I wish other car companies would create more compelling and somewhat affordable electric cars.
At least in the US, the only two cars I can think of (besides the Model 3, which is hard to come by) that move the needle at all are the Nissan Leaf and Chevy Bolt, both of which look... not great.
Why don't any other car companies offer a 'standard' mid size or compact sedan that's fully electric? Just take an existing decent car like a Toyota Corolla, Honda Civic, etc. and redesign it electric? I know it's a different drivetrain/architecture, but why not a standard looking body instead of some weird buggy space-age thing?
Toyota has a Corolla hybrid option now too, which seems to further support your case that they could do a full electric conversion as well if they really wanted to.
Because car companies are horridly shortsighted. All of the major US car makers right now are doubling down on building gas-guzzling pickup trucks and SUVs because they have a nice profit margin and because Americans love commuting alone downtown in traffic every day in their seats 7, 20 mpg abominations with trunks and beds that are never used.
Maybe it's what's necessary to survive in the moment and maybe the moment is the nature of the car industry, but all of these car producers seem to forget what happens when gas prices rise and the economy slows. Maybe then they'll actually innovate, but in terms of technology they're already playing catchup to Tesla. If Tesla can figure out how to produce these cars steadily traditional car makers are in trouble.
We just drove our Model 3 home 13 days ago. IF you want an electric car, nothing else on the market has the compelling mix of features that the 3 has, IMO.
I'm a big BMW fan, and they keep promising that they'll be selling normal electric cars Real Soon Like Now, but frankly, most automaker efforts are either 'weird' electrics like the i3 or Leaf or Bolt (which have their own range or fast charging network issues), or PROMISES to bolt electric motors to existing cars like the 3 series. It's great that they think that will magically result in an electric car, but it doesn't resolve the fast charging network issues, I've seen no real promises of charging network investments, UI that makes it easy to find said chargers, etc. Maybe it's in the works, I don't know, but the fact that they're not even publicizing whatever efforts they're making mean that they're not making a splash in the market; they're not trying hard enough.
The 3 feels like a substantially different rethink of the car; it's on when I touch the door handle (or sooner, if I start the A/C via the app). Other automakers seem lost in the "take a car, remove the gas engine, replace with electric motors, and BAM, electric car!" mindset.
>I'm a big BMW fan, and they keep promising that they'll be selling normal electric cars Real Soon Like Now
I feel ya. I'm a chapter officer in the BMW Car Club, but we just placed an order for a Model 3 for my wife on Saturday. The only thing even remotely on the horizon for BMW is the iX3, which will be produced in China (even though BMW produces all X3s in the US currently). It will only have 250 miles of range. And it launches in 2020.
I currently drive a 530e plugin hybrid. I tell anyone who will listen not to waste their time with it. It has 15-20 miles of real world EV-only range. I live in a small town and it typically isn't enough for me to drive across town and back if I have the AC on. If I wasn't so upside down on the lease (12 months in), I'd be ordering myself a Model 3.
My wife made me get rid of the 2015 M3 I had prior to the 530e. I greatly miss that vehicle, but now the joke is that she's going to be the one with an M3. Just a slightly different kind of M3.
My next vehicle is not likely to be a BMW. It is mostly likely to be either a Tesla or a Porsche Taycan. Maybe BMW will have something worth my time in 2023. And it's so sad as they were ahead of the curve with the i3. And then they did... nothing.
I've got a Clownshoe but in 2015 I also bought a Golf R 6MT (replaced by the Tesla) instead of an F31 3 series wagon because of BMW's shortsightedness in not bringing a manual over anymore -- a car I waited YEARS for, basically since the E91 was discontinued. I always argued that by catering to the fashionistas instead of car people, they wouldn't have a "base" once the fashion went elsewhere. Well, the fashion is going to electric cars and they're being left behind...
BMW has definitely decided that the X vehicles are what Americans will buy if they want cargo space. Those of us who have no desire to drive an SUV or "Crossover" seem to be the minority these days, unfortunately.
BMW is hitting it out of the park with the M2, but their mass market vehicles of the G generation seem to be missing the point as the market moves to EVs.
Hopefully VW will knock it out of the park w/the Taycan and it's charging network.
How awful that they're making cars that their customers want to buy. </s>
The reality is that electric cars aren't in great demand today, Everyone's working on them but most aren't in a particular hurry to push out cars that don't necessarily have a good mix of price/range/features for their customers and which they won't sell all that many of as a result.
Something no one really talks about is the difficulty of just charging an electric car for anyone who isn't a homeowner. That's a nontrivial question -- and possibly a dealbreaker -- for millions of apartment dwellers.
Or homeowners without garages. I live in a house but park in the street in front of it. I can't practically string an extension cord to my car to charge it every night.
Nevermind what a bunch of drunk teenagers would do upon seeing that setup.
I'm in the same situation, there's the option of renting a nearby garage but when I factor that into the cost of an already expensive vehicle, the economics just aren't interesting at all.
Tesla's network of superchargers aim to solve this. They stopped giving out free supercharging IIRC, but it's still a great way to keep the battery close to topped off - you can do it as a short pitstop after driving to work, and the same after your drive home assuming you have a supercharger closeby
Making an electric car is trivial. The big problem is that battery costs still cause the majority of the total vehicle cost. The e-golf is a perfect example of that. It's identical to the ICE version except it costs twice as much at the cost of significantly lower range. The 2017 version is still at the 30k price point but the range was upgraded to 185 miles. It will probably take another 3 years until we see a 300 mile version to eliminate range anxiety for the majority of the population and then it will take another 3-6 years for prices to go down.
The ICE vehicle manufacturers are waiting for battery costs to come down. They aren't short sighted. It's simple economics.
Today one can buy electric and/or hybrid cars from Ford, GM, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, BMW, Mercedes, VW, Volvo, Audi, and even Jaguar. They are not going to stop making gas guzzlers, but they are steadily increasing their commitment to electric cars.
If electric cars take over the mass market, most of them will be made by established carmakers who know how to crank out millions of cars per year and have thousands of dealerships across the country. I'm sure they will be grateful to Tesla for proving the concept, but the traditional automakers won't have much trouble ramping up production once they know the market is there.
By the way, I would love to have an electric car but I don't have anywhere to charge it because I live in an apartment without a garage. Charging it at work is not realistic for me -- we have some charging spots, but it's really difficult to get one because so many of my coworkers also want to use them. There are millions of customers like me who need the charging infrastructure to improve before electric car ownership becomes practical, and we are going to keep giving our money to the traditional automakers.
> By the way, I would love to have an electric car but I don't have anywhere to charge it because I live in an apartment without a garage.
I figure there might be an opening for a startup company to drive around neighbourhoods early in the morning, fast charging peoples cars for them. Subscription service. Partner with an electric car company.
And even if you do have a garage, would your apartment complex allow you to install a real charger? Or would you get stuck charging with 110v?
Unfortunately that little piece of infrastructure could easily be a deal killer for a ton of people.
Not everyone is a homeowner with a garage. And parking in a charging space at some random retail establishment every couple days for a few hours to charge just seems insane.
That sounds like a temporary problem to me - not anything fundamentally wrong that can't be fixed.
Apartment complexes where I live (Denver metro) are already competing with each other on features like "bike/snowboard fix-up stations", "Amazon lockers", "heated pool", and other absurdities - you bet they're going to install 220v chargers if it helps lure people in. Eventually, it will be expected - just like the bike fix-up station.
Schoedel be fixed, for right now if you were at one of the big auto companies and you find out that 30% of customers* can’t buy an electric car because of these issues… what does that do to your interest in selling electric cars?
If I could buy something equivalent to my current car that was electric, I’d be happy to. But I would definitely have to figure out the charging situation. And that could easily turn into a mess. That mass, plus premium price, plus possibly limited availability may make it easier for me to just buy another gas car for now.
I expect there is going to be a bit of a chicken and egg problem during the evolution of car charging infrastructure.
For example, if electric cars become popular we will need tons of public charging stations, but nobody will be willing to build charging stations unless there are already a lot of electric car owners to use them.
The early adopters of electric cars are going to have to deal with a lot of overcrowding at charging stations, unless they are homeowners and can charge in their garages.
All that aside, there is still the issue of price. I paid $21k for a new Prius C that gets 45-50 mpg. A new Chevy Bolt costs about $29k in California after tax credits as far as I can tell, and that does not include the cost of an in-home charger. That $8k difference would cover years of gas purchases for the Prius -- I've had it for 5 years and I've been spending about $35 for a tank every 3 weeks.
At some point this is going to become the limiting factor for EV adoption, but I don't think we're there yet. The market's small enough that single-family homeowners can sustain it.
BTW, depending on where you live, you may be able to have a charging station installed (at your expense). In Hawaii, condo associations must allow the installation of charging stations. Less useful for apartment renters, but possibly still an option. You can read stories on Tesla forums of renters who convinced their apartment owners to spring for a bank of charging spots, though it's an effort.
And there are people who make it work without home charging. I did that for a year before I got my own charging station installed, but for anyone who puts serious miles on their car, it's a nightmare--a green version of Mad Max--hunting for an opening in one of the few public spots. Wouldn't recommend it.
Notice a pattern? All of the safest cars (including the handful in which nobody died) are large. Mostly SUVs and pickups, with a few luxury sedans thrown in. All of the least safe cars are small. Many of them are tiny.
Incidentally, electric cars tend to be very safe for their size because the battery makes them weigh more. I'm all for that-- I'm just saying that Americans' love of large cars isn't entirely irrational. Some very unlucky Ford Fiesta drivers would still be alive if they'd been behind the wheel of a Jeep Cherokee.
Are larger cars increasing safety overall, or are they just "winning" in crashes v.s. smaller vehicles? Would the driver of the Ford Fiesta still be alive if he'd crashed into another Fiesta instead of a Jeep Cherokee?
Most likely they’re just killing people in smaller cars, deaths from car crashes are higher in the US compared to other developed countries after all. Americans seem to enjoy a good arms race.
Part of that is that in multi -vehicle accidents bigger cars do more damage to small ones because they have more mass. So the bigger car is definitely safer for its occupants, but not necessarily better overall.
Pedestrian vs SUV bull bars turned out to be so grim for the pedestrians that they've been banned in Europe. The occupant safety statistics only tell part of the story.
> but why not a standard looking body instead of some weird buggy space-age thing?
I think they're still counting on the signaling. It's said that the Prius was bought by so many in large part because it looked so goofy, in that it didn't look like anything else, so everybody knew it was a Prius, which by proxy meant that you were driving green.
Tesla shook that up, but styling still remains something withheld for the maximum dollars. There are very few stylish cars at cheaper price points because they know that despite whatever features are there, people shop with their eyes predominately.
If they happen to land on a design that's too fetching for the price point they're targeting, it seems likely that they'd uglify it somewhat and withhold the better design for a more expensive vehicle that they may or may not plan to make.
Tesla has the ability to make "normal"-looking cars because the brand itself signals the owner is environmentally-conscious. The "traditional" automakers could probably get away with the same thing if they had exclusively-electric sub-brands (GM should bring back Saturn as an EV-exclusive brand, IMO).
The Gen-1 Prius didn't look much different from any other "used bar of soap" compact that Toyota made. The Gen-2 did have a unique body style, but I put that down to aero requirements to hit fuel economy targets.
I drive a 2004 Prius and my friend recently bought a 2000 Insight.
The Insight is pretty much strictly a commuter car: it's laughably tiny, like a roadster without any power. But it's really fun, and gets outrageously good fuel economy despite how crude the hybrid system is relative to Toyota's.
The Prius on the other hand is an everyday vehicle that's spacious inside and small on the outside. Far better suited to be the only car someone owns.
the ugliness is intentional, and i think this was even acknowledge by bmw execs to an extent. the margins on EV are comparitively very low, the (battery) supply chain is fragile. less profit + production headaches = don't make the product any more appealing than it needs to be
Because battery technology isn't where it needs to be yet, where Tesla is absolutely winning when it comes to this. Honda released their plug in Honda Clarity, but it only has a range of 89 miles.
This simply isn't true - the Chevrolet Bolt has an EPA-estimate 238 mile range, with many reviewers getting close to 300. Pretty much what you get in a base Model 3. What's more you can actually walk into a dealership and buy a Bolt today, good luck trying that with a Model 3. It also costs almost 15 grand less than the cheapest Model 3 Tesla is currently shipping, given they still don't have a release date for the mythical 35k mass market version.
Batteries are increasingly just a commodity, and will become more so as the rest of the industry ramps up electric car production.
There are a lot of automotive buying decisions where you can save $15k by purchasing a smaller, slower, uglier car. It’s not a choice people always make.
Couldn't agree more. It's also not the point I'm making.
Parent comment used the example of the 89 mile range Honda Clarity as evidence you don't get competitive battery range on non-Tesla cars. This is demonstrably not true.
> you don't get competitive battery range on non-Tesla cars. This is demonstrably not true.
While the Bolt is a nice car with good range, it is not range competitive with the Telsa LR model 3. I have been evaluating this in the context of driving from San Francisco to Portland. This is a practical drive in the Model 3, but not even close in the Bolt.
Chevvy sell the Bolt at an $8k loss, due to the battery. Nonetheless I'd love to have a Bolt, but I live in the UK and they aren't bothering to produce a RHD version.
Honda released their plug in Honda Clarity, but it only has a range of 89 miles.
Oh, c'mon, you're going to use a car I can't even find a price on for comparison? Honda wants a zip code to determine if I'm even privileged enough to buy one.
Compare to a Chevy Bolt, as the sibling commenter mentions. The range might come up slightly short, but then go compare the price tags (and for bonus points, when you can get one). If Chevy wanted to bump the price, I think they could easily match Tesla's range.
One of the design constraint comes from the size of batteries. This is the battery for a Toyota Camry hybrid, a car with very limited electric range : https://images.hgmsites.net/med/toyota-camry-hybrid-battery-... Imagine the size required for Prius batteries or other electric cars! They just didn't come up one day with the idea of selling ugly cars
Most of the ugliness in electric vehicles is not in their bulk/shape, but in the unnecessary and ugly flairs that manufacturers put all over them. Just freaking remove that crap.
As for batteries, why can't they just make it wider and flatter and put it at the bottom, like tesla?
That’s significantly smaller than a gass tank. Picture 3+ 5 gallon water containers as they hold 15+ gallons. You are also removing the engine and exhaust system. Look just look at a muffler some time they are huge.
Go a little further and remove the axle and giant transmission and suddenly you have a lot of space under a car.
I just had the traction battery in my Gen 2 Prius replaced. It's not really any larger than what's in the Camry. There was a hack for the Gen 2 Prius that allowed EV only operation, and the maximum distance on that was less than 10 miles. Unless you're looking at one of the new plug-in Prius implementations, the batteries they use aren't really all that large.
> Why don't any other car companies offer a 'standard' mid size or compact sedan that's fully electric?
Given that Ford is largely abandoning sedans, it would seem that they're not particularly popular anymore. The Leaf and Bolt aren't all that weird looking for hatchbacks. Original Leaf had some weird-ish features (like the headlights), but mostly had a similar profile to the Nissan Versa hatchback. The new 2018 model is very ordinary looking. The Chevy Bolt has a pretty similar shape to the Chevy Spark.
It's not a very sexy shape, but it's a practical one.
Tangential question: why do people prefer sedans over hatchbacks?
Hatchbacks seem a lot more practical than sedans with no obvious downside. I can see people preferring the looks of one or the other, but neither is objectively prettier.
I was going to say you’re wrong, but apparently in the US you’re right! Very strange.
I think that is a US-specific thing.
For some reason US customers prefer sedans (maybe some of the reasons given by other commenters) and that has probably skewed the market a bit (e.g. hatchbacks are only sold at higher trim levels since they’re marketed as a niche product).
Edit to add: and maybe there’s a feedback effect too? Hatchbacks are more expensive because they’re less popular, so then they’re less popular because they’re more expensive.
I think you're right about the feedback effect. Imagine the tooling needed to make all the parts, and then spreading that tooling cost across either 10x vehicles or 30x vehicles. Lower-volume vehicles are more expensive, all things equal.
Sedans are a bit easier to cool/warm due to less air volume. The trunk also feels more secure for storage of valuables than leaving them exposed in a glass hatchback’s rear. Style and price also play into it I think but even cheap hatchbacks like the Ford Fiesta don’t sell that well in the US.
In general people looking for a practical car in the US are often buying a crossover, SUV, or pickup truck.
Hmm, those are interesting points, although it seems like both can be addressed with a simple cover over the trunk.
I think you’re right that SUVs and crossovers are taking over, from both sedans and traditional hatchbacks.
It must just be fashion, as SUVs don’t have any real advantage -- most people never do any off-roading or haul large sports equipment, and most “SUVs” wouldn’t be up to the job anyway.
SUVs sit up higher. This makes them easier to get into and out of.
SUVs are basically hatchbacks. I currently own a hatchback (GTI) and our old SUV was easier to get into and out of. The GTI is more fun to drive though.
Is a "3" a Tesla Model 3, or something else? I recently saw someone refer to this vehicle as an "M3", which was pretty confusing given the BMW vehicle that goes by this name.
I realize this thread is about Teslas, but still folks are referring to non-Teslas here as well.
Yes, sorry, it's the Tesla version. I was trying to be more clear, not less clear. I have owned an actual M3 and I hate people calling Mazdas and Teslas "M3"s. I was tossing around the idea of making "T3" a thing, though, as I don't think it'll confuse others in the car world.
or "TM3"? There could conceivably be other Tesla models with 3 in the name, like versions of the Roadster or X (though we'll be in real naming trouble if Tesla releases an "X3"!)
On the rational side (in addition to aesthetics, preference, etc.). There's also aesthetics and probably a general feel that a sedan is a more serious adult car.)
Some people prefer a separate locked trunk.
In addition, small hatchbacks often tend to be designed as 2-seaters with a vestigal back seat as a way to maximize the use of the hatchback for cargo. As you get bigger you get something more like an Outback wagon or (increasingly) a crossover of some sort.
I believe that only applies to the North American market. It's still possible that they'll make sedans for Europe. It's also possible that they'll continue to make sedans but jack them up and call them crossovers.
It's "affordable" at $30k, but it has 1/2 the range of the Model 3 at around 130 miles, which I think tells you a lot. This technology is still at a price point where you need to make significant trade-offs between range and price. A new Honda Civic is something like $20k by comparison, and without the range anxiety.
Still, I see a lot more of the these Hyundai Ioniqs here in Amsterdam after they were released, particularly as workhorse vehicles like local taxis. Part of that's government incentives to use electric vehicles, European customers having lower range requirements, and that gas is still practically given away for free in the US compared to what it costs in the EU.
> At least in the US, the only two cars I can think of (besides the Model 3, which is hard to come by) that move the needle at all are the Nissan Leaf and Chevy Bolt, both of which look... not great.
Yeah, Nissan LEAF and Chevy Bolt might not look great but they are far more affordable. With heavy federal and state incentives (and sometime as much as $10k incentives from local utility companies), you are talking about half or even as little as a third of the Model 3 MSRP. [1][2]
There's still the Golf GT-E which looks pretty sweet, shared platform with the Audi e-tron. Finally a mainstream plug in hybrid with good performance. Now, about the price...
Each to their own, however the Leaf looks good in its 2018 refresh, the earlier model was a design abomination but some people bought them.
In Europe with tighter roads and enough charging stations springing up the new Leaf is looking more desirable than the Model 3. The range has increased on the Leaf for 2018 and with the growing infrastructure in charging I am not sure everyone needs the increased range of the 3.
Nissan have earned their spurs in EV, as have Tesla obviously. I would be happy buying from them due to their innovation and design effort. I would not buy an electric VW Golf or even an electric Smart Car as that ground up engineering hasn't been done, it is a mere retro-fit of an existing fossil-burner.
I think the fossil-burner marques that thought they could just put some batteries in the back seat and rip out the ICE did so for regulatory lip-service reasons, a bit like how Aston Martin came out with a re-badged Toyota iQ so that the average fuel consumption figures across their fleet could be lowered. Clearly it is not in the Aston Martin DNA to make a car that is vaguely safe outside school gates. Neither has it been in the DNA of the Big Three or the German auto companies to want to do electric power properly.
I don't know what the Chevy Bolt is there for, however I think the Nissan Leaf has grown into something that suits the European market really well. Teslas are a bit too land-yacht sized for Europe plus European buyers have different standards when it comes to panel fit. Even the 'autopilot' is ridiculous in European markets where there are 'roads and motorways' not 'highways, surface roads and the interstate'. The ludicrous mode is nice to have but the novelty has worn off. The Leaf is quicker on the 0-60 times than the Nissan Qashqai and able to compete at the lights with pimped fossil burners, that is enough, there is no need for it to trounce passing Ferraris.
The BMW i3 fits a niche in London as it is compact enough to actually park. People can sneak into EV only parking spots and avoid congestion charges. There are people able to pay the premium for these benefits, they are not necessarily wanting to go green, just have private transport and be able to park it.
Tesla are working their way down from the top of the market and it could be a while before they create an 'econobox'. Realistically there is a good chance that the car you want comes from elsewhere, e.g. China, and that it has new technology such as a much smaller battery coupled to a supercapacitor for regen/city economy. Waiting for the fossil burning marques to produce something is a waste of time, EV is not in their DNA.
I believe it's for the exact same reason other Big Companies are incapable of delivering anything "exciting":
1. Soulless design-by-committee.
2. Complex internal politics - "Cool idea you have there with the Prius, but I don't want to see it become too successful and eat into the sales of the Corolla. We need to sell 200k Corollas or I don't get my bonus".
3. The "proven" technique of having focus groups with a diverse crowd of aged-35+ white suburban soccer moms tell you what features they value in a car the most.
That, but also the aim to serve the mass market rather than the 1%, and therefore the need to produce a car that is profitable when sold for 25k rather than 65k.
Probably has to look buggy to keep it compact with sufficient headroom. I’m 6’5” and still have 2” headroom in my Leaf, which is awesome considering it is a compact car. I can also put the seat all the way back and fit an adult behind me. Can’t do that in a Prius or Volt due to their sleekness. I have not been in a Tesla, but I’m guessing the 3 has poor headroom compared to the Leaf.
At least in the US, the only two cars I can think of (besides the Model 3, which is hard to come by) that move the needle at all are the Nissan Leaf and Chevy Bolt, both of which look... not great.
Why don't any other car companies offer a 'standard' mid size or compact sedan that's fully electric? Just take an existing decent car like a Toyota Corolla, Honda Civic, etc. and redesign it electric? I know it's a different drivetrain/architecture, but why not a standard looking body instead of some weird buggy space-age thing?
reply