Hi Scotty,
I work at the Toyota plant in Georgetown Kentucky and we were just informed we are getting the BZ4X BEV model.i think it was a mistake to mention it because no member of management has made it public yet.
Thoughts???? 6/29/2023 at 6:03 AM
Thanks love the channel
SouperB
"You can't fix stupid". Sure, there are some situations for select individuals where an EV makes sense. For the US population in mass, this country currently doesn't have an electric grid that can support EV charging 24/7. Does anyone really expect that to change in the next 20-30 years?
While Kentucky, North Carolina and other states may now be benefiting from government policy, that policy really shouldn't even exist. All this EV stuff reminds me of the ethanol push years ago. Who really benefited from it? The "alternative fuel"'s suppliers. As mmj suggested, it's hard to stop progress tho, because the people spinning the EV narrative are typically the same ones who will derive the most benefit from it.
Not sure what you'd want anyone here to say about it. Scotty has voiced his opinion on the forced push to electric vehicles many times in his videos. (In short the word "scam" pretty much describes it.) I agree with him. Others do not.
much of the complexity is due to the insane and escalating requirements of politicians and bureaucrats, not due to market demand.)
I think a lot of it is market demand.
One of the first questions that new car buyers always ask is about fuel economy.
Another requirement (especially as people age like my parents) is various comfort options. Heated steering wheels etc.
Young people want music and screens and gadgets.
And of course everybody wants low maintenance. People want to drive cars, not work on them. That means more complexity on the manufacturing side.
Ditto for "miracle batteries"
pretty soon getting a new battery for your car will be like getting new batteries for your phone etc., and the guy on the corner will be doing it for cheap. Maybe they'll even become hot-pluggable like cordless power tools.
Yep! quickly replaceable EV batteries have been a thing for a while. it was one of the main features of the Renault Fluence Z.E from over a decade ago - it took only a few minutes and you didn't even need to get out of the car.
https://youtu.be/PtO3BxnMoAs
Sadly 'Better Place' doesn't exist anymore, But the tech lives on and is available in NIO cars with over 1,000 automated quick battery swap stations in China.
https://youtu.be/lqZOJUW4STY
The car even goes into the swap station and aligns itself on its own with no driver input
-
Another cool option was battery rentals,
on the Renault ZOE you could just rent the battery instead of buying / owning one.
https://www.press.renault.co.uk/en-gb/releases/291
Although in Renault's case it was poorly priced so they recently have ended that program...
Regime change is a real possibility
It is in most of the world, yet - it's still happening.
(we had like 4 PM changes in 3 years and I think we'll have another this or next year)
can barely keep up with demand
Yeah but they'll have no choice but to build new plants.
A natural gas power plant takes 1 to 6 years to build and at a state and federal level - it's not a big deal,
looking at grid expansion in the US there's no question that 10% in 5 years is doable.
Who is going to pay for all the huge number that would be required
Paving a road with asphalt costs $370,000 to $900,000 per mile, EV chargers are nothing to municipalities.
Here the municipality announces that it will allow X chargers to be installed and the higher bidder gets to install them and collect the profits (capped at 15% of revenue)
particularly in the many apartment complexes where the parking lots are privately owned?
I own my parking lot spaces, it's in my טאבו, and if I would own an EV I would just pay the $1,000 to have the charger installed and always have my car fully charged.
Note that it was not necessary for government to build gas stations
Neither do EV chargers, chargers are a profitable business.
you don't need one at every parking space.
Neither do you with EV chargers, a modern EV like an INOIQ5 charges 15-80% in 15 minutes.
Having it charge in your own parking lot is a luxury some owners choose.
People in the low end of the used car market will be left behind
I'm sure that cars like the £15,000 Dacia Spring and so many other upcoming cheap EVs are going to depreciate to nothing reasonably fast.
A large part of that is due to government distortion of the marketplace
A lot of governments don't do that. The Model Y is just popular.
Generally were at the point where EVs aren't that much more - although the US is a bit behind in this regard, you still don't have the Chinese (Geely, NIO, BYD, AiWays, ORA, ...) and the big players like Stellantis' European devision competing with the rest.
in the U.S. they know if they push people too far they're out.
As we've seen, it's not difficult. They easily pushed everybody into their homes during the pandemic.
There are other examples. All you need a boogeyman.
Who is going to pay for all the huge number that would be required,
That's easy. Business who want to attract customers. Apartment and home developers that want to attract buyers, cities that need to promote touristm, etc.
batteries will be cheap and easy to replace is pie in the sky fantasy
it seems to be moving in that direction. LCD displays were once obscenely expensive. Now every home has a massive one, and a smaller one in every pocket. All it take is widespread adoption. Once it takes off and mass production starts and economies of scale kick in, prices plummet.
EVs are a scam
if it is , then it's a very successful scam that people are flocking to. The owners I talked to still don't regret their decisions. They don't worry about the same things you do.
If politicians in the U.S. take extreme measures to push this
They know their demographic very well.
There's an old saying here that people vote with their wallets.
Yup.
Tesla sales:
You have the building sitting in the middle of a common parking lot. Why go to the expense and trouble of tearing up parking lots all over the country just to put in chargers?
here new apartments have parking underground. Chargers are surface mounted. Minimal tearing up needed. It's a pointless discussion though. Wrinkles will get ironed out. It's just a matter of time.
I would not pay $1000 or more for a charger. I have entire vehicles that did not cost that much .... As I said, no sale here.
Like I said ... it won't matter one iota what you do.
they'll be little more than junkyard fodder.
people love junkyard fodder. There are dollar stores on every corner here.
LIke I said, my views are not merely my own, you will find there are a lot of people out here who would tell you the same thing. As far as Teslas's rise in popularity there's a sucker born every minute. People bought millions of Chevrolet Vegas as well. We'll see how many Tesla owners still love the stupid things when their batteries crater on them.
Tesla has been selling cars 15 years. They've grown around 250% just in the last 5 years.
EV sales in general show similar growth. I don't think it's going away anytime soon. It's a cash cow.
Lots of suckers out there, no doubt about that.
well, appealing to the suckers is how you build an empire in the USA
On that we can agree.
There's not a legitimate reason in the world for forcing this massive change
They will tell ya it's the "climate crisis".
Building power plants is not a trivial exercise
Are you seriously suggesting there won't be electricity in America?
Power plants are a trivial exercise and there's no reason why private parties shouldn't be allowed to build their own plants to supply the grid.
rosy projections
It has finally took off into exponential growth - no projections needed.
at 13% global marketshare they're already here and everywhere.
NEWS: (3 hours ago) https://insideevs.com/news/674654/tesla-q2-2023-deliveries-production/
Tesla delivered 446,915 cars in Q2 of 2023.
That's in addition to "over 400,000 Model Y and Model 3 (...) in the first quarter of 2023"
So in Q1 and Q2 of this year they've delivered 887,723 model 3 and Y compared to just 533,358 in 2022.
that's 66% growth in a year - EVs are becoming absolutely mainstream.
What Tesla alone (with only 20% marketshare in the EV space) made and sold in 6 months, is more than all EVs sold in the entire year of 2016.
Why go to the expense and trouble of tearing up parking lots all over the country just to put in chargers
Public chargers in high density areas where private companies are willing to install them.
Suburbs do not need the speeds required by public stations.
At home, you don't need your car to charge in 15 minutes - for that there are public ones.
The typical home EV charger is called "Level 2" and they're inexpensive.
Even the largest IONIQ5 battery will charge overnight using one.
They're like $200 - not a massive expense, that's like 3-4 fuel ups.
How much will rents need to increase for the owners to do that
In apartments? cheap level 2 chargers not much.
rapid charger areas in apartments, not much either.
Rapid chargers for public use - leave that to the market to figure out.
How long will the batteries last when constantly fast charged
Toyota says the lifespan is 1,000,000km, BYD says 1,000,000 miles.
Rapid charging has gotten really good - active cooling helps a lot with it.
Plenty of cars that were not particularly good have been popular
The top worldwide best sellers always have been great cars
(usually it's mostly Japanese sedans and SUVs, last quarter except Tesla the others are Corolla, Hilux, RAV4 and Camry)
Tesla (...) Not only due to being electric but also other aspects I find undesirable
Have you been in one?
I 'disliked' (rather was very cautious about) them until I had the opportunity to experience one, there are cars I liked way more - but the Tesla model 3 is probably way better than you would think.
The only big drawback is the lack of Apple CarPlay, needing a phone holder in a modern luxury car is just... insane.
Besides, Telsa is only one the options - there are plentiful others.
I'm suggesting that building power plants in the face of "green" requirements is going to be extremely expensive and will result in skyrocketing electricity rates.
maybe not in the long term. It all depends on supply and demand. If the costs and rates are subsidized by ev charging customers , they might even go down. Especially if there's competition between companies.
Electric cars will not affect this one way or the other.
that's not what most people believe
Ripping up an existing parking lot to wire it for chargers is going to cost $$$$
which is probably subsidized. But even if it's not, it's still happening everywhere . Businesses know it brings customers, and eventually when they start charging money, it will bring revenue as well.
Why the heck would I want to spend money on that when I can fill up a fuel tank just a few minutes practically anywhere?
people don't want to drive anywhere. They want to drive home, park it, plug it in , carry one with their day and forget about it.
You have to admit it sounds much nicer than waiting in line at a smelly gas station in freezing temps.
any Tesla is garbage to me
to you, but to others its a luxury vehicle. the general aesthetic and fit & finish is probably of a higher caliber than other vehicles in the same price category.
Can you show us any that have actually lasted that long?
there are probably a lot of variables, but it seems to be on the order of a few percent of range degredation per year.
But again, they are still in their infancy.
With over a million Tesla vehicles sold, there are several real-life examples of owners racking up huge mileage. Twitter user gem8mingen drives a 2013 Tesla Model S P85 that has reached over one million miles, with the original battery pack replaced at 180,000 miles.
Tesloop, a former shuttle service company in California, was one of the first to run a 2016 Model X 90D past 300,000 miles back in 2018. That electric SUV mostly relied on DC fast charging, which can degrade batteries quicker, and yet the company reported just 12.6 percent battery degradation with most of that occurring in the first nine months of service.
The Maiden Voyage blog has been sharing one owner's experience with a 2018 Tesla Model 3 Long Range RWD that reached the 200,000 miles mark with 13.7 percent degradation. One MotorTrend reader, Cory, shared with us that his 2018 Model 3 Long Range had crossed the 100,000-mile mark in late June 2022 with around 7 percent capacity loss.
https://www.motortrend.com/features/how-long-does-a-tesla-battery-last/
According to an Impact Report released by Tesla in 2019, Tesla Model S and X batteries retain over 80% of their range even after driving 200,000 miles.
Tesla is designing vehicles with a battery life that will outlast the vehicle itself. Tesla also started offering a minimum 70% battery retention guarantee over a period of 8 years or 100,000 to 120,000 miles. A study on 286 Tesla Model owners across the world revealed that Tesla vehicles lose just 5% of their capacity in the first 50,000 miles. Additionally, these vehicles will exceed 150,000 miles of driving before losing 10% of their initial battery life.
https://optiwatt.com/blog/how-long-will-your-tesla-battery-really-last
If you took a poll you would find a huge number of people also believe in astrology. Doesn't make it so. The forces of nature dwarf anything that we can do.
Obviously. But collective beliefs are what shape the market, the public budget, and legislation.
Not interested ... none of that is really of any interest to me.
We know your personal view. You keep telling us. But again, I don't think it's representative. What I'm saying is based on what I hear from people, and EV owners, and I think represents the general attitude.
where is the decades-old battery that is still viable?
I don't think most people expect 25 years out of a battery. Most cars today would be long replaced.
But that's a poor metric anyway. Degredation is more correlated to distance than time. I posted the stats above.
My vehicles have retained 100% of their range after decades and hundreds of thousands of miles.
and the same power? and economy? how much money in repairs? fuel?
you're not going to convince me
I'm not trying to, so I don't know why you keep being defensive about it. I'm just talking about what I think realistically will happen. Our personal views on the matter are irrelevant. You're free to let it go anytime.
Final word since you asked: On my end, very few repairs needed over the years. Still running great after decades on the road and high mileage. Not being defensive, just a counterpoint to being told time and time again how "wonderful" those vehicles are. And, it just seems we are at the point where we are just spinning our wheels here. We'll all see how the future plays out over the next several years. All we can do here is crab about it or crow about it.
You didn't answer about fuel costs. Gotta throw everything in the balance.
not exactly spinning wheels.
it seems to go like this: you offer a generalizations based on your personal preferences and opinions
we debunk your preconceptions, and you shut down the discussion with "but I don't like it, and you can't make me".
Well, it doesn't suit you and that's your prerogative. But that doesn't make it universally true for everyone and for all time. It seems like the march will go on with or without you. Most of us are just interested in how WE might realistically benefit, and there's no chance of that happening by wasting precious time focusing on what you don't like . Life is about how deal with new situations, and you can either adapt and plan ahead, or spend your life grumbling about it.
Counterpoint: Scotty has done a much better job in his videos than I could ever do when it comes to documenting the drawbacks of electrification. What I see here is the waving away of real, practical problems that a mass transition to electric vehicle power brings to the table. Certainly there might be benefit for some people. I see none for myself and I am certainly not the only one holding that opinion. When I see no good reason and no real benefit for a change I'm not inclined to silently acquiesce to it. There are others with the same view.
your acquiescence isn't required. Or mine. It's going ahead regardless of yours or my views or others. The numbers show it. I think most people see the potential benefits, and there are many if executed properly. You just can't argue with 80% energy conversion effienciency
.
Unfortunately it looks like people will be driving Chinese electric cars in the future though, because China is going all in. They have no qualms about dumping massive public funds into the endeavor.
.
If you see no benefits for yourself, then I guess that's that. End of discussion for you. I will continue to keep an open, yet skeptical mind , and I enjoy the discussion.
.
Scotty mocks the blunders which is his shtick as an entertainer. He does this for all types of vehicles. But I think he understands full well it's going forward full speed. And there is plenty more fodder for criticism to come.
Maybe I missed it reading this thread. Has anyone mentioned that any many cases, only the manufacture is allowed to work on the EV?
Worldwide, only 3% of all motor vehicles (not just cars) are EVs. An internal combustion engine is currently used to power 97% of all vehicles. The decision to impose this "change" has nothing to do with what's best for the consumer. Powerful idiots are trying to force a 97% majority to change their preference for using the internal combustion engines to using an electric engines. Supposed this is to save the world from climate change.
As I mentioned, they're not asking, they're imposing. There's no cost/benefit analysis. There's no overwhelming scientific data and analysis either. It's also a minority opinion that this conversion might benefit the environment as opposed to hurting it.
Of course it varies by region. Poor countries are not going to get EVs , maybe ever. In China, EV's are already over 1/3 of all new vehicles being sold. Polls show 80% of Canadians are in favor of getting one. In the US, 53% are open to it.
74% believe in climate change, and 86% of those people believe humans contribute to it.
Oh yes, there's always regional variations.. and poor countries rarely hold a winning lottery ticket. China is by far the largest polluter of all countries. They've also built entire cities, massive cities , which have no populace. The CCP works towards one objective, the total control of ALL individuals by the CCP. And propaganda plays a central political role in their quest. So I don't put much value on anything coming from them.
Not believing in climate change is just silly. There has always been climate change. When the sun came up this morning it changed the climate. Whether or not, and to what degree if so, humans consumption impacts the earths climate is what's 'questioned'. I have no doubt we use and abuse this planet more than any other species.
Promoting the use EVs over internal combustion engines -- it's not about the climate, it's about the money.
preaching to the choire my friend. I'm just giving you the reality of the situation, and public opinion right now.
China's population and economy is massive. Despite what anybody thinks about their policies, they are a major global player, and simply dismissing would be foolish.
Posted by: @hixster
only the manufacture is allowed to work on the EV?
This is false.
Most do support repair - for example, Kia and Hyundai have all repair information available both on ALLDATA.
What's "allowed"? The only one's a I can think about who are less cooperative are Tesla. but realistically there's enough tooling and knowledge to work on them.
Worldwide, only 3% of all motor vehicles
Last year they accounted for 13% of worldwide sales, and they're growing quite rapidly.
As I mentioned, they're not asking, they're imposing
Exactly, EVs will be imposed on everyone and there's no way around it.
What I'm saying is that people are being too dramatic about them, they're not nearly as bad.
CCP (...) So I don't put much value on anything coming from them.
Well then look at other sources:
"China was the biggest market for Tesla's Model Y electric sport utility vehicles, helping it become the world's top selling vehicle in the first quarter of this year. (...) Tesla (...) Model Ys in the first quarter of this year, of which 94,469 were sold in China, higher than 83,664 in the United States and 71,114 in Europe, according the data"
As it seems these statistics are true - the Chinese market is full of EVs
Where I live Chinese EVs are everywhere - they do have the capacity and they are dominant on the market
Not believing in climate change is just silly (...)
Promoting the use EVs over internal combustion engines -- it's not about the climate, it's about the money.
Whose money?
Car makers ain't happy about being forced into spending billions to adapt to EVs, neither is the oil industry, who is?
China is happy!
Kentucky and we were just informed we are getting the BZ4X BEV model
Biden is handing out taxpayer dollars to companies if they make EV's in the USA.
Good for Georgetown I guess.
no member of management has made it public yet.
not exactly shocking
this is on the internet:
The North Carolina battery plant will feature six battery production lines - four for hybrid vehicles and two for batteries for all-electric models. The site near Greensboro is relatively close to many of Toyota's U.S. assembly plants in Missouri, Kentucky, Indiana, Alabama and Texas, which is certain to help reduce transportation costs.
In short the word "scam"
Eventually we will have electric cars whether you like it or not. Technology will get to a point where they will be largely superior to conventional engines in most ways. I think it's inevitable. They will be practical , affordable, and make sense to the majority of the population, even without all the greenwashing, at least in some parts of the world. They eliminate A LOT of inefficiency. They will solve or at least minimize most of the weaknesses. I'm not saying it's going to be within my lifetime .. they have a long way to go ... but it'll happen.
Consider that it takes a lot of resources to get there. Time, research, development, engineering, manpower, MONEY! Who's going to pay for all that? These companies NEED to sell electric vehicles along the way. Not only to fund the development, but to shape it. Now, I'm not going to buy one, and I'm not telling anybody else to buy one. But people will buy them, and heck a lot of people enjoy them too. They have different priorities to you and I.
Sure, there is a lot of shady business surrounding this industry, exaggerated claims, and bad legislation, mostly by technically illiterate politicians. But calling the EV vehicles themselves a whoesale scam is an oversimplification I think, and not 100% honest. If you don't like them, then don't buy them. Nobody is holding a gun to your head (yet). But you can't fight progress. Things change.
Eventually we will have electric cars whether you like it or not.
Who is this "we" that you speak of? I will never have one. At my age it will not be possible to get rid of fossil fuels or gasoline powered cars in my lifetime. The younger folks will have to deal with what comes after that.
I don't buy new cars anyway and there are plenty of good used gas powered ones around to buy and will be for many years. Depending on how long I have left the little fleet I have now may even be sufficient to carry me through. Even if the psychopaths in charge make it more expensive to drive an old gas-powered beater than to go with a new EV I'm sticking with the beater. (I may be a cheapskate but get my back up when pushed.)
So it may not be possible to stop the insanity but I do not have to take part in it.
"we" as in society. You've made you aversion abundantly clear on many occasions, so no need to reiterate. I clearly said "don't buy them" since that wasn't my point.
There are many fair criticisms, but that doesn't make the basic concept or idea a scam.
I'll re-evaluate if and when Mr. Fusion becomes available.
the only useful mr. fusion is the bright ball in the sky
That's for sure. We've been 10 years away from practical fusion power for about the last 70 years and counting. I'm not holding my breath.
things change
Yes, far from being a new idea, electric vehicles were all the rage in the early 20th century. A laundry company in Dublin, Ireland (the Swastika Laundry) famously used electric vans for deliveries mid-century. Everything old is new again.
I will never have one. At my age it will not be possible to get rid of fossil fuels or gasoline powered cars in my lifetime
Eh, I don't know about that - a lot of places have decided to outlaw the sell of the internal combustion vehicles by the early-mid 2030s. And I can honestly see that happening, yeah it might get pushed back a few times (due to grind issues and not enough lithium production) - but EVs are definitely coming wether we like it or not...
I wasn't very in favor of EVs, and personally I'm sticking to good old gas for now - but EVs have gotten cheap and good.
Realistically, (using UK pricing, since it's not yet available in the US) the MG4 EV starts at £26,995 with the long range for a bit more (£29,495)
(For reference, that's LESS than the base model Toyota Corolla there, in the same price range as it's Yaris Cross fossil powered counterpart!)
That car has 281 miles in the highway and a full 360 miles in the city, it charges in 35 minutes (10%-80%, so on road trips, it quick recharging stops take 10-15 minutes), and on a performance hatchback-crossover with over 200 horsepower and 0-60 in 7.9 seconds.
An honorable mention is the BYD ATTO3 which is shockingly well built and luxurious and for £37,695 in the UK and that's in the same range as it's fossil powered competitors but so much nicer...
After looking at how refined and well priced that car is, I now understand why BYD is evaluated as one of the biggest and one of the most valuable car makers in the world.
Where I live one of the best selling cars is the Geely Geometry C (aka Geometry M6)
Super affordable, super capable, very cheap, people absolutely love them - they cost less than a Corolla to buy, but they're super cheap to operate, very quick, absolutely silent, just a very nice hatchback-crossover.
Stellantis is also a big player in this space, they're likely to rebadge one of their new well prices EVs and sell it in the US. (Like how they rebadged the Alfa Romeo Tonale as the "Dodge Hornet")
The Citoren ë-C4 is cheap, large, comfortable and has decent range (although not as much as some Chinese ones)
Cheap and rattly avaliable EVs are here - and they're quite good.
The only downside is that they probably will only last 7-12 years, and yet that's not that big of a downside - about as much as hybrids.
Eh, I don't know about that - a lot of places have decided to outlaw the sell of the internal combustion vehicles by the early-mid 2030s.
As I said, I don't buy new cars so while the oligarchs banning the sale of new gas-powered vehicles is ridiculous and destructive it does not directly affect me. I really don't care how "affordable" new electric cars might become, I won't be buying one. As mentioned the vehicles I have in my stable now may well see me through.
My idea of "affordable" by the way is buying an old car for maybe a few to several grand, fix it up, and drive the heck out of it. (My current daily driver was purchased in 2011 for $1500. If/when it craters I already have others to take its place.) I don't do payments. A new electric car at say $20,000 is way too expensive and taking that much money out of the bank for something that depreciates rapidly is not my idea of a good time. A cheap used electric car is likely to have dead or dying batteries and who knows what failures in the electronics. So, no sale.
I really don't care how "affordable" new electric cars might become
Very.
MG4 EV starts at £26,995 with the long range for a bit more (£29,495) (...) that's LESS than the base model Toyota Corolla
MG4 is cheaper than a Corolla.
So is the Geometry, and the Citroen
Geely Geometry C (aka Geometry M6) (...) Super affordable (...) Citoren ë-C4 is cheap
is buying an old car for maybe a few to several grand, fix it up, and drive the heck out of it.
I don't know.
I used to buy a very nice well equipped larger car with ~60k miles and get in another ~60k before selling it on (I only loose a few grand by going that and enjoy driving a modern beauty and I would also retrofit them with equipment I needed like CarPlay, a decent radio, a reverse cam, reverse sensors, a Mobileye etc.)
But after driving a brand new Niro with all the modern Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) installed and they're so great and take off so much workload off me, I couldn't ever go back.
And looking at the next generation (Driving Assist 2) it makes new cars be worth it.
But after driving a brand new Niro with all the modern Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) installed and they're so great and take off so much workload off me, I couldn't ever go back.
As we used to say, "Different strokes for different folks." I'm not interested in any of those things and certainly am not willing to pay for them or, worse yet, go into debt for them. In fact, none of the cars you mention are "affordable" (let alone "very affordable") by my standards.
Well, that's cause they're new - I'm sure they'll depreciate like every car out there.
But it will take some time.
They will, but being so complex they'll become endless money pits and of course electric models will have failing out-of-warranty batteries that will cost $$$$$ to replace.
Modern petrol car drivetrains have gotten much more complex than EVs.
A Camry has insane mechanical complexity (for example: 8 injectors in 2 fuel systems, electrically actuated VVT, an oil pump with 5 performance modes, 12 oil sprayer nozzles, shut off valves in the coolant channels, EGR ports inside of the cylinder head - I can go for days with all of the odd super technologically complex features in just a boring Camry)
-
In an EV, there's just an inverter that handles the battery and electrical current and the drive unit.
And these drive train related ones seem to hold up well (they're pretty much the same as you'd find in a HEV or especially a PHEV)
On a Toyota / Honda / the absolute majority of cars these held up great (with the once exception of VW GTE models where there were flaws)
-
And the "body electronics" (everything else except the drivetrain) haven't changed too much, I didn't find a significant difference between a 2011 Volvo coupe I had and Kias most advanced Hybrid.
-
The battery aging issue is definitely a consideration, but they are getting better at refurbishing battery packs and long term reliability.
A lot of the early failed batteries are not thermally managed - that is still the main cause of battery death on early EVs (Leaf, Focus EV, Soul EV, etc.) and there's a good chance that it will change.
-
Toyota are developing and producing batteries that should last 15-20 years - on the ProACE Electric (jointly developed by Toyota and Citroën) they say it should last 15 years or 1,000,000 km.
They have also said that their EV SUV should retain around 90% of its battery capacity after 10 years of use.
So yeah, Battery longevity is definitely increasing - a lot
(especially when comparing it to older EVs like the LEAF)
-
And with the wide adoption they will have due to the laws passed on the subject in Europe, I think that battery prices will spike and later fall much lower than the $150/kWh that we're currently seeing. I believe that in 5-10 years a battery replacement on a long range EV will only cost a few grand ($45-$50 per kWh would be great)
Since I have never owned a vehicle made after 1999 and have no plans to do so, the complexity of late-model gasoline cars is not anything I'm concerned about. (I would note however that much of the complexity is due to the insane and escalating requirements of politicians and bureaucrats, not due to market demand.)
Speculation of how inexpensive it will supposedly be to keep an old EV going is just that - speculation. Ditto for "miracle batteries" which have been promised to be just around the corner for the last 50 years. I strongly suspect that if it is ever possible to buy a 15-20 year old fully functional electric car for cash I'll either be pushing up the daisies or too old to drive. So from both the aspect of practicality and that of not giving in to "green" nonsense, as I said: NO SALE.
The BZ4X seems like they crammed an EV into an older RAV4 chassis, with ugly wheel well panels.
I was actually super excited for the Toyota EV compact SUV. But then then decided to call it the BZ4X, which is a dumb name. They made it ugly. And the technology inside of it isn’t all that impressive.
We shall see though, if this Toyota tech is resilient! Only time will tell.
I think a lot of it is market demand.
Crazy technologies required to meet ever more stringent emissions and fuel economy requirements drive the complexity of today's engines and transmissions. These are tiny, incremental improvements, virtually unnoticeable by either consumers or the environment, being required by bureaucrats who do not understand the concept of diminishing returns.
pretty soon getting a new battery for your car will be like getting new batteries for your phone etc., and the guy on the corner will be doing it for cheap.
I've been hearing that mantra from electric car proponents for decades. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting.
being required by bureaucrats
CAFE standards set a baseline. Manufacturers are not required to go beyond that. But they do anyway. Why? Because people demand it now. There is a MPG competition amongst manufacturers to win more customers. Mostly people worry about how volatile fuel prices are. It's not a stretch to imagine that the next geopolitical event could rock global markets so much that gasoline becomes a luxury.
These are tiny, incremental improvements,
That's right. The combustion engine have run out of optimization. But that's a constraint of that particular technology, not of what humans are able to devise. The DOT doesn't care HOW you improve efficiency, just that you do. Europe is already far ahead, mostly due to the high prices they've had there for a long time now. They are a glimpse of what lies ahead for N.America.
I've been hearing that mantra from electric car proponents for decades
There was no money in it back then. They were just a novelty. Electric cars have only recently hit the maintstream. Now that they're trendy and desirable , we will see rapid development. Even industry (for example mining) is using electric vehicles now.
Batteries are entering a lot of markets that didn't see them before. Heavy duty tools like jackhammers, 14" metal and concrete saws, coring drills and AC generators.
The DOT doesn't care HOW you improve efficiency,
I really don't care what the DOT wants.
As far as future gas and diesel prices, no one knows what will happen. However no matter what though I refuse to electrify, period, and will stick with internal combustion for the duration.
I really don't care what the DOT wants.
and nobody cares what Chuck wants. People who still need to think about the future, and will need cars for many years to come, care about where things are going. This topic is about new cars being built.
As far as future gas and diesel prices, no one knows what will happen
exactly, but prices rarely get better.
However no matter what though I refuse to electrify, period, and will stick with internal combustion for the duration.
yup. we heard you loud and clear. Hopefully you make it. A lot of us won't have that luxury. The youngest of us might even have something positive to look forward to.
Rest assured it is not just me, there are a lot of people out here who see through this nonsense and are not interested in going along with it. Seeing what at least some of those behind this push want, if they get their way this is just a stepping stone. The youngest of you may not have much positive to look forward to unless you enjoy the thought of being crowded into the like of "15 minute cities".
Most people won't have a choice. Car companies have to go along with it. Manufacturers have some leverage with lobbying and marketing, but for the most part they have to obey (1) what law says and (2) what people want. Supply and demand, and to some degree technology is what will shape the future. A small cohort of people holding onto old cars don't really factor into the equation very much. Dozens of millions of new cars are built and sold just in the USA every year.
.
Nobody enjoys thinking about doom and gloom. Luckily it's just that... doomsaying. The truth is the future will be completely unlike anybody expects or can imagine. Making up horror scenarios in my head and focusing on them doesn't seem like a productive use of time.
The hundreds of millions of gasoline and diesel powered vehicles currently in use are not going anywhere any time soon. It will be more than just a few people holding on to them. Widespread electrification is clearly not going to work without a serious reduction in the use of personal transportation. The electrical capacity is just not there and would require trillions of dollars of grid upgrades. Also there's no need to make up horror stories. Powerful organizations and people make no secret of what they want the future to look like.
the most gas guzzling vehicles will become unaffordable for the majority of public, and won't make financial sense for businesses either, and money is the ultimate driving factor. Electrification will come slowly. I imagine there will be some kind of partitioning or staggering so that everybody doesn't charge at once. It will also be more expensive to charge during peak times than during surplus. Instead of using existing infrastructure, I think we'll see new networks, similar to gas stations chains now. They will have their own private microgeneration plants. Or perhaps batteries will be charged all together in one facility with it's own power generation, and then distributed out to refuel stations. Who knows. People will figure it out . Necessity is the mother of invention. America could figure it out, as long as they focus on technology education, because right now China is leading.
.
15 minute cities doesn't sound so bad to me. Right now I have nothing around me. I have to jump in the car and drive for a long ways into awful traffic , and parking nightmares, just to pick up a quart of milk, or go to the bank. I would absolutely love to be able to walk from home instead. My aging parents don't want to be far from amenities like supplies and medical facilities either.
"Necessity is the mother of invention."
The problem is that none of this is really necessary. Electrification is mainly being pushed by governments before it is fully baked for no good reason, rather than allowing the idea to follow the normal path of technological development and market adoption. If the technology was really better it would not need to be subsidized or forced.
I suppose there are people who like the idea of being herded into a crowded city, living in a small Soviet style apartment, owning nothing, and being expected (or even required) to not stray more than a 15 minute walk, bicycle ride, or electric bus ride from there. However there are many who find the idea repellent and prefer a more rural lifestyle. (I was a city kid and I'm not going back to that.)
In any event this is getting pretty far astray and obviously neither one of us is going to convince the other.
yes you are right about that. For better or for worse, It is getting a huge push. As a result , there has been squandering of taxpayer dollars, and money fueled poor decision making. Immature products come with the territory. There's no shortage of eager, early adopters who are happy to part with their money for new toys. I think any time you make big risks , growing pains are inevitable. We'll see how they pay off. I don't think there's much that you or I are going to do about this. All we can do is make the best of it, and hope that some good comes out.
.
I don't think anybody wants to force you to stay within the confines of the city or your home. That's futile. But breaking up huge monolithic cities into smaller self reliant communities doesn't sound so bad. I'm not built for apartment living either, but I welcome the OPTION of having nearby amenities. Travelling takes precious time out of my life and adds unnecessary stress.
I don't see rural areas changing anytime soon I think think they'll remain unchanged as they have for a long time.
.
Circling back to the original topic, Toyota opening up new high tech plants in the USA could be a silver lining. It will employ a lot of people in high tech jobs, and hopefully bring more bright minds and innovators back to home soil. Biden is also investing money into domestic microchip production, reducing American reliance on overseas chips, which we recently saw cripple the economy. You know, USA used to be a big leader in semiconductor manufacturing. There were many huge names based in the USA before the industry was wiped out. It would be good to see some of that come back. It will pay huge dividends to the American economy in the future , not to have China own the monopoly on electric vehicles.
Posted by: @chucktobias
> "The hundreds of millions of gasoline and diesel powered vehicles currently in use are not going anywhere any time soon"
-
Have you seen how the EU got rid of diesel cars? especially older ones?
They decided that they'll have to pass inspection more frequently, pay huge registration fees, and jacked up the price of diesel by adding a $2 per gallon TAX.
----------------
Posted by: @chucktobias
> "Widespread electrification is clearly not going to work without a serious reduction in the use of personal transportation"
-
I really don't see how EVs will have an impact on personal mobility. my neighbors have a Hyundai iNOIQ 5 (not with LG chem batteries...) - that thing charges 15%-80% in 15 minutes. It has gotten so good that there's literally not an obstacle even on long trips. (even during highway cruising it requires recharging only every 5-6 hours. He needs to recharge only twice as frequently as I need to refuel, and I have the world's most efficient production hybrid...)
In the U.S. there's only so much they can get away with without being booted out of office. Very unlikely our politicians would try something as brazen as is done in the EU and other countries. EVs will have an impact on mobility if for no other reason than there is not sufficient electrical capacity either on the generation or delivery side to support mass adoption. Until trillions of dollars are spent and quite a few years of physical infrastructure upgrades done electricity would either need to be rationed or priced sky high, not to mention that a huge number of people cannot afford a new "affordable" EV, or live in apartments with no convenient place to charge. I can "recharge" my gasoline powered vehicles 100% in much less than 15 minutes and can do so virtually anywhere, no planning needed and the vehicles themselves can last for decades without major repairs. And, to add insult to injury, there is absolutely no legitimate reason to force this change. So once again, no sale.
Posted by: @chucktobias
> "only so much they can get away with without being booted out"
-
Until it's a bi-partisan bill with wide support.
And there's no reason to believe that won't happen.
----------------
Posted by: @chucktobias
> " not sufficient electrical capacity "
-
well, you should try electrical grid privatization -
private companies can keep up with demand.
-
Anyhow it's not that severe, "For 26.4 million EVs, that's over 101 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity in a year or about 2.5% of what the U.S. grid produced in 2020"
If 40% of cars in the US will suddenly become EVs that'll be just 10% of grid capacity - nothing catastrophic.
----------------
Posted by: @chucktobias
> "a huge number of people cannot afford a new "affordable" EV"
-
You're saying a huge number of people can't afford a new car.
It's true - to them no new car is affordable.
They'll have to buy a used one with 50% of it's life behind it.
No different than ICEs.
----------------
Posted by: @chucktobias
> "live in apartments with no convenient place to charge"
-
That issue was solved where I live, you just install an EV charger on your parking spot.
If there are no private spots, even better, delegate 2-5 spots for charging stations.
----------------
Posted by: @chucktobias
> "I can "recharge" my gasoline powered vehicles 100% in much less than 15 minutes"
-
EV chargers aren't like gas stations, in places where EVs are already prominent.
An EV charger is only like $1,000-$2,500 to install in an already exiting parking spot (with already existing city electricity infrastructure, it's not like you need to dig deep and install gasoline talks and pumps, and have a supply chain, etc. just connect it to existing cables)
(I have one literally on the side walk across from my house, and more and more are popping up -while the nearest gas station is a 10. minute drive and the one I use is a full 15 minute drive)
Just a parking spot with an outlet, they're on the same lines as the light poles.
(Where I live they're also equipped with an automatic system that fines internal combustion engine cars that park there)
----------------
Posted by: @chucktobias
> "the vehicles themselves can last for decades"
-
The average modern car lasts 12-15 years, about as much as an EV would.
----------------
It's really not as bad as you'd think, the progress that's being made in the field is insane.
The facts are that more and more people are choosing to go EV.
(EV sales are having 40%-60% growth Year-over-year It's not some fridge toy, people buy these as their primary methods of transportation, I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years we'll see a 30%-40% marketshare)
The entire WORLD's best selling car is the Tesla Model Y (EV).
Until it's a bi-partisan bill with wide support.
And there's no reason to believe that won't happen.
There's also no reason to believe it will happen. Politicians are primarily concerned with their own careers and at least in the U.S. they know if they push people too far they're out. Regime change is a real possibility if they push too far too fast. (Really all the governments pushing this nonsense need to be tossed out, but that's a different discussion.)
that'll be just 10% of grid capacity - nothing catastrophic.
Even if that calculation is accurate the grid in the U.S. can barely keep up with demand as it is now - and in some places it can't when demand peaks.
An EV charger is only like $1,000-$2,500 to install in an already exiting parking spot
Who is going to pay for all the huge number that would be required, particularly in the many apartment complexes where the parking lots are privately owned? That's a very common setup in the U.S. (Note that it was not necessary for government to build gas stations at taxpayer expense and you don't need one at every parking space.)
The average modern car lasts 12-15 years, about as much as an EV would.
12-15 years old is nothing. An EV that old will require an expensive battery replacement in short order. (The claim that batteries will be cheap and easy to replace is pie in the sky fantasy until such time as it might be fact - and at the present time it is not.) People in the low end of the used car market will be left behind. On the other hand, a gasoline model can keep going for decades. I have several vehicles and none are less than about 25 years old, all still running just fine. Chances are that at least some of them will last the rest of my life.
The facts are that more and more people are choosing to go EV.
A large part of that is due to government distortion of the marketplace - and as the old saying goes, a fool and his money are soon parted. I won't be joining the lemmings running off the end of the cliff.
Scotty has covered these issues in his videos in detail. I'm with him - EVs are a scam. As I've said there isn't even a good reason for forcing this change down peoples' throats.
It is in most of the world, yet - it's still happening.
Lemmings streaming off the cliff. Kind of a mass hysteria. There's not a legitimate reason in the world for forcing this massive change. If politicians in the U.S. take extreme measures to push this, to the point where a lot of people experience significant negative impact, they are very likely to find themselves out of jobs. There's an old saying here that people vote with their wallets.
looking at grid expansion in the US there's no question that 10% in 5 years is doable.
I wouldn't bet on it. Building power plants is not a trivial exercise. Electricity rates will likely go through the roof. (Frankly I've learned not to trust any of the rosy projections or statistics coming from the EV crowd.)
I own my parking lot spaces, it's in my טאבו, and if I would own an EV I would just pay the $1,000 to have the charger installed and always have my car fully charged.
That's not the way it's generally done with U.S. suburban apartments. You have the building sitting in the middle of a common parking lot. Why go to the expense and trouble of tearing up parking lots all over the country just to put in chargers? How long will those chargers last? How much will rents need to increase for the owners to do that, particularly in the beginning when most residents won't even have electric cars? Makes no sense.
In my own garage or driveway I would not pay $1000 or more for a charger. I have entire vehicles that did not cost that much.
a modern EV like an INOIQ5 charges 15-80% in 15 minutes.
How long will the batteries last when constantly fast charged? I expect a vehicle to last decades. I doubt that one will.
I'm sure that cars like the £15,000 Dacia Spring and so many other upcoming cheap EVs are going to depreciate to nothing reasonably fast.
Of course. With failed or failing out-of-warranty batteries they'll be little more than junkyard fodder.
The Model Y is just popular.
Plenty of cars that were not particularly good have been popular. If someone gave me a Tesla I'd give it back. (Not only due to being electric but also other aspects I find undesirable.)
As I said, no sale here.
there is not sufficient electrical capacity
in the public system, sure. I strongly believe it will be a private venture. And a lucrative one. In fact, it might even BENEFIT and supplement the public system
I really don't understand that. I've always gotten electricity from privately owned companies, though they are regulated and beholden to their respective state public utilities boards.
well just like cellular service. It was once a public utility, operated by a private company but funded by the government. Then you de-regulate the industry and open it up to commerce. They can then do business in the sector and collect their own revenue, and compete with each other.
At least anywhere I've lived electricity has always been through a private company, though there may well be parts of the country where power is provided by the public sector. Even Con Edison in New York has always been a private company and is listed on the NY stock exchange.
Right and I think then con ed sells the power it generates in its plants to the New York power authority (state run public organisation) who then distributes and sells it to the public.
Well if what startups were able to produce their own power and distribute it too. Much like cellular providers build their own towers.
The top worldwide best sellers always have been great cars
Like the Vega and Pinto which had huge sales in the U.S.? Crap cars have a long history of popularity and good sales here.
Are you seriously suggesting there won't be electricity in America?
No, I'm suggesting that building power plants in the face of "green" requirements is going to be extremely expensive and will result in skyrocketing electricity rates.
They will tell ya it's the "climate crisis".
There is no "climate crisis", only changes due to the forces of nature. Electric cars will not affect this one way or the other.
In apartments? cheap level 2 chargers not much.
rapid charger areas in apartments, not much either.
I very much doubt it. Ripping up an existing parking lot to wire it for chargers is going to cost $$$$. Payback could take years and would be uncertain since people in apartments are frequently going to be the least likely to be able to afford an electric car.
The typical home EV charger is called "Level 2" and they're inexpensive.
Even the largest IONIQ5 battery will charge overnight using one.
Why the heck would I want to spend money on that when I can fill up a fuel tank just a few minutes practically anywhere? I guess though you'd have the edge if you happen to run out of power on the road - just have AAA bring a canister of electricity out to you!
the Tesla model 3 is probably way better than you would think.
I rather doubt it. From not having a real dashboard and instrument panel to all the crap electronics ("auto pilot" that runs into things etc.), and being under wireless control of the manufacturer, any Tesla is garbage to me. None of that even has to do with it being electric. I wouldn't want it if it had a V8. As mentioned, if somebody gave me one I'd give it back.
Toyota says the lifespan is 1,000,000km, BYD says 1,000,000 miles.
Can you show us any that have actually lasted that long? Also, age is a big factor, can you show us maybe a 20-25 year-old electric car with a battery that still has most of its capacity left? If one can be brought forward, fine, otherwise it is blowing smoke until proven in the field.
It's all nonsensical to me and I see absolutely no reason to go with it.
"The top worldwide best sellers always have been great cars"Reply by: @chucktobias"Like the Vega and Pinto which had huge sales in the U.S.?"
building power plants in the face of "green" requirements
Natural gas is clean and 'green' energy.
Happens to also be the cheapest and easiest power plants to build.
spend money on that when I can fill up a fuel tank
Yea, you can charge an EV at a public station.
As I said that's the cost of 3 gas tanks is an optional extra that allows an EV owner who lives in a suburb to never worry about finding a charger again in his life.
The gas (which is way cheaper than actual gas) magically appears in your car every night!
just have AAA bring a canister of electricity
Meet my local AAA, שגריר אלקטריק.
10 minute charge from the AAA truck and you get 100km of range.
The thing back there? a battery pack capable of delivering rapid charge.
It's a 59 shekel upcharge on insurance.
Also, the governments completely car free "car first aid" does offer towing to the nearest charger.
dashboard and instrument panel
instruments for what? other than the speed there's not much to see.
"auto pilot" that runs into things
The publicly available software offers the exact same features as a Corolla.
under wireless control
what?
From what I'm getting you haven't sat in one and realized that it's a very nice semi-luxury car.
It's really hard to argue with how nice it actually is irl.
Tesla is only one of the EV companies, everyone else are joining the space too
Can you show us any that have actually lasted that long?
This one lasted 300,000 miles on the original battery and is still going strong.
Older Model S batteries lasted 250k miles, and that's before Teslas new revised tech.
There is no "climate crisis",
It sure seems like your elected representatives don't agree.
And that all are willing to spend top dollar on "dealing with the climate crisis" (and """Environmental Justice""")
As I said, when they ban petrol cars and jack up gas prices - 'They will tell ya it's the "climate crisis".'
This is the boogyman that will give them authority to switch you to EVs
Ripping up an existing parking lot to wire it for chargers is going to cost
Uhhhh why?
In public open air public parking areas - EV chargers are installed near lighting equipment and near the sidewalks where there are buildings and existing electricity lines.
In closed parkings, such as apartments, it can be run on the walls.
Last time I flew to Europe they have accomplished facilitation of EV charing wonderfully.
My municipality is also heading in the right direction (by turning some random public parking spaces into EV fast charging stations).
"auto pilot" that runs into things etc.
if I'm not mistaken, the basic models don't have this. And even if you pay for it, you're not obligated to use it. You can still drive your car (and I'm sure they insist you do). Crashes have been driver negligence, which is nothing new.
wireless control of the manufacturer
I haven't heard of this issue. Do you own a computer?
There are plenty of fair criticisms. We don't need to start grasping at straws.
My understanding is that Tesla can control features of their cars after the sale via wireless. Not something I would be interested in no matter how a vehicle is powered.
@chucktobias
if you allow them, tech support can remotely operate your computer to fix issues. Do you own a computer?
My computers all run Linux and thus are not under the control of a major tech company which can push changes out whether you want them or not. I provide my own tech support. (Most support companies are not even set up to assist Linux desktop users, just Windows and maybe MacOS-X.) I admittedly do not know if it is possible for an owner to turn off Tesla's remote access to their vehicles or not.
@chucktobias
but they can. Any computer can be remotely accessed, and yet you still own a computer and it's not an issue for various reasons (such as the ones you listed). I believe it's likely the same for these cars. They are very sophisticated and capable of many things. Let's talk about it when it becomes and actual issue, instead of reacting to alarmist headlines.
Someone criminally hacking into a computer remotely is a bit different issue than a product being deliberately set up for its manufacturer to exercise control over it that way. I have what I believe is sufficient firewalling in place for my purposes but of course anyone can break into anything connected to the public internet if they are sufficiently interested in doing so.
@chucktobias
I didn't say anything about criminals. I'm talking about legitimate remote computer access. Computer are deliberately set up to receive software updates. Is that a reason not to buy them?
It wasn't quite clear to me what you were getting at, but I think I see now. The answer is that I do updates manually as they are needed. (There are sites where flaws and updates for them are documented on a regular basis.) If I don't manually check for and download updates they are not installed. There is no automatic access to or from a remote server. It's all under my own control. If I don't see a need for a particular update (as in not security related), or believe it is going to cause problems I just don't install it. Hope this clears that up.
Anyway ... that's irrelevant detail. The updates were just an example. I'm looking at the bigger picture. Computers can be accessed remotely, but you're not bothered. why? Because it's safe. So why the double standard for a car? How is it different.
Why am I not bothered by using a computer? Because it's under my control. No one can come in remotely and change anything, barring criminal trespass. Control is retained by the owner, not an external entity. I expect the same in a vehicle.
yup you explained that already. So how are these cars different?
actually lets back this up even more .... how do you think the car connects in the first place?
The manufacturer can apply updates and change features remotely. This is not a problem specific to Tesla or electric cars, it is being explored by others for things like subscribing to heated seats and other features. I don't like the idea of a products that are designed to be modified on the fly that way from an external source. You were attempting to tell me that my computer has the same issue but it does not. (Now if I was using a typical home PC running Windows where Microsoft reserves the right to push out updates under their control that can change features you would be correct.)
Lets start at the beginning. how does the car manufacturer apply updates?
Windows is on 74% of computers. So 74% of people don't seem to mind.
That's moving the goal posts. The issue you raised is why would I mind remote access in a car if I use a computer. The answer is that my computers are not subject to the kind of remote access you're talking about so the question is not really relevant in my case. In fact I do not own anything that is subject to being fiddled with remotely.
Now, to bring others into it, when the practice of making cars remotely accessible becomes more widespread how will people react? I suspect the issue for most will be having to pay a subscription fee to keep features working on a car they've already purchased, particularly as the practice filters down to lower priced vehicles. I suspect that's the part that most people will have a problem with.
well you raised the issue. Both computers and according to you, the cars, are capable of remote access. One seems to be an issue for you but not the other. I'm still waiting for an explanation how they're different, because so far everything you say about the computer applies to (hypothetically) the car.
.
but again, from the beginning ... how exactly are these cars being accessed/updated/controlled or whatever? supposedly
@ChuckTobias I suspect that this is not the big issue you make it out to be.
Check out the subscription model currently being pursued and tested by car manufacturers. The remote access is likely via cellular internet connection. I personally don't want an item that can be modified by the manufacturer after the sale. As the practice becomes more widespread time will tell whether it becomes an important issue for new or used car buyers.
https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/6/21127243/tesla-model-s-autopilot-disabled-remotely-used-car-update
so what is the problem exactly? Added features have always costed more money. If you don't like the price then don't buy it.
.
Cellular internet connection requires paying a provider for the service does it not? So I can just not buy it... right?
.
In the posted article, the owner did not pay for autopilot (again, a digital service that requires service provider) so the company cancelled it. If you don't pay your power bill, the company will shut off your power. This is nothing shocking.
If you say so.
am I wrong? will the car not work perfectly fine without any of this?
Depends on what hardware in the car is put into the "subscription" category that can be disabled remotely. (I've read BMW has been trying that out with heated seats.) The market will decide whether buyers will put up with that kind of thing.
@chucktobias I think people will like that if they decide they want heated seats, all it takes is a phone call. Can you imagine the cost and time to order and retrofit heated seats into a vehicle that didn't come with it? In my experience, the dealership will refuse to even do it.
We'll see if they like having to pay a monthly or yearly fee for them to continue working. Ditto with other features that may be deemed subscription items in the future. (Heater? AC?) Using the seat heater example, my expectation is that if the seat heaters are already in the car, paid for as a part of the original selling price, they'll continue to work without additional fees as mine have for the last 27 years. Ditto for other hardware paid for when the car is purchased that does not require external services for its operation.
if you think the price you pay for a product actually represents the material cost of that particular object, then you haven't been paying attention the last 50 years or so.
So you're saying that companies make a routine practice of charging less for their products than it costs to manufacture them. OK, if you say so.
manufacturing cost is a just a small part of operating a business.
All of those costs are figured into the selling price of a product in order to make a profit.
Lets say a small, medium and large coffee costs $1.50, $2.00, and $2.50 respectively, at a cafe. Do you think the large coffee actually has $0.50 more worth of coffee in the cup? It's just a price model. It has NOTHING to do with the material value. Nobody pulled out their calculator and said , ok 10mL of coffee is worth 10 cents or whatever. The coffee is probably worth 0.00000... something. They could just serve everyone the same large size of coffee for a fixed price. If they charge 'small' price, they lose money. If the charge 'large' price they lose customers and still lose money. A price model give the consumer a choice of how much money they want to spend, and at the end of the day it all averages out and (hopefully) the merchant made money.
.
It's purely based on supply and demand. They know what it costs them to develop a feature, and they know how much they need to recover, and how much customers are willing to pay. The cost of putting it in or not, is negligible to them and irrelevant to price structure. They probably save money by making everything the same, allowing them lower the total cost which benefits you. But giving it away for free would be silly.
.
I'm sure you've heard of pricing strategies like "loss leaders". Prices are made up. This is called "value pricing" , and it's used any time the value to a customer is worth many times the production cost. And if you're a business, you would be silly not to take advantage of it.
.
As a consumer, all I care about is what I get, for what I pay. Why is it of any concern to me how the internals of a company works, how they assemble things, what their operating costs are, and how they came up with their pricing model. It's a product for a price, period. If you want a feature buy it. If not, don't. If you hadn't known that a seat heater or whatever wasn't actually in there, you would never have said a thing. And as far as the business owner is concerned, it's none of your business.
If you say so.
This is how the world works. I didn't make it up. I just live in it.
If you are not bothered by the idea of a manufacturer having remote access and the ability to enable or disable features on something you have already purchased that's fine. Go for it. As far as I'm concerned they've already made their money on the sale of the item and I'm not willing to pony up more for a "subscription", whether we're talking about a car, a computer, or a toaster.
It would be like Intel telling me I need to pay them a subscription fee or they'll disable some CPU cores in my computer, or Samsung saying well you need to keep paying us or we're going to disable some of the memory chips you bought from us, etc., and we reserve the right to connect to your computer remotely to do it. Maybe Black & Decker wants a subscription to use the toaster I bought from them.
I find that kind of thing unacceptable and would not buy a product sold that way. I'd bet I'm not the only one. Sorry guys, you priced the product according to how much you calculated you needed to make on it at point of sale and you don't get another dime from me.
@chucktobias
You want to do this all over again?
I'm not bothered , because you're making things up. Which feature is being disabled that people paid for?
As I explained: If I stop paying my electricity bill, it gets cut off.
If I don't pay for heated seats, I won't get any heated seats. I DID NOT pay for it.
I have a computer that's connected to the internet all the time, and it's safe.
Everybody has a phone in their pocket that's connected all sorts of ways. Nobody minds.
All of a sudden a car (which is NOT connected by default) is a problem?
If you have any actual evidence that anybody is remotely doing anything , in some inappropriate way, please go ahead and post it.
Reality check : cars are not toasters. They are rolling computers. If you don't want any subscriptions (like navigation that has up to date maps) then don't buy them. The car will still work fine.
@chucktobias
I'm really glad you brought up electronics, because that is one market that is full of value pricing.
Companies are not going to spin up half a dozen boards based on options customers buy. There is ONE configuration, and features are enabled or disabled in software. There are thousands of examples of this. It is extremely common. And don't make it sound like some kind of sly trick. You know exactly what you're getting when you purchase. Remote access isn't always needed (it could just be a code, or file that is loaded. a hardware dongle, etc) but it does make it more convenient. Just because you don't understand it, it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, or that it's fraudulent. Nobody sneaks into your equipment to remove things you had an valid expectation of getting.
.
Trial software is another area where this has existed for decades. I can remember in the 90's getting software that came with a free trial. When you purchased a license from the developer, he sent you a code that entered into the software to enable to missing features. The capability was there the whole time. So according you they should let me use it for free, right?
Nope.
I'm not "making things up". Clearly you're not understanding the issue, possibly because I'm not good enough at explaining it. Now you're bringing in non-sequiturs like paying for shareware and typing a code in which has nothing to do with having your "rolling computer" or any other device being designed for the manufacturer to change its operation remotely after purchase. If the capability is not being misused now you can bet it will be in the future.
"Everybody has a phone in their pocket that's connected all sorts of ways. Nobody minds."
Not everyone. Heck, I personally know people who have no cell phone at all. Most != Everybody.
How is it a non sequiter? The software operated fully for a limited time. Then it later "changes its operation" to limit functionality until you paid for the license to use the full functions again.
I'm not a betting man. I try to focus on reality.
Let me give you a more relevant example of market segmentation then, which actually relates to cars.
Cars usually come in standard colors. Lets take VW for example because I'm familiar. No matter the model , they would come standard in only black, grey, or blue. If you wanted a different color, you would pay a fair bit extra. Did it actually cost VW more to paint them in a different color? Maybe a tiny bit. Certainly not the hundreds of dollars the customer shelled out. It's just way to give customer some added benefit, in this case exclusive colors. The companies know that certain features hold a higher value for certain customers (even if the actual cost is trivial), and that they're willing to pay more for it.
"Most != Everybody."
In USA, 97% of people. I'm calling that close enough.
Not the same thing at all. In that 1990s scenario after you buy the license and activate the software by typing in a code the vendor cannot remotely go in and alter it after the fact. It's a matter of who has ultimate control after purchase - the customer or the manufacturer. I don't buy any product which can be modified remotely at the pleasure of the manufacturer whether it's a car, a computer, a phone, software, or whatever.
"In USA, 97% of people. I'm calling that close enough."
That's not reality, that's making things up. A 3% difference is millions of people.
Sometimes the license was only good for a year, and when it expired you had to get a new one. Of course these days, the software connects to a server to make sure your license is up to date. But honestly , it doesn't matter. It comes down to simple economics: you want a service, you have to pay. Nobody is modifying anything for pleasure. And even if they could ... how would they? You still haven't answered that.
Well if you can't trust anyone to provide you a service, then you can't enjoy them I guess. Too bad for you.
Do you have home internet by the way? Who controls your bandwidth?
"A 3% difference is millions of people."
it's semantics. In no way does it change my point. hundreds of millions of people are using cellphones which to a large degree are able to change their functionality post-purchase. I won't even go into computers. And it will become even more so as things becomes more interconnected.
If the capability to make remote changes is there it will result in misuse or at the very least inadvertent problems. It's inevitable. You can debate what constitutes a "service" of course. I don't consider physical items installed in a vehicle or device that I own to be a "service". (BMW did have to back away from its plans for subscription heated seats due to customer outcry, now classifying those as a "basic feature". It's a good bet though that the idea will not go away. GM is foaming at the mouth to turn everything they can into a subscription in the future.)
Who controls my bandwidth is irrelevant. The service provider is not able to make any changes to anything on the local network side of the connection.
@chucktobias
plus... do you have any actual examples. The only car features I'm aware of that required subscriptions, were those that required some kind of ongoing service from a provider, without which the feature cannot physically work. Such as Lexus "digital key" which allows people to unlock the car from a smartphone. That kind of service requires expensive infrastructure on Lexus' part to maintain. Not to mention expensive, sophisticated security hardening, and liability which that kind of service entails. According to you , this should be free? Shouldn't that be a add-on option for only those that want/need it and are willing to pay the premium?
"hundreds of millions of people are using cellphones which to a large degree are able to change their functionality post-purchase. I won't even go into computers. And it will become even more so as things becomes more interconnected."
The functionality of my phone cannot be changed by the cellular provider or manufacturer, as far as the phone itself is concerned. It is a model that is specifically designed to be under control of the end user. While most aren't concerned, enough do care that it has been feasible for such devices to be brought to market. Ditto for my computers.
well of course services/relationships can be misused or have inadvertent problems.I don't understand the point of this statement. That risk has always there. Your phone company can shut off your phone. How is this any different? ARE they misusing it? Have there been issues with people not getting what they paid for? Your internet service provider has the power to throttle your connection any time they like, but you do business with them.
What difference does it make to you whether something is physical and virtual? And where do you draw you arbitrary line? Software? Firmware?
"plus... do you have any actual examples.
Have you forgotten about Tesla and Hurricane Irma already? That's an example of remote over-the-air changes being used for a good purpose, but there is no reason to believe the capability won't be problematical in the future.
"That kind of service requires expensive infrastructure on Lexus' part to maintain."
You know that's not the kind of service I'm talking about. The issue is hardware built into the car that requires no external services or infrastructure being subject to a subscription charge, and the manufacturer having the capability of remotely disabling such items.
"Your phone company can shut off your phone."
Actually they cannot, they can only terminate service. The phone could then be registered with a different service or even just used on the internet, which some people elect to do. Its internal functionality cannot be changed by the service provider or manufacturer.
"The functionality of my phone cannot be changed "
can't it? what if AT&T shuts down text messaging? Phones are basically computers now, and their functionality relies on software. I know you're a special exception, but most people use a plethora of connected services on phones, that are controlled by a provider. Those service can and do change. And people still pay, voluntarily, which means they are satisfied with the arrangement.
"It is a model that is specifically designed to be under control of the end user. "
"crippled" in other words.
No, the functionality of the phone itself cannot be changed by the provider. They cannot change the software or firmware. Whatever they do on their end the phone itself has not been changed and can be used on other services and in other ways. It is not "crippled". It can do many things that conventional phones cannot, they are just different than what most people want. These kind of devices were not developed simply for my benefit, there are enough people who want them to justify their manufacture.
I draw the line at an external entity being able to make changes in software or firmware remotely. (Obviously direct changes to hardware cannot be made that way.) It's really quite simple.
"there is no reason to believe the capability won't be problematical in the future."
There's little reason to believe it WILL. Angry customers aren't a very successful business model.
I can make a up all sorts of scenarios in my head too, limited only by my imagination. Capability doesn't infer malice.
.
"The phone could then be registered with a different service"
unless it's network locked, or on a different band. Back in the day if it was a landline, there was nobody else so you'd be without phone service.
.
" the manufacturer having the capability of remotely disabling such items."
again ... how?? you've avoided the question several time now.
" Whatever they do on their end the phone itself has not been changed"
It doesn't matter. If the provider side is changed, and they the only provider, then the effect to you is the same. No worky.
.
"Obviously direct changes to hardware cannot be made that way."
that's basically what firmware is. Programmable hardware.
.
I draw the line at an external entity being able to make changes in software
Do you not update your software?
"Have you forgotten about Tesla and Hurricane Irma "
I didn't forget because I've never heard of it. That was 10,000km away from me and I don't follow every storm on the planet. We don't really get them here.
@chucktobias
So I'm reading now that BMW offered unlimited use of the heated seats for $415.
Isn't that basically ... buying the option with the car?
The phone will still work fine on other services as already explained. They cannot lock it to prevent that.
By direct changes to hardware I mean physically modifying components, not changing their programming. Firmware obviously can be changed unless it is on read-only media, which is not often done these days.
As far as software updates, as I have already stated ad nauseum, they are under my control. I vet them and those that in my estimation are appropriate are installed manually. No one is able to just push them out whether I want them or not, or at inconvenient times.
Since BMW was planning to make heated seats a subscription that means they would have the capability of disabling them if the subscription was not paid. Once a car is remotely connected to the manufacturer there is likely no limit on what they can do since everything is computer-controlled.
Working for over 45 years in technology (though now semi-retired) I've seen many horror stories and broken promises, so I expect the worst.
In any event it's evident that you simply don't get it and may even be just arguing for the sake of being argumentative since you keep asking about things that have already been covered. Or maybe I'm just lousy at explaining them. It's getting very late here and there is a holiday tomorrow, so that's all for now and likely I won't be around for most of tomorrow.
"So I'm reading now that BMW offered unlimited use of the heated seats for $415."
As already stated, they changed their heated seat subscription plans due to customer outcry at the idea. And with that, good night.
@chucktobias
" software updates, as I have already stated ad nauseum, they are under my control. "
And as I keep saying ad nauseum... how is the car any different? You keep avoiding this one.
.
" As already stated, they changed their heated seat subscription plans due to customer outcry "
Yes, they did change the plans after outcry: they made it standard.
But I think the "unlimited" plan for $415 was available from the beginning.
.
" I mean physically modifying components, not changing their programming"
again, the net effect to you can be identical. And they don't even need to touch the programming. Let's say a phone is advertised as featuring some function. For instance, Google Hangouts or Google Picasa, etc. Then Google discontinues the service (it requires their server). You can't use the software anymore, and nobody else supports it because it was exclusive. The function of the phone to you (and maybe is was deciding factor in buying it) has changed .. outside of your control.
.
"Once a car is remotely connected to the manufacturer there is likely no limit on what they can do since everything is computer-controlled."
same as your phone, computer, printer, etc. Or even just taking your car to the mechanic for that matter.
.
"I've seen many horror stories and broken promises, so I expect the worst."
so then what? live in a cave?
.
"just arguing for the sake of being argumentative"
I'm just trying to apply sound reasoning. It seems that what it all really comes down to is that you're afraid someone is going to steal car features from you, which seems irrational to me.
" maybe I'm just lousy at explaining them"
Maybe if you share your the horror stories you mentioned I'll understand better.
Happy Independence Day, Chuck 🙂
Fact check: The US is not worldwide.
What happens in other countries is of course their own business.
Natural gas is clean and 'green' energy.
Not according to people who think CO2 is "pollution". Usually those folks don't want nukes either.
instruments for what? other than the speed there's not much to see.
There's nothing in those things but a big touch screen. Thanks but no thanks.
what?
Tesla can control features and even range remotely. Of course some others are testing those waters as well for subscription-based features but I would never buy into any vehicle set up that way.
From what I'm getting you haven't sat in one and realized that it's a very nice semi-luxury car.
It's really hard to argue with how nice it actually is irl.
Not interested. There's really not much about it that I would consider "nice". They're practically alien inside. I prefer a more traditional automotive environment. A friend of mine had one (I forget which model) for a while. I was not particularly impressed. He wound up getting rid of it after a few years and buying a hybrid.
It sure seems like your elected representatives don't agree.
Primarily those from a particular party. With few exceptions politicians will go whichever way they believe will secure their jobs and bring them the most power and wealth. To understand the alleged "climate crisis" you need to follow the path of money and power. It has also become something of a cult and a religion for its adherents.
This is the boogyman that will give them authority to switch you to EVs
Not likely in the U.S. in my lifetime. The political party pushing this agenda knows elections have been close and they can be tossed out if they move too fast and too hard. Of course they may try taxes and incentives in an attempt to "nudge" people over and that will probably work with some.