Connect with us

Published

on

Mazda has finally announced their long-rumored MX-30 plug-in hybrid, named the MX-30 R-EV, which uses a small rotary engine as a range extender to supplement a now even smaller battery.

The new MX-30 R-EV was shown at the Brussels Motor Show today, though Mazda’s press release is light on details. All it mentions is that the car will have a 17.8kWh battery good for 85km (53mi) of range on the WLTP test cycle. This battery is half the size of the EV’s 35.5kWh, and is paired to an 830cc rotary engine and a 50 liter (13 gallon) gas tank. It will be available in a new “Edition R” trim and color (pictured above) and will feature 1.5kW of V2L “power supply functionality.”

At first glance, the R-EV’s lower range (with half the battery capacity and less-than-half of the range) might suggest a less efficient vehicle, but if the R-EV carries over the EV’s ~5kWh battery holdback, the two seem almost identical in efficiency. The R-EV is 58kg (127lbs) heavier and slightly more powerful (168hp, up from 143hp) than the EV, so both cars have similar performance.

The R-EV will be capable of 36kW DC fast charging, down from 50kW for the EV. Both of these are pretty pedestrian numbers in this day and age, with 350kW chargers propagating throughout Europe. But PHEVs generally do not rely on DC fast charging when they need a quick fill up, so this is less of an achilles heel for a car with a range extender under the hood.

Mazda will offer drivers a choice of three drive modes to control the engine – “normal” which mostly uses the electric motor until battery charge gets low or the driver floors the accelerator, “EV” which will force the engine to stay off as long as possible, and “charge” which will preferentially run the gas engine so you can maintain a certain battery charge percentage. Drivers can set their own preferred percentage, and this can be used, for example, for driving through various EV-only zones which are propagating around some European city centers.

In terms of price and availability, the R-EV will start at the same base price as the EV, as Mazda says it wants to offer buyers a simpler decision to choose the powertrain that’s best for them, and it should start shipping to various countries next quarter.

Earlier this week, Mazda announced the MX-30 EV is coming back to California after spending the better part of a year missing in action with no comment on whether it would be back for the 2023 model year. In its first model year, Mazda planned to sell a paltry 560 vehicles in California only, and ended up selling 505. This MX-30 EV is not available anywhere else in the US, nor is the newly-announced PHEV.

Electrek’s Take

The MX-30 has had somewhat of a tortured existence so far. First announced as a fully electric car, it was praised for its sleek looks, mature interior, and interesting suicide doors.

But when Mazda started talking about and showing the car, it became more and more clear that it… didn’t really want to make an electric car. Before the car even came out, Mazda announced that it was artificially making it slower “to feel more like a gas car.”

Then, when we drove the car, we noticed a lot of design decisions that seemed far more consistent with having an engine than a battery. Not only was all the electric badging quite temporary-looking, but there is a massive empty space under the hood just waiting to be filled by an engine:

Mazda says that their strategy is to offer appropriate powertrains for each region based on that region’s needs, which has translated into EVs for Europe and California, conventional “mild” gas-powered hybrids in other regions, and PHEVs now for Europe.

But… why? The US has much larger distances, and the US’ “road trip culture” is often cited as something that keeps people (wrongly) away from EVs. PHEVs give drivers the ability to stay on electric drive for most driving, but still have a tank for road tripping, so it seems like this would work for the US.

And in Europe, it seems like electric would work great, with some cities banning internal combustion engines and with the whole continent being covered by a quality train network to get between cities when needed. Europe also has much higher petrol prices than the US, and an acute reason to want to avoid using oil – its main supplier, Russia, has just decided to launch an unjustifiable war in Europe, and much of the oil burned on the continent therefore directly funds that war.

But there’s a hitch – incentives. In Europe, PHEVs are actually more common than in the US, despite the factors mentioned above, because it’s quite common for companies to purchase or lease vehicles to employees as company cars, and the companies get incentives for those cars. These cars are commonly plug-in hybrids, and they also commonly never get plugged in.

Meanwhile, in the US, California requires manufacturers to sell a certain amount of zero emission vehicles or else they have to purchase costly ZEV credits from other automakers, so manufacturers often sell EVs only in California in order to meet these regulations. These half-baked EVs are called “compliance cars,” and they have been a common way for manufacturers to get around California’s ZEV regulation for the last decade.

So it seems that a large part of Mazda’s true rationale for these vehicles isn’t what customers need, but how they can best game the system in each territory.

Which is a shame, since this could be a good PHEV. While we were hoping for a full 35.5kWh paired with a small engine, much like the old BMW i3, 85km/53mi is still longer range than other PHEVs on the market. And it’s enough to cover most people’s daily needs, so it’s entirely possible that many R-EV drivers will be able to go months or even a year without filling up on gas.

But the problem is, there are still lots of people who will just never plug their car in. PHEVs have been found to get much less efficiency than the stickers claim because of this. While it is attractive to think that we could spread a limited battery supply around to more vehicles by putting, say, 3x20kWh PHEVs on the road instead of one 60kWh EV, the calculus breaks down if people don’t plug those PHEVs in. And we just end up with a bunch of slightly-more-efficient gas cars on the road, using up batteries that could have been put into something that doesn’t use fossil fuels.

We also like that Mazda has announced price parity between the R-EV and the EV. Many other vehicles have a cheaper PHEV, which makes little sense since you’re buying two powertrains instead of one. The BMW i3 again did this right – the PHEV was actually more expensive than the EV, underlining that the EV is the better deal, both for buyers and for the environment. And the i3 was connected to a tiny gas tank, again underlining that it was to be used as a backup, instead of the massive 50L tank on the MX-30.

And most of all, it doesn’t make sense that the car is only available in Europe. Mazda, you screwed up with the MX-30 EV, and everyone knows it. It’s not great. But you have a good-looking car which was designed to be a PHEV from the start, which you could theoretically offer at a competitive price and with a better package (i.e., larger EV range) than competing vehicles.

But, like the EV itself, it kind of feels like you don’t actually want to sell it. Prove us wrong. If you’re proud of this product, let people buy it.

Now… electrify the Miata, next. Please? Come on. We’ve been asking for so long!

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla officially launches Model YL with 6 seats, starting at ~$47,000

Published

on

By

Tesla officially launches Model YL with 6 seats, starting at ~,000

Tesla has officially launched the Model YL, a new, larger Model Y with 6 seats, in China, and it starts at 339,000 Chinese Yuan, the equivalent of about $47,000 USD.

After a few weeks of teasing, Tesla has officially launched the new version of the Model Y on its online configurator in China:

The main things we didn’t know about the vehicle yet were the price and range. Those questions are now answered.

The Model YL starts at ¥339,000, equivalent to approximately $47,000 USD. It’s about $3,600 USD more expensive than the Model Y Long Range AWD in China.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

It is rated with a range of 751 km (466 miles) based on the CLTC driving cycle, which typically yields a longer range than the WLTP and EPA standards.

For comparison, the larger version achieves roughly the same range as the smaller Model Y Long Range AWD, thanks to its larger battery pack.

Tesla has released new images of the new version of the Model Y:

Last month, the first specifications and dimensions were released, confirming a length of approximately 180mm (7 inches) longer, a height of about 24mm (1 inch) taller, and a wheelbase that is also 150mm (or approximately 6 inches) longer.

Now, Tesla has confirmed a few more features, including up to 2,539 liters of storage space and electric armrests in the second-row seats.

The automaker is guiding deliveries in September.

Electrek’s Take

The price is reasonable in comparison to Tesla’s current lineup, making the upgrade relatively affordable.

However, it is a lot more expensive than other 6-seater all-electric SUV options in China, such as the Onvo L90, which is about $8,000 cheaper.

I’m curious to see how it will be priced in North America, where I think it would be much more popular than in China.

Tesla needs to go downmarket to access a bigger market in China – not upmarket, but the new option is still a positive for the automaker.

If the pricing matches the one in China, it shouldn’t be much more than $51,000 in the US, which I think would make it a popular option.

However, I think it would be the end of the Model X.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Analysts downplay AI bubble worries as Altman says some investors will be left ‘very burnt’

Published

on

By

Analysts downplay AI bubble worries as Altman says some investors will be left 'very burnt'

Wedbush's Dan Ives: The next two to three years will be a tech bull market

The artificial intelligence boom that Sam Altman helped ignite with ChatGPT in late 2022 is starting to make even him uneasy.

Startups with little more than a pitch deck are raising hundreds of millions. Valuations have become “insane.” Capital is chasing a “kernel of truth” with feverish speed.

The OpenAI CEO still believes the long-term societal upside of AI will outweigh the froth, and he’s ready to keep spending in pursuit of that goal.

“Are we in a phase where investors as a whole are overexcited about AI? My opinion is yes,” he said at a recent dinner with reporters. “Is AI the most important thing to happen in a very long time? My opinion is also yes.”

He repeated the word ‘bubble‘ three times in 15 seconds, then half-joked, “I’m sure someone’s gonna write some sensational headline about that. I wish you wouldn’t, but that’s fine.”

While Altman warned that valuations are now out of control, he’s ready to shell out on more infrastructure.

“You should expect OpenAI to spend trillions of dollars on datacenter construction in the not very distant future,” Altman said. “And you should expect a bunch of economists wringing their hands, saying, ‘This is so crazy, it’s so reckless,’ and we’ll just be like, ‘You know what? Let us do our thing.'”

OpenAI is already looking beyond Microsoft Azure’s cloud capacity, and is shopping around for more.

The company signed a deal with Google Cloud this spring and, according to Altman, OpenAI is “beyond the compute demand” of what any one hyperscaler can offer.

“You should expect us to take as much compute as we can,” he added. “Our bet is, our demand is going to keep growing, our training needs are going to keep going, and we will spend maybe more aggressively than any company who’s ever spent on anything ahead of progress, because we just have this very deep belief in what we’re seeing.”

It’s not just OpenAI. All the megacaps are trying to keep up.

In their most recent earnings, tech’s biggest names all raised capital expenditure guidance to keep pace with AI demand: Microsoft is now targeting $120 billion in full-year capital expenditures, Amazon is topping $100 billion, Alphabet raised its forecast to $85 billion, and Meta lifted the high end of its capex range to $72 billion.

Sam Altman says OpenAI pushed a 'much warmer' tone for GPT-5

Wedbush’s Dan Ives said Monday on CNBC’s “Closing Bell” that demand for AI infrastructure has grown 30% to 40% in the last months, calling the capex surge a validation moment for the sector.

Ives acknowledged “some froth” in parts of the market, but said the AI revolution with autonomous is only starting to play out and we are in the “second inning of a nine-inning game.”

“The actual impact over the medium and long term is actually being underestimated,” he said.

Citi’s Rob Rowe, speaking Monday on CNBC’s “Money Movers,” pushed back on comparisons between today’s AI boom and the dotcom bubble.

“Back then, you had a lot of over-leveraged situations. You didn’t have a lot of companies that had earnings,” Rowe said. “Here you’re talking about companies that have very solid earnings, very strong cash flow, and they’re funding a lot of this growth through that cash flow. So in many respects, it’s a little different than that.”

He added that the current wave of AI investment is being driven by structural shifts in the global economy, particularly the rapid growth of digital services, which now account for a large share of global exports. Also unlike the dotcom cycle of the late 90s, companies today are funding their infrastructure spending with strong cash flow rather than relying on debt.

Still, concerns about overheating have been mounting. 

Alibaba co-founder Joe Tsai pointed to worrying signs in the AI sector well before the hyperscalers raised their annual capex guidance during the latest earnings prints.

In March, he warned of a brewing AI bubble in the U.S.

Speaking at HSBC’s Global Investment Summit in Hong Kong, Tsai said he was astounded by the scale of datacenter spending under discussion. Tsai questioned whether hundreds of billions in spending is necessary, and flagged concern about companies starting to build datacenters “on spec,” without clear demand.

Altman, for his part, sees these cycles as part of the natural rhythm of technological progress.

The dotcom crash wiped out scores of companies, but still gave rise to the modern internet. He expects AI to follow a similar path: a few high-profile wipeouts, followed by a lasting transformation.

“I do think some investors are likely to get very burnt here, and that sucks. And I don’t want to minimize that,” he said. “But on the whole, it is my belief that… the value created by AI for society will be tremendous.”

WATCH: OpenAI staffer reportedly to sell $6 billion in stock to SoftBank and other investors

OpenAI staffer reportedly to sell $6 billion in stock to SoftBank and other investors

Continue Reading

Environment

Waymo founder: Please let me know when Tesla launches a robotaxi — I’m still waiting”

Published

on

By

Waymo founder: Please let me know when Tesla launches a robotaxi — I'm still waiting

Waymo founder and former CEO John Krafcik is a critic of Tesla’s approach to self-driving, and he has so far accurately predicted the rollout of the “Robotaxi” service.

He is now taking another dig at Tesla.

Krafcik is a highly respected leader in the auto industry. He began his career as a mechanical engineer at the NUMMI plant, which was then a joint GM-Toyota factory, but is now owned by Tesla.

He spent 14 years at Ford, where he was chief engineer of the Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator, a very successful vehicle program. He then moved to Hyundai America, where he served as President for five years.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

However, Krafcik is best known for leading Waymo from 2015 to 2021, helping it become the consensus leader in self-driving technology.

Ahead of Tesla’s rollout of its so-called “Robotaxi” service in Austin in June, Krafcik suggested that Tesla could fake the service:

“There are many ways to fake a robotaxi service.”

He wasn’t exactly wrong.

There’s a Tesla employee in the front seat of every “Robotaxi” in the fleet, which is only about a dozen vehicles, based on crowdsource data, which is the only data available, as Tesla doesn’t release any.

Those supervisors in the front seat have their fingers on a kill switch ready to stop the vehicle at all times, and there are many examples of them intervening to prevent accidents or traffic violations.

In new comments (via Business Insider), Krafcik makes it clear that he doesn’t consider this to be a “robotaxi” service:

“Please let me know when Tesla launches a robotaxi — I’m still waiting. It’s (rather obviously) not a robotaxi if there’s an employee inside the car.”

More recently, Tesla expanded its “Robotaxi” service area to the Bay Area in California, but it again has an employee in the car, this time in the driver’s seat.

Krafcik commented:

“If they were striving to re-create today’s Bay Area Uber experience, looks like they’ve absolutely nailed it.”

He continued:

“I think the AV industry would be delighted if Tesla followed Waymo’s approach to launch a robotaxi service, but they are not doing that.”

Furthermore, Tesla has been limiting access to “invite-only” and the invites have been primarily going to Tesla influencers and investors who are rarely critical of the company.

CEO Elon Musk has been discussing “opening up” the service in Austin to the public next month, but it appears that Tesla will need to retain the in-car supervisor for the foreseeable future.

Electrek’s Take

It must be a bit frustrating for Waymo, which has deployed an actual robotaxi service for years, to see Tesla calling this a robotaxi.

When Waymo was using in-car “safety drivers’, it didn’t call its service “robotaxi.” It was obviously in the testing phase.

If Tesla were to remove the safety drivers, which I suggest they don’t, based on the current disengagement rate of FSD and the interventions we have seen from supervisors in the currently minimal “Robotaxi” service in Austin, it would officially be about 5 years behind Waymo.

The argument that Tesla will magically scale faster because they don’t use lidar should be retired, as the goal should be the safest, not the fastest, at scaling.

And when it comes to scaling, Tesla’s current bottleneck is safety. It needs to be safe enough to remove the safety supervisor, and it’s clearly not there yet.

I really don’t like Tesla’s approach. It seems to be more about optics than adopting a safe and transparent approach.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending