Australian fuel efficiency standards aimed at cutting petrol bills, 'catching up' with US

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by kypez

Again. Australian media will follow the hype. Yes, resale has fallen as supply has increased. People were flipping Raptors and Rav4's for $10k profits as were people with EVs. That is gone. That doesn't mean it's fallen rather than the inflated market has been restored.

Price of the meth-mobile of choice (SS Commodore) has significantly fallen now too.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by kypez

When the US dropped their subsidies, manufacturers dropped their price too. Manufacturers who came to market with a proper strategy and not being dependant on subsidies to make their cars affordable will be fine.

The bigger issue is that buyers seem to be leaving the market for now but that may just be winter…

[kypez]

Originally Posted by jpd80

The bigger issue is that buyers seem to be leaving the market for now but that may just be winter…

One month isn't people leaving the market. Big problem in the US is the EVs aren't good enough from the other brands. They've only been at it for 2 - 3 years.

Good read below

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmo...mI-8z0mnanM7OY

[Romulus]

Hertz dumping 20k of Tesla vehicles due to unreliability, poor range and servicing costs send a clear signal EV’s are toys, like Lego.

It’s not an individual YouTuber saying they’ve dumped their EV and aren’t going back, it’s an international car hire company saying EV’s aren’t good for their business.

One of the worlds arguably largest vehicle manufacturers, Toyota, has stated EV’s won’t ever exceed 30% of all passenger vehicles, they’re confident ICE and hydrogen will play a big part in future powertrains.

I had a look at the new BMW I5. I think it’s the worst 5 Series BMW have ever made. When asked if I would consider buying one, I told the salesman to keep an eye out for a low K F90 LCI M5 Competition. There’s no way I’d buy an electric BMW.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by Romulus

Hertz dumping 20k of Tesla vehicles due to unreliability, poor range and servicing costs send a clear signal EV’s are toys, like Lego.

It’s not an individual YouTuber saying they’ve dumped their EV and aren’t going back, it’s an international car hire company saying EV’s aren’t good for their business.

One of the worlds arguably largest vehicle manufacturers, Toyota, has stated EV’s won’t ever exceed 30% of all passenger vehicles, they’re confident ICE and hydrogen will play a big part in future powertrains.

I had a look at the new BMW I5. I think it’s the worst 5 Series BMW have ever made. When asked if I would consider buying one, I told the salesman to keep an eye out for a low K F90 LCI M5 Competition. There’s no way I’d buy an electric BMW.

It's a shame people don't understand why they're dumping them and make up stuff. There are no servicing on Teslas.

The problem is the prices dropped by Tesla are hurting their resale which Hertz and co are worried about.

But you've shown time and again very poor understanding and a clear bias against EVs.

I will agree with you though that BMW EVs are garbage as they stand.

[Citroënbender]

Originally Posted by ozpacman

I'm just stockpilin' AUs!

Have you got a thread about the Benz on here?

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Must have been Stevie Wonder who signed off on it then because those things chaff like nobodies business when you get on the throttle



Its going to look like the 2019/2020 bushfires out the exhaust when I'm driving it, don't worry.

I call it my James Bond mode....means everyone stays back as normally I wouldn't be able to outrun them...

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by kypez

It's a shame people don't understand why they're dumping them and make up stuff. There are no servicing on Teslas.

The problem is the prices dropped by Tesla are hurting their resale which Hertz and co are worried about.

But you've shown time and again very poor understanding and a clear bias against EVs.

I will agree with you though that BMW EVs are garbage as they stand.

I think that should have been repair costs and not servicing.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

I think that should have been repair costs and not servicing.

That's the thing, repair costs aren't anymore than usual. Heck, a Subaru windscreen will make a grown man cry when you see the replacement cost! Model 3 and Y are steel as well not aluminium.

Honestly, it's that Tesla keeps dropping their prices. They actually reduce prices as components become cheaper unlike traditional manufacturers. Heck, most are increasing pricing which is great for resale value. Problem is that the Hertz business model is designed with the legacy pricing structure.

The market doesn't understand how to work with a company that is actually doing things differently.

[ozpacman]

Originally Posted by Citroënbender

Have you got a thread about the Benz on here?

Well picked up CB! I don't have a thread on the Benz sorry. Bit of an interesting story behind this car. I bought this property in 2015 as a Deceased Estate. The old guy that had owned it had a used car yard in the nearby town and apparently used to buy a few cars through the auctions down south and sell them through his yard. He was a real wheeler dealer by all accounts! When he died, this car, which is a 1989 300SE, and a mid 70's 280 SLC were left in the shed, along with tons of old furniture, appliances and rubbish basically. The property was littered with all sorts of rubbish as well.

Anyway his poor widow was left to try and sort out all this stuff. Thankfully a local bloke who lived nearby (and who I've since become friends with) offered to give her a hand to sort the whole mess out prior to the sale of the property.

When he had it all done, the widow wanted to pay him but she was very low on funds and gave him the two Mercs as payment. When I was first inspecting the property to buy, my future mate came over to speak with me as he had the two Mercs, as well as a mini excavator and equipment on a plant trailer stored in the shed and wanted to know when I would need them moved. I told him not to worry as I wasn't in a position to move to the property for several years, and the cars and excavator were better off being stored out of the weather. I subsequently bought the mini excavator and equipment from him so that solved that particular storage issue.

Fast forward a couple of years and he decided to move the 280SLC to his place with a view to restoring it. I knew he was being very ambitious as the thing was rotten with rust and my mate doesn't really have the skills to tackle a project of that magnitude. He then told me he didn't have room for the 300SE, so would take it to the tip. I told him it was far too good to dump and he then asked me if I wanted it! I've never been a Euro car man, but this thing is as straight as a die with not a speck of rust in it anywhere. I couldn't bear the thought of this car going into land fill so yeah, there it sits!

I did have a crack at getting it running once but in fairness it was a bit of a half hearted effort. It winds over and will run briefly if you dribble a bit of fuel down the fuel plenum/distributor, so I suspect it may need a new fuel pump and filter and clean out of the fuel tank.

Or alternately - maybe an Intech and a BTR!

[whynot]

Perhaps reading the Hertz's filing with the SEC might help.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...z-20240111.htm

Item 2.02 Results of Operations and Financial Condition

Hertz Global Holdings, Inc. (the “Company” or “Hertz”) has made the strategic decision to sell approximately 20,000 electric vehicles (“EVs”) from its U.S. fleet, or about one-third of the global EV fleet. These vehicle dispositions, which were initiated in December 2023 and are expected to take place in an orderly fashion over the course of 2024, will cover multiple makes and models. EVs held for sale will remain eligible for rental within the Company’s fleet during the sales process. The Company expects to reinvest a portion of the proceeds from the sale of EVs into the purchase of internal combustion engine (“ICE”) vehicles to meet customer demand.

The Company’s decision to reduce its EV fleet will result in the recognition, during the fourth quarter of 2023, of approximately $245 million of incremental net depreciation expense related to the sale. This non-cash charge represents the write down of the EVs’ carrying values as of December 31, 2023 to their fair values, less related expenses associated with the disposition of the vehicles. This charge is in addition to the depreciation expense that the Company will report for the fourth quarter in the ordinary course with respect to the remainder of its fleet. Future depreciation expense on the specific vehicles held for sale is expected to be limited to impacts from changes in the vehicles’ condition and general market factors. Any gain or loss associated with the ultimate disposition of any specific EV will be recognized in the period of sale. The Company does not expect this EV fleet reduction and the corresponding addition of ICE vehicles to have a material impact on its asset-backed securitization facilities, nor does it anticipate the need to make additional cash contributions to such facilities as a result of this strategic action. 

The Company expects this action to better balance supply against expected demand of EVs. This will position the Company to eliminate a disproportionate number of lower margin rentals and reduce damage expense associated with EVs. The Company will continue to execute its strategy around EV mobility and offer customers a wide selection of vehicles. The Company continues to implement a series of initiatives that it anticipates will continue to improve the profitability of the remaining EV fleet. These initiatives include the expansion of EV charging infrastructure, growing relationships with EV manufacturers, particularly related to more affordable access to parts and labor, and continued implementation of policies and educational tools to help enhance the EV experience for customers. Going forward, the Company will continue to actively manage the total size of its EV fleet, as well as the allocation of EVs among customer segments, including leisure, corporate, government and rideshare.

It is expected that the planned reduction in the EV fleet and reinvestment in additional ICE vehicles will improve Adjusted Corporate EBITDA across 2024, as vehicles are rotated, and in 2025, by which time all of the vehicles included in this plan are expected to be sold. By year end 2025, it is expected that the aggregate two-year benefit to Adjusted Corporate EBITDA related to the sale will approximate the incremental net depreciation expense to be recognized in the fourth quarter of 2023. It is expected that this benefit to the Company’s financial results will be derived from higher revenue per day and lower depreciation and operating expenses related to its remaining fleet. The Company further anticipates that incremental free cash flow generation related to this action will approximate $250 million to $300 million in the aggregate over 2024 and 2025.

The Company expects to report financial results for the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2023 on February 6, 2024. Consistent with expectations, the Company expects to report revenue for the fourth quarter of 2023 in the range of $2.1 billion to $2.2 billion, in line with historical seasonality relative to its third quarter. Adjusted Corporate EBITDA for the fourth quarter of 2023 will be negatively impacted by the incremental net depreciation expense associated with the EV sales plan, and further burdened by higher depreciation expense in the ordinary course as residual values for vehicles generally fell throughout the quarter greater than previously expected. While direct operating expenses per transaction day, excluding collision and damage, will be flat for the quarter and down for the year, expenses related to collision and damage, primarily associated with EVs, remained high in the quarter, thereby supporting the Company’s decision to initiate the material reduction in the EV fleet. The Company expects to report a negative Adjusted Corporate EBITDA (excluding the impact of the non-cash charge related to the EV sales plan) for the fourth quarter in the range of ($120 million) to ($130 million).

The Company’s estimated results for the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2023, are preliminary in nature and subject to change as results for such period are finalized. Estimates of results are inherently uncertain and subject to change, and the Company undertakes no obligation to update the estimated results. The Company’s estimates contained in this Current Report on Form 8-K may differ, perhaps materially, from actual results. Hertz is in the process of finalizing its fourth quarter 2023 financial statements and will discuss actual performance and more details in its regularly scheduled earnings release and conference call, which are planned for February 6, 2024.

The Company cannot, without unreasonable effort, reconcile its forecasted range of Adjusted Corporate EBITDA, a non-GAAP financial measure, to its most directly comparable GAAP financial measure, net income (loss) attributable to the Company, due to the uncertainty and inherent difficulty of predicting the occurrence and the financial impact of items impacting comparability as of the date of this Current Report on Form 8-K. Management uses Adjusted Corporate EBITDA as an operating performance metric for internal monitoring and planning purposes, including the preparation of the Company's annual operating budget and monthly operating reviews, and analysis of investment decisions, profitability and performance trends. This measure enables management and investors to isolate the effects on profitability of operating metrics most meaningful to the business of renting and leasing vehicles. It also allows management and investors to assess the performance of the entire business on the same basis as its reportable segments.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by whynot

Perhaps reading the Hertz's filing with the SEC might help.



https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...z-20240111.htm

Devil is in the detail. The cost itself isn't much higher but the lack of spares readily available might see cars off the road for a period of time that adds to the "repair cost".

[bfets]

https://www.drive.com.au/news/tesla-...petrol-diesel/

[kypez]

Originally Posted by bfets

https://www.drive.com.au/news/tesla-...petrol-diesel/

Love when an Australian publication tries to push "Facts" based on other countries and making claims based on "Research companies" like we used to see that said Smoking was good for health.

Funnier is people just don't apply any commonsense to what they're reading.

No **** a Tesla is going to cost more than a corolla to fix. But like for like, the costs are comparable if not a little in favour of Teslas for certain items.

[bfets]

Originally Posted by kypez

Love when an Australian publication tries to push "Facts" based on other countries and making claims based on "Research companies" like we used to see that said Smoking was good for health.

Funnier is people just don't apply any commonsense to what they're reading.

No **** a Tesla is going to cost more than a corolla to fix. But like for like, the costs are comparable if not a little in favour of Teslas for certain items.

Did you even read the damn article? It literally touches on what you are trying to prove. The average for other EV's (non Teslas) are only 5% more than ICE cars. They explain why a Tesla is expensive to repair. Because like you say it is way more complex than a Corolla, or most other cars for that matter.

Are Tesla's the most expensive? No!
"While the average cost to repair a Tesla is high, Mr Mandell said electric models from niche car-makers such as Rivian, Lucid and Polestar can exceed $US8000 ($AU15,400)."

This reminds me why I don't tend to comment on these types of conversations. It's like having a debate about religion, or politics. People are way too invested in proving themselves right instead of seeing middle ground and that the truth can be a sea of grey. This is true for both sides of the EVs are awesome and EV's are evil arguments.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by bfets

Did you even read the damn article? It literally touches on what you are trying to prove. The average for other EV's (non Teslas) are only 5% more than ICE cars. They explain why a Tesla is expensive to repair. Because like you say it is way more complex than a Corolla, or most other cars for that matter.

Are Tesla's the most expensive? No!
"While the average cost to repair a Tesla is high, Mr Mandell said electric models from niche car-makers such as Rivian, Lucid and Polestar can exceed $US8000 ($AU15,400)."

This reminds me why I don't tend to comment on these types of conversations. It's like having a debate about religion, or politics. People are way too invested in proving themselves right instead of seeing middle ground and that the truth can be a sea of grey. This is true for both sides of the EVs are awesome and EV's are evil arguments.

Yes, I read it and typical click bait exists with the UK battery story.

Again, no commonsense. Most other EV vehicles are based on ICE platforms. Naturally spares will be interchangeable and easily available. Other EVs are also significantly cheaper than Teslas and the US has a plethora of EVs offered less than a Tesla with cheap repair bills outside of the exohtics of Lucid,etc.

None of these create any useful information at all. What did we learn from the article? Petrol/diesel is not a classification of a car. More expensive EVs cost more to repair. Author couldn't help avoid the click baiting by segmenting cars based on their Market segmentation (e.g. Tesla 3, BMW 3 Series, Merc C class).

Has nothing to do with religion or politics. Just junk articles being pushed.

RIP commonsense.

[Franco Cozzo]

Also how is an EV more complex than a traditional ICE car?

If anything its mechanically and electrically simpler, it just includes some nasty high voltage stuff and inverters.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Also how is an EV more complex than a traditional ICE car?

If anything its mechanically and electrically simpler, it just includes some nasty high voltage stuff and inverters.

The problem with some, like model S/X, is the aluminium. It's expensive to repair. For the 3/Y, the giga pressing of large sections of the frame makes it harder to just swap out parts (good old Panel beating might be making a comeback!). For most accidents, it's a non issue but it can cost more due to the large sections to repair.

But no more than say a BMW or Merc model using extra sensors, cameras (those front bumper camera are eye watering again that the Tesla doesn't have), etc.

Light clusters and bumpers, etc are very similar.

[mick taylor]

In regards to using less fuel ?

When you fire up a EFI cold car, what happens is that the fuel mixture is as rich as hell ?

So i pull out of my place drive down the road and sit at the read lights and watch the fuel that it is using come up on the dash readings and think f ! does this use fuel at cold idle.

If i get a green light boy can i get some distance on the fuel, that is used if i do not get the lights.
Not to mention It could be revving at 1600 to 1800 RPM cold ?

I say to a mate with a New Mazda 626 up the road, too drive that car out of the shed directly and drive normal ! but he always sits for 10 min then creeps down the road past my place like a 99yo dude and sits at the lights.

I drive up past his place and turn where their are no lights, unless i can see the green will come soon.

But the reason for the massive amount of rich fuel being pumped in, is too heat up the cat converter !

So this deal must be dealt with i would think, regarding the ADR new standards ? as The next standards are looking at the fuel being used coming into the deal more so ?

One does not need such rich fuel at idle ! I could sit at the red lights with a warm engine and use nothing much at all like it does cold !

Not to mention that if the engine needs rich fuel when driving cold so be it as the computer will deal with it easy, but at idle, running rich just to get the cat con fired up is nonsense !

Old mate is still in the 1970's with a HQ Holden 202 mentality of warming it up before driving in below 10c, something he picked up living down South ?
You just do not go flogging a cold engine !

Not to mention i seen a lot of 202's being flogged when cold too warm them up back in the days, no wonder some cracked pistons !

[whynot]

Article in The Australian says that

The Biden administration is poised to dump controversial rule that would require Americans to buy more electric cars sooner, in a nod to their declining popularity and increasing cost that will embarrass the Albanese government, which has sought to copy the US approach.

In a move that will infuriate environmentalists the US Environmental Protection Agency is reportedly going to dump proposed rules would have ensured around two thirds of sales of new cars and light trucks in the US were fully electric by 2032, up from almost 8 per cent last year.

“Instead of essentially requiring automakers to rapidly ramp up sales of electric vehicles over the next few years, the administration would give car manufacturers more time, with a sharp increase in sales not required until after 2030,” the New York Times said based on two anonymous administration sources, on Saturday (Sunday AEDT).

CNN has similar wording

The Biden administration is considering relaxing stringent vehicle emissions rules it proposed last year, giving automakers more time to meet requirements that would make them sell more electric vehicles, according to two sources familiar with the plan.

The Environmental Protection Agency’s vehicle emissions rule is a key plank of President Joe Biden’s climate agenda. Biden has made the transition to EVs a signature issue of his presidency, stressing the economic impacts in addition to the boost for the climate.

Instead of a previously proposed rule that would rapidly increase the number of EVs sold to meet strict emissions requirements, the EPA is considering delaying these requirements until after 2030, the two people said. The EPA rule is still not finalized and is expected to be released in the spring.

...

I am sure there are heaps of other articles around by now.

[Sprintey]

I wonder how much of it is actually geopolitical. So much of the market in EVs is dominated by his strategic competitor, having a 10 year head start. US is self sufficient in liquid hydrocarbons, can refine and value-add them.

[Sprintey]

from the linked article:

“When you look at the average number of parts being replaced, it's increasing every year. You look at the frequency of calibration work — that's increasing by the day.

“You look at the number of parts that are other than mild steel, that increases continually. All of these trends are leading us toward more expensive collision repair.”

- this is true of many cars, the Suby windscreen with Eyesight mentioned downthread, a Jeep side mirror, etc.

There is a place for simple and cheap to repair - the product built this way will last longer in the market (thus using less resources as it is recycled later) as more people can afford to keep it for longer, as individual bills that will be beyond their ability to pay for will occur at a lower dollar level, delaying the scrapping of the car.

Kudos to the man stockpiling AUs - those were designed to be cheap to repair and reliable, for the taxi industry.

[Hemihunter]

https://electrek.co/2024/02/26/ford-...kEfEAmKq_7Bveo

[kypez]

Originally Posted by Hemihunter

https://electrek.co/2024/02/26/ford-...kEfEAmKq_7Bveo

Problems for both EV and petrol powered models. Stop sale on both that has been since lifted.

[Hemihunter]

Was more about the fact they have them sitting around, that cannot be good.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by Hemihunter

Was more about the fact they have them sitting around, that cannot be good.

They're sitting around due to a stop sale from Ford. Not because they're unsold.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by mick taylor

In regards to using less fuel ?

When you fire up a EFI cold car, what happens is that the fuel mixture is as rich as hell ?

So i pull out of my place drive down the road and sit at the read lights and watch the fuel that it is using come up on the dash readings and think f ! does this use fuel at cold idle.

If i get a green light boy can i get some distance on the fuel, that is used if i do not get the lights.
Not to mention It could be revving at 1600 to 1800 RPM cold ?

I say to a mate with a New Mazda 626 up the road, too drive that car out of the shed directly and drive normal ! but he always sits for 10 min then creeps down the road past my place like a 99yo dude and sits at the lights.

I drive up past his place and turn where their are no lights, unless i can see the green will come soon.

But the reason for the massive amount of rich fuel being pumped in, is too heat up the cat converter !

So this deal must be dealt with i would think, regarding the ADR new standards ? as The next standards are looking at the fuel being used coming into the deal more so ?

One does not need such rich fuel at idle ! I could sit at the red lights with a warm engine and use nothing much at all like it does cold !

Not to mention that if the engine needs rich fuel when driving cold so be it as the computer will deal with it easy, but at idle, running rich just to get the cat con fired up is nonsense !

Old mate is still in the 1970's with a HQ Holden 202 mentality of warming it up before driving in below 10c, something he picked up living down South ?
You just do not go flogging a cold engine !

Not to mention i seen a lot of 202's being flogged when cold too warm them up back in the days, no wonder some cracked pistons !

As far as the ADRs are concerned, the later vehicles Cats are required to light off in about 30 seconds
And a lot of later cars warm up much quicker now (less coolant?) to get up to operating temperature faster.

I don’t know what vintage you drive but if it’s PFI like mine, they need to run rich like a carb
When cold or the fuel just won’t combust properly thanks to cold metal, may be different for DI.

Old guy nonsense to sit there and warm everything up before driving off, the whole point is
to be able to start and get going immediately and warm up everything on the move but you know that.

Sorry, struggling with autocorrect turning my words into other ones…..that’s the modern world for you.

[fatgas]

Originally Posted by bfets

https://www.drive.com.au/news/tesla-...petrol-diesel/

I can add fuel to this fire, anecdotal though it is.

I have a handful of independent panel shops as clients and they all either handball the EV's when they come through the system or write them off. They don't want the liability of a possible smoke show after repair and the margins are even thinner when the repair doesn't involve the zappy zappy stuff (as others mentioned due to the significant use of aluminium, welded or bonded).

[whynot]

Lots of media reporting this morning that Apple is to shut down its division that is working on its electric vehicle. Apparently moving some of the team over to working on AI. And this is after it gave up on its full self driving project a few years back.

While sinking a few billion into a black hole EV project and then walking away with nothing might seem wasteful, but this is the way capitalism works. The successful survive and the weak perish.


It also says a lot about managerial confidence in being able to make a buck out of EV. Ditto, investor's confidence in EV when Apple's stock rose 0.7% immediately after the announcement.

[fatgas]

https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...28-p5f8c5.html


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-generative-ai