• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

The Official Complaint Thread!

Nik the Trik said:
Electric cars are still built by the automotive industry. If government rebates can result in an electric car that is relatively affordable and can build an infrastructure that minimizes practical concerns than there's huge financial incentive for the auto industry to invest in the technology.

It's not like the government only started building roads once the combustion engine was perfected.

Although, weren't "roads" already there?  Horsey highways!
 
Frank E said:
WhatIfGodWasALeaf said:
Frank, would your position change if every EV sold came with an extra $1000 dealership commision/taxbreak?

That wouldn't affect my thinking that going to the source of the pollution is probably a better way to tackle the pollution.

My being in the auto industry is irrelevant.  We sell and service whatever the market demands.  Whether they be electric, fuel cell, or whatever, it really doesn't make any difference.

Tax breaks come and go, but putting tax breaks on cars that only a fraction of people can afford really isn't going to spur sales.  And as far as dealership incentives go, it makes zero difference.  We deal in rates of return of 2%-3% of sales.  The manufacturers are the ones that make the money in the auto industry in Canada, not the dealers.


All the dealers (of new cars) locally are definitely in the wealthier crowd. But the money comes mostly from the service side, from what I've been told. One I talked to was upset because of the money he had to spend on renovating his dealership to meet the manufacturer's new image. He said he was one of the first to renovate to meet the dealer image program in the 80's but stated this time around he was going to wait until they threatened to pull his license because the $1M it was going to cost him "won't sell a single additional damn car." And I think he's right.
 
Also, the Nissan Leaf has a MRSP of 32,698 and there's the potential for 12,000 or so in rebates(soon to be 14-15k under this new plan). The new Camry has a MRSP of 24,970. The Ford Fusion is 22,481. So the idea that it's something entirely out of reach for people seems false.
 
Bullfrog said:
Nik the Trik said:
cabber24 said:
I think you guys are missing my point. Electric cars are great, public charging stations are not. Current technology dictates electric cars are suitable for short distance travel only, charging for 40 minutes every 2 hours while traveling does not make sense. Use these cars close to home and charge at home. Don't waste money on public charging stations.

Except I've given you a concrete example of how it does make sense. It takes me about 2 hours 15 minutes to drive to my cottage. It's not a trip that makes sense in an Electric Car right now. If there are easily accessible charge points on the way, it does. It's not like the difference between two hours and fifteen minutes and three hours is the difference between me going to my cottage or not.

Think of all the productive things you could do in that 40 minutes. It's a blessing really.
I concur.
 
Nik the Trik said:
Also, the Nissan Leaf has a MRSP of 32,698 and there's the potential for 12,000 or so in rebates(soon to be 14-15k under this new plan). The new Camry has a MRSP of 24,970. The Ford Fusion is 22,481. So the idea that it's something entirely out of reach for people seems false.

Good point, but the Leaf is the size of a Corolla which can be bought for about $18,000.  But I think we need to understand the sustainability of manufacturing the vehicles at that price point.

Nissan loses money on every single Leaf, Tesla still loses money on every car as well.

The government rebates are supposed to help bridge some of the cost realities to help make them affordable, but manufacturers are reluctant to build a business case taking into account a rebate that may not be there by the time they get a competitive EV to market...and without some hefty rebates, they can't at this point make them make sense.

I'm all for cleaner vehicles and technologies, but I'd just like to see them invest in removing the big problems before investing in further infrastructure.  You may think they can do both, but the required resources are a finite thing, especially given the bank balances of our provincial government.
 
Frank E said:
Good point, but the Leaf is the size of a Corolla which can be bought for about $18,000.  But I think we need to understand the sustainability of manufacturing the vehicles at that price point.

Nissan loses money on every single Leaf, Tesla still loses money on every car as well.

The government rebates are supposed to help bridge some of the cost realities to help make them affordable, but manufacturers are reluctant to build a business case taking into account a rebate that may not be there by the time they get a competitive EV to market...and without some hefty rebates, they can't at this point make them make sense.

I'm all for cleaner vehicles and technologies, but I'd just like to see them invest in removing the big problems before investing in further infrastructure.  You may think they can do both, but the required resources are a finite thing, especially given the bank balances of our provincial government.

It's not so much a case of me thinking they can, it's a fact that they are and if we're going to get into a wholescale discussion of the provincial budget I'd lay decent odds I could come up with 20 million dollars spent on stuff I'd rather see go towards this.

Anyways, that's largely a separate issue. New technology always comes along slowly and, if there's a good case to be made that there's a public good in it, it makes sense for the government to support it even if it's not exactly where you want it to be. Government built railroads and the ARPAnet well before the commercial necessity was there. Electric cars are not only attainable for the fabulously wealthy right now and it's exactly the sort of thing the government should be promoting both for individual consumers and private industry. Give Nissan and Tesla tax breaks, like Potvin says we've been doing that for companies who are bad the environment.

Because ultimately to reduce our carbon emissions it's not going to be a case where we can lay the entire burden on the government or think we only have an obligation to act once the car companies have figured out how to make a Chevy Tahoe sized behemoth charge in 12 minutes and cost us 50 bucks. It is going to require individual sacrifice and a rethinking of how we use energy. We might not be able to get every single thing we want, when we want it, just like it is now.
 
My vehicle is from 1991 -- many people think I just bought is recently.  Yes, even the mechanic shop people.  Not kidding.  Why?
Well, first of all I have low mileage on it, and secondly, I've taken judicious care of my car for the longest time.  In the early days, I used to maintain it really well -- washing & keeping it clean/upkeep, etc., as well as keeping it in the garage and not parked on the driveway (my father kept his car outside).  I have also had yearly rust-proofing done.

Car still runs well, but have had to replace parts.  My mechanic tells me he hasn't seen a cleaner car (not overloaded with too much gunk/grease in-between door jambs, under hood, etc), and he tells me it's still got a "great engine" (23 years strong!).  it has also passed the emissions test each and every time. 

I'm planning on buying a new car and if it ever came to the point of choosing between a hybrid or electric, let's just say, I believe the better choice would be hybrid.  If the government of this province (Ontario) truly wanted to reduce vehicle, carbon emissions, it woukd need to offer incentives to those who's situation does not make it feasibe to purchase a new vehicle while ditching their older version.

i am not in that category, but, for those who are, there should be some sort of enticement/incentive/etc., to better facilitate the transition. 

Until people are convinced that an all-electric vehicle can withstand our winter climate and at the same time make long treks (highways, etc.) similar to the cars we drive today, and are easy to maintain, charge, are safe, etcetera, etcetera, only then true changes in tackling our environmental challenge begin.

For now, i myself will stick to tradition when I will soon buy a new car.
 
hockeyfan1 said:
If the government of this province (Ontario) truly wanted to reduce vehicle, carbon emissions, it woukd need to offer incentives to those who's situation does not make it feasibe to purchase a new vehicle while ditching their older version.

i am not in that category, but, for those who are, there should be some sort of enticement/incentive/etc., to better facilitate the transition. 

Have you paid any attention to this conversation at all?
 
Looks like the Japs are seriously countering Tesla and getting into the fuel cell game, first.

The 2017 Honda Clarity Fuel cell will precede the Hybrid and All Electric versions.

And of course the Toyota Mirai.
 
TBLeafer said:
Tigger said:

Honda and Toyota.  Japs are to Japanese what Canucks are to Canadians.  :)

What Tigger is driving at is:
Jap is an English abbreviation of the word "Japanese." Today it is generally regarded as an ethnic slur among Japanese minority populations in other countries, although English-speaking countries differ in the degree to which they consider the term offensive. In the United States, Japanese Americans have come to find the term controversial or offensive, even when used as an abbreviation.[1] In the past, Jap was not considered primarily offensive; however, during and after the events of World War II, the term became derogatory.[2]
 
TBLeafer said:
Tigger said:

Honda and Toyota.  Japs are to Japanese what Canucks are to Canadians.  :)

Let's ease off on the casual racism, shall we?

EDIT: Also, let's avoid its use for the females of Nik and my people, as well - though, I don't think they're making any sort of concerted effort to get into the fuel cell game.
 
All about context.

Jew? Canuck? Pol? Ruskie? Jap?

If just meant to be taken as an abbreviated identifier with no offence intended, no offence need be taken.

#WhenPoliticalCorrectnessGoesTooFar
 
TBLeafer said:
All about context.

Jew? Canuck? Pol? Ruskie? Jap?

If just meant to be taken as an abbreviated identifier with no offence intended, no offence need be taken.

#WhenPoliticalCorrectnessGoesTooFar

Wow, alrighty then.
 
TBLeafer said:
All about context.

Jew? Canuck? Pol? Ruskie? Jap?

If just meant to be taken as an abbreviated identifier with no offence intended, no offence need be taken.

#WhenPoliticalCorrectnessGoesTooFar

I was in the middle of saying, "Let's ease up guys, it's probably an innocent mistake; he now knows that isn't the right way to refer to people because they might have different interpretations of the words than he intended"... Clearly I was wrong.

"Well, I didn't intend to pull the trigger, so he really shouldn't be bleeding like that."
 
Tigger said:
TBLeafer said:
All about context.

Jew? Canuck? Pol? Ruskie? Jap?

If just meant to be taken as an abbreviated identifier with no offence intended, no offence need be taken.

#WhenPoliticalCorrectnessGoesTooFar

Wow, alrighty then.

No worries, your valid.  Its a complaint thread.  :)
 

About Us

This website is NOT associated with the Toronto Maple Leafs or the NHL.


It is operated by Rick Couchman and Jeff Lewis.
Back
Top