John's Stuff - Personal Log 1302

November 29, 2024 - December 10, 2024

Last Updated: Weds. 6/25/2025

12-10-2024 Concern & Confidence. Sometimes, it's nice having full context rather than just the question. This was the entire post: "My wife and I were looking at the BZ4X limited this evening and my main concern is RANGE and charging times. We looked at some Chevy EVs and they have an adapter for $225 that allows use of Tesla Supercharges (so they say). I have yet to 100% confirm that. Does the BZ4X have an adapter for Tesla charging stations? What are you thoughts on charging and what type of range are you getting on a full charge. The salesman told us we would be lucky to get 200 miles." I see that as lack of confidence in our infrastructure, current state of DC fast-chargers available for road trips. Not being concerned about the technology anymore for some is a big step forward. Woohoo! Progress is slow, but eventually you see signs of success. Anywho, this was my reply to that:

EVs in general are currently a challenge for long range trips simply due to there being so few locations, that's where charge speed comes in handy. In the future, it will be more about being able to charge where you want to stop. Extra time becomes less important then.

Anywho for a bZ4X, it works fine for the shorter trips... like the weekend escape to the cabin. When you just need to charge once somewhere along the way or not even plug in until you get to your destination, no big deal. Nice part is, bZ4X overall efficiency is quite good for a SUV with high ground-clearance. You'll save a little when it comes to total electricity consumption compared to others in the same class.

With regard to being 200 miles, that's very easy in the summer. I average about 3.8 mi/kWh then with my AWD, despite the occasional trip carrying a bike on back. That delivers 245 miles.
Winter in any EV will drop range by about a third. bZ4X estimated 225-mile range turns into about 150 miles during the worst of winter for me in Minnesota.

12-08-2024 Math Issues. I called out some numbers that simply didn't add up. With this title, it is unacceptable for the leading data for the article to be question and not addressed: "Chevrolet Equinox EV: How Much Does It Cost To Charge It?" This was the first example provided: "...with an average rate of 11.93 cents/kWh, a 10-80% charge for an Equinox EV would cost $7.10" There have been many problems over the years with actual & usable battery capacities being mixed up. That's fine initially from reporters doing reviews, but from a supposed journalist later... absolutely not. The article should be well researched and an effort made to be very clear. So, I drew attention to the math issues. 3 days later, not a peep. When challenged numbers get ignored, that's evidence rhetoric feeding. I suspect more is to come. Detail is the enemy of propaganda. Anywho, this was the latest nonsense:

Unless Equinox EV has no buffer whatsoever, that math is wrong or is actual capacity in the 90's?

$7.10 / $0.1193 = 59.5 kWh

59.5 / 70% = 85 kWh usable?

Also, 31 kWh/100mi (EPA rating for FWD Equinox EV) is 3.23 mi/kWh. Assuming 100% = 85 kWh means a range of 274.6 miles. Assuming 100% = 319 miles of range (EPA rating for FWD Equinox EV) at 3.23 mi/kWh is 98.8 kWh. I found a claim of 93.6 kWh, but to get 319 miles efficiency would have to be 3.41 mi/kWh. So, something is amiss.
The reason for the question is how such low pack voltage came about. 288 volts total makes it slower for DC charging when amps from the station are low.

12-05-2024
Cold Weather Report. His trip report had a starting expectation of 256 miles. That was the distance needed to travel and the assumption was it being realistic. I'm not sure why. Speed alone drops range. We are starting to reach consumers who have no idea how their vehicle actually works though. That same type of audience expansion happened with hybrids too. Enthusiasts are understanding & forgiving. So even when they make an incorrect assumption, they accept it as their own mistake. We're at the tipping point where that can instead turn into upset & anger. Fortunately, this owner was just annoyed by his close call and scramble to find a charger along the way. His recognized the influence of cold weather. It was an information report of his trip. So, I provided advice to consider the next time: mi/kWh is what you should be basing expectations on. After all, that is the value trip-planners like ABRP depend upon. Even better is a live feed, so the estimate leverages data while the trip is taking place rather than prior drive history. Regardless, it gets easy once you start doing that. I live in Minnesota. Seeing over 4 mi/kWh all summer long is now just a distant memory. Drives on the highway with temperatures below freezing, I expect to get 2.7 mi/kWh. That means I'm able to squeeze out 175 miles. Higher mi/kWh will deliver more and lower would be less. Knowing that makes what to expect realistic. In short, don't focus on miles memories past. Focus on mi/kWh at the moment of travel.

12-02-2024
Bashing. It's nice to see some speak out against the status quo, using Toyota as a scapegoat. I suspect some of that comes from seeing Tesla fall from its throne. Too many for too long have simply looked upon Tesla as what others should imitate. The very idea of anyone ever wanting something different was looked upon as anti-EV. That's absurd. But then again, enthusiasts aren't known for critical thinking. I joined into the emerging opinion that less-than-perfect perspective, which allows discussion of Toyota rather than their usual "vastly superior" nonsense: Bashing comes from those who have different priorities. They turn a blind-eye to how well refined the EV system is by criticizing the battery... knowing it is only a matter of time before they lose that advantage. Toyota is supposed to be desperately behind, unable to survive. Seeing they will be appealing & competitive within the next few years means challenging sales for those who neglected some traits mainstream consumers will find important. Look at the rework legacy automakers & Tesla are doing to address that audience shift Toyota has always been focused on.

12-02-2024
Regen Limited. When people see a message, they tend to over-react. I've seen it for decades. An indicator light or color change sends them into a panic. Assuming something is wrong when their is an unexpected behavior is quite normal. It's a pain to deal with though. So many not taking the time to have a moment of critical thinking ends up cluttering online venues. It's what ultimately ends up turning off lots of lurkers. They just don't feel there's any benefit from participating when so little is actually accomplished. That's why I'm thankful for some of the smaller private groups. They cut through the noise easier. Sometimes, you just have to deal with it though. Today, it was the limited regen experienced when winter arrives. Responding to something very concerned from what they had witnessed, I provided: It is a FYI message, not an error. The system is designed to operate cold, rather than consuming energy to heat the battery. That's why there is a big draw prior to charging when you plug in, since that is when the battery-heater runs. For AC, it only runs enough to keep the battery above freezing. For DC, it will raise temperature to the happy zone... around room temperature.

12-01-2024
Electric Heaters. I got a "cool, thanks for that info" when I pointed out Solterra used a heat-pump rather than a resistance-heater. Focus on consumption is a big deal, now that temperatures have dropped. This was my insight into the discussion of heater type influence: Not as much anymore. It served as a wake-up call back in the days when Volt supposedly reigned superior. Finding out Prius Prime delivered better winter efficiency messed up rhetoric messaging. Thankfully, by the time Tesla caught up to Toyota, many had already swallowed their pride. We'll see the same play out with Solterra/bZ4X when the new platform debuts. The more efficient inverter will be standard by then, upgraded to use SiC (silicon carbide) for improved efficiency. Every component makes a difference, but their influence is often overlooked.

12-01-2024 Range Information. This is what caught my attention, kicking off the new month with a seasonal question: "I'm only getting 183 mile range on 100% charge since the weather got cooler. I'm in Georgia so not freezing. Is that the reason it has dropped from 228 range??" Focus on miles, rather than efficiency, is the same old problem I have been dealing with for decades. The topic can serve as an effective means of drawing in newbies, stirring their curiosity. I gave it a shot with this one:

Good critical thinking, but the answer to that question really won't tell you anything useful.

Think about what "miles" means to anyone else owning or interested in an EV. Battery sizes vary. Driving styles vary. Temperature & Seasons vary. When on a road trip, depending upon a range value will get you in trouble. Mostly highway miles will be lower than your routine daily driving. That's why trip-planners use "miles/kWh" instead.

For some perspective, last night we did a 45-mile round-trip with the temperature at 13°F on the way there and 10°F on the drive back, most of the miles were between 60 & 65 mph. We also ran the heater remotely so the vehicle would be warm by the time we got back to it after the show. The overall result was 2.7 miles/kWh. That's far lower than the daily commute I had enjoyed just 2 months ago, but perfectly fine for a drive in those circumstances.
In short, start watching "miles/kWh". You'll quickly see how it associates with efficiency influencing factors, like speed & temperature. It's useful insight about how an EV operates.

11-30-2024
Electrification Distractions. I get really tired of having to read nonsense like this: "Sorry to disappoint you. I use FSD every day, hands free. It has driven me everywhere I asked it to go. On road trips, all over the US, it maps the route, finds superchargers and even free overnight chargers along the way. It expertly handles difficult situations on freeways, country roads and city streets. It avoids obstacles, even avoided a wild turkey flying across my windshield. I've been using it for 3 years..." Tesla has wasted a massive amount of resources on FSD, yet another source of income not directly related to the electrification of vehicles, but such a double-standard is ok. Ugh. Problem is, even if people are willing to spend money on it, the technology still has serious shortcomings. I responded to that by asking: Tell us about road awareness, a very common issue all throughout the winter. How does FSD assess how slippery a road is? For humans, we gain knowledge of current traction conditions based on our walk to the vehicle. That heightens our awareness, informing us to be alert when approaching possible locations where it could be slippery before we even attempt to drive. How can FSD provide quick travel for when it's safe to do so and make accurate predictions of when to use caution without irritating the driver by reacting with it didn't actually need to? Proactive is much more difficult to provide satisfying behavior for than reactive. That software is far more complex that rose-colored reports ever address.

11-30-2024 VW Redesigns. Major rework is coming for ID.3 and ID.4 in 2026, stated as a "completely new design language" by VW. Enthusiasts have struggled all along. VW had a variety of problems initially, the kind of trouble Toyota was able to avoid from having so much experience with their hybrids... a benefit most EV purists denied was possible. Anywho, this was the complaint I homed in out from comments posted about this news: "VW is constantly publicly telling the world about its design flaws and then promising a future where they’re fixed. Meanwhile what happens to the current product dealers are trying to sell?" It was an invitation to provide a view for the market most enthusiasts simply never see:

Some of that might be perception of early-adopters. There will always be promotion of what's coming next. Automakers are quite aware of the Osborne Effect, but they need to convey a sense of on-going improvement. Dealers, as well as consumers, want to know there is continued investment in the new tech.

Master of that is Toyota. They know their audience and thrive with the continuous improvement messaging. Those who like the current generation will purchase it. Those who desire better, simply wait. That's why gen-1 of Prius was fine only appealing to a limited audience, as does gen-1 of bZ4X. Being used to collect real-world data for adapting gen-2 to appeal to a much wider audience is a sensible approach, though it frustrates enthusiasts to no end. History shows us that worked remarkably well for Prius. Despite not having tax-credits available, sales were competitive with ICE. Isn't that the goal for VW with their gen-2 offerings too?
For us, that's where perspective comes it with regard to design "flaws". There will always be shortcomings. Engineering involves a lot of tradeoff decisions. It is the reason why multiple models & packages are offered by automakers. When that selection is limited to a debut vehicle, like only ID.4 in the United States, of course there will be some who don't see their requirements fulfilled. Patience is a virtue.

11-29-2024
High Expectations. I always want to know more. Rarely do I get any type of constructive feedback though. Most replies are extremely vague. They want "more" & "faster" but fail to provide any quantification. That tends to indicate a purchase based on assumption... as this appears to be: "I chose Toyota because of their quality and resale value, and I've owned quite a few Toyotas over the years. But I am seriously disappointed in the range of the bZ4x and slow charging." That is exactly why gen-1 releases from Toyota are limited volume. It makes no sense skipping the opportunity to learn & improve. Why not capitalize on feedback from early-adopters to make a mass-market rollout right from the start... you know, figure out what loyal consumers who make purchases based on assumption will truly be happy with. I encounter a lot of buyer's remorse from those who have high expectations that were never realistic. In fact, there is usually a comment in such a discussion asking "didn't you research?" before buying. Since most people don't have any idea what to research, that's not a constructive question. Know your audience. Anywho, I make efforts to do exactly that by asking: Being seriously disappointed means you had high expectations. What were they? I'm curious since the entire market is a moving target. Once a ceiling is hit, some move on and others cling to all they know. Target is already well into efficiency and reliability refinement, as well as longevity. We know that better battery chemistries are on the way, which will address range and charging speed. That basically puts Toyota on par, if not a little ahead, with respect to where the market will be in a few years. In other words, expectations will be changing... hence my inquiry for the here & now.

11-29-2024 Impossible, 3 weeks later. I waited to add commentary more to the "Toyota Calls California EV Rules 'Impossible' " article. It's quite telling how deep the denial is at this point. There was EV struggle prior to the election. Now with the threat of subsidy help, the situation for each automaker is going to get ugly. Pressure is growing from China too. I'm grateful Toyota stayed true to their enough to phaseout traditional vehicles. How legacy automakers will move their customer-base forward remains a huge mystery. In the meantime, there's that 35% requirement for the 2026 model year none have wanted to discuss. I pushed on that topic again with:

3 weeks later, this discussion has become a great example of how people turn a blind-eye to what they don't want to address. No one was able to provide an explanation of how other legacy automakers will achieve what Toyota deemed impossible. How will they deliver on a requirement of 35% for the 2026 model year?

Instead of addressing the topic of this article, they accepted click-bait and fed a narrative attempting to vilify Toyota. Reality is, the others will struggle to deliver any sizeable amount of EV sales... even selling them at a loss... which should have been a big clue. If they don't deliver enough, they will be fined.

43% of Tesla's profit (based on their Q3 earning report for this year) stated earning $2.1 Billion from selling carbon credits. In other words, Toyota is trying to draw attention to the shell game legacy automakers are playing. They give an impression of striving to deliver, but they really don't.

Ford sold 137,350 vehicles in California last year. 35% is 48,072 vehicles. Chevy sold 118,952. 35% of that is 41,633. Honda's embrace of rebranding becomes apparent when consider their numbers... 172,834 sold last year. 35% is 60,492. That's just in California alone. Think about the other states who adopted those same EV rules. It also explains Nissan's panic from 66,982. It means a requirement of 23,444. What about Kia's outlook, 35% of their 83,512 is 29,229. And Hyundai at 63,183 comes to 22,114.

Long story short, it becomes obvious why Toyota has been investing heavily in battery-production that will favor PHEV. Credits generated from those sales would be better served than giving money to Tesla. At 278,345 for Toyota and 56,706 for Lexus, that's a massive presence in California. It is why the Lexus brand is targeted for 100% by 2030 and the platform bZ4X will be getting a redesign. It also serves as proof Toyota is taking the situation seriously, having focused on EV operation itself rather than making range & charging a top priority.
Think about how close the 2026 model year actually is. Think about how many legacy automakers will choose to purchase carbon credits rather than take on major risk & debt to deliver 35%. Think about where Toyota will be in a few years, knowing how much is really taking place behind the scenes to make profitable high-volume sales realistic. Then, think about how many of those PHEV sales will build loyalty, enabling the rest of each household to purchase a BEV.

12-10-2024	Concern & Confidence. Sometimes, it's nice having full context rather than just the question. This was the entire post: "My wife and I were looking at the BZ4X limited this evening and my main concern is RANGE and charging times. We looked at some Chevy EVs and they have an adapter for $225 that allows use of Tesla Supercharges (so they say). I have yet to 100% confirm that. Does the BZ4X have an adapter for Tesla charging stations? What are you thoughts on charging and what type of range are you getting on a full charge. The salesman told us we would be lucky to get 200 miles." I see that as lack of confidence in our infrastructure, current state of DC fast-chargers available for road trips. Not being concerned about the technology anymore for some is a big step forward. Woohoo! Progress is slow, but eventually you see signs of success. Anywho, this was my reply to that: EVs in general are currently a challenge for long range trips simply due to there being so few locations, that's where charge speed comes in handy. In the future, it will be more about being able to charge where you want to stop. Extra time becomes less important then. Anywho for a bZ4X, it works fine for the shorter trips... like the weekend escape to the cabin. When you just need to charge once somewhere along the way or not even plug in until you get to your destination, no big deal. Nice part is, bZ4X overall efficiency is quite good for a SUV with high ground-clearance. You'll save a little when it comes to total electricity consumption compared to others in the same class. With regard to being 200 miles, that's very easy in the summer. I average about 3.8 mi/kWh then with my AWD, despite the occasional trip carrying a bike on back. That delivers 245 miles. Winter in any EV will drop range by about a third. bZ4X estimated 225-mile range turns into about 150 miles during the worst of winter for me in Minnesota.
12-08-2024	Math Issues. I called out some numbers that simply didn't add up. With this title, it is unacceptable for the leading data for the article to be question and not addressed: "Chevrolet Equinox EV: How Much Does It Cost To Charge It?" This was the first example provided: "...with an average rate of 11.93 cents/kWh, a 10-80% charge for an Equinox EV would cost $7.10" There have been many problems over the years with actual & usable battery capacities being mixed up. That's fine initially from reporters doing reviews, but from a supposed journalist later... absolutely not. The article should be well researched and an effort made to be very clear. So, I drew attention to the math issues. 3 days later, not a peep. When challenged numbers get ignored, that's evidence rhetoric feeding. I suspect more is to come. Detail is the enemy of propaganda. Anywho, this was the latest nonsense: Unless Equinox EV has no buffer whatsoever, that math is wrong or is actual capacity in the 90's? $7.10 / $0.1193 = 59.5 kWh 59.5 / 70% = 85 kWh usable? Also, 31 kWh/100mi (EPA rating for FWD Equinox EV) is 3.23 mi/kWh. Assuming 100% = 85 kWh means a range of 274.6 miles. Assuming 100% = 319 miles of range (EPA rating for FWD Equinox EV) at 3.23 mi/kWh is 98.8 kWh. I found a claim of 93.6 kWh, but to get 319 miles efficiency would have to be 3.41 mi/kWh. So, something is amiss. The reason for the question is how such low pack voltage came about. 288 volts total makes it slower for DC charging when amps from the station are low.
12-05-2024	Cold Weather Report. His trip report had a starting expectation of 256 miles. That was the distance needed to travel and the assumption was it being realistic. I'm not sure why. Speed alone drops range. We are starting to reach consumers who have no idea how their vehicle actually works though. That same type of audience expansion happened with hybrids too. Enthusiasts are understanding & forgiving. So even when they make an incorrect assumption, they accept it as their own mistake. We're at the tipping point where that can instead turn into upset & anger. Fortunately, this owner was just annoyed by his close call and scramble to find a charger along the way. His recognized the influence of cold weather. It was an information report of his trip. So, I provided advice to consider the next time: mi/kWh is what you should be basing expectations on. After all, that is the value trip-planners like ABRP depend upon. Even better is a live feed, so the estimate leverages data while the trip is taking place rather than prior drive history. Regardless, it gets easy once you start doing that. I live in Minnesota. Seeing over 4 mi/kWh all summer long is now just a distant memory. Drives on the highway with temperatures below freezing, I expect to get 2.7 mi/kWh. That means I'm able to squeeze out 175 miles. Higher mi/kWh will deliver more and lower would be less. Knowing that makes what to expect realistic. In short, don't focus on miles memories past. Focus on mi/kWh at the moment of travel.
12-02-2024	Bashing. It's nice to see some speak out against the status quo, using Toyota as a scapegoat. I suspect some of that comes from seeing Tesla fall from its throne. Too many for too long have simply looked upon Tesla as what others should imitate. The very idea of anyone ever wanting something different was looked upon as anti-EV. That's absurd. But then again, enthusiasts aren't known for critical thinking. I joined into the emerging opinion that less-than-perfect perspective, which allows discussion of Toyota rather than their usual "vastly superior" nonsense: Bashing comes from those who have different priorities. They turn a blind-eye to how well refined the EV system is by criticizing the battery... knowing it is only a matter of time before they lose that advantage. Toyota is supposed to be desperately behind, unable to survive. Seeing they will be appealing & competitive within the next few years means challenging sales for those who neglected some traits mainstream consumers will find important. Look at the rework legacy automakers & Tesla are doing to address that audience shift Toyota has always been focused on.
12-02-2024	Regen Limited. When people see a message, they tend to over-react. I've seen it for decades. An indicator light or color change sends them into a panic. Assuming something is wrong when their is an unexpected behavior is quite normal. It's a pain to deal with though. So many not taking the time to have a moment of critical thinking ends up cluttering online venues. It's what ultimately ends up turning off lots of lurkers. They just don't feel there's any benefit from participating when so little is actually accomplished. That's why I'm thankful for some of the smaller private groups. They cut through the noise easier. Sometimes, you just have to deal with it though. Today, it was the limited regen experienced when winter arrives. Responding to something very concerned from what they had witnessed, I provided: It is a FYI message, not an error. The system is designed to operate cold, rather than consuming energy to heat the battery. That's why there is a big draw prior to charging when you plug in, since that is when the battery-heater runs. For AC, it only runs enough to keep the battery above freezing. For DC, it will raise temperature to the happy zone... around room temperature.
12-01-2024	Electric Heaters. I got a "cool, thanks for that info" when I pointed out Solterra used a heat-pump rather than a resistance-heater. Focus on consumption is a big deal, now that temperatures have dropped. This was my insight into the discussion of heater type influence: Not as much anymore. It served as a wake-up call back in the days when Volt supposedly reigned superior. Finding out Prius Prime delivered better winter efficiency messed up rhetoric messaging. Thankfully, by the time Tesla caught up to Toyota, many had already swallowed their pride. We'll see the same play out with Solterra/bZ4X when the new platform debuts. The more efficient inverter will be standard by then, upgraded to use SiC (silicon carbide) for improved efficiency. Every component makes a difference, but their influence is often overlooked.
12-01-2024	Range Information. This is what caught my attention, kicking off the new month with a seasonal question: "I'm only getting 183 mile range on 100% charge since the weather got cooler. I'm in Georgia so not freezing. Is that the reason it has dropped from 228 range??" Focus on miles, rather than efficiency, is the same old problem I have been dealing with for decades. The topic can serve as an effective means of drawing in newbies, stirring their curiosity. I gave it a shot with this one: Good critical thinking, but the answer to that question really won't tell you anything useful. Think about what "miles" means to anyone else owning or interested in an EV. Battery sizes vary. Driving styles vary. Temperature & Seasons vary. When on a road trip, depending upon a range value will get you in trouble. Mostly highway miles will be lower than your routine daily driving. That's why trip-planners use "miles/kWh" instead. For some perspective, last night we did a 45-mile round-trip with the temperature at 13°F on the way there and 10°F on the drive back, most of the miles were between 60 & 65 mph. We also ran the heater remotely so the vehicle would be warm by the time we got back to it after the show. The overall result was 2.7 miles/kWh. That's far lower than the daily commute I had enjoyed just 2 months ago, but perfectly fine for a drive in those circumstances. In short, start watching "miles/kWh". You'll quickly see how it associates with efficiency influencing factors, like speed & temperature. It's useful insight about how an EV operates.
11-30-2024	Electrification Distractions. I get really tired of having to read nonsense like this: "Sorry to disappoint you. I use FSD every day, hands free. It has driven me everywhere I asked it to go. On road trips, all over the US, it maps the route, finds superchargers and even free overnight chargers along the way. It expertly handles difficult situations on freeways, country roads and city streets. It avoids obstacles, even avoided a wild turkey flying across my windshield. I've been using it for 3 years..." Tesla has wasted a massive amount of resources on FSD, yet another source of income not directly related to the electrification of vehicles, but such a double-standard is ok. Ugh. Problem is, even if people are willing to spend money on it, the technology still has serious shortcomings. I responded to that by asking: Tell us about road awareness, a very common issue all throughout the winter. How does FSD assess how slippery a road is? For humans, we gain knowledge of current traction conditions based on our walk to the vehicle. That heightens our awareness, informing us to be alert when approaching possible locations where it could be slippery before we even attempt to drive. How can FSD provide quick travel for when it's safe to do so and make accurate predictions of when to use caution without irritating the driver by reacting with it didn't actually need to? Proactive is much more difficult to provide satisfying behavior for than reactive. That software is far more complex that rose-colored reports ever address.
11-30-2024	VW Redesigns. Major rework is coming for ID.3 and ID.4 in 2026, stated as a "completely new design language" by VW. Enthusiasts have struggled all along. VW had a variety of problems initially, the kind of trouble Toyota was able to avoid from having so much experience with their hybrids... a benefit most EV purists denied was possible. Anywho, this was the complaint I homed in out from comments posted about this news: "VW is constantly publicly telling the world about its design flaws and then promising a future where they’re fixed. Meanwhile what happens to the current product dealers are trying to sell?" It was an invitation to provide a view for the market most enthusiasts simply never see: Some of that might be perception of early-adopters. There will always be promotion of what's coming next. Automakers are quite aware of the Osborne Effect, but they need to convey a sense of on-going improvement. Dealers, as well as consumers, want to know there is continued investment in the new tech. Master of that is Toyota. They know their audience and thrive with the continuous improvement messaging. Those who like the current generation will purchase it. Those who desire better, simply wait. That's why gen-1 of Prius was fine only appealing to a limited audience, as does gen-1 of bZ4X. Being used to collect real-world data for adapting gen-2 to appeal to a much wider audience is a sensible approach, though it frustrates enthusiasts to no end. History shows us that worked remarkably well for Prius. Despite not having tax-credits available, sales were competitive with ICE. Isn't that the goal for VW with their gen-2 offerings too? For us, that's where perspective comes it with regard to design "flaws". There will always be shortcomings. Engineering involves a lot of tradeoff decisions. It is the reason why multiple models & packages are offered by automakers. When that selection is limited to a debut vehicle, like only ID.4 in the United States, of course there will be some who don't see their requirements fulfilled. Patience is a virtue.
11-29-2024	High Expectations. I always want to know more. Rarely do I get any type of constructive feedback though. Most replies are extremely vague. They want "more" & "faster" but fail to provide any quantification. That tends to indicate a purchase based on assumption... as this appears to be: "I chose Toyota because of their quality and resale value, and I've owned quite a few Toyotas over the years. But I am seriously disappointed in the range of the bZ4x and slow charging." That is exactly why gen-1 releases from Toyota are limited volume. It makes no sense skipping the opportunity to learn & improve. Why not capitalize on feedback from early-adopters to make a mass-market rollout right from the start... you know, figure out what loyal consumers who make purchases based on assumption will truly be happy with. I encounter a lot of buyer's remorse from those who have high expectations that were never realistic. In fact, there is usually a comment in such a discussion asking "didn't you research?" before buying. Since most people don't have any idea what to research, that's not a constructive question. Know your audience. Anywho, I make efforts to do exactly that by asking: Being seriously disappointed means you had high expectations. What were they? I'm curious since the entire market is a moving target. Once a ceiling is hit, some move on and others cling to all they know. Target is already well into efficiency and reliability refinement, as well as longevity. We know that better battery chemistries are on the way, which will address range and charging speed. That basically puts Toyota on par, if not a little ahead, with respect to where the market will be in a few years. In other words, expectations will be changing... hence my inquiry for the here & now.
11-29-2024	Impossible, 3 weeks later. I waited to add commentary more to the "Toyota Calls California EV Rules 'Impossible' " article. It's quite telling how deep the denial is at this point. There was EV struggle prior to the election. Now with the threat of subsidy help, the situation for each automaker is going to get ugly. Pressure is growing from China too. I'm grateful Toyota stayed true to their enough to phaseout traditional vehicles. How legacy automakers will move their customer-base forward remains a huge mystery. In the meantime, there's that 35% requirement for the 2026 model year none have wanted to discuss. I pushed on that topic again with: 3 weeks later, this discussion has become a great example of how people turn a blind-eye to what they don't want to address. No one was able to provide an explanation of how other legacy automakers will achieve what Toyota deemed impossible. How will they deliver on a requirement of 35% for the 2026 model year? Instead of addressing the topic of this article, they accepted click-bait and fed a narrative attempting to vilify Toyota. Reality is, the others will struggle to deliver any sizeable amount of EV sales... even selling them at a loss... which should have been a big clue. If they don't deliver enough, they will be fined. 43% of Tesla's profit (based on their Q3 earning report for this year) stated earning $2.1 Billion from selling carbon credits. In other words, Toyota is trying to draw attention to the shell game legacy automakers are playing. They give an impression of striving to deliver, but they really don't. Ford sold 137,350 vehicles in California last year. 35% is 48,072 vehicles. Chevy sold 118,952. 35% of that is 41,633. Honda's embrace of rebranding becomes apparent when consider their numbers... 172,834 sold last year. 35% is 60,492. That's just in California alone. Think about the other states who adopted those same EV rules. It also explains Nissan's panic from 66,982. It means a requirement of 23,444. What about Kia's outlook, 35% of their 83,512 is 29,229. And Hyundai at 63,183 comes to 22,114. Long story short, it becomes obvious why Toyota has been investing heavily in battery-production that will favor PHEV. Credits generated from those sales would be better served than giving money to Tesla. At 278,345 for Toyota and 56,706 for Lexus, that's a massive presence in California. It is why the Lexus brand is targeted for 100% by 2030 and the platform bZ4X will be getting a redesign. It also serves as proof Toyota is taking the situation seriously, having focused on EV operation itself rather than making range & charging a top priority. Think about how close the 2026 model year actually is. Think about how many legacy automakers will choose to purchase carbon credits rather than take on major risk & debt to deliver 35%. Think about where Toyota will be in a few years, knowing how much is really taking place behind the scenes to make profitable high-volume sales realistic. Then, think about how many of those PHEV sales will build loyalty, enabling the rest of each household to purchase a BEV.