Automakers hedge their bets with plug-in hybrids as EV sales slow
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
IMO we have already past the ideal time to build PHEVs.
PHEVs were once looked as a more economical choice than, than full EVs. That was prime time to build PHEVs, but as battery prices fall, EVs will undercut PHEVs. How many are going to purchase PHEVs when equivalent EVs are less expensive?
So I don't see any big shift to PHEVs. Almost all of these stories are really about GM/Ford failure to execute with EVs.
GM and Ford flailing around is not the market, and expect them flailing back toward PHEVs will not end any better than their poor execution on EVs, in fact it seems like it will end even worse for them. Poorly executed Ford/GM PHEVs aren't likely to do that well either, and there is a lot of cost changing directions seemingly on a whim.
PHEVs were once looked as a more economical choice than, than full EVs. That was prime time to build PHEVs, but as battery prices fall, EVs will undercut PHEVs. How many are going to purchase PHEVs when equivalent EVs are less expensive?
So I don't see any big shift to PHEVs. Almost all of these stories are really about GM/Ford failure to execute with EVs.
GM and Ford flailing around is not the market, and expect them flailing back toward PHEVs will not end any better than their poor execution on EVs, in fact it seems like it will end even worse for them. Poorly executed Ford/GM PHEVs aren't likely to do that well either, and there is a lot of cost changing directions seemingly on a whim.
Upvote
-2
(4
/
-6)
Go ahead and quote where I said anything negative about PHEVs. I've only refuted the typical anti-BEV bullshit.
Upvote
2
(6
/
-4)
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
This is why a big part of the solution is fewer overall cars, not just replacing every single car with a battery-powered car.
Upvote
0
(4
/
-4)
Upvote
4
(8
/
-4)
Exactly hybrids have their place. Toyota was right hybrids are important. Toyota was getting bashed being behind on EVs that hybrid were obsolete and EVs were the bright shining star. The trouble with plugins reports say is many people don’t bother plugging them in. So they get worse mileage with all that extra weight. I have to wonder why there can’t be a conventional and plugin hybrid? Should be able to charge a conventional hybrid battery externally to.
Upvote
-2
(3
/
-5)
The photo on this article is a bit too ironic, that is the charging port of the Honda Clarity PHEV, a car that Honda discontinued even though it was likely the most practical sedan in America.
Honda isn’t investing in PHEV. Toyota is, kind of (it’s like 2% of their sales volume). Volvo is all-in.
Point is, PHEVs are rare. They should be way more common, but they have all the downsides of “needing to charge” and all the upsides of “driving all electric” and “can fuel up, no need to fast charge”
They’re a great compromise for many but they’re not a panacea.
Honda isn’t investing in PHEV. Toyota is, kind of (it’s like 2% of their sales volume). Volvo is all-in.
Point is, PHEVs are rare. They should be way more common, but they have all the downsides of “needing to charge” and all the upsides of “driving all electric” and “can fuel up, no need to fast charge”
They’re a great compromise for many but they’re not a panacea.
Last edited:
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
Not right now it doesn't. It's in the mid 200s. Which is fine for most people.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
No... as I mentioned Tesla sold 654k BEV in the US... which is more than the 643k hybrids that Toyota+Lexus sold in the US (Toyota itself sold 565k). Did you mean to say every other automakers except Tesla from your first statement?
That's only because you are disingenously exclude BEVs which non-Tesla BEV makers are making instead of hybrids. Ford sold 206k BEV+hybrid, Honda sold 297k hybrids in the US. GM (Chevy, Cadlilac, GMC) sold 80k BEV. Kia/Hyundai/Gensis sold 104k BEV, VWAG (VW, Audi, Porsche) which sold 90k BEV, Mercedes (40k BEV), BMW (45k BEV), Rivian sold 50k BEV, altogether that's like over 912k electrified vehicles... so your cherry picked number of only hybrids is kind of irrelevant.
And only 40k of those Toyota's hybrids were PHEV... because once you go past the Prius (only 38k sold in 2023) - the fuel efficiency of the other Toyota traditional hybrids (HEV) are ok, but not amazing. I mean the ICEV RAV4 ICEV gets 35mpg... and the RAV4 HEV gets 38 mpg (10% reduction in fuel usage and CO2 emissions) that's Toyota's best selling model. The Tacoma Hybrid gets 24mpg which is not not particularly mid-blowing reduction in fuel usage. Toyota Tundra Hybrid also as less than inspiring fuel efficiency at 24mpg.
Last edited:
Upvote
9
(9
/
0)
There’s no need for me to quote you, when all I’m trying to understand is your viewpoint and your strong feelings on the matter.
Why do you feel strongly compelled to call out and talk over any hesitance on BEVs?
You could choose to “call-out” some overly-optimistic takes on BEVs: Is that your stance?
Why don’t you feel compelled to argue for the pros of PHEVs? Like I asked before, what am I missing here because I just don’t get it.
Last edited:
Upvote
-3
(3
/
-6)
Completely waiving all taxes on EVs was a hell of an incentive.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
Eh, the point is you can fill up an ICEV almost anywhere. You don't need an app to calculate a special side trip taking into account which pumps happen to be known to be working today.
Upvote
-3
(5
/
-8)
I think y'all are getting the Ranger hybrid, though, which the US isn't in part because of the Maverick hybrid. Ford was asked, and basically said "Get a Maverick or Lightning".
I'm still pretty salty about it. The Maverick doesn't work for me, and the Lightning is both excessive and sucks for towing.
<Boskone Ford Pickup Rant>
The Maverick is really a Ranger.
The Ranger is really an F-150.
The F-150 is really an F-250.
</BFPR>
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
Those have been phased out over the last few years starting in 2017... with the value-added tax being re-instituted in Jan 2023 for EV over 500000 SEK (roughly 45k USD)
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
Ars Technica Automotive Editor Jonathan Gitlin lives in DC since 2009 and doesn't own a car.
I've lived in NYC, Boston, SF (yea I'm coastal person). It varies on what parts of the city (e.g. urban core), but large chunks of people there who are not in poverty (even affluent households like doctors and lawyers) do fine without a car. I have friends in Seattle, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Francisco that lived for a years without a car, or without using a car regularly (i.e. only on weekends). These are doctors, lawyers, grad students (now professors), software engineers... so it's not like they couldn't afford to get a car... but usually in their 20-30s that found it an unnecessary cost.
Last edited:
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
Half the gas of ICE: infinitely more gas than BEV.
You don't plan. The stop is calculated for you.
And as someone who drove ICE cars for many decades: absolutely I had to think about gas. Indeed: it was a huge annoyance as I'd have to stop on my way in to work, or on my way back during rush hour (an hour long drive already) or make a special trip. That was about once a week.
That me refueling stops are longer a few times a year when I take long trips and that I never have to think about it any other time is a pretty great trade. And frankly, planning to grab a snack and walk around once every few hours has been a good thing.
Upvote
4
(7
/
-3)
You don't have to look for a charging station. The car includes charging stops on your route when you select a destination. Does your car do that for gas?
And no: It's never 5 min with gas. You spend more than 5 min getting off and on the interstate. More like 20.
And let's add quantity. You are doing some long trips so what... 15k miles per year? What do you do on a tank? 400miles? So 38 gas stops per year? At even 15 min that's 570 minutes (just under 10 hours) per year fueling up your ICE.
Meanwhile I only have to stop to refuel on long trips; and by then I want to stop (and I don't have to do nearly as much work at the stop. Pull up and plug in. No credit card, no selecting fuel, no holding it while it pumps, no caps to screw off or on.. hell, I don't even have to bother turning off the car (which my passengers appriciate).
I suspect there's no PHEV Corolla because the cost of the dual power train was too impactful on this low-cost, high-fuel-economy car.
I don't like the way Toyota Hybrids drive. I find acceleration too unpredictable. I liked my CMAX, but they don't make those any more and it lasted like a Ford.
Upvote
3
(5
/
-2)
The thing you'll notice is that there aren't legions of Tesla owners (and former owners) telling you that it turned out to actually be a lot of hassle... because it really isn't.
Upvote
6
(7
/
-1)
I feel like US is gonna get cooked in the EV territory. China will dominate and already have plenty of affordabole models. Need influx of Chinese EVs in the US to lower the price
Upvote
0
(3
/
-3)
I'm calling out FUD. The bullshit "you have to stress about charging on trips over 100mi" and "but what if there's an emergency and your battery is dead." That's classic Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt. They're made by people who are either wildly misinformed (by someone else spreading FUD no doubt), or they are entirely disingenuous arguments. There's little to no truth to them at all.
Upvote
3
(8
/
-5)
Ford and Rivian now. Others to follow.
Though don't pin all your hopes on Superchargers. Musk had a hissy fit and sacked everyone working on them.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
I don't. (no desire to give a nickel to an erratic neo-nazi)
Which is one more reason for a PHEV, today.
Rather than get all wound up about ICE vs BEV, you could focus on the topic of the article: PHEVs.
Upvote
1
(6
/
-5)
The topic of the article is not just PHEVs. Even the damn title mentions (B)EVs. It's not some focused article about PHEV tech or something. It's very specifically about the shift away from pure ICEVs and the current climate of PHEVs and BEVs.
Upvote
0
(2
/
-2)
I mean, that's the irony, isn't it? If you can afford to live in a city where you don't need a car you almost certainly have enough of an income to buy one.
Upvote
1
(2
/
-1)
Well, sure, but Tesla owners are the kind of people who will let their car break their finger and still praise it.
You don't criticize the cult once you're in it.
Upvote
-8
(2
/
-10)
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Not really?
I mean do you think everyone in New York City (one of the best places to live without a car) is rolling in disposable cash? Similarly, Chicago or Boston? Those cities have both the affluent and the destitute.
San Francisco is famous for having both lots of billionaires and lots of homeless people. All of those cities you don't need a car, but there are sizable chunk of the population that can't easily afford a car, as well as people who can afford a car - but choose not to.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
I think there'll still be a place for PHEVs for a while yet; while charging infrastructure in cities and at service stations etc. has improved significantly in many countries, there will still be rural areas where the situation still isn't ideal for electric cars, as well as countries that just haven't invested in charging infrastructure.
I do wonder if we should really be seeing more PHEV pickups catering to those kinds of possible uses, as well as maybe some vans and lorries for sectors that might expect to be making rural deliveries.
While range anxiety is definitely a "problem" that's been massively overblown for most people (especially when most people will never even come close to the limit), there are also still legitimate cases where range (or the time lost to having to stop and charge) are still valid concerns, the problem of range anxiety has been people worrying about it that don't actually need to.
I actually really meant all types of hybrids, including those that were basically just petrol engines driving electric motors, or charging batteries "on the go". While in terms of tackling climate change these weren't strictly beneficial, they would have still meant increased production of electric motors for vehicles, improving battery and charging technology etc. (as the faster you can charge a battery on the go, the less the petrol/diesel engine needs to run) etc., all the pieces we needed to be developing sooner.
Plus there has been more public awareness of city pollution for quite a long time, so even though non-PHEV hybrids weren't truly cutting emissions, reducing emissions inside densely populated areas would have still been a win, and would have helped with developing the technologies and expertise needed to switch to true PHEVs, and full-electric in a much more gradual and organised way.
Again though, to be clear, I'm talking about what should have been happening years (decades) ago, rather than now when it's a frantic race to avert disaster.
That said, I will say I disagree that PHEV don't support public charging infrastructure; while it's true they don't need it (can run the petrol engine if they need to) that doesn't mean that charging on the go isn't desirable for PHEVs, as it's how you run the vehicle quieter and cleaner for longer, and maximise your fuel economy (by simply not using fuel).
People tend to over-inflate the hassle of having to charge EVs, but the reality is there are plenty of times where you can be charging an EV (or PHEV) that aren't requiring you to wait, such as when you're stopping for food, to take a break, or doing whatever it is you went to do. Since your car isn't moving anyway, it might as well be charging if that'll give you the extra range you need for the next leg of the journey. So I wouldn't say that it's true that PHEVs only want to be charged at home; there are still benefits to charging elsewhere, so charging infrastructure still makes sense for them, the demand for it just wouldn't have been as high.
You're of course correct that PHEVs don't have as much battery capacity, and that means their batteries are worked harder for the same number of short trips (though conversely they're also not being worked as hard for the longer ones, so it depends a lot on usage), but that's again a good reason why we should have transitioned to hybrids as a stepping stone, because it would have encouraged investment in battery renewal and replacement, as well as capacity improvements.
Again though, sadly it's a ship that's mostly sailed. It might still be worth doing in other countries with little or no charging infrastructure, but I'm mostly just lamenting that it wasn't done when it made most sense, at least in my mind.
Last edited:
Upvote
-1
(1
/
-2)
Those have been phased out over the last few years starting in 2017... with the value-added tax being re-instituted in Jan 2023 for EV over 500000 SEK (roughly 45k USD)
Norway EV sales have have continued their dominance, even as incentives draw down. EVs are no longer some kind of scary unknown and don't need incentives to sell them.
BEV will soon (with a year) surpass gas powered cars on the road in Norway, though Diesels once dominated so it will be a couple more years before they are eclipsed by BEVs.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
A PHEV would let me do 90% of my driving (and 100% of my least efficient around-town driving) on electrons, while not having to upgrade the electrical in my old house to support an L2 charger. That last 10% would be quite painful with a full EV, and the cost currently is not palatable to me to get one with enough range to make it not painful.
Trouble is, nobody makes one that I find appealing. Volvo comes closest with the V60 Recharge, but the price due to it only being offered in "Polestar" trim is a non-starter. If I could have the proper wagon in base trim for the usual wagon upcharge over an S60 sedan, there would be one in my garage, but $72K+ is ludicrous.
Trouble is, nobody makes one that I find appealing. Volvo comes closest with the V60 Recharge, but the price due to it only being offered in "Polestar" trim is a non-starter. If I could have the proper wagon in base trim for the usual wagon upcharge over an S60 sedan, there would be one in my garage, but $72K+ is ludicrous.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
To what end? I’m concluding that you’re looking to be angry just to be angry.
Example: One point that’s frequently brought up is having to plan or rely on an app.
Where you see “FUD”, I see a yellow flag and hint to think it through.
Whereas I spent time thinking it over to try and make BEV work, I suspect most people apply a heuristic and move on.
That, to me, is valid. If I have to rely on navigation to plan out my route or plan out my schedule, that tells me the charging infrastructure isn’t quite there. At the very least it’s a cause for pause.
Which leads me to this:
The Tesla supercharger network is the only national-scale option. There is no real #2 as of yet.
I see this quote and the news, and my immediate thought is that the BEV ecosystem is a fragile shitshow.
The root cause of uncertainty is real, no matter how much you’re shouting otherwise.
Last edited:
Upvote
-4
(3
/
-7)
That place is niche though. There is no heyday of PHEV ahead of us. GM and Ford flip flopping toward PHEVs is unlikely to pay off for them.
Since it's niche though, they could just stay with regular hybrids or gas power, that have lower entry costs and no thoughts about charging.
The Dodge 1500 Ramcharger PHEV is expected to start at around $60K, but a base Dodge Ram 1500 gas powered starts around $40K. $20K buys a lot of gas if you were thinking of getting a PHEV to save gas...
PHEVs generally don't support DC fast charging at all. So the infrastructure being built is of limited use to PHEVs. You aren't going to stop at a rest stop to do level 2 charging for 4 hours to get back 40 miles of range.
Upvote
-1
(3
/
-4)
PHEV owner here and no, PHEVs aren't well served by public infrastructure. On long range trips, PHEVs that can use Level 3 charging are almost non-existent and spending hours charging at Level 2 is pointless. Level 2 charging at hotels would be nice, but still very rare in the US.
For commuting, Level 2 parking in garages is more common but still nowhere near adequate. There's 4 chargers in the garage where I work and those are continually in use with no sign the owner will expand. And that's a near perfect scenario as an 8 hour work day is plenty for a PHEV to charge on Level 2.
Upvote
3
(5
/
-2)
And why is that? Is there an inherent limitation to this?
Even a pure BEV like the Nissan Leaf had to wait ages for a CHAdeMO to CCS adapter, so let’s not pretend this is about PHEVs.
Last edited:
Upvote
-5
(1
/
-6)
Upvote
-1
(2
/
-3)
It's entirely about PHEVs because the expected use case is that you will use gasoline for long distance, not DC fast charging.
Upvote
6
(7
/
-1)