Toyota Puts Brakes on EV Plans, Builds Just 100 Units of iQ EV

By Wolfgang Gruener
published

One of the pioneers of electric technology in cars is now reconsidering the viability of all-electric cars.

The Toyota Prius was not the first hybrid vehicle on the U.S. market - that honor goes to the Honda Insight - but it is still the poster child of hybrids and electric technology overall. It has taken Toyota quite a while to make the jump from hybrid to all-electric and now it appears that it may not be going all in with all-electric.

The news comes as the company is launching its iQ EV small full electric vehicle, which was originally planned to sell thousands of units, but is now being reduced to a production run of just 100. The iQ EV, which sells as the Scion iQ in combustion engine form as the Toyota iQ in Europe and Asia, as well as the Aston Martin Cygnet in a fancied up version, will get a 47 kW electric motor and a driving range of "about" 53 miles. The range is a manufacturer estimate and could still drop in the EPA rating.

Even for an electric car, the range is disappointing and renders the car useless for most scenarios, even for local purpose. According to the Federal Highway Association, U.S. drivers cover an average of 13,476 miles per year, or 36 miles per day. So, on average, the iQ EV fits this scenario very well. However, while females appear do drive only 27 miles per day on average, males drive 43 miles per day, coming within 15 percent of their driving limit that day. Throw in an extra run to Target and you may be in trouble.

"The current capabilities of electric vehicles do not meet society’s needs, whether it may be the distance the cars can run, or the costs, or how it takes a long time to charge," said Toyota’s vice chairman Takeshi Uchiyamada. As a result, the company said it will be focusing on hybrids and only offer its RAV EV in a production run of 2,600 units. Of course, range and charging is a big deal for EVs - and even Tesla's $100,000+ S sedan with a range of 265 miles is not exactly what we would call a car to take across the country due to its charging time and available charging stations. However, with a range of just 53 miles, it does not take extensive business analysis to figure out that such a car will not sell in huge numbers.

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Wolfgang Gruener
27 Comments Comment from the forums
  • nforce4max
    I really do want something that is truly economical to use, better yet no gas at all. However the real reason why people won't buy cars like this is because of all the idiots that buy two ton trucks that drive them over 80-115mph. People in my state drive their trucks so badly that when they show up at the shop for a oil change the oil comes out like pudding.
    Reply
  • frombehind
    well of course they want to keep selling their old cars instead of investing mountains of cash into researching new tech, and then to top it off, a well-built electric motor will last so much longer then a gas engine... again a loss overall for car manufactures. Now just imagine what would happen, if oil companies subsidized car makers to instead of building electric vehicles, to build "better and more efficient" gasoline vehicles.
    Reply
  • jdog2pt0
    The technology just isn't there yet, and I don't know if anyone is to blame or not. I would imagine that if all the energy that went into the mobile device market, went into furthering transportation technology, we would all be using transporters by now (exaggerating but you get my point). However, this slow development pace leaves me genuinely scared. I worry about what our oil situation will be in the not too distant future. If they don't get the move on, we're all fucked.
    Reply
  • twelch82
    All-electric cars are really only practical for people who own houses and own another gasoline-powered car as a backup. In that scenario, I can see owning an electric car as being a beneficial move, but it definitely limits prospective customers a bit.
    Reply
  • DRosencraft
    Detroit experimented with EV cars in the 70s and 80s. They got little response from consumers so they scrapped it. Every time anyone brought it up again, it was shot down because they didn't want to waste money on it again. Fast forward to today, the tech for these cars is much better, but far from perfect. The rate of degradation on the battery is relatively high if you are constantly charging them instead of only charging when it depletes. However, it's not at such a staggering rate that you can't use it - sort of how a gasoline engine becomes less efficient over time because of buildup in the engine.

    Add on to that the fact no one wants to pay for the infrastructure spending for gas station like charge stations and the fact that charging the battery is not quick. This limits range for many. If you live in a city, chances are you live in an apartment building. And if you live in an apartment building, there's no garage for you to park in. You're not gonna drive your car upstairs to plug it in overnight, or hang an extension cord out your window. EVs do not have a healthy infrastructure to work with.

    Finally, people are simply skeptical. They're terrified of a high electric bill, not realizing that relative to their gas bill it will be equal if not lower (electricity per kWh to fully charge an EV like Toyota's is less than a full-tank of gas for a comparable car).

    All this stuff combines to make EVs difficult to sell. They're expensive to build, and to sell them you have to make price them very low, therefore making for low profit margins. As a company, that's not gonna cut for shareholders. It may be worth it for regular people, or various special interests, those concerned about the environment, but in the end Toyota, like any other for-profit company, is going to make decisions that make them money. And this one doesn't seem to make much money. You can argue they should stick to it longer, but truth is that wouldn't work in the end. They aren't designed for going full-bore on EV projects, until EVs actually gain more favor with the general public.
    Reply
  • Alphi
    nforce4maxI really do want something that is truly economical to use, better yet no gas at all. However the real reason why people won't buy cars like this is because of all the idiots that buy two ton trucks that drive them over 80-115mph. People in my state drive their trucks so badly that when they show up at the shop for a oil change the oil comes out like pudding.
    i think you misread the article.. it has a range of 53 miles not a top speed of 53 miles.. one thing electric vehicles have over combustion engines is faster acceleration
    Reply
  • okibrian
    The problems are range and price. But I'll save on gas, right? Yes, but then you have to replace that battery every 3 years or so at around 4-5k. Maintenance also cost a lot more as well. We can talk green all we want, but the green that really matters most to people is the green that sits in my wallet.
    Reply
  • joytech22
    EDIT: Repost.. Didn't show up at first. Thumb this down.
    Reply
  • joytech22
    Well 53 miles wouldn't get me to work and back.. So.. well it would kind of make owning it useless considering just to have the damn thing registered for road use here is $1000 a year.
    Reply
  • nebun
    all electric don't make any sense at all...why drive with the fear of not making it where you are trying to go?...especially if your are going to use your AC and have extra passengers...Hybrids are the future....all electric are a FAD which hopefully will fade away very soon, plus they are way to expensive
    Reply