RegGuheert wrote:I find it "funny" that you trot out a "sub-$30K" category now that you can show PHEVs winning in that price range. You made no mention of that category for the past few years when it was dominated by BEVs.
But that's par for the course for someone who comes to a BEV forum daily to bash BEVs and promote all more-polluting alternatives.
Meanwhile, in the US as well as worldwide, BEVs are outselling PHEVs.
Reg, I made no mention of it because there were so few cars that qualified - from memory, it was the iMiEV and Spark EV [Edit: forgot the Smart ED. Given that it and the iMiEV only have 68 and 62 miles of range and sell in very small numbers, easy to do], and for a short time the LEAF S (although that had its MSRP boosted and no longer qualifies), so I didn't think it worth breaking out, especially as the iMiEV's range was so limited. In the sub-$40k market, the Volt has been winning for some time, so how has anything changed?
Now that the Prime and the Ionic BEV are both available, the Focus EV has dropped its price while increasing its range, and there's the prospect of more sub-$30k PEVs to come, I think it's worthwhile to separate them. Also, some years ago I stated that IMO the general public wouldn't start to consider BEVs until they could buy one with 150 miles of range for no more than $30k MSRP, and we are now approaching that point - we've got a 124 mile BEV (the Ionic) offered for a base MSRP of $29,500 - IDK whether that is enough to get past the tipping point, or whether my estimate of 150 miles will be. Judging by some of the comments in the LEAF 2 thread about 30 versus 40 versus 60kWh LEAFs, 150 miles at a lower price does seem to be a popular option.
Assuming that I'm still bothering to post then, once sub-$25k PEVs appear in substantial numbers I'll break them out as well; ditto for sub-$20k PEVs, as each $5k step down doubles the size of the potential market.
As to your persistent belief that I am somehow anti-BEV, I'm pro-facts, and am in favor of all reduced/non-fossil-fueled alternatives that have a reasonable chance of success. That you interpret this as bashing BEVs is your perception - I've been happy to recommend BEVs generally and/or particular models specifically when I believe they're a good fit for someone, just as I'm happy to recommend HEVs or PHEVs (even FCEVs for the tiny % of people I'd consider a good match now) if I think those are, but I do believe that people should understand their options as well as why they are making the decision (i.e. what their priorities are) - after that, it's up to them to choose. Now that longer-ranged BEVs are showing up at lower prices I'm willing to recommend them more often because IMO they are a good fit for more people, but I won't recommend something if I think long-term success would be questionable. My philosophy with new tech has always been what my sig used to say, "under-promise and over-deliver rather than the reverse"; I'd rather not recommend something new to someone if there's a more than minuscule chance that they'll be disappointed down the road, because dissatisfied customers make a lot more noise than happy ones, and are more likely to retard future growth than hasten it.