Featured 2023 Prius spy shot

More info about the 2023 Prius and Prius Prime this time coming from Creative311. Seems in Japan they expect to issue the new Prius via a lottery. So most of the rest of the info may be for Japan only, but we'll see since we usually follow them. The Crown has been for sale in Japan for a while but not yet here in NA.

https://creative311.com/?p=147438
partial translations:

• Prius
• Production start date: December 9, 2022
• Release date: January 10th, 2023

• Prius PHV
• Production start date: March 15, 2023
• Release date: March 1, 2023

Other interesting tidbits - some direct translation:
"Going back to the new Prius, another thing that has become personal is how to fasten the tire wheels.

As of October 2022, the details are still unknown, but it is expected that Toyota/Lexus will focus on hub bolt fastening from nut fastening in the future, and the first unit to commemorate is a new type of pure EV crossover. It is also introduced in the bZ4X and later in the New Crown Crossover."

So some more subtle conjecture based on wheel fastening. Later in the article they verified that the Prius will get the same 1.8L NA hybrid power train as the new 2023 Corolla Hybrid. No other new info on the Prius Prime.

 

Don't remember where, or how I got there, but I came across a discussion site for EV conversions. There was a guideline for determining how much EV range you would need that I remember as the rule of thirds. The car range you needed was long enough that a third covered your regular trip out, a third for the trip home, and a third for the 'what ifs' of errands, weather, detours, etc.

That's for a BEV. An EREV/REx would need less. A manufacturer offering a choice of EV ranges would be nice, but doing so increases development and manufacturing costs that may not be recouped. That's why we are only seeing options of two ranges in BEVs, and one with PHEVs today.

A 40 mile EV range would cover about half of the US's population's commute distance. That was why GM was targeting it for the Volt. With lower costs for batteries, a range of 60 miles should be the target minimum for the goal of reducing gas use. Longer range just means more of the population can go 100% EV for their daily use.

 

Round trip. 80% if you can charge at the destination.

 

That's an if I wouldn't depend on. It requires an employer to supply charging to every parking spot, or enough public charging in the very near vicinity. As we move out of the early adopter phase, I expect people to be come less inclined towards the car shuffling going on now for people to make use of limited chargers.

 

Plus, your commute could change while still owning the same car

 

According to this (read between the lines)

https://news.stanford.edu/press-releases/2022/09/22/charging-cars-honight-not-way-go/

It’s common to charge electric vehicles at night. That will be a problem. - The Washington Post

The only acceptable time for charging is L1 at work during the day, overnight L2+ at home overnight charging unacceptable. (ignoring the fact there is a power surplus in many areas after midnight and a bunch of other misconceptions)


I figured out why the trucking industry wants extremely high registration fees on daily drivers

As EV sales grow, battle over U.S. road weight limits heats up | Reuters

 

The concerns of the study are valid within its scope of the California grid and states it imports electricity from, while still cutting GHG emissions.

California wants to cut GHG emissions, with EVs being part of the answer to that. The emission cutting means they don't want efficient natural gas, and other concerns means no nuclear, within the state. Most of the renewable they have is solar. Wind production can augment solar with the differing production peaks, but energy storage is needed to use them reliably at night.

They do have some hydro, and import more, but that source is pretty much maxed out. While the capacity for night charging is there, without changes, the planned for increases to Ca's EV fleet will result in more natural gas and even coal being used. For California, getting EVs to charge during the day means using the daily solar surplus, that they now basically give away, with having to put less investment into energy storage to shift that solar production for night time charging.

The increase to peak demand from EVs is in the evening peak when most people are getting home at the end of the day. Not only does more EVs mean more people plugging them in at that time, but the ratio of EV owners that don't use timers to charge late at time will likely increase. In general, time of use rates will nudge more people to charge outside that getting home peak. Usually, that is to later at night when there is more available grid capacity. For specific cases, shifting to the day could be better. Of course that entails there is charging available for people when they are likely away from home.

For those that have hit Reuters free limit.
As EV sales grow, battle over U.S. road weight limits heats up

 

Like it or not unless we enjoy 3rd world living we will need to figure out advanced nuclear and proper waste cycles

not just for adverse weather and nighttime AC due to climate change but also for desalination.

Remove flush toilets and traditional dish washing/ clothes washing/ and shower habits which I am all for and you will see the extreme prejudice that happens when peoples normal wasteful behaviors are unpossible and they have to do things in a less convient labor intensive fashion

 

The work is being done on next gen nuclear power. US policy and regulations is partially an obstacle, but it is mostly public perception that blocks nuclear.

 

No we don't.

Fission is dead technology.

 

Coal is also a dead technology then. Yet places are building new coal.

Natural gas is much better. It has potential with renewable fuels, but a large majority of plants will stick with fossil fuels.

Renewable and storage is great. Once we have a steady supply of the batteries and fuel cells. Right now, the major grid battery companies are using the same chemistries as EVs, and there is already a bottleneck in supply for just the cars. Using different chemistries for stationary storage would ease the overall demand, but then we have to scale up the production of those battery types.

 

YouTube photo from Halo Oto

 

We don't need a single vehicle to accommodate 100% of the population. No vehicle can do that. A Camry might be out of the running because it isn't a CUV. RAV4 because it doesn't have 7 seats. Sienna because not everyone needs a vehicle that large.

Similarly, we shouldn't expect every PHEV to have sufficient range for commuting to and from work on EV alone. We need some that are focused on range/performance and some that are focused on value. Prius should probably be in the later camp. (And there are some people for whom no PHEV might be ideal, and they can purchase a hybrid/EV instead.)

 

I like everything about this design except the ground clearance.

 

With a round trip work commute of 20 miles, I replaced mine, a 2017 Prime 25 mi EV with a 2019 Tesla Model 3 with 240 mi EV range. We also kept the 72 mi EV, 2014 BMW i3-REx.

Bob Wilson

 

Not sure exactly why you quoted my specific post here.

That aside, I agree we need a selection of BEVs and PHEVs with differing ranges. Just like we have a selection of cars now.

For a person that wants to drive their entire commute on electric, they should plan on getting a plug in with enough range for that. Relying on work charging for reaching a 100% EV commute isn't a good plan at this time. The work charging situation is getting better, but it will take time before it works for the entire work force. That's the point of my post above.

 

The rims bug me; sim to gen 4 17”, spindly black-painted with 5 silver-painted plastic inserts. Just way too busy/plasticy, look like poop with the plastic bits out.

who knows though, finished product yet to come.

The pictures on the whole look “saner” than 4th gen, like the designers are in some multi-step recovery program. Still they can’t seem to shake the urge to make these super-skinny (and presumably super expensive) headlights.

I’m gonna assume for now no levels will have a spare, they’re taking their dash design cues from Tesla, the entire windshield needs to be peeled off to access spark plugs. “Maybe” exaggerating, that last one.

 

Many 2023 models in the US are now up on the Toyota.com web site.

 

People who purchase PHEVs should focus on gasoline usage mitigation, not gasoline usage elimination. If you are OK with reducing gasoline usage by say 90% during your daily commutes instead of wanting to eliminate it altogether, you'll have a lot more PHEV options at your disposal. And you might have a lower carbon footprint because you purchased a car with a smaller battery that achieves better gas mileage when the engine runs.

 

Which is why I get a little amused by people buying a PHEV, and then worrying about the engine coming on for cabin heat, or when flooring the accelerator. Yet that is the trend among PHEV buyers. Toyota even gave the Prius Prime a 'full' EV mode for North America.

The other side of the discussion is that the work commute is not only trip a car takes. Going to my parents is over 600 miles one way. Annually, it is almost 5000 miles; 28% of the total. Maybe a PHEV with 10% less EV range than my commute could have better fuel efficiency and lower carbon footprint for those trips. It will add 1300 miles of gas use over the year from just commuting vs a plug in that can do 100% of it EV.