Green Car Congress  
Home Topics Archives About Contact  RSS Headlines

« Bosch Backs Tidal Power Project | Main | Goldman Sachs Invests C$30 Million in Cellulosic Ethanol Provider »

Print this post

Used Toyota RAV4-EV Sells for $67,300 on eBay

1 May 2006

Rav4
The RAV4-EV

A 2003 Toyota RAV4-EV auctioned on eBay went to the winning bidder for a price of $67,300.

Toyota began sales of the RAV4 Electric Vehicle (EV) to California retail customers in March 2002 after five years of leasing to utilities and other corporations that operate vehicle fleets. Toyota then ceased production of EV in 2003.

When the RAV4-EVs went on sale to the public in 2002, they carried a manufacturers suggested retail price (MSRP) of $42,000. However, a $9,000 incentive from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and a $4,000 IRS credit could bring the price below $30,000.

Based on the first-generation RAV4 platform, the RAV4-EV combines a 50kW (67hp) electric motor that develops 190 Nm of torque with a 288V NiMH battery to yield a projected driving range of 85-100 miles per charge and an electronically controlled top speed of 78 mph.

(The sellers said that they pulled in 100 miles—90% on the freeway—per charge.)

The car on auction had 59,000 miles on it just had its battery pack replaced under warranty.

In its official statement on the cessation of production of the RAV4-EV, Toyota said:

Toyota believes that in order to have a positive environmental impact, a large number of consumers must embrace the technology. In order for this to happen, the vehicle must meet the lifestyle needs of, and be affordable to, the mass market. Although a significant marketing effort was undertaken for the RAV4-EV, we only sold about 300 vehicles a year.

Toyota was preparing in 2005 to crush the remaining RAV4-EVs coming off of lease, but yielded to a campaign launched by DontCrush.Com to keep the EVs on the road.

May 1, 2006 in Electric (Battery) | Permalink | Comments (56) | TrackBack (1)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef00d834267da453ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Used Toyota RAV4-EV Sells for $67,300 on eBay:

» Used Toyota RAV4-EV Sells for $67,300 on eBay from
A used RAV4 all electric vehicle recently was sold for $63,300 on ebay. It had 53,000 miles on it. Who says there is no market for all electric vehicles? [Read More]

Comments

Hogwash. Current gasoline vehicles, at their 15% tank-to-wheels efficiency, deliver less than 90 GW. This is about 20% of total average electrical generation, and could easily be handled off-peak. If we need more fuel, we could generate this juice by burning oil in 60%-efficient CCGT's instead of 15%-efficient gas drivetrains until we can build more nuclear or wind plants.

Your usual claim is that a Prius requires .25 kWh/mile, correct? As a gas-powered vehicle, it gets 55 mpg.

Contrast that with the current US fleet average of 20 mpg. So, using those relative gasoline efficiencies as a guide to what a US fleet conversion would consume, you're talking about an average of .69 kWh/mile. Americans drove around 2.7 trillion vehicle-miles last year, which at .69 kWh/mile equates to 1.8 trillion kWh. Electrical supply in 2004 was 3.7 trillion kWh, or about twice that - as I said.

Population increases will push up vehicle-miles, and the fact that electricity is cheap as a fuel will deter efficiency improvements in the overall US fleet, if a conversion to EVs were to occur. Expensive fuel drives efficiency improvements, like it or not.

I'm not saying it's not doable, but people need to understand the scale of things being discussed.

Rafael Seidl said: "Regular hybrids make sense for stop-and-go traffic." Wrong. At least with the hybrids oriented for mileage, like prius, insight. With 3 dollar gas, maybe 5 dollars a gallen in a couple years as demand goes up up up, the insight driver is laughing all the way, even if he has the car a decade and has to change a battery pack. They make sense in the city or freeway.

You also said: "PHEVs are niche concepts for vehicles used almost exclusively for very short trips at low speeds. EVs are dead and should stay that way."

Huh???? You are obviously very confused about plug in hybrid's, and show a strong bias against EV's. Where do you come from man, Detroit headquarters?

And Joseph Willemssen, one of the main arguments you employ in your reply to engineer Poet is fundamentally flawed. Fred was originally talking about EV's, not hybrids which still use gas. That is the context of your original reply to Fred. Your comparison between a prius versus regular vehicle mileage average is useless here: it doesn't address what Engineer Poet was saying. Sorry. :)

Fred and Engineer Poet are right. While *right* now EV's are not so feasible for most, we are on the threshold, and in 2-5 years we will be seeing all kinds of wonderful EV's rise to prominance. It just depends on who's all willing to make them and break with established infrastructure. Many will buy them if they would only be made efficiently (not some 5000 pound "big auto producer" variety.) Look at the article on Firefly's new battery posted May 2, and see the comments.

And Joseph Willemssen, one of the main arguments you employ in your reply to engineer Poet is fundamentally flawed. Fred was originally talking about EV's, not hybrids which still use gas. That is the context of your original reply to Fred. Your comparison between a prius versus regular vehicle mileage average is useless here: it doesn't address what Engineer Poet was saying. Sorry. :)

Let me clarify, since you didn't understand what I said.

EP regularly tells us the Prius in all-electric mode uses 0.25 kWh/mile, so I start by assuming that to be correct. Since we don't know what the average US light vehicle would consume in all-electric mode (since very little of the fleet can run in all-electric mode), all we can do is guess what it would be by comparing the Prius as a whole to the light vehicle average as a whole (55 mpg v 20 mpg) to get a sense of the relative efficiency difference between them. That then means we can get an estimate of how much electrical energy per mile would be required to move this theoretical "average light vehicle". Take 0.25 and multiply it by (55/20) and one gets 0.69 kWh/mile. Then you multiply that by the number of vehicle-miles last year (2.7 trillion) and that then tells you how much electrical energy would be required to move the US light vehicle fleet in a given year. It ends up being about 50% of our total current electricity consumption.

Or, we can take a vehicle which currently is rated at 20 mpg (eg, the 2WD Dodge Caravan) and you can tell me how much electrical energy per mile would be required to maintain its current performance level with a 55 city/45 highway split and 300 mile range. If it's less than 0.69 kWh/mile, please give me the correct figure.

Okay, Joseph W., thanks for clarifying what you meant. I can misunderstand people at times too. :)

Yet the math about electric vehicles taking half our grid power sounds off. It will take forever for our society to be a the point where we all drive electric cars, for starters. Heck, there's still people on this forum even who don't like their future for some weird reason. Secondly, as has been pointed out, there is a huge surplus of electricity at night, when the *majority* will recharge. Sure there will be some during day, but the majority will be at night. Infrastructure can gradually grow to meet demand over the years if it needs to, but probably won't even need to.

And someone (can't remember who) said no house can handle 600 volts at 100 amps for minutes at a time. Just wanted to comment that while new batteries *can* be recharged in minutes, that doesn't necessarily mean they *have to* be charged up in minutes, with a charging system that also handles a slower charge. If there are restraints to your house's/neighborhood's grid system, you will just have to live within them and take longer, perhaps hours after all, to recharge the battery. Yet, I could easily live with that still.

If all you naysayers can get over your decadent lifstyles and realize that electric cars take a different mentality, we could all benefit from this technology. Instead of worying about the "Unexpected" long distance emergency vancation scenario, you focus on the daily driving most Americans do, you will see that this technology is actually very practical. Even if batteries need to be replaced and you do the math, the cost of such an expense drawn out over a period of the life of the batteries would still cost less than a fossil fuel vehicle. But if "Convenience" of refueling is your only gripe because you forgot to plug your car in to recharge it, then maybe you should consider a bicycle. Hey it doesn't need any recharging, nor refueling, and you would definitly kick the oil habit! We also wouldn't have to breath your polution!

If all you naysayers can get over your decadent lifstyles and realize that electric cars take a different mentality, we could all benefit from this technology. Instead of worying about the "Unexpected" long distance emergency vancation scenario, you focus on the daily driving most Americans do, you will see that this technology is actually very practical. Even if batteries need to be replaced and you do the math, the cost of such an expense drawn out over a period of the life of the batteries would still cost less than a fossil fuel vehicle. But if "Convenience" of refueling is your only gripe because you forgot to plug your car in to recharge it, then maybe you should consider a bicycle. Hey it doesn't need any recharging, nor refueling, and you would definitly kick the oil habit! We also wouldn't have to breath your polution!

It's best to assume that most people here are very conscious about their choices with respect to how they affect the environment. The question isn't about whether any of us would be willing to make compromises for the sake of improving the environment (as I'm sure many of us do already many times over in our daily lives), it's whether a given proposed solution is scalable, considering the realities of how people actually are -- not how we want them to be.

Playing the "moral superiority" card may be internally satisfying, but change rarely occurs because people are guilted into it, especially when what's being proposed is less easy than the current paradigm.

To chalk that up by calling people "naysayers" is really below the belt and unwarranted. We're all trying to weigh the different options, and some of us want to see all the pluses and minuses of each direction/choice, as opposed to simply focusing on what boosters wish to emphasize. Because I can assure you that society as a whole is going to be a whole lot more harsh about specific change than people who care about the environment and already used to modifying their behavior, even if it takes more effort.

I agree that the amount of electricity required for BEV operation would greatly exceed today's grid capacity. Using the earlier calculation, a typical 24 vehicle "gas station" would use 24x600kw = 14.4 MW. A few of these stations would use as much power as a small city. For this reason, I think the BEV world, should it ever occur, would depend on fuel cells - not in the cars, but at the refueling station. This has the additional advantage of being able to use the cogenerated heat for a useful purpose - and the refueling stations would be part of a building, campus, etc.
All the people that think all this charging is going to be done overnight need to remember that surveys have shown that about 15 to 20 percent of all cars are parked overnight where there is no reasonable prospect of electrical service - this was in some studies I read perhaps 5 years ago. Also, think of the vehicles you see in gas stations mid-afternoon. These are light commercial vehicles on the go all day that will need to be recharged prior to overnight. In addition, 120 volts times 15 amps is a maximum of 1.8 kwh of charge per hour plugged in, so there will be perhaps 6 or 7 miles of range added to the battery per hour of charge in a home that has not been modified for faster charging. There will be a lot of charging going on during the day, before we even talk about vacationers driving BEVs.
Finally, does anyone know the breakout on the approximately 3 trillion miles travelled in the US each year between light vehicles and vehicles that have no prospect of being BEVs, such as class 8 (greater than 33,000 pound) trucks?
Thank you in advance.

Bill, here's some relevant data:
http://cta.ornl.gov/data/tedb24/Edition24_Chapter03.pdf

The have "Combination Trucks" accounting for about 5% of vehicle-miles. Light vehicles and motorcycles account for about 92% of vehicle-miles. (see Table 3.5)

Vehicle stock data is in Table 3.4.

The extra grid capacity issue is one of the most common objections heard to the electric-car idea--it is assumed that we must have enormously more grid capacity to pull it off than we do now. Yet the only actual calculation I have seen puts the excess at perhaps 30% of existing capacity--significant, but hardly overwhelming in the long run. Generating capacity is forecast to rise by more than that over the next 50 years, anyway. And everyone seems to assume that the gasoline-to-electric transition would happen instantaneously. No credible real-world scenario would envisage this. Any transition would probably take decades, more than enough for utilities to keep ahead of demand.

As our electric use grows they will need to add more power plants to satisfy daytime demand. There will be even more nighttime power available as time goes on. Only a huge transition to electric cars would change that, and we would have plenty of time to see the change and build the plants. Hopefully solar, wind and nuclear electricity.

good arguements, i still think i'd be pretty happy with PHEV honda fit and filling the gas tank every few months or so since it only turns on when it thinks its really efficent to do so (over 50 km/h) which is pretty good in my book. ANy speed lower and the ICE is a real gas hog.

Perhaps many of you already know about these but...

http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/04/technology/business2_wrightspeed/index.htm

http://wrightspeed.com

http://www.teslamotors.com/index.html

Fred Sands, PhD

Go here http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm

Compair the 2001 Rav4 EV to a 2001 prius.

They give estimates on MPG on both vehicles, as well as # of tons of GHG produced per yr.

I was surprised to see that the prius was rated at 3.8 tons per yr where the rav4 was actually higher at 4.2 tons.

I find that pretty funny.


At $67,300 used, with a $26,000 battery you can't claim it is cheaper, and from the looks of it, you might not be able to claim it is any cleaner either.

Hmm... less than 59,000 miles and the batteries died... and it costs $26,000 to replace them...

That gives the RAV4-EV a cost of around $2 per mile.
On the other hand, take say a Chevy Suburban that gets 9 miles per gallon and costs $3 per gallon to fill at today's prices: Cost per mile = 33 cents. The worst fuel efficent vehicle on the road is SIX TIMES cheaper than an electric vehicle to drive. Let alone all the outstanding issues of range, speed, etc.

Do the same thing with a standard small car that gets 30mpg : 10 cents per mile.

Oops... not $2 per mile, rather make that 50 cents.
Still more expensive than the Suburban - just not by as much.

earthlings will argue about anything

Sure Jeff... I guess you do not care or worry about pollution and global warming.

By the way, the RAV4 was never intended to be an EV, or better, it wasn't designed from scratch as EV, but rather it was an adapation based on the CARB mandate of the late 90'. Also, the technology [batteries, electric motor, on-board charger] are now obsolete like a an old 2000? PC.

So, there's no comparison between EV and ICE vehicles when it comes to tail-pipe emissions, noise pollution and global warming. [Especially, when you mention anything made in Detroit such as those pieces of crap SUV like Tahoe, Suburban, Denali, Expedition, Explorer, Navigator, Aviator, Hummers and the likes.

Americans should be proud of driving non-polluting vehicles and try to do their best to help save the planet [Please watch: To Hot NOT To Handle on HBO] and forget all about those uneccesary ugly [SUV] that 99% of drivers never once drive them off-road like they are supposed to be used.

Great Electric Vehicles are coming...and they are going to be [eventually] pretty cheap, while gasoline will still go up and up...and all those silly SUV drivers will have to fork a good $100+ to fill up the tank!

I am patientiously waiting and laughing out loud...
The early adopters and eco-conscious people will teach other drivers that life is/can be beautiful without a drop of gasoline!

Brace for impact... 'cause it's coming and fast!!!

Fred Sands, Ph.D.

Fred we don't all have Ph.D paychecks, we are forced to pick from the choices we can afford.

Last I checked a 2001 suburban, a 2001 gas 2wd rav 4 and even a new suburban was much less than $67,300

While we all care about the planet but environmental impact is rather intangeable so while we'd all drive fuel cell / electic / solar / wind powered vehicles ...if there were any (in quantity)

we pick a vehicle than we can afford and meets most of our needs... if it does not do those 2 things it is of no use to us.

The Rav 4 EV is is not a viable option for many people.

It is however a big green status symbol, it can be used to raise awareness of alternatives to gasoline or it can be used as a "look how much better than you I am"

"The early adopters and eco-conscious people will teach other drivers that life is/can be beautiful without a drop of gasoline!"

"the technology [batteries, electric motor, on-board charger] are now obsolete like a an old 2000? PC."

Why would I want to be an early adopter if it does not save me $, is "dirtier" than cheaper more practical alternatives and becomes "obsolete" quickly?

No one is going to learn anything from you because no one wants to listen to someone who is condeming them for their actions and runs around with a "I'm better than you" attitude.

It does not do any good to condem people for driving an SUV when there is not an EV, or hybrid or otherwise "better" option that has the same capabilities.

"Highlander Hybrid in 2WD or 4WD-i is not designed to be driven off road."

Highlander max towing capacity 3500 lbs, I could not find towing capacity for the hybrid excape, the regular has a 3500 lb capacity as well.

"...99% of drivers never once drive them off-road like they are supposed to be used."

How is that any different than people who buy sports cars and never take them on the race track? What is the point of a tripple didget top speed when the max speed limit I have ever seen in the states is 75.

What good is tighter handeling when abrupt manuvers are more likely to get you into an accident?

Regardless of the energy source (gasoline, diesel, electric) an economy car designed to haul people and light cargo will use less than a large vehicle designed to haul heavy cargo.

Please note however that large does not mean inefficent,
a semi does more work with less fuel than even the highest mpg hybrid.

40,000 lbs at 6 mpg still beats 3000 lbs at 51 mpg.

"Great Electric Vehicles are coming...and they are going to be [eventually] pretty cheap..."

Yay, but that does not help me now.

Better electric vehicles have been "a few yrs off" for the past 100 yrs... show me results.
Show me the problems, be honest, hiding them does noting to improve the technology.

We are all in this together, pointing the finger at the other guy only slows us down and prevents us fromg getting where we need to go.

Ok RI,

First of all, the $67+K price is a "special" sale on Ebay. Did you read the posting?

Yes, you're right sport cars are also to be thrown in the SUV fire because they do run at best at 11 mpg.
However, there thousands of more SUVs than SC.
Anway, you're missing the point and you are hiding behind the "payload" excuse that apparently every SUV and truck ownner is so concerned....yeah right!
How many thousands of SUVs and pick-up trucks have I seen never hauling a single thing. I do not disagree that [see the new H1 posting] some people needs heavy vehicles to pull heavy wheights, but then those are called contractors and not "Jennifer" from Beverly Hills... or Brittney from Topeka for that matter.

The problem with the US driver mentality is old and it is time to change it. The famous say "the bigger-the better" does not work anymore, [never worked for decades], and people in this country must do their part in saving the planet by reducing tail-pipe pollution as well as stop importation of blodd stained petroleum!

FS

PS: My annual pay as [Ph.D.] has nothing to do with buying a more conscious/eco friendly car. By the way, the new 2007 Yukon Denali cost [approx] $30K just as much as a Toyota Prius. Happy now?

Pardon the typos...too much caffeine!

FS

I am a new reader of this site so pardon my lack of knowledge on this subject. As a potential and ready consumer of an EV, is there any hope for EVs in our future? Is anyone out there trying to develop a ground up EV design that has a chance of succeeding? If the major auto companies would stop competing with each other so much and begin thinking about the common good, maybe all of their bright auto designers along with those from smaller start-up companies could do something good for mankind and propel us into a new age of transportation to extend and eventually replace the current oil based one. They make a big deal out of how the American and European joint car companies efforts have made better autos which goes faster, are safer,etc. I have to think there are new cheaper less polluting battery and motor technologies just waiting to be discovered if we/they collectively put our mind to it. With the billions we spend on other less productive projects, everyone can name, we could do something good for ourselves and our Earth.

has anybody heard about the ev from miles automotive they have it covered over with a blanket on their web site.supposedly the release date is sometime in 2007.I drive a 2006 prius its one of the best cars i've ever had.i've been a muscle car guy my whole life.I still own three but i'm looking to buying an ev

"Sports cars run at best at 11 MPG". I can't let that go without comment. My Mazdaspeed Miata easily gets in the mid-twenties with spirited driving. Even a 400 HP Corvette gets EPA figures of 18 MPG city, 28 MPG highway. A Porsche 911 Turbo (480 HP) is 18/25. Your assertion is simply incorrect. Also, consider that sports cars are typically used for enjoyment on weekends and not as daily drivers.

Mark

Most of you boys are silly. I am a PhD astrophysicist who also happens to be a hot chick (while my name is an alias, all of the above is true), and I will gladly spend my modest paycheck (low hundreds) on an EV - I am shopping now. It cracks me up to hear all the testosterone-fueled yammering about needing big trucks. Just remember, all you boys driving your supercharged-bright-red-honkin-humongous-SUV-pickup-trucks-with-eight-wheels: This is what women (esp. hot chicks with half a brain) think when we see you pull up next to us on the street - first, we think that the giant pile of metal makes you look SOOOO LITTLE! Second, it makes you look like a complete a$$hole who is compensating for his complete lack of security in his masculinity. REAL men drive logical vehicles, and they drive them logically as well - no road rage!

A good friend of mine who is a psychologist (female) makes a point of telling male drivers in the giant trucks, "Oh, you look so LITTLE in your big truck! Like a little boy!"

If more men realized how assinine they really looked in these freakish piles of gas-wasting blood-stained-oil-wasters, we'd have 18 different standardized EVs on the market by now. How much of the American addiction to oil is about insecure males with testosterone poisoning? Granted, there are lots of soccer moms who think they really need 8,000 lbs of metal to ferry the spoiled kids around, but just look at the marketing for SUVs. Clearly, they're targeted to make couch potato American men feel like He Man. Ha!

Dr. Sands, it is wonderful to hear your news about the new models in '08!

I'm going to be a horrible snob now and claim that there is in fact a reason why most of you boys don't have PhDs in science, and why you don't support EVs now: you're just not that smart.

-Annie, saving her pennies for the Tesla

I have been driving an electric car for 7 months now and I can tell you I have been laughing ALL the way yo the bank since I started driving ALL battery electric! In the past 7 months I have spent $20 for gas in my Prius. My electric vehicle might not be for everybody but it sure works for me!

Hey, ONCE you go EV there is NO looking back!

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Green Car Congress © 2017 BioAge Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Home | BioAge Group