agracer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Changing a username takes two seconds. You're here day in day out, researching about a car you don't own and never will.

---

You changed your username b/c you were a vaccine troll and wanted to disassociate yourself from that handle. Also, a fraudster.

---

So bitter

Cybertruck workers furloughed three days.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-cybertruck-workers-begin-3-day-furlough-signaling-demand-slowdown-155804324.html

Repeal the emissions mandates and chicken tax and Cafe regulations entirely so we can have nice, mid-size, affordable trucks again, such as the Mazda BT-50, no need to worry about a rock causing a 7K oil leak on your new cybertruck.

techno-ag said:

---

CentralTXag said:

---

Some interesting factoids from Chevron CEO (he was asked a question in an employee town hall about the future of the oil industry). EV's make up about 2% of US auto fleet (after record sales last year). US auto fleet turns over about once every 2 decades. Only about 25-30% of crude oil is used for light duty vehicles, the rest is used in areas that is a lot harder to electrify (long-haul road transportation, off-road transportation and agriculture, aviation, marine transportation, mining, petrochemicals, etc. ). Bottom line - will continue to be robust demand for oil and gas products that grows as the global population grows (will be important and around for a long time).

---

Similar conclusions Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway made. They bought a significant stake in Flying J/Pilot truck stops. Electrification is not coming nearly as fast as the fanbois hope.

---

I would love to see your proof that is why Berkshire purchased them.

You realize that EVs would likely make c-Stores more valuable because people will almost always go inside while the car charges vs many people now just get gas and go. The Beaver has made massive investments in EVs for many of their stores. In other words, the bet is people will still need cars and not what the specific fuel source will be.

PS. I do agree we will still need fuel pumps for a long time but that conclusion has nothing to do with buying into travel centers.

*$30,000 as pictured.


Do you want a Ford Ranger? Ford will sell you a Ford Ranger. Guessing you don't own, and never have considered, a Ford Ranger.

nortex97 said:

---

Repeal the emissions mandates and chicken tax and Cafe regulations entirely so we can have nice, mid-size, affordable trucks again, such as the Mazda BT-50, no need to worry about a rock causing a 7K oil leak on your new cybertruck.

---

"The 2025 Mazda BT-50 arrives with a 3.0-liter turbo-diesel four-cylinder engine that generates 188 horsepower and 331 lb-ft of torque."


Weird, I was told these were going away. And it also can't be used around town for short trips. Oh well.

hph6203 said:

---

*$30,000 as pictured.


Do you want a Ford Ranger? Ford will sell you a Ford Ranger. Guessing you don't own, and never have considered, a Ford Ranger.

---

That thing is probably closer to a Maverick. And it's available here for that price point.

Kansas Kid said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

CentralTXag said:

---

Some interesting factoids from Chevron CEO (he was asked a question in an employee town hall about the future of the oil industry). EV's make up about 2% of US auto fleet (after record sales last year). US auto fleet turns over about once every 2 decades. Only about 25-30% of crude oil is used for light duty vehicles, the rest is used in areas that is a lot harder to electrify (long-haul road transportation, off-road transportation and agriculture, aviation, marine transportation, mining, petrochemicals, etc. ). Bottom line - will continue to be robust demand for oil and gas products that grows as the global population grows (will be important and around for a long time).

---

Similar conclusions Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway made. They bought a significant stake in Flying J/Pilot truck stops. Electrification is not coming nearly as fast as the fanbois hope.

---

I would love to see your proof that is why Berkshire purchased them.

You realize that EVs would likely make c-Stores more valuable because people will almost always go inside while the car charges vs many people now just get gas and go. The Beaver has made massive investments in EVs for many of their stores. In other words, the bet is people will still need cars and not what the specific fuel source will be.

PS. I do agree we will still need fuel pumps for a long time but that conclusion has nothing to do with buying into travel centers.

---

From what I remember when it was announced Berkshire Hathaway people were focused on the trucking fuel centers. Buccees actually prohibits truck traffic, they focus on passenger vehicles only.

hph6203 said:

---

*$30,000 as pictured.


Do you want a Ford Ranger? Ford will sell you a Ford Ranger. Guessing you don't own, and never have considered, a Ford Ranger.

---

I don't want the ancient ranger no. And as usual teslag is lying about my views otherwise.

chap said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

chap said:

---

You posted about this before and I absolutely cannot figure out what the issue is. Go to the gas station and fill it up. It's an ICE that gets good gas mileage. What point are you making that you were glad to discover the problem before you left the rental car place? The Aggie jokes write themselves…

---

I drive a Rubicon.

I didn't know it was a hybrid and not a full EV. I knew it had a plugin.

I'm sure everyone else would know for sure, though, that it was a hybrid and not an EV that NEVER needed to be plugged in (even though it has a plugin). The average person is VERY astute.

---

And I'm saying I don't believe you.

I drive a Rubicon. And I know that Jeep doesn't make an EV.

But even if I didn't know that I cannot imagine noticing that there is a plug but also NOT noticing that there is a gas cap. Especially since I drive a Rubicon.

---

I give FEWER THAN zero ****s that you don't believe me.

But, thanks for calling me a liar. I appreciate you letting me know never to care about anything you say.

I was in a car rental, hauling luggage, saw the Rubicon and didn't see the plug or even the gas cap...because I just tossed my luggage in and started it and THAT is when I figured it out.

I also drive Rubicon myself and I don't inspect the entire body every time I get in like you apparently do...

Have a nice day.

Teslag said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

I'm west of Ft Worth

---

You're in f-ing Weatherford, too?

Or, Aledo?

---

I smell a round at Canyon West

---

Next time I come up to see my daughter in Peaster.

Wait...round means beers, not golf, right? I'm to lazy for the golf.

nortex97 said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

*$30,000 as pictured.


Do you want a Ford Ranger? Ford will sell you a Ford Ranger. Guessing you don't own, and never have considered, a Ford Ranger.

---

I don't want the ancient ranger no. And as usual teslag is lying about my views otherwise.

---

The $23,000 variation of that truck is a single cab, unfinished aluminum box for the bed that makes the Ford Ranger look like luxury vehicle.

Your reaction to the suggestion of a Ranger is exactly why that kind of truck doesn't exist in this market, because when it comes down to it those that say they want cheap aren't willing to settle for what cheap gets you.

hph6203 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

*$30,000 as pictured.


Do you want a Ford Ranger? Ford will sell you a Ford Ranger. Guessing you don't own, and never have considered, a Ford Ranger.

---

I don't want the ancient ranger no. And as usual teslag is lying about my views otherwise.

---

The $23,000 variation of that truck is a single cab, unfinished aluminum box for the bed that makes the Ford Ranger look like luxury vehicle.

Your reaction to the suggestion of a Ranger is exactly why that kind of truck doesn't exist in this market, because when it comes down to it those that say they want cheap aren't willing to settle for what cheap gets you.

---

Your projection as to why I won't consider a Ranger is frankly blatantly ignorant, as well as presumptuous. First, it is a Ford product late in the life cycle introduced to the US market as a reaction by a company desperately flailing to retain market share in the pickup market to compensate for their EV losses. Second, no. Just, no. It's a lousy vehicle.

Ford is desperate to retain market share in the truck market? Ford that makes the F150? The best selling vehicle of any kind in the US?

Teslag said:

---

Ford is desperate to retain market share in the truck market? Ford that makes the F150? The best selling vehicle of any kind in the US?

---

The horse used to be the best selling vehicle

"I don't want the ancient Ranger."

You didn't say you didn't want it because it was a Ford, you said you didn't want it because it was old. That's not projection, it's an acknowledgment of what you said. Ford re-introduced the Ranger in 2019. They didn't launch their first EV until 2021.

Not sure you're really making a great argument when you say you don't want it because it's a Ford while drooling over an Isuzu. You don't actually want a "small capable truck" you want an excuse to complain about efficiency standards as a reason for expensive vehicles, but the reality is that cheap vehicles were abandoned in the wake of the 2008 crash, because they're low margin and add risk to the business when the economy down turns.

hph6203 said:

---

"I don't want the ancient Ranger."

You didn't say you didn't want it because it was a Ford, you said you didn't want it because it was old. That's not projection, it's an acknowledgment of what you said. Ford re-introduced the Ranger in 2019. They didn't launch their first EV until 2021.

Not sure you're really making a great argument when you say you don't want it because it's a Ford while drooling over an Isuzu. You don't actually want a "small capable truck" you want an excuse to complain about efficiency standards as a reason for expensive vehicles, but the reality is that cheap vehicles were abandoned in the wake of the 2008 crash, because they're low margin and add risk to the business when the economy down turns.

---

The T6 platform is from 2011. It wasn't brought over here until 2019 to be built in Michigan, primarily because the GM twins (Colorado/Canyon) were going to take from the domestic F150 franchise. Cafe standards (combined with the chicken tax) absolutely had a devastating impact on compact trucks. That's an old article nowadays but explains why the T6 wasn't initially brought over. I know my editorial committee here likes to advise what I 'really' think/want but the truth is I've owned a bunch of Fords over the years, but have no use case/desire for a large pickup, yet would prefer a good/modern smaller one (I might look at a Tacoma at some point). Frankly, I just don't plan to possibly get one for a few years anyway.


The prospect of spending $50K for a T6 ranger with a buzzy 2.3L turbo four just doesn't appeal to me (yeah there's a V6 option but you get a flavor from this review). To each his own.

Quote:

---

yet would prefer a good/modern smaller one (I might look at a Tacoma at some point). Frankly, I just don't plan to possibly get one for a few years anyway.

---

Give serious consideration to the Canyon/Colorado. Have one for a month now and love it. Test drove them and the Frontier/Tacomas. It was just better. And the GM 2.7 is awesome.

Been thinking about those two also. I can't believe I am agreeing with you about anything automotive...

My wife has recently caught the EV bug. I am not as enthusiastic about it. I admit I have not read through the 200+ pages here. I am curious what is the general opinions at this point compared to when the thread started?

Factors: live in Houston Suburb where she would have roughly an hour drive at minimum from home to office then another hour back in the evening. Not sure what else should be considered when thinking about if an EV is worth it for this scenario.

I drive 75 minutes each way in my Tesla Model 3 Performance. Charging to 80% at home, I get back with about 30%. I love the car, and it's nice to avoid gas stations. My wife has an ICE SUV if we ever want to do a road trip, but that doesn't really happen.

Model Y all day if you have kids. I have a referral code the can save you a bit if you need it. Your use case sounds perfect for a Tesla.

I recently got a Model Y LR. Would have gotten a performance but opted for the third row jump seats since we have kids. I was pretty nervous, traded in a Tahoe for it, but the car has blown me away. Beginning with the buying process it seems like over and over again I find myself saying "oh, that's nice."

Charging
I live in a Houston suburb and drive around 85 miles a day round trip not including kids' extracurricular activities. The battery is recommended to sit at 80% max charge for daily use, and I usually end the day around 40% charge. So it's plenty even for a heavy commute.

I average around 675 kWh per month on the car with that driving, so you can figure your "gas" cost there. I have a nights free charging plan, so my electricity / "gas" cost per mile is literally zero.

I've taken it on two long trips now, used supercharging for both. No issues at all, as with the wife and kids end up stopping more often than you need to charge anyway... The navigation system routes you to the chargers, and there are a surprising amount of them (way more than I thought).

That being said, you need to charge at home. Don't expect to charge it at superchargers all the time. A wall connector is great to push 40 or 50 amps in. For reference, on a 50 amp circuit my car charges at a net rate of 12 kW, so it charges for 2-3 hours each night. If you don't drive quite much, you can get by with a 220 on a lower amp circuit. Installing the wall connector is not difficult - took me around 3 hours including the panel work and trip to home depot to buy the wire.

Driving
The car is a blast to drive. Just the acceleration is simply fun, and it handles great.

Once you get used to one pedal driving (took me about... a day) it seems dumb driving an ICE car. The pedal is heavy, but that makes it easier to drive one pedal with regen braking. I was nervous about one pedal, needlessly. It was super easy to adjust to.

FSD is a game changer and for me personally well worth the $99/mo. I get in my car, it is already set for my destination (nav learns your habits) and set to cabin temperature automatically, get out of the driveway / out of the gate of the company property, engage autopilot, and generally don't touch the steering wheel til I get home. In Houston traffic. It's good, and it has gotten noticeably better since I got the car.

Misc
I do some work in audio, and am kinda picky about sound systems - this thing sounds better than the Bose system in the Chevy by far (that system really sucked) or the stock VW system. I prefer it to the Audi B&O premium sound system (B&O always sound tinny to me). It does have some tonal similarities to the B&O system, and I read that Tesla had B&O involved in the design - so take that for what its worth. The sub is nice, and the multiband EQ is better than the usual three band you get in most cars.

The user interface is much better than any other car I've had. Very intuitive in a lot of ways. Voice commands work well. The big screen is great.

The car is a little "tweaky" - you have some setup, and there are a lot of options. But once you do it, you don't have to mess with it any more, and the driver profile system works really well. So if it feels overwhelming, just take it easy and dont scroll through all the setup options. Most aren't really necessary.

The model Y itself is basically the same size as an Audi Q5, if that helps as a reference. The X is the size of a Q8.

Find someone to give you a referral code, its $2k off the car. Any Tesla owner will do it because they get $1k for the referral (pays for accessories and supercharging).

It's just a great car. I really enjoy it so far. I think it's probably the best vehicle I've ever owned, which sounds ridiculous and I can't believe I'm saying it. But it's true.

Comparison vehicles - my parents are on their second Kia. I was shocked when they bought the first one, my dad was kind of like others on here as a never EV-er but they loved their Nero and really, really love their EV9 now. So check that one out. It's comparable to the Audi etron options. I preferred the Model Y to both in the end. I also looked at Rivian but I was worried about the stability of that company, and it was significantly more expensive. The Model Y value seems completely unbeatable.

Model X is super cool (falcon doors) but so much more expensive I couldn't justify it.

If the EV works for you range-wise, it really is an inherently nicer driving experience than an IC engine.

DartAg1970 said:

---

My wife has recently caught the EV bug. I am not as enthusiastic about it. I admit I have not read through the 200+ pages here. I am curious what is the general opinions at this point compared to when the thread started?

Factors: live in Houston Suburb where she would have roughly an hour drive at minimum from home to office then another hour back in the evening. Not sure what else should be considered when thinking about if an EV is worth it for this scenario.

---

This thread started out with a rational OP about why one would not want to ever get an EV, but now it is primarily EVangelists who cannot stand dissent from adoration/psalms of praise toward their vehicle choices.

To revisit a more civilized discussion, the primary arguments against the EV's are (a) the class of danger a fire from one represents (not the frequency, but type of fire/risk if there is one, especially in/near a dwelling structure), (b) the CCP providing the overwhelming majority of refined metals/mass in the batteries (politics), and (c) the lack of real environmental benefit and real downsides to a transition to EV's including the massive resources to be poured into power transmission/distribution lines this would require (many TA EVangelists disclaim this last point, contra EV buyers writ large). Finally, a consideration should be given to the lack of mobility/freedom reliance on the electric grid for charging could create. Oh, and many of us appreciate the great/convenient fuel infrastructure we have built up over the past 100 years.

All that said, 40 miles/an hour drive each way shouldn't be a bad use case if it can be safely charged away from the home, and keeps momma happy. There are many heretics though, who wind up regretting their choice after living with a BEV, and if kept long term (5-10 years) it won't make any real sense as the battery costs something like $20-40K to swap out. Future solid state batteries will render current options as relics at some point.

And yet Hawg in her OP asked for why am I wrong to not want an EV and not just agree with me and tell me how I am right.

Also many people that have EVs have pointed to the issues and concerns but you and other EVidians for the most part just say how bad they are but as this post shows, you have softened some on that stance.

Then shifted the argument to semi trucks after she got answers she didn't like.

At least we have some actual recommendations beyond fire fear mongering and "muhCCP" for the guy that asked.

Quote:

---

if kept long term (5-10 years) it won't make any real sense as the battery costs something like $20-40K to swap out.

---

The Tesla vehicles referred to him all come with 8 year battery warranties...

If you get one, keep a tow truck driver's number handy. And don't park it inside.

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

if kept long term (5-10 years) it won't make any real sense as the battery costs something like $20-40K to swap out.

---

The Tesla vehicles referred to him all come with 8 year battery warranties...

---

How will this affect the used car market for 8 year old Teslas?

This would obviously affect resale value...Which oftentimes affects vehicle purchase decisions. I'm thinking of the buyer that is looking at buying a 6 y/o used Tesla. Buying a car that might need a $20K battery replacement after 2 years would dampen demand

From CarEdge. No clue if accurate.

Tesla Model 3
49% residual after 5 years
28% residual after 8 years
https://caredge.com/tesla/model-3/depreciation

For comparison a Toyota RAV4
73% residual after 5 years
57% residual after 8 years
https://caredge.com/toyota/rav4/depreciation

73% on that 5 year Toyota residual

As a long-time Toyota driver who has also purchased Rav4s for both my kids, that depreciation seems right.

The $20k price tag, at least for Tesla, are based upon older batteries that go into the Model S/X vehicles (18650 cells). The Model Y/3 batteries are in much higher production (2170 cells) and the Model 3/Y are smaller packs (~80 kWh varies vs 100 kWh). Battery replacement on a Model 3/Y ranges between 9k and 15k typically.

Battery prices are falling quickly and they are falling faster than experts have been projecting. Goldman Sachs has done an estimate for at least the last 3 years.

2022 Projection for 2024 battery prices: $136.88/kWh
2023 Projection for 2024 battery prices: $120.48/kWh
Actual 2024 battery prices from their report: $111/kWh

2024 Projection for 2030 battery prices: $64/kWh

Current expectation is that the cost to replace a battery will reach equivalence with the cost to replace an engine for an average vehicle by the end of the decade. It is a non-concern for anyone that drives average mileage, because by 8 years from now the cost to replace is expected to be below the cost to replace an engine, and the expected life of an average battery is at least as long as the average engine.

This is a trend that has persisted for decades and tracks with the rate of increase in total number of batteries produced. We are about to hit a second wave of battery production increases as the viability of grid scale storage has improved significantly. Tesla already has one factory completed in California that is producing grid batteries at a scale of 40 GWh per year. They are completing a second factory in Shanghai in the first quarter of 2025 to do the same volume. Would be shocked if they don't announce another factory within the next 6 months and the bare ground to factory completion time is ~12 months.

bobbranco said:

---

From CarEdge. No clue if accurate.

Tesla Model 3
49% residual after 5 years
28% residual after 8 years
https://caredge.com/tesla/model-3/depreciation

For comparison a Toyota RAV4
27% residual after 5 years
57% residual after 8 years
https://caredge.com/toyota/rav4/depreciation

---

Inappropriate to compare the depreciation rate of a $36,000 vehicle to a $48,000 vehicle. Some of the depreciation for the Model 3 is derived from the fact that the $48,000 purchase price is not the actual price the majority of consumers pay for the vehicle, because it's offered with a $7,500 tax credit, bringing the starting price for most buyers to $40,500 (assuming you don't purchase it out of inventory for a $4,000 discount bringing the price to 36,500).

If you compare the Model 3 to an Audi A4 the residual value for the Model 3 beats the A4 in residual value (47%), and after accounting for the $7500 tax credit the Model 3 wipes the floor with it. Factor in ~$4,000 in fuel savings over those 5 years and it's not even a comparison. Won't even be close in 5 years when the Model 3 LR RWD is at price parity with a top trim Camry.

thx and changed.

Mostly pimped out RAV4 costs as much as a $43,000 Model 3.

Sorry the Model 3 doesn't hold its value.