Lexus October 2018 Sales Report

[krew]

krew

Lexus October 2018 Sales Report

Down 4.6% year-over-year.

View the original article post

 

[Rob Grieveson]

The new ES sold less this month than the old one did in September? Was the old model on a discount runout perhaps?
The LS better than September but missing their target of 1000 per month - need the Limitless!

 

[Gecko]

At this point, IS sales are reaching niche-model levels. Hopefully Lexus has some way to fast track the development of the 4IS. RC sales are so low... hopefully the refreshed model and a strong advertising campaign will help.

All SUVs were negative for the month of September... yikes. Refreshes for GX and RX would really help about now. Lexus' decision to bump out the 4RX refresh until 2019 was unfortunate.

 

[Tragic Bronson]

https://www.wardsauto.com/industry/toyota-honda-october-sales-dip-despite-record-light-truck-results

At Lexus, sales fell 4.6% on 22,716 deliveries.

In a twist of the narrative for most brands this year, it was light trucks that upended the brand’s result, not cars. Lexus car deliveries were flat, up 0.6% on a DSR basis, but light trucks fell 7.0% due to losses at all nameplates.

The LX large SUV posted the biggest drop, down 40.5% on 377 deliveries, but the typically strong NX and RX CUVs also fell, down 11.5% and 1.2%, respectively.

Both models’ hybrid variants posted good results, however. The NX hybrid, with 656 deliveries, was up 232.0% from October 2017 and the RX hybrid, with 1,416 sold, rose 101.7%.

Among cars, only two models, the new ES midsize sedan and new LS flagship, posted increases. The ES achieved a 29.5% increase on an adjusted basis vs. year-ago, while the LS boosted that model’s results 144.8%.

Through October, Toyota’s U.S. vehicle sales were flat, down 0.2% on volume of 2.015 million. The Toyota brand was up 0.1% while Lexus was down 2.6%.

 

[Ian Schmidt]

That's interesting that the normal NX/RX were down but the hybrids were up, and that Honda's bright spot was their EVs. I wonder if the EV mass market is actually finally materializing.

 

[Gecko]

That's interesting that the normal NX/RX were down but the hybrids were up, and that Honda's bright spot was their EVs. I wonder if the EV mass market is actually finally materializing.

Lots of environmental news last month... "11 years to save the world," etc. That correlation might be far fetched, but I wonder if that could be fueling some of the changes?

The thing I don't fully understand but have been meaning to post is that a month or two ago, I read an article talking about how auto-related pollution increased significantly and it was due to emissions released during coal burning. The article pointed out how there is starting to be a measurable impact from electric cars and it's stressing the power grid, requiring more and more coal to be burnt to power it. If I recall correctly, it seemed to indicate that the burden of electric cars is just as bad of a pollutant as ICE cars, and possibly worse.

I wish I could dig it up.

 

[Ian Schmidt]

Right. I just saw a similar article about how carbon emissions from electricity generation in the US were way down from 2005 due to a combination of conversion from coal to gas and lower demand due to more efficient appliances and light bulbs. It seems entirely reasonable that significant EV adoption could reverse that trend and actually make things worse.

 

[TheNerdyPotato]

Going a little further off topic, I see nuclear power as being a necessity in the coming decades. It's sad that despite so many people seeing this coming and warning about it, any plans for expanded nuclear capacity are at least a decade off.

 

[Ian Schmidt]

The gadget Elon Musk really needs to put money into is the Mr. Fusion.

 

[maiaramdan]

& finally the GX & LX shows there real age on the charts, guess when we can have the next generation of both?!!!

 

[spwolf]

Lots of environmental news last month... "11 years to save the world," etc. That correlation might be far fetched, but I wonder if that could be fueling some of the changes?

The thing I don't fully understand but have been meaning to post is that a month or two ago, I read an article talking about how auto-related pollution increased significantly and it was due to emissions released during coal burning. The article pointed out how there is starting to be a measurable impact from electric cars and it's stressing the power grid, requiring more and more coal to be burnt to power it. If I recall correctly, it seemed to indicate that the burden of electric cars is just as bad of a pollutant as ICE cars, and possibly worse.

I wish I could dig it up.

coal plants are easy power up again and can provide quick additional energy... for anything else, you have years of development time.

Also, it creates pollution close to us vs oil being far away.

Nevertheless, it will even itself out in the future. I cant see EVs not being a benefit to the society.

 

[Gecko]

It also makes me feel like while Toyota's investment in hydrogen has seemed far fetched to some, it really might be our cleanest and most viable long term solution. It's unfortunate that there isn't more infrastructure to support it.

Theoretically, solar-powered sources pumping energy into the grid that supports EVs would also be clean, but it does seem to me that the coal burning required to power EVs doesn't make batteries as clean of a solution as many would like to envision.

 

[maiaramdan]

The process of extracting the lithium and the battery rare components is much worse on the environment, that's why I pray asking the success for the solid state, at least won't be this harm, on the other hand the FCEV is less harm as they aren't 100% battery dependable so the battery whatever it's technology can stay way more

 

[spwolf]

It also makes me feel like while Toyota's investment in hydrogen has seemed far fetched to some, it really might be our cleanest and most viable long term solution. It's unfortunate that there isn't more infrastructure to support it.

Theoretically, solar-powered sources pumping energy into the grid that supports EVs would also be clean, but it does seem to me that the coal burning required to power EVs doesn't make batteries as clean of a solution as many would like to envision.

all of this is very long term anyway... by the 2030-2040 they have plenty of time to build new, cleaner energy. Problems are costs of expanding the grid, chargers, electricity generation... all of that spends energy, so........

 

[ssun30]

Just to cap off this digression to EV, I would like to clear up some common misconceptions. TLDR:
>>Even a lousy compliance EV needs to use very dirty electricity (I mean, pre-cold war era dirty) to be more harmful than the state of the art ICEV to the atmosphere. That's just the nature of power generation: modern fossil fuel power plants are incredibly efficient that ICEs cannot hope to match.
>>Average 2018 BEVs are already better than the Prius in lifetime GHG emission.
>>PHEVs are better than both BEVs and HVs in coal-heavy developing nations (like China and India). FCVs make more sense for an average developed nation with average carbon footprint (like USA and Japan). BEVs are unbeatable in nations with low carbon footprint in the electricity sector (like France and Canada).
>>Nuclear power is amazing. No renewable is as good, not even close.

EDIT: Too long. So I just put the conclusion here.

 

[maiaramdan]

@ssun30, thanks a lot bro for those info but
1) the 20% enviromental clean advantage will need upgrade for the electric grid for every country as this will be extra load and can make electric shortage as what happened in France because of the BEV

2) still after all those years, the nuclear power is not safe and any small fault can lead to another Fukushima or Chernobyl

3) the rare materials used in Li batteries

4) the recycling process which will make like double the pollution of creating the battery itself

5) the limited mileage in comparison to the other variants from Gasoline, Diesel, Natural Gas or even Fuel-Cell

6) the long refueling time in comparison to the variants from Gasoline, Diesel, Natural Gas or even Fuel-Cell

7) the accidents, floods safety and we saw 2 teslas and 1 Nissan in my mind that burned after got crashed in the battery place

So honestly the normal Ni-MH hybrid is much more safe and good / safer on the planet for the long run until the solid state start being produced or until there is enough refueling bases for the FCEV

 

[Ian Schmidt]

@ssun30 Thanks for the detailed backgrounder!

@maiaramdan Nuclear power can be 100% safe; modern reactor designs exist that are fail-safe and cannot enter a "runaway" state. However, thanks to a very effective scare campaign in the 1970s and the resulting legislation/regulation nobody's been able to get a license to build one of those designs.

A Japanese company, I think Toshiba, has a working prototype of a fail-safe self-contained nuclear power plant about the size of a large refrigerator that could power an entire neighborhood for 20 years before major maintenance. I'd be thrilled to have one of those in my neighborhood, but I know I'm a serious outlier there

 

[maiaramdan]

@Ian Schmidt , I know this info as I was working before in safety systems for nuclear reactors, but sir it won't ever reach 90% (+) you will have another problem which is the nuclear wastes after period of time for every reactor

 

[GTG]

Wow ! The Es sales are doing great! The Ls sales are doing good , the sales over all are lower than last years around this time , because of no Ct sales , well next year is looking great
And I am sure Toyota planned for this .

 

[zeusus]

Lots of environmental news last month... "11 years to save the world," etc. That correlation might be far fetched, but I wonder if that could be fueling some of the changes?

The thing I don't fully understand but have been meaning to post is that a month or two ago, I read an article talking about how auto-related pollution increased significantly and it was due to emissions released during coal burning. The article pointed out how there is starting to be a measurable impact from electric cars and it's stressing the power grid, requiring more and more coal to be burnt to power it. If I recall correctly, it seemed to indicate that the burden of electric cars is just as bad of a pollutant as ICE cars, and possibly worse.

Its not that people care about the environment, its that gas prices are up, so people are switching over to the MPG friendlier cars. End of the day, if weighing the pocket book vs. the environment, the bottom line always wins.