BMW make their i3 from carbon fibre produced in a factory operating on solar power. The interior trim is made of bamboo. The chassis is aluminium. The batteries are designed to be removed, recycled and replaced at end of life.
They've probably go some way to go with the electronic parts, but considering a modern smart phone carries more computer power than the entire world had 50 years ago, modern cars don't need heaps of printed circuit boards and so on, despite having a lot more on board processing than even 10 years ago.
The big change will be when we see more and more other large vehicles going electric, trucks and airplanes are next. Who knows when the military will switch.
Indeed. I wonder what the limitations are now with larger vehicles - I am thinking 1) crossover SUVs; 2) mini vans; 3) commercial sized vans and commercial sized pickup trucks.
To address the inner quote first: EV flight of any real commercial impact is a long LOOOOOONG way off. . . . Like, some folks at Airbus were telling my group a couple weeks ago that they don't think electric commercial aviation will even be prototyping for another 20-30 years. The problem is the battery size/power/weight ratios.
ATM, among the biggest vehicles I'm seeing in the pipeline is VW's relaunched bus (they're calling it the Buzz IQ or some gak), which is getting the commercial van line done first, with "normal" minivan sales coming in the following model year. . . so we're looking at model years 2021 or 2022 for commercial and then a year later for "civilian" vehicles.
On the Tesla front, the cars themselves may be decent, but gott damm that company can not stay out of its own way. . . They are a rolling case study for MBA programs for decades at this point, and they're almost entirely case studies of how NOT to do things.
The big change will be when we see more and more other large vehicles going electric, trucks and airplanes are next. Who knows when the military will switch.
Indeed. I wonder what the limitations are now with larger vehicles - I am thinking 1) crossover SUVs; 2) mini vans; 3) commercial sized vans and commercial sized pickup trucks.
To address the inner quote first: EV flight of any real commercial impact is a long LOOOOOONG way off. . . . Like, some folks at Airbus were telling my group a couple weeks ago that they don't think electric commercial aviation will even be prototyping for another 20-30 years. The problem is the battery size/power/weight ratios.
So just today Tesla made some changes .. they killed the original base model 3 standard range and changed it around and took it off online ordering. So if you order online now the minimum is $39,500 standard range plus, but also they have made Autopilot a standard feature which was a $3000 upgrade before. Also they lowered the cost of their paint jobs a little. I’m pretty sure it was $37500 yesterday, so they are including autopilot for $1000 less that if you would have added it yourself. Now the only upgrade besides cosmetics is the $5000 self driving stuff.
They still will offer the standard range for $35k, just not for online ordering. You have to call them and special order it, and then you will basically just get a SR+ but with a few things disabled in the software. So that’s what they’re sending out to people who ordered the regular standard range model. They said they did this because the SR+ is way outselling everything else, looks like this will make things a lot easier and more streamlined for them to fulfill their orders. Bet most of the base model delays were due to the cloth seats and basic interior it was supposed to have.
They also added an option for leasing now, but if you lease you don’t get the federal tax credit, it goes to the leasing company instead. So that’s not an option for me.
Whats a poll of 1536 people worth out of 25 million? But it wouldn't surprise me for the city folk to push for electric cars, they tried/half succeeded to ban bullbars too. Me and all the country people I talk to don't want them.
Ouze wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote: Probably those 50 degrees summers have a way of influencing thinking about global warming.
That sounds a bit chilly to me, honestly; I would think they would welcome a nice warming.
Well Celsius not fahrenheit, was at 39 couple weeks ago(102f?), though it coming into winter here now anyway.
Necros wrote: So just today Tesla made some changes .. they killed the original base model 3 standard range and changed it around and took it off online ordering. So if you order online now the minimum is $39,500 standard range plus, but also they have made Autopilot a standard feature which was a $3000 upgrade before. Also they lowered the cost of their paint jobs a little. I’m pretty sure it was $37500 yesterday, so they are including autopilot for $1000 less that if you would have added it yourself. Now the only upgrade besides cosmetics is the $5000 self driving stuff.
They still will offer the standard range for $35k, just not for online ordering. You have to call them and special order it, and then you will basically just get a SR+ but with a few things disabled in the software. So that’s what they’re sending out to people who ordered the regular standard range model. They said they did this because the SR+ is way outselling everything else, looks like this will make things a lot easier and more streamlined for them to fulfill their orders. Bet most of the base model delays were due to the cloth seats and basic interior it was supposed to have.
They also added an option for leasing now, but if you lease you don’t get the federal tax credit, it goes to the leasing company instead. So that’s not an option for me.
Thats a pretty good deal, if all they are doing for the $35K one is software limiting the range you are actually getting a much better car. You get the (fake, they call it vegan) leather interior, the premium sound system and the power of the larger battery. What would be nice if they later let you remove range limit for a reasonable charge.
Also they announced they are starting to lease them, at the end of the lease you have to turn in the cars as they are going to use them for their fleet of autonomous ride sharing cars. Is autonomous ride sharing only 3 years away?..........I have my doubts but that would be impressive.
Even though I buy a new car every 3-4 years, I always finance. I like the idea of a lease where you can just turn it in and get a new one, but I don't like being told I can only drive a certain amt of miles and friends have had horror stories about how much they charge you for the slightest scratch when you turn it in. I'm too messy. But.. a 3 year 15k mile lease is a lot cheaper than a loan, monthly payment wise.
Seems weird that they wouldn't let you keep the car though, like what if you really really wanted to?
Oh one bad thing about the lease is I read that you don't get the tax credit if you lease, only if you buy
Kilkrazy wrote: BMW make their i3 from carbon fibre produced in a factory operating on solar power. The interior trim is made of bamboo. The chassis is aluminium. The batteries are designed to be removed, recycled and replaced at end of life.
They've probably go some way to go with the electronic parts, but considering a modern smart phone carries more computer power than the entire world had 50 years ago, modern cars don't need heaps of printed circuit boards and so on, despite having a lot more on board processing than even 10 years ago.
TLDR, they're predicting that the costs of batteries is getting cheaper and cheaper and soon EV prices will be getting much closer to gas car prices in the next few years. I feel like it'll be the other way around, gas car prices will keep climbing, maybe they'll meet in the middle.
I like the idea of cheaper EVs but personally, if batteries are getting cheaper, I think I'd rather instead of lowering the price of the car they might be better off adding more cells to increase the battery sizes and the car's range.
Aren't batteries of this type using up all world stocks of certain materials?
I read that Lithium and Cobalt are becoming scarce, and that is likely to run up costs.
The same as when Tesla put huge batteries in Australia and elsewhere.
I'm all up for electric cars, and I can probably handle fairly-short ranges and charge times.
If the price of batteries is going to rise as technology keeps pace, we should be OK.
Skinnereal wrote: Aren't batteries of this type using up all world stocks of certain materials?
I read that Lithium and Cobalt are becoming scarce, and that is likely to run up costs.
The same as when Tesla put huge batteries in Australia and elsewhere.
I'm all up for electric cars, and I can probably handle fairly-short ranges and charge times.
If the price of batteries is going to rise as technology keeps pace, we should be OK.
Don't know how it works 100%, but I was under the impression that even if there wasn't a lot of that stuff left, the batteries can be recycled using way less natural resources in the future for newer cars.. unlike gas that just gets burned up and turned into exhaust and then gone for good
Skinnereal wrote: Aren't batteries of this type using up all world stocks of certain materials?
I read that Lithium and Cobalt are becoming scarce, and that is likely to run up costs.
The same as when Tesla put huge batteries in Australia and elsewhere.
It's actually the electric motors that use a lot of rare earths, not the batteries.
Skinnereal wrote: Aren't batteries of this type using up all world stocks of certain materials?
I read that Lithium and Cobalt are becoming scarce, and that is likely to run up costs.
The same as when Tesla put huge batteries in Australia and elsewhere.
It's actually the electric motors that use a lot of rare earths, not the batteries.
Maybe, I don't know about other brands, but Tesla doesnt really use them in their motors much. They have two basic motor designs and neither if them use much of the exotic materials.
Actually I read an article recently, that basically said that the battery production definitely isn't good for the environment, and comparing a brand new EV to a brand new ICE, the ICE is better. But, over the course of 5 years of ownership, and both cars running the same amount of miles the emissions from the ICE will double the environmental impact of the EV's battery. They break even at around the 2 year mark and then it just gets worse from there. I dunno which is true and which isn't, I think at the end of the day it just gets down to what you like driving more and is more convenient for you.
Skinnereal wrote: Aren't batteries of this type using up all world stocks of certain materials?
I read that Lithium and Cobalt are becoming scarce, and that is likely to run up costs.
The same as when Tesla put huge batteries in Australia and elsewhere.
It's actually the electric motors that use a lot of rare earths, not the batteries.
Maybe, I don't know about other brands, but Tesla doesnt really use them in their motors much. They have two basic motor designs and neither if them use much of the exotic materials.
Tesla moved to permanent magnet motors with the model 3, and the S and X new powerplant will no longer be induction with the last powerplant tinkering, too (which just makes sense).
I noticed Tesla just announced they increased the range for new Model S and X's to be up to 370 miles, but only for newer models and the older ones already out there stay the same. That's a nice improvement and should help those slumping sales, but personally I think the price to begin with compared to the Model 3 is just way too high. I'd love a Model X, but I don't think I have enough kidneys to sell to be able to afford a 6 figure car, and then if I did I'd be too scared to drive it anywhere because people are dumb.
Going to see if I can pull the trigger on a Model 3 in May or June, but if I can't and end up missing the deadline for the tax refund, I may just hold off and wait for a Model Y, or the VW hippie van, whichever comes first
Skinnereal wrote: Aren't batteries of this type using up all world stocks of certain materials?
I read that Lithium and Cobalt are becoming scarce, and that is likely to run up costs.
The same as when Tesla put huge batteries in Australia and elsewhere.
It's actually the electric motors that use a lot of rare earths, not the batteries.
Maybe, I don't know about other brands, but Tesla doesnt really use them in their motors much. They have two basic motor designs and neither if them use much of the exotic materials.
Tesla moved to permanent magnet motors with the model 3, and the S and X new powerplant will no longer be induction with the last powerplant tinkering, too (which just makes sense).
Ugh, as usual you are a wealth of missinformation. The new motor does not use lots of rare earth magnets....some yes, but not much. Here is a whole article about it. It would be nice if you backed you assertions first before you made them.
"in lieu of deploying expensive permanent magnets on the rotor, a large magnetic field generated from the stationary portion of the motor (the stator) actually induces an opposing magnetic field on the highly conductive copper rotor. And we know what happens when two opposing magnetic fields interact: they pull toward each other. If you have a magnet sitting on the kitchen table and move another magnet of opposite polarity nearby, the magnet in your hand pulls the other magnet toward it. Likewise when the two opposing magnetic fields generated inside the motor of a Ludicrous Model S P100D interact … the car takes off like a bat out of Hell.
Isn’t science fun?
The reluctance motor is capable of similar magic. However, in this case, the design is not based on two magnetic fields interacting with each. There’s only one magnetic field. How can that be? Well, go back to that kitchen table and replace one of those magnets with a small piece of iron or steel. What happens when you move the remaining magnet toward the metal? The magnet will of course pull the chunk of metal toward itself. Now what if you were to fashion a rotor for an electric motor out of just a refined chunk of steel, but retain the existing electromagnets in the stator? As the electromagnets are turned on and off in just the right sequence, they would coax the steel cylinder to turn. Congratulations, you just designed a reluctance motor! And the fact that the electromagnets are switched on and off in sequence to spin the rotor (as with the induction motor), you have what is termed a Switched Reluctance Machine."
The article about Ice cars being cleaner is complete garbage and has been debunked by many reputable sites.
Skinnereal wrote: Aren't batteries of this type using up all world stocks of certain materials?
I read that Lithium and Cobalt are becoming scarce, and that is likely to run up costs.
The same as when Tesla put huge batteries in Australia and elsewhere.
It's actually the electric motors that use a lot of rare earths, not the batteries.
Maybe, I don't know about other brands, but Tesla doesnt really use them in their motors much. They have two basic motor designs and neither if them use much of the exotic materials.
Tesla moved to permanent magnet motors with the model 3, and the S and X new powerplant will no longer be induction with the last powerplant tinkering, too (which just makes sense).
Ugh, as usual you are a wealth of missinformation. The new motor does not use lots of rare earth magnets....some yes, but not much. Here is a whole article about it. It would be nice if you backed you assertions first before you made them.
I don't know where in that article you get that PMSRM motors like the one on the model 3 use "not much" rare earth magnets.
PMSRM use approximately 40% less neodymium per kw compared to, say an IPM-hybrid kind like the one on the BMW i3..... but then again Tesla is putting more powerful motors so the difference per unit is significantly reduced.
Whether or not ICE vs EV has a worse manufacturing CO2 footprint is largely irrelevant, we need to tackle the problem of vehicle lifespan, because there's a huge carbon footprint for BOTH types in the manufacturing. Don't get me wrong, cars are more maintenance free than they've ever been, but a lot of people are used to getting new cars every 3-4 years, if not 5-7 years. We can do far better!
Hopefully the rise of fully autonomous vehicles will push down car ownership and the robo-taxi companies will need longer lasting vehicles, pushing vehicular lifespan to the same kind of range as passenger aircraft or buses (multiple decades).
1hadhq wrote: Average lifespan of cars isn't 12 - 15 Years? Modern engines don't last 200-300000 km ?
I wouldn't want some smart-phone like lifespan for something that weighs more than 1 ton....
I'm not just talking about how long a car might last, it's the willingness of people to replace a perfectly good car because it's 4+ years past new. Generally those cars are bought and used by someone else and are in the market for the length you mention. Current e-vehicle battery warranties seem to be about 8 years on average and Tesla is touting 90% capacity for 160k miles and 500k mile lifespan - probably under ideal conditions which never happens. So e-vehicles seem to be built to last on similar time scales as IC cars - few cars will see 15 years without transmission/engine troubles that would be cheaper to replace the vehicle, I imagine battery replacement will be a similar breakpoint.
Average commercial aircraft are in service for 30 years of near continuous use, compared to cars that are generally used only for a fraction of the time. Public transit vehicles have a turnover rate of 12 years in the USA because subsidies encourage it, in Australia it's 23 years, and even further where nations will keep stuff operational until it dies.
Now imagine if we could expect people to consider a car 'new' for its first full decade, and that car is in the market for an average of 25-30 years. Bad for the car industry to be sure, but probably good for the environment.
1hadhq wrote: Average lifespan of cars isn't 12 - 15 Years? Modern engines don't last 200-300000 km ?
I wouldn't want some smart-phone like lifespan for something that weighs more than 1 ton....
They'll last much more than 3-4 years and it's not uncommon to see 12-15-year old cars on the road but there's definitely been a shift in the last decade or so towards people replacing their cars more often than they used to. Partly this seems to be the increase in hire-purchase deals that encourage people to "buy" new and trade in every 3-5 years but it also seems to just be a change in general attitude that lots of people don't want to be driving and "old" car. I remember growing up my parents had cars they would keep for 10 years or more and that was not unusual at all.
It's an interesting topic to discuss as far as sustainability and the environmental impact goes. Newer cars are more efficient, with lower emissions, but if the average lifespan of a car is decreasing (note, we don't know for sure it is) that needs to be taken into account as part of its lifetime impact.
I think people replacing cars sooner may also be due to leasing becoming more common. I am one of those that replaces a car every 4-5 years because I just like newer stuff. I like the idea of a lease for that reason, and leases also tend to have lower monthly payments .. but so far haven't ever gone that route because I drive more than 15k miles a year and that's pretty much the max for any lease. Plus I'm messy, so they'd get me for over the mile limit charges and a hefty detailing bill at the end.
Skinnereal wrote: Aren't batteries of this type using up all world stocks of certain materials?
I read that Lithium and Cobalt are becoming scarce, and that is likely to run up costs.
The same as when Tesla put huge batteries in Australia and elsewhere.
It's actually the electric motors that use a lot of rare earths, not the batteries.
Maybe, I don't know about other brands, but Tesla doesnt really use them in their motors much. They have two basic motor designs and neither if them use much of the exotic materials.
Tesla moved to permanent magnet motors with the model 3, and the S and X new powerplant will no longer be induction with the last powerplant tinkering, too (which just makes sense).
Ugh, as usual you are a wealth of missinformation. The new motor does not use lots of rare earth magnets....some yes, but not much. Here is a whole article about it. It would be nice if you backed you assertions first before you made them.
I don't know where in that article you get that PMSRM motors like the one on the model 3 use "not much" rare earth magnets.
PMSRM use approximately 40% less neodymium per kw compared to, say an IPM-hybrid kind like the one on the BMW i3..... but then again Tesla is putting more powerful motors so the difference per unit is significantly reduced.
"With two of the major issues of the reluctance machine having been addressed, you take the plunge and start working with this design. The first thing you are able to do is discard that expensive copper rotor in the legacy motor and replace it with a far cheaper ferrous metal rotor. Probably steel. And probably silicon steel. You just saved a ton of money. Next, although the rare-earths are expensive, they are going into the stator, not on the rotor as with a traditional permanent magnet motor, so you’re going to be augmenting the electromagnets with relatively smallish permanent magnets. Your chosen design has some issues with acoustic noise, but you feel that it’s worthwhile to pursue this design because it’s the simplest and least expensive motor to build, yet highly efficient and powerful (especially with those rare-earths). Good job!
So, the first puzzle piece in the theory that Tesla has put a switched reluctance motor in the Model 3 is the magnets. We know they’re in there, and now we know that one of the latest breakthroughs in motor design is the inclusion of rare-earths in the stator of the reluctance machine. This is huge. It has brought the reluctance machine out of mothballs!
Another clue that the Model 3 motor is not using those rare-earths in a conventional permanent-magnet motor design is that the car does not do regen all the way down to 0 miles per hour. For example, the Bolt has a conventional 3-phase PM motor which allows it to do regen to 0 MPH. I saw this for myself last year when I test drove a Bolt — you can stop without applying the brakes. We’re calling this puzzle piece #2."
If you read the article they show that they are using substantially less rare earth magnets, like I said they use some, but not a lot compared to other manufacturers. Hence "relatively smallish permanent magnets".
If you read the article they show that they are using substantially less rare earth magnets, like I said they use some, but not a lot compared to other manufacturers. Hence "relatively smallish permanent magnets".
Which is what I said, a tesla model 3 motor uses approx. 40% less neodymium per kw than other permanent magnets (mostly going to the Halbach array). Your article was written at a time when no actual engine had been torn down by press and competition.
40% is indeed a lot, but a lot of that difference is eaten up because Tesla engines have more output. The problem with halbach arrays is they're complicated to manufacturer, which probably can explain the relatively higher rate of motor failure compared to other electric cars.
Already halfway through 2018 Tesla had already imported half a million pounds of Chinese-sourced parts which most analysists identify being mostly neodymium and other rare-earth magnets.
Even being rather conservative and figuring only half of those being magnets, it leaves us with approx. 1.000.000 kg of neodymium. That's good enough for 1.000.000 BMW i3 (which has approx 1kg of neodymium in it) or 750.000 Nissan Leafs (leaves? whatever) which is about 10 years of production for the Nissan.
Which is why shifting to magnets has been widely thought to be straining world supply (and a possible answer on why Tesla is building a Chinese factory).
I read that Tesla is building a factory in China so that they can build their cars and sell them there domestically there, to increase production and not have to deal with shipping them across the ocean. China is really big on EV now, there's a few chinese companies making EVs, I think EV is gonna be a bigger biz over there than it is here.
If you read the article they show that they are using substantially less rare earth magnets, like I said they use some, but not a lot compared to other manufacturers. Hence "relatively smallish permanent magnets".
Which is what I said, a tesla model 3 motor uses approx. 40% less neodymium per kw than other permanent magnets (mostly going to the Halbach array). Your article was written at a time when no actual engine had been torn down by press and competition.
40% is indeed a lot, but a lot of that difference is eaten up because Tesla engines have more output. The problem with halbach arrays is they're complicated to manufacturer, which probably can explain the relatively higher rate of motor failure compared to other electric cars.
Already halfway through 2018 Tesla had already imported half a million pounds of Chinese-sourced parts which most analysists identify being mostly neodymium and other rare-earth magnets.
Even being rather conservative and figuring only half of those being magnets, it leaves us with approx. 1.000.000 kg of neodymium. That's good enough for 1.000.000 BMW i3 (which has approx 1kg of neodymium in it) or 750.000 Nissan Leafs (leaves? whatever) which is about 10 years of production for the Nissan.
Which is why shifting to magnets has been widely thought to be straining world supply (and a possible answer on why Tesla is building a Chinese factory).
Nope. you said "So yes, they do use a lot" They don't, they use very little in comparison to other motor designs. I'd love to see where you are getting your info on model 3 motor fail rates and your stats on how much rare earth the motor uses.
Not the mention that rare earth magnets are just another boogey man. Far less damaging to the environment than oil production.
If you read the article they show that they are using substantially less rare earth magnets, like I said they use some, but not a lot compared to other manufacturers. Hence "relatively smallish permanent magnets".
Which is what I said, a tesla model 3 motor uses approx. 40% less neodymium per kw than other permanent magnets (mostly going to the Halbach array). Your article was written at a time when no actual engine had been torn down by press and competition.
40% is indeed a lot, but a lot of that difference is eaten up because Tesla engines have more output. The problem with halbach arrays is they're complicated to manufacturer, which probably can explain the relatively higher rate of motor failure compared to other electric cars.
Already halfway through 2018 Tesla had already imported half a million pounds of Chinese-sourced parts which most analysists identify being mostly neodymium and other rare-earth magnets.
Even being rather conservative and figuring only half of those being magnets, it leaves us with approx. 1.000.000 kg of neodymium. That's good enough for 1.000.000 BMW i3 (which has approx 1kg of neodymium in it) or 750.000 Nissan Leafs (leaves? whatever) which is about 10 years of production for the Nissan.
Which is why shifting to magnets has been widely thought to be straining world supply (and a possible answer on why Tesla is building a Chinese factory).
Nope. you said "So yes, they do use a lot" They don't, they use very little in comparison to other motor designs. I'd love to see where you are getting your info on model 3 motor fail rates and your stats on how much rare earth the motor uses.
Not the mention that rare earth magnets are just another boogey man. Far less damaging to the environment than oil production.
So, if they use 40% less per kw, but the engines are roughly double the power (Leaf vs Model 3 it's 147 vs 286) you end up putting MORE neodymium than the other. It's just math, and import data doesn't lie.
As per reliability:
How about this Chinese operator of Teslas (the biggest in China) that claims on any given time 20% of their cars are out of service?
cease our activities.
Due to increasing technical difficulties, and the lack of timely parts supply by Tesla Motors, we could not longer operate half of our Tesla rental fleet since mid-december 2018. Because this situation is no longer maintainable and a solution does not seem to be within reach, we had no other option than to stop all of our rental activities.
Or this small taxi company in Sweden, also forced to close.
"Nothing has worked. Tesla does the worst cars. It has been too much wrong, for poor quality and when the closest workshops are in Stockholm, the costs have become unreasonably high. In the end, we did not see any opportunity to continue with these cars but chose to put the company into bankruptcy at its own request, "says the marketing manager and vice president Mohammed Al-Nasser to the newspaper .
If you read the article they show that they are using substantially less rare earth magnets, like I said they use some, but not a lot compared to other manufacturers. Hence "relatively smallish permanent magnets".
Which is what I said, a tesla model 3 motor uses approx. 40% less neodymium per kw than other permanent magnets (mostly going to the Halbach array). Your article was written at a time when no actual engine had been torn down by press and competition.
40% is indeed a lot, but a lot of that difference is eaten up because Tesla engines have more output. The problem with halbach arrays is they're complicated to manufacturer, which probably can explain the relatively higher rate of motor failure compared to other electric cars.
Already halfway through 2018 Tesla had already imported half a million pounds of Chinese-sourced parts which most analysists identify being mostly neodymium and other rare-earth magnets.
Even being rather conservative and figuring only half of those being magnets, it leaves us with approx. 1.000.000 kg of neodymium. That's good enough for 1.000.000 BMW i3 (which has approx 1kg of neodymium in it) or 750.000 Nissan Leafs (leaves? whatever) which is about 10 years of production for the Nissan.
Which is why shifting to magnets has been widely thought to be straining world supply (and a possible answer on why Tesla is building a Chinese factory).
Nope. you said "So yes, they do use a lot" They don't, they use very little in comparison to other motor designs. I'd love to see where you are getting your info on model 3 motor fail rates and your stats on how much rare earth the motor uses.
Not the mention that rare earth magnets are just another boogey man. Far less damaging to the environment than oil production.
So, if they use 40% less per kw, but the engines are roughly double the power (Leaf vs Model 3 it's 147 vs 286) you end up putting MORE neodymium than the other. It's just math, and import data doesn't lie.
As per reliability:
How about this Chinese operator of Teslas (the biggest in China) that claims on any given time 20% of their cars are out of service?
cease our activities.
Due to increasing technical difficulties, and the lack of timely parts supply by Tesla Motors, we could not longer operate half of our Tesla rental fleet since mid-december 2018. Because this situation is no longer maintainable and a solution does not seem to be within reach, we had no other option than to stop all of our rental activities.
Or this small taxi company in Sweden, also forced to close.
"Nothing has worked. Tesla does the worst cars. It has been too much wrong, for poor quality and when the closest workshops are in Stockholm, the costs have become unreasonably high. In the end, we did not see any opportunity to continue with these cars but chose to put the company into bankruptcy at its own request, "says the marketing manager and vice president Mohammed Al-Nasser to the newspaper .
Tesla has bigger motors than some not all, you've never given where you are getting this 40% from. It is nice of you to cherry pick probably the smallest electric motor on the market though.
As far as these companies claiming that their Teslas don't work we have very little info on that. I'll trust Tesloop who runs a car service in California and is very open about their experiences with Tesla, the good and the bad, they are calling these reports junk. They have had very little issue with their cars. Oh and maybe if you run a car rental service, a buisness which is notorious for abusing cars.....maybe don't use a car that you can't service or has no service anywhere near you...thats just common sense. You have no list on why these cars are not working, could be user abuse, could be someone tore up the interior, could be a million different abusive issues that come with renting cars to strangers. Not one of them says its a motor issue. Quit reaching.
The level of customer damage is going to be pretty constant across all models, though; so why is getting them repaired only a problem with one specific brand?
If you read the article they show that they are using substantially less rare earth magnets, like I said they use some, but not a lot compared to other manufacturers. Hence "relatively smallish permanent magnets".
Which is what I said, a tesla model 3 motor uses approx. 40% less neodymium per kw than other permanent magnets (mostly going to the Halbach array). Your article was written at a time when no actual engine had been torn down by press and competition.
40% is indeed a lot, but a lot of that difference is eaten up because Tesla engines have more output. The problem with halbach arrays is they're complicated to manufacturer, which probably can explain the relatively higher rate of motor failure compared to other electric cars.
Already halfway through 2018 Tesla had already imported half a million pounds of Chinese-sourced parts which most analysists identify being mostly neodymium and other rare-earth magnets.
Even being rather conservative and figuring only half of those being magnets, it leaves us with approx. 1.000.000 kg of neodymium. That's good enough for 1.000.000 BMW i3 (which has approx 1kg of neodymium in it) or 750.000 Nissan Leafs (leaves? whatever) which is about 10 years of production for the Nissan.
Which is why shifting to magnets has been widely thought to be straining world supply (and a possible answer on why Tesla is building a Chinese factory).
Nope. you said "So yes, they do use a lot" They don't, they use very little in comparison to other motor designs. I'd love to see where you are getting your info on model 3 motor fail rates and your stats on how much rare earth the motor uses.
Not the mention that rare earth magnets are just another boogey man. Far less damaging to the environment than oil production.
So, if they use 40% less per kw, but the engines are roughly double the power (Leaf vs Model 3 it's 147 vs 286) you end up putting MORE neodymium than the other. It's just math, and import data doesn't lie.
As per reliability:
How about this Chinese operator of Teslas (the biggest in China) that claims on any given time 20% of their cars are out of service?
cease our activities.
Due to increasing technical difficulties, and the lack of timely parts supply by Tesla Motors, we could not longer operate half of our Tesla rental fleet since mid-december 2018. Because this situation is no longer maintainable and a solution does not seem to be within reach, we had no other option than to stop all of our rental activities.
Or this small taxi company in Sweden, also forced to close.
"Nothing has worked. Tesla does the worst cars. It has been too much wrong, for poor quality and when the closest workshops are in Stockholm, the costs have become unreasonably high. In the end, we did not see any opportunity to continue with these cars but chose to put the company into bankruptcy at its own request, "says the marketing manager and vice president Mohammed Al-Nasser to the newspaper .
Tesla has bigger motors than some not all, you've never given where you are getting this 40% from. It is nice of you to cherry pick probably the smallest electric motor on the market though.
I got it from my Tesla-driving neighbour is an electrical engineer who works in electric motors. He sent me this table from a paper comparing different technologies which could reduce neodymium use in motors.
Reduced NdeFB is literally the BMW i3 motor, and the others were built for similar specs, active material being ofc neodymium. Bottom line is, if you want to save the environment, don't drive cars selling themselves on 0-60 times.
Buy a Ford Fiesta, or even better, a used car.
As far as these companies claiming that their Teslas don't work we have very little info on that. I'll trust Tesloop who runs a car service in California and is very open about their experiences with Tesla, the good and the bad, they are calling these reports junk. They have had very little issue with their cars. Oh and maybe if you run a car rental service, a buisness which is notorious for abusing cars.....maybe don't use a car that you can't service or has no service anywhere near you...thats just common sense. You have no list on why these cars are not working, could be user abuse, could be someone tore up the interior, could be a million different abusive issues that come with renting cars to strangers. Not one of them says its a motor issue. Quit reaching.
They speak directly of mechanical issues, the rant of the Dutch rental company is open to everyone on twitter if you want to check it out.
Again, no other manufacturer has anything close to these issues. No one. Anywhere.
AndrewGPaul wrote: The level of customer damage is going to be pretty constant across all models, though; so why is getting them repaired only a problem with one specific brand?
This is pretty simple.
1. Its easy to damage electric cars if you abuse the battery by not charging it properly. Something EV owners know about, someone renting one probably does not.
2. Tesla's infrastructure is not adequate to handle that kind of service in the area. if someone gets into a fender bender in norway or china getting the car repaired is going to be an issue. Probably best not to start a Tesla rental company until Tesla has a real footprint in the region. Until we have more info we wont really know the issue. However Tesloop has been running in Califorina for 5+ years and is doing very well and are very pleased with the abilities of the cars. https://cleantechnica.com/2018/07/17/tesloop-shares-lessons-learned-in-400000-miles-in-a-tesla/
3. If you don't have a ford dealership anywhere near you.....might not be a good idea to start a Ford rental company unless you can do the repairs yourself. If these claims had any merit there would be law suits not bluster, but i guess we will see what happens with them.
4. Until we know why the cars are not operable, we really just don't know. Its not hard for me to believe that 20% of a rental companies cars got into accidents that caused cosmetic damage that made them unrentable. As we know Tesla has a major spare parts issue even in the US much less globally. I've never denied this.
Reduced NdeFB is literally the BMW i3 motor, and the others were built for similar specs, active material being of neodymium. Bottom line is, if you want to save the environment, don't drive cars selling themselves on 0-60 times.
Buy a Ford Fiesta, or even better, a used car.
So I'm still not seeing where your info comes from? There is no mention of the Tesla motor just a switched reluctance motor. You don't have any data to back your claim. You got a paper from your neighbor? Thats a super reliable source! Who did the study? where is the actual data? I could have typed a similar chart in MSword. This is worse than someone using wikipedia for christs sake, how is such a strong and well put together study not even able to standardize between UK pounds and US dollars on a chart? Oh wait i've done the math...your impeccable source just used the wrong sign.....they uses pound instead of dollar a few times....accuracy counts in REAL science papers. If any of my papers had such glaring problems I would have gotten an F! I'm just going to call your source spurious as best.
But for arguments sake lets say the numbers are accurate. Even then it shows that the Tesla uses less than other manufacturers almost half. $188 of neodymium is what 4 pounds of material at $110,000 a US ton...you are right thats crazy! How many gamers have more rare earth in their plastic dudesmen?
Even then, you appear to believe Rare earth metals are somehow more damaging to the environment than oil production.....which is nonsence. Lets say your average car gets 300,000 miles at 30mpg per gallon, thats 10,000 gallons of gas. Each gallon is 20 pounds of Co2, so thats 200,000 pounds of Co2, just coming out of the tailpipe, not even including the pollution it takes to get the oil out of the ground and to the car. Your argument is terrible.
For reference "For an average American car (26 miles per gallon), Shindell estimates that the air pollution emissions altogether cost us $1700 in damages per year. In comparison, emissions from energy to power an electric Nissan Leaf would cost us $840 even if purely powered by coal, and $290 if fueled by electricity supplied entirely from natural gas. These costs would become negligible if the electricity came from renewable or nuclear power. Electric vehicles (EVs) are clearly the winners in this cost comparison."
Also I'm not buying a car to save the planet. I bought a car because I like it. For my situation it made financial sense (MUCH cheaper in the long run vs a comparable ICE car), I like how it drives (better performance than a similarly priced ICE car), I like how it works (less maintenance than an ICE car), I like waking up to a fully fueled car in the morning. The fact that its better for the environment is gravy. I'm not a hippy.
I've consulted my expert (my dog) and here is his report
Now of course this isn't really my dog, if he were really that talented I'd have enough throw away money to buy something stupid that could beat my Tesla on a track....but his report appears to me to be as based on fact and siteable research as yours.
AndrewGPaul wrote: The level of customer damage is going to be pretty constant across all models, though; so why is getting them repaired only a problem with one specific brand?
This is pretty simple.
1. Its easy to damage electric cars if you abuse the battery by not charging it properly. Something EV owners know about, someone renting one probably does not.
2. Tesla's infrastructure is not adequate to handle that kind of service in the area.
I'm glad we agree. That is, in fact, the point everyone has been making.
I've consulted my expert (my dog) and here is his report
Now of course this isn't really my dog, if he were really that talented I'd have enough throw away money to buy something stupid that could beat my Tesla on a track....but his report appears to me to be as based on fact and siteable research as yours.
Rodney the wiener dog respects this detailed report.
AndrewGPaul wrote: The level of customer damage is going to be pretty constant across all models, though; so why is getting them repaired only a problem with one specific brand?
This is pretty simple.
1. Its easy to damage electric cars if you abuse the battery by not charging it properly. Something EV owners know about, someone renting one probably does not.
2. Tesla's infrastructure is not adequate to handle that kind of service in the area.
I'm glad we agree. That is, in fact, the point everyone has been making.
Right but for the original poster living in the US this is not an issue, so the point "everyone" is trying to make is mute. If for instance I have a problem with my car Tesla will give me a loaner until the issue is solved. Be smart, don't buy a car if you don't have service relatively near you. If I bought a Hyundai EV Kona in California (the ONLY place they sell and service them) Im pretty sure I'd be screwed if I brought it to PA with me. In this instance the problem is not the car or particularly the service itself, its with assuming Tesala will stretch its fledgling infrastructure to support your business. In short dumb business owners make dumb business decisions. Tesloop and many other EV rental companies have figured out how to make it work and are pleased with the product.
Starting a Rental business with Teslas where there is no close service center is a poorly thought out business plan. If you make poor business decisions in one area....its likely you make them in others and probably shouldn't run said business in the first place.
Andrew1975 wrote: Right but for the original poster living in the US this is not an issue, so the point "everyone" is trying to make is mute.
This discussion is a global discussion, so ignoring any data regarding the rest of the planet to focus on the US simply because it corroborates your street teaming for Tesla would be akin to being a moot point.
Moot.
If you're going to attempt to outsmart your opponents in a debate like this, attaining a correct grasp of your own language would be essential.
Andrew1975 wrote: Starting a Rental business with Teslas where there is no close service center is a poorly thought out business plan. If you make poor business decisions in one area....its likely you make them in others and probably shouldn't run said business in the first place.
Some would say rolling a product out internationally without the infrastructure to support it would be a poor business decision. One wonders if maybe THAT company shouldn't run said business in the first place...
Yeah. If you come up with a new Widget that requires some new fangled Gizmo to operate, it would be prudent of you to ensure a supply of Gizmos so people can actually use your Widget. And making a Widget 2.0 when you can't supply an adequate support system for your existing Widget customers is irresponsible at best.
So I'm still not seeing where your info comes from?
From a peer-reviewed work on electric motors by James D. Widmer at the Centre for Advanced Electric Drives at Newcastle University, presented at the IEEE IVEC.
There is no mention of the Tesla motor just a switched reluctance motor.
Except from Tesla themselves? And the cleantechnica article you posted. And everyone who has dissected the Tesla motor which by now are quite a few people already (check Sandy Munro videos, for instance)
If you knew what a Halbach array is, you'd know that it uses a lot of magnet surface.
Nice summary of all your interventions in this thread.
Right but for the original poster living in the US this is not an issue, so the point "everyone" is trying to make is mute.
The Fort Lauderdale, Fla., resident damaged his bumper in a low-speed collision and then had to wait three months for the repair shop to get the spare parts from Tesla and fix his car
Andrew1975 wrote: Right but for the original poster living in the US this is not an issue, so the point "everyone" is trying to make is mute.
This discussion is a global discussion, so ignoring any data regarding the rest of the planet to focus on the US simply because it corroborates your street teaming for Tesla would be akin to being a moot point.
Moot.
If you're going to attempt to outsmart your opponents in a debate like this, attaining a correct grasp of your own language would be essential.
Andrew1975 wrote: Starting a Rental business with Teslas where there is no close service center is a poorly thought out business plan. If you make poor business decisions in one area....its likely you make them in others and probably shouldn't run said business in the first place.
Some would say rolling a product out internationally without the infrastructure to support it would be a poor business decision. One wonders if maybe THAT company shouldn't run said business in the first place...
You and others have turned the discussion global. I was answering questions for someone in the US! I have no experience with Tesla anywhere else. As far as Tesla supporting businesses overseas......again I can't comment on that except to say again if you buy a product and rely on it for business, you should make smart decisions on what products you buy and what infrastructure there is for those services. I could list a bunch of European Tesla rentals that are doing just fine! I'm still gonna say its a problem with that business and poor decisions made by it.
As for another posters widget theory. Do we know that Tesla went around selling cars around the world based on using them as rental cars to run your business and saying they had a support network....I kind of doubt it. One of these companies was a crowd sourced company run by a guy who has no experience in renting cars.
Yeah, parts are hard to come by, I've admitted this over and over, even in the US. In that case they give you a loaner.....cry me a River Phoenix!
The peer reviewed work missed the (pounds/dollar) typo sounds like its been reviewed pretty well!
Look just find a siteable report from a reputable source that says what the motor is made of and how those rare earth metals are worse than pollution from an ICE car and we are all good! Right now you are cryinig about 4 pounds of material in an automobile......is it uranium? NOPE! I mean, its really only fair play, I give completely verifiable info, I'm going to hold you to the same standard! I find it very interesting that your report names types of motors but not specific motors. Like all Ferrite permanent motors have the exact same specs! Again your sources have been as credible as my dogs.
Oh and now tweets are a credible source of information......coll I'll go eat some handgerbers while I bring up lists and lists of happy Tesla twitter customers and rental companies from Twitter and Facebook. Theres always a bitch somewhere no company makes everybody happy. The Model 3 is a best seller in many places and also has a very high satisfaction and loyalty rating....I think those numbers speak volumes about just how wrong some of you are.
The original question's still there- this is a discussion about what people think of electric cars in general. Tesla's reliability is a weird quality to have to worry about in an EV- one of their main draws is supposed to be a lack of maintenance compared to ICE vehicles.
I don't imagine any of these sources will be credible enough for you, but consumer reports downgraded the Model 3's recommendation.
https://www.consumerreports.org/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/tesla-model-3-loses-cr-recommendation-over-reliability-issues/
And Tesla admitted the lack of support structure with this pledge to increase its service branch.
No one's arguing about the speed and power, or it's impressive technological breakthroughs, but for the actual consumer, these issues are very on topic for anyone considering an electrical video- and it does not seem like they are limited to a few anecdotal twitter users. I found all this in maybe 15 minutes, and my depth of knowledge pales in comparison to yours, Andrew.
Look just find a siteable report from a reputable source that says what the motor is made of and how those rare earth metals are worse than pollution from an ICE car and we are all good! Right now you are cryinig about 4 pounds of material in an automobile......is it uranium? NOPE! I mean, its really only fair play, I give completely verifiable info, I'm going to hold you to the same standard! I find it very interesting that your report names types of motors but not specific motors. Like all Ferrite permanent motors have the exact same specs! Again your sources have been as credible as my dogs.
That's some goalpost moving there. You were the one saying Tesla's motors don't have barely if any magnets on them citing an article written even before the motor was in full production (and which didn't really say what you interpreted from it).
Munro clearly says the motor has a Halbach array in his model 3 teardown video. A Halbach array on a 200+ hp motor is a giant chunk of neodymium magnets, period.
No one cries about 4 pounds of anything. I'm just challenging your baseless claim about Tesla motors not having barely any magnets.
Look just find a siteable report from a reputable source that says what the motor is made of and how those rare earth metals are worse than pollution from an ICE car and we are all good! Right now you are cryinig about 4 pounds of material in an automobile......is it uranium? NOPE! I mean, its really only fair play, I give completely verifiable info, I'm going to hold you to the same standard! I find it very interesting that your report names types of motors but not specific motors. Like all Ferrite permanent motors have the exact same specs! Again your sources have been as credible as my dogs.
That's some goalpost moving there. You were the one saying Tesla's motors don't have barely if any magnets on them citing an article written even before the motor was in full production (and which didn't really say what you interpreted from it).
Munro clearly says the motor has a Halbach array in his model 3 teardown video. A Halbach array on a 200+ hp motor is a giant chunk of neodymium magnets, period.
No one cries about 4 pounds of anything. I'm just challenging your baseless claim about Tesla motors not having barely any magnets.
Barely is subjective I guess. A Halbach Array can take many forms and have different arrangements. On my end I have an article stating that they use a small amount......on your end you have........wait what do you have? A unsiteable peer reviewed paper full of typos that you got from your neighbor.....and conjecture based on what other motors do. Tesla does things very different. For instance on my M3P i have 450 horsepower from 2 motors. One has no permanent magnet at all the other even by your math uses 40% less permanent magnets than other comparable motors. So My Telsa has somewhere around 25% of the magnetic material that other manufacturers will use to get 450 horsepower. I'd say 75% savings is a significant amount (hence barely any).....and thats even by your figures which I believe are spurious. Not to mention that the Models X, S, Roadster and I believe even the Semi have No permanent magnets........Yeah I'm going to stand by my assertion that compared to other manufacturers Tesla uses barely any of the rare earth metals that you are all in a twist about.
And lets face it the only reason you are pushing the amount of magnets is because you think they are bad for the environment, which again is a pretty baseless claim when compared to the technology they are replacing.
No one's arguing about the speed and power, or it's impressive technological breakthroughs, but for the actual consumer, these issues are very on topic for anyone considering an electrical video- and it does not seem like they are limited to a few anecdotal twitter users. I found all this in maybe 15 minutes, and my depth of knowledge pales in comparison to yours, Andrew.
Yes did you actually read why consumer reports removed the recommendation though? First of all its a pretty big accolade in the first place to even get a recommendation! It was removed not based on reliability issues but fit and finish issues which have already been addressed by Tesla, not reliability issues where you are going to get stuck on the side of the road.
I've already admitted repeatedly they Tesla has infrastructure and support issues. Many legacy car companies do when they release a new vehicle. Tesla is having an even harder time because they are a smaller company, they will grow into it.
The Hot cars article is so full of crap....i don't even have the time to address it.
Do you know what a recall is, its when a company has to recall their products because there is a major issue. ALL car companies do it, some quite a bit more than others, with cars that they have been making for years and years.....Do you know how many recalls Tesla has had?
Its very easy to go in the internet and find all kinds of crazy bad info about Teslas and EVs in general.....there is a lot of pressure against them. A lot of people don't even understand EV tech, I can easily find a bunch of reports that somehow claim EVS are worse for the environment that ICE cars.....but any real investigation quickly proves that thats a bunch of horseGak. Look at your sources and look at what they really are saying. Teslas and EVs are not perfect yet for everyone on the planet and every situation....but they will get there.
I've already admitted repeatedly they Tesla has infrastructure and support issues. Many legacy car companies do when they release a new vehicle. Tesla is having an even harder time because they are a smaller company, they will grow into it.
No, they are a garbage company. . . Size plays no bearing in it. Business schools have been pumping out numerous case studies over the years since Tesla was founded, and they've all come to largely the same conclusion: Tesla is a fething trainwreck, and the prime reason why it is so, is because of Elon Musk.
But I suppose you'll never see things that way, since you've been white knighting the company from the beginning.
I've already admitted repeatedly they Tesla has infrastructure and support issues. Many legacy car companies do when they release a new vehicle. Tesla is having an even harder time because they are a smaller company, they will grow into it.
No, they are a garbage company. . . Size plays no bearing in it. Business schools have been pumping out numerous case studies over the years since Tesla was founded, and they've all come to largely the same conclusion: Tesla is a fething trainwreck, and the prime reason why it is so, is because of Elon Musk.
But I suppose you'll never see things that way, since you've been white knighting the company from the beginning.
So then you should have no problem linking us to one of them......or are you just repeating what you have heard somewhere else? Probably a big fan of chasing Alpha.
I'm sure Elon is very upset about how you feel...probably wiping his tears with $100 bills as we type. I'll agree the guy doesn't know when to shut up sometimes....but hey, when you've done so many things that people say can't be done, maybe you get to act like that.
Imagine if for the last 100 years we had been driving electric cars.....and then someone just now invented the ICE car......we'd be absolutely appalled by the thing shooting poison gas everywhere and having to stop at some filling station everyday just to make it go and having to change the oil all the time....the idea is ridiculous.
Elon Musk may be an idiot. Tesla may be a badly run company. That doesn't make the Tesla a bad car. If the Tesla is a bad car it doesn't make EVs a bad idea.
I've already admitted repeatedly they Tesla has infrastructure and support issues. Many legacy car companies do when they release a new vehicle. Tesla is having an even harder time because they are a smaller company, they will grow into it.
No, they are a garbage company. . . Size plays no bearing in it. Business schools have been pumping out numerous case studies over the years since Tesla was founded, and they've all come to largely the same conclusion: Tesla is a fething trainwreck, and the prime reason why it is so, is because of Elon Musk.
But I suppose you'll never see things that way, since you've been white knighting the company from the beginning.
.
hello I am here to white knight for elon
I'd buy a telsa if I don't go with an SUV for my next vehicle
Kilkrazy wrote: Elon Musk may be an idiot. Tesla may be a badly run company. That doesn't make the Tesla a bad car. If the Tesla is a bad car it doesn't make EVs a bad idea.
Killster has the way of it. A friend of mine loves his, primarily because of the ease of "refueling" and the driverless features.
Here's my only issue. If I want to go to a competition in Arkansas, and I live in Austin, I can't use an electric car. Once that is fixed and the price comes down then we are good to go.
Kilkrazy wrote: Elon Musk may be an idiot. Tesla may be a badly run company. That doesn't make the Tesla a bad car. If the Tesla is a bad car it doesn't make EVs a bad idea.
Killster has the way of it. A friend of mine loves his, primarily because of the ease of "refueling" and the driverless features.
Here's my only issue. If I want to go to a competition in Arkansas, and I live in Austin, I can't use an electric car. Once that is fixed and the price comes down then we are good to go.
Pretty much this. Your average citizen has to travel. Period. So our choice is either wait and skip travelling until EV catches up, or own a hybrid/ICE. That's it.
I guess you could always throw money down the drain on Greyhound, but that's just a stupid overexpenditure.
Kilkrazy wrote: Elon Musk may be an idiot. Tesla may be a badly run company. That doesn't make the Tesla a bad car. If the Tesla is a bad car it doesn't make EVs a bad idea.
Killster has the way of it. A friend of mine loves his, primarily because of the ease of "refueling" and the driverless features.
Here's my only issue. If I want to go to a competition in Arkansas, and I live in Austin, I can't use an electric car. Once that is fixed and the price comes down then we are good to go.
Pretty much this. Your average citizen has to travel. Period. So our choice is either wait and skip travelling until EV catches up, or own a hybrid/ICE. That's it.
I guess you could always throw money down the drain on Greyhound, but that's just a stupid overexpenditure.
Greyhound is not going to let me carry a bags full of competition gear and ammo...
Depending on how the numbers work out, and how frequently you need to do a 1,000-mile round trip (and whether you're doing that drive in one go), it might be feasible to own an electric car for day-to-day commuting then hire something for the odd occasions.
I hope a zombie apocalypse doesn't happen in the next 10 years, I'd really like to see what EVs are like in 2030. If they can double the average range and drop destination charing times down to like a quarter of what they are now and make them 5-10 minutes, I think EVs will really take off.
I'm probably not gonna be able to get into a model 3 before the end of june when the tax break goes down, so I think I'm gonna stick with my jeep for now and wait and save up for the Model Y, or the VW ID Buzz.
Necros wrote: I hope a zombie apocalypse doesn't happen in the next 10 years, I'd really like to see what EVs are like in 2030. If they can double the average range and drop destination charing times down to like a quarter of what they are now and make them 5-10 minutes, I think EVs will really take off.
I'm probably not gonna be able to get into a model 3 before the end of june when the tax break goes down, so I think I'm gonna stick with my jeep for now and wait and save up for the Model Y, or the VW ID Buzz.
As I'm finishing up school, I've been seeing, through the course of light project research, that there is a lot of interest in the VW bus coming in a couple years. What remains to be seen, IMO, is whether that interest is due to its electricness, or it being the latest throwback model vehicle.
But as you note, the thing holding them back, for now, is range and charge times. The problem is, that is a very hard nut to crack. . . . If you've watched every episode of "James May's Cars of the People" you will have seen the episode where he talks about EVs, and how the first ones from 1908 or so, have the same range as the modern EVs do. Getting performance and distance out of a battery is a huge obstacle at this point, and the engineers who solve that problem will become ridiculously rich (most likely). I say that, because many of the other ideas that I personally have seen have been "shot down" by various people in the industry. For instance, in an EV, treating batteries in a way that is more like gasoline: on a long journey, the EV driver pulls into a service station, pulls up to the "pump", pays, and an attendent unhooks a couple bits and bobs, and does a full battery swap. The dead battery goes onto the charging station that the fresh one just came off of, and you're essentially refueled. Something akin to a jumbo sized cordless drill battery setup.
The monetary investment in that may (or may not) be required to make EVs more viable in a country as large as the US may be one of the largest hold-ups in the adoption of EVs. They may work great on an individual level for people who live in SF, or NYC or similar places that do have some charging stations and other things available right now, but they do seem to work best for those people who live in those places and rarely leave those places except via other modes of transport (ie, flying).
Barely is subjective I guess. A Halbach Array can take many forms and have different arrangements.
Dude, you didn't even know your Tesla had a HA or even knew what one was five posts ago. You have customs data of Tesla importing huge quantities of magnets from China, you have several videos where you can look at the M3 motor cross-section and make a good guess at it. There's a good net consensus on the M3 NdFeB content which would put it top of the class. If your blind shilling for that company doesn't let you admit it it's ok, neither of us particularly care about magnet use (which ultimately is an economic rather than environmental choice).
Do you know what a recall is, its when a company has to recall their products because there is a major issue. ALL car companies do it, some quite a bit more than others, with cars that they have been making for years and years.....Do you know how many recalls Tesla has had?
And why is a new company pushing the envelope of automotive engineering have so little recalls?
I've already admitted repeatedly they Tesla has infrastructure and support issues. Many legacy car companies do when they release a new vehicle. Tesla is having an even harder time because they are a smaller company, they will grow into it.
No, they are a garbage company..
I can see the normal FUD circlejerk is alive and well here too
My Model 3 is a better car than my Audi A6. It's about as fast as my Viper. I have no complaints, and patiently awaiting that "tesla killer" that everyone seems to have in the works...for the last 5 years. But hey, if we can get plastic sisters, I guess anything is possible.
Barely is subjective I guess. A Halbach Array can take many forms and have different arrangements.
Dude, you didn't even know your Tesla had a HA or even knew what one was five posts ago. You have customs data of Tesla importing huge quantities of magnets from China, you have several videos where you can look at the M3 motor cross-section and make a good guess at it. There's a good net consensus on the M3 NdFeB content which would put it top of the class. If your blind shilling for that company doesn't let you admit it it's ok, neither of us particularly care about magnet use (which ultimately is an economic rather than environmental choice).
Do you know what a recall is, its when a company has to recall their products because there is a major issue. ALL car companies do it, some quite a bit more than others, with cars that they have been making for years and years.....Do you know how many recalls Tesla has had?
And why is a new company pushing the envelope of automotive engineering have so little recalls?
DUUUUDE!, You have no idea what I know. I know that pretty much every argument you have put together has been baseless crap. unfounded and unsitable. Yes there have been recall, but in comparison they have been minimal as I showed you in the rport on recalls. Should I list how many times Ford has recalled their F-150, a truck thay hve been making since God knows when........you would think after a while they would get it right, some of the trucks have been recallled 4 times, sometimes to fix the recalled fix! So yeah, i'm going to give a new company a little room on a new product that has had some minor issues. You might as well be telling me Teslas catch on fire, because that appears to be the level of knowledge and insight you express in your argument.
And you can list raw tonnage of rare earth all you want. I've shown you that my model 3 uses about 25% of the material that other manufacturers use to attain the same level of performance. Your one (spurious ) article says they use about 4 pounds if you extrapolate the cost of "exotic materials" vs cost per ton.
Here's my only issue. If I want to go to a competition in Arkansas, and I live in Austin, I can't use an electric car. Once that is fixed and the price comes down then we are good to go.
Most EVs don't have great charging networks, but I bet you could get there on the Tesla Supercharging network.https://www.tesla.com/supercharger
And thats just official Tesla stations, that doesn't include the destination chargers that some restaurants, hotels and parking garages have.
I've already admitted repeatedly they Tesla has infrastructure and support issues. Many legacy car companies do when they release a new vehicle. Tesla is having an even harder time because they are a smaller company, they will grow into it.
No, they are a garbage company..
I can see the normal FUD circlejerk is alive and well here too
My Model 3 is a better car than my Audi A6. It's about as fast as my Viper. I have no complaints, and patiently awaiting that "tesla killer" that everyone seems to have in the works...for the last 5 years. But hey, if we can get plastic sisters, I guess anything is possible.
Here is the thing, even if someone made the Tesla Killer they are always talking about....until they have a charging network, its still not as good.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AndrewGPaul wrote: Depending on how the numbers work out, and how frequently you need to do a 1,000-mile round trip (and whether you're doing that drive in one go), it might be feasible to own an electric car for day-to-day commuting then hire something for the odd occasions.
I used to drive from Mobile Alabama to Cleveland and back for work. usually about 12 hours each way. I would stop for gas and food along the way. I don't think it would be so different with my Tesla. Maybe I'd take my time at food stops a little more to let the car charge, but I don't think it would add a whole lot of time. At 310 miles a charge Id have to stop at least 4 times probably more as if you drive over 80MPH it really does use electricity much more.....like significantly. The trip would cost maybe maybe $40 vs the $150 it cost me in gas, but it would take longer and have more stops....but its more than possible. Plus with EAP driving for me, it would be much more relaxed.
I can see the normal FUD circlejerk is alive and well here too
My Model 3 is a better car than my Audi A6. It's about as fast as my Viper. I have no complaints, and patiently awaiting that "tesla killer" that everyone seems to have in the works...for the last 5 years. But hey, if we can get plastic sisters, I guess anything is possible.
My comments have never been about the cars themselves. . . The "unrollable" SUV seems great for what it is. The Model 3 appears to push most of the right buttons. . . that doesn't absolve the simple facts that the company cannot meet demand, as evidenced by wait times that many people must go through https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a26948744/tesla-model-3-deliveries-delays/ (and note, that article is only talking about the model 3). Producing a good product doesn't absolve the company of poor business practices. That is now, and has been my criticism of Tesla ITT.
I can see the normal FUD circlejerk is alive and well here too
My Model 3 is a better car than my Audi A6. It's about as fast as my Viper. I have no complaints, and patiently awaiting that "tesla killer" that everyone seems to have in the works...for the last 5 years. But hey, if we can get plastic sisters, I guess anything is possible.
My comments have never been about the cars themselves. . . The "unrollable" SUV seems great for what it is. The Model 3 appears to push most of the right buttons. . . that doesn't absolve the simple facts that the company cannot meet demand, as evidenced by wait times that many people must go through https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a26948744/tesla-model-3-deliveries-delays/ (and note, that article is only talking about the model 3). Producing a good product doesn't absolve the company of poor business practices. That is now, and has been my criticism of Tesla ITT.
The company is such a dumpster fire that they have created so much demand that they can't meet it......yep thats just a terrible problem to have......seriously? I mean I get being upset about repair times. but delivery times for a new product that is in high demand? Most investors are pissed Tesla is stilll putting money into growth, so much so that they don't make a profit. As a company you don't want to over invest in production either.
The production problem they are having with the original layout of the $35000 Tesla is that it would have required another assembly line to produce the cars with a different interior configuration. They have since scratched this plan and are software limiting a much better version of the car, this has streamlined production and actually gives people a better product.
The company is such a dumpster fire that they have created so much demand that they can't meet it......yep thats just a terrible problem to have......seriously? I mean I get being upset about repair times. but delivery times for a new product that is in high demand? Most investors are pissed Tesla is stilll putting money into growth, so much so that they don't make a profit. As a company you don't want to over invest in production either.
The company is such a dumpster fire that they have created so much demand that they can't meet it......yep thats just a terrible problem to have......seriously? I mean I get being upset about repair times. but delivery times for a new product that is in high demand? Most investors are pissed Tesla is stilll putting money into growth, so much so that they don't make a profit. As a company you don't want to over invest in production either.
No I get that they are upset, but Tesla are pretty much right were they said they would be. https://cleantechnica.com/2018/03/02/tesla-model-3-actually-original-schedule/ Sure there were delays and things could have gone smoother, but for a relatively new company producing the first true mass produced EV.......people need to give them some slack. They have done, what the big legacy manufactures said couldn't be done....now they have all joined the race because Tesla led the way. That was Elon's goal in the first place, to get the other companies to start making better cars.
Andrew1975 wrote: Here is the thing, even if someone made the Tesla Killer they are always talking about....until they have a charging network, its still not as good.
Why would having a brand specific charging network be good? That sounds just wasteful. I've seen all kinds of charging station (on private and public parking spaces) that are compatible with all kinds of cars all around the city. What's the benefit from having a brand specific charging station if nobody else can use it?
That's be like having BMW/Tesla specific gas station and that sounds like a ridiculous idea and also sounds rather wasteful (especially coming from a company that wants to help with saving the planet). It's like Musk's hyperloop and tunnel idea vs. regular public transportation. Some people believe in it just because it came out of his brain but it's still just a stupid and inefficient idea.
Just throwing this out there... I ordered my Model 3 on a Tuesday, had it in my hands on Friday. Took a 1200 mile trip in it less than 24hrs after I took delivery
I only own like 50 shares of TSLA, so I'm not even a small fish compared to most holders. I do really enjoy the vision, and think the true power behind the company is going to be it's software and potentially CaaS (Car as a Service) model in the future.
Andrew1975 wrote: Here is the thing, even if someone made the Tesla Killer they are always talking about....until they have a charging network, its still not as good.
Why would having a brand specific charging network be good? That sounds just wasteful. I've seen all kinds of charging station (on private and public parking spaces) that are compatible with all kinds of cars all around the city. What's the benefit from having a brand specific charging station if nobody else can use it?
That's be like having BMW/Tesla specific gas station and that sounds like a ridiculous idea and also sounds rather wasteful (especially coming from a company that wants to help with saving the planet). It's like Musk's hyperloop and tunnel idea vs. regular public transportation. Some people believe in it just because it came out of his brain but it's still just a stupid and inefficient idea.
Tesla already has the infrastructure for EV. While you've got other 3rd parties offering level 2 DC, Tesla SC's are superior in every respect. Anyone entering the EV arena either has to 1) build their own infrastructure or 2) utilize someone else's. While Tesla is pretty closed to anyone but them using their grid, they have stated that a leasing-style program would be something to consider for other makers in the future. Barring that, you're relying on Chargepoint or the like to have a solid infrastructure... which really they don't outside of heavy urban areas.
Posche/Audi/VW already have their own chargers built (some out front of the Porsche NA HQ currently) for the Taycan since they're 800v, but have already run into the country-wide infrastructure problem. Note that the only time these chargers are really relevant is on long trips -- 95% of the time you'll be charging at home.
ncshooter426 wrote: Just throwing this out there... I ordered my Model 3 on a Tuesday, had it in my hands on Friday. Took a 1200 mile trip in it less than 24hrs after I took delivery
I only own like 50 shares of TSLA, so I'm not even a small fish compared to most holders. I do really enjoy the vision, and think the true power behind the company is going to be it's software and potentially CaaS (Car as a Service) model in the future.
I got my M3P in less than a week......but i'm not typical. I got a floor model with 1200 miles on it.....they took $6500 off the top for that. They had to ship it in for Kansas city. They then sent a model S to pick me up, I live an hour away from the store. Now I still don't have my spoiler that was supposed to come with the car, this annoys me, but I'm not going to cry about it, they will eventually send a ranger out to install it at my house. My brother got a flat when he was visiting a client, he was able to get into the clients parking lot and called Tesla. By the time he was done with his meeting a ranger had replaced the tire and put it on his account. Thats San Francisco for you though, thats Teslas backyard, but eventually thats the kind of service they want to do.
Andrew1975 wrote: Here is the thing, even if someone made the Tesla Killer they are always talking about....until they have a charging network, its still not as good.
Why would having a brand specific charging network be good? That sounds just wasteful. I've seen all kinds of charging station (on private and public parking spaces) that are compatible with all kinds of cars all around the city. What's the benefit from having a brand specific charging station if nobody else can use it?
That's be like having BMW/Tesla specific gas station and that sounds like a ridiculous idea and also sounds rather wasteful (especially coming from a company that wants to help with saving the planet). It's like Musk's hyperloop and tunnel idea vs. regular public transportation. Some people believe in it just because it came out of his brain but it's still just a stupid and inefficient idea.
Tesla built their chargers to their specs and paid for the installation. Graciously Tesla has said any car company can piggy back on them as long as they are willing to be an actual partner in the charging network, nobody has taken them up on it.https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/tesla-elon-musk-open-supercharger-network/
ncshooter426 wrote: I'm still stuck on 8.5 firmware.. I want my new games damn it LOL
Really? That means you still have pole position!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I did just see an advert on TV that I think will solve the world's problems. . .
Jaguar has the Electric I-Pace. . . . All the Jaaaag styling, without all the oil leaks!
I mean, if you absolutely hate Teslas and want to go electric its not a terrible car. Jaguar Tech and reliability has gotten much better since Tata (India) took them over (not that it could get much worse than it was). I think you are sacrificing quite a bit with the Jag, where do you even charge them? Sure most EV charging is done at home, but without remote charging as a least a reasonable option, I just couldn't justify buying one. It also lacks performance and range compared to a similarly priced Tesla. Not sure why it has a range of only 234 miles on a 90KWH battery. My Tesla get 310 on a 75KWH battery. Now Jaguar Service might be better.....well have to wait and see how they do with it.
VW (second largest auto manufacturer in the world) has a stiffy right now because they got 10,000 reservations in 24 hours for their new EV hatchback. They are saying they are overwhelmed with demand already as they only planned on building 30,000 of them. Model 3 had around 250,000 reservations in its first 24 hours.
I mean, if you absolutely hate Teslas and want to go electric its not a terrible car. Jaguar Tech and reliability has gotten much better since Tata (India) took them over (not that it could get much worse than it was). I think you are sacrificing quite a bit with the Jag, where do you even charge them? Sure most EV charging is done at home, but without remote charging as a least a reasonable option, I just couldn't justify buying one. It also lacks performance and range compared to a similarly priced Tesla. Not sure why it has a range of only 234 miles on a 90KWH battery. My Tesla get 310 on a 75KWH battery. Now Jaguar Service might be better.....well have to wait and see how they do with it.
LMFAO. . . . it was a joke. but since you seemed to take it seriously, I think there is a very certain and select crowd of people who would go for an E-I-Pace, and I think they are the type who would pass on a Tesla, regardless of the quality over the Jag, because Jag, despite their. . . . history in terms of quality (hence the oil leak joke in my comment), does have a pedigree and history. Whether its current or not, there is still a certain "pride" in the name badge. . . these are people who roll up to country clubs and are parking alongside high end Land Rovers, E and S class Benzes, 5 and 700 series BMWs. IMO, the Tesla doesn't (yet) have the name presence/prestige or whatever people want to call it that a BMW or other luxury brand does.
I mean, if you absolutely hate Teslas and want to go electric its not a terrible car. Jaguar Tech and reliability has gotten much better since Tata (India) took them over (not that it could get much worse than it was). I think you are sacrificing quite a bit with the Jag, where do you even charge them? Sure most EV charging is done at home, but without remote charging as a least a reasonable option, I just couldn't justify buying one. It also lacks performance and range compared to a similarly priced Tesla. Not sure why it has a range of only 234 miles on a 90KWH battery. My Tesla get 310 on a 75KWH battery. Now Jaguar Service might be better.....well have to wait and see how they do with it.
LMFAO. . . . it was a joke. but since you seemed to take it seriously, I think there is a very certain and select crowd of people who would go for an E-I-Pace, and I think they are the type who would pass on a Tesla, regardless of the quality over the Jag, because Jag, despite their. . . . history in terms of quality (hence the oil leak joke in my comment), does have a pedigree and history. Whether its current or not, there is still a certain "pride" in the name badge. . . these are people who roll up to country clubs and are parking alongside high end Land Rovers, E and S class Benzes, 5 and 700 series BMWs. IMO, the Tesla doesn't (yet) have the name presence/prestige or whatever people want to call it that a BMW or other luxury brand does.
Well, no. I mean. I meant it seriously. Its not a terrible car. Its just got a long way to go, and it need more infrastructure. Which I think was your major complaint about Tesla. I've seen soooooooo many, legacy car manufactures bring out their "Tesla Killers" and they get a lot of media hype, while people love to poo poo Tesla and nit pick issues. But not one of the Tesla Killers even competes really, If the I pace or E tron were the leading edge of EVs, without a charging network, I wouldn't believe in EVs and I wouldn't have bought one, but that doesn't make them bad cars necessarily. However I think their capabilities put them in the range of secondary transportation, where you still have to have a second car. I-pace, E-tron, Tycan, Kona, the list goes on and on.
I'd also argue about brand recognition. Many times when I go to fancy places you will see them park the Tesla right out front with the Porshes and ferraris, the Tesla brand may not have the lineage, but it has the cool factor.
Growth takes a lot of energy, and Elon is definitely pushing the envelope, maybe too hard, too fast, but their are a lot of dogs on his heels. Tesla is either going to burn out or its going to just take over.
Growth takes a lot of energy, and Elon is definitely pushing the envelope, maybe too hard, too fast, but their are a lot of dogs on his heels. Tesla is either going to burn out or its going to just take over.
IMHO, the thing that will push EVs forward is the one thing Tesla isn't doing: Racing. . . . Say what you will about Formula E, I don't much care to watch it myself, but I suspect that like Le Mans and other hard core racing series, Formula E will produce new tech/advancements that will make their way into passenger EVs sooner, than just producing cars alone. We can look at racing history, especially Le Mans, and see the vast bulk of improvements in performance and safety have come from racing.
Now, I won't call Audi and VW and other company's EV offerings "Tesla Killers" and I don't think they would call them that either, what I do think is that a company like Audi, when its marketing its E-Tron, or VW their ID Buzz, they aren't trying to "kill" Tesla, they are marketing to Audi and VW customers. And that is where the "science" of marketing comes in to play, those companies know through mountains of data the type of people that they get, which is largely true of basically any company that has a marketing department. That sort of term seems like something that journalists and media use moreso than the companies themselves (unless of course, say. . . Ford announces the release of a new EV that they are calling the Edison because everyone would instantly see the connection).
I think your final point is rather spot on. . . I took a scroll through the news tab of Yahoo Finance on Tesla, and without clicking on articles, the gist of the headlines were: "will tesla ever turn a profit?" "is tesla dragging Panasonic down?" "Tesla seeks court to drop lawsuit" (this last one is interesting, because the sub-heading is talking about shareholders suing the company over Musk's compensation). . . Meanwhile, as we've talked about VW bringing EVs to the market, and now M-B has made announcements as well, we know for certain that neither of those companies is going to bring EVs to market at the cost of profitability; they will generally make decisions, and use their infrastructure to ensure that they stay profitable.
I've already admitted repeatedly they Tesla has infrastructure and support issues. Many legacy car companies do when they release a new vehicle. Tesla is having an even harder time because they are a smaller company, they will grow into it.
No, they are a garbage company..
I can see the normal FUD circlejerk is alive and well here too
My Model 3 is a better car than my Audi A6. It's about as fast as my Viper. I have no complaints, and patiently awaiting that "tesla killer" that everyone seems to have in the works...for the last 5 years. But hey, if we can get plastic sisters, I guess anything is possible.
Gee Mr. Stark, couldn't you come up with a solution to the charging supply issues between building suits of armor?
DUUUUDE!, You have no idea what I know. I know that pretty much every argument you have put together has been baseless crap. unfounded and unsitable.
Read your own posts on the subject. They convey the absolute opposite.
Tesla built their chargers to their specs and paid for the installation. Graciously Tesla has said any car company can piggy back on them as long as they are willing to be an actual partner in the charging network, nobody has taken them up on
Why would they sign for a proprietary system while there was a common system already in development?
DUUUUDE!, You have no idea what I know. I know that pretty much every argument you have put together has been baseless crap. unfounded and unsitable.
Read your own posts on the subject. They convey the absolute opposite.
Right, says the guy who thinks rare earth metals are worse for the environment than oil.
Tesla built their chargers to their specs and paid for the installation. Graciously Tesla has said any car company can piggy back on them as long as they are willing to be an actual partner in the charging network, nobody has taken them up on
Why would they sign for a proprietary system while there was a common system already in development?
Because Tesla Chargers are already better and deployed. The bigger question is why not piggy back on an already successful and deployed system and make that system expand. Its like they really want to back Betamax, when VHS is already on the market.
I've already admitted repeatedly they Tesla has infrastructure and support issues. Many legacy car companies do when they release a new vehicle. Tesla is having an even harder time because they are a smaller company, they will grow into it.
No, they are a garbage company..
I can see the normal FUD circlejerk is alive and well here too
My Model 3 is a better car than my Audi A6. It's about as fast as my Viper. I have no complaints, and patiently awaiting that "tesla killer" that everyone seems to have in the works...for the last 5 years. But hey, if we can get plastic sisters, I guess anything is possible.
Gee Mr. Stark, couldn't you come up with a solution to the charging supply issues between building suits of armor?
Besides, he doesnt have a charging supply problem....because he has a Tesla, hes in the US. Could it be better, sure, but its getting there. Also there is this. https://www.plugshare.com/
I'm not jealous of him claiming to own three top dollar high performance cars, I'm skeptical. Though given GW's prices as of late, it might actually make sense that a multimillionaire would be on here.
A hybrid would be the best of both worlds I guess.
Not sure but I'll consider a BMW 235 xe next time. Its an all-wheel drive and a hybrid with about 230 PS (horse power).
I've already admitted repeatedly they Tesla has infrastructure and support issues. Many legacy car companies do when they release a new vehicle. Tesla is having an even harder time because they are a smaller company, they will grow into it.
No, they are a garbage company..
I can see the normal FUD circlejerk is alive and well here too
My Model 3 is a better car than my Audi A6. It's about as fast as my Viper. I have no complaints, and patiently awaiting that "tesla killer" that everyone seems to have in the works...for the last 5 years. But hey, if we can get plastic sisters, I guess anything is possible.
Gee Mr. Stark, couldn't you come up with a solution to the charging supply issues between building suits of armor?
DUUUUDE!, You have no idea what I know. I know that pretty much every argument you have put together has been baseless crap. unfounded and unsitable.
Read your own posts on the subject. They convey the absolute opposite.
Right, says the guy who thinks rare earth metals are worse for the environment than oil.
Care to point out where I said that?
Tesla built their chargers to their specs and paid for the installation. Graciously Tesla has said any car company can piggy back on them as long as they are willing to be an actual partner in the charging network, nobody has taken them up on
Why would they sign for a proprietary system while there was a common system already in development?
Because Tesla Chargers are already better and deployed. The bigger question is why not piggy back on an already successful and deployed system and make that system expand. Its like they really want to back Betamax, when VHS is already on the market.
Except CCS is VHS and superchargers are the Betamax.
CCS network is already bigger than Tesla's in most countries. With possible faster chargers without having to wait for a new version as is the case of Tesla.
Tesla has basically stopped building new chargers because they're short of cash so the gap will only increase.
Except CCS is VHS and superchargers are the Betamax.
CCS network is already bigger than Tesla's in most countries. With possible faster chargers without having to wait for a new version as is the case of Tesla.
Tesla has basically stopped building new chargers because they're short of cash so the gap will only increase.
Nope.... SC deployment hasn't changed at all, and has nothing to do with cash on hand. You really need to start getting your info from places other than short seller twitters
Except CCS is VHS and superchargers are the Betamax.
CCS network is already bigger than Tesla's in most countries. With possible faster chargers without having to wait for a new version as is the case of Tesla.
Tesla has basically stopped building new chargers because they're short of cash so the gap will only increase.
Nope.... SC deployment hasn't changed at all, and has nothing to do with cash on hand. You really need to start getting your info from places other than short seller twitters
Why don't you find out how many new chargers Tesla has built in Europe in 2019 (after promising all Europe coverage back in December)
CCS chargers are being built at a pace of around 5 per day (having multiple companies involved helps).
And it had everything to do with cash. Tesla CapEx is now lower than depreciation that's a clear cash conservation strategy.
wuestenfux wrote: A hybrid would be the best of both worlds I guess.
Not sure but I'll consider a BMW 235 xe next time. Its an all-wheel drive and a hybrid with about 230 PS (horse power).
Problem with hybrids is now you have the issues of both systems. Still all the maintenance of an ICE car.
Except CCS is VHS and superchargers are the Betamax.
CCS network is already bigger than Tesla's in most countries. With possible faster chargers without having to wait for a new version as is the case of Tesla.
Tesla has basically stopped building new chargers because they're short of cash so the gap will only increase.
Nope.... SC deployment hasn't changed at all, and has nothing to do with cash on hand. You really need to start getting your info from places other than short seller twitters
Why don't you find out how many new chargers Tesla has built in Europe in 2019 (after promising all Europe coverage back in December)
CCS chargers are being built at a pace of around 5 per day (having multiple companies involved helps).
And it had everything to do with cash. Tesla CapEx is now lower than depreciation that's a clear cash conservation strategy.
wuestenfux wrote: A hybrid would be the best of both worlds I guess.
Not sure but I'll consider a BMW 235 xe next time. Its an all-wheel drive and a hybrid with about 230 PS (horse power).
Problem with hybrids is now you have the issues of both systems. Still all the maintenance of an ICE car.
Except CCS is VHS and superchargers are the Betamax.
CCS network is already bigger than Tesla's in most countries. With possible faster chargers without having to wait for a new version as is the case of Tesla.
Tesla has basically stopped building new chargers because they're short of cash so the gap will only increase.
Nope.... SC deployment hasn't changed at all, and has nothing to do with cash on hand. You really need to start getting your info from places other than short seller twitters
Why don't you find out how many new chargers Tesla has built in Europe in 2019 (after promising all Europe coverage back in December)
CCS chargers are being built at a pace of around 5 per day (having multiple companies involved helps).
And it had everything to do with cash. Tesla CapEx is now lower than depreciation that's a clear cash conservation strategy.
He is aware of that, he simply chooses to ignore it since it wrecks his "Tesla is the super special bestest perfectest EVER!!!!!!!!!11!!!!!!!!!!" street teaming.
He is aware of that, he simply chooses to ignore it since it wrecks his "Tesla is the super special bestest perfectest EVER!!!!!!!!!11!!!!!!!!!!" street teaming.
I don't really care if he's talking Europe or United States. We know already Teslas Superchargers are better and more available in the US. Model 3 is taking Europe by storm right now. Is it possible that one standard rules the US and one rules Europe, possibly. Lets face it though, the one that rules the US isn't going anywhere for awhile. The Tesla network killer is as visible now as the "Tesla Killer" car. I'm still waiting for someone that even competes much less kills.
I see a lot more of all the other models of EVs in the UK than the Tesla. For instance it's a rare day I don't see two or three BMW 13s, or Nissan Leafs.
I see a Tesla nearly every day because there's usually one parked at the charger in the Park and Ride, next to the two Leafs attached to the EU charger.
IDK if the Tesla can connect to EU standard EV plugs, but if it can't, it's not going to have much of a future. But that's only a matter of changing the plug and the inverter (?) which supplies the electricity to the battery.
Aftermarket adapter kits will probably sort that problem out, unless Tesla aggressively goes after producers in hopes to maintain exclusivity, which would be pretty dumb on their part when to comes to the REST of the planet that isn't the US. It wouldn't be shooting yourself in the foot, it'd be bathing in napalm.
Kilkrazy wrote:IDK if the Tesla can connect to EU standard EV plugs,
I think they can. There are some chargers a few metres from my home and all kinds of cars are hooked up there. I think I have seen Teslas there (but mostly BMW, and others) and if I remember correctly there does exist some EU law about interoperability of chargers (kinda how all smartphones are supposed to be able to use the same type of USB chargers these days).
Kilkrazy wrote:IDK if the Tesla can connect to EU standard EV plugs,
I think they can. There are some chargers a few metres from my home and all kinds of cars are hooked up there. I think I have seen Teslas there (but mostly BMW, and others) and if I remember correctly there does exist some EU law about interoperability of chargers (kinda how all smartphones are supposed to be able to use the same type of USB chargers these days).
Tesla already switched to CSS in Europe for the model 3 to make charging easier there. Tesla also makes a CSS adapter for models made before the switch. My Tesla came with an adapter so that I can charge pretty much anywhere in the US that uses J1772 chargers which is most non Tesla Chargers in the US. Also many of the newer Tesla chargers in Europe are combination chargers featuring a Tesla charger and a CSS charger. Tesla has stated they are not trying to create a walled garden for Tesla vehicles, but if others want to share the Tesla chargers they want real partners. Teslas goal has always been to create and environment friendly to EV saturation, not a Tesla only club.
Tesla-CCS Superchargers will enable Model 3 to charge at up to 250 kW, there are about 400 banks of these in Europe. The other CCSDC fast chargers (like the 175 kW Fastned units) so far provided up to 125 kW of power, there are 95 of these in all of Europe! Most CSS chargers are at only about 50 KW which is very slow. As you can see the Telsla Chargers even when fitted with CCS connections are more powerful than the current CSS standard, Tesla V3 chargers are even more powerful.
So as far as charging goes, yes there are more chargers that are not Tesla....but Telsa has the largest network of High Speed Chargers in both Europe and The US! Again while most of your charging will be done at home, when you go on a trip you want the fastest charging possible......that currently is Tesla. Which is again why I say EVEN IN EUROPE Teslas network of charging is better!
The hard truth of the charger battle basically comes down to this, the problem today is that the 3 fast charging standards were developed for different purposes. CHAdeMO was designed as a urban backup charger for those rare occasions when you get a little far from home and need a little extra juice to get back. Tesla's standard was designed to be a small, clean connector that can handle everything from 120volt 8amps, 1 KW AC to 250 KW DC Superchargers. CCS was designed by ICE companies that did not want EVs, also to conflict with Tesla and make use of the J-1772 connector which had carefully been made to NOT support high power charging AND be delayed past when Tesla actually had to start selling cars. Europe went their own way to intentionally NOT be compatible with US systems (that were already in place) as a protectionist move to make it harder for American companies to sell in Europe.
AndrewGPaul wrote: If the US system was deliberately designed to be inferior as you claim, then it's probably a good thing it's not been adopted elsewhere.
CCS was designed by ICE companies that did not want EVs, also to conflict with Tesla and make use of the J-1772 connector which had carefully been made to NOT support high power charging AND be delayed past when Tesla actually had to start selling cars. Europe went their own way to intentionally NOT be compatible with US systems (that were already in place) as a protectionist move to make it harder for American companies to sell in Europe.
Had to lol at this, honestly.
Tesla is not an American system, it's a Tesla system. CCS was agreed on an industry association level ( which Tesla joined later, and half-assedly) and everyone else bar Chinese in China and Japanese in Japan are moving to CCS.
GM uses CCS in their electric cars and it's pretty much a given that Ford and FCA will also follow suit.
CCS can also be scalated further than supercharger (hence the bulkier pins and general look) but when you design a standard longevity is a major requirement.
Just checking in to see if this is still the Official Dakka Tesla Advertising and PR thread. I see that it still is.
I will note that the general attitude of the pro-Tesla posters here is remarkably similar to what I have encountered in my investigations into the possibility of buying an EV in the UK. Everywhere you go you have to wade through piles of comments from Tesla supporters reacting to every last piece of criticism of their beloved brand, or even praise for a rival. Just yesterday I was watching a video from a British car magazine about the best EVs you can buy and the comments section was completely overtaken by Tesla fanboys demanding to know why the Model 3 wasn't on the list (hint: it's not available in the UK yet).
My own continuing investigation has shown that Tesla is possibly losing its place as the best EV on the market. Other cars now exist with very similar ranges and the non-Tesla charging infrastructure in many parts of Europe is now approaching practical usefulness. You have Jaguar (and soon Audi) competing at the top end of the market with Tesla and still being much cheaper, and in the middle where the Model 3 will sit the Kona and e-Niro match or exceed the Tesla's range while also leveraging the existing servicing and repair facilities those bigger car brands can take advantage of.
To be fair, you are going to have a difficult time convincing someone that the not-insignificant chunk of money they have just laid out on a car was not for the best possible vehicle one can buy.
AndrewGPaul wrote: If the US system was deliberately designed to be inferior as you claim, then it's probably a good thing it's not been adopted elsewhere.
Your reading comprehension is amazing.
I just read the words you wrote :
CCS was designed by ICE companies that did not want EVs, also to conflict with Tesla and make use of the J-1772 connector which had carefully been made to NOT support high power charging
mind you, it looks like CCS is being used in the EU, so your comment I was replying to seems to be inaccurate and thus my attempt at a cheap joke has fallen flat.
CCS was designed by ICE companies that did not want EVs, also to conflict with Tesla and make use of the J-1772 connector which had carefully been made to NOT support high power charging AND be delayed past when Tesla actually had to start selling cars. Europe went their own way to intentionally NOT be compatible with US systems (that were already in place) as a protectionist move to make it harder for American companies to sell in Europe.
Had to lol at this, honestly.
Tesla is not an American system, it's a Tesla system. CCS was agreed on an industry association level ( which Tesla joined later, and half-assedly) and everyone else bar Chinese in China and Japanese in Japan are moving to CCS.
GM uses CCS in their electric cars and it's pretty much a given that Ford and FCA will also follow suit.
CCS can also be scalated further than supercharger (hence the bulkier pins and general look) but when you design a standard longevity is a major requirement.
CSS (which again is inferior) was agreed to by a bunch of companies truly interested in continuing to make ICE cars and hamstring EV rollout. Teslas system was built from the ground up to support the EV market. I'd really love to see some kind of proof that CCS is more scalable than Tesla, just because the connector is giant and hidious doesn't mean its any better. Tesla V2 superchargers are already more powerful than CSS and Tesla V3 chargers are even more powerful still. Case in point the V3 powercord is actually thinner than the V2.
Thats pretty nice looking vs this monstrosity
That looks like when the USSR would make some sad attempt at copying US tech and claim reliability just because it was bigger and bulkier.
AndrewGPaul wrote: If the US system was deliberately designed to be inferior as you claim, then it's probably a good thing it's not been adopted elsewhere.
Your reading comprehension is amazing.
I just read the words you wrote :
CCS was designed by ICE companies that did not want EVs, also to conflict with Tesla and make use of the J-1772 connector which had carefully been made to NOT support high power charging
mind you, it looks like CCS is being used in the EU, so your comment I was replying to seems to be inaccurate and thus my attempt at a cheap joke has fallen flat.
You read them poorly. Where did I say CCS is not being used in the EU or The US? Teslas Supercharging system is the more capable system of all three, no matter what connector you are using.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slipspace wrote: Just checking in to see if this is still the Official Dakka Tesla Advertising and PR thread. I see that it still is.
I will note that the general attitude of the pro-Tesla posters here is remarkably similar to what I have encountered in my investigations into the possibility of buying an EV in the UK. Everywhere you go you have to wade through piles of comments from Tesla supporters reacting to every last piece of criticism of their beloved brand, or even praise for a rival. Just yesterday I was watching a video from a British car magazine about the best EVs you can buy and the comments section was completely overtaken by Tesla fanboys demanding to know why the Model 3 wasn't on the list (hint: it's not available in the UK yet).
My own continuing investigation has shown that Tesla is possibly losing its place as the best EV on the market. Other cars now exist with very similar ranges and the non-Tesla charging infrastructure in many parts of Europe is now approaching practical usefulness. You have Jaguar (and soon Audi) competing at the top end of the market with Tesla and still being much cheaper, and in the middle where the Model 3 will sit the Kona and e-Niro match or exceed the Tesla's range while also leveraging the existing servicing and repair facilities those bigger car brands can take advantage of.
I mean, this is pretty typical car talk. Try going to a Mustang vs Camaro argument, this is actually quite civil in comparison.
Cool points though, you let me know when someone has better range or performance than a Tesla though, ill be more than happy to have a look.....but it will be some time in future for sure. I'm aslo not sure where you are getting that the Jaguar or Audi will be cheaper. Possibly in Europe but even vs the more expensive Model Y the price comparison is not looking good for the competition, and again the performance numbers of the Y should still be better than what you are seeing from the others.
" The Tesla Model Y's biggest advantage will be its affordable price, which will be as low as $48,200 (including a $1,200 destination fee) when the Long-Range rear-wheel-drive model launches next fall. That's set to fall to as little as $39,000 (before destination) when the Standard Range model arrives in spring 2021. On the other hand, the priciest Performance variant will cost $61,200 after destination.
Those prices are extremely competitive when compared with the Model Y's rivals. The Polestar 2, for instance, is set to start at $55,000, the Audi E-Tron will be $75,795 with destination, The Jaguar I-Pace starts at $70,525. No price has yet been confirmed for the Mercedes-Benz EQC, but a figure around $70,000 is expected."
Kilkrazy wrote: It's a law of physics that a wider conductor has lower resistance than a narrower one, and produces less waste heat and can sustain a higher current.
Sure thats physics.....but thats not the only factor...lets have a look shall we.
Ill grant that this is a bit dated, but not so much. But the big bulky guys here were not faster than the nice slim package of the V2 Tesla charger either.
. I'd really love to see some kind of proof that CCS is more scalable than Tesla, just because the connector is giant and hidious doesn't mean its any better.
Tesla v3 superchargers with liquid cooled cables charge up to 250kw, CCS liquid cooled chargers now charge up to 350kw with the fastest currently deployed chargers (some of them in the US, too). There are more 350kw chargers in use than v3 SCs, too (a single location so far).
And the connector can still go as far as 450kw while the Tesla is pretty much maxed out.
. I'd really love to see some kind of proof that CCS is more scalable than Tesla, just because the connector is giant and hidious doesn't mean its any better.
Tesla v3 superchargers with liquid cooled cables charge up to 250kw, CCS liquid cooled chargers now charge up to 350kw with the fastest currently deployed chargers (some of them in the US, too). There are more 350kw chargers in use than v3 SCs, too (a single location so far).
And the connector can still go as far as 450kw while the Tesla is pretty much maxed out.
Cool points though, you let me know when someone has better range or performance than a Tesla though, ill be more than happy to have a look.....but it will be some time in future for sure. I'm aslo not sure where you are getting that the Jaguar or Audi will be cheaper. Possibly in Europe but even vs the more expensive Model Y the price comparison is not looking good for the competition, and again the performance numbers of the Y should still be better than what you are seeing from the others.
" The Tesla Model Y's biggest advantage will be its affordable price, which will be as low as $48,200 (including a $1,200 destination fee) when the Long-Range rear-wheel-drive model launches next fall. That's set to fall to as little as $39,000 (before destination) when the Standard Range model arrives in spring 2021. On the other hand, the priciest Performance variant will cost $61,200 after destination.
Those prices are extremely competitive when compared with the Model Y's rivals. The Polestar 2, for instance, is set to start at $55,000, the Audi E-Tron will be $75,795 with destination, The Jaguar I-Pace starts at $70,525. No price has yet been confirmed for the Mercedes-Benz EQC, but a figure around $70,000 is expected."
The Model Y isn't what they're competing against, and likely won't be available until at least 2021 anyway. They're competing against the Model X. I'm genuinely confused why you'd compare to the Model Y unless it was just to make the Tesla look better. You might as well compare the cost of a Honda Civic to an Aston Martin - they're completely different cars. The range is similar (slightly longer for the Tesla) but the Jaguar is currently over £20,000 cheaper in the UK and just over $15,000 cheaper in the US.
. I'd really love to see some kind of proof that CCS is more scalable than Tesla, just because the connector is giant and hidious doesn't mean its any better.
Tesla v3 superchargers with liquid cooled cables charge up to 250kw, CCS liquid cooled chargers now charge up to 350kw with the fastest currently deployed chargers (some of them in the US, too). There are more 350kw chargers in use than v3 SCs, too (a single location so far).
And the connector can still go as far as 450kw while the Tesla is pretty much maxed out.
While Tesla still has the single v3 demo charger which is closed to the grand public.
And yes, cooling the cable is pretty much the last lever to get extra charging speeds. Once you get there you know the pins are pretty much maxed. They might, maybe, with better cooling or changing the pin materials get as far up as 300 but the laws of physics are pretty tough on that one. Either more pins (which is the apparently what Tesla will be doing with the Semi megacharger if it ever comes to work) or thicker pins, which is what CCS did.
In any case here is a very good reason on why an industry-wide standard is always a good thing. On one hand you have Tesla doing things their way, on the other side there's everyone else. Doesn't really matter who makes what, because ultimately everyone benefits from more and faster chargers.
Andrew1975 wrote: Where did I say CCS is not being used in the EU or The US?
I never claimed you said CCS wasn't being used in the US. However, the structure of your paragragh implied to me that Tesla's system, CCS and CHAdeMo were all being used in the US. You then said that the EU was implementing a different system to that developed in the USA (the implication there being that you meant CCS).
The hard truth of the charger battle basically comes down to this, the problem today is that the 3 fast charging standards were developed for different purposes. CHAdeMO was designed as a urban backup charger for those rare occasions when you get a little far from home and need a little extra juice to get back. Tesla's standard was designed to be a small, clean connector that can handle everything from 120volt 8amps, 1 KW AC to 250 KW DC Superchargers. CCS was designed by ICE companies that did not want EVs, also to conflict with Tesla and make use of the J-1772 connector which had carefully been made to NOT support high power charging AND be delayed past when Tesla actually had to start selling cars. Europe went their own way to intentionally NOT be compatible with US systems (that were already in place) as a protectionist move to make it harder for American companies to sell in Europe.
(emphasis mine). Since CHAdeMO is Japanese and Tesla are using a proprietary closed system, the only on left for the EU to not be comaptible with, based on your words, is CCS.
I drove a hybrid for 11 years. Other than some factory recalls (4, I think), I never had a mechanical problem. They paid for the recall work, in each case.
I got a new car in March, but I went with Honda CRV. I wanted something a bit larger as we have been going on more road trips.
I considered another hybrid and even full on electric. In the end, since I keep a car for at least 8 years, I think that 8 more years of the electric car industry picking a fething system they can agree on (Betamax vs VHS) and several more years of infrastructure growth (more charging stations acrosss the US), and I will be more comfortable making the switch to electric.
I’m all for it. Not for the environment, mind you. I don’t have kids, I got mine, feth the environment. I would do it to save on gas.
kronk wrote: I drove a hybrid for 11 years. Other than some factory recalls (4, I think), I never had a mechanical problem. They paid for the recall work, in each case.
I got a new car in March, but I went with Honda CRV. I wanted something a bit larger as we have been going on more road trips.
I considered another hybrid and even full on electric. In the end, since I keep a car for at least 8 years, I think that 8 more years of the electric car industry picking a fething system they can agree on (Betamax vs VHS) and several more years of infrastructure growth (more charging stations acrosss the US), and I will be more comfortable making the switch to electric.
I’m all for it. Not for the environment, mind you. I don’t have kids, I got mine, feth the environment. I would do it to save on gas.
That's our attitude too. It's not really an environmental thing, it's just if we can save money on fuel costs and the car itself is practical to use for mainly city/urban travel with a few longer-distance road trips thrown in per year, we'd be very interested in picking up an EV. The prices at the moment are verging on the high side and the ranges a little on the low side but it's at least a the point where we're considering it.
AndrewGPaul wrote: If the US system was deliberately designed to be inferior as you claim, then it's probably a good thing it's not been adopted elsewhere.
Your reading comprehension is amazing.
Andrew or Andrew? I'm confused.
Tesla is not a big hit in Germany these days. I guess we'll see ''better'' e-cars ahead.
Just Tony wrote: https://www.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-tesla-needs-cut-180656865.html
Since we're linking to stories to back up our stances. Can't wait to see the "spin" on this one...
This highlights a potential weakness with Tesla which, paradoxically, is also one of its biggest strengths. It has its own proprietary charging network, which is great if you own one, but if you're concerned about the company's future it's a bit of a turn-off as far as potentially buying one goes. If there's a chance the company goes under there's a chance you lose that charging infrastructure too. It's admittedly probably a small chance but it's enough to cause concern given the cost of buying a Tesla.
AndrewGPaul wrote: If the US system was deliberately designed to be inferior as you claim, then it's probably a good thing it's not been adopted elsewhere.
Your reading comprehension is amazing.
Andrew or Andrew? I'm confused.
Tesla is not a big hit in Germany these days. I guess we'll see ''better'' e-cars ahead.
The original US system was designed to be very limiting, they didnt really want people buying EVs, thats why Tesla created their own.
This highlights a potential weakness with Tesla which, paradoxically, is also one of its biggest strengths. It has its own proprietary charging network, which is great if you own one, but if you're concerned about the company's future it's a bit of a turn-off as far as potentially buying one goes. If there's a chance the company goes under there's a chance you lose that charging infrastructure too. It's admittedly probably a small chance but it's enough to cause concern given the cost of buying a Tesla.
Not at all, in the US you can use and adapter and in Europe Teslas don't even need one. Teslas can use any CSS charger in Europe....they just wont generally wont charge as fast as a Tesla charger.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just Tony wrote: https://www.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-tesla-needs-cut-180656865.html
Since we're linking to stories to back up our stances. Can't wait to see the "spin" on this one...
The article is in itself spin. Just spun by all the FUDs
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote: Tesla's stock price has drop from 258 to 195 in 30 days. wow.
. I'd really love to see some kind of proof that CCS is more scalable than Tesla, just because the connector is giant and hidious doesn't mean its any better.
Tesla v3 superchargers with liquid cooled cables charge up to 250kw, CCS liquid cooled chargers now charge up to 350kw with the fastest currently deployed chargers (some of them in the US, too). There are more 350kw chargers in use than v3 SCs, too (a single location so far).
And the connector can still go as far as 450kw while the Tesla is pretty much maxed out.
While Tesla still has the single v3 demo charger which is closed to the grand public.
And yes, cooling the cable is pretty much the last lever to get extra charging speeds. Once you get there you know the pins are pretty much maxed. They might, maybe, with better cooling or changing the pin materials get as far up as 300 but the laws of physics are pretty tough on that one. Either more pins (which is the apparently what Tesla will be doing with the Semi megacharger if it ever comes to work) or thicker pins, which is what CCS did.
In any case here is a very good reason on why an industry-wide standard is always a good thing. On one hand you have Tesla doing things their way, on the other side there's everyone else. Doesn't really matter who makes what, because ultimately everyone benefits from more and faster chargers.
The 350 CSS chargers are also cooled. THe fact remains that Tesla still has the largest network of fast chargers in the US and Europe. Are there a few very fast CSS chargers, sure. The vast majority of them hover around 50KWH. Which is pretty much unusable for distance charging.
Standards are great if they are good standards. Teslas charging standards have been far superior than anyone elses.
Just Tony wrote: https://www.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-tesla-needs-cut-180656865.html
Since we're linking to stories to back up our stances. Can't wait to see the "spin" on this one...
The article is in itself spin. Just spun by all the FUDs
Wow, you didn't disappoint. I will just go ahead and assume that you will call anything pointing out flaws/issues/downturns for Tesla as spin pieces, while anything that fluffs Tesla is simply unbiased and accurate.
If he wants to be correct, he had to say so. Wuestenfux 1 : 0 Andrew1975
1000 registered units sounds like something, but Munich alone has more than 700000 cars. So your Teslas are a drop in the ocean.
I mean if being the best selling EV in Germany means its not a big hit.........im not sure what does?
Is it a big hit if you are "at the top" amongst a very small part of a market in a publication , a very lobby-heavy one if I dare say? We are looking at a few % ......
A big hit is IMHO something you sell a 1000000 units or more.
If he wants to be correct, he had to say so. Wuestenfux 1 : 0 Andrew1975
1000 registered units sounds like something, but Munich alone has more than 700000 cars. So your Teslas are a drop in the ocean.
I mean if being the best selling EV in Germany means its not a big hit.........im not sure what does?
Is it a big hit if you are "at the top" amongst a very small part of a market in a publication , a very lobby-heavy one if I dare say? We are looking at a few % ......
A big hit is IMHO something you sell a 1000000 units or more.
Just Tony wrote: https://www.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-tesla-needs-cut-180656865.html
Since we're linking to stories to back up our stances. Can't wait to see the "spin" on this one...
The article is in itself spin. Just spun by all the FUDs
Wow, you didn't disappoint. I will just go ahead and assume that you will call anything pointing out flaws/issues/downturns for Tesla as spin pieces, while anything that fluffs Tesla is simply unbiased and accurate.
Neither do you. You make mountain out of every mole hill to support your position, but FUDers go to FUD. Its pretty easy to take a quote and use it out of context. Essentially he said if they continued to operate as they did they would go bankrupt. Which is true, but they arent operating that way anymore. Lets see the Q2 sales numbers. Also Tesla spent tons of money building its Chinese facility, that facility is now almost finished and should be making cars (Tarrif free by the way) pretty soon.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Wait. . . . did this guy really just tell a GERMAN "if you understood the German market" ?!?!?!?
Wow.
Dude, we get it, you're Tesla's #1 fan boy. But seriously, things are not as rosy as you keep saying they are.
I would say anyone who expects a company to sell 1million units of a certain model a person who doesn't understand any car market much less his own. Its been done a total of six times and thats with global numbers. I highly doubt anyone has sold 1 million units of any car in 6 months in Germany. So yeah he doesn't understand.
The German car market is very protected, dominated by consumer loyalty to their own country, the sales figures of the model 3 in Germany are astronomical and far better than anyone had anticipated. In general Germans don't buy American cars (can't say blame them, I think most US cars are inferior) but US cars have only a 0.5 percent market share in Germany. Tesla is by far outpacing that trend.
https://bestsellingcarsblog.com/2012/06/world-the-models-that-sold-over-1-million-units-in-a-single-year/
It's not all that protected. Germany is in the EU, so any cars built within the EU can be imported without any tax added. This includes lots of big companies such as Nissan, Toyota, Fiat, Renault, Citroen, Skoda, and Seat,
The Germans are loyal to their own manufacturers partly because they make very good cars.
Kilkrazy wrote: It's not all that protected. Germany is in the EU, so any cars built within the EU can be imported without any tax added. This includes lots of big companies such as Nissan, Toyota, Fiat, Renault, Citroen, Skoda, and Seat,
The Germans are loyal to their own manufacturers partly because they make very good cars.
Oh, I wasn't saying they are protected by the government, I meant that it was protected by the loyalty of the German people to buy domestically produced vehicles. That being said they also make excellent cars. What I am saying is that for Tesla to sell as many vehicles as they do IN GERMANY is a testament to how good the Teslas are as cars, Germans tend to not buy gak cars.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote: Plus their own inspectors are more favorable to faking emissions results...
No emissions with a Tesla unless you count Fart mode.
Kilkrazy wrote: It's not all that protected. Germany is in the EU, so any cars built within the EU can be imported without any tax added. This includes lots of big companies such as Nissan, Toyota, Fiat, Renault, Citroen, Skoda, and Seat,
The Germans are loyal to their own manufacturers partly because they make very good cars.
Oh, I wasn't saying they are protected by the government, I meant that it was protected by the loyalty of the German people to buy domestically produced vehicles. That being said they also make excellent cars. What I am saying is that for Tesla to sell as many vehicles as they do IN GERMANY is a testament to how good the Teslas are as cars, Germans tend to not buy gak cars.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote: Plus their own inspectors are more favorable to faking emissions results...
No emissions with a Tesla unless you count Fart mode.
I am talking about German cars...cough *** Volkswagen *** cough...
If he wants to be correct, he had to say so. Wuestenfux 1 : 0 Andrew1975
1000 registered units sounds like something, but Munich alone has more than 700000 cars. So your Teslas are a drop in the ocean.
I mean if being the best selling EV in Germany means its not a big hit.........im not sure what does?
Is it a big hit if you are "at the top" amongst a very small part of a market in a publication , a very lobby-heavy one if I dare say? We are looking at a few % ......
A big hit isIMHOsomething you sell a 1000000 units or more.
Andrew1975 wrote:
OK, then you have to show a model that sells 1 million units a year in Germany or in a quarter......i'll wait. To put it in perspective, Tesla almost outsold ALL of Porsche in GERMANY! If you understood the German market, you would know how insane that is. Those are some pretty big goal posts you are putting up!https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-03/tesla-closes-in-on-porsche-in-germany-as-model-3-sales-jump
Porsche, well known for inexpensive cars.... oh wait. They are not. So you deem a Luxury product of 100000+ € your choice? I thought those cars you like so much are "affordable".?
Andrew1975 wrote:
I would say anyone who expects a company to sell 1million units of a certain model a person who doesn't understand any car market much less his own. Its been done a total of six times and thats with global numbers. I highly doubt anyone has sold 1 million units of any car in 6 months in Germany. So yeah he doesn't understand.
1000 registered units sounds like something, but Munich alone has more than 700000 cars. So your Teslas are a drop in the ocean.
Andrew1975 wrote:
I mean if being the best selling EV in Germany means its not a big hit.........im not sure what does?
Is it a big hit if you are "at the top" amongst a very small part of a market in a publication , a very lobby-heavy one if I dare say? We are looking at a few % ......
A big hit isIMHOsomething you sell a 1000000 units or more.
Does understand you wont read what I wrote. I said big hit = 1000000. and IMHO too.
And your reply is?
If you just read the whole story .... come on, its pretty spelled out there.
The Sedan is not the typical car here. Maybe 25 % of a model if you want to believe the link you have posted....
Andrew1975 wrote:
Oh, I wasn't saying they are protected by the government, I meant that it was protected by the loyalty of the German people to buy domestically produced vehicles. That being said they also make excellent cars. What I am saying is that for Tesla to sell as many vehicles as they do IN GERMANY is a testament to how good the Teslas are as cars, Germans tend to not buy gak cars.
We have lots of "foreign" cars here, just very very few from the USA. And Tesla wont change that. Teslas are as common as , for example a Corvette. Or a Jeep. Or worse, you'll see 1 tesla for 2 or 3 of the other...
OTOH France/Italy/Japan/Korea, not hard to find on our streets.
You clearly said for a car to be a big hit it has to sell 1000000. Then your opinion is impossible, nobody has sold 1 million models of any car in Germany in 5 months, which I'm not even sure the Model 3 has been available that long.
The Model 3 sedan is out selling German sedans, now if you want to count all the wagon versions of an Audi model, thats fine, but the model 3 doesn't have a wagon model. Thats why the auto industry has these things called segments, sedans and wagons are in different segments. A Mazda 3 sedan is not in the same segment as a Mazda 3 Hatchback even though they are very similar cars. A VW golf is not in the same segment as a Jetta.
Yes there are lots of options in Germany, however looking at raw data the vast majority of cars sold in Germany are domestically produced. Its a hard market especially for American cars doubly so for American cars not produced specifically for the European market.
And if you want to talk about a segment being lobbied......I mean, oil is probably the largest and most powerful lobby in the world. soooooooooo.
Fart mode is the default mode for German cars, they only run clean when you hook them up to diagnostic equipment. Which is why they have to pay for our electric charging infrastructure now.
A California lobbyist for Chevron is urging retirees of the oil company in Arizona to oppose electric-car policies, saying the vehicles are too expensive for most people and should not be promoted. From a report:
A handful of people who either retired from Chevron or from Unocal, which Chevron acquired in 2005, have used the form letter to urge Arizona Corporation Commissioners not to require electric companies here to build electric-car charging stations. Form letters are commonly used to lobby commissioners, but the secretive nature of this campaign has drawn criticism, including from a retiree who alerted commissioners to the lobbyist's effort.
The letters discourage electric-car infrastructure. "Let the electric vehicle industry finance the construction of the infrastructure from which it will benefit, rather than burdening most Arizona ratepayers with the costs of supporting the electric vehicle market," wrote Sel Larsen, the president of the Arizona retirees group. The letter-writing campaign is a response to a March document from the Corporation Commission asking electric companies in Arizona to propose how they will roll out electric-vehicle infrastructure and incorporate electric vehicles into their business.
Or maybe that its roasting high end German cars on your own turf. Thats a BMW M2 trying to pass the Tesla....it can't.
I like electric cars and think they ahave a major part to play, but no, that does not show it "roasting high end German cars on your own turf".
1) That's an M2. It is not high end. It is the same price as the Tesla. It's low to mid range performance car in the same market as the Tesla.
2) That's the Nürburgring, not a race track. It is an open session. The M2 is following the Tesla, and keeping up no problem.If the M2 was trying to pass one of them would have been black flagged.
3) The Tesla driver, frankly, is driving like a bit of a gakker. The M2 drives very sensibly, waiting for other drivers to pull right to let him pass. The Tesla is following cars far to close and trying to bully them out of the way.
At best that shows that the Tesla 3's performance is similar to equivalent cars. Not even current ones. The M2 is now end of life, and the Model 3 is brand new.
Seriously, Tesla's are not bad cars, but they are not better than the competition, unless you take some very specific metrics and ignore their history of woeful reliability and their inability to meet demand, both for new cars and parts when something goes wrong.
Steve steveson wrote: Seriously, Tesla's are not bad cars, but they are not better than the competition, unless you take some very specific metrics and ignore their history of woeful reliability and their inability to meet demand, both for new cars and parts when something goes wrong.
Have you NOT been following the thread? That's exactly what he's been doing.
I know that's what he is doing, but I thought it worth restating for clarification of my statement. I wanted to state that I have no issue with electric cars or Tesla before the inevitable reply that everyone else has had painting every statement I have made as somehow anti either electric cars, Tesla or both.
Or maybe that its roasting high end German cars on your own turf. Thats a BMW M2 trying to pass the Tesla....it can't.
I like electric cars and think they ahave a major part to play, but no, that does not show it "roasting high end German cars on your own turf".
1) That's an M2. It is not high end. It is the same price as the Tesla. It's low to mid range performance car in the same market as the Tesla.
2) That's the Nürburgring, not a race track. It is an open session. The M2 is following the Tesla, and keeping up no problem.If the M2 was trying to pass one of them would have been black flagged.
3) The Tesla driver, frankly, is driving like a bit of a gakker. The M2 drives very sensibly, waiting for other drivers to pull right to let him pass. The Tesla is following cars far to close and trying to bully them out of the way.
The M2 is following [u]the M3P, and they're friends. That was the purpose of the video.
If anything you can say that the M3 can't shake off the M2.
The Model 3 sedan is out selling German sedans, now if you want to count all the wagon versions of an Audi model, thats fine, but the model 3 doesn't have a wagon model.
Thats why the auto industry has these things called segments, sedans and wagons are in different segments. A Mazda 3 sedan is not in the same segment as a Mazda 3 Hatchback even though they are very similar cars. A VW golf is not in the same segment as a Jetta.
It doesn't matter if your american company is big in pick up trucks if almost no one over here buys pick ups.
The majority of the sold VW Golf for example would be classified in the 2 most common categories, one being at 22% and the other at 18,5 % ( source : kba ) , the smaller Polo / Lupo in a group of 14,5 % , the Passat in another of 10,9%.
Our market isn't just luxury driving for the filhty rich ( tesla "toys", it starts down there at ( ignoring used cars ) ~ 8000€ .
Imported Cars sorted by brands , Top 4: Skoda 5,7% , Renault 3,8% , Seat 3,5 % , Hyundai 3,3 % .
Your precious Tesla gets special attention: (2017: +74,6 % vs 2018: -42,8 %) You see this - ? not a + ? And not part of the Top either.
Jumping up ( +74) and down (-42) seems more like a hype than a product...
Yes we got more cars from 2010 to 2019:
Had 41737627 in 2010, now at 47095784.
As you may see, the shares change a bit over time:
France had ~ 10% and lost a little bit to ~ 8% , Japan almost kept their share of ~11% which is now at ~10%, South korea managed to grow from ~ 2% to 4%.
Or maybe that its roasting high end German cars on your own turf. Thats a BMW M2 trying to pass the Tesla....it can't.
I like electric cars and think they ahave a major part to play, but no, that does not show it "roasting high end German cars on your own turf".
1) That's an M2. It is not high end. It is the same price as the Tesla. It's low to mid range performance car in the same market as the Tesla.
2) That's the Nürburgring, not a race track. It is an open session. The M2 is following the Tesla, and keeping up no problem.If the M2 was trying to pass one of them would have been black flagged.
3) The Tesla driver, frankly, is driving like a bit of a gakker. The M2 drives very sensibly, waiting for other drivers to pull right to let him pass. The Tesla is following cars far to close and trying to bully them out of the way.
At best that shows that the Tesla 3's performance is similar to equivalent cars. Not even current ones. The M2 is now end of life, and the Model 3 is brand new.
Seriously, Tesla's are not bad cars, but they are not better than the competition, unless you take some very specific metrics and ignore their history of woeful reliability and their inability to meet demand, both for new cars and parts when something goes wrong.
Interesting opinions there. Most reports I've read have the M2 as a pretty decent drivers car in most repects better than an M3, The M2 clearly gets dusted on acceleration repeatedly, you are also clearly allowed to pass on the track, so i don't know what you are talking about. Nobody said this guy was a professional driver in fact there are three people in the Tesla. Just another FUDer whos got to FUD.
Gunboat diplomacy.
REMOVED - BROOKM
It is easy to pass a Tesla, usually they are standing around charging.... not even a challenge for pedestrians!
I bet you take far more time out of your day fueling your car than I do, i just plug it in when i get home and wake up to a fresh car. No need to drive around, look for a gas station and wait for 15 minutes.
So here are some other numbers. "During its initial test under the hands of the professional driver, the Model 3 Performance lapped the track in 1:23.90. Equipped with Track Mode’s “release version,” the electric sedan completed the same course in 1:21.49. That time pretty much matches the record of the 2016 Porsche Cayman GT4, and is far quicker than the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio’s 1:22.78 lap. Perhaps more remarkable was that the Model 3 Performance’s new record in the Willow Springs Streets actually ended up beating one of Motor Trend‘s Best Driver’s Car winners in the past — the 2011 Ferrari 458 Italia, which completed the course in 1:22.30.
Or maybe that its roasting high end German cars on your own turf. Thats a BMW M2 trying to pass the Tesla....it can't.
I like electric cars and think they ahave a major part to play, but no, that does not show it "roasting high end German cars on your own turf".
1) That's an M2. It is not high end. It is the same price as the Tesla. It's low to mid range performance car in the same market as the Tesla.
2) That's the Nürburgring, not a race track. It is an open session. The M2 is following the Tesla, and keeping up no problem.If the M2 was trying to pass one of them would have been black flagged.
3) The Tesla driver, frankly, is driving like a bit of a gakker. The M2 drives very sensibly, waiting for other drivers to pull right to let him pass. The Tesla is following cars far to close and trying to bully them out of the way.
At best that shows that the Tesla 3's performance is similar to equivalent cars. Not even current ones. The M2 is now end of life, and the Model 3 is brand new.
Seriously, Tesla's are not bad cars, but they are not better than the competition, unless you take some very specific metrics and ignore their history of woeful reliability and their inability to meet demand, both for new cars and parts when something goes wrong.
Interesting opinions there. Most reports I've read have the M2 as a pretty decent drivers car in most repects better than an M3, The M2 clearly gets dusted on acceleration repeatedly, you are also clearly allowed to pass on the track, so i don't know what you are talking about. Nobody said this guy was a professional driver in fact there are three people in the Tesla. Just another FUDer whos got to FUD.
So here are some other numbers. "During its initial test under the hands of the professional driver, the Model 3 Performance lapped the track in 1:23.90. Equipped with Track Mode’s “release version,” the electric sedan completed the same course in 1:21.49. That time pretty much matches the record of the 2016 Porsche Cayman GT4, and is far quicker than the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio’s 1:22.78 lap. Perhaps more remarkable was that the Model 3 Performance’s new record in the Willow Springs Streets actually ended up beating one of Motor Trend‘s Best Driver’s Car winners in the past — the 2011 Ferrari 458 Italia, which completed the course in 1:22.30.
I had a wtf moment when I saw minute and a half times for Nurburgring then a googled a bit and saw those are for the much shorter Willow springs.
Then I tried to get Nurburgring times for the Tesla M3P and I couldn't find any, and probably this is the cause:
Or maybe that its roasting high end German cars on your own turf. Thats a BMW M2 trying to pass the Tesla....it can't.
I like electric cars and think they ahave a major part to play, but no, that does not show it "roasting high end German cars on your own turf".
1) That's an M2. It is not high end. It is the same price as the Tesla. It's low to mid range performance car in the same market as the Tesla.
2) That's the Nürburgring, not a race track. It is an open session. The M2 is following the Tesla, and keeping up no problem.If the M2 was trying to pass one of them would have been black flagged.
3) The Tesla driver, frankly, is driving like a bit of a gakker. The M2 drives very sensibly, waiting for other drivers to pull right to let him pass. The Tesla is following cars far to close and trying to bully them out of the way.
At best that shows that the Tesla 3's performance is similar to equivalent cars. Not even current ones. The M2 is now end of life, and the Model 3 is brand new.
Seriously, Tesla's are not bad cars, but they are not better than the competition, unless you take some very specific metrics and ignore their history of woeful reliability and their inability to meet demand, both for new cars and parts when something goes wrong.
Interesting opinions there. Most reports I've read have the M2 as a pretty decent drivers car in most repects better than an M3, The M2 clearly gets dusted on acceleration repeatedly, you are also clearly allowed to pass on the track, so i don't know what you are talking about. Nobody said this guy was a professional driver in fact there are three people in the Tesla. Just another FUDer whos got to FUD.
So here are some other numbers. "During its initial test under the hands of the professional driver, the Model 3 Performance lapped the track in 1:23.90. Equipped with Track Mode’s “release version,” the electric sedan completed the same course in 1:21.49. That time pretty much matches the record of the 2016 Porsche Cayman GT4, and is far quicker than the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio’s 1:22.78 lap. Perhaps more remarkable was that the Model 3 Performance’s new record in the Willow Springs Streets actually ended up beating one of Motor Trend‘s Best Driver’s Car winners in the past — the 2011 Ferrari 458 Italia, which completed the course in 1:22.30.
Yes, the M2 is considered a decent drivers car, but that’s not the same as a high end performance car, which was your statement. And yes, people are clearly allowed to pass, but you are not allowed to race or be aggressive. It is a public road after all, so anyone involved in “trying” to pass would be black flagged. Slower cars have to move over to facilitate passing and faster cars have to wait until the slower car moves over. If you read the background of this clip the drivers are friends and neither car is pushing it, it was just a ride round they filmed. It shows nothing.
AndrewGPaul wrote: As Steve points out, the Nurburgring isn’t a race track; it’s a public road, subject to all the same rules and laws as any other road in Germany.
Yea but it sounds really cool, like you may pass some Valkyries or something.
Or maybe that its roasting high end German cars on your own turf. Thats a BMW M2 trying to pass the Tesla....it can't.
I like electric cars and think they ahave a major part to play, but no, that does not show it "roasting high end German cars on your own turf".
1) That's an M2. It is not high end. It is the same price as the Tesla. It's low to mid range performance car in the same market as the Tesla.
2) That's the Nürburgring, not a race track. It is an open session. The M2 is following the Tesla, and keeping up no problem.If the M2 was trying to pass one of them would have been black flagged.
3) The Tesla driver, frankly, is driving like a bit of a gakker. The M2 drives very sensibly, waiting for other drivers to pull right to let him pass. The Tesla is following cars far to close and trying to bully them out of the way.
At best that shows that the Tesla 3's performance is similar to equivalent cars. Not even current ones. The M2 is now end of life, and the Model 3 is brand new.
Seriously, Tesla's are not bad cars, but they are not better than the competition, unless you take some very specific metrics and ignore their history of woeful reliability and their inability to meet demand, both for new cars and parts when something goes wrong.
Interesting opinions there. Most reports I've read have the M2 as a pretty decent drivers car in most repects better than an M3, The M2 clearly gets dusted on acceleration repeatedly, you are also clearly allowed to pass on the track, so i don't know what you are talking about. Nobody said this guy was a professional driver in fact there are three people in the Tesla. Just another FUDer whos got to FUD.
So here are some other numbers. "During its initial test under the hands of the professional driver, the Model 3 Performance lapped the track in 1:23.90. Equipped with Track Mode’s “release version,” the electric sedan completed the same course in 1:21.49. That time pretty much matches the record of the 2016 Porsche Cayman GT4, and is far quicker than the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio’s 1:22.78 lap. Perhaps more remarkable was that the Model 3 Performance’s new record in the Willow Springs Streets actually ended up beating one of Motor Trend‘s Best Driver’s Car winners in the past — the 2011 Ferrari 458 Italia, which completed the course in 1:22.30.
I had a wtf moment when I saw minute and a half times for Nurburgring then a googled a bit and saw those are for the much shorter Willow springs.
Then I tried to get Nurburgring times for the Tesla M3P and I couldn't find any, and probably this is the cause:
Or maybe that its roasting high end German cars on your own turf. Thats a BMW M2 trying to pass the Tesla....it can't.
I like electric cars and think they ahave a major part to play, but no, that does not show it "roasting high end German cars on your own turf".
1) That's an M2. It is not high end. It is the same price as the Tesla. It's low to mid range performance car in the same market as the Tesla.
2) That's the Nürburgring, not a race track. It is an open session. The M2 is following the Tesla, and keeping up no problem.If the M2 was trying to pass one of them would have been black flagged.
3) The Tesla driver, frankly, is driving like a bit of a gakker. The M2 drives very sensibly, waiting for other drivers to pull right to let him pass. The Tesla is following cars far to close and trying to bully them out of the way.
At best that shows that the Tesla 3's performance is similar to equivalent cars. Not even current ones. The M2 is now end of life, and the Model 3 is brand new.
Seriously, Tesla's are not bad cars, but they are not better than the competition, unless you take some very specific metrics and ignore their history of woeful reliability and their inability to meet demand, both for new cars and parts when something goes wrong.
Interesting opinions there. Most reports I've read have the M2 as a pretty decent drivers car in most repects better than an M3, The M2 clearly gets dusted on acceleration repeatedly, you are also clearly allowed to pass on the track, so i don't know what you are talking about. Nobody said this guy was a professional driver in fact there are three people in the Tesla. Just another FUDer whos got to FUD.
So here are some other numbers. "During its initial test under the hands of the professional driver, the Model 3 Performance lapped the track in 1:23.90. Equipped with Track Mode’s “release version,” the electric sedan completed the same course in 1:21.49. That time pretty much matches the record of the 2016 Porsche Cayman GT4, and is far quicker than the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio’s 1:22.78 lap. Perhaps more remarkable was that the Model 3 Performance’s new record in the Willow Springs Streets actually ended up beating one of Motor Trend‘s Best Driver’s Car winners in the past — the 2011 Ferrari 458 Italia, which completed the course in 1:22.30.
I had a wtf moment when I saw minute and a half times for Nurburgring then a googled a bit and saw those are for the much shorter Willow springs.
Then I tried to get Nurburgring times for the Tesla M3P and I couldn't find any, and probably this is the cause:
Impossible Opinion??? is that possible? Please explain.
1hadhq, you should just ignore Andrew, as he's demonstrated repeatedly that he is 1, a Tesla Fanboy and *nothing* they do can be wrong. and 2, he does not know what he is talking about, as I shall now prove (and not the first person to do so)
See, he claims that 1 million units of a given vehicle is "impossible. . .
If you see here, Ford has done it again with their POS F-150. 1 million units in a year.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Steve steveson wrote: It is a public road after all, so anyone involved in “trying” to pass would be black flagged. Slower cars have to move over to facilitate passing and faster cars have to wait until the slower car moves over. If you read the background of this clip the drivers are friends and neither car is pushing it, it was just a ride round they filmed. It shows nothing.
Nurburgring isn't quite a public road, at least not in the same sense as Circuit de la Sarthe is. . . . But you are absolutely correct in that in the "open day" sessions they run throughout non-race weekends during the summer, during the drivers' brief they tell you all the rules, and they are just as they are on the open highways: stay to the right basically at all times, if you see another car coming up behind you, stay to the right, etc.
Just Tony wrote: Okay, so time for some clarity: what the feth is a FUD?
google tells me a few things. . . one, its an acronym for "fear uncertainty and doubt" . . . and two, its scottish slang, and rather rude slang for "certain lady bits"
Impossible Opinion??? is that possible? Please explain.
1hadhq, you should just ignore Andrew, as he's demonstrated repeatedly that he is 1, a Tesla Fanboy and *nothing* they do can be wrong. and 2, he does not know what he is talking about, as I shall now prove (and not the first person to do so)
See, he claims that 1 million units of a given vehicle is "impossible. . .
If you see here, Ford has done it again with their POS F-150. 1 million units in a year.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Steve steveson wrote: It is a public road after all, so anyone involved in “trying” to pass would be black flagged. Slower cars have to move over to facilitate passing and faster cars have to wait until the slower car moves over. If you read the background of this clip the drivers are friends and neither car is pushing it, it was just a ride round they filmed. It shows nothing.
Nurburgring isn't quite a public road, at least not in the same sense as Circuit de la Sarthe is. . . . But you are absolutely correct in that in the "open day" sessions they run throughout non-race weekends during the summer, during the drivers' brief they tell you all the rules, and they are just as they are on the open highways: stay to the right basically at all times, if you see another car coming up behind you, stay to the right, etc.
Officially during public sessions it is legal classed as a one way public toll road with no speed limit. All German road laws apply.
Just Tony wrote: Okay, so time for some clarity: what the feth is a FUD?
google tells me a few things. . . one, its an acronym for "fear uncertainty and doubt" . . . and two, its scottish slang, and rather rude slang for "certain lady bits"
I think he is trying to imply that I’m not unconditionally praising the model 3 because I don’t understand and fear it because it is new... I didn’t even say it was bad, just that it is not as good as claimed. They are good cars and have their place. They are about as fast as the competition round a track, but by all accounts no where near as engaging and enjoyable. They are cheap to run but also about the worst for reliability and after sales support. The biggest problem is the owners who will defend them to the hilt and put off people who are vaguely positive. I have said before that I like electric cars, and may well buy one as my next car, but not a Tesla. Nothing to do with performance or range, both of which are adequate, but because I can’t have a car that is likely to go wrong and when it does possibly have to wait weeks for parts. I also don’t want to be on a waiting list to buy a car for months or years unless it is something seriously special, not a family saloon.
Glad to see this thread is still as entertaining as always.
I think the post above hits the nail on the head for what Tesla's problems are in the real world, and more so in Europe than in the US I suspect. The Model 3 isn't available for most people yet because it's either sold out or not even on sale at all. Tesla's reliability issues are a concern, as is the lack of support for servicing and repairs. Ultimately, if I buy an EV from literally any other manufacturer I get all the benefits of an EV and the benefits of that manufacturer's servicing and repair infrastructure. I don't think anyone's doubting the specs of the Tesla and how good the technology is but after a certain point that stops being the primary concern and things like reliability and price enter into the equation. I think this is when Tesla might start to struggle. Initially they were the only really practical EV on the market but as more and more manufacturers start producing cars with ranges above 200 miles I think Tesla stops being as attractive as it once was.
Most people in Europe would be happy with a reliable range of 100 miles as long as they could be sure of finding a charger when they arrive.
For example my daily commut is 25 miles each way.
if I drive to the Cotswolds for a weekend, it's about 50-60 miles so I'll be fine if I can charge while I'm parked.
The last long trip I made was to take my daughter to university in Exeter. That's about 150 to 180 miles, depending on the route. If my car had 100 miles range, I would need to plan a charging stop in the middle, which would be the equivalent of a coffee and wee stop in a conventional car.
Before that I had a holiday in Corwall. It was about 200+ mile drive to get there, so I would plan in two charging stops.
It certainly would be nice to have a 200 mile range but what EVs really need is more charging points.
150 miles is the range we're looking at and would be happy with but there are a few cars either on the market or coming soon that have over 200 miles of range and won't cost £70,000+. The Model 3 is one but Kia and Hyundai both have EVs with that kind of range too.
Agree that the real change that's needed is more chargers. It'd be nice if every EV didn't have to come with an app built-in that shows the nearest charging points. What we should be moving towards is having charging points be the norm in any large car park or service station. And not just the half a dozen a lot of these locations currently have, but enough that you don't have to worry about being able to use them.
If driving an EV narrows your world view so much, you start to think Germans = gassing people, maybe get a real car and open your eyes. Its not the 1900 anymore.
It is easy to pass a Tesla, usually they are standing around charging.... not even a challenge for pedestrians!
I bet you take far more time out of your day fueling your car than I do, i just plug it in when i get home and wake up to a fresh car. No need to drive around, look for a gas station and wait for 15 minutes.
The majority of kilometres i drive is for work. And we get paid for the time we are at the gas station, i am making money when refueling Plus, range of vehicles i drive is usually 700-800 km. Won't be at a gas station more than 1x-2x a month.
Yeah , I listed how many times cars have sold 1 million units globally, its been done six times. The model 3 has been available in Germany for a whopping 5 months...if even. Nobody has ever sold 1 million units of a specific model in Germany in one year EVER!
So literally under those conditions has any car ever been a big hit in Germany.
VW bug was. Interestingly it was firstly a pre-order car. Many (most) who originally pre-ordered never saw them as the whole 'hey lets invade Russia! What could go wrong?' thing didn't work out as planned...
There a fairly solid idea. But they lack range right now.
Also the fact is to recharge can take hours.
I can fill up my petrol engine in 5 minutes and be on my way for longer than said electric car to boot.
That and the costs are quite serious if you need to replace a battery or repair. Thousands of pounds.
Now.
Hybrids, hrydotgen, high efficency frictionless drive conventional engines with ability to use brake energy gathering and battery boost hybrid systems etc.
Pure electric may not be the answer but I can be part of the solotion.
Now I do a short commute, so yes a electric might work for me but there also alot more expensive to buy though.
I can buy a OK ish small car for 2k, I doubt I could get a decent eketreic for 20k.
I have a question about electric cars. Is it unfeasible to carry an extended range battery in one, maybe in the trunk or backseat, maybe one the size of a suitcase?
Cryptek Keeper wrote: I have a question about electric cars. Is it unfeasible to carry an extended range battery in one, maybe in the trunk or backseat, maybe one the size of a suitcase?
Maybe. But for one they weigh a fair bit.
Two. The materals that make them up are fairly intense if ignited, so they for protection and weight place that down into thr chasis and lower body.
Maybe, but it depends on density, the Wright of a large ernough battery would have to be low ernough, and discharge fast ernough to charge the car, and extend range by a fair bit. Rather than a short distence to worth it.
For refrence I checked. The Teslas main battery weighs about half a ton.
Cryptek Keeper wrote: I have a question about electric cars. Is it unfeasible to carry an extended range battery in one, maybe in the trunk or backseat, maybe one the size of a suitcase?
Maybe. But for one they weigh a fair bit.
Two. The materals that make them up are fairly intense if ignited, so they for protection and weight place that down into thr chasis and lower body.
Maybe, but it depends on density, the Wright of a large ernough battery would have to be low ernough, and discharge fast ernough to charge the car, and extend range by a fair bit. Rather than a short distence to worth it.
For refrence I checked. The Teslas main battery weighs about half a ton.
skip to about the 3:50 mark, and they actually change the batteries on this non-Tesla EV. . . I don't think Tesla's batteries are much smaller than this car's.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Electric cars are useful and have a place in the world. They have the ability to eliminate gas burners in very large numbers as they can replace them for a lot of people a lot of the time. They can be used in cities and over shorter distances that a lot of peolle deal with.
People who routinely drive longer distances will likely need to stick with gas cars, but even if electric cars "only" eliminate half of gas burners it's huge in terms of co2 emissions and fossil fuel usage.
And i'd imagine electric cars can replace more than half of cars by a fair margin.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Electric cars are useful and have a place in the world. They have the ability to eliminate gas burners in very large numbers as they can replace them for a lot of people a lot of the time. They can be used in cities and over shorter distances that a lot of peolle deal with.
People who routinely drive longer distances will likely need to stick with gas cars, but even if electric cars "only" eliminate half of gas burners it's huge in terms of co2 emissions and fossil fuel usage.
And i'd imagine electric cars can replace more than half of cars by a fair margin.
Plenty of room for hybrids, or hydrogen cars. Also ultra effichant engines developed to furful the long distance requirements.
Electric will not yet fur full the long range section of transport, but yeah as a nip into town, drop the kids off, or so.
Its ideal. Though right now there alot of money vs a regular gasoline powered model. Basix cars, and low end ones might not be electric for a long time on mass.
If the savings of using an electric car for my daily commute were sufficient, I'd be happy to own one and then rent an ICE car for the one or two times a year where I have a long-distance drive. The only problem in the long term is that passing my driving test in an electric might mean I'm not eligible to drive an ICE car due to the different drivetrain and controls.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Electric cars are useful and have a place in the world. They have the ability to eliminate gas burners in very large numbers as they can replace them for a lot of people a lot of the time. They can be used in cities and over shorter distances that a lot of peolle deal with.
People who routinely drive longer distances will likely need to stick with gas cars, but even if electric cars "only" eliminate half of gas burners it's huge in terms of co2 emissions and fossil fuel usage.
And i'd imagine electric cars can replace more than half of cars by a fair margin.
Plenty of room for hybrids, or hydrogen cars. Also ultra effichant engines developed to furful the long distance requirements.
Electric will not yet fur full the long range section of transport, but yeah as a nip into town, drop the kids off, or so.
Its ideal. Though right now there alot of money vs a regular gasoline powered model. Basix cars, and low end ones might not be electric for a long time on mass.
I'm pretty sure that the next car in our household will be electric, though the economics are not there yet.
However electric vehicles come with their own challenges.
To replace all UK-based vehicles today with electric vehicles (not including the LGV and HGV fleets), assuming they use the most resource-frugal next-generation NMC 811 batteries, would take 207,900 tonnes cobalt, 264,600 tonnes of lithium carbonate (LCE), at least 7,200 tonnes of neodymium and dysprosium, in addition to 2,362,500 tonnes copper. This represents, just under two times the total annual world cobalt production, nearly the entire world production of neodymium, three quarters the world’s lithium production and at least half of the world’s copper production during 2018.
And that's just for the UK, now look at it from a global perspective.
hat and the costs are quite serious if you need to replace a battery or repair. Thousands of pounds.
Think this one probably needs to be put to bed. Take a look at some of the Prius' (preiii? No idea how to write the plural ) with 200K + and 10 years old, still running on the original batteries. Yes at some point they will lose efficiency, but it's not likely to shorten the lifespan of the vehicle any further than the components on a petrol or diesel engined vehicle.
Future War Cultist wrote: Is it possible to have one vehicle with the options for both a hybrid engine and a full electric motor? VW do it with the Golf don’t they?
There are a few models out now that do this. As you say there is a Golf E that is a plug-in hybrid - keep it charged up (think range is about 40 miles?), but can run on petrol motor the rest of the time. You can choose to alternate between which motor you run on (i.e. switch to battery only if toodling around the city centre or at slow speed).
Toyota and Hyundai do similar, again you have the choice between recharging hybrid, plug-in hybrid or full electric.
I see there were some German posters above commenting about electrics not really being suitable. Having done some driving in Germany recently I can kind of see why - I would say at least 50% of the traffic seems to be big German motorway cruisers (BMWs, Audis etc.) doing 80/90mph+ on the autobahns for long stretches of time.
I've got a hybrid (petrol/electric combo) and there is no advantage at all to having that type of car on those roads - you may as well just get a big diesel and do 50/60mpg cruising at 80.
Where the hybrid comes into its own is on the UKs bendy B-roads, stopping and starting all of the time and cruising at low speed, where I think that type of road is a lot more common in the UK.
Future War Cultist wrote: Is it possible to have one vehicle with the options for both a hybrid engine and a full electric motor? VW do it with the Golf don’t they?
It is, but that tends to lead to compromises that are undesirable. Generally speaking you're better off developing an electric from the ground up. The Golf, for example, has quite a short range for an electric, and I suspect that's at least partially down to it being based on a regular ICE car. The Chevy Bolt is pretty much a bodge-job based on a city car rather than building it "properly" from a blank sheet of paper. It works well enough as is but could probably be even better if developed as an EV from scratch. That costs money, though, and for most manufacturers it's more ecenomicaly viable to shove an electric motor and batteries in an existing car.
Radio 4 had an interesting report this morning about Porto Santo, an island in Portugal where they currently import most of their energy in the form of diesel.
They want to go sustainable and have plenty of potential for solar and wind, but they need a battery storage solution for calm/dark times.
They have teamed up with Renault to provide electric cars which can charge during peak production and feed back power into the local grid at night.
The cars only spend about 20% of their time being driven, so the rest of the time they can act as the island's power reserve.
Kilkrazy wrote: Radio 4 had an interesting report this morning about Porto Santo, an island in Portugal where they currently import most of their energy in the form of diesel.
They want to go sustainable and have plenty of potential for solar and wind, but they need a battery storage solution for calm/dark times.
They have teamed up with Renault to provide electric cars which can charge during peak production and feed back power into the local grid at night.
The cars only spend about 20% of their time being driven, so the rest of the time they can act as the island's power reserve.
Was also on the BBC News on TV this morning. It's interesting but I was a bit confused about some of the practicalities. The biggest concern most EV owners have is range and charging time and this system seemed to reduce range by taking energy from the car, while then also meaning you may need to charge more often when you want to use the car as an actual car rather than an energy storage unit. Admittedly I wasn't paying full attention as I was making breakfast at the time so these questions may have been answered.
Future War Cultist wrote: Is it possible to have one vehicle with the options for both a hybrid engine and a full electric motor? VW do it with the Golf don’t they?
It is, but that tends to lead to compromises that are undesirable. Generally speaking you're better off developing an electric from the ground up. The Golf, for example, has quite a short range for an electric, and I suspect that's at least partially down to it being based on a regular ICE car.
It's purely down to cost. Batteries are expensive, and VW probably just wanted to dip their toe in electrics building experience before going all in.
The case of this island is special because their key concern is to reduce imports of diesel rather than ensure everyone can drive around all the time.
However it is true that most cars spend most of their time sitting still, and EVs spend most of thier sitting still time plugged into the mains. It's also true that most EV journeys are a fraction of the full range of the battery.
(As in my case, where I need to drive 25 miles in the morning, then 25 miles in the evening, and I could potentially be plugged in for 9 hours in the day and 13 hours overnight.)
Therefore the Porto Santo case is an interesting technical trial of technology which might be useful to roll out Europe wide in the longer term. It's not a full solution.
Kilkrazy wrote: Radio 4 had an interesting report this morning about Porto Santo, an island in Portugal where they currently import most of their energy in the form of diesel.
They want to go sustainable and have plenty of potential for solar and wind, but they need a battery storage solution for calm/dark times.
They have teamed up with Renault to provide electric cars which can charge during peak production and feed back power into the local grid at night.
The cars only spend about 20% of their time being driven, so the rest of the time they can act as the island's power reserve.
Was also on the BBC News on TV this morning. It's interesting but I was a bit confused about some of the practicalities. The biggest concern most EV owners have is range and charging time and this system seemed to reduce range by taking energy from the car,
the island is only about 15km long, so range probably isn't an issue.
The longest drive you can make is 7 miles with average temperatures of 15-22C. Porto Santo is not an example of somewhere that can use EVs, its an example of the lazyness of people. That is perfect for cycling and walking. Far more sustainable for a tiny island.
Future War Cultist wrote: Is it possible to have one vehicle with the options for both a hybrid engine and a full electric motor? VW do it with the Golf don’t they?
It is, but that tends to lead to compromises that are undesirable. Generally speaking you're better off developing an electric from the ground up. The Golf, for example, has quite a short range for an electric, and I suspect that's at least partially down to it being based on a regular ICE car.
It's purely down to cost. Batteries are expensive, and VW probably just wanted to dip their toe in electrics building experience before going all in.
Here's an aftermarket battery that jumps the capacity to 55,7 kw/h and 350/450km of range which is in line with other extended range electric cars.
There's nothing stopping anyone from making long-range cars except whether the market will accept the accompanying price tag.
My little aygo, costs about 8-10 grand new. But it still does 60mph, still has a max range of 300-400 miles and can refuel in 5 minutes.
Cheap car. Basic. Does a solid 40-50 mpg though.
The problem is a electric car to do the same probably costs 20-30grand +
Much as change, especially with efficiency upgrades and so, fosil fuel cars are still mature technology, cheap technology and we lack the infrastructure to fully roll out electric or hydrogen.
There are thousands of places to refuel fosil fuel. Far less electricity points, and even less hyrmdrogen fuel stops.
To really be embraced there needs to be a major advantage over petrol and such cars, be it cost, tech, ranges. They need some way to stand out.
One added issue to solve, well solve self pretty much but repairs need a big shift to mainstream to help there success. You need special tools and gear. There not always easiest to work on. Especially if there power system involved as the voltage and power can be lethal. Mosth cars use about 12volts, or 24 at times.
Everyone can have a charging point at home for an EV, and there are new public charging points every day. They are much easier and cheaper than petrol stations. The latest Tesla does and 85% charge in 20mins, which is not that much longer than the time it takes to fill a car with petrol and pay. Payment for EVs can all be automated with no need to do anything. And most of the time you don’t even need to stop. It is 20mins a few times a year rather than 5 a week for most people.
The cost is partly an issue of mass production and partly that you pay upfront costs with less ongoing costs.
They don’t need special tools, just different ones, and the batteries are no more dangerous than high pressure direct injection engines. They can cause huge damage if you get in the way of one.
Grey Templar wrote: Unless there is a huge line, where the heck does it take 20 minutes to fill your gas tank? The actual filling and paying takes a couple minutes tops.
Its rare but it happens. Especially when you consider the time it take to route to a filling station. Again with my EV i don't have to go to filling stations at all except on super long trips. My car get topped off every night in my garage.
Grey Templar wrote: Unless there is a huge line, where the heck does it take 20 minutes to fill your gas tank? The actual filling and paying takes a couple minutes tops.
Not 20, but 10, by the time you have queued, filled up, queued to pay, got back to the car. That’s not unusual, especially if you fill up as a commuter.
Grey Templar wrote: Unless there is a huge line, where the heck does it take 20 minutes to fill your gas tank? The actual filling and paying takes a couple minutes tops.
Not 20, but 10, by the time you have queued, filled up, queued to pay, got back to the car. That’s not unusual, especially if you fill up as a commuter.
Grey Templar wrote: Unless there is a huge line, where the heck does it take 20 minutes to fill your gas tank? The actual filling and paying takes a couple minutes tops.
Not 20, but 10, by the time you have queued, filled up, queued to pay, got back to the car. That’s not unusual, especially if you fill up as a commuter.
Lined up to pay? What is this, 1975?
Bear in mind that the poster you're quoting is not in the US, where we drop filling stations at ridiculously close intervals.
Everyone can have a charging point at home for an EV,
There are huge swathes of Glasgow where that's not the case. The areas of tenement flats, where you've got six or eight separate homes with enough street frontage for two cars, parked on the street. It's not uncommon for people to park their car a block or two away, and not in the same spot from day to day.
Grey Templar wrote: Unless there is a huge line, where the heck does it take 20 minutes to fill your gas tank? The actual filling and paying takes a couple minutes tops.
Not 20, but 10, by the time you have queued, filled up, queued to pay, got back to the car. That’s not unusual, especially if you fill up as a commuter.
You mean you don’t have credit card machines on your pumps? What savages...
Teslas Shareholder meeting was pretty informative. Truck debut should be sometime this summer for all you pick up truck drivers, Semi should start production this year also along with mass placement of V3 chargers. Tesla Killers still at levels of charge and efficiency that Tesla was at in 2012. Tesla also looking for spots to build European factory. Q2 looking very good for Tesla.
Future War Cultist wrote: Is it possible to have one vehicle with the options for both a hybrid engine and a full electric motor? VW do it with the Golf don’t they?
Its possible, but its not Ideal. The best cars are purpose built. This has been a major problem with many of the EVs out there right now, they were not built from scratch as EVS.....and it shows. The body architecture is completely different or at least it should be to take advantage of how an EV can lay out its Drivetrain.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cryptek Keeper wrote: I have a question about electric cars. Is it unfeasible to carry an extended range battery in one, maybe in the trunk or backseat, maybe one the size of a suitcase?
Not really, now I think Rivien has the option to place a secondary battery in the bed of the truck that would extend range at the cost of using the truck bed. I don't think a suitcase sized battery will get you very far.
If ya want people to take your argument seriously, please, for feht's sake, quit trying to compare Tesla sales to Porsche and Jaguar. . .
I'll even help you out here: if I wanted to make a point about how well a vehicle is selling comparatively I would do this: "look at how many Ford F-150s are sold compared to the Chevy Silverado or Toyota Tundra".
That comparison works because all three of the vehicles mentioned compete in the same segment. Segmentation is important because each segment, by and large has its own distinct characteristics/traits in terms of the buyers.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: If ya want people to take your argument seriously, please, for feht's sake, quit trying to compare Tesla sales to Porsche and Jaguar. . .
I'll even help you out here: if I wanted to make a point about how well a vehicle is selling comparatively I would do this: "look at how many Ford F-150s are sold compared to the Chevy Silverado or Toyota Tundra".
That comparison works because all three of the vehicles mentioned compete in the same segment. Segmentation is important because each segment, by and large has its own distinct characteristics/traits in terms of the buyers.
You are missing the point. Currently Tesla sells 3 cars...thats it, not even globally yet. Actually in a very limited market so far, Model 3 has only recently landed outside of the US !.....and yet they are outselling prominent legacy automakers who have global distribution and a full range of vehicles. This is extremely telling. Especially when people claim that demand for Teslas is dying. Teslas numbers are a production issue, not a demand issue. This is why Tesla doesnt even bother to market or advertise yet, it would be a waste as they already sell everything they produce.....why spend money on advertising and marketing when you can't produce enough to keep up with demand?
"Porsche sells the Panamera, which I consider to be a sport sedan. They chose to sell at the price points and models they have. They didn't make a "stretched Boxster" that competes with the Model 3, but the Boxster is in the same price range as the Model 3 so all the nonsense about different markets and demographics is just that, nonsense. And they sell SUVs.
Facts - Porsche chose to market the products it has, with a 73 year lead and the backing of VW, and is selling fewer than Tesla. If you want to emphasize different markets, that's partly true. Tesla hasn't had time to enter as many markets. Over time their continued geographic expansion will skew the comparative sales numbers even more. Porsche decided on their product mix and marketing, they own the results. Great engineering for a great niche company - and none of that changes the numbers"
So as you see we could do segments, but it hardly matters. Model 3 is dominating all kinds of segments wherever it goes and thats versus legacy ICE cars! (lets face it if we wanted to really micro segment Tesla already dominates every EV segment it is in outside of China) When a company with a limited portfolio of models and limited distribution is outselling whole legacy brands (and look we are not talking about coach built bespoke supercar brands) we have an indication as to how well that company and its products are doing.....which is quite well. Short term investors may not be happy about returns as the company throws so much money into growth, but the demand for growth is there, make hay while the sun shines.
Also this https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/447171-teslas-advantage-its-the-software-stupid "As an owner of both an Audi and a Tesla, I’ve been eagerly awaiting the arrival of a Tesla competitor, and I was excited to take the Audi electric for a test drive. My excitement was short-lived. It’s a flop; a lemon. Calling it a 21st-century Edsel is not an overstatement. The car drives okay, and although it has a much more limited range than a Tesla, it is — as advertised — a functioning electric automobile.
What it decidedly is not is a Tesla.In fact, it isn’t within hailing distance of Tesla. The Audi electric’s software is non-intuitive and utterly impossible to use. Its user interface is a frustrating obstacle course. Audi simply doesn’t get it. Not yet anyway. It needs to quit and start over. Audi, the first legitimate competitor to Tesla, has shipped a working electric car that is a bad joke. Its failure to understand that “it’s the software stupid” has given Musk even more time to extend his competitive advantage. "
Problem for getting a Tesla in the UK (not sure if it's the same in Europe) is the mark up on US selling costs. Model 3 is $35K in the US, you would expect (conservatively) £30k or so given exchange rate. Nope - it costs £40k. Difference is more pronounced for the model S.
VW Golfs and Jag electrics are bloody expensive too (Prius too for that matter) - think the Hyundai Ioniq electric version is probably one of the cheapest over here (and I think actually has got quite good reviews) and still getting on for £30k. So even though the running costs are vastly cheaper than petrol or diesel engine cars, you still need that investment up front - which I think along with the lack of charging points has stopped people going all out and lots of them selling (although you are seeing a hell of a lot more of them on the roads over here).
Grey Templar wrote: Unless there is a huge line, where the heck does it take 20 minutes to fill your gas tank? The actual filling and paying takes a couple minutes tops.
Not 20, but 10, by the time you have queued, filled up, queued to pay, got back to the car. That’s not unusual, especially if you fill up as a commuter.
Lined up to pay? What is this, 1975?
UK - we get up and go and queue at the bar to get served drinks too!
Grey Templar wrote: Unless there is a huge line, where the heck does it take 20 minutes to fill your gas tank? The actual filling and paying takes a couple minutes tops.
Not 20, but 10, by the time you have queued, filled up, queued to pay, got back to the car. That’s not unusual, especially if you fill up as a commuter.
You mean you don’t have credit card machines on your pumps? What savages...
They're pretty common (ASDA doesn't have a manned pay point at their supermarket pumps at all), but usually not all pumps in a petrol station have a pay-at-pump facility. Also, if you need anything from the shop, you obviously can't do that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
I mean as long as I have enough shareholder billions to burn I can sell dollars for 99p and have an exponential growth company.
At the moment, doing that would make you 20% profit (1USD = 0.79GBP), but I know what you meant.
You should always be worried when companies are very keen to show off their revenue. Profit is what's important, but revenue always looks so much flashier so that's what companies tend to advertise. You can have huge revenues and even greater costs and those revenues mean absolutely nothing because you're still losing money. As for the market segment stuff, I think it's pretty clear there's at least one poster in this thread who has their own unique take on reality and I don't think it's worth taking things much further on that front.
Grey Templar wrote: Unless there is a huge line, where the heck does it take 20 minutes to fill your gas tank? The actual filling and paying takes a couple minutes tops.
Not 20, but 10, by the time you have queued, filled up, queued to pay, got back to the car. That’s not unusual, especially if you fill up as a commuter.
You mean you don’t have credit card machines on your pumps? What savages...
They're pretty common (ASDA doesn't have a manned pay point at their supermarket pumps at all), but usually not all pumps in a petrol station have a pay-at-pump facility. Also, if you need anything from the shop, you obviously can't do that.
I have found them less and less common. Supermarket stations often have them, but supermarkets are often in places that are not that convenient to get to unless you are going to the supermarket. Petrol stations not linked to a supermarket have them less and less. They want to drive customers in to the shop. They make very little profit on fuel, so anyone stopping just to fill up is a lost opertunity to flog them a mars bar, bottle of wine or bag of logs. Very annoying when all you want to do is get a tank on the way to work.
And how much many does Tesla make with those sales?
I mean as long as I have enough shareholder billions to burn I can sell dollars for 99p and have an exponential growth company.
Check the news reports though. There making a fortune yes but also spending it just as fast at the same time.
There making billions but bwtwrrn model 3 issues with giga factories and more. They spent a vast chunk of that.
Also. They get some major subsidies at times for making electric cars, yet as articles show. They have been losing a fair amount of money at times, barely meeting production targets for months last year ish, and the model 3 production was beget with major issues.
Grey Templar wrote: Unless there is a huge line, where the heck does it take 20 minutes to fill your gas tank? The actual filling and paying takes a couple minutes tops.
Not 20, but 10, by the time you have queued, filled up, queued to pay, got back to the car. That’s not unusual, especially if you fill up as a commuter.
You mean you don’t have credit card machines on your pumps? What savages...
Grey Templar wrote: Unless there is a huge line, where the heck does it take 20 minutes to fill your gas tank? The actual filling and paying takes a couple minutes tops.
Not 20, but 10, by the time you have queued, filled up, queued to pay, got back to the car. That’s not unusual, especially if you fill up as a commuter.
I don't bother timing it but I expect it takes me between 5 and 20 minutes to fill up once a week, depending on how busy it is.
If I've stopping at a motorway service station it's more like 30-40 minutes, because you go for a wee, get a coffee, go and look in WH Smiths and then have to round up the family and put them back in the car. This is where the EV charging time and the petrol filling time make no difference.
And how much many does Tesla make with those sales?
I mean as long as I have enough shareholder billions to burn I can sell dollars for 99p and have an exponential growth company.
Check the news reports though. There making a fortune yes but also spending it just as fast at the same time.
There making billions but bwtwrrn model 3 issues with giga factories and more. They spent a vast chunk of that.
Nope. Their capex (which is where factories, tooling for new models, etc. goes) minus depreciation is almost negative.
They're spending lots of money to keep the machine going.
They are spending tons of money building the Infrastructure and R&D. I'm not sure which news reports you are looking at. They are currently tooling for 5 New products (Semi, Truck, Y, Roadster, V3 charger), Building a factory in China. That takes a lot of cash. Not to mention retooling S and X. Tooling is always going to be there as refresh on cars is a constant thing, setting up new lines and factories is not.
If I've stopping at a motorway service station it's more like 30-40 minutes, because you go for a wee, get a coffee, go and look in WH Smiths and then have to round up the family and put them back in the car. This is where the EV charging time and the petrol filling time make no difference.
At least until electric cars make up a meaningful part of the motor pool.
Petrol stations are very efficient space wise, in the way that in 3-5 minutes you can stop, fill up and go. An electric car will spend 20 minutes at least hooked up, so imagine what the usual service station on a major route has to look like to cope with an influx of electric cars spending 5 to 10 times the current time it takes to fill up and go (I'm not counting coffee/bathroom times because usually that's something you do after you've filled up, so the car is no longer occupying a refueling stall).
Grey Templar wrote: Unless there is a huge line, where the heck does it take 20 minutes to fill your gas tank? The actual filling and paying takes a couple minutes tops.
Not 20, but 10, by the time you have queued, filled up, queued to pay, got back to the car. That’s not unusual, especially if you fill up as a commuter.
I don't bother timing it but I expect it takes me between 5 and 20 minutes to fill up once a week, depending on how busy it is.
If I've stopping at a motorway service station it's more like 30-40 minutes, because you go for a wee, get a coffee, go and look in WH Smiths and then have to round up the family and put them back in the car. This is where the EV charging time and the petrol filling time make no difference.
I'm 100% positive I spend much less of my time fueling my car now then I did in the past and I drive quite a lot. I used to have to stop for gas 3 times a week. Now I havent taken my car on super extended trips. When I used to drive from Alabama to Cleveland I had to stop twice in my old car. Usually for gas, bathroom break and food, was at least a half hour. That would get my Tesla to about 80% right now on a super charger......that last 20% admittedly does go pretty slow.
If I've stopping at a motorway service station it's more like 30-40 minutes, because you go for a wee, get a coffee, go and look in WH Smiths and then have to round up the family and put them back in the car. This is where the EV charging time and the petrol filling time make no difference.
At least until electric cars make up a meaningful part of the motor pool.
Petrol stations are very efficient space wise, in the way that in 3-5 minutes you can stop, fill up and go. An electric car will spend 20 minutes at least hooked up, so imagine what the usual service station on a major route has to look like to cope with an influx of electric cars spending 5 to 10 times the current time it takes to fill up and go (I'm not counting coffee/bathroom times because usually that's something you do after you've filled up, so the car is no longer occupying a refueling stall).
This is less of an issue than you think. Most people will charge at home. I rarely use a charger. Also chargers can be most anywhere, so most any parking spot can have a charger, they don't need to be at service stations. This is one of the reasons Tesla is not offering free charging on the model 3. Too many people with free charging just hog up the chargers instead of charging at home. This was ok when Teslas were not so prevalent, but if they keep selling at the current rate it is unsustainable. Why you would waste an hour of your life over $8 is kind of beyond me. Just charge at home if you can.
They are spending tons of money building the Infrastructure and R&D. I'm not sure which news reports you are looking at. They are currently tooling for 5 New products (Semi, Truck, Y, Roadster, V3 charger), Building a factory in China. That takes a lot of cash. Not to mention retooling S and X.
I don't need to look at news, it's all in Tesla's quarterly reports.
Anything below 100 means the company is investing less than what current equipment depreciates. Q1 2019 was even lower.
And how much many does Tesla make with those sales?
I mean as long as I have enough shareholder billions to burn I can sell dollars for 99p and have an exponential growth company.
Check the news reports though. There making a fortune yes but also spending it just as fast at the same time.
There making billions but bwtwrrn model 3 issues with giga factories and more. They spent a vast chunk of that.
Nope. Their capex (which is where factories, tooling for new models, etc. goes) minus depreciation is almost negative.
They're spending lots of money to keep the machine going.
They are spending tons of money building the Infrastructure and R&D. I'm not sure which news reports you are looking at. They are currently tooling for 5 New products (Semi, Truck, Y, Roadster, V3 charger), Building a factory in China. That takes a lot of cash. Not to mention retooling S and X. Tooling is always going to be there as refresh on cars is a constant thing, setting up new lines and factories is not.
Building a factory in China knocks them off my list of potential car companies.
If I've stopping at a motorway service station it's more like 30-40 minutes, because you go for a wee, get a coffee, go and look in WH Smiths and then have to round up the family and put them back in the car. This is where the EV charging time and the petrol filling time make no difference.
At least until electric cars make up a meaningful part of the motor pool.
Petrol stations are very efficient space wise, in the way that in 3-5 minutes you can stop, fill up and go. An electric car will spend 20 minutes at least hooked up, so imagine what the usual service station on a major route has to look like to cope with an influx of electric cars spending 5 to 10 times the current time it takes to fill up and go (I'm not counting coffee/bathroom times because usually that's something you do after you've filled up, so the car is no longer occupying a refueling stall).
This really requires a change in attitude from local and national governments. You can solve this problem by putting recharging points in each car parking bay at motorway services, so you don't have a specific charging station like you do a petrol station. There's probably some infrastructure issues apart from just installing the charging points that you'd need to figure out but the big advantage of charging points is you don't need loads of highly specialised equipment like underground tanks for the fuel and pressurised pumps. As we're looking at buying an EV I've been thinking about this a lot recently and I see a lot of missed opportunities. A shopping centre near my work recently did a lot of work in their car park, for example, and didn't put a single EV charging point in. If I drive there and do my shopping I can't charge my car while I'm in the shop. To make EVs more viable we need a change in attitude all-round. Not coincidentally that's exactly what many EV users experience once they go electric. Their approach to recharging is completely different to the approach to regular refuelling, with "little and often" being the best practice, rather than waiting until the tank's empty and filling up all in one go.
Edit: also, any chance we could stop quoting that obnoxiously large graph in replies, or at least spoiler-tag it? Makes reading this thread on a phone almost impossible!
They are spending tons of money building the Infrastructure and R&D. I'm not sure which news reports you are looking at. They are currently tooling for 5 New products (Semi, Truck, Y, Roadster, V3 charger), Building a factory in China. That takes a lot of cash. Not to mention retooling S and X.
I don't need to look at news, it's all in Tesla's quarterly reports.
Anything below 100 means the company is investing less than what current equipment depreciates. Q1 2019 was even lower.
OK, but that doesn't mean they aren't spending vast sums. Its just investing less than what current equipment depreciates. You have to look deeper.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Building a factory in China knocks them off my list of potential car companies.
Why, its smart. Especially with the Tarrifs coming. This lets them skip tarrifs by avoiding import/export. You may be surprised at who has factories in China already. Spoiler alert, Most US Auto companies have factories in China....so I'm not sure which brand you could buy. Tesla is still going to make its American cars in America.
If I've stopping at a motorway service station it's more like 30-40 minutes, because you go for a wee, get a coffee, go and look in WH Smiths and then have to round up the family and put them back in the car. This is where the EV charging time and the petrol filling time make no difference.
At least until electric cars make up a meaningful part of the motor pool.
Petrol stations are very efficient space wise, in the way that in 3-5 minutes you can stop, fill up and go. An electric car will spend 20 minutes at least hooked up, so imagine what the usual service station on a major route has to look like to cope with an influx of electric cars spending 5 to 10 times the current time it takes to fill up and go (I'm not counting coffee/bathroom times because usually that's something you do after you've filled up, so the car is no longer occupying a refueling stall).
This really requires a change in attitude from local and national governments. You can solve this problem by putting recharging points in each car parking bay at motorway services, so you don't have a specific charging station like you do a petrol station. There's probably some infrastructure issues apart from just installing the charging points that you'd need to figure out but the big advantage of charging points is you don't need loads of highly specialised equipment like underground tanks for the fuel and pressurised pumps. As we're looking at buying an EV I've been thinking about this a lot recently and I see a lot of missed opportunities. A shopping centre near my work recently did a lot of work in their car park, for example, and didn't put a single EV charging point in. If I drive there and do my shopping I can't charge my car while I'm in the shop. To make EVs more viable we need a change in attitude all-round. Not coincidentally that's exactly what many EV users experience once they go electric. Their approach to recharging is completely different to the approach to regular refuelling, with "little and often" being the best practice, rather than waiting until the tank's empty and filling up all in one go.
Edit: also, any chance we could stop quoting that obnoxiously large graph in replies, or at least spoiler-tag it? Makes reading this thread on a phone almost impossible!
I have to agree that this is a problem, but an achievable temporary one. "Refuelling" stations are a capex investment but not a technology one. Indeed, many existing gas stations could gradually start adding fast rechargers as the market shifts (same reason for fuel sales to drive customers inside while waiting).
They are spending tons of money building the Infrastructure and R&D. I'm not sure which news reports you are looking at. They are currently tooling for 5 New products (Semi, Truck, Y, Roadster, V3 charger), Building a factory in China. That takes a lot of cash. Not to mention retooling S and X.
I don't need to look at news, it's all in Tesla's quarterly reports.
Anything below 100 means the company is investing less than what current equipment depreciates. Q1 2019 was even lower.
OK, but that doesn't mean they aren't spending vast sums. Its just investing less than what current equipment depreciates. You have to look deeper.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Building a factory in China knocks them off my list of potential car companies.
Why, its smart. Especially with the Tarrifs coming. This lets them skip tarrifs by avoiding import/export. You may be surprised at who has factories in China already.
If there are tariffs its less smart. Its makes sales to the US more expensive.
Honda, NIssan, and Toyota have major plants in the US. I will stick with those. Its the same reason I haven't looked at a Ford or GM ever.
I have to agree that this is a problem, but an achievable temporary one. "Refuelling" stations are a capex investment but not a technology one. Indeed, many existing gas stations could gradually start adding fast rechargers as the market shifts (same reason for fuel sales to drive customers inside while waiting).
You are missing the point. Charging stations can be most anywhere. Grocery store parking lot, street meters, movie theaters, just about anywhere. No EPA issues or nasty cleanup like a gas station and less maintenance. Sheets currently has an agreement with Tesla, which works nicely because a Telal customer is in general going to be there longer and spend more money per fill up. They have probably been on the road for hours and need a break.
If there are tariffs its less smart. Its makes sales to the US more expensive.
Honda, NIssan, and Toyota have major plants in the US. I will stick with those. Its the same reason I haven't looked at a Ford or GM ever.
But again, the American Teslas will be built here. There will still be production in the US. They are not moving all production to China, just Chinese production. Tesla is also looking at building another factory in Europe right now. By building in China for China they skip the import/export tarrifs. Honda, Nissan and Toyota still have their plants in their home countries and elsewhere.
Building a factory in China knocks them off my list of potential car companies.
The vast, vast majority of cars made in chinese factories are made to be sold in the Chinese market. It isn't being done to build a car for cheaper and then ship it to the US, its that the Chinese market "forces" (ie, the government) require that goods sold in China be from "Chinese companies", which is why when those factories are built, even GM's factories, they are nominally owned by some local national person.
Building a factory in China knocks them off my list of potential car companies.
The vast, vast majority of cars made in chinese factories are made to be sold in the Chinese market. It isn't being done to build a car for cheaper and then ship it to the US, its that the Chinese market "forces" (ie, the government) require that goods sold in China be from "Chinese companies", which is why when those factories are built, even GM's factories, they are nominally owned by some local national person.
That and Captain Tarrif war make it almost compulsory to build cars in China. Tesla (Shanghi) fully owns Gigagafactory 3
So a company has to have 100% US production for global distribution for you to buy a car......thats slim pickins. What even are the options?
1. It has to be considered a domestic content vehicle under current NAFTA trade rules.
2. I trust the reliability of a Honda or Toyota at whole completely different levels to a Tesla. If Subaru had one that met my needs, it would be a whole level above them.
Building a factory in China knocks them off my list of potential car companies.
The vast, vast majority of cars made in chinese factories are made to be sold in the Chinese market. It isn't being done to build a car for cheaper and then ship it to the US, its that the Chinese market "forces" (ie, the government) require that goods sold in China be from "Chinese companies", which is why when those factories are built, even GM's factories, they are nominally owned by some local national person.
Caterpillar has factories in locations around the world specifically for this reason. If they have to ship a 3516 from, say, Lafayette Indiana to Indonesia, then the cost becomes prohibitive from shipping alone, and the lead time on getting that engine to the customer could cost Cat sales. The 3516 engines sold in the US, however, are American made.
Building a factory in China knocks them off my list of potential car companies.
The vast, vast majority of cars made in chinese factories are made to be sold in the Chinese market. It isn't being done to build a car for cheaper and then ship it to the US, its that the Chinese market "forces" (ie, the government) require that goods sold in China be from "Chinese companies", which is why when those factories are built, even GM's factories, they are nominally owned by some local national person.
That and Captain Tarrif war make it almost compulsory to build cars in China. Tesla (Shanghi) fully owns Gigagafactory 3
Don't bring politics in this. At all. You need to win this debate on the merits of Tesla's failing business model, not by getting it shut down for dipping into forum rules violations.
Building a factory in China knocks them off my list of potential car companies.
The vast, vast majority of cars made in chinese factories are made to be sold in the Chinese market. It isn't being done to build a car for cheaper and then ship it to the US, its that the Chinese market "forces" (ie, the government) require that goods sold in China be from "Chinese companies", which is why when those factories are built, even GM's factories, they are nominally owned by some local national person.
Caterpillar has factories in locations around the world specifically for this reason. If they have to ship a 3516 from, say, Lafayette Indiana to Indonesia, then the cost becomes prohibitive from shipping alone, and the lead time on getting that engine to the customer could cost Cat sales. The 3516 engines sold in the US, however, are American made.
Building a factory in China knocks them off my list of potential car companies.
The vast, vast majority of cars made in chinese factories are made to be sold in the Chinese market. It isn't being done to build a car for cheaper and then ship it to the US, its that the Chinese market "forces" (ie, the government) require that goods sold in China be from "Chinese companies", which is why when those factories are built, even GM's factories, they are nominally owned by some local national person.
That and Captain Tarrif war make it almost compulsory to build cars in China. Tesla (Shanghi) fully owns Gigagafactory 3
Don't bring politics in this. At all. You need to win this debate on the merits of Tesla's failing business model, not by getting it shut down for dipping into forum rules violations.
Man you have got to be a Short. Tesla is not failing. Its growing exponentially. And it is totally political. Taffis are making it so that Tesla has to build a factory in China in order to compete on price. Thats not even debatable.
So a company has to have 100% US production for global distribution for you to buy a car......thats slim pickins. What even are the options?
1. It has to be considered a domestic content vehicle under current NAFTA trade rules.
2. I trust the reliability of a Honda or Toyota at whole completely different levels to a Tesla. If Subaru had one that met my needs, it would be a whole level above them.
1. Ok, Well I would think Teslas would be domestic content Vehicles.
2. I can understand that, but if you look at the percentage of recalls done by Honda and Toyota...or pretty much anyone they dwarf Tesla recalls. Many of these recalls are major safety recall issues too.
3. Im not sure about other EVs but Tesla has a very good battery warranty.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote: Except they were building a plant before the tariff kerfluffle, but if you say so.
Really? So the trade war wasn't even on the radar in July 2018? Sure we know when the tarrifs actually started, but there was a lot of blustering before then. Its not the exclusive reason for building the factory, but with the tarrifs it would have become necessary.
They are spending tons of money building the Infrastructure and R&D. I'm not sure which news reports you are looking at. They are currently tooling for 5 New products (Semi, Truck, Y, Roadster, V3 charger), Building a factory in China. That takes a lot of cash. Not to mention retooling S and X.
I don't need to look at news, it's all in Tesla's quarterly reports.
Anything below 100 means the company is investing less than what current equipment depreciates. Q1 2019 was even lower.
OK, but that doesn't mean they aren't spending vast sums. Its just investing less than what current equipment depreciates. You have to look deeper.
Vast is a void word. Compared to my monthly salary? Yes, it's a vast amount, compared to trade volume on the NYSE is pocket change.
The statement in question is "Tesla loses money year after year because they spend everything in capex and R&D" so we have to find industry benchmarks for that.
Tesla expects to have Capex (things like superchargers, factories and tooling for new cars) at 7,8% of revenue for 2019. The figure for Volkswagen is exactly the same: 7,8%. BMW is at 7,1% so Tesla is going to spend along the lines of mature auto companies which post profits year after year. Hardly a company in a massive growth stage.
Ferrari, a company much more similar to Tesla than big auto groups like VW is at 18,5%. NIO, a Chinese electric car company is at a whopping 24,6% That's where Tesla should be if they intend to take on all those investments.
But capex is not the whole story, that still doesn't include R&D. Tesla estimated figure for R&D for Y2019 as per their own guidance is 4,9% of revenue (down from 6,8% on 2018). What's the figure for mature auto groups? 5,5% for BMW, 5,4% for VW.
Ferrari spends a whopping 18,6% and NIO is at 27,1%
So the explanation for Tesla not posting profits is absolutely not spending too much on capex or R&D. They aren't spending more than the competition yet profits are still nowhere to be found.
1. Ok, Well I would think Teslas would be domestic content Vehicles.
***They may very well be. Thats my criteria, and if they make that, cool.
2. I can understand that, but if you look at the percentage of recalls done by Honda and Toyota...or pretty much anyone they dwarf Tesla recalls. Many of these recalls are major safety recall issues too.
***My boy's Honda is past the 200K mark. Tesla's have to build that quality brand benchmark. They may in the future.
3. Im not sure about other EVs but Tesla has a very good battery warranty.
***Thanks. Let me clarify. Its more of a policy question., If someone has a vehicle for 125K and they have to change out the batteries, who pays for that? Where do the batteries go? Who's liable for those batteries? With a car battery I can swap out the old battery and the old battery does not cost me anything-or I might get some money for it. How does that work? Again, this is not a criticism, but seeking info.
2. I can understand that, but if you look at the percentage of recalls done by Honda and Toyota...or pretty much anyone they dwarf Tesla recalls. Many of these recalls are major safety recall issues too.
Are you seriously trying to claim Teslas are more reliable than Hondas or Toyotas? Tesla have been panned time and again in just about every reliability survey. If your going to try and claim otherwise I want to see the evidence, as I have plenty showing how bad they are and how good Toyota and Honda are.
They are spending tons of money building the Infrastructure and R&D. I'm not sure which news reports you are looking at. They are currently tooling for 5 New products (Semi, Truck, Y, Roadster, V3 charger), Building a factory in China. That takes a lot of cash. Not to mention retooling S and X.
I don't need to look at news, it's all in Tesla's quarterly reports.
Anything below 100 means the company is investing less than what current equipment depreciates. Q1 2019 was even lower.
OK, but that doesn't mean they aren't spending vast sums. Its just investing less than what current equipment depreciates. You have to look deeper.
Vast is a void word. Compared to my monthly salary? Yes, it's a vast amount, compared to trade volume on the NYSE is pocket change.
The statement in question is "Tesla loses money year after year because they spend everything in capex and R&D" so we have to find industry benchmarks for that.
Tesla expects to have Capex (things like superchargers, factories and tooling for new cars) at 7,8% of revenue for 2019. The figure for Volkswagen is exactly the same: 7,8%. BMW is at 7,1% so Tesla is going to spend along the lines of mature auto companies which post profits year after year. Hardly a company in a massive growth stage.
Ferrari, a company much more similar to Tesla than big auto groups like VW is at 18,5%. NIO, a Chinese electric car company is at a whopping 24,6% That's where Tesla should be if they intend to take on all those investments.
But capex is not the whole story, that still doesn't include R&D. Tesla estimated figure for R&D for Y2019 as per their own guidance is 4,9% of revenue (down from 6,8% on 2018). What's the figure for mature auto groups? 5,5% for BMW, 5,4% for VW.
Ferrari spends a whopping 18,6% and NIO is at 27,1%
So the explanation for Tesla not posting profits is absolutely not spending too much on capex or R&D. They aren't spending more than the competition yet profits are still nowhere to be found.
Nio doesnt even have its own factory, they produce their cars using other companies space. Seeking Alpha is notoriusly anti Tesla and was home of one of its greatest shorts until Musk outed him.
2. I can understand that, but if you look at the percentage of recalls done by Honda and Toyota...or pretty much anyone they dwarf Tesla recalls. Many of these recalls are major safety recall issues too.
Are you seriously trying to claim Teslas are more reliable than Hondas or Toyotas? Tesla have been panned time and again in just about every reliability survey. If your going to try and claim otherwise I want to see the evidence, as I have plenty showing how bad they are and how good Toyota and Honda are.
Cool, show me the mass recalls and major safety issues involved with Teslas. I can post plenty of honda a toyota recalls. Has Tesla had some issues with panel gaps and paint.....absolutely, but from reports those issues have been taken care of.
Really? So the trade war wasn't even on the radar in July 2018? Sure we know when the tarrifs actually started, but there was a lot of blustering before then. Its not the exclusive reason for building the factory, but with the tarrifs it would have become necessary.
Yes, really. . . . It's been this way since the 1990s at least. . . If Global companies want to do business in China, they must be "domestic" companies that are owned by Chinese Nationals.
Nio doesnt even have its own factory, they produce their cars using other companies space. Seeking Alpha is notoriusly anti Tesla and was home of one of its greatest shorts until Musk outed him.
Seeking alpha is just a place where people can write articles. You will find both pro and anti any stock articles there (Inc Tesla).
But that's shooting the messenger, the data is hard data, extracted from Tesla's own quarterly reports.
Slice it the way you want but the fact remains Tesla doesn't currently invest more than mature auto companies (as % of revenue) who do post profits year after year.
They did invest at some point in the past (hence your article about infrastructure debt) which means they can't make ends meet servicing the current debt, much less take on another massive pile of the same to fund all those projects you named before.
They are spending tons of money building the Infrastructure and R&D. I'm not sure which news reports you are looking at. They are currently tooling for 5 New products (Semi, Truck, Y, Roadster, V3 charger), Building a factory in China. That takes a lot of cash. Not to mention retooling S and X.
I don't need to look at news, it's all in Tesla's quarterly reports.
Anything below 100 means the company is investing less than what current equipment depreciates. Q1 2019 was even lower.
OK, but that doesn't mean they aren't spending vast sums. Its just investing less than what current equipment depreciates. You have to look deeper.
Vast is a void word. Compared to my monthly salary? Yes, it's a vast amount, compared to trade volume on the NYSE is pocket change.
The statement in question is "Tesla loses money year after year because they spend everything in capex and R&D" so we have to find industry benchmarks for that.
Tesla expects to have Capex (things like superchargers, factories and tooling for new cars) at 7,8% of revenue for 2019. The figure for Volkswagen is exactly the same: 7,8%. BMW is at 7,1% so Tesla is going to spend along the lines of mature auto companies which post profits year after year. Hardly a company in a massive growth stage.
Ferrari, a company much more similar to Tesla than big auto groups like VW is at 18,5%. NIO, a Chinese electric car company is at a whopping 24,6% That's where Tesla should be if they intend to take on all those investments.
But capex is not the whole story, that still doesn't include R&D. Tesla estimated figure for R&D for Y2019 as per their own guidance is 4,9% of revenue (down from 6,8% on 2018). What's the figure for mature auto groups? 5,5% for BMW, 5,4% for VW.
Ferrari spends a whopping 18,6% and NIO is at 27,1%
So the explanation for Tesla not posting profits is absolutely not spending too much on capex or R&D. They aren't spending more than the competition yet profits are still nowhere to be found.
Nio doesnt even have its own factory, they produce their cars using other companies space. Seeking Alpha is notoriusly anti Tesla and was home of one of its greatest shorts until Musk outed him.
2. I can understand that, but if you look at the percentage of recalls done by Honda and Toyota...or pretty much anyone they dwarf Tesla recalls. Many of these recalls are major safety recall issues too.
Are you seriously trying to claim Teslas are more reliable than Hondas or Toyotas? Tesla have been panned time and again in just about every reliability survey. If your going to try and claim otherwise I want to see the evidence, as I have plenty showing how bad they are and how good Toyota and Honda are.
Cool, show me the mass recalls and major safety issues involved with Teslas. I can post plenty of honda a toyota recalls. Has Tesla had some issues with panel gaps and paint.....absolutely, but from reports those issues have been taken care of.
Reliability is not the same as recalls, but since you ask:
“China’s top market regulator said on Friday that Tesla will recall a total of 14,123 imported Model S vehicles in the country over potentially deadly airbags.”
“In order to ensure the safety of our customers, Tesla will proactively retrofit a power steering component in all Model S vehicles built before April 2016.”
https://www.tesla.com/support/model-s-seat-belt-inspection “Tesla found a Model S in Europe with a front seat belt that was not properly connected to the outboard lap pretensioner. This vehicle was not involved in a crash and there were no injuries.
However, in the event of a crash, a seat belt in this condition would not provide full protection.”
https://www.cars.com/research/tesla/recalls/ “Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2016 Model S and Model X vehicles. The electric parking brake calipers have an internal gear that may be improperly manufactured, possibly resulting in the gear fracturing during parking brake application or release.
Consequence
If the gear breaks during parking brake release, the vehicle will not be able to be moved. If the gear breaks during parking brake application, the parking brake may not adequately hold the vehicle, potentially resulting in the vehicle rolling, increasing the risk of a crash.”
Now, where is the evidence of Teslas being more reliable?
Andrew1975 wrote:Tesla is not failing. Its growing exponentially.
What Tesla is doing is spending capital for expansion before it's even turned a profit on current production. Other car brands established their footing before exploding. Exponential growth without a proper food source causes organisms to collapse and die. Guess what? Same applies to car companies fronted by unstable stoners.
Andrew1975 wrote:And it is totally political. Taffis are making it so that Tesla has to build a factory in China in order to compete on price. Thats not even debatable.
Political discussion on this site is prohibited. Period. Once again, you're going to get this thread locked. I sincerely don't want that to happen because you could potentially get the last word in simply because of the time of lock, and you'll go around thinking that you were successful in your "argument".
Serioulsy I've never seen a thread on Dakka get shut down because of a general discussion on politics. You are overstating the ban on Political talk. Its only when it turns into a gak show. Tarrifs are a legitimate business concern.
You just love being wrong about stuff.
"nor is any thread that could have some political implication going to be immediately locked on sight. There is not a simple black and white distinction to be drawn here but common sense will suffice in almost all cases. Consider what most people would find appropriate to discuss in a game store open to the public, where you are likely to be around people you don't know very well. People go there to relax and have fun. If saying something about politics or religion in that situation would make it awkward and uncomfortable for others (for example, causing a heated argument likely to get personal) then don't post it on Dakka Dakka. "
People have been calling for Teslas death for years.....hasn't happened yet. Now that they are growing and making better products.....its unlikely to happen.
Thats a huge list of Recalls alright. Huge how may vehicles do you think were affected in total? Also most of those are for cars produced in between 2014-2016, not the most recent versions. Telsa absolutely had teething issues, even with the model 3 they had fit and finish issues. These have been addressed and fixed. This is pretty common with new models of cars EVEN FROM HONDA AND TOYOTA!
I'm not really sure how panel gaps and paint issues make a car less reliable. But if thats the criteria for consumer reports fine, but lets not pretend its dangerous. Is it an issue, sure and its been addressed according to resent 3rd party reports.
Teslas are ranked the safest cars in their classes, auto pilot has saved plenty of lives, the car is pretty much unstealable, Sentry mode has caught people hitting or otherwise damaging the car. Yes the car is not perfect, very few are. I've been in cars that cost more that were worse in every way. The cars are not perfect, but the magnifier that is on Tesla is pretty ridiculous. But thats ok. Tesla didnt raise the bar on EVs....it is the Bar by which all other EVs are judged, and by which all ICE cars will soon be judged. So of course being the leader is going to bring a certain amount of attention and extra scrutiny. I'd like to see other companies step up, but pretty much they all fall short. I am interested in what the Polestar will do...but Im not impressed with the numbers so far.
I could list them out like you did....but it would just be an ungainly wall of text....oh right spoiler tags. Now truthfully this is just US recalls, but if we go globally....I think it probably only gets worse for Honda and Toyota.
Now to be fair, every car I've ever owned (except my Tesla) has had a recall, mostly for minor things, but many of these Toyota and Honda recalls are pretty frightening. You'd think companies that have been making cars for so long would be able to get it right by now. Also to be fair Honda and Toyota are pretty good. The GM and Ford recall pages are giant!
Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A. is recalling approximately 52,000 2011-'12 Toyota Avalon sedans because of a fire risk due to a subwoofer that could overheat. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 20,000 2014 Toyota Camry, Avalon, Highlander, Sienna and 2015 Lexus RX vehicles because of a possible fuel leak that increases the risk of a fire. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 803,000 vehicles in the U.S., including the 2012-'13 Toyota Camry, Camry Hybrid, Avalon, Avalon Hybrid and Venza due to a problem with the air-conditioning condensers. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 10,000 vehicles in the U.S., including the 2013-'14 Toyota Camry, to replace the wiper switch. Read More
Toyota Avalon Hybrid
Toyota is recalling approximately 803,000 vehicles in the U.S., including the 2012-'13 Toyota Camry, Camry Hybrid, Avalon, Avalon Hybrid and Venza due to a problem with the air-conditioning condensers. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 10,000 vehicles in the U.S., including the 2013-'14 Toyota Camry, to replace the wiper switch. Read More
Toyota Camry
Toyota Motor Sales U.S. A. is recalling approximately 2 million vehicles because the power-window switches may short-circuit, potentially leading to a fire risk. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 110,000 2015 Toyota Camry and Camry Hybrid sedans; Toyota Highlander and Highlander Hybrid SUVs; and 2014-'15 Toyota RAV4 SUVs because of a possible loss of power steering assist. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 20,000 2014 Toyota Camry, Avalon, Highlander, Sienna and 2015 Lexus RX vehicles because of a possible fuel leak that increases the risk of a fire. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 803,000 vehicles in the U.S., including the 2012-'13 Toyota Camry, Camry Hybrid, Avalon, Avalon Hybrid and Venza due to a problem with the air-conditioning condensers. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 10,000 vehicles in the U.S., including the 2013-'14 Toyota Camry, to replace the wiper switch. Read More
Toyota Camry Hybrid
Toyota Motor Sales U.S. A. is recalling approximately 2 million vehicles because the power-window switches may short-circuit, potentially leading to a fire risk. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 110,000 2015 Toyota Camry and Camry Hybrid sedans; Toyota Highlander and Highlander Hybrid SUVs; and 2014-'15 Toyota RAV4 SUVs because of a possible loss of power steering assist. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 803,000 vehicles in the U.S., including the 2012-'13 Toyota Camry, Camry Hybrid, Avalon, Avalon Hybrid and Venza due to a problem with the air-conditioning condensers. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 10,000 vehicles in the U.S., including the 2013-'14 Toyota Camry, to replace the wiper switch. Read More
Toyota Corolla
Toyota Motor Sales U.S. A. is recalling approximately 2 million vehicles because the power-window switches may short-circuit, potentially leading to a fire risk. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. said it is expanding its recalls involving defective Takata airbag inflators to include an additional 637,000 vehicles in the U.S. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 247,000 cars because of potentially defective front passenger airbag inflators supplied by Takata Corp. Read More
Toyota is conducting a limited regional recall for certain 2003-'05 Toyota Corolla, Matrix, Sequoia, Tundra, Lexus SC 430 and Pontiac Vibe vehicles currently registered in Florida, Puerto Rico, Hawaii and the U.S. Virgin Islands and equipped with Takata passenger-side airbag inflators. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 1.3 million vehicles because of a problem that could cause the driver's airbag to deactivate in a crash. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 10,000 vehicles in the U.S., including the 2013-'14 Toyota Camry, to replace the wiper switch. Read More
Toyota is recalling the 2001-'03 Corolla due to defective airbags. Read More
Toyota is recalling 752,000 2003-'04 Toyota Corolla and Matrix vehicles because of a faulty airbag control module. Read More
Toyota FJ Cruiser
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 120 2014 Toyota FJ Cruiser SUVs to fix a steering problem. Read More
Toyota is recalling 11,489 2007-'13 Toyota FJ Cruisers equipped with the Toyota Auxiliary Driving Lamp Kit because the lights are excessively bright. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 209,000 2007-'13 Toyota FJ Cruisers because the front seatbelt retractors may become detached. Read More
Toyota Highlander
Toyota Motor Sales U.S. A. is recalling approximately 2 million vehicles because the power-window switches may short-circuit, potentially leading to a fire risk. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 110,000 2015 Toyota Camry and Camry Hybrid sedans; Toyota Highlander and Highlander Hybrid SUVs; and 2014-'15 Toyota RAV4 SUVs because of a possible loss of power steering assist. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 20,000 2014 Toyota Camry, Avalon, Highlander, Sienna and 2015 Lexus RX vehicles because of a possible fuel leak that increases the risk of a fire. Read More
Toyota is recalling 231 2014 Toyota Highlander crossovers in the U.S. because the second-row right-hand seat could come out of the track. Read More
Toyota is recalling 50,000 2014 Toyota Highlander and Highlander Hybrid crossovers in the U.S. for improper seatbelt-restraint software. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 1.3 million vehicles because of a problem that could cause the driver's airbag to deactivate in a crash. Read More
Toyota is recalling 7,067 2014 Toyota Highlander crossovers in the U.S. because the third-row middle seatbelt assembly may not be anchored properly. Read More
Toyota Highlander Hybrid
Toyota Motor Sales U.S. A. is recalling approximately 2 million vehicles because the power-window switches may short-circuit, potentially leading to a fire risk. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 110,000 2015 Toyota Camry and Camry Hybrid sedans; Toyota Highlander and Highlander Hybrid SUVs; and 2014-'15 Toyota RAV4 SUVs because of a possible loss of power steering assist. Read More
Toyota is recalling 50,000 2014 Toyota Highlander and Highlander Hybrid crossovers in the U.S. for improper seatbelt-restraint software. Read More
Toyota is recalling the Highlander Hybrid and the Lexus RX 400h because a problem with the hybrid system's inverter assembly may cause the hybrid system to shut down and result in the vehicle stopping while being driven. Read More
Toyota Land Cruiser
There are currently no recalls for this vehicle.
Toyota Matrix
Toyota Motor Sales U.S. A. is recalling approximately 2 million vehicles because the power-window switches may short-circuit, potentially leading to a fire risk. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 247,000 cars because of potentially defective front passenger airbag inflators supplied by Takata Corp. Read More
Toyota is conducting a limited regional recall for certain 2003-'05 Toyota Corolla, Matrix, Sequoia, Tundra, Lexus SC 430 and Pontiac Vibe vehicles currently registered in Florida, Puerto Rico, Hawaii and the U.S. Virgin Islands and equipped with Takata passenger-side airbag inflators. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 1.3 million vehicles because of a problem that could cause the driver's airbag to deactivate in a crash. Read More
Toyota is recalling the 2001-'03 Matrix due to defective airbags. Read More
Toyota is recalling 752,000 2003-'04 Toyota Corolla and Matrix vehicles because of a faulty airbag control module. Read More
Toyota Prius
Toyota is recalling 87,000 2010 Toyota Prius and Lexus HS 250h vehicles in the U.S. to fix a brake problem, as part of a larger global recall of about 242,000 of its gas-electric hybrids. Read More
Toyota is recalling about 2.8 million vehicles worldwide, including 670,000 2004-'09 Toyota Prius vehicles in the U.S., because of steering and water pump problems. Read More
Toyota Prius c
There are currently no recalls for this vehicle.
Toyota Prius Plug-in
There are currently no recalls for this vehicle.
Toyota Prius v
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 5,000 2014-'15 Toyota Prius V wagons because the front-passenger airbag may not deploy properly. Read More
Toyota RAV4
Toyota Motor Sales U.S. A. is recalling approximately 2 million vehicles because the power-window switches may short-circuit, potentially leading to a fire risk. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. said it is expanding its recalls involving defective Takata airbag inflators to include an additional 637,000 vehicles in the U.S. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 110,000 2015 Toyota Camry and Camry Hybrid sedans; Toyota Highlander and Highlander Hybrid SUVs; and 2014-'15 Toyota RAV4 SUVs because of a possible loss of power steering assist. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 1.3 million vehicles because of a problem that could cause the driver's airbag to deactivate in a crash. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 260,000 2012 Toyota RAV4 crossovers, 2012-'13 Toyota Tacoma pickup trucks and 2012-'13 Lexus RX 350 crossovers in the U.S. to fix a software problem that can cause the vehicle's stability, antilock brakes and traction control functions to intermittently turn off. Read More
Toyota RAV4 EV
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 110,000 2015 Toyota Camry and Camry Hybrid sedans; Toyota Highlander and Highlander Hybrid SUVs; and 2014-'15 Toyota RAV4 SUVs because of a possible loss of power steering assist. Read More
Toyota Sequoia
Toyota Motor Sales U.S. A. is recalling approximately 2 million vehicles because the power-window switches may short-circuit, potentially leading to a fire risk. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. said it is expanding its recalls involving defective Takata airbag inflators to include an additional 637,000 vehicles in the U.S. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 247,000 cars because of potentially defective front passenger airbag inflators supplied by Takata Corp. Read More
Toyota is conducting a limited regional recall for certain 2003-'05 Toyota Corolla, Matrix, Sequoia, Tundra, Lexus SC 430 and Pontiac Vibe vehicles currently registered in Florida, Puerto Rico, Hawaii and the U.S. Virgin Islands and equipped with Takata passenger-side airbag inflators. Read More
Toyota is recalling the 2001-'03 Sequoia due to defective airbags. Read More
Toyota Sienna
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 25,500 2015 Toyota Sienna minivans because the second-row overhead assist grips could detach, potentially striking vehicle occupants. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 20,000 2014 Toyota Camry, Avalon, Highlander, Sienna and 2015 Lexus RX vehicles because of a possible fuel leak that increases the risk of a fire. Read More
Toyota is recalling 263 2014 Toyota Sienna minivans in the U.S. because of a problem with the transmission shift cable that could lead to rollaway risk. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. said it will recall approximately 370,000 2004-'11 Toyota Sienna minivans in the U.S. because the spare tire could fall off the vehicle if a cable rusts. Read More
Toyota is recalling 615,000 2004-'05 and 2007-'09 Toyota Sienna minivans in the U.S. because problems with a shift lever assembly could result in a vehicle rollaway. Read More
Toyota Tacoma
Toyota is recalling approximately 690,000 2005-'11 Toyota Tacoma pickup trucks in the U.S. to fix a problem with the rear suspension system. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 1.3 million vehicles because of a problem that could cause the driver's airbag to deactivate in a crash. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 260,000 2012 Toyota RAV4 crossovers, 2012-'13 Toyota Tacoma pickup trucks and 2012-'13 Lexus RX 350 crossovers in the U.S. to fix a software problem that can cause the vehicle's stability, antilock brakes and traction control functions to intermittently turn off. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 4,000 2013-'14 Toyota Tacoma pickup trucks in the U.S. because a problem with engine valve springs could lead to engine failure. Read More
Toyota is recalling 150,000 2001-'04 Toyota Tacoma pickup trucks because the spare tire can detach from the vehicle. Read More
Toyota said it is recalling approximately 342,000 Toyota Tacoma Access Cab pickups produced from 2004-'11 because of potentially defective seatbelts. Read More
Toyota Tundra
Toyota Motor Sales U.S. A. is recalling approximately 2 million vehicles because the power-window switches may short-circuit, potentially leading to a fire risk. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. said it is expanding its recalls involving defective Takata airbag inflators to include an additional 637,000 vehicles in the U.S. Read More
Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 247,000 cars because of potentially defective front passenger airbag inflators supplied by Takata Corp. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 130,000 2014 Toyota Tundra CrewMax Cab and Double Cab trucks in the U.S. because a trim piece could interfere with the deployment of the side-curtain airbags. Read More
Toyota is conducting a limited regional recall for certain 2003-'05 Toyota Corolla, Matrix, Sequoia, Tundra, Lexus SC 430 and Pontiac Vibe vehicles currently registered in Florida, Puerto Rico, Hawaii and the U.S. Virgin Islands and equipped with Takata passenger-side airbag inflators. Read More
Toyota is recalling the 2001-'03 Tundra due to defective airbags. Read More
Toyota Venza
Toyota is recalling approximately 803,000 vehicles in the U.S., including the 2012-'13 Toyota Camry, Camry Hybrid, Avalon, Avalon Hybrid and Venza due to a problem with the air-conditioning condensers. Read More
Toyota Yaris
Toyota Motor Sales U.S. A. is recalling approximately 2 million vehicles because the power-window switches may short-circuit, potentially leading to a fire risk. Read More
Toyota Motors Sales U.S.A. is recalling approximately 230 2015 Toyota Yaris hatchbacks because the rear axle bearing bolts may not have been tightened sufficiently during vehicle assembly. Read More
Toyota is recalling approximately 1.3 million vehicles because of a problem that could cause the driver's airbag to deactivate in a crash. Read More
Toyota is recalling 472,500 vehicles to fix a seat problem. Read More
Toyota is recalling 74 2012 Toyota Yaris vehicles for possible loss of power steering assist. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. is recalling 303,904 2008-'09 Honda Accord sedans for inadvertent airbag deployment. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. expanded its Takata airbag recall, adding another 104,871 vehicles. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. is recalling 137 2014-'15 Honda Accord cars with a four-cylinder engine and 2015 Honda CR-V SUVs to replace the engine short block. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. upgraded a "safety improvement campaign" involving nine of its models equipped with Takata airbags to a formal recall. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. said it will recall approximately 2 million vehicles in the U.S., including the 2002-'03 Honda Civic, CR-V and Odyssey, to replace one or both front airbag inflators. Read More
Honda is recalling 1,659 2013 Honda Accords in the U.S. to replace defective fuel tanks. Read More
Honda Accord Hybrid
American Honda Motor Co. is recalling 6,786 2014-'15 Honda Accord Hybrid sedans because of a stalling risk. Read More
Honda Accord Plug-In Hybrid
There are currently no recalls for this vehicle.
Honda Civic
American Honda Motor Co. is recalling 143,676 2014-'15 Honda Civic and 2015 Honda Fit cars in the U.S. because the software settings that control the continuously variable transmission operation may result in damage to the transmission drive pulley shaft. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. expanded its Takata airbag recall, adding another 104,871 vehicles. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. upgraded a "safety improvement campaign" involving nine of its models equipped with Takata airbags to a formal recall. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. said it will recall approximately 2 million vehicles in the U.S., including the 2002-'03 Honda Civic, CR-V and Odyssey, to replace one or both front airbag inflators. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. is recalling 9,817 2014 Honda Civic LX cars in the U.S. because of possible tire damage. Read More
In the U.S., Honda said it is recalling more than 561,000 vehicles, including the 2001-'03 Civic, because the front airbags can deploy with too much pressure and "could result in injury." Read More
Honda is recalling 157 2012 Honda Civics to replace the steering column. Read More
Honda Crosstour
American Honda Motor Co. is recalling 1,252 2015 Honda Crosstour hatchbacks to replace one or both of the side curtain airbags. Read More
Honda CR-V
American Honda Motor Co. is recalling 137 2014-'15 Honda Accord cars with a four-cylinder engine and 2015 Honda CR-V SUVs to replace the engine short block. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. upgraded a "safety improvement campaign" involving nine of its models equipped with Takata airbags to a formal recall. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. said it will recall approximately 2 million vehicles in the U.S., including the 2002-'03 Honda Civic, CR-V and Odyssey, to replace one or both front airbag inflators. Read More
American Honda is recalling 204,500 vehicles, including the 2012-'13 CR-V, because of an automatic shift-lever problem that could allow the vehicles to roll away. Read More
In the U.S., Honda said it is recalling more than 561,000 vehicles, including the 2002-'03 CR-V, because the front airbags can deploy with too much pressure and "could result in injury." Read More
Honda CR-Z
There are currently no recalls for this vehicle.
Honda Element
American Honda Motor Co. upgraded a "safety improvement campaign" involving nine of its models equipped with Takata airbags to a formal recall. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. said it will recall approximately 2 million vehicles in the U.S., including the 2002-'03 Honda Civic, CR-V and Odyssey, to replace one or both front airbag inflators. Read More
Honda Fit
American Honda Motor Co. is recalling 143,676 2014-'15 Honda Civic and 2015 Honda Fit cars in the U.S. because the software settings that control the continuously variable transmission operation may result in damage to the transmission drive pulley shaft. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. is recalling 6,292 2015 Honda Fit cars to fix an A-pillar cover that could adversely affect the performance of the side curtain airbags. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. is recalling 1,038 2013 Honda Fit hatchbacks to fix a defective right front driveshaft. Read More
American Honda is recalling 143,083 2007-'08 Honda Fits for a second time to fix a master power window switch that could overheat and cause a fire. Read More
American Honda is recalling 43,782 2012-'13 Honda Fit Sports because of an electronic stability control problem. Read More
Honda Fit EV
There are currently no recalls for this vehicle.
Honda Insight
There are currently no recalls for this vehicle.
Honda Odyssey
American Honda Motor Co. upgraded a "safety improvement campaign" involving nine of its models equipped with Takata airbags to a formal recall. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. said it will recall approximately 2 million vehicles in the U.S., including the 2002-'03 Honda Civic, CR-V and Odyssey, to replace one or both front airbag inflators. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. is recalling 24,889 2014 Honda Odyssey minivans because the side curtain airbag on the passenger?s side of the vehicle may not deploy. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. is recalling 886,815 2005-'10 Honda Odyssey minivans in the U.S. because a fuel leak increases the risk of a fire. Read More
Honda is recalling 344,187 2007-'08 Honda Odyssey minivans because the Vehicle Safety Assist System may apply the brakes unexpectedly. Read More
In the U.S., Honda said it is recalling more than 561,000 vehicles, including the 2002 Odyssey, because the front airbags can deploy with too much pressure and "could result in injury." Read More
Honda is recalling 748,000 vehicles, including the 2011-'13 Honda Odysessy because of an airbag problem. Read More
Honda is recalling 807,000 vehicles, including the 2003-'04 Honda Odyssey, because of a problem that may cause the vehicles to roll away. Read More
American Honda is recalling approximately 374,000 vehicles in the U.S., including the 2003-'04 Honda Odyssey and 2003 Acura MDX, to fix a problem that could cause inadvertent airbag deployment. Read More
American Honda is recalling 270 2013 Honda Pilot and Honda Odyssey vehicles because a worn piston may suddenly fail, causing the engine to stall. Read More
Honda Pilot
American Honda Motor Co. expanded its Takata airbag recall, adding another 104,871 vehicles. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. upgraded a "safety improvement campaign" involving nine of its models equipped with Takata airbags to a formal recall. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. said it will recall approximately 2 million vehicles in the U.S., including the 2002-'03 Honda Civic, CR-V and Odyssey, to replace one or both front airbag inflators. Read More
American Honda is recalling 182,000 vehicles, including the 2005 Honda Pilot, because the Vehicle Stability Assist system could malfunction and apply the brakes without any input from the driver. Read More
Honda is recalling 748,000 vehicles, including the 2009-'13 Honda Pilot, because of an airbag problem. Read More
Honda is recalling 807,000 vehicles, including the 2003-'04 Honda Pilot, because of a problem that may cause the vehicles to roll away. Read More
American Honda is recalling 270 2013 Honda Pilot and Honda Odyssey vehicles because a worn piston may suddenly fail, causing the engine to stall. Read More
Honda Ridgeline
American Honda Motor Co. upgraded a "safety improvement campaign" involving nine of its models equipped with Takata airbags to a formal recall. Read More
American Honda Motor Co. said it will recall approximately 2 million vehicles in the U.S., including the 2002-'03 Honda Civic, CR-V and Odyssey, to replace one or both front airbag inflators. Read More
Honda S2000
American Honda Motor Co. is recalling 18,352 vehicles, including the 2006-'07 Honda S2000, to replace the brake booster. Read More
Sets New NHTSA Vehicle Safety Score Record. Palo Alto, CA — Independent testing by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has awarded the Tesla Model S a 5-star safety rating, not just overall, but in every subcategory without exception.
Many cars achieve an overall 5-star rating, but it is a little more rare for cars to get 5 stars in every category tested by NHTSA. Its even more rare for a company to get that rating for every car currently in production!
Really? So the trade war wasn't even on the radar in July 2018? Sure we know when the tarrifs actually started, but there was a lot of blustering before then. Its not the exclusive reason for building the factory, but with the tarrifs it would have become necessary.
Yes, really. . . . It's been this way since the 1990s at least. . . If Global companies want to do business in China, they must be "domestic" companies that are owned by Chinese Nationals.
Nope https://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/2154674/tesla-build-its-gigafactory-shanghai-capacity-produce-500000-cars Tesla fully owns Gigafactory 3 "Tesla will set up its first overseas assembly in China’s premier commercial city, establishing a beach head in the world’s largest vehicle market even as a trade war simmers between Washington and Beijing.The Palo Alto, California-based carmaker will establish its Gigafactory 3 at Lingang near Shanghai’s free-trade zone, with an annual capacity to produce 500,000 electric vehicles, according to an announcement. The wholly foreign-owned plant – the first car plant in China to operate without a local partner "
Nio doesnt even have its own factory, they produce their cars using other companies space. Seeking Alpha is notoriusly anti Tesla and was home of one of its greatest shorts until Musk outed him.
Seeking alpha is just a place where people can write articles. You will find both pro and anti any stock articles there (Inc Tesla).
But that's shooting the messenger, the data is hard data, extracted from Tesla's own quarterly reports.
Slice it the way you want but the fact remains Tesla doesn't currently invest more than mature auto companies (as % of revenue) who do post profits year after year.
They did invest at some point in the past (hence your article about infrastructure debt) which means they can't make ends meet servicing the current debt, much less take on another massive pile of the same to fund all those projects you named before.
Meh, Tesla has always been different. Q2 deliveries look promising. That would make it 3 out of 4 quarters with a profit. Elon has a high tolerance for risk and is a long game player. Their stock says it all, even depressed right not at about $200 its way over punching its weight. You either get Teslas vision or you don't. Tesla has never really had problems raising cash because enough people get it. Without Tesla, US auto would be screwed.....where would they buy their offsets from? Bye Bye Hellcats!
1. Ok, Well I would think Teslas would be domestic content Vehicles.
***They may very well be. Thats my criteria, and if they make that, cool.
2. I can understand that, but if you look at the percentage of recalls done by Honda and Toyota...or pretty much anyone they dwarf Tesla recalls. Many of these recalls are major safety recall issues too.
***My boy's Honda is past the 200K mark. Tesla's have to build that quality brand benchmark. They may in the future.
3. Im not sure about other EVs but Tesla has a very good battery warranty.
***Thanks. Let me clarify. Its more of a policy question., If someone has a vehicle for 125K and they have to change out the batteries, who pays for that? Where do the batteries go? Who's liable for those batteries? With a car battery I can swap out the old battery and the old battery does not cost me anything-or I might get some money for it. How does that work? Again, this is not a criticism, but seeking info.
What does a new out of warranty battery cost....ive seen reports between 30k and 8K.....30k sounds excessive, 8k sounds large, some reports say because they are individual cells you can just replace the bad ones fo $1 per cell, other articles say you have to replace them in bundles...it might depend on the model....i don't know. Its not been too much of an issue yet as Telsa batteries and battery management are very good. As the first cars hit a decade will it become a problem, i don't know. Tesloop doesnt seem to think so and they are a third party company that has put tons of miles on the cars running them as taxis.
Really? So the trade war wasn't even on the radar in July 2018? Sure we know when the tarrifs actually started, but there was a lot of blustering before then. Its not the exclusive reason for building the factory, but with the tarrifs it would have become necessary.
Yes, really. . . . It's been this way since the 1990s at least. . . If Global companies want to do business in China, they must be "domestic" companies that are owned by Chinese Nationals.
Nope https://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/2154674/tesla-build-its-gigafactory-shanghai-capacity-produce-500000-cars Tesla fully owns Gigafactory 3 "Tesla will set up its first overseas assembly in China’s premier commercial city, establishing a beach head in the world’s largest vehicle market even as a trade war simmers between Washington and Beijing.The Palo Alto, California-based carmaker will establish its Gigafactory 3 at Lingang near Shanghai’s free-trade zone, with an annual capacity to produce 500,000 electric vehicles, according to an announcement. The wholly foreign-owned plant – the first car plant in China to operate without a local partner "
Thanks for playing though.
That is news to me, and clearly a sign that China is changing more and more policies. . . . Doesn't make you right about much else. . . And frankly, I'm done engaging with you, as your attitude and bizarre need to defend Tesla when the entire thread is about EVs, not Tesla alone is tiresome and old.
Wow! What a surprise! Company that makes 10million cars a year across 51 models has more recalls than a brand that produces 50000 across 3.
Also, you listed the same fault multiple times, including the same airbag fault that Tesla had, lots of non safety stuff, stuff Tesla have ignored, and lots of cars where it says there are no recalls.
You stated that Tesla had no safety critical recalls. I gave you 4. You can’t dismiss them because they were for 2016 cars. Those were dated 2018 & 2019, showing that there has simply not been time to find issues on newer cars.
Seriously, this is just refusal to accept reality. Show me one thing showing Teslas are reliable. I can’t find a single report anywhere saying anything other than Teslas being unreliable.
Tesla spend twice as much as Ford on warrantee work. Any way you cut it Teslas are not reliable cars. You can keep hand waving it away, but everyone else can see how your dismissing facts.
Really? So the trade war wasn't even on the radar in July 2018? Sure we know when the tarrifs actually started, but there was a lot of blustering before then. Its not the exclusive reason for building the factory, but with the tarrifs it would have become necessary.
Yes, really. . . . It's been this way since the 1990s at least. . . If Global companies want to do business in China, they must be "domestic" companies that are owned by Chinese Nationals.
Nope https://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/2154674/tesla-build-its-gigafactory-shanghai-capacity-produce-500000-cars Tesla fully owns Gigafactory 3 "Tesla will set up its first overseas assembly in China’s premier commercial city, establishing a beach head in the world’s largest vehicle market even as a trade war simmers between Washington and Beijing.The Palo Alto, California-based carmaker will establish its Gigafactory 3 at Lingang near Shanghai’s free-trade zone, with an annual capacity to produce 500,000 electric vehicles, according to an announcement. The wholly foreign-owned plant – the first car plant in China to operate without a local partner "
Thanks for playing though.
That is news to me, and clearly a sign that China is changing more and more policies. . . . Doesn't make you right about much else. . . And frankly, I'm done engaging with you, as your attitude and bizarre need to defend Tesla when the entire thread is about EVs, not Tesla alone is tiresome and old.
Cool, look I Said EVs are good, Teslas are the best of the bunch, and are currently the only EV capable of being the primary/sole vehicle for the average family. Most of them lack the range and charging ability to replace ICE cars 100% of the time for most people. Most EVs cant compete with the flexibility advantage that Ice cars currently hold. From there it was a dog pile on Tesla. I simply defended my opinion and set the record straight. The amount of misinformation presented here on EVs and Teslas is pretty crazy, obviously EV companies need to to better educate the general public. However, Don't start none, won't be none. I could say many peoples attitude and bizarre need to attack Tesla is tiresome and old....and ignorant. But most EV and Tesla people are used to this.
Chinas policy changed 1 because of agreements with the WTO, 2 Elon would not have it any other way, 3 China can't sell cars globally, well they can but nobody wants them because they are crap. Because of that they are desperate to corner the market on EVs, the amount of spys they will send into the gigafactory to learn how to dominate EVs will be substantial! There is no doubt that EVs are the future, the US in its typical behavior is doing everything they can to stall EVS.....China is doing the polar opposite.
Chinas policy changed 1 because of agreements with the WTO, 2 Elon would not have it any other way, 3 China can't sell cars globally, well they can but nobody wants them because they are crap. Because of that they are desperate to corner the market on EVs, the amount of spys they will send into the gigafactory to learn how to dominate EVs will be substantial! There is no doubt that EVs are the future, the US in its typical behavior is doing everything they can to stall EVS.....China is doing the polar opposite.
So wait a minute. . . you're saying that Elon Musk's puny, insignificant company has greater power than GM did when they entered the Chinese market??? Wow, I'd love to live in that fairytale world.
Chinas policy changed 1 because of agreements with the WTO, 2 Elon would not have it any other way, 3 China can't sell cars globally, well they can but nobody wants them because they are crap. Because of that they are desperate to corner the market on EVs, the amount of spys they will send into the gigafactory to learn how to dominate EVs will be substantial! There is no doubt that EVs are the future, the US in its typical behavior is doing everything they can to stall EVS.....China is doing the polar opposite.
So wait a minute. . . you're saying that Elon Musk's puny, insignificant company has greater power than GM did when they entered the Chinese market??? Wow, I'd love to live in that fairytale world.
Funny, I thought you weren't engaging anymore. And yes I'm saying that. GM is old tech, and its not even good old tech. China has its eyes on the prize which is EVs....you know the tech that GM started and shortsightedly killed. What could china learn from them? How to lose an advantage? How to destroy your global dominating market share by building gag cars and letting little Japanese cars show you up?
You could take my word for it....or you could read the article. China initially insisted on the classic 50 percent ownership.....but gave in to Elon when he said no.
Seeking alpha is just a place where people can write articles. You will find both pro and anti any stock articles there (Inc Tesla).
But that's shooting the messenger, the data is hard data, extracted from Tesla's own quarterly reports.
Slice it the way you want but the fact remains Tesla doesn't currently invest more than mature auto companies (as % of revenue) who do post profits year after year.
They did invest at some point in the past (hence your article about infrastructure debt) which means they can't make ends meet servicing the current debt, much less take on another massive pile of the same to fund all those projects you named before.
Meh, Tesla has always been different. Q2 deliveries look promising. That would make it 3 out of 4 quarters with a profit. Elon has a high tolerance for risk and is a long game player. Their stock says it all, even depressed right not at about $200 its way over punching its weight. You either get Teslas vision or you don't. Tesla has never really had problems raising cash because enough people get it. Without Tesla, US auto would be screwed.....where would they buy their offsets from? Bye Bye Hellcats!
So, Q2 deliveries look promising (in the US, they're tanking in Europe, but that's a whole different thing) and Tesla is looking at delivery numbers roughly like those of Q4 last year.
Yet, Tesla still guides a loss for Q2 '19 (Elon's words, just 2 days ago at the shareholder meeting).
So at record deliveries, with minimal investment (they're basically running on fumes, their capex doesn't even cover depreciation) and Tesla still can't make money.
Those are the signs of a structurally unprofitable manufacturer, and no magic robotaxi or mythical future model will change that.
Re: China factory, the reason why Tesla has been allowed to make a factory with no local partner is this one:
The Chinese are betting Tesla builds them a fancy new tech factory they will repo when they fail to pay the (Chinese) banks. By all accounts this is a very abnormal credit for PPE, which has to be repaid in just one year so we'll see it very soon.
Cool, look I Said EVs are good, Teslas are the best of the bunch, and are currently the only EV capable of being the primary/sole vehicle for the average family.
Funny that this quote comes in a comment bemoaning the amount of misinformation in this thread. Teslas are in no way the only EV capable of being the primary/sole vehicle for the average family. The e-Niro, Kona and I-Pace all have comparable ranges to a Tesla, compete on price (in the case of the first two actually beat any Tesla on price by a significant degree, at least in the UK) and are practical cars in terms of space and comfort. The idea that only Tesla produce practical EVs is either laughably biased or hugely misinformed.
Emphasis mine. That's what you're arguing against here. Despite Andrew's requests for facts and sources, your facts and sources are either too anecdotal or too biased to be proof, while his will be accurate and objecTESLA, which is Tesla's new better than objective truth.
Personally, I want to hear more about this using the car as a power source. Living in Florida, every few years we do lose power- if one had a solar rig on your house, could it be used to charge the car during the day, and then use the car's battery to run the home during the night? I realize it's not really what it's intended for, but in the aftermath of a hurricane you're not driving anywhere.
Porto Santo Island has begun testing a scheme in which the batteries in electric vehicles are charged by solar power during the day but at night return spare energy to the grid to power people's homes.
Some experts say this form of energy storage could become a global trend.
That'll be the same story Killkrazy mentioned on page 16, before the latest installment of the TESLA! show.
In general, using old EV batteries for domestic storage has been sugegsted previously. IIRC such schemes haven't met expectations yet because EV batteries are proving to last longer than was initially predicted, so there isn't the stock of degraded batteries that was originally assumed.
1. He's claiming you have a financial interest in making Tesla look bad. Essentially he says you're arguing with unclean hands. Or
2. He think's you're short and doesn't like short people. This is dangerous. My wife is short. My wife drives a large vehicle. My wife is known to not be concerned about the things she hits (fences, buildings, people who call her short...). Every time I start humming "short people got no reason to live" I suddenly run into something from behind and wake up with a bad headache. Like this weekend when I complained about supper being late and woke up being thrown out of an airplane.
1. He's claiming you have a financial interest in making Tesla look bad. Essentially he says you're arguing with unclean hands. Or
2. He think's you're short and doesn't like short people. This is dangerous. My wife is short. My wife drives a large vehicle. My wife is known to not be concerned about the things she hits (fences, buildings, people who call her short...). Every time I start humming "short people got no reason to live" I suddenly run into something from behind and wake up with a bad headache. Like this weekend when I complained about supper being late and woke up being thrown out of an airplane.
Thank you on the battery info.
I was more concerned that it was a "short bus" reference. I was preparing my documentation...
Ensis Ferrae wrote: GM has been in China longer than you think there. . . to quote someone in this thread, "thanks for playing though"\
Yes I know, how that working out for them https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/26/business/gm-oshawa-plant/index.html......Maybe they can teach the Chinese how to take a Taxpayer Bailout! Gm at one time Dominated global car sales.....then they sucked so bad they made WW2 pacific veterans buy Japanese Cars! China already knows how to make crappy cars that nobody wants to buy. Good job! Gm can also thank Tesla for the carbon credits, they wouldn't even be able to make most of their higher end gas guzzeler cars without the carbon credits.
Funny that this quote comes in a comment bemoaning the amount of misinformation in this thread. Teslas are in no way the only EV capable of being the primary/sole vehicle for the average family. The e-Niro, Kona and I-Pace all have comparable ranges to a Tesla, compete on price (in the case of the first two actually beat any Tesla on price by a significant degree, at least in the UK) and are practical cars in terms of space and comfort. The idea that only Tesla produce practical EVs is either laughably biased or hugely misinformed.
Funny, lets look what it will take to get your average person to switch to EVs. The EV needs to be at least as capable if not more so than currently available ICE cars. Any car without the option to go 300 miles is out as a Primary/Sole car, dou any of the cars you've listed qualify? Nope! They all have a real usuable range of about 200 miles at their peak trim level, which is about what a Model 3 base model provides for less $ than all 3 (Well in most major markets anyway). Thats just not going to make them anything more than a second car. Most everybody makes long road trips here and there....If I have to rent a car for trips.....i'm not buying an one of those EVs.....and neither are most families who can only afford one car.
That is what you guys don't get. You can harp about panel gaps and paint all you want. The hard fact is that the EV, self driving and battery tech of a 2012 Model S is still better than anything anyone else has on the books much less in production! And thats a 7 year old car now! The Tech is Gold. The New Model S will get 400 miles a charge. It will be far easier for Tesla to get up to the pristine levels of German car trim and detail (that apparently many people expect of all car manufacturers) than it will for other manufacturers to catch up to Tesla Technology.
Lots of other EVs out there are great, but they are niche cars. They are urban grocery getters and secondary cars. They do not fulfill the need to replace ICE cars 100% of the time. They work great about 90% of the time for most drivers, but thats not 99.9% of the time for 99.9% of drivers.....that 9% is a world difference. But look that not an indictment of other EVs they are great for what they are deigned to be which is offering a product that doesn't replace their companies core competency which is ICE cars. Tesla doesn't have this hangup, they went full in on EVs while everyone else is still dipping their toes.
Seeking alpha is just a place where people can write articles. You will find both pro and anti any stock articles there (Inc Tesla).
But that's shooting the messenger, the data is hard data, extracted from Tesla's own quarterly reports.
Slice it the way you want but the fact remains Tesla doesn't currently invest more than mature auto companies (as % of revenue) who do post profits year after year.
They did invest at some point in the past (hence your article about infrastructure debt) which means they can't make ends meet servicing the current debt, much less take on another massive pile of the same to fund all those projects you named before.
Meh, Tesla has always been different. Q2 deliveries look promising. That would make it 3 out of 4 quarters with a profit. Elon has a high tolerance for risk and is a long game player. Their stock says it all, even depressed right not at about $200 its way over punching its weight. You either get Teslas vision or you don't. Tesla has never really had problems raising cash because enough people get it. Without Tesla, US auto would be screwed.....where would they buy their offsets from? Bye Bye Hellcats!
So, Q2 deliveries look promising (in the US, they're tanking in Europe, but that's a whole different thing) and Tesla is looking at delivery numbers roughly like those of Q4 last year.
Yet, Tesla still guides a loss for Q2 '19 (Elon's words, just 2 days ago at the shareholder meeting).
So at record deliveries, with minimal investment (they're basically running on fumes, their capex doesn't even cover depreciation) and Tesla still can't make money.
Those are the signs of a structurally unprofitable manufacturer, and no magic robotaxi or mythical future model will change that.
Re: China factory, the reason why Tesla has been allowed to make a factory with no local partner is this one:
The Chinese are betting Tesla builds them a fancy new tech factory they will repo when they fail to pay the (Chinese) banks. By all accounts this is a very abnormal credit for PPE, which has to be repaid in just one year so we'll see it very soon.
Very Chinese. Debts on secured assets already gained them least 1-2 ports in Africa and 1-2 controlling stakes in international airports there.
Using greed to get what they want long term.
No force. All legal. And its not there fault as merely enforcing the contract you agreed to.
The Russians debt for help got them a major 50 year + valubal commercial sole licence for Tartorus.
Andrew1975 wrote:Funny, lets look what it will take to get your average person to switch to EVs. The EV needs to be at least as capable if not more so than currently available ICE cars. Any car without the option to go 300 miles is out as a Primary/Sole car, dou any of the cars you've listed qualify? Nope! They all have a real usuable range of about 200 miles at their peak trim level, which is about what a Model 3 base model provides for less $ than all 3 (Well in most major markets anyway). Thats just not going to make them anything more than a second car. Most everybody makes long road trips here and there....If I have to rent a car for trips.....i'm not buying an one of those EVs.....and neither are most families who can only afford one car.
That is what you guys don't get. You can harp about panel gaps and paint all you want. The hard fact is that the EV, self driving and battery tech of a 2012 Model S is still better than anything anyone else has on the books much less in production! And thats a 7 year old car now! The Tech is Gold. The New Model S will get 400 miles a charge. It will be far easier for Tesla to get up to the pristine levels of German car trim and detail (that apparently many people expect of all car manufacturers) than it will for other manufacturers to catch up to Tesla Technology.
Lots of other EVs out there are great, but they are niche cars. They are urban grocery getters and secondary cars. They do not fulfill the need to replace ICE cars 100% of the time. They work great about 90% of the time for most drivers, but thats not 99.9% of the time for 99.9% of drivers.....that 9% is a world difference. But look that not an indictment of other EVs they are great for what they are deigned to be which is offering a product that doesn't replace their companies core competency which is ICE cars. Tesla doesn't have this hangup, they went full in on EVs while everyone else is still dipping their toes.
Maybe the problem here is that you basing your "range needs" on US driving habits and not on European habits (the person you replied to in the second part of your post being from the UK)? Just blindly parroting Tesla talking points and ignoring the actual issue doesn't make a good argument. What you describe as niche cars could be just regular cars over here :/
That is what you guys don't get. You can harp about panel gaps and paint all you want. The hard fact is that the EV, self driving and battery tech of a 2012 Model S is still better than anything anyone else has on the books much less in production! And thats a 7 year old car now! The Tech is Gold. The New Model S will get 400 miles a charge. It will be far easier for Tesla to get up to the pristine levels of German car trim and detail (that apparently many people expect of all car manufacturers)
Trim and detail is one small issue on the grand scheme of things. What Tesla needs to address right now is reliability and service.
That's why "inferior" cars like the etron or ipace outsell the model S and X combined in countries like Norway, the Netherlands, Germany, etc.
That is what you guys don't get. You can harp about panel gaps and paint all you want. The hard fact is that the EV, self driving and battery tech of a 2012 Model S is still better than anything anyone else has on the books much less in production!
No it's not. Volvo is generally regarded as having the best semi autonomous tech and to be the closest to being self driving. Tesla are close, and may well again be better with the next update, but all the big manufactures are rolling out self driving tech, but the general feeling is they are much more careful than Tesla. The accidents people have had in Tesla's doing dumb things the big guys would not be able to hand wave away.
Battery tech:
2017 Ford Focus Electric - 26,39 kWh/100 miles
Renault Zoe Q210 (22 kWh battery and 17“ wheels) - 25,3 kWh/100 miles
Renault Zoe Q90 (41 kWh battery and 17“ wheels) - 24,84 kWh/100 miles
2016 Ford Focus Electric - 24,78 kWh/100 miles
2017 Tesla Model S 75D - 24,63 kWh/100 miles
2016 Nissan Leaf (24 kWh battery) - 24,14 kWh/100 miles
2017 Nissan Leaf (30 kWh battery) - 24,14 kWh/100 miles
2017 Tesla Model S 60D - 23,72 kWh/100 miles
2017 Kia Soul EV - 23,66 kWh/100 miles
Again, their efficiency is about the same as anyone else. Bigger batteries does not mean better tech.
And thats a 7 year old car now! The Tech is Gold. The New Model S will get 400 miles a charge. It will be far easier for Tesla to get up to the pristine levels of German car trim and detail (that apparently many people expect of all car manufacturers)
Yes, oddly if I were to spend £75,000 on a large 4 door family car I expect the level of trim and detail to be the same quality as the competition.
That is what you guys don't get. You can harp about panel gaps and paint all you want. The hard fact is that the EV, self driving and battery tech of a 2012 Model S is still better than anything anyone else has on the books much less in production!
No it's not. Volvo is generally regarded as having the best semi autonomous tech and to be the closest to being self driving. Tesla are close, and may well again be better with the next update, but all the big manufactures are rolling out self driving tech, but the general feeling is they are much more careful than Tesla. The accidents people have had in Tesla's doing dumb things the big guys would not be able to hand wave away.
Battery tech:
2017 Ford Focus Electric - 26,39 kWh/100 miles
Renault Zoe Q210 (22 kWh battery and 17“ wheels) - 25,3 kWh/100 miles
Renault Zoe Q90 (41 kWh battery and 17“ wheels) - 24,84 kWh/100 miles
2016 Ford Focus Electric - 24,78 kWh/100 miles
2017 Tesla Model S 75D - 24,63 kWh/100 miles
2016 Nissan Leaf (24 kWh battery) - 24,14 kWh/100 miles
2017 Nissan Leaf (30 kWh battery) - 24,14 kWh/100 miles
2017 Tesla Model S 60D - 23,72 kWh/100 miles
2017 Kia Soul EV - 23,66 kWh/100 miles
Again, their efficiency is about the same as anyone else. Bigger batteries does not mean better tech.
And thats a 7 year old car now! The Tech is Gold. The New Model S will get 400 miles a charge. It will be far easier for Tesla to get up to the pristine levels of German car trim and detail (that apparently many people expect of all car manufacturers)
Yes, oddly if I were to spend £75,000 on a large 4 door family car I expect the level of trim and detail to be the same quality as the competition.
75k puts it into luxury German and such price band.
Learger seats, air con, bells, whistle s and xeon head lights etc as standard.
At that price +brand new. I'm expecting a high end car. You buy at that level to have a good car, compatition is tight with all the others too.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: GM has been in China longer than you think there. . . to quote someone in this thread, "thanks for playing though"\
Yes I know, how that working out for them https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/26/business/gm-oshawa-plant/index.html......Maybe they can teach the Chinese how to take a Taxpayer Bailout! Gm at one time Dominated global car sales.....then they sucked so bad they made WW2 pacific veterans buy Japanese Cars! China already knows how to make crappy cars that nobody wants to buy. Good job! Gm can also thank Tesla for the carbon credits, they wouldn't even be able to make most of their higher end gas guzzeler cars without the carbon credits.
Funny that this quote comes in a comment bemoaning the amount of misinformation in this thread. Teslas are in no way the only EV capable of being the primary/sole vehicle for the average family. The e-Niro, Kona and I-Pace all have comparable ranges to a Tesla, compete on price (in the case of the first two actually beat any Tesla on price by a significant degree, at least in the UK) and are practical cars in terms of space and comfort. The idea that only Tesla produce practical EVs is either laughably biased or hugely misinformed.
Funny, lets look what it will take to get your average person to switch to EVs. The EV needs to be at least as capable if not more so than currently available ICE cars. Any car without the option to go 300 miles is out as a Primary/Sole car, dou any of the cars you've listed qualify? Nope! They all have a real usuable range of about 200 miles at their peak trim level, which is about what a Model 3 base model provides for less $ than all 3 (Well in most major markets anyway). Thats just not going to make them anything more than a second car. Most everybody makes long road trips here and there....If I have to rent a car for trips.....i'm not buying an one of those EVs.....and neither are most families who can only afford one car.
...
I think you're wrong. Simply in that most people don't need a car that can go 300 miles.
Everyone's got cars that can go 250-300 miles on one tank of fuel, but they hardly ever use that capability.
Reasons:Most people don't do very long trips often. I've done only one trip that long in the past 10 years. (Driving to Scotland for a wedding.) I've done about five trips over 100 miles.
Another reason: People on such long trips have to stop every so often for a wee and a coffee. In those breaks they could charge an EV.
I commute 50 miles a day though. An EV which could reliably do over 100 miles without a charge would be ideal for me and lots of ordinary people with similar lifestyles.
The main barrier is the cost. The secondary barrier is the availability of charging stations. Both these barriers are getting lower.
Funny that this quote comes in a comment bemoaning the amount of misinformation in this thread. Teslas are in no way the only EV capable of being the primary/sole vehicle for the average family. The e-Niro, Kona and I-Pace all have comparable ranges to a Tesla, compete on price (in the case of the first two actually beat any Tesla on price by a significant degree, at least in the UK) and are practical cars in terms of space and comfort. The idea that only Tesla produce practical EVs is either laughably biased or hugely misinformed.
Funny, lets look what it will take to get your average person to switch to EVs. The EV needs to be at least as capable if not more so than currently available ICE cars. Any car without the option to go 300 miles is out as a Primary/Sole car, dou any of the cars you've listed qualify? Nope! They all have a real usuable range of about 200 miles at their peak trim level, which is about what a Model 3 base model provides for less $ than all 3 (Well in most major markets anyway). Thats just not going to make them anything more than a second car. Most everybody makes long road trips here and there....If I have to rent a car for trips.....i'm not buying an one of those EVs.....and neither are most families who can only afford one car.
300 miles is completely unnecessary for most people's purposes, especially in Europe. We're looking at cars with around 150-160 mile range, which is absolutely fine for our purposes. Secondly, you're flat-out wrong about the ranges you're quoting for the non-Tesla models I mentioned. They'll all do between 225-250+ miles in real world terms (as tested by various review sites and independent companies, not the manufacturers themselves). So I'll adjust my opinion - your information is both laughably biased and woefully misinformed. I'll also bow out of any future discussion with you on this. Many people here are having some interesting discussions about EVs in today's market but you're basically contributing nothing to the thread at this point, IMO.
I would use a car with a range of 300 miles. That is usually a week or two of commuting.
But, I often manage 200+ miles in a day, and that is just between sites in the same county. Having to look up charging sites between offices would really slow me down, what with having to lug kit from the car into the office.
There is only one car park with charging points near my main office, for roughly the whole town.
Kilkrazy wrote: Would you use a car with a range of 50 miles which you have to stop to refuel every day?
Would you use a car with a range of 100 miles which you never had to stop to refuel because it happens while you're asleep?
No, and No.
50 Miles wouldn't get me to work and back home, therefore it is useless to me. 100 would work some days, but lord forbid I had to run errands on the way home, or go to Ft Benning, Stewart or Bragg (from Ft Gordon) for the day. Neither works for me. Hell, my motorcycle has way more range than 100 miles and it still only gets me to and from work twice before I need to gas it up (small fuel tank) so it tends to not get used for work very often.
Frazzled wrote: a company who's entire business model is based on tax credits should not talk about bailouts...
Thats a pretty funny statement Frazzled. 1. Tesla is not the only company that gets tax credits, anyone who makes EVs does, Tesla has just sold the most and is running out of credits. 2 Other manufacturers get other huge government incentives and kickbacks that make their cars and use affordable that Tesla doesn't get though, Hell the only reason gas is affordable is because oil is the most subsidized product on the planet....and thats direct subsidy. Besides that The US has spent tens of trillions of dollars securing oil. Gasoline cars are a huge expense to the tax payers.
As I said before most people could get through their daily commute with 100 miles......they just have to do something else for long trips. Which most people don't want to have to buy or rent a second car for those trips. They just buy a capable car in the first place. This massively effects EV sales as range anxiety is a thing....there is a reason you don't see many ICE cars that get less than 300 on a tank of gas. People don't want to compromise or buy a consolation prize, thats just how it works. For EVs to truly take off they need to be as good or better than ICE cars in most every way.....Teslas accomplish that goal.
Andrew1975 wrote:Funny, lets look what it will take to get your average person to switch to EVs. The EV needs to be at least as capable if not more so than currently available ICE cars. Any car without the option to go 300 miles is out as a Primary/Sole car, dou any of the cars you've listed qualify? Nope! They all have a real usuable range of about 200 miles at their peak trim level, which is about what a Model 3 base model provides for less $ than all 3 (Well in most major markets anyway). Thats just not going to make them anything more than a second car. Most everybody makes long road trips here and there....If I have to rent a car for trips.....i'm not buying an one of those EVs.....and neither are most families who can only afford one car.
That is what you guys don't get. You can harp about panel gaps and paint all you want. The hard fact is that the EV, self driving and battery tech of a 2012 Model S is still better than anything anyone else has on the books much less in production! And thats a 7 year old car now! The Tech is Gold. The New Model S will get 400 miles a charge. It will be far easier for Tesla to get up to the pristine levels of German car trim and detail (that apparently many people expect of all car manufacturers) than it will for other manufacturers to catch up to Tesla Technology.
Lots of other EVs out there are great, but they are niche cars. They are urban grocery getters and secondary cars. They do not fulfill the need to replace ICE cars 100% of the time. They work great about 90% of the time for most drivers, but thats not 99.9% of the time for 99.9% of drivers.....that 9% is a world difference. But look that not an indictment of other EVs they are great for what they are deigned to be which is offering a product that doesn't replace their companies core competency which is ICE cars. Tesla doesn't have this hangup, they went full in on EVs while everyone else is still dipping their toes.
Maybe the problem here is that you basing your "range needs" on US driving habits and not on European habits (the person you replied to in the second part of your post being from the UK)? Just blindly parroting Tesla talking points and ignoring the actual issue doesn't make a good argument. What you describe as niche cars could be just regular cars over here :/
Is the ICE market in Europe dominated by cars that get less than 300 miles per fill up? If not then I think you have your answer. If 100 mile range cars were great.....then they would be great for ICE cars too. I can't find the numbers for Europe....but I bet its more than 200 miles and closer to 3-400.....but lets go bigger! Globally whats the average range on a car? Do you know....are you curious........The answer by the way is "globally the average cars range is 300-400 miles." However if you look at newer cars lets say produced within the last 10 years globally the average is getting closer to 500 miles. a 2015 Honda CRV will get 520 miles per fill up, thats neither the newest or most fuel efficient car out there....its pretty average. EVs need to be there to successfully replace ICE cars. So its not just a Europe vs America thing...its pretty much a global standard.
That is what you guys don't get. You can harp about panel gaps and paint all you want. The hard fact is that the EV, self driving and battery tech of a 2012 Model S is still better than anything anyone else has on the books much less in production! And thats a 7 year old car now! The Tech is Gold. The New Model S will get 400 miles a charge. It will be far easier for Tesla to get up to the pristine levels of German car trim and detail (that apparently many people expect of all car manufacturers)
Trim and detail is one small issue on the grand scheme of things. What Tesla needs to address right now is reliability and service.
That's why "inferior" cars like the etron or ipace outsell the model S and X combined in countries like Norway, the Netherlands, Germany, etc.
How are they faring against the model 3?.....not so well. Model S and X are wayyyyyyyyy more expensive than either the E-tron or the I-pace.....you need to compare those with the model 3 or the model Y.
Top 5 BEVs (January-May 2019):
Tesla Model 3: ≈26,000 (new)
Renault ZOE: ≈19,400 (up 45.0%)
Nissan LEAF: ≈14,400 (up 3.4%)
BMW i3: ≈12,300 (up 38.6%)
Volkswagen e-Golf: ≈9,200 (up 18.7%)
Model 3 winner winner chicken dinner! Sorry, I pace and Etron didnt even make the list.
Berlin-based automotive industry analyst Matthias Schmidt noted that Tesla sold 19,482 Model 3 in the first quarter, a significant lead over the previous #1 EV in the region, the ubiquitous Renault Zoe, which sold 11,049 units over the same period. This is particularly impressive for the Model 3, as it was only available in the market since February, and it was more than twice, or (at times) even three times the cost of the best-selling Zoe. The Nissan Leaf, a veteran in the mainstream EV market, bowed down to the Model 3 as well, selling 10,315 in the first quarter.
The Model 3’s competitors in the premium electric vehicle segment were farther off. The Jaguar I-PACE, which recently received the World Car of the Year award, was 7th place in Europe’s sales, selling 3,012 units in Q1. The Audi e-tron, also a much-hyped vehicle that was, at one time, considered as a potential “Tesla Killer” by skeptics, sold a rather humble 2,526 units in the first quarter, according to the Berlin-based analyst’s data.
That is what you guys don't get. You can harp about panel gaps and paint all you want. The hard fact is that the EV, self driving and battery tech of a 2012 Model S is still better than anything anyone else has on the books much less in production!
No it's not. Volvo is generally regarded as having the best semi autonomous tech and to be the closest to being self driving. Tesla are close, and may well again be better with the next update, but all the big manufactures are rolling out self driving tech, but the general feeling is they are much more careful than Tesla. The accidents people have had in Tesla's doing dumb things the big guys would not be able to hand wave away.
Battery tech:
2017 Ford Focus Electric - 26,39 kWh/100 miles
Renault Zoe Q210 (22 kWh battery and 17“ wheels) - 25,3 kWh/100 miles
Renault Zoe Q90 (41 kWh battery and 17“ wheels) - 24,84 kWh/100 miles
2016 Ford Focus Electric - 24,78 kWh/100 miles
2017 Tesla Model S 75D - 24,63 kWh/100 miles
2016 Nissan Leaf (24 kWh battery) - 24,14 kWh/100 miles
2017 Nissan Leaf (30 kWh battery) - 24,14 kWh/100 miles
2017 Tesla Model S 60D - 23,72 kWh/100 miles
2017 Kia Soul EV - 23,66 kWh/100 miles
Again, their efficiency is about the same as anyone else. Bigger batteries does not mean better tech.
And thats a 7 year old car now! The Tech is Gold. The New Model S will get 400 miles a charge. It will be far easier for Tesla to get up to the pristine levels of German car trim and detail (that apparently many people expect of all car manufacturers)
Yes, oddly if I were to spend £75,000 on a large 4 door family car I expect the level of trim and detail to be the same quality as the competition.
75k puts it into luxury German and such price band.
Learger seats, air con, bells, whistle s and xeon head lights etc as standard.
At that price +brand new. I'm expecting a high end car. You buy at that level to have a good car, compatition is tight with all the others too.
In all areas.
Well, it depends on how you look at it. The model S gets super car speed.....I can show you lots of super cars whose fit and finish are absolute garbage at twice the price of a model S. Show me a car that goes 0-60 in 2.3 seconds and has perfect fit and finish at the same price as a model S....ill wait. Its all about priorities....and now that it appears Tesla has caught up with fit and finish....your arguments wont hold water. Also when you look at long term ownership costs......The Tesla will be far cheaper than similarly priced ICE cars. in fact the longer you own them the better the Teslas numbers get.....but all EVs SHOULD work this way. Its a matter of priorities I guess...for now.
Funny that this quote comes in a comment bemoaning the amount of misinformation in this thread. Teslas are in no way the only EV capable of being the primary/sole vehicle for the average family. The e-Niro, Kona and I-Pace all have comparable ranges to a Tesla, compete on price (in the case of the first two actually beat any Tesla on price by a significant degree, at least in the UK) and are practical cars in terms of space and comfort. The idea that only Tesla produce practical EVs is either laughably biased or hugely misinformed.
Funny, lets look what it will take to get your average person to switch to EVs. The EV needs to be at least as capable if not more so than currently available ICE cars. Any car without the option to go 300 miles is out as a Primary/Sole car, dou any of the cars you've listed qualify? Nope! They all have a real usuable range of about 200 miles at their peak trim level, which is about what a Model 3 base model provides for less $ than all 3 (Well in most major markets anyway). Thats just not going to make them anything more than a second car. Most everybody makes long road trips here and there....If I have to rent a car for trips.....i'm not buying an one of those EVs.....and neither are most families who can only afford one car.
300 miles is completely unnecessary for most people's purposes, especially in Europe. We're looking at cars with around 150-160 mile range, which is absolutely fine for our purposes. Secondly, you're flat-out wrong about the ranges you're quoting for the non-Tesla models I mentioned. They'll all do between 225-250+ miles in real world terms (as tested by various review sites and independent companies, not the manufacturers themselves). So I'll adjust my opinion - your information is both laughably biased and woefully misinformed. I'll also bow out of any future discussion with you on this. Many people here are having some interesting discussions about EVs in today's market but you're basically contributing nothing to the thread at this point, IMO.
Ok i've already answered that 300-400 miles is the global average range for cars....its there for a good reason. Secondly when an EV gets 250 max range (which by the way neither of them are listed at 250 anywhere)......you are not getting 250 max range. Thats 250 miles of perfect range.....rarely if ever do you get it. 1. you really arent supposed to charge up to 100% except right before a long drive. Unless you want to degrade the battery. 2. You are not supposed to go below 10% unless you again want to start the process of degrading your battery. So perfectly you really only have 80% that is usable. 3. Weather and speed massively affect EV range, on my commute during good weather doing 80 Mph for 80 miles.....I generally use a bit over 100 miles of charge....in the winter that same trip might cost me 150 miles......So when I say those cars really.....honestly have a range of about 200 miles.....its not Biased or uninformed.....its just what it is.....the truth. Numbers mean nothing without context. Sure you might get close to maximum range is you drive like a tart....but who drives like that on long drives? My old Skyactive Mazda 3 had a 13 gallon tank and even driving 80MPH got 35 of the promised 40 MPG.......Electric cars just don't work the same. Again, numbers are meaningless without context.
For instance my Tesla Model 3 is rated at 310 miles. But it stops charging at 278 unless i set it to fully charge....which I rarely do unless I'm planning a long drive. So i can't on a whim really drive 310 miles, like most people can with ICE cars. id have to stop and charge along the way. Also I'm not going to get 310 miles out of it anyway even at full charge because I'm going to be driving at least 80MPH on a freeway if im going 310 miles.....and god forbid its winter......but I have the option to quickly charge it at superchargers (free until august when my six months are up but otherwise) pretty cheaply much cheaper than gas and much cheaper than what I have seen other chargers charging...and faster too. Again I drive a lot, but id be happier if I could routinely get 400 miles out of it......and 200 is just a non starter.
That is what you guys don't get. You can harp about panel gaps and paint all you want. The hard fact is that the EV, self driving and battery tech of a 2012 Model S is still better than anything anyone else has on the books much less in production! And thats a 7 year old car now! The Tech is Gold. The New Model S will get 400 miles a charge. It will be far easier for Tesla to get up to the pristine levels of German car trim and detail (that apparently many people expect of all car manufacturers)
Trim and detail is one small issue on the grand scheme of things. What Tesla needs to address right now is reliability and service.
That's why "inferior" cars like the etron or ipace outsell the model S and X combined in countries like Norway, the Netherlands, Germany, etc.
How are they faring against the model 3?.....not so well. Model S and X are wayyyyyyyyy more expensive than either the E-tron or the I-pace.....you need to compare those with the model 3 or the model Y.
Top 5 BEVs (January-May 2019):
Do you even make a bit of research or just post the first thing that comes off your head?
New model X in Spain 84K euro
New model S in Spain 82K euro
New Audi Etron in Spain 82K euro
New Jag iPace 79K euro
I don't think 2-3K is "wayyyyyyyy more expensive" for an 80K car.
That is what you guys don't get. You can harp about panel gaps and paint all you want. The hard fact is that the EV, self driving and battery tech of a 2012 Model S is still better than anything anyone else has on the books much less in production! And thats a 7 year old car now! The Tech is Gold. The New Model S will get 400 miles a charge. It will be far easier for Tesla to get up to the pristine levels of German car trim and detail (that apparently many people expect of all car manufacturers)
Trim and detail is one small issue on the grand scheme of things. What Tesla needs to address right now is reliability and service.
That's why "inferior" cars like the etron or ipace outsell the model S and X combined in countries like Norway, the Netherlands, Germany, etc.
How are they faring against the model 3?.....not so well. Model S and X are wayyyyyyyyy more expensive than either the E-tron or the I-pace.....you need to compare those with the model 3 or the model Y.
Top 5 BEVs (January-May 2019):
Do you even make a bit of research or just post the first thing that comes off your head?
New model X in Spain 84K euro
New model S in Spain 82K euro
New Audi Etron in Spain 82K euro
New Jag iPace 79K euro
I don't think 2-3K is "wayyyyyyyy more expensive" for an 80K car.
Relative to what? Here, they start at £38,000, which is a £9,000 above the average new car price (£28,973). Looking at Autotrader, the cheapest second hand Tesla I can find is a 2014 Model S at £34k. That's £21k above the average used car price (£12,967).
Do you even make a bit of research or just post the first thing that comes off your head?
New model X in Spain 84K euro
New model S in Spain 82K euro
New Audi Etron in Spain 82K euro
New Jag iPace 79K euro
Nope you just like to Cherry pick as usual. In fact your whole post is deceptive.
New model X US $81-102K But really add ludicrous 20k and FSD is 7K and 1250 destination fee so anywhere between ...so really between 90k and 130k
New model S US $76-97 But really Add ludicrous 20k and FSD is $7K and 1250 destination fee...so really between 85K and 130K
New Model 3 US $35-60K Before FSD of $7000 So really between and 1250 destination fee...so really between 45K and 70K
Model Y is about 10K more than model 3 so 55k and 80K
Audi Eton 75 to 82K
Jag I pace 70K
So we see price wise these two cars compete more with Model X and Y based on price.
However when we look at their performance......WOW do you get a better value with going for a mid range model 3!
However when we get to performance both of them perform more around the level of a model 3 Standard range plus at 240 miles per charge, 140 MPH and 5.3 0 to 60 which comes to 49K total.
.................................................................................................................................I pace ......................................234...........................124...............4.5....................................70K
.................................................................................................................................E tron........................................204...........................124...............5.5...................................82K
Which car is better and cheaper again?
Now onto your Text message....which what even is that...who is it from? How do we authenticate it?......but ill let your spurious as usual evidence slide again.
Its pretty simple its a update issue....it will be addressed and fixed. I bet Audi and Jag are wishing they could fix their cars with an over the air update!
A Tesla spokesperson has stated that the settings for Max Battery Power and Launch Mode were inadvertently removed from some Model S vehicles after a UI update. The electric car maker is currently working on a fix for the issue, and has noted that the updates were not intended to restrict the performance of the affected Model S vehicles. Tesla extends its apologies to electric car owners for the inconvenience resulting from this issue.
Relative to what? Here, they start at £38,000, which is a £9,000 above the average new car price (£28,973). Looking at Autotrader, the cheapest second hand Tesla I can find is a 2014 Model S at £34k. That's £21k above the average used car price (£12,967).
They are expensive cars.
Nice copy paste butcher job....you could use the whole sentence and reference and actually look at the reference material.
Relative to what? Here, they start at £38,000, which is a £9,000 above the average new car price (£28,973). Looking at Autotrader, the cheapest second hand Tesla I can find is a 2014 Model S at £34k. That's £21k above the average used car price (£12,967).
They are expensive cars.
Nice copy paste butcher job....you could use the whole sentence and reference and actually look at the reference material.
But since you can't be bothered to read...here is a sample
Ignoring your needless rudeness (and the fact that I did quote the entire sentence, though not paragraph), the point I'm making is that they're only 'not expensive' if you are very selective in what you compare them to. Relative to other similarly priced vehicles, obviously they're not that expensive, because you're deliberately comparing them to things that make them look affordable. Here, I could buy four Toyota Aygos for the price of a Model 3. In fact, I could buy multiples of most of their current range. I could buy 5 and a half Dacia Sanderos. As it goes, in the UK, a BMW 3 Series can be had for the same money as a Model 3.
Arguing that they're not that expensive because, whilst being significant more expensive than average prices paid for cars in a given territory, they're similar in price to other expensive cars is very silly.
For what it's worth, I'm all for electric cars, like the idea of a Tesla, and would buy one if we could afford the outlay.
I guess expensive is subjective for sure, however most people wouldn't consider a Toyota Camry expensive "Oh my god did you see that base model Prius, get the good silverware out Maude.....royalty must be in town."
Sure you can get a BMW M3 ....but the BUY in price is more expensive than a Model 3 performance.....the long term ownership cost is much more and The model 3 has better all around performance. So, I'm not sure the point you are trying to make here.
I mean you are trying to compare a glorified go cart with actual automobiles. The Aygo is a car in that it has 4 wheels and 2 doors, and thats about it. Are you purposefully being daft? Because for someone of accusing me of being rude.....your attempt at whit is pretty poor. You could buy a whole fleet of them and Dacia Sandros.....and you would have spent your money poorly.....they are horrible "cars".
What you want is a Cheap car that you can afford on "The Dole", not an affordable one, and that thing is a cheap piece of gak for sure! Toyota Aygo....yeah....I go somewhere else to buy a actual car. They should call it the arugula because thats how appetizing of a car it is. Pow, pow powerwheels. Just buy a Tata Nano already!
Seriously the lengths and depths you people will go........
Andrew1975 wrote: I guess expensive is subjective for sure, however most people wouldn't consider a Toyota Camry expensive. Sure you can get a BMW M3 ....but the BUY in price is more expensive than a Model 3 performance.....the long term ownership cost is much more and The model 3 has better all around performance. So, I'm not sure the point you are trying to make here.
I mean you are trying to compare a glorified go cart with actual automobiles. The Aygo is a car in that it has 4 wheels and 2 doors, and thats about it. Are you purposefully being daft? Because for someone of accusing me of being rude.....your attempt at whit is pretty poor. You could buy a whole fleet of them and Dacia Sandros.....and you would have spent your money poorly.....they are horrible "cars".
What you want is a Cheap car that you can afford on "The Dole", not an affordable one, and that thing is a cheap piece of gak for sure! Toyota Aygo....yeah....I go somewhere else to buy a actual car. They should call it the arugula because thats how appetizing of a car it is. Pow, pow powerwheels. Just buy a Tata Nano already!
Seriously the lengths and depths you people will go........
Hey lol I drive a Aygo. There a good cheap super mini. Sure there not fastest, best, and they Don, t come with all the toys but mines got me from A-B reliably for the past 2-3years a without much problems.
I admit there not most pretty, abit of a cube and underpowered but it's cheap, economical and most of my roads I drive are max 60mph so it's fine for its job.
Andrew1975 wrote: I guess expensive is subjective for sure, however most people wouldn't consider a Toyota Camry expensive. Sure you can get a BMW M3 ....but the BUY in price is more expensive than a Model 3 performance.....the long term ownership cost is much more and The model 3 has better all around performance. So, I'm not sure the point you are trying to make here.
I mean you are trying to compare a glorified go cart with actual automobiles. The Aygo is a car in that it has 4 wheels and 2 doors, and thats about it. Are you purposefully being daft? Because for someone of accusing me of being rude.....your attempt at whit is pretty poor.
What you want is a Cheap car, not an affordable one, and that thing is a cheap piece of gak for sure! Toyota Aygo....yeah....I go somewhere else to buy a actual car.
Just you crack on with being impolite, then. Now with the sneering snobbishness bonus.
I'm not sure what you mean buy 'BUY in price'? Here, new Series 3s and new Model 3s are within a few hundred pounds of one another.
The point, as above, is that you're comparing vehicles that, in this territory, are considered expensive. You don't think they're expensive, and want to dismiss the fact that there are cars out there that are a fraction of the price because you don't think they're worthy of being called cars but they exist. Given that these options are available, however, it is hard to argue that vehicles costing several times as much, that are 25% more than the average new car, 10k more than the average UK salary, and about double the average Scottish salary, are not expensive.
Andrew1975 wrote: I guess expensive is subjective for sure, however most people wouldn't consider a Toyota Camry expensive. Sure you can get a BMW M3 ....but the BUY in price is more expensive than a Model 3 performance.....the long term ownership cost is much more and The model 3 has better all around performance. So, I'm not sure the point you are trying to make here.
I mean you are trying to compare a glorified go cart with actual automobiles. The Aygo is a car in that it has 4 wheels and 2 doors, and thats about it. Are you purposefully being daft? Because for someone of accusing me of being rude.....your attempt at whit is pretty poor. You could buy a whole fleet of them and Dacia Sandros.....and you would have spent your money poorly.....they are horrible "cars".
What you want is a Cheap car that you can afford on "The Dole", not an affordable one, and that thing is a cheap piece of gak for sure! Toyota Aygo....yeah....I go somewhere else to buy a actual car. They should call it the arugula because thats how appetizing of a car it is. Pow, pow powerwheels. Just buy a Tata Nano already!
Seriously the lengths and depths you people will go........
Hey lol I drive a Aygo. There a good cheap super mini. Sure there not fastest, best, and they Don, t come with all the toys but mines got me from A-B reliably for the past 2-3years a without much problems.
I admit there not most pretty, abit of a cube and underpowered but it's cheap, economical and most of my roads I drive are max 60mph so it's fine for its job.
Look, I'm sure it has its uses. I used to drive a Ford Festiva....wait no it was the model before that a Fiesta. Let me tell you it was no Fiesta to drive when I was a kid. But lets compare apples to apples is all I'm saying. Not apples to .......raisins.
And I bet it was bought used and you got a killer deal on it....because the resale value on micro cars is gak!
Andrew1975 wrote: I guess expensive is subjective for sure, however most people wouldn't consider a Toyota Camry expensive. Sure you can get a BMW M3 ....but the BUY in price is more expensive than a Model 3 performance.....the long term ownership cost is much more and The model 3 has better all around performance. So, I'm not sure the point you are trying to make here.
I mean you are trying to compare a glorified go cart with actual automobiles. The Aygo is a car in that it has 4 wheels and 2 doors, and thats about it. Are you purposefully being daft? Because for someone of accusing me of being rude.....your attempt at whit is pretty poor. You could buy a whole fleet of them and Dacia Sandros.....and you would have spent your money poorly.....they are horrible "cars".
What you want is a Cheap car that you can afford on "The Dole", not an affordable one, and that thing is a cheap piece of gak for sure! Toyota Aygo....yeah....I go somewhere else to buy a actual car. They should call it the arugula because thats how appetizing of a car it is. Pow, pow powerwheels. Just buy a Tata Nano already!
Seriously the lengths and depths you people will go........
Hey lol I drive a Aygo. There a good cheap super mini. Sure there not fastest, best, and they Don, t come with all the toys but mines got me from A-B reliably for the past 2-3years a without much problems.
I admit there not most pretty, abit of a cube and underpowered but it's cheap, economical and most of my roads I drive are max 60mph so it's fine for its job.
Look, I'm sure it has its uses. I used to drive a Ford Festiva....wait no it was the model before that a Fiesta. Let me tell you it was no Fiesta to drive when I was a kid. But lets compare apples to apples is all I'm saying. Not apples to .......raisins.
And I bet it was bought used and you got a killer deal on it....because the resale value on micro cars is gak!
Yep... Yes. Second hand, 100k miles on it or near about. But got air con, clean mot, engine runs nice and theres no rust warnings. Oils clean as clean. Works fine for a max 25 ish mile or so commute per day. Bout 30-40 minutes, depending on bad delays.
Cost me about 2 grand all in, with insurance and taxes, etc.
Cars imaiculate inside mostly, and only a repaired scratch on bumper from me and a wall getting too close. Just cut some groves on the plastic I filleted, sanded and sprayed.
Andrew1975 wrote: I guess expensive is subjective for sure, however most people wouldn't consider a Toyota Camry expensive. Sure you can get a BMW M3 ....but the BUY in price is more expensive than a Model 3 performance.....the long term ownership cost is much more and The model 3 has better all around performance. So, I'm not sure the point you are trying to make here.
I mean you are trying to compare a glorified go cart with actual automobiles. The Aygo is a car in that it has 4 wheels and 2 doors, and thats about it. Are you purposefully being daft? Because for someone of accusing me of being rude.....your attempt at whit is pretty poor.
What you want is a Cheap car, not an affordable one, and that thing is a cheap piece of gak for sure! Toyota Aygo....yeah....I go somewhere else to buy a actual car.
Just you crack on with being impolite, then. Now with the sneering snobbishness bonus.
I'm not sure what you mean buy 'BUY in price'? Here, new Series 3s and new Model 3s are within a few hundred pounds of one another.
The point, as above, is that you're comparing vehicles that, in this territory, are considered expensive. You don't think they're expensive, and want to dismiss the fact that there are cars out there that are a fraction of the price because you don't think they're worthy of being called cars but they exist. Given that these options are available, however, it is hard to argue that vehicles costing several times as much, that are 25% more than the average new car, 10k more than the average UK salary, and about double the average Scottish salary, are not expensive.
They are expensive cars.
Yeah thats how I get when I feel someone is willfully being dishonest in their arguments. I find willful dishonesty rude and a return it in kind! You are trying to make it sound like bargain bin Econoboxes are "affordable", no they are cheap. You are not making a honest comparison based on easily available data. You conveniently cut my quotes to fit your agenda and don't even bother reading what I write or post before making a blatantly apples to oranges comparison. Then you accuse me of being rude, or snobbish.....again you are playing at being daft?
Not long term they are not. The BMW will be much more expensive to maintain and fuel. A base M3 is $67k I've seen top end ones around $85K. Thats more than a top end Model 3 performance at $60K
A standard range Model 3 will be cheaper than a Pruis over the long term and be a much better car.
But apparently you believe a base Prius is expensive....I mean, thats an opinion, thats one point of view. It would generally be considered uninformed....but here let me shed some light.
"The analysts at Kelley Blue Book today reported the estimated average transaction price for light vehicles in the United States was $37,577 in December 2018" Thats essentially what a base model 3 costs. So unless you consider average expensive.....then its average. Both cars you mentioned are again not great cars, sure they work for some people, but they are cheap econobox cars. No Teslas are not cheap.....but they aren't all expensive, and in the long term you are getting a cheaper cost of ownership of a more capable car then comparatively priced cars.
Fact is that your cheap cars do not provide the utility that most people seek in buying a car. If they did they would sell well and retain their value.....they do not. Small, no storage room, short range, low speed, cramped, low on features. They are cheap for a reason. And as we know most cheap things are just that...Cheap, cheaply built, and in the long run rarely worth what was actually paid for them. Thats why when you sell them you take a bath on them! But don't try to confuse cheap with affordable. Just because Ford named a car the Aspire......doesn't mean anyone aspired to own one.....and everyone called them the Assfire.
Descent cars have always cost about a year of an average persons labor! Good cars cost a bit more! Cars now are much more capable, safer and complex than ever before its why they cost more working hours. For those in full-time work, the average UK salary is £35,423
Do you even make a bit of research or just post the first thing that comes off your head?
New model X in Spain 84K euro
New model S in Spain 82K euro
New Audi Etron in Spain 82K euro
New Jag iPace 79K euro
Nope you just like to Cherry pick as usual. In fact your whole post is deceptive.
New model X US $81-102K But really add ludicrous 20k and FSD is 7K and 1250 destination fee so anywhere between ...so really between 90k and 130k
New model S US $76-97 But really Add ludicrous 20k and FSD is $7K and 1250 destination fee...so really between 85K and 130K
New Model 3 US $35-60K Before FSD of $7000 So really between and 1250 destination fee...so really between 45K and 70K
Model Y is about 10K more than model 3 so 55k and 80K
.
And both the e-tron and jag can go well north of 100K if you start piling up stuff. Congratulations, you have discovered options. I quoted the base price on each car so the comparison stands.
See, 116K euro and I didn't even have to add that many things.
You can easily get a 50K+ Nissan leaf which is the car that compares to the model 3.
A Tesla spokesperson has stated that the settings for Max Battery Power and Launch Mode were inadvertently removed from some Model S vehicles after a UI update. The electric car maker is currently working on a fix for the issue, and has noted that the updates were not intended to restrict the performance of the affected Model S vehicles. Tesla extends its apologies to electric car owners for the inconvenience resulting from this issue.
Not the same instance you're quoting from the May update. Review the TMC thread I posted before and you'll see it's a brand new thing.
This is strictly battery-capacity related, and right after the China fires, and Tesla service is on record telling owners they're cutting their battery capacity "to prolong the life of the battery".
There's a class action brewing there. Either Tesla has to compensate for lack of range/charging speed or they have to acknowledge their tech has dangerously traded performance for safety.
Andrew1975 wrote: I guess expensive is subjective for sure, however most people wouldn't consider a Toyota Camry expensive. Sure you can get a BMW M3 ....but the BUY in price is more expensive than a Model 3 performance.....the long term ownership cost is much more and The model 3 has better all around performance. So, I'm not sure the point you are trying to make here.
I mean you are trying to compare a glorified go cart with actual automobiles. The Aygo is a car in that it has 4 wheels and 2 doors, and thats about it. Are you purposefully being daft? Because for someone of accusing me of being rude.....your attempt at whit is pretty poor.
What you want is a Cheap car, not an affordable one, and that thing is a cheap piece of gak for sure! Toyota Aygo....yeah....I go somewhere else to buy a actual car.
Just you crack on with being impolite, then. Now with the sneering snobbishness bonus.
I'm not sure what you mean buy 'BUY in price'? Here, new Series 3s and new Model 3s are within a few hundred pounds of one another.
The point, as above, is that you're comparing vehicles that, in this territory, are considered expensive. You don't think they're expensive, and want to dismiss the fact that there are cars out there that are a fraction of the price because you don't think they're worthy of being called cars but they exist. Given that these options are available, however, it is hard to argue that vehicles costing several times as much, that are 25% more than the average new car, 10k more than the average UK salary, and about double the average Scottish salary, are not expensive.
They are expensive cars.
Yeah thats how I get when I feel someone is willfully being dishonest in their arguments. I find willful dishonesty rude and a return it in kind!
I'm not being dishonest, I just recognise that determining whether something is expensive (rather than value for money) requires situating a product in the full spectrum of available options, not just similarly priced examples.
You are trying to make it sound like bargain bin Econoboxes are "affordable", no they are cheap. You are not making a honest comparison based on easily available data. You conveniently cut my quotes to fit your agenda and don't even bother reading what I write or post before making a blatantly apples to oranges comparison. Then you accuse me of being rude, or snobbish.....again you are playing at being daft?
Not long term they are not. The BMW will be much more expensive to maintain and fuel. A base M3 is $67k I've seen top end ones around $85K. Thats more than a top end Model 3 performance at $60K
A standard range Model 3 will be cheaper than a Pruis over the long term and be a much better car.
The BMW (from £28,350, turns out I priced it too high) will certainly be much more expensive to run, and I've never disputed that electric cars are cheaper to run (as I said, I'm a fan and think they're the way forward) but you need to be able to buy it first.
But apparently you believe a base Prius is expensive....I mean, thats an opinion, thats one point of view. It would generally be considered uninformed....but here let me shed some light.
"The analysts at Kelley Blue Book today reported the estimated average transaction price for light vehicles in the United States was $37,577 in December 2018" Thats essentially what a base model 3 costs. So unless you consider average expensive.....then its average. Both cars you mentioned are again not great cars, sure they work for some people, but they are cheap econobox cars. No Teslas are not cheap.....but they aren't all expensive, and in the long term you are getting a cheaper cost of ownership of a more capable car then comparatively priced cars.
Fact is that your cheap cars do not provide the utility that most people seek in buying a car. If they did they would sell well and retain their value.....they do not. Small, no storage room, short range, low speed, cramped, low on features. They are cheap for a reason. And as we know most cheap things are just that...Cheap, cheaply built, and in the long run rarely worth what was actually paid for them. Thats why when you sell them you take a bath on them! But don't try to confuse cheap with affordable. Just because Ford named a car the Aspire......doesn't mean anyone aspired to own one.....and everyone called them the Assfire.
Descent cars have always cost about a year of an average persons labor! Good cars cost a bit more! Cars now are much more capable, safer and complex than ever before its why they cost more working hours. For those in full-time work, the average UK salary is £35,423
The average is 29k. Many people don't have full time jobs but still need cars. Perhaps an even more useful number is the median household disposable income (equivalised for household size and where 'disposable' means everything after direct taxation) which is 28,400 - and more and more households need (or feel they need) to have two vehicles.
Re: their utility. It's been clear from the outset that I'm talking about UK Pricing, yes? Bear in mind that Europe is largely composed of small nations with overwhelmingly urban populations that have short commutes (that are very often on public transport or foot anyway) almost entirely through urban landscapes. The shops they go to are most probably in that same environment. The closest airport is probably much the same. Most of their family likely live within an hour or two, if that far. Most of your negatives there are irrelevant to most drivers and small is often a bonus (and if you need space most folks are buying a Renault Kadjar, Nissan Qashqai, Ford Kuga, Hyundai Tucson,
Kia Sportage or other £20k-ish car).
The vehicles that most people consider perfectly decent here have never been aligned with the average salary. As I said earlier, our average new car price is 28,973 (which has seen a 38% jump in ten years, largely due to lease deals, so historically people spent far less compared to their salary), but that is seriously skewed by the people buying the expensive things.
Our ten most popular new cars are:
Beyond that, it's also important to remember that in the UK people buy more than five times as many used cars as new cars - where the differential between a Tesla (and all electrica, really) and other options because even more stark. This will change, hopefully quickly so that more people can switch to electric cars, but the difference is huge, currently. An increase of around 200% between the average used car and a used Tesla when I checked a couple posts ago.
Teslas are expensive cars. Whether they're good value for money, and I think they are, is a different issue, and I feel that that's really what you're addressing.
That story is, to put it mildly, bullgak. You can't take the dollar price, convert it to UK pounds and call that the price of the car, which is what they've done. I live in the UK and I can tell you that the model 3 starts at £38k - and you can't actually buy one until next year anyway due to the waiting list (I know this because I've phoned them and asked them as part of our ongoing research into buying an EV). So that's about 50% more than the 26k you're talking about. £38k in the UK market would be classed as expensive. We're not into full-on luxury but that's Mercedes E-Class territory, or similar to a Jaguar XF/F-Pace. Those cars would not be considered "average".
This highlights a major problem with your arguments - you're coming at everything from a US-centric point of view. That's fine, but at least acknowledge that, and be aware it doesn't apply everywhere. The type of driving in the UK is vastly different to what people in the US do, for example. Also, when it comes to EV infrastructure, it's very important to consider access to things like fast charging and in the UK in particular, and my bit of it specifically, the Tesla Supercharger is not a selling point for a Tesla because they don't exist in large enough numbers to make any kind of difference to the decision making process of buying a new EV. Similarly, you seem to be really keen to point out the performance of a Model 3. I, like many others, don't care. Sure, I don't want to drive something that accelerates and handles like an oil tanker but all the EVs I've tested so far (those being the Leaf, i3 and Ioniq) have been fast enough for urban driving thanks to the instant torque from the electric motor, and have not felt slow on the motorway either. The Leaf and particularly the i3 were actually quite fun in city traffic, which isn't something I'd ever thought I'd say of a car. After a certain point the average driver doesn't care about 0-60 times, or lap times round the Nürburgring.
Andrew1975 wrote: I guess expensive is subjective for sure, however most people wouldn't consider a Toyota Camry expensive. Sure you can get a BMW M3 ....but the BUY in price is more expensive than a Model 3 performance.....the long term ownership cost is much more and The model 3 has better all around performance. So, I'm not sure the point you are trying to make here.
I mean you are trying to compare a glorified go cart with actual automobiles. The Aygo is a car in that it has 4 wheels and 2 doors, and thats about it. Are you purposefully being daft? Because for someone of accusing me of being rude.....your attempt at whit is pretty poor.
What you want is a Cheap car, not an affordable one, and that thing is a cheap piece of gak for sure! Toyota Aygo....yeah....I go somewhere else to buy a actual car.
Just you crack on with being impolite, then. Now with the sneering snobbishness bonus.
I'm not sure what you mean buy 'BUY in price'? Here, new Series 3s and new Model 3s are within a few hundred pounds of one another.
The point, as above, is that you're comparing vehicles that, in this territory, are considered expensive. You don't think they're expensive, and want to dismiss the fact that there are cars out there that are a fraction of the price because you don't think they're worthy of being called cars but they exist. Given that these options are available, however, it is hard to argue that vehicles costing several times as much, that are 25% more than the average new car, 10k more than the average UK salary, and about double the average Scottish salary, are not expensive.
They are expensive cars.
I can buy three fully loaded Hyundai Elantras for the Model 3.
Do you even make a bit of research or just post the first thing that comes off your head?
New model X in Spain 84K euro
New model S in Spain 82K euro
New Audi Etron in Spain 82K euro
New Jag iPace 79K euro
Nope you just like to Cherry pick as usual. In fact your whole post is deceptive.
New model X US $81-102K But really add ludicrous 20k and FSD is 7K and 1250 destination fee so anywhere between ...so really between 90k and 130k
New model S US $76-97 But really Add ludicrous 20k and FSD is $7K and 1250 destination fee...so really between 85K and 130K
New Model 3 US $35-60K Before FSD of $7000 So really between and 1250 destination fee...so really between 45K and 70K
Model Y is about 10K more than model 3 so 55k and 80K
.
And both the e-tron and jag can go well north of 100K if you start piling up stuff. Congratulations, you have discovered options. I quoted the base price on each car so the comparison stands.
See, 116K euro and I didn't even have to add that many things.
You can easily get a 50K+ Nissan leaf which is the car that compares to the model 3.
A Tesla spokesperson has stated that the settings for Max Battery Power and Launch Mode were inadvertently removed from some Model S vehicles after a UI update. The electric car maker is currently working on a fix for the issue, and has noted that the updates were not intended to restrict the performance of the affected Model S vehicles. Tesla extends its apologies to electric car owners for the inconvenience resulting from this issue.
Not the same instance you're quoting from the May update. Review the TMC thread I posted before and you'll see it's a brand new thing.
This is strictly battery-capacity related, and right after the China fires, and Tesla service is on record telling owners they're cutting their battery capacity "to prolong the life of the battery".
There's a class action brewing there. Either Tesla has to compensate for lack of range/charging speed or they have to acknowledge their tech has dangerously traded performance for safety.
Sure you can get a Jag I pace with a ton of cosmetic options on it if you want to add a bunch of Gak to it that doesn't change the argument. By both performance and price those cars are closer to 3 and y than x and s.
Youe own articicle says this is a software and tesla communications issue.
The average is 29k. Many people don't have full time jobs but still need cars. Perhaps an even more useful number is the median household disposable income (equivalised for household size and where 'disposable' means everything after direct taxation) which is 28,400 - and more and more households need (or feel they need) to have two vehicles.
If thats the case they can buy cheap econoboxes. Thats fine. You are still equating cheap with affordable.
I'm not being dishonest, I just recognise that determining whether something is expensive (rather than value for money) requires situating a product in the full spectrum of available options, not just similarly priced examples.
Well thats just silly because if you look at the "full spectrum of cars" Model 3 is pretty cheap. You can pay millions for a car. Now if you take cars with similar abilities, size and performance......the 3 is still affordable. If your view of affordable is limited to cars that are 14K new......im sorry, but thats just not reality. The base model is an average priced car.
I live in the UK and I can tell you that the model 3 starts at £38k - and you can't actually buy one until next year anyway due to the waiting list (I know this because I've phoned them and asked them as part of our ongoing research into buying an EV). So that's about 50% more than the 26k you're talking about. £38k in the UK market would be classed as expensive. We're not into full-on luxury but that's Mercedes E-Class territory, or similar to a Jaguar XF/F-Pace. Those cars would not be considered "average".
I already said this currently the only one available is the standard range plus....Tesla does that. Even in the US if you want the base model you have to place a special order for it. Its not available on the site, you must call in and request it directly. Will you have to wait till one is built and ready....yes. For now, thats how it works. They havent really built them, if you order the base model right now what you get is a software limited version of the midrange model. Its actually a really good deal. Yeah, Tesla especially outside the US has huge waiting lists...its a popular car, Tesla is having problems growing fast enough to keep up with demand.
I can buy three fully loaded Hyundai Elantras for the Model 3.
But why would you want 3 Hyundai Elantras????
A person whom wants to summon nugle cars?
Though seriously a EV would be pretty perfect for millage really, but here's the thing a massive ass pay wall.
38,000 for a car I use as a run about, and short 25 - 30 mile commute. And that's starting prices.
Bring the prices down, could be practical.
Just not at at that money, vs the cost of a Ice run about.
Oh for sure! Look its not perfect for everyone all the time.....what car is? As EV adoption takes place and tech gets cheaper you will see cheaper EVs.....what you will see first is the ICE used car prices tank, people will be able to pick up used ICE cars for peanuts.
Whether they're good value for money, and I think they are, is a different issue, and I feel that that's really what you're addressing.
It goes beyond that. Affordable has so many meanings. Its a matter of priorities, Ive seen lots of people go the cheap route on things and it often comes back to haunt them. When we do a long term cost comparison.....not even that long we can see that the 3 comes out cheaper than many of the cheaper cars in your top ten list of cars. The long term ownership costs of those cars actually make them more expensive, even when you include financing of the higher buy in amount of the 3. Here we have a car with thousands of less moving parts requiring almost no maintenance....(this is why GM killed the EV1) we have hard data on from Tesloop a third party rideshareing service thats shows even after 600,000 miles we have minimal...almost 0 maintenance and/or battery degradation. This means that these cars properly cared for may last much longer than other cars and still require little maintenance.
I live in the UK and I can tell you that the model 3 starts at £38k - and you can't actually buy one until next year anyway due to the waiting list (I know this because I've phoned them and asked them as part of our ongoing research into buying an EV). So that's about 50% more than the 26k you're talking about. £38k in the UK market would be classed as expensive. We're not into full-on luxury but that's Mercedes E-Class territory, or similar to a Jaguar XF/F-Pace. Those cars would not be considered "average".
I already said this currently the only one available is the standard range plus....Tesla does that. Even in the US if you want the base model you have to place a special order for it. Its not available on the site, you must call in and request it directly. Will you have to wait till one is built and ready....yes. For now, thats how it works. They havent really built them, if you order the base model right now what you get is a software limited version of the midrange model. Its actually a really good deal. Yeah, Tesla especially outside the US has huge waiting lists...its a popular car, Tesla is having problems growing fast enough to keep up with demand.
You know you come across as really patronising right? Did you even read what I said at all? The article you posted is utter crap. It's taking the dollar price and converting it to pounds, which isn't even remotely accurate. The starting price is as I quoted. I know this because I have phoned them. I spoke to the dealership directly and that is the base price quoted, not the actual purchase price of the ones you can order right now, which is over £40k. You are wrong, it's as simple as that.
I live in the UK and I can tell you that the model 3 starts at £38k - and you can't actually buy one until next year anyway due to the waiting list (I know this because I've phoned them and asked them as part of our ongoing research into buying an EV). So that's about 50% more than the 26k you're talking about. £38k in the UK market would be classed as expensive. We're not into full-on luxury but that's Mercedes E-Class territory, or similar to a Jaguar XF/F-Pace. Those cars would not be considered "average".
I already said this currently the only one available is the standard range plus....Tesla does that. Even in the US if you want the base model you have to place a special order for it. Its not available on the site, you must call in and request it directly. Will you have to wait till one is built and ready....yes. For now, thats how it works. They havent really built them, if you order the base model right now what you get is a software limited version of the midrange model. Its actually a really good deal. Yeah, Tesla especially outside the US has huge waiting lists...its a popular car, Tesla is having problems growing fast enough to keep up with demand.
You know you come across as really patronising right? Did you even read what I said at all? The article you posted is utter crap. It's taking the dollar price and converting it to pounds, which isn't even remotely accurate. The starting price is as I quoted. I know this because I have phoned them. I spoke to the dealership directly and that is the base price quoted, not the actual purchase price of the ones you can order right now, which is over £40k. You are wrong, it's as simple as that.
Andrew1975 wrote:
Elbows wrote: Just checking in, my monthly "is Andrew what's-his-face still on his Tesla crusade" check. All is well with the world. Carry on.
Ahhh, thanks for your oh so insightful additions as usual.
I can buy three fully loaded Hyundai Elantras for the Model 3.
But why would you want 3 Hyundai Elantras????
A person whom wants to summon nugle cars?
Though seriously a EV would be pretty perfect for millage really, but here's the thing a massive ass pay wall.
38,000 for a car I use as a run about, and short 25 - 30 mile commute. And that's starting prices.
Bring the prices down, could be practical.
Just not at at that money, vs the cost of a Ice run about.
Oh for sure! Look its not perfect for everyone all the time.....what car is? As EV adoption takes place and tech gets cheaper you will see cheaper EVs.....what you will see first is the ICE used car prices tank, people will be able to pick up used ICE cars for peanuts.
Whether they're good value for money, and I think they are, is a different issue, and I feel that that's really what you're addressing.
It goes beyond that. Affordable has so many meanings. Its a matter of priorities, Ive seen lots of people go the cheap route on things and it often comes back to haunt them. When we do a long term cost comparison.....not even that long we can see that the 3 comes out cheaper than many of the cheaper cars in your top ten list of cars. The long term ownership costs of those cars actually make them more expensive, even when you include financing of the higher buy in amount of the 3. Here we have a car with thousands of less moving parts requiring almost no maintenance....(this is why GM killed the EV1) we have hard data on from Tesloop a third party rideshareing service thats shows even after 600,000 miles we have minimal...almost 0 maintenance and/or battery degradation. This means that these cars properly cared for may last much longer than other cars and still require little maintenance.
Tue. Not perfect, however while prices have gone down, I Don, t see those becoming a regular affordable average Joe cost for a good while.
The car makers and industry are not geared up to mass produce them. Take a mega oil crisis or somthing of that ilk to force such a huge transformation in transport..
And I must say a straight price convert ignores UK custom, exercise and also first time ownership and one of tac payments which add up fairly high. Even with EV schemes.
New cars have a fair few grand in first time costs.
So 40k is Peobbly very acurate or more.
...
One other thing. While we may love or hate them there is a very real cost in a africa to consider etc.
Sustainable must also be sustainable and ethical as far as Africa and so allows. Its never gonna be perfect b it bi just saw this story. This is the hell that feeds our demands for batteries.
Save planet yes. Let's also consider how we do it.
Do you even make a bit of research or just post the first thing that comes off your head?
New model X in Spain 84K euro New model S in Spain 82K euro New Audi Etron in Spain 82K euro New Jag iPace 79K euro
Nope you just like to Cherry pick as usual. In fact your whole post is deceptive.
New model X US $81-102K But really add ludicrous 20k and FSD is 7K and 1250 destination fee so anywhere between ...so really between 90k and 130k New model S US $76-97 But really Add ludicrous 20k and FSD is $7K and 1250 destination fee...so really between 85K and 130K New Model 3 US $35-60K Before FSD of $7000 So really between and 1250 destination fee...so really between 45K and 70K Model Y is about 10K more than model 3 so 55k and 80K .
And both the e-tron and jag can go well north of 100K if you start piling up stuff. Congratulations, you have discovered options. I quoted the base price on each car so the comparison stands.
See, 116K euro and I didn't even have to add that many things.
You can easily get a 50K+ Nissan leaf which is the car that compares to the model 3.
A Tesla spokesperson has stated that the settings for Max Battery Power and Launch Mode were inadvertently removed from some Model S vehicles after a UI update. The electric car maker is currently working on a fix for the issue, and has noted that the updates were not intended to restrict the performance of the affected Model S vehicles. Tesla extends its apologies to electric car owners for the inconvenience resulting from this issue.
Not the same instance you're quoting from the May update. Review the TMC thread I posted before and you'll see it's a brand new thing.
This is strictly battery-capacity related, and right after the China fires, and Tesla service is on record telling owners they're cutting their battery capacity "to prolong the life of the battery".
There's a class action brewing there. Either Tesla has to compensate for lack of range/charging speed or they have to acknowledge their tech has dangerously traded performance for safety.
Sure you can get a Jag I pace with a ton of cosmetic options on it if you want to add a bunch of Gak to it that doesn't change the argument. By both performance and price those cars are closer to 3 and y than x and s.
Youe own articicle says this is a software and tesla communications issue.
Cosmetic or otherwise doesn't mean anything, price is price and the basic editions of either Tesla, Jag or Audi cost roughly the same.
Well, of course it is a software issue. Tesla is taking away advertised capacity and performance without telling their owners.
Remember all your math about how tesla tech is the very best? How good is that math if one year from purchase Tesla cuts your range by over 10% without telling you? Say you purchased a model S over an e-tron because their range is 10% higher then Tesla cuts you off one year after purchase.
Remember the collective Tesla community pointing fingers at Audi and Jaguar because of the relatively poor range they got from their big batteries? Most likely here's the answer. If the batteries can't meet Tesla's stated range in a safe manner they should be considered defective and replaced, period. Remember the last time Porsche cut off two cylingers off an owner flat-six because the owner drove the car too hard? Yeah, me neither.
One way or another this is going to end in court, and it doesn't look good for Tesla.
As a bonus piece Tesla finds itself again dead bottom of whatcar reliability index. A whopping 20 points below the 2nd worst (Land Rover, incidentally) and well far of most brands which stay firmly in the 90s.
The average is 29k. Many people don't have full time jobs but still need cars. Perhaps an even more useful number is the median household disposable income (equivalised for household size and where 'disposable' means everything after direct taxation) which is 28,400 - and more and more households need (or feel they need) to have two vehicles.
If thats the case they can buy cheap econoboxes. Thats fine. You are still equating cheap with affordable.
I'm talking about affordable for the average family. That's what you call cheap - and that's perfectly fine - but these are meaningful figures I'm giving you.
I'm not being dishonest, I just recognise that determining whether something is expensive (rather than value for money) requires situating a product in the full spectrum of available options, not just similarly priced examples.
Well thats just silly because if you look at the "full spectrum of cars" Model 3 is pretty cheap. You can pay millions for a car.
Fair, but I think it should have been clear I meant relative to vehicles that are bought in meaningful numbers. Apologies if not.
Now if you take cars with similar abilities, size and performance......the 3 is still affordable. If your view of affordable is limited to cars that are 14K new......im sorry, but thats just not reality. The base model is an average priced car.
It is reality. And they are not average. I've literally given you average new car prices in the UK, the ten most popular new cars, average incomes, and average household disposable incomes. Cheapest Teslas are 10k more than the average new car. Teslas are 8k more expensive than the most expensive of the ten most popular, 15k more than the 2nd most expensive, 16k more than the next, and almost twice, or more than twice, as expensive the other 7. They are significantly more than both the average salary and the average household disposable income.
They've put these six big power blocks into the Redbridge park and ride. I'm not clear if they are huge batteries or generators or some kind of hybrid technology, They say quiet hybrid on them.
I think there are solar cells on top. It's going to be interesting to see what happens.
Quick update: just ordered a Nissan Leaf, for delivery in a few months. Took an i3, Leaf and Ioniq for test drives recently and found the i3 and Leaf to be great to drive (not so impressed with the Ioniq as it didn't really feel like it was leveraging the advantages of an electric properly). Loved that both the i3 and Leaf are capable of genuine 1-pedal driving. Did a 7-mile drive through from the suburbs of Edinburgh to a nearby town through city streets and more open roads an managed not to touch the brakes once, which was a fantastic experience.
We did a lot of research into all of our options and ended on the Leaf for the following reasons:
1. Price. We weren't willing to go much over £35k maximum. That knocked out a couple of contenders
2. Availability. We were willing to wait a little bit but not for the 9-12 months Kia, Hyundai and Tesla are currently quoting as wait times for their new cars
3. Range. This was our biggest issue. We did a lot of research into this, from getting an idea based on our own test drives (not very accurate) to looking at various real-world tests that have been carried out over a longer time period. We wanted something that would comfortably get over 200 miles with just a single fast-charge in the middle, with the realistic possibility of stretching that out to closer to 250 miles. Most of our driving will be around town, no more than 30 miles at a time, with the odd 100-mile round trip thrown in here and there.
4. Practicality. It had to be a decent size inside, including luggage space in the back/front. Ideally it had to have 5 seats as well. We won't often use all 5 but the option is a good one to have. This is the big area where the i3 fell down. The stupid back doors are hugely impractical and the boot is laughably small. As a small city car it'd be OK, but not at the prices BMW are charging.
After putting all that together we ended up on the Leaf. We were very impressed with the test drive and level of equipment offered as standard and the driving experience was very relaxing - not often I can say that about a car. Accelerates really well in city traffic too. We're now just going through the various processes for setting up home charging, which I have to say, could be made a lot easier with a little bit of thought. Looking forward to taking delivery soon.
Slipspace wrote: We're now just going through the various processes for setting up home charging, which I have to say, could be made a lot easier with a little bit of thought. Looking forward to taking delivery soon.
Congrats on the purchase.
Back when we were on the market for an electric car about these dates on last year Nissan was offering something like 1.200 euro to help pay for the home charging setup.
Slipspace wrote: We're now just going through the various processes for setting up home charging, which I have to say, could be made a lot easier with a little bit of thought. Looking forward to taking delivery soon.
Congrats on the purchase.
Back when we were on the market for an electric car about these dates on last year Nissan was offering something like 1.200 euro to help pay for the home charging setup.
Are they offering that in the UK, too?
Thanks
In the UK there's £3500 off the price of the car and a £500 grant towards the cost of the home charging kit. However, I'm in Scotland, which has a couple of extra incentives in the form of a £300 additional grant for home charging and a 6-year interest-free loan to cover up to £35,000 of the cost of a new EV. This is because Scotland has committed to banning all sales of ICE cars by 2032 (the target for the rest of the UK is 2040).
The problem isn't so much on the financial side. The bureaucracy and really inconvenient system in place to claim a lot of the incentives just seems completely unnecessary. Ironically, it feels like something from about 20 years ago, when governments were still getting to grips with the internet, as so much of it has to be done by phone or mail when it could easily be done online.
I live in the UK and I can tell you that the model 3 starts at £38k - and you can't actually buy one until next year anyway due to the waiting list (I know this because I've phoned them and asked them as part of our ongoing research into buying an EV). So that's about 50% more than the 26k you're talking about. £38k in the UK market would be classed as expensive. We're not into full-on luxury but that's Mercedes E-Class territory, or similar to a Jaguar XF/F-Pace. Those cars would not be considered "average".
I already said this currently the only one available is the standard range plus....Tesla does that. Even in the US if you want the base model you have to place a special order for it. Its not available on the site, you must call in and request it directly. Will you have to wait till one is built and ready....yes. For now, thats how it works. They havent really built them, if you order the base model right now what you get is a software limited version of the midrange model. Its actually a really good deal. Yeah, Tesla especially outside the US has huge waiting lists...its a popular car, Tesla is having problems growing fast enough to keep up with demand.
You know you come across as really patronising right? Did you even read what I said at all? The article you posted is utter crap. It's taking the dollar price and converting it to pounds, which isn't even remotely accurate. The starting price is as I quoted. I know this because I have phoned them. I spoke to the dealership directly and that is the base price quoted, not the actual purchase price of the ones you can order right now, which is over £40k. You are wrong, it's as simple as that.
No you are not getting it, the 38K might be the cheapest they have available NOW....its not the cheapest model 3 they make!
It is reality. And they are not average. I've literally given you average new car prices in the UK, the ten most popular new cars, average incomes, and average household disposable incomes. Cheapest Teslas are 10k more than the average new car. Teslas are 8k more expensive than the most expensive of the ten most popular, 15k more than the 2nd most expensive, 16k more than the next, and almost twice, or more than twice, as expensive the other 7. They are significantly more than both the average salary and the average household disposable income.
One other thing. While we may love or hate them there is a very real cost in a africa to consider etc.
Absolutely, and I think the situation will improve. However when we see compare this to the damage the oil industry brings....its worth the transition. Oil has been a key source of human suffering for the last couple centuries.
Well, of course it is a software issue. Tesla is taking away advertised capacity and performance without telling their owners.
I meant that its an update issue that will and can be solved. Does it suck, sure. But its a software bug that affected a very small percentage of Tesla Model S's nothing more.
As a bonus piece Tesla finds itself again dead bottom of whatcar reliability index. A whopping 20 points below the 2nd worst (Land Rover, incidentally) and well far of most brands which stay firmly in the 90s.
Who has ever even heard of Whatcar? Could they maybe post some insightful data? Maybe its a thing in the UK. I'm not worried about it. If Tesla needs to do a recall I'm sure they will. We have already seen the extensive list of recall from other companies..no need to put then up again. What I would like to see is some real world data showing how many Teslas are still running, and how many have been lost to quality issues.....I mean we see a lot of stories....but where is the Data? Its funny you would think since there are so many haters, that someone would have this metric.....I wonder why it hasn't surfaced? ..........I wonder.
After putting all that together we ended up on the Leaf. We were very impressed with the test drive and level of equipment offered as standard and the driving experience was very relaxing - not often I can say that about a car. Accelerates really well in city traffic too. We're now just going through the various processes for setting up home charging, which I have to say, could be made a lot easier with a little bit of thought. Looking forward to taking delivery soon.
Congrats, I hope you like it. Its not hard to set up home charging if you are a little handy.....their are plenty of youtube videos on how to do it.
It is reality. And they are not average. I've literally given you average new car prices in the UK, the ten most popular new cars, average incomes, and average household disposable incomes. Cheapest Teslas are 10k more than the average new car. Teslas are 8k more expensive than the most expensive of the ten most popular, 15k more than the 2nd most expensive, 16k more than the next, and almost twice, or more than twice, as expensive the other 7. They are significantly more than both the average salary and the average household disposable income.
You've repeatedly said they were not expensive without qualification and separately noted the savings over time - as an additional bonus rather than as justification for the first claim. If what you meant was always 'they are expensive to buy but not to run' then great - we're in full agreement. Alas, that purchase cost is what makes them unaffordable for most people.
You are being very disingenuous. The Nissan starts at £19,995, Merc A-Class at £23,160. The BMW £23,055. Firstly, if you're citing a list of the most popular cars in the UK, clearly the most expensive variants of the most expensive cars on the list are not the cars that are being bought in the large numbers and are in no way representative of the norm, never mind that you're simply ignoring that the others making up the list are cheaper, and most often significantly so, than even their base models. Secondly, you can't compare the most expensive variants of the most expensive cars popular in the UK with the base price of the cheapest Tesla to try and prove their relative affordability amongst the average cars popular in the UK. The points stands that the cheapest Tesla is significantly more expensive than all of the most popular cars in the UK. I refer you again to the average new car prices, average income, and median household disposable income.
If you want to compare like for like in terms of spec options, a fully loaded Model 3 costs near double the base price in the US, right? We can't extrapolate that directly to UK pricing, but the fully loaded version is still going to be way, way beyond the three cars you cite above with every bell and whistle you can get; likely at least in the region of 20k more expensive.
I live in the UK and I can tell you that the model 3 starts at £38k - and you can't actually buy one until next year anyway due to the waiting list (I know this because I've phoned them and asked them as part of our ongoing research into buying an EV). So that's about 50% more than the 26k you're talking about. £38k in the UK market would be classed as expensive. We're not into full-on luxury but that's Mercedes E-Class territory, or similar to a Jaguar XF/F-Pace. Those cars would not be considered "average".
I already said this currently the only one available is the standard range plus....Tesla does that. Even in the US if you want the base model you have to place a special order for it. Its not available on the site, you must call in and request it directly. Will you have to wait till one is built and ready....yes. For now, thats how it works. They havent really built them, if you order the base model right now what you get is a software limited version of the midrange model. Its actually a really good deal. Yeah, Tesla especially outside the US has huge waiting lists...its a popular car, Tesla is having problems growing fast enough to keep up with demand.
You know you come across as really patronising right? Did you even read what I said at all? The article you posted is utter crap. It's taking the dollar price and converting it to pounds, which isn't even remotely accurate. The starting price is as I quoted. I know this because I have phoned them. I spoke to the dealership directly and that is the base price quoted, not the actual purchase price of the ones you can order right now, which is over £40k. You are wrong, it's as simple as that.
No you are not getting it, the 38K might be the cheapest they have available NOW....its not the cheapest model 3 they make!
It is reality. And they are not average. I've literally given you average new car prices in the UK, the ten most popular new cars, average incomes, and average household disposable incomes. Cheapest Teslas are 10k more than the average new car. Teslas are 8k more expensive than the most expensive of the ten most popular, 15k more than the 2nd most expensive, 16k more than the next, and almost twice, or more than twice, as expensive the other 7. They are significantly more than both the average salary and the average household disposable income.
One other thing. While we may love or hate them there is a very real cost in a africa to consider etc.
Absolutely, and I think the situation will improve. However when we see compare this to the damage the oil industry brings....its worth the transition. Oil has been a key source of human suffering for the last couple centuries.
Well, of course it is a software issue. Tesla is taking away advertised capacity and performance without telling their owners.
I meant that its an update issue that will and can be solved. Does it suck, sure. But its a software bug that affected a very small percentage of Tesla Model S's nothing more.
You make it sound like it is an unintended consequence of a badly written software upgrade.
It is not, it is a deliberate software patch to solve a hardware issue, namely that Tesla batteries develop a fire risk if you push them too hard or supercharge them too often.
In the past Tesla would have reached out to you and just replaced the battery pack proactively like on the famous 400.000 mile Tesla that had its pack replaced twice under warranty.
The first battery pack replacement happened after 194,000 miles. At that time, the battery pack energy capacity degradation was at ~6%, which is reasonable, but Tesla found a problem due to Tesloop’s frequent Supercharging.
Here’s the reason Tesla gave for the battery replacement:
Found internal imbalance in HV battery due to consistent supercharging to 100% from a low state of charge (SOC) without any rest periods in between. HV battery has been approved to be replaced. Also recommend that customer does not Supercharge on a regular basis and does not charge to 100% on a regular basis. We also recommend that the customer use scheduled charging to start charge 3 hours after end of drive at low SOC.
Right now Tesla will just put a hard cap on your battery, and won't even tell you about it unless you push them. Just like it removed hp and launch mode if you used them too often.
Who has ever even heard of Whatcar? Could they maybe post some insightful data? Maybe its a thing in the UK. I'm not worried about it.
Tesla should if they want to sell any meaningful number of cars in the UK.
It's the most important survey over there. Data and methodology are a few clicks away, look it up.
No you are not getting it, the 38K might be the cheapest they have available NOW....its not the cheapest model 3 they make!
It is for us! Seriously dude, this isn't hard to grasp. In the UK the Model 3 IS NOT AVAILABLE AT LESS THAN £38k (after the £3500 government grant). It never will be and the indication I received from Tesla when I spoke to them is that the vast majority of vehicles they're going to be importing will be the much more expensive AWD one, starting at £48,500.
Who has ever even heard of Whatcar?
Everyone from the UK. It's one of the biggest car magazines/websites in the UK for reviews and well respected when it comes to their reliability scoring and owners surveys.
Just like your comments about the Tesla Model 3 in the UK, this perfectly shows your US-centric view is simply not valid everywhere and your dismissive approach to anything that doesn't confirm your Tesla fanboy world-view becomes more comical each time you say things like "Who has ever heard of WhatCar?"
Let's take your comments about the best selling cars, using base prices, to show how the Tesla stacks up as an "affordable" car.
The Tesla is a minimum of £38k. You might notice that's over £15k more than any of the cars on that list. Sure, you can (and probably will) spend more than the base price on most of those cars, but the same's true of the Tesla, which can end up at over £50k depending ont he specific make and the options you choose. EV's biggest problem remains the buy-in cost and, for us, Tesla exacerbates that by being even more expensive than the competition, to the point where they priced themselves out of consideration for us given all the other issues we were concerned about like servicing and repairs.
Just like your comments about the Tesla Model 3 in the UK, this perfectly shows your US-centric view is simply not valid everywhere and your dismissive approach to anything that doesn't confirm your Tesla fanboy world-view becomes more comical each time you say things like "Who has ever heard of WhatCar?"
Mate, his veiws aren't really all that valid even considering the US-Centric views. . . I mean, lets take his favorite "unbiased" source. It's straight up a pro-tesla site, and they make no bones about it.
I'm a yank, and I've definitely heard of WhatCar, as well as a number of other overseas auto publications. But then, I AM a bit of an oddball petrolhead in the US in that I prefer proper sports cars (as in cars that are designed to make high speed turns, unlike most US "sports" cars that are designed for the standing 1/4 mile)
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I'm a yank, and I've definitely heard of WhatCar, as well as a number of other overseas auto publications. But then, I AM a bit of an oddball petrolhead in the US in that I prefer proper sports cars (as in cars that are designed to make high speed turns, unlike most US "sports" cars that are designed for the standing 1/4 mile)
What US "sports cars" are you talking about? The classic US sports cars are the Chevy Corvette and Dodge Viper (if it returns) and they both go round corners pretty fast. The Mustang and Camaro are "pony cars", not sure if they fall under the "sports car" heading, but modern variants of the Mustang and Camaro get praised as being pretty good track cars, even tracks that have corners.
I think it's mostly the Dodge muscle cars that aren't too good through the twisties and seem to be focusing on 1/4 mile times with the Hellcat and Demon.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I'm a yank, and I've definitely heard of WhatCar, as well as a number of other overseas auto publications. But then, I AM a bit of an oddball petrolhead in the US in that I prefer proper sports cars (as in cars that are designed to make high speed turns, unlike most US "sports" cars that are designed for the standing 1/4 mile)
What US "sports cars" are you talking about? The classic US sports cars are the Chevy Corvette and Dodge Viper (if it returns) and they both go round corners pretty fast. The Mustang and Camaro are "pony cars", not sure if they fall under the "sports car" heading, but modern variants of the Mustang and Camaro get praised as being pretty good track cars, even tracks that have corners.
I think it's mostly the Dodge muscle cars that aren't too good through the twisties and seem to be focusing on 1/4 mile times with the Hellcat and Demon.
When you look at the street versions of cars, a lot of the US sports cars get panned heavily by motoring journalists for their handling (when compared to their Euro/Asian counterparts). Sure, the purpose-built Corvettes competed fairly well at Le Mans. It wasn't until the most recent generation of Vettes (with the ZR.1 variant) that nearly everyone loved the handling abilities of the Vette. When the Corvette first came out in the 50s and 60s yeah, it was certainly one of the top sports cars around, and one of the better "weekend warrior" racers out there. . . Then technology moved on and by the 70s, 80s and through the early 2000s, the Corvette continued on with the same mindset of those early years. As a result, you may see them on a track day event, but they weren't major contenders for major races (a la, Le Mans, 24 hours of Daytona, etc)
And yeah, Dodge has for quite a while been all bout that pure straight line speed. And while Pony Cars are certainly a type of car, I personally would consider them to be a subset under the "sports car" umbrella because they were originally designed to be the "poor man's racer" and helped kick off the muscle car 'thing' in the US.
Wuestenfux 1 : 0 Andrew1975
They must have a fart mode. Partially owned by the government..... 
