Hacker News Reader

Comment by thephyber | Hacker News Reader

> I'm really grateful to Tesla/GM/Nissan and the people buying their cars.

I find it interesting that it's GM and not Ford.

In the pre-2008 years (when Ford didn't need a bailout but GM did), Ford was investing in and rolling out gas-electric hybrids while GM was very heavily invested in SUVs and opted to minimize hybrid development while maximizing the $500/unit upgrade to "FlexFuel" type ICE drivetrains. When the price of gas spiked in 2005-2007, Ford benefitted while GM was reeling.

I wonder if the restructure during the bailout changed GM's priorities...

View on HN

Ford's electrification strategy was and still is hybridization (much like Toyota's).

Personally, I think Ford/Toyota's strategy is best. Any improvement in the pure EV space also impact hybrids. It's completely possible for battery tech to improve to the point that a hybrid option is basically no cost (or at a cost savings). As in, instead of offering a V6 or turbo 4, a Ford can offer a hybrid drive train at the same price as those engines, but with the better performance and fuel economy.

Also, keep in mind that Ford is a really a truck builder with a car division. The bulk of their profits come from F-series pickups and EV pickups are probably a long way off, but hybrid pickups are coming this generation.

I think Nissan and GM are capitalizing on the fact that Ford and Toyota are sitting back, watching how the market evolves. But so far, neither the Leaf, Volt, nor Bolt have earned any any real ROI.

Hybrids lose so many benefits of a pure EV vehicle. EV drivetrains are much simpler. No complicated transmission or ICE. Easier to produce, scale, and maintain. Hybrids require all the complexity of both systems, and the weight.

benefits to who? the best thing for the car buyer is a standard ICE car - every mechanic out there can fix it. the worst thing out there for the consumer is an electric car that can only be fixed by the dealer

How are you going to get gas, when the rest of us are driving EVs?

That's a great argument against every new technology in a car. For example, only a subset of body shops can do aluminum.

FWIW, extra complexity and complicated transmissions can be largely avoid with the "range extended EV" approach, where the gas engine is a generator producing electricity and doesn't drive the wheels directly.

That said, the best vehicle in that style that I can think of, the Chevy Volt, does actually allow the engine to drive the wheels and has two planetary gear/clutch systems. On the plus side, the gas engine is expected to need much less maintenance than a regular engine that's used in a much wider power range.

You want the BMW i3 with range extender, the gasoline engine only attaches to a generator.

Meh? I mean I've owned many cars over the last 15 years or so and it's never been the ice/transmission/drivetrain that's failed.

Meanwhile every car I've ever had has suffered from window motor failure.

It is worth pointing out that the Toyota Prius, despite being a hybrid, is regularly featured as one of the most reliable cars out there, including regular ICE cars.

I've never quite understood this. Why not have the gas engine simply drive a generator which charges the batteries / drives the electric motors, like a diesel-electric locomotive? Then there's no dual drivetrain issue.

Even for an all-electric car, it'd be nice to have a small gas engine to drive a generator to charge the batteries if you're too far from a socket.

Yeah, I'd love to know why this hasn't been an option. Seems like the best of both worlds

I work at a train museum. Locomotives are fundamentally different. They have to have electric traction motors to grab the rails. Weight is unimportant. 125 tons. That's a quarter million pounds, 113,400 kg. Automobiles need every weight-saving trick the engineers can pull off. Such as combination drives.

Also trains don't change speed super often so they can have their prime mover running in the power band all of the time. A car changes speed at lot so its more inefficient to have the prime mover running in its power band constantly to drive the generator.

This is one of the functions of the Chevy Volt - "...its internal combustion engine powers an electric generator to extend the vehicle's range as needed. When the engine is running it may be periodically mechanically linked (by a clutch) to a planetary gear set, and hence the output drive axle, to improve energy efficiency." -- from wikipedia page on the Volt

totally agree hybrid is where the value is right now.

everyone on this site loves tesla and loves to think of their electric car as the solution to everyones car needs. but electric cars are still only viable as a 2nd car. a hybrid can be your only car

My Tesla is my only car. Its doing pretty good.

After taking a few 3000+ mile roadtrips, I'm done taking roadtrips. If I can't get there in a single day's drive, I'm flying, see you when you get there. Running the miles on the Model 3, it has more than enough to be my only car. If you don't do roadtrips, which are vacation-day intensive anyway, it's an interesting experiment to run the numbers if an electric works for you. Of course some hater will, till the end of time, find a scenario where it doesn't work. But I think if most people really think about it, they'll see how well the current range of a car like the Model 3 will fit their needs. It does for me and can't wait to get mine.

And don't forget, the battery tech keeps getting better. How long til the Model 3 hits 400 miles, or 500?

long drives are exactly the problem EV can’t do but hybrid can.

want to take a family trip sf to la? you will stop for gas once for 20 minutes and pay ~$60. want to take EV? plan for a long charging stop. want to fly? you’ll pay $100+/pp and rent a car when you get there. “most people” are going to see that EV has far less utility than a hybrid, usually at greater cost

That's a horrendous example. It's 5.7 hours between LA and SF. Perfectly fits what I described as a day's drive. You'd probably need to stop once to recharge for 30 minutes (super charge time with a Tesla), 10 more minutes than you described with the hybrid. Once you take a wiz, stretch the legs, change your kid's diaper, get them a quick snack and tend to everyone's needs you'll easily need 30 minutes in a 6 hour drive at some point. I'll take that.

Especially given the lack of complexity to electrics compared to hybrids, which are the worst vehicles on the road for complexity (inferior to a plain old lone ICE).

The only worse idea than a hybrid is hydrogen fuel cells. Some people like needlessly complex technology, I do not.

My Tesla is my only car. It's doing pretty good.

I can totally believe that it wouldn't work for you, but I'm not you.

Car companies are by nature and market, passive. What it takes for them to move is disruptive innovation (battery tech) or government regulations (I'm thinking more China than the US).

I've owned a hybrid, however my current EV (Ford Focus EV amusingly) is just simply better in so many ways for how I actually use my car (commute/kids/groceries). We have a 2nd non-EV minivan for trips/hauling.

Charger availability is a decently available now, and charging standard adoption (i.e., DC Fast) is a game changer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com