Official Honda Clarity FCEV/BEV/PHEV thread

Honda managed to deliver 2 more Clarity FCVs in December, in addition to the 6 previously announced: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/american-honda-sets-all-time-sales-records-powered-by-demand-for-cars-and-trucks-300385631.html

It will be interesting to see what if any effect this has on Mirai sales going forward, as they fill inventory - will it cannibalize them, or will they both increase/decrease?

Via ABG:

Honda has a super creepy ad for the Clarity Fuel Cell

Click to expand...

http://www.autoblog.com/2017/02/08/creepy-honda-clarity-fuel-cell-ad-video/

You know what's cute? Little kids. They're also a great reminder of why we want to leave behind a healthy planet for them to inherit. You know what's creepy? Floating heads, particularly those of children singing in eerie chorus.

This is the new one-minute TV spot for the 2017 Honda Clarity Fuel Cell. Shot in some sort of ethereal plane of existence where our weirdest nightmares are brought to life, the disembodied cherubs sing a haunting a cappella version of Fleetwood Mac's "Don't Stop. . . ."

It's part of a larger campaign for Honda's new hydrogen powered sedan . . . In addition to the TV ad above, Honda has published a series of short [horror films] "edu-tainment" videos, complete with more floating heads (which represent hydrogen). . . .

If you live in California . . . the ad will first air in the Los Angeles market during the Academy Awards on February 26. That will be followed by TV campaigns in the Clarity Fuel Cell's markets of LA, San Francisco, and Sacramento. In a clever move, the refueling video will also play on video screens above gas pumps at stations that also serve hydrogen fuel.

Click to expand...

You can watch the video. This seems to be an action coordinated to some extent with Toyota's Mirai ad campaign, or maybe it's just that now that both cars are out and the fueling infrastructure is considered reasonably robust and adequate for initial growth, it makes sense to begin advertising.

GRA said:

You can watch the video. This seems to be an action coordinated to some extent with Toyota's Mirai ad campaign, or maybe it's just that now that both cars are out and the fueling infrastructure is considered reasonably robust and adequate for initial growth, it makes sense to begin advertising.

Click to expand...

If it makes sense to advertise, then doesn't it make sense to come up with something that doesn't imply rapid oxidation of children? I agree with ABG: it's creepy.

Here's an ad from the same campaign, but with disembodied adult hydrogen molecules instead:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXvgee2Amng[/youtube]

They actually make the car seem attractive if you can get past the Soylent Green aspect of these ads. In any case it's WAY better-looking than the Mirai (probably because I cannot make out exactly where the massive air intakes are located).

RegGuheert said:

GRA said:

You can watch the video. This seems to be an action coordinated to some extent with Toyota's Mirai ad campaign, or maybe it's just that now that both cars are out and the fueling infrastructure is considered reasonably robust and adequate for initial growth, it makes sense to begin advertising.

Click to expand...

If it makes sense to advertise, then doesn't it make sense to come up with something that doesn't imply rapid oxidation of children? I agree with ABG: it's creepy.

Here's an ad from the same campaign, but with disembodied adult hydrogen molecules instead:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXvgee2Amng[/youtube]

They actually make the car seem attractive if you can get past the Soylent Green aspect of these ads. In any case it's WAY better-looking than the Mirai (probably because I cannot make out exactly where the massive air intakes are located).

Click to expand...

The intakes are in about the same place as the Mirai, just less prominent. As to looks, that it's better looking than the Mirai is true, albeit a low bar. Still, I've now degraded the Mirai to merely ugly rather than fugly, an appellation I now reserve for the Gen. 4 Prius (poss. excepting the Prime, which I have yet to see in the flesh), the Juke, and similar 'shock and awe' assaults on aesthetics. As for the ad itself, I admit it's weird, although it didn't cross the line for me into creepy. Companies are still having trouble trying to figure out how to advertise AFVs to the public beyond the green crowd (e.g. polar bears). The biggest problem I see with Toyota's billboard "Actually, it is rocket science" ad for the Mirai is that the car appears on it! You've already got to be pretty motivated to change to an AFV, if the first thing you know about a car is how ugly it is.

Via IEVS:

Report: All-Electric Honda Clarity To Have Just 80 Miles Of Range, Priced Around $35,000

Click to expand...

http://insideevs.com/report-electric-honda-clarity-just-80-miles-range-priced/

If accurate, we can write off the Clarity BEV now. I find it hard to believe that Honda would do something so stupid, so suspect this is disinformation. OTOH, I also didn't believe that Nissan would act in ways that were so antithetical to maintaining good relations with their early adopter customers, and boy was I wrong about that.

I basically wrote off Honda years ago. This is the last straw, and I can't imagine ever looking back. And I used to be a long-term Honda fan, having owned an S2000, Prelude Si, and Civic.

It sounds to me like the Clarity BEV is a conversion EV. Instead of starting with an ICEV, like the Fit EV, they started with a FCEV. But batteries and hydrogen tanks are very different shapes, so they probably are right; they probably can't fit a whole lot of batteries in the car.

Such a shame.

GetOffYourGas said:

I basically wrote off Honda years ago. This is the last straw, and I can't imagine ever looking back. And I used to be a long-term Honda fan, having owned an S2000, Prelude Si, and Civic.

It sounds to me like the Clarity BEV is a conversion EV. Instead of starting with an ICEV, like the Fit EV, they started with a FCEV. But batteries and hydrogen tanks are very different shapes, so they probably are right; they probably can't fit a whole lot of batteries in the car.

Such a shame.

Click to expand...

From all I've read, the Clarity was always intended to be multi-powerplant capable, just as VW is doing. It's hard to believe that Honda couldn't fit a bigger battery in the car, but even if they can't, that doesn't explain how they think they can price it at $35k when competing BEVs with ca. 125 miles AER are priced below $30k. At $25k there might be a few takers. This is the Accord PHEV redux.

GRA said:

GetOffYourGas said:

I basically wrote off Honda years ago. This is the last straw, and I can't imagine ever looking back. And I used to be a long-term Honda fan, having owned an S2000, Prelude Si, and Civic.

It sounds to me like the Clarity BEV is a conversion EV. Instead of starting with an ICEV, like the Fit EV, they started with a FCEV. But batteries and hydrogen tanks are very different shapes, so they probably are right; they probably can't fit a whole lot of batteries in the car.

Such a shame.

Click to expand...

From all I've read, the Clarity was always intended to be multi-powerplant capable, just as VW is doing. It's hard to believe that Honda couldn't fit a bigger battery in the car, but even if they can't, that doesn't explain how they think they can price it at $35k when competing BEVs with ca. 125 miles AER are priced below $30k. At $25k there might be a few takers. This is the Accord PHEV redux.

Click to expand...

That was originally my understanding too. However, compare it to the VW platform. VW seems to have done a much better job of building a shareable platform. Honda seems to have made a FCEV platform which they offer in a BEV variant.

Looking at this:

(Source: InsideEVs.com)

There is a huge hydrogen cylinder behind the rear seats. I'm guessing that they don't use any of that space for batteries. Assuming they use batteries of similar density to those used in the Bolt. Eyeballing it, I would guess that they basically replaced the fuel cell stack under the front seats with batteries.

Where's Jeremy when you need him?

I mean, we can't have GRA as the ONLY H2 troll on here.

GetOffYourGas said:

GRA said:

From all I've read, the Clarity was always intended to be multi-powerplant capable, just as VW is doing. It's hard to believe that Honda couldn't fit a bigger battery in the car, but even if they can't, that doesn't explain how they think they can price it at $35k when competing BEVs with ca. 125 miles AER are priced below $30k. At $25k there might be a few takers. This is the Accord PHEV redux.

Click to expand...

That was originally my understanding too. However, compare it to the VW platform. VW seems to have done a much better job of building a shareable platform. Honda seems to have made a FCEV platform which they offer in a BEV variant.

Looking at this:

(Source: InsideEVs.com)

There is a huge hydrogen cylinder behind the rear seats. I'm guessing that they don't use any of that space for batteries. Assuming they use batteries of similar density to those used in the Bolt. Eyeballing it, I would guess that they basically replaced the fuel cell stack under the front seats with batteries.

Click to expand...

No, the FC stack and related components are all under the hood. I imagine what's under the front seats in the FCEV is the hybrid battery, to provide extra power for accel/storage for regen. All current FCEVs are FCHEVs. There looks to be plenty of room in the cargo area for more battery, at some sacrifice in depth to be sure (they'd need to do a much better job than Ford did - VW seems to have managed it with no problem), but still providing a much more practical space. When I looked at the Clarity back during Fleet Week in S.F., the small sized, awkwardly-shaped trunk would have been enough to rule it out immediately for me if I were interested.

The Mirai's trunk is pretty limited by the tank too, but it's slightly better. However, neither is as good as the Tucson FCEV, which appears to be identical to the ICE version, admittedly with the smallest range of the current FCEVs as well. OTOH, with rapid refueling range isn't as critical, and it's easier to trade off between the two as long as the fueling infrastructure's dense enough to avoid problems. At this stage, that's only true in California around the Bay Area and L.A., and a limited issue between the Bay Area and Tahoe. Once there are H2 stations spaced no more than 1/2 max. range apart (in all conditions, so say 33-40% of max. range), that issue disappears. Of course, that assumes that we'll get to that point.

I do have a serious question for you GRA since you're the main pusher of H2 on there. And I don't mean that in a bad way, you're just the biggest(only) advocate for H2 on here really so my question is this.....

This last week was my birthday so my wife and I took the S for a 804 mile trek in 3 days.

Friday.. Leaving Burbank to Lone Pine.. Supercharging. Going to Whitney Portal.. coming back down and going to Manzanar then racing to Independence.

Sat.. Racing back down to Lone Pine, SC'ing.. then to Death Valley. Furnace Creek, Badwater then back to Lone Pine (SC'd) the up to Bishop.

Sun. Go up to Lake Isabella 8,450ft (almost, rd closed).. back down, Schats then back to Lone Pine (SC'd) High speed 85+ mph burn to Mojave.. 15min stop.. then home at 31%..

There is NO WAY ANY H2 vehicle could have made this trip. Not now, not in the future.

I remember on "Who killed the electric car" the who Hydrogen Hwy was coming, where is that?

I'd like to know when this H2 dream is coming?

JasonA said:

I do have a serious question for you GRA since you're the main pusher of H2 on there. And I don't mean that in a bad way, you're just the biggest(only) advocate for H2 on here really so my question is this.....

Click to expand...

I'm not an H2 advocate, I'm a supporter of any reasonably promising ZEV tech that has the potential to get us off fossil fuels. I believe that currently there are three such, batteries/BEVs, H2/FCEVs, and biofuels, and am willing to support continued development and limited deployment in the near certainty that we'll be likely wasting several hundred to some billions of dollars, until one or more of them is able to completely replace fossil-fueled ICEs, and the public are willing to buy them in the requisite numbers without having to be bribed to do so. As this is a topic that has been covered to death in the H2 and FCEV thread, any further discussion of it here is OT.

JasonA said:

This last week was my birthday so my wife and I took the S for a 804 mile trek in 3 days.

Friday.. Leaving Burbank to Lone Pine.. Supercharging. Going to Whitney Portal.. coming back down and going to Manzanar then racing to Independence.

Sat.. Racing back down to Lone Pine, SC'ing.. then to Death Valley. Furnace Creek, Badwater then back to Lone Pine (SC'd) the up to Bishop.

Sun. Go up to Lake Isabella 8,450ft (almost, rd closed).. back down, Schats then back to Lone Pine (SC'd) High speed 85+ mph burn to Mojave.. 15min stop.. then home at 31%..

There is NO WAY ANY H2 vehicle could have made this trip. Not now, not in the future.

Click to expand...

Oh, don't be ridiculous. You might as well have said that "No H2 vehicle could have made a trip from LA to Tahoe and back. Not now, not in the future." http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=17145&p=471184&hilit=on+the+same+487#p471184

Or for that matter "No BEV could have made the trip. Not now, not in the future", which was true up to about 18 months ago, when Tesla completed the SCs along it. Any vehicle is dependent on fueling/charging infrastructure.

It's certainly true that no FCEV can make your trip now owing to lack of infrastructure, but any H2 vehicle can make the trip to and from any point along 395 from Tahoe south as soon as they build an H2 station in Lone Pine (or somewhere close by; it or Olancha was one of the locations I recommended to the CAFCP) and someplace like Lee Vining, with Bishop or Mammoth as options, plus (depending on how much driving someone does there; for your trip you wouldn't need it), a station in Death Valley. There's no need for one in Mojave, although it's a nice to have. I also suggested one in Baker, both for round trips to Las Vegas as well as allowing a loop through Death Valley from Lone Pine/Olancha.

JasonA said:

I remember on "Who killed the electric car" the who Hydrogen Hwy was coming, where is that?

I'd like to know when this H2 dream is coming?

Click to expand...

See the California H2 stations thread for that, as it has both the current and next round of funding plans. Currently there are 25 full retail stations, including 4 (Sacramento, Harris Ranch, Del Mar and Truckee) [Edit: I should add two more, Santa Barbara and San Juan Capistrano] that are part of a hydrogen highway network that allows inter-regional travel. Unfortunately, while they're adding redundancy to I-5 in the next round, neither adds coverage for 395, and I've been lobbying CAFCP to get some along it as well as some serving Yosemite and Sequoia/Kings Canyon. The next round of funding solicitations should be dated 2017, but based on the lag time between solicitation for and award of the current round of grants they probably won't be awarded until mid-2018 or early 2019.

So you are lobbying them? Funny thing is every year you keep saying the same thing.

And no, there's not a single H2 vehicle that could have completed the trip I did in the amount of time I did.

GRA said:

No, the FC stack and related components are all under the hood. I imagine what's under the front seats in the FCEV is the hybrid battery, to provide extra power for accel/storage for regen. All current FCEVs are FCHEVs. There looks to be plenty of room in the cargo area for more battery, at some sacrifice in depth to be sure (they'd need to do a much better job than Ford did - VW seems to have managed it with no problem), but still providing a much more practical space. When I looked at the Clarity back during Fleet Week in S.F., the small sized, awkwardly-shaped trunk would have been enough to rule it out immediately for me if I were interested.

Click to expand...

I am aware of the presence of a battery. But I assumed that was not just the battery under the seats. I thought I read somewhere that was the fuel cell stack.

The Clarity has something like a 1kWh battery. Enough for some buffer / regen. My old 2010 Insight had a 0.5kWh battery located in the trunk, under the spare tire (yes, the Insight came with a donut spare, none of this fix-a-flat nonsense). It was much smaller than half of what you call the battery in the Clarity. AND it was NiMH, not Lithium. So I assume that the box under the seat is much too large to be the battery.

I'm not personally in the market for a FCEV, notably because there are no fueling stations. I personally wouldn't buy one unless it had a plug-in option (no reason it can't) with enough AER to handle my daily driving. But the BEV was of interest until I heard its dismal range. Still, I wonder what the trunk of the BEV will look like. Will Honda reclaim all of that space, giving back a normal size/shape trunk?

JasonA said:

So you are lobbying them? Funny thing is every year you keep saying the same thing.

And no, there's not a single H2 vehicle that could have completed the trip I did in the amount of time I did.

Click to expand...

Honest question, Jason: Can you provide evidence that GRA is "lobbying" or "advocating" hydrogen?

Because all I see here is him sharing information about it. He has spelled out in great detail the (few) advantages of hydrogen over a battery. In short, they are quick refueling and large-scale storage of renewables. Whether or not you or I or GRA believe it is a viable path forward, many large companies (like Honda and Toyota) seem to think it is. So GRA shares their progress.

GetOffYourGas said:

JasonA said:

So you are lobbying them? Funny thing is every year you keep saying the same thing.

And no, there's not a single H2 vehicle that could have completed the trip I did in the amount of time I did.

Click to expand...

Honest question, Jason: Can you provide evidence that GRA is "lobbying" or "advocating" hydrogen?

Because all I see here is him sharing information about it. He has spelled out in great detail the (few) advantages of hydrogen over a battery. In short, they are quick refueling and large-scale storage of renewables. Whether or not you or I or GRA believe it is a viable path forward, many large companies (like Honda and Toyota) seem to think it is. So GRA shares their progress.

Click to expand...

He said...

it or Olancha was one of the locations I recommended to the CAFCP) and someplace like Lee Vining, with Bishop or Mammoth as options,

Click to expand...

When I hear and see that along with his past posts... yes, in my mind he is one..

And to quote him some more...

Or for that matter "No BEV could have made the trip. Not now, not in the future", which was true up to about 18 months ago, when Tesla completed the SCs along it. Any vehicle is dependent on fueling/charging infrastructure.

Click to expand...

I've made that trip before in my Rav4EV using RV park charging... not the S

Tons of RavEV and Leaf owners in Vegas have made the trip to LA (to our EV meets) using the RV parks (14-50's)... so no, it's NOT possible now on H2

It's not possible in the future.. and I just watched key parts of WKTEC again last night and that H2 pusher/ lobbyist (was that you? lol)

A 2006 movie, and the H2 guys said by 2015, the state WILL BE FLOODED WITH STATIONS and by 2020, H2 will be the DOMINATE fuel of choice...

hmm

JasonA said:

He said...

it or Olancha was one of the locations I recommended to the CAFCP) and someplace like Lee Vining, with Bishop or Mammoth as options,

Click to expand...

When I hear and see that along with his past posts... yes, in my mind he is one..

Click to expand...

Ok, I can see where you're coming from I guess. When I read that, though, I assumed that the CAFCP was already planning on spending money on a fueling station. Maybe they even asked for inputs on desirable locations. So if all Guy did is to respond to a request, that's still not really lobbying for them.

He basically has three options:
1) Recommend a location which makes sense to him (seems a logical, rational thing to do, even if simply open-minded about the possibility of FCVs working)
2) Ignore the request. This is what I'd expect most people to do who don't care about FCVs.
3) Make a bad recommendation in order to try to sabotage FCVs. Clearly neither of us would expect him to do that.

JasonA said:

So you are lobbying them? Funny thing is every year you keep saying the same thing.

And no, there's not a single H2 vehicle that could have completed the trip I did in the amount of time I did.

Click to expand...

True enough now as it's beyond the maximum radius from an H2 station, but when/if the necessary H2 stations are built any FCEV will be able to complete the trip in less time than it took you, just as the Mirai was able to beat the Model X by 90 minutes (would have been more if the driver hadn't stopped to take some pictures) from Santa Monica to Tahoe (and beat it back, even though taking a longer route that also involved an out of the way detour), or any ICE would. There's no way to reasonably argue that a car with greater range and faster refueling will be slower or unable to make the trip you did in your Tesla using SCs, if the fueling infrastructure exists.

BTW, since you brought up doing similar trips in a RAV4EV, my comment was based on doing the trip "in the time you did" or less, which obviously isn't the case if you have to L2 charge at RV parks. Depending on routing, you probably couldn't have done that trip at all in the course of a weekend in a RAV4EV. Certainly you would have had to plan the whole trip around charging stops, to a much greater extent than is necessary with SCs. In the case of a car with fast refueling, the only 'planning' you need to do is to make sure you've got the necessary range to/from a station - where you choose to eat/sleep/recreate can be unrelated. Now, back on topic.

GetOffYourGas said:

GRA said:

No, the FC stack and related components are all under the hood. I imagine what's under the front seats in the FCEV is the hybrid battery, to provide extra power for accel/storage for regen. All current FCEVs are FCHEVs. There looks to be plenty of room in the cargo area for more battery, at some sacrifice in depth to be sure (they'd need to do a much better job than Ford did - VW seems to have managed it with no problem), but still providing a much more practical space. When I looked at the Clarity back during Fleet Week in S.F., the small sized, awkwardly-shaped trunk would have been enough to rule it out immediately for me if I were interested.

Click to expand...

I am aware of the presence of a battery. But I assumed that was not just the battery under the seats. I thought I read somewhere that was the fuel cell stack. <snip>

Click to expand...

The stack in previous generation Claritys was in the tunnel. Honda's made a big deal of pointing out that they were able to shrink the size (i.e. boost the power density) of their newest stack and related components so that everything fits under the hood. See http://world.honda.com/automobile-technology/engineer-talk/CLARITY/

Roger, thanks for the link. I still confused though. If that is really the battery under the seat, why is it so large?

And when will we see cutaway views of the BEV version? (looking at you, Honda).