Does the £17k Volkswagen ID 1 really represent progress?
Range of "at least" 155 miles could mean the ID 1 can't go as far as the previous e-Up
There's a lot to like about the Volkswagen ID 1. In an age when cars are forever growing bigger, here's a proper city car that's right-sized and looks great.
A mainstream car brand committing to the A-segment is something to celebrate.
But there's one big concern: with a promised range of 'at least' 155 miles, it's possible the ID 1 will go on sale in 2027 with basically the same range as offered by later versions of its spiritual predecessor, the e-Up. That doesn't feel like progress.
To be fair, the ID 1 promises to be larger, more practical, more powerful and around £3000 cheaper than a new e-Up would have set you back in 2023 (and the e-Up benefitted from a government grant). Those are hard-won gains, and they haven't been easy. Still, it's a stark illustration of how making affordable electric cars is a huge challenge.
EV batteries are slowly – glacially – getting cheaper, but they remain by far the most expensive part of a new EV.
Volkswagen was determined to hit its €20,000 (£17,000) target for the ID 1, and the best way to do that is to right-size the battery for its intended urban use case.
Trouble is, that requires buyers to accept a potentially unpalatable compromise. A range of 155 miles might be fine for the everyday, but what about those occasional weekend trips away?
History suggests buyers are unlikely to compromise with their main or only car.
It's concerning that, like the Renault Zoe, Nissan Leaf and e-Up in the early days of mass-market EVs a decade or so back, the likes of the ID 1 and Dacia Spring could find most success as budget second cars – a daily runaround that allows you to keep your bigger, posher car for the weekend.
Which is great, but that means instead of widening access to electric mobility, the new wave of cheap EV is really providing further benefit to more affluent buyers who can afford two cars. Single-car owners on a budget who don't want to compromise will stick with petrol.
None of that is Volkswagen's fault: it can produce cheaper EVs, but it can't control who buys them. And in an age when so many rivals have given up on smaller, more affordable cars, credit to it for persisting in a category that is no longer a huge profit driver. It's absolutely doing the right thing.
But this is a reminder that there's a long way to go to making truly usable everyday EVs that are genuinely affordable – and that, at present, even the drive towards affordable EVs risks benefitting those who are better off.
]]>
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
3 hours ago
- Miami Herald
3 Things That Prove Car Buyers Don't Want EVs to Be Weird
The first mass-market electric vehicle (EV) was the Nissan LEAF, introduced in 2010, and it seems Nissan's goal was to separate the LEAF from gas-powered models by looking strange. The solid proboscis front fascia, the amorphous headlights that crept up to the A-pillars, the odd round rear haunches, and the protruding butt all made for an almost alien-like craft. And that was just the exterior. For more than a decade, automakers have tried to make electric vehicles stand out by making them… well, weird. Early EVs often looked and felt like they were from another planet. It was all part of a strategy: If you're going to drive the car of the future, shouldn't it look futuristic? But a funny thing happened on the way to mass EV adoption: car buyers balked. Turns out, most people don't want to drive a pod on wheels or relearn how to operate a vehicle just because it's electric. What consumers really want are EVs that fit seamlessly into their lives, not ones that scream, "I'm different!" Here are three things that prove car buyers want EVs to be familiar, rather than looking like weird rolling spacecraft. In the early EV days, standing out was the name of the game. It wasn't just the LEAF that worked too hard to be noticed. The BMW i3 was easily the brand's least fetching model with some of the worst bodywork we've ever laid eyes on. Sure, it looked like nothing else on the road, but that's not always a good thing. The original Toyota Prius-while not an EV but a hybrid pioneer-looked like Paul Bunyan was insulted by its environmental efforts and stepped on the nose of a once normal-looking subcompact sedan. But as more buyers entered the EV market, especially mainstream consumers who weren't early adopters or tech nerds, it became clear that outlandish designs were a turnoff. Today, many of the best-selling EVs are the ones that look like regular cars. They prove you can ditch the gas without ditching good taste. Take the Ford F-150 Lightning, for example. It looks nearly identical to the gas-powered F-150, the best-selling vehicle in America for decades. The typical bystander can't distinguish between the two, and that's no accident. Ford specifically chose to preserve the familiar shape and utility of the truck because it knows its customers don't want to drive a spaceship; they want to haul lumber, go camping, and tow boats, just like a gas truck owner. The Hyundai Ioniq 6 may look sleek and futuristic, but the Ioniq 5 and Kia EV6-both of which sell well-strike a balance between distinctive and practical, without being too radical. Even Tesla, a brand known for innovation, has stuck with relatively minimalist, subdued exterior styling on its most successful models, the Model 3 and Model Y. They're clean and modern, yes, but not weird. Okay, so there's the Cybertruck, but we all know how that's going. Then there's the 3rd-generation Nissan LEAF, a conventional-looking modern crossover that shed all of its old weirdness. If that's not enough proof, consider the new crop of EVs: the Honda Prologue, the restyled Toyota bZ, the Chevy Blazer EV, the Hummer EV, and the Hyundai Ioniq 5. These are EVs meant to look like real cars, and that's the hot trend now. If you think that some of the cabins in EVs were annoying and strange, you're not alone. One of the more frustrating trends in early EVs was the push to reinvent the wheel-literally and figuratively-when it came to controls. Carmakers, perhaps trying to emphasize that EVs were different, often went overboard with gimmicky interfaces. The first Nissan LEAF's bizarre interior looked like it came out of a '90s B sci-fi flick with its doughy white steering wheel and the orb-like shifter. It's the kind of stuff that makes the ovular 1996 Ford Taurus cabin look conventional. It also seems that numerous EV manufacturers thought their vehicles should have a tablet-sized center screen that controlled everything from the radio to the air vents. How about when Tesla eliminated stalks and buttons altogether in favor of a touch-and-swipe interface? For a while, EV cabins felt more like iPads on wheels than traditional cars. The result for drivers was often frustration with the unfamiliarity and the steep learning curve. Minimalism isn't always a good thing, tantamount to eyeglass frames that clamp on the nose with no temples to grab. Even Tesla's controversial decision to remove traditional turn signal stalks in the updated Model S and Model X has drawn widespread criticism. Many drivers are simply not ready to rewire their muscle memory every time they drive. Now, there appear to be more EVs that utilize physical controls, relatively standard shift knobs, and ergonomics that contribute to intuitive operation. The Chevy Blazer EV is one of them. It has big screens, yes, but switchgear to complement it. Hyundai and Kia have smartly kept a mix of physical and digital controls, allowing for a user experience that feels both modern and comfortable. The interior of the Honda Prologue is about as conventional as they get. If you were to get inside without knowing it's an EV, you'd never guess by looking at the dash, center stack, and center console. It has a normal-looking steering wheel, big stalk controls, and plenty of buttons and knobs for audio and climate. The lesson here is simple: car buyers might be open to new powertrains, but they don't want to relearn how to drive. Familiarity builds comfort, and comfort builds sales. Another clue that buyers want familiarity in their EVs is the transition away from names that were meant to set EVs apart from gas models. The Mercedes-Benz EQS and the Volkswagen ID series stand out the most. Both naming conventions seemed to have backfired. The EQS sedan and SUV don't carry the same panache as the S-Class or GLS-Class, as much as the electric versions try to follow in the footsteps of their gas-powered stablemates. VW's ID series is just plain awkward, especially when paired with non-words like and ID.2all. Even Toyota misfired with its hard-to-remember bZ4X name. Once you could finally memorize the name, you realized you didn't know which letters were uppercase or lowercase. Nobody should have to think about that. Now, it's just called bZ, and Toyota might do away with that shortly. Smarter name choices by manufacturers included the Ford Mustang Mach-E, Hyundai Kona Electric, and the Chevrolet Blazer EV, all recognized model names with electric labels attached to them. It's not just ditching what's strange, it's capitalizing on what has already worked. In the EV race, it has taken only a little over a decade for automakers to figure out that departing too much from what's familiar is bad and that radical reinvention isn't always the way to win hearts or wallets. As EVs begin to feel more like the cars people already love-visually, ergonomically, and functionally-they're proof that making the kind of improvements people care about results in better sales. Of course, EV buyers don't want their vehicles to be boring. They just don't want them to be weird. Give them something familiar, with all the benefits of electric driving and none of the alienation, and they're on board. Onlookers might say, "That's electric?" because they can't tell the difference, and that just might be the best kind of compliment. Copyright 2025 The Arena Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Homewi$e: How student loans affect homeowners, potential buyers?
DES MOINES, Iowa — On this week's episode of Homewi$e Amanda Krenz and mortgage expert Tyler Osby discuss how student loan repayment can affect potential homebuyers and current homeowners. Past Episodes: Homewi$e: How student loans affect homeowners, potential buyers? Homewi$e: What you need to know about closing on a home Homewi$e: Who pays the realtors? Homewi$e: Credit check can trigger series of events, what to know Homewi$e: What is a gift of equity, what can it do for you? Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Could Buying Tesla Stock Today Set You Up for Life?
Most of the value in Tesla lies in its robotaxi and full self-driving offerings. The company starts with a significant advantage over its competition, and is about to launch its robotaxi concept. Tesla is a speculative growth stock, but it has numerous advantages over the typical growth stock. These 10 stocks could mint the next wave of millionaires › For many investors, buying Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) has already set them up for life, but will that be true for anyone newly buying into the stock now? Here's a look at what you need to know before buying the stock. Tesla is an unusual stock, known to most investors primarily as the leading electric vehicle (EV) company, but that isn't the primary value driver of the stock. Indeed, if you look at Tesla solely as a car company, you would likely avoid the stock. Let's put it this way: Tesla currently trades at a price-to-earnings multiple of 192, compared to single-digit multiples at car companies like Ford Motor Company and General Motors. The valuation discrepancy doesn't stem from Tesla's superior profit margins or its leading position in the electric vehicle market. Instead, it comes down to Tesla being able to do something that rival car companies haven't yet done or have abandoned trying to do: launch a robotaxi service. General Motors has already abandoned robotaxi development, and Ford (which had planned to have a robotaxi service in place by 2021) ended its investment (alongside Volkswagen) in robotaxi company Argo AI in 2022. Volkswagen plans to launch its robotaxi service in 2026. So, if Tesla's valuation isn't justified in terms of being a highly successful electric vehicle company, then how should it be viewed? The following key points apply, and they make Tesla a highly attractive stock for the speculative end of your portfolio: The value in Tesla lies in its robotaxi business; this is not purely a car company stock, or even an electric vehicle stock, and its valuation reflects that. The reliance on robotaxi/full self-driving (FSD) makes it a speculative growth stock. Tesla's installed base of vehicles gives it significant advantages over Waymo and others. Tesla is not your average speculative growth stock; it holds significant advantages over typical growth stocks. The robotaxi concept and the FSD that powers it are potentially a huge earnings driver for Tesla. One of Tesla's most vocal and visible supporters, Cathie Wood's Ark Invest, which expected a valuation of $2,600 per share for Tesla in 2029, relies on a model that prescribes 88% of the company's value from robotaxis, compared to just 9% from EVs. The opportunity to earn recurring revenue from selling unsupervised FSD subscriptions to Tesla owners wanting to use their vehicles as robotaxis is massive, as is the potential to generate recurring revenue on a ride-per-mile basis from robotaxis. Moreover, Tesla plans to mass-produce its dedicated robotaxi vehicle, Cybercab, next year. That said, the robotaxi launch hasn't even taken place yet (it's scheduled for June 12 in Austin), and it will only be on a small scale initially. As such, Tesla is a speculative growth stock, an observation that suggests Tesla stock should be filed on a long list of highly speculative investments to consider on a rainy day. However, there are differences -- in fact, many differences -- between Tesla and typical growth stocks. First, speculative growth stocks are usually not established leaders in the core business that underpins their growth. The Model Y is not only the best-selling electric vehicle (EV) in the world, but it's also the best-selling car in the world. In other words, Tesla already has a compelling brand and is the market leader in the growth area of the auto market. Second, this is not a struggling small-cap stock desperately trying to establish brand recognition and promote its new technology to a sceptical marketplace. Waymo has offered a robotaxi service since 2018, and there is little doubt that consumers want to use robotaxis. Third, Tesla isn't a growth stock struggling with its finances and seeking a larger partner to invest, which would dilute existing shareholders' claims on future cash flows. A quick look at its most recent balance sheet reveals $37 billion in cash and equivalents, alongside $7.5 billion in debt and finance leases, resulting in a net cash position of $29.5 billion. Finally, Tesla's position as a cost-effective automaker with the capacity and scale to ramp up production and the vehicles on the road means it can produce robotaxis (whether Cybercab or existing Tesla models) to support growth, and it has a vast bank of data from Tesla vehicles to use to improve its FSD capability. All told, Tesla is speculative because its robotaxis haven't even been launched yet, there's a lot more certainty around the company than in most growth stocks. That makes it worth buying for the risk-seeking end of a portfolio. Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you'll want to hear this. On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a 'Double Down' stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you're worried you've already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it's too late. And the numbers speak for themselves: Nvidia: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009, you'd have $367,516!* Apple: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, you'd have $38,712!* Netflix: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2004, you'd have $669,517!* Right now, we're issuing 'Double Down' alerts for three incredible companies, available when you join , and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon.*Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Lee Samaha has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Tesla. The Motley Fool recommends General Motors and Volkswagen Ag. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Could Buying Tesla Stock Today Set You Up for Life? was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
