The $25k car is going extinct?

You can still buy a new subcompact car (like a Renault Clio or Skoda Fabia) in Europe for under 20k EUR.

The more interesting question is why these cars disappeared in the US. And while many of the factors discussed here are true for both EU and US (inflation, interest rates, manufacturer profit margins etc) I am surprised no one mentioned the 'SUV loophole' of US regulations that effectively boosted the SUVs (off-road vehicles are classified as non-passenger automobiles with everything that entails, notably much less stringent emission standards) and made the small cars unprofitable to make in comparison.

> I am surprised no one mentioned the 'SUV loophole' of US regulations that effectively boosted the SUVs (off-road vehicles are classified as non-passenger automobiles with everything that entails, notably much less stringent emission standards) and made the small cars unprofitable to make in comparison.

This has become the irrelevant part because "does it have an electric motor in the powertrain" has become more important to fuel economy than vehicle size. There are hybrid SUVs that get better MPG than non-hybrid sedans, to say nothing of the full electric ones.

Which is another reason the average price is increasing. Hybrids have a lower TCO even though they have a higher initial purchase price. People who can do the math realize that paying more up front for a hybrid or full electric is paying less long-term. But then the market for lower priced new cars declines, because the people who can afford a new car can afford to pay a little extra for long-term savings and most of the people who can't afford to do that were buying used to begin with.

>People who can do the math realize that paying more up front for a hybrid or full electric is paying less long-term.

Can they? In long term maintainability decides. And hybrids usually has it with maintainability pretty bad. Large area of potential breaking, expansive spare parts usually with strong vendor-lock.

Hybrids are very costly in maintainability, even if you are privileged elite that buys hybrid and in two years resell it and buy brand new car, even then hybrids looses comparatively big percent of its original cost.

So people that buys hybrids, usually CAN NOT do the math.

Toyota hybrids are much cheaper to maintain.

- No engine belts

- No starter

- No alternator

- No transmission(1)

- No torque converter

- No turbochargers

- Regenerative braking can significantly reduce brake pad wear

Edit: - AWD is an electric motor on the rear axle. No driveshaft or transfer case required.

As long as you drive it regularly and keep up with scheduled maintenance, you don't have to do anything for well over 100,000 miles.

Replacing the traction battery after 10~15 years is cheaper than the additional maintenance required for regular cars.

1: Yes, it has an “e-CVT”. Which is just a set of fixed planetary gears. All “shifting” is done through varying the power output of two electric motor-generators.

CVTs are generally less reliable than traditional transmissions, especially under heavy loads. You get better mpg in exchange. You don’t have an alternator, but you have a much more expensive electric motor. You don’t have a turbocharger, but in exchange you lose performance at highway speeds. So like most engineering problems, it’s all about tradeoffs.

Despite the name, "eCVT"s are mechanically unrelated to the CVTs used in gasoline cars. They are mechanically similar to a differential, and have extremely low failure rates.

Thanks for clarifying! It does seem like the planetary design would be more reliable (but the point able heavy loads may still apply)