The price is wrong

Honda has (finally?) launched a fully electric vehicle for the North American market: the Honda Prologue. As expected, the Prologue is a mid-size SUV thing - the most popular type of vehicle in the States - designed to haul people and stuff. The layman would not know that this all-electric Honda is co-developed with General Motors. Not quite a re-badge, but it’s definitely a GM car with Honda window dressing on top.

Not that in it of itself is a bad thing. What Toyota has done with the Supra - essentially a re-styled BMW Z4 roadster - seems to have worked (and continues to work) just fine. I see plenty of Supras on the road, driven by guys who look a bit too young to be able to afford a $60,000 sports car.

The main problem I see with the Honda Prologue is that it is too expensive. The poverty FWD trim level starts at $48,795. For the AWD trim with some bells and whistles that most people would want, you’re looking at well into the $50,000 mark. Worse: as of writing, the Honda Prologue does not quality for the Federal EV tax credit ($7,500). I would bet only the true die-hard Honda fans would buy one of these over a Tesla Model Y (low $40,000s after tax incentives). That, or Honda will have to heavily discount the Prologue.

The Model Y has another advantage: buyers don’t have to beg some asshole at a dealership to take their money.

To be competitive, I think the Honda Prologue needs to start the high $30,000s. Because that’s what a gas engine equivalent - the Honda Pilot - starts at. Honda can’t charge an EV premium for what is a mass-market product, because that would simply drive buyers towards Tesla. Ford found out about this with its electric Mach E SUV. The problem is that Honda - GM, really - cannot build the Prologue cheap enough to sell in the $30,000s. Meanwhile, Tesla can produce Model 3 sedans and sell profitably in the high $30,000s all day long. It’s a competitive advantage that’s evident in the sheer amount of Model 3s and Model Ys we see on the road.

The first legacy automaker to market with an all-electric mid-size SUV selling in the $30,000s will be the one to take a chunk out of Tesla.

View fullsize

Minecraft.

Don't buy used

Word on the street is that Ford has (again) lowered pricing on its Mustang Mach E electric car. The base real-wheel drive version can now be had for (just) under $40,000. Ford is also throwing in $7,500 on leases. Combining with the federal EV tax credit of another $7,500 makes the base Mach E a highly attractive option if you just need a simple electric runabout. I would consider one if I actually needed a car.

And because I wouldn’t want to buy a used electric vehicle. You simply cannot trust it. The thing no one seems to be talking about is battery degradation. Much like the battery in our smartphones, the cells in electric cars degrade with use and time. But how much it degrades does not scale linearly with mileage. Depending on the usage pattern - how often it’s charged, how fast, to what level, etc - an EV with 50,000 miles can potentially have a healthier battery than a 20,000 miler.

This is a critical piece of information in electric vehicles because the battery is everything. A degraded battery cannot motivate the car to the same number of miles as new on once charge. At least with a combustion car you can expect the same range in a high-mileage gas engine.

The problem is we have no way of knowing about battery degradation. The electric cars (currently) don’t show the health percentage (our smartphones do). Venturing into the vast menu of a Tesla Model 3 doesn’t reveal this information. I think manufacturers should include battery health indicators, plus showing how much maximum range has been lost as well. As I said, range in an electric car is everything.

View fullsize

Outlaw.

The ICE era is truly over

With Ford set to announce a fully electric version of its venerable F-150 pickup truck - the best selling vehicle in America for the past few decades - the era of the internal combustion engine is truly over. We’ve reached the point of no return in the transition to electric vehicles. The question is only how fast can we get to mass adoption, and how quickly can the public charging infrastructure build out to compliment the EV transition of nearly every major automaker.

I think that if you have the capability to charge at home, your next new car should be fully electric. Unless you drive an absurd amount of miles for your commute, there’s absolutely no need use any public charging point. An overnight charge on any standard 240 volt home system should be able to adequately charge an EV. For the few instances when you absolutely need the range (think road trips), you can always rent a regular gas-powered car. Don’t be like that person who drives a pickup truck, but only goes on a Home Depot haul once a year.

I am more certain than ever that my BMW M2 Competition will be the last new internal-combustion car I buy. The only petrol car I would get to replace it with is something used, and something with a Porsche badge. Otherwise, any future new car will surely be electrically motivated. Other than the current state of the public charging infrastructure, there’s really no downside to electric vehicles (perhaps price). Once you’ve experienced that EV shove and the silent ride, there’s no going back.

Obviously I am keen to hold on to the M2 for quite awhile. Hopefully by the time I am ready for my personal transition to an electric car, public charging points will be way more abundant and reliable than it is now. I see no greater incentive for that to happen than America’s best selling vehicle - the Ford F-150 - going fully electric.

View fullsize

Take a look outside.

GM doesn't care to make good sedans

A few months ago Ford announced the company will cease to sell sedans (other than the Mustang) and will focus fully on SUVs and trucks. Most in the industry thought it is a prudent strategy because consumer tastes having switched dramatically to SUVs, and also Ford’s currently lineup of sedans are lackluster to say the least.

Last week General Motors basically announced a similar plan, only that GM will shutdown plants and cut workforce into the 10 thousands as well. The public reception to that have not been so good. The same GM that received the massive government bailout after the start of the great recession, and the same GM that just last year lavished in the cut to corporate taxes, cannot repay the favors in kind by eliminating precious jobs. Those are real consequences to people’s livelihoods, rather than just a different product mix inside a dealership showroom as in the case of Ford.

Even from a strict economical standpoint this plan by GM isn’t entirely positive. It’s true that the market is leaning so heavily towards SUVs that Lamborghini sells one, but that isn’t to indicate the sedan category is dead in the waters. Asian manufacturers are still making quality sedans and continuously improving them (the redesigned Honda Accord is brilliant), and people are still buying. While not completely immune to shift to SUVs, the combines sales of Toyota’s Corolla and Camry remains in the 600,000s annually.

GM simply isn’t making class-competitive cars.

Indeed (negative) reputation plays a part, and I think American manufacturers never recovered from the adverse brand equity it carried from the 80’s and 90’s. Back then if a customer wanted a well-built car that will last for many years, the only option were Asian marques, and brand perception is a heck of a sticking point. Surely you’ve seen the Chevy commercials where “real people” were surprised at the quality of a Chevrolet car; bad reputation is insanely difficult to repair.

These days GM and Ford are making solid cars, but it’s never class-leading. Alpha-chassis Cadillac sedans are some of the best handling cars currently available, but the interior quality is leagues below its rivals from Germany. It can be argued that GM never intend to produce world-class sedans, but merely what’s good enough to move units. Now that those units aren’t moving quite at the numbers of the past, GM decides to eliminate the category from its portfolio completely.

It’s a shrewd move; partly due to prevailing market forces, and partly because GM doesn’t care to make great cars. Thousands will be out of a job because of GM’s incompetence.

Businesses are driven by the bottom line, but I think ceasing production of sedans is the wrong decision. The popularity of SUVs and trucks is partly bolstered by cheap gasoline prices, so then what will happen when prices inevitably go back up? Just like in the early aughts, American automakers will once again not have the appropriate product mix to cater to that demand.

Only there won’t be another bailout; GM never learned from their mistakes precisely because the government saved them from collapse back in 2009.

Working hard or hardly working?

I now see why SUVs are so popular

Sport-utility vehicles (SUV) are popular as ever; if an automaker wishes to print money, produce an SUV. Porsche was highly prescient over a decade and a half ago introducing the Cayenne SUV; that car made the company so much money that they were then able to invest it back into sports cars. The likes of Lamborghini and Bentley have followed suit, and Ferrari will soon join the fray. These historic nameplates, far removed from the idea of an SUV, simply can’t resist the money prospective.

Full-line manufacturers have long ago latched on to the SUV money train, even if some are later to the party than others (looking at you, Volkswagen). Particularly, Subaru proved that consumers will buy anything resembling an SUV: they simply raised the Impreza hatchback on stilts, call it the ‘Crosstrek’, and the result is mega profits. The buyers are none the wiser that it’s merely a wagon sat higher from the ground.

SUV sales are doing so well and consequently traditional sedans are not (even the vaunted Honda Accord and Toyota Camry is down in sales) that Ford will be jettisoning its entirely sedan lineup in favor of SUVs. Of course, nowhere in the announcement is an admission that Ford’s current sedan portfolio is desperately outdated and behind on the competition.

As a car enthusiast I used to be utterly against SUVs. Wagons and hatchbacks offers the same utility, and if I were inclined to venture truly off-road, I’d buy a proper body-on-frame bruiser like a Toyota 4Runner or a Jeep Wrangler. The way I see it, the typical unibody SUV needlessly sacrifice fuel economy for the sake of a tall seating position and commanding view.

Keyword is I used to. My family recently bought an SUV - Hyundai Tucson, and having driven it around and on a few long trips, my mind has completely changed. There is indeed something magical, and more importantly comfortable, about the elevated seating position: ingress and egress is tremendously easy, and unlike a sedan your body is not hunkered down in a contorted position (especially if you’re on the taller side like I am). An SUV is also much easier to park, it being significantly shorter in the length than the typical four-door.

Sports cars remains the zenith in my heart, but for the regular commute and long journeys, I can understand why SUVs have become so incredibly popular.

The iPhone XS Max’s camera is a low-light monster.

Ken Block's Gymkhana Five

Ever since the first Gymkhana, I’ve been a fan of Ken Block’s video brand of rally car driving acrobatics. Imagine my surprise and delight when I found out that the fifth iteration of the series will be shot in the streets of my lovely hometown, San Francisco. The hilly and twisty roads of the city coupled with world renowned landmarks makes for the perfect canvas for Block to perform his technical car handling ballet with a rally car. Doing burnouts and massive drifts on such epic San Francisco locations like the Bay Bridge, Financial district, and Twin Peaks is something us regular car enthusiasts can only dream about. 

The reason I am a big fan of the Gymkhana series is that it helps introduce/promote the rally form of motorsport to the American public. Rally cars and the World Rally Championship (WRC) over in the Europe has been one of my favorite racing discipline. Just the sheer variety of terrain the rally cars has to traverse and the abuse it is designed to take is simply magnificence in engineering. Unlike most other forms of racing, WRC features race cars based largely on road cars you can buy. The greatest examples of this is perhaps the Subaru Impreza STi, Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, and the original Audi Quattro. These cars were essentially homologation road going models of the same rally cars campaigning in WRC. The kind of car Ken Block is using to zip through San Francisco with? You can buy one. Today - and that is absolutely magic. 

Unfortunately in the land of left turn racing, rally car is something many Americans are unfamiliar with. If it was not for racing games such as Gran Turismo introducing it to us and making us desire these type of cars, automakers wouldn’t even make them available to the American market (it wasn’t until 2003 before STi and Evos finally arrived to our shores, while the two have been sold in other markets for a decade.) What I hope ultimately happens with these Gymkhana videos is spread the rally motorsport discipline throughout America. It would be nice to see actual rally events in the States (and not just the X-Games.) The popularity will then push automakers to make road going rally type cars for people to purchase (that Ford Fiesta Ken Block is driving can NOT currently be bought in the turbo four wheel drive form). As a car enthusiast living in the U.S. that loves rally cars, this reality would be awesome. 

Close