• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    IHS Automotive Says Electric Cars Catching On Faster Than Hybrids


    • Are Electric Vehicles Catching On Quicker Than Hybrids?

    While many still think electric vehicles are a niche, a new study from IHS Automotive suggests that EVs are actually catching on more quickly than hybrids when they were first introduced.

    The study looked at the cumulative global sales of the first-generation Toyota Prius, Chevrolet Volt, and Nissan Leaf in the first four years. IHS Automotive found that the Toyota Prius moved 52,200 units from 2000 to 2004. However, the Volt and Leaf have sold more vehicles in their respective four-year timeframes. The Chevrolet Volt and all of its derivatives saw sales of 68,507 units, while the Nissan Leaf saw sales of 96,477 units.

    It should be noted that while Toyota Prius went on sale in 1997 in Japan, IHS Automotive uses 2000 as the starting point for figuring out sales as that is when Toyota launched the model worldwide.

    The IHS Automotive study also points out that early expectations for EVs may have been inflated a lot, causing many to think of early EVs and plug-ins as failures in sales despite the relative success in sales around the world.

    Source: Automobile Magazine

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at william.maley@cheersandgears.com or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    0


      Report Article
    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback


    I think once people realize the advantages of electric cars for certain applications, sales will continue to increase at 8-10 percent a year. Grandpa Kettle can still drive his blue air cooled split window without fear, however, as the internal combustion motor isn't going anywhere.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The luxury gold carts like the Leaf seem like a green solution but in reality produce even more Green house gas and toxic waste. I believe that they are over blown sales figures for the EV market. They talk about how many are sold and yet you still do not see many of them. Seems most are bought by gov agencies and sit around.

    EV's have their place to help reduce immediate pollution in large congested cities, but outside of that they are not very practical.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The luxury gold carts like the Leaf seem like a green solution but in reality produce even more Green house gas and toxic waste. I believe that they are over blown sales figures for the EV market. They talk about how many are sold and yet you still do not see many of them. Seems most are bought by gov agencies and sit around.

    EV's have their place to help reduce immediate pollution in large congested cities, but outside of that they are not very practical.

    Not so sure about that, they are popular here in Ohio. The Tesla is an amazing piece of engineering.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The luxury gold carts like the Leaf seem like a green solution but in reality produce even more Green house gas and toxic waste. I believe that they are over blown sales figures for the EV market. They talk about how many are sold and yet you still do not see many of them. Seems most are bought by gov agencies and sit around.

    EV's have their place to help reduce immediate pollution in large congested cities, but outside of that they are not very practical.

    Not so sure about that, they are popular here in Ohio. The Tesla is an amazing piece of engineering.

    Yes it is a great piece of Engineering, but how many can afford a $100,000 electric car.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Spark EV seems more remarkable to me.

    Really, the Volt is the way to go. Chevy needs to get a 25k Volt to market and then work on building volume with their system.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Spark EV seems more remarkable to me.

    Really, the Volt is the way to go. Chevy needs to get a 25k Volt to market and then work on building volume with their system.

    GM needs to get the VOLT system into the Chevy Equinox and GMC Terrain. They would have a sweet FWD CUV and if possible to do it with AWD they would clean up.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Looking forward to what the next generation of EVs will bring. The second-generation Volt and LEAF will be MY 2016, as will the $35,000 Tesla rumored to be named Model E. My guess is that Volt will come down another $5,000 in price, and LEAF will have an optional 150-mile range. Tesla should have no problems with demand for Model E; my guess is 100,000 units for the first full year of production. This year, they are on track to deliver 40,000 units of a car that costs twice as much. In the US, Model S is actually the best-selling car with a base MSRP of $60,000 or higher, outselling competitors like A7, CLS, 6 Series Gran Coupe, as well as exec limos like S-Class, 7-series, and A8, and not to mention, all of Jaguar.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Spark EV seems more remarkable to me.

    Really, the Volt is the way to go. Chevy needs to get a 25k Volt to market and then work on building volume with their system.

    GM needs to get the VOLT system into the Chevy Equinox and GMC Terrain. They would have a sweet FWD CUV and if possible to do it with AWD they would clean up.

    Absolutely, especially in the near future when people still want to drive SUV's and gas is 5.50 a gallon

    Looking forward to what the next generation of EVs will bring. The second-generation Volt and LEAF will be MY 2016, as will the $35,000 Tesla rumored to be named Model E. My guess is that Volt will come down another $5,000 in price, and LEAF will have an optional 150-mile range. Tesla should have no problems with demand for Model E; my guess is 100,000 units for the first full year of production. This year, they are on track to deliver 40,000 units of a car that costs twice as much. In the US, Model S is actually the best-selling car with a base MSRP of $60,000 or higher, outselling competitors like A7, CLS, 6 Series Gran Coupe, as well as exec limos like S-Class, 7-series, and A8, and not to mention, all of Jaguar.

    In the next ten years, I see myself buying one more premium small car (say, a MK 7 GTI) a model E, and one oddball Auto-x or collector car (think vintage Alfa GTV or something ODD)....a total of three cars...

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    Loading...



  • Popular Stories

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. BowTieFarmer
      BowTieFarmer
      (57 years old)
    2. will75
      will75
      (41 years old)
  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      'Autonomous Emergency Braking' (AEB) and the various names this system goes under have the same goal; to bring the vehicle to a stop if the driver doesn't fails to engage the brakes. But a new study done by AAA reveals not all systems are equal and a very worrying trend concerning a consumer's belief in the system.
      There are two types of emergency braking systems, ones that are designed to bring the vehicle to stop to avoid a crash and ones that reduce speed to limit the severity of a crash. Unsurprisingly, AAA's tests showed that systems designed to avoid a crash did a better job than systems designed to limit the crash damage. At speeds under 30 mph, systems designed to avoid crashes were successful about 60 percent of the time. Systems designed to limit damage had a success rate of 33 percent. Increase speed to 45 mph and the systems designed to avoid a crash had a success rate of 74 percent. The systems designed to limit damage were successful 9 percent of the time.
      AAA also surveyed Americans familiar with the technology and it revealed something very troubling. Nearly two-thirds of those surveyed believe autonomous emergency braking systems will totally avoid a crash without driver intervention.
      “AAA found that two-thirds of Americans familiar with the technology believe that automatic emergency braking systems are designed to avoid crashes without driver intervention. The reality is that today’s systems vary greatly in performance, and many are not designed to stop a moving car,” said John Nielsen, AAA’s managing director of Automotive Engineering and Repair in a statement.
      This is important as 22 different automakers have agreed to make this technology standard on all of their models by 2022. Currently, 10 percent of new vehicles have this system as standard while more than 50 percent of new vehicles have it as an option. AAA recommends that if you're looking at a vehicle with an AEB system to make sure what system you'll have. It will make a difference when it comes to avoiding a crash.
      Source: AAA
      Press Release is on Page 2
      Hit The Brakes: Not All Self-Braking Cars Designed to Stop
      AAA Tests Reveal Automatic Emergency Braking Systems Vary Significantly ORLANDO, Fla (August 24, 2016) – New test results from AAA reveal that automatic emergency braking systems — the safety technology that will soon be standard equipment on 99 percent of vehicles — vary widely in design and performance. All the systems tested by AAA are designed to apply the brakes when a driver fails to engage, however, those that are designed to prevent crashes reduced vehicle speeds by nearly twice that of those designed to lessen crash severity. While any reduction in speed offers a significant safety benefit to drivers, AAA warns that automatic braking systems are not all designed to prevent collisions and urges consumers to fully understand system limitations before getting behind the wheel.
      “AAA found that two-thirds of Americans familiar with the technology believe that automatic emergency braking systems are designed to avoid crashes without driver intervention,” said John Nielsen, AAA’s managing director of Automotive Engineering and Repair. “The reality is that today’s systems vary greatly in performance, and many are not designed to stop a moving car.”
      In partnership with the Automobile Club of Southern California’s Automotive Research Center, AAA evaluated five 2016 model-year vehicles equipped with automatic emergency braking systems for performance within system limitations and in real-world driving scenarios that were designed to push the technology’s limits. Systems were tested and compared based on the capabilities and limitations stated in the owner’s manuals and grouped into two categories — those designed to slow or stop the vehicle enough to prevent crashes, and those designed to slow the vehicle to lessen crash severity. After more than 70 trials, tests reveal:
      In terms of overall speed reduction, the systems designed to prevent crashes reduced vehicle speeds by twice that of systems that are designed to only lessen crash severity (79 percent speed reduction vs. 40 percent speed reduction). With speed differentials of under 30 mph, systems designed to prevent crashes successfully avoided collisions in 60 percent of test scenarios. Surprisingly, the systems designed to only lessen crash severity were able to completely avoid crashes in nearly one-third (33 percent) of test scenarios. When pushed beyond stated system limitations and proposed federal requirements, the variation among systems became more pronounced. When traveling at 45 mph and approaching a static vehicle, the systems designed to prevent crashes reduced speeds by 74 percent overall and avoided crashes in 40 percent of scenarios. In contrast, systems designed to lessen crash severity were only able to reduce vehicle speed by 9 percent overall. “Automatic emergency braking systems have the potential to drastically reduce the risk of injury from a crash,” said Megan McKernan, manager of the Automobile Club of Southern California’s Automotive Research Center. “When traveling at 30 mph, a speed reduction of just 10 mph can reduce the energy of crash impact by more than 50 percent.”
      In addition to the independent testing, AAA surveyed U.S. drivers to understand consumer purchase habits and trust of automatic emergency braking systems. Results reveal:
      Nine percent of U.S. drivers currently have automatic emergency braking on their vehicle. Nearly 40 percent of U.S. drivers want automatic emergency braking on their next vehicle. Men are more likely to want an automatic emergency braking system in their next vehicle (42 percent) than female drivers (35 percent). Two out of five U.S. drivers trust automatic emergency braking to work. Drivers who currently own a vehicle equipped with automatic emergency braking system are more likely to trust it to work (71 percent) compared to drivers that have not experienced the technology (41 percent). “When shopping for a new vehicle, AAA recommends considering one equipped with an automatic emergency braking system,” continued Nielsen. “However, with the proliferation of vehicle technology, it’s more important than ever for drivers to fully understand their vehicle’s capabilities and limitations before driving off the dealer lot.”
      For its potential to reduce crash severity, 22 automakers representing 99 percent of vehicle sales have committed to making automatic emergency braking systems standard on all new vehicles by 2022. The U.S. Department of Transportation said this voluntary agreement will make the safety feature available on new cars up to three years sooner than could be achieved through the formal regulatory process. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, rear-end collisions, which automatic emergency braking systems are designed to mitigate, result in nearly 2,000 fatalities and more than 500,000 injuries annually. Currently, 10 percent of new vehicles have automatic emergency braking as standard equipment, and more than half of new vehicles offer the feature as an option.

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      'Autonomous Emergency Braking' (AEB) and the various names this system goes under have the same goal; to bring the vehicle to a stop if the driver doesn't fails to engage the brakes. But a new study done by AAA reveals not all systems are equal and a very worrying trend concerning a consumer's belief in the system.
      There are two types of emergency braking systems, ones that are designed to bring the vehicle to stop to avoid a crash and ones that reduce speed to limit the severity of a crash. Unsurprisingly, AAA's tests showed that systems designed to avoid a crash did a better job than systems designed to limit the crash damage. At speeds under 30 mph, systems designed to avoid crashes were successful about 60 percent of the time. Systems designed to limit damage had a success rate of 33 percent. Increase speed to 45 mph and the systems designed to avoid a crash had a success rate of 74 percent. The systems designed to limit damage were successful 9 percent of the time.
      AAA also surveyed Americans familiar with the technology and it revealed something very troubling. Nearly two-thirds of those surveyed believe autonomous emergency braking systems will totally avoid a crash without driver intervention.
      “AAA found that two-thirds of Americans familiar with the technology believe that automatic emergency braking systems are designed to avoid crashes without driver intervention. The reality is that today’s systems vary greatly in performance, and many are not designed to stop a moving car,” said John Nielsen, AAA’s managing director of Automotive Engineering and Repair in a statement.
      This is important as 22 different automakers have agreed to make this technology standard on all of their models by 2022. Currently, 10 percent of new vehicles have this system as standard while more than 50 percent of new vehicles have it as an option. AAA recommends that if you're looking at a vehicle with an AEB system to make sure what system you'll have. It will make a difference when it comes to avoiding a crash.
      Source: AAA
      Press Release is on Page 2
      Hit The Brakes: Not All Self-Braking Cars Designed to Stop
      AAA Tests Reveal Automatic Emergency Braking Systems Vary Significantly ORLANDO, Fla (August 24, 2016) – New test results from AAA reveal that automatic emergency braking systems — the safety technology that will soon be standard equipment on 99 percent of vehicles — vary widely in design and performance. All the systems tested by AAA are designed to apply the brakes when a driver fails to engage, however, those that are designed to prevent crashes reduced vehicle speeds by nearly twice that of those designed to lessen crash severity. While any reduction in speed offers a significant safety benefit to drivers, AAA warns that automatic braking systems are not all designed to prevent collisions and urges consumers to fully understand system limitations before getting behind the wheel.
      “AAA found that two-thirds of Americans familiar with the technology believe that automatic emergency braking systems are designed to avoid crashes without driver intervention,” said John Nielsen, AAA’s managing director of Automotive Engineering and Repair. “The reality is that today’s systems vary greatly in performance, and many are not designed to stop a moving car.”
      In partnership with the Automobile Club of Southern California’s Automotive Research Center, AAA evaluated five 2016 model-year vehicles equipped with automatic emergency braking systems for performance within system limitations and in real-world driving scenarios that were designed to push the technology’s limits. Systems were tested and compared based on the capabilities and limitations stated in the owner’s manuals and grouped into two categories — those designed to slow or stop the vehicle enough to prevent crashes, and those designed to slow the vehicle to lessen crash severity. After more than 70 trials, tests reveal:
      In terms of overall speed reduction, the systems designed to prevent crashes reduced vehicle speeds by twice that of systems that are designed to only lessen crash severity (79 percent speed reduction vs. 40 percent speed reduction). With speed differentials of under 30 mph, systems designed to prevent crashes successfully avoided collisions in 60 percent of test scenarios. Surprisingly, the systems designed to only lessen crash severity were able to completely avoid crashes in nearly one-third (33 percent) of test scenarios. When pushed beyond stated system limitations and proposed federal requirements, the variation among systems became more pronounced. When traveling at 45 mph and approaching a static vehicle, the systems designed to prevent crashes reduced speeds by 74 percent overall and avoided crashes in 40 percent of scenarios. In contrast, systems designed to lessen crash severity were only able to reduce vehicle speed by 9 percent overall. “Automatic emergency braking systems have the potential to drastically reduce the risk of injury from a crash,” said Megan McKernan, manager of the Automobile Club of Southern California’s Automotive Research Center. “When traveling at 30 mph, a speed reduction of just 10 mph can reduce the energy of crash impact by more than 50 percent.”
      In addition to the independent testing, AAA surveyed U.S. drivers to understand consumer purchase habits and trust of automatic emergency braking systems. Results reveal:
      Nine percent of U.S. drivers currently have automatic emergency braking on their vehicle. Nearly 40 percent of U.S. drivers want automatic emergency braking on their next vehicle. Men are more likely to want an automatic emergency braking system in their next vehicle (42 percent) than female drivers (35 percent). Two out of five U.S. drivers trust automatic emergency braking to work. Drivers who currently own a vehicle equipped with automatic emergency braking system are more likely to trust it to work (71 percent) compared to drivers that have not experienced the technology (41 percent). “When shopping for a new vehicle, AAA recommends considering one equipped with an automatic emergency braking system,” continued Nielsen. “However, with the proliferation of vehicle technology, it’s more important than ever for drivers to fully understand their vehicle’s capabilities and limitations before driving off the dealer lot.”
      For its potential to reduce crash severity, 22 automakers representing 99 percent of vehicle sales have committed to making automatic emergency braking systems standard on all new vehicles by 2022. The U.S. Department of Transportation said this voluntary agreement will make the safety feature available on new cars up to three years sooner than could be achieved through the formal regulatory process. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, rear-end collisions, which automatic emergency braking systems are designed to mitigate, result in nearly 2,000 fatalities and more than 500,000 injuries annually. Currently, 10 percent of new vehicles have automatic emergency braking as standard equipment, and more than half of new vehicles offer the feature as an option.
    • By William Maley
      Mercedes-Benz is planning to launch a handful of electric vehicles in the near future, and those vehicles will be part of a new subbrand.
       
      Bloomberg has learned from sources that the German automaker will be taking a page out of BMW's playbook and introduce a new subbrand that will be comprised of two electric sedans and two SUVs - something we first reported back in May. A name hasn't been chosen yet according to the sources. What is for certain is that Mercedes will show off a concept electric SUV at the Paris Motor Show in September. Using a new platform for electric vehicles, the concept is expected to boast a range of 310 miles. Mercedes hopes to start selling vehicles under this subbrand before the end of the decade.
       
      But doing a subbrand for electric vehicles is a risky proposition. BMW's i hasn't made any real impact in terms of sales or recognition. This has caused the brand to delay plans for another i model. Whether Mercedes-Benz is able to avoid the pitfallls remains to be seen.
       
      Source: Bloomberg
    • By William Maley
      What does the future of Jaguar's lineup look like? According to Automobile Magazine, expect EVs and no replacement for the XK Coupe and Convertible.
       
      Let's begin with the EVs. First up is a replacement for the XJ known under the codename of X590. The report says X590 will be a four-door coupe with a liftback (something like an Audi A7). This is a compromise between infighting with Jaguar Land Rover boss Ralf Speth (wanted a three-box design to replace the XJ) and Jaguar design chief Ian Callum (wanted a big coupe). The underpinnings is a new architecture that is capable of handling the hardware needed for autonomous technologies. All-wheel drive will come standard.
       
      The plan is to have X590 possibly launch in 2018, beating models that are expected from Audi, BMW, and Mercedes-Benz. While Jaguar hopes this model is a success, the current XJ will be sold alongside it for a time in case it flops. (Secretly, we're hoping there is a new XJ coming as well.)
       
      Following a year later will be an electric SUV. Now this isn't an electrified version of the F-Pace. According to the report, this model was originally going to be a Range Rover before becoming a Jaguar.
       
      “Although it looks sleek, modern and aerodynamically efficient, this model will be rated as an SUV in North-America. All the SUV-defining hard points are there in place,” said a source about the design.
       
      This model will be offered with the choice of rear-wheel or all-wheel drive, and three different battery packs.
       
      The plan is to build around 20,000 to 30,000 X590s, and 30,000 to 50,000 of the new SUV.
       
      We should also mention the replacement for the XK has canceled, most likely due to Jaguar's electric ambitions. We know the replacement would have used a stretched version of the F-Type's platform.
       
      Source: Automobile Magazine
    • By William Maley
      Back in June, we learned that Skoda (a Czech brand under the Volkswagen group) was investigating possibly entering new markets. One of those new markets was North America, a place where 20 percent of global car sales take place. At the time our original report, Skoda hasn't set a timeframe for a decision. Also as we noted, Skoda would need to get more crossovers and SUVs ready if they want to try and make inroads in the U.S.
       
      Speaking of SUVs and the U.S., a recent article done by Autocar piqued our interest. Skoda CEO Bernhard Maier said if they were to launch the brand in the U.S. in the near future, they would have their upcoming seven-seat Kodiaq leading the charge.
       
      “If we do decide to compete in the US, we will have one chance to make a good first impression. We feel that if we were there now, the Kodiaq would be a home-run car,” said Maier.
       
      Maier did stress that the U.S. isn't on Skoda's immediate radar. At the moment, the brand is looking closely at Iran, Singapore, and South Korea as possible new markets. But Maier isn't saying the U.S. isn't on their radar at all.
       
      “America is the one that we don't currently compete in with the biggest potential.”
       
      Skoda appears to have taken a page out of PSA Peugeot Citroën's playbook. Autocar says the automaker has begun a feasibility study as to whether or not it makes sense to enter the U.S.
       
      Source: Autocar
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)