John's Stuff - Personal Log 1300

November 12, 2024 - November 20, 2024

Last Updated: Weds. 6/25/2025

11-20-2024
EREV Anger, emotion. Promotion of plug-in hybrid market growth is irritating BEV purists and angering former Volt owners. Remember those Volt enthusiasts from long ago? They took great pride in being different; claims of "vastly superior" were what dominated their posts. Finding out their "EREV" identifier was only a marketing label, not an actual advantage, was too much to accept then. Turns out, it still is for some: "The Volt is not an EREV??? That's certainly news to GM, owners, media, etc. that have been calling it an EREV for 15 years. Heck, the term EREV was basically introduced into public lexicon by the Volt itself. An EREV does *not* have to be a series hybrid. It's just an EV with extended range from an engine." I replied to that emotional outburst with: The term EREV was indeed originally coined as a marketing term. Enthusiasts kept changing the definition though, to keep it unique as non-EREV adopted the same traits. Eventually, SAE declared an official definition... which knocked Volt out of its supposed stature.

11-19-2024
Overlooked Priority. This topic introduction was quite annoying to read: "With EV technology evolving so quickly, what do you think is the most important feature to look for in an electric vehicle today: range, charging speed, or affordability?" That tells us a lot about the market status. Matured choices emphasize low operating-cost, as was overwhelmingly confirmed by hybrids. Upfront pricing was secondary to how much fuel it would ultimately consume. We can see hints of that now emerging from those asking how much their monthly electricity bill will go up. But with so much attention being diverted by BEV purists to DC fast-charging speed, there is a blatant effort to dismiss the cost involved. If you need less electricity in the first place, you won't need to recharge as much. Much higher energy-density expected from solid-state batteries messes up their favor for fast-charging too. They are an audience in conflict... exactly like I dealt with years ago from Volt enthusiasts. They couldn't make up their mind what was important. Absolutely refusing to state goals when confronted was a dead giveaway. How much such a conflict exists now is why I posted this, hoping for some constructive feedback: It's rather disappointing that EFFICIENCY didn't even make the priority list. How much you actually pay to drive should be, especially if a goal is to be as green as possible. There are now electricity guzzlers. The measure of MI/KWH is not only useful for cost either; that value is essential for route planning on trips.

11-19-2024 Will They? You can tell the topic of plug-in hybrids is still torturing BEV purists: "Unfortunately, no data today suggests owners of new EREVs will plug them in regularly for most of their miles… or perhaps at all." That was interesting spin... which compelled me to pushback with:

The data that is available shows surveys were based on PHEV models that are many years old in an environment unsupportive to plugging in. Since then, we have seen large investments toward infrastructure and highly politicized discussions resulting in a wave of education for newcomers to the topic.

It's like taking a survey when smartphones were new and people had to pay for data usage by the gigabyte. Usage was very limited. Results years later when people had much better hardware & apps and unlimited data were profoundly different. There was such a dramatic rise in usage, it became the norm.

We're seeing a paradigm-shift at the same time. Rather than the only place to refuel being a gas-station, we're seeing malls, parks, ramps, recreational centers, city halls, coffeeshops, grocery stores, fast food, and bars jumping into the mix. That alone greatly increases the odds of plugging in.

There's also the delay from electricity co-ops finally getting programs into place. Some are now even getting creative, offering flat-rate subscriptions for off-peak charging to provide a choice over per-kilowatt. There's the growth of solar & storage at play too, helping to ultimately drive down cost.
In other words, it's basically just enthusiast-rhetoric and media-stir raising the question of plugging in. Ordinary consumers are becoming increasingly more curious about the benefits from electricity.

11-19-2024
EV-Only Performance. The topic of plug-in hybrids is suddenly booming. Confused messaging about "EREV" purpose as a result: "What should be mentioned is that you get 375 horsepower in hybrid mode. When you're in EV-Only mode, the electric motor provides just 134 hp, which I'm guessing isn't real impressive in a 5,000+ lb vehicle. And that gets into the drawback of most of the PHEVs currently on the market, which is that the EV-only performance just isn't that great." This is just like the acceleration nonsense from long ago that still continues today. Fast is better, period. That's why most reviews simple label Toyota as "slower" but never actually quote any time or provide any context. Supposed, the 0-60 in my AWD bZ4X is pitifully slow... 6.5 seconds. What ordinary consumer shopping a showroom with serious consideration of purchase would be disappointed in that time? Taking the topic of "performance" to imply horsepower for towing, the situation is even worse. You simply want power when it is needed. That's what a PHEV delivers. Any vehicle labeled as "EREV" won't have a large battery-pack anyway. When used for towing, having the engine join in is a plus. Since most driving will be nothing but a driver, perhaps a passenger, and maybe a small load in the bed, no excessive horsepower is required. In other words, how the purpose of new "EREV" vehicles will be marketed is still a confusing mess like those of the past. What makes it better in terms of real-world use? I like pointing out some history which this nonsense came from: It was intriguing over the years to watch the definition of EREV change. That happened each time PHEV got better... enthusiasts moved the goal-posts. Improvement from the newest generation of Prius PHEV makes it quite clear that the supposed power advantage of EREV is overkill. 121 kW (160 hp) from the third-generation's electric-motor in a vehicle that size easily fulfills power needs. Heck, the 68 kW (91 hp) from the previous generation allowed you to accelerate onto a highway just fine. In other words, EREV has become a talking-point more than actually delivering any type of stand-out advantage for the typical consumer.

11-18-2024

Should Be. Some things will never change. Enthusiasts will always impose their priorities, pushing for what they deem a necessity as it everyone treats their purchase decisions on the same criteria. Today, it was: "It's not just winter! It was obviously an issue if they changed stuff on the 2024. But they are still not up to where they should be." This is why reviews are almost pointless. Unless you are cross-shopping between brands, there's nothing useful. How are EV comparisons suppose to help with someone trying to choose between a traditional vehicle, a hybrid or something with a plug? I fired back with:

That assessment of "should be" is very much a subjective measure. Enthusiasts tend to value their priorities higher than ordinary consumers and don't recognize differences. Sometimes, that results in an assumption they come to regret based. That mismatch is surprisingly common. It's always informative to listen, but it won't change anything and rarely makes them feel better.

In this case, it was a Tesla owner unfamiliar with the "vampire" drains of their system. Turns out, continuous loss of range was in large part just battery conditioning. Tesla heated their battery-pack for better drive efficiency and faster DC charging at the tradeoff of lower overall efficiency. Software was optimized to reduce impact, but it was never eliminated.

That was electricity consumed which Toyota saw as unnecessary; instead, they strived for balance. Could the system reliability DC charge when the temperature was -4° F (-20°C) like EVs from other automakers? Yes. It works just fine then. Move on to the next priority. Faster during the winter simply wasn't important for a first-generation rollout. Like with their hybrids, wants would be addressed later.

It's great that you held expectations of Toyota so high, but that wasn't realistic and was easy to confirm with some online research. This is exactly why Toyota rollouts are so limited in quantity initially. Education of salespeople is difficult enough. Consumers are far more diverse and make a lot of assumptions.
Keep in mind, the fact that Toyota responded to requests to upgrade so quickly should not be overlooked. Most take quite a bit longer to provide improvements. Look at how both GM and VW have struggled in that regard.

11-17-2024 EV Credit, uncertainty. The future of Tesla is no longer clear. There is uncertainty making some fanboys uncomfortable. I'm all too happy to continue playing offense to keep that spotlight on their unknown they must face. This was my follow-up to the competition, pointing out the competition from within:

Another aspect of ending EV credits to consider is what the outcome does for SuperChargers.

Think about how many Model 3 and Model Y owners are already annoyed by J3400 rollout. Evidence of that comes when that is mentioned as the new standard instead of NACS... which doesn't even stand for "North American Charging Standard" anymore. The powers that be changed "Standard" to "System". Anywho, I've encountered pushback a number of times now when referring to J3400 instead of NACS.

Also, think about how many current Tesla owners refused to address what would happen to SuperChargers if Model 2 became a reality. A flood of new Tesla's all charging slower (due to their smaller packs) would further dilute the benefit of having easy access to DC charging. Retention of exclusivity is lost when growth outpaces availability. Some of the CCS station usage congestion would become a problem at SuperCharger locations too.
Long story short, the future of Tesla is no longer clear and manipulating subsidies will only provide a temporary benefit.

11-16-2024 EV Credit, competition. The new administration is determined to remove any advantage EVs have, even if it crimples Tesla in the process. Basically, the attitude is collateral damage is worth it... believing Tesla will be able to handle the loss of tax-credits and the harm to legacy automakers will be much worse. This is how it is believed that projection of 20 million annual sales will be achieved... through the manipulation of outside financial controls rather than actual competition. This is the same reason massive tariffs are expected for imports from China. Unfortunately, certain antagonists don't see it that way: "Kind of a shame, in that scenario, Toyota will never have to make a great EV. That might leave the entire Market in the US for Tesla. Not a bad thing for those people that held onto their stock." I fired back at that with:

That narrative doesn't stand a chance, since Tesla has no intention of breaking out beyond its niche. Toyota is taking its own sweet time with offerings capable of competing elsewhere with market China is pursuing. So what if it is exploiting its worldwide reach with hybrids to offset the cost of that. We'll see that void here which Tesla is refusing to address get filled by others.

In other words, there is a massive audience for Model 2. A sampling of sedans currently available in the United States make that all too clear.

$30,000 = 2025 Toyota Prius
$29,535 = 2025 Toyota Camry hybrid
$29,945 = 2025 Mini Cooper
$29,390 = 2025 Honda Accord hybrid
$29,280 = 2025 Nissan Leaf
$28,145 = 2025 Kia K5
$28,140 = 2025 Nissan Altima
$27,800 = 2025 Hyundai Sonata
$26,995 = 2025 Chevrolet Malibu
$26,065 = 2025 Subaru Legacy
$25,345 = 2025 Honda Civic
$25,135 = 2025 Mazda 3
$24,665 = 2025 Subaru Impreza
$23,310 = 2025 Toyota Corolla
$23,220 = 2025 Volkswagen Jetta
$23,145 = 2025 Kia K4
$22,775 = 2024 Hyundai Elantra
$22,730 = 2025 Nissan Sentra
$21,145 = 2024 Kia Forte

That market segment is absolutely vital, but quite a challenge to do well in from getting only razor-thin profit in return from each sale. With all the years of hope a Model 2 would eventually be offered, people are now finding out Tesla can't actually compete. It's an example of a business that catered to enthusiasts to such an extreme, resulting optimization now impairs the ability to appeal to the wider audience. And just like with conquest sales GM focused on, loyalty has been extremely difficult to retain.

Ordinary showroom shoppers will be looking for an affordable choice at their favorite dealer. That is why GM has finally targeting their own loyal customers with EV models of Equinox & Blazer. That is also why Ford has their "Skunkworks" project, to develop a low-cost offering. We know that Toyota is working on smaller & affordable too. Legacy auto is painfully slow, but at least they aren't choosing to stay within a niche.
It has been obvious for years that Tesla has been dependent upon money FSD. That meant selling something in the entry-level category would never happen, since such a vehicle wouldn't include FSD. So, it is utter nonsense to imply: "That might leave the entire Market in the US for Tesla."

11-16-2024 Subpar, too much. It took 3 days of back & forth before the typical shoot-the-messenger subsided. He tried to dismiss the difference as aerodynamic influence. I was hoping there would be some effort to actually research. He obviously didn't bother. Like most keyboard-warriors, he assumed it was just some type of mismatch between GM and Toyota. Long ago, I noticed it wasn't that simple and couldn't actually be explained away so easily. I'm quite curious what the response to this will be. I suspect it will be taken like a sucker-punch, where he had absolutely no idea there was indeed a reason worthy of a closer look. I provided constructive substance to consider. Now I'm basically just taking the told-you-so path, taking a position of offense. The days of playing defense are over. Here's what I posted:

You mentioned EPA, but clearly didn't actually check...

27 kWh/100mi = RZ 300e 18" wheels
31 kWh/100mi = RZ 300e 20" wheels
That's far too much of a difference for wheels alone.

11-15-2024
Elon Bind. It's a business bind becoming increasingly more difficult to deny. Some fanboys still attempt to forgive the obvious political alignment. They are quickly becoming apologists without an outcome worth defending. What exactly are the goals for Tesla now? It certainly isn't to deliver something for the masses. Mainstream consumers are looking elsewhere; whether that is for an EV or an ICE doesn't matter. The point is Elon no longer supports what Tesla owners had purchased their Model 3 and Model Y believed to be the future. I put it this way: In terms of being competitive, Elon has backed himself into a corner. So much time & resources was dedicated to a niche audience that there is no way to avoid the Osborne Effect. We have already seen the circumstances. When Model 3 became a reality, Model S sales tanked. Production hell resulted to get the business back on track. Think about what even just a Model 2 announcement would do. A lower priced choice is exactly what's needed without tax-credits anymore. To be able to retain sales leader position, something more affordable must be offered. The risk of cannibalization is bad enough. The potential for simply not even being a player in the low-cost market is also a reality. The move to align with Trump is intriguing. How does one take advantage of a situation controlled by a president who doesn't actually understand the situation, really doesn't care about the greater good, and expects immediate results? It will be like watching a train wreck.

11-14-2024
Appearing Competitive. It's nice to see some critical thinking: "Does it ever bother anyone else that it takes forever to charge when at public stations compared to other EVs? I feel like they charge their cars in like about 25/35 minutes to which takes me about a hour and 20 minutes. Or is it just me?" I was blown away by what I learned about perspective when switching from PHEV to BEV. For 10 years, they lived in their own world pushing the "EV market" without any real effort to reach the masses. They were seeing the world from a viewpoint of being well informed and willing to spend a great deal on eliminating gas consumption. That's how speed was enabled as a top priority. Educating others by providing detail about cost & tradeoff was never addressed... resulting in a market ill prepared to handle actual barriers. That's how marketing works. You are presented with a solution for a problem that really wasn't an issue. Slow was given a stigma for the sake of appearing competitive. As a result, expectations aren't met. Assumptions were made, confusing want with need. Ugh. Fortunately, there are some business realities which will help guide people in a direction that actually carries the market forward. I chimed into that discussion with: Most EV owners stop charging before 80%, which means they don't stay long enough to notice or care about slower charging (unless there are others waiting). Ideally, there will be enough stations along your trip to take advantage of charge-curve, where lower % charges faster. Stopping somewhere, like McDonald's or Starbucks, they want you to stay long enough to eat & drink something anyway.

11-12-2024
Competitiveness. It is intriguing to look at comments like this years later, after enthusiasts come to realize their priorities were misplaced: "The BZ was a bit late and a bit short of competitive." Like I have said countless times over the years, it's all about audience. If they don't know them, they won't recognize what it takes to appeal to them. Not everyone finds range & charging absolutely vital for ownership. In fact, most people won't even care about that years from now. What's the point of carrying a lot of battery when places to charge become abundant and speed is very fast? Even Hyundai is starting to sound off about focus for the masses being different. Quality is quite lacking right now. Toyota stands out in that regard. Notice how software updates have been non-existent? Reliability has been proven already. We're not seeing hardware recalls like others are struggling with either. Anywho, I pointed out: Competitiveness isn't the point of their gen-1 rollout. Look at the history of Prius for perspective on Toyota's approach. It was intentionally low volume to gain an understanding of what ordinary consumers will be drawn to, which is a profoundly different audience than enthusiasts. That's why gen-2 did so well right out of the gate. The same thing is being done for bZ4X, as their technology roadmap clearly confirms.

11-20-2024	EREV Anger, emotion. Promotion of plug-in hybrid market growth is irritating BEV purists and angering former Volt owners. Remember those Volt enthusiasts from long ago? They took great pride in being different; claims of "vastly superior" were what dominated their posts. Finding out their "EREV" identifier was only a marketing label, not an actual advantage, was too much to accept then. Turns out, it still is for some: "The Volt is not an EREV??? That's certainly news to GM, owners, media, etc. that have been calling it an EREV for 15 years. Heck, the term EREV was basically introduced into public lexicon by the Volt itself. An EREV does not have to be a series hybrid. It's just an EV with extended range from an engine." I replied to that emotional outburst with: The term EREV was indeed originally coined as a marketing term. Enthusiasts kept changing the definition though, to keep it unique as non-EREV adopted the same traits. Eventually, SAE declared an official definition... which knocked Volt out of its supposed stature.
11-19-2024	Overlooked Priority. This topic introduction was quite annoying to read: "With EV technology evolving so quickly, what do you think is the most important feature to look for in an electric vehicle today: range, charging speed, or affordability?" That tells us a lot about the market status. Matured choices emphasize low operating-cost, as was overwhelmingly confirmed by hybrids. Upfront pricing was secondary to how much fuel it would ultimately consume. We can see hints of that now emerging from those asking how much their monthly electricity bill will go up. But with so much attention being diverted by BEV purists to DC fast-charging speed, there is a blatant effort to dismiss the cost involved. If you need less electricity in the first place, you won't need to recharge as much. Much higher energy-density expected from solid-state batteries messes up their favor for fast-charging too. They are an audience in conflict... exactly like I dealt with years ago from Volt enthusiasts. They couldn't make up their mind what was important. Absolutely refusing to state goals when confronted was a dead giveaway. How much such a conflict exists now is why I posted this, hoping for some constructive feedback: It's rather disappointing that EFFICIENCY didn't even make the priority list. How much you actually pay to drive should be, especially if a goal is to be as green as possible. There are now electricity guzzlers. The measure of MI/KWH is not only useful for cost either; that value is essential for route planning on trips.
11-19-2024	Will They? You can tell the topic of plug-in hybrids is still torturing BEV purists: "Unfortunately, no data today suggests owners of new EREVs will plug them in regularly for most of their miles… or perhaps at all." That was interesting spin... which compelled me to pushback with: The data that is available shows surveys were based on PHEV models that are many years old in an environment unsupportive to plugging in. Since then, we have seen large investments toward infrastructure and highly politicized discussions resulting in a wave of education for newcomers to the topic. It's like taking a survey when smartphones were new and people had to pay for data usage by the gigabyte. Usage was very limited. Results years later when people had much better hardware & apps and unlimited data were profoundly different. There was such a dramatic rise in usage, it became the norm. We're seeing a paradigm-shift at the same time. Rather than the only place to refuel being a gas-station, we're seeing malls, parks, ramps, recreational centers, city halls, coffeeshops, grocery stores, fast food, and bars jumping into the mix. That alone greatly increases the odds of plugging in. There's also the delay from electricity co-ops finally getting programs into place. Some are now even getting creative, offering flat-rate subscriptions for off-peak charging to provide a choice over per-kilowatt. There's the growth of solar & storage at play too, helping to ultimately drive down cost. In other words, it's basically just enthusiast-rhetoric and media-stir raising the question of plugging in. Ordinary consumers are becoming increasingly more curious about the benefits from electricity.
11-19-2024	EV-Only Performance. The topic of plug-in hybrids is suddenly booming. Confused messaging about "EREV" purpose as a result: "What should be mentioned is that you get 375 horsepower in hybrid mode. When you're in EV-Only mode, the electric motor provides just 134 hp, which I'm guessing isn't real impressive in a 5,000+ lb vehicle. And that gets into the drawback of most of the PHEVs currently on the market, which is that the EV-only performance just isn't that great." This is just like the acceleration nonsense from long ago that still continues today. Fast is better, period. That's why most reviews simple label Toyota as "slower" but never actually quote any time or provide any context. Supposed, the 0-60 in my AWD bZ4X is pitifully slow... 6.5 seconds. What ordinary consumer shopping a showroom with serious consideration of purchase would be disappointed in that time? Taking the topic of "performance" to imply horsepower for towing, the situation is even worse. You simply want power when it is needed. That's what a PHEV delivers. Any vehicle labeled as "EREV" won't have a large battery-pack anyway. When used for towing, having the engine join in is a plus. Since most driving will be nothing but a driver, perhaps a passenger, and maybe a small load in the bed, no excessive horsepower is required. In other words, how the purpose of new "EREV" vehicles will be marketed is still a confusing mess like those of the past. What makes it better in terms of real-world use? I like pointing out some history which this nonsense came from: It was intriguing over the years to watch the definition of EREV change. That happened each time PHEV got better... enthusiasts moved the goal-posts. Improvement from the newest generation of Prius PHEV makes it quite clear that the supposed power advantage of EREV is overkill. 121 kW (160 hp) from the third-generation's electric-motor in a vehicle that size easily fulfills power needs. Heck, the 68 kW (91 hp) from the previous generation allowed you to accelerate onto a highway just fine. In other words, EREV has become a talking-point more than actually delivering any type of stand-out advantage for the typical consumer.
11-18-2024	Should Be. Some things will never change. Enthusiasts will always impose their priorities, pushing for what they deem a necessity as it everyone treats their purchase decisions on the same criteria. Today, it was: "It's not just winter! It was obviously an issue if they changed stuff on the 2024. But they are still not up to where they should be." This is why reviews are almost pointless. Unless you are cross-shopping between brands, there's nothing useful. How are EV comparisons suppose to help with someone trying to choose between a traditional vehicle, a hybrid or something with a plug? I fired back with: That assessment of "should be" is very much a subjective measure. Enthusiasts tend to value their priorities higher than ordinary consumers and don't recognize differences. Sometimes, that results in an assumption they come to regret based. That mismatch is surprisingly common. It's always informative to listen, but it won't change anything and rarely makes them feel better. In this case, it was a Tesla owner unfamiliar with the "vampire" drains of their system. Turns out, continuous loss of range was in large part just battery conditioning. Tesla heated their battery-pack for better drive efficiency and faster DC charging at the tradeoff of lower overall efficiency. Software was optimized to reduce impact, but it was never eliminated. That was electricity consumed which Toyota saw as unnecessary; instead, they strived for balance. Could the system reliability DC charge when the temperature was -4° F (-20°C) like EVs from other automakers? Yes. It works just fine then. Move on to the next priority. Faster during the winter simply wasn't important for a first-generation rollout. Like with their hybrids, wants would be addressed later. It's great that you held expectations of Toyota so high, but that wasn't realistic and was easy to confirm with some online research. This is exactly why Toyota rollouts are so limited in quantity initially. Education of salespeople is difficult enough. Consumers are far more diverse and make a lot of assumptions. Keep in mind, the fact that Toyota responded to requests to upgrade so quickly should not be overlooked. Most take quite a bit longer to provide improvements. Look at how both GM and VW have struggled in that regard.
11-17-2024	EV Credit, uncertainty. The future of Tesla is no longer clear. There is uncertainty making some fanboys uncomfortable. I'm all too happy to continue playing offense to keep that spotlight on their unknown they must face. This was my follow-up to the competition, pointing out the competition from within: Another aspect of ending EV credits to consider is what the outcome does for SuperChargers. Think about how many Model 3 and Model Y owners are already annoyed by J3400 rollout. Evidence of that comes when that is mentioned as the new standard instead of NACS... which doesn't even stand for "North American Charging Standard" anymore. The powers that be changed "Standard" to "System". Anywho, I've encountered pushback a number of times now when referring to J3400 instead of NACS. Also, think about how many current Tesla owners refused to address what would happen to SuperChargers if Model 2 became a reality. A flood of new Tesla's all charging slower (due to their smaller packs) would further dilute the benefit of having easy access to DC charging. Retention of exclusivity is lost when growth outpaces availability. Some of the CCS station usage congestion would become a problem at SuperCharger locations too. Long story short, the future of Tesla is no longer clear and manipulating subsidies will only provide a temporary benefit.
11-16-2024	EV Credit, competition. The new administration is determined to remove any advantage EVs have, even if it crimples Tesla in the process. Basically, the attitude is collateral damage is worth it... believing Tesla will be able to handle the loss of tax-credits and the harm to legacy automakers will be much worse. This is how it is believed that projection of 20 million annual sales will be achieved... through the manipulation of outside financial controls rather than actual competition. This is the same reason massive tariffs are expected for imports from China. Unfortunately, certain antagonists don't see it that way: "Kind of a shame, in that scenario, Toyota will never have to make a great EV. That might leave the entire Market in the US for Tesla. Not a bad thing for those people that held onto their stock." I fired back at that with: That narrative doesn't stand a chance, since Tesla has no intention of breaking out beyond its niche. Toyota is taking its own sweet time with offerings capable of competing elsewhere with market China is pursuing. So what if it is exploiting its worldwide reach with hybrids to offset the cost of that. We'll see that void here which Tesla is refusing to address get filled by others. In other words, there is a massive audience for Model 2. A sampling of sedans currently available in the United States make that all too clear. $30,000 = 2025 Toyota Prius $29,535 = 2025 Toyota Camry hybrid $29,945 = 2025 Mini Cooper $29,390 = 2025 Honda Accord hybrid $29,280 = 2025 Nissan Leaf $28,145 = 2025 Kia K5 $28,140 = 2025 Nissan Altima $27,800 = 2025 Hyundai Sonata $26,995 = 2025 Chevrolet Malibu $26,065 = 2025 Subaru Legacy $25,345 = 2025 Honda Civic $25,135 = 2025 Mazda 3 $24,665 = 2025 Subaru Impreza $23,310 = 2025 Toyota Corolla $23,220 = 2025 Volkswagen Jetta $23,145 = 2025 Kia K4 $22,775 = 2024 Hyundai Elantra $22,730 = 2025 Nissan Sentra $21,145 = 2024 Kia Forte That market segment is absolutely vital, but quite a challenge to do well in from getting only razor-thin profit in return from each sale. With all the years of hope a Model 2 would eventually be offered, people are now finding out Tesla can't actually compete. It's an example of a business that catered to enthusiasts to such an extreme, resulting optimization now impairs the ability to appeal to the wider audience. And just like with conquest sales GM focused on, loyalty has been extremely difficult to retain. Ordinary showroom shoppers will be looking for an affordable choice at their favorite dealer. That is why GM has finally targeting their own loyal customers with EV models of Equinox & Blazer. That is also why Ford has their "Skunkworks" project, to develop a low-cost offering. We know that Toyota is working on smaller & affordable too. Legacy auto is painfully slow, but at least they aren't choosing to stay within a niche. It has been obvious for years that Tesla has been dependent upon money FSD. That meant selling something in the entry-level category would never happen, since such a vehicle wouldn't include FSD. So, it is utter nonsense to imply: "That might leave the entire Market in the US for Tesla."
11-16-2024	Subpar, too much. It took 3 days of back & forth before the typical shoot-the-messenger subsided. He tried to dismiss the difference as aerodynamic influence. I was hoping there would be some effort to actually research. He obviously didn't bother. Like most keyboard-warriors, he assumed it was just some type of mismatch between GM and Toyota. Long ago, I noticed it wasn't that simple and couldn't actually be explained away so easily. I'm quite curious what the response to this will be. I suspect it will be taken like a sucker-punch, where he had absolutely no idea there was indeed a reason worthy of a closer look. I provided constructive substance to consider. Now I'm basically just taking the told-you-so path, taking a position of offense. The days of playing defense are over. Here's what I posted: You mentioned EPA, but clearly didn't actually check... 27 kWh/100mi = RZ 300e 18" wheels 31 kWh/100mi = RZ 300e 20" wheels That's far too much of a difference for wheels alone.
11-15-2024	Elon Bind. It's a business bind becoming increasingly more difficult to deny. Some fanboys still attempt to forgive the obvious political alignment. They are quickly becoming apologists without an outcome worth defending. What exactly are the goals for Tesla now? It certainly isn't to deliver something for the masses. Mainstream consumers are looking elsewhere; whether that is for an EV or an ICE doesn't matter. The point is Elon no longer supports what Tesla owners had purchased their Model 3 and Model Y believed to be the future. I put it this way: In terms of being competitive, Elon has backed himself into a corner. So much time & resources was dedicated to a niche audience that there is no way to avoid the Osborne Effect. We have already seen the circumstances. When Model 3 became a reality, Model S sales tanked. Production hell resulted to get the business back on track. Think about what even just a Model 2 announcement would do. A lower priced choice is exactly what's needed without tax-credits anymore. To be able to retain sales leader position, something more affordable must be offered. The risk of cannibalization is bad enough. The potential for simply not even being a player in the low-cost market is also a reality. The move to align with Trump is intriguing. How does one take advantage of a situation controlled by a president who doesn't actually understand the situation, really doesn't care about the greater good, and expects immediate results? It will be like watching a train wreck.
11-14-2024	Appearing Competitive. It's nice to see some critical thinking: "Does it ever bother anyone else that it takes forever to charge when at public stations compared to other EVs? I feel like they charge their cars in like about 25/35 minutes to which takes me about a hour and 20 minutes. Or is it just me?" I was blown away by what I learned about perspective when switching from PHEV to BEV. For 10 years, they lived in their own world pushing the "EV market" without any real effort to reach the masses. They were seeing the world from a viewpoint of being well informed and willing to spend a great deal on eliminating gas consumption. That's how speed was enabled as a top priority. Educating others by providing detail about cost & tradeoff was never addressed... resulting in a market ill prepared to handle actual barriers. That's how marketing works. You are presented with a solution for a problem that really wasn't an issue. Slow was given a stigma for the sake of appearing competitive. As a result, expectations aren't met. Assumptions were made, confusing want with need. Ugh. Fortunately, there are some business realities which will help guide people in a direction that actually carries the market forward. I chimed into that discussion with: Most EV owners stop charging before 80%, which means they don't stay long enough to notice or care about slower charging (unless there are others waiting). Ideally, there will be enough stations along your trip to take advantage of charge-curve, where lower % charges faster. Stopping somewhere, like McDonald's or Starbucks, they want you to stay long enough to eat & drink something anyway.
11-12-2024	Competitiveness. It is intriguing to look at comments like this years later, after enthusiasts come to realize their priorities were misplaced: "The BZ was a bit late and a bit short of competitive." Like I have said countless times over the years, it's all about audience. If they don't know them, they won't recognize what it takes to appeal to them. Not everyone finds range & charging absolutely vital for ownership. In fact, most people won't even care about that years from now. What's the point of carrying a lot of battery when places to charge become abundant and speed is very fast? Even Hyundai is starting to sound off about focus for the masses being different. Quality is quite lacking right now. Toyota stands out in that regard. Notice how software updates have been non-existent? Reliability has been proven already. We're not seeing hardware recalls like others are struggling with either. Anywho, I pointed out: Competitiveness isn't the point of their gen-1 rollout. Look at the history of Prius for perspective on Toyota's approach. It was intentionally low volume to gain an understanding of what ordinary consumers will be drawn to, which is a profoundly different audience than enthusiasts. That's why gen-2 did so well right out of the gate. The same thing is being done for bZ4X, as their technology roadmap clearly confirms.