By on January 17, 2019

2017 Hyundai Ioniq Electric, Image: Steph Willems

That asterisk exists in the headline because the Smart EQ Fortwo is not a vehicle many families would consider useful as a lone driveway denizen. With two seats and a range of — wait for it — 58 miles, the Smart brand’s city runabout manages to be more impractical that the late, unloved Mitsubishi i-MiEV. A difficult feat!

Moving up the practicality ladder, EV buyers looking for better range and a backseat now have a new option for low-priced motoring. Assuming, that is, that they live in one of the 13 states that signed on to California’s emissions laws.

We’ve tested the Hyundai Ioniq Electric not once, but twice. The model first appeared on North American shores in late 2016, offering a driving range that placed it on par with Volkswagen’s e-Golf and just ahead of the soon-to-be-defunct first-gen Nissan Leaf.

Hyundai relegated American Ioniq Electrics to the green-happy state of California, and maintained that there was no news to share on a possible expansion of availability when I contacted the company a number of months back. Well, things changed. According to CarsDirect, Ioniq Electrics are now appearing on lots in Massachusetts and Maryland.

Derek Joyce, Hyundai’s senior manager of product and advanced powertrain PR, Senior Manager Product and Advanced Powertrain PR, said the automaker is now shipping plug-in and electric Ioniqs to all CARB states. “2018 retail sales were mostly CARB states for both and we plan to continue that trend as we seek more supply to meet demand beyond,” he said.

2017 Hyundai Ioniq Electric, Image: Steph Willems

Life moves fast in the EV realm, and the Ioniq Electric’s 124-mile range was soon eclipsed by the 151-mile, second-gen Leaf, which appeared for the 2018 model year. Hyundai execs are no doubt pissed to see Nissan keep the price of its base Leaf static for 2019, as it means there’s just a $195 difference between the entry-level models.

Before a federal tax credit of $7,500 that applies to both cars, the 2019 Ioniq Electric starts at $30,700 after destination, though a customer rebate now shows it sitting at $29,815. A 2019 Leaf S, meanwhile, stickers for $30,885 after destination, and offers the buyer 27 extra miles of range. Every mile counts in the EV realm, especially at the low end.

Still, Hyundai’s offering can claim to be the cheapest EV with a backseat in the states of California, New Jersey, Connecticut, Vermont, Washington, Maine, New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maryland, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Mexico.

In day to day driving, this writer found the spartan little hatchback surprisingly liveable, though it lost points for its fairly hard and shapeless driver’s seat. While the comparatively limited range was also a knock, it’s fine for commuting and exurban jaunts. The 3,164-pound car’s 215 lb-ft of torque also elicits a symphony of squeals from the low-drag front rubber. Not necessarily a bad thing.

For lessees, CarsDirect warns of a different range issue: mileage allowance. The base 2019 Ioniq Electric leases at $239 per month for 36 months with $2,500 due at signing, but dealers can restrict your annual mileage to anywhere between 10,000 and 15,000 miles.

It took a while for Hyundai to allow the little EV to spread its legs, and new competition now threatens its appeal. And not just Nissan, either. The automaker’s Kona Electric crossover goes on sale in California this month, offering 258 miles of driving range for a starting price of $37,495 (after destination, but before the federal tax credit), with sales then migrating to states that follow California’s ZEV laws.

[Images: Steph Willems/TTAC]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

15 Comments on “The Country’s Cheapest Normal* Electric Breaks Out of California...”


  • avatar
    eggsalad

    There’s still a gap of $4500 to step up from the plug-in hybrid Ioniq and the full EV. That strikes me as a pretty compelling argument for the plug-in.

    • 0 avatar
      Kendahl

      That a plug-in hybrid isn’t range limited is a pretty compelling argument all by itself.

      In my opinion, the Chevy Bolt is mostly greenwashing. A crossover version of the Volt would have been a far more practical vehicle.

  • avatar
    eggsalad

    Oh, and the FIAT 500e has a back seat. Here’s one for $27k after rebate:

    https://www.fiatusaofglendale.com/new/FIAT/2018-FIAT-500e-139b785e0a0e0ae962e47c652dd069b9.htm

  • avatar
    NECarGuy

    I’m guessing you meant for it to read, “Stretch it’s legs”, not “Spread it’s legs”. Those are definitely much different analogies!

  • avatar
    Add Lightness

    ‘manages to be more impractical that the late, unloved Mitsubishi i-MiEV. A difficult feat’

    I always figured a very shiny Raptor or similar vehicle that never goes off of paved roads has to be the most impractical vehicle one could drive in the city.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    After cross-shopping the Model 3, Bolt, and Leaf 2.0, I got my Ioniq EV from Maryland in early November (15k miles/year lease). So I’m not sure what is ‘new’ about this news. It’s a very livable car.

  • avatar
    Oberkanone

    Can electric vehicles be successful without government regulations or government incentives involved?
    CARB states are an artificial market.

  • avatar
    HotPotato

    You’re right: CARB states are an artificial market.

    But cars themselves exist within and because of an artificial market. Think about the huge amount of “government incentives” in terms of road building, traffic enforcement, parking, public health costs from pollution, and so on. Nothing was natural or inevitable about the car as we know it taking over from trolleys and trains; government policy made that possible, and government policy can make the car as we’ll know it next possible too.

    Think too about all the externalities that are *not* accounted for in the price of gas: the increased rates of disease and destruction that inevitably accompany mining, refining, transporting, dispensing, and burning gasoline. I suppose instead of tax refunds for EVs, we could increase the gas tax high enough to recover the cost of mitigating all those externalities. I’m sure $10 a gallon gas would do more to push people into EVs than any amount of tax refunds or carpool lane access, but it would also be a disaster for politicians, since people like to pretend their behavior has no consequences: my doctor can waste all the breath he wants telling me that cheese will kill me, but when I see it all I can think is “delicious, must eat.”

    Given all that, the CARB solution — requiring manufacturers to offer EVs, and bribing drivers to try them — seems much more pleasant. It serves the environment in a way that increases vehicle choice and lowers costs, instead of in a way that restricts driving and increases costs. We could certainly do worse.

    • 0 avatar
      Oberkanone

      We could do worse is not a platform I can support. I find no merit in your argument.

      • 0 avatar
        aquaticko

        Is this going to devolve into the whole “we shoulda gone back to gold” argument?

        I’m hoping that Hyundai sees fit to install the Kona’s big battery pack in the Ioniq, unlikely though that is.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      @hotpotato, You aren’t wrong on your points like gasoline refining being a dirty business, however you gloss over some of the dirtyness of battery production. First off, We are currently a net exporter of oil. Most of what we now consume comes from first world economies close to home. The metals involved in making batteries are mined in countries typically that are not known for human rights or stout environmental regulations. Building more batteries will make it worse unless we can source the materials from more developed nations. Its a step above diamonds in Africa right now though.

      ICE engines could make the switch to natural gas as well which would clean them up significantly all the way from supplier to tailpipe.

      Then there is the obligatory how is your electricity generated. Mine is clean, safe nuclear by in large so not bad.

      Anyway, you aren’t wrong on your assertions, but electric as we sit isn’t a free ride. I think it will be the future, but the future is still the future, not the now. But they are usable for an increasingly large subset of drivers, and the future is not so distant in this regard as it has been. I think the next gen cars will be good enough with respect to capacity, charge times, and purchase price for 90 percent of drivers (we are pretty much there on the first 2).


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • kyjosu: The insurance industry wasn’t happy when NHTSA rolled back the 5mph no damage standard. Insurance carriers...
  • jammyjo: Redesign the outside, and that will get people into the showrooms. The big grills, slash and gash, fake...
  • kyjosu: There are supposedly aerodynamic benefits that make the spoiler on the top of the rear hatch practical. My...
  • baconator: Yeah, I *really* don’t understand why there’s a CLA “4-door coupe” and also an...
  • DeadWeight: “According to a new report, GM’s recent streamlining push saw company brass attempt to sell [their...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States