2017+ Chrysler Pacifica Minivan Forums banner

Compare EV and Plug-in Hybrids

16K views 85 replies 21 participants last post by  m0ebius604 
#1 · (Edited)
Hey Pacifica Plug-in Hybrid enthusiasts,
I was browsing looking for a local Plug-in America event I could show the public the great PacHy at, and ran across a link to PlugStar. This has a great comparison feature to line up ALL the EV and Plug-in Hybrids that are available by area code. I was happy to see my/our PacHy among the options and it really stands out from the crowd when looking at the miles in EV and the total range as compared to other larger vehicles. In fact, looking at the fancy European options like BMW and Mercedes and Jaguar, some of them only offer EV in the first 11-17 miles. Why bother! With a net starting price after incentives of $32K, I think the PacHy is a real deal and comparable price to the regular model as well as the competition non-hybids.
ONE QUESTION, see the link of the feature on PlugStar showing the Pacifica Hybrid monthly sales. I was VERY surprised to see the PacHy sales nationally at only about 600 units per month. Why so low?

https://plugstar.zappyride.com/cars

I would think Chrysler could so some advertising if it wanted and make this 6000 units monthly easily! If all minivan purchasers were made aware of the "similar to non-hybrid" net price, and the vast difference in annual operating costs (lower gas use), I would think the PacHy is at the top of the pack as far as choices. I'm comparing Odessey and Sienna in this mix. I understand exceptions such as if someone wants AWD with a Sienna as an option. But otherwise, PacHy should be a first choice.
This coming from me, a guy who had never purchased an American brand car before and thought he never would!
I'm really enthusiastic about the PacHy if you haven't figured this out yet, and wonder why Chrysler doesn't take advantage of it's real gem of a product before the competition starts offering plug-in hybrids among minivans. Someone call the Marketing folks at Chrysler and wake them up!
What to my other PacHy enthusiasts think? I welcome your honest opinions.
ps. I understand the first 2017 model year had issues, but since 2018, I think it is a great product. Please concentrate your responses on 2018+ models.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
The Pacifica has the stigma of being a minivan. Lots of people won't even consider it even if it fits their needs the best. I was in that camp before the Pachy came out and bought a '16 Highlander. Traded that in for the '19 Pachy and am loving the combination of size, fuel economy, and family friendliness of it.
 
#3 ·
I own a gas Pacifica so not a PacHy enthusiast but I did think about buying a PacHy. I don't think the FCA marketing folks need to be woken up. Increasing PacHy sales from 600 per month to 6000 would not be easy. 6000 per month would represent roughly 60% of all Pacifica's sold on an annual basis. Electric vehicles in any form are no where near 60% of new vehicle sales across the entire market. I think doubling the sales of the PacHy would be a challenge with even a wide awake marketing staff. After all, this is a mini van. Buyers tend to shy away from mini vans in favor of SUVs.

I chose a gas model for some basic reasons:
Although it would be intriguing to drive electric, the annual savings were not high enough based on my driving.
The PacHy stripped out too many features, when compared to the Limited gas model, including stow-n-go second row and zero towing capacity.
Unknown battery replacement cost and life. I keep my vehicles a long time so the cost to replace the battery becomes a factor.
Resale value of the hybrid compared to a gas model in 8 to 10 years.
Did not know enough on how a hybrid would operate in cold, northern climate. Would I be happy with performance or sacrifices during winter months? Now I know I probably would be okay, but then I did not.

Some reasons FCA may not want to put a lot of marketing cost/effort (which includes educating consumers on hybrid technology) into the PacHy:
The profit margin for the PacHy is likely lower than the gas model
The PacHy is affordable only because of government subsidies which run out when sales quantities reach thresholds or could be eliminated entirely sooner.
This is relatively new technology for FCA. There is risk in selling too many, too soon. Unanticipated problems can cost lots of $$$ across a higher sales number.
FCA may have manufacturing limits as to how many PacHy's they can build based on battery availability, etc. (Look at the manufacturing problems Tesla is having in ramping up their sales and they have been at it awhile)

I'm sure there are other factors but it is not a simple or cheap thing to increase PacHy sales to 6,000/month.
I am glad for your experience, and others, with the PacHy. It is a good vehicle.
 
#5 ·
I've read in several places that PHEV hybrids are big money losers per vehicle. High horsepower electric motors and large batteries are very expensive, plus the costly technology to support battery cooling and power crossover systems. Chrysler probably just wants to build enough to be in the game, and let the gas vehicle production absorb the losses. Regular hybrids have much smaller, less complicated (and cheaper) electrical components.

I don't understand the enthusiasm of some people who think this will save the planet. The thoughtful verdict is not in on that yet. Remember when those spiral light bulbs (now deemed poisonous) were touted as going to save the planet? Not everything is as it is blindly painted by the green advocates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stop-eject and 1tg1
#6 ·
I don't understand the enthusiasm of some people who think this will save the planet. The thoughtful verdict is not in on that yet. Remember when those spiral light bulbs (now deemed poisonous) were touted as going to save the planet? Not everything is as it is blindly painted by the green advocates.
Plug-in hybrids are always going to be a stop-gap between conventional gasoline cars and a fully electric future, nobody sees them as a solution in and of themselves. They're a compromise that gets more people familiar with charging and driving a plug-in car and saves some gas in the process.

All fluorescent lamps contain mercury, whether they're tubular lamps we've been using for 70 years or the compact ones we've had for 30. They didn't fall out of favor because they were "deemed poisonous", but because LEDs eventually surpassed them on price, efficiency, durability, dimmability, and light quality.

Sent from my H8314 using Tapatalk
 
#7 ·
In fact, looking at the fancy European options like BMW and Mercedes and Jaguar, some of them only offer EV in the first 11-17 miles. Why bother!
The European hybrids use the electric portion of the drivetrain for added performance, not fuel economy. Think Porsche, Volvo, Mercedes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Newfoundland
#8 ·
Most people still want a SUV or maybe Truck .

Most people still want a SUV or maybe a Truck .
Except for the Electric enthusiasts where they may want a fully electric vehicle. Also a car in the 40 to 50k range is a lot for most people . Some of these Trucks are 50 k and they are absolute
gas hogs. Then you need a charging station . Lets face it 115volts is just not going to cut it. Yeah it drives great and if you don't have a problem with it , the problems have not been trivial though.
 
#9 ·
A lot of people buying minivans opt for the lower cost trim/packages... after all, if you want one for a young/growing family, then you may also have concerns that it's going to get trashed by spills and other mishaps... and since you have to wait until you file taxes for the $7500 rebate, people don't always factor that into the cost. Plus missing features in the Hybrid (stow-and-go is the biggest and power folding 3rd row, but 2018 didn't have memory seats or folding mirrors if I recall correctly) was another drawback for some. I see a lot of gas Pacificas in my area, but only 2-3 Hybrids in the 18 months I've had mine.

Then again, a number of EV enthusiasts don't like the features of the Hybrid. You can't toggle between ICE and electric mode, the regenerative braking isn't really strong enough for 1-pedal driving, and 30ish miles is pretty short range if you're trying to avoid gasoline completely.

Personally I love mine and have had minimal problems, even though it's a 17. It's mainly a hauler (brought home an 8-ft tree and assorted other plants last weekend) but still accommodates family when we all get together, I've gone from refueling weekly to once every 6-8 weeks, is comfortable for roadtrips (and don't have to charge for 30 minutes every 200 miles like my husband's EV). I went from a smart forTwo coupe to my PacHy, and I think I'm saving money on fuel. Plus my husband commented that he likes driving my van and misses its advanced safety features when he drives his older Tesla model S. So I agree that it's a great vehicle, but I'm not surprised that not everyone is going to want one.
 
#10 ·
Thanks for your input Waldo. Yes, unfortunately environmental concerns seem to have been politicized, so I decided not to even go near that subject. I instead, just pointed out all the benefits to the individual consumer of a PacHy.
 
#11 ·
Shawnee,
Thanks for your input. I do see you have a point about significant differences between the hybrid and non-hybrid PacHy versions. Stow and go, as well as towing ability are valuable features for those that will want these instead of the hybrid benefits. I also understand folks concerns with reliability/cost of the hybrid system into the future. Personally I felt reassured that the hybrid portion of the warranty on these cars is over 100K (I think 150K in WA State), so unlikely this cost would really be an issue to me in any way except if the lithium battery wasn't included in the warranty. I have seen a few posts from those driving (now old models) prius 1st and 2nd generation versions that only a few have needed batteries replaced up to now, and they were a lot lower cost now than was anticipated early-on.

Regards, Jonathan
 
#12 ·
MLambert,
Thanks for your input. Glad you love your PacHy. I've also seen some of the feedback from my earlier post include mentions of true EV enthusiasts not liking that EV range of 30, and not being able to force the van between EV and ICE at will. I would only point out what Arteitle in his thread noted, that a Hybrid plug-in is a technology changing stop-gap that will last for a time and serves it's purpose very well.

That purpose includes providing the majority of the savings of using EV in the first 30 miles of each day (cold weather climate use excluded) where most commuting does not much exceed this, having a more affordable price as a hybird than a strictly EV which would be much more expensive (battery cost) at this time in the ultimate change to EV in the future, providing folks with a psychological way to ease into converting by still having ICE for use when needed, 50% better MPG that the ICE-only versions, and of course the MUCH higher range as compared to true EV vehicles (which generally top out between 200-300 miles). Some folks noted that it can't charge fast on the road trips and you wouldn't want to stop every 30 miles. That is only something that is needed if you have an EV only vehicle. The PacHy I see as the great merging (among minivans) between the low MPG ICE only option and the future mostly EV options. It works great for this point in evolution of vehicles.

I'm also see the cost issue with those buying the lower end minivans that are generally around the $30K range with lower budgets. However, most of those folks also likely needed to take out a loan anyway, and if they carried the extra 10K cost of interest payments for the hybrid for just one year, then paid down their loan by the $7,500 Federal tax credit a year later, the $2,500 true net cost difference would more than pay for itself over the first 2-3 years of ownership in saved fuel and 50% better MPG. Think of the long term cost of ownership for someone using the vehicle for 150K miles which the hybrid components are warranted for by Chrysler. As long as they don't need stow and go feature of towing of course.

Regards.
 
#13 ·
#15 ·
A good thread which highlights what are probably the main detriments of the PacHy versus ICE versions:

- Lack of Stow N Go.
I can't see this being resolved (at least on the present platform) and, in fact, is a big reason FCA was able to build a PHEV minivan in the first place, i.e., the space needed for a big battery was already there.

- Lack of trailer towing.
The issue here isn't so much the need for occasinal towing, but just having an OEM hitch for a bike rack. I guess the total cargo capacity of the PacHy is 1100 pounds so, technically, so long as one stays beneath that limit, it's safe.

- Lack of spare tire.
I don't know if they really needed to relocate the battery to the place where a compact spare tire is an option on the ICE. I'd almost be willing to bet it was intentional since eliminating the spare tire is both a cost and weight-saving measure on many new, non-PHEV vehicles.

- Inability to manually toggle between ICE and EV.
This one should be relatively easy to resolve. I don't know why it wasn't incorporated since I presume FCA researched and should have discovered this was a wanted feature on the first Volts (a PHEV with a very similar mode of operation). GM responded and subsequent Volts did, indeed, get the ICE/EV toggle.

These caveats aside, the estimated $2500 premium for the PacHy over the non-PHEV is in line with any other hybrid and, personally, seems worth it.
 
#16 ·
I also found this really interesting interview session of about one hour in length from 12/2016 discussing the revolutionary changes that the PacHy brings to market.

AAH #359 ? Pacifica Goes Electric ? Autoline After Hours
Notice that two FCA executive/experts in the PacHy are interviewed as well as other industry folks:
"SPECIAL GUESTS:
01:25 - Kevin Mets, Chief Engineer, Pacifica Hybrid
13:09 - John Gibson, Global Chief Engineer, Electrified Powertrains, FCA
26:10 – PANEL DISCUSSION: Gary Vasilash, AD&P; Jean Jennings, Facebook.com/JeanKnowsCars; Anton Wahlman, Seeking Alpha; Alisa Priddle, Motor Trend"
 
#17 ·
Hybrid battery and components warranty:
One more clarification I found out after a little more warranty research. It is in your Pacifica Hybrid Warranty Information booklet.

Under 2.5, B: (summarized) the high voltage battery is warranted to the purchaser of the vehicle for either 10 year/150K miles, or 10 year/100K miles depending on if your State adopts the California ZEV regulations. I'm in WA State so the battery is covered for 10year/150K miles. Likely more than I would own the vehicle.

In addition to this in section 5 under Emission Warranty, their are a LOT of items that FCA covers for 10 years including specific to the PacHy "Hybrid Charging System; Hybrid Electric Cooling System; Hybrid Power Inverter System".
So in regards to folks that are concerned about the battery or hybrid components cost, I would think it probably isn't much of an issue for the average original owner out to those warranty limits.
 
#18 ·
I've always wondered how the high voltage battery warranty works. Does the warranty only come into play with a total battery failure? Is it prorated? Lithium batteries lose capacity over time. What happens if the range drops to 15 or 20 miles after 8 years? Is there any warranty coverage? I expect that if you were trying to sell the PacHy after owning it for 8 years and near 100K miles, the value would be affected by whatever a replacement battery costs at the time. Or does it just become an ICE only van?
 
#21 · (Edited)
I can remove the seats easily enough, if I needed the space. Even without removing seats, I can carry full size doors and up to 7' long 4x4 through the middle easily enough. So I really don't see the point of stow`n go not on a passenger van anyways. Again once in a blue moon, I need the extra space like garage cleanup or something, but all the time, every commute, every day I'm glad for not having to go to gas station when I'm already late, I also enjoy the better handling characteristics, the additional quietness and finally I am happy to contribute to slowing down global warming.

I don't follow what's the big deal about stow`n go, at least compared to almost magical no gas for months on end. Stow n go sounds gimmicky. And honestly at the same price point after tax savings, it sounds like a Luddite excuse not to get the PaChy. It only makes sense if one is a building contractor, but then why passenger van instead of truck or commercial van? Or live in an apartment/condos w/o charging station or don't make enough to enjoy the full tax credit - are people just shy to admit this? Or do people just live really far from their work? ie. 60+ miles away to not need the fuel economy, although I can't imagine this explains the much bigger sales of ice Pacifica, given identical price point and still efficiency is efficiency, instead of refueling every 3 days, you can go a whole work week. Lack of towing capacity may be a bit more legit, just a bit, again goes back to what are you doing buying FWD van to tow? All that weight on the wheels not doing the driving sounds like a whole lot of bad idea especially on the slopes, with a tight turn, in inclement weather. Get a BOF truck or rent one. You get a van because you're starting a family life, have little ones, wanna carry bicycles, cooler box, picnic and sporting gears etc inside, instead of outside all are things that can be done w/o stow n' go. In fact I don't see myself stowing very much with the baby seats there. Do you know how much trouble they're to install and remove. If I'm going to go through that trouble, might as well remove the whole seat in 1 go, takes a bit more muscle, but at least I don't have to mess with 100 different straps and clips - ok an exaggeration but not by much.
 
#25 ·
I'm not sure I completely agree with the reason for getting a minivan is family life. For some people (maybe a lot of people), a minivan is an alternative to a small or midsize pickup where the cargo area will be covered and out of the weather, and still have occasional ability to haul people. IOW, just the opposite of a family hauler. In that regard, Stow n'Go would come in quite handy as temporary seating. I sure like the minivan a whole lot more than an SUV for that purpose.

And Stow n'Go has been around for some time, as well (2005), with no sign that it will not be offered in future versisons. Compare that with the short-lived Swivel n'Go system from 2007-10.

Not to mention the idea that, without the Stow n'Go compartments, there might not even have been a PacHy, since those compartments offered a very convenient and easy place to put a good-sized traction battery. I strongly suspect this is the very reason Toyota and Honda aren't offering a hybrid version of the Sienna and Odyssey. Quite simply, it would be way too difficult and expensive to revise the chassis just to accomodate a traction battery.

But it is true that Stow n'Go is cumbersome and the folding seats uncomfortable. The front seats have to be moved to their most forward position, with the seat backs released, as well, to get the compartment doors opened enough for the seats to be folded into. Kids might be okay, but I sure wouldn't want to have to sit in a second row Stow n'Go seat for very long.

I guess there's a valid argument either way. But it sure is nice to have the option.
 
#22 ·
Going back to the op topic, while I don't see nothing but advantages going with PHEV vs ICE, I think the next step to BEV is the one more problematic...

1) Charging out of town is slow or spotty. Especially that last 20%, in winter. Sucks when you're already freezing.
2) For the type of car / size, still ultimately costs too much. Something the size of Pachy that is all BEV is the model X, and that's more than 3x the PACHY in price.
3) Spontaneous road trip is near impossible with BEV, limited charging infrastructure, and some aren't reliable. So you're down to the last 5 miles, the station you thought you were gonna charge at is broken, now what? find a wall outlet and hope? What if you have your family with you? Do you just tell them to stay calm and finish the kitkat?
4) People complain about lugging around a gas engine when you're not using them on short commute, and a dead battery on longer commute, well... what about all the heavy electrolyte and cells in the BEV that hardly gets used in a 30 miles commute? They cost a ton and weigh a ton, and is hardly used in most commute. In a trip their charge rate is wanting and energy density is poor.

Barring some break through to make BEV cheaper, charge faster I don't think we're quite there yet, as much as I want to.

IMO the best BEV is probably something like the bolt, cheap, small, commuter car, that's easy to drive in the city and can go to the next town if necessary, but by no mean can BEV become my primary family car at this point - yet.
 
#23 · (Edited)
The charging infrastructure issues even though relevant now, will be a moot point in future when the big boys enter the field. That will probably be more extensive and comparable to Tesla in charging efficiency/ speed. Not bashing Tesla (I’m still their fan), but the combined clout of the rest of the industry will easily outpace the Tesla advantages in this regard.

I feel that the proposed Chrysler crossover based on Pacifica platform can have more range than Pachy since they can use the more available underbody space in an SUV vs a minivan. May be 100 miles pure electric would not seem like a stretch after all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#29 ·
Don't underestimate the draw of Stow'n'Go. In 2009, it's what ruled out the Toyota and Honda options for me. It's not as though I use it a lot, but when I need it nothing beats it. I don't have to do any planning around reconfiguring my van.

For Chrysler, they traded AWD for it. They wagered--quite correctly--that SnG would be a differentiator for them. For those that haven't used it, it's dead simple. The Advance and Return seats make it pretty easy, now.

The PacHy isn't for everyone, that's for sure. There's considerable risk involved for a buy-and-hold customer. We don't know what the long-term reliability of the hybrid system used is. It's simply too new to know. There's substantially more complexity in its systems, which likely means much higher repair bills down the line. Whatever a person saves in fuel may very well be consumed by repair costs. It's not as though your neighborhood shop is likely to be able to work on it--dealership repair prices should be the expectation.

Even it's "green" credentials are questionable. Sure, it should put somewhat fewer emissions into the atmosphere directly, but as an all-up lifecycle? Batteries have an environmental risk all of their own. If repair becomes uneconomical at a younger age, that's considerably more scrap and materials going into a replacement vehicle.

I totally get why people would chose a conventional solution. I'm also totally enamered with the technology. It's counter to my experiences and expectations, but I'm likely to make a PacHy my next van. It's not the most rational choice (and minivans are, at heart, all about rational choices).
 
#54 · (Edited)
You guys have no clue what ANNOYING is.


Eighteen of the 19 warmest years all have occurred since 2001, with the exception of 1998. The year 2016 ranks as the warmest on record. (Source: NASA/GISS). This research is broadly consistent with similar constructions prepared by the Climatic Research Unit and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/


Here's what is annoying.


If doing something about it, means donating $1,000 to some shady charity or an account under my name, sure - balk away, that's ridiculous.


You're getting paid $1,000+ in savings to drive one of the best vans on the road and incidentally help stave off global warming that is causing a lot of hardships all over the planet (that includes you and your children, and your retirement money) - but 94% of Chrysler buyers are too obstinate or foolish to ever see the light. Now that is hella ANNOYING. So what's your excuse?

I'm not naive to to think one thing will solve a problem hundred+ years in the making. But if government switches to renewable (and it's happening) and consumers use electricity instead of burning fuel when possible, then we can hope to all be in a better place. But this only works, if everyone does their part.
 
#55 ·
I’m starting to see why you need a van. That soapbox isn’t going to carry itself.

Not sure who or what you’re debating, but your attitude likely pushes a lot more people away than you’re probably aware of. If you really want to make your point effectively, learn to be appealing to your audience, rather than repelling them away. You’re obviously a person who is passionate about something—why not put effort into becoming effective at being persuasive?
 
#62 ·
What zealots like Madbot don't understand is how they come across to the average person. Zealots lack any empathy or ability to see another's perspective. With Madbot, he/she might have some mental health issues that play into it, too. The "I know I'm right, why would anyone think differently, there must be something wrong with them, I need to tell them this!" approach just isn't conducive to persuading anyone. You see it in every type of zealot, be it religious, political, or ecological. They simply can't conceive of why someone would make a choice other than the choice they themselves made.

Zealots don't understand how repelling they can be. Someone who might have an inclination to be swayed by a gentler, more reasoned approach might also be turned away by the passion that so often emerges as emotional vitriol. There's no better example than our current US politics--how many people that would have agreed with Clinton were repelled not so much by her, but by her more zealous supporters? So much of persuasiveness is being the most reasonable person in the conversation. Had Clinton's proxies been less arrogant, less vitriolic, and less willing to tell others how stupid anyone who disagreed with them was, we'd likely have a different administration in place. Nobody likes being told that they're stupid or that someone else knows what is best for them.

Same thing goes with PacHys. Telling folks that they're stupid if they don't see why buying one is the only clear choice is repelling. It marginalizes the voice of the person saying it. It's so much more effective to do anything other than attack people. Simple things like sharing positive results and experiences helps to persuade someone. Telling them that you'll beat them over the head ad nauseam with cherry-picked numbers and arguments, all the while projecting arrogance and a condescending tone, isn't likely to make a person like you (or your position) much.

I find myself wondering why Madbot is driving a 5,000lbs van, rather than modifying his lifestyle just a bit further to put action to his values. Plenty of folks manage to live a lifestyle where they don't own a vehicle, don't put more than a small amount into a landfill, and truly try to have a minimal impact through consumption. Some of them don't even rub it in others' faces.

If you want to create change, you've got to do it in ways that work for people. Telling them that they're stupid and that you know what is best for them doesn't get it done.

The polarization is pretty funny, too. The willingness to consider someone an enemy, because they have a different thought process or belief, is highly entertaining. Madbot probably thinks I'm a stupid, ignorant, foolish fellow--all because I find his shrill voice annoying. I'm still quite likely to make a PacHy purchase sometime this year, even though he's doing a masterful job in alienating me.
 
#64 · (Edited)
I find myself wondering why Madbot is driving a 5,000lbs van, rather than modifying his lifestyle just a bit further to put action to his values. Plenty of folks manage to live a lifestyle where they don't own a vehicle, don't put more than a small amount into a landfill, and truly try to have a minimal impact through consumption. Some of them don't even rub it in others' faces.
I live close to station, walk to work 3-4 out of 5 days. Van for family, weekend trip and such. Now, what have you done?

You gotta understand where the vitriol is coming from. There is strong concern about the state the environment is in, so one part of the population is doing what they can to correct it, and another part is callously talking about how miserable their commute is without stow'n go in their 5000+lbs behemoth.

It's a bit like a house/neighborhood, where one person is doing all the house chores to keep the house clean, and the other part continues to pig out. And the one creating the work, wonders why the one doing the work is acting shrill. Well, duh.

Yes it's inconvenient to have to clean up after your own junk, but as long as we all live in the same world and the action you do affects everybody else, it's the RIGHT thing to do. You're now even getting bribed to do so, and still many are pulling their leg. If you have extenuating circumstances, that's a different story, but we can't have 90%+ people with extenuating circumstances.
 
#84 ·
Thread needs to be revived ...

So... it seems that this thread has been dead for 2 months... so in an attempt to not let all the good info shared in multiple different posts, I would like to ask:

Why did you go with the PacHy over the Gasser and or the Honda Odissey and simply what was your Price out the door?

Hope different people can chime in, since I'm looking at getting a Minivan on Memorial Day 2019 ( hoping I can make a decision by then )

Thanks in advance for your comments and or rants (^_^)/
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top