Jump to content

Toyota scrambles for EV reboot with eye on Tesla


Recommended Posts

On 11/8/2022 at 1:23 PM, DeluxeStang said:

Time will tell. I believe it was ExplorerDude who said ford was considering an affordable sedan offering if the economic outlook remained grim with high gas prices. Maybe not as a  BEV if they wanted to provide a more affordable offering, but the c2 platform could make a great basis for a hybrid sedan/hatchback. Maybe call it the escort or cortina. The c2 platform is already developed, so it would be more cost efficient, we know it's flexible, we know it's reliable. That would be my play if I was Ford's CEO trying to reenter the sedan space. That and offer a higher performance, aspirational sedan to compete at the higher level, maybe as an ev. 

 

Thanks.  I’m not sure how compact an aerodynamic sedan the C2 platform could support, but see a need for affordable long-range hybrid cars the size of Civics and Corollas to complement their BEV counterparts.  Considering Maverick’s excellent fuel economy, it seems reasonable that 50 to 60 MPG should be achievable as other manufacturers have proven.  I’m not aware of a Ford Atkinson engine smaller than the 2.5L, but a compact fuel-efficient hybrid sedan might need a smaller engine in +/- 1.5L  range.  Is there a smaller Atkinson engine available, and if not, would Ford invest in one?  From what I read here, Ford seem committed mostly to BEVs and larger vehicles going forward, at least for North America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

 

Thanks.  I’m not sure how compact an aerodynamic sedan the C2 platform could support, but see a need for affordable long-range hybrid cars the size of Civics and Corollas to complement their BEV counterparts.  Considering Maverick’s excellent fuel economy, it seems reasonable that 50 to 60 MPG should be achievable as other manufacturers have proven.  I’m not aware of a Ford Atkinson engine smaller than the 2.5L, but a compact fuel-efficient hybrid sedan might need a smaller engine in +/- 1.5L  range.  Is there a smaller Atkinson engine available, and if not, would Ford invest in one?  From what I read here, Ford seem committed mostly to BEVs and larger vehicles going forward, at least for North America.


 Buyers don’t want civics or corollas for long trips.  They’d rather have 50 mpg in an escape than 60 in something smaller.  On a 1000 mile trip the difference in gas is only $12 or so.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, silvrsvt said:


what is the point of selling a product that makes no money in a crowded segment?

 

Ford would be better off bringing out the Puma in North America instead of another Sedan. 

This is normally my position on sedans as well. But the c2 platform has been a runaway success for ford. So leveraging it, in theory, would enable them to make an affordable small car while still being profitable. If they essentially took the original c2 chassis, aka the focus, and threw in the maverick powertrains, sure, they'd have to still do some development work, but not a ton. They could save so much money on development costs that it would basically be a profitable product out of the gate. Give it a cool looking design, use what the team learned in the maverick program to maximize all their resources, and there you go. Using shared platforms is often a solid way to reenter low sales volume segments, because it reduces the amount of assets you have to invest to create the product. 

 

I would love to see the puma make it's way to the states as much as the next person. It would be a much better product than the EcoSport which is an embarrassment. But the issue is, based off what I've seen, if it came here, it would almost certainly have a starting price in the 30s. I just don't see people playing over 30k starting for ford's smallest crossover. Maybe they could replace the escape with it if the escape isn't selling well. But again, it's a size or two smaller, so that would be a hard sell. 

 

In an ideal world, the evos would replace the edge, and the puma would replace their lackluster compact SUVs. But I don't see either of these things happening unfortunately.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are we talking about a C2 sedan? For what purpose? 

 

For the price sensitive buyers, they have or are moving to B-segment CUV, which Ford failed big time with EcoSport. They need a competent replacement there - something like the Territory but with Ford engine that can fill the lower price point and leaving Bronco Sport to cover the premium price buyers.

 

For the buyers that want good MPG but not price sensitive, Maverick is the replacement for Focus and Fusion and it is available in a 40 MPG hybrid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, akirby said:


 Buyers don’t want civics or corollas for long trips.  They’d rather have 50 mpg in an escape than 60 in something smaller.  On a 1000 mile trip the difference in gas is only $12 or so.

 

You're right, as fuel efficiency improves, fuel cost savings have diminishing return.  The same applies to reduction of GHGs, which makes justifying switch from hybrid to BEV that much tougher.

 

I agree buyers don’t want to take long trips in smaller cars, but guess most don’t want to take long trips in BEVs either.  While I prefer road trips in a van, I think I would prefer a Civic over a Tesla 3 if I had to choose when driving 850 miles in a day (did it twice last month).

 

I discussed this very subject last weekend with a new Tesla S owner who just upgraded from previous S.  He loves the new 400-mile range versus the previous car’s 280 miles, but said they still use their ICE SUV to take long trips.  He mentioned that on long road trips he would only use about 60% of battery capacity, reducing range to less than 240 miles at Interstate speeds.  It is only on mid-distance trips that added battery range adds value since his first S easily handled all local trips.

 

For buyers who own only one vehicle and are limited by cost, decision on which type of vehicle to own must be exponentially more difficult if they take road trips on a regular basis.  A fuel-efficient hybrid may be a good compromise for now. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rick73 said:

 

You're right, as fuel efficiency improves, fuel cost savings have diminishing return.  The same applies to reduction of GHGs, which makes justifying switch from hybrid to BEV that much tougher.

 

I agree buyers don’t want to take long trips in smaller cars, but guess most don’t want to take long trips in BEVs either.  While I prefer road trips in a van, I think I would prefer a Civic over a Tesla 3 if I had to choose when driving 850 miles in a day (did it twice last month).

 

I discussed this very subject last weekend with a new Tesla S owner who just upgraded from previous S.  He loves the new 400-mile range versus the previous car’s 280 miles, but said they still use their ICE SUV to take long trips.  He mentioned that on long road trips he would only use about 60% of battery capacity, reducing range to less than 240 miles at Interstate speeds.  It is only on mid-distance trips that added battery range adds value since his first S easily handled all local trips.

 

For buyers who own only one vehicle and are limited by cost, decision on which type of vehicle to own must be exponentially more difficult if they take road trips on a regular basis.  A fuel-efficient hybrid may be a good compromise for now. 

Even at the start of this increasing switch  to BEVs that began about five years ago, the percentage of GHG emissions coming for road vehicles was about 10% versus over 50% from power generation. I think the current levels have changed downwards but can’t find percentages that verify this.
 

My point being that cars and light vehicle contribution to GHGs was a small percentage to begin with but electrification was a way that environmentalists could engage the public on making change - making a lot of noise about gasoline and diesel while hybrids alone could significantly cut those emission without any changes to power generation and grid infrastructure.

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

This is normally my position on sedans as well. But the c2 platform has been a runaway success for ford. So leveraging it, in theory, would enable them to make an affordable small car while still being profitable. If they essentially took the original c2 chassis, aka the focus, and threw in the maverick powertrains, sure, they'd have to still do some development work, but not a ton. They could save so much money on development costs that it would basically be a profitable product out of the gate. Give it a cool looking design, use what the team learned in the maverick program to maximize all their resources, and there you go. Using shared platforms is often a solid way to reenter low sales volume segments, because it reduces the amount of assets you have to invest to create the product. 

 

I would love to see the puma make it's way to the states as much as the next person. It would be a much better product than the EcoSport which is an embarrassment. But the issue is, based off what I've seen, if it came here, it would almost certainly have a starting price in the 30s. I just don't see people playing over 30k starting for ford's smallest crossover. Maybe they could replace the escape with it if the escape isn't selling well. But again, it's a size or two smaller, so that would be a hard sell. 

 

In an ideal world, the evos would replace the edge, and the puma would replace their lackluster compact SUVs. But I don't see either of these things happening unfortunately.

FYI, the “base” Puma Trim is basically a Titanium trim, that’s why it’s more expensive. Ford also has a BEV Puma coming out in the near future, it’s basically an electrified version of the ICE vehicles but said to be better than the old  EV Focus….

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

This is normally my position on sedans as well. But the c2 platform has been a runaway success for ford. So leveraging it, in theory, would enable them to make an affordable small car while still being profitable. If they essentially took the original c2 chassis, aka the focus, and threw in the maverick powertrains, sure, they'd have to still do some development work, but not a ton. They could save so much money on development costs that it would basically be a profitable product out of the gate. Give it a cool looking design, use what the team learned in the maverick program to maximize all their resources, and there you go. Using shared platforms is often a solid way to reenter low sales volume segments, because it reduces the amount of assets you have to invest to create the product. 

 

I would love to see the puma make it's way to the states as much as the next person. It would be a much better product than the EcoSport which is an embarrassment. But the issue is, based off what I've seen, if it came here, it would almost certainly have a starting price in the 30s. I just don't see people playing over 30k starting for ford's smallest crossover. Maybe they could replace the escape with it if the escape isn't selling well. But again, it's a size or two smaller, so that would be a hard sell. 

 

In an ideal world, the evos would replace the edge, and the puma would replace their lackluster compact SUVs. But I don't see either of these things happening unfortunately.

with the results we've had with our C-Max, which cost us over $30k new in 2012 and our over 50 MPG since new, which was the ~same price as the Escape we were considering, if it was a plugin we would certainly consider it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hearing stories out of Norway that Toyota’s EV is short on range in real world testing, they’ve been misleading folks about available capacity, their quoted max 71 Kwhr battery looks more like an available 62 Kwhr in real world testing and boy, are buyers pissed..,,,

 

Maybe this is why Toyota put the brakes on its EV developments, the cat is leaking out of the bag, stinking badly.

Edited by jpd80
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The European brands were not ready for Tesla, they’re still not ready for Chinese makers like BYD and NIO, they’re gonna get knee capped in their biggest market (China) and in Europe, their home market. America is probably their last stand for ICE and some BEV sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/11/2022 at 12:48 AM, Rick73 said:

 

Thanks.  I’m not sure how compact an aerodynamic sedan the C2 platform could support, but see a need for affordable long-range hybrid cars the size of Civics and Corollas to complement their BEV counterparts.  Considering Maverick’s excellent fuel economy, it seems reasonable that 50 to 60 MPG should be achievable as other manufacturers have proven.  I’m not aware of a Ford Atkinson engine smaller than the 2.5L, but a compact fuel-efficient hybrid sedan might need a smaller engine in +/- 1.5L  range.  Is there a smaller Atkinson engine available, and if not, would Ford invest in one?  From what I read here, Ford seem committed mostly to BEVs and larger vehicles going forward, at least for North America.

Earlier Ford hybrids used the 2.0 Atkinson I-4 but it looks like the slightly bigger capacity 2.5 gives a better balance of power that keeps away from richer mixtures when the throttle is pressed deeper. A bit like bigger capacity engines in heavy duty trucks being more fuel efficient under loaded conditions…..maybe…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/11/2022 at 4:43 PM, jpd80 said:

Earlier Ford hybrids used the 2.0 Atkinson I-4 but it looks like the slightly bigger capacity 2.5 gives a better balance of power that keeps away from richer mixtures when the throttle is pressed deeper. A bit like bigger capacity engines in heavy duty trucks being more fuel efficient under loaded conditions…..maybe…

 

It may be difficult to compare Atkinson engine displacement to that of conventional truck ICE since Atkinson effective engine displacement is less than its volume, and as engines are made more efficient, the effective displacement “may” be even less.  I’m not sure what the upper limit will be when CR are already 14 to 1 (more like expansion ratio?).

 

To your point, Honda apparently increased the new Civic Hybrid’s displacement to 2.0L with an all new engine, but I haven’t seen details other than engine achieves class-leading 41% thermal efficiency.  It will be interesting to see engine design details, and fuel economy.

 

It will also be interesting to see in a couple of days what Toyota does with redesigned Prius; and whether it is more of a Corolla Hybrid, or an all-new design that tests fuel-economy limits.  If electric power and torque is increased, perhaps ICE can be decreased in size.  As far as I know, Hyundai hybrids with 1.6L engines are most fuel efficient in US (though electric contribution is limited by comparison).  Toyota may try to exceed those fuel economy ratings to get back on top of list.

 

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1137834_redesigned-2023-toyota-prius-due-for-nov-16-reveal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rick73 said:

 

It may be difficult to compare Atkinson engine displacement to that of conventional truck ICE since Atkinson effective engine displacement is less than its volume, and as engines are made more efficient, the effective displacement “may” be even less.  I’m not sure what the upper limit will be when CR are already 14 to 1 (more like expansion ratio?).

While CR is not as high, it is possible with VCT to delay the  intake valve closing by significant amounts, the older MODs could delay intake closing by up to 40/50 degrees but was done for internal EGR but you get the idea…….

 

 

 

Quote

 

To your point, Honda apparently increased the new Civic Hybrid’s displacement to 2.0L with an all new engine, but I haven’t seen details other than engine achieves class-leading 41% thermal efficiency.  It will be interesting to see engine design details, and fuel economy.

I think Honda trades in BS and achieves that efficiency number on a dyno, not real world. It may be super efficient but that’s not what most customers want( a better balance between power and fuel efficiency)

 

 

Quote

It will also be interesting to see in a couple of days what Toyota does with redesigned Prius; and whether it is more of a Corolla Hybrid, or an all-new design that tests fuel-economy limits.  If electric power and torque is increased, perhaps ICE can be decreased in size.  As far as I know, Hyundai hybrids with 1.6L engines are most fuel efficient in US (though electric contribution is limited by comparison).  Toyota may try to exceed those fuel economy ratings to get back on top of list.

 

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1137834_redesigned-2023-toyota-prius-due-for-nov-16-reveal

Yes, Prius will have a bigger future role because BYD based EV “Corolla” won’t be coming to USA.

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

New Prius claimed to be most fuel efficient hybrid in its class; and looks better than previous Prius or newest Corolla in my opinion.  It looks quite low and aero, so may achieve 60 MPG.  Not much data was revealed, other than plug-in has 50% more electric range, and able to accelerate to 62 MPH in 6 seconds.  Not bad for an ECO car. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Rick73 said:

New Prius claimed to be most fuel efficient hybrid in its class; and looks better than previous Prius or newest Corolla in my opinion.  It looks quite low and aero, so may achieve 60 MPG.  Not much data was revealed, other than plug-in has 50% more electric range, and able to accelerate to 62 MPH in 6 seconds.  Not bad for an ECO car. 



Even if it improves to 60 MPG, your only going to see roughly 2-5% improvement in gas usage or MPG. 
 

As MPG increase, the amount of savings you see gets flatter when you hit 30+ MPG. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Rick73 said:

New Prius claimed to be most fuel efficient hybrid in its class; and looks better than previous Prius or newest Corolla in my opinion.  It looks quite low and aero, so may achieve 60 MPG.

 

Photo of JDM Prius.

2023-toyota-prius-japan-front-three-quar

 

U.S. spec model will be unveiled November 17, 2022.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:



Even if it improves to 60 MPG, your only going to see roughly 2-5% improvement in gas usage or MPG. 
 

As MPG increase, the amount of savings you see gets flatter when you hit 30+ MPG. 

 

 

 

Agree savings diminish as MPG improve, but Prius having the highest rating would be about bragging rights; not unlike power, torque, and towing race for trucks.

 

If Prius can achieve around 60 MPG, it also challenges BEV energy cost advantages, particularly on longer trips where BEVs must charge away from home.  Currently my cost would be about 5 cents per mile for a Prius or an efficient BEV ($3.00 per gallon and $0.20 per kWh).  On a long road trip like I just completed, a Prius would cost less in gas than a Tesla 3 to charge.  I have no idea how Toyota will market the Prius, but expect lower cost compared to BEVs will come up.  During reveal Toyota stated BEVs are great, and that they are working on them, but that during transition a variety of vehicles are needed; particularly affordable ones.

 

Improved looks and power may win over more buyers than fuel savings anyway.

 

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a41974283/2023-toyota-prius-preview/

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New Prius definitely hits the mark on better design/look. The previous one has odd and ugly looking thing with some very amatuer efforts on detailing and surfacing treatments.

 

The JDM model also got a massive power boost so it should actually be decent to drive for the first time ever. The Corolla hybrid is taking the place of the old Prius and feels like Toyota is moving Prius up the performance scale. Sort of like how Corolla Cross allowed RAV4 to move up market.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

image.png.cfe4625fdd0d19f7e803fa17bd2fab06.png
 

just to underscore diminishing returns with increasing MPG, refer to the gallons per 10,000 miles.

Once you get beyond 40 mpg, the gains become much less.

 

Consider when CAFE began in the early 1970s, average fleet economy for cars was around 13 mpg

but rose to 26 mpg less then ten years later. That change saved massive amounts of fuel. Today’s 

ICEs laugh at the old V8s but now electric vehicles are surpassing all of that.

 

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, jpd80 said:

image.png.cfe4625fdd0d19f7e803fa17bd2fab06.png
 

just to underscore diminishing returns with increasing MPG, refer to the gallons per 10,000 miles.

Once you get beyond 40 mpg, the gains become much less.

 

Consider when CAFE began in the early 1970s, average fleet economy for cars was around 13 mpg

but rose to 26 mpg less then ten years later. That change saved massive amounts of fuel. Today’s 

ICEs laugh at the old V8s but now electric vehicles are surpassing all of that.

 


The elephant in the room no one talks about with the cost savings in electric operation is the lack of road/sales/use tax. Sure you might pay $50-$150 more in plate fees but for a lot of uses that will not come close to the tax dollars they paid under gasoline. States are quickly realizing this and are making proactive moves to change the way those fees are collected.

In Michigan you'd pay an extra $50-$150 for a electric vehicle in plate fees.

If you drove a 26mpg car 15000 miles a year you'd pay $260 a year in Fuel tax and another $86.50 in sales tax (at a $2.50 wholesale cost).

Granted each state funds roads slightly differently but in the end there must be a way to makeup these fund  and must be decided soon. This will amount to hundreds of millions in shortfall even when you hit a 5% or 10% market penetration rate.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gurgeh said:

Yikes, did someone say something about backseat headroom? Well, I guess that's not why one buys a Prius...

 

At around 6 minutes in video you can see how tight a 6’-2” man fits in both headroom and legroom; though average people and children should be fine.

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jasonj80 said:


The elephant in the room no one talks about with the cost savings in electric operation is the lack of road/sales/use tax. Sure you might pay $50-$150 more in plate fees but for a lot of uses that will not come close to the tax dollars they paid under gasoline. States are quickly realizing this and are making proactive moves to change the way those fees are collected.

In Michigan you'd pay an extra $50-$150 for a electric vehicle in plate fees.

If you drove a 26mpg car 15000 miles a year you'd pay $260 a year in Fuel tax and another $86.50 in sales tax (at a $2.50 wholesale cost).

Granted each state funds roads slightly differently but in the end there must be a way to makeup these fund  and must be decided soon. This will amount to hundreds of millions in shortfall even when you hit a 5% or 10% market penetration rate.

 

Ford Connect and their competitions' counterparts keep track of accumulated milage and location were driven now. It may come to pass that in order to register a vehicle that does not use conventional fuels, e.g.FCEVs, BEVs, you would be required to sign a privacy waiver so that the States' and Federal highway admins can bill you; something like what IFTA does for commercial vehicle fuel tax.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...