Vehicles powered solely by electricity may be the future, but they’re only a fraction of the present. Widespread adoption once seemed to many to be impossible, then, suddenly, it became imminent. The reality has turned out to be somewhere in between. The open question is: How far backwards will electric sales go without subsidies?
It’s going to be a few months before we can accurately answer that question, because the first look at August sales shows the overall market continuing to quietly plod along, whereas electric car sales may make up a record percentage of new cars sold. The Morning Dump is here to jump into the data.
Tesla was probably the biggest EV automaker in August, even if its total share of the market continues to dwindle. The company’s future isn’t hinged on month-to-month sales. Instead, the company claims, it should be judged by its ability to mass produce “driverless” cars. The safety of those cars is being called into question by the feds, who say Tesla has been slow to report issues.
Hyundai is a company that does care about month-to-month sales. It also has to carry water for the South Korean government, which is why it’s touting more investments in the United States. Will it be shipping any of its new cars in the United States via rail? If so, it might want to keep an eye on how the country is securing its railways.
Were More Than 10% Of New Car Sales In August Electric Cars?
One of the numbers I’ve been looking forward to is when, on a monthly basis, the number of new electric cars sold makes up more than 10% of all new car sales. As you can see in this series of charts from the Energy Information Agency, there has been a steady climb in EVs and electric cars since 2014.
That graphic shows the steady progress of hybrids, which, for a little while, shrank as a percentage of the total market as EVs became the hot new thing. Obviously, hybrids are back on top. Let’s zoom in a little to see what electric cars look like more recently:
Obviously, August sales aren’t over, but S&P Mobility is generally accurate about these things. Here’s what S&P says about the current market:
August 2025 US auto sales are projected to reach 1.43 million units, according to S&P Global Mobility. This would translate to an estimated sales pace of 15.8 million units (seasonally adjusted annual rate: SAAR), down slightly from the 16.4 million-unit pace in July but the second consecutive month of advancing sales from the mild May-June results.
“Auto demand in August is expected to carry some of the current momentum, as electric vehicle sales continue to support monthly volumes in advance of the September 30th expiration of federal EV incentives,” said Chris Hopson, principal analyst at S&P Global Mobility. “At the same time automakers continue to raise incentive levels and there are signals that credit conditions are loosening. While good for short term boosts, these signs also point to supports enhanced when underlying demand is weakening.”
Car sales are probably a little up against last August, but not as dramatically as they were earlier this year. There’s been a bit of a whipsaw effect with electric car sales due to the threat of removing the tax credit for electric cars and then the eventual carrying out of that threat. After President Trump’s election, there was a run on electric cars, but that just pulled forward sales of EVs. At the same time, the threat of tariffs sent more people into dealerships to get what they could before expected price increases.
Now, it seems like the ICE/hybrid sales pulled forward by tariffs are starting to wane at the same time that automakers/consumers are trying to sell/buy EVs before the expiration of the federal tax credit at the end of September. The estimate from S&P Mobility is that, for the first time ever (I think), the combination of mid regular car sales and urgent EV sales will push that number over 10%.
September could be even better if the gas-powered market stays on par with where it’s been, though that assumes automakers haven’t exhausted their supply of electric cars by then. We’re probably either at the peak or quite near the peak.
Feds Are Curious Why Tesla Is So Slow To Report Accidents
For Tesla investors, the work CEO Elon Musk did to elect Republicans was going to benefit the company greatly when it came time to clear a path for the company’s advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS). Then Musk and President Trump started fighting, and it’s been unclear what happens next.
Per the Associated Press, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is looking into why Tesla has allegedly been slow to report incidents with self-driving technology. From the news site:
Federal auto safety regulators are investigating why Tesla Inc. has repeatedly broken rules requiring it to quickly tell them about crashes involving its self-driving technology, a potentially significant development given the company’s plans to put hundreds of thousands of driverless cars on U.S. roads over the next year.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said in a filing on Thursday that Tesla’s reports on “numerous” incidents involving its driver assistance and self-driving features were submitted far too late — several months after the crashes instead of within five days as required.
Hyundai Ups Investment In The United States By About $5 Billion
South Korean President Lee Jae Myung recently got the job after his predecessor was removed from office after trying to declare martial law and attempting to send troops into the streets over what most perceived to be made-up reasons. This week, President Lee was in the White House to try to persuade President Trump to continue to lower tariffs on his country’s exports in exchange for concessions.
As with all of these “deals,” it’s not really clear what was entirely agreed to and what the end result will be, as Bloomberg pointed out in this preview:
One potential source of tension will be details pertaining to South Korea’s $350 billion fund for projects in the US. When he announced the trade agreement on July 31, Trump said investments from the fund would be directed by the president himself, and that 90% of the profits would flow back to the US.
South Korea has released few details on how it sees the fund playing out, but authorities have said it would be largely structured as loan guarantees, with the actual equity commitment likely remaining below 5%.
President Trump wants South Korea to open up its markets to more American agriculture, which is a problem for Lee’s liberal party, which relies partially on farmers.
One lever that South Korea has is Hyundai, which already has a huge industrial base in the United States. The company already trumpeted big investments in the country (even though most of that investment was probably going to happen either way), and according to Hyundai, it’s going to toss another $5 billion on there.
Hyundai Motor Group (the Group) today announced a significant increase in investment to USD 26 billion in the United States, reinforcing its long-term commitment to innovation, jobs creation, and sustainable growth across key industries.
This investment will be made between 2025 and 2028, significantly expanding the Group’s footprint in the U.S. market.
This new commitment represents an additional USD 5 billion investment on the USD 21 billion allocation announced in March 2025, dedicated to advancing the Group’s strategic initiatives in automotive, steel, and robotics.
A big chunk of this investment will be in Louisiana, where the current Speaker of the House resides. What a coincidence!
Railroads Are Trying To Get A Waiver To Cut Track Inspections Dramatically
Here’s a story I didn’t expect to write today. The Association of American Railroads is possibly going to get a waiver that would allow railroads to use “track geometry measurement systems” to spot issues that could lead to future derailments, thus reducing the number of human inspections to twice a month from twice a week.
That seems fine, right? Not everyone sees it that way, as the AP reports:
Tony Cardwell, president of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees Division (BMWED) union that represents track inspectors and other rail workers, called AAR’s analysis flawed.
The technology only checks about a quarter of the items in track defect inspections, he said. Human inspectors also see foundation issues like broken rail ties or water damage earlier, allowing problems to be fixed before they get serious enough for the technology to flag them.
“Track geometry is the end result of a defect, not the cause of a defect,” Cardwell said.
Opponents of the plan have noted that after three train passengers died following a 2021 Amtrak derailment, a government report concluded that automated track inspections do not find as many types of track hazards as human inspectors.
If they do this, and any trains derail, you’ll know what’s up.
What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD
It’s the Fugees with “Fu-Gee-La” because I need to get pumped today.
The Big Question
Will more electric cars get sold in the United States in August, September, or October?
Top photo: Ford
“Feds Are Curious Why Tesla Is So Slow To Report Accidents.
…the work CEO Elon Musk did to elect Republicans was going to benefit the company greatly…”
I believe you answered your own question.
They need to seperate Hybrid from EV. It is not even close to the same and EV people just use it to juice numbers. Take out the Hybrids and how are EV sales?
Where I am, pretty damn good. It seems like every new car I see around here is an EV. That is likely because they are easier to spot than something like another 50 F-150s or Rav4s on the road.
But still, I see EVs commonly now. Wasn’t that long ago that they were as rare as the 56 T-Bird someone drives regularly around here.
I see a lot more too. I just don’t like how they mixed the sales together when originally hybrids were counted differently. It screams manipulation to me and I think its misleading and dishonest.
Realistically, outside of Toyota, who is selling Hybrids by the dozen? I guess Honda sells a reasonable amount, but Toyota is absolutely dominating the hybrid market.
I think if you just subtracted Toyota hybrid sales from the chart, you will get closer to reality for EVs.
The real thing that is going on is the expiration of the $7500 tax credit. If I was even thinking of a new car right now, I would be shopping EVs and PHEVs just to see if they fit my needs. And if I was shopping EVs, I would jump NOW before the tax incentive goes away.
Plug-in hybrids are just never going to take off. They seem to be the best of both worlds, but I guess most people either want a car that plugs in all the time or a car that takes gas all the time.
Half full, half empty situation here.
It is the worst of both worlds. Small battery range. High complexity.
Disagree. It fits so many use cases. Take my wife’s weird one. She works animal rescue. Most days, it is runs to vets, pet stores and Starbucks with a van full of dogs. The cheap vet way away is 20 miles, so a PHEV with 40 miles of range wouldn’t even turn on the ICE on that trip (in theory).
But about once a month or so, it’s a LONG drive. Like driving out to a place where the gravel road has a number and the houses don’t. She’s been chasing stray dogs in places where the only electricity comes from propane fired generators. These are NOT EV friendly places (hell they aren’t friendly places at all if the Meth addicts are awake). So, she needs an ICE.
A PHEV Minivan would be perfect for her and an EV would not. However, since the only PHEV Minivan on the market is the trouble prone Pacifica, I’m hoping that Toyota will “Prime all the things” soon and offer a Sienna Prime.
Now strangely, I think you will find that a LOT of Americans actually have PHEV friendly lives. “We take a trip to the Beach once a year and need range!” But you also do a lot of runs to the stores and work and whatever that are 20-30 miles at most a day.
Long write confirming my comment.
So let us keep an entire global oil industry running because your wife feels insecure about having only 300 miles of range (that can be recharged in 20 minutes) and somebody wants to go to the beach or visit their in laws once a year without the inconvenience of having to charge for half an hour.
Got it!
Right now we have an old van that needs to be replaced. Just a month ago, we were so deep into the “hallow” that we nearly ran out of gas with it before we found a gas station up a gravel road.
So, we will replace the van with a new EV van with 300+ mile range and see a charging network that is more extensive in rural areas than gas stations.
If the van breaks down before this occurs, we will get an ICE van instead of a hybrid or PHEV van since those are evil.
(The only van on the market here has less than 250 miles of range and costs twice as much as a PHEV.)
Look, you do you. But the use case for my wife is NOT a vanity project. We saved 12 dogs last month from horrible conditions. It’s our passion. A hybrid or PHEV would work well for us. The id.Buzz will not… yet. Maybe in another 5-10 years.
I think the issue is how humans work.
Think of your last drive? Got it? Now think of when that was. Was it today? Was it even in this week?
Most of our drives are BORING. As in never becomes part of our memory. I went to two doctors today. Not sure how I got there, I guess teleported, but I’ll assume my car was involved. This was about 20 miles of driving. Well within the capabilities of a PHEV.
But I won’t think of that as a real use case. I have a 200 mile drive tomorrow. This will be the drive I’ll remember as “my last drive” for a month or more. Doable in a EV or a ICE, but not in range of a PHEV battery.
So, emotionally, I don’t think a PHEV will work for me, even though it almost certainly would (especially since I’m not even using the same vehicle for the drive tomorrow).
Which leads to the second problem that I have emotionally with a PHEV.
How to charge it? I automatically think of EVs, where to fully charge a discharged battery is overnight with a Level 2 charger. But I don’t. PHEVs only have about 30 miles of range. A Level 1 charger(basically an extension cord to a regular outlet). will fully recharge that battery overnight.
But emotionally, I think “I need to re-wire my house to run an EV, so why not get a full on EV?”
My analytical side says “get a PHEV” but my emotions say “get an EV.”
We always remember exceptions and never think of the rule.
Update. So, yesterday, I did a triangle route. 50 miles up the interstate to a tiny “town” that was two larger gas stations to meet a guy that was adopting a dog from my wife’s rescue. Then about 100 miles through Fields, forests and an occasional gas station to a small town where I could get a great deal on a new appliance. Then back roads back home for about 125 miles. So, total of about 275 miles of driving, most in areas where a town is defined by a gas station.
If you asked me before yesterday, if a BEV would handle this trip I would say I would need well over 300 miles of range and an SUV/minivan.
However….
The large gas station that I met with the adopter had about a dozen Superchargers. I had seen them on a map, but it didn’t register that they were there. The Adopter ran a bit late and I watched a Y, Model 3 and a Hummer all get charges that didn’t seem to take unreasonable times while I waited (not all at the same charger of course).
Suddenly, instead of thinking I need a R1S to do a trip like that, I realized that something like an id.4 or Equinox EV would do that trip given the charger availability.
The only “but wait” is that we really do need a minivan. Minivans are so much easier for animal rescue and dog loading and unloading. I don’t know if an ID.Buzz has the range for a real 225 miles of driving in BFE without getting a 100% charge (which you don’t want to do with a Level 3 charger I hear). Add that the Buzz is twice the price as a Pacifica PHEV, and it’s still not time to switch to EVs.
But I’m a HELL of a lot closer. For a second car, a Equinox EV type vehicle sounds good.
I keep checking Lease Hackr to see if there is a blowout on one of the EV models. Prefer a Mach E, maybe a Prologue, Lyriq/Optiq. Would consider an Ioniq 5, EV6, Nissan whatever it is called. F-150 Lightnings are rarely that cheap. I still have a hard time with the idea of buying a $40k+ EV, but a lease and maybe do the math for a mileage overage would be interesting for a commuter.
Ultimately I need to buy a different car first, that won’t be a EV (maybe a hybrid), so a replacement commuter car will wait unless it is a fire sale.
Equinox EV have had some smoking lease and buy deals
I had an uber in a Blazer EV. It was impressive. Too bad it’s a Chevy and the local dealer seemed to invent the term “plaid” when it comes to dealing with the sales force and the service department is more interested in servicing you than servicing your car, if you know what I mean.
I just bought a 2019 Chevy Bolt with 15k miles, new battery (under warranty until 2032) for under $12k OTD. Of course, it qualified for the $4k fed rebate at the point of sale. The deal was was just too good to pass up! I’m impressed with the Bolt, as it is my commuter car (about 70 miles per day, round-trip). I’ve been charging with the wall socket for several weeks, but got the new 50A outlet installed yesterday for my EVSE and can now charge at 9.5kw/hr. instead of 1.44 kw/hr. My power company will reimburse about 90% of the cost of the electrical upgrade! So my net cost will be a few hundred bucks, plus $400 for the EVSE.
The BIG caveat is that the Bolt has a branded title, since it was a manufacturer buyback out of CA. My insurance company had no issues covering it, though. (They won’t accept flood, salvage or rebuilt titles.) Another upside is that the new battery that GM put in was a bit bigger than the original 60kw battery. Now, I’m rocking with a 65kw battery and about 250 miles of range.
This qualifies as a fire sale to me!
Very tempted to follow your lead. I’ve heard the Bolt has uncomfortable seats in that year, unless you spring for leather. Your thoughts?
The 2017 and 2018 models have much “harder” seats. For 2019, the seats are noticeably a bit softer. I checked out a 2018, as well, and compared back-to-back. I didn’t like the fake leather seats in the Premier, but I didn’t actually notice if they felt any different. The cloth seats in my 2019 are fine for me, no issues with comfort.
Used tax credit isn’t in play for me, so it isn’t quite such a good deal, but I have checked on Bolt (and Mach E and Lightning) prices myself. I don’t want to buy a $40-50k EV, but would buy a cheaper one. Am curious what the used prices may look like when the tax credit goes away.
Two of my very good friends purchased a new 2025 Mach E Saturday, in that same color. It didn’t qualify for the federal tax credit (unless leased), but was discounted about $9K off of its MSRP to the point that it made financial sense to them. I believe it’s a RWD model.
“union argues against rule change that would allow automation to replace some jobs”
Companies primarily have a profit motive. Politicians primarily have a reelection motive. Neither of them is incentivized to actually do the right thing – writ large or for the individual – insofar as it serves their primary motive. In this case, unions are more like politicians, with a primary motivation to stay in power.
As part of a union i can concur. They have had no teeth to help solve any issues that we have where i work but they don’t have any problem collecting dues out of my paycheck.
Hard to say, some of the crazy lease deals are still going. I would imagine when they dry up it will go down. Maybe if ev sales plumit when that happens the oems will price them better or give rebates.
I’m really curious what the market will look like in October-November.
I’m expecting EV prices to fall as demand falls too.
Maybe it’ll be the best time to get a used EV.
I also could be dead wrong about all of this and if the prices go up, I won’t get one in the near future I guess.
I’m buying used, replacing an ’05 MDX with a’13 Highlander. That with my hybrid Camry and the wife’s older Corolla should have us sitting pretty for a while.
I may replace the Corolla with an EV if the right deal comes around.
I’m not agianst track geometry measurement per se, but it must be augmented by human eyes. Sadly, I fear this will not be the case. The Class 1 Freight RR in the US will not spend a dime that they are not forced to.
The railroads will get their waiver because this Gomez Addams administration loves train wrecks.
It’ll be Pete Buttigieg’s fault don’t worry.
I’m going with August, September, then October for most to least.
I feel like September will be worse than August, because the people who want them got ahead of the game. While, the incentives ending in September may scare people away because they might be somehow worried of missing it, even though it’s still September, and buying a car is not necessarily a one day thing. Meanwhile, October is going to suck, for obvious reason.
That said, I don’t qualify for the fed rebate because I used it last year. So, I would have to wait. I feel like the price of EV’s is going to drop in October to make up for the loss of sales, and other incentives will replace what the fed has offered. I’m eager to see how used EV prices move in October as well.
I suspect used EV prices will tank, for some reason. But, that’s somewhat counterintuitive, as if new prices rise, then that should push people to used, and create scarcity. I still think all EV prices tank in October. Incentives are a thing, and a huge driver of human psyche. I say this because they motivated me when I otherwise was not looking for another car.
The purchase of an EV doesn’t need to be completed by 9-30, even a deposit down could qualify (according to Elon)
I think you’re right regarding the months. If I can snag a $159/mo with ~1500 down lease on a Prologue I will be adding to the numbers.
I’m sure Hyundai’s investments were already planned years ago.
But curious the tie-in with push for agricultural exports, with the announcements to push for more E15 (and talk of E30), how this will affect fuel and food costs.
Corn farmers are about to harvest the largest crop of all time, but profit margins do not exist because the cost of inputs is so high. E15 will increase demand somewhat, but at the same time small refineries in places such as Montana are getting exemptions so they can sell E0 if that is more profitable to them.
“Exceedingly High Production Costs Unaffordable for Corn Growers
Average production costs have dropped just three percent from their peak in 2022 to 2025 while corn prices have declined by over 50 percent over the same period. Even with higher yields, farmers are unlikely to be able to offset these high costs, resulting in continued and widening negative profit margins for the third consecutive year. The outlook for 2026 is even worse, with the forecast for lower corn prices and rising costs.
Extreme High Costs Relative to Price
The average cost to grow corn has dropped just 3 percent from 2022 to 2025 while corn prices have dropped more than 50 percent since 2022.
The average total cost to grow an acre of corn in the United States jumped 26 percent from 2021 to 2022, to a record high of $928 per acre. This notable increase deviated from the steady upward trend from the mid-1990s through 2021. Since that peak in 2022, costs have dropped only slightly. The average cost to grow an acre of corn in 2025 is $897 per acre, only 3.3% lower than the 2022 peak.
This is particularly problematic for farmers trying to cash flow high production costs while the corn price has tanked. The nearby futures contract for corn topped $8 per bushel in 2022 and is currently well below $4 per bushel.
Market Below Breakeven Price for Corn
Even with higher-than-expected yields, the average farmer cannot yield enough to avoid significant negative profit margins this year.
USDA raised their forecast corn yield for 2025 from 181 bushels per acre to 188.8 bushels per acre in their August report, which, if realized, would be the largest crop on record by far. Using the forecast $897 average cost per acre to grow corn, the average breakeven price for corn is $4.75 per bushel. The increased yield projection reduces the average cost per bushel from what was a higher breakeven at $4.96 per bushel with a 181 bushel per acre yield projection.
But USDA also decreased the forecast for market-year average farm price, the average price farmers will receive for the 2025 corn crop from $4.20 to $3.90 per bushel. A farmer with an average cost of production who receives the expected average price is facing an $0.85 per bushel loss.”
When the average yield is losing $0.85 per bushel we should be more concerned with farm bankruptcies than with food and fuel prices.
I’m sure if we could find a way to get that corn into Sudan and Gaza, there would be some real demand.
That assumes the corn in question is edible. Not all the varieties are, some are optimized for corn syrup and or ethanol at the expense of being a food.
Grain corn of every variety is always edible even if it needs processing. Commercial enzymes are purchased to turn starch into corn syrup and ethanol. All corn is technically edible if you consider Fritos edible, but traditionally the nixtamilization process is used to make it easier to cook and digest.
Some times corn can contain so many mycotoxins that there is nothing it can be used for other than corn syrup or ethanol. This is because it got infected is contaminated, and not because of the seed variety.
Demand yeah but is anyone going to pay for it? No. Especially now that USAID was illegally dismantled.
On one hand:
Family farms continue to struggle to survive, leaving it to the consolidation of intensive farming chasing low-cost.
On the other hand:
The significant subsidization of farms in America is huge, people would be rightly afraid of true cost of food (not that anyone’s going to be honest about how much government money goes into it)
The talk of expanding E15 and a move to E30 is because the USA’s gasoline consumption peaked and is declining while the renewable fuels mandate still exists. More corn into less gas requires higher blends.
My Kia says in the owners manual that anything over E15 voids the warranty (even though E30 would work just fine). E15 has been approved for model year 2001 and newer cars since 2011. The government has made it incredibly difficult for retailers to actually sell the stuff with increased regulatory costs, like requiring new tanks or pumps even if no changes are needed other than a new sticker.
The government has been competent enough to make it so that auto companies can not void your warranty for using E15 but not competent enough so that it actually ends up in people’s tanks. I am not confident these clowns are going to do anything that makes gas cheaper at Costco.
I’m going with September, though anything could happen to the EV Credit.
S. Korean people removed their leader for making stuff up and sending troops into the city?
I’d pay a tariff to import how they accomplish that!
Practice. Lots of practice.
Time to get started with having a meaningful legislative branch that takes maintaining the democracy part of our form of government seriously.
So how many EVs are we selling per manual transmission car these days?
Inquiring minds want to know…
Last I heard manuals account for ~2% of new cars sold in the US, though that number may have gone down a bit.
3rg gear: Considering how decrepit our infrastructure already is, I can’t wait for the return to the 19th century levels of rail disasters.
I follow a few youtube channels that profile industrial and rail disasters, with the endless push for deregulation they’re going to have lots of new content.
There’s a say that safety regulations are written in blood. Virtually every reg is a result of some horrific disaster.
I consider myself a conservative (at least as far as fiscal matters go), but I’ve also come to the conclusion that businesses are basically the societal version of teenagers. They NEED supervision.
I’m generalizing a bit here (this isn’t all teenagers, and this isn’t all businesses, of course), but they tend to push bounds, try to get away with as little work/effort as they can, and pay way more attention to what’s better for them than what’s better for the rest of the world.
I’d argue deregulation isn’t actually all that good for them. They get excited about saving money (on say thermal sensors that detect bearing failures on train cars) and cut corners to the point where not only do the savings go out the window (e.g. the train derails in some random town because of said failed bearings, releasing all sorts of noxious and toxic chemicals that poison the townfolk) and in extreme cases people even die (anybody remember Love Canal? Bhopal? Boeing’s MCAS?), so then they wind up paying out millions in settlements or court judgements.
It can make the costs associated with the regulations look like a bargain, and that doesn’t even begin to factor in the personal losses and tragedies the affected people suffer.
We tend to oscillate between “we need to let these companies make more money” and “we need to make sure the companies aren’t killing people”. It would be nice if we could find a happy medium and stay there.
Unfortunately that will probably never happen, of course.
It can make the costs associated with the regulations look like a bargain, and that doesn’t even begin to factor in the personal losses and tragedies the affected people suffer.
I think this has a few driving factors: first, people tend to think shortsightedly in general, shareholders essentially FORCE companies to think shortsightedly, and there is a mindset of rolling the dice that it happens to another competing company first and they take the brunt of the settlement payouts, known as the “thats something that happens to other people” mentality.
I agree that a better balance needs to be struck. gotta give some breathing room for companies to occasionally do something amazing, but not let them do things awful.
I’ll say September will be the big push, before the rebate goes away, maybe carry over into October with deposits but basically since the bill passed in July people have been getting while the getting is good.
Also on the rail thing, where were these inspection guys in Ohio with the rails that go all higgledy piggledy? Nothing against unions but when they’re named a ‘brotherhood’ it raises my suspicions, maybe just years of stereotyping have swayed me but I feel like they should at least rebrand to just Maintenance of ways Union, probably some women on the team too by now.
Yeah I have a feeling sales will dip once the tax credit is gone. I have already seen used EV prices creep up a little bit but I think once the credits are gone we will see prices drop (especially on used) but I dont think it will align with the price of the credit though.
We should all march down to the Moose Lodge and demand they get back to work.
Same comment on this sad state of affairs. The global automotive market is clearly moving in an EV direction. In the US, by executive decree, innovation and progress has stalled as the president is now meddling in the free market. The ‘domestics’ are going to ask for another bail out when they find themselves in the past and behind competitors.
You think our market was free with Biden or any other president in the last 30 years, maybe 60? That’s just a huge lack of critical thinking. If Tump is causing problems rolling back things. Then didn’t someone IMPOSE regulation that messed with the market in the first palce?
yes, I’m looking to lease an EV in the next week or so to take advantage of the fed and state rebates.
It’s still not clear to me how automakers will react to losing the tax incentives. Of course, every dealer with any kind of electrified vehicle will tell you “Now is the time to buy!” but automakers will still need to sell EVs after Sept 30, so incentives aren’t going away.
I will say that if you’re even casually considering a BEV or PHEV, I would look at lease incentives TODAY, even if you don’t usually lease cars. We never had either as we keep our cars a long time, but there are some truly amazing lease deals out there on PHEVs and EVs that even if you decide to keep the car, make it cheaper than financing (or in our case, even cheaper than buying a CPO car with cash). Worth doing a little exploring and number crunching for sure.
The credit has gone away before, so we can look at that as an indicator of what might happen.
Tesla “used up” it’s credits from the old system and the $7500 credit went away starting Jan 1, 2019 (over the course of a few quarters). Ultimately, the price mostly lowered back down to the same effective price as before. Meaning, Tesla discounted the price to account for the lost tax credit, resulting in the same-ish price to the consumer.
GM also lost the credit in 2021-ish (give or take a year). Ultimately, the actual price to buy a “$37,500” Chevy Bolt was low 20s for years, starting pretty early after its debut, and running through the end of its life, regardless of what tax credits and MSRP changes were. Why? Because that’s how much people were willing to pay for one.
So, I expect that the price-to-consumer for EVs *generally* will drop by an amount close to the value of the tax credit.
Some may not where the manufacturer is OK with not selling as many, and some models may be less available here (Kia/Hyundai has focused inventory on other markets before when the incentives didn’t work well for them, here, for instance), but I think the real pricing won’t change TOO much from what it is now for the major players.
Yeah, that was largely the same conclusion I came to as well. Though back the first time Tesla got cut off from the credits, their margins were head and shoulders above the legacy automakers so even taking the margin hit by lowering prices, they were still better off than the other brands.
I’m not sure what margins a GM Blazer EV has for example, and if they could afford to drop the price much more than what it is now.
Or put another way – nearly 90% of vehicles sold are not EVs. Seems kind of dumb to ignore that market in favor of the new shiny.
No one is ignoring ICEs, reporting on a new segment picking up market share is legitimate.
I’m not commenting on the reporting. I am commenting on the industry as a whole.
Where do you live where the ICE market is being ignored?
Don’t care, if automakers make electric cars people want then they’ll buy them.
Making them Technophilic certainly doesn’t help sell them.
Making them unnecessarily complicated due to Technophilism doesn’t help their reliability any.
Make good cars that happen to be electric and people will buy them.
Though giving them ICE range extenders that can meet the maximum power draw of the drivetrain would help with adoption.
I’d revise that to “everyone who wants a Technophilic vehicle already has one by this point”, because there are plenty of buyers (myself included for the most part) that like having tech in cars, but I’m happy with the ones I have and am not looking to upgrade.
The people I know who really rail against technology in cars have never bought a new car in their life, regardless of propulsion, so really not much point in automakers designing a car for them.
I bought A 2025 Nissan Leaf S specifically because it had the least amount of Technophilic features of the BEVs sold in the US currently. Manual seats, mechanical parking brake, manual glove compartment latch, vents I can mechanically position as well as open/close, etc.
A Fiat 500e would almost certainly suit my use case better than my Leaf, but the only way I’m buying a car with electric door handles is if said doors are easily and legally removable (like how they are on the upcoming Jeep Recon).
I’m not against tech in cars, I’m against unnecessary tech in cars, as it’s just more shit to go wrong, and frankly it’s easier for me to fix mechanical things than electric things.
The rejection of systems like MyFordTouch, CUE, whatever abomination VW has been pushing, and even some of the more extreme Tesla features suggests that people who buy new cars do, in fact, dislike excessive tech. Pretty much every manufacturer has faced sales pushback when they go too far with it. And almost every EV falls into that category, thanks to the unusually tech-savvy audience Tesla cultivated that everyone is (mistakenly) trying to replicate.
I’ll defend Tesla a little here by saying their everyday car usability is perfectly fine for the old 3 and Y. The screen is decently sensitive without being body hair triggered. It’s also positioned very well for average sized folks. I can’t recall the last time as a driver I used the volume slider instead of the left thumbwheel on the steering wheel. They’re the one possible exception (in the US/Canadian markets) to the rule that everything touchscreen always sucks. They committed to the bit on those cars and it works. I daily a Model Y and quite like it.
Now the yoke and deleting stalks only to add them back is dumb. No defending that bone-headed move!
Yeah, that’s why I made sure to mention them. I realize they’re generally considered the gold standard for touchscreen usability and they have the most tech-friendly customers by far, and even then they get pushback when they go too far with it. Traditional automakers are going to have far less leeway when it comes to that sort of thing, even if they do get the implementation right.
I re-read your comment and see what you mean. We’re in agreement.
MyFordTouch was just the branding for SYNC 2 back in 2010, and Ford is producing vehicles (both ICE and EV) with SYNC 4 today, and that system has been well-received in reviews and such. I have a Mach-E with Sync 4, and I wouldn’t say it’s any different from every other modern car out there.
I specifically bought the Mach-E because driving it is just like a normal car. It has normal vents, normal turn signals / wiper stalks, normal steering wheel buttons, and has a dash display. The large center display was clearly taken from Tesla styling, sure, but the physical volume knob is great, and having a large display for maps is very useful.
At least specific to Ford, I think they’ve struck a good balance on Sync 4, but I agree the VW system is awful.
What’s normal about lacking external door handles?
Does your house also lack external door handles?
*Sigh* Have you even tried it? I’ve had my Mach-E for over 3 years at this point, and have used the door poppers in all weather conditions including when the car was completely frozen over. Guess what? The doors opened just fine. The front doors do have handles, btw, and all internal door openers are mechanical.
Taking your house analogy, it’s no different than the outside of a sliding glass door, only this glass door will unlock for you outside, unlike a house slider.
Is it necessary? Maybe not, though door poppers are hardly a new thing. Is it offensive to use? Not even remotely.
It’s such a tired complaint, often by people who have never been in a Mach-E, let alone owned one. If you want to complain about door handles, I’d say the Model 3/Y handles are the worst, followed closely by the Model S/X.
Or, looking at the economies of scale principle in economics:
Since the global automotive market is already heading in the EV direction, everything from OEM parts suppliers to an increasing slant of technicians to anything related to gas/oil from drilling to refining to corner gas stations will begin to suffer as less and less of that is needed or utilized, and everything becomes more EV-centric. Now extrapolate this long term.
Somewhat, we’re still using 12v batteries and 99.99% of BEVs are built around said 12v architecture.
And all that tech just makes the cars more expensive also. For me I just wanted to be driving an EV that still felt similar to driving a normal car not a giant phone/computer. Though I do enjoy having adaptive cruise control and being able to use my phone as a key and to turn the a/c on or roll up the windows is nice I could go without many of those systems (well besides ACC it makes the drive to and from work much better).
Assuming you mean maximum *average* power draw of the drivetrain during a common use case, then I agree. Assuming you mean maximum *instantaneous* power draw of the drivetrain, then I couldn’t disagree more.
The BMW i3 did not need a 170hp range extender, for instance. More than 34hp (like 60hp for high speed cruising in bad weather) would have been nice, but 170hp would have been extreme overkill on power, size, cost, etc.
PHEVs don’t need engines that meet the maximum *instant* power draw of the drivetrain. They need engines that meet the *average* power draw of common use cases, and use the battery as the buffer to give bursts of power when necessary.
The RAM PHEV having a 300hp engine (officially, it’s less, but not really) is *plenty* (it’s actually highly overkill considering how big the battery buffer is… almost as big as a Lightning standard range battery). It would be crazy for the engine to be even bigger than it is to make it meet the maximum power draw.
Making the range extenders meet the maximum *instantaneous* power draw of the drivetrain wouldn’t meaningfully help adoption because the cost would be so high and the packaging would be so compromised.
What I mean that IF there is an ICE Range Extender IT needs to be able to allow the car to drive at the speed limit while operating, not function as a limp home mode, where you cannot do the speed limit in all conditions due to it being underpowered for the application.
Then, reasonably, that would be more like the average power draw, and I would generally agree with you.
That would be like my i3 example. The engine probably should have made ~60hp instead of just 34hp, allowing it to easily handle the average power usage of interstate driving in nearly all conditions (except maybe in a snowstorm up a mountain pass with a 30mph headwind), but the engine doesn’t need to make 170hp so it can handle the instantaneous max output of the drivetrain.
“Though giving them ICE range extenders that can meet the maximum power draw of the drivetrain would help with adoption.”
Or you could recharge your batteries at a charging station!
Adding a complete ICE drivetrain, to a BEV is ultra Technophilism.
-Very complex (bad for reliability)
-Additional cost
-Additional dead weight
It is much easier to have stationary range extenders at the side of the road.