chemistry instead of what was to be rolled out with 4680, it was a major endorsement to LFP potential in Europe and North America.  You don't make that big of a roadmap change without lots of solid data.

Unexpected Advantage.  Those impatient enthusiasts are not going to be happy with this sentiment increasing: "Toyota makes awesome hybrids, which are the better option, so I don’t think they care too much.  I'd go hybrid before electric any day of the week right now.  Cost, ease of use, reliability.  I favor all those things."  Their rush to declare mainstream acceptance is showing signs of being false in the business world.  From the consumer perspective, it's much worse.  But if you only listen to your peers and only focus on their echo-chamber for perspective, you're doomed.  That's how Volt failed.  The critical nature of climate-change and oil-dependency isn't a priority for ordinary showroom shoppers.  Know your audience!  Needless to say, their voices are starting to get heard more.  I sounded off to one of such comment; that "awesome" and "better" needed some reinforcement... which I was all too happy to provide.  Having owned a plug-in Prius gen-1 for 5 years and a gen-2 for 6 years, now driving a bZ4X, is substantial experience to support my insight.  So, I shared:  That begs the question of what kind of hybrid.  Toyota's PHEV reliability is outstanding.  Success of the plug-in model of Prius spawned RAV4 with a plug.  Now, we see both Crown and CH-R with plug-in models forthcoming.  You get to enjoy EV drive without any concern whatsoever.  It's a best of both worlds.  Since the gas-engine is so infrequently used and startup is always protected from stress, it will last an extraordinarily long time.  And of course, recharging with nothing but a standard 120-volt household outlet provides enough electricity overnight to cover most daily driving.

Thankfully, those challenges don't include vehicle or battery reliability.  At least that part of the technology rollout has progressed beyond that proof-of-worth stage.

Puzzle Pieces.  For those who want solid confirmation of what's to come, stop reading this post.  For those who enjoy critical thinking, listen carefully to what reviewers say.  Sometimes, you'll get lucky and find another piece of the puzzle.  I got lucky twice yesterday with a review of the upcoming 2024 bZ4X, the introduction of the Toyota EV to Australia.  First was it looks like there may be an increase to usable capacity.  Since we already heard through hearsay that there would be a small bump in range, it makes sense... especially since that market will almost certainly have CATL-supplied cells like the AWD model has in North America.  Including that along with software revisions to squeeze out more efficiency has been a common practice for EVs.  The new size appears to be 67 kW.  Second would be related to charge-curve.  We know for a fact that Toyota will be delivering some type of improved charging speed for cold conditions.  Temperature plays major big role in that, as does chemistry.  But there is also a software component.  The reason why those CATL cells have been limited to 100 kW is not known.  It is likely due to packaging, since the NMC chemistry is so well proven.  That doesn't mean a faster maximum cannot be achieved though.  It looks like that happened too, a small bump to 105 kW.

For Current Owners?  Rollout to Australia was delayed.  Debut there will be the 2024 model.  I stumbled across the world's first review of it today.  The reviewer has new information too, just tidbits posted in the need-to-know for his video: "Essentially, the 2024 BZ4X gets (1) improved HV thermal management, mainly for faster <0ºC charging, (2) slightly more unlocked battery capacity, and (3) more efficient air conditioning which should boost range by about 5 percent and improve range by about 5 percent too."  I jumped on the opportunity to reply to that:  I have a 2023 AWD bZ4X in the US. Yesterday evening, it was 4°C (39°F) outside and I wanted to find out what the battery-heater was capable of.  Currently, the only way to get it to warm the pack above normal operating temperature for faster charging is to plug into DC.  My hope is that draw from the pack itself will be enabled via software update for existing 2023 vehicles, so you can pre-condition the pack prior to arrival at the DC fast-charging station.  When I plugged in, using ODB-II to monitor the system, I could see requests for warming go as high as 58°C (136°F) while charging.  The heater appeared to have a steady 6kW draw and the pack ended up warming to 32°C (90°F). It was clear confirmation of the existing hardware being capable.  Did you get any information alluding to what Toyota plans to provide for current owners?

New Questions.  Rollout of a new generation involves lots of exploration.  Each Prius that following the first had that.  Owners would make discoveries.  Some would dig with the hope of uncovering secrets.  I know Toyota plays chess.  They position a player without most noticing what is actually trying to be achieved.  Enthusiasts make assumptions.  They play checkers.  It is a nature impatience which clouds their judgment.  I see that.  It's quite telling... and serves as inspiration to figure out what Toyota is up to.  Their strategy is far from obvious.  It's a sense of patience I have really come to admire.  Taking time can be very rewarding.  Needless to say, that inspiring outlook stirred me today.  Here's what I shared about that online:  I explored the question related to pre-conditioning this evening... do the current vehicles already have the necessary hardware?  The answer is a resounding: YES!  With the outside temperature 39°F and the battery only warmed to 54°F from the drive to the DC fast-charger, it was a good opportunity.  I plugged and watched the heater come to life.  For many BEV, the "pre-condition" is achieved by consuming electricity from the battery itself.  That starts 30 minutes prior to arriving at the station.  For our vehicles currently, there is no route-planner activated feature like that.  There a manual on-switch either.  The way it is programmed to operate only by drawing electricity from the plug, specifically 6 kW.  So, that's what I was there to witness.  The MAX value climbed to 90°F before it plateaued.  That means a software update for pre-conditioning for us (they already have something being rolled out in Japan) is more likely to include current vehicles if a hardware update is not necessary.  It clearly warms the battery as needed.

Self-Charging.  The reality of enthusiasts being their own worst enemy at times is about to become evident, again.  Stellantis just revealed a electric pickup with a gas-engine.  Without a clear marketing term... due to all controversy stemming from Volt  enthusiasts and the self-charging backlash... setting expectation within that audience will be a nightmare.  The upcoming new audience the pickup targets is quite different though.  I was happy to point that out too, when I encountered this claim: "A parallel hybrid, where the engine can directly drive the wheels in addition to the electric motors is much more efficient at higher speeds but also adds significant weight and complexity over a series hybrid like this."  That was my invitation.  I responded with:  Toyota proved the weight & complexity to be false... hence Prius Prime surviving the test of time, RAV4 Prime joining in, and Crown Prime on the way.  The design is an EV with the gas-engine clutched into a power-split-device... which is nothing but a 3-way differential.  As for the thinking plug-in hybrids are a means of "weaning those who still aren't ready to go full electric through this transition", that fails to address infrastructure shortcomings.  For our household, having both a BEV and PHEV works out well.  Gas is required for the few trips per year that take us to locations where DC fast-charge isn't available... which sadly is a common problem for many still.  From the perspective of trying to market Ram 1500 Ram Charger to an audience who couldn't care less about complexity or weight, cries of deception will likely fall on deaf ears. They don't have the background, nor is optimized design a priority.

Giving Advice.  This is where know your audience becomes critical.  You aren't trying to convince a shopper of opportunity.  You are trying to prevent a poorly informed owner from having regret about their purchase.  Acting upon incorrect assumptions can bring about disenchantment.  That's what this post is leaning toward: "I think people want to know what real world range they can expect to actually get.  We have needs that are about 70 miles away, and kids 165 miles away.  Our question is: can we expect to get in a car, drive to the first, and drive back, without needing to stop and charge?  And, can we do the same to the second without needing to stop in both directions?"  Asking questions is a good sign.  It means this owner hasn't made a decision yet.  It could go in either direction depending upon how supportive answers are and if the advice given is actually helpful.  This was my contribution to the cause:  That is what a route-planner, like ABRP, is for.  You supply a MI/KWH average prior to the trip.  Then while on the trip, the app automatically fine tunes estimates using a live-data feed.  Range is useless in that regard.  You want to know where to stop to recharge and for how long.  In your case, knowing how far a reviewer was able to travel at 70 mph under ideal conditions is not informative.  Their review provides nothing with regard to expectations when you drive during the holidays, when there's snow on the ground.  That's why knowing your own MI/KWH is so essential.  Newbies tends to be completely unaware that even their own real-world results will fluctuate.  Range is never a guarantee.  Some times it comes up short.  Other times it exceeds expectations. Rarely does it actually match what reviewers observe.

Reviews of Range.  I have said it before and I will say it again...  Efficiency portrayed in terms of range is a disservice to those trying to learn about EV operation for that vehicle.  The information is basically useless unless you are pushing it on a very long trip.  For normal operation, it conveys nothing about actual efficiency.  People need to be informed about mi/kWh (kWh/100km) values.  That is what you need to know when calculating range potential based on current conditions.  No one really cares about a maximum value portrayed from a review.  They want real-world at that moment for their immediate circumstances.  It's quite unfortunate that most reviewers don't review such vital data.  Observations of operation are a really big deal when you are considering the purchase of a large EV.  Some really guzzle electricity but use a large battery to conceal, since it gets you to focus on range instead.

The Next Bolt, expectations.  It is going to be awhile, quite awhile, before any real entry-level vehicle is offered here.  Bolt was both a loss-leader and a stop-gap.  Enthusiasts didn't care though.  Being sustainable isn't important to them.  Ugh.  Their focus is engineering.  Business will supposedly somehow work out well if the engineering is done well.  That doesn't make sense.  They think it does.  No critical thinking... ugh.  So, we end up just getting posts like this: "I'd imagine the Gen 2 Bolt will be capable of at least 150 kW, which seems to be the minimum acceptable charging speed nowadays."  That assessment of acceptable is arbitrary.  They just pick a value and objectively draw a conclusion.  Again, ugh.  I tried to incept that nonsense with some actual detail:  The next Bolt will undoubtedly target 150 kW, just like Blazer EV does.  There will be some limitations to that, but it won't be the trait to focus on anyway.  Bolt will remain GM's efficiency leader.  The first review I encountered for Blazer EV made that quite obvious.  The reviewer consistently observed 2.5 mi/kWh from his 70-75 mph drives with outside temperature of 80°F.  That's pretty bad.  Under those same conditions, I get a little over 3.0 mi/kWh in my bZ4X... which everyone claims inefficient.  Despite having AWD with 20-inch tires, that's still competitive.  Efficiency jumps above 4.0 mi/kWh in ordinary day to day driving.  Seeing how Bolt delivers 5.0 mi/kWh, it's disappointing how that doesn't get more attention.  Perhaps it will with gen-2. We need entry-level offerings.  Those vehicles tend to deliver razor-thin profit though.  It makes them very unappealing for dealers & salespeople.  Pushing high-profit vehicles will continue to be a problem.  Shoppers new to EV make that situation worse by asking lots of questions... like how DC charging works.