John's Stuff - Personal Log 1314

March 28, 2025 - April 3, 2025

Last Updated: Weds. 6/25/2025

4-03-2025
Allowing Competition. There were several comments sharing the same sentiment in the same discussion thread: "Toyota has had this issue for years. At which point do you say to management, You guys are dummies for allowing this." Followed by: "The car company that leads all others in sales to people 'are dummies' ???" Then this: "Toyota is not the only game in town. They're 'dummies' if they can't or won't deliver and a potential customer goes elsewhere. (Business 101)" I was quite motivated by that last one, since I was just arguing economics with someone in another forum. That inspired this teaching opportunity here: Business 201 teaches about the need for partners. A paradigm shift (when the entire market changes) requires others to be included. Loss of initial sales to someone else fulfills that requirement. Getting others to participate on a competitive level is extremely difficult. Toyota learned this with hybrids a long ago. Watch what happens for BEVs. We can already see the pattern with bZ4X resembling that of Prius.

4-02-2025
Flaws. It is always enlightening when someone posts something like this: "How Toyota is managing to push this decades old tech is amazing. Are people so preoccupied they don't notice the flaws in driving?" In their mind,, the person probably does see shortcomings, some to the point of being some type of design mistake. They can never actually articulate it though. Whatever supposed choice that was made on Toyota's part isn't ever explained. There's just a vague statement as if that's a fact everyone should recognize without explanation. That pattern repeats so often, you would think they'd notice. They don't. Most of the time, I don't bother to reply. In this case, I did: Claiming "flaws" at this point is a true act of desperation, a sign "all in" supporters recognize a transitional step really was necessary. Toyota's hybrid design is so well proven, 100% of Camry are now hybrid and there's an expectation of the same to happen with RAV4 late this year. A large portion of the market simply isn't ready yet. A hybrid in the household enables easier BEV purchase decisions. There's no worry about road trips and even just ordinary 120-volt charging covers daily commuting. The stage is being set for PHEV upsell opportunity as North Carolina battery production ramps up too. Toyota clearly studied the market here well.

4-01-2025
Multi-Pathway. Sales results for the first quarter of 2025 are being posted. As expected, growing dislike for Tesla has translated to sales way under projections. Taking so long to rollout the updated Model Y in this market, which doesn't actually deliver much improvement anyway, has turned into a massive liability... because CyberTruck sales were horrible before they were stopped. Several recalls at the same time have backed up service departments... which is what has opened eyes to even the most blind enthusiasts. Tesla is incapable of the growth they had already proclaimed a future victory. Instead, some are starting to realize the approach Toyota has taken is viable: "Multi-pathway is a great term for more susceptible to supply chain disruptions because they have more exposure to more supply lines doing this all-of-the-above approach." This is just basic economics. Most people don't realize that though. They have no idea what product diversity means for a business. Today's numbers posted is a wake-up call: Toyota sold 2,332,623 vehicles in North America last year. 1,006,461 of them were hybrids. That's 43% carrying 2 electric-motors, an inverter and battery-pack. Camry's ICE model was discontinued for 2025. That means hybrid growth will continue strong. RAV4 is expected to do the same for 2026. It also means production is getting ramped up for essential components also used in BEV. That's genuine progress forward, the old status quo rapidly fading away for them. What other legacy automaker is experiencing change on that scale in North America?

4-01-2025
Too Many Acronyms. This is why knowing your audience is so important: "It's either a hybrid (HEV) if it has no plug, or a plug in hybrid (PHEV). It could be parallel/series/both. Anyone who makes a series version either has to admit that they are bad at engineering AND/OR doesn't comprehend basic thermodynamics. REX and ERVE are marketing terms, and even the proponents here can't agree on what makes one different from another." Even within the community of enthusiasts, there was not agreement. That's key. Failing to agree within a niche is a very strong indication the same will be true within the masses. People simply won't have a clue. I reminded everyone of that reality with: Ordinary consumers don't recognize the basics, like ICE transmissions. They neither understand nor care how many gears (if any) that the vehicle has. Heck, they still don't even realize their are different types of HEV. For that matter, benefit from various heaters in BEV wasn't recognized until recently either. So, anyone who's arguing that PLUG or NO-PLUG won't be how hybrids will be identified is out of touch. Know your audience.

3-31-2025
Shaky Mediocrity. Assessments using "shaky mediocrity" as a description is new. Defenders of Tesla have vanished completely. There absence is a little strange. For so long, owning a Tesla was like being invited into the promised land. Everything was so much better... It never ceased to amaze me how the "vastly superior" attitude could expand on such a scale in the past. Of course, it never made any sense. They had no substance to back claims. Heck, some declared victory before rollout even started. So seeing it repeat now was easy to predict. Supporters of Tesla didn't like hearing it though and enthusiasts remained in denial. More posts drawing attention to Tesla's lack of any future are growing. It's an automaker without anything competitive coming. Meanwhile, we see the supposed laggard (Toyota) rolling out new BEV with next-gen components and there's an expectation of a next-gen hybrid system. Seizing on the opportunity to make sure people see what Tesla is dealing with, I added this to the discussion: Shaky mediocrity is an interesting way of putting it. Another is watching M3 & MY grow old and CT crash out of the gate. Those are signs of not really understanding the market. What do ordinary consumers actually want? Enthusiasts wearing rose-colored glasses just feed the misguided CEOs to do that churning. Meanwhile, China is rapidly delivering compelling choices... many of which here are considered DOA... because we have convinced ourselves that more is better. It's why we never saw a Model 2 from Tesla. Imagine a smaller vehicle with less range, less power and slower DC charging. That would be quick to design. Just scale down what has already been delivered.

3-31-2025
Makes More Sense, How? Gotta love how an enthusiast just draws a conclusion without actually being able to support what was claimed: "In the end though, series hybrids make more sense the bigger the battery is. Old PHEVs were mostly ICE drivetrains added, while a series hybrid is ideally a BEV with an ICE added." That brought me back to the biggest troublemaker Volt enthusiast. He lost his job and apparently had nothing better to do but harass me while waiting for rollout. It finally did, but his campaigning for "vastly superior" technology came to a screeching halt. For years, he argued efficiency would be far better than Prius. Turns out, it fell significantly short of that. Adding insult to injury was the justification for his position came from Volt being a series hybrid, which we learned it wasn't about 6 months prior to rollout. Attacks continued. It was relentless. But he had nothing to leverage. So when I did finally get my first plug-in Prius, his anger turned to trying to reconcile differences. My goals were sincere, but he didn't like my approach or attitude. Really? Both were due to his hostility... which did end up teaching me a lot about how to stick to principle... which is how I learned to share such positions now. Of course, so much real-world data backing my position helps dissolve conflict. Anywho, he's how the rebuttal to today's conclusion went: Toyota's first (2012 model) had the entire EV drive system in front (closest to the wheels) of the gas engine. So when adding a clutch in the next-gen (2017 model) so it could completely disengage, there was a very big return from very little change. The result was easily hitting 5 mi/kWh for EV in the summer, while retaining exceptional HV efficiency (55 MPG) in the summer. What would make a series hybrid the ideal?

3-30-2025
Faster is Better. The exchange about "better" and what that really means continued: Who would want to host chargers that fast? Businesses want you to patronize their store. That means having some time to kill while you wait for the charge. Heck, that's not much of a stretch from what already happens now. The bulk of gas station profit comes from sales inside of food & beverage, since gas itself has such low margins. Look at what Starbucks is trying. They've installed 125 kW dual-port units. That means at best you'll get 125 kW. Shared with another patron, you top out at 62.5 kW. The point is to get you to stay for a coffee and something to eat. If you're local and just charging your EV from time to time, since home access is limited, that's no big deal. An hour is very easy to spend there. Same goes for visits to a local park. Those lower speed DC units cost less too, so more can be provided. That's a big deal for people concerned about chargers being busy. Growing concern about chargers working is alleviated some by quantity available as well. In short, it's easy to agree with the "faster is not always better" thought.

3-30-2025
Bigger is Better. My post about correlation was apparently well received. Not getting attacked anymore is a welcome twist. For years, anything not fully endorsing their enshrined choice was considered "anti" to their cause. I was regarded as either being a blind loyalist to Toyota or somehow fighting for the oil industry. All that rhetoric is how the polarization came about. They were unwilling to take any risk. Compromise was considered weakness and tradeoff unacceptable. Their stance was understandable. When an engineer sees the world with only engineering in mind, no amount of business reasoning made any sense. It was looked upon as a lost battle, giving in to unnecessary delay or distraction. That's changing... most likely because many of those voices simply moved on. The chorus now is singing praise of reward. What would your purchase actually deliver? That's critical thinking, a big step away from rhetoric. Ironically, this is an example of where bigger actually is better. The catch is avoiding overkill, finding the right balance... you know, is that a good buy for your money. I shared: Prius PHV (2012-2015) provided a great example of the difference battery size makes. 46 mph was the top EV speed for the hybrid. From the very same system, adding battery capacity for the plug-in model allowed greater draw, which bumped the top EV speed to 62 mph.

3-30-2025
Battery Fundamentals. I enjoyed responding to this observation: "There's a correlation between size of battery and the current it produces." Knowing there's more than just FUD now at play, my sense of intrigue was peaked. Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt come from rhetoric. First quarter sales results are real, very difficult to spin with so much already stacked up against the status quo of the EV market. Tesla is no longer a leader. Potential for BEV from other automakers, along with a wide variety of plug-in hybrids, is really stirring attention. No one is going to sound off with a "should have bought a Tesla" slam anymore. That reason why is simple, people are asking why. I provide some answers to that, in context to the Volt discussion about correlation:

That fundamental is what divided Volt enthusiasts. They knew GM needed to diversify Voltec, spread it to other vehicle choices for the technology to become profitable.

Two ideas emerged from that. One was creating an Equinox with Voltec, but fear was it would be so popular interest would be lost for Volt. The other was creating a "lite" version of Volt, but fear was it would dilute the appeal of Volt. Both had drawbacks from battery size.

Enthusiasts were well aware that Volt was already drawing a maximum from its battery. That same pack reused (to keep cost in check) for the larger and less aerodynamic Equinox would equate to less power. Using fewer stacks in the pack (to help reduce cost) for a "lite" version of Volt would also equate to less power.

The equation becomes even more of a tradeoff for BEV. A smaller pack equates to slower DC charging too. That's why years ago even the "smaller" capacity Teslas still had a larger battery; otherwise, they would have been disadvantaged at SuperChargers.

Needless to say, that correlation has contributed to slower adoption and has fed obsession for range, power and speed... the need vs. want problem.

3-29-2025
Less Complex. It's telling how substanceless arguments end with: "This eliminates the complexity and cost of a dual drive chain, and makes the most efficient use of the combustion engine." He was going on and on how being less complex reasoning will result in sales. Only basic hybrids have the dual setup. More advanced designs eliminate components... like starter, alternator, serpentine-belt and gears. That reduces advantage of a series hybrid. Conversion of energy mechanical to electrical is less efficient too. So like with most engineering, there are tradeoffs. Having discovered years later that some Volt owners didn't actually understand how their own vehicle worked, it made sense seeing how misplaced their arguments against Prius Prime were. They were basically clueless, just holding onto a talking-point someone had shared long before. That's why asking who is still quite relevant. Know your audience. Someone nowadays will ask how much it costs to recharge. That's becoming a common theme, not how many EV miles are available. The reason why is simple. Battery sizes are increasing. Armed with that situational awareness, I fired back with: Who will be swayed by "less complex" reasoning? Since most people have no idea how their ICE works anyway, there's no basis for gauging benefit. For us here, we're better informed and see that any type of hybrid without a transmission is less complex. Keep in mind, a power-split device is just like a differential... a vehicle component that pretty much never needs servicing.

3-29-2025
BEV Backbone. This is a new means of stating the same old weak argument: "I understand the EREV method to be essentially a BEV backbone, with the genset added on top. I would imagine this setup allows for advancement of the BEV portion while waiting for battery prices to come down. Then, when the time is right, remove the genset and add more battery modules." Better designed PHEV offer the very same thing. Imagine the frunk space that would become available when the ICE was eliminated. Combine that with the potential better battery chemistry & packaging could offer, you can easily see the potential. In other words, there is no huge advantage as enthusiasts strive to portray. Like in the past, the design doesn't actually stand out as offering special advantage. I stated it this way: EREV is mostly a marketing term, since it doesn't standout in terms of outcome. Toyota's PHEV design is also a BEV backbone... two electric motors used for propulsion along with a heat-pump for cabin heating & cooling. The gas-engine is clutched in and doesn't have a starter, alternator, serpentine-belt or transmission. It just interacts with a planetary device to provide power.

3-29-2025
Newest E-POWER. Nissan has been selling a series hybrids in Japan for quite a few years now. That wasn't something they wanted to stir the market here with. That made sense too. Volt was quite misunderstood, believed to be a series hybrid but never was. For that level of confused support to persist for so long, there was no possible way Nissan could rollout something that actually was but didn't offer a plug. If people focused on outcome rather than labels, that would be an entirely different story. But here, there's an obsession with labels. You can pound your chest if enthusiasts declare a winner... even if there is no actual victory. All others must proceed in shame. It's pathetic. I tried to reference some of that history to provide context of where we are heading: We have already been through this. It's a series hybrid, proven less efficient than a parallel hybrid in sustaining mode. The advantage is its simplicity. That means if the vehicle can carry lots of battery-capacity and a reduction of power is acceptable once depleted, it can be a competitive plug-in choice. Catch is, advanced parallel hybrids offer more power, don't cost much more, and were already more efficient in sustaining mode as a plug-in. So when the other is marketed as an "EREV", look for the efficiency rating (mi/kWh) to understand what's being offered. After all, people want to know how much it will cost to charge. Consider goals. Knowing ACC-II requirements (stage 2 of California rules) will push automakers to deliver variety, since not everyone will want a BEV. Any type of plug-in hybrid delivering at least 50 miles of EV range can be a portion of the automakers sales to qualify. So, why not?

3-28-2025
Compliance. Same old rhetoric is now facing a new challenge... audience shrinking. There had been a stigma attached to "compliance" comments, making it easy to portray any type of move forward as a sign of weakness unless there was an "all in" declaration. That's utter nonsense. Enthusiasts use that as a feel-good cover for their shortcomings. Progress is always an "over promise, under deliver" situation for enthusiast. In fact, that's what sets them apart from supporters. They don't look upon setbacks or slowness as constructive. They turn hope into hype. That's why anything capable of raising the bar a little is look upon as not enough. Simply breaking the status quo is not fast enough, despite being genuine progress. Fortunately, it's becoming much easier to deal with their nonsense. I kept this encounter brief: Feeding the "behind" narrative has been a common theme... make it seem like Toyota is scrambling to deliver rather than following their well proven process of continuous improvement. Also, like in California, plug-in hybrids counts as partial credit in Europe. That's why all Prius are PHEV there, the newest CH-R is offered as a PHEV, and CH-R will be available as a BEV. Along with the mid-cycle refresh of bZ4X this year and those 4 other new BEV, where's the problem? How will other legacy automakers meet the same requirements?

4-03-2025	Allowing Competition. There were several comments sharing the same sentiment in the same discussion thread: "Toyota has had this issue for years. At which point do you say to management, You guys are dummies for allowing this." Followed by: "The car company that leads all others in sales to people 'are dummies' ???" Then this: "Toyota is not the only game in town. They're 'dummies' if they can't or won't deliver and a potential customer goes elsewhere. (Business 101)" I was quite motivated by that last one, since I was just arguing economics with someone in another forum. That inspired this teaching opportunity here: Business 201 teaches about the need for partners. A paradigm shift (when the entire market changes) requires others to be included. Loss of initial sales to someone else fulfills that requirement. Getting others to participate on a competitive level is extremely difficult. Toyota learned this with hybrids a long ago. Watch what happens for BEVs. We can already see the pattern with bZ4X resembling that of Prius.
4-02-2025	Flaws. It is always enlightening when someone posts something like this: "How Toyota is managing to push this decades old tech is amazing. Are people so preoccupied they don't notice the flaws in driving?" In their mind,, the person probably does see shortcomings, some to the point of being some type of design mistake. They can never actually articulate it though. Whatever supposed choice that was made on Toyota's part isn't ever explained. There's just a vague statement as if that's a fact everyone should recognize without explanation. That pattern repeats so often, you would think they'd notice. They don't. Most of the time, I don't bother to reply. In this case, I did: Claiming "flaws" at this point is a true act of desperation, a sign "all in" supporters recognize a transitional step really was necessary. Toyota's hybrid design is so well proven, 100% of Camry are now hybrid and there's an expectation of the same to happen with RAV4 late this year. A large portion of the market simply isn't ready yet. A hybrid in the household enables easier BEV purchase decisions. There's no worry about road trips and even just ordinary 120-volt charging covers daily commuting. The stage is being set for PHEV upsell opportunity as North Carolina battery production ramps up too. Toyota clearly studied the market here well.
4-01-2025	Multi-Pathway. Sales results for the first quarter of 2025 are being posted. As expected, growing dislike for Tesla has translated to sales way under projections. Taking so long to rollout the updated Model Y in this market, which doesn't actually deliver much improvement anyway, has turned into a massive liability... because CyberTruck sales were horrible before they were stopped. Several recalls at the same time have backed up service departments... which is what has opened eyes to even the most blind enthusiasts. Tesla is incapable of the growth they had already proclaimed a future victory. Instead, some are starting to realize the approach Toyota has taken is viable: "Multi-pathway is a great term for more susceptible to supply chain disruptions because they have more exposure to more supply lines doing this all-of-the-above approach." This is just basic economics. Most people don't realize that though. They have no idea what product diversity means for a business. Today's numbers posted is a wake-up call: Toyota sold 2,332,623 vehicles in North America last year. 1,006,461 of them were hybrids. That's 43% carrying 2 electric-motors, an inverter and battery-pack. Camry's ICE model was discontinued for 2025. That means hybrid growth will continue strong. RAV4 is expected to do the same for 2026. It also means production is getting ramped up for essential components also used in BEV. That's genuine progress forward, the old status quo rapidly fading away for them. What other legacy automaker is experiencing change on that scale in North America?
4-01-2025	Too Many Acronyms. This is why knowing your audience is so important: "It's either a hybrid (HEV) if it has no plug, or a plug in hybrid (PHEV). It could be parallel/series/both. Anyone who makes a series version either has to admit that they are bad at engineering AND/OR doesn't comprehend basic thermodynamics. REX and ERVE are marketing terms, and even the proponents here can't agree on what makes one different from another." Even within the community of enthusiasts, there was not agreement. That's key. Failing to agree within a niche is a very strong indication the same will be true within the masses. People simply won't have a clue. I reminded everyone of that reality with: Ordinary consumers don't recognize the basics, like ICE transmissions. They neither understand nor care how many gears (if any) that the vehicle has. Heck, they still don't even realize their are different types of HEV. For that matter, benefit from various heaters in BEV wasn't recognized until recently either. So, anyone who's arguing that PLUG or NO-PLUG won't be how hybrids will be identified is out of touch. Know your audience.
3-31-2025	Shaky Mediocrity. Assessments using "shaky mediocrity" as a description is new. Defenders of Tesla have vanished completely. There absence is a little strange. For so long, owning a Tesla was like being invited into the promised land. Everything was so much better... It never ceased to amaze me how the "vastly superior" attitude could expand on such a scale in the past. Of course, it never made any sense. They had no substance to back claims. Heck, some declared victory before rollout even started. So seeing it repeat now was easy to predict. Supporters of Tesla didn't like hearing it though and enthusiasts remained in denial. More posts drawing attention to Tesla's lack of any future are growing. It's an automaker without anything competitive coming. Meanwhile, we see the supposed laggard (Toyota) rolling out new BEV with next-gen components and there's an expectation of a next-gen hybrid system. Seizing on the opportunity to make sure people see what Tesla is dealing with, I added this to the discussion: Shaky mediocrity is an interesting way of putting it. Another is watching M3 & MY grow old and CT crash out of the gate. Those are signs of not really understanding the market. What do ordinary consumers actually want? Enthusiasts wearing rose-colored glasses just feed the misguided CEOs to do that churning. Meanwhile, China is rapidly delivering compelling choices... many of which here are considered DOA... because we have convinced ourselves that more is better. It's why we never saw a Model 2 from Tesla. Imagine a smaller vehicle with less range, less power and slower DC charging. That would be quick to design. Just scale down what has already been delivered.
3-31-2025	Makes More Sense, How? Gotta love how an enthusiast just draws a conclusion without actually being able to support what was claimed: "In the end though, series hybrids make more sense the bigger the battery is. Old PHEVs were mostly ICE drivetrains added, while a series hybrid is ideally a BEV with an ICE added." That brought me back to the biggest troublemaker Volt enthusiast. He lost his job and apparently had nothing better to do but harass me while waiting for rollout. It finally did, but his campaigning for "vastly superior" technology came to a screeching halt. For years, he argued efficiency would be far better than Prius. Turns out, it fell significantly short of that. Adding insult to injury was the justification for his position came from Volt being a series hybrid, which we learned it wasn't about 6 months prior to rollout. Attacks continued. It was relentless. But he had nothing to leverage. So when I did finally get my first plug-in Prius, his anger turned to trying to reconcile differences. My goals were sincere, but he didn't like my approach or attitude. Really? Both were due to his hostility... which did end up teaching me a lot about how to stick to principle... which is how I learned to share such positions now. Of course, so much real-world data backing my position helps dissolve conflict. Anywho, he's how the rebuttal to today's conclusion went: Toyota's first (2012 model) had the entire EV drive system in front (closest to the wheels) of the gas engine. So when adding a clutch in the next-gen (2017 model) so it could completely disengage, there was a very big return from very little change. The result was easily hitting 5 mi/kWh for EV in the summer, while retaining exceptional HV efficiency (55 MPG) in the summer. What would make a series hybrid the ideal?
3-30-2025	Faster is Better. The exchange about "better" and what that really means continued: Who would want to host chargers that fast? Businesses want you to patronize their store. That means having some time to kill while you wait for the charge. Heck, that's not much of a stretch from what already happens now. The bulk of gas station profit comes from sales inside of food & beverage, since gas itself has such low margins. Look at what Starbucks is trying. They've installed 125 kW dual-port units. That means at best you'll get 125 kW. Shared with another patron, you top out at 62.5 kW. The point is to get you to stay for a coffee and something to eat. If you're local and just charging your EV from time to time, since home access is limited, that's no big deal. An hour is very easy to spend there. Same goes for visits to a local park. Those lower speed DC units cost less too, so more can be provided. That's a big deal for people concerned about chargers being busy. Growing concern about chargers working is alleviated some by quantity available as well. In short, it's easy to agree with the "faster is not always better" thought.
3-30-2025	Bigger is Better. My post about correlation was apparently well received. Not getting attacked anymore is a welcome twist. For years, anything not fully endorsing their enshrined choice was considered "anti" to their cause. I was regarded as either being a blind loyalist to Toyota or somehow fighting for the oil industry. All that rhetoric is how the polarization came about. They were unwilling to take any risk. Compromise was considered weakness and tradeoff unacceptable. Their stance was understandable. When an engineer sees the world with only engineering in mind, no amount of business reasoning made any sense. It was looked upon as a lost battle, giving in to unnecessary delay or distraction. That's changing... most likely because many of those voices simply moved on. The chorus now is singing praise of reward. What would your purchase actually deliver? That's critical thinking, a big step away from rhetoric. Ironically, this is an example of where bigger actually is better. The catch is avoiding overkill, finding the right balance... you know, is that a good buy for your money. I shared: Prius PHV (2012-2015) provided a great example of the difference battery size makes. 46 mph was the top EV speed for the hybrid. From the very same system, adding battery capacity for the plug-in model allowed greater draw, which bumped the top EV speed to 62 mph.
3-30-2025	Battery Fundamentals. I enjoyed responding to this observation: "There's a correlation between size of battery and the current it produces." Knowing there's more than just FUD now at play, my sense of intrigue was peaked. Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt come from rhetoric. First quarter sales results are real, very difficult to spin with so much already stacked up against the status quo of the EV market. Tesla is no longer a leader. Potential for BEV from other automakers, along with a wide variety of plug-in hybrids, is really stirring attention. No one is going to sound off with a "should have bought a Tesla" slam anymore. That reason why is simple, people are asking why. I provide some answers to that, in context to the Volt discussion about correlation: That fundamental is what divided Volt enthusiasts. They knew GM needed to diversify Voltec, spread it to other vehicle choices for the technology to become profitable. Two ideas emerged from that. One was creating an Equinox with Voltec, but fear was it would be so popular interest would be lost for Volt. The other was creating a "lite" version of Volt, but fear was it would dilute the appeal of Volt. Both had drawbacks from battery size. Enthusiasts were well aware that Volt was already drawing a maximum from its battery. That same pack reused (to keep cost in check) for the larger and less aerodynamic Equinox would equate to less power. Using fewer stacks in the pack (to help reduce cost) for a "lite" version of Volt would also equate to less power. The equation becomes even more of a tradeoff for BEV. A smaller pack equates to slower DC charging too. That's why years ago even the "smaller" capacity Teslas still had a larger battery; otherwise, they would have been disadvantaged at SuperChargers. Needless to say, that correlation has contributed to slower adoption and has fed obsession for range, power and speed... the need vs. want problem.
3-29-2025	Less Complex. It's telling how substanceless arguments end with: "This eliminates the complexity and cost of a dual drive chain, and makes the most efficient use of the combustion engine." He was going on and on how being less complex reasoning will result in sales. Only basic hybrids have the dual setup. More advanced designs eliminate components... like starter, alternator, serpentine-belt and gears. That reduces advantage of a series hybrid. Conversion of energy mechanical to electrical is less efficient too. So like with most engineering, there are tradeoffs. Having discovered years later that some Volt owners didn't actually understand how their own vehicle worked, it made sense seeing how misplaced their arguments against Prius Prime were. They were basically clueless, just holding onto a talking-point someone had shared long before. That's why asking who is still quite relevant. Know your audience. Someone nowadays will ask how much it costs to recharge. That's becoming a common theme, not how many EV miles are available. The reason why is simple. Battery sizes are increasing. Armed with that situational awareness, I fired back with: Who will be swayed by "less complex" reasoning? Since most people have no idea how their ICE works anyway, there's no basis for gauging benefit. For us here, we're better informed and see that any type of hybrid without a transmission is less complex. Keep in mind, a power-split device is just like a differential... a vehicle component that pretty much never needs servicing.
3-29-2025	BEV Backbone. This is a new means of stating the same old weak argument: "I understand the EREV method to be essentially a BEV backbone, with the genset added on top. I would imagine this setup allows for advancement of the BEV portion while waiting for battery prices to come down. Then, when the time is right, remove the genset and add more battery modules." Better designed PHEV offer the very same thing. Imagine the frunk space that would become available when the ICE was eliminated. Combine that with the potential better battery chemistry & packaging could offer, you can easily see the potential. In other words, there is no huge advantage as enthusiasts strive to portray. Like in the past, the design doesn't actually stand out as offering special advantage. I stated it this way: EREV is mostly a marketing term, since it doesn't standout in terms of outcome. Toyota's PHEV design is also a BEV backbone... two electric motors used for propulsion along with a heat-pump for cabin heating & cooling. The gas-engine is clutched in and doesn't have a starter, alternator, serpentine-belt or transmission. It just interacts with a planetary device to provide power.
3-29-2025	Newest E-POWER. Nissan has been selling a series hybrids in Japan for quite a few years now. That wasn't something they wanted to stir the market here with. That made sense too. Volt was quite misunderstood, believed to be a series hybrid but never was. For that level of confused support to persist for so long, there was no possible way Nissan could rollout something that actually was but didn't offer a plug. If people focused on outcome rather than labels, that would be an entirely different story. But here, there's an obsession with labels. You can pound your chest if enthusiasts declare a winner... even if there is no actual victory. All others must proceed in shame. It's pathetic. I tried to reference some of that history to provide context of where we are heading: We have already been through this. It's a series hybrid, proven less efficient than a parallel hybrid in sustaining mode. The advantage is its simplicity. That means if the vehicle can carry lots of battery-capacity and a reduction of power is acceptable once depleted, it can be a competitive plug-in choice. Catch is, advanced parallel hybrids offer more power, don't cost much more, and were already more efficient in sustaining mode as a plug-in. So when the other is marketed as an "EREV", look for the efficiency rating (mi/kWh) to understand what's being offered. After all, people want to know how much it will cost to charge. Consider goals. Knowing ACC-II requirements (stage 2 of California rules) will push automakers to deliver variety, since not everyone will want a BEV. Any type of plug-in hybrid delivering at least 50 miles of EV range can be a portion of the automakers sales to qualify. So, why not?
3-28-2025	Compliance. Same old rhetoric is now facing a new challenge... audience shrinking. There had been a stigma attached to "compliance" comments, making it easy to portray any type of move forward as a sign of weakness unless there was an "all in" declaration. That's utter nonsense. Enthusiasts use that as a feel-good cover for their shortcomings. Progress is always an "over promise, under deliver" situation for enthusiast. In fact, that's what sets them apart from supporters. They don't look upon setbacks or slowness as constructive. They turn hope into hype. That's why anything capable of raising the bar a little is look upon as not enough. Simply breaking the status quo is not fast enough, despite being genuine progress. Fortunately, it's becoming much easier to deal with their nonsense. I kept this encounter brief: Feeding the "behind" narrative has been a common theme... make it seem like Toyota is scrambling to deliver rather than following their well proven process of continuous improvement. Also, like in California, plug-in hybrids counts as partial credit in Europe. That's why all Prius are PHEV there, the newest CH-R is offered as a PHEV, and CH-R will be available as a BEV. Along with the mid-cycle refresh of bZ4X this year and those 4 other new BEV, where's the problem? How will other legacy automakers meet the same requirements?