Alternative Fuels & Propulsion RANDOM

[riviera74]

That should be the next CH-R, or better yet replace the CH-R with that Yaris Cross.

[ocnblu]

I hate myself for loving it.  I would get one with a regular gas motor though.  If it's not available, then the deal is off.

[riviera74]

28 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

I hate myself for loving it.  I would get one with a regular gas motor though.  If it's not available, then the deal is off.

That sounds fair.  Hybrid or regular should be an option.

[G. David Felt]

53 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

I hate myself for loving it.  I would get one with a regular gas motor though.  If it's not available, then the deal is off.

Yes you can get a less powerful FWD ICE version.

[G. David Felt]

Toshiba has achieved a major milestone with their latest generation of SCiB Lithium Ion battery getting Class NK certification. This allows the battery cells to be used in Marine applications. Hybrid Container ships and other forms of commercial hybrid power trains.

https://chargedevs.com/newswire/toshibas-scib-battery-system-meets-classnk-guidelines-for-ships/

On another front, we are making big strides in solid state batteries that removes totally the fire issue that traditional Lithium Ion batteries have. This new Solid State Lithium Ion battery not only have much higher energy density, but also higher temperature capability 1200 degrees before degradation of power efficiency happens.

https://chargedevs.com/newswire/researchers-make-ceramic-based-flexible-electrolyte-sheets-for-lithium-metal-batteries/

Final bit of news is that Renault has ended ICE auto sales in China and will move forward selling EVs only ahead of the 2030 mandate by the Chinese government.

https://chargedevs.com/newswire/renault-to-sell-only-electric-cars-in-china/

[balthazar]

On 4/23/2020 at 8:12 AM, dfelt said:

I truly do not see any reason for things to go back to the old way of doing work for many.

I realize you said “for many”, but the same circumstances that are keeping people working remotely from home are also keeping a huge swath of people from working AT ALL. There are tens of millions of reasons to go back to the so-called “old way” (of a mere 2 months ago).

[G. David Felt]

On 4/23/2020 at 10:32 AM, riviera74 said:

That should be the next CH-R, or better yet replace the CH-R with that Yaris Cross.

Toyota has a new Global Platform for EV's and ICE auto's and they first 3 EVs are going on sale this week in China as the start of Toyota delivering 10 new EVs by 2025.

https://electrek.co/2020/04/27/all-electric-lexus-goes-on-sale-in-china-this-week-two-toyota-evs-to-follow/#more-131746

Lexus UX 300e

Toyota CH-R EV

Last model listed that is on sales but no picture is the Toyota Izoa.

Toyota said EVs are for the future and the younger generation who is open to change. As such the next 3 models are focused on those born 1990 and newer. AKA the younger generations. As such, we have the Concept Rhombus EV from Toyota that is supposed to appeal to the youthful.

Toyota Rhombus EV

2 hours ago, balthazar said:

I realize you said “for many”, but the same circumstances that are keeping people working remotely from home are also keeping a huge swath of people from working AT ALL. There are tens of millions of reasons to go back to the so-called “old way” (of a mere 2 months ago).

I get what you say and for the 26 million out of work, yes going back to the construction jobs, restaurants, fast food, service based industry is understandable. 

The point being is we have proven that millions can work from home removing them from the roads and wasting hours a day on commute. This also is a reduction on people on the road so those that have jobs like you where you work on site at various places also have a shorter commute.

[balthazar]

The 'office world' has dragged it's feet on the work from home metric for too long- having investments in 'brick & mortar' sites they allowed work from home just a few days a week for well over 10 years now. IF they go to a largely WFH model, look for a crash in commercial real estate as a result.

Toyota average buyer age : circa 52 yrs old.
OEMs have targeted the 'youth buyer' forever, and it hasn't worked since the 1960s. Toyota's last grand experiment on this road, the scion, was a failure.

[ocnblu]

6 minutes ago, balthazar said:

a failure

But... how on earth could THIS be a failure?  I mean... just LOOK AT IT! 

 

[G. David Felt]

20 hours ago, balthazar said:

The 'office world' has dragged it's feet on the work from home metric for too long- having investments in 'brick & mortar' sites they allowed work from home just a few days a week for well over 10 years now. IF they go to a largely WFH model, look for a crash in commercial real estate as a result.

Toyota average buyer age : circa 52 yrs old.
OEMs have targeted the 'youth buyer' forever, and it hasn't worked since the 1960s. Toyota's last grand experiment on this road, the scion, was a failure.

For tech companies that do not own their commercial property, I can see this becoming a reality as leases come up and yes that means a crash in commercial property. I know the 7 story building I work in for Dell Tech our lease is up at the end of the year. I can see the bulk of the 1,200 tech employees working from home. I still expect a physical office presence due to customer meetings.

My gut tells me that Dell will go from 7 to 3 floors in our building by the end of the year.

[balthazar]

And other companies, IF they go to 100% remote work, will be putting owned properties up for sale... for which they'll be a greatly reduced pool of potential buyers. Add to that the business that maintained physical property (restaurants & retailers) who will go out of business.
Will a commercial real estate crash spill over into a residential one?

[Robert Hall]

As a tech worker WFH for almost 3 years, I'm not really interested to going back to commuting to an cube in an office, though I may at some point in my career.    I do miss some aspects of office life, like going out to lunch w/ my team or happy hours...

[riviera74]

3 hours ago, balthazar said:

The 'office world' has dragged it's feet on the work from home metric for too long- having investments in 'brick & mortar' sites they allowed work from home just a few days a week for well over 10 years now. IF they go to a largely WFH model, look for a crash in commercial real estate as a result.

Toyota average buyer age : circa 52 yrs old.
OEMs have targeted the 'youth buyer' forever, and it hasn't worked since the 1960s. Toyota's last grand experiment on this road, the scion, was a failure.

A lot of those buildings will be reused by others.  The commercial real estate crash may spur new (rental) investments in a few years.  Remember, gentrification of Offices (not residential) starts with cheap buildings AND low rents.  Of course, it could take five years for that to actually happen.  In some cases, there simply is no substitute for a group of people working onsite.

 

As for Toyota and other OEMs, the average buyer age is a symptom of a much larger problem.  As always, the real issue is that too many cars at MSRP are priced too damn high.  Average transaction prices on new cars are already close to $40K, leased or financed.  What young people want is a NEW CAR priced at $10K, not $40K.  There are simply too many used cars in good enough shape at $20K or less that attracts young buyers, given that OEMs expect people to pay top dollar for the latest and greatest.  Also, do not underestimate weak demand thanks to semi-flat salaries because of rising health care costs that eat away at anything not health care related, including buying a new car.

For EVs to actually sell, they must be priced to dissuade people from buying a USED CAR, not a new car.  That is why low prices for BEVs are required.

[balthazar]

1 hour ago, riviera74 said:

A lot of those buildings will be reused by others.  The commercial real estate crash may spur new (rental) investments in a few years.  Remember, gentrification of Offices (not residential) starts with cheap buildings AND low rents.  Of course, it could take five years for that to actually happen.  In some cases, there simply is no substitute for a group of people working onsite.

You have more optimism towards the near future than I have.
My response to the bolded above is 'who?'

The private citizen is 70% of the economy, and beyond the 26 million to date out of work, there are even more than have simply retired early (and aren't tallied). A lot of companies are extending 'good will' and retaining staff even tho they're already feeling the downturn hard. That cannot & will not continue long-term. That means- more unemployment / more corporate contraction. That means less commercial demand. It's all interlinked.

There may not be any 'others'.

[G. David Felt]

13 hours ago, balthazar said:

You have more optimism towards the near future than I have.
My response to the bolded above is 'who?'

The private citizen is 70% of the economy, and beyond the 26 million to date out of work, there are even more than have simply retired early (and aren't tallied). A lot of companies are extending 'good will' and retaining staff even tho they're already feeling the downturn hard. That cannot & will not continue long-term. That means- more unemployment / more corporate contraction. That means less commercial demand. It's all interlinked.

There may not be any 'others'.

I could easily see investment groups buy up commercial building to turn them into apartments / condos. 

While I am not one of them suburbs is as close to the city I want to be, I know many love to live in dense cities. That could drive a change in the makeup of cities with more shopping or at least delivery to home as people move into commercial buildings changed to apartments.

Change is inevitable. I would say we should expect a 10 to 15% contraction in companies commercial space used as they figure out how to have workers work from home.

[riviera74]

There are people who want to move into big cities because of the ambience and the amenities, but most big cities (NYC, San Fran, Seattle) have far too little housing to meet the existing demand.  Hence gentrification in the last 15 years and rising rents.  Eventually, some buildings will be rezoned residential and relieve the pressure of rising demand for in-city housing.  If it requires a commercial real estate crash, so be it.  They are not making anymore land anyways.  The best thing big cities can do is rezone for more density once the Covid-19 pandemic fully subsides and people are looking for work and housing again.

[G. David Felt]

3 hours ago, riviera74 said:

There are people who want to move into big cities because of the ambiance and the amenities, but most big cities (NYC, San Fran, Seattle) have far too little housing to meet the existing demand.  Hence gentrification in the last 15 years and rising rents.  Eventually, some buildings will be rezoned residential and relieve the pressure of rising demand for in-city housing.  If it requires a commercial real estate crash, so be it.  They are not making anymore land anyways.  The best thing big cities can do is rezone for more density once the Covid-19 pandemic fully subsides and people are looking for work and housing again.

The flip side of this is even if there is a commercial real estate crash, even with rezoning you might not get the people as NY stands out as a perfect example of how super dense cities spread viruses faster than the suburbs or rural area and as such could scare many to want to live away from the dense city for the immediate future.

The current pandemic and leading doctors are saying this is far from over and could be worse next year much like the Flu of 1918 that got worse in 1919 but history only talks about the year the pandemic started.

I could see us with millions more infected next year and hundreds of thousands dying and making people want to get away from the dense cities.

[balthazar]

If people at large become disinterested in living in dense cities due to being pandemic hot spots, they're certainly going to think twice about moving into a converted office building where they fear going outside their front door. At least home owners can go into their yards.
Everything is in a holding pattern right now and likely thru the summer. If COVID comes back significantly in the fall, that holding pattern will push thru into next year. That's a LOT of taxes on empty buildings producing nothing. And if there's no buyers for these buildings, and no income to pay taxes, etc, the next inevitability is loan defaulting and a commercial real estate bubble going POP.

[balthazar]

This just in : the Lincoln / Rivian co-developed product is... DEAD. As in: cancelled (vs. delayed).

[G. David Felt]

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

This just in : the Lincoln / Rivian co-developed product is... DEAD. As in: cancelled (vs. delayed).

Yes, I posted that in the random thread with a bunch of other news.

Ford is focusing on their F-150 EV pickup and the Mach-e.

[G. David Felt]

Seems while we have a delay on the Hummer by GMC, they did release an updated teaser video.

https://www.autoblog.com/2020/04/29/gmc-hummer-ev-reveal-postponed-teased/

Excited to see removable roof panels and the story says that it will have the multi-gate that is on the Denali Trucks. 

Excited to see one and test drive it and who knows could end up buying one.

[G. David Felt]

Official GMC announcement about the delay of their Hummer by GMC reveal date. Development stays on track, production stays fall 2021 still with availability in first half of 2022.

Reveal will happen once GM gets their folks back to work. 

https://media.gmc.com/media/us/en/gmc/home.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2020/apr/0429-hummer.html

 

[G. David Felt]

According to Ken Morris, VP and head of the Electric / Autonomous vehicle division at GM, Mr. Morris believes GM will be ALL ELECTRIC Sooner rather than later in what people think.

To quote the write up at Electrek web site:

Projections out to 2030 say that we’re only going to have 15% electric vehicles on the road by 2030. I believe and we believe the number will be much higher once people start to experience electric vehicles.

He was asked if he believed we would have to wait a full decade before we saw vehicles customers would want to buy.

My hope and gut feel is that there’s going to be an inflection point in the mid-2020s where suddenly people are going to be buying these at a faster rate than anybody expects, just because the driving experience on these vehicles is fantastic.

And when you get used to charging your vehicle like a phone at night, when you charge it, and you don’t worry about it, you never have to stop at a gas station. There’s a lot to be said for that kind of lifestyle.

They posted a statement from him a year ago when he was head of Global Product Integrity.

I would say GM’s speed of that transition in terms of volumes is probably less huge than you would expect. IHS data says 90% still ICE 10 years from now. But you never know what’s going to happen when really good electric vehicles come out in volume, and the infrastructure starts coming around.

He was then asked if the collapse of oil prices would kill GM's EV program.

If you can sell a vehicle that doesn’t use any gas at all for the same price of a vehicle that does burn gas, you don’t have to do that math of, is it worth the payback or not? We’re not there yet.

Today we’re getting much closer, the research does tell us that for now a customer will pay a select premium for an EV vehicle, but they’re not going to pay a big premium. And so, our job is to get those things as close together as we can.

Morris wants GM to offer EV at a “broad band of price entry point.” He said that range of prices will come, and be profitable, “very quickly between now and 2025.”

Morris was asked if the Pandemic would slow down or kill any part of the GM EV Program.

We’re working from home, so engineers are working from home, and designers are working from home, but they’re going through extraordinary lengths to make sure that we’re maintaining the timing on the programs. We’re constantly going full-throttle to maintain timing on these programs.

My guess is when we’re able to come back to work, and we’re able to get our hands on hardware and clay models and all those things, we may have to work harder, maybe put more resources on these programs to keep them on time. But there’s no slowdown, none.

But a shift to electric vehicles is not possible at all without a fervent belief in the technology. Morris believes. With each statement about an “all-electric” future, GM raises the stakes.

We’re still more than a year away from production of the GMC Hummer EV pickup, scheduled to begin in late 2021. By that time, the 2022 Bolt EUV will launch. The Cadillac Lyriq luxury SUV launches in 2022. Other GM EVs scheduled for production are the GMC Hummer EV SUT, two Buick SUVs, and a hand-built flagship Cadillac sedan dubbed Celistiq.

That mid-2020s inflection point is quickly approaching.

https://electrek.co/2020/05/01/general-motors-says-it-will-be-all-electric-sooner-than-people-would-think/

 

[balthazar]

Typical PR. Look no further than “they’re going to be profitable between now...”

OEMs can launch 1000 EVs, or 10,000, but buyers have to BUY. And if that dream that everyone is lazily and effortlessly charging overnight was true, the constant clamoring for and building thousands of public chargers would also not be happening.

Edited May 3, 2020 by balthazar

[riviera74]

52 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Typical PR. Look no further than “they’re going to be profitable between now...”

OEMs can launch 1000 EVs, or 10,000, but buyers have to BUY. And if thos dream that everyone is lazily and effortlessly charging overnight were true, the constant clamoring for and building thousands of public chargers would also not be happening.

If a new BEV is cheaper than a new equivalent ICE vehicle, that will change minds (and create buyers).  BEVs must be cheaper upfront in order for that future to happen; the easy take profits early mentality will NOT allow that to happen.

[ocnblu]

Doesn't matter if it's $1500 MSRP. 

Wow, Morris is clearly insane.  A "Mad Scientist" is as kind a description I can think of.

[G. David Felt]

5 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

Doesn't matter if it's $1500 MSRP. 

Wow, Morris is clearly insane.  A "Mad Scientist" is as kind a description I can think of.

I totally disagree as Morris sees the future and where we will move to and how people want less maintenance than ICE requires along with cleaner emissions. As such, I believe he is right, once you have EVs in all price tiers, that cost less out of pocket for each paycheck, people will change.

West coast has chargers everywhere, July 1 2016 is when charging mandates went into effect and why the West coast is ahead of the east coast in charging infastructure.

https://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=51-50-0427

This regulation states that 20% of all available parking in any structure or area such as parking garage, apartments, condo's, etc. is to have charging installed. As such it is very easy to recharge an EV far more than driving out to find a gas station.

[ocnblu]

Modern cars require semi-major maintenance every 100k miles these days.  Oil changes require a half hour every 5-7k miles.  A half hour will get you, what, 50 miles of range on an EV?  How often will an EV require tires?  Much more often than an ICE vehicle.

[G. David Felt]

11 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

Modern cars require semi-major maintenance every 100k miles these days.  Oil changes require a half hour every 5-7k miles.  A half hour will get you, what, 50 miles of range on an EV?  How often will an EV require tires?  Much more often than an ICE vehicle.

No oil changes ever, no major maintenance every 100,000 miles let alone the still tagged mid 45 to 50K maintenance auto's still list. Leaf and Bolt give far more than 50 miles in 30 min when on a fast charger and the tech is constantly improving. Chevrolet lists for the 2020 and earlier models 90 miles in 30 min. But the 2021 as a 2022 model on the new bev platform is stated to be considerable faster, more inline with gassing up an ICE auto. So all things change and improve just as ICE did over the last 100 plus years. 2020 Nissan Leaf gives 80% battery capacity in 40 min for a Quick charge connection. Yet, plug in at night at home and always have a full battery in the morning.

EV's DO NOT need tires more often than an ICE auto.

You sound like SMK about his MB love affair.  I get it you love ICE auto's, nothing wrong with that, but the future is changing so get used to it.

Chevrolet Bolt Maintenance Schedule:

Here is the excellent Chevrolet VOLT Maintenance Schedule:

Equal in Size, Chevrolet Trax Maintenance Schedule:

So let's try again about which auto is more expensive to maintain between EV and ICE.

[G. David Felt]

Chairman Bill Fords daughter Alexandra Ford English has joined the board of Rivian cementing a deeper and long term co engineering strategy for Ford with Rivian in building EVs for Fords product portfolio.

To quote the news story:

"Our strategic partnership with Rivian plays an important role in the future of fully networked battery electric vehicles,” said President and CEO Jim Hackett in Ford's announcement. “With Alexandra’s experience in mobility and self-driving services, she will bring a unique perspective to Rivian’s board during this transformational time in our industry." 

“Alexandra and I share a deep passion for mobility and electrification, and her connection to Ford’s long family role in transportation is something special. I am looking forward to working closely with her and the perspective that she will bring to the Board,” said Rivian CEO RJ Scaringe.

https://www.autoblog.com/2020/05/01/alexandra-english-rivian-board/

 

[ocnblu]

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

So let's try again about which auto is more expensive to maintain between EV and ICE

Chevy Cruze LT hatchback:  $23k MSRP.  Chevy Bolt LT hatchback:  $37k MSRP.

More expensive to buy, terrible resale value when you trade.  Easy choice.  Except Chevy gave away Cruze customers to Honda, Toyota, Hyundai and Kia.

[riviera74]

1 hour ago, ocnblu said:

Chevy Cruze LT hatchback:  $23k MSRP.  Chevy Bolt LT hatchback:  $37k MSRP.

More expensive to buy, terrible resale value when you trade.  Easy choice.  Except Chevy gave away Cruze customers to Honda, Toyota, Hyundai and Kia.

Mostly because nobody bought the Cruze, just like nobody wanted the Cobalt, or any really small Chevy since the bad old days of the Citation and the Chevette.

[ocnblu]

39 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

Mostly because nobody bought the Cruze, just like nobody wanted the Cobalt, or any really small Chevy since the bad old days of the Citation and the Chevette.

They sold 184k in 2017 and 142k in 2018.  That's a lot of nobodies.

GM reported that 2018 US sales for the Bolt totaled 18,019, down 22% from the previous year.

[G. David Felt]

On 5/2/2020 at 2:38 PM, ocnblu said:

Chevy Cruze LT hatchback:  $23k MSRP.  Chevy Bolt LT hatchback:  $37k MSRP.

More expensive to buy, terrible resale value when you trade.  Easy choice.  Except Chevy gave away Cruze customers to Honda, Toyota, Hyundai and Kia.

Fine we will look at this comparison you want. 10 Year ownership.

Chevrolet Cruze LT Maintenance schedule:

• Using National average cost of a regular gallon of gas is $1.87 a gallon right now. So 12,000 miles a year driving averaging 34 mpg. So this is 353 gallons of gas a year equal $660.11 in yearly fuel costs. 10 yr Fuel cost of ownership $6,601.10
• Oil Changes every 7,500 miles @ average cost of $39.99 means 13 changes for 10yrs cost of $399.90
• Passenger compartment air filter every 2 years = 5 filters @ $20 average = $100.00
• 45K mile service - Local Dealership charge $499.95
• 90K Mile Service - Local Dealership charge $629.95
• 97,5K Mile Serivice - Timing belt replacement depending on engine choice in auto - $366.00 - Optional

Total Cost of Maintenance for 10 years = $8,230.99 or $8,596.99

Chevrolet Bolt LT Maintenance Schedule:

• Passenger compartment air filter every 2 years = 5 filters @ $20 average = $100.00
• Electricity National Average @ 13.2 cents per kilowatt, 66kWh per 259 miles for 3,057 kWh of energy used for 12,000 miles per year at a cost of $403.52 per year fueling cost, 10 years = $4,035.24 total cost

Total Cost of Maintenance for 10 years = $4,135.24

10 yr comparison.

• Chevy Cruze cost $23K MSRP + Maintenance cost $8,230.99 = $31,230.99
• Chevy Bolt cost $37K MSRP + Maintenance cost $4,135.24 = $41,135.24

Yes the Bolt costs a bit more, but you gain many things in not having the emissions of the auto as you drive it, less noise, fueling from home, less maintenance, etc. etc. etc.

Cost per service as posted by my local Chevrolet dealership.

@balthazar Updated to reflect the national average on gas, electricity and corrected as the web site I looked at said 32 mpg average, KBB says 34 mpg average.

[ocnblu]

The 1.4t Ecotec engine has a timing chain.  Zero maintenance for the life of the engine.  And I guarantee you the Cruze will be worth more than the Bolt (although neither will be worth much.  Prius doesn't hold its value either.)

Plus, everyone knows dealerships are the most expensive places to get your car serviced.  The Cruze can be serviced easily by small independent shops... the Bolt will NEED to go to a dealership.

Edited May 3, 2020 by ocnblu

[oldshurst442]

I googled Cavalier, Cobalt and Cruze US sales

The Cavalier in 1985  had 400 000 units sold. In 1986 had 350 000 units. 1987-1990 had 300 000 units per yer sold. The Cavalier also had 300 000 units sold constantly in the 1990s but also had many 200 000- 250 000 units sold too. 

The Cobalt had two or three years of 200 000  units sold

The trend of 200 000-250 000 units sold per year sold for the Cruze continued.

Id say, 200 000-300 000 units for econobox small FWD Chevys are the norm.  

Is that a big enough number to say Chevrolet conceded to Honda, Toyota, Kia and Hyundai?  

Well...I googled Civic, Corolla, Elantra and Forte US sales figures...

If I made a mistake somewhere, the Civic and Corolla figures always stayed relatively constant in their sales in the US. And that would be surprisingly as much as the Cavalier/Cobalt/Cruze sales figures.  Like I said, unless I made a mistake...

And there was never any huge bumps in sales for anyone of these cars. Not for the Civic, not for the Corolla. The Civic and Corolla always sold in and around 300 000 units. They dipped in the 250 000 units and had some 400 000 units sold, but their sweet spot were always in the 300 000s. The Cavalier did see a few 400 000 units sold, to 350 000 units to many more 200 000-250 000 units. Id say, Chevys sweet spot would be between 200 000-250 000 untis.

The Elantra went from below 100 000 units to selling constantly in the 200 000-250 000 untis sold so I think the Elantra has become the Cavalier/Cobalt/Cruze.  

But to say that Chevrolet conceded market share to Honda, Toyota and Hyunda/Kia I think is false.  Maybe a tad to the Elantra as the Forte still sells like shyte. 

I think its more accurate to say that BECAUSE the market has shifted to CUVs that GM is just cutting ties to the small FWD econobox car and just wants to concentrate on producing and selling small FWD oriented AWD econobox equivalent CUVs...

The CR-V in the late 1990s has gone from 100 000 units to close to 400 000 units in 2019.  200 000 units in  2010.  300 000 units in 2013...

Same pattern for the RAV4.  Except the RAV4 has eclipsed the 400 000 units thrice the last 3 years.

The Equinox is a slightly larger vehicle than any Cavalier/Cobalt/Cruze and CUV that Im mentioning, but the Equinox barely hit 100 000 units prior to 2008 and since 2008 has gained a lot of sales going to 200 000 in 2011, 300 000 in 2017 and in 2019 350 000. 

When one has a certain narrative stuck in his mind, one will invent all kinds of theories to justify one's opinion.  Reality says otherwise. In response to the usual ad nauseum anti-EV rhetoric...

Although the Bolt sells like shyte as compared to what a FWD econobox Chevy done, Chevy doing away with these cars has NOTHING to do with the BOLT and EVERYTHING to do with CUVs...and NOTHING still to conceding sales to the Japanese (maybe Koreans though) but maintaining and possibly growing market share...

https://carsalesbase.com/us-chevrolet-cavalier/

https://carsalesbase.com/us-chevrolet-cobalt/

https://carsalesbase.com/us-chevrolet-cruze/

https://carsalesbase.com/us-honda-civic/

https://carsalesbase.com/us-toyota-corolla-sedan/

https://carsalesbase.com/us-hyundai-elantra/

https://carsalesbase.com/us-toyota-rav4/

https://carsalesbase.com/us-honda-cr-v/

https://carsalesbase.com/us-chevrolet-equinox/

 

PS: I dont think the Citation nor the Chevette done damage to future Cavalier/Cobalt/Cruze sales.  I dont think those cars even done harm to Celebrity/Lumina/Impala sales either as all these other cars still sold well DESPITE the shytiness pf the Citation and the Chevette...

What I think done more damage is the constant name changing...

Vega to Chevette to Cavalier to Cobalt to Cruze.

Citation to Celebrity to Lumina to Impala. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 3, 2020 by oldshurst442

[G. David Felt]

3 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

The 1.4t Ecotec engine has a timing chain.  Zero maintenance for the life of the engine.  And I guarantee you the Cruze will be worth more than the Bolt (although neither will be worth much.  Prius doesn't hold its value either.)

Kelly Blue Book shows the 2017 Cruze after two years for LT based on the 23K MSRP is worth $11,607. Value Loss of $11,393 or 49.5% loss in value after 2 years.

Kelly Blue Book shows the 2017 Bolt after two years for LT based on the 37K MSRP is worth $25,471. Value Loss of $11,529 or 31.159% loss.

Bolt holds a better value over the Cruze.

[oldshurst442]

 

6 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Kelly Blue Book shows the 2017 Cruze after two years for LT based on the 23K MSRP is worth $11,607. Value Loss of $11,393 or 49.5% loss in value after 2 years.

Kelly Blue Book shows the 2017 Bolt after two years for LT based on the 37K MSRP is worth $25,471. Value Loss of $11,529 or 31.159% loss.

Bolt holds a better value over the Cruze.

When one has a certain narrative stuck in one's mind, one will invent all kinds of theories to justify one's opinion.  Reality says otherwise.

Edited May 3, 2020 by oldshurst442

[ocnblu]

29 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Kelly Blue Book shows the 2017 Cruze after two years for LT based on the 23K MSRP is worth $11,607. Value Loss of $11,393 or 49.5% loss in value after 2 years.

Kelly Blue Book shows the 2017 Bolt after two years for LT based on the 37K MSRP is worth $25,471. Value Loss of $11,529 or 31.159% loss.

Bolt holds a better value over the Cruze.

On the NADA website (the most authoritative car value website, the one insurance companies ask us to use because of their accuracy) -

2017 Cruze LT hatchback, no additional options, with 36k miles, clean retail value $14,225.  68% of $21k original MSRP.

2017 Bolt LT hatchback, no additional options, with 36k miles, clean retail value $21,775.  59% of $37k original MSRP.

"The narrative" stands.

Edited May 3, 2020 by ocnblu

[balthazar]

2 hours ago, dfelt said:

Fine we will look at this comparison you want. 10 Year ownership.

• Your gas prices are well over the national average.  What you should have considered is the (much lower) national average for regular gas ($1.87) and the (much higher) national average of electricity (13.2 cents/kW).

• You used the minimum rating of the 31/47 MPG Cruze. That's not real-world or objective.

• You forgot the permit & labor charges to upgrade the home for an electric car charger, plus the cost of the charger itself.

[G. David Felt]

14 hours ago, balthazar said:

• Your gas prices are well over the national average.  What you should have considered is the (much lower) national average for regular gas ($1.87) and the (much higher) national average of electricity (13.2 cents/kW).

• You used the minimum rating of the 31/47 MPG Cruze. That's not real-world or objective.

• You forgot the permit & labor charges to upgrade the home for an electric car charger, plus the cost of the charger itself.

Yes I COULD have used national averages, but since the individual uses his local are info, I choose to use my local info.

I could if I wanted faster charger add those electrical upgrades to the home. Yet everyone has 110 charging which has been proven to be sufficient for overnight charging having a full battery in the morning. Hence no added cost.

On top of this while I know in your area they do not require this, but for almost 15 years now, Washington state has made it a requirement for a 220V 30amp outlet in garages for all forms of electrical needs from auto charging to Wire feed arc welding. So here it is common to already have the outlet in the garage. At most your looking at $250 to $500 depending on the fancy level of your 220 charger you want to buy and plug in for use.

Also forgot to mention that Ocnblu brought up the maintenance issue and I think it is well covered above that EVs have much less maintenance than ICE auto's.

[ocnblu]

27 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Yes I COULD have used national averages, but since the individual uses his local are info, I choose to use my local info.

What local info?

[balthazar]

• A business case can make all the sense in the world for an individual in one location.
But you can't then say 'You're wrong; it's cheaper to own an EV' based solely on your location, when they are in a different location.

• I have never encountered an as-built 220V outlet in a garage. The home I GC'd in 2016 doesn't have one. Plus, you have a majority of older homes that would've predated such a code if there were one. Like a 'Model T garage' that's never been updated/rebuilt.

When I googled around, a 110 outlet is generally regarded as being good for 3 or 4 miles for an hour of charging. That's only about 50 miles overnight. Also saw a few estimates for a Level 2 charger installation being a grand to $1500. Depends on the existing in-house wiring/panel too, don't forget. Some of those Model T houses still may have 20A knob & tube systems.

[riviera74]

19 hours ago, ocnblu said:

They sold 184k in 2017 and 142k in 2018.  That's a lot of nobodies.

GM reported that 2018 US sales for the Bolt totaled 18,019, down 22% from the previous year.

Yes the Bolt did not sell very well.  Point taken.

As for the Cobalt, that can be explained fairly easily by two things.  Trax and Equinox sales have spiked in the last five years.  And the Koreans/Japanese have been kicking GM small car butt since the 1980s.

[balthazar]

Correction: Bolt sold quite well... FOR AN EV.

[G. David Felt]

On 5/2/2020 at 6:03 PM, ocnblu said:

On the NADA website (the most authoritative car value website, the one insurance companies ask us to use because of their accuracy) -

2017 Cruze LT hatchback, no additional options, with 36k miles, clean retail value $14,225.  68% of $21k original MSRP.

2017 Bolt LT hatchback, no additional options, with 36k miles, clean retail value $21,775.  59% of $37k original MSRP.

"The narrative" stands.

We'll since you did not post the actual web site and screen captures to go along with your info, let me correct this for you from the Nada site as of this morning comparing to equal 2017 LT Cruze to BOLT.

Since you also love Diesel, I added the Diesel Cruze too that shows the BOLT still has better trade-in value, clean retail value than the cruse.

BOLT based on NADA Site shows 57% of Retained Value

Cruze Gas on NADA Site shows 63% of Retained Value

Cruze Diesel NADA Site shows 60% of Retained Value

Here the BOLT has More Horsepower, More Torque to go along with the less maintenance. Which for many other than the cost increase would love to not have to deal with trips for repairs, etc.

 

[frogger]

Soyfan just posted a review of the slightly updated Bolt a few hours ago..

 

[G. David Felt]

1 hour ago, frogger said:

Soyfan just posted a review of the slightly updated Bolt a few hours ago..

 

Decent updates, but still has the terrible black n white dash and I agree with him on the inconsistent stitching found around the auto, the hard plastics, etc. There are things to question, but it is long in the tooth and needed to have a refresh sooner than waiting for the new platform that comes out next year.

Also after covering the whole dash, he ignores the sport mode. Sport mode changes the performance and driving dynamic.

Good comparison between the Leaf and the Hyundai EVs.

[ocnblu]

dfelt, why compare a Cruze SEDAN to a Bolt HATCHBACK?  You have to compare the Cruze HATCHBACK to the Bolt HATCHBACK (or SUV, as Chevy calls it).

[riviera74]

2 hours ago, ocnblu said:

dfelt, why compare a Cruze SEDAN to a Bolt HATCHBACK?  You have to compare the Cruze HATCHBACK to the Bolt HATCHBACK (or SUV, as Chevy calls it).

The Bolt was not an SUV.  The Equinox is; the Tahoe even more so.  Unfortunately, nobody buys hatchbacks anymore.  They buy CUVs and SUVs now.