That's in Novato, Marin County, CA. Up the road from the Golden Gate Bridge and Sausalito.

I have a great friend who lives there. Them people can afford it.

Bubblez said:

---

Why are so many traditional car dealers this crappy?

---

So, this is NOT a Texas dealership.
Now the inflated prices make a lot more sense.

"No one knew EVs would get this cheap and charge this fast."

Some of you. In 7 years.

hph6203 said:

---

"No one knew EVs would get this cheap and charge this fast."

Some of you. In 7 years.

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

So, this is NOT a Texas dealership.
Now the inflated prices make a lot more sense.

---

Uh, have you seen the tags on the cars here? We pay an arm and leg to support entrenched interests who barely have to lift a finger to compete. It's horrendous.

Agreed, but it's a sliding scale of "worse for me" and "better for me" that is shifting towards EVs over time as they improve. Some of the "worse for me" people are actually people that fall into "better for me" category, but they lack the knowledge about the product to make the switch. The rest require product improvement. It's why when people post that only 50% of people would consider an EV my response is to be encouraged that 50% of people already will.

The problem with the last year and a half is that the legacy auto manufacturers made EVs that were the equivalent of those made 7 years ago (and in reality, worse), functionally targeting a smaller market, while another manufacturer was making modern iterations. That made them believe a false premise that they could just make half the product and get the same results, which they found out wasn't the case.

They need the charging infrastructure, which they'll gain access to this year, and they need to put the entire package together to make their products viable. Tesla's next vehicle, released in the second half of 2025 is going to portend another wave of consumers deciding "it works for me." Maybe not for that particular vehicle, but for the kind of vehicle that can be made with the manufacturing techniques and technology going into it.


The dominant things that are coming with that vehicle are a price point comparable to an equivalent, or lesser, ICE vehicle, faster 15-18 minute charging, and the ability to use the vehicle as an emergency power back up for your home. It is also targeting the largest global vehicle class for sales and should surpass the Model Y for best selling model, which will help drive down cost, spread profitability over more production lines and allow Tesla to back fill those improvements into the Model 3 and then Y without massive reductions in profitability.


I expect that, at least for Tesla, the strategy is going to be to test case new technologies into the Cybertruck or some other smaller volume higher potential margin vehicles to get an understanding of how they perform in the real world (I say some other small volume, because I don't know that Cybertruck is going to durably draw interest as more and more of them hit the road, it may be a 5 year cycle of them introducing production concept cars and then retiring them), and then proliferate it through their product lineup vehicle by vehicle so they never substantially slow production across all of the production lines.


I'm a fan of EVs in that I think the 2035 iteration of them is going to be the superior product for the vast majority of people whereas the modern product is superior for some subset of the whole.

Tibbers said:

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

So, this is NOT a Texas dealership.
Now the inflated prices make a lot more sense.

---

Uh, have you seen the tags on the cars here? We pay an arm and leg to support entrenched interests who barely have to lift a finger to compete. It's horrendous.

---

Stealerships are a bipartisan issue found in every state in this country. There are some good dealerships out there but I think they are in the minority.

Dude...

TLDR

hph6203 said:

---

Agreed, but it's a sliding scale of "worse for me" and "better for me" that is shifting towards EVs over time as they improve. Some of the "worse for me" people are actually people that fall into "better for me" category, but they lack the knowledge about the product to make the switch. The rest require product improvement. It's why when people post that only 50% of people would consider an EV my response is to be encouraged that 50% of people already will.

The problem with the last year and a half is that the legacy auto manufacturers made EVs that were the equivalent of those made 7 years ago (and in reality, worse), functionally targeting a smaller market, while another manufacturer was making modern iterations. That made them believe a false premise that they could just make half the product and get the same results, which they found out wasn't the case.

They need the charging infrastructure, which they'll gain access to this year, and they need to put the entire package together to make their products viable. Tesla's next vehicle, released in the second half of 2025 is going to portend another wave of consumers deciding "it works for me." Maybe not for that particular vehicle, but for the kind of vehicle that can be made with the manufacturing techniques and technology going into it.


The dominant things that are coming with that vehicle are a price point comparable to an equivalent, or lesser, ICE vehicle, faster 15-18 minute charging, and the ability to use the vehicle as an emergency power back up for your home. It is also targeting the largest global vehicle class for sales and should surpass the Model Y for best selling model, which will help drive down cost, spread profitability over more production lines and allow Tesla to back fill those improvements into the Model 3 and then Y without massive reductions in profitability.


I expect that, at least for Tesla, the strategy is going to be to test case new technologies into the Cybertruck or some other smaller volume higher potential margin vehicles to get an understanding of how they perform in the real world (I say some other small volume, because I don't know that Cybertruck is going to durably draw interest as more and more of them hit the road, it may be a 5 year cycle of them introducing production concept cars and then retiring them), and then proliferate it through their product lineup vehicle by vehicle so they never substantially slow production across all of the production lines.


I'm a fan of EVs in that I think the 2035 iteration of them is going to be the superior product for the vast majority of people whereas the modern product is superior for some subset of the whole.

---

Then don't discuss the topic. It's a more complicated discussion than 2 sentences.

You know what's cool about that area? My Buddy's wife goes to the same salon Sammy Hagar frequents. And Steve Perry from Journey lives there.

And some of you old ****ers may remember this one hit wonder. As a teenager in New Orleans, I had no idea what this song was about and where Sausalito was. Overheating over grapevine??? Now I know.

hph6203 said:

---

Then don't discuss the topic. It's a more complicated discussion than 2 sentences.

---

2 sentence response.

Don't tell me what to do ****er. You're the one who can't succinctly communicate due to low IQ.

Kansas Kid said:

---

Tibbers said:

---

Rongagin71 said:

---

So, this is NOT a Texas dealership.
Now the inflated prices make a lot more sense.

---

Uh, have you seen the tags on the cars here? We pay an arm and leg to support entrenched interests who barely have to lift a finger to compete. It's horrendous.

---

Stealerships are a bipartisan issue found in every state in this country. There are some good dealerships out there but I think they are in the minority.

---

Then why do none of our state reps have the balls to even put forth legislation to change this disastrous status quo?

I remember the song but never would have been able to name the band. I love how they took a break north of San Fran when driving from LA to San Fran

AggieDruggist89 said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Then don't discuss the topic. It's a more complicated discussion than 2 sentences.

---

2 sentence response.

Don't tell me what to do ****er. You're the one who can't succinctly communicate due to low IQ.

---

Seek help.

Can you read a two word response?

Kansas Kid said:

---

I remember the song but never would have been able to name the band.

---

Diesel

One word response

AggieDruggist89 said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Then don't discuss the topic. It's a more complicated discussion than 2 sentences.

---

2 sentence response.

Don't tell me what to do ****er. You're the one who can't succinctly communicate due to low IQ.

---

The closer you follow a topic the more complex it becomes. You can read headlines and believe you have an understanding of it, but you're going to come away generally uninformed.

High IQ is understanding the complexity of a topic and using the appropriate amount of words to convey the information. Pointing out that you're unengaged and lacking in knowledge takes two sentences. Explaining why legacy auto has failed with their EV strategy takes more. Thinking it takes less is low IQ.


I'm not calling you stupid, I'm merely saying you're unengaged.

To keep it thread related...

Here's the AMC Rambler that blew the gasket over Grapevine mentioned in the song Sausalito Summer night. Definitely not an EV and takes 200 gallons of gas for LA to SF.

Quote:

---

I'm a fan of EVs in that I think the 2035 iteration of them is going to be the superior product for the vast majority of people whereas the modern product is superior for some subset of the whole.

---

Nicely cogent and logical post. However it still doesn't address THE issue, which ironically may well be ******ing EV progress and adoption rather than accelerating it.

GET THE GDMF GOVERNMENT OUT OF IT.

The ONLY reason that EVs should (or will) ever be adopted widely is because they are better for what people need. Saving the world or the environment et all should NEVER HAVE BEEN PART OF IT.

It absolutely is damaging the long term likelihood that EVs maintain enough interest to reach their end state utility.

EVs at their technological peak based upon working technologies today are likely to charge in under 10 minutes, have ubiquitous charging opportunities, drive and recharge themselves and will make power outages for residences a thing of the past.

CAFE standards at best make EV adoption incrementally faster, but at worst kill their potential by poisoning the public's perception by forcing production/adoption ahead of utility/infrastructure support.

Quote:

---

CAFE standards at best make EV adoption incrementally faster, but at worst kill their potential by poisoning the public's perception by forcing production/adoption ahead of utility/infrastructure support.

---

That's understating the situation by a ton. It's not just CAFE standards. It's mandates, e.g. CA, that are pushing an agenda, Vehicles are a transportation utility. That is all they are, and all that the consumer should consider.

It's mostly CAFE standards. Bans have very little impact on the drive towards EVs, because without a federal ban buyers and manufacturers will just circumvent bans by completing transactions in states that have no ban. And the only time a federal ban will occur is when the demand for ICE is so low that it won't impact elections. Bans are politicking with very little teeth. Which is why they're already backtracking.

Credits are a pull mechanism that removes pricing barriers to allow more consumers to afford a product. They may create a market that otherwise wouldn't exist, but they're not driving production of products people don't want at the prices they can in actuality buy them at. They also drive incentives to redirect supply chains through friendly governments/domestic production.

CAFE by contrast puts upward price pressure on ICE vehicles by punishing manufacturers for not selling higher efficiency vehicles without consideration to whether the consumer actually wants them. CAFE is the dominant detrimental player, followed by credits, and bans are just a flea circus designed to drive an emotional response.

hph6203 said:

---

It absolutely is damaging the long term likelihood that EVs maintain enough interest to reach their end state utility.

EVs at their technological peak based upon working technologies today are likely to charge in under 10 minutes, have ubiquitous charging opportunities, drive and recharge themselves and will make power outages for residences a thing of the past.

CAFE standards at best make EV adoption incrementally faster, but at worst kill their potential by poisoning the public's perception by forcing production/adoption ahead of utility/infrastructure support.

---

If they are the best solution, let the market dictate. I struggle to see them being the best solution for a majority of people over the next decade even with advancements. Will there be people that will always want an ICE because they are traditionalists or just love the sound of a hemi or similar engine? Yes, but that is ok as well because it is how they value the experience.

hph6203 said:

---

It's mostly CAFE standards. Bans have very little impact on the drive towards EVs, because without a federal ban buyers and manufacturers will just circumvent bans by completing transactions in states that have no ban. And the only time a federal ban will occur is when the demand for ICE is so low that it won't impact elections. Bans are politicking with very little teeth. Which is why they're already backtracking.

Credits are a pull mechanism that removes pricing barriers to allow more consumers to afford a product. They may create a market that otherwise wouldn't exist, but they're not driving production of products people don't want at the prices they can in actuality buy them at. They also drive incentives to redirect supply chains through friendly governments/domestic production.

CAFE by contrast puts upward price pressure on ICE vehicles by punishing manufacturers for not selling higher efficiency vehicles without consideration to whether the consumer actually wants them. CAFE is the dominant detrimental player, followed by credits, and bans are just a flea circus designed to drive an emotional response.

---

They are a hidden tax on ICE vehicles which shouldn't exist. Let the market decide. Every time the government decides winners and losers, the American public are losers.

Quote:

---

Meanwhile, the EV is deeply loved by many as a second car for well-to-do suburban commuters who own homes, can charge overnight and have a petrol or diesel car as a backup for cold weather and out-of-town trips. That is to say, the market is becoming exactly what it should be a street-worthy golf cart with very fancy features

---

So well put. Glorified golf carts indeed. Even our biggest fanboi on here admits he has a pickup for any serious driving he needs to do.

Ha! AMC. No wonder it kept breaking down. "Shoulda rolled it in the bay."

Kansas Kid said:

---

Everyone could see this coming from a mile away. Connecticut cut their mandate a few months ago. This is why I have been saying I think EVs will cap out for new vehicle sales in the US for the foreseeable future at 30-40% because the political pressure would force the mandates to be dropped.

---

EVs are at around 10% right now...how long do you anticipate for that to triple or quadruple?

Ag with kids said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

Everyone could see this coming from a mile away. Connecticut cut their mandate a few months ago. This is why I have been saying I think EVs will cap out for new vehicle sales in the US for the foreseeable future at 30-40% because the political pressure would force the mandates to be dropped.

---

EVs are at around 10% right now...how long do you anticipate for that to triple or quadruple?

---

No real idea but if I had to guess, 10-20 years in the US.

We don't exist in a free market. Even absent CAFE standards or tax credits.

Economies of scale works in both directions.

EVs are improving in capability while decreasing in cost to produce while combustion vehicles are relatively stagnant in capability and increasing in price as demand has fallen dramatically since their peak in 2017.

Whether a person wants a product is different than whether or not they'll buy a product. There are people that want CRT TVs, but no one is willing to produce them because the market has fallen so precipitously that they can't be produced at a price that people can broadly afford. The kind of people that can pay a premium for a combustion engine are also the kind of people least impacted by the tradeoffs of EVs.

AggieDruggist89 said:

---

Dude...

TLDR

hph6203 said:

---

Agreed, but it's a sliding scale of "worse for me" and "better for me" that is shifting towards EVs over time as they improve. Some of the "worse for me" people are actually people that fall into "better for me" category, but they lack the knowledge about the product to make the switch. The rest require product improvement. It's why when people post that only 50% of people would consider an EV my response is to be encouraged that 50% of people already will.

The problem with the last year and a half is that the legacy auto manufacturers made EVs that were the equivalent of those made 7 years ago (and in reality, worse), functionally targeting a smaller market, while another manufacturer was making modern iterations. That made them believe a false premise that they could just make half the product and get the same results, which they found out wasn't the case.

They need the charging infrastructure, which they'll gain access to this year, and they need to put the entire package together to make their products viable. Tesla's next vehicle, released in the second half of 2025 is going to portend another wave of consumers deciding "it works for me." Maybe not for that particular vehicle, but for the kind of vehicle that can be made with the manufacturing techniques and technology going into it.


The dominant things that are coming with that vehicle are a price point comparable to an equivalent, or lesser, ICE vehicle, faster 15-18 minute charging, and the ability to use the vehicle as an emergency power back up for your home. It is also targeting the largest global vehicle class for sales and should surpass the Model Y for best selling model, which will help drive down cost, spread profitability over more production lines and allow Tesla to back fill those improvements into the Model 3 and then Y without massive reductions in profitability.


I expect that, at least for Tesla, the strategy is going to be to test case new technologies into the Cybertruck or some other smaller volume higher potential margin vehicles to get an understanding of how they perform in the real world (I say some other small volume, because I don't know that Cybertruck is going to durably draw interest as more and more of them hit the road, it may be a 5 year cycle of them introducing production concept cars and then retiring them), and then proliferate it through their product lineup vehicle by vehicle so they never substantially slow production across all of the production lines.


I'm a fan of EVs in that I think the 2035 iteration of them is going to be the superior product for the vast majority of people whereas the modern product is superior for some subset of the whole.

---

---

He's an EV fan fiction author.

Tibbers said:

---

AggieDruggist89 said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Then don't discuss the topic. It's a more complicated discussion than 2 sentences.

---

2 sentence response.

Don't tell me what to do ****er. You're the one who can't succinctly communicate due to low IQ.

---

Seek help.

Can you read a two word response?

---

That's 9.

cecil77 said:

---

Quote:

---

CAFE standards at best make EV adoption incrementally faster, but at worst kill their potential by poisoning the public's perception by forcing production/adoption ahead of utility/infrastructure support.

---

That's understating the situation by a ton. It's not just CAFE standards. It's mandates, e.g. CA, that are pushing an agenda, Vehicles are a transportation utility. That is all they are, and all that the consumer should consider.

---

Yep.

And the government is attacking ICE vehicles with the CAFE standards and boosting EVs with mandates and tax credits.

Let the two compete on an equal playing field and the chips will fall where they will.

If that's EVs, it's because they won on their own, not because we didn't have other choices...

You'll get a lot less pushback if that's the case.

hph6203 said:

---

EVs are improving in capability while decreasing in cost to produce while combustion vehicles are relatively stagnant in capability and increasing in price as demand has fallen dramatically since their peak in 2017.

Whether a person wants a product is different than whether or not they'll buy a product. There are people that want CRT TVs, but no one is willing to produce them because the market has fallen so precipitously that they can't be produced at a price that people can broadly afford. The kind of people that can pay a premium for a combustion engine are also the kind of people least impacted by the tradeoffs of EVs.

---

Wow. Lots to unpack here but I'll try.

EVs are not improving in capability. Batteries have to deal with physics.

CVs are not stagnant by any means. The technology has been continuously improved for almost 150 years.

Car sales went down during Covid because of global parts shortages. Cyclical demand.

Tube TVs are a terrible analogy. Dude. SMH.

A premium for a CV? You have that wrong. Even people who can afford to buy an EV like our resident fans on here also say they buy a "real" car for long trips, hauling stuff, etc. EVs are only useful for upper middle class folks who own their own homes, have close urban jobs, and can afford more than one vehicle.

Kansas Kid said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

Everyone could see this coming from a mile away. Connecticut cut their mandate a few months ago. This is why I have been saying I think EVs will cap out for new vehicle sales in the US for the foreseeable future at 30-40% because the political pressure would force the mandates to be dropped.

---

EVs are at around 10% right now...how long do you anticipate for that to triple or quadruple?

---

No real idea but if I had to guess, 10-20 years in the US.

---

Absent government mandates, I agree with the 20 year range but think it'll probably peak at around 20-30%. Maybe as time goes on it will increase slowly, though. I think there are more barriers than many proponents really acknowledge...

I know in the aviation industry, for AAM, eVTOLs are what is coming - straight electric aircraft. I don't even think any of the players in the field have non electric entries. But, they're for short haul intra-city flights with most having plans for battery SWAPS rather than charging at each stop. Totally different aviation model than we have now but also totally different market.

techno-ag said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

EVs are improving in capability while decreasing in cost to produce while combustion vehicles are relatively stagnant in capability and increasing in price as demand has fallen dramatically since their peak in 2017.

Whether a person wants a product is different than whether or not they'll buy a product. There are people that want CRT TVs, but no one is willing to produce them because the market has fallen so precipitously that they can't be produced at a price that people can broadly afford. The kind of people that can pay a premium for a combustion engine are also the kind of people least impacted by the tradeoffs of EVs.

---

Wow. Lots to unpack here but I'll try.

EVs are not improving in capability. Batteries have to deal with physics.

CVs are not stagnant by any means. The technology has been continuously improved for almost 150 years.

Car sales went down during Covid because of global parts shortages. Cyclical demand.

Tube TVs are a terrible analogy. Dude. SMH.

A premium for a CV? You have that wrong. Even people who can afford to buy an EV like our resident fans on here also say they buy a "real" car for long trips, hauling stuff, etc. EVs are only useful for upper middle class folks who own their own homes, have close urban jobs, and can afford more than one vehicle.

---

To help price your point that EVs are not improving in capability, the chart of average and maximum range over time. 0-60 times are virtually unchanged going from 3.7 seconds to under 2.0 and maximum charge rates have gone from 18-19 kW to 250kW. Those pesky laws of physics have kept them from making any real improvements.

DEVASTATING!!!!!!!

Snarkism noted.

The median range is mostly flat. That max range is meaningless.