2 years later... rollout has been slow and compatibility of Superchargers has been far less than hoped.  Why are so many newer V3 not supporting NACS still?

Having embraced Trump, a sworn enemy of EV support, was a bizarre choice.  It has proven to be incredibly destructive to the Tesla brand.  Seeing it erupt into a fight where causing harm is the goal means something drastic will finally happen.  Musk needs to be ousted.  Since the tech itself is excellent, some type of rebirth with a completely new business approach & objective is required. Anything less won't attract new shoppers.

In other words, there are many opportunities still.  Drawing conclusions already makes no sense.

Compliance Numbers.  It didn't take long before the discussion about Equinox PHEV expectations turned to mocking & belittling of Toyota: "RAV4 Prime is like a unicorn and only built in compliance numbers".  Up until now, enthusiasts could say whatever they wanted because there was no consequence.  Mandated sales are only beginning now.  So, there was nothing to comply with.  An automaker could simply address falling short of carbon-emission requirements by purchasing carbon-credits.  There was no compliance requirement demanding plug-in sales, yet.  That meant anyone implying there was had either been incorrectly informed or they were lying.  Whatever the case, word of the what's and why's and when's is getting spread... and may finally get proper attention.  I chimed in with:  Building the outgoing model in high-volume prior to the new battery production in North Carolina coming online made no sense.  There wasn't anything to comply with until 2026 anyway.  It would be like GM rushing out the new Bolt using old battery supply.  That might not accomplish anything and may actually be a negative in the long run.  Also, GM has its own compliance to fulfill.   Don't expect ACC-II to be entirely addressed with BEV.

Only BEV.  This speaks for itself: "Many people here think only BEVs are necessary..."  That came about from an article speculating about Equinox PHEV expectations.  I couldn't resist chiming in:  Those who praised GM for going "all in" on BEV have become silent.  They stigmatized bridge options, calling them an unnecessary "stop gap" rather than recognizing them as a means of accelerating adoption.   It's too bad GM didn't follow through all those years ago.  Anyone remember the prototype Saturn Vue plug-in Two-Mode planned for 2009?  That was even before Volt.  PHEV will play an essential role in the transition.  Like it or not, the tech is an effective means of addressing our market & industry shortcomings.

PHEV serves as an effective bridge for both business & consumer.

Use Case for DCFC.  Some just plain don't see the value of offering DC charging for plug-in hybrids.  Just like hybrids, they lump all PHEV into a single category as if they were all designed the same way and had the same purpose.  Ugh.  That makes it easy for BEV purists to struggle seeing any benefit.  For example: "It doesn't charge at high speed.  30 min to add about 30 miles isn't high speed DC charging.  What's the use case here?"  Since there is already a narrative of slower being bad, getting beyond that is difficult.  Yes, the smaller pack will limit DC charging speed.  It won't be fast in their mind.  BEV tend to carry a capacity of several days of usage.  The idea of depleting entirely everyday is unfamiliar.  So, that's understandable.  I do wonder how many will make an effort to actually understand though.  This is what I shared on that:  PHEV benefit immensely from opportunity charging.  While you are out & about, the entire EV capacity could be restored from your stop at Wal-Mart... where they are planning "installation of a five-digit number of charging stalls by 2030".  Heck, we already have 3 McDonald's locally with EVgo.  It doesn't take much imagination to see lots of other while-you-shop-or-eat DCFC locations.  You could see them providing discount incentives to lure you there too.

Cherry Picking, laughable.  Beside myself with how well the pattern has matched, I continued on.  This watching history is fascinating.  I remember so many attacks in the same manner, disregard for the bigger picture for the sake of declaring premature victory... diesel, Two-Mode, and Volt all standout as easy to recognize.  The mess with Tesla is diluted and took longer, but that pattern is clearly there.  This was my follow up:

And this "to try to distract from the reality that this launch was laughable" reveals motive, not mine, yours.  For years, I have been pointing out that Toyota was likely to follow the very same history as Prius.  That meant approach would disappoint enthusiasts, resulting in a celebration of short-term victories.  The resulting narrative was Toyota being so far behind, catching up was basically hopeless.

Now, there is a sense of panic.  Enthusiasts didn't understand Toyota's continuous improvement method and didn't realize how quickly changes would happen.  This is why results from past measures continue to be posted and the effort to pretend updates the 2026 model will deliver are completely ignored... which is recognition that Prius history was indeed followed.

In short, that laughing will change to silence.  We have seen this before.

Cherry Picking, winning.  Learning his was a victim of his own choices was too much to accept, so I got the step away from cherry picking.  But than making it a personal attack, he tried to derail my approach.  Not realizing I'm simply pointing out the approach of Toyota is his error.  He thinks I'm just fighting to win a battle too.  After all, he's really just a keyboard warrior... not in a BEV supporter as he believes.  That's what happens when you select a particular set of data to justify your defense while dismissing everything else.  I hinted as to why his efforts will follow the same fate I witnessed in the path with:  Claiming "subject changes and vague off-topic statements" is confirmation of posting only for the sake of winning a battle... cherry picking.  That's the history repeating.  Put another way, failing to see the pattern is from believing the game is checkers but it is really chess.  It is why each move appears to be a mistake.  The approach is not recognized.  It is also why other criteria for winning is so easily dismissed.  You don't think it is relevant.

Cherry Picking, insults.  It's been a non-stop series of posts chasing each opportunities with this sentiment: "Putting out cars with awful range, molasses charging, terrible styling and dumb names does a disservice to the EV community."  That was his attempt to counter my offense post pointing out the disservice he was doing for BEV support by focusing solely on a single 75 mph test recently, exactly what others have expressed the same from.  They are upset that so much attention has created a narrative emphasizing range-anxiety.  This is their-own-worst-enemy problem, recognition of an unintended consequence.  Anywho, my pointing out of his activity being exclusively about road trips... cherry picking a very particular situation... multi-hour drives at 75 mph... revealed a good sign.  His constant insults on Toyota, rather than making it personal, meant I could reveal the bigger picture to hopefully break the cycle:  Watching you continue down the rabbit-hole is fascinating.  This repeat of history so telling.  You have no idea what happened the first time this very same situation played out either.  Keep going!

Cherry Picking, experience.  Sure enough, someone did chime in: "Speaking from personal experience having taken a road trip last summer through several western states, 75mph is quite common..."  That was exactly what I had hoped would happen.  It was an invitation for me build upon the topic, drowning out the troll attempt.  Far too often, those efforts to distract are successful.  This time, I stand a chance of turning into productive exchanges... a teaching moment for lurkers.  We'll see.  Here's what I added:  My sister-in-law lives in Wyoming.  We drive there at 80 mph.  Efficiency drops significantly at speeds above 60 mph, which is why EPA doesn't include that in their rating criteria.  Aerodynamics make a huge difference.  It's not just a factor of motor/battery/inverter operation.   That needs to be another category.  Much like Europe does for extra-urban, we should have an extra-highway category.  After all, it is absurd to expect a SUV with an 8.1" ground-clearance to behave in a similar manner when measured on a dynameter compared to a low riding sedan.

Cherry Picking, rating.  Authors on that website must have been monitoring comments and noticed how much the same topic kept coming up... the troll bait... so an article about highway EPA range was published.  It highlighted the difference between rating & real-world.  You know who immediately jumped on an started spewing his same old nonsense.  The vague comments with an obvious attempt to mislead were posted.  Nothing changed from him.  But from me, I know have the attention of a larger audience.  His benefit was attacked discussions about bZ4X.  This time, it is his mistake... since the topic was about broader, addressing all BEV.  That will likely stir unwanted contributions sharing my stance.  So, I started by posting:  75 MPH driving is not representative of highway EPA rating.  That's much faster than the testing is performed and higher than the speed limit in most states.

PHEV Emphasis.  This sounded good to me: "I would prefer an emphasis on PHEV, as they introduce the driver to the benefits of EV and maybe that would give them the motivation to buy EVs."  I jumped into the discussion adding:  Game over.  No more efficiency compares.  100% of the Camry, RAV4 and Sienna, not to mention Prius, are hybrid as of 2026. The conversation has indeed moved focus onto what configuration makes the PHEV model a compelling choice.  Having a PHEV in the household enables all other vehicles to easily become BEV.  That's why the market for smaller capacity packs is starting to pick up in the US.   With DC fast-chargers finally becoming available far from metro areas, even weekend-warrior trips are becoming practical with shorter range BEV.   The PHEV serves as an effective bridge for both business & consumer.

Why?  Such a simple question: "Why do we keep seeing posts that conflate EPA combined mileage with expected highway range?"  It doesn't get asked often.  There's not much of an audience to care either.  There's just an on-going obsession with values that have little actual value.  If the point is to make the EV experience like the gas experience, it shouldn't matter.  Think about how minor of a role the EPA rating for ICE vehicles has played.  At some point, stopping to recharge will be no big deal.  There will be stops along the highway just like there are now for gas... well actually, more.  The fact that you can expect a coffeeshop or fast-food or retail-store to also offer charging isn't much of a stretch.  Electricity availability is much easier to support than large buried tanks of flammable liquid.  Anywho, this was what I added to today's question:  EPA ratings were originally created to provide a standardized basis of comparison, which is what the fine print on the window-sticker clearly stated.  YMMV (Your Mileage May Vary) came about after the assumption of that number being an expectation got out of hand.  Those hoping to undermine exploited the incorrect assumption opportunity, making the situation even worse.  Dealing with this is how real-world drive videos came about, including my own channel.  Online activity thrives from misinformation and efforts to address it.

Cherry Picking, trolling.  It was getting out of hand.  Exactly like Volt enthusiasts, every time something positive came up for Prius, they would attack the discussion by injecting troll bait.  Their acts of desperation were a wonderful confirmation of fear.  They were afraid Toyota had delivered an upgrade that couldn't be competed with.  So, the best they could come up with was to distract.  If people didn't learn about the improvement, outdated & misleading beliefs could dominate... hence, feeding the narrative.  In this case with bZ4X, it was all about keeping the belief alive about range being poor.  With today's attempt, I fired back disregarding the data to bring attention to the broader topic:  Long distance travel at 75 mph is cherry picking.  It's blatantly obvious you're avoiding data from slower speeds.  It derails your narrative.  And since most states have a speed limit of 70 mph, it exposes the desperation to preserve that narrative.