Official Honda Clarity FCEV/BEV/PHEV thread

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
To repeat, If 89 miles EPA range is enough for you, it is enough for you.

As with all vehicles, choosing a BEV requires you to make rational trade-offs.

Do you want a nice car, or one with thousands of dollars (and hundreds of pounds) of batteries you don't need, and are taking up useful space in your vehicle only as rapidly-depreciating ballast?

Why I find a viable driving future in 2018 Clarity BEV

While attending Honda’s recent Clarity PHEV press rollout in Napa, I had the opportunity to drive Honda’s premium Clarity battery electric vehicle. While the press pans Clarity BEV’s drive range, there’s something outstanding about this EV that none is talking about.

Setting the record straight, and there’s no arguing this point, Honda’s latest and largest stand alone battery electric vehicle has the lowest stated range of all new generation BEVs. So why lease one? On my last press trip for 2017 to Napa, California, I experienced two, 2018 BEVs, (battery electric vehicles) Honda Clarity, and the reinvented 2nd generation Nissan Leaf. While these cars are as different white and wheat bread, both are cutting edge when it comes to normalizing the electric car driving experience.

As Clarity brings a near full size sedan offering to the ever expanding BEV segment, Nissan Leaf opts for a reboot of its ever popular 5 door hatchback configuration. While Clarity BEV is march larger than Leaf, Leaf comes to market with a more powerful, quicker charging battery module, offering 150 + miles between charging, Clarity doesn’t!...

Clarity BEV is not designed for the long trip. With a stated 89 miles between charges, under ideal weather and road conditions, it would take a bit of charge management to cover many commuters daily work grind. However, for me, and the vast majority of Americans, less than 40 miles per day are traveled between work and home, easily done for Clarity. I can’t overstate the cabin comfort, quiet, standard featured active safety, and personal electronic connectivity integrated in Clarity BEV. I recommend a Clarity BEV test drive to anyone that can live with the 80+ mile charge range...
https://www.torquenews.com/1574/why-i-find-viable-driving-future-2018-clarity-bev

edatoakrun said:
The clarity BEV is a relatively large sedan, reportedly having very nice appointments, many features and quality fit-and finish, and is available for very attractive lease terms, $700 down and 199/mo for a 36 month, 20k mile-per-year lease.

https://automobiles.honda.com/clarity-series?ef_id=1:1:1&CID=SEARCH_HON_GOOGLE_FY18_SERIES_BRD&gclid=COjDnouN-dcCFcydfgodwKMHEA&gclsrc=ds

I'm not at all surprised that some lessees have preferred it to a more expensive lease on a smaller LEAF/Golf/Soul/Ioniq hatch, with fewer features.

If 89 miles EPA range is enough for you, it is enough for you, which is the case for many drivers in the CA/OR coastal population centers, now that DC charge sites are ubiquitous.

As to the Tesla 3, the lease+maintenance costs of the base model (if and when it ever becomes available) will probably be (post incentives) two to three times that of the Clarity.

The model 3 just will not competitive with the Clarity, or any of the other BEVs mentioned, in terms of cost.

GRA said:
GetOffYourGas said:
I've been a BEV driver for almost 6 years, and I also don't understand. Please enlighten us, Ed.

My best guess would be a strong loyalty to either the brand or the sedan form factor. Those are the only things that make the Clarity different from the slew of 100+ mile BEVs selling for a similar price.
That's the only thing I can think of that sets it apart, but that doesn't require that I drive it. Once the regular range Model 3 arrives, a BEV sedan with ~ 2.5 times the range for not much more money, the value proposition of the Clarity drops even further. For those not wedded to a sedan, the Soul/e-Golf/Ionic/2018 LEAF all provide at least 110 miles of range and four or five seats for the same or less money as the Clarity.
 
edatoakrun said:
To repeat, If 89 miles EPA range is enough for you, it is enough for you.
Of course. As we know from 7 years of experience, the number of people for whom sub-100 miles of range under ideal conditions when new is considered enough is a fraction of 1%.

edatoakrun said:
As with all vehicles, choosing a BEV requires you to make rational trade-offs.

Do you want a nice car, or one with thousands of dollars (and hundreds of pounds) of batteries you don't need, and are taking up useful space in your vehicle only as rapidly-depreciating ballast?
As above. If most car buyers made purely rational decisions, we wouldn't be seeing 4WD SUVs being bought and used as single person commute cars in areas that never see snow. Of course, if you only intend to lease for a limited period of time and don't care about long-term viability, then it might make sense to get a car which can only handle your needs for that period of time. We have ample evidence that most people don't think that way.
 
GRA said:
Of course. As we know from 7 years of experience, the number of people for whom sub-100 miles of range under ideal conditions when new is considered enough is a fraction of 1%.

Really? Changes to the way people do things take time. Why do you think that 7 years is really long enough to get to the equilibrium fraction of people that will buy a sub-100 mile range BEV?
 
WetEV said:
GRA said:
Of course. As we know from 7 years of experience, the number of people for whom sub-100 miles of range under ideal conditions when new is considered enough is a fraction of 1%.
Really? Changes to the way people do things take time. Why do you think that 7 years is really long enough to get to the equilibrium fraction of people that will buy a sub-100 mile range BEV?
What we know is that even most of the (tiny group of) people who were willing to buy sub-100 mile BEVs are stepping up to longer ranged ones now that they're available at comparable prices. Do you believe Nissan should be offering a lower-cost 24kWh 2018 LEAF because of the vast market that awaits it?

If the early adopters don't think they're acceptable, why would mainstream buyers who are used to 300+ miles be likely to find them so? Changes in attitudes may or may not take place, but that tends to be over decades even if voluntary.
 
Part of the issue is that the early sub-100 mile BEVs were marketed as 100 mile BEVs, and a LOT of people got burned by finding that they had at most 75% as much range as they were told, and that was dropping annually. Now when an EV has a listed range of, say, 89 miles, any savvy EV driver will automatically subtract 25% from that, making the car even less appealing.
 
GRA said:
...What we know is that even most of the (tiny group of) people who were willing to buy sub-100 mile BEVs are stepping up to longer ranged ones now that they're available at comparable prices...
What YOU know is a twisted reality distorted by your petroleum addiction.

Long range between fuel stops is a cheap high only when the costs of the environmental damage it entails can be imposed on others.

In five or ten years batteries will be cheap and light enough that most people probably will want to pay for sixty (or more) kWh battery packs in their vehicles.

But today, the large majority of BEV buyers prefer better BEVs (and better infrastructure) at far lower financial and environmental costs, and they simply do not suffer from the range anxiety your addiction spawns.
 
GRA said:
What we know is that even most of the (tiny group of) people who were willing to buy sub-100 mile BEVs are stepping up to longer ranged ones now that they're available at comparable prices.

Based on what? The squeaky wheels at MNL?

GRA said:
Do you believe Nissan should be offering a lower-cost 24kW 2018 LEAF because of the vast market that awaits it?

I suspect that there will be a market for lower cost BEVs. Exactly what battery size will be the equilibrium low end BEV isn't something that I have a clue about, of course. If you were being honest with yourself, you would say the same.
 
edatoakrun said:
GRA said:
...What we know is that even most of the (tiny group of) people who were willing to buy sub-100 mile BEVs are stepping up to longer ranged ones now that they're available at comparable prices...
...In five or ten years batteries will be cheap and light enough that most people probably will want to pay for sixty (or more) kWh battery packs in their vehicles.

But today, the large majority of BEV buyers prefer better BEVs (and better infrastructure) at far lower financial and environmental costs, and they simply do not suffer from the range anxiety your addiction spawns.

I should add that there should still be a market for ~20 kWh BEVs, indefinitely, even in a world where the BEV market is centered on the ~60 kWh Family Truckster.

This is because they will be much cheaper and smaller (outside) than today's entry-level ICEVs, and government agencies and private companies will probably come to understand that since they make more efficient use of roads and parking places, they should receive preferential rates and tolls for these services.

And of course, a more-efficient ~20 kWh BEV in the future will should be able to cover ~200 miles in urban/suburban driving, and quickly charge at available DC stations on the few occasions when longer range is required
 
LeftieBiker said:
Part of the issue is that the early sub-100 mile BEVs were marketed as 100 mile BEVs, and a LOT of people got burned by finding that they had at most 75% as much range as they were told, and that was dropping annually. Now when an EV has a listed range of, say, 89 miles, any savvy EV driver will automatically subtract 25% from that, making the car even less appealing.
Personally, I tell people to assume .6-.67 of EPA no worries when new, which allows for adverse conditions, HVAC use and a reserve. It's obviously possible for people to get more, depending on how much they're willing to adapt their behavior to the car, but for the typical mainstream driver who just wants to drive without thinking about it, that's a good place to start.
 
edatoakrun said:
GRA said:
...What we know is that even most of the (tiny group of) people who were willing to buy sub-100 mile BEVs are stepping up to longer ranged ones now that they're available at comparable prices...
What YOU know is a twisted reality distorted by your petroleum addiction.
Which petroleum addiction would that be, exactly? The bicycle which handles all my commuting and beyond walking range errands? The electrified mass transit which along with my bike handles most of my regional transportation? Or the less than 500 miles I've driven my ICE this year (an anomaly due to constant winter storms and then summer-fall fires in the Sierra, keeping me out of the Sierra and most of my recreation local. Normally it's <= 3k/year)?

edatoakrun said:
Long range between fuel stops is a cheap high only when the costs of the environmental damage it entails can be imposed on others.

In five or ten years batteries will be cheap and light enough that most people probably will want to pay for sixty (or more) kWh battery packs in their vehicles.

But today, the large majority of BEV buyers prefer better BEVs (and better infrastructure) at far lower financial and environmental costs, and they simply do not suffer from the range anxiety your addiction spawns.
Riiiight, and that's why they're all rushing to buy sub-100 mile BEVs that start at $34k, the automakers are flooding the market with same, and no need for subsidies either. Apropos of that:
DOE: median EV range in US grew 56% from 73 miles in MY 2011 to 114 miles in MY 2017

. . . In model year 2011, there were just three different models of AEVs available and their ranges on a full charge (according to the Environmental Protection Agency) spanned from 63 to 94 miles.

By model year 2017, the number of AEV models increased to 15 and the available ranges expanded as well, from a minimum of 58 miles for the smart fortwo Electric Drive Coupe to a maximum of 335 miles for the Tesla Model S 100D.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2017/12/20171219-fotw.html

I think you have the situation bass-ackwards - there will undoubtedly come a point at which people decide that BEVs have more than enough range, and range will decrease and a sweet spot will emerge once people are comfortable with the cars and the prices come down; it's a lot easier to justify a car suited purely for local use when it costs $15 - $20k than when it costs $34k; get the price down to $10k and (assuming they're adequate in other areas) they won't be able to keep them in stock. For now though, the vast majority of the car-buying population, including the early adopters, is simply unwilling to accept the limitations of short-range BEVs (or any BEVs, for most of them), and until that changes owing to greater familiarity or more likely massive price hikes in the cost of driving an ICE, few will be willing to change. Most simply don't care enough about environmental issues to make choices based on that.
 
WetEV said:
GRA said:
What we know is that even most of the (tiny group of) people who were willing to buy sub-100 mile BEVs are stepping up to longer ranged ones now that they're available at comparable prices.
Based on what? The squeaky wheels at MNL?
Among others, plus the fact that the best selling BEVs in the U.S are also the most expensive ones. Can you point to any other mass-produced tech where there's a competing product where that's the case ? Granted, it's not just Tesla's range that boosts their sales, but that was certainly a major factor in people motivated by environmental issues choosing to step up to cars that cost far more (even used) than they'd typically pay, e.g. early BEV adopters like abasile and dgpcolorado.

WetEV said:
GRA said:
Do you believe Nissan should be offering a lower-cost 24kW 2018 LEAF because of the vast market that awaits it?
I suspect that there will be a market for lower cost BEVs. Exactly what battery size will be the equilibrium low end BEV isn't something that I have a clue about, of course. If you were being honest with yourself, you would say the same.
I agree, have said so before, and make the same point in my immediately preceding post (written before I'd read your post), but as noted there we're not at that point yet, and won't be for some time. In the meantime, PHEVs will likely rule, as they provide enough range for routine use with no limitations on where they can go or forcing people to significantly alter their driving behavior. As far as the Clarity goes, Honda thinks so too.
 
As to the rationality of small battery local cars, theoretically the most rational one that's currently available is the SMART ED. Here's what one reviewer had to say about it at IEVS, that hotbed of fellow petroleum addicts:

Fun as it may be, Smart’s cute little cabrio is an EV argument that’s tough to justify. . . .

It’s not until you begin to unpack the details of the Smart ForTwo Electric Drive that the cute little runabout begins to lose its luster. The range is the lowest among all electric vehicles. There’s hardly any cargo space. And holy crap, it’s expensive. Smart will only sell the ForTwo as an EV in the U.S. (in all 50 states) from here on out, and all I can say is, well, good luck. . . .

Dat range, tho. Because the Smart is so small, there isn’t a ton of room for big batteries without totally eliminating cargo space. That means you’re left with a 17.6-Kilowatt-hour lithium-ion battery that’s rated at just 57 miles of electric range in the Electric Drive Cabriolet (58 in the Coupe). Smart officials say real-world driving tends to yield several more miles of usable range, but you can’t slap an official number of “57” on a window sticker in a time when most EVs are getting at least double that number.

Way too expensive. I could maybe forgive the 57-mile range if this car was like, $20,000. But in fact, only the very base Smart ForTwo Electric Drive Coupe is a bargain, at $23,900 to start, before available EV incentives, making it the cheapest brand-new electric car you can buy in the United States by a long shot. If you want the Cabrio, that’ll be an extra $4,200, and adding options like heated leather seats, touchscreen infotainment with navigation, upgraded audio, and more, bring the as-tested price of the Cabriolet you see here to – wait for it – $32,180. That’s as much as a Volkswagen e-Golf, which amply seats four adults and all their luggage, and carries it 125 miles before needing to be plugged in.

Too many compromises. The ways in which the Smart ForTwo Electric Drive charms me are not unique to itself. Drive any small EV and you’ll be rewarded with fun-around-town handling. The Smart’s party trick of being easy to park and fun to U-turn can’t outweigh all the other sacrifices you have to make to live with one every single day. As a second, urban car, it makes sense. But only if you get the cheapest one possible. And even then. . .
https://insideevs.com/2018-smart-fortwo-electric-drive-cabrio-review-take-two/

He also had some good things to say about it, but I'm concentrating here on the perceived value for money. For a more positive IEVS review by Tom Moloughney, see: https://insideevs.com/2018-smart-fortwo-electric-drive-cabrio-test-drive/

The Smart ED is as close as you can (currently) get in the U.S. to what Ed is talking about, yet total U.S. sales this year are 415 YTD. However, they were phasing out the old model and bringing in the next gen, which caused sales to drop into single digits for 4 months so it's not necessarily representative of actual U.S. market demand. Looking at 2016, 657 were sold in the U.S. for the year, out of total U.S. LDV sales of ~17.6 million. This represents a market share of 373 millionths of a percent. [Edit: I miscounted a decimal, and that number's 10 times too low, not that it significantly alters the conclusion: 657/17,600,000 = 0.00003732954 x 100 = 0.003732954%, i.e. 3,730 millionths or 3.73 thousandths of a percent of the LDV market.]

The one BEV I've driven for an extended period of time (1 week) as opposed to just a single test drive was a pre-production (PIV3) Pivco City Bee, which with improvements later became the Think City: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_Global

essentially aiming at the same market the Smart ED does, albeit in a much less refined fashion. It's EPA range would probably be about what the Smart's is now - IIRR the guy who was renting them said he typically got about 70 miles, but could stretch it to about 100 using all the hypermiling tricks we know about. AFAIR (it was 1997 or '98), the furthest I drove it between charges was 55 miles or so on the freeway, as there were no public charging stations then. A week of living with it quickly convinced me of two things:

  • Its range was so short as to be very limiting for anything other than local errands and short commutes, and combined with the lack of public charging stations made it unusable for most intra-regional trips;

    L1-only charging (it had a pigtail adapter for L2, but I had nowhere to plug it in), combined with the short range, meant that any time you arrived home with the battery mostly depleted and wanted/needed to go out again on short notice, you were screwed.

At the time, I was told that they were hoping to sell them for $13-$15k. I told the rep that I thought anything over $10k or at the absolute outside $12k (assuming they improved all the other issues besides the range I felt made the vehicle non-commercial at the time) was the most I could see people paying for it. Add 20 years of low inflation to one of those numbers, and that's what I think the Smart or a similar car needs to sell for in the U.S. to find a substantial market.
 
GRA said:
The Fusion Energi is going to need replacement by a mid-sized PHEV that doesn't just dump the battery under the cargo area. Driving dynamics are okay though not exciting, but the engine's apparently noisy under high power (climbing hills), and the regen paddles don't seem to do much.

A few months back, I rented a Fusion Hybrid (non-plug-in) for a road trip, and the car seemed woefully underpowered. It was like driving a 70's or 80's econobox again. US 50 headed east from Sacramento towards Lake Tahoe required the accelerator pedal be floored for much of the time. Climbing I-70 west of Denver towards the Eisenhower Tunnel required it be floored ALL of the time. This was just to keep up with the posted speed limit with 2 people and luggage in the car.

And yes the ICE was rather noisy during this time. I was also surprised by the weak regen, even weaker than the 2011-2012 Leaf. The car had its own battery charge level meter so I know it wasn't because the battery was full.
 
IEVS is reporting total December Clarity BEV/PHEV sales as taking a huge jump, from 464 (BEV only) last month to 1,425 combined, but apparently they're not going to give the split. I expect there's little doubt that the PHEV makes up the majority (or soon will) given its nationwide availability and more general utility, but no proof yet.

No report of Clarity FCEV leases for the third straight month. Not sure if they're still working on the software issue reported upthread, or if IEVS is just not bothering to list them.
 
As expensive as the BEV is compared to the PHEV I’m surprised they do as well as they do,

I expect some good discounts in a few years.
 
IEVS now says there were 898 PHEVs sold in their first full month on the market, and 527 BEVs, which totals 1,425 by my math. I remain astonished that they can find that many people to buy/lease the BEV. I'm very curious to see what happens now people know the tax credit isn't going away.
 
rmay635703 said:
As expensive as the BEV is compared to the PHEV...
GRA said:
IEVS now says there were 898 PHEVs sold in their first full month on the market, and 527 BEVs, which totals 1,425 by my math. I remain astonished that they can find that many people to buy/lease the BEV...
The BEV is only available in CA and OR, and only by lease, W/O purchase option, $899 down and $199 for 36 months.

I'd expect the PHEV (available nationwide) lease costs to be higher, reflecting the (likely) higher build/depreciation cost.
 
edatoakrun said:
rmay635703 said:
As expensive as the BEV is compared to the PHEV...
GRA said:
IEVS now says there were 898 PHEVs sold in their first full month on the market, and 527 BEVs, which totals 1,425 by my math. I remain astonished that they can find that many people to buy/lease the BEV...
The BEV is only available in CA and OR, and only by lease, W/O purchase option, $899 down and $199 for 36 months.

I'd expect the PHEV (available nationwide) lease costs to be higher, reflecting the (likely) higher build/depreciation cost.
At least they've recognized that almost no one would buy the BEV, when there's so many other options that provide better value for the money, now and in the near future.
 
Back
Top