riredale

So says this article. I'll admit I've never driven a Tesla or Leaf, but while I imagine it would be a gas (hah!) to floor the pedal and get squashed into my seat with Saturn V-like acceleration, I'd eventually think of this as just a parlor trick. And I don't want to plug in every night. Solve this issue and give me a full recharge in 5 minutes and I'd reconsider. But, hey, whatever floats your boat. For me the sweet spot is my 450h hybrid. Internal combustion with efficiency fairly close to the practical limits.

https://www.climatedepot.com/2018/01...th-investment/

mmarshall

I'm sure they will get the recharge period down with more time and development, but 5 minutes? I think you've been reading too many Genie stories.

jadu

iTrader: (42)

smart move. safe. it's a lot to invest in (research, engineering, development, manufacturing, reliability, QA etc...). the risk is definitely high

spwolf

I am sure they will change their mind if parameters change - like demand, cost, practicality.

FCA does not have money to lose on this, but I am not sure what are they doing with being so frank about it. People in the industry understand that demand is not there, while press and facebook/twitter/blogs will be against you so what are they gaining, nothing except badwill from future customers.

Just play the PR game like everyone does and say that you will "electrify" your fleet by 2035.

AWD4Mo

The biggest enemy of Lithium-Ion batteries is heat, which is created when you charge or discharge them. The faster you discharge them, the higher the heat. In the same way, the faster you charge them the more heat is created. A certain amount of heat is needed to make them efficient, as cold Lithium-Ion's don't provide much voltage or current. Unless some drastically new chemistry comes along, Lithium-Ion's will likely never be able to charge faster than, say, 30 minutes or so. These batteries last longest if you keep them between 20% and 80% capacity.

jadu

iTrader: (42)

agreed. I'm sure many higher ups and directors in the company have been asking, "if not now, then when?" they'll probably change their minds and start planning, tomorrow. or, just say that they're not working on EV's when they really are haha

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

from rumors, fca may not be around much longer as an entity, it will probably be bought by the chinese. then the strategy will likely change.

mmarshall

Well, we know that Sergio Marchionne has been putting the corporation on the market for several years now, looking for some one else to pay all of his bills. That is not rumor, but a fact. The only question is who (or when) the next buyer will turn out to be. GM and Toyota, the two most likely candidates, as I understand it, have both said no.

My guess, though, is that the Chinese might think twice before signing on the dotted line. In the last 20 years, since 1998, Chrysler has been through four different owners (including the U.S. Government's share of the buyout)....Daimler/Mercedes, Cerebus, and Fiat. All of them have essentially failed.

MattyG

The Jeep and Ram brands are the big money products on the US side. FCA's Chrysler side has a questionable track record on even the most simplest of hybrids. The Pacificas have all had to be recalled and then the plant shut down. The Fiat 500e is a joke for sales numbers so that's out. There is a Jeep Wrangler coming up with a plug in hybrid option, and that's about it.

The small crossovers are the best opportunity to do something and there's nothing happening there. It's not a bad decision here on the FCA chairman's view of the world. Why try and compete in a market where you lost already, and it's not worth going up against other manufacturers who are doing the same as you, but using electric/hybrid to meet mileage/emissions requirements.

btw this climate change website cited by the OP has a questionable rep, so they're just making political hay out of a decision. The FCA chairman has vacillated often on this topic.

spwolf

FCA is looking for merger, not for buyout, which is going to be completely impossible due to anti-trust laws in Italy and USA (and Chinese). They might put Ferrari or Masserati on stock market.

But when it comes to money, they just had $2b in operating profit last quarter, and are on track to earn $6b in positive cash inflow... They are getting to a healthy state thanks to the Jeep and SUVs.

There is no Chinese car manufacturer that can buy them, they are all much smaller companies with much smaller profits. Volvo was another thing, it was dying away at Ford and they paid very little for it.

Sulu

I believe that this announcement is about managing expectations: Don't expect any wonderful news about EVs and new (higher-capacity, safer, faster-charging) batteries in the near future (to 2020, assuming that all other automakers and battery companies are aiming at 2020 to have something significant to show).

Work on EVs will continue quietly in the background and if there is an eureka moment before 2020, FCA will announce that; but if there is no big breakthrough in the next 2 years, shareholders will not be disappointed and they will have no reason to sell because FCA broke a promise.

It is better to under-promise and then be seen as over-delivering, rather than to over-promise and under-deliver (which Tesla has become known for).

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

As long as FCA has the cash cow Jeep, they have some leverage. A hybrid / EV Jeep could be interesting.

Aron9000

FCA's current business model is highly dependent on gas prices staying low and the economy staying robust.

They don't have a fallback plan if we have another "Great Recession" like in 2007-2010. Where are their small/midsized cheap cars that get good gas mileage??? They discontinued the Chrysler 200 and Dodge Dart. Where are the hybrids and EV models??? They never made any(or any worth a damn) and just told us they don't plan to invest in that technology. Toyota absolutely cleaned house with the Prius during the recession, while Chrysler and GM had to "pass the hat around Congress" so to speak to remain solvent.

spuds

Like it or not the WORLD's governments have mandated they are coming,and they will.Doesnt matter if we want them or not,its a done deal.

mmarshall

LOL. California tried mandating a percentage of electric production, and the whole thing fell flat in their face. Governments can mandate production, but the public can't be forced into buying them.

And that's exactly what happened in California. The state government, in embarrassment, was forced to rescind the policy when the public resisted. Now, several years later, it looks like they didn't learn their their lesson the first, and they are getting ready to try the same nonsense again. And they will probably be forced to rescind it again.