ICE, ICE Baby Isn’t Just for Immigration; American Automakers Pivoting Back to Gasoline-Powered Cars
GM has announced a $4 billion plan to expand production of internal combustion engine (ICE) trucks and SUVs, while Stellantis is bringing back gas-powered engines for the Dodge Charger.
There have been some intriguing signs that American automakers are reembracing internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles.
To begin with, General Motors (GM) recently announced a major initiative to expand production of its ICE vehicles, including SUVs and pickup trucks, in Michigan.
The Detroit giant and many of its U.S. competitors have pulled back on some goals around production of electric vehicles as demand has been weaker than expected. GM’s continued investment in vehicles like the Sierra and Escalade calls into question its plan to end the production of gas-powered cars and trucks by 2035.
The Escalade is currently produced in Arlington, Texas, alongside other large SUVs such as the GMC Yukon, Chevrolet Suburban and Chevy Tahoe. Production at Arlington is expected to remain consistent after the Escalade moves to Michigan, a GM spokesperson said.
The automaker will be adding production of the Silverado and Sierra trucks at its Orion Township, Michigan factory, in addition to existing production in Fort Wayne, Indiana. The gasoline-powered trucks and SUVs are among GM’s biggest money makers.
GM told Reuters the moves would “help meet continued strong customer demand.”
The plant in Orion, Michigan, was slated to be the home of an EV-exclusive production facility.
The move builds on GM’s plans to invest $4 billion in U.S. facilities, which the automaker announced in June. That announcement came after President Donald Trump earlier this year implemented 25% tariffs on imported vehicles and 25% duties on many auto parts imported into the U.S.
It also builds on the automaker’s gas-powered vehicle production.
The Orion Assembly plant in suburban Detroit, which is being retooled for gas products, was expected to be its second electric vehicle-exclusive plant in the U.S.
Earlier this year, Stellantis announced that it’s bringing back internal combustion engines for the Dodge Charger and potentially other models. Apparently, EV’s did not provide the same turbo-charged thrill as the ICE versions.
The return of ICE means that upcoming versions of the Dodge Charger and Challenger will once again pack serious heat under the hood. Expect to see the return of powerful HEMI V8s and perhaps some modernized inline-six turbo options. While Dodge had teased electric versions of these iconic nameplates, the latest reports suggest that internal combustion will remain an option for those who crave the growl and performance that made the Challenger and Charger household names.
On the design front, Dodge is rumored to blend classic muscle car styling with modern performance tech, ensuring that these models not only perform but also look the part. Whether it’s aggressive widebody kits, functional hood scoops, or retro-inspired interiors, the upcoming models promise to be a hit with both old-school gearheads and new-generation muscle car fans.
These moves align with a global trend of automobile makers rethinking their EV production objectives given the loss of tax incentives and continuing weakness in consumer demand that was evident late last year.
…General Motors cut its EV production forecast, and shortly thereafter, rival Ford scrapped its plans for a large three-row all-electric SUV and postponed the launch of its next electric pickup truck. German luxury carmaker Porsche also scaled back its target of selling 80% full/battery powered EVs this summer.
Meanwhile Toyota, the world’s leading automaker by units produced in a year, has adopted a stance of strategic ambiguity by placing faith in the future of EVs but not losing sight of interim production of conventional petrol cars as well as plug-in hybrids, hybrids and fuel cell electric vehicles.
The downgrading of EV targets by Volvo and its automaking rivals bottles down to changing market conditions and a likely misplaced optimism on consumer demand for EVs.
It will be interesting to see exactly how strong the EV market remains, especially as President Donald Trump and his team continue to gut the “Green New Deal” imposed during the Biden eara.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
This correction was inevitable and could be foreseen for anyone with even a passing acquantance with business. I want to know why all the top executives who inexplicably bought into the EV hype have not been summarily fired as yet.
Probably because there is no one to replace them. They all probably bought driven by the dramacrats in power and the progressive mob howling for the green new deal. I’d like to know which of the consulting firms recommending electric cars are going to be fired. They’re useless anyways. Good riddance.
The prior attraction to EVs was driven the fear that, as some future point, ICE engines would be prohibited and therefore, the future would belong to the EV makers (and those that switched in time). Nowhere was there a consumer preference in any numbers to justify such a switch.
I think the attraction started as novelty, and has spread to urban commuter cars. Frankly, I am a little surprised that EVs haven’t taken more market share given the increases in battery size and range in the current generation of lithium batteries.
My guess is that it’s mainly psychology. The average commute is 30 or so miles a day, well within the range of the EVs now on the market. But I think a lot of buyers are conditioned to have “full service” cars even as second vehicles, not special-purpose ones. The next generation of solid-state batteries will remove that deeply embedded selling objection.
I think the problem with EV adoption sluggishness runs a little deeper than just psychological aversion. There are several problems that can be quantified:
First is the higher cost of a new EV compared to its ICE equivalent. There’s also the increasing cost of insurance as EV’s are more likely to be totaled (because of concerns about potential battery damage) and also more expensive to repair if not totaled. We must also include depreciation concerns which are just now starting to be observable. That is: an ICE car can pass through the hands of at least 3 owners before leaving the road permanently. There is NO third-owner market for EV’s for a couple reasons. A third owner is most likely to face battery failure too expensive to repair. They are also less likely to own a home where they can charge. Now, the fact that’s there’s no ‘third-owner-market’ means that ‘second-owners’ must adsorb much more depreciation than with an ICE…
Very, very good points.
I don’t think there’s any good reason for EVs to be more expensive to repair apart from the batteries, but a lot of them are. Especially Teslas. The electronica is finicky, and they have problems with basic crap like suspensions and seals. There aren’t many aftermarket parts, and the service centers are notoriously expensive and the repair delays can be very long.
Also Rivians, which can have tens of thousands of dollars of damage from an ordinary fender bender. Those things are just notorious. This is why I tell people to buy an EV from a real car company. GM’s Bolt had battery issues off the bat, but that got fixed, and the ordinary car stuff is fine. If someone gave me a Tesla, I’d turn right around and sell it.
I agree about resale value. That’s all about the batteries. There is actually a way to measure battery capacity of a used EV to judge its degradation, but I doubt too many dealers are going to know about it. And why tell the buyer of a used one? Up to the buyer to find out. If I were to buy a used EV, I’d go back and re-educate myself on how to measure the degradation.
From what I have gleaned, I think solid state batteries are going to last a lot longer than the current liquid electrolyte ones, so degradation won’t be as much of an issue with them. But I still think EVs are new enough that people are going to have to get to know more about how to judge the health of a battery in a used one regardless of which kind of battery.
Interesting point about buyers of used EVs not being as likely to be homeowners or otherwise be able to charge at home, i.e. at an apartment. Makes intuitive sense to me, but without numbers I can’t guess how important an issue this is. How much does it reduce the size of the resale market, and thus the salvage value? I just don’t know.
There are some workarounds for that one, but I don’t want to put lipstick on the pig either. Besides, no matter what the nerd-level facts might be, the psychology is important. This is especially true with vehicles, which are sold not just in the cortex but in the limbic system. Perception might not be everything, but it’s a big thing.
Recently got an ICE car registration renewal in NJ. It included a nice note that EV owners would get a bonus charge of $250, increasing by $10 per year.
You mean Donald Trump, who held a press conference on the White House lawn with Elon Musk, encouraging Americans to buy Teslas?
I laughed when I saw that, and I am far from a Trump hater.
“I want to know why all the top executives who inexplicably bought into the EV hype have not been summarily fired as yet.”
They were extorted by the federal government.
Same as the ones who bought into the “2.5 gal/min hype.”
Obama and Biden brought them all in and told them that was the way it was going to be then California led the way by banning ICE in the near future. Combine that with tax credits and they went all in on it. Now the pendulum has swung and the people that initially boosted sales of EV’s have all got one. Companies can’t stay in business pushing a product no one wants if the government doesn’t force people to buy it.
GM has not backed off going all EV. The woke chick running it is still all onboard with phasing out gasoline vehicles by 2035. They need to fire her.
The Invisible Hand is going to phase out ICEVs. I don’t think by ’35, but timing is hard. Definitely by ’50, and I think sooner.
Keep in mind that, once General Motors commercialized the diesel electric locomative in the late 1930s, steam locomotives were gone other than as museum pieces by the mid-1950s. Once solid-state batteries come into play at popular prices, the famed S-curve will come into play.
Aside from the manufactures I;m wondering about the 14 or so states which have a 2035 deadline for substantial EV sales. These are led by CA of course. What the zig by the manufacturers means is those EV targets are never going to be met not that they were going to be met anyways, I’m sure our progressive elitist overlords are thinking: “You stupid ignorant unwashed plebians, do what we tell you to do. Now we’re going to look stupid (again) because of you.
If solid state batteries take longer than I think to come online, those mandates will be revised. I think they were ridiculous to begin with, but that’s the Democrats.
Bolshevik Bernie and AOC said the word will end in 2030 if the green new deal wasn’t immediately implemented, We have 3.5 years left. This is long before the 2035 deadline.
We’re doomed.
But then again, since the Left’s sure that we are doomed before anything can be done; why should be bother?
Subotai Bahadur
Those states will kick the can down the road. Why 2035? Because all the current legislators will either be retired, on to other gigs, or be able to confuse their constituents as to who was originally responsible. When 2033 gets here they’ll amend the law to 2045.
This “return to ICE cars” won’t last for long.
Before I explain why, I should say a few things about myself and EVs. First, I own a dinky little Think City that I bought for 70% off when they went bankrupt. Did it not for the environment, but out of pure curiosity. Secondly, I have watched EVs go from liberals to conservatives to liberals, and have felt alone in the sense that, to me, they’ve never been about anything other than engineering.
Thirdly, I’ve been booted off of EV websites by Tesla fanboys for my criticisms of their cars, and for my view — 10 years ago — that EV batteries needed to be at least 60 kW for the cars to be anything other than pure curiosities. Today, you can’t buy a new EV with a battery smaller than that, and most are larger.
Okay, now for the meat.
The big issue with EVs is the low energy density of the batteries. That’s going to be cured very soon, as lithium ion batteries go from liquid to solid electrolytes. The result will be a tripling of energy density per unit of weight, and therefore a tripling of range. Every few months, there are new developments, and they are not hype.
The next issue will be on the manufacturing side. Solid state batteries are harder to make. The first ones will be really expensive, just like the first liquid electrolyte ones were. (As an aside, that’s why Think went belly up. They arrived in the market too soon, and therefore those little plastic cars with the 24 kW batteries listed for $37,000. No one would pay that.)
The solid state manufacturing issues are going to be the “D” of “R&D.” I think we’ll see cheap enough solid state batteries by the mid-’30s, maybe sooner. Besides solving the range issue, these batteries will have much longer lifespans, be much less inclined to catch fire, recharge much faster, and will have a wider ambient operating temperature, making them suitable for all of the climactic conditi0ns.
At that point, the superiority of electric motive power will be visible to everyone. I don’t think you’ll even be able to find a new ICEV passenger vehicle by 2050, and probably quite a bit sooner.
EVs, even that dinky plastic Think City of mine, are smoother, require much less maintenance, and have much better acceleration than ICEVs. The show-stopper now is range and charging time, but when those go away then it’s off to the races. EVs will do what Edison’s lightbulbs did to oil lamps, what LEDs did to incandescents and cathode ray tubes, what cars and trucks did to horses, what diesel-electric locomotives did to steam locomotives, what engines did to sailing ships.
This is ENTIRELY engineering. Nothing else matters. The political crapola surrounding EVs will go away; future generations will look back and laugh and then forget it ever existed, just as today hardly anyone ever knows that gold vs silver money was one of the most hotly debated issues after the Civil War.
For the wingnuts here, let me throw a couple bones.
I laugh my ass off at the idea that EVs are somehow going to save the planet. Even if I thought that “climate change” was anything other than the latest liberal excuse to raise taxes, EVs won’t save much by way of carbon emissi0ns anyway.
Secondly, I take a dim view of consumer-level subsidies of EV purchases. I’m not even sure that, say, government subsidy of solid state battery R&D is warranted, given how far along that is (to nerds like me who read the literature) and how quickly the battery manufacturers in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and mainland China will ride down the manufacturing economy cost curve.
Anyone here who frames this stuff in political terms is a moron. Lots of morons around. Once more, this is ENTIRELY about the engineering. NOTHING else matters. Oh, and finally: Besides that Think City, I own a Ram 3500 pickup with a diesel engine, and a Toyota RAV-4 gasser. The Toyota is okay, but the Ram is my favorite vehicle of the 20 or so that I have owned.
Thus, I am not an “EVangelist,” however it lo0ks. I am in favor of what works, and like my father before me, I have a something of a talent over the years for seeing through the fog and making accurate long-term calls. My sense is that most posters here are at least in their 50s, and many older than that. You might never drive an EV before you die, but the kids sure as hell will. ICEVs will be museum pieces before the turn of the next century.
There are a number of issues that proponents EVs avert their eyes from:
1) The production of EVs is environmentally more detrimental than ICE vehicles. 500,000 pounds of earth have to be moved to produce one EV vs. 30,000 for one ICE vehicle. Also, there is currently no environmentally friendly way of disposing nonfunctional EVs.
2) The production of lithium is centered primarily in China which uses Uighur as slave labor to mine the lithium.
3) The cobalt needed for EVs come from African mines which utilize child labor and generally contaminate the ground water in the vicinity of the mines.
4) There will be a needed increase in electric power production, and that will entail increasing the number of power lines as well as thickening (as increase the diameter) of existing power lines. That will then require the expense of rebuilding the grid which will require more copper than in current lines.
5) The needed increase in electric power because of hypothetically more EVs will require building more fossil fuel plants (primarily gas fired or coal fired) or nuclear plants; wind and solar are totally inadequate.
1. No, the accurate studies show manufacturing environmental effect roughly the same.
2. Australia is #1, Chile #2, China close behind Chile at #3.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_lithium_production
3. I don’t know enough to comment.
4. I have done those numbers before, and posted them here in detail. The increase in electric generation would be 10%-15%, with much of that increase taking place overnight when there is slack capacity. If you want to worry about electricity demand, look at A.I. and crypto “mining.” That said, for fast charging, there’ll have to be big upgrades in voltage to charging stations, more of which will be needed.
5. Agree.
ICE cars do not need rare earth elements. They are called rare earth because a whole lot of earth has to be mined to get a usable amount of the element. It is thus implausible to me that the environmental effects are roughly the same. Also, while Chile and Australia may be mining lithium, I think China
(continued) still has a lock on the market. I don’t disagree about AI and crypto, but that will be on top of the needed power for EVs.
Finally, the very fact that EVs have to be subsidized to be competitive ot mandated, is proof positive they are an inferior product compared to ICE vehicles.
I don’t think EVs need to be subsidized, required, or coerced, and I especially don’t think they will need any of that once solid state batteries are out there at acceptable prices. I think they’ll sell themselves.
You may want to get your information from somewhere other than wikipedia. For example, 1 ton of lithium production which produces enough for 100 batteries requires 2,000,000 tons of water and the resulting pollution. Production of rare earth minerals needed for the batteries has devastating environmental consequences far surpassing that for the production of traditional ice vehicles. The reason the left loves ev’s and damn the environment is that the production takes place hidden in third world countries.
Are you saying that Australia isn’t the largest lithium supplier and that Chile isn’t #2? That’s what I used Wikipedia for. The rest of what you wrote might or might not be true, but has NO bearing on my use of Wikipedia to give the order of lithium producers. Apples and oranges.
Perhaps they are referring to this–
1. No, the accurate studies show manufacturing environmental effect roughly the same.
which appeared to use the same Wikipedia cite.
Was that simply an unsupported statement, backed with nothing? An opinion?
” … which appeared to use the same Wikipedia cite … ”
The Wikipedia citation never mentioned anything about the envir0nmental impact of EV manufacturing vs. ICEV manufacturing. If diver64 thought that the citation applied to point #1, he’s not much of a reader to put it mildly. Nor are you.
Eat these sources
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/lithium-production-by-country
https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/the-worlds-lithium-is-mined-in-just-a-handful-of-countries
https://www.jagranjosh.com/general-knowledge/list-of-top-countries-of-production-and-reserves-of-lithium-1820000637-1
No EV can match the thunder of a 440 wedge head or a 426 hemi at wide open throttle. You just can’t put duals and glasspacks on an electric motor.
.
True, EVs don’t thunder. Under acceleration, they whine like a liberal suburban woman. The pro quo on that one is that they are much faster off the line.
There’s a lot to unpack with the Electric Dodge Charger story.
Here’s a 25 May 25 extract from the owners’ club…it’s pretty typical
[QUOTE=”CNortham, post: 7690, member: 535″]
I just joined the Brick Club. After watching a ton of videos and reading forums I too am waiting for the tow truck to take my Charger Daytona 2024 Scat Pack to the dealer. All the same warnings. Dead car!
This is the second time it’s happened but for whatever reason first time it eventually started. Worth noting both times it happened after completing a charge to 80%.
Also I was previously called by the dealer to bring the car in for an essential battery update amongst other updates in March. What was meant to take 1 hour took a whole day into the next day.
I have never been sent any over-the-air updates and have checked back online repeatedly (inputting my VIN). Nothing. And I know I don’t have the latest software because i don’t have the Stealth option in the EV Sound settings (seen in multiple forums and videos).
Absolutely love the car but man this is rough. Two service trips in two months. Now they sent the wrong tow truck so I wait for another to arrive. To top it off they’ve made me fork out $15 out of pocket because the closest dealership is more than 2 miles away. Classy.
[USER=260]@DodgeCares[/USER]
[/QUOTE]
A fellow Mopar head! I’ll add in the small block 340 to your list. I was happy to hear the new CEO of Stellantis is also entertaining a return to NASCAR.
They are much faster, though. A Tesla Plaid is crazy fast but as you say, just doesn’t sound like a 396.
The buyers who care about the sound of the engine are a stub end of the market. If you think that’s going to matter, you’re a 50- or 60-something guy who isn’t getting enough at home. LOL
a few more maga admins and america will have crushed lefty
The direction that the auto industry has gone has been almost entirely driven by government regulations, from CAFE standards to EV mandates and subsidies.
Get the regulatory thumb/10 ton weight off the market place and see what the consumer actually wants.
Exactly!! The auto industry has been adversely affected by non automotive people in government.
To wit: for the gain of insubstantial gains in fuel economy, the automakers have had to go beyond the realm of common sense and practicality. The trend to relatively tiny, highly stressed turbocharged engines, stop/start tech, and cylinder deactivation have all made once reliable vehicles much less so. Even Toyota, with its recent recall of 100K+ Tundra engines, when they replaced the ultra reliable 5.7L V8 with a twin turboed V6. Bleeding edge tech replacing stone solid reliability. GM with its failing cylinder deactivation. Ford with its self destructing “Ecoboost” engines, etc., etc. All of them are producing marginally reliable transmissions of up to 10 speeds, or worse, the hideous CVT, all to meet their EPA certifications.
Physics puts a limit on what you can squeeze out of a gallon of fuel. Parlor games designed to eke out a fraction of an MPG to meet some arbitrary gov’t mandate is insanity. The best solution are hybrids, which can juggle energy transfers to maximize fuel economy and reclaim energy normally lost to braking and low speed starts, but is still reliant on batteries and extra complication that “Bob” at your local repair shop is not prepared to handle. Hence, you are off to the Stealership.
This country has been reliant on the freedom and mobility the personal vehicle provides, and the left is determined to put us in prole busses and crime ridden subways. High speed rail? See Commufornica’s boondoggle.
EVs just aren’t there yet. Sure, they’ve gotten a lot better, and they can produce 100% of their torque at 0 rpm, but the fire hazards, extra weight, questionable sources for lithium and rare earth minerals, limited infrastructure to support EVs, and the biggest problem of all: charging times. Even Tesla Superchargers still take an order of magnitude longer to charge than a fill up at the gas station. And you can’t have AAA bring a gallon of electrons to your energy depleted vehicle on the side of the road. EVs might make sense in congested cities, but for rural drivers, it is a losing proposition.
Let the car manufacturers supply the cars that customers want. Our “betters” don’t know squat about cars.
Toyota bet big on hybrids and have been proven right. It’s the best way to go imho. EV mandates were concocted by the same leftists living in coastal cities as all the other bad idea’s that just don’t work in fly over. We are heading home on vacation and the nearest charger to my vacation place is 50 miles away. What good does that do me?
Can you write more about those “Ecoboost” engines? I’ve always been curious, but not curious enough to dive into the deep end of the pool. What’s different or unique; why does Ford call them “Ecoboost”; and what’s wrong with them?
Tesla is the best selling car in the world.
People don’t want crappy electric cars.
I didn’t believe your Tesla statement so looked it up. Your right, in 2024 Tesla’s were the worlds best selling cars. Your also right, some people will buy electric cars but they won’t buy crappy electric cars and the demand for the good ones without government subsidies remains to be seen
Tesla’s Model Y was the top selling car in 2023, but that’s only because Tesla only makes a few models. Tesla as a company isn’t even in the top 10. Toyota and Volkswagen are consistently the top manufacturers, but watch of for China. Their companies will be #1 soon enough. Tesla has been a leader in EVs, but that’s only because they were first.
https://roadgenius.com/cars/statistics/sales-by-manufacturer/
https://www.factorywarrantylist.com/car-sales-by-manufacturer.html
https://seasia.co/infographic/top-10-world-car-manufacturers-ranking-2023
https://autothusiasts.com/10-biggest-car-manufacturers-in-the-world-2025/
https://luxe.digital/lifestyle/garage/largest-car-companies/
And in new er news out of Australia, apparently CCP made vehicles will comprise 43% of Australian imports by 2035 – they were 0% in 2015. CCP vehicles already comprise 65% of “battery electric vehicles” and with the current Left government pushing for Net Zero, ICEVs will become either loss makers thanks to government imposed ‘climate pollution’ penalties, or opt for hybrid technology like Toyota promotes.
The turbocharged straight 6 has been planned for the new Chargers since the beginning and they actually run very well. The hemi is only speculative for now.
Hmm. I bought myself a Mustang Mach-E Premium EV as a retirement present, and am thrilled with everything about it. (I had a ’67 Mustang in my 20s and regretted for decades selling)
I also have an ICE Jag that I *totally* love, and will *never* give up the testicle-torsion thrill of driving. This is always the number one.
That said, there is lots of cool and thrill to the Mach-E, and I love not paying for petrol and the 0-60 in 3 sec. odd. Its 375-mile range & AWD is great for my urban and rural needs.
So I’m in the ‘don’t see the need for hostility’ camp. (Except the government can bugger off with the subsidies and coercion to push EVs, solidly agree with need for hostility there :–)
US auto makers have big problems. They’re not pivoting back to ‘cars.’ They’re pivoting back to ICE SUVs/Trucks. Several years ago, in a fit of absolutely stupidity, the Big 3 collectively decided to cede the production of CARS to the foreign manufacturers. How did that turn out?
Stellantis is in dire financial shape (again) after losing $3B in the first 6-months of this year and falling to the #6 auto maker in the US. GM now only makes two sedans (both Cadillac) and Ford sells no sedans and only makes only one coup – the Mustang – and its long-term future is uncertain. In 1965, Ford sold more than 500K Mustangs. In 2024, it was 44K and through the first 6-months of this year, that number < 20K. It's difficult for any automotive company to make money on a 'mass-produced' automobile that is selling < 50K vehicles a year.
Toyota is now the #2 automaker, just 200K vehicles a year behind GM. Ford is #3 with Hyundai catching it quickly. Stellantis is #6 and about to be caught by Nissan. Tesla is all the way down at #11, if anyone is wondering. Yes, they sell the most EVs. But, they only sell -300K cars a year out of the 8M that are sold in the US every year.