GM Delays EV Truck Production At Michigan Plant By Another Year (reuters.com) 114
General Motors said it will delay production of electric pickups trucks at its plant in Michigan by another year as the No. 1 U.S. automaker grapples with flattening demand for electric vehicles. Reuters reports: The move is the latest sign that electric vehicle production and demand may not be as strong as forecast. GM had been set to begin production of the electric Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra in late 2024 at the suburban Detroit plant. The company said the plan now is to start it in late 2025.
GM said the change was being made "to better manage capital investment while aligning with evolving EV demand" but said the move does not impact its battery plant plans. GM said in July battery production at the Ultium joint venture plant Ohio has been hampered because "our automation equipment supplier is struggling with delivery issues."
The automaker in July reiterated a previous target of building 400,000 EVs from 2022 through the first half of 2024, and projected EV revenue of $50 billion in 2025. GM has said it is targeting production of roughly 100,000 EVs in the second half of 2023. Reuters reported in July that the U.S. electric vehicle market is growing, but not quickly enough to prevent unsold EVs from stacking up at some automakers' dealerships.
GM said the change was being made "to better manage capital investment while aligning with evolving EV demand" but said the move does not impact its battery plant plans. GM said in July battery production at the Ultium joint venture plant Ohio has been hampered because "our automation equipment supplier is struggling with delivery issues."
The automaker in July reiterated a previous target of building 400,000 EVs from 2022 through the first half of 2024, and projected EV revenue of $50 billion in 2025. GM has said it is targeting production of roughly 100,000 EVs in the second half of 2023. Reuters reported in July that the U.S. electric vehicle market is growing, but not quickly enough to prevent unsold EVs from stacking up at some automakers' dealerships.
Dump the Truck (Score:1)
Like 'lectric blade
EV's suck
For razor, trade
Burma Shave
Re:Dump the Truck (Score:2)
Myanmar.
Re: Dump the Truck (Score:3)
Are you?
The median car age in the US is 12.5 years.
If EVs win out after 10 years that's still a win, assuming battery management allows them to last that long.
I think it's getting there, but I'm not sure. I have a 2016 i3 and the battery is definitely suffering, but the 2017+ models have very little degradation.
CO2 break even point (Re: Dump the Truck) (Score:1)
The CO2 break even point on gasoline vs. BEV has many variables, and the years the vehicle is driven has less to do with that point than the miles.
Here's something I found with a quick search:
https://www.reuters.com/busine... [reuters.com]
The claim is the break even point could be beyond 75000 miles.
I saw a YouTube video recently where someone claimed the break even point on CO2 emissions was well beyond the typical miles a car would be expected to drive in its operational life, meaning on average a fuel efficient gasoline option is still the better option on CO2 emissions. That's not saying there's no benefits for getting a BEV, only that it's not guaranteed that reduced CO2 emissions is among those benefits.
Many of the benefits of a BEV are shared with hybrid electric vehicles, especially plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. A PHEV gives all electric driving for most daily commuting while not needing the big expensive heavy battery for getting the range people expect for long trips, that also means the convenience of not needing to get fuel every week or two, cheap per mile operation, low end torque for acceleration, and so on like any BEV. With the smaller battery the CO2 emissions for construction is lower, meaning the break even point is sooner.
Re:CO2 break even point (Re: Dump the Truck) (Score:3, Informative)
The claim is the break even point could be beyond 75000 miles.
nowhere in the usa is 100% coal powered anymore
Power scenario 2: U.S. average energy mix (23% coal-fired, plus other fossil fuels and renewables)
Break-even point: 13,500 miles
Power scenario 3: 100% coal-fired
Break-even point: 78,700 miles
even if we were being nice and say 30k, that's a significant difference in lifetime emissions considering the average lifetime is 150kish, 80%
so this youtube guy is off from a factor of 10 from this estimate, how does he calculate this kinda extrordinary claim
Re:CO2 break even point (Re: Dump the Truck) (Score:3)
This is complete drivel. The carbon emissions of ICE are worse than for an EV after about 20k miles.
https://www.reuters.com/busine... [reuters.com]
Re:CO2 break even point (Re: Dump the Truck) (Score:2)
In the article the numbers were all over the place. I'll quote a couple segments from your link to demonstrate.
University of Liege researcher Damien Ernst said in 2019 that the typical EV would have to travel nearly 700,000 km before it emitted less CO2 than a comparable gasoline vehicle. He later revised his figures down.
But if the same Tesla was being driven in Norway, which generates almost all its electricity from renewable hydropower, the break-even point would come after just 8,400 miles.
That's quite a difference, and far from an agreement that the break even point is 20000 miles.
Re:CO2 break even point (Re: Dump the Truck) (Score:2)
I was just grabbing a quick first article written in an accessible style. The consensus view is 20k miles across many researchers. See, for example:
https://www.politifact.com/art... [politifact.com]
You can go argue with Auke Hoekstra on Twitter if you want, but I wouldn't advise it
Re:CO2 break even point (Re: Dump the Truck) (Score:4, Informative)
SIGH.
First off, as the AC above pointed out, nowhere in the US is 100% coal. Coal is a dying fuel source. Even in major developing markets where it still grows, it declines in percentage terms and its growth is leveling off. In the US and most developed countries, it's in free fall. In the US it is now a relatively minor player in power generation.
Secondly, even if it were 78,7k miles, the average American car is driven over 14k miles per year and stays on the road an average of 20 years, so that's a blip.
Third, all of these "breakeven" numbers are always obsolete, because you have a chain of delays:
1) You, in the present, search for an article.
2) The article you find was published previously, possibly years ago
3) That article cites research (or occasionally not even research, just non-peer-reviewed garbage) that was reported previously, possibly years ago.
4) The research is based on data that was collected previously, often years ago.
So you get years (sometimes even a decade or more!) lag on the data - in a field where energy consumption and emissions in EV manufacture have been dropping precipitously every year.
I'd advise you look at EV makers' impact reports, as they usually publish their data (but there's still lag! Just not as much). For example, here's Tesla's most recent (2022) report [tesla.com]. You'll see that they use much less water per vehicle (including cell manufacturer) than ICEs, and that producing the battery is down to just 27% of the total CO2 emissions of producing the vehicles (while at the same time skipping the "producing an ICE engine" part) - while vehicles emit vastly more in operation than is emitted in production. The 2021 report [tesla.com] (even more dated) has some better graphics, pages 60-62.
Re:CO2 break even point (Re: Dump the Truck) (Score:1)
Re:CO2 break even point (Re: Dump the Truck) (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, coal is dying. [eia.gov]
They're not only being shut down as they age, but the mean lifespan is being slashed, too [researchgate.net]
And coal is not coming back. [eia.gov]
Re:CO2 break even point (Re: Dump the Truck) (Score:2)
Re:CO2 break even point (Re: Dump the Truck) (Score:2)
Well one of my friends owns zero coal mines, so from my point of view, coal is dying.
Re:CO2 break even point (Re: Dump the Truck) (Score:2)
Third, all of these "breakeven" numbers are always obsolete, because you have a chain of delays:
Of course there's a delay in the results, but I recall an old saying that says something about the horse with a history of the fastest running times tends to win the next race. What is important in these results is that it gives estimates based on what produces the electricity when and where the study was done, and that is useful in the here and now because people can use that for how long they can expect to drive their vehicle to reach that break even point by comparing to where their electricity comes from where they live today.
I'd advise you look at EV makers' impact reports
I'd advise looking to sources with far less financial stakes in what the results show. Perhaps a study from some government entity, educational institution like a university, or a financial advisory/accounting firm that has stakes in many diverse industries. The people that make the EV has an incentive to put their products in the best light. That's not saying the studies would give any false data, but they could mislead by omission.
It appears you assume that the CO2 emissions from electricity generation will always decrease in the future, and that is not the case. We've seen Germany has their CO2 emissions increase after the collision of several events. They closed their nuclear power plants, lost access to natural gas from Russia, had something of a dunkelflaute impacting renewable energy output, with some benefits of an unusually warm winter but that's not going to last, and I could go on. I expect CO2 emissions from Germany to keep rising until they get some nuclear power online, and depending on if they can or will bring existing power plants online or drag their feet on building new plants that could be weeks to decades to turn that around and get to reducing CO2 emissions again. If there's 15 years to make that shift then
The CO2 emissions of an ICEV varies on the source of fuel as much as the BEV. There's carbon neutral fuels being produced, and if that comes to market where coal contributes a significant portion of the electricity yet then the ICEV will have the better CO2 emissions, and that's true no matter what the EV maker impact report says. The BEV option will have its carbon footprint vary based on the specifics, and the ICEV will also have the carbon footprint vary. With increasing demand for BEVs the carbon footprint will rise as lower quality mines are opened up to meet increasing demand for material. With increasing use of biomass fuels and synthesized fuels the carbon footprint of ICEVs will reduce. We can't predict exactly where things will go but we have a good idea based on past results.
Coal may be dying but it isn't dead. https://www.theguardian.com/wo... [theguardian.com]
Re:CO2 break even point (Re: Dump the Truck) (Score:2)
If you are interested in playing with those variables, I suggest tinkering with the GREET Model [anl.gov] from Argonne National Lab. It's probably the comprehensive model to make these comparisons (or, at least, the one that's most transparent about what assumptions are being made). Put in the values for this or that factor you think are important, and you can determine the breakeven point.
Think that Tesla is lying about the carbon-intensity of their batteries? Think comparing a 10-mpg F-350 to a Tesla Model 3 is a pointless comparison? Want to evaluate 100% coal vs 100% solar? Think battery recycling will never become mature? Change the values and re-run the analysis.
Re:CO2 break even point (Re: Dump the Truck) (Score:2)
Think that Tesla is lying about the carbon-intensity of their batteries?
As I pointed out in a different post I expect the EV manufacturers to be completely honest in their analysis, I'll add further that they'd be incentivized to be honest as people will be standing in line to pick their data apart. What I also expect is them to do is leave out any data that is inconvenient for their case, a lie by omission in a way. They'd state their assumptions up front, perhaps in the fine print but it will be there, but there's always going to be a question on if they don't have their thumb on the scale somehow.
Think comparing a 10-mpg F-350 to a Tesla Model 3 is a pointless comparison?
Yes, I do find that a pointless comparison. I can use that F-350 to pull a large camping trailer for 250 miles or so on a single tank but no Tesla can do that. I might have to specify the 48 gallon tank option to get that range (and I estimate the MPG drops by half because of the trailer) but I suspect with the larger engine option that gets 10 MPG with no load that the larger tank is the default.
Want to evaluate 100% coal vs 100% solar?
No, because either option is unrealistic, just as 100% anything is almost certainly unrealistic.
I believe the claim that ICEVs running off 100% petroleum is unrealistic, but that's the common assumption. Around here (in the "corn belt") there's some kind of mandate that gasoline has to have some minimum content of ethanol (I believe that there's a federal mandate but there's a local one that is stricter), with most options containing 15% ethanol. I recall while in the US Army that the diesel fuel tanks at the motor pool were marked as "B20", which I found out meant that they were 20% soybean oil. Is that taken into account with these evaluations?
Want to evaluate the carbon footprint of a car running on 100% ethanol? I don't because that's not something I can expect to buy anywhere, but I expect I can find 85% ethanol fuel at a half dozen filling stations within 5 or 10 miles of where I sit now.
Think battery recycling will never become mature?
No, I expect there to be a maturation of the technology eventually. The question is on if that happens in 5 years or 50 years. If it takes 5 years then that would count in favor of buying a BEV today, if it takes 50 years then perhaps holding off on the BEV may be wise.
Change the values and re-run the analysis.
Thanks for the offer but no, I believe I'll pass. I don't much care for a BEV because of the higher initial cost and the very small chance I'd make up for that added cost in fuel/energy savings. I did my own analysis and discovered that gasoline prices would have to reach ridiculously high prices before I'd make up the TCO difference on BEV versus ICEV. With gasoline prices as high as what my calculations show that would create all kinds of side effects, like BEV prices spiking, electric utility rates spiking, more use of ethanol to mitigate against the costs, or whatever. I don't much care about my CO2 emissions because I see politicians not all that concerned about my CO2 emissions. They talk big about it but if they can't bring themselves to allow more nuclear power plants to lower CO2 emissions from coal and natural gas then they are clearly not taking the problem seriously. When they start demanding more nuclear power plants, move out from their beach side homes, stop flying back to their home districts every weekend, and so on then I'll pay attention.
Re: Dump the Truck (Score:2)
Re: Dump the Truck (Score:2)
Re: Dump the Truck (Score:2)
I think a lot of people, myself included, are waiting for the next generation of solid state batteries to hit. 400+ mile range, lasts the life of the car, can't catch fire and charges in 10 minutes. Toyota may be first to market with these.
Re: Dump the Truck (Score:4, Informative)
Do you have a citation on the 5 year point?
Life cycle break even is estimated at 17.4k miles [cyberswitching.com] - Average annual miles is 13.5k [caranddriver.com]. Or about 5 seasons (1.3 years), not 5 years.
Reuters [reuters.com] estimates 13.5k, back in 2021. Which is 1 year.
2-6 years [usatoday.com], depending on driving average american amounts per year, depending on the mix of power you have. 2 years for green energy, 6 if you're pretty much 100% fossil fuels.
If you use british data, Forbes [forbes.com] says that 30k miles will see you break even in 1 year, but for some reason "up to 10k miles/year" means you'll need 5. Probably using average mileage for the < 10k miles category, which is probably ~6k miles/year.
They recommend a "Full Hybrid" car for light users. Which I hadn't heard of before. Turns out that it's between "mild hybrid", and "PHEV" - Plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicle. They might call my car a "full hybrid", but I've been calling it a mild one - I can go (very) short distances on all electric, at low speeds.
So it's a spectrum:
ICE - no battery power to the wheels, no regeneration, etc...
Mild hybrid - provides an acceleration boost, a little regenerative braking. This is like the old GM vehicles that would shut off when you stopped. They basically had a more powerful starter that would get the car going while also starting the engine. Tiny battery
Full hybrid - can imitate a golf cart for a bit. Small battery. Bigger motors than the milds.
PHEV - even bigger motor, medium battery pack.
EV - might have a bigger motor than the PHEV, large to huge battery pack.
A "full hybrid" would maximize use of the battery pack system, while minimizing the amount of battery. This would help conserve fuel, reducing CO2 emissions, while keeping the CO2 cost of the battery low.
But anyways, I think you're looking at pessimistic quotes, and odds are the EVs will last more than 5 years, so they're still the better option. Especially since the average age of cars(light passenger vehicles) in the USA is over a decade. Not lifespan, average age.
As for battery life - well, we've gone through like 5 major revisions of the battery chemistry in the last decade. They just keep getting better - cheaper, longer lasting, more energy, etc...
Re: Dump the Truck (Score:2, Troll)
So it's a spectrum:
ICE - no battery power to the wheels, no regeneration, etc...
Mild hybrid - provides an acceleration boost, a little regenerative braking. This is like the old GM vehicles that would shut off when you stopped. They basically had a more powerful starter that would get the car going while also starting the engine. Tiny battery
Full hybrid - can imitate a golf cart for a bit. Small battery. Bigger motors than the milds.
PHEV - even bigger motor, medium battery pack.
EV - might have a bigger motor than the PHEV, large to huge battery pack.
It appears that many people forget that there's a spectrum here, not just ICEV vs. BEV. I expect that in a few years the ICEV as we see them today will disappear with every vehicle having some elements of what we consider a "hybrid" now. The changes will be subtle enough that it might not even be apparent that the changes have been made, it's just that people expect a "golf cart mode" (the ICE turns off when stopped for a traffic light and starts immediately with pressing the accelerator) on their new vehicle.
My brother has what might be considered a "mild hybrid" in that the ICE doesn't run if moving at "parking lot speed" (under 15 MPH or something). With that feature available it incentivizes driving slow through residential areas just so there's no engine noise, it's kind of calming somehow. That safety of slower driving comes with a hazard, pedestrians don't hear the vehicle approaching.
I expect the PHEV to dominate the automotive market at some point. Maybe BEVs will become popular but with the limits inherent to batteries I expect them to be either very high end types with very expensive battery chemistry, or low end cars with cheap batteries and limited range to match. I doubt the BEV will do well in that large middle ground where people buy practical vehicles than splurge on a luxury item or pinch every penny for a vehicle that trades range, seating capacity, or something to make something economical. A PHEV gives most every benefit of the pure BEV but without the high sticker price that comes with the huge battery required for the range we expect for long trips. There's a spectrum on the PHEV too, where there's "range extended" EVs that have a tiny ICE that's just big enough to maintain highway speeds to what I guess might be a called a "full hybrid" where the ICE is merely on the smallish side of what comes in the ICE-only version of that same model vehicle.
Re: Dump the Truck (Score:2)
I guess might be a called a "full hybrid" where the ICE is merely on the smallish side of what comes in the ICE-only version of that same model vehicle.
We have ones now where the engine is the exact same size. It might even be the big one.
The big deal is generally retuning the engine to be Atkinson cycle, rather than Otto. This costs low-end horsepower, and generally lowers the power density of the engine, but substantially increases fuel efficiency. You then cover the lost low end power with the electric motor system.
But yeah. I've been advocating for contractors to get PHEV vans that have the full engine - so they can tow and use the engine as a job site generator, but otherwise go electric when that's available. Plus, the battery allows the engine to shut off during low load periods.
Even put that capability into a car - with the proper wiring, it'd be able to act as a whole house generator.
Re: Dump the Truck (Score:2)
We have ones now where the engine is the exact same size. It might even be the big one.
Indeed. Perhaps I wasn't clear before but I meant to point out that on the hybrid vehicle spectrum the ICE will be the same size as the non-hybrid option. I've not seen any model of hybrid where there is more than one ICE option, and when there's more than one option of engine for the ICE-only variant the hybrid uses the lower power version. As an example if there is a vehicle that has a V4 or V6 option then the hybrid option will use the same V4 engine of the ICE-only variant. If there's a hybrid vehicle that uses "the big one" in the engine options then I'd like to see an example out of curiosity, that must be some kind of luxury/sport car or heavy duty truck.
Even put that capability into a car - with the proper wiring, it'd be able to act as a whole house generator.
I'm seeing more comments on using a vehicle for backup power lately and this is making me wonder what that says about the state of our infrastructure. In addition to that I saw an interview Jordan Peterson did where his guest, with a name I can't recall right now, commented on how backup generators are currently selling in record numbers.
I didn't think much of having a backup generator while growing up since I lived on a dairy farm where the electricity came in on miles of overhead power lines, so of course they'd come down during a storm. I've lived in large cities before and I recall a couple power outages one was a storm that was considered a once in a decade event, the other a transformer failed, both quickly rectified and considered rare events so getting a generator wasn't high on my list of concerns. After buying my own house in the suburbs I would have a UPS on my computer to deal with the occasional "power glitch", again not a big concern really since I could see overhead power lines around the area so not unexpected and any "glitch" was anywhere from a split second for most events to at the worst a bit over an hour a couple times. But after a big wind storm knocked out power for days I finally broke down to buy a generator, as did many people I know because this was a very big storm that knocked out power for over half a million people.
Are power outages getting to be more common? Or is there something else going on that is driving people to invest in backup generators and seek out vehicles that can act as a backup generator? Maybe people just think they need a generator because they read and hear about power outages more often with better news coverage that we see today versus 10 or 20 years ago. Again, I experienced plenty of power outages in my life but I always thought this was a "rural thing" and that life in a city meant power outages were exceedingly rare, and when they did happen they'd be very localized and/or short lived. Lately I see news out of California that power is out because of a wildfire. Power out in Florida from a hurricane. Power out in Hawaii from volcanoes or something. Are these happening more often, or am I just hearing about them more often from getting better news reporting?
Maybe the option of getting electrical power from a vehicle is getting attention from being a novelty, something that people want because it's new rather than out of any necessity. I kind of hope that is the case because if people are seeking this feature because of real, than merely perceived, regularity and severity of power outages then that is not a good sign.
Re: Dump the Truck (Score:3)
Overall US power outages are increasing, but it's very uneven [scientificamerican.com].
BTW, in natural disasters, you generally want to be in an EV. This article [dailykos.com] (now quite dated) analyzing EV ownership vs. gas car ownership in Harvey and Irma illustrates the point (the difference is even greater today). TL/DR: during natural disasters (and in advance of them, where they're predictable), fuel shortages are abundant and crippling, and it's a much worse problem than power shortages, even in disasters that are primarily "power grid disasters". Not just because most gas stations don't have generators and can't pump in a disaster, but because everyone needs to fill up for evacuation, evacuation traffic snarls fuel deliveries, damaged roads block deliveries, damage causes fuel leaks or shuts down stations, idling cars burn lots of fuel, etc. EVs by contrast start every day "full" - almost nobody encounters the disaster while on empty and needs an immediate fillup that they can't get. They consume little energy when "idling" stuck in traffic jams during evacuations. They function well as "lifeboats", being able to run their climate control and infotainment systems for days on end. Power plants generally have excess capacity during disasters, as people who flee stop using power and damage to power consumers is generally vastly more than damage to power plants. High power DC chargers are connected to large distribution lines rather than small feeders, making them both less likely to go down, and among the first things to come back up if they do. When power goes down in an area, it rarely goes down *everywhere* within hundreds of kilometers radius; it's generally quite easy to find some place that still has power and plug in there. And of course, you can have your own backup generator or solar power - the former requires fuel storage, like with an ICE car, but the latter doesn't help an ICE car at all. And when doing the inverse - using the vehicle to provide power to a home - you avoid the risks of long-term idling (such as carbon monoxide buildup, either in enclosed spaces or even on calm days idling outside... both particularly with respect to older, less well maintained vehicles).
Re: Dump the Truck (Score:2)
Overall US power outages are increasing, but it's very uneven.
Interesting, and thanks.
BTW, in natural disasters, you generally want to be in an EV
In the event of a hurricane coming you'd want to be in an EV, or that least that's what I took away from your link. Out here in the Midwest USA there's a greater threat to life from cold than heat, and to prepare for that I'd expect an ICEV or PHEV to be a better option. The problem of burning fuel while idling if there's a traffic jam would be a concern but if I'm stuck on some road on my way out of the path of a snowstorm then that burning fuel produces lifesaving heat.
We had a big windstorm that knocked out power, blocked roads with debris, and even damaged many phone and internet lines. Many filling stations were closed from being damaged, lacking power for the pumps and such, and certainly from an inability to bring in fuel trucks. Even so it was preferable to have a gasoline vehicle because that meant being able to drive the many miles out of town to find a place that still had fuel and bring that back in jerrycans to top off vehicles, generators, chainsaws, and so on. The natural gas supply stayed up in the aftermath of the storm so after I bought a dual fuel LPG/gasoline generator I was kicking myself for not thinking to get something that could run on natural gas, either as the only fuel or a dual fuel like the one I got. I investigated the option of getting some natural gas conversion kit for my generator but found that the cost might not be worth it, it would be better to just get a different generator.
What I was considering at one time was a natural gas vehicle, or a dual fuel NG/gasoline vehicle. I found someone willing to sell one to me but I'd have to buy it unseen, they could get them easily enough but they knew it would be a loss to them if I didn't buy it before they trucked it out to the dealership. I'd then have to find someone to install the natural gas pump in my house, because the primary point is to be able to fill up at home so as to not have to rely on gasoline being available. There's a few natural gas filling stations in the area, but not exactly conveniently located for me. If concerns for power outages rise then perhaps natural gas vehicles will get popular fairly quickly, it should take only a one or two more filling stations to pop up to make NGVs more convenient and once that hurdle is cleared then local dealers might be willing to keep NGVs in stock on their lots for people to test drive before buying.
Consider a hybrid NG-electric vehicle, wouldn't that be a nice option for a "get out of Dodge" or shelter in place kind of natural disaster?
Re: Dump the Truck (Score:2)
In the event of a hurricane coming you'd want to be in an EV, or that least that's what I took away from your link. Out here in the Midwest USA there's a greater threat to life from cold than heat, and to prepare for that I'd expect an ICEV or PHEV to be a better option. The problem of burning fuel while idling if there's a traffic jam would be a concern but if I'm stuck on some road on my way out of the path of a snowstorm then that burning fuel produces lifesaving heat.
I looked into this because I used to live in Alaska. What I ended up with was proposing to retrofit a high efficiency burner into EVs, just for heat.
But in the Midwest(I used to live in Nebraska), the heat pump most EVs have are capable of providing you sufficient heat for days. If not, well, some blankets and warm clothing can provide the limited boost you need.
A PHEV would generally be the "best of both worlds" option, in that you don't need to keep the engine running to keep providing heat.
As for a NG PHEV? Probably runs into the problem that finding a NG dealer that is still operating is going to be more difficult than just finding an EV charger these days. If it can run off propane, it might be easier, those are still "all over".
Re: Dump the Truck (Score:2)
It's common in areas that are older....and get hit by hurricanes or strong storms from time to time.
Re: Dump the Truck (Score:2)
The issue isn't "supply and demand", it's "inability to produce at competitive margins". Tesla launched a global BEV price war at the start of the year, at a time when most automakers were already at "roughly zero" automotive margins (which are always higher than net margins) on their EVs, some outright negative. So exactly how many EVs do you expect them to produce when losing cash? Most are going back to the drawing board to redesign their next generation platforms because their sales price points were aiming at a much less competitive market (that said, few are scaling back current production - they're mainly just eating the losses).
Those shrugging it off best are in China, as Chinese manufacturers have been doing better with margins - in particular BYD, who has the second-best margins in the industry, and which grows at quite a clip**. In a price war, the most efficient manufacturers win and all other manufacturers lose.
** BYD used to be a relatively minor BEV player (much more focused on PHEVs), but had explosive growth from 2021 up through mid 2022. Its BEV sales have roughly paralleled Tesla since, about 25%-ish lower on average (but big quarterly fluctuations). In BEV + PHEV ("EV") numbers, BYD is bigger.
But meanwhile, EV demand continues to grow, even in this auto downturn. For example, US EV sales are now 7,9% of the market, up from 6,1% a year ago - 30%, actually slightly outpacing Tesla's YoY growth. Because again, few are killing off existing production, so what we're seeing now represents the results of decisions taken in past years (in addition to who's between new model launches, who's had downtime for retooling or other reasons, etc - prices and incentives get matched to production).
But if they don't invest now... this is only going to get worse [twimg.com]. Despite the CEO's best efforts to drive off potential customers.
Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling futu (Score:5, Interesting)
I bought a 2023 Chevy Bolt EUV. Iâ(TM)ve had it since April and couldnâ(TM)t be happier. It is an awesome car at a fair price.
It also has wireless CarPlay - a requirement for me when considering a new car.
All 2024 and newer Chevy EVs were scheduled to feature faster charging (yeah!) but no CarPlay and a MUCH higher starting price for larger vehicles.
Me, I am glad I ordered what I did when I did. It was a brief moment when the stars aligned and one could get reasonable value for the money. Then top brass went and messed it all up for future customers.
No thanks.
Re:Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling f (Score:2)
I bought a 2023 Chevy Bolt EUV. I've had it since April and couldn't be happier. It is an awesome car at a fair price.
It's no secret that I'm personally not the biggest fan of EVs due to their cost and potential battery longevity issues. However, my partner has a 60 mile-per-day commute and his previous car payment plus the cost of gas was actually higher (by roughly $100/mo) than what we figured he'd be paying on a Bolt EUV. For shits and giggles, we went to the dealer and had them kick some numbers around on his trade and they actually were able to put together a decent deal. I guess supply really has caught up with demand.
It is a nice car and the acceleration is absolutely nuts compared to anything I've ever driven. It also surprisingly hasn't jacked up the power bill all that much either. Also, he really likes it, so at the end of the day that's what really matters.
The biggest complaint about the Bolts that I've seen is that their fast charging isn't really all that fast. That might be a problem for some people if it's their only vehicle, but we've got no plans on completely ditching ICE. I've still got my dino-fueled car for if we're going to take a longer trip (there's a concert in Tampa we'll be taking my car to), and as a charge-at-home commuter vehicle, the Bolt is great.
Re:Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling f (Score:2)
Of all the auto makers Chevy really seemed to understand using the high torque of an electric motor was fun.
Their Spark EV wasn't fast (low horsepower), but threw 300 ft lb of torque at 0 RPMs and was a fun pep machine.
Their their bolts and volts similar, excellent 0-30 and decent 0-60, especially if compared to something like a civic which would be their closest competitor in size and luxury.
Re:Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling f (Score:2)
Their their bolts and volts similar, excellent 0-30 and decent 0-60, especially if compared to something like a civic which would be their closest competitor in size and luxury.
I'm used to driving vehicles that have 9 to 10 second (or worse) 0-60 times, so I was blown away by how fast the Bolt EUV accelerates.
Re:Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling f (Score:2)
For what it's worth, in urban driving what counts for me is 0 to 40. My Renault Zoe is only about 9.5 seconds 0 to 60, but 0 to 40 is much faster than you'd expected, it's 40 to 60 that's slow. So it is really great in town driving, which is 99% of my driving -- small and nimble
Re:Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling f (Score:2)
I drive a Prius. My average speed to and from work is 21mph. While I enjoy a fast 0-40 in power mode, 99% of the time if I accelerate fast I'd hit the car in front of me.
Re:Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling f (Score:2)
London is mostly now 20mph speed limits, but there's enough places where that's not the case that it's still fun for me. I am glad not to have to drive to work each day!
Re:Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling f (Score:2)
They're a pleasure to drive.
I test drove a volt plug in hybrid and a spark EV before getting the bmw i3 plug in hybrid.
The newer volts were too expensive, and I wasn't sure about the long term support on the bolt EV, and both had fairly sad interiors.
But driving that spark at reasonable speeds was joyous.
Re:Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling f (Score:2)
Lol, if you think the *Bolt*'s acceleration is good... ;)
Re:Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling f (Score:2)
Have you tried one? In the low end (0-40 mph), it DOES have really good acceleration for it's class. It feels like the acceleration I used to get in small cars that had a turbo in them (before turbo became a way to get better gas mileage by reducing the size of the engine and making up for it with a turbo).
If I hit the gas in a little commuter car and it pushes me back in my seat, that's really good acceleration for its class.
Re:Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling f (Score:2)
If you're coming from a gas econobox, I can imagine how you'd feel like a 6,5s 0-60 is a lot.
The *slowest* Tesla does 0-60 in 5,8s (and that's slowed down from what it was until recently, used to be 5,3s for the slowest). The base long range Model 3 is 4,2s, without acceleration boost, and performance is 3,1s.
Or, say, for non-Teslas: the slowest Mach E is 6,1s (2 trims). Then 5,8s (2 trims), 5,2s (2 trims), 4,8s (2 trims), 3,8s, and finally 3,5s.
The standard for EV acceleration is a lot sportier than the standard for ICE acceleration.
Re: Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling (Score:2)
Re:Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling f (Score:2)
It also has wireless CarPlay - a requirement for me when considering a new car.
Think about it: a $500 device determines whether or not a $20k+ vehicle is worthy of buying. We are fucked. Why is audio vertically integrated? To get exactly this result. Fuck that, I have not bought a car in 20 years because of this nonsense.
(The most epic CAPTCHA ever: abjure. Does AI choose these based on the contents of the message?)
Re:Lack of demand or boneheaded choices hobbling f (Score:2)
I don't think top brass messed it up, that Bolt you got for that price was losing GM money. It was a compliance car. If they have to show a profit they couldn't sell it for that price.
Must be a Truck (Score:3)
Ford is getting murdered in the market and the press because their EV truck is bad at everything a truck is for and is bad at being an aerodynamic SUV which is all it really is.
GM needs to have K1500 parity before going to market. 2500+ is a different story.
Re:Must be a Truck (Score:1)
Let's be honest here. The vast majority of the people driving around suburbia and the city aren't doing truck things with their truck. They aren't hauling a yacht, they aren't getting a load of gravel (can't scratch up that fancy bed liner!), they aren't hauling lumber (bed can't fit 4x8 plywood or sheetrock anyhow), and they aren't taking it offroad with those fancy alloy wheels and low profile tires either.
They haul their ass back and forth to work and the grocery store. Most trade workers have box trucks and even the landscapers I see don't have much in the back of their pickup besides a few garbage cans. The rest of the equipment is on a trailer.
Re:Must be a Truck (Score:2)
"The vast majority of the people driving around suburbia and the city aren't doing truck things with their truck"
An anti-Tesla investor on SeekingAlpha told me some years back that "vast majority" of trucks in his West Texas stomping grounds have never felt the touch of even 1 piece of lumber.
So yes, most of them could easily cope with having an EV as the 2nd vehicle or even a daily driver.
Re:Must be a Truck (Score:2)
An anti-Tesla investor on SeekingAlpha told me some years back that "vast majority" of trucks in his West Texas stomping grounds have never felt the touch of even 1 piece of lumber.
It's like that in Florida, too. Certainly, people in the trades use them for actual hauling purposes, but your average suburban dweller buys one because he thinks it looks really cool sitting in the parking lot at Publix.
Re:Must be a Truck (Score:2)
My brother's an electrician. He doesn't drive a truck, he drives a panel van. You know, so his tools and supplies are at least a little protected from the weather and theft, plus it's easier to get to stuff than being placed in today's ridiculously huge and tall trucks?
They've tried to sell him a truck before though. Because that's the money maker.
I think a PHEV would be ideal for him - a big battery for the reduced mileage cost, plus an engine capable of acting as a job site generator, for when he's working a site that doesn't have power yet, or they have to turn it off, whatever.
Re:Must be a Truck (Score:2)
My brother's an electrician. He doesn't drive a truck, he drives a panel van.
I completely agree that a full-size van is the more practical vehicle for trade work, but I see plenty of people at construction sites with pickup trucks. If I had to guess, I'd say a big contributing factor is that vans absolutely suck to drive. If you own one, you'll absolutely want a secondary vehicle for when you're not on the job. A truck ends up being a reasonable enough compromise if you're only going to own a single vehicle.
Re:Must be a Truck (Score:2)
"I think a PHEV would be ideal for him - a big battery for the reduced mileage cost, plus an engine capable of acting as a job site generator"
A quarter century past I worked for a friend's renovation company demolishing houses, including through 4 winters.
Not fun & not something I would a last a full day doing now.
Something like the F-150 Lightning would have been a fantastic asset& while I rarely find myself in agreement with Bob Lutz, I did applaud his support of hybrid startup Via Motors
https://www.motortrend.com/new... [motortrend.com]
Re:Must be a Truck (Score:2)
The best selling 3 vehicles in the US are pickup trucks (Ford, Chevy, then ram. Number 6 is GMC), so it seems pretty obvious most aren't used as "trucks".
I will say though, I love my fake truck (Honda Ridgeline). The mileage is frustrating at times, but the tiny bed is super convenient a couple times a month, and the ride is nice.
I miss when I lived near a car share where I could no hassle rent a truck by the hour 3 blocks away and own a tiny car for normal use.
But as it is, I use the bed enough that dealing with a rental company is absolutely not worth it (they're unreliable on actual availability and take so long to get the car. The car share I used to use was walk up and drive off).
Re:Must be a Truck (Score:2)
Since 10 months I drive a Nissan Ariya and have done some 15000 mi among which a 2300 mi round trip from Denmark to France, the car has behaved beautifully and charging every ~2-3 hrs is easy.
Re:Must be a Truck (Score:1)
Let's be honest here. The vast majority of the people driving around suburbia and the city aren't doing truck things with their truck.
Let's be honest, some people are doing "truck things" with their truck.
I noticed when I moved into my house that all the neighbors up and down the street drove 4WD vehicles. I don't know why I noticed this but I realized in the first winter why this was the case. The neighborhood is quite hilly and the city tends to plow major roads twice before venturing into side streets like those in front of my house. I got stuck in the street many times after first moving in and at one point I had enough and sold my sedan for a 4WD SUV. Even then there's been three times I could not park in my garage at night because the snow was too deep or the ice too slick. I had all four wheels spinning while trying to go up the hill to my house, I ended up parking on the street and walking a short bit home. That was still an improvement over my sedan where I had to park about a quarter mile away several times because the roads to my house were too slick for a front wheel drive car to navigate.
Other "truck things" I do is go hunting, target shooting, and camping. I'll visit family and friends that live on dirt roads that can be difficult to navigate without the extra grip and clearance of a truck. As a person that likes to DIY I'll carry tools and parts from a local hardware store. Every once in a while I find the need to tow a trailer to carry trash to the landfill or bring over-sized loads home from the hardware store. I now wish I had bought an extended cab truck instead of a SUV so I'd have an open bed than back seats I don't really need. I didn't want a regular cab truck because being as tall as I am I found out that a regular cab truck usually limits the range a seat can go back by a couple inches over an extended cab, crew cab, SUV, etc. For the same reason I avoid a sun roof, that takes a half inch or so out of the headroom. Even if I didn't need 4WD and the extra clearance of a truck to navigate the roads to my house in the winter I'd still prefer a truck because sedans tend to have less interior space, I'd just keep bumping my head, knees, and elbows on things.
If automakers made cars with interiors big enough for normal sized people like me (because "normal" to me is a bit shy of two meters in height) then I might consider a lighter vehicle than I have now. I noticed that with improved traction control and "all season" tires a FWD car from the last 10 years or so doesn't do too bad in the snow and hills around here, fair enough that I might consider that again for the fuel economy, better acceleration, and ease of navigating crowded parking lots. I'd just probably end up borrowing my brother's trailer more often for trips to the hardware store, or get one of my own.
Re: Must be a Truck (Score:2)
Re:Must be a Truck (Score:2)
Depends on whether you are in a white collar or blue collar neighborhood. I'm in a blue collar one, there are tons of trucks, and I see them doing truck things all the time. That includes pulling trailers, and hauling work supplies, and even 4x8 plywood, which can fit with tailgate down.
I wonder if there's also a media blitz (Score:2)
Not only this, but I've been seeing a LOT of "EVs Suck!" type news articles lately. "How much EVs actually cost!", "Hidden dangers of EVs", "How hybrids are better than EVs", etc...
Makes me wonder if there's a campaign out there to put down EVs a bit.
Re:I wonder if there's also a media blitz (Score:2)
"Hidden dangers of EVs"
Like feeling really silly when you start planning your trips to gas stations based on which ones have the best* selection of junk foods, rather than the cheapest gas.
* Spoiler alert: It's always Wawa.
Re: I wonder if there's also a media blitz (Score:3)
Clearly you haven't been to buc-ee's if you think Wawa has the best gas station food...
Re:I wonder if there's also a media blitz (Score:2)
Makes me wonder if there's a campaign out there to put down EVs a bit.
With all the hype that's been given about BEVs for the last (pulling a number out of my head) 15 years there's plenty of room for merely some realism to pull people back.
One example is the claims of how quickly a BEV can charge does need a reality check given what I've seen. I expect it is true that people can get 80% range in 10 minutes, or whatever the claim might be, but that's with ideal conditions of the battery not getting below 5% (or whatever) before stopping for a charge, the weather being mild (too hot or too cold can impact charge time), only needing to get to 85% (or whatever) to get to the destination or next charger, having a charger from the same manufacturer (Tesla charger for a Tesla car, Ford charger for a Ford car, etc.), and also that charger being the "fast" charger from that manufacturer because not all chargers are equal in capacity. Toss out any one of those ideal conditions and the charge time can easily double, which might not be so bad, but could triple the time to charge if more than one of the ideal conditions aren't met, which I can see as inducing "range anxiety".
There's YouTube videos showing how well a BEV can accelerate while towing which can be misleading, people expecting this to translate into a BEV being ideal to tow a camper or something. What other YouTube videos will show is how range can easily be cut in half because of the added wind load of the trailer. That means people could need to stop for an hour charge (because of missing ideal conditions for a "fast" charge) for only two hours of driving (because they got the "standard" battery option than the "plaid" option seen in some demonstration).
Re:I wonder if there's also a media blitz (Score:2)
Hmmm...
The battery not being below 5% - I haven't ever heard of this being an issue. Charging slows when the battery is nearly full, not nearly empty.
Too hot or cold - cold shouldn't be an issue, so long as it isn't grossly outside of operating temperatures (like a really cold day in Alaska/Canada, around -40), as charging the battery isn't 100%, and one of the limiting factors for fast charging is heat. If you don't need to operate the battery warmers, being able to dump heat faster just helps the process. Heat, on the other hand, I can easily see.
Needing a charger from the same manufacturer: Volts are Volts. Ford doesn't make chargers. The only car company actually MAKING chargers that I'm aware of is Tesla. As long as the voltage and amperage is within tolerances, they can charge at full speed. The charger itself is more likely the limiting factor.
I think you're forgetting that for most EV owners, the "average" charge is going to be a nice easy on the battery slow charge at home, more or less nightly. Or at work. It shouldn't trigger range anxiety because they're "never" going to be routinely under half a charge.
Now trips can be a nightmare, but I've had nightmare car trips as well. Imagine you're on a Thanksgiving holiday trip to family, around 500 miles away, and something important in your engine breaks.
There's YouTube videos showing how well a BEV can accelerate while towing which can be misleading, people expecting this to translate into a BEV being ideal to tow a camper or something.
Do you have any evidence of this being common? I mean, I've town trailers before, and I read up before doing it. I had to make sure my truck could handle the weight, for example. There's plenty of reports about how range drops when towing. Besides, most people don't tow campers. But if you're towing a camper and staying in camping sites, well, they usually have a higher capacity plug that you can use to charge your vehicle back up overnight.
Re:I wonder if there's also a media blitz (Score:2)
Or, it may be that the truth about how the EV use case doesn't fit the average American if you don't live on the far east/west coast....
Re:I wonder if there's also a media blitz (Score:2)
Except that the titles are mostly clickbait.
Either the article itself is mostly "EVs are actually pretty great despite this!" or the hazard is seriously overstated, like the stuff telling people to not charge their phones overnight because Apple messed up their design and/or people were stupid enough to charge their phones in hotboxes(under the blankets, insulating them).
My phone, for example, does an explicit slow charge when plugged in at night. I also have it set so it doesn't actually charge to battery 100%, for preservation purposes.
EVs should do fine in most of the midwest, for example.
Re:I wonder if there's also a media blitz (Score:2)
I was thinking more on infrastructure....
You have plenty (apparently) of charging stations out there on the west coast and east coasts....but across the country, it just isn't there yet...you have to hunt and plan where to charge if taking a remotely distant trip.
And like others have talked about, the EV trucks aren't ready to replace ICE pickup trucks, where people actually use them.
For the most part, across the middle of the US, people, the majority of people aren't seeing compelling reasons to switch to EV over ICE....it isn't as convenient, etc.
Chinese having a laugh (Score:2, Insightful)
I can't wait for it to come out that the UAW is China funded/controlled. At least I hope they are, because the alternative is that the UAW is doing this out of sheer stupidity. I'd rather we got screwed by next-level outsmarting than sheer stupidity.
Re:Chinese having a laugh (Score:2)
I think the big three automakers and the UAW deserve each other. However if (though likely when) they all implode, the democratic party will be more than happy to provide corporate welfare, because union jobs are too big to fail even though they produce some of the worlds crappiest cars. And that's something that can be said objectively based on how they fare on consumer reports reliability ratings. Six of the bottom nine car brands are UAW. The only two UAW brands that aren't near the bottom are Lincoln and Buick, however they're basically mediocre.
https://www.consumerreports.or... [consumerreports.org]
Re:Chinese having a laugh (Score:2)
Oh please, Tata has them beat when it comes to crap.
Ford EV Truck sales off 46% (Score:3)
Sales of the F-150 lightning electric pickup were off about 46% during third quarter due to slower-than-expected demand and downtime at the plant [CNBC 10/04/2023] [cnbc.com]
Ford sold 6,464 F150 Lightning EVs in Q3 2022, but sales in Q3 2023 fell to just 3,503 which annualizes to only 42,000 per year. Ford executives think pretend theyre going to sell hundreds of thousands of EV pickups per year, but demand has already imploded. Even worse, a great many of the recent Lightning sales are to governmental fleets. Consumers have rejected this product.
As for downtime at the plant affecting sales of the F150 Lighting EV, an ideal supply of vehicles on dealer lots is 60 days worth, Ford dealers are currently choking on a 97-day supply of Lightnings nationwide with 3,632 for sale [caredge.com]. Downtime is not retarding sales.
Meanwhile, Ford has suddenly canceled all further deliveries to dealers of 2023 model year F150 Lightnings that are not already pre-sold.
Ford cancels dealer stock orders of 2023 F-150 Lightning to do quality checks [Detroit Free Press 10/02/2023] [freep.com]
Additional quality checks? Is something wrong with them?
No, the issue is the growing glut of 2023 model year F150 Lightnings.
Re:Ford EV Truck sales off 46% (Score:2)
I think PHEV makes more sense for a pickup. No gas for normal use, but range when you need it.
Re:Ford EV Truck sales off 46% (Score:3)
The Tesla model Y is their most popular, and it's a SUV.
As for the Cybertruck, well, as I understand it it's become a lot more standard in order to meet crash requirements.
Re:Ford EV Truck sales off 46% (Score:2)
I think the biggest thing truck buyers are likely bothered by is the 320 mile range. For a commuter sedan that's very good, but for trucks...eh...
Re:Ford EV Truck sales off 46% (Score:3)
Disappointing, but not that concerning.
Pickup trucks are used by blue collar folks and/or while collar folks who fantasize that they're manly men doing manly things, and Ford in particular has a conservative consumer base [reddit.com].
All those things that are not great cultural fits for EVs.
I see it more as Ford trying to buy itself some good PR and prepping for the eventual transition, but EV sedans are going to lead the way.
Re:Ford EV Truck sales off 46% (Score:2)
Every company has issues with their first EVs. Ford has made some smaller EVs before, but the F-150 was a new platform and I think the first widely sold in the US.
Re:Ford EV Truck sales off 46% (Score:2)
I had a first day reservation, heck, I had it 10 minutes after the reveal show was over. However, Ford allowed dealer to prioritize "good customers" to the top of the list, 5 in the case of my dealer. I ended up being #9 on their list when I should have been #4. They only received 5 for the first year (to be fair that "year" was only 6 months long). So I had to wait for the next year and hope my 11 year old car continued to survive.
By the time my Lightning came to the dealer, Ford had jacked the price up by $7500 -AND- the IRA bill came thru so my model no longer qualified, inducing a $15K add-on to the final price. My dealer sold at MSRP, but that extra $15K was too much and I needed a new vehicle then. I order a new Ranger (yeah it's smaller but did what I need to haul things around) at literally half the price of the Lightning.
I want a BEV truck, but it has to be affordable. Yes, a BEV really wins when it comes to TCO calculations, especially when you have a solar array, but the initial price still matters. So I have a 1 year old truck in the driveway, and my purchase window won't reopen for another 4 years. Ford and everyone else has that long to get their act together before I'm ready to purchase a new truck. I really hope that's enough time to get a BEV Ranger or an equivalent, out there because I really want a BEV pickup and not have to purchase gasoline.
Economics 101 ++price == --demand (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem isn't demand, it's that Ford will happily sell you a fully loaded 4x4 V8 F150 Lariat for $60K. However, for a similarly spaced out Lightning Lariat the want $80K. That's.a 33% premium, which paired with a 7% financing offer, leaves only those comfortable with a $1425/month car payment to buy their EV truck.
The GM Silverado EV is even more whacko with a BASE price of $80K.
The addressable market for EV trucks at >$75K is tiny. Another problem with hyper-expensive EV versions of gas trucks with $35K base models is that people spending >$75K on a truck don't want to be lopped in the same Venn diagram as a $35K truck.
Tesla's best selling model is a sub $50K all wheel drive SUV with 300 miles of range that doesn't even have cloth seats as an option. The cheapest Ford option with all wheel drive and a 300 mile range is $70K, and you can only get cloth seats at that price.
So it's all whiney nonsense, Ford and GM don't WANT to sell a $50K EV truck people want. They're in the "nobody wants these" phase, while ignoring the "for a 33% premium over our gas models". There's a non-zero chance they will get hollowed out by the Cybertruck *if* Tesla manages to deliver a $50K 4x4 with 300 miles of range that (gasp) has seats that aren't cloth.
Re:Economics 101 ++price == --demand (Score:2)
You numbers and reasoning make sense, but as a non-American I am confused by the repeated mention of cloth seats. Are cloth seats "good" or "bad" in this context? My 1990 hatchback has cloth seats which have survived 320k km and are still just fine... so in my mind, cloth seats are a positive feature of a car. What is the alternative? Leather? Fake leather? The only leather seats I've seen after 30 years and 320k km are pretty gross, and even when new, leather seats are prone to getting uncomfortably hot and sweaty if the car has been parked in the sun, or it's a humid days, or your clothes are damp from rain...
Re: Economics 101 ++price == --demand (Score:2)
Re:Economics 101 ++price == --demand (Score:2)
The American new truck market is driven by fashion, not function. Once you understand that, the styles make a lot more sense.
Re: Economics 101 ++price == --demand (Score:2)
Re:Economics 101 ++price == --demand (Score:2)
So it's all whiney nonsense, Ford and GM don't WANT to sell a $50K EV truck people want.
That was obvious back when Ford announced they were discontinuing all cars except the Mustang... and they were also re-using the Mustang brand on -- wait for it -- a new SUV. My dad drives a Ford Fusion, which is a truly excellent car. In its last model year, it sold in excess of 250,000 cars, and Ford boldly announced they were getting rid of cars because nobody buys them.
Automobile manufacturers are so greedy and stupid. I'm so glad my 9-year-old WRX is still in great shape, because I'd be really upset if I had to buy any new vehicle in this market, regardless if it were EV or ICE.
Re:Economics 101 ++price == --demand (Score:2)
So it's all whiney nonsense, Ford and GM don't WANT to sell a $50K EV truck people want. They're in the "nobody wants these" phase, while ignoring the "for a 33% premium over our gas models". There's a non-zero chance they will get hollowed out by the Cybertruck *if* Tesla manages to deliver a $50K 4x4 with 300 miles of range that (gasp) has seats that aren't cloth.
This. You also forgot to mention that towing range is abysmal with electric trucks. Just terrible. No boating for you, expensive truck owner.
Re:Economics 101 ++price == --demand (Score:2)
This. You also forgot to mention that towing range is abysmal with electric trucks. Just terrible. No boating for you, expensive truck owner.
You forgot to mention that range drops about the same with gas trucks (lots of people have show and said that). The advantage they have is 5 min refuels. Once solid state batteries are mainstream, an EV truck will do just as well.
Re:Economics 101 ++price == --demand (Score:1)
Demand seems to be there... (Score:2)
Ford is having no problems selling the F-150 lightning (last I heard they still had a waiting list) so why would GM think there would be no buyers for their electric pickups?
Re:Demand seems to be there... (Score:2)
There's something that's impacting sales of the F-150 Lightning.
https://electrek.co/2023/10/13... [electrek.co]
There's other articles and it seems that there's been a severe drop in demand, union troubles are impacting production, supply problems are impacting production, something else, or some mix of all the above. Whatever the case there's something going on with Ford F-150 Lightning sales.
If you can show that demand is unchanged then that still leaves Ford reducing supply for some reason or another, and that reason could be labor problems or supply problems shared by GM. I suspect a battery supply problem which would impact vehicles needing large batteries like trucks and luxury/sport cars more than lighter and/or more economy minded cars. Tesla has shifted some markets and/or models to different battery chemistry to mitigate against cobalt shortages or something, I don't recall all the details. If GM planned on getting these same batteries for their trucks then they might need a year to redesign and/or shift suppliers for different batteries.
It is Elons fault ... right? (Score:1)
At least that is my wild guess.
Hint (Score:2)
Maybe consumers are waiting for 2024 (Score:2)
The federal tax incentives for EVs get way better in 2024. Consumers can get the tax credit even if they don't make enough money to owe much tax. The downside is fewer vehicles may qualify.
Also lots of EV makers have promised to support Tesla Superchargers in 2024. If they come through that will make a big difference on road trips.
Amazing torque for acceleration, then what ? (Score:2)
Re: Amazing torque for acceleration, then what ? (Score:2)
They cost too much. (Score:2)
Re:Nobody wants EV trucks... (Score:2)
Most people that own a truck don't use it to tow anything.
According to the article "GM had originally been scheduled to begin production of the electric Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra in late 2024, but the company said the plan is now to start it in late 2025."
Re:Nobody wants EV trucks... (Score:2)
Re:Nobody wants EV trucks... (Score:2)
[1]: China, by law, requires a location transponder on all vehicles sold on the mainland. Wonder if that was removed with the US exports... hmm?
[1]: You aren't important enough for the government to care what you do.
Re:Nobody wants EV trucks... (Score:2)
[1]: You aren't important enough for the government to care what you do.
Not to mention the cellphone in your pocket already uploads everything to Google and Facebook. Hell, even China blocks the latter.
Re:Nobody wants EV trucks... (Score:2)
Not everyone is on social media.
Not everyone carries their phone around everywhere.
More and more, I'm treating mine like the days of the land line, leaving it at home and being excited when I get there to listen to see who's on the answering machine.
Re:Nobody wants EV trucks... (Score:2)
Not everyone is on social media.
Not everyone carries their phone around everywhere.
More and more, I'm treating mine like the days of the land line, leaving it at home and being excited when I get there to listen to see who's on the answering machine.
Yes, and unlike tracking built-in to a car, at least with a phone one has the option to leave it at home, even though most people do not exercise that option.
But I fear we are a very small minority. I don't know many people who leave their home (whether driving, walking, biking, whatever) without their phone. Personally, I love leaving the phone behind.
Re:Nobody wants EV trucks... (Score:1)
[1]: You aren't important enough for the government to care what you do.
Stop repeating that outdated canard. Ubiquitous spyware makes surveillance cheap.
NSA with mod points (Score:2)
Nothing to see here, plebians! There is no illegal citizen spying like Snowden was vilified for telling us about! Enjoy your American gladiators!
Re:Nobody wants EV trucks... (Score:3)
" However, in the real world, a F-150 Lightning can tow such a short distance that it isn't a viable vehicle"
about 120 miles towing 7000 pounds; not amazing but not terrible, considering the weight
https://insideevs.com/news/624... [insideevs.com]
Re:Nobody wants EV trucks... (Score:2)
"Fun fact, weight is not as important as wind resistance"
Sure but you're basically claiming hauling an extra ~10,000lbs a distance of 400 miles had effectively zero impact on fuel economy, which seems implausible.
I'm basing that on the numbers here: https://www.edmunds.com/chevro... [edmunds.com]
Re:Is it because they have no batteries? (Score:2)
All Chinese companies are owned/managed/beholden to the Communist Chinese Party.
The Party is antagonistic to the US and is an adversary.
It is smart to not let ones adversary on your land, spying and using your resources and pumping your money back to their coffers.
Nothing xenophobic about that.