What happened to EVs? The sudden slowdown in electric car sales is a symptom of a much uglier problem

[rmc523]

44 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Well, it should get interesting in that Tesla just today started taking orders for 2024 Model 3 Highland at same price.  I thought some buyers may have delayed buying Model 3s waiting for upgrade, and if that’s the case, it may hurt Mach-E sales somewhat over next few months.  Starting price for Model 3 is still +/- $40k.

 

There is speculation (fancy word for guessing) that Tesla’s new smaller car (Model 2) will be about 15% shorter, 30% lighter, and with about 25% smaller battery.  Analyst estimate COGS about 37% lower, roughly half from size-related savings and other half on more-efficient assembly if I recall correctly.  That’s how the analyst roughly projects $25k as a reasonable target.  I think even at $30k a smaller Tesla could interest a lot of buyers.  It would me.

 

I guess my question to you would be that if Mach-E had been made a little smaller, would Ford have loss any more per car, and would sales have been that much lower?  Not suggesting Mach-E is wrong size, just questioning if smaller and lower-cost would have been any worse.

 

Given they're trying to force it as an Edge successor (when it isn't, IMO), yes.

[Rick73]

56 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

Given they're trying to force it as an Edge successor (when it isn't, IMO), yes.

Since Mach-E hasn’t succeeded Edge (at least to date AFAIK), I don’t understand your reply.  Had Mach-E been smaller and not competed as directly with Edge, wouldn’t that have been more beneficial to Ford?  I expect profitability on Edge is better than on Mach-E.

 

Anyway, it doesn’t matter since it was a hypothetical question in that Ford will likely continue to go after more expensive vehicles, including 3-row electric SUVs, and is very unlikely to pursue BEVs smaller than Mach-E for North America.  We’ll know how it all works out soon enough.  Thanks for your reply.

[silvrsvt]

Unpopular opinion-The Edge was replaced by the Bronco AND Mach E in the line up. Neither is a direct replacement, but both products have something that appeals to the demographics/buyer of an Edge. 

[akirby]

32 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

Unpopular opinion-The Edge was replaced by the Bronco AND Mach E in the line up. Neither is a direct replacement, but both products have something that appeals to the demographics/buyer of an Edge. 

Nope.  There is no replacement in the lineup.  It was sacrificed for BEV production.  A few might go Escape or Explorer if they were thinking of up or down sizing already.  Some might go to Nautilus but the China thing is an issue for a lot of folks.  A few might go Mach-E or Bronco but the majority will keep what they have or look elsewhere.  

[Rick73]

Puma was very successful in UK in 2023, and for 2024 an EV variant is reported to be introduced to compete with BEVs in that size range, which is considerably smaller than Mach-E, and with an anticipated price much lower as well.  A Puma EV is about the size I was thinking would work well as an urban city car in US, without false ambition of being suitable for long road trips. 

 

https://fordauthority.com/2024/01/ford-puma-was-uks-best-selling-passenger-car-of-2023/

 

https://fordauthority.com/2023/11/2024-ford-puma-ev-spotted-testing-for-first-time/

 

[rmc523]

22 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Since Mach-E hasn’t succeeded Edge (at least to date AFAIK), I don’t understand your reply.  Had Mach-E been smaller and not competed as directly with Edge, wouldn’t that have been more beneficial to Ford?  I expect profitability on Edge is better than on Mach-E.

 

Anyway, it doesn’t matter since it was a hypothetical question in that Ford will likely continue to go after more expensive vehicles, including 3-row electric SUVs, and is very unlikely to pursue BEVs smaller than Mach-E for North America.  We’ll know how it all works out soon enough.  Thanks for your reply.

 

Many try to say that Mach E is a sort of Edge successor, and I disagree - it's being forced into that spot (at the moment) because Ford is dropping Edge.  Obviously right this second Edge is still around, but I'm projecting forward.

 

5 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

Unpopular opinion-The Edge was replaced by the Bronco AND Mach E in the line up. Neither is a direct replacement, but both products have something that appeals to the demographics/buyer of an Edge. 

 

You're not wrong, but IMO, neither product offers what Edge offers for those buyers.  Mach E is too low, Bronco is too unrefined for that customer.

[Rick73]

Another major factor IMO that has limited BEV sales is the proliferation of hybrid vehicle options.  We’ve come a long ways since first Prius.  Data below shows US hybrids outsold BEVS in 2023.  It’s hard to say how many new hybrid buyers would have gone with a BEV versus remain with ICE had it not been for having more hybrid options.

 

US CAR BUYERS SWITCHED TO HYBRIDS OVER EVS IN 2023: REPORT

 

https://fordauthority.com/2024/01/us-car-buyers-switched-to-hybrids-over-evs-in-2023-report/

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Another major factor IMO that has limited BEV sales is the proliferation of hybrid vehicle options.  We’ve come a long ways since first Prius.  Data below shows US hybrids outsold BEVS in 2023.  It’s hard to say how many new hybrid buyers would have gone with a BEV versus remain with ICE had it not been for having more hybrid options.

 

US CAR BUYERS SWITCHED TO HYBRIDS OVER EVS IN 2023: REPORT

 

https://fordauthority.com/2024/01/us-car-buyers-switched-to-hybrids-over-evs-in-2023-report/

A hybrid buyer was not an EV buyer to begin with.

[Rick73]

There’s some impulse buying to consider, so I doubt it would be 100% back to ICE.  I also recall rperez817 and one other arguing against  hybrids because they would detract from BEV sales.. They feared hybrids would give buyers an out instead of being forced into BEVs.  There’s probably some truth to that though I could personally go with hybrid or BEV depending on what my second vehicle is.

[Flying68]

We are looking at a 2024 Nautilus with the hybrid powertrain.  We might have gone BEV had Lincoln actually had a BEV to offer that is in that 2 row segment (we don't need a 3 row crossover or mid-sized SUV).  Was really thinking about a Mach-E at the end of 2023, but decided against it due to ever dropping residual values.  Perhaps once the kids are off to college and I don't need the Expedition, BEV's may be ready for prime time then, depends on what I need or want when that time comes.  The only way BEV's will takeoff is for the manufacturers to start offering options in each of those segments.  The only way to make that profitable is to get an adaptable platform that can scale.

[akirby]

Let me clarify.  I don’t see people who were seriously considering an EV suddenly deciding to buy a hybrid.  I’m not counting those who may want an EV but not what is currently available.  And I could see a PHEV replacing a BEV but to me that’s not someone who really wanted a BEV.

 

The reason Hybrids are selling more is more are now available and BEV prices have gone way up.  Nothing more nothing less.

[jpd80]

On 1/11/2024 at 5:25 AM, Rick73 said:

Well, it should get interesting in that Tesla just today started taking orders for 2024 Model 3 Highland at same price.  I thought some buyers may have delayed buying Model 3s waiting for upgrade, and if that’s the case, it may hurt Mach-E sales somewhat over next few months.  Starting price for Model 3 is still +/- $40k.

 

There is speculation (fancy word for guessing) that Tesla’s new smaller car (Model 2) will be about 15% shorter, 30% lighter, and with about 25% smaller battery.  Analyst estimate COGS about 37% lower, roughly half from size-related savings and other half on more-efficient assembly if I recall correctly.  That’s how the analyst roughly projects $25k as a reasonable target.  I think even at $30k a smaller Tesla could interest a lot of buyers.  It would me.

 

 

well here’s the thing, most of today’s Tesla buyers are stuck with buying either a “compact” 3 or a Y 

and from memory, the 3’s original starting price was $35,000 but Tesla first refused to build many

and then cancelled that trim level to force more buyers into more profitable trim levels.

 

So then Tesla tried the same bait and switch thing with Cybertruck $39,900 entry point that 

no longer exists, disappointing many buyers who signed up hoping for the $40k truck.

 

so…getting to Tesla 2’s  $25,000 starting price…..I’d take that with a grain of salt.

We’ve  seen this dance a couple of times before…it will start north of $30,000

and more likely, the the original 3 starting price of $35,000 but in 2025, not 2019.

 

 

 

Quote

 

I guess my question to you would be that if Mach-E had been made a little smaller, would Ford have loss any more per car, and would sales have been that much lower?  Not suggesting Mach-E is wrong size, just questioning if smaller and lower-cost would have been any worse.

Aww, you were soo, close…

Just take the wider top hat of the Ford Edge and kick the front axle forward the same as they did with the original  

E-Max to Mach E plan. That way, Ford would end up with a Tesla X competitor using the wider GE2 platform that

doesn’t need to command Tesla X’s $79,000 “discounted” starting price.

Edited January 12 by jpd80

[Rick73]

I want to see details including price on new electric Puma in Europe, and compare sales and price to Mach-E, before giving up on idea that there’s greater opportunity for profitability with smaller and lower-cost electric vehicles.

 

The few specs Yahoo mentions below suggest affordable basic vehicle that doesn’t go crazy with unnecessary performance, range, etc.  Key will be how low Ford can get costs.  Article speculates 35,000 pounds I believe.

 

2024 electric Ford Puma takes to public roads

 

https://autos.yahoo.com/2024-electric-ford-puma-takes-151959902.html
 

[silvrsvt]

Selling more PHEVs will help people get familiarized with charging, which should lead to more EV adoption. But it also remains to see to how many people are actually using the PH of their PHEV...going to need more data for that. 

[Deanh]

16 hours ago, akirby said:

Let me clarify.  I don’t see people who were seriously considering an EV suddenly deciding to buy a hybrid.  I’m not counting those who may want an EV but not what is currently available.  And I could see a PHEV replacing a BEV but to me that’s not someone who really wanted a BEV.

 

The reason Hybrids are selling more is more are now available and BEV prices have gone way up.  Nothing more nothing less.

Perhaps, if the main reason youre buying a BEV is to not have to buy gas period...but dont forget hybrids sidestep a mutitude of BEV "issues"....and theres a BUNCH 

[akirby]

14 minutes ago, Deanh said:

Perhaps, if the main reason youre buying a BEV is to not have to buy gas period...but dont forget hybrids sidestep a mutitude of BEV "issues"....and theres a BUNCH 

But that’s a reason to not choose a BEV in the first place.  Rick was asserting that having more hybrids available was causing EV buyers to switch to hybrids.  My point is they’re choosing hybrid because they’re available and if they weren’t available those buyers would just buy ICE instead.

[Deanh]

21 minutes ago, akirby said:

But that’s a reason to not choose a BEV in the first place.  Rick was asserting that having more hybrids available was causing EV buyers to switch to hybrids.  My point is they’re choosing hybrid because they’re available and if they weren’t available those buyers would just buy ICE instead.

theyre available?.....where?..........only hybrids Ive got is 3 Escapes ( one is $48k which is Mach E territory  ) a couple of Powewrboost F150s and 1 Maverick. I do have about 20 Lightnings and 40 or so mach E's....situation will be interesting...the only BEV with any form of Tax incentives is the Lightning. Mach E got cut off.....As of right now BEVs are like garlic to a Vampire, something Ive stated before and been flamed for.... 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Deanh said:

theyre available?.....where?..........only hybrids Ive got is 3 Escapes ( one is $48k which is Mach E territory  ) a couple of Powewrboost F150s and 1 Maverick. I do have about 20 Lightnings and 40 or so mach E's....situation will be interesting...the only BEV with any form of Tax incentives is the Lightning. Mach E got cut off.....As of right now BEVs are like garlic to a Vampire, something Ive stated before and been flamed for.... 

 

Other mfrs Dean.  Toyota is selling 150k hybrid rav4s every year.  

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

But that’s a reason to not choose a BEV in the first place.  Rick was asserting that having more hybrids available was causing EV buyers to switch to hybrids.  My point is they’re choosing hybrid because they’re available and if they weren’t available those buyers would just buy ICE instead.

I didn’t “assert” anything, only “questioned” what the article implied.  It was buyers going from ICE to BEV, or ICE to HEV.  In other words, I asked if there weren’t so many hybrids available, would buyers who purchased hybrids have purchased ICE or BEV?  It wouldn’t have been 100% one way or the other anyway.  Some would have purchased ICE, others BEV.  We won’t ever know.

 

 

 

 

[Rick73]

12 minutes ago, akirby said:

 

Other mfrs Dean.  Toyota is selling 150k hybrid rav4s every year.  

Honda and Hyundai/Kia sell a ton too.

[edselford]

It’s an interesting question being asked by the OEM’s right now.

Electric are easier to build but weigh allot more than IC engined vehicles.

most people don’t have the luxury of having an EV vehicle and an IC vehicle for long/vacation trips.

can you just jump in your EV and take an impromptu trip to Atlanta??? I don’t think so.

I would venture a guess that if we knew the total CO2 equation for IC versus EV ,complete life cycle, I just wonder why we are trying to take the trip???

Maybe, hydrogen, ammonia hydrogen or something to combust without the carbonC, it might be smart to Waite until these new technogies can reduce CO2 without putting up with long charge times.

Also federal tax credits for a period of time, covers up the real cost of the EV technology!

If I were Ford, GM and Stalantus, I would delay the switchover to EV because people are not ready for them

Keep the Edge, the Chrysler300 and others . Don’t bet the farm on EV’s

edselford

[Rick73]

The fundamental question I’ve asked myself is why do buyers choose BEVs or hybrids in first place, or at all?  Why don’t they just buy ICE instead?  We may have government mandates, but they don’t prevent a person from buying an ICE vehicle today, so mandates are not much of an obstacle when a buyer walks into a showroom.  Main reasons I come up with fall under three categories (pure personal opinions):

 

1) BEV and hybrid buyers feel they are doing their part to save the environment.

 

2) Wow factor — like look at me, I have a car few do.  Whether Prius or Tesla they initially stood out visually; and also telegraphed “I care”.

 

3) BEVs will save a lot of costs long-term versus owning an ICE vehicle.

 

(FOR CLARITY: I’M NOT SAYING THESE ARE CORRECT OR VALID, JUST WHAT I BELIEVE BUYERS MAY HAVE BEEN THINKING, AND COULD APPLY IN COMBINATION)

 

 

Why is BEV adoption slowing?  Also in my opinion:

 

Firstly, global warming is proceeding faster than ever, and BEVs haven’t made a dent.  Unless grid is much cleaner, and all sources of dirty electricity are eliminated first, we are mostly just misusing valuable resources.  Plus most people will emphasize their personal needs over that of the collective, thereby choosing vehicles offering greatest value to them, not necessarily the planet.

 

Secondly, as BEVs became more common, the wow factor of ownership started to wear off.  Very few observers will give an owner a second look just because they drive a Tesla or Mach-E.  Now it takes a Hummer or Cybertruck to get noticed, but that too will pass.

 

Thirdly, BEV cost savings haven’t materialized yet.  Initial costs are still high because battery prices have not declined as fast as projected, it takes more battery capacity to meet real-world range expectations thus making vehicles larger/heavier and even more expensive, charging costs are higher than initially estimated, as are repair costs, insurance and depreciation.  BEV ownership essentially remains more of a luxury.

 

 

For now hybrids reduce green house gases at a much lower cost penalty to buyers as well as society in general (fewer power plants, transmission and distribution costs, charging stations, etc.), so it’s no surprise hybrids are presently a more affordable choice for average buyers.  

 

Lastly, ICE vehicle improvements are not sitting still.  Many technical improvements applied to BEVs and hybrids can also be incorporated into ICE (like aerodynamics, low rolling resistance tires, etc.) which keeps comparative gap from widening.  More importantly, as energy efficiency goes up, energy costs go down, making justification to spend more up front for BEV or even hybrid that much more difficult.

[jpd80]

18 hours ago, Rick73 said:

I want to see details including price on new electric Puma in Europe, and compare sales and price to Mach-E, before giving up on idea that there’s greater opportunity for profitability with smaller and lower-cost electric vehicles.

 

The few specs Yahoo mentions below suggest affordable basic vehicle that doesn’t go crazy with unnecessary performance, range, etc.  Key will be how low Ford can get costs.  Article speculates 35,000 pounds I believe.

 

2024 electric Ford Puma takes to public roads

 

https://autos.yahoo.com/2024-electric-ford-puma-takes-151959902.html
 

Problem is that you can’t directly compare prices charged in Europe/UK with USA,

they’re generally 20% higher price.That 35,000 pound expected price for the BEV  Puma 

is why I think Tesla model 2 will be a similar price in Europe….

 

If the Tesla 2 starts in Europe at say, 30,000 pounds, you can see that BEV Puma will

be in trouble as soon as the 2 is launched.

 

Smaller EVs will be profitable in Europe and China but, I just don’t think that price would

work in North America, maybe that’s where Tesla was floating the  $25,000 price but again,

we’ve seen that dance before…

 

From what I’ve found, external width of Puma with mirrors folded is 71” 

maybe take another 3” off that without mirrors.

Interior shoulder room - Front 53” Rear 51.96”

 

Edited January 13 by jpd80

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

The fundamental question I’ve asked myself is why do buyers choose BEVs or hybrids in first place, or at all?  Why don’t they just buy ICE instead?  We may have government mandates, but they don’t prevent a person from buying an ICE vehicle today, so mandates are not much of an obstacle when a buyer walks into a showroom.  Main reasons I come up with fall under three categories (pure personal opinions):

 

1) BEV and hybrid buyers feel they are doing their part to save the environment.

 

2) Wow factor — like look at me, I have a car few do.  Whether Prius or Tesla they initially stood out visually; and also telegraphed “I care”.

 

3) BEVs will save a lot of costs long-term versus owning an ICE vehicle.

 

(FOR CLARITY: I’M NOT SAYING THESE ARE CORRECT OR VALID, JUST WHAT I BELIEVE BUYERS MAY HAVE BEEN THINKING, AND COULD APPLY IN COMBINATION)

 

 

Why is BEV adoption slowing?  Also in my opinion:

 

Firstly, global warming is proceeding faster than ever, and BEVs haven’t made a dent.  Unless grid is much cleaner, and all sources of dirty electricity are eliminated first, we are mostly just misusing valuable resources.  Plus most people will emphasize their personal needs over that of the collective, thereby choosing vehicles offering greatest value to them, not necessarily the planet.

 

Secondly, as BEVs became more common, the wow factor of ownership started to wear off.  Very few observers will give an owner a second look just because they drive a Tesla or Mach-E.  Now it takes a Hummer or Cybertruck to get noticed, but that too will pass.

 

Thirdly, BEV cost savings haven’t materialized yet.  Initial costs are still high because battery prices have not declined as fast as projected, it takes more battery capacity to meet real-world range expectations thus making vehicles larger/heavier and even more expensive, charging costs are higher than initially estimated, as are repair costs, insurance and depreciation.  BEV ownership essentially remains more of a luxury.

 

Perhaps people now realise that bigger reductions on greenhouse gasses are possible by reducing the use of coal in power generation, replacing it with gas, solar, wind and batteries. Pressing harder with help to achieve that in the first place also gives more time for utilities and power suppliers to improve delivery grid capacity. 

 

Quote

 

For now hybrids reduce green house gases at a much lower cost penalty to buyers as well as society in general (fewer power plants, transmission and distribution costs, charging stations, etc.), so it’s no surprise hybrids are presently a more affordable choice for average buyers.  

 

Lastly, ICE vehicle improvements are not sitting still.  Many technical improvements applied to BEVs and hybrids can also be incorporated into ICE (like aerodynamics, low rolling resistance tires, etc.) which keeps comparative gap from widening.  More importantly, as energy efficiency goes up, energy costs go down, making justification to spend more up front for BEV or even hybrid that much more difficult.

People who have choosen not to buy BEVs are not going to immediately embrace hybrids and PHEVs 

but companies offering affordable hybrids at entry level trims will certainly help their CAFE numbers.

 

What’s often forgotten her is that manufacturers are being compelled to meet tighter emissions and

fuel economy targets, how they spin that as an advantage to customers is the key. So in order to stay

in business and avoid fines from the EPA, companies like GM and Ford now have to go back to the

drawing board and come up with near term solutions that make economic sense.

 

Plenty of buyers know the government is increasing CAFE  requirement and expect that improving fuel economy should be baked into the vehicles they buy at no added cost, I know this is unrealistic but it’s part of the problem that manufacturers have faced for decades. People don’t necessarily want to pay extra for better fuel economy but will for added performance. So how all of that is sold as an overall package is important.

 

 

Edited January 13 by jpd80

[akirby]

I still do t think people are choosing hybrid over BEV.  I think they’re deciding BEV or ICE and once they decide on ICE if the vehicle they want is available as a HEV or PHEV they’re choosing that powertrain option.  There are just more HEV options today.