Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...
One of the big draws for nEVs in Europe comes from the market position they are in: These speed limited vehicles can be operated *without drivers license* and if you know that to get a DL in Europe will often cost you $3000+ in fees and also that youth cannot get a DL until they are 18, but they *can* operate a NEV or similar speed-limited ICE with just a simple moped license when they are 16, then you know that the youth and the elderly who no longer can get (or never had) a DL are prime markets for these vehicles, in contrast to the USA where a NEV still requires a full DL. Cor van de Water Chief Scientist Proxim Wireless office +1 408 383 7626 Skype: cor_van_de_water XoIP +31 87 784 1130 private: cvandewater.info www.proxim.com This email message (including any attachments) contains confidential and proprietary information of Proxim Wireless Corporation. If you received this message in error, please delete it and notify the sender. Any unauthorized use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of any part of this message is prohibited. -Original Message- From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of brucedp5 via EV Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 12:24 AM To: ev@lists.evdl.org Subject: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ... * Keep discussions EV related * Sieving through all the newswires on plugins, one can foresee see some coming trends, along with mis-information still being spend by automakers. With the slightly less pump price$ (<$4gal), the public has relaxed its buying habits. One might make the mistake of thinking their buying will shift back to huge inefficient (more vehicle than they need for the one-person commute) SUVs ice. But the news piece below mentions rather that buyers are going to smaller (non-electrified, non-plug-in) ice ... http://www.dailydemocrat.com/business/20150615/honda-to-kill-its-civic-hybrid-and-cng-models Honda to kill its Civic hybrid and CNG models By Charles Fleming Los Angeles Times 06/15/15 ... While a new Accord hybrid will debut for 2016, there will be no plug-in version of that vehicle until 2018 ... will go forward with a planned [fcv] by 2016. Honda will also offer "an entirely new generation" of all-new battery electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles after 2016 "This reflects zero interest from American consumers in small, fuel-efficient cars -- especially more expensive hybrid versions of small, fuel-efficient cars," said Karl Brauer, of Kelley Blue Book. "This is in keeping with where the market is going, away from hybrids and toward smaller, more efficient [ice]." ... [© Daily Democrat] ... http://www.wsj.com/articles/honda-to-discontinue-cng-and-hybrid-civic-models-1434386062 The above news piece reads like copy handed to the media outlet by the automaker (it is the automaker's words, not fact). What is not said is the automaker's mood-change is not new, and their attempt to rationalism their change with 'buyer demand'. IMO, I can not see their 'excuse' as valid. Weak efforts on the automaker's part (they never really wanted to sell plugins, and like TMC, wanted to sell a few fcvs), in combination with the 'threat' of the other automakers' pressure of going fcv (TMC aka:Toyota, -many-others-, recently BMW & more), and their dislike for less profitable plugins, are forces on the automaker. Yet in: http://www.motoring.com.au/news/2015/honda/accord/honda-accord-goes-hybrid-51877 Honda Accord goes hybrid 16 June 2015 ... "We're not concerned with mass-market hybrid," said Honda Australia chief Stephen Collins. "Instead we'll focus on the premium end. We see the growth at the top-end of the mid-size hybrid market." ... Which reads like the automaker is willing to make high-end/more-costly electrified vehicles (for Eco-feel-good affluent buyers) if there is a profit to be made (money talks). But IMO, I foresee something else. That change to weaken the CA-CARB mandate smells of the dilution of the former CA-mandate of years ago as a prelude to the U.S. administration change that happened at about the same time (which fought the CARB mandate tooth and nail). So, does brick-and-mortar (old-school) automakers' marketing changes signal they are betting on the coming elections to favor their 'non-plugin' way of thinking? ... (it looks that way from what I am reading). Also, some will notice that I am including more nEVs (lower cost, sub-highway-speed EVs) in the newswires I post. Another change is that these nEVs are no longer just focused on lower income countries. TMC has long pushed that the only EV-market are nEVs. Now, other companies are selling nEVs because they are a lower-priced transportation solution that consumers enjoy. China buyers like low cost nEVs, and now Euro buyers are going to be offered the same de
Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...
On Jun 16, 2015, at 10:40 AM, EVDL Administrator via EV wrote: > Many of these guys actively LIKE -- deliberately PREFER -- the noise, stink, > and grime that their ICEVs produce. That may even be more important to them > than their actual performance. They really DO have "gasoline in their > veins." I'm sure there're some examples of that...but all the reports I hear from, for example, the crowds that gather 'round the NEDRA member cars...at least outwardly, they're easily convinced that this is something to take seriously. > If they really wanted to "fish where the fish are" with EVs, they'd have to > build something heavy, clumsy, and grossly inefficient, with a 50+ year old > chassis and drivetrain layout. > > That's because the #1 selling vehicle in the USA today is Ford's F-series > pickup truck. Maybe, but perhaps not this coming generation of batteries, but definitely the generation after that...Ford will be able to build an electric F-series pickup that will be hugely superior to the gasoline version. It'll have more torque, more towing capacity, offer a built-in inverter to run power tools off of on job sites...and all those pickups parked in shopping malls with perfect paint jobs, even in the bed? The ones driven by the proverbial soon-to-be soccer moms and the guys they're dating? They might not say it out loud, but they'd really, really love the silent ride so they can listen to their tunes. > I don't have any data, but I suspect that for a very long time, EVs will > share more buyers with the Prius than with the Mustang. So for the > immediate future, successful EVs that stick to the conventional vehicle > model will tend to look and act more like a Prius than like a Mustang. I suspect that the automakers will drag their heels on the performance EVs, despite all the bad press Tesla is giving their ICE versions on that front. But I'll bet you a cup of coffee or other suitable beverage that the first high performance electric vehicle to come out of a major manufacturer is one that they simply won't be able to make fast enough and that becomes as iconic for future generations as the Mustang and Camaro have for the past few generations. The only real question is going to be who pulls that trigger first. b& ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...
On 16 Jun 2015 at 6:52, Ben Goren via EV wrote: > Imagine if Ford made a ... 2017 electric Mustang ... The demand for > *that* EV would be instant.. I guess that depends on how you define "demand." You might indeed land some buyers. But you have to remember a salient characteristic of most gearheads. It's an attitude that you probably don't share. Many of these guys actively LIKE -- deliberately PREFER -- the noise, stink, and grime that their ICEVs produce. That may even be more important to them than their actual performance. They really DO have "gasoline in their veins." These people will never buy an EV, full stop. They'll never believe that EVs are superior in the very thing that they say is important to them -- raw acceleration -- even when EVs beating them on the track. They'll keep right on trying to top EVs with their crude, dated ICE technology, until they're dead and gone along with their vehicles and the fuel to run them. But I also hear you suggesting that the automakers haven't really put their hearts (and marketing muscle) into their EVs, and there I agree. If they really wanted to "fish where the fish are" with EVs, they'd have to build something heavy, clumsy, and grossly inefficient, with a 50+ year old chassis and drivetrain layout. That's because the #1 selling vehicle in the USA today is Ford's F-series pickup truck. Second place goes to the same damn thing wearing a bow-tie badge. Third place goes to the same damn thing wearing a rampant bull badge. Finally in 4th place we find a car, and it's the midsize Toyota Camry. Right below that is a small car, the Toyota Corolla. There are no sporty cars or muscle cars anywhere in the list of top 30-selling vehicles. Vehicles are a saturated market. If you want to sell one successfully, you pick a target buyer, preferably one not well served by the other vehicles now in the market, and build what he/she wants. This is why it probably DOESN'T make sense for the automakers to build EV pickups and muscle cars. The people who buy those vehicles are less likely to see (or want to see) any advantage in electric drive. For EVs to succeed as conventional vehicles (and that's another issue right there), they should have other characteristics that appeal to people who are open to the very idea of electric drive. This is why the first generation Toyota Prius had mediocre sales and the second generation did much better. For their second try, Toyota determined what kind of buyer they wanted and could capture, and tuned the Prius's size, features, and image to that buyer. I don't have any data, but I suspect that for a very long time, EVs will share more buyers with the Prius than with the Mustang. So for the immediate future, successful EVs that stick to the conventional vehicle model will tend to look and act more like a Prius than like a Mustang. David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA EVDL Administrator = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/ = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Note: mail sent to "evpost" and "etpost" addresses will not reach me. To send a private message, please obtain my email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ . = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...
Sorry, didn't get a chance to finish. You may be correct about EVs, but give it time - there's no turning back. The cost delta is shrinking, and some great cars are being produced that raise the bar - Tesla comes to mind. High cost, and maybe not as Musk had promised, but no boxy car. And remember, the interest in the innovative Prius took awhile. Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 16, 2015, at 6:52 AM, Ben Goren wrote: > >> On Jun 16, 2015, at 2:25 AM, Mark Abramowitz via EV >> wrote: >> >> I'm not understanding why you have a problem with Honda developing their >> line based on consumer demand, or the most profit. Don't you understand that >> this is how all the automakers compete, not to mention companies in other >> fields? > > Automakers also drive demand. > > You know one of the big reasons people are buying ICE rather than EV? EVs are > perceived as wimpy oversized golf cars. And, save for Tesla, they're all made > as econoboxes, more or less. Even BMW, one of the icons of powerful luxury > vehicles...their EV is a dinky little thing that's smaller than the very > definition of wimpy econoboxes: the classic aircooled VW Bug. > > Honestly, there's absolutely no reason why this should be so. Just look at > the Zombie 222 project to see how a few (not-so-)random schmucks can turn a > 50-year-old hunk of legendary Detroit steel into something faster than > anything that has _ever_ left a Detroit factory even to this day. And they'll > sell you one of your own for about the price of a Tesla. > > If they can do that, what the hell is the problem with the big manufacturers? > It should be trivial for them to make electric versions of their own modern > production muscle cars -- and to make them absolutely smoke the ICE versions. > And sell them for less, after subsidies, than the top-of-the-line ICE > versions, and still with plenty of range for commuting. > > Imagine if Ford made a fifteen-second SuperBowl commercial for the all-new > 2017 electric Mustang, consisting of nothing more than a drag race between it > and an ICE Dodge Hellcat. The demand for *that* EV would be instant...and > gasoline would suddenly be that old-n-busted stuff that gramps used to have > to drive to get twice a day uphill through the snow to put in his lame-ass > last-century slowboat. Electric or go home. > > Great that Ford has electrified a Focus, that Honda has the Fit, Nissan the > Leaf, BMW the i3, Chevy the Spark, and so on. Wonderful little cars. And we > all know that there's a lot more to them than meets the eye. > > But there's not a one of them that the archetypal 18-35 demographic would > pick to be seen in on a date. Those aren't even Mom cars...they're the sort > of thing bland generic middle-aged resigned-to-be-boring office drones drive > to their cube farms and back to their apartment complexes in quiet > desperation. Probably even with a prized red stapler hidden in the glove box. > > ...and we're surprised that there's no demand, no excitement for EVs...why, > exactly? > > b& ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...
I won't argue with your fundamental principle, but certainly, of all the automakers, Honda has been one of the most responsible, if not the most, of all the automakers. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 16, 2015, at 6:33 AM, Robert Bruninga via EV wrote: >> I'm not understanding why you have a problem with Honda developing their >> line based on consumer demand, or the most profit. > > There is the problem. Our collective failure to understand that our maximum > approach to GREED and CONSUMPTION is simply unsustainable. > > Maximizing Profit is pure greed especialy when it is done at the expense of > our future. Of course, no CEO is going to be popular with his board of > directors unless he brings in the money. But there is nothing in stone that > says Maximum consumption of our environment has to be the only way to > profit. > > The best CEO's and companies will find a way to capitalize on the future and > to bring their customers into this new way of thinking. > > That is the challenge! > > And note, it is all driven by "perceived consumer demand"... well THAT IS > US. > > So it is incumbent on each of us that see's the clarity of EV transportation > as being one answer to future better living, should strive everyday to be > ambassadors of this future.. to our friends, neighbors, colleagues, etc. > They are the "demand" that drives greed. WE must fix this. > > Bob, WB4APR > ___ > UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub > http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org > For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA > (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA) > > ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...
On Jun 16, 2015, at 2:25 AM, Mark Abramowitz via EV wrote: > I'm not understanding why you have a problem with Honda developing their line > based on consumer demand, or the most profit. Don't you understand that this > is how all the automakers compete, not to mention companies in other fields? Automakers also drive demand. You know one of the big reasons people are buying ICE rather than EV? EVs are perceived as wimpy oversized golf cars. And, save for Tesla, they're all made as econoboxes, more or less. Even BMW, one of the icons of powerful luxury vehicles...their EV is a dinky little thing that's smaller than the very definition of wimpy econoboxes: the classic aircooled VW Bug. Honestly, there's absolutely no reason why this should be so. Just look at the Zombie 222 project to see how a few (not-so-)random schmucks can turn a 50-year-old hunk of legendary Detroit steel into something faster than anything that has _ever_ left a Detroit factory even to this day. And they'll sell you one of your own for about the price of a Tesla. If they can do that, what the hell is the problem with the big manufacturers? It should be trivial for them to make electric versions of their own modern production muscle cars -- and to make them absolutely smoke the ICE versions. And sell them for less, after subsidies, than the top-of-the-line ICE versions, and still with plenty of range for commuting. Imagine if Ford made a fifteen-second SuperBowl commercial for the all-new 2017 electric Mustang, consisting of nothing more than a drag race between it and an ICE Dodge Hellcat. The demand for *that* EV would be instant...and gasoline would suddenly be that old-n-busted stuff that gramps used to have to drive to get twice a day uphill through the snow to put in his lame-ass last-century slowboat. Electric or go home. Great that Ford has electrified a Focus, that Honda has the Fit, Nissan the Leaf, BMW the i3, Chevy the Spark, and so on. Wonderful little cars. And we all know that there's a lot more to them than meets the eye. But there's not a one of them that the archetypal 18-35 demographic would pick to be seen in on a date. Those aren't even Mom cars...they're the sort of thing bland generic middle-aged resigned-to-be-boring office drones drive to their cube farms and back to their apartment complexes in quiet desperation. Probably even with a prized red stapler hidden in the glove box. ...and we're surprised that there's no demand, no excitement for EVs...why, exactly? b& ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...
> I'm not understanding why you have a problem with Honda developing their > line based on consumer demand, or the most profit. There is the problem. Our collective failure to understand that our maximum approach to GREED and CONSUMPTION is simply unsustainable. Maximizing Profit is pure greed especialy when it is done at the expense of our future. Of course, no CEO is going to be popular with his board of directors unless he brings in the money. But there is nothing in stone that says Maximum consumption of our environment has to be the only way to profit. The best CEO's and companies will find a way to capitalize on the future and to bring their customers into this new way of thinking. That is the challenge! And note, it is all driven by "perceived consumer demand"... well THAT IS US. So it is incumbent on each of us that see's the clarity of EV transportation as being one answer to future better living, should strive everyday to be ambassadors of this future.. to our friends, neighbors, colleagues, etc. They are the "demand" that drives greed. WE must fix this. Bob, WB4APR ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
Re: [EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...
Some bold statements you put out there for discussion. I find it ironic that you chose to pick on Honda, as opposed to any of the other automakers. Growing up in Detroit, I remember Honda flipping the bird to the other auto makers by not only meeting the "infeasible" new pollution control standards that would require "expensive" catalytic converters, but did it without a catalytic converter. Honda also has other first in terms of leadership with low emission and energy efficient cars, that I'm sure any of their marketing materials will be happy to point out to you. And their limited production Fit EV has gotten rave reviews. Lastly, Honda went it alone in the U.S., producing CNG cars all alone, and saw the vagaries of the market, from the 2005s that just sat on the lots, to 2006, where they couldn't make enough, and later years, where you paid MSRP plus, to this last year, where sales have dropped - all following the price of gasoline. I know this so well because I have two of them, and regularly talk to my dealer about how sales and demand is going for these cars. So I think that your criticisms are misplaced. Since one of the articles requires a signin, I'm not sure what you think are misleading comments from Honda, but your own comment that there is not a shift back towards the big beasts isn't accurate. Check out recent sales reports from GM, which has a multitude of lines, and their earnings reports, which point to this shift in sales. I'm not understanding why you have a problem with Honda developing their line based on consumer demand, or the most profit. Don't you understand that this is how all the automakers compete, not to mention companies in other fields? How is that not "valid", as you put it? That's why we have mandates, and incentives. Some of these have even worked to allow companies like Tesla make a go at it. Also ironically, you miss the big news found in your first article - a new line of battery electrics. This was a stunner to me. I would have picked Honda to go to FCEVs-only for their ZEVs. Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 16, 2015, at 12:24 AM, brucedp5 via EV wrote: > > > > * Keep discussions EV related * > > Sieving through all the newswires on plugins, one can foresee see some > coming trends, along with mis-information still being spend by automakers. > With the slightly less pump price$ (<$4gal), the public has relaxed its > buying habits. > > One might make the mistake of thinking their buying will shift back to huge > inefficient (more vehicle than they need for the one-person commute) SUVs > ice. But the news piece below mentions rather that buyers are going to > smaller (non-electrified, non-plug-in) ice ... > > > http://www.dailydemocrat.com/business/20150615/honda-to-kill-its-civic-hybrid-and-cng-models > Honda to kill its Civic hybrid and CNG models > By Charles Fleming Los Angeles Times 06/15/15 ... > > While a new Accord hybrid will debut for 2016, there will be no plug-in > version of that vehicle until 2018 ... will go forward with a planned [fcv] > by 2016. Honda will also offer "an entirely new generation" of all-new > battery electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles after 2016 > > "This reflects zero interest from American consumers in small, > fuel-efficient cars -- especially more expensive hybrid versions of small, > fuel-efficient cars," said Karl Brauer, of Kelley Blue Book. "This is in > keeping with where the market is going, away from hybrids and toward > smaller, more efficient [ice]." ... > [© Daily Democrat] > ... > http://www.wsj.com/articles/honda-to-discontinue-cng-and-hybrid-civic-models-1434386062 > > > The above news piece reads like copy handed to the media outlet by the > automaker (it is the automaker's words, not fact). What is not said is the > automaker's mood-change is not new, and their attempt to rationalism their > change with 'buyer demand'. > > IMO, I can not see their 'excuse' as valid. Weak efforts on the automaker's > part (they never really wanted to sell plugins, and like TMC, wanted to sell > a few fcvs), in combination with the 'threat' of the other automakers' > pressure of going fcv (TMC aka:Toyota, -many-others-, recently BMW & more), > and their dislike for less profitable plugins, are forces on the automaker. > > Yet in: > > > http://www.motoring.com.au/news/2015/honda/accord/honda-accord-goes-hybrid-51877 > Honda Accord goes hybrid > 16 June 2015 ... > "We're not concerned with mass-market hybrid," said Honda Australia chief > Stephen Collins. "Instead we'll focus on the premium end. We see the growth > at the top-end of the mid-size hybrid market." ... > > > Which reads like the automaker is willing to make high-end/more-costly > electrified vehicles (for Eco-feel-good affluent buyers) if there is a > profit to be made (money talks). > > > But IMO, I foresee something else. That change to weaken the CA-CARB mandate > smells of the dilution of the former CA-mandate of year
[EVDL] OT: Change in automakers' direction ...
* Keep discussions EV related * Sieving through all the newswires on plugins, one can foresee see some coming trends, along with mis-information still being spend by automakers. With the slightly less pump price$ (<$4gal), the public has relaxed its buying habits. One might make the mistake of thinking their buying will shift back to huge inefficient (more vehicle than they need for the one-person commute) SUVs ice. But the news piece below mentions rather that buyers are going to smaller (non-electrified, non-plug-in) ice ... http://www.dailydemocrat.com/business/20150615/honda-to-kill-its-civic-hybrid-and-cng-models Honda to kill its Civic hybrid and CNG models By Charles Fleming Los Angeles Times 06/15/15 ... While a new Accord hybrid will debut for 2016, there will be no plug-in version of that vehicle until 2018 ... will go forward with a planned [fcv] by 2016. Honda will also offer "an entirely new generation" of all-new battery electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles after 2016 "This reflects zero interest from American consumers in small, fuel-efficient cars -- especially more expensive hybrid versions of small, fuel-efficient cars," said Karl Brauer, of Kelley Blue Book. "This is in keeping with where the market is going, away from hybrids and toward smaller, more efficient [ice]." ... [© Daily Democrat] ... http://www.wsj.com/articles/honda-to-discontinue-cng-and-hybrid-civic-models-1434386062 The above news piece reads like copy handed to the media outlet by the automaker (it is the automaker's words, not fact). What is not said is the automaker's mood-change is not new, and their attempt to rationalism their change with 'buyer demand'. IMO, I can not see their 'excuse' as valid. Weak efforts on the automaker's part (they never really wanted to sell plugins, and like TMC, wanted to sell a few fcvs), in combination with the 'threat' of the other automakers' pressure of going fcv (TMC aka:Toyota, -many-others-, recently BMW & more), and their dislike for less profitable plugins, are forces on the automaker. Yet in: http://www.motoring.com.au/news/2015/honda/accord/honda-accord-goes-hybrid-51877 Honda Accord goes hybrid 16 June 2015 ... "We're not concerned with mass-market hybrid," said Honda Australia chief Stephen Collins. "Instead we'll focus on the premium end. We see the growth at the top-end of the mid-size hybrid market." ... Which reads like the automaker is willing to make high-end/more-costly electrified vehicles (for Eco-feel-good affluent buyers) if there is a profit to be made (money talks). But IMO, I foresee something else. That change to weaken the CA-CARB mandate smells of the dilution of the former CA-mandate of years ago as a prelude to the U.S. administration change that happened at about the same time (which fought the CARB mandate tooth and nail). So, does brick-and-mortar (old-school) automakers' marketing changes signal they are betting on the coming elections to favor their 'non-plugin' way of thinking? ... (it looks that way from what I am reading). Also, some will notice that I am including more nEVs (lower cost, sub-highway-speed EVs) in the newswires I post. Another change is that these nEVs are no longer just focused on lower income countries. TMC has long pushed that the only EV-market are nEVs. Now, other companies are selling nEVs because they are a lower-priced transportation solution that consumers enjoy. China buyers like low cost nEVs, and now Euro buyers are going to be offered the same deal. For companies that sell nEVs, it is cheaper thus more profitable for them plus there are less regulations on these lower-speed EV to be hassled with. Sadly, none of these nEVs at this time are offered with L2 charging which would make them a truly viable low-cost EV (a 50mi@30mph nEV w/ a L2 6kW on-board charger= ~20mins to 60%SOC?). EVangels should stay vigilant to know of these automaker marketing changes and continue to promote the EV-cause no-matter what is thrown at us. Even if it gets as bad as in the 2000's when automakers got-away-with not making/offering any plugins at-all by just giving-away egolf-carts/nEVs. For EVLN posts use: http://evdl.org/evln/ {brucedp.150m.com} -- View this message in context: http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/OT-Change-in-automakers-direction-tp4676263.html Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)