
GM, Volkswagen Say Goodbye to Hybrid Vehicles - JumpCrisscross
https://www.wsj.com/articles/gm-volkswagen-say-goodbye-to-hybrid-vehicles-11565602200?mod=rsswn
======
Someone1234
To fully electric.

As the article says, both companies produced these as regulatory compliance
vehicles. Now they're shifted that effort over to electric because the
incentives are better for them.

The only companies trying to make hybrids for real are Toyota and Honda.
Everyone else is just pumping out low effort compliance vehicles. It is hardly
surprising that these vehicles haven't been hugely successful.

I'd love to buy an electric vehicle. Unfortunately prices remain impractical
($30K+ for a sedan) and the federal tax incentive is both expiring and
regressive (the richer you are the more you'll get back up to $7.2K, after the
new standard deduction ($25K) I'd need to earn near $90K with two dependants
to get the full amount).

They're great for those living in California or similar. Our state offers no
incentives and actually stabbed people who installed solar in the back
(decreased the buy-back amount to almost nothing).

~~~
yardie
> both companies produced these as regulatory compliance vehicles.

At one point I was completely fascinated with the Fiat 500e. Here was an
electric car that was stylish, quirky, and could be had on the used market at
a great price. But as I got further into it I realized that FCA hated
producing this car. Its only reason to exist is to allow them to produce more
pollutant vehicles as a regulatory balance. And if it did have a future there
would be the barest minimum invested into it. So I'm back to looking at
Teslas, even though I haven't liked the styling since the Lotus designed
Roadster.

~~~
rconti
Why does it matter to you, as the consumer, that FCA hated producing the car?
It's still cheap to buy and operate.

~~~
yardie
Because I want them to do better.

As an environmentalist this vehicle goes against my ethics. It exists to allow
them to sell more pollutant vehicles in California. It's all sizzle and no
steak. There are better EVs out there. Most car manufacturers will take
customer feedback to incorporate into newer models. FCA is having none of that
with the 500e. They aren't interested in customer feedback just government
CAFE regs.

~~~
cr0sh
You should probably be angry at the CAFE regs too. It's what (supposedly) had
prevented all the manufacturers from selling a small pickup, which is why Ford
stopped selling the Ranger. They basically switched to making the F150, then
making it larger (actually, I have suspected without proof that what they did
was move models downline - sometime post 1990s, the F150 became really larger
- the size of that era's F250, and the F250 became the size of the F350 -
Ford's re-introduction of the Ranger? About the size of the 1990s
F150...again, I have no proof of this).

Lots of people want a small pickup like the Ranger (Toyota also followed along
- compare sizes of the Tacoma of the 90s vs today - I suspect they all changed
in size), but they can't buy one. It has something to do with CAFE rules, plus
some weird calculation of area - so the larger the vehicles footprint, the
more it'll pass or offset or something; I'm not sure how it works.

But something changed in the 1990s - and now we have this.

~~~
yardie
Yeah I remember something vague about CAFE and EPA rules from that era. It
created a lot of perverse incentives do to poor planning. Like Hummer H2s were
classified as work utility trucks and didn't have to adhere to the tight
emissions rules of smaller vehicles. So you had soccer moms and realtors slap
a magnetic sign on the back and, TADA!, commercial vehicle. And your "work
truck" with heated leather seats was now eligible for all kinds of tax
deductions.

------
lukifer
> Later, [GM] found some success with the Chevy Volt, a plug-in hybrid that
> runs on electric power but also has a backup gas engine. The car was too
> expensive, though...

As a happy Volt owner (I've yet to met one who didn't love theirs), I can't
help but wonder if "expensive" is code for "lost service revenue because the
thing is too dang low maintenance and reliable". ;)

~~~
btilly
No. Expensive is code for, "We lost money selling them, and only bothered
because we got tax write-offs."

In short, expensive means expensive. They cost a lot to make.

~~~
Nasrudith
Isn't that also a bit tautological given how fixed costs are divided over
units produced? If they produced and sold more they would be cheaper. Of
course that assumes they would sell well if they put more effort into doing
so.

~~~
freehunter
That works if they're losing money due to not selling enough volume to recoup
the startup costs. However if they're actually selling them for less money
than they cost to make, every unit sold is just adding to the loss.

If it costs $1,000,000 to design a car and I sell that car for $30,000 and I
sell 33 cars, I've lost $10k. But just selling one more car will turn a
profit.

On the other hand if that car costs $32,000 to make and I'm selling it for
$30,000... GM has long been in the business, for whatever reason, of selling
cars below cost [1]. And for the Volt, it's more like selling a $40k car that
actually costs $80k to manufacture [2], not even taking engineering and
marketing costs as a factor.

Selling more Bolts and Volts would _hurt_ GM, not help.

[1] [https://www.hotcars.com/gm-admits-bolt-not-
profitable/](https://www.hotcars.com/gm-admits-bolt-not-profitable/)

[2]
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelinemaynard/2012/09/10/stu...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelinemaynard/2012/09/10/stunner-
gm-may-be-losing-50000-on-each-chevrolet-volt/#107188aa2cc9)

~~~
chrisbolt
> not even taking engineering and marketing costs as a factor.

It looks like engineering is included as "Development" in the original report:
[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-generalmotors-
volt/factbo...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-generalmotors-volt/factbox-
estimating-costs-of-making-general-motors-volt-idUSBRE88904V20120910)

------
dsr_
It's always struck me as weird that they aren't producing hybrids in the
vehicles that can most benefit from them: vans, pickups, trucks and tractors.

All of these are vehicles with a focus on power and range that would benefit
from the torque and simplicity of electric motors, and could easily absorb the
weight penalty of a motor-generator and fuel versus more batteries. The people
who buy these for functional reasons would appreciate the long range, easy
refueling, and reduced maintenance costs.

~~~
kube-system
GM used to make a Tahoe Hybrid. It was okay, but I think the price premium was
a bit much for the economy gain.

It also doesn’t help that the units of “miles per gallon” are not linear with
consumption. A improvement from 10 to 15 mpg doesn’t sound nearly as
impressive as an improvement from 20 to 60 mpg... but unintuitively, over
20,000 miles, it’s the same amount of fuel savings.

------
throw0101a
My parents' house does not have a garage or a driveway, how exactly will the
only-full-EV future work for them? Where are they supposed to charge?

~~~
llampx
Do they have an oil well and refinery in their backyard?

~~~
hayksaakian
Let's be more charitable and assume the OP means they park vehicles curb-side

~~~
branchan
I think llmapx's comment still applies here.

~~~
throw0101a
I have no idea what point llmapx's comment is supposed to convey.

------
cmrdporcupine
Well, I love my Volt. Maybe it will be a collectors car some day. Amazing
piece of engineering. I charge at work and at home and use gas about once
every two months.

I don't have "range anxiety", I have "range requirements"; no way I'm going on
an 8 hour drive to go skiing in the Adirondacks or in Vermont with a pure
electric.

A pure BEV won't meet my needs.

~~~
NickM
Admittedly it is still a small compromise, but I’ve done 8 hour road trips in
my Tesla to go snowboarding in Vermont and having to stop and charge adds
under an hour to the trip. The Volt does seem like a great car, but to me it’s
not worth the maintenance/space/reliability compromise of a gas engine in
exchange for not having to take a relaxing break every few hours when I’m road
tripping; obviously my values may be different but to me the extra time spent
feels pretty inconsequential in the grand scheme of things.

~~~
cmrdporcupine
There is no maintenance or reliability compromise. Go look at owner's reports.

~~~
gwbas1c
I had a Leaf for 4 years and had no scheduled maintenance. The only thing I
had to do was rotate the tires, put air in them, and put washer fluid in.

I assume the Volt requires at least an oil change every year?

~~~
cmrdporcupine
No, it only needs an only change when the number of hours logged on the motor
necessitates it, or every 2 years, whichever comes first.

I've had my Volt for 2.5 years, almost 70,000km. Have done one oil change.
Only one visit to dealer, which was oil change and some cleaning of the brakes
since they barely get used.

------
jameskilton
As a 2017 Volt owner, this makes me sad. If they so choose, there could be a
huge market for plug-in hybrids, where you get all the benefit of EV for local
transit but you still have the fuel backup for long range trips. The
infrastructure for a fully EV fleet just isn't there yet to assuage range
anxiety, though they are working hard on it. Plug-in Hybrids are the perfect
stepping stone to help a society learn how to move into a more electric-only
future.

At the same time it is good to see more companies jumping into full EV
designs, so the future is, IMO, bright, but it may be harder to sell this in
the short term.

~~~
searine
I wouldn't be surprised if the Volt comes back in a few years as a full EV
sedan.

~~~
rootusrootus
I would rather they upsized it slightly. The Volt is essentially a Cruze body
with a different drivetrain, and it is pretty small. I looked at buying one
but banging my head on the roof on my way to sit down made me rethink the
plan. It doesn't even need to be that much bigger, maybe just taller. A Prius,
by comparison, is pretty spacious.

~~~
WorldMaker
The Gen 1 Volt wasn't just a Cruze body and was a hatchback closer to the
"cross-over" territory that is currently all the rage for them. For cost
cutting GM moved the Gen 2 Volt into a Cruze body, and then GM killed the Gen
2 Volt for not being a cross-over or hatchback.

------
dreamcompiler
50 years from now we'll look back on hybrids as a brief transition phase in
the history of automobiles. They're much more complicated than ICE cars and
_vastly_ more complicated than electric cars. Once good enough, cheap enough
batteries happen (i.e. now) there's no reason for hybrids to exist.

~~~
arrrg
Cars like the Volt are most certainly not more complicated than ICE cars …

You can simplify those cars significantly due to them being an hybrid.

~~~
dreamcompiler
The Volt has a 1.4L ICE engine, three clutches, two electric motors (of two
different types--ferrite and neodymium), a large battery, a wall charger, an
inverter, and a complicated mechanical transmission that accepts drive input
from any motor. The Volt may be more efficient than an ICE car, but it is in
no way simpler.

~~~
ProfessorLayton
The Volt may not be simpler (Not saying it isn’t, but many of the parts you
listed are in regular ICE cars, just in different proportions) — but that’s
not inherently because it’s a hybrid.

Look at Toyota’s Hybrid Synergy Drive. It is rather beautiful in its
simplicity, and bypasses the need for a traditional automatic transmission — a
part so complicated the big auto makers have mostly given up on designing in-
house. Toyota’s HSD scales from the tiny Prius to Hylander, something a CVT
can’t do reliably.

Hondas’s hybrids are also mechanically simpler by bypassing a transmission as
well, and the ICE motor driving the wheels directly at highway speeds.

Failing transmissions are often the cause of a totaled older car, because it
is an extremely complex and expensive part to replace.

------
benmorris
We had a Gen 1 Volt for nearly two years. A greatly underrated car in my
opinion. No maintenance issues at all, it just worked like it was supposed to.
Frankly people are scared of them, we sold ours locally and everyone that
looked at it was obsessed with the battery and everything to do with the
hybrid features. Our car had a few years left on the GM hybrid component
warranty even! It was difficult for people to understand even though the car
had 45k miles on it the engine did not (it ran probably 20% of our use). Over
the 2 years we owned it we averaged about 75mpg.

------
gordon_freeman
So the article says that GM will keep making Plug-Ins so isn't a Plug-In is
also considered a Hybrid? I was of understanding that these vehicles use the
same underlying hybrid tech too such as regen braking.

------
jillesvangurp
Not unexpected given the trends in the EV market (dropping battery prices,
increasing ranges, faster charging times, massive growth in charging
infrastructure, etc.). A VW executive made some interesting comments about
this recently: [https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/vw-exec-says-
tipping-...](https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/vw-exec-says-tipping-
point-near-electric-vehicles)

Basically they are talking about a tipping point where BEVs are flat out
cheaper and more cost effective for everyone. They are not talking about
decades but the next few years. Right now it's a luxury thing for early
adopters. A few years from now, it will be the obvious cost effective choice
across all price rangers and vehicle types.

The WSJ article seems to suggest that battery vehicles are not profitable
currently. I'd argue that's probably not true. At least Tesla is apparently
enjoying pretty decent margins on their cars; even before you consider tax
advantages.

------
jedberg
I'm trying to replace my 2012 SUV with another SUV. I've been looking all over
for a plug in hybrid SUV, and there aren't any good ones. I want the plug in
hybrid because 95% of the time we do less than 30 miles locally, but once in a
while we drive a couple hundred.

I would be fine with an all electric SUV with a decent range, but those don't
exist either. The model X is not sufficient, and is also terrible for everyone
who isn't the driver (and also costs way too much for what you get).

Hopefully this change means that in a few years I'll be able to find what I
want.

~~~
malyk
Yeah, this is what I don't understand, but maybe it's because my wife and I
are a one car and mostly public transit oriented family.

What I want: A hybrid electric with ~40 miles of battery and a 300mi gas tank
for longer trips

What Auto Manufacturers assume (I'm guessing): 2 car households where one is
100% electric and the other 100% gas.

Seems to me like the plug in hybrid is the best of all worlds. Everyone can
use battery for all the short trips we do and we don't make any compromises
for our long distance needs.

~~~
clouddrover
> _What I want: A hybrid electric with ~40 miles of battery and a 300mi gas
> tank for longer trips_

A Toyota Prius Prime will do 25 miles of EV range and 640 miles total range:
[https://www.toyota.com/priusprime/](https://www.toyota.com/priusprime/)

A Honda Clarity plug-in hybrid will do 47 miles EV range and 340 miles total
range: [https://automobiles.honda.com/clarity-plug-in-
hybrid](https://automobiles.honda.com/clarity-plug-in-hybrid)

~~~
malyk
I have a Chevy Volt. It’s awesome. I just hate that more of these are being
killed off. There are more in the market, but every loss feels like a step
backwards.

------
madengr
I read recently that Honda has stopped all Clarity sales except for CA,
especially since the Volt is no longer available. That is a shame because it
is a really nice car and fills in the gap between pure EV and a hybrid. 40
miles on full electric, but a gas engine run at peak efficiency for long
trips.

~~~
jjtheblunt
but it's a ridiculously constrained trunk rather than hatchback form
factor...which removes Honda from consideration for many, i imagine. Tesla and
Chevy (and BMW and Mercedes) get the hatchback audience rather than Honda, in
this case.

~~~
madengr
We can fit a hard-cased cello in it, with one seat folded down, but that
reduced rear seat to one person. But yeah, hatchback would have been better.

------
diebir
Well, that's just stupid. Hybrids would be the fastest way to improve fuel
economy for the most common types of vehicles that Americans are buying (SUVs,
trucks, etc).

Maybe this will kill GM. Good riddance.

------
chvid
According to the WLTP standard for measuring gasoline consumption the new
Toyota Corolla hybrid does 22 km/l whereas the comparable VW Golf 1.5 TSI DSG
does 16 km/l.

Seems to me a quite substantial improvement.

------
sgt101
I need a eV for a 120mile round trip commute - what's my best bet?

~~~
gwbas1c
FYI: If you're in cold weather, assume that you can loose 40% of range on the
coldest day of the year. Thus, when it's 20 degrees, the 120 mile trip will
take 200 miles of range.

Furthermore, you need a bit of a safety buffer, because you shouldn't plan to
drive an EV to 0% everyday, so if you plan on driving in cold weather, you
should have about 240 miles of range.

FWIW: My wife and I had some very close calls in our 2014 Leaf. (EPA rated for
80ish miles) One 40 mile round trip on a 10 degree New Years Eve nearly left
us with a dead battery.

------
mrfusion
I never understood why the big vehicles never got hybrids?

I’d love to own a suburban but I’d never consider paying that much in gas.
Maybe I’m not a typical customer?

------
wffurr
[http://archive.is/qBHXl](http://archive.is/qBHXl)

------
e12e
Hm. I guess there's no bright commercial future for diesel-electric (biofuel)
hybrids.

