Before either hybrids or EVs were commercially viable, The Innovator's Dilemma included a case study done for the car industry on the switch to electric. The case study concluded that, based on the history of disruptive innovation, the requirements of driving, and the trends in batteries, electric vehicles would become economically viable around 2020. It also concluded that traditional manufacturers would pursue hybrids but would have trouble moving into the EV market.
As a prior correlated example, shortly before steam became competitive for trans-oceanic travel, sailboat manufacturers briefly produced hybrid sail/steam ships. In so doing they made acceptable compromises to sail to allow for the reliability of steam near land. However none of the companies that did that survived into the steamship era.
In fact every detail of that case study has happened as predicted except that they predicted that EVs would start at the bottom of the market and move up, while Tesla started at the top and moved down. However the jury is still out on who will wind up winning the EV market - Tesla or one of the Chinese or Indian manufacturers who produce low-end EVs in higher quantity than Tesla. If it is China or India, then that case study will work out in every detail.
But the point remains. Designing an electric engine whose job is to be a boost to a gasoline engine, compromising both power and range, is not on a natural technological path to a pure electric vehicle. And history suggests that companies that go that route will have trouble when pressure comes to switch to the more natural technology.
Therefore Toyota's migration to hybrids is not only not a move to EVs, but it was both predicted and is suggestive that they would have trouble moving to pure EVs.
> Tesla or one of the Chinese or Indian manufacturers who produce low-end EVs in higher quantity than Tesla
I don't see Tesla ever becoming a gargantuan multinational carmaker giant like Toyota or GM - it's just not in their corporate ethos. I compare Tesla to Apple: they're technological leaders who set the benchmarks (and own the patents) but who also keep a relatively small and simple product matrix. There's loads of computer form-factors that Apple doesn't produce products for (e.g. rugged laptops, industrial control computers, "affordable" computers, and so on) - the demand for these products which are typically lower-margin are met by other manufacturers and I see Tesla being fine with this: let Toyota, GM, etc stress over meeting demand for a sub-$30k BEV while making hardly any profit.
I think the importance of self-driving / autonomous cars should also be considered. GM has Cruise, but Toyota, Ford, Honda, etc are either uninterested for some reason, or hoping Google or Apple will license them their Waymo or Titan system, or playing catchup very, very slowly - given Tesla is looking like they'll make their FSD an open-beta this year (and a public 1.0 release before the year's end, I hope!) that further widens their moat and with their current (overinflated, I admit) valuation that could see them buy-out a smaller carmarker to cement themselves should anything detrimental happen in the medium-term.
And the vision of becoming that is not exactly new. See https://www.tesla.com/blog/secret-tesla-motors-master-plan-j... for Elon Musk laying out that plan back in 2006.
And he's been sticking to the roadmap. For example that blog post was the first public announcement that they would eventually produce a family sedan called the Model 3. And indeed they eventually produced a family sedan..and called it the Model 3.
Oh wow, I never saw that, but that's exactly what I saw they were doing and now everything makes sense.
Given they've been literally telegraphing their moves right-up-until the decision to do self-driving tech, I'm surprised bigger automakers haven't reacted at all until now, at which point they're lagging so far behind it's just depressing.
Until they focused too much on where the puck was and not enough on where the puck is going to be.
Toyota OWNED the hybrid market. They are barely part of the EV market now.
They have a fully sorted fuel cell vehicle in the Mirai, based upon technology that is no more expensive to produce than an ICE.
They are late to the game on EV's, but the entire market is still in its early days.
You can bet that once the battery technology becomes cheap enough to stuff into cars with Corolla price tags, Toyota will be doing it, and they will be the #1 seller of EV's in terms of sales volume.
Maybe. But you are assuming the cost of battery technology will be the same for everyone. Currently it seems like Tesla is about 3-5 years ahead of everyone in terms of price & performance. What happens if/ when[1] Tesla launches an EV at Corolla prices and Toyota is still waiting for battery prices to come down?
I think it's far more likely at this point that Tesla will have a $25k EV in the next 5 years than Toyota.
Isn't the range of a Tesla already well over that? What holds you back if your range is only 200 miles? You can charge at home can't you?
people regularly drive to cities which is like 300-400 miles round trip. They need to pull 1 ton in a truck. There’s snow on the road and no charging station, do you want to freeze?
I’m not saying we won’t get there, just saying right now hybrids (which I actually own) are the only real option for people outside of a metropolitan area (or if they just want to drive local, which is fine). Pacifica hybrids are great, they have 30 mile full battery power. Then switch to gas. I drive locally 90% is the time, but can still drive to the closest major city 160 miles away
As a Bay Area resident, let me tell you: I have driven all over California and there are Tesla’s meeting me at each spot. You’re in the past with this take.
Like I said, we will get there. It’s really not there yet. I too lived in the Bay and regularly went down to San Diego. Much easier to do if you’re willing to take a couple 20 min breaks on the way (pretty normal). There are charging stations though. It’s always warm, roads are flat, etc
All I was saying is Tesla is good for what it is. It’s not well suited (today) for country or even some suburbs. For those instances hybrids are a better fit
When I was in Alabama, I drove across Alabama to Florida and back in an evening. A Tesla could handle that no problem. 300 miles is a long range...
A second ago you only needed 100-200 miles a day?
> Many of us like the idea of EV, but also drive 100-200 miles a day.
This was / is common in my area. My point is that a Tesla works well in many cases, particularly in densely populated regions. They work less well if you have to drive distances, carry a heavy load, and especially not if it’s more rugged. All the more true if you have kids, particularly young ones where a 20 min charging break is rough. Or running out of charge could be a problem.
Hybrids are really much better suited to these scenarios. I think EVs will get there, they’re always closing gaps, just right now less densely populated areas make less sense.
.
Towing a boat uphill the whole way.
It’s a policy problem, not a technology problem. Tesla has deployed an enormous fast charging network on their own dime, so it’s reasonable more can be done faster with government support (including mandating and funding EV chargers for apartment dwellers).
No one wants to charge their EV from a Honda generator at their apartment complex. If you’re a Tesla owner in an apartment with no apartment parking EV charger access, you pop over to a Supercharger once a week (which, while suboptimal, is equivalent to gas stations until EV chargers are more widely available).
Yes an electricity supply is available everywhere most people would want. Practical charging facilities, however, are not.
I frequently find myself in situations where I can get petrol very easily but cannot practically plug in anywhere. With a range extender I could run a very efficient little engine and reduce my emissions today.
When you’re not going to the boonies, you’re fully electric without dragging a generator with you, and can rely on charging stations.
[1] https://powerequipment.honda.com/generators
[2] https://www.ebay.com/b/Industrial-Trailer-Mounted-Generators...
Now you've got it! People are demonstrably still going for the 'not this' option. They buy a petrol or diesel car instead of an electric one.
That's the problem.
Scroll down to jurisdictions banning fossil fuel car sales. It’s a problem only until the government no longer allows you to buy a petrol vehicle. Canada’s ban starts in 2040, although I expect that to be pulled forward to align with other jurisdictions targeting 2030.
Right, you're nailing it - it's a problem today. A problem we could solve today. By popping a range extender under the (currently empty!) bonnet of a Tesla. Then everyone could get an EV, figure out how to make it work right now, and be ready for the way forward.
Don't think about what we could be doing by 2030 - think about what we could achieve right now!
And it's not just about petrol - don't fixate on when petrol is phased out - it's about diesel as well.
(An unrelated problem is that EVs need more form factors, such as off-road vehicles, which Teslas don't currently do.)
Tesla is selling all of the cars they can make, and the people simply don't find themselves experiencing the range anxiety they imagine they will. The vast majority of them just plug in their cars when they get home and never, ever think about going to a gas station. It's not about 30 minutes at a charger vs 5 minutes at a gas station; it's about 5 minutes at a gas station vs 0 minutes.
That's 99% of the trips taken in a Tesla. For 99% of the rest, there are superchargers.
So your range extender is a lot of extra machinery in an otherwise mostly solid-state device. To a Tesla owner, it just feels dirty, the way a gas station always feels grimy. It wouldn't help them sell any extra cars because the limiting factor on their sales is how fast they can build them.
They're scaling up, and by the time the gas cars are phased out, the entire system will have shifted. There will be even more superchargers and even more solid options for those 1% of 1% of trips that it won't suffice for.
Meantime, Tesla owners already spend less time than gas car owners fueling their cars, because it happens while they sleep. They don't need a mechanical solution because it's already solved.
Mazda is working on a model with a range extender. BMW just took them out of their models, but they’re not quite the same segment.
EVs were not viable until battery technology improved enough. Batteries have been improving about 7%/year. Based on those figures from the 1990s and an estimate of minimum acceleration, range, and recharge time to be acceptable on the road, EVs were predicted to become viable for the mass market around 2020.
Guess what. Those trends held and EVs became viable for the mass market around 2020. :-)
If you want to do a road trip in an EV Tesla is often the best/only option.
Huh? Didn't Toyota define EVs in the 2000s with the hybrid Prius? It became iconic, broke into practical use and the mass market, and led the way for things like the Tesla. They were innovators and disrupters, not late to it.
Toyota worked on EVs when they were unfashionable, impractical, and unlikely. And they made them work in spite of all that. Now people are talking about them like they're EV laggards. Madness.