Chevrolet Volt tops Sierra Club ranking of plug-in hybrids

Yes, hybrids and PHVs with small batteries are cheaper. Which means they are attainable for a larger portion of the populace. They won't save any gas if nobody buys them, even with a lower price tag. Before repeating the unfairness of the tax credit, the initial draft of the bill wouldn't have given a dime to the PPI.

The Prius and PPI are both designed to be cost effective and practical. People just want a bit more for the price difference between the two.

Texas is one of the biggest markets for the Prius. The Volt and Leaf are selling there. Why not offer the PPI there?

Our bad mouthing isn't what is bringing down PPI sales.

The US isn't Japan or Europe. We have an issue with urban sprawl so that most of us don't and can't live in a city. I don't think marketing the PPI as a city car will help with its sales.

Maybe the incentives goal wasn't to promote a clean and practical plug in.

The PPI's sales might take off if Toyota ever feels it is ready to go nationwide.

"Last year Toyota sold 12,750 plug-in Prii in the 10 months it was available, it currently appears that number will not be matched in 2013, which would make the plug-in Prius the first EV sold in the US to lose sales year over year."
June 2013 Plug-In Electric Vehicle Sales Report Card

I originally though that the PPI would surpass Volt sales if it had gone nationally. I am beginning to doubt that. It's beginning to look like the people that really wanted a PPI bought regardless of where they lived. A look at where PPIs are registered would be interesting. Expanding sales to other states won't net as much extra sales then. Perhaps Toyota knows this.

For the record I don't think the PPI is a bad car. I just think that for the wait and the price, it comes up short.

 

Good new that the liftback sales are up since at end of may YTD was down significantly 13%), so with the better performacne in June its only down 3% YTD compared to 2012. Never saw anything explaining the dip.. anyone have data on why?

Not surprising Toyota neglected to mention PiP sales; 584 for June, its worst full month ever. Yep that design really is appealing to the main stream.

Not bad given how much driving you do. For more modest "city" drivers can do better. For the past year my average MPGe on Eletricity has been 125MPGe, and on Gas 38MPG (the winter short trips and ERDTT is a killer).

This month was light as I had a 11 day trip, so only ~700 miles..


but unlike may where I used almost no gas, this month I had to use gas for an airport run.

and I had 5miles of EV left because I turned off MM based on distance to destination but then hit a bit of construction traffic that dropped my speed for the last 10 miles to 30-40mph leaving some EV miles in the battery. (I use MM to save EV for the last 15 miles of "city" traffic at the airport. )

Note the latter image is only partially cherry picking, its just my more a recent trip with gas, though I think it may be my best MPG in my volt @ 62MPG (Maybe my car is finally breaking in ;-) as I'm approaching 3000 Ice miles after 23 months of use. ) But I've had dozens of nice-weather days of 50+MPG and 50miles per charge.



There are a few PiP users with > 100MPGe over a tank/month, but very few.

 

You have to point out what needs to change for the existing PiP sales to take off. What is Toyota changing? Or is the idea that it will take off significantly on it's own?

I'm as solid a Prius buyer as anyone on the forum, but even I take painful note of the 11 mile EV range. That is a lot of money for a lot less range than any other PHEV. I can pretty much say that if my one-way work distance was 5 miles I would be pedaling a bike to work (if safe)....just like the last time I lived that close to work. Right now any PHEV is a thinking persons vehicle, and that can be a problem for the PiP.

It may sound strange, but I get the idea that unlike the Prius, the PiP performance was not a case of the system being built to achieve a certain amount of range, but just putting in a certain form factor battery and then accepting the range. That is not good engineering and definitely not how the preceding Prius generations were engineered. It shows.

The advantage of the PiP is it is still a extremely reliable auto that does fit well with many. That is what Ford and GM have as a major shortcoming: history. It is not the Ford and GM PHEV designs are inferior to the PiP, just the previous decades overall auto reliability. If GM and Ford start proving that their PHEVs are as reliable as a Prius, then I see big PiP sales problems (but I'm not sure that proof is assured, or even possible).

 

I believe correcting the misinformation and educating the design goal of the current gen should improve sales. Toyota could explain the benefit better through a simple yet clear marketing. The current marketing as a Prius that plugs in isn't working. I think the focus on EV in the city and Prius on the highway is a better way of explaining PiP. Pointing out as the cleanest plugin hybrid on the market is also a selling point. PiP is also the plugin hybrid with the largest cargo.

NS4 revealed about 1.5 years ago should be the direction Toyota is going.

Toyota | Toyota Reveals NS4 Advanced Plug-In Hybrid Concept

"Toyota engineers were challenged to design a new mid-sized concept for potential global market introduction by 2015. The NS4 concept is a dedicated plug-in hybrid, separate from the Prius family, designed with future mobility requirements in mind."

"NS4’s advanced powertrain targets a next-generation Hybrid Synergy Drive plug-in system featuring reductions in component size and weight with improved overall fuel economy, better acceleration and longer all-electric range, while maintaining a short charge time."

 

So as long as sales of Volt are better than Prius PHV, all is well? Wow! Some have definitely lost touch with reality.

Here's a wake-up call, other GM sales for June:

32,871 Cruze
23,645 Equinox
21,288 Malibu
17,255 Impala
43,259 Silverado

Attempts to divert attention away from the cold hard fact that those profitable traditional vehicles are absolutely crushing Volt won't change anything. They are just excuses to feel better about a really bad situation. GM doesn't have an alternative available.

Want to compare to Toyota? How about acknowledging that they could easily follow Ford's approach of sacrificing cargo room for more battery, which would increase both range & power. Then there's the fact that Toyota already offers an HSD system which pairs a larger motor with a larger engine. There is also the reality that the system is extremely efficient even without plugging in, as well as profitable. Take all that and offer it in a body built as an alternative configuration.

What will GM do?

 

What will GM do.. we don't know for sure as they have not done a press release but we hope/expect GM will expect the Volt to follow the trajectory of new innovation technologies.. which is slower process than many would like. Hybrids also took a long time to catch on. Your logic was used by anti-hybrid to try to argue against them.

Sure, you can choose a few cars that sell well, Toyota Camry also does well. But that is irrelevant.
The volt outsold 13 other GM models last month.. including corvette..

The comparison with the PiP is become a few fanboys keep claiming its the mainstream choice while the volt is not.. which is clearly NOT supported by sales data. Facts and data, please, not FUD and delusion.

The Prius HSD is a fine hybrid. It could have made an outstanding PHEV. the Sierra Club found, like many, the PiP is lacking as an EV. Yes toyota could have been a leader and had the first PHEV by years, or they could have had a larger battery with a little less cargo space, like Ford (which Sierra rated better). They choose not to. I'm glad your inside information says the PiP is profitable, can you cite that source? Will they be rolling their profits into a more efficient car, or just distributing profits back to Japan?

 

Thanks for the reply. I'm not sure calling it a "marketing" mistake is a viable explanation. For quite a few years Prius sales were brisk with virtually no "marketing" at the national level. Yet, getting a Prius was a no-brainer. Still is for best mpg. The thing making me think twice about a PiP is fully understanding it, not any marketing shortcoming (other than still not selling it in FL, the fourth largest population state?!). Likewise, being the cleanest plugin hybrid does not mean much. The whole reason for getting a PHEV is not to be in that battle to begin with.

While fun to observe, there was only a quip about more range and paragraphs of flashy stuff description. Perfect for an auto show, but short on specifics. Unfortunately, the original question about what would cause the PiP sales to improve is still elusive.

Don't misunderstand me. I'm not an enemy of the PiP. It may be my next car, but the gap has closed immensely among PHEVs. Toyota has to make a big move to reclaim the high ground in PHEV offerings. I wish they would so I could return to no-brainer decisions.....but the burden is on Toyota, not me, to make that happen.

 

You do realize you are near one of the most aggressive volume retailers of Volts in the country? You should go to Stingray Chevrolet and take a test drive.

 

Time is needed more than anything. The first-year jitters combined with simply not being available are barriers that will overcome themselves. No redesign is needed. Prius PHV is already configured to match middle-market purchase priorities.

We knew the misconceptions related to batteries would be a challenge to deal with. Fallout from the first attempts was the uncertainty, hence the delay faced now. Fortunately, just the act of taking that next step of national rollout will stimulate sales even in the markets already established.

Selling a car that will basically be thought of as an appliance will never make an enthusiast happy. Acceptance of vehicles they consider dull & boring to achieve business-sustaining sales isn't taken seriously. Arguing with them is a futile endeavor. The only thing it actually accomplishes is to provide confirmation that priorities were correct.

As the dust settles, those who didn't understand what was needed will grow silent. Dealing with that more-is-better nonsense is a pain, but it's nothing new. We've been through it many times in the past.

 

Then why delay?

 

Yes I pointed out the tiny range 11 miles, and tax credit in 2010. Weren't you arguing that the battery size was optimal, and sales would follow back then? If you keep claiming that, and complaining about how poor toyota needs more government money, I will keep confronting you. Just stop making the same tired wrong arguments, now that the facts are out.

Again you say, I am mad at toyota, when I simply point out, that the strategy was likely to fail, High price premium, small battery, was likely to fail, despite the tax credit structure being a given.

Come on now again. It really is childish all this blaim of the tax credit. I didn't rwrite it, but toyota did help write it. The rules are exceedingly fair to toyota. They knew about them before they put out the car.

What do you want, the government to cut toyota checks for $7500 for every car they produce and export. The battery in the phv likely costs them less than $2000 more than the one in the liftback,. The contributing factor is Toyota's choice to price the car high despite lack of electric range, not that the government is not giving them a lot of money. It is sour grapes on your part. Toyota is getting more per kwh than any other manufacturer, I am just tired of you bringing up the excuses every time. Please it is completely childish.

Reason for pour sales, initial pricing very high after tax credits for little gain in ev driving experience. There I fixed it for you. Other problem, didn't roll out to other states. Claiming toyota was right to put a small battery in it, and do the minimum, buecause tax credits will dry up, was confronted every year. No one is going to propose in congress, to simply cut toyota a bigger check, to continue to put a small battery in the car.

Again, I didn't write this policy. If I had, I would not have lowered the number to 4kwh, and would have it run out for foreign manufacture. GM was in the room along with toyota. Toyota got it to start lower, GM got it to maximize at their battery size. Congress bent over backwards to give toyota and gm money to get these cars out. Toyota did the minimum. They can change now, but the strategy like the 50 mile range in the IQ bev was a bad one.

Stop claiming that we need to change the tax credit. Toyota wrote the rules. They need to play within them.

We can agree to some reasons, like toyota's choice to heavily discount in NJ, instead of making the cars available in better selling states, but the tax credit wining does no good.

The two forms
A) the cars need to be compared without tax credits
This doesn't fly, since people buy them with the credits.

B) It will fail when credits disappear
Also false, battery prices are falling. If DOE is right, this will be down to $300/kwh by 2020. That is only 2100 for a 7kwh pack.

 

That had already been pointed out, many reasons without any benefit coming from sooner.

What would there be to gain from sending out 2013 inventory to dealers right at the start of clearance time?

 

You have a good point. Prius "marketing" has always been through word of mouth. Enthusiasts not fully understanding PiP is probably the underlying reason why the sales are where it is now.


PiP was designed to have the advantage of EV in the city driving condition and a full hybrid experience for longer highway drives. As mentioned before, EPA did not get the concept or unwilling to update their testing procedure. Their test procedure runs through both city and highway (in pair) with each fuel. Therefore, PiP came out with funny figures. Square peg didn't fit into a round hole.

I use PiP pretty much per the design goal. For every trip, I think of where to use EV miles and where to use HV (if any). EV miles are used where I know HV mode gas engine will start and stop often (city). HV miles are used for long continuous highway drives. I get about 12 EV miles per charge (132 MPGe) and 54 MPG on gas. The electric rating I got is totally different from 95 MPGe EPA rating due to how I utilize (differently) with each fuel.

Volt did not have to face that dilemma with EPA because it was design to operate full EV for both city and highway.

I am not understanding this statement. Can you explain the battle you are referring to?

You have gone chicken head cut-off, dude. I have said the tax incentive structure was unfair back then and it is still unfair now. Nothing has changed. We are now looking at the result of it. Volt's inability to sell even with additional $5,000 dealer/GM incentive is also affecting the PiP (and other plugins as well) sales.

The incentive should not be based on the battery size. It should be based on the gallons of gas it saves. It doesn't matter how it is achieved. What matters is the result. That's how the prior successfully tax incentive was structured on. The current battery size structure based around Volt battery size is a failure. It is unfair for the EVs, other plugin hybrids, regular hybrids or even Diesels.

I am bringing up the fairness based on the gallon saved results for all technologies (including Diesel). You keep confronting me thinking I am asking the government to give Toyota more money, LOL. Have a great day.

 

I don't understand. You made your point in 2010. I disagree with you, but do not object to your opinion about fairness. LIfe is not fair.

What in the world in 2013, does your idea of tax fairness, have to do with the sierra club picking the volt. Again, toyota wrote the rules, and understands them. I have nothing to do with writing the policy, but toyota should be able to sell with this policy.

As for the volt not selling as well as the leaf, now that the leaf dropped the price, absolutely. GM needs to pull out costs in the next generation. This is rather obvious, and there are plenty of places the volt can be improved. None of this has anything to do with the tax credits.

Again, the point is moot. The credits have been in effect, and Toyota should be already designing the next generation car, with knowledge of them, and the new knowledge that the old strategy, doing the minimum, and pricing the car high has failed.

I don't really think its productive to discuss tax policy in this thread. You said your piece years ago, and I don't know why you keep bringing it up. I don't agree with your premise, but again, I am not in congress. Toyota needs to deal with the politicial reality of the credits. I don't hear them whining about them. I hope they address buyers needs and the political reality and add battery capacity.

Again, not why the policy was put in place. Congress is never fair. IMHO though congress wrote these incentives to favor toyota and gm, and had them in the room when negotiating them. If Toyota thinks it got a raw deal let them speak up. Instead I hear them asking for money for more money for fuel cells, and saying batteries are not ready for bevs. If they would actually support plug-ins, and work with the rules, they would do better. I am hoping that will take place in the next generation. Right now they seem to not want to give much support to plug-ins at all, but I am hoping that changes.

 

That is a big factor. Just referring back to the EV ESTIMATE misunderstandings a few months ago should make that obvious.

 

The only impact the Volt has on PiP and other plug ing sales is taking potential customers.. Volt is the best selling plug in in the US, but new concepts take a while to gain market traction. Its not terribly surprising that Sierra club rankings and sales are correlated.

The incentives were NOT about a direct savings, but to encourage investment in the next generation technology to transform the space. This was not cash-for-clunkers, a different program explicitly about trading in old cars for high-MPG new cars.

But even if you want to talk about baseing it on reducing gas, the predictive models back then, and the actual data now, show that bigger batteries, at least up to the 15-25kWh range, save more fuel. The median volt MPG is > 170 and the average on voltstats is > 130. The average Plug in Prius on Fuelly is a median of 69 with an average of 80 MPG for 2012 and a median of 65 and mean of 69 for 2013s PiPs. (Might be an interesting sampling bias going there).

Using the median, as the credit is per car not per mile, the PiP's 2500 credit for 4.4kWh bought an increase of 70-50=20MPG while the volts credit of $7500 for 16kWh bought an increase of 170-50=120MPG. And of course BEVs like the leaf and sparc can save even more (at least if you only count that car.. I would use more in a leaf since my long trips would be in the wife's CUV).

 

My point was the effectiveness of the incentive and the result from it. My belief is that a fair and balance incentive would spur the plugin interest as the best plugin vehicle would have higher chance of succeeding.

The discussion started from Sierra club not understanding what MPGe means, neither were the policy makers. The incentive was written before understanding the effectiveness of plugin vehicles.

As you said, such is life. I am just pointing out how it played out. If I have the power, I would change it.

Don't pretend like NS4 was never unveiled.

I could see why Toyota acted the way they did. This is how I think it went. At the end of Gen3 design, the plugin bill came about. It is too late to redesign it to fit more battery in that platform. They tried to add 5.2 kWh pack but it affected the cargo space so they worked hard to get the 4.4 kWh pack qualify for the tax credit.

The timing was good for GM because Volt was still in the design stage.

I still believe PiP has the optimal battery size for that platform/generation. Toyota did a great job balancing/addressing many criteria. There is no doubt their next dedicated plugin hybrid platform will be better and expand the potential buyers.

You are bad mouthing Toyota and PiP because they got caught in bad timing of the product cycle. That's pretty silly and you are acting upon congress (opposite of progress).

Volt gas saving is not 3x like the incentive amount. That was my point.

The prior successful incentive also took account of the gas saving per the comparable vehicle size. So, the gallons Volt saved should be in reference to a compact car consumption. Similarly, PiP gallon saved compared to a midsize consumption.

It worked well. Diesels were qualified per the amount of fuel it saved from a comparable gas model. That incentive structure was technology neutral and focused on a common goal. The current model is battery biased. It is not EV biased because it is capped at 16 kWh (Volt size).

 

In all your arguing for this tax credit bs, I really don't think you are making the point you think you are.

1) Toyota helped write the tax credit
2) Toyota has marketed small batteries being better, and chose a small battery design in spite of the tax credit
3) Sierra Club seemed to understand the EPA rankings just fine. Tax credits have nothing to do with this.

And this has to do with your whining that the tax credit is unfair matters how?
You and John seem to be arguing that the prius phv is fine as it is and the small battery strategy is working.

All I am saying is this avoids reality, and goes into pure fantasy. The tax credit is reality. I wish you guys would just acknoledge that and that toyota's effort to market the small battery as an advantage has failed. I am not arguing whether a small battery is best for you or me, only that this strategy was always unlikely to stimulate sales. This was an opinion in 2010, but has been validated by sales in 2013.

You have to ask who toyota is trageting with the small battery, and do they agree with with marketing enough to buy the car. I am not even arguing reality of the stituation, whether it is better.

I would not object to that world view. It would allow you to acknolege that the next generation should get a bigger battery. What I object to is the argument that the battery should stay small, and the tax credit needs to change to support this. To me this is just not productive.

They both were, but that is neither here nor there. Toyota had the innovators delema, and chose to try to market a small battery car, hoping not to cannibalize the prius liftback. IMHO this strategy has not worked for them. Sure there has been low cannibalization, but low sales also. Part of low sales is the marketing message that small is better, and batteries are not ready. This is not a good message if you want dealers and engineers to support plug-in development.

If those were your only comments I would not have replied.

I am saying that the marketing strategy did not work. This is in direct contradiction to what you and john seemed to be saying that all it takes is time and the prius phv would start selling well. I find this, more than a little bit unlikely.

If toyota marketing had set the base price lower, and promoted the car, it might be different. Instaed they have tried a strategy that has not worked. Pointing that out is not bad mouthing the car. It is pointing out that it is initial adopters that will buy these plug ins. They have shown in surveys that they want more of an electric driving experience than the prius phv involves. There are a small number of people buying because of the discounting, but these are loyal prius owners. They are not getting conquest sales with this car. Not rolling it out to Texas and Florida (both in top 5 of plug-in sales) was another marketing mistake, instead choosing many states with low potential sales.

It is not bad mouthing to tell the truth. Look at the sales figures versus the estimates by toyota. They are truely bad. They have not fallen as flat as nissan, but no one in Toyota can be happy about how this has turned out. I hope that they look honestly at the market and improve the next generation.

 

diminishing returns

 

I disagree that Toyota had the innovators dilemma. Gen4 HSD will be plugin dedicated platform aimed to come out in 2015. They will introduce FCV in 2015 as well. You head is buried with the size of battery. You cannot see beyond that bias.

Regarding the failure of the tax incentive spurring plugin sales, I don't care who screwed it up, whether if Toyota, GM or our government. My point was simply that it is ineffective. For some reason, you have an underlying assumption is I cannot see Toyota fault. Just so we are clear, I don't think Toyota is GOD. I have pointed out that their marketing isn't effective either.

PiP is ideal for people with short daily commutes with 12 miles or less and drives longer distance in the weekends/holidays. The way EPA rated (AER=6 miles) didn't help either.