Toyota Chairman Says “People Are Finally Seeing Reality” Of EVs

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by Sy1616

I find most EV hating people either can’t afford an EV or haven’t driven the right one.

I can afford almost any EV our there but I care too much about the environment to even think about owning one or even driving one. Second my company sells LiPo batteries so I know how dam dangerous they are and I choose to not temp fate. So that leaves only the speed thing. As a adult I always keep my need for speed off the public roads and on the track. If beating a new Vette to the next traffic light is what gets you off, that is just sad.

[Gautam]

Originally Posted by Sy1616

I’d buy another Tesla, currently have a ‘22 Model S Plaid before any German car. I have three M cars and will take the Tesla before any, it’s just better, faster, more fun. I find most EV hating people either can’t afford an EV or haven’t driven the right one.

You're on a BMW forum so the sentiment isn't terribly surprising. I like EV's, just not Tesla. It's hard to separate the two, and the person running the show at Tesla, which makes the discourse even more polarized.

For me, the right EV hadn't come around the last time I purchased. I spent a weekend with a P100D, tried very hard to sell my wife (and myself) on it, but the instant we sat in a 5 series it was over.

From my perspective, the only advantage the Tesla had was 0-60 time, and I spend too much time in traffic jams for that to be an important criterion. For others, 0-60 is the most important quality. It just needs to be at a point that it's fast enough, and Tesla's are way, way past that point, while many ICE vehicles fit the bill well enough. I do think they hide their weight well and are fun to drive, the 3 and the S at least, though not at the level of bonafide M cars. Drivetrain is fantastic. Many other aspects are lacking. What's more important is highly subjective. For how well they're selling, Tesla has clearly identified and doubled down on the aspects that are appealing to a majority of consumers.

I find BMW's EV lineup very compelling. If I were buying a car today it'd likely be an iX or an i5.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Sy1616

I’d buy another Tesla, currently have a ‘22 Model S Plaid before any German car. I have three M cars and will take the Tesla before any, it’s just better, faster, more fun. I find most EV hating people either can’t afford an EV or haven’t driven the right one.

Lol. Such a stupid and ignorant statement. I'm not an EV hater at all. I've driven several. I think the EV drivetrain uses energy far more efficiently and effectively than ICEV; that's simply the physics of it. My issue is powering EV using a battery is stupid. The power density simply sucks and the recharge wait time is unacceptable when on a trip of more than 250 miles. It's not that people can't afford EV, it's ICEV offer a better value proposition than EV. Most people who use their money wisely recognize that fact. There is no real world advantage to using EV compared to ICEV. If there was an advantage to owning and using EV for private transportation purposes, there would be no need for MASSIVE Govenment INTERVENTION adjustment of the market.

[Davil]

Originally Posted by SoCal_NSX

LOL...cuz they make a shitty EV

Meanwhile Tesla has become one of the best selling cars in the world....


I still love my ICE cars, but it is nice not paying $6 a gallon and stomping all the Chargers, Mustangs and anything else that try to test me in my M3P at stop lights

“Stomping”

[RM7]

Don't be naive, 90% or more of people that are interested in "performance" vehicles just want to go fast in a straight line or at a stoplight. Those of us that want an excellent handling car (see avatar) are a minority in that picture...and that's the people that are interested in more than just basic transportation. All you have to do to see this is look at all the "performance" SUVs.

This is not just something that EVs are good at...it's what they are best at and they are winning it.

Like it or not, sports cars were already killed off by people buying SUVs.

And cars like the M3P set up on track tires with good brake pads are doing crazy things in autoX because they don't turn horrible and accelerate next-level. This is only going to increase.

[crAbb]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Lol. Such a stupid and ignorant statement. I'm not an EV hater at all. I've driven several. I think the EV drivetrain uses energy far more efficiently and effectively than ICEV; that's simply the physics of it. My issue is powering EV using a battery is stupid. The power density simply sucks and the recharge wait time is unacceptable when on a trip of more than 250 miles. It's not that people can't afford EV, it's ICEV offer a better value proposition than EV. Most people who use their money wisely recognize that fact. There is no real world advantage to using EV compared to ICEV. If there was an advantage to owning and using EV for private transportation purposes, there would be no need for MASSIVE Govenment INTERVENTION adjustment of the market.

Start up a 3.0 litre BMW inlie six. Give the throttle a blip, or two, feel the car come alive, the sound, the sensation.
Now try that with your EV.....

[SoCal_NSX]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

I find it hard to believe that any real car person that wants an engaging driving experience will find an EV able to scratch that itch. Yes, EVs can be wildly quick, but there's way more to performance and the driving experience than just acceleration which is about the only performance metric an EV is good at. Yeah, you can make an EV handle all right with a lot of work, but there's no getting around all the weight and general sensory deprivation.

I'm not an EV hater and I've driven a few Teslas and could easily buy a Plaid, but I'd MUCH rather have lighter and engaging and fun to drive cars that feel alive.

I have three totally different cars and they all serve their purpose.

2018 Cayman 6MT

2020 Tesla Model 3 Performance

2021 Rubicon


I can tell you right now, the m3P can hang with my mid engine Porsche when it comes to handling and is faster around a track using the same driver on the same track than many sports cars including my 718(Top Gear test track/ The Stig)

62. Tesla Model 3 Performance The Stig 1:21.50 487 / 1846
63. Aston Martin DB11 The Stig 1:21.50 608 / 1902
64. BMW M3 (F80) The Stig 1:21.60 431 / 1602
65. Porsche 718 Cayman S The Stig 1:21.60 350 / 1424
66. Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG The Stig 1:21.60 571 / 1674
67. Audi R8 V10 5.2 FSI (Mk I) The Stig 1:21.60 525 / 1671
68. Porsche Cayman GTS (981) The Stig 1:21.60 340 / 1379
69. Jaguar F-Type R Coupe The Stig 1:21.60 550 / 1665
70. Aston Martin One-77 The Stig 1:21.67 760 / 1500
71. Chevrolet Corvette Stingray The Stig 1:21.70 502 / 1646
72. SLS AMG Coupe Electric Drive The Stig 1:21.70 751 / 2095
73. Lamborghini Urus The Stig 1:21.70 650 / 2263
74. Ford GT (Mk I) The Stig 1:21.90 550 / 1574
75. Audi RS6 Avant (C8) The Stig 1:21.90 600 / 2188
76. Porsche 911 Turbo Cabriolet The Stig 1:22.20 500 / 1667
77. Ferrari 360 CS The Stig 1:22.30 425 / 1280
78. Alpine A110 S (Mk II 300 PS) The Stig 1:22.30 300 / 1133
79. Porsche 911 GT3 RS (996) The Stig 1:22.30 381 / 1360
80. Caterham Seven 620R The Stig 1:22.30 w 315 / 551
81. Audi R8 V10 5.2 FSI Spyder The Stig 1:22.30 525 / 1755
82. Chevrolet Corvette Z06 (C6) The Stig 1:22.40 512 / 1446
83. Audi RS Q8 The Stig 1:22.50 600 / 2421


the list goes on but you get the picture....People who think they are only good in a straight line have never actually driven one....


I have had many many fun and fast cars in my life and the M3P is one of my favorite cars I've ever owned....not paying close to $6 a gallon these days here in Cali is just a nice bonus

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by RM7

Don't be naive, 90% or more of people that are interested in "performance" vehicles just want to go fast in a straight line or at a stoplight. Those of us that want an excellent handling car (see avatar) are a minority in that picture...and that's the people that are interested in more than just basic transportation. All you have to do to see this is look at all the "performance" SUVs.

This is not just something that EVs are good at...it's what they are best at and they are winning it.

Like it or not, sports cars were already killed off by people buying SUVs.

And cars like the M3P set up on track tires with good brake pads are doing crazy things in autoX because they don't turn horrible and accelerate next-level. This is only going to increase.

The performance I like is driving 400 miles, stopping for 5 minutes and refueling to 100% range. I'm definitely not in the majority in that sense.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by SoCal_NSX

I have three totally different cars and they all serve their purpose.

2018 Cayman 6MT

2020 Tesla Model 3 Performance

2021 Rubicon


I can tell you right now, the m3P can hang with my mid engine Porsche when it comes to handling and is faster around a track using the same driver on the same track than many sports cars including my 718(Top Gear test track/ The Stig)

62. Tesla Model 3 Performance The Stig 1:21.50 487 / 1846
63. Aston Martin DB11 The Stig 1:21.50 608 / 1902


the list goes on but you get the picture....People who think they are only good in a straight line have never actually driven one....


I have had many many fun and fast cars in my life and the M3P is one of my favorite cars I've ever owned....not paying close to $6 a gallon these days here in Cali is just a nice bonus

$6 fuel is a result of your state Government policies, not with the concept of internal combustion. SMOG is a problem with your state's geography. Yet, for some reason California gets to dictate to the world what type of vehicle everyone must drive. CARB regulations get a pass from EPA statutes. The other 49 state taxpayers get to foot the bill.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by chassis

Car companies are bleeding their way (profit-wise) into a hoped-for EV future. Ford last quarter lost $1.3b in the EV division which works out to approx $33k per vehicle loss. EV pricing and sales volumes are softening.

A question is whether car companies have enough blood in the body to continue bleeding before the bloodmobile arrives, which is the hoped-for EV age. Or will they staunch their own bleeding and embrace either a dual-fuel world or retrench back to an ICE landscape?

https://shareholder.ford.com/Investo...rterly-results

An interesting business discussion would be, what would have happened if all seven major automobile manufacturers set off to build the modern large-battery electric car 15 years ago and took a piece of the capital investment dollars that propped up Tesla for the last 13 years. The reason Ford Model E division loses $1.3B a quarter is the company is self-investing in its EV development. Tesla lost billions too, 10 years ago, but made-up carbon tax credits and over-enthusiastic capital investment of the single EV company kept it afloat. The investment was such because the Government is forcing the adoption of EV, so it was a safe bet. Tesla's advantage was building out its own (subsidized) charging infrastructure keyed to its architecture. Had all the other manufacturers followed the Tesla implementation model and had the investment backing, Tesla would not have prospered and survived to what it is today. How world seven proprietary EV charging infrastructures have worked? One worked, multiples wouldn't, there is no business case for it. There is barely a business case for the non-Tesla (CCS) public charging infrastructure now, it's going to get propped up by taxpayer funds on the order of 100 billion dollars.

Tesla makes just four (4) models off of two EV platforms. All of Tesla's Models are visually outdated. The legacy manufacturers are developing EV while still developing and supporting a vast legacy ICE vehicle fleet including light-duty trucks, delivery vehicles, heavy-duty trucks, and a highly diversified light-duty passenger vehicles.

Making it sound like Ford (and the others) lose $33K per EV (as compared to Tesla) is not framing the business situation from the correct view. Of course Tesla can make a profitable EV, that's all it does. It has no legacy costs to cover and has not re-platformed any of it's vehicles in the past six years. Tesla does not make a 4x4 ORV (Jeep, Bronco, Land Cruiser), does not make a sedan-based convertible, does not make a work truck, does not make a work van, does not have a heavy-duty line of cab/chassis trucks. It makes just two outdated platforms.

[ASAP]

I think Toyota made major mistakes in how they approached the 2010s with borderline little to no innovation on turbo motors, being last on tech and losing a lot of market share to the Germans. I am sure that is a major reason why he was asked to leave as well... Now they are releasing cars like the new US landcruiser about 5-6 years too later however-

Where I think they went very right was to continue to invest in Hybrid tech while everyone else went all out on EVs.

[kyriian]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

, it's going to get propped up by taxpayer funds on the order of 100 billion dollars.

Tesla makes just four (4) models off of two EV platforms. All of Tesla's Models are visually outdated. The legacy manufacturers are developing EV while still developing and supporting a vast legacy ICE vehicle fleet including light-duty trucks, delivery vehicles, heavy-duty trucks, and a highly diversified light-duty passenger vehicles.

Making it sound like Ford (and the others) lose $33K per EV (as compared to Tesla) is not framing the business situation from the correct view. Of course Tesla can make a profitable EV, that's all it does. It has no legacy costs to cover and has not re-platformed any of it's vehicles in the past six years. Tesla does not make a 4x4 ORV (Jeep, Bronco, Land Cruiser), does not make a sedan-based convertible, does not make a work truck, does not make a work van, does not have a heavy-duty line of cab/chassis trucks. It makes just two outdated platforms.

There is a new car coming on Nov 30, you know, the Cybercunk… I mean Cybertruck?
https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/s/7nm7HO4cuy
$98,900!

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by SoCal_NSX

I can tell you right now, the m3P can hang with my mid engine Porsche when it comes to handling and is faster around a track using the same driver on the same track than many sports cars including my 718(Top Gear test track/ The Stig)

Now back to reality:
Why racetracks are giving hybrids and EVs the cold shoulder
01 May 2023
Summit Point Motorsports Park, a two-mile, natural-terrain road course in West Virginia that opened in 1969. Summit Point’s director of motorsports operations, Edwin Pardue, has banned the use of electric vehicles and hybrids on track.
Pardue is not alone. Carolina Motorsports Park, in Kershaw, South Carolina, which has a 2.27-mile road course, abides by a simple rule on its books: “No electric vehicles allowed on track.” A relative handful of other circuits have followed suit.

The NCCC went even further than Summit Point, stating that if you bring your E-Ray to a motorsports event, you’ll be required to park “30 feet minimum from buildings and other cars.”

https://www.hagerty.com/media/motors...cold-shoulder/

I guess you will be either left to your Stig fantasy world or more street racing until you get caught.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by ASAP

I think Toyota made major mistakes in how they approached the 2010s with borderline little to no innovation on turbo motors, being last on tech and losing a lot of market share to the Germans. I am sure that is a major reason why he was asked to leave as well... Now they are releasing cars like the new US landcruiser about 5-6 years too later however-

Where I think they went very right was to continue to invest in Hybrid tech while everyone else went all out on EVs.

I just have never understood why GM abandoned the Voltec architecture. The Volt was just so far ahead as a hybrid engineering solution, maybe now with the delay in EV rollout, GM will dig into the coffers and bring it back. Maybe GM just knew California was going to invoke an all-out ICE ban.

[chassis]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

An interesting business discussion would be, what would have happened if all seven major automobile manufacturers set off to build the modern large-battery electric car 15 years ago and took a piece of the capital investment dollars that propped up Tesla for the last 13 years. The reason Ford Model E division loses $1.3B a quarter is the company is self-investing in its EV development. Tesla lost billions too, 10 years ago, but made-up carbon tax credits and over-enthusiastic capital investment of the single EV company kept it afloat. The investment was such because the Government is forcing the adoption of EV, so it was a safe bet. Tesla's advantage was building out its own (subsidized) charging infrastructure keyed to its architecture. Had all the other manufacturers followed the Tesla implementation model and had the investment backing, Tesla would not have prospered and survived to what it is today. How world seven proprietary EV charging infrastructures have worked? One worked, multiples wouldn't, there is no business case for it. There is barely a business case for the non-Tesla (CCS) public charging infrastructure now, it's going to get propped up by taxpayer funds on the order of 100 billion dollars.

Tesla makes just four (4) models off of two EV platforms. All of Tesla's Models are visually outdated. The legacy manufacturers are developing EV while still developing and supporting a vast legacy ICE vehicle fleet including light-duty trucks, delivery vehicles, heavy-duty trucks, and a highly diversified light-duty passenger vehicles.

Making it sound like Ford (and the others) lose $33K per EV (as compared to Tesla) is not framing the business situation from the correct view. Of course Tesla can make a profitable EV, that's all it does. It has no legacy costs to cover and has not re-platformed any of it's vehicles in the past six years. Tesla does not make a 4x4 ORV (Jeep, Bronco, Land Cruiser), does not make a sedan-based convertible, does not make a work truck, does not make a work van, does not have a heavy-duty line of cab/chassis trucks. It makes just two outdated platforms.

In 25 words or less, what is your point? What are you saying?

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by kyriian

There is a new car coming on Nov 30, you know, the Cybercunk… I mean Cybertruck?
https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/s/7nm7HO4cuy
$98,900!

Yeah, a construction worker is going to show up in a Cyber truck...

[Car-Addicted]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

The performance I like is driving 400 miles, stopping for 5 minutes and refueling to 100% range. I'm definitely not in the majority in that sense.

Yes you are.
The journey not the arrival matters.
-T. S. Eliot

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by chassis

In 25 words or less, what is your point? What are you saying?

Tesla wouldn't have made it. (5 words )

[Car-Addicted]

We've been here before:
The story of the little known inventor, Thomas Parker, who built and drove the world's first practical electric car...over 130 years ago.

[SoCal_NSX]

Originally Posted by Car-Addicted

Now back to reality:
Why racetracks are giving hybrids and EVs the cold shoulder
01 May 2023
Summit Point Motorsports Park, a two-mile, natural-terrain road course in West Virginia that opened in 1969. Summit Point’s director of motorsports operations, Edwin Pardue, has banned the use of electric vehicles and hybrids on track.
Pardue is not alone. Carolina Motorsports Park, in Kershaw, South Carolina, which has a 2.27-mile road course, abides by a simple rule on its books: “No electric vehicles allowed on track.” A relative handful of other circuits have followed suit.

The NCCC went even further than Summit Point, stating that if you bring your E-Ray to a motorsports event, you’ll be required to park “30 feet minimum from buildings and other cars.”

https://www.hagerty.com/media/motors...cold-shoulder/

I guess you will be either left to your Stig fantasy world or more street racing until you get caught.

Of course somebody as obtuse as yourself would completely miss the point

Not surprising

[KillerExcessive]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

There is no real world advantage to using EV compared to ICEV.

Ehhh, that’s just hyperbole mate and you know it.

For in town daily driving with something like hydro or nuclear power it’s a more advantageous type of personal car than burning petrol.

The rest of your points, yeah they track.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by KillerExcessive

Ehhh, that’s just hyperbole mate and you know it.

For in town daily driving with something like hydro or nuclear power it’s a more advantageous type of personal car than burning petrol.

The rest of your points, yeah they track.

Right, because you know to plug in only when the grid is fed by nuke or hydro...

And the Greens just LOVE fish-killing hydro and Chernobal/Fukushima nuclear generation.