22 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

So basically zero maintenance until 120,000 miles. 

 

That's not what we're talking about.  A Ford Focus has a bunch of "recommended" maintenance - changing your oil, for example.  At 100k, you're supposed to replace the spark plugs and potentially timing belts, things you don't have to do with an EV (same for the oil, obviously).

 

https://www.carcomplaints.com/worst_vehicles/?goto=Worst+Vehicles

 

Also a 2012 Ford Focus is apparently one of the worst vehicles on the market.

^The complaints re: the Focus are all centered around the transmission, which is a 6-speed manual transmission that is shifted by a computer, not a traditional hydraulic transmission.  This unusual transmission is fuel efficient and saves weight, which improves performance and further improves fuel efficiency.  The early years of the current Focus had a faulty transmission module, which is the computer that controls the manual transmission.  Ford replaced the module under warranty and not one of the episodic transmission issues reappeared, however fuel efficiency appears to have been dinged by maybe 1-2mpg as the new module shifts more conservatively. 

 

Spark plugs cost like $3 and take 10 minutes to replace.  The Ford Focus has a timing chain so it never needs to be replaced. 

 

Stuff like starters, alternators, radiators, catalytic convertors, mufflers, etc., used to go out on cars well before they hit 100,000 miles.  A lot of this stuff was pretty easy to do yourself.  But now all of this stuff is lasting WAY longer in new cars. 

 

 

 

^ Part of the reason I like to buy manual transmission cars is that they tend to be more durable than most types of automatic transmissions.  Also, the cars sell for less money because nobody knows how to drive a stick. 

2 hours ago, DarkandStormy said:

That's not what we're talking about.  A Ford Focus has a bunch of "recommended" maintenance - changing your oil, for example.  At 100k, you're supposed to replace the spark plugs and potentially timing belts, things you don't have to do with an EV (same for the oil, obviously).

 

The only vehicles on the road that require significant recommended maintenance are diesels. Modern diesels usually require fuel filter changes every 2nd or 3rd oil change along with DPF maintenance. Not to mention ongoing DEF top ups.

 

Gasoline powered vehicles are pretty hands off as Jake said. "Recommended maintenance" usually consists of oil changes, fluid top offs, cabin air filters, engine air filters, clutches (manuals only and no one drives a manual), timing belts (few cars have timing belts anymore), and spark plugs at 150-175k miles..

 

Wear items are different and EVs need brakes and tires just like ICE vehicles. So not a massive cost basis difference.

Edited December 17, 20186 yr by LtCheese

https://www.fleetcarma.com/electric-vehicles-lower-maintenance-costs/

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030626191731526X?via%3Dihub

 

Average maintenance costs in a given year could be ~$100 more expensive with an ICE vehicle than an EV.  And that probably gets more drastic the longer you keep your vehicle given some of the bigger ticket items with ICE vehicles that come around 100k/125k miles.

^There is a ton of data on the maintenance needs of traditional electric buses (overhead wire trolleybuses) as compared to diesel buses, but not battery-powered city buses as compared to electric trolleybuses.  There was never such thing as a private car powered by overhead wires, so the jump to electric cars has always been a jump into uncharted territory with regards to maintenance. 

 

And I am a bit of a skeptic with battery-powered buses...I am surprised that in China with their big push toward reducing C02 emissions in their cities that they aren't simply stringing up overhead wires.  They're counting on battery-powered buses working and working bigly, but again, I am skeptical of their overall environmental impact as compared to traditional trolleybuses. 

 

I know that Seattle did a study on electrifying its busiest diesel routes, and the capital costs are quite high, at least in the United States. 

 

 

 

Edited December 17, 20186 yr by jmecklenborg

I’m curious to see how charging plays out in urban areas. EVs work great if you have a suburban home with a driveway and a 2 car garage. In urban neighborhoods, most people park either on the street or in public lots/garages. Lots and garages could be easy – you’d park, swipe your card at a meter, plug in and let it charge. Streets, however, seem tough, and some of the densest areas of Cincinnati rely mostly or almost entirely upon on-street parking.

 

I know there are cities that will give you a reserved spot in front of your property for EV parking (like they do for handicap spaces), but I don’t think they are reserved for your EV, just any EV. So you could come home for the night with a need to charge your car, and find that someone visiting a friend down the street is in the spot.  I also don’t think this solution would work when everyone has an EV, it only works when they’re rare.

 

This isn’t a huge problem, just an interesting one that I’m curious to watch play out.

I think physically charging the cars at a charging point is less of an issue than the draw on power grids, at least in some areas.  The real-time power draw of a network of electric trolleybuses or a rapid transit system is a fraction of what hundreds of thousands of cars and buses will require to recharge.   If utilities are permitted to charge a premium to recharge electric cars during the day, then that will limit the attractiveness of electric cars.  Also, if the use of gas-powered vehicles declines by 20-30%, the price of gasoline will stay low and so therefore remain quite competitive. 

 

 

Eventually, outlets will be installed curbside, e.g., on parking meters, etc.  Once it becomes normal, engineering the built environment will transition in due course.  It doesn't have to happen all at once.

 

The draw on the grid will be very manageable on all but the hottest summer days (when the grid strain is already intense), at least according to people I've spoken with in the utility industry.  I was actually surprised they weren't more upbeat about the impending increase in demand for their product, honestly.

^I'm pretty sure that is because as a regulated monopoly, the electric companies don't make any more or less money whether demand is up or down. 

16 hours ago, jmecklenborg said:

Also, if the use of gas-powered vehicles declines by 20-30%, the price of gasoline will stay low and so therefore remain quite competitive. 

 

It may not be that simple.  So many countries are now in the oil business, including the U.S.  It will be interesting to watch because I don't think the simple "supply and demand" will apply here.  These countries are trying to squeeze every $ they can out of the oil barrels.  They are all competing with each other and will want to produce more.  If demand globally drops 25%, in order to find price equilibrium they will collectively have to decide to cut down on oil production.  I don't know if that will happen. 

https://www.tesla.com/blog/full-7500-federal-ev-tax-credit-expires-under-two-weeks

 

Quote

Full $7,500 Federal EV Tax Credit Expires in Under Two Weeks

 

So...that $35k Model 3 will essentially never be a reality?

Apparently, the latest version of "rollin' coal" is parking non-electric cars at Tesla charging stations to prevent them from being able to recharge.

 

 

So much masculine fragility on display.

10 minutes ago, taestell said:

Apparently, the latest version of "rollin' coal" is parking non-electric cars at Tesla charging stations to prevent them from being able to recharge.

 

 

So much masculine fragility on display.

 

Are these stations that  just work for Teslas, or all electric cars?  Seems odd, Tesla has seeemed immune from the stigma some hybrids and EVs have in some circles.

 

I would think the same laws that keep people from parking in private lots would apply.

Right now only Teslas can use the superchargers. Elon Musk has openly stated, he is open to other electric cars using them, the manufacturers of those cars just need to reach out to make a deal (probably just agreeing to pay for the electricity).

 

Most of them are in private parking lots (around here, a lot of them are in Meijer parking lots), and there probably just isn't anyone from the store monitoring the spaces. That might have to change if "ICE-ing" becomes a widespread hillbilly trend.

The whole bro truck thing might have been kinda neat in like 1988 when monster trucks first got popular but now most car people think it's lame.

When I was a kid I remember when those lifted trucks with rally bars and smiley face covers on the lights came along.  It was like an event seeing one.  People rode around with their windows open a lot more since few cars had AC.  So you're hear whatever devilish music the guy was playing and get a glimpse of him. 

 

Honestly, maybe some of the decline in car culture has to do with the rise of air conditioning.  You can't see people well when their windows are up, and you definitely can't hear what they're listening to. 

 

Our car (we only had one until I was maybe 9) when I was a kid was an early Toyota Tercel hatchback.  It was the base model so had no AC or tape player.  You had to listen to the radio or whatever was on a louder car's radio when you pulled up to a light. 

 

It was pretty similar to this:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On 12/18/2018 at 11:19 AM, DarkandStormy said:

 

It may not be that simple.  So many countries are now in the oil business, including the U.S.  It will be interesting to watch because I don't think the simple "supply and demand" will apply here.  These countries are trying to squeeze every $ they can out of the oil barrels.  They are all competing with each other and will want to produce more.  If demand globally drops 25%, in order to find price equilibrium they will collectively have to decide to cut down on oil production.  I don't know if that will happen. 

 

Hah!  Now I'm picturing the headlines if the US joins OPEC.  That would actually be among the most hilarious historical developments.  Of course, given that most US oil reserves are privately owned, US commitments to expand or reduce extraction would all come with a big asterisk.

 

That said, if they want to stay relevant long term, oil companies are going to have to expand the offerings, and demand for offerings, of things you can do with oil other than burn it.  And that list looks impressive but it's just a tiny fraction of the oil market by volume.  (My wife now works on the process oils side of an oil refiner.  Between asphalt, base oils, process oils, waxes, pharmaceutical white oils, automotive/industrial lubricants, greases, etc., you get to around 10% of the consolidated output of the company by volume.  The rest is all gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel.)

 

1 hour ago, E Rocc said:

 

Are these stations that  just work for Teslas, or all electric cars?  Seems odd, Tesla has seeemed immune from the stigma some hybrids and EVs have in some circles.

 

I would think the same laws that keep people from parking in private lots would apply.

 

Tesla has not been immune from that stigma and in fact is frequently a direct, named target of conservative populist ideological hit pieces.

 

These parking lots not private in the sense of private lots, though of course they're almost all on private property (in shopping plazas, at hotels, etc.).  The owners would of course have the right to tow but, as often happens, people can gamble on not getting towed and often get away with it, unless you're parking anywhere near OSU and are 1" over the line into any space that Shamrock Towing is responsible for towing, regardless of how poorly marked, because burn those sorry misanthropes to cinders, but I digress.  Someone would probably have to specifically call for the tow truck, meaning knowing whom to call, and it would also have to get there in time.

 

1 hour ago, taestell said:

Right now only Teslas can use the superchargers. Elon Musk has openly stated, he is open to other electric cars using them, the manufacturers of those cars just need to reach out to make a deal (probably just agreeing to pay for the electricity).

 

Most of them are in private parking lots (around here, a lot of them are in Meijer parking lots), and there probably just isn't anyone from the store monitoring the spaces. That might have to change if "ICE-ing" becomes a widespread hillbilly trend.

 

Guessing that means the Columbus area, for you.  I did charge at the Sawmill Road Meijer one in early December when I was back at OSU for an alumni club meeting.  Good times.  Had lunch at the Red Lobster before getting on the road again.

 

The Mt. Gilead one is next to a car wash and a bakery.  (And a bunch of gas stations.)  Not much there.  Surprised they didn't locate it a little further up I-71 at the OH-13 exit (south of Mansfield).  More even spacing between Columbus and Cleveland and many more amenities already there.

 

The Macedonia Supercharger is in the middle of a retail strip, not particularly walkable but still near a decent number of amenities.

 

Routinely Supercharging is actually bad for your battery, though.  They're there for longer trips, not everyday use.  Charging at work is ideal if your company will allow it, of course (and many do, which means you're getting free fuel as a job perk).  Charging at home is most convenient, though of course you pay for the juice (and likely for installing a NEMA 14-50 outlet in your garage, too, though you can charge on a 110v trickle if that works for you).

 

And somewhere in the middle are the Destination Chargers, which are slower than Superchargers but still strong enough to make a noticeable difference in an hour or two.  The Sheraton in Cuyahoga Falls where Beau's on the River is located has a few of those chargers, and of course, while many other chargers in the area have nearby restaurants, that one's a cut above most.  (I still haven't had their Sunday brunch but it is on my bucket list.)  Gervasi Vineyard has one as well, at their villas.

1 minute ago, Gramarye said:

 The Mt. Gilead one is next to a car wash and a bakery.  (And a bunch of gas stations.)  Not much there.  Surprised they didn't locate it a little further up I-71 at the OH-13 exit (south of Mansfield).  More even spacing between Columbus and Cleveland and many more amenities already there.

 

We stopped at that Supercharger on a recent road trip.  Very weird set up.  The one in Strongsville (I believe) is attached to a Sheetz so we stopped there and grabbed a quick bite inside.

1 hour ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

 

Honestly, maybe some of the decline in car culture has to do with the rise of air conditioning.  You can't see people well when their windows are up, and you definitely can't hear what they're listening to. 

 

 

It has more to do with social media IMO. The car was a sign of independence for teens, the faster ones a sign of status.  It carried over to the grownup years.

 

Now it's no longer necessary to get out of the house to connect with your friends without parents underfoot.

 

1 hour ago, Gramarye said:

 

 

The Macedonia Supercharger is in the middle of a retail strip, not particularly walkable but still near a decent number of amenities.

 

 

 

Couple of restaurants are a very short walk away, Hobby Lobby and a few stores a moderate one.

 

As for blocking them with cars, setting up cameras and calling the local PD on parkers seems like a very Elon thing to do, and I know the Macedonia PD reasonably well and they would be more than game.

I say call the SEC on them

6 hours ago, taestell said:

Apparently, the latest version of "rollin' coal" is parking non-electric cars at Tesla charging stations to prevent them from being able to recharge.

 

 

This is just the far right's version of the far left's "occupy" type protests. Liberals shut down interstates, Conservatives shut down Tesla charging stations. Both are pretty petulant, but at least the occupy Tesla protests don't screw over thousands of bystanders.

16 minutes ago, Ram23 said:

 

This is just the far right's version of the far left's "occupy" type protests. Liberals shut down interstates, Conservatives shut down Tesla charging stations. Both are pretty petulant, but at least the occupy Tesla protests don't screw over thousands of bystanders.

So blocking charging stations because you have a big truck is the same as protesting against police brutality.  You guys are getting bad at your both sides whataboutisms. 

1 hour ago, Ram23 said:

 

This is just the far right's version of the far left's "occupy" type protests. Liberals shut down interstates, Conservatives shut down Tesla charging stations. Both are pretty petulant, but at least the occupy Tesla protests don't screw over thousands of bystanders.

 

What the hell are they protesting?

Attention being taken away from their trucks.

Tesla has dropped the price of the Model 3 by $2,000 to partly compensate for the halving of the federal tax credit from $7,000 to $3,500:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/02/business/tesla-sales-price-cut.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

 

The article states that General Motors will experience the same tax credit cut on March 30.  Apparently GM has sold almost as many electric cars as Telsa but nobody is tweeting endlessly about it, so it's as if it never happened. 

Including GM, which only wants to sell bigass trucks. If GM cared about anything besides bigass trucks they'd be making tons of noise about how many EVs they're selling.

GM hasn't gained any momentum in the EV market. It will take them 8 years to hit 200k units. They just axed the Volt and the Bolt is on pace to sell less this year than last. 

 

Meanwhile Tesla sold more Model 3's in Q4 2018 than GM sold Bolts and Volts combined the last 2 years.

...because small electric cars aren't profitable because small cars aren't profitable.  Hell, even sedans aren't profitable anymore. 

 

Tesla is still in a deep debt swamp.  Its luxury cars are profitable but the imaginary $35,000 Model 3 will never exist and it couldn't be profitable if it did exist.  The article alluded that the market for the Model 3 might be softening.  Tesla came within a few weeks of going bankrupt in 2018.  If we hit any sort of rocky patch in 2019, Tesla will be out-of-business in 2020. 

 

Also, irony of ironies -- the newest BART station is physically adjacent to the Tesla factory in Fremont, CA, although there is no way for pedestrians to simply walk to the factory.  Instead, it appears that they have to take a shuttle van or maybe a regular city bus to the factory.  Musk feigns ignorance of rapid transit systems yet his factory is physically adjacent to one!

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Tesla+Factory+Store/@37.5008887,-121.9434532,981m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x808fc654f67bbf49:0x2d4f6c443c47fb25!8m2!3d37.492509!4d-121.9446156

 

 

Civics and Corollas are profitable. It can be done. But if the sales staff's mouths are trained only to force crossovers and bigass trucks on people they become unprofitable. GM used to make tons of money from the Cavalier/Sunbird/Sunfire despite them being vastly inferior to Civics, Corollas, Sentras, Trecels, Stanzas and even the Geos/Chevys that were just Corollas with a GM badge.

My mother has a 2018 Accord and despite being front wheel drive and a four door it's the best Camaro I've ever driven. It takes a company that actually cares about real cars to make a proper sedan. Recent American sedans were ashamed that they weren't SUVs.

I am renting a Hyundai (I know) Sonata (I think) right now.  It has the buttery American suspension like a Grand Vic.  I seriously feel like an undercover cop driving the silly thing around.  It even has a center console that reminds me of a mid-80s Pontiac. 

14 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

Including GM, which only wants to sell bigass trucks. If GM cared about anything besides bigass trucks they'd be making tons of noise about how many EVs they're selling.

 

There is actually an interesting theory going around in some of the EV circles that GM is secretly ramping up production of EVs - trucks even.  But it will take them 5-7 years to ramp up to full production.  So instead of announcing it, thus likely reducing their sales of ICE trucks in the next 3-5 years, they are publicly saying they aren't getting into the EV truck business.  Who knows if that's true, of course.  But if you were already a big manufacturer of ICE trucks switching to EV models, you wouldn't want to play your hand too soon and have sales plummet while people wait for a better version in a few years.

The whole in that theory is that it assumes GM operates with any forethought.

They try at times to get off of the truck/SUV crack when gas prices rise, but the second the door to bigass trucks opens back up again they throw it all out. They are truly addicts. Ford and Jeep/Ram (err, I mean Chrysler) are the same way.

Tesla has reduced the prices on their cars by $2000 to remain competative after the loss of federal tax credits for electric car buyers. Their stock is currently down 10% on the news.

 

So does that base model $35k Model 3 now becomes $33k?

more like from $46k to $44k

17 hours ago, taestell said:

Tesla has reduced the priced on their cars by $2000 to remain competative after the loss of federal tax credits for electric car buyers. Their stock is currently down 10% on the news.

 

So does that base model $35k Model 3 now become $33k?

 

There never was any base Model 3 at $35k.  First, they aren't making that edition yet.  And even if they were, it would have been sold at $42.5k (or thereabouts) and then customers would have gotten the $7.5k tax credit (of course, you'd need a tax liability of at least that much to get the credit, if I'm not mistaken).  The $7.5k tax credit is gone now.

 

The absolute cheapest version of the Model 3 you can get right now - rear wheel drive, no enhanced auto pilot, black paint trim, 18'' wheels comes to $44k (without taxes) + $1,200 doc fee.  You'd then get a tax credit of $3,750.

 

They could stand to make that doc fee more efficient.

On ‎12‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 7:22 PM, Ram23 said:

 

This is just the far right's version of the far left's "occupy" type protests. Liberals shut down interstates, Conservatives shut down Tesla charging stations. Both are pretty petulant, but at least the occupy Tesla protests don't screw over thousands of bystanders.

 

If you can't seriously answer what they're protesting then I assume you are 1) a troll and/or 2) a terrible person.

http://www.thedrive.com/news/25833/upcoming-tesla-model-y-crossover-will-start-at-40000-or-less-report

 

Supposedly, Tesla will unveil its Model Y this year with production to begin in 2020.  The Model Y is believed to be a crossover SUV and rumors are out there that the base price could be $40k (and instead of playing around with FWD, AWD, etc. types all models will come with AWD so there shouldn't be a whole lot of confusion on price v. production a la the Model 3).

1 hour ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

If you can't seriously answer what they're protesting then I assume you are 1) a troll and/or 2) a terrible person.

 

I won't pretend to speak for anyone else, but if I had to guess, I assume they're protesting preferential treatment of electric car drivers over the common man. Free charging, preferred parking spaces, government subsidy, etc. I don't have a dog in this fight, though. I'd probably have an electric car if I didn't live in the city in a location I have no choice but to park on the street.

Bad news for electric cars.  Not only is Ford ceasing to manufacture almost all cars, they brought back the defunct Ranger for 2019:

 

 

I priced one on Ford's website and a base model is listed for $24,000 but in all practicality few under about $29,000 will be sold.  Meanwhile, people drove off the lot in $23,000 Focuses for years.  No way does this thing, despite being physically larger, cost $6,000 more to manufacture.  That's way more money in Ford's pocket per unit. 

 

Tonight I paid $1.75 to fill up my car.  It's a really bad time for electric car technology to mature. 

 

22 hours ago, Ram23 said:

Free charging, preferred parking spaces, government subsidy, etc.

 

Free charging = it's not free.  For a select few, it came with the purchase of a $60k+ vehicle.  For most, they pay for the electricity they use to charge at whatever charging station they are using.

Preferred parking space = you mean...where there are EV charging stations?  There are designated compact spots in parking garages, designated low-emission vehicle spots, etc.  This is stupid.

Government subsidy = are we going to protest corn too?  Because that is subsidized.

Edited January 9, 20196 yr by DarkandStormy

11 hours ago, jmecklenborg said:

Bad news for electric cars.  Not only is Ford ceasing to manufacture almost all cars, they brought back the defunct Ranger for 2019:

 

 

I priced one on Ford's website and a base model is listed for $24,000 but in all practicality few under about $29,000 will be sold.  Meanwhile, people drove off the lot in $23,000 Focuses for years.  No way does this thing, despite being physically larger, cost $6,000 more to manufacture.  That's way more money in Ford's pocket per unit. 

 

Tonight I paid $1.75 to fill up my car.  It's a really bad time for electric car technology to mature. 

 

 

 

Well, at least James Hetfield is having a good time in the screenshot

VW hints that it will start building electric cars at its plant in Chattanooga, TN by 2022:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/14/business/volkswagen-tennessee-plant/index.html

Tesla’s Life After Hell: 7 Charts Show Musk on Firmer Footing

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-01-07/tesla-s-life-after-hell-7-charts-show-musk-on-firmer-footing

 

To start 2019, Tesla is turning out more than 4,700 Model 3s each week. The electric-car maker has emerged from its year of existential uncertainty as one of the most valuable car companies in the world, with a stock value greater than Ford Motor Co., General Motors Co., BMW AG and, depending on the day of the week, Daimler AG. This may end up helping the company reduce its debt obligations and limit future borrowing costs. The hot mess that was last year has, somewhat surprisingly, forged Tesla into a company on more solid footing for the year ahead.

 

As more cars roll out, money is flowing in. The Model 3 is now  generating more revenue than any other sedan in the U.S., and Tesla’s cash flows have flipped from burning about $1.7 billion in the first half of 2018 to generating $774 million in the third quarter. (Results for the fourth quarter and full year are expected in February.)

 

=================================

 

Meanwhile, Volkswagen and others are just announcing someday-ish plans to start building electric cars eventually.  If jmecklenborg's post is right and VW starts building electric cars in Chattanooga in 2022, those cars will not be competing with today's Teslas, they'll be competing with the Tesla lineup of 2022, which at the current pace of Tesla's expansion will be considerably more varied and advanced.  Daimler and others are making similar someday-type promises (which don't affect the day-to-day culture or attention demands in C-suites).  And that's assuming that they actually start producing on time as promised; as Tesla has learned, that's not always easy.  (Tesla's delays get splattered all over the press, though, whereas normal corporate slouching from project to project does't attract nearly the same number of eyeballs.)

 

Realistically, Tesla will have the Model Y crossover in production by 2022 and might even have a light-duty pickup in the works by then.  If Tesla can take the pickup space away from the American OEMs who are increasingly one-trick-ponies with that as their only trick, I don't see how the Detroit crew can suddenly get their act together in time to survive.  They're defending smaller and smaller sandcastles and the tide is getting bigger and hungrier.

22 hours ago, Gramarye said:

  Daimler and others are making similar someday-type promises (which don't affect the day-to-day culture or attention demands in C-suites).  And that's assuming that they actually start producing on time as promised; as Tesla has learned, that's not always easy.  (Tesla's delays get splattered all over the press, though, whereas normal corporate slouching from project to project does't attract nearly the same number of eyeballs.)
 

 

The difference is that they never verbally or officially set inaccurate timelines unlike Musk. It's the media that ascribes timelines to Chevrolet, Ford etc. Such as "The 1990 Mustang will be front wheel drive" in 1986 and "The 2003 Corvette is expected to be mid-engined" in 1998", not the companies themselves.

9 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

 

The difference is that they never verbally or officially set inaccurate timelines unlike Musk. It's the media that ascribes timelines to Chevrolet, Ford etc. Such as "The 1990 Mustang will be front wheel drive" in 1986 and "The 2003 Corvette is expected to be mid-engined" in 1998", not the companies themselves.

 

The issue is that they do set such timelines when it comes to electric vehicles.  Maybe not VW specifically (until now, of course), but many other brands.  They are internally and externally compromised because in order to really market electric vehicles properly, they'd need to emphasize the positive comparisons of EVs with ICE vehicles--which of course would mean attacking their own ICE vehicles.  Therefore, they are not spending (major, C-suite-level capital expenditures) like they seriously believe that EVs are the future and/or that that future will arrive sooner than they think and they'd better be ready because the lead times for getting into that market are long.