Chinese brands are crushing the EV race right now, and Geely just unveiled a 197-inch-long sedan with a claimed 341 miles of electric range for the equivalent of $24,720 (were it coming to the States, which it isn’t). It’s called the Galaxy E8, and while it seems like a relatively understated bargain at first glance, there are a handful of other things to consider.
Right off the rip, this isn’t a particularly good-looking car, but it doesn’t matter. Buying one of these for its looks is like reading Playboy for the articles, or watching Michael Bay films for the product placement. Aside from a handful of small details, this isn’t a substantially more irritating car to look at than, say, a Nissan Altima. However, you already know I’m going to talk about some of those styling nitpicks.
While the upward-sweeping character line on the lower doors does echo the rising greenhouse, it doesn’t flow into anything else. Meanwhile, the hockey stick-like crease in each front door doesn’t harmonize with other exterior elements, instead blending into the upward-sweeping lower character line in a manner suggesting the lead designer knows what surfacing is but hasn’t quite nailed how to go about it. The bottom line? This thing is perfectly inoffensive to look at, like a McDonald’s hash brown. You don’t buy into the styling, but you still get the car for other reasons.
Perhaps the interior’s a good reason. A gargantuan 45-inch OLED display dominates the entire dashboard, which will make some of you readers check out and some of you drool uncontrollably. Although the relative lack of redundant physical controls is definitely a turn-off, just remember that this is a $25,000 large sedan. While a lot can be said about how tech ages, on a cheaper car like this, how much do you really care?
Despite its tiny price tag, the Galaxy E8 is based on the same SEA platform that’s underneath the Polestar 4 and Zeekr 001. Keep in mind, the handsome Volvo EX30 and the so-ugly-you’ll-want-to-squash-it Zeekr X ride on a substantially shorter SEA-E platform variant, so don’t think of those cars as direct next-of-kin to the Galaxy E8. Still, this Geely platform means that even the base model runs on a 400-volt architecture, can allegedly dash from zero-to-60 mph in a pube-width under six seconds, and is claimed to have a total range of 341 miles of roadway before needing a charge.
There are just two problems: The name and the price. Customers know the name “Galaxy” well, but not from cars. Sure, Ford had the Galaxie in North America and the Galaxy people carrier in Europe, but the immediate association is with Samsung’s Galaxy family of smartphones and tablets. Yeah, that’s an uphill battle if ever I’ve seen one. Then there’s the price tag. Don’t get me wrong, a sub-$25,000 starting price sounds amazing, but it might be due to some heavy subsidization.
According to Energy Storage News, the average battery pack price in China clocked in at $126 per kWh late last year. That should mean this electric sedan includes roughly $7,800 worth of battery pack aboard its base model. Take that number away, and Geely should have $16,960 per car to cover bodywork, tooling, lighting, suspension, brakes, wheels, tires, airbags, electronics, seating and upholstery, styling, engineering, software development, homologation, branding, and some level of profit margin. In a car of this size and position, that sounds relatively tough, doesn’t it? Well, it’s easier to understand when you look at what’s been propping up cheap Chinese EVs.
It’s no secret that the Chinese EV industry has benefitted from billions of yuan in subsidies, and Nikkei Asia reports that companies like BYD, SAIC, and battery manufacturer CATL received benefits in the first half of 2023 worth hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars. What for? Well, it’s rather vague. As Nikkei Asia reports, some companies claim auto-related costs, but out of SAIC, BYD, and Chongqing Changan Automobile, “None of the three automakers responded to Nikkei Asia’s queries regarding the subsidies.”
Unsurprisingly, these subsidies have raised some eyebrows, with the European Union investigating several Chinese automakers including Geely, maker of the Galaxy E8, for potential dumping. Back in October, Geely issued a statement, and a relatively thin one at that:
Geely Holdings follows all laws, regulations and supports fair market competition globally.
Geely has been a careful guardian of iconic European automotive brands for over a decade, its continued investments have enhanced European and Chinese industrial capacity, creating substantial industrial synergies.
Geely Holdings regards free trade, including for EVs, as beneficial for all consumers and in helping to combat global climate change.”
Hmm. There doesn’t seem to be any explicit denying going on here. Or much implicit denying. Either way, those headline-earning cheap EV prices you see coming out of China aren’t apples to apples. Sure, the cost of manufacturing is lower there, but manufacturing costs are a relatively small piece of the EV development process, and extensive subsidies are a way of potentially passing savings onto consumers. Those astonishing price tags, like the sub-$25,000 figure for the Galaxy E8, might not be organic or sustainable in the face of anti-dumping laws, so don’t feel too bad that they aren’t here yet.
(Photo credits: Geely)
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
-
Tesla Slashes Range Figures For Multiple Models, But Why?
-
Why Some Automakers Are Waffling On Electric Cars
-
Lee Iacocca Saved Chrysler, Then He Became An E-Bike Pioneer
-
VW’s Prototype Solid-State Battery Keeps 95% Of Range Over 300,000 Miles In Test
-
The Audi Q8 e-tron Edition Dakar Comes From The Factory With Eight Freaking Tires
Got a hot tip? Send it to us here. Or check out the stories on our homepage.
I want to know its drag coefficient. I couldn’t find info on that.
There was a Chinese produced prototype called the GAC Eno.146, a sedan with a 0.146 drag coefficient. I’d like to see an affordable, low-cost vehicle with that sort of drag, both EV and ICE, because the value proposition would be astounding. Imagine a basic-bitch non-hybrid 4-cylinder ICE that all passengers can fully stretch their legs out in and have plenty of room, that gets 60+ mpg highway, or an EV with a tiny 30 kWh battery pack that still gets 200 miles range highway on U.S. roads, both under $20k. Both are possible, and once an American sat in something like this, I think it would have instant appeal.
With all of the tech fetishism and features almost all modern vehicles have, the vast majority have also lost a basic level of comfort present in the big cars of the 1970s, in spite of ballooning in size, and if you want it, currently automakers are making you PAY for it with overpriced truck/SUV/CUV offerings.
The big questions, at least for me, would be safety and handling. Does this thing meet our safety standards?
But why all the concern about appearances? I really care very little about appearances but I do care about ergonomics and performance and safety etc. Perceived beauty is only sheet metal deep. I would be happy with a streamlined checker cab if it excelled in the other dimensions.
‘It looks fine from the fun seat’
-my take
I will somewhat echo what others have said here, that range is wildly optimistic and you should convert it to EPA’s range in the article. Yes it’s an estimate but it would help to compare it to domestic EV’s.
Can we get an article explaining the cars available in China and their prices? Not just the electric ones but the gasoline and diesel ones too. In the last week I saw Andrew Collins’s article claiming that if Americans could buy a new EV for the cost of a BYD Seagull (~$11k), they probably would and found it hard to disagree, but then I thought “If you can get an EV for $11k, how cheap can you get a gas car for?” and “What are all the prices when all the subsidies are unwound?” Turns out it’s kind of hard figure out as an English speaker since at the bottom end of the market they have REALLY cheap, non-highway-capable glorified golf carts for like $2000. They flood the top level search results, and that’s not a useful comparison.
These low cost cars surely have compromises, but just think how many people might find a path off the debt treadmill if they could have a new car with a warranty for $7k.
As much as you and i would like it to happen,very few americans would buy the seagull.Almost everyone is buying a mid to high priced vehicle by choice.
The Seagull isn’t coming to Oz like the rest of the BYD’s Ocean group. But if it did then they themselves admitted it’d be closer to AU$25k. And that’s not where they want to be because they want the margins that come from the angle of ‘affordable luxury’.
We had the Chevy Spark for $11k and very few people bought it, though I agree that the super budget end of the market shouldn’t be ignored by automakers
According to Energy Storage News, the average battery pack price in China clocked in at $126 per kWh late last year. That should mean this electric sedan includes roughly $7,800 worth of battery pack aboard its base model. Take that number away, and Geely should have $16,960 per car to cover bodywork, tooling, lighting, suspension, brakes, wheels, tires, airbags, electronics, seating and upholstery, styling, engineering, software development, homologation, branding, and some level of profit margin. In a car of this size and position, that sounds relatively tough, doesn’t it? Well, it’s easier to understand when you look at what’s been propping up cheap Chinese EVs.
Um, lack of labor costs? Or maybe lack of massive executive compensation?
Good ol slave labor and absence of STOCK PRICE STOCK PRICE STOCK PRICE STOCK PRICE STOCK PRICE STOCK PRICE STOCK PRICE STOCK PRICE STOCK PRICE STOCK PRICE culture
Real 1st world labor would likely add under $3,000 to the cost.
The car doesn’t appear to be all that streamlined either. I suspect the range numbers are inflated by the gentle parameters of the Chinese driving cycle. It’s probably closer to 250 miles range on U.S. interstates.
In any event, this car shows the legacy automakers COULD be offering us affordable EVs if they really wanted to. They simply choose not to.
Well duh, how would that help their stock price?
With regard to legacy U.S. automakers, lack of affordable long-range EVs, and of affordable cars in general that are also desirable, will likely tank their stock prices in the long term, prompting them to request government bailouts at taxpayer expense.
People can only juggle so much debt around for so long until the sales drop off a cliff… and we haven’t even factored in any economic or energy crisis that may transpire for a myriad of reasons that could upend everything.
People can only juggle so much debt around for so long until the sales drop off a cliff… and we haven’t even factored in any economic or energy crisis that may transpire for a myriad of reasons that could upend everything.
And if that were that to happen the Fed will buy up the bad company debt ala QE and print more money to cover it.
Rinse, repeat.
Until the currency hyperinflates to worthlessness, and no one can buy anything anymore, at least…
If you’ve got a wheelbarrow full of Benjamins I’ve got half a loaf of stale bread to sell you.
We might end up with $100 trillion paper bills, ala Zimbabwe.
If we do you can kiss not just our economy but that of the entire world goodbye.
As a wise man once said “plant potatoes. Or yams.”
Add in more or less “free” land and highly subsidized building/infrastructure. When I was in China we visited what will be a new contract manufacturer who is established and now moving to a new building. New building is way oversized, on the outskirts of a small city (new buildings in an office park, with active farming in between – until the next company arrives), new roads/bridges being built to get folks from surrounding cities in faster, etc. From what I gathered, the land is more or less “free” and the gov subsidies work out to be about 30-40% of the building cost. We are talking a 4-5 building campus, a few 5 story buildings, roughly 400k sq ft, cost quite a bit under $100m which would probably be what you need to build 1/4 of it in the Boston area. I am sure there are some economic impact targets they need to meet but they are aggressive.
It’s not an amazing looking car but it’s also not hideous like say, a beaver tooth BMW. They kind of phoned it in on the interior design by just slapping a screen on and calling it a day.
Depending on how much a lease payment would be I’d consider this with my main hesitation being what appears to be an atrocious UX for climate control, etc.
Given the fact that the vast majority of Chinese car design is an amalgamation of other designs, it doesn’t surprise me that this car looks kinda like a Chinese VW Arteon with an overbite.
The Arteon is a rare design triumph for VW and I won’t forgive them for killing it.
I don’t find the styling offensive – I’d rather look at this than a Camry with it’s nonsensical and haphazard “styling”
As for the Ginza at Night Billboard dash – I could do without that, but programming is cheaper than tooling buttons and switches I hear.
So the Chinese subsidize their car industry – Who cares?
The US subsizes our car industry too – just at point of sale rather than to the manufacturer directly. As well as subsidizing the fuel it takes to run our old ICE cars for the past 50-some-odd years.
And if the US had subsidized our EV/Battery tech/manufacturing years ago – we wouldn’t be looking at cheap Chinese batteries but cheap US batteries, as the tech was developed here and sold to the long-term thinking Chinese when the demand wasn’t yet there.
But hey – Wars to be fought over Oil and Religion and stuff.
You had 2 out of three right!
The 3rd… i.e. direct US Govt. Help most certainly has been happeningat least as far back as WWII and probably farther.
The US Fed. (And state) governments give Plenty of direct subsidies to US automakers. At the federal level there are a plethora of tax breaks, muiti-billions in grants for R and D and Sweetheart deal loans that are announced every few years at the least.
At the state level there are similar huge tax breaks and other incentives any time any need plant is whispered about being built or major plant retrofit needed.
This of course is not unique to the US or China either. Each auto producing country (or at least everyone I can think of) does this. Italy, France, Most definitely Germany, Japan, Korea…
This actually would be a great article (or book) idea. i.e. compare/contrast the extent to which world governments subsidize automobile manufacturers
Furthermore, compare the subsidies in countries without auto manufacturing and see where they focus their spending.
Where can I buy some subsidized fuel? Where I am 1/3 of the price of gas is taxes.
Lucky you. With a pump price of 172 cent per liter, we pay 95.50c tax per 76.50c petrol.
Average of 184 US cents per litre in the UK.
Although my local station sells the 97RON I have to use for 233 cents per litre, which is $8.82/US gallon.
I’ve no idea how much of that is tax because the tax is a flat tax of 52.95p per litre plus 20% on top (yes, that’s a percentage tax paid on the tax you already paid).
I think you win, you are looking at about 80 US cents/L tax which is over 50%, sorry.
Do you live in the US?
All our fuel is subsidized by our Federal US Government.
That’s why it’s at least 1/3 cheaper than most places on the planet.
The state fuel taxes are largely to pay for our roads & mass transit.
I think something to state is that the range of 341 miles from the Chinese economy cycle is not equivalent to 341 miles of Euro or EPA cycles. CLTC is probably one of the most optimistic cycles in regards to economy and isn’t realistic at all.
I asked before and I’ll ask again. Will someone write a deep dive into the differences of these testing cycles? @matthardigree @davidtracy
Ignoring all the obvious China-related issues with this, it looks fine? Why the massive front overhang though? I get annoyed seeing any electric car with bad proportions; not having to fit an ICE in the front should prevent this.
I would say that interior looks fine but the screen is an absolute horror show.
I was thinking the same, but figured it might be for aero reasons. Looking at the skateboard chassis though, it appears the batteries take up quite a bit of room where the steering box would go, so maybe the overhang is part of accommodating the geometry?
Word is these huge screens are all going to be replaced by chatbots soon, so this might be short term pain. /s
I’m not usually on of the hysterical luddites around these parts, but I actually would refuse to buy something operated by voice command. There is little I hate more than having to give out terse commands to consumer electronics. And there is nothing I hate more than having to listen to my MIL struggling to get Alexa to do something.
Sarcasm received, yet just the idea of that triggered me, haha.
Lets see how it does in U.S. crash tests.
Probably OK, this company does own Volvo.
Or possibly not ok. You see how much front overhang there is on the car? I wonder if that was to allow for longer front crash rails.
If they added the ugly to include better crash protection then presumably the crash protection is ok?
There are plenty of Chinese cars that crash just fine (that sounds bad, but you know what I mean). If they want to engineer a global car it’ll be made to global crash standards.
This car looks like they designed a car-shaped car, and then decided it looked too plain and added some lines that have nothing to do with the design of the car.
Welcome to every car designed this millennium.
‘in a pube-width under six seconds”
Man, we Americans really will use anything other than metric…
And it still looks better than most Lexuseseses.
The funny thing is Thomas is Canadian and presumably understands metric.
He thinks distance is a unit of time. I’m not sure he’s even a scientist.
It brakes from 3,801,615,206 pube-widths per hour to 0 pube-widths per hour in about 2,040,000 pube-widths I hear, which is pretty competitive for the class.
Why maintain that horrid looking FWD dash to axle ratio if it, well… isn’t? There’s nothing up there in front of the front wheels, why push them so far back?
Also, that Geely press release reads to me like “Wow, look at those iconic, legacy European brands we own – Volvo, Lotus… sure would be a shame if something happened to them. Anyway… any more questions about dumping?”
Wow I didn’t even notice the axle to dash until you pointed it out. That really is horrid.
The only conventional reason I can think of for a shorter wheelbase is tighter turning circle. Maybe it’s that.
With that giant snoot sticking out? Sure it’ll turn sharply. Only to have the schnoz hit whatever it was.
Amusingly, if you compare the second photo of it to an actual Camry (which is FWD obviously) it looks like they are about tied regarding the dash to axle ratio, and I think the Camry has a bit less of a front overhang.
US tariff on Chinese car is currently at 27.5%.
$24,720 x 1.275 = $31,518
Even with Zero US consumer special ev incentives… $31,518 is a heck of a good price for a large ev sedan with 340 miles of range should Geely decide to sell it in the US.
Or Geely could rebate this as a Volvo (could make a great new Volvo S 90)
Assuming it does well in crash tests and is otherwise reliable
CPLC is about 35 percent more optimistic than the EPA’s measurements, so figure this 340 is somewhere around 220 miles.
By “CPLC” I’m assuming you mean CLTC (China Light Duty Vehicle Test Cycle) yes?
And damn I knew WLTP (Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicles Test Procedure), which in Europe replaced the NEDC was roughly 20% optimistic vs EPA rating, but I didnt realize CLTC was Even More optimistic, Inside EVs agrees with your 35% conversion from CLTC to EPA too.
A large ev sedan with actual real world 220 mile range is a he’ll of a lot less attractive a proposition and vale than if it actually had a 340 EPA range!
https://insideevs.com/features/343231/heres-how-to-calculate-conflicting-ev-range-test-cycles-epa-wltp-nedc/
OK I had to dig a bit further, @Thomas where did your “341 miles of range” come from and what testing cycle was used?
The below noted InsideEVs article quotes:
“Battery options range from 62 kWh to 76 kWh, for a range of a maximum of 665 kilometers (413 miles), based on the CLTC testing cycle”
So IF above is true… that would mean 268 miles of EPA range (413 x 0.65).
So still not super, as I’d like to see closer to 300 miles of EPA range bc in real life.driving at 70 mph that is likely to mean approx. 3 hrs. of driving bf stopping… but certainly better than an assumed 220
https://insideevs.com/news/703666/geely-galaxy-e8-china/
General styling question: why do more and more cars taper down from good lines on top to a bulbous, bulging lower bumpers? Essentially, a design looks like it should get to the end of the trunk/hatch and then flow straight down or even tuck back under towards the rear wheels, but instead it bulges outwards, almost like the car is wearing a diaper.
This car does it, and I’ve also noticed it on Audi SUVs and wagons, the last few Mustangs (but not the current Camaro), the Camry and BRZ, and the BMW i4/i7. Why do this instead of just extending the trunk/hatch 4 more inches and having a more flat back?
Umm…… The bumper has to bulge out to……. Bump.
If the back of the car is flat , then the unibody is the bumper. Remember the whole point of the bumper is to be a sturdier/sacrificial part so you don’t have to write off the unibody in a fender bender.
I thought of that too, but the front of unibody cars is also a big metal cross beam and we don’t see fronts of cars bulging out the same way. Plus, the existence of cars that don’t do this style shows that it can be done
Older cars that have actually functional bumpers do in fact have protruding front bumpers. I think newer cars sort of do, just because the front is sloped and so the front edge of the hood and fenders is significantly behind the furthest forward point of the bumper.
You’re right though, it is interesting that manufacturers sort of care about keeping the rear bumper functional and care less about the front bumper being functional. It might be simply because it’s easier to back into something in a parking lot than to drive forwards into something by accident.
There are plenty of cars using bumpers that don’t protrude at all. It’s very possible. Those cars have bumpers that are not very useful. This kind of all started with the 1967 Pontiac GTO and the John Deloreans sledgehammer ad. Very much a form over function thing.
Maybe they want to appeal the same women who get ass implants.
Every time I see those I just ask myself: WHY? Are you constantly sitting on rocks or something?
It looks kind of like the new Supra.
Yep, you nailed it, Chinese subsidies, which they don’t dare dump into the US but they will happily do so in the rest of the world that allows it. Also no pesky unions for living wages, and no respect for IP so you know, there’s that as well. And safety regs? Probably not as stringent as US/Europe. So yeah, put all that together and you get a car specifically designed to keep Tesla at bay, after they studied Tesla’s cars.
Elon Musk made a deal with the devil there didn’t he. Of course he did.
It was the drugs.
I don’t know, Thomas. The design isn’t really much more offensive than comparable EVs. I’m usually picky about that sort of thing, and I don’t mind it…especially at that price. For ~$25K, I’d definitely be interested in one of these, and I’m not the typical target EV customer.
It appears to me that the warning volley has been fired. So bring on a new round of protectionist tariffs, I guess.
I think the last “bigger than midsize” new car we got here that was in that price range was maybe the 2012 Accord at $23,000 (the EPA classified that generation as a large car), the Taurus and Impala both jumped over the $26,000 mark in 2012, the Charger did so in 2011, the Avalon way back in 2005, the Amanti moved past that level in 2006.
My first car was a Ford Galaxie and the build quality was HORRID! I would bet the build quality on this one is better.
Please sign my petition to leave articles like this in Yuan so that I can continue to pretend that nice EVs are expensive for everyone everywhere. My hopes need to stay at an appropriate level (low).
Zimbabwe denominations for everyone!
An awful lot of people buy Galaxy smartphones, and given the giant screen I suspect there will be significant overlap between those customer bases. The name might not be such a bad thing.
Everything else about the Chinese EV industry right now…well…
The US could do the same if it wanted regarding the subsidies. Could. Not saying we should (“coughweshouldcough”) but we could. Just a matter of priorities.
We are offering tax breaks for onshore battery production/mining especially, and more of them for more EV components onshore, but it’s not like this.
Countries only complain about other countries’ subsidies when they’re being outdone. Everyone does it
Better looking than a Camry and it’s painted in a color! Not bad!
Yeah, yellow is a color that is just ok, but put a nice shade of it on a car and it pops. Especially these days.
It’s significantly less ugly than some far more expensive cars IMO.