Now it's pretty obvious that conventional automakers are dropping ICE engine development all together
to prepare for the impending paradigm shift to electric cars.
There could be an initial confusion from new car buyers about weather to get an ICE car at all in the next 5 years or so.
Will this scenario make existing ICE cars cheaper? and what will happen to the petrol stations?
I'll elaborate…
Personally, I see EV take-up to increase when a) the infrastructure better supports it, and b) prices drop to reasonable levels.
Ideally, I believe you'd want solar panels and battery storage at home, to then charge your car at night and won't cost you a cent to go to work and back. The average Aussie would hope for 700-1000km range out of the car, to replace the family car. You'd hope that the cost of purchasing would cover the savings, or not be too ridiculous (say $10,000 more than the ICE equivalent?).
When everything starts falling into place, more and more will adopt the technology.
Look at hybrid as an example. 20 years ago, if you heard the word Prius, you thought yuppie and/or celebrity. Now, hybrid is far more 'normalised' as the interest level in EV is gaining popularity (thanks Tesla). The take-up on hybrid is going crazy as more and more people hear about it, and understand it. That will be EV in (I believe) 10 years or so.
I'm curious to see how the LiS batteries change the expected timeline of widespread battery based tech adoption rate.
Also C) when more model options are released to market and available to buyers.
Currently market is very limited with choices but that will change and drive competition and prices down. Euro brands, Rivian and GM/Hummer EV releases will create a drastic market change. Also Tesla's truck although still not quite convinced it's not a joke.
(Tesla) Truck. Americans. Enough said.
Range and convenience of charging will be main hurdles just for the convenience. People will prefer to charge at home, because charging outside takes too long for the commute.
One plus is that it should be easy to install chargers in existing parking lots around the place. I'd expect to see them popping up in more shopping centres and restaurants. Saw exactly this 5 years ago in London Westfield, and a couple years ago at an old countryside hotel in Japan.
So charging could become as easy as going out for lunch.
That kind of infrastructure will make it convenient enough in metro areas, which is especially useful since people in apartments may not even have access to a powerpoint, let alone the ability to install a fast charger (or whatever is needed).
But once you get out of metro areas, and assuming EV range doesn't dramatically improve, petrol is probably going to remain more attractive simply for being a portable fuel source. Range anxiety in the countryside can be bad enough in a petrol car, but at least you can carry an extra jerry can, or bring one to a stranded vehicle.
(I saw a recent range test of some EVs in the UK, and they showed that roadside service cars now have to carry around diesel generators)
Yeah I saw that Carwow vid :)
The average Aussie would hope for 700-1000km range out of the car, to replace the family car.
The average Aussie drives less than 40km/day. Tesla have stopped increasing the range of their cars due to lack of demand. You don't need cars with more endurance than people, if it can recharge 250km of range in 10 ish minutes that will be fine. I don't think we'll ever get to 1000km of battery range in anything but specialised vehicles because lugging that amount of dead weight around for the 99.7% of the time you couldn't make use of it if you wanted to is just a waste of capital and running costs.
I don't think we'll ever get to 1000km of battery range
See, that's just naive
Unless another fuel source comes along, of course battery technology will get better with time.
There was a time where a 2TB microsd card was unheard of, and that wasn't that long ago.
As EV becomes the norm, assuming nothing else does in the meantime, of course the range will be insane. These won't just be cars that need charging every night.
@spackbace: battery tech has advanced at a much smaller rate than storage tech. Battery life gains have come more in the form of efficiency of the processors than density of the battery. When you pack too much density into a tight space, you get the Note 7 which is still banned from all airports.
@lostn: Demand will be there to perfect the technology. When funding and the need are in place, good things happen!
@spackbace: To be clear, I do agree that we will reach 1000km range (though I don't actually see it as essential for most people — there will be charging stations along the way if you are driving across country) and it would be dismissive to assume it doesn't happen.
But it's probably going to come from improved efficiency of the vehicle than packing a bigger battery. Unless all new battery tech is invented that replaces Lithium.
Range shouldn't be that big an issue because they are working on faster charging. At some point you'll be able to charge in 5 minutes enough juice to get half a tank or even a full tank, and then your range won't matter.
@spackbace: Re demand: see the average Australian drives 40km or less per day. Current capacities are over 300km or just over a week of average driving. There's very little demand now for 1000km+ fuel tanks. Humans are still human and they're the limiting factor here, not technology.
@spackbace: Agreed, before Tesla the market was not well defined, now the market knows what it wants, goal posts are
clear, sales figures are in, charging infrastructure exists, allocating significant amounts of capital
to battery research would appear less risky.
@spackbace: It's not a technology thing, it's a cost and demand thing. As battery technology gets better we'll need the range less. It's just inefficient to lug excess weight around no matter the technology, this is a physics thing, the physics doesn't change. At the moment lower charge time is winning the race vs capacity:weight and trying to stuff more charge in there is a losing battle.
@spackbace: It's not just that as well. 1000km rating is just a rating. What happens if the EV needs to start towing? Or journey is hilly, etc etc.
1000km range might sound a lot, and so does all day battery for a phone. Until you start recording 4k videos in broad daylight and you'll quickly realise all day battery life is with caveats.
@spackbace: Isn't a 2TB Micro SD card still largely unheard of? None of the brandname manufacturers make them do they?
1000kms without towing anything, half that amount with a load. That is why they need the extra km's
2 different markets.
I think there might be strong demand from those that use vehicle for commute only.
If they can come up with a fast charge or battery swap out, I reckon it would be a hit for taxis, couriers etc.
But there is a lot of Aussies that need close to 1000km range + fast refuel/ swap out, and until that is available ICE aren't going anywhere.
@SlickMick: Yeah, a couple of % of the Australian population is still quite a few people. It's going to be a long time before rural people and those with caravans through the outback change. My original reply was to the statement that it would take 1000 km + to replace the 'average' aussie family car. And the average aussie family car doesn't tow and need 1000km range, the average Aussie will be electric long before the range is close to 1000km, my ICE car only does just over 400km on a tank and can't tow squat without a tow bar.
They won't need battery swap out for taxis and couriers, taxi's spend a lot of time idle, they just need charging in taxi ranks or a charge at lunch time. Couriers just need a charge that will get them 80% in their lunch break as well. There's already courier companies out there building out electric fleets. Fast charging is happening.
Market share of electric vehicles is still so low that no one is spending heaps of money going after the couple of % of people with high demands when the average demand is 1/10th of that.
Note that if you're already towing, it would make more sense to build extra battery capacity into the thing you're towing, so you don't lug that dead weight around when not towing.
@SlickMick: So maybe the grey haired nomads and weekend fishermen will buy monster trucks and keep on burning carbon just like they have for decades, and the young-uns will choose to ride electric mopeds and taking uberpods in the pouring rainstorms, hoping this will help fix the damage
You don't need cars with more endurance than people
Brilliantly put!
Sick to death to hear that EVs don't do 900km (towing a horse float!), so they are useless …
They may only drive on average 40km a day but they still need to be able to do those longer trips on demand. 700+ will be a requirement for widespread adoption and this will happen. also remember those distanced will be halved or more when towing heavy loads which would make lowly capacities for large parts of the country completely impractical. Australia has a lot larger distances between towns and refueling points than most other countries.
@gromit: In many decades of driving I've only once needed more than 200km of endurance and that was in the remote northern territory where I couldn't have taken the car I own anyway. Almost no one tows anything, most cars don't even have the ability to tow anything so mentions of towing show a complete lack of understanding of the average Australian's needs. The race is on to see if electric adoption happens before car ownership at all for the average person becomes a distant memory. There's lots of distance in Australia, but not many people as a proportion of the population ever encounter them, let alone encounter them often enough to spend an extra $10-20k on batteries and $10 a week on electricity on the off chance they might want one day to avoid hiring a car for the trip they're not even planning on doing yet.
I'm not diminishing that people do need these things, it's just that, relatively few do, and not enough to consider their requirements mandatory for any form of 'widespread' adoption.
Spot on. I'm buying a new commuter car around mid year and won't be considering an electric. There's not enough models, prices are too high and the infrastructure to support charging isn't there yet IMO. I will take a look at a few hybrids but few of them appeal so the odds are I'll be buying another ICE. I am fairly confident however it'll be the last ICE car I buy with the next being at least hybrid if not full EV.
i am seeing car parks in convenient spots reserved for EVs with charging stations attached to them. But they are being abused. Non-EVs are being parked in those spaces and no one is around to fine them. These ICE cars are parking there because there's no other parking bay available. They are abusing the system and need to be fined, but there just isn't enough manpower to enforce it.
@t_c: They are usually on private property, so no. Occasionally e.g city of Sydney has such a setup, and it's abused, mostly from hybrid drivers. In that case, I don't think they get enough complaints, but surely that would be about the chsnge
Currently many people are looking to get around the cost by importing from Japan, you can get near new examples of cars, well optioned, for 20 to 30k off the price. Puts EVs well into the picture, no other car will save you the cost of the car in its lifetime and then some.
When I bought cars in the past, range never seemed to be a consideration. One of the cars was a Honda Civic with a 40L tank. I only started noticing this from having to fill up more frequently than usual, but it didn't really bother me. I still don't know how many kilometres I could drive from the Civic, but I doubt it was any more than the Tesla Model 3.
Probably you can drive your Civic for at least 570 km assuming a consumption of 7lt/100km.
I am more concerned about resale.
As the biggest component to the cost of an EV is the battery, and the battery has a life of a defined number of cycles, who would want to buy a 10 year old electric car?
The ICE cars do depreciate, but you know what is the estimated price you'll get from the sale of your old car.
With EVs is more difficult.
Also, if you are a second hand car buyer how do you know how long the battery will last you. Battery life depends on how the car was used, how often was charged, etc.
As the vehicle age the cost of the battery proportional to the cost of the overall vehicle increase, thus being riskier to own.
An ICE you can buy from a wrecker in worst case for a couple of thousands and you are set to go again.
I am expecting someone to say but Tesla's hold value quite well etc. But that will not be the case for all EVs.
As the biggest component to the cost of an EV is the battery, and the battery has a life of a defined number of cycles, who would want to buy a 10 year old electric car?
You could just buy a new battery from Tesla
It won't be cheap, but if it breathes new life into an EV, why not?
Since it may cost $7,000 USD, which let's say cost $10,000 AUD this is not that bad if the cars do not have any noticeable improvements in the next 10 years.
Salvage value may be lower I suppose, but it doesn't mean an EV will stop working completely, just needs a new battery.
Old battery's materials can be reclaimed by Tesla for raw materials for new batteries.
@cwongtech: If Tesla's don't noticable improve in the next 10 years they will be dead. Their build quality is appalling and their saving grace at the moment is they are "relatively" alone in their market segment.
All reports I have seen have battery replacements costing well in excess of 10k US, I guess in 10 years it will come down some but 7k seems a little optimistic.
If Tesla's don't noticeable improve in the next 10 years they will be dead.
Tesla is continually targeting new market segments. They have their semi, ute and roadster refresh all scheduled for the next few years. As long as they keep their line up fresh, providing stupidly quick, low maintenance, reliable cars should be enough for them to continue to weather criticisms about their build quality.
@cwongtech: What I am saying is, would you "invest" $10,000 in a car that is already 10 years old?
What happens if you just want a new car after 8 years? Do you have to write-off the car (so it's value is actually zero, well its weight in materials)
I do get the car still works, but it will have no value.
Unless there is a reliable market for second hand electric cars with service and appropriate warranties I believe many people will have concerns like mine
@MechEng: People do that now. Only question is on the value of the. Arteries, unlike an ICE car that can keep going for decades (albeit less efficiently). The rest of it is likely to be fine.
@Euphemistic: Let's assume that a given used vehicle's value is $10,000.
If this is an ICE, and the value of a new engine is $5,000 you have still $5,000 in value in the rest of the car.so you may consider investing a $5,000 in a new engine to still have a $10,000 car.
But if is an EV the cost of the battery= the value of the car, so if the battery dies ( no longer is able to hold charge) then the car has no value.
Perhaps I am just too conservative but I would not buy a used EV just because that issue, apart from that they are as good vehicle as any.
@MechEng: It’s just weird economics, and economics is always weird. It just depends how you look at it.
The remainder of the car will still hold some value. It might be that it’s value would be $10k but a replacement battery is $10k so it sort of has $0 value. But if a new car is worth $40k and has no significant improvements over the $0 dead battery car spending $10k for a new battery provides you with a $30k saving. Plenty of people will spend money replacing an engine now to keep an older car running because they can’t afford a new car or for other reasons, they’ll keep doing that.
If you think about current ICE vehicles there have been incremental safety improvements, but in reality the car has been much the same for decades. Seats, engine, doors etc.
@MechEng: Batteries are getting cheaper all the time, in 10 years they'll likely be a much lower proportion of the car, and I've seen ICE cars that are but 5 years old with $12k worth of engine replacement needed (4WD :\ ) Electric cars have many many fewer things to go wrong, if you're literally only worried about the battery pack you're in a much better position because the state of the battery pack can be measured way easier than you can look inside an engine. I'd take a 10 year old electric car over a 10 year old ICE car any day of the week as it's so much more likely to have retained its value.
Service is much more of a concern, particularly with all the electronics and Tesla being pretty terrible at it. At this point I'd be more concerned that any car's value will be more or less $0 in 20 years anyway.
@[Deactivated]: You could also consider that 1st generation electric cars may have some extra nostalgia value once they get older. Enthusiasts might want to keep their first electric car running past it’s use by date. Some Old ICE cars are increasing in value for collectors and enthusiasts.
@MechEng: That's not really how batteries work. It's not an all or nothing, batteries just degrade and so will your range.
You won't go from a working car to a completely broken car, you'll go from 300km range to 200km range.
To further this, as battery tech becomes more common place, you'll get places that will refurbish battery packs by removing bad cells and putting in new good ones.
Sure a new battery pack is going to be really expensive, but if you just have a couple of bad cells, you should be able to swap out the bad cells for much much cheaper.
@flametornado: I know that. And my assumption is that significant degradation occurs within those 10 years, and after that the range is significantly reduced (from 300km to 200km is a 33% reduction)
There are other issues, like module failure etc that can actually make the battery not even perform at that level.
We have not had a battery car around for 10 years to have enough information to make an informed decision. Thus the less riskier position is to stick with the ICE.
@MechEng: 2008 Tesla roadster
2010 Nissan leaf
2012 Tesla model s.
BEV cars have been around for quite some time.
Module failure can be an issue, but a) it's covered under warranty, b) it's a solved problem, replacing a module is not as expensive as a battery pack.
@MechEng: It's looking like modern charge controllers are going to end up keeping batteries in the 85-95% of charge range after 10 years, and this is likely to be extended further with better software. They're already keeping up to 80% after 10 years with current controllers.
The way they're improving battery life is things like predictive charging to keep the battery @ 100% for the shortest possible time, eg, having it sit at 80% until a short time before you usually leave in the morning and then proceeding to 100% in time for your usual departure. Battery life can be further improved by lowering the max charge you usually want to keep and saving the extra capacity for the longer trips, that way cells do way less cycles each.
Kind of the 'worst case' is about 20% after more than 200,000km driven, and most people don't keep cars that long. By the time you'll need to replace the battery in most cars you'd have long since sent most ICE cars off for scrap and parts. Current batteries in the lab are putting out the equivalent of 500,000 km for a car with 250km range, real world performance is not quite as good due to the smaller trips.
The other thing is that batteries which are no longer good for EVs still have recycling value, plenty of people are already repurposing 10-12 year old EV batteries as home batteries.
@flametornado: This. I’ve got a couple of cordless tool batteries that are not plying well anymore. Plan to pull them apart and pick the best of the cells and make one good out of two duds. Buying new cells isn’t hard, but I don’t really need the extra battery for now.
Most cordless tool batteries available cheap on eBay are repacks of used cells.
All true that availability of both vehicles and chargers is not up to scratch yet. But in Oz we get a false idea of how long it will be before it becomes up to scratch because we are a lot further behind in the transition than most developed countries. The plain truth is that Oz is a backwater; the Europeans and Chinese are leaving us behind.
The plain truth is that Oz is a backwater; the Europeans and Chinese are leaving us behind.
Size of scale. Our population is minor in comparison. People seem to forget that
Our population density is also massively different to either of your examples
Size of scale.
Not an issue. Increase price.
Our population density is also massively different
A major use case of any vehicle is commuting from a suburb to a place of work. Plug in's charge at home, meaning lower density is an advantage as it is easier to organise install of a home charging station when their is only one person, couple or family living in a building.
There could be an initial confusion from new car buyers about weather to get an ICE car at all in the next 5 years or so.
5 years is super optimistic, if not outright trolling. Even if people didn't want to buy ICE cars in 5 years time the supply of EVs would simply not be there, nor can someone who would normally be buying a 25k Corolla be able to afford an 80k Model 3.
Tesla's cars are in such high demand that there's always a months to years long wait time before you can actually get it delivered. That means the prices are not going down any time soon. Demand outstrips supply, in spite of these prices.
There are plenty of reasons not to get an Ice car right now, but because people have lived with the compromises for years it seems fine to keep compromising. Also plenty of countries are banning diesel and ICE cars from parts of town, and that could flip things on its head overnight if it happened here. The watershed moment has already happened in some countries, it will tip here very soon.
But agreed ICE cars won't be rendered completely useless, they will just take a hit in desirability. One thing we can all agree on is that most of society now keeps cars only a few years, so when it happens the change will be swift, not because it needs to be but because people always want an update
Will this scenario make existing ICE cars cheaper?
The cars (except collectibles and prestige cars), for sure but you'd be missing the big picture if you think the ticket price is the major factor.
Fuel excise is a major component of overall ownership. When disincentivising ICE cars, excise will increase. Fuel stations will resuce in number and running cost will again increase.
So if you're thinking you'll save a few bucks when ICE goes out of fashion, you're sadly mistaken. If you're worried a new purchase will depreciate, you'll never buy a car. Any car.
You can definitely get good second hand cars these days that have very little depreciation and are perfectly reliable, camry, corolla, small to medium Hyundai/Kia, older nissans. We have just become too snobby to drive them
You can get them new if you don't mind it called a demo. Manufacturers still pay dealerships bonuses based on sold cars, meaning if your not picky on colour you can often buy an undriven demo for the same as one with demo km's on it.
I was more talking about sub $8k cars that are a few years old. The aforementioned ones will all do 250k without problems at least, as long as they are cared for, some examples 500k.
sub $8k cars that are a few years old.
The aforementioned ones will all do 250k without problems at least
(followed by cost per 50,000km of life left, cost of cheapest demo, cost of new over 250,000km)
Camry: $13k DA, 190,000km $10,900 per 50,000km or Demo: 27,000 or $5,400 per 50,000km
Corolla: $10k + transfers, 190,000km for $8,300 per 50,000km or Demo: $23k DA for $4,600 per 50,000km
i30: $8,500 DA, 245,000km for $85k per 50,000km or Demo: $20k for $4k per 50,000km
Cerato: tie $9,500 + transfers, 70,000km manual for $2,600 per 50,000, 130,000km auto for $4k per 50,000km or Demo (auto): $18,500 + transfers for $$3,700 per 50,000km (~$4k with transfers)
Quashqai: $12,500 + transfers, 205,000km for $13,900 per 50,000km or Demo: $23,000 + transfers for $4,600 per 50,000km
Juke: $13k + transfers, 70,000km auto, 75,000km manual for $3,600 per 50,000km or New: $20k for $4k per $50,000km
If you want to keep cars to 250,000km, buying an mainstream auto demo is cheaper per km than buying a few year old car in the same trim level.
All of these except the Qashqai can be found close to $20k new in the right month.
Ignored Rio, Picanto and i20 because they are almost the same internal size and the picanto is a micro car.
Ignored Accent's, which can be had for under $9k with ~70km, because most 10 year old cars with $70,000km are a far better deal.
This took far less effort than it looks as this used to be a task at a previous job
@This Guy: Good effort, would have been easier for me to follow in a google sheet though ;)
I wonder if you would get a different result looking at a moderately low km example rather than the cheapest, since almost for certain the cheapest has the most kms?
google sheet
People rarely click links, so no linked tables. I included links so you wouldn't call bull****.
I wonder if you would get a different result looking at a moderately low km example rather than the cheapest, since almost for certain the cheapest has the most kms?
Of cause, but you put a few restrictions: brands and models; a few years old; under $8k; and a few years old.
I set a few years old as 2015 as 5 years old is generous and I could still find the same trim level as demos. When I searched by price (>$8k) I found 15 to 35 year old corollas with under 50,000km. I assumed you meant ~100,000km to 150,000km, but at that point it is basically the same price per km to by a demo and get a few extra features, warranty, around five years of low cost servicing and highly reliable driving (you normally don't loose an aircon pump in the first 100,000km). ie it would have been boring.
All of these except the Qashqai can be found close to $20k new in the right month.
Camry can't, nor can Corolla. Corolla has a $28,500 start price. Best you'll find is a really old stock demo for ~$26k. Camry has a $31k start price, so you'll need at least $28k for an old stock demo.
@spackbace: We are in different markets.
Corollas have been advertised locally $20k in dealer stock clearances and $21k at the last run out. I personally have been offered a six month old (then) current shape "demo" corolla with 121km on the clock for $17,770 (they couldn't move on that number apparently…).
Camerys have been advertised recently at $24k locally. A family member picked up an auto for $23k off a similar ad, with no trade in or finance. I have never paid much attention to the Camery's price as it is a fleet car.
Small car prices are going up again now that Lancers are off the market, but if MG can keep it's market share and continues to grow (more modestly), expect the Koreans to react and the arse to fall out of your C-HR and Rav4 at retail instead (in my market).
@This Guy: Yeah, RAV4 isn't going down in price, you're crazy if you think that
Chinese might dominate the lower end of the market, but it's nothing on the stronghold that Toyota has in terms of market share, which is only increasing.
Someone looking at an MG isn't looking at Hyundai/Kia, and very few of them are looking at Toyota/Mazda.
You need to realise the market segments:
Lower end - MG/Tata/Great Wall etc
Mid - Kia/Hyundai/Mitsubishi
Upper - Toyota/Subaru/Mazda/Honda
That sort of segmenting dictates pricing.
Newer cars are coming with so much safety as standard, that the only way to cost cut is to lose those features. Many reviews praise the safety that Toyota puts in as standard.
When were you offered a demo Corolla for $17,770? I can assure you, there was no way in hell that was a post-mid-2018 shape car, with a clear PPSR.
A family member picked up an auto for $23k off a similar ad
No they weren't. Not a genuine demo. Used most likely. Basic search for NSW yields $25,990 + stamp being the cheapest entry price for a used car, with $28,990 + stamp for the next used car. That's the market
Corollas have been advertised locally $20k in dealer stock clearances and $21k at the last run out.
Again, not for current shape, you're thinking the older shape - Pre-mid-2018
@spackbace: Google states the MSRP of the Rav4 is $29,990.
The reason you believe that there are different market segments is because you are too brand loyal. Your Casper's find that MSRP on google, are informed of the drive away price by a Toyota sales person and walk out to any of the other brands you listed. They are the easiest customers to close as they believe they have been deceived by Australia's leading car brand. MG's 7 year warranty does wonders at winning brand trust.
There are sayings in cars, they include "Sales people go to Toyota to die", "Never hire an ex Toyota salesperson, they can't sell, they rely on brand loyalty" and "Toyota customers walk in every three years and buy the same car, even if it is the same shape, no negotiation." These are jealous jabs of sales people selling harder to sell cars, but some of these guys also earn $120k to $150k every year. There is some truth in those claims.
If you want to earn the money you should be in your role, you would be far better off doing market research or practicing your pitch with cold and warm calls while at work. You are literally throwing away $10's of thousands of dollars each year by living on this site.
Please don't get me wrong, you add so much to this site, it is insane. You should be on the payroll. Until you are, you are screwing over your family by procrastinating at work.
And if you want better prices, you need to more of the sales person's favourite word. Dealerships are independent businesses. Find one still rocking a finance or aftermarket heavy business model or one with silly stock levels and you will be surprised at what is possible.
Google states the MSRP of the Rav4 is $29,990.
Excluding on-road costs, yes. GST, stamp duty, licensing, dealer delivery. So straight off the bat your comment has no weight if you don't know that basic terminology.
The reason you believe that there are different market segments is because you are too brand loyal.
I've worked for 4 major brands, but do carry on.
MG's 7 year warranty does wonders at winning brand trust.
Not really. Jeep offers 5yrs, Lexus offers 4yrs, BMW/MB offer 3 years. Would you buy a Jeep, or a MG, over a Lexus because you consider it to last longer? No…
These are jealous jabs of sales people selling harder to sell cars
Again, worked for 4 brands.
Toyota actually train a lot more than other brands, not only in product knowledge but in how to treat our customers, who are actually called Guests. From what we wear, how we interact, what facilities the dealership offers. We value repeat business, and word of mouth.
Toyota's market share is increasing, with cars like the RAV4 received Drive and Carsguide COTY for 2019. These weren't because they were whitegoods on wheels or anything, it was because they're good cars.
Find one still rocking a finance or aftermarket heavy business model or one with silly stock levels and you will be surprised at what is possible.
Not as much money in finance any more (since Royal Commission), and new car stock levels will never need to be high
And please don't tell me how to do my job. This site centres me. I work 60hrs/week, there's down-time. Cold-calling, in this day and age, is a waste of time and stress and if anything you burn customers. They don't appreciate cold calls, and it's never had good ROI. I make sure my product knowledge and training is up to scratch, and I'm up to the level where I can give my next customer the best of me. Get caught on the phone, and you lose the next walk in customer, or the next phone call of someone who's actually interested in buying a car.
@spackbace: "Google states the MSRP of the Rav4 is $29,990."
"Excluding on-road costs, yes. So straight off the bat your comment has no weight if you don't know that basic terminology."
Two sentences later:
"Your Casper's find that MSRP on google, are informed of the drive away price by a Toyota sales person and walk out to any of the other brands you listed."
I clearly
don't know that basic terminology
.
I've worked for 4 major brands, but do carry on.
K. And you haven't noticed in my posts I have worked for far more. Market analysis means paying attention to your competition, because I sure as hell have shipped cars to WA. You should also consider moving dealerships or even industries when it is more beneficial for your family.
Not really. [compares 5 year warranties to 7 year warranties]
Like I said, this lack of understanding of customer priorities in Toyota's sales process earns Toyota distrust. Competing sales process target Toyota's missteps in their sales process and marketing. 7 year warranties and advertising mostly in drive away pricing are two competing marketing strategies.
Toyota actually train a lot more than other brands
This is rote learning. You learn how to progress a customer through Toyota's version of a road to a sale, not sell a car.
We value repeat business, and word of mouth.
We all do, they are stupidly easy sales to close, and goes to the "truth in those claims". Over brands don't have 30% of the market and can't rely on repeat business as their main business model.
Drive and Carsguide COTY
Look at some of the crap on these lists:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_of_the_Year
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheels_Car_of_the_Year
https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-of-the-year
Not as much money in finance any more
Talk to your GM about moving into finance. You would be surprised.
new car stock levels will never need to be high
The monthly and quarterly bonuses most dealerships use to pay their bills are based on volume. They are often designed so the lowest 25% of sites do not recieve bonuses. Hence you will "*at participating dealers only" on drive away pricing as some dealerships have to turn a profit on sales to keep doors open. Others will over stock demo's to hit targets and end up with 10's of millions of dollars in stock.
But whatever.
@pegaxs: $8k cars are usually poor value, most people would be better off with a demo.
Toyota's can be had for considerably cheaper than Spackbace believes.
Spackbace's market knowledge is poor.
Spackbace could make a lot more money each year if they worked on making them self a better sales person in their down time at work instead of constantly entertaining us here.
If you want a sentence or paragraph converted to English from jargon, reply with it in quotes and I will translate it when I am on here next.
There are spelling mistakes, so it is not just you.
Funny how GM brought out an electric car in the 90s and the beta testers loved it. Then in the 2000's I think it was ford that was pushing for hydrogen fuel cells. Of course the oil tycoons killed / paid everything / everyone off.
I think the world may have been a different place if we took climate change seriously back then. At least Germany is doing the right thing, we need to step up our game and boycott the companies that fund fossil fuels. No one has to lose jobs, there are plenty of other countries shutting down coal mines and ensuring no one goes out of work.
I still think that the hydrogen fuel cell is the way ahead purely because you can fill a hydrogen tank in a few minutes, where as to charge a battery by any useful amount in a short time (5 minutes, not plug it in and go for a meal) requires huge spike currents, necessitating considerably better electricity distribution systems than are in place in Australia.
For a hydrogen fuel filling station, transfer it to filling stations as water, hydrolise the water all the time and store the gas. Relatively constant current draw, safe raw material transfer to the fuelling station, and only water as a byproduct.
Yes there will be a requirement for raw materials for whatever the best fuel cell catalyst is, but there will be no more outrageous demand for massive gaping hole lithium mines, and no battery disposable problems.
Unfortunately hydrogen fuel cell vehicles aren’t very energy efficient. They may be suited for some usage types, but battery electric is significantly more efficient, especially when renewable energy is used.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7MzFfuNOtY&t=7s
It's far more efficient to use a direct electric car than hydrogen once you look at all the whole energy chain.
Clicked the link hoping it was real engineering, not disappointed! Such a great channel
have you seen this, it's hydrogen-boron fusion with lasers:
https://newatlas.com/energy/hb11-hydrogen-boron-fusion-clean…
I would be very surprised to see hydrogen fuel cell cars take off. They require a massive upfront cost to infrastructure compared to battery electric.
Before you'd even consider buying a HEV, you need to have pumps with hydrogen around you (which are not cheap and would have terrible roi for a long time and a strong chance to become a stranded asset).
With BEV you can use any regular 240v 10amp 3 pin plug and charge (albeit slowly, you would still get 90 - 130 km overnight). You can use other 32 amp chargers to charge much faster, or even install one at home.
I'm not an expert, but what about all the material required to build battery (e.g. lithium) and the environmental impact to mine the resources and build the battery.
We billions of ICE car. if we have to replace all of them with EV, imagine how much battery we have to build. Do we even have that much lithium?
@Bargain80: Lithium is a weird metal to look at, it's actually a very tiny percentage of the battery. Most of it is nickel and copper iirc. We should have enough lithium for a very very long time.
To further that, lithium is mined on salt flats in a weird sludge form. It's mined in areas that are incredibly desolate so the environmental impact is very small.
Cobalt is a piece of battery chemistry that is much worse environmentally to mine, but many battery manufacturers are looking to move away from it. Tesla model 3 made in China editions are looking to be cobalt free through a partnership between Tesla and catl.
Environmentally speaking, a mid size battery adds about 10t of co2 into the atmosphere for production. To give some context, the average petrol car pumps about 5t of carbon per year.
@flametornado: A large percentage of cobalt currently mined is used in petroleum refining and is not single use.
@Bargain80: Also hydrogen fuel cells require some very rare minerals to be built. They are currently much worse for the environment and much less efficient than BEV.
See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen vehicle. I know people don't like referencing Wikipedia, but it had some excellent references there and discussed the problems facing fuel cells very well.
For a hydrogen fuel filling station, transfer it to filling stations as water, hydrolise the water all the time and store the gas. Relatively constant current draw, safe raw material transfer to the fuelling station, and only water as a byproduct.
They have very low energy density capacity compared to lithium batteries and especially petroleum, not to mention storing liquid hydrogen means it has be extremely cold (which is highly energy intensive to keep it cool).
Any pressurized gases are cannot be worked with easily and safely.
Amazon warehouses in the US use hydrogen powered industrial equipment. I worked with one, it was really cool to be inside a factory and be driving a little truck around with just a tiny unnoticeable amount of water vapour as the only emission (inside).
I think price is the biggest problem right now. Sure, it will come down but while we think that it is necessary to have over 400km of range when we drive less than that per week the manufacturers will keep stuffing electric cars full of expensive batteries.
Reality is many could use a car with 150km range quite comfortably as a second car. Recharge daily overnight or while at the station or office and take the ICE car for long trips. I could do that quite easily, typically fill the tank less than once a fortnight. While ever you fill your tank less than once a week and park in the garage overnight you probably don’t need more than 150km range.
Still, we are in the initial take up phase. The wealthy are the first to take up and they need ‘the best’. Hence Tesla offering staggering performance, good range and luxurious size and features. Once there is more infrastructure around and the price comes down and they start building basic smaller, cheaper e-cars that will be the tipping point.
I currently do that every night with my electric bike with its 50km range. Goes straight on charge when I get home. Essentially no different if it was an electric car.
That’s the important bit that some people don’t seem to understand. You almost never have to make time to go and fill up. Just plug in when you get home and it’s good for full range tomorrow morning.
Once we get fast chargers all over the place it won’t be hard to plan for a 10min stop every couple of hours for longer trips.
Not all makers are, Mazda for instance are being dragged kicking and screaming towards electric, releasing just enough models to meet regulations in countries with them.
I think we're 5 years away from buying electric even being a reasonable choice for most people based on price alone. It's only when regulations in Europe / California etc start forcing auto makers to put them out in quantity we might start seeing prices become reasonable and decent buying options.
Australia has no real incentives for electric adoption so we'll be one of the last countries onboard :\
Things will really be mainstream around 2030-2035.
Bets are on as to whether people will still own their own cars by 2040 anyway.
EVs only account for 0.2% of new car sales as of 2019. We're a long way from needing to worry about that future.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-03/fact-check-electric-c…
It is predicted that half of new vehicles sold in Australia will be EVs by 2035.
Yeah, a very long way away.
Our infrastructure (charging stations namely) is nowhere near ready for the load, and key car manufacturers such as VW have no faith in this country being ready for EVs and therefore have chosen not to release their EVs and hybrids here.
I don't forsee any change at all to ICE sales. My next car will be ICE, and most likely so will the one after it.
Read that link above to see just how far behind the entire world is in EV uptake. Among OECD members, the highest uptake of EVs is the US at only 2.1%.
The outliers in the world would be Norway at 49% and Iceland at 19.1%. Their governments have aggressive subsidies for EVs and taxes for ICE vehicles. It also helps that they are high income countries who can afford these cars.
I’m a bit of a car person and take notice of what is on the roads. At this point in time I’m seein more big American pickups on the roads than electric vehicles. It’s a bit of a catch 22 though. There is not a big range of electric vehicles available so people don’t buy them, but people don’t buy they aren’t available for test drives or there isn’t a vehicle in the category they want that’s electric.
i wouldn't mind one. I'd prefer one. But the price needs to come down significantly.
Tesla's model 3 which is supposed to be aimed at the widest market of all their EVs is far more expensive in AU than its US price.
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/elon-musk-agrees-tesla-…
We need to stop being ripped off first. As long as the entry level car is within the luxury car tax bracket, it's only going to reach the affluent people, the ones who would normally be in the market for a BMW or Merc.
If you want mainstream adoption of EVs, they can't be priced like Mercs. You need to go after the Toyota/Mazda owners.
At my income, I just can't afford one, so it's out of the question.
I think this is a good example of how things will change quickly.
It is quite believable the next election will include promises that drop the LCT for electric vehicles, add a reduced rego fee, add in $2/l unleaded and other incentives and "I just can't afford one" becomes "I do a lot of kilometers so I can't afford ICE."
@mskeggs: Thing is, I don't do a lot of KMs, so it makes no sense economically or environmentally to get an EV. I do want an EV, but for the technology inside, not the actual electric power.
The federal government is in a quandary with EVs. The revenue that goes into maintaining roads comes from fuel taxes. When everyone stops buying fuel, they stop getting revenue for the roads. Especially if you're also going to reduce rego costs for EVs. One proposed solution is to charge all EVs a tax based on how many KMs they have done. This will not be popular because people want to save money on running costs, not pay extra.
If they want to raise unleaded to $2 to dissuade you from continuing to use your ICE car it will make that government unpopular, and most likely be removed at the next election. Anyone who squeezes you in cost of living is likely going to get voted out. The majority are using ICE. If you squeeze the majority to make things better for the minority (the rich), it's political suicide. I can only imagine a Labor government attempting this, and they are going to enjoy more years in opposition.
A country like China could pull this off. They don't care about re-election. In a democracy, people will say they care about the environment but when the chips are down, they care about themselves and making ends meet more than the environment unless they're rich.
and "I just can't afford one" becomes "I do a lot of kilometers so I can't afford ICE."
Even if it were the case that EV would be cheaper than ICE, there is still the problem of that initial sticker price. EV would be cheaper over time. But you still have to make that initial payment for the car that would normally be beyond the budget of the Mazda3/Corolla customer. Unless the government is going to offer 100% loans interest free, the hurdle will be the initial purchase price. You can't save money in the long run if you can't even afford to drive it off the lot.
@mskeggs: Ironically doing more kilometers makes the case for electric vehicles since fuel costs are much lower with low KMs it removes alot of the electric advantage (lower running costs). Also as electric cars gain significant market share that puts downwards pressure on fuel prices and increasing prices on government to move to a per KM road tax rather than fuel excise.
At the moment, with the price difference between electric and conventional engines it's well beyond my life expectancy before I'd get pay back with low KMs, even if charging was completely free. The power costs in some Australian cities as well make some electric cars cost more to run from the grid than an ICE car. :o
If the LCT makes a difference for electric cars then they have utterly failed (it won't and they haven't). For an electric car the threshold for LCT is $75,526, and it's only the value ABOVE this that attracts LCT. Anyone paying LCT is buying a luxury car, electric or not, they need to be cheaper than that to get mainstream adoption.
In the US to push adoption people got tax credits on their federal income tax, I don't see this government doing that.
In the US to push adoption people got tax credits on their federal income tax, I don't see this government doing that.
The US pays less taxes than a lot of other developed countries but they rank lower in the happiness meter. Countries like Canada, Australia and the scandinavian countries have higher taxes but we get more from our taxes and are happier with the arrangement. You will find that people from these higher taxed countries are happier to pay the taxes to get the benefits they get than pay lower taxes and get less in return. In Norway the sales tax is 25% which is massive. But they are happy because their standard of living is better than the US. Their people don't want lower taxes because they like the benefits they're getting in exchange.
If our taxes decrease, something else has to give. We already can't live within our means. Things will get cut somewhere else, or new taxes will be introduced somewhere to offset the loss in tax revenue.
@lostn: "The US pays less taxes than a lot of other developed countries … Countries like Canada, Australia and the scandinavian countries have higher taxes"
Not really - once you take state taxes into account (heavier in the US than in Oz or Canada) the overall tax burden in the US is almost identical to Oz and only a little lower than Canada's (I once had a job doing international comparisons of tax systems). The big difference is on the spending side - the US spends their taxes on bombs and prisons rather than looking after its poor. As you can see by the wellbeing indicators.
The obvious replacement for fuel excise is a carbon price. But thanks to Messrs Murdoch and Abbott that's out of the question, so I expect we'll just bump up the GST a couple of percent.
I think it will be a bit like solar panels.
Initially, only people who are pretty price insensitive, and motivated by performance or environmental reasons.
Then prices will drop, battery capacity will grow, and it will flip to being financially the only choice for new cars.
Then it will be hard to sell new ICE cars that aren't special/niche, and the second hand market will pretty quickly drop.
It won't be a catastrophe. The average car is 10 years old, despite the people posting here about Westpac investment vehicles. The average car is already quite depreciated, so it won't really be a huge wealth destruction event, just a decade of change. People buying $4000 old cars won't suddenly buy $50,000 new electric cars, but $4000 old cars will sell for $3000, and people who might have bought a $40,000 ICE will buy a $50,000 electric, and this will keep moving that way.
I'm pretty keen for it. The Tesla already has a 600km+ range, so it isn't as far away as many who last looked a year or two ago might think.
If I was buying a new car, I would already consider an electric vehicle, and I tow a camper and do some road trips.
Likely, people will buy an electric car for city commuting and still keep the guzzling Hilux/Landcruiser a bit longer for the towing/trips as their second car. This is a bit of a flip of the current usual practice of having the smaller car as the second car.
The 30% of residences who can put a bunch of solar panels on will be leaders, as their cheap power makes it economically sensible to move early.
Now it's pretty obvious that conventional automakers are dropping ICE engine development all together
Right, well aside from Tesla can you name some car companies that have already made the pledge to do this?
VW and Mercedes Benz recently announced that they are slowing and/or halting ICE development. I also read somewhere recently that Honda have recently also said they by the 2030’s they would like to be selling nothing but EV’s into the European market. Hyundai and Kia are already pushing for more and lower cost EV’s to replace vehicles in their current range.
Toyota has not really made a pledge in this direction, as they are planning the hybrid as their main focus, hence why just about everything Toyota offers now has a hybrid variant.
And I am pretty sure that a quick Google search would tell you other manufacturers that are either winding back their ICE developments or those who are looking at stopping it altogether…
that's rich from a company who refuses to release EVs or hybrids in this country because we're not "ready" for it yet.
You are talking about a 5 year time frame where ICE development is dropped. I cannot find any evidence for this, google or otherwise. The examples you've provided have so many caveats. Pushing for more EVs =/= ending ICE development.
2030's to sell nothing but EVs into Europe is just pushing the goal posts. What have any of them said about Australia, the country pertinent to OP's actual topic?
Australia is a tiny market for cars. We just get the leftovers or whatever everyone else gets. Combine that with the significantly bigger distances we travel than in Europe and it’s no wonder we aren’t getting a bunch of electric cars. The companies think no one in Aus will buy a car with 150km range. They struggle to make an economically viable car with 400km range so there is virtually nothing for us.
I’d guess Africa will also get nothing for a long time.
@Euphemistic: VW said we don't have the infrastructure to support EVs, so they won't release theirs here. Not even their hybrids.
But if manufacturers don't give us the EVs, we won't build the infrastructure. It's a catch 22.
Will be further than 5yrs before it all falls into place to such an extent.
Unlikely in such a short time, they still cost $x amount to produce. You'll need EV to account for a far greater % of purchases to bring the cost of that down
Still plenty of ICE/hybrid cars/trucks/bikes on the road currently that need petrol