John's Stuff - Personal Log 1312

March 12, 2025 - March 22, 2025

Last Updated: Weds. 6/25/2025

3-22-2025 Tesla Sales, expectations. I jumped on the chance to point out Tesla's missed opportunity, posted a reaction to this comment: "Monthly historical figures would be better, but at least this way we can estimate that sales were almost 6,000 a month and then just over 4,000 a month and now around 2,600. Seems like a steady decline." With my history, that was simply too good to pass up:

Precedent set long ago, way before plug-ins was what sales expectation should be for the vehicle to be sustainable. It's an Economics 101 issue. If production drops too low, cost will rise and profit will be lost. That minimum was roughly 60,000 annual... 5,000 monthly. To be a runaway hit, as CT was expected, volume would have to be much higher.

It simply makes no sense that CT could ever sell at that rate. Who would the buyers be? Know your audience. Mainstream consumers are looking for something resembling the "nicely under $30,000" vehicle they owned for countless years. After all, they have been promised EVs would cost less due to so many fewer moving parts.

Tesla made bold predictions of being able to reach annual sales of 20 Million by 2030. How could that possibly happen with only 3, Y and CT being primary offerings? That never made any sense. An entry-level vehicle is required. That means abandoning principle, no longer emphasizing range, power and speed or building in FSD. People seek the basics, cheap & reliable EV drive.

That market expectation is exactly why PHEV are so well positioned for the masses. They couldn't care less whether or not the vehicle includes an ICE. Simply being able to exploit lost-cost travel opportunity by plugging in every night is key. With a PHEV, that's very easy to achieve with just the 120-volt outlet they already have available.
This is a rude awakening for BEV purists. They had hoped Tesla would lead the way, continuing to innovate and carry the industry forward. Those coming to realize only no that Tesla lost its way are struggling to figure out what should happen next. Meanwhile, other automakers are preparing to take advantage of Tesla's missed opportunity.

3-22-2025 Tesla Sales, falling. We are witnessing a nightmare. Tesla sales are falling so much and so quickly, it's future is being questioned. Ideally, the board will be able to push out Musk as CEO and primary stockholder. As long as he has a stake in the automotive division, it has no way forward. How will it compete? Cybertruck has so many recalls now, no one wants to buy a new one. Heck, used ones are extremely difficult to sell even at a massive discount. To make matters worse, owners of other Tesla vehicles face the possibility of raised insurance cost due to the increased likelihood of vandalism. Needless to say, everyone is shocked at the dramatic recent turn of favor. I'm even surprised how quickly it become obvious Tesla was in trouble. On a new article about exactly that this morning, I jumped into the discussion with:

Stepping back to look at the bigger picture, before considering the political & recall mess, expectations were not realistic. This was yet another example of "over promise, under deliver". What miraculous engineering could possibly fulfill what so many miles for so little money? It didn't matter what shape or material was used; that larger & powerful of a vehicle could not achieve such goals yet. That technology is several generations (vehicle product-cycles) away still.

There were many red-flags familiar to us who recognize the historical pattern. Enthusiasts were praising the concept, declaring victory even before anything had been delivered. Such optimism is hope transformed to hype. That's bad, really bad... especially for a vehicle with high-volume sales expectations. The fact that CT itself is so unconventional in appearance meant it was a risky move too, a case where you would definitely want supporting evidence for such optimism.

As for the politics & recall, the history of CT has already been written. All the mocking & belittling EV enthusiasts had done to Toyota has already been exceeded by magnitudes. A vehicle plagued with so many problems is doomed. We've seen this history before. GM went through the same thing with Two-Mode.
The best solution for Tesla is to swallow their pride and start over. Take that technology finally deliver a vehicle to take on even the most difficult of customers, those looking to replace their entry-level ICE with an entry-level BEV. We has see VW, Toyota, GM, Ford and Hyundai/Kia all striving to counter what BYD has already delivered in that category. If Tesla doesn't it will just become a chapter in textbooks, a great example of what went wrong.

3-22-2025
Familiar Posts. I have been witnessing a friend struggle online with another friend who very much resembles the posting pattern I am all too familiar with. Basically, he's trolling each of her posts. It's the same close-mindedness I have dealt with since the very beginning. Only now, it's with politics rather than vehicles. The psychology is the same. Humans react with a recognizable resistance pattern, regardless of topic. When their status quo is threatened, they lash out any way they can. Here's the advice I shared, which will hoping be of some help for my friend: It's the identical behavior I have seen for decades, owning hybrids for 12 years then switching to plug-ins for now 13 years. Posting techniques to evade & divert are quite familiar and very easy to spot. In the end, there's no way to beat a keyboard warrior... but you can overwhelm them. Key to that is to sway lurkers, compel them to consider what you share. In other words, seek out an audience the troublemaker cannot reach. For me, that has been through use of my website and video channel, combined with in-person events. When a person absolutely refuses to accept facts, change their reality. Switch to offense; being pushed into defense is their weakness.

3-20-2025 Out Of Touch. I had to jump on what just hit the news. Supposedly, there will be a breakthru battery advancement rolled out for Cybertruck soon. Reading that immediately after BYD released info to the press about being able to achieve megawatt charging speed is highly suspicious, especially when no detail whatsoever was included. Sadly, we have seen media stunts like this before. It's called engineering by press-release. There's no substance, no credibility, no reason. It's just a means of drawing attention away from a competitor. Ugh. I pointed that out with:

This "report" smells like counter messaging, an attempt to steal the spotlight away from BYD. It is also hypocritical, since whenever Toyota mentions anything "coming" it is followed by an onslaught of criticism.

Of course, Tesla brings this on themselves anyway. It adopted the "over promise, under deliver" approach from GM. Delay with Model 3 was understandable and something to learn from. Tesla didn't though. 4680 and CT have become textbook examples of what not to do.

Using a breakthru battery in CT doesn't make any sense. It's a niche vehicle that shouldn't be consuming even more resources, since the recalls are really hurting bottom-line expectations.

Take the fight with BYD seriously. Don't just abandon the market in Europe by continuing to ignore the small vehicle market there. Heck, even Toyota is considering rollout to fill in the gap Tesla has left here.
Looking back at all the chest-pounding we got from Tesla supporters about the "20 Million annual sales" goal, their empty claims then seem absolutely out-of-touch with reality now.

3-15-2025 Waiting. It's a fine line to walk when you are a true supporter. You want to demonstrate faith in promises, but setting realistic expectations isn't easy. This is such an attempt: "Toyota has a solid state battery tech coming out in 2-3 years that blow away other EV manufacturers. 1200 km range 10 min charge time from empty on a fast charger. I have been waiting and will bit one as soon as I can!!!" I attempted to contribute by adding:

Solid-State will indeed check a number of important boxes, but expectations being set for ordinary consumer usage are rather distorted. There is no doubt a variety offerings will become available from a variety of sources in the next few years, Toyota included.

The tech will be expensive though. This is why primary use will be focused on PHEV initially. Being able to hit a small battery-pack with a lot more amps than batteries with liquid electrolyte is a paradigm shift. You'll get a lot more bang for your buck. Existing DC fast-chargers would become a useful tool for PHEV, since even just pulling 100 kW is awesomely fast for a battery-pack that's only 25 kWh... about 75 miles (120 km) usable at 3.5 mi/kWh.

To get 745 miles (1200 km) at 3.5 mi/kWh, roughly 250 kWh will be needed... 10 times larger than the PHEV. At that capacity, transferring enough electricity in 10 minutes could only be achieved with a commercial megawatt (1000 kW) charger. Expecting those for public use at an affordable cost will be totally unrealistic. It simply isn't going to happen for many, many years still.
This is why Toyota's effort to phaseout ICE in favor of hybrids easily augmented to provide a plug makes a lot of sense. It would be odd for us as plug-in advocates seeing a PHEV taking advantage of DC, but that is exactly what ordinary consumers have envisioned for their plug-in vehicle for years.

3-14-2025 Short-Sighted. The weekly podcast featured Toyota's reveals. I was eager to jump on the opportunity to comment. I only made it halfway through the hour-long listen before pausing to post this:

That comment about Toyota "sitting on the sidelines" was an interesting anecdotal twist on the situation. Hybrid history taught us that would be a necessary step for mass adoption. Other automakers simply couldn't compete. They needed extra upfront to get established.

Look at GM's effort with Volt. Neither EV nor HV efficiency was as good as what Toyota rolled out. GM lost money too. Toyota ended up delivering what GM had always strived for too, a PHEV model of a popular SUV. Now, GM is working to deliver the same.

All the "behind" narrative efforts to portray Toyota as hopelessly struggling with no chance to ever catch up didn't acknowledge this possibility. With so much already invested in motors, controllers, inverters and batteries for hybrids, what if Toyota wasn't resting on their laurels for BEV? What if they were actually allowing the competition to lap them for the sake of that larger effort to phase out ICE being a win-win for everyone.

Looking at was just revealed, that sure looks like the case. During that time, they have carefully studied what the masses will truly be drawn to while also advancing their tech. That next-gen eAxle combined with the switch to SiC semiconductors will deliver an efficiency increase.
Consider goals. Using more with less is the point. A more efficient BEV means reduced cost & time charging. Obviously, needing less battery to deliver competitive miles has advantages too. Toyota has basically been gaming the market and enthusiasts were too short-sighted to notice.

3-14-2025
Always Said. There is a lot that has been said. Reading this was rather annoying, but quite predictable: "We've always said that if the Toyota bZ4X ever got some upgrades..." It's the typical expectation from an enthusiast perspective. They ignore every reference to loss-leader sales. They pretend it is easy to achieve sustainable high-volume sales. That was always their formula for profit. No need to address the barriers, just delivering a very desirable vehicle will magically overcome the problem of want over need. Ugh. Much of that comes from impatience. Having to wait an entire product-cycle is unacceptable. They have come to believe over-the-air software updates are the solution for everything. Again, ugh. Tired of such selective interpretations of the market and their related purchase decisions (completely ignoring industry challenges still faced), I posted this about their unrealistic belief that only something minor is all it would take. A lot of time and even more effort that will go unnoticed is what it takes and what it took: History informs us a lot about setting expectations. In this case, it was wise to look at what Toyota did with Prius. Odds were pretty good they would follow that same success formula for bZ4X. Turns out, they are.

3-14-2025 Out Of Options. Immediate response to seeing that Toyota will be offering something smaller than bZ4X, appealing very directly to European shoppers, there was an article featuring the "affordable" choice coming from Tesla. It's already too late. Sales have dropped dramatically in Europe. Turns out, the already difficult to deal with "vastly superior" attitude from Tesla was taken too far with the stir of support for Germany's offensive past. The solution will supposedly be a stripped down Model Y, enough to reduce price by 20%. How will that be competitive? The interior is already minimalized. I suspect reduction of range & power is where corners will be cut. It won't change much though. It won't be enough. I posted why:

This is textbook Innovator's Dilemma. As predicted, the innovator remains trapped trying to try alter the product that was a huge success for its initial audience to now have much broader appeal. It was doomed to fail.

It would have been like trying to push Prius to everyone who stopped at a Toyota dealer to look at a new vehicle. Instead, the technology was spread from that hatchback, where it now thrives as a popular sedan (Camry) and top-selling crossover (RAV4). The only way for that technology to reach a wider audience is to diversify. Sticking with only 3/Y for high-volume is business suicide.

Rolling out CT was truly an act of desperation. Rather than designing something to draw the masses, Musk tried to create a popular enthusiast niche. That has been a disastrous choice.

Stripping down Y makes no sense either. With a market already saturated from highly depreciated Y nicely loaded, who will the audience be? Many seeking entry-level vehicles won't want anything that big anyway.
It's easy to see Toyota considering C-HR+ to fill in that gap. It might be a good opportunity for VW to consider ID.3 here too. Tesla is clearly out of competitive options.

3-13-2025 Update Spin. Almost immediately, there was argument claiming that Toyota had failed to properly address audience. It was a desperate effort to retain the "EV market" perspective. The BEV purist know they still cannot compete with other vehicles on the showroom floor. They have been fighting that reality for years... hence a narrative to portray sales as only necessary to enthusiasts. It's why I pushed back so hard on their efforts. They know ordinary consumers are no where near as forgiving and are unwilling to spend a premium on want rather than need. They keep trying though: "Toyota may be remiss in that arena. Their wheelhouse is NOT "loyal Toyota customers", but (loyal) BEV owners who want BEV and want the whole dealership ubiquity, training, parts departments and repair bays across the U.S." I was all to happy to fire back on that nonsense, especially since it was a frequent poster of comments trying to keep the status quo from changing. You know, keeping Toyota as their antithesis. I posted:

That narrative does not carry much weight anymore. It was popular when conquest sales were the norm, excited early-adopters taking advantage of the tax-credit opportunity. Kudos to them, but shameful for misrepresenting Toyota's goal pushing that narrative.

Just as was with Prius, focus is targeting showroom shoppers. That's a long-term effort in direct conflict with conquest sales. That meant limited volume, not giving into the temptation of offering a loss-leader. Just like with Prius history, what will be delivered for the masses is gen-2.

It should be undeniable at this point that the market wasn't ready. Absence of infrastructure (so few DCFC and almost non-existent support for apartment/condo dwellers) was very easy to predict. There's still an obsession with range too; long road-trips shouldn't be the highest priority.
Appealing to showroom shoppers is vital. Legacy automakers have yet to impact the status quo. BEV are still looked upon as niche offerings. It is vital to get loyal customers looking to replace their aged RAV4, Camry or Corolla to consider something with a plug.

3-12-2025
Mistake. This is more rhetoric, twisting the situation to appear to be a design overlook: "Yeah it's probably a baked-in design flaw to not allocate enough space for a larger pack. Considering that the ostensibly smaller C-HR+ has a slightly larger pack, I'm hoping they learn from their mistake next generation. At the very least, design a larger pack area even if it goes unused when they don't increase the battery size, so they have the flexibility to offer a larger one once they realize that's a mistake lol." Since when was larger ever a requirement? The rest of the world is perfectly fine with shorter EV ranges. Why should automakers have to compensate for infrastructure shortcomings. Why not just address the actual problem? Needing less battery reduces the cost of the vehicle. Having to carry less weight improves efficiency too. Again, annoyed, I posted a reply: That would be a subjective assessment. Toyota's supposed "mistake" has allowed them to avoid falling into the loss-leader trap like other legacy automakers. The plan ever before rollout was to leverage an existing platform by stretching it for gen-1 and for gen-2 to be a start from scratch. It's a very effective means of mitigating risk to learning as much as possible before committing to high-volume production. It makes a lot of sense when you address the bigger picture of transition, something the "all in" pledges completely ignored. Continuous improvement has proven very effective for moving entire product-lines forward.

3-12-2025 Mid-Cycle update (2026 model). Here's the highlight list I provided for next years update to bZ4X:

· battery-cell count from 96 to 104 = range increase
· Silicon Carbide (SiC) semiconductor = range increase
· next-gen eAxle (traction motor) = power increase
· pre-conditioning (navigation & manual) = faster DC charging
· charge-curve improved = faster DC charging

3-22-2025	Tesla Sales, expectations. I jumped on the chance to point out Tesla's missed opportunity, posted a reaction to this comment: "Monthly historical figures would be better, but at least this way we can estimate that sales were almost 6,000 a month and then just over 4,000 a month and now around 2,600. Seems like a steady decline." With my history, that was simply too good to pass up: Precedent set long ago, way before plug-ins was what sales expectation should be for the vehicle to be sustainable. It's an Economics 101 issue. If production drops too low, cost will rise and profit will be lost. That minimum was roughly 60,000 annual... 5,000 monthly. To be a runaway hit, as CT was expected, volume would have to be much higher. It simply makes no sense that CT could ever sell at that rate. Who would the buyers be? Know your audience. Mainstream consumers are looking for something resembling the "nicely under $30,000" vehicle they owned for countless years. After all, they have been promised EVs would cost less due to so many fewer moving parts. Tesla made bold predictions of being able to reach annual sales of 20 Million by 2030. How could that possibly happen with only 3, Y and CT being primary offerings? That never made any sense. An entry-level vehicle is required. That means abandoning principle, no longer emphasizing range, power and speed or building in FSD. People seek the basics, cheap & reliable EV drive. That market expectation is exactly why PHEV are so well positioned for the masses. They couldn't care less whether or not the vehicle includes an ICE. Simply being able to exploit lost-cost travel opportunity by plugging in every night is key. With a PHEV, that's very easy to achieve with just the 120-volt outlet they already have available. This is a rude awakening for BEV purists. They had hoped Tesla would lead the way, continuing to innovate and carry the industry forward. Those coming to realize only no that Tesla lost its way are struggling to figure out what should happen next. Meanwhile, other automakers are preparing to take advantage of Tesla's missed opportunity.
3-22-2025	Tesla Sales, falling. We are witnessing a nightmare. Tesla sales are falling so much and so quickly, it's future is being questioned. Ideally, the board will be able to push out Musk as CEO and primary stockholder. As long as he has a stake in the automotive division, it has no way forward. How will it compete? Cybertruck has so many recalls now, no one wants to buy a new one. Heck, used ones are extremely difficult to sell even at a massive discount. To make matters worse, owners of other Tesla vehicles face the possibility of raised insurance cost due to the increased likelihood of vandalism. Needless to say, everyone is shocked at the dramatic recent turn of favor. I'm even surprised how quickly it become obvious Tesla was in trouble. On a new article about exactly that this morning, I jumped into the discussion with: Stepping back to look at the bigger picture, before considering the political & recall mess, expectations were not realistic. This was yet another example of "over promise, under deliver". What miraculous engineering could possibly fulfill what so many miles for so little money? It didn't matter what shape or material was used; that larger & powerful of a vehicle could not achieve such goals yet. That technology is several generations (vehicle product-cycles) away still. There were many red-flags familiar to us who recognize the historical pattern. Enthusiasts were praising the concept, declaring victory even before anything had been delivered. Such optimism is hope transformed to hype. That's bad, really bad... especially for a vehicle with high-volume sales expectations. The fact that CT itself is so unconventional in appearance meant it was a risky move too, a case where you would definitely want supporting evidence for such optimism. As for the politics & recall, the history of CT has already been written. All the mocking & belittling EV enthusiasts had done to Toyota has already been exceeded by magnitudes. A vehicle plagued with so many problems is doomed. We've seen this history before. GM went through the same thing with Two-Mode. The best solution for Tesla is to swallow their pride and start over. Take that technology finally deliver a vehicle to take on even the most difficult of customers, those looking to replace their entry-level ICE with an entry-level BEV. We has see VW, Toyota, GM, Ford and Hyundai/Kia all striving to counter what BYD has already delivered in that category. If Tesla doesn't it will just become a chapter in textbooks, a great example of what went wrong.
3-22-2025	Familiar Posts. I have been witnessing a friend struggle online with another friend who very much resembles the posting pattern I am all too familiar with. Basically, he's trolling each of her posts. It's the same close-mindedness I have dealt with since the very beginning. Only now, it's with politics rather than vehicles. The psychology is the same. Humans react with a recognizable resistance pattern, regardless of topic. When their status quo is threatened, they lash out any way they can. Here's the advice I shared, which will hoping be of some help for my friend: It's the identical behavior I have seen for decades, owning hybrids for 12 years then switching to plug-ins for now 13 years. Posting techniques to evade & divert are quite familiar and very easy to spot. In the end, there's no way to beat a keyboard warrior... but you can overwhelm them. Key to that is to sway lurkers, compel them to consider what you share. In other words, seek out an audience the troublemaker cannot reach. For me, that has been through use of my website and video channel, combined with in-person events. When a person absolutely refuses to accept facts, change their reality. Switch to offense; being pushed into defense is their weakness.
3-20-2025	Out Of Touch. I had to jump on what just hit the news. Supposedly, there will be a breakthru battery advancement rolled out for Cybertruck soon. Reading that immediately after BYD released info to the press about being able to achieve megawatt charging speed is highly suspicious, especially when no detail whatsoever was included. Sadly, we have seen media stunts like this before. It's called engineering by press-release. There's no substance, no credibility, no reason. It's just a means of drawing attention away from a competitor. Ugh. I pointed that out with: This "report" smells like counter messaging, an attempt to steal the spotlight away from BYD. It is also hypocritical, since whenever Toyota mentions anything "coming" it is followed by an onslaught of criticism. Of course, Tesla brings this on themselves anyway. It adopted the "over promise, under deliver" approach from GM. Delay with Model 3 was understandable and something to learn from. Tesla didn't though. 4680 and CT have become textbook examples of what not to do. Using a breakthru battery in CT doesn't make any sense. It's a niche vehicle that shouldn't be consuming even more resources, since the recalls are really hurting bottom-line expectations. Take the fight with BYD seriously. Don't just abandon the market in Europe by continuing to ignore the small vehicle market there. Heck, even Toyota is considering rollout to fill in the gap Tesla has left here. Looking back at all the chest-pounding we got from Tesla supporters about the "20 Million annual sales" goal, their empty claims then seem absolutely out-of-touch with reality now.
3-15-2025	Waiting. It's a fine line to walk when you are a true supporter. You want to demonstrate faith in promises, but setting realistic expectations isn't easy. This is such an attempt: "Toyota has a solid state battery tech coming out in 2-3 years that blow away other EV manufacturers. 1200 km range 10 min charge time from empty on a fast charger. I have been waiting and will bit one as soon as I can!!!" I attempted to contribute by adding: Solid-State will indeed check a number of important boxes, but expectations being set for ordinary consumer usage are rather distorted. There is no doubt a variety offerings will become available from a variety of sources in the next few years, Toyota included. The tech will be expensive though. This is why primary use will be focused on PHEV initially. Being able to hit a small battery-pack with a lot more amps than batteries with liquid electrolyte is a paradigm shift. You'll get a lot more bang for your buck. Existing DC fast-chargers would become a useful tool for PHEV, since even just pulling 100 kW is awesomely fast for a battery-pack that's only 25 kWh... about 75 miles (120 km) usable at 3.5 mi/kWh. To get 745 miles (1200 km) at 3.5 mi/kWh, roughly 250 kWh will be needed... 10 times larger than the PHEV. At that capacity, transferring enough electricity in 10 minutes could only be achieved with a commercial megawatt (1000 kW) charger. Expecting those for public use at an affordable cost will be totally unrealistic. It simply isn't going to happen for many, many years still. This is why Toyota's effort to phaseout ICE in favor of hybrids easily augmented to provide a plug makes a lot of sense. It would be odd for us as plug-in advocates seeing a PHEV taking advantage of DC, but that is exactly what ordinary consumers have envisioned for their plug-in vehicle for years.
3-14-2025	Short-Sighted. The weekly podcast featured Toyota's reveals. I was eager to jump on the opportunity to comment. I only made it halfway through the hour-long listen before pausing to post this: That comment about Toyota "sitting on the sidelines" was an interesting anecdotal twist on the situation. Hybrid history taught us that would be a necessary step for mass adoption. Other automakers simply couldn't compete. They needed extra upfront to get established. Look at GM's effort with Volt. Neither EV nor HV efficiency was as good as what Toyota rolled out. GM lost money too. Toyota ended up delivering what GM had always strived for too, a PHEV model of a popular SUV. Now, GM is working to deliver the same. All the "behind" narrative efforts to portray Toyota as hopelessly struggling with no chance to ever catch up didn't acknowledge this possibility. With so much already invested in motors, controllers, inverters and batteries for hybrids, what if Toyota wasn't resting on their laurels for BEV? What if they were actually allowing the competition to lap them for the sake of that larger effort to phase out ICE being a win-win for everyone. Looking at was just revealed, that sure looks like the case. During that time, they have carefully studied what the masses will truly be drawn to while also advancing their tech. That next-gen eAxle combined with the switch to SiC semiconductors will deliver an efficiency increase. Consider goals. Using more with less is the point. A more efficient BEV means reduced cost & time charging. Obviously, needing less battery to deliver competitive miles has advantages too. Toyota has basically been gaming the market and enthusiasts were too short-sighted to notice.
3-14-2025	Always Said. There is a lot that has been said. Reading this was rather annoying, but quite predictable: "We've always said that if the Toyota bZ4X ever got some upgrades..." It's the typical expectation from an enthusiast perspective. They ignore every reference to loss-leader sales. They pretend it is easy to achieve sustainable high-volume sales. That was always their formula for profit. No need to address the barriers, just delivering a very desirable vehicle will magically overcome the problem of want over need. Ugh. Much of that comes from impatience. Having to wait an entire product-cycle is unacceptable. They have come to believe over-the-air software updates are the solution for everything. Again, ugh. Tired of such selective interpretations of the market and their related purchase decisions (completely ignoring industry challenges still faced), I posted this about their unrealistic belief that only something minor is all it would take. A lot of time and even more effort that will go unnoticed is what it takes and what it took: History informs us a lot about setting expectations. In this case, it was wise to look at what Toyota did with Prius. Odds were pretty good they would follow that same success formula for bZ4X. Turns out, they are.
3-14-2025	Out Of Options. Immediate response to seeing that Toyota will be offering something smaller than bZ4X, appealing very directly to European shoppers, there was an article featuring the "affordable" choice coming from Tesla. It's already too late. Sales have dropped dramatically in Europe. Turns out, the already difficult to deal with "vastly superior" attitude from Tesla was taken too far with the stir of support for Germany's offensive past. The solution will supposedly be a stripped down Model Y, enough to reduce price by 20%. How will that be competitive? The interior is already minimalized. I suspect reduction of range & power is where corners will be cut. It won't change much though. It won't be enough. I posted why: This is textbook Innovator's Dilemma. As predicted, the innovator remains trapped trying to try alter the product that was a huge success for its initial audience to now have much broader appeal. It was doomed to fail. It would have been like trying to push Prius to everyone who stopped at a Toyota dealer to look at a new vehicle. Instead, the technology was spread from that hatchback, where it now thrives as a popular sedan (Camry) and top-selling crossover (RAV4). The only way for that technology to reach a wider audience is to diversify. Sticking with only 3/Y for high-volume is business suicide. Rolling out CT was truly an act of desperation. Rather than designing something to draw the masses, Musk tried to create a popular enthusiast niche. That has been a disastrous choice. Stripping down Y makes no sense either. With a market already saturated from highly depreciated Y nicely loaded, who will the audience be? Many seeking entry-level vehicles won't want anything that big anyway. It's easy to see Toyota considering C-HR+ to fill in that gap. It might be a good opportunity for VW to consider ID.3 here too. Tesla is clearly out of competitive options.
3-13-2025	Update Spin. Almost immediately, there was argument claiming that Toyota had failed to properly address audience. It was a desperate effort to retain the "EV market" perspective. The BEV purist know they still cannot compete with other vehicles on the showroom floor. They have been fighting that reality for years... hence a narrative to portray sales as only necessary to enthusiasts. It's why I pushed back so hard on their efforts. They know ordinary consumers are no where near as forgiving and are unwilling to spend a premium on want rather than need. They keep trying though: "Toyota may be remiss in that arena. Their wheelhouse is NOT "loyal Toyota customers", but (loyal) BEV owners who want BEV and want the whole dealership ubiquity, training, parts departments and repair bays across the U.S." I was all to happy to fire back on that nonsense, especially since it was a frequent poster of comments trying to keep the status quo from changing. You know, keeping Toyota as their antithesis. I posted: That narrative does not carry much weight anymore. It was popular when conquest sales were the norm, excited early-adopters taking advantage of the tax-credit opportunity. Kudos to them, but shameful for misrepresenting Toyota's goal pushing that narrative. Just as was with Prius, focus is targeting showroom shoppers. That's a long-term effort in direct conflict with conquest sales. That meant limited volume, not giving into the temptation of offering a loss-leader. Just like with Prius history, what will be delivered for the masses is gen-2. It should be undeniable at this point that the market wasn't ready. Absence of infrastructure (so few DCFC and almost non-existent support for apartment/condo dwellers) was very easy to predict. There's still an obsession with range too; long road-trips shouldn't be the highest priority. Appealing to showroom shoppers is vital. Legacy automakers have yet to impact the status quo. BEV are still looked upon as niche offerings. It is vital to get loyal customers looking to replace their aged RAV4, Camry or Corolla to consider something with a plug.
3-12-2025	Mistake. This is more rhetoric, twisting the situation to appear to be a design overlook: "Yeah it's probably a baked-in design flaw to not allocate enough space for a larger pack. Considering that the ostensibly smaller C-HR+ has a slightly larger pack, I'm hoping they learn from their mistake next generation. At the very least, design a larger pack area even if it goes unused when they don't increase the battery size, so they have the flexibility to offer a larger one once they realize that's a mistake lol." Since when was larger ever a requirement? The rest of the world is perfectly fine with shorter EV ranges. Why should automakers have to compensate for infrastructure shortcomings. Why not just address the actual problem? Needing less battery reduces the cost of the vehicle. Having to carry less weight improves efficiency too. Again, annoyed, I posted a reply: That would be a subjective assessment. Toyota's supposed "mistake" has allowed them to avoid falling into the loss-leader trap like other legacy automakers. The plan ever before rollout was to leverage an existing platform by stretching it for gen-1 and for gen-2 to be a start from scratch. It's a very effective means of mitigating risk to learning as much as possible before committing to high-volume production. It makes a lot of sense when you address the bigger picture of transition, something the "all in" pledges completely ignored. Continuous improvement has proven very effective for moving entire product-lines forward.
3-12-2025	Mid-Cycle update (2026 model). Here's the highlight list I provided for next years update to bZ4X: · battery-cell count from 96 to 104 = range increase · Silicon Carbide (SiC) semiconductor = range increase · next-gen eAxle (traction motor) = power increase · pre-conditioning (navigation & manual) = faster DC charging · charge-curve improved = faster DC charging