Huh? Didn't Toyota define EVs in the 2000s with the hybrid Prius? It became iconic, broke into practical use and the mass market, and led the way for things like the Tesla. They were innovators and disrupters, not late to it.
Toyota worked on EVs when they were unfashionable, impractical, and unlikely. And they made them work in spite of all that. Now people are talking about them like they're EV laggards. Madness.
Hybrids and EVs are very different. And what you need to do to make one does not translate very well to the other.
Before either hybrids or EVs were commercially viable, The Innovator's Dilemma included a case study done for the car industry on the switch to electric. The case study concluded that, based on the history of disruptive innovation, the requirements of driving, and the trends in batteries, electric vehicles would become economically viable around 2020. It also concluded that traditional manufacturers would pursue hybrids but would have trouble moving into the EV market.
As a prior correlated example, shortly before steam became competitive for trans-oceanic travel, sailboat manufacturers briefly produced hybrid sail/steam ships. In so doing they made acceptable compromises to sail to allow for the reliability of steam near land. However none of the companies that did that survived into the steamship era.
In fact every detail of that case study has happened as predicted except that they predicted that EVs would start at the bottom of the market and move up, while Tesla started at the top and moved down. However the jury is still out on who will wind up winning the EV market - Tesla or one of the Chinese or Indian manufacturers who produce low-end EVs in higher quantity than Tesla. If it is China or India, then that case study will work out in every detail.
But the point remains. Designing an electric engine whose job is to be a boost to a gasoline engine, compromising both power and range, is not on a natural technological path to a pure electric vehicle. And history suggests that companies that go that route will have trouble when pressure comes to switch to the more natural technology.
Therefore Toyota's migration to hybrids is not only not a move to EVs, but it was both predicted and is suggestive that they would have trouble moving to pure EVs.
> Tesla or one of the Chinese or Indian manufacturers who produce low-end EVs in higher quantity than Tesla
I don't see Tesla ever becoming a gargantuan multinational carmaker giant like Toyota or GM - it's just not in their corporate ethos. I compare Tesla to Apple: they're technological leaders who set the benchmarks (and own the patents) but who also keep a relatively small and simple product matrix. There's loads of computer form-factors that Apple doesn't produce products for (e.g. rugged laptops, industrial control computers, "affordable" computers, and so on) - the demand for these products which are typically lower-margin are met by other manufacturers and I see Tesla being fine with this: let Toyota, GM, etc stress over meeting demand for a sub-$30k BEV while making hardly any profit.
I think the importance of self-driving / autonomous cars should also be considered. GM has Cruise, but Toyota, Ford, Honda, etc are either uninterested for some reason, or hoping Google or Apple will license them their Waymo or Titan system, or playing catchup very, very slowly - given Tesla is looking like they'll make their FSD an open-beta this year (and a public 1.0 release before the year's end, I hope!) that further widens their moat and with their current (overinflated, I admit) valuation that could see them buy-out a smaller carmarker to cement themselves should anything detrimental happen in the medium-term.
And he's been sticking to the roadmap. For example that blog post was the first public announcement that they would eventually produce a family sedan called the Model 3. And indeed they eventually produced a family sedan..and called it the Model 3.
Oh wow, I never saw that, but that's exactly what I saw they were doing and now everything makes sense.
Given they've been literally telegraphing their moves right-up-until the decision to do self-driving tech, I'm surprised bigger automakers haven't reacted at all until now, at which point they're lagging so far behind it's just depressing.
In the updated roadmap Elon realized that full autonomy will be ready before the 20 years that it takes to switch all current cars to electric, so it's more important than having the cheapest possible car.
Toyota had the first mass produced hybrid vehicle in 1997 with the Prius. Today, they have hybrid vehicles for all of their passenger cars, and class leading MPG in most of them. They are #1 in terms of sales volume for hybrid vehicles.
They have a fully sorted fuel cell vehicle in the Mirai, based upon technology that is no more expensive to produce than an ICE.
They are late to the game on EV's, but the entire market is still in its early days.
You can bet that once the battery technology becomes cheap enough to stuff into cars with Corolla price tags, Toyota will be doing it, and they will be the #1 seller of EV's in terms of sales volume.
> You can bet that once the battery technology becomes cheap enough to stuff into cars with Corolla price tags, Toyota will be doing it, and they will be the #1 seller of EV's in terms of sales volume.
Maybe. But you are assuming the cost of battery technology will be the same for everyone. Currently it seems like Tesla is about 3-5 years ahead of everyone in terms of price & performance. What happens if/ when[1] Tesla launches an EV at Corolla prices and Toyota is still waiting for battery prices to come down?
I think it's far more likely at this point that Tesla will have a $25k EV in the next 5 years than Toyota.
In the situation (Tesla and others) looks not a big problem for other manufacturers because Tesla can't fill all EV demands and not all people (especially outside US) like Tesla.
Tbh I never want to own a full EV. Many in the suburbs or country can’t afford to wait 20 min at a charging station. Many of us like the idea of EV, but also drive 100-200 miles a day or in cold weather or mountains, etc (all of which reduces the range of EV)
If you live in the suburbs or country, there is no need to ever wait at a charging station since you presumably should be charging at your home. This is just like charging your phone at night, just on a bigger scale.
No you can’t that’s the “range” if it’s sunny Southern California on flat terrain. And even that might only be 160 miles.
people regularly drive to cities which is like 300-400 miles round trip. They need to pull 1 ton in a truck. There’s snow on the road and no charging station, do you want to freeze?
I’m not saying we won’t get there, just saying right now hybrids (which I actually own) are the only real option for people outside of a metropolitan area (or if they just want to drive local, which is fine). Pacifica hybrids are great, they have 30 mile full battery power. Then switch to gas. I drive locally 90% is the time, but can still drive to the closest major city 160 miles away
As a Bay Area resident, let me tell you: I have driven all over California and there are Tesla’s meeting me at each spot. You’re in the past with this take.
Like I said, we will get there. It’s really not there yet. I too lived in the Bay and regularly went down to San Diego. Much easier to do if you’re willing to take a couple 20 min breaks on the way (pretty normal). There are charging stations though. It’s always warm, roads are flat, etc
All I was saying is Tesla is good for what it is. It’s not well suited (today) for country or even some suburbs. For those instances hybrids are a better fit
I used to drive ~180 miles round trip a day for work. A Tesla wouldn’t have been able to pull that off. Particularly in cold weather in the hills. But even assuming there was a charging station at work (enabling the round trip) - I also regularly drove to other cities(weekends and such) that would be 300-400 miles away. There are no charging stations anywhere in between.
This was / is common in my area. My point is that a Tesla works well in many cases, particularly in densely populated regions. They work less well if you have to drive distances, carry a heavy load, and especially not if it’s more rugged. All the more true if you have kids, particularly young ones where a 20 min charging break is rough. Or running out of charge could be a problem.
Hybrids are really much better suited to these scenarios. I think EVs will get there, they’re always closing gaps, just right now less densely populated areas make less sense.
We don't wait at charging stations. We charge at home and or at work. The vast majority of people don't drive enough in a day to run out of range on a tesla.
Agree. They just didn't build it solely around one big battery without any ICE engine. Look, if you live in an apartment it most likely is impossible to charge and own an EV. That’s a huge market segment to not address. They can all comfortably buy hybrids though.
I don't get why range extenders aren't more popular. A little motorbike-size engine that you can fuel from any petrol station on the planet that can charge the battery overnight, not connected to the drive train and running at optimal RPM for the alternator.
Because electricity is ubiquitous. It’s literally everywhere. Some states have mandated apartment complexes accompanied EV owners, and with the Biden administration, I expect federal standards in short order.
It’s a policy problem, not a technology problem. Tesla has deployed an enormous fast charging network on their own dime, so it’s reasonable more can be done faster with government support (including mandating and funding EV chargers for apartment dwellers).
No one wants to charge their EV from a Honda generator at their apartment complex. If you’re a Tesla owner in an apartment with no apartment parking EV charger access, you pop over to a Supercharger once a week (which, while suboptimal, is equivalent to gas stations until EV chargers are more widely available).
Is that an idealistic statement, or a practical one?
Yes an electricity supply is available everywhere most people would want. Practical charging facilities, however, are not.
I frequently find myself in situations where I can get petrol very easily but cannot practically plug in anywhere. With a range extender I could run a very efficient little engine and reduce my emissions today.
My statements are pragmatic, based on the uptake of Tesla EVs in the marketplace versus consumers who want to drag a generator around with them to charge.
I quite often drive beyond the range of an EV, to a place where there are no chargers at all. If I could just have a little range extender motor that I could put petrol in and use to charge overnight, I could fully commit to EVs right now forever. But I can't yet. That little bit of pragmatism would make it all work. It'd even fit in the front cargo space of a Tesla!
But you can! Get a portable Honda generator [1] and plug into it with a mobile connector to charge (my Tesla can charge from a 120V 15a circuit, or a 220v dryer outlet). If that doesn’t provide you enough charge, find a surplus generator on a trailer [2] and haul it behind you with a hitch. If it’s a diesel, you can even run it on vegetable oil instead of petroleum.
When you’re not going to the boonies, you’re fully electric without dragging a generator with you, and can rely on charging stations.
Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but this isn't a reasonably well packaged solution for people to use. What's the security of the generator sitting outside my car all night? It needs to be an integrated solution.
Scroll down to jurisdictions banning fossil fuel car sales. It’s a problem only until the government no longer allows you to buy a petrol vehicle. Canada’s ban starts in 2040, although I expect that to be pulled forward to align with other jurisdictions targeting 2030.
> It’s a problem only until the government no longer allows you to buy a petrol vehicle.
Right, you're nailing it - it's a problem today. A problem we could solve today. By popping a range extender under the (currently empty!) bonnet of a Tesla. Then everyone could get an EV, figure out how to make it work right now, and be ready for the way forward.
Don't think about what we could be doing by 2030 - think about what we could achieve right now!
And it's not just about petrol - don't fixate on when petrol is phased out - it's about diesel as well.
(An unrelated problem is that EVs need more form factors, such as off-road vehicles, which Teslas don't currently do.)
You just don't need it. It's solving a non-problem.
Tesla is selling all of the cars they can make, and the people simply don't find themselves experiencing the range anxiety they imagine they will. The vast majority of them just plug in their cars when they get home and never, ever think about going to a gas station. It's not about 30 minutes at a charger vs 5 minutes at a gas station; it's about 5 minutes at a gas station vs 0 minutes.
That's 99% of the trips taken in a Tesla. For 99% of the rest, there are superchargers.
So your range extender is a lot of extra machinery in an otherwise mostly solid-state device. To a Tesla owner, it just feels dirty, the way a gas station always feels grimy. It wouldn't help them sell any extra cars because the limiting factor on their sales is how fast they can build them.
They're scaling up, and by the time the gas cars are phased out, the entire system will have shifted. There will be even more superchargers and even more solid options for those 1% of 1% of trips that it won't suffice for.
Meantime, Tesla owners already spend less time than gas car owners fueling their cars, because it happens while they sleep. They don't need a mechanical solution because it's already solved.
I agree. Those generators should also be optimized for optimal power output for exactly what the batteries need. It’d probably be more efficient than a larger engine in a traditional machine.
Mazda is working on a model with a range extender. BMW just took them out of their models, but they’re not quite the same segment.
I don't think Tesla would have been possible if Toyota hadn't blasted the way for them. Before Toyota's work people didn't think any kind of EV was practical.
The classic business book on disruptive innovation, produced before the Prius existed, shows that people who cared actually knew better.
EVs were not viable until battery technology improved enough. Batteries have been improving about 7%/year. Based on those figures from the 1990s and an estimate of minimum acceleration, range, and recharge time to be acceptable on the road, EVs were predicted to become viable for the mass market around 2020.
Guess what. Those trends held and EVs became viable for the mass market around 2020. :-)
Huh? Didn't Toyota define EVs in the 2000s with the hybrid Prius? It became iconic, broke into practical use and the mass market, and led the way for things like the Tesla. They were innovators and disrupters, not late to it.
Toyota worked on EVs when they were unfashionable, impractical, and unlikely. And they made them work in spite of all that. Now people are talking about them like they're EV laggards. Madness.