Honda Cancels All Three EVs That It Planned To Build In the US (caranddriver.com) 156
sinij shares a report from Car and Driver: Honda is making a monumental shift in its business plans. The automaker is canceling the development and launch of the 0 Series SUV, the 0 Series saloon, and the Acura RSX, and as a result, expects to take a significant financial hit in 2026 [of up to $15.8 billion]. The automaker was blunt in its announcement of the changing plans, citing American tariff policies and the unpredictable nature surrounding American EV incentives and fossil fuel regulations. In its release marking the announcement, Honda made it clear that it expected to incur further financial losses over the long term if it went through with launching the cars.
Honda also called out changing customer values in China, with buyers focusing more on software features and less on things like fuel efficiency and cabin space. In its release regarding the changing product plans, Honda was shockingly blunt about its situation, saying that it was simply unable to deliver products that offer a better value than that of newer Chinese manufacturers.
Honda also called out changing customer values in China, with buyers focusing more on software features and less on things like fuel efficiency and cabin space. In its release regarding the changing product plans, Honda was shockingly blunt about its situation, saying that it was simply unable to deliver products that offer a better value than that of newer Chinese manufacturers.
Not exactly shocking (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think that Honda ever wanted to build those EV's in the US, but was probably required to by the prior administration to at least attempt to meet the EPA's alternative fuel and fleet fuel mileage requirements. Now that those regulations are gone for at least the next 2 1/2 years or so, there really isn't any pressure to build these vehicles.
Re: (Score:2)
(rolls eyes). Yeah, sure, they were investing billions in building the plants and assembly lines, but only the subsidies were going to make the money. (Subsidies, right: I'm on social security, and pay no federal taxes, so when I bought my PHEV last year, I got nothing.) And people only buy an EV or PHEV just for the tax break.
That EV Mustang we just saw this morning looked interesting...
Re: Not exactly shocking (Score:5, Informative)
Re: Not exactly shocking (Score:4, Insightful)
While that is certainly true, it leaves China as a whole in a really good place with regards to actually producing EVs in the future as Chinese cities transition the vast majority of cars to electric. They have the technology, know how, and experience now. Whereas we have none of those things.
Obviously the CCP knows that their distortion of the market ultimately puts us at a disadvantage and helps their corrupt buddies. But our governments are also good at distorting markets to help rich people, such as what's happening now in Iran and the price of oil, to say nothing about drumming up consumer demand for oil and ICE vehicles.
Consider recent wars (Score:3)
On the other hand, consider two recent wars that spiked oil prices. First Ukraine then Iran. China is scrambling right now to conserve oil. Every EV on the road is one less vehicle dependent upon that supply chain.
Now, there is a lot of industry still reliant on oil and oil byproducts, but they can fudge with refinery products to make less gasoline and more of them. Plus, there are generally substitutes, even if they are a touch more expensive.
No solution is perfect, but the less they need to change the
Re: (Score:3)
Ember wrote an excellent recent report on a related topic:
https://ember-energy.org/lates... [ember-energy.org]
Re: (Score:2)
"Manufacturers" - but manufacturing what? Between the ones making niche commercial vehicles, the startups trying to perfect some new tech and not actually in mass production, and the ones just supplying parts, there were never that many making their own cars.
Re: Not exactly shocking (Score:5, Insightful)
Would you care to discuss oil subsidies?
Re: Not exactly shocking (Score:4, Insightful)
Would you care to discuss oil subsidies?
Unlike cars, everybody depend on oil. Even those who think they don't.
Re: Not exactly shocking (Score:5, Informative)
Unlike cars, everybody depend on oil. Even those who think they don't.
On one hand, this is absolutely correct for a lot of reasons. On the other hand, it's not inevitable. We can and should reduce our dependence on oil, and petroleum plastics, etc etc. And keep in mind, literally as I wrote that I saw with my right eye that the next window shows a video feed from my 3d printer where some PETG parts just finished up and the Z axis dropped for my convenience, which is why I noticed... but part of why that's the material I'm using right now is that it's cheap and overplentiful. It could be something else, and in fact I still do a lot of PLA (which is kinda sorta compostable.)
There are alternatives to all of the things we do with petroleum fuels and their byproducts. It's absolutely true that we are dependent on them right now, but it's also true that this dependence is a primary driver of AGW and is therefore unsustainable.
Re: (Score:2)
it's not inevitable. We can and should reduce our dependence on oil, and petroleum plastics, etc etc.
I agree, and we are reducing our reliance on fossil fuels. It is going to take a long time. For some it is too fast, for others it is too slow. I don't lose sleep over it either way. 8 billion people gonna do what 8 billion people do.
Re: (Score:2)
Unlike cars, everybody depend on oil. Even those who think they don't.
Many years ago, I saw a photo of a protester holding a sign that said, "Who needs oil? I take the bus".
Re: Not exactly shocking (Score:2)
Electric buses have been around for a while.
Re: Not exactly shocking (Score:4, Insightful)
Obviously we all depend on oil. But given the challenges associated with it, from the costs of extraction to wars to climate change, it makes sense to use as little as possible, and certainly not for activity which is better done with alternatives. EVs are an excellent example. Heat pumps are another.
Re: (Score:2)
Would you care to discuss oil subsidies?
Unlike cars, everybody depend on oil. Even those who think they don't.
Why does that mean we should be giving our tax dollars to one of the most profitable industries in the world?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Definitely *NOT* "insightful.
Go ahead, explain to us how all the pollution, etc, is from tires and such, and has nothing to do with the 100lbs you burn in every tank as long as you own your ICE car.
Re: (Score:2)
Area Man Constantly Mentioning He Doesn't Own A TV (Score:5, Insightful)
Q: Do you eat FOOD?!
Re: (Score:3)
Does your EV require lubrication of joints or other spinning things? ... you know, non-natural fibers? Perhaps shoes with mesh?
Do you want to drive on asphalt?
Do you use plastic for anything, especially in your EV?
Do you have clothes with nylon, rayon, etc
Those are just the ones off the top of my head, and doesn't count all of the fuel used to transport even the "natural stuff" to the stores for you.
We'll always have some oil usage, but I am looking forward to a world where the amount used is greatly reduce
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Not exactly shocking (Score:2)
Rayon isn't a petrochemical, and "natural" is mostly arbitrary, and at the end of the day, doesn't really mean anything. But rayon is made from plant cellulose if that's what you mean.
Furthermore, not all plastics are petrochemicals either.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Not exactly shocking (Score:5, Informative)
Subsidy cars are unprofitable when the subsidies are cancelled. Incredible innit?
Which is the only reason Tesla is around. Those billions in subsidies the U.S. taxpayer was forced to hand over.
Re: (Score:2)
Subsidy cars are unprofitable when the subsidies are cancelled. Incredible innit?
It's almost like you don't know what a subsidy is for, or the economic concepts of economies of scale, or how technological development is spurred by subsidies. Most industries today ... profitable industries ... were built on a subsidy that helped create them. The device you're reading this on almost certainly has subsidies during its early development to thank for its very existence.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
the reviews on that model are not complimentary, it feels like they just got it wrong with that one.
Honda's problem is the same as at every Japanese automaker but Nissan. They all decided to focus on hybrids and didn't bother making an EV until it was very late, presumably figuring they would just benefit from what everyone else did and just buy the tech but this clearly hasn't panned out. So now they are having to play catch up. Yes the original Leaf was an embarrassment, but Nissan now has a new one that doesn't suck and some other vehicles as well, and they are looking better technologically than the o
Re: (Score:2)
The e:Ny1 is not Honda's EV. It's a rebadged Dongfeng.
Honda did make one EV, the Honda e. It was great. Amazing car, full of interesting ideas and tech, very comfortable and fun to drive. I wish they had developed that tech, I'd love a larger version with bigger battery. Instead they seemed to just give up.
A lot of Japanese manufacturers are struggling with EVs. They want to get as much out of their investment in hybrids as possible, and there are a lot of suppliers that they feel responsible for who make p
Another fabulous win for Trump (Score:5, Insightful)
And yet another fabulous win for Trump. So. Much. Winning.
Have you seen the bribes from oil companies? (Score:5, Funny)
It's like when you send your seed money to the TV preacher. You just know it's going to come back tenfold. It's the same principle.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't be so negative. Those people whose jobs are lost to technology and AI can just go work at the Mustache Wax factory or the Buggy Whip plant.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a win for consumer choice, not for Trump. His policies regarding EVs are that consumers should be able to choose if they want one or an ICE vehicle. The government should not be subsidizing a product that cannot sell without the government giving a significant subsidy nor should the government be forcing a transition when EVs are not a practical option for many use cases.
I have nothing against EVs. I actually own two. But I also recognize they're not ready for mass acceptance. They need market for
Re:Another fabulous win for Trump (Score:4, Insightful)
It's truly astonishing that people write that kind of stuff without the slightest hint of irony, isn't it? After Trump has used military force against two oil producing countries in less than six months, and announced he's just going to take Venezuelan oil without compensation (although being an idiot, he's neglected to get the oil majors on board)
Re: (Score:2)
Trump can give a masterclass on how to abuse one's position to extract as much wealth as possible for himself and his cronies, and unlike Kim Jong-Un, he has access to a massive military machine to enforce colonialism as well.
Trump's tariffs are a disaster (Score:5, Insightful)
The USA started out as a federal republic but has since degenerated into a kleprocratic neo-feudalist banana-republic run by a criminal mafia oligarchy
Trump's tariffs were a resounding success (Score:5, Insightful)
With a legislative process called budget reconciliation you can pass bills with a simple majority in the Senate that cannot be filibustered. The catch is they have to be budget neutral. You can't increase the national deficit or debt.
So to do the billionaire tax cuts Trump wanted he needed the tariffs. The tariffs were basically taking money out of your pocket and putting it in his and in the pockets of the billionaires like Elon Musk that paid to elect Trump.
In that sense the tariffs were incredibly successful. They took billions of dollars out of your pocket and mine and put them directly into Trump and his buddy's pockets.
Re: (Score:3)
In that sense the tariffs were incredibly successful. They took billions of dollars out of your pocket and mine and put them directly into Trump and his buddy's pockets.
That is not possible. No Democrats spoke up and we all know they would fight tooth and nail to prevent such a thing from happening. And they didn't, so it didn't happen.
Lots of Democrats spoke up (Score:2)
But they are out there trying to get through to you you're just not hearing it.
Re: (Score:2)
While I consider myself to be "left" I think that the idea that 90% of "the media" was bought by "the right" is outright paranoia.
Up to a couple of years ago the main complaint was that "the left" controlled the media - and now it's turned around completely?
I am based in Europe though, where "the left" still pretty much owns the field - to the great annoyance of our own "right" parties. So YMMV.
Re:Trump's tariffs are a disaster (Score:5, Insightful)
If only this had been predicted... by people the average voter would listen to. It was screamed by a lot of people, both experts and educated lay people pointing to historical precedent, but apparently that wasn't enough.
Re: Trump's tariffs are a disaster (Score:3)
We live in an idiocracy.
Ebb and flow .... (Score:2)
I think Toyota and Honda are two auto-makers that have stood out for their excellence in building hybrid vehicles that are truly reliable, at reasonable price-points.
Full EVs don't necessarily seem like they're so relevant for them to build, even if both have dabbled in it a bit.
Right now in America? The reality is, apartment and condo dwellers typically have no good option to charge an EV at home. Some may make do with a workplace that provides EV charging in their parking lot or garage. But even that prob
Re:Ebb and flow .... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't see a need for any auto maker to rush to try to build more EVs just for the sake of change? The market forces will dictate the real demand, and the people with the best quality offerings at fair prices will get the lion's share of those sales.
The last thing Trump wants is for actual market forces to dictate anything - hence the tariffs.
Re: (Score:3)
The idea behind tariffs is sound. You apply tariffs to maintain domestic production, that has to compete in a global market that has lower wages, less environmental regulation, and cheaper energy. That is, tariffs are a mechanism to compensate domestic industry for imposing costly regulations on them.
No it isn't. It is more like you apply tariffs to maintain domestic consumption of domestic production. The US is just 4.2% of global population and 15% of the vehicle market. With this strategy beyond the retaliatory tariffs you ultimately have no chance of competing against the rest of the world operating at much greater economies of scale responding to higher competitive pressures.
Traditionally US production remained competitive against cheap labor through automation. This is eroding as pool of cheap
Re: (Score:3)
The market forces will dictate the real demand
Virtually nothing in the transport industry is left up market forces alone. Virtually every part of the supply chain for every component in the concept of transportation is manipulated in some form by government intervention or regulation. That goes for EVs as much as Gasoline.
Re: (Score:2)
Right now in America? The reality is, apartment and condo dwellers typically have no good option to charge an EV at home.
Well, that could be a problem, seeing as apartment and condo dwellers typically have perfectly good options to install their own oil wells and refining plants. Right?
This may come as a surprise to you but, you can recharge EVs at service stations, just like old-fashioned combustion vehicles.
Makes sense ... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a very rational response, and certainly impossible for a business to plan when the rules (e.g. tariffs) are changing on a daily basis
Certainly China seems far ahead of everyone, US as well as Japan, in being able to build low-cost desirable EVs.
Of course the tariff playing field is far from level, and Trump is likely to flip-flop on what he's imposing on which country based on what he had for lunch, what presents they've sent him, etc.
It may be that even though China is the low-cost producer than Japan still has an advantage in the US market because Trump is choosing to penalize them less than China, but that can change in a heartbeat and therefore isn't something that it makes sense for a manufacturer to plan around. Even if Trump made some "commitment" to Japan over tariffs, his words are meaningless, as I'm sure the whole world is well aware.
In the meantime, the official goal of tariffs is supposedly to encourage domestic manufacture, but Trump's buddy Musk doesn't seem to be stepping up to the challenge, no anyone else. The car manufacturers have all learnt that it's more profitable to sell fewer expensive SUVs than more entry level cars, and new cars in the US are increasingly becoming a luxury item than many can no longer afford.
Re: (Score:2)
new cars in the US are increasingly becoming a luxury item than many can no longer afford.
New cars are becoming like new houses. All the profit is on the upper end. Everyone else can buy used, if they can even afford that. This has been happening with housing for far longer and a workable fix hasn't shown up yet.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not broken for the people that matter. The other 90% of us don't matter. Hence, in the eyes of government and their financial backers, there is nothing to fix. Working as intended.
Re: (Score:2)
"Certainly China seems far ahead of everyone, US as well as Japan, in being able to build low-cost desirable EVs."
Disclaimer: I'm basing my response on a number of videos and reporting from only a few sources, but...
If the videos (smuggled?) out of China are even half true, then China can certainly crank out a lot of low-cost EVs, but they have a real quality control problem. Lots of reports/videos of EVs bursting into flames while charging, while just parked and while being driven. That high of a percentag
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe some are like that, but have you seen Marques Brownlee's review of the Xiami SU7 ? High end, high quality. Priced at equivalent of $40-45K, and in Marques opinion competitive with anything here at $70-75K point.
Tesla's aren't exactly flawless in this respect either - plenty of reports of fires and recalls like Cybertruck glued-on body panels falling off.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
China is perfectly capable of making quality items. It's only the bottom tier zero margin stuff that America is addicted to. If you started making cell phone chargers domestically and bought the absolute cheapest model you would get the exact same quality as China.
Re: (Score:3)
You can't rely on fucking anecdotes for this kind of thing. You need some actual data. All the data points in the opposite direction, and in line with what one would expect: low cost Chinese EVs use LFP batteries because those are cheap, and LFP batteries do not have any thermal runaway issues.
Problem is the rules (Score:5, Interesting)
The rules for car manufacturing require them to meet pollution rules. But they managed to get higher pollution amounts for larger cars. Then they proceeded to make bigger and bigger cars. Which resulted in larger prices.
Now the US cars are too big for anyone outside of the US to buy. Nobody wants vehicles that big and expensive if they have a choice of smaller cars.
With the current inflation, even US citizens do not want the large, expensive US made cars.
The solution is obvious - require all cars, regardless of size, to meet the tight pollution rules for the smaller cars. We can still make the larger cars, just expect a lot more electric vehicles.
Maybe it's smart... (Score:2)
They are only stopping EVs in the USA which are under attack. They can make more money selling crap ICE cars Americans want while trying to survive the global EV market. Write it down as a loss... but actually make more money. It's not like they are stopping EV completely.
I have to imagine... (Score:3)
...that the nonsense around Hyundai and the ICE raid at that Georgia plant really didn't help.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2025/11/08/korean-americans-foreigners-biggest-ice-raid-hyundai/86950317007/
Cancels EV plans... (Score:4, Interesting)
False reasoning (Score:2)
"In its release regarding the changing product plans, Honda was shockingly blunt about its situation, saying that it was simply unable to deliver products that offer a better value than that of newer Chinese manufacturers."
This makes no sense. The only reason to build cars in the US is to sell to the US market. While there are a few minor models available in the US that are made by companies with Chinese owners, there is essentially no Chinese competition in the US market because the all major Chinese mod
Re: (Score:2)
Between the lines (Score:2)
They know better when they say something that idiotic it's likely another message is being sent. Or some translator is drunk. While if the USA says something idiotic we all just assume it is within character.
Honda didn't play it right (Score:2)
Re:Subsidized, isn’t a plan. (Score:5, Insightful)
and yet just this week how much oil is released from reserves? Why do we even have oil reserves? I won't even go into the subsidizing of oil and ICE.
If subsidizing isn't a plan then we should do away with all.
Re:Subsidized, isn’t a plan. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm old enough to remember Republicans criticizing Biden for releasing oil from the SPR to combat price collusion on the part of the cartels.
Apparently it's fine for politically bailing him out on a war of aggression, taken on by choice. Unfortunately for him, 140m bbl of oil only covers US consumption for two weeks, and that's a lever he won't be able to pull again.
Things are going to get expensive.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Things are going to get expensive.
Holy understatement Batman!
Re: Subsidized, isn’t a plan. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: Subsidized, isn’t a plan. (Score:5, Informative)
No, the high sulfur, heavy crude oil from Venezuela is too expensive to process, not to mention more damaging to the environment. It was rightly left in the ground.
We could have stopped oil subsidies a long time ago, though, to favor cleaner tech.
Re: (Score:3)
That sounds bad, except that many American refineries are largely designed around processing high sulfur low API crudes. This stuff is cheap, and it's also the reason why America imports a shitton of crude from other countries despite having ample reserves and production capacity of its own. In fact Texas imports a significant amount of heavy shit below API 20deg from Mexico for refining despite the fact that the Permean basin produces 45% of all oil in the USA. Most of that easy to process stuff goes to ex
Re: (Score:2)
Once again, Trump is an idiot. The literal only reason that Venezuela is said to have the largest oil reserves in the world is because their government said so in various official reports. There is no actual proof that it does have oil reserves of the size it's claimed.
Re:Subsidized, isn’t a plan. (Score:5, Insightful)
When you cannot sell cars without taxpayer-funded incentives (basically offering a “discount” I paid for already), you fucked up.
It worked for telephone lines. Once. After that, any attempt at federal help became grift instead. Some things need a jump start or the infrastructure itself is the problem. Right now, people don't want EVs because their home isn't set up for it and they can't stop very many places along the way. Without a financial incentive it will never become the cheaper option. With it, it can remain cheaper post-subsidy. I don't think the idea is bad in itself.
Re:Subsidized, isn’t a plan. (Score:5, Insightful)
It worked pretty good for electrification as well.
There is a whole lot of rural America that still wouldn't have grid power if it wasn't for federal programs.
Re:Subsidized, isn’t a plan. (Score:5, Interesting)
The modern approach of stimulating development by handing out public money is very problematic. One, because we can't balance the budget and we don't have the public money in the first place. Two, either there aren't enough strings attached so it becomes corrupt (like broadband subsidies that disappear into a black hole), or there are too many strings attached and the money never gets spent or it becomes a different kind of grift (like the NEVI which allocated billions of dollars but only a tiny fraction of chargers were built even many years later).
The government is bad at executing. If the government wants to encourage EV adoption it should do something like the REA and encourage the formation of co-ops and private charging companies by paving the way for them, removing regulatory barriers (not adding a thousand like NEVI), and promulgating standards and blueprints.
Re:Subsidized, isn’t a plan. (Score:5, Funny)
That electrification was our greatest folly. Could you imagine if all those people weren't online?
Re:Subsidized, isn’t a plan. (Score:4, Interesting)
Some things need a jump start or the infrastructure itself is the problem.
Agree, there is a "chicken and egg" issue.
Right now, people don't want EVs because their home isn't set up for it
Disagree. If you have a single residence house in the US, your home is set up for it. At the very least use a 120V plug; that will get you 40+ miles of recharge every night, which is more than the average person drives per day (which is 37 miles). If your garage has a dryer in it, use that plug and get more range per night (or 2 x 120V on separate breakers plus a special adapter to make them into a 240v feed). No re-wiring required.
and they can't stop very many places along the way.
This is "it depends". If you are going on the major highways, you shouldn't have a problem for most of the US, and even fewer problems on the interstate highways. If you're going off into the back roads, that's what the trip planner app is for. The newer EVs coming out in 2027-2030 are where the solid state batteries will hit the sales lots and will make range an even less of a problem with their charging as fast as a gas fill up and longer range.
We are at the point where EVs will work for ~70% of the US right now if we wanted to (with how people actually drive not how they think they drive). The reason EVs aren't selling is the government making it harder than it should be (constantly changing tariffs and credits) and the cost, plus a LOT of lobbying by the oil & gas industry. Of course, buying a used EV is the cheapest option at the moment. Cost is coming down for new ones and will continue to drop in the long term; in the short term Trump may slow that down some but even he can't totally stop it. Europe (and the rest of the world really) has a lot more options and is doing better for EVs at the moment ... sigh.
Re: Subsidized, isn’t a plan. (Score:2)
> We are at the point where EVs will work for ~70%
I donâ(TM)t buy that. I live in a solid sized city in the downtown. Thereâ(TM)s like 4 chargers. 99% of the nearby apt complexes have no chargers. Thatâ(TM)s more than half the population.
incidentally, single family detached housing is a large part of the reason weâ(TM)re in this mess.
Re: (Score:2)
If your garage has a dryer in it
I'm not picking on you, but Slashdotters are typically in a different (financial) league than others. Most cars are not garaged. If that's not obvious, look around in other neighborhoods. I've considered an EV and can afford it, but can't have one yet for this reason.
Re:Subsidized, isn’t a plan. (Score:5, Insightful)
You wonâ(TM)t mock Honda for that until you can find a maker who can. Without assuming the customer can afford a rolling mortgage.
It's clear that a number of Chinese companies are capable of it. Quite a lot of their EVs are kind of hilariously cheap for what you're getting. And as more units are sold there's more economic pressure to produce better batteries, which in fact is what we have observed happening.
Re:Subsidized, isn’t a plan. (Score:5, Informative)
Without assuming the customer can afford a rolling mortgage.
There are several profit making EVs on the market at below the price of the average new car. If you need a mortgage to buy a below average car then the problem isn't the cost of the car.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Subsidized, isn’t a plan. (Score:2)
Iâ(TM)d be totally fine with no subsidies, as long as we price in all externalized costs an all products. My guess is small gassers would increase about 50%, full size suvs maybe as much as 200%.
Re: (Score:2)
It would have been THE plan if Trump had not waded in and fucked it all up. The problem with subsidizing something you believe is necessary or good is that the next administration has a tiny boner for destroying everything you tried to accomplish and really has no other plan. Honda had to change plans because the current administration is completely moronic but somehow pro-business, because they're Republicans and they love money, right? Incompetence by the government is bad for business. It's bad for every
Re: (Score:2)
> First they claim this is because of tariffs...but aren't vehicles with final assembly in the U.S. free from most tariffs?
Does that apply any more? It used to be that "made in USA" cars might actually have less actually "made in USA" content than a "foreign" car due to these bizarre cross-border rules, but Trump's tariffs are/were anyways ADDITIONAL on top of pre-existing tariffs, and generally so high that they dominate.
SCOTUS recently declared Trump's tariffs illegal, but Trump responded same day that
Re: (Score:3)
"aren't vehicles with final assembly in the U.S. free from most tariffs?"
IIUC, no. The vehicle itself may be free of tariff, but the parts aren't. And the parts need to be imported. I could well be wrong about that, but that's the way I understand it. https://www.supplychaindive.co... [supplychaindive.com]
Re: (Score:2)
This whole thing is reminiscent of the 1970s and 1980s where U.S. c
Re: (Score:2)
Ehh...IIUC, it's only in the US market that Honda (and others) are avoiding EVs. And honestly, most people don't have a decent way to charge them.
Re: (Score:2)
And honestly, most people don't have a decent way to charge them
That is a solvable problem; China more than doubled its charging network in 18 months. It's a bit chicken-and-the-egg problem, but when chargers start showing up more in the U.S. people will demand cheap EVs, which will all be made by China. Honda is doomed.
Re: (Score:2)
All the cult followers are saying we really don’t need gasoline and should be using less anyway. If I don’t recall weren’t they yelling something about drill baby drill?
Re: Enjoy your $5 gas! (Score:4, Insightful)
Paid $7 for premium in my Volt on a road trip in 2022 when the Ukraine war started.
I read there was a station charging $8.21 in LA this week. It will get worse.
I got rid of the Volt last year before the EV tax credit expired. We now have 2 EVs and solar. Our net grid exports were 6 MWh last year. My gas furnace gave up the ghost in January. I just put in a heat pump, installed days before the subsidies also expired. It is incredibly efficient.
I still have 2 nat gas water heaters, and one furnace. But expect in 5-10 years they will all be heat pumps too. Probably much sooner for the water heaters.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I thought that was pretty suspect as well. Maybe they only polled 20 somethings and not 40+ year olds with families.
Re: Car makers rejoice! (Score:2)
Yes, this is crazy talk. My 2025 Equinox EV is my first car with OTA updates. I keep declining them. Software regressiosn are a thing. If it's going to get bricked, I would rather it happen at the service dept. Of course, if all features just worked in the first place, there would be no need for updates. New features on a car ? No.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm absolutely with you. Honda is strategically fucked, as are the US OEMs over the longer term. BMW and Renault may get through this, along with Hyundai and Kia, but many ICE OEMs are in their death throes, whether they know it or not.
Re: (Score:2)
The US automakers are at least still developing EV tech, even if they are not seriously trying to sell a lot of units. This puts them ahead of all of the Japanese automakers except for Nissan, which is basically executing the same plan. All of the US automakers have their own in-house EVs, and have for years. But not only can you not convince Americans to buy them (I'd love one but can't reasonably charge at home... maybe wherever I live next) you also can't convince dealers to sell them, and they have prot
Re: (Score:2)
I think the gap between Honda, Nissan, Toyota, Stellantis, GM and Ford in relation to EVs is a distinction without a difference. They are all in deeper trouble than they know what to do with. The US auto market is doomed to ever-higher prices and ever-worse tech than the rest of the world, because it will miss out on the global economies of scale that have been essential to the last 50 years of automotive manufacturing and which will be just as important, if not more so, in the next 50. Camshafts made for a
Re: (Score:2)
Camshafts are already mostly domestically made, they are pretty simple products in the grand scheme of things and everything we need to make them comes from here. We mostly make our own powertrains with mostly domestic materials. (There are some minerals we buy in which go into the process, but we can produce those here too, and used to, and are investing in doing it again.) It's the electronics that are a problem, since we all but stopped making them here, and the supply chains are long — no amount o
Re: (Score:2)
You’ve got yourself confused. Camshafts are made in the US, yes, but by global suppliers like MAHLE and LInamar. They amortise tooling, designs, and process engineering across all their global production. They are able to purchase supplies at costs held down by their global scale. They stay in the market at all because the volumes of sales globally justify it, and having multiple camshaft suppliers keeps costs down by increasing competition.