No Plans for Plug-In Hybrid (PHEV) Maverick Says Mike Levine

[stoptothink]

Yeah, I used to like on a hillside in draper called South Mountain where the Draper temple is. The winters up there are super rough, snow plows getting stuck in the snow kind of rough. Snowpacks building up 10-12 feet to the top of our staircase kind of rough.

So I see why some people have AWD in that area, but it's so bad, that I honestly don't think having AWD would make a difference. Saw a jeep driver break an axle from how hard he was pushing his AWD SUV to get up the hill. Axle sheared off the vehicle.

Live in the valley now, so much better. Don't have to park our car in a church parking lot and trek half a mile back and forth through the snow up 30 degree hills just to get home. It's nice. Our 2001 Windstar did the best it could, but it really struggled at times to get up there. That van had such a hard life, wrecked, stolen, started as a rental car, driven up massive hills everyday. Still made it over a decade without serious issues, and that's often considered one of Ford's least reliable cars of all time .

We live in Pleasant Grove, right upside the mountains. It's all about tires, countless objectives tests have shown that a FWD vehicle with proper tires is superior to AWD/4WD on all-seasons in snow and ice. Our VW jetta is a tank in the snow with blizzaks. We snowshoe a few hundred miles every winter and never have we had an issue. If conditions are too bad outside where we feel uncomfortable in our jetta (maybe once or twice a year), we shouldn't be driving at all.

Sponsored

 

[JimParker256]

We moved from the boonies to the "big city" (population ~68K), and 90% of the places we need to go are within a 10-minute drive. Before I ordered the Maverick Hybrid, I considered buying an EV as our 2nd car (wife has an Impala that used to be mine until she decided she liked it...).

The problem is that our house has 100Amp service, and would need to be upgraded (another 100Amps) to power any reasonable home charging system... So I thought, well, If I'm going to spend money to upgrade the house's electrical system, why not go solar and save a lot of money?

To make a really long story much shorter, we determined that installing solar just doesn't make sense here. Sure, there's plenty of sun, but our electric rates are relatively low, the utility charges a fixed connection fee that offsets a significant amount of any surplus power you could sell back to the utility, and our utility (a Co-Op, so we don't get to choose alternate providers) purchases surplus production, but only at 58% of what they charge YOU for that same electricity.

When we ran the numbers, the break-even point for even a minimal system is around 15 years. For one that would be able to keep an EV charged, the break-even is around 28 years. And that was factoring in 5% rate increases every year (which is not historically accurate here in Texas.)

I somehow doubt I'll still be living in this house to cash that first check when I'm 95 years old... And somewhere along the way to reaching this decision about home solar, the idea of an EV stopped making sense. Now I'm so happy with my Hybrid Maverick that I don't think I would want to switch...

 

[CuriousGary]

Hybrid and gas only Rav4 are priced the same. Or were a few years back.

Original source: Heatmap
Reported by: Ford Authority

Mike Levin said: “There’s no current need for a PHEV. The Maverick Hybrid is incredibly efficient and affordable. The EPA estimates that Maverick Hybrid’s total annual fuel cost is just $1,500.”

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

 

[AznMav]

Original source: Heatmap
Reported by: Ford Authority

Mike Levin said: “There’s no current need for a PHEV. The Maverick Hybrid is incredibly efficient and affordable. The EPA estimates that Maverick Hybrid’s total annual fuel cost is just $1,500.”

If it truly is $1,500 a year a PHEV won't be that much better as that's about how much I pay in electricity to power our Bolt EUV. I drive about 15k miles at $4.50 a gallon currently in CA that's about $134 a month in gas for me. 42 mpg on the nose by hand on last two tanks.

 

[GPSMan]

Everyone (well most) default to fuel cost as the reason to switch and don't consider other reasons.

Anyone, any school or university, any business, any party public or private can generate their own electricity.

People can't generate their own gasoline.
My workplace has 250,000 watts of solar. The college 6 blocks from my home has 5 acres of solar covered parking lot (and 16 Free solar powered charging stations).

More rural areas may choose to erect windmills, and so on.

 

[OneAlienBoi]

We live in Pleasant Grove, right upside the mountains. It's all about tires, countless objectives tests have shown that a FWD vehicle with proper tires is superior to AWD/4WD on all-seasons in snow and ice. Our VW jetta is a tank in the snow with blizzaks. We snowshoe a few hundred miles every winter and never have we had an issue. If conditions are too bad outside where we feel uncomfortable in our jetta (maybe once or twice a year), we shouldn't be driving at all.

Yeah, good tires and common sense will usually take you further than AWD and hopes and prayers. Sadly, you'll probably agree that common sense is nowhere to be found with many of Utah's citizens. Hence all the lifted truck drivers doing 60 through Logan canyon during a blizzard who end up in a ditch.

I moved here from CA about 15 years ago, and the drivers here still scare me compared to the ones in LA. Especially Provo drivers, taking the UTA frontrunner to class 3-4 times a week was a major pain, my commute almost always took longer than my classes. But it was worth it not having to deal with other BYU student drivers.

 

[stoptothink]

Yeah, good tires and common sense will usually take you further than AWD and hopes and prayers. Sadly, you'll probably agree that common sense is nowhere to be found with many of Utah's citizens. Hence all the lifted truck drivers doing 60 through Logan canyon during a blizzard who end up in a ditch.

I moved here from CA about 15 years ago, and the drivers here still scare me compared to the ones in LA. Especially Provo drivers, taking the UTA frontrunner to class 3-4 times a week was a major pain, my commute almost always took longer than my classes. But it was worth it not having to deal with other BYU student drivers.

I moved from Los Angeles to Utah in '05. Moved to Texas '08-'13 and then moved back to Utah (likely for good). Can't disagree that Utah drivers suck compared to those in LA, but that and the beach IMO are pretty much the only things California has over Utah; couldn't pay us (wife is originally from Bay Area) to move back.

 

[OneAlienBoi]

I moved from Los Angeles to Utah in '05. Moved to Texas '08-'13 and then moved back to Utah (likely for good). Can't disagree that Utah drivers suck compared to those in LA, but that and the beach IMO are pretty much the only things California has over Utah; couldn't pay us (wife is originally from Bay Area) to move back.

Oh for sure, grew up in Folsom, moved to Utah when I was 10, also in '05. Cali isn't what it used to be.

There are a lot of good things about Utah, nature sites, increasingly diverse industries emerging, relatively low cost of living prior to this current housing boom, nice people, great place to raise a family, plus most of the people from the predominant religion are pretty nice.

There are some parts of downtown SLC that are a little iffy, but beyond that, you don't really have to worry about violent crime here that much, which is nice.

 

[JimParker256]

From my observations, there are LOTS of 4WD / AWD owners who totally misunderstand their capabilities. They drive WAY too fast in slippery conditions, believing that somehow having power to all four corners makes them invulnerable slick roads.

I've long suspected that at least part of the reason for that is those owners don't ever use their vehicles off-road, so they have zero experience with what it really can and cannot do. Lots of folks by 4WD trucks or Jeeps just because the "look cool" and convey a certain image about themselves that they like...

On the other hand, the guys who DO go off-road really seem to get it, and use 4WD / AWD to maximize their traction when it's compromised. You rarely find those folks slid off the side of the road after a rain or ice storm. Nope, they are the ones pulling the other folks out of the ditches, and practicing "safe winching"... (Another oft-misunderstood "art form" that can be extremely dangerous when done wrong. If you haven't gotten some training from someone with experience, don't try winching on your own! It's surprisingly easy to kill or maim someone!)

 

[rmay635703]

PHEV aren't as efficient as we would think they "should" be.

I read an article breaking down the 3 different Toyota Rav4 vehicles- the regular, Hybrid, PHEV. Money-wise the PHEV was the worst of all of them, (by a few Thousand $$ over 5 years) when considering purchase price and gas money spent. PLUS the PHEV usually have to compromise storage space somewhere for that extra battery.

They said the hybrid was the best.

Toyota does not want to produce plug ins, so they aren’t a good example considering they only make a few thousand a year for carb

+1 Long road trips is exactly where PHEVs are the worst. You are carrying around all that extra weight for no benefit on long highway drives. PHEVs generally are slightly less fuel efficient on the highway. If most of your driving is <30 mile trips, a PHEV might be a cost-efficient option over time.

Batteries get cheaper, more power dense and lighter everyday.

A modern battery that is the weight of the original Prius hybrid battery holds about 16kwhr of energy.

PHEVs that aren’t similar in efficiency to the hybrid version are examples of bad design.

Toyota is almost 10 years behind on battery chemistry in their plug ins at this point , they dropped the ball and will have to play catch up.

 

[Automate]

Toyota is almost 10 years behind on battery chemistry in their plug ins at this point , they dropped the ball and will have to play catch up.

They could also leap frog everyone
https://electrek.co/2023/06/13/toyota-claims-solid-state-ev-battery-tech-breakthrough/

 

[rmay635703]

+1 Long road trips is exactly where PHEVs are the worst. You are carrying around all that extra weight for no benefit on long highway drives. PHEVs generally are slightly less fuel efficient on the highway. If most of your driving is <30 mile trips, a PHEV might be a cost-efficient option over time.

Batteries get cheaper, more power dense and lighter everyday.

A modern battery that is the weight of the original Prius hybrid battery holds about 16kwhr of energy.

PHEVs that aren’t similar in efficiency to the hybrid version are examples of bad design.

They could also leap frog everyone
https://electrek.co/2023/06/13/toyota-claims-solid-state-ev-battery-tech-breakthrough/

That same article was ran with different dates in 2017.

When they have them for sale wake me.

 

[Dean.Engelhardt]

PHEV aren't as efficient as we would think they "should" be.

I read an article breaking down the 3 different Toyota Rav4 vehicles- the regular, Hybrid, PHEV. Money-wise the PHEV was the worst of all of them, (by a few Thousand $$ over 5 years) when considering purchase price and gas money spent. PLUS the PHEV usually have to compromise storage space somewhere for that extra battery.

They said the hybrid was the best.

$5K over 5 years doesn't sound bad when you get a $7.5K tax credit.

 

[stoptothink]

Batteries get cheaper, more power dense and lighter everyday.

A modern battery that is the weight of the original Prius hybrid battery holds about 16kwhr of energy.

PHEVs that aren’t similar in efficiency to the hybrid version are examples of bad design.


That same article was ran with different dates in 2017.

When they have them for sale wake me.

Sure, but the cost and weight are still significant. For our use case, with current upfront costs and weight/fuel efficiency it would probably take decades for a PHEV to be cheaper than a normal hybrid. You need to do the math for your own situation.

 

[vap0rtranz]

Sure, but the cost and weight are still significant. For our use case, with current upfront costs and weight/fuel efficiency it would probably take decades for a PHEV to be cheaper than a normal hybrid. You need to do the math for your own situation.

That's always the case.

Still, it's a bit hyperbolic to say plugin-hybrids are "the worst" for long hauls. Sure, their mileage would be better without having to lug around a high voltage battery after it's empty but the weight penalty isn't big. Plugin-hybrids are already more efficient than many other standard run-of-the-mill ICE. Attkinson cycle instead of Otto, aerodynamics instead a box on wheels, etc.

Even within the same vehicle, plugin-hybrids aren't the worst. Since Toyota is being picked on in these replies take the Rav4 variants. If I set the EPA's website to 100% highway miles -- so no city traffic hybrid benefit and no plugging in after the battery is empty -- the Rav4 mileages it spits out are:

The Rav4 Prime plugin's weight penalty compared to the standard Rav4 Hybrid's is .2 gal per 100 miles, so yea the non-plugin hybrid beats it. But the plugin still beats the standard Rav4's mileage. That's probably the Atkinson cycle efficiency over the Otto. It's hard to tell just on paper.

EPA testing ain't perfect, it's in a lab, MPG is a terrible unit of measure*, but it's the best we got. AWD adds weight too so I set both Hybrid and standard Rav4's to AWD in the EPA's website, but EVs can do 4WD with independent electric motors and I don't know how that affects weight. It'd be more realistic to get 3 people doing a long haul in each of these variants and report back.

Long haul trips just on highway ain't real anyways. There's no such thing as 100% highway driving. There will be some stop & go (like in my family's case: bathroom breaks!) so the battery won't be empty the whole trip. The driver just pushes a button and the battery isn't used on highway. Perhaps folks aren't aware of hypermiling plugins. It's not required to use the battery 1st and then the engine takes over.

And yea, the problem for the plugins and EVs is the upfront cost of ownership. That's the Elephant in the Room, and probably why @rmay635703 replied about technology generally getting cheaper over time. There's ways around that. I drove a cheap plugin-hybrid as a 2nd owner (of a Chevy Volt, when nobody wanted them so they flooded the market), and I did standard 120V slow charging. My Volt took 12hours to charge but a perk to overnight charging is utilities offer kwh rate reductions during off-peak hours. Mine offered upto 50% offpeak discount. Slow charging works for the smaller batteries in most plugin-hybrids but takes too long for the big batteries in pure EVs so they'll have to wait for things to get cheaper. Or fork out $$$.

The big lie is that gas is always cheaper than electricity. It depends. $ / mile is how to do that but few calculate it. Even without offpeak discount, my $ / mile * on electric was cheaper than gas. $0.12kWh. There are Devil in Details here that require taking out a spreadsheet, which I did do. For example, I drive in the Snow Belt and cold kills battery efficiency, so during cold winter months driving the Volt on gas got better mileage for cheaper (4 of the 12 months). At the end of the year, however, it was still cheap for me to do both city and long hauls with a charged up Volt. (There's no non-plugin hybrid of the Volt to compare against just the Chevy Cruze that averages 30 MPG compared to the Volt's 40.) If electricity prices skyrocket, then yea folks will be in trouble with all these plugins and EVs sucking up electrons.

* MPG and MPGe are terrible units of measure. gal / mile and kWh / mile are better, $ / mile is the best way to compare gas to electric driving costs.

Sponsored