Still want an EV?

[chassis]

I have spoken with 20-30 somethings (EV market wheelhouse) and mid-50s smart savvy business guys re: EVs.

Summary from these folks: EVs don’t make sense today. They aren’t equally usable and equally impactful from a total cost of ownership point of view vs ICE vehicles. These people don’t believe the planet will self-destruct if they don’t buy an EV today or anytime soon.

Toyota CEO’s recent comments suggest the industry looks at the EV euphoria as the scantily-clad emperor. Expect timelines for EV penetration to be pushed back, either accompanied by public announcements or quietly out of the public spotlight.

Expect furthermore that ICE technology will continue its relentless march forward and upward, as it always has and always will. Specific power and fuel consumption will continue better (lower) causing the EV-ICE parity point to be continually pushed further into the future, if it ever arrives.

[Alfisti]

The timelines won't be pushed back, they will just allow PHEV's as part of the mix and boom, problem solved.

[chassis]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

The timelines won't be pushed back, they will just allow PHEV's as part of the mix and boom, problem solved.

EV in the preceding post = BEV, whose timelines will indeed be pushed back. Likely not uniformly in each country but rather guided by political and energy security (independence) pressures.

Hybrids are workable solutions today.

[Cos270]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

The timelines won't be pushed back, they will just allow PHEV's as part of the mix and boom, problem solved.

Expect companies that are not incorporating PHEV’s into their current lineup and going all in on EVs instead to have serious liquidity problems, if not bankruptcy.

[Murf the Surf]

Governments can make mandates and impose timelines but common sense and the market dictates that if the mandates aren't realistic then the dates will change.

[________]

Originally Posted by Cos270

Expect companies that are not incorporating PHEV’s into their current lineup and going all in on EVs instead to have serious liquidity problems, if not bankruptcy.

Why is that in your view?

[M5VanHalen]

Originally Posted by Cos270

Expect companies that are not incorporating PHEV’s into their current lineup and going all in on EVs instead to have serious liquidity problems, if not bankruptcy.

100% correct. Why have companies like GM not asked the consumers what they want in their next vehicle? I don't believe for a second that ALL customers want an EV, so why has companies like GM committed to all EV's by 2035? I bet that only about 1/3 of customers actually want an EV if ICE vehicles are also available. The auto manufactures that commit to building both EV's and ICE vehicles in the future will win!

[Murf the Surf]

Originally Posted by M5VanHalen

100% correct. Why have companies like GM not asked the consumers what they want in their next vehicle? I don't believe for a second that ALL customers want an EV, so why has companies like GM committed to all EV's by 2035? I bet that only about 1/3 of customers actually want an EV if ICE vehicles are also available. The auto manufactures that commit to building both EV's and ICE vehicles in the future will win!

Is it possible that GM for example is telling the government what it wants to here, and possibly the reality is more in line with Toyota CEO's view that the transition to all EV's isn't the reality.

[Cos270]

Originally Posted by Onesie

Why is that in your view?

In short, most companies (basically everyone except VW and Stellantis) do not have the resources (capital, manpower or equipment) to offer both EVs and PHEVs in large volumes or varieties.
Making cars is INCREDIBLY capital intensive and margins are small. Those margins shrink even more for PHEVs because they have the challenges/costs associated with both ICE and BEV, with almost none of the benefits (from a manufacturing standpoint).
Retooling facilities and developing and implementing processes to make cars and components also takes time. The speed at which companies are attempting to switch to EV production is unprecedented, and it’s still a 3-5 year process at minimum.
If people do not buy EVs as governments and companies are expecting/hoping, companies that have a majority EV portfolio will not have the time and resources required to start making ICE cars or PHEVs to meet demand.

[________]

Originally Posted by Cos270

In short, most companies (basically everyone except VW and Stellantis) do not have the resources (capital, manpower or equipment) to offer both EVs and PHEVs in large volumes or varieties.
Making cars is INCREDIBLY capital intensive and margins are small. Those margins shrink even more for PHEVs because they have the challenges/costs associated with both ICE and BEV, with almost none of the benefits (from a manufacturing standpoint).
Retooling facilities and developing and implementing processes to make cars and components also takes time. The speed at which companies are attempting to switch to EV production is unprecedented, and it’s still a 3-5 year process at minimum.
If people do not buy EVs as governments and companies are expecting/hoping, companies that have a majority EV portfolio will not have the time and resources required to start making ICE cars or PHEVs to meet demand.

Awesome, understood.

So it is your view that companies are making the quick switch to EV because of anticipated regulations, correct?

I was kinda thinking they were moving with the market, to supply demand. So, regulations or no regulations, they’d still be selling what people wanted to buy. Is that not how you think?

[M3WC]

Originally Posted by Murf the Surf

Is it possible that GM for example is telling the government what it wants to here, and possibly the reality is more in line with Toyota CEO's view that the transition to all EV's isn't the reality.

No, not with Mary Barra running GM.

[Cos270]

Originally Posted by Onesie

Awesome, understood.

So it is your view that companies are making the quick switch to EV because of anticipated regulations, correct?

I was kinda thinking they were moving with the market, to supply demand. So, regulations or no regulations, they’d still be selling what people wanted to buy. Is that not how you think?

Their actions are motivated by a combination of things, I think:
- Impending regulations
- EVs are a buzzword right now, so that gets shareholder’s attention (short term profits). As the CEO of Toyota has said, the silent majority are indifferent or do not want EVs (some have said that he’s trying to downplay EV enthusiasm because of Toyota’s investments in hydrogen - probably not entirely false, but I still think he’s right). But like everything in the media today, the vocal minority gets the most attention.
- The initial thinking was that once scaled to full production capacity, margins on EVs would be fatter than ICE vehicles. High initial investment, but the modular nature of most EV platforms lends itself to a simpler final assembly process, and machining electric drive unit components is much simpler than an ICE powertrain (no cylinder heads, blocks, transmissions). Recent supply chain issues and the fact that everyone is trying to make EVs in relatively large capacities at the same time have seriously hamstrung companies’ ability to scale as fast as they thought, along with unforeseen issues with in-house battery and electric motor production (GM, for example, has never made batteries in-house before Ultium - they were purchased from LG previously).

Many companies that went all-in on EVs needed a ton of external factors to play out perfectly in order for their plans to work. In the real world, this never happens, of course. I have no proof for this next claim, but it’s the only way such shortsightedness and greed makes sense - I believe there have been conversations between auto executives and governments/regulators that have gone something like this: We (gov) will create all the demand you need, you (auto execs) just make sure you can handle the supply.

[LogicalApex]

Originally Posted by M5VanHalen

100% correct. Why have companies like GM not asked the consumers what they want in their next vehicle? I don't believe for a second that ALL customers want an EV, so why has companies like GM committed to all EV's by 2035? I bet that only about 1/3 of customers actually want an EV if ICE vehicles are also available. The auto manufactures that commit to building both EV's and ICE vehicles in the future will win!

You can't just ask customers what they want and then try to give that to them. By the time you get it built, they'll want something new.
- Steve Jobs

Customers can’t envision the world so if you ask them what they want they’ll tell you the same thing they are familiar with. Then when something better comes along that shows them a new world they’ll take that and you’ll be left with no customers.

When Apple was working on the iPhone if you asked someone would they want an expensive phone without a keyboard they would have laughed at you…

Fast forward to today and Nokia is no longer making phones and everything is a smartphone… Microsoft used to lead the PDA/smartphone space and now they don’t even make a phone/PDA OS anymore…

You sound like Steve Ballmer when he saw the iPhone…

[chassis]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Interesting information regarding the 20 - 30 year olds. I'm kind of like Mr. Hann from Fast Times at Ridgemont High; I think all youngin's have been brainwashed into thinking "the world is on fire, and we all are going to die soon" (a quote from a politician's daughter...) and have saving the planet as their primary concern. Are these educated young people you found?

Just curious.

Yes.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Interesting information regarding the 20 - 30 year olds. I'm kind of like Mr. Hann from Fast Times at Ridgemont High; I think all youngin's have been brainwashed into thinking "the world is on fire, and we all are going to die soon" (a quote from a politician's daughter...) and have saving the planet as their primary concern. Are these educated young people you found?

Just curious.

When the only 20-30 year olds most people interact with are news stories or on Twitter it is easy to get the sensationalist impression that the loudest voices are the majority. I manage about 25 people in this age group, all college degreed, mostly BS/MS Eng, and I can tell you that there is more diversity of thought than people think.

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by Cos270

Expect companies that are not incorporating PHEV’s into their current lineup and going all in on EVs instead to have serious liquidity problems, if not bankruptcy.

Which is why Toyota and Honda are the horses to back, in North America and Australasia anyway. VW, IMHO, are in for a WORLD of hurt.

The dates will remain to save face, no one wants to be seen to be wrong, they will just allow PHEV's in with a quiet adjustment and no fanfare then spruike that they hit their target.

[M5Rick]

Fact of the matter over here quite simply is that the party that was voted in to run the country didn't say they would reduce the date from 2040 to 2030 for banning the sale of fuel cars which will have cost them the next general election for taking some of those voters for a ride, even Jeremy Clarkson has said the blue party now are not the ones of old.
They didn't take into account that drivers of older cars, and there are a lot of them, can't afford newer EV's.

[Cos270]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I'm not bought in to this idea that EV are less labor intensive to build and will be more profitable on a per unit basis. I studied and have a degree in manufacturing engineering. Being the car geek I am, I focused a lot of study on automobile manufacturing. The supply chain for building ICE drivetrain (engines/transmissions) is huge and very cost effective. Aluminum and steel are cheap raw materials and highly recyclable. Based on my understanding in general of how EV batteries are manufactured they are more expensive to manufacture than an engine and transmission.

While there are less parts assembled to manufacture an EV drive motor, it still has a lot of high-precision parts in it that require precise assembly. Add in the power electronics and charging system to process battery charging and distribution of energy to the EV motor(s), I don't see a large delta in manufacturing time (i.e. cost). It has always been the the basic floor pan of the chassis that is the most expensive part of producing an automobile. The manufacturing facility is built around the chassis design, which is what makes it expensive to manufacture. That cost is the same regardless of drivetrain architecture. Switchgear for the MMI is also a high-cost production item. EVs toss most of that hardware into the console TV screen and software, which tells me that's where a significant cost savings is found. It's disguised as "elemental design" or "minimalistic design", but it's just plain old manufacturing cost cutting.

While the internet reports Tesla clears $9K in profit per car, [...]

I totally agree. Maybe I was misleading in what I wrote, but the initial assumption that EVs being cheaper to manufacture was just that, an assumption. I can only speak from my personal experiences, but so far this has proven to NOT be the case for all the reasons you mentioned.

[M5Rick]

Add on the constant same tv ad's about EV's mostly from Kia and Hyundai (and hardly any or none for normal ICE vehicles) toeing the line for misinformed governments.

[M5Rick]

What's happening in UK now, there is chaos at EV charging stations.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...elated-replace

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

In the USA, this is when the guns come out...

[Murf the Surf]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

What's happening in UK now, there is chaos at EV charging stations.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...elated-replace

I get pissed when I have to wait for someone at the gas pump ahead of me.