Toyota cashes in on booming hybrid sales
wsj.com
wsj.com
Given my driving habits, I'd only use gas for infrequent long trips.
And Toyota has it priced right. I'm not surprised they're making a killing.
Kia has the Niro PHEV, and Hyundai has the Tuscon Prime PHEV, but discontinued the Sonata PHEV in 2020.
Then you've got a decent amount of "luxury" options like the XC60 Recharge - that don't really have that impressive of MPGe.
Is there anything else on the roadmap or currently available?
They are compact SUVs however and are arguably more of a RAV4 competitor but come in at under Prius Prime prices.
-------
The Lincoln Corsair PHEV is the luxury version of the Ford Escape, but is well cheaper than the Lexus equivalent.
I've been told that Ford/Lincoln is using licensed Toyota drivetrain technology too. I'll have to double check that claim but the Ford Escape/Lincoln Corsair drivetrain is RAV4-like for sure, albeit lower powered / inferior. But I'm hoping it's still got similar reliability.
But it's very hard to compete vs the Prius / Prime / RAV4 hybrid. But the Ford models have the tax credit AND lower MSRP.
------
I'm personally still strongly considering the Prius. But the other vehicles could feasibly come in at the right price point and turn me away from Toyota.
I heard that too but couldn't find a recent source that they still did when I researched that a little more than a year ago. From what I remember, they're using something simpler now; one axle is gas and one is electric and it'll just switch between the two automatically.
I have the Corsair and it's great. If you're careful about putting it in EV mode every time you start the car (it defaults to hybrid) and charge at home, it doesn't use any gas for daily stuff that's within range.
Edit: This may be different for the Escape. The PHEV Escape seems to be front wheel drive while the Corsair is all wheel drive.
> Given my driving habits, I'd only use gas for infrequent long trips.
Why do you need a "fast charging car"? Lack of overnight charging setup?
Hybrids only make sense when you can charge at home. Otherwise it’s better to get a BEV with 10x larger battery, that needs to be plugged in 10 times less often.
I really want an EV but reading all the forums and what kind of issues people have really puts me off. I love our hybrid and when it runs on battery it's such a nice and smooth ride and I'm dreaming of 100% electric now. I guess the next step will be PHEV but I really, really want 100% electric. Unfortunately experience of other drivers, like I said, is putting me off for now.
x < $0.23 per kWh.
Good luck beating hybrid with Super charger rates. With charging at home, your mileage will vary. In Southern California, where electricity rate at the top usage tier is closer to $0.50 per kWh including transmission, you are better off buying almost anything else but an EV.
Now, I will have to go into hiding to protect my life.
[1] https://insideevs.com/news/597460/tesla-efficiency-depends-o...
[2] https://www.caranddriver.com/toyota/prius-2023#
[3] https://web.archive.org/web/20240205144433/https://gasprices...
Additional Notes
- diagram maxes at $0.15, so some of those states may be lower than the $0.23 cut off
- you're taking national average gas prices and comparing to highest price of electricity, but so-cal also tends to have higher gas prices in comparison so I imagine the math ends up working more often than first glance may indicate.
- Your also ignoring the convenience/time saving of charging electric, I've maybe spent an hour waiting on my car to charge in the last year, but I would have been stopping at those points for meals anyways so there was very little "waiting" on my part whereas with gas I had 10/15 minutes a week of time going out of my way to fill up with gas. Just pull in at home plug in and I'm topped up next time I go someone was actually my #1 reason for going electric.
[1] https://www.globalenergyinstitute.org/2022-average-us-electr...
While I know anecdote isn't data my cost last year in Western WA for charging my car was ~$300, it would have been closer to $2000-2200 for gas.
I can tell you that the numbers here in Europe are dramatically different. And in particular Sweden with comparatively cheap electricity.
1 liter gas = 1.9 Euro means around $6.7/g
1kWh electricity is on average maybe $0.1 to $0.13 but fluctuates a lot between summer and winter. With solar panels you become self sufficient.
FWIW the reason I stayed away from a Hybrid is the extra burden of maintenance and care. You get two different systems that can have troubles in their own way. In particular the gasoline part is much more sensitive and complex I'd say.
Then there's Tesla's (successful) war against dealerships. Some people simply don't want to ever talk to a dealer ever again.
Honestly, I'd prefer more mass transit and less cars but I don't think that's going to be solved in the US any time soon.
Agreed charging network evolution is required for people who don't have capability to charge at home or work fully. Right now EVs are great if you own a home + solar which means you don't pay for fuel at all, and fine even without solar if you have decent electricity rates.
[1] https://www.rakuten.com/blog/how-many-batteries-star-wars/
My apartment complex, built in 2020 on a commercial power grid in a region with many EVs on the road, has 600 units, 10 reserved chargers, and a waitlist of 50. This is an unusually high number of chargers, relative to the single one my previous medium-density housing had. None of an hundred apartment listings has a charger when I search.
High density EVs are inconceivable to cope with given the American power grid and parking zoning laws as they are implemented today, and until changes made by force of law and compulsory upgrades occur, EVs will remain inaccessible to 90% of the US population.
That being said, I think hybrids are still the idea car for most people today.
... is heavily taxed in the same countries.
You hardly have to stretch to tip the numbers back towards EVs (a ~35mpg sedan and $4/gal fuel prices).
Personally, I don't think the added cost of hybrids make sense right now unless you are driving an extreme amount of miles per year. The supply chain crunch has added a hefty premium to the hybrids that's just not worth it for most people. The Corolla/Corolla Hybrid is the one scenario where it makes sense to get the hybrid, but they're un-obtanium.
Same. Recent BMWs look increasingly garish. Why would you make the "grill" ("nostrils" some call them on BMWs) bigger on EVs? And then when you get close to them you see there is actually no opening there - they're like fake shutters on a house.
Yes, maybe the two are related in some unseen way. Like, for all its power, the eye of Sauron at the top of the corp tower can't focus on all things equally.
I semi-anticipated a hybrid to be the worst of both worlds, but after 13 + 6 years that hasn't proven the case for my Prii.
Our household used to exclusively drive private party used Corollas. We've switched to Teslas. If your time is valuable and you factor time and money together, the savings on hassles is already worth it in spades.
There's just far less to go wrong on an EV. Corollas have a reputation for reliability? The Teslas following the S/X super luxury models, the 3 and the Y, look to beat them at this game.
What's interesting is the despite this Teslas often rank near the top for owner satisfaction.
I can believe that both are true.
[Citation Needed]
There's a long history of such rankings being gamed by the auto industry. If you follow Tesla closely, it's quite obvious that so many of the rankings are simply designed to exclude or disadvantage them.
What's interesting is the despite this Teslas often rank near the top for owner satisfaction.
I can believe that both are true.
In automotive history, when there's disruption and car adoption shifts so massively, has it ever turned out that large numbers of people were deluded? Has it ever turned out that large numbers of people saw real value where complacent incumbents dropped the ball? (Example: Japanese imports disrupting the US market.)
That answer to both is yes. However, the 2nd has been more often the case. Also, the instances of the 1st simply don't last multiple years.
So if you consider automotive history, it's far more likely that loyal Tesla owners are onto something, and you simply want them to be deluded.
I'm pretty sure that's not what I said.
More objective looks at reliability put Teslas as a class very far down in any ordered ranking.
Really, you should look more closely at automotive industry rankings. This is basically fodder for the legacy media, which has deservedly lost a lot of credibility. For that matter, take a close look at media covering these things. So many of these things are gamed. Also look up what Peter Thiel says about incumbency, ossification, and lack of true innovation in today's industry. It's not that the emperor has no clothes, but things a lot skimpier than they're supposed to be.
What seems to happen often with owners of the vehicles is that they are so enamored with many of the benefits of them, that they overlook some issues -- sometimes to the point where they don't or won't acknowledge them. And use this very biased point of view to extend their positive feelings and anecdotes towards the entire brand.
I also personally believe that things that were issues with traditional ICE cars simply aren't the same kind of problem with electrics, or of the same magnitude. So even similar sounding problems are more a matter of degree than equavalency. In addition, there are benefits to electrics that have no real equivalency with ICE cars.
What I do know is that if you do even the most cursory research on the overall large-scale and longterm reliability of the vehicles...which because Tesla isn't forthcoming with their data has to be accumulated voluntarily by survey...the cars don't do well.
However, it's really not that important to most owners as the vehicles as again, the benefits simply overwhelm all of that. Things that would be unacceptable to an owner of a Toyota really does just get a free pass with a Tesla.
Perhaps my experience is atypical, but I had way more issues (not just hassles) with my last Toyota Corolla.
!remind me after 5 years.
The above link is an older version of the article. Here is a paywall free link but I think you will have to enable JS for it to work.
https://www.wsj.com/business/earnings/toyota-motor-reports-r...
The key is they have hybrids at "normal car" prices - the basic Sienna is hybrid and comparable in price to the Kia Carnival and other non hybrid minivans; and much cheaper than the plug-in hybrid Pacifica.
The basic model Sienna just doesn't actually exist anywhere for purchase.
From the article: "In the U.S., hybrid demand significantly exceeds production capacity, leading to tight inventories at dealerships, Miyazaki said."
I'll further my point about hybrid being such a low-hanging, realistic solution.
The core technology has been there since the late 90s. Every single major manufacture can quickly produce them. This doesn't have to be just daily family cars, the luxury market (Ferrari) and the 4x4 segment can also take advantage of this. There is already a hybrid Tundra available.
Lets take London for e.g. there are about 2.5 Million cars, lets assume if all of all them were to be hybrid, you would have SIGNIFICANT reduction in fuel consumption and costs to the owners, without ANY lifestyle change. You are not giving anything up as there is something available for everyone's taste.
No range anxiety.
I seriously do not understand why governments don't take this seriously.
The reason government incentives aren’t pushing hybrids now is that government policy is driven off of idealism instead of practicality. In the ideal world, a brand new hybrid is too little too late. A 2024 hybrid will almost certainly still be operating in 2040. By then we really need to be at near-zero carbon emissions if we want to have any hope of avoiding climate catastrophe. On the other hand the status quo means people are just buying gas guzzlers since they can’t afford/can’t practically use BEV.
But you could make it so it has different size batteries installable, either by end-user or dealer.
You sell the car with a 30 mile battery, and a year or two later it pops up a note that says "for only $Z you could upgrade your battery to one that would have meant you only filled up on gas once last year".
Range anxiety? Nonexistent.
Upsell? Present.
Improved mileage and emissions? Golden.
The reason they are efficient is something like this:
A cars engines efficiency/fuel economy is constrained by its max output. Ie when you have an engine capable of very rapid acceleration, that engine is going to be too big across all other scenarios - ie two cars of the same weight going the same speed , the one with the bigger engine will consume more fuel.
The hybrid lets you take advantage of this in two ways. First it allows you to have a smaller engine because the electric motors kick in when you need the acceleration. So it lets you get away with a smaller engine that is more than enough for your driving and that gives you efficiency.
Then it also uses the fact that even the smaller engine is still oversized for things like coasting or going steady so it uses the extra engine output to charge the battery at the right times. Regenerative breaking is another efficiency play
Curious what will happen to the battery over time but for the past few years the hybrid highlander is great.
Generally. But that bigger engine might be producing more power at a lower RPM and there might be some cases where the difference isn't as noticable.
The design of most Toyota hybrids is quite simple, there are two electric motors and one gasoline engine coupled by a simple planetary gear set. This eliminates the need for a mechanical transmission -- varied wheel speed is accomplished by simply varying the relative speeds of the electric motors. Contrary to a popular misconception, there is no mechanical cone-and-belt CVT in Toyota hybrids, like people might be familiar with in other CVTs. Also, because the engine is linked to the drive motors, this eliminates the need for a starter motor. And because all of the engine accessories are electric on most Toyota hybrids (because they need to operate when the engine is off) there is no accessory belt.
These components (drive belts, transmissions, starter motors) aren't uncommon issues in ICE-only vehicles, so this does translate to improved reliability and lower maintenance.
Also keep in mind that the electric tends to handle low speed movement which it's just great at (instant torque), while the gas engines tend to handle highway / steady state driving which they are just great at. And overall they are each getting less usage than if they were the only powertrain.
A full electric on the other hand, needs a very huge battery as it need to give you about 300 mile range, to cover the edge cases. That is a lot of battery weight (and expense) you are carrying around. So the tradeoff is do you want to lug around a huge battery that you will mostly not use, or lug around a gas engine that you will mostly not use? About an equal tradeoff (esp. since the gas engine only needs to be enough HP to maintain cruising speed, acceleration can be handled by the battery, or have it set up as a serial hybrid).
Personally I'd rather have the gas engine as my range extender, instead of the larger battery, since I can quickly fuel up in about 3 minutes vs. 20 - 30 at a minimum. But once battery tech improves and recharge times are in the 10 minute range, I'd say that would be the end of gas engines.
There's nothing under-powered about the gas engine. F-150 daily drivers may cringe, but that's a cultural problem not a problem with the vehicle.
Call it a cultural problem if you want, but a F-150 is damn useful even if it is not utilized all the time. When you do need it though, it's there and ready to work. There is a reason it's the best selling car in America.
I don't think "state of the art" is the word when there's no variability or development because that is the engine style mandated by regulations for that time.
99% of my daily local trips are under 40 miles, so short range isn't a factor.
I mean, that's just me, but for me it's a near-perfect fit.
Until batteries and chargers get better, anyway.
Plug-in is where it gets interesting as you can go mostly without fillups for commutes/shopping if you have access to charging at home/work.
> Honda’s two-motor hybrid system can operate as either a series or parallel hybrid. The majority of the time, the system operates as a series hybrid. Its electric propulsion motor drives the wheels directly, while the gasoline engine connected to the electric generator/starter motor functions as an electrical generator, supplying power to the hybrid battery and/or the propulsion motor. Under certain driving conditions, such as steady-state cruising at highway speeds, the system switches seamlessly to parallel hybrid operation, with the gasoline engine connecting to the front axle via a clutch, and vehicle speed is proportional to engine speed (rpm).
Source: https://hondanews.com/en-US/honda-automobiles/releases/relea...
I don't think I've ever had an actual drive-train issue.
I did this every 6 months for my Tacoma, which was the required schedule for a new car to maintain the warranty.
I've taken my Bolt in once for a battery recall / cabin air filter in 6 years of ownership.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/cars/2024/01/hertz-is-selling-20000-...