Cars that are designed from the ground up to be EVs tend to be much better than trying to shoehorn an EV into an ICE design.
The new Lexus ES350e, which comes in both hybrid and EV flavors, has been pretty universally panned as a mediocre EV [1]. Lexus anticipates that the vast majority of ES sales will be for the hybrid model, and I expect the same will be true of the Corolla.
The updated bZ and new bZ Woodland on the other hand, which are built as ground-up EVs on the e-TNGA platform, actually seem pretty decent. And I'm hopeful for the upcoming EV Highlander, too (although that will use a modified version of the TNGA-K platform).
I would prefer if Toyota just released a new EV model with roughly the same proportions as the Corolla, instead of going with the one-size-fits-all approach. But maybe they'll finally be able to get it right this time.
The upside of using a platform for EV and hybrid engines is that it typically looks a lot better aesthetically than an EV only platform.
Just look at the Mercedes S class versus the EQS. The EQS was ground up designed as an EV and because of the design decisions made in that process is the ugliest Mercedes designed ever.
Same with the Audi A6 which was always a masterclass in design and now is a generic blob of a car with the new EV only model.
A lot of the way EVs look has to do with reducing drag, which extends range. Hence the “blob” shape that the parent is talking about that is common to EVs - and the Prius before that. Or retractable handles.
So not just an aesthetic choice, although carmakers do seem to “lean in” to that aesthetic and go all in on the futuristic look with EVs.
They're already at the kind of range I'd be happy to trade off the other way.
I don't need 400 mile ranges; I'm happy to half that to get a shorter front so I can see the corners, a squared off hatch at the back, and proper headroom. Basically give me a smaller Transit van.
Its reliably improves as the British engineering is reduced... These EV trucks are going to be running for 100 years. No crazy Chinese firmware, no bonkers Musk autonomy, charge them from the solar on your roof, enough torque to pull a semi trailer out of a ditch.
It's precisely because these EVs don't repackage android or attempt to remain internet connected that will allow them to keep working on the software side. Embedded firmware (for ISO/IEC 15118 comms with the CCS2 port) for charge controllers is about as sophisticated as it gets.
Have I got an E-transit for you: <a href="https://www.autotrader.co.uk/van-details/202512088451612" rel="nofollow">https://www.autotrader.co.uk/van-details/202512088451612
There's also the Kia PV5, and if you're fabulously wealthy the ID Buzz.
Unfortunately people are convinced that they would rather spend 10 minutes a week at a gas station rather than have to do one 30 minute charge on a road trip once a year.
freetime2 · · focus · HN ↗
The new Lexus ES350e, which comes in both hybrid and EV flavors, has been pretty universally panned as a mediocre EV [1]. Lexus anticipates that the vast majority of ES sales will be for the hybrid model, and I expect the same will be true of the Corolla.
The updated bZ and new bZ Woodland on the other hand, which are built as ground-up EVs on the e-TNGA platform, actually seem pretty decent. And I'm hopeful for the upcoming EV Highlander, too (although that will use a modified version of the TNGA-K platform).
I would prefer if Toyota just released a new EV model with roughly the same proportions as the Corolla, instead of going with the one-size-fits-all approach. But maybe they'll finally be able to get it right this time.
[1] <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQ97R1nhq4M" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQ97R1nhq4M
artisinal · · focus · HN ↗
Just look at the Mercedes S class versus the EQS. The EQS was ground up designed as an EV and because of the design decisions made in that process is the ugliest Mercedes designed ever.
Same with the Audi A6 which was always a masterclass in design and now is a generic blob of a car with the new EV only model.
xedrac · · focus · HN ↗
freetime2 · · focus · HN ↗
So not just an aesthetic choice, although carmakers do seem to “lean in” to that aesthetic and go all in on the futuristic look with EVs.
mook · · focus · HN ↗
I don't need 400 mile ranges; I'm happy to half that to get a shorter front so I can see the corners, a squared off hatch at the back, and proper headroom. Basically give me a smaller Transit van.
rrr_oh_man · · focus · HN ↗
In my calculation it was around 100 miles range tops due to battery weight, aerodynamics, unoptimized drivetrain, etc.
[0] <a href="https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS7clbTkwzGBp9_QGtHz8zAD0g6RjJffx3O6MI2WJ7Go8JQn1S_GUlbJjU&s=10" rel="nofollow">https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS7clbT...
angry_octet · · focus · HN ↗
<a href="https://www.jauntmotors.com/series" rel="nofollow">https://www.jauntmotors.com/series <a href="https://www.youtube.com/@Jauntmotors/shorts" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/@Jauntmotors/shorts
Range: 55kWh 250km (155 miles), 110kWh 450km (279 miles).
rrr_oh_man · · focus · HN ↗
Maybe without the powertrain that Land Rover might be halfway reliable, finally (hehe) [0]
[0] <a href="https://www.lrukforums.com/media/land-rovers-turning-owners-into-mechanics-jpg.90052/" rel="nofollow">https://www.lrukforums.com/media/land-rovers-turning-owners-...
angry_octet · · focus · HN ↗
rrr_oh_man · · focus · HN ↗
Dunno, man. I can't get my phone to work for 5 years.
angry_octet · · focus · HN ↗
pjc50 · · focus · HN ↗
There's also the Kia PV5, and if you're fabulously wealthy the ID Buzz.
WarmWash · · focus · HN ↗
wallst07 · · focus · HN ↗
The new Rang Rover electric is indistinguishable from the ICE version.
Lucid Air / Rivian are decent looking but they make no ICE equivalent.
englishspot · · focus · HN ↗
especially with how screen-centric they typically are.