Medaggie said:

---

If you stop throwing a tantrum then I'm happy to discuss.

I agree that mandates and incentives are stupid but no one cares when the big 3 gets preferential loans an bailouts. That's a whole diff debate.

But mandates are here, we agree it should not be. But the discussion is about the cars not the mandates.

If u start a thread on if mandates are good or bad, they thread will die quickly as everyone would agree.

---

That's the core issue with those you claim are anti EV zealots.

You guys are in here evangelizing for EVs despite any and all evidence to the contrary. Almost as if you are attempting to justify the Biden mandate to move to them.

Thus, I'm going to post each and every negative - that overwhelming outweighs the benefits - to prove that mandates are lunacy.

I agree that an EV is superior in some respects, ie no gas engine, no transmission, etc.. Heck, I have a new F150 with transmission issues right now that Im at the mercy of the dealers to fix. The fewer parts the better. I'm actually glad that service jobs will be removed by EVs because I loathe the dealers and their crappy warranty repair process. They deserve everything coming their way assuming this EV mandate does play out.

We said repair as well as concerns of reliability. Which the BMW is terrible about. As several BMW owners explained to you, we own them because of their performance. The Tesla gives even better performance, at a slightly higher price, but no maintenance and far better reliability.

But you sat in one once or something right?

Logos Stick said:

---

Medaggie said:

---

If you stop throwing a tantrum then I'm happy to discuss.

I agree that mandates and incentives are stupid but no one cares when the big 3 gets preferential loans an bailouts. That's a whole diff debate.

But mandates are here, we agree it should not be. But the discussion is about the cars not the mandates.

If u start a thread on if mandates are good or bad, they thread will die quickly as everyone would agree.

---

That's the core issue with those you claim are anti EV zealots.

You guys are in here evangelizing for EVs despite any and all evidence to the contrary. Almost as if you are attempting to justify the Biden mandate to move to them.

Thus, I'm going to post each and every negative - that overwhelming outweighs the benefits - to prove that mandates are lunacy.

I agree that an EV is superior in some respects, ie no gas engine, no transmission, etc.. Heck, I have a new F150 with transmission issues right now that Im at the mercy of the dealers to fix. The fewer parts the better. I'm actually glad that service jobs will be removed by EVs because I loathe the dealers and their crappy warranty repair process. They deserve everything coming their way assuming this EV mandate does play out.

---

I can't say I disagree with any of those. Though I'd say none of us as evangelical about them. Just defending. Remember we didn't start this thread or most of the others.

I knew I was right. You could not afford to maintain the Ultimate Driving Machine, so you bought a Tesla instead, and pretend it's a more luxurious car to cope with you demotion. Thanks for confirming.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

I knew I was right. You could not afford to maintain the Ultimate Driving Machine, so you bought a Tesla instead, and pretend it's a more luxurious car to cope with you demotion. Thanks for confirming.

---

That's quite a reach…


repair doesn't equal maintenance

Can't say I didn't warn you, questioning anything about Tesla is like taking a baseball bat to a wasps nest.

(Note, I am not trying to call all tesla drivers angry suburban white Anglo Saxon protestants who live in the burbs and think of their car as a status symbol, with inferiority complexes. Some are also catholic).

nortex97 said:

---

Can't say I didn't warn you, questioning anything about Tesla is like taking a baseball bat to a wasps nest.

(Note, I am not trying to call all tesla drivers angry suburban white Anglo Saxon protestants who live in the burbs and think of their car as a status symbol, with inferiority complexes. Some are also catholic).

---

The only reason you don't like to discuss Teslas is because they shatter the narratives you like to create with stories of the failings of the major automakers attempts at EV's.

But it cost the same, so it must be a luxury vehicle! A yokel told me so!

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

But it cost the same, so it must be a luxury vehicle! A yokel told me so!

---

And Motortrend. But who are rhey?

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

But it cost the same, so it must be a luxury vehicle! A yokel told me so!

---

And Motortrend. But who are rhey?

---

Did your **** box come with a subscription to their papers? I read Edmunds and Car and Driver.

https://www.caranddriver.com/rankings/best-suvs/electric/luxury

Which vehicle is listed at 15 on that list of luxury EV's? This Car And Driver?

Teslag said:

---

https://www.caranddriver.com/rankings/best-suvs/electric/luxury

Which vehicle is listed at 15 on that list of luxury EV's? This Car And Driver?

---

Yes this is who I read. I'll admit I stopped after the top 5, so perhaps you have caught me here. Maybe someday I'll pay more for less, but today is not that day.

Teslag said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

But it cost the same, so it must be a luxury vehicle! A yokel told me so!

---

And Motortrend. But who are rhey?

---

F-ing pronouns!!!

"My pronouns are rhey/rhem."

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

But it cost the same, so it must be a luxury vehicle! A yokel told me so!

---

No, you said people buy Tesla's because they can't afford to buy a luxury car. That is all I responded to and showed how flawed your comment is. I never argued a Tesla is a luxury car because I don't think they are. They are a high performance car which is hard to argue but I am sure you or someone else will.

As far as luxury being subjective, do you think Donald Trump would call a Cadillac or any other car on that list a luxury car? NFW. He is into Maybach's and the like.

Kansas Kid said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

But it cost the same, so it must be a luxury vehicle! A yokel told me so!

---

No, you said people buy Tesla's because they can't afford to buy a luxury car. That is all I responded to and showed how flawed your comment is. I never argued a Tesla is a luxury car because I don't think they are. They are a high performance car which is hard to argue but I am sure you or someone else will.

As far as luxury being subjective, do you think Donald Trump would call a Cadillac or any other car on that list a luxury car? NFW. He is into Maybach's and the like.

---

Are you comparing MSRP or cost to own? I know the answer, but maybe you'll finally figure it out if I ask such an obvious question?

I agree with you that Donald Trump would also declare that a Tesla is not a luxury vehicle. What do you think you're proving? I'm smiling.

You are the kind of person who I can have a drink with, debate points, and agree on most then disagree on some. I find it refreshing rather than the staunch stuck in cement nature of most people now who just want to be proven right rather than listening for a new perspective.

I agree with alot of what you say on EVs. I don't like the mandate and wish it just goes away but it will not. It started with China then Europe, the biggest car market, and when the biggest market moves everyone follows. Even without the IRA mandates, it will happen as all car manufacturers have to move to EVs to access the largest car market. So harp on the IRA but the US market has been forced to move with China/Europe.

I agree that EVs are not green. Until Solar becomes highly efficient, mining and fossil burning negates this. Its virtual signaling but really most who buys EVs do not care. I can care less about the green-ness.

I agree the infrastructure is not up to snuff but it eventually will. Its not like half the cars in the next 3 yrs are going to be EVs.

Most on here, including myself, just care about practicality for their individual needs, maintenance savings, tech.

My family of 5 will always have an ICE for long trips. If Evs ever get to 500 real driving mile range and 90% charge in 30 minutes, we will be a ICE/EV family.

People who says Evs are golf carts, are not practical for most, drive poorly are sorely misguided.

Tesla isn't trying to be a luxury car brand, they're trying to be a compelling car brand. They're trying to be a Camry XLE. Some middle ground between commodity car and luxury. That's their intention. They're trying to make you think they didn't set out to spare every expense in the production of the vehicle, while not overdoing it. I think they succeed in that aim.

What Tesla does focus on is making the most performant, highest range vehicle for the money which at present is the primary concern of EV buyers when comparing vehicles. They want to know it's not a golf cart, and they want to know it can get them from Point A to Point B without having to stop every hour.

That's why when Nortex posts that Mercedes is having trouble selling EVs, the obvious response is "of course they are". Their lowest priced "SUV" is $52k, has 247 miles of range, goes 0-60 in 8.0 seconds as compared to a Model Y that costs $8k less, has 260 miles of range, and goes 0-60 in 6.6 seconds. Would you even consider paying $8k more for a Mercedes that's smaller than the Model Y for that kind of performance drop off if you weren't just an absolute blind Mercedes lover? No. That's the story for most of these auto manufacturers, which is why most of them are going to struggle substantially (and likely many will go bankrupt) in the transition because their business strategy is not well suited for a less complicated machine.


In the next 6 months Tesla is going to start delivering their Model 3 Highland (branded Model 3+) vehicle, which improves the range from 273 miles to somewhere around 310 miles (EPA testing hasn't been disclosed, WLTP testing shows higher range, but those numbers are typically inflated due to lower driving speeds in Europe). It's on sale now in Europe and Australia and the price increased by around 2% for that range gain.

In the next 2 years Tesla is going to shift their vehicles over to a 48v low voltage system, reducing cost and improving efficiency (range gain, price reduction), shift to in house production for their chips, remove rare earth minerals from their motors (cost reduction). It is not inconceivable that the base Model 3 could cost $35,000 or less while having a a range around 330 miles while being able to charge to 80% in 15-20 minutes within 3-4 years (if they shift to an 800v architecture).

80 pages of EV owners telling us how much money they are saving by owning an EV and this yokel declares ICE is cheaper based on MSRP. I laughed.

Car buying at the end of the day is price + practicality + reliability.

It is amazing to me how much advancement Tesla has made compared to ICE.

We have a 5 yr old odyssey and drove in a 2023 Odyssey recently. Its essentially the same car, same drive, same feel, same tech. I don't think Honda has spent a cent dong any R&D.

I went from a 2020 MY to a 2023 MY even before the refresh. From a tech standpoint, not much difference b/c they do continuous OTA update so improvements are incremental. But looking back, the car has changed drastically.

My car now has a load of more tech/security. It is quieter. Performance is better. What I am most amazed at is the efficiency with the same battery size.

From the same battery, my real world driving with similar routes has gone from about 250 to 300+ miles with max charge which is a 20% increase. My biggest fault with Tesla was their fantasy range numbers. A car rated at 330 miles should not drive for 250 miles but now I get 300+ with a mix of city/HWy driving. The Model 3 recent refresh range increased 12% with the same battery size. If they can do the same for the model Y, then the rated range will be 360miles or about 330 real driving miles.

Get to 500miles real range and Ice will be obsolete other than niche needs like heavy towing. Even construction workers needing to haul would do a full days work easily with 300 miles even if they needed to tow heavy stuff.

Man some folks really get their panties in a bunch over people choosing to drive a Tesla.

1 just switched from a 2017 Lincoln MKX Black Label to a 2023 Aviator Black Label. The advancements are dramatic.

But yes, get me to 500, better 600, miles Range and we'll talk.

I think what you've described about your driving habits an EV may never be right for you. But that's why we need choices

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

80 pages of EV owners telling us how much money they are saving by owning an EV and this yokel declares ICE is cheaper based on MSRP. I laughed.

---

Should laugh at yourself if you think MSRP is the only factor in determining cost. Upfront costs are higher for EVs, energy/maintenance are lower and the gap between ICE and EVs is made up on the cost of ownership after purchase. They're comparing prices to a BMW, I'm comparing to a reasonably comparably specced out Camry and it's still cheaper (before accounting for tax credits).

IRA doesn't impose mandates, it extended the EV tax credits, lifted the sales cap (previously 200,000 vehicles) and added requirements that the vehicle be produced in North America ($3,750 of the $7,500 credit) and a certain proportion of the battery pack has to be produced in the U.S. or be made in countries for which the U.S. has a free trade agreement with (Not China, obviously) at a escalating percentage (the other half of the credit). Which is designed to bring manufacturing jobs and spur investment in domestic production, which has generally worked (so far) for that purpose.

The IRA also added battery manufacturing incentives that provides credits for the battery manufacturers if they are made domestically, so from a battery perspective it's getting credited on the transfer from the battery manufacturer to the EV manufacturer (or grid battery manufacturer) as well as at point of sale to the consumer (renewable storage, or EV battery).

There are no federal mandates that exist that ban the sale of ICE vehicles by any date. The only thing that has occurred is Joe Biden setting goals for EV adoption by 2030 and 2035 (50% and 100% respectively, I believe).

The "mandates" are a tangential effect of the CAFE standards that are being implemented over the next decade that make it substantially more difficult for a large proportion of a manufacturers vehicles to be a pure ICE vehicle. What will ultimately happen is that some proportion (likely the majority) of vehicles will be all electric by 2035 and some proportion will be PHEVs, with an ever decreasing proportion operating purely on gas.

The only governments that have an official policy to outright ban ICE vehicles are liberal nitwits on the west coast and the northeast, that don't produce the vehicles (I.e. they can't ban their manufacture) and would have to rely on the rest of the states to follow their lead for their "bans" to have any effect. California tried to mandate that 10% of all vehicles be electric by 2003. How'd that work out? Quietly went away with no one even remembering it happened.


And as a point of clarification, EVs do produce fewer emissions over their useful life, regardless of the "cleanliness" of the energy source, it's just a matter of how long the payback period. Dirty energy? 7-8 years, U.S. grid mix? 2-3 years. Solar/wind? Less than a year. (These are on the high side of estimates). That "cleanliness" is a small part of why I appreciate them, but it's not GHG that I care about, it's particulates/air quality improvements.

The primary reason I like EVs is the long term transportation cost savings they will provide in a mature, rather than early adopter, state. Look at those Model 3 specs and imagine a charging infrastructure that is 2-3x more well distributed. 300 miles of range will be the bare minimum in 3-4 years.

That Model 3 is supposedly not even using the newly announced batteries from CATL, the Shenxing battery, that can charge to 80% in 10 minutes or their M3P battery that improves energy density by 15% for LFP batteries (actual chemistry of the M3P battery is LMFP). We'll see.


I don't think 500 mile or 600 mile range vehicles will be the norm. The rates of charging are improving, the infrastructure for charging is improving, and the energy density/battery costs are improving. I think what you're going to see is a deflationary move in EVs with ranges settling in at the 3-400 miles range and just allowing the infrastructure buildout and charging rates to resolve any range anxiety. 350 miles of range covers something like 95% of all trips away from home (trips where a return home in the same day doesn't occur) with 50 miles to spare. Smaller batteries and better charging infrastructure is way, way more cost efficient than bigger batteries.

I get there is not a technical mandate federally but the incentives is a financial mandate. Also, Cali does have mandates and as the biggest car market in the US goes, then the rest will follow. The Big III can't ignore EVs or they will lose the biggest market which would gut their company.

The Model S, at 71K, has an EPA of 400 miles. I can see this getting to 500 miles and drop 10K in price in the next 3-5 years. Battery tech and efficiency is in its early phase. In 10 yrs, I see 400 miles as standard range with long range versions in the 500 with super chargers every 20 miles on the Interstate Highways. They may never hit parity with gas cars but will be close where it won't matter to many who now can leave 80% charge with 1/3 of the costs.

Kansas Kid said:

---

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

"Luxury is subjective" is just more cope from the can't afford luxury crowd

Laugh at it, pat their head, feel bad for them if you're so inclined; but don't take these folks seriously.

---

Luxury cars per Edmonds
Audi.
BMW.
Cadillac.
Genesis.
Jaguar.
Land Rover.

What cars on the list are above the price of a Tesla Model S or X?

Take pity on the anti EV crowd because they make up stuff and twist facts not backed by facts in many cases.

---

. Didn't you hear? It's "Luxury Tech"

Car and Driver and Motortrend both say it's a luxury car so that pretty much ended that "debate".

I still don't view Tesla's as luxury cars (or the vast majority of the current EVs) but I also don't think Cadillacs and low end BMWs and Audis are either.

Just because a magazine classifies something as a luxury car doesn't automatically make it a luxury car IMO. It is like the rental car companies where they may say it is a full size car but good luck getting four adults and luggage into the car.

Kansas Kid said:

---

I still don't view Tesla's as luxury cars (or the vast majority of the current EVs) but I also don't think Cadillacs and low end BMWs and Audis are either.

Just because a magazine classifies something as a luxury car doesn't automatically make it a luxury car IMO. It is like the rental car companies where they may say it is a full size car but good luck getting four adults and luggage into the car.

---

I agree with every word in this post, but you brought the magazines into this. I see no reason to pretend anyone (except Tesla owners) thinks Teslas are luxurious.

But while we are talking about magazines, I'd also assert a vehicle magazine ranking Tesla in the teens (15th LOL!! & (behind hummer!!!!) proves my point. I'm still smiling.

With the Model Y being the best selling car in the world, ICE or EV, I doubt Tesla is really sweating 15 ranking in a magazine.

Teslag said:

---

Own a BMW, get hit with the subsequent repair bills, then come back and lecture us on their quality.

---

Been there, done that, it sucks

Anyone looking at car magazines and cherry picking rankings should never be part of car discussions.

Medaggie said:

---

Anyone looking at car magazines and cherry picking rankings should never be part of car discussions.

---