S550 may be eliminated sooner rather then later...

[Bikeman315]

Whether TESLA will implode is something only time will tell, but their software, AI, self driving tech, and home power storage/solar systems make them more than just an electric car company. What's interesting is that Musk made a comment this week about being willing to enter into agreements with other car manufacturers and is also hinting at a google/android style open sourced approach to their tech.

It was noted some time ago the Musk’s end game is not cars, it’s the batteries. Eventually the car division will be sold off and Tesla will be a battery company. That’s where the money is and Wall St. knows it.

Sponsored

 

[K4fxd]

Batteries are interim. Musk is into Space. The batteries and cars are just a way to get his spacecraft division government subsidized.

 

[Hi-PO Stang]

Interesting speculations.

 

[Ace]

The important thing to know is: Selling an EV currently has nothing to do with offering a good vehicle. There fine EVs on the market for many years now, like the Volt. But people actually don't care about this.

What counts is creating a Hype. There is a huge crowd out there who somehow wants to invest $50k to $100k by preordering a car they never even sat in once with delivery times of at least 1-2 years. For those buyers you have to create something that stood outs. Tesla just has the effect that Apple had years ago, with many blind fans that somehow lead to media believing they have currently some magic technological lead in the industry, when in reality they are just the only carmaker who does not have to care about actually generating profit with the sold cars, has no dealer infrastructure they care about and s*** all over the rights and needs of their workers, while big carmakers bring pretty nice wealth to millions of workers.

Let's compare YouTube Reveal video views to make that point clear:
Cadillac Lyric is a pretty nice EV, but the initial reveal from Cadillac is right under 70k views in 4 months. Nobody cares for that random Cadillac EV.
Hummer is such a strong name, that the car created an insane hype leading to 6,4 million views of the reveal in just 1 month.
It's not about the product, just about having a big name to throw in.

So for Ford to get their piece of the EV cake, they had to come up with something that is equally hype-worthy as a new Tesla. It's no secret that the Mach-E was developed as a Focus-based EV and mid-dev they decided to rebrand and redesign the car as a Mustang-named EV.

In the end it is much better to have a Mustang named EV that is offered parallel to the regular Mustang. So they can get their EV market share and their emission fleet numbers, while still offering the real Mustang. There are a lot of sportscars that are completely replaced by EVs (like Audi TT + R8), so it's great to know Mustang is safe until 2030.

 

[Bikeman315]

What did it actually cost you out of pocket to do this?

Who are you asking this question to?

 

[1958cyclist]

That's an interesting point.

Tastes and interests tend to be cyclical.

Are "car" companies pushing big SUVs and Crossovers because they're more profitable? Or are they simply the current vehicle de jur, so everyone is buying them? I think certain SUVs/COs are more profitable, like those built on shared chassis, which I'd guess most of them are. Hell, I remember the original Honda CRV was built on a Civic or Accord chassis. I was selling Hondas when they came out, and a Ford engineer came into the showroom and asked if he could poke around the CRV in our showroom. He pulled out the carpet in the trunk area, and confirmed that the floor-pan was from another Honda, he could tell by the stampings.

So if the Mustang can continue on with it's chassis based on one used for other vehicles, that would speak well for it's future.

It is possible that tastes could change in a swing back to coupes and sedans. People just must be getting sick and freakin' tired of driving those huge behemoths. I mean, have you seen a Nissan Armada? Have you seen one of those beasts? And something that could help with that is people like us letting folks drive our cars. Let them feel the control, poise and sophistication. Let them feel what real brakes feels like, real control feels like, what a great ride feels like. Let them see how huge the trunk is.

ETA; One other thought; there are people that are NOT interested in all the complex tech. It's just overwhelming for them, stops them from buying vehicles that are laden with it. Offering a Premium interior, but skipping some of the Big Tech crap in it, would be an interesting idea. Ditch SYNC, or offer a toned-down version of it. Still have a nice big LCD screen that makes using the stereo and HVAC super easy, but get rid of many different sub-screens where stuff is buried, and presented in tech-speak.

Anyways......those are some idle thoughts.

Or, I continue to watch the many pickups and SUV's try and maintain the same off ramp speeds that I do and end up in the grass. I often wonder if they wonder...

 

[jacknifetoaswan]

I'd hate to have to add that kind of planning, and then feel like I'm locked into it the whole time. Too many of our trips have had a little sparkle added to them by an unplanned detour or the choice to take the road less traveled. As described, Tesla's travel model lacks that sort of spontaneity, those on-the-fly decisions to take a different road that eventually ends up rejoining the original route. No big deal if I have to crack open the atlas, which might have been the inspiration to get off the original road in the first place.

For us, gas stops rarely take more than about 10 minutes, including potty break time. The kids are 40+, and there's no dog, so we're not bringing along any built-in delays.

Norm

So here's the thing...

The infotainment/navigation system already figures out the stops for you and optimizes your route based on charger availability. It's not going to send you to a Supercharger location that's full. There are also Superchargers all of the the place - 2000+ locations in the US - and more opening or planned. We recently took a trip from Charleston to Lake Lure, NC. It would have cost us 15 minutes to stop about halfway, and the interesting roads are on the second half of that journey, not the first. I could have cruised to Columbus, NC, then gotten on the back roads and really enjoyed myself.

Really, you jump in the car, start driving, and if you need to charge, navigation shows you the best place to go to charge. Easy, peasy, and available on all interstate highways.

But that said, this certainly isn't for old guys that like old school stuff for old school reasons. I have a 435 HP Mustang and a 550 HP, big block Camaro. New school and old school. The Camaro is fun to drive with zero nannies and electronics, other than the trans computer that tells the 700-R4 when to shift. The Mustang is worlds better for any number of reasons, not the least of which is that I can push it hard and the electronic nannies will make sure I don't end up in a ditch.

JR

 

[Norm Peterson]

ETA; One other thought; there are people that are NOT interested in all the complex tech. It's just overwhelming for them, stops them from buying vehicles that are laden with it. Offering a Premium interior, but skipping some of the Big Tech crap in it, would be an interesting idea. Ditch SYNC, or offer a toned-down version of it. Still have a nice big LCD screen that makes using the stereo and HVAC super easy, but get rid of many different sub-screens where stuff is buried, and presented in tech-speak.

Anyways......those are some idle thoughts.

As an idle thought on your last idle thought . . . I'm sure that there are people for whom complex tech is no more than today's go-to answer for questions we never asked, for functions we never needed.

I sure do hear you on the matter of menu structures for doing all these things - if all your added stuff needs a menu, pretty much by definition you've added too much stuff.

Touch screens are a terrible interface for use in a firm-riding car at speed. Frustrating in the extreme when they refuse to acknowledge your 'touches', which has been an all-to-common problem for me for touchscreens in general (and sometimes in the WRX for my wife as well).


Norm

 

[shogun32]

Touch screens are a terrible interface for use in a firm-riding car at speed.

it's obvious the designers sit in a cubicle for hours polishing their little buttons for that perfect gazing impact and photo shoots and not trying to stab the F'king things at 40 miles an hour on city streets.

This infatuation with "everything has gotta look like a cell phone" is just disgusting, shallow, and unimaginitive. And 100x pox on Tesla for the "we'll just get rid of all buttons and make you do everything thru this retarded screen". The earthquake that submerges Silicon Valley under the Pacific can't come soon enough.

 

[NoVaGT]

As an idle thought on your last idle thought . . . I'm sure that there are people for whom complex tech is no more than today's go-to answer for questions we never asked, for functions we never needed.

I sure do hear you on the matter of menu structures for doing all these things - if all your added stuff needs a menu, pretty much by definition you've added too much stuff.

Touch screens are a terrible interface for use in a firm-riding car at speed. Frustrating in the extreme when they refuse to acknowledge your 'touches', which has been an all-to-common problem for me for touchscreens in general (and sometimes in the WRX for my wife as well).


Norm


Norm

I get your thoughts. Definitely agree about the firm ride/touch screen issue.

If I were to pick a singular issue, it's the HVAC controls as part of the infotainment system. Those should always be their own buttons and knobs, not buried in a sub-screen like on my car.

I also don't want or need the damn car figuring out what to do based on it's limited input options. I want to adjust knob and some buttons, and let me adjust it to what I want, based on what I feel coming from the vents.

I really don't like auto HVAC systems. They're annoying. Either too hot or too cool in the winter months.

 

[jacknifetoaswan]

I really don't like auto HVAC systems. They're annoying. Either too hot or too cool in the winter months.

The auto HVAC in my Mustang and my wife's Benz are both bang on, hot or cold. The Mustang takes a little while to build heat, because of the size of the engine, but if I set it at 72 degrees, in either car, under normal circumstances, it's 72 degrees.

JR

 

[LSchicago]

Unfortunately EV's are not being driven by the market, they are being driven by politics.

The whole world is moving towards EV's. Many countries are banning gas powered car sales in the near future. Not really US politics, but a world movement. That said, I probably won't consider electric vehicles until the current fast electric cars seem slow, and 500+ miles on a charge is normal.

 

[NoVaGT]

The auto HVAC in my Mustang and my wife's Benz are both bang on, hot or cold. The Mustang takes a little while to build heat, because of the size of the engine, but if I set it at 72 degrees, in either car, under normal circumstances, it's 72 degrees.

JR

I drive with my windows open most of the time, which is not good with auto HVAC systems. Especially in the cold months, when I'd like the system giving me a certain temp air, but the system doesn't just do what I want it to.

I think there's a temp sensor somewhere inside the car, and it tries to keep the interior to the temp it's set at. But I want a certain temp air flowing from the vents, and I can't get that.

 

[Bikeman315]

I drive with my windows open most of the time, which is not good with auto HVAC systems. Especially in the cold months, when I'd like the system giving me a certain temp air, but the system doesn't just do what I want it to.

I think there's a temp sensor somewhere inside the car, and it tries to keep the interior to the temp it's set at. But I want a certain temp air flowing from the vents, and I can't get that.

Why don't you just turn to auto part off. There's a switch for that.

 

[shogun32]

I probably won't consider electric vehicles until the current fast electric cars seem slow, and 500+ miles on a charge is normal.

that's the thing. over 200 mile range is the worst possible application of electrics. By far the most useful societal contribution for electrics comes from 'runabout' use for which 150mi range is plenty. And 'runabout' is the worst possible use for ICE both from a BTU/mile and pollution standpoint.

Tesla was stupid to do consumer cars when the obvious market is delivery vans that stay close to home base, have a known mostly fixed path or travel distance, do a billion start/stop cycles and are lucky to go faster than 40mph. The fleet comes home every night to industrial 3-phase power so charging infra is downright trivial to implement and 'super duper' charging is not important.

For long-range use instead of relying only on charging you have industry-standard drop-in packs the size of a briefcase or 50cal ammo can that you open a hatch in the floor and drop in. The packs can be found at charging stations, ready-charged, and have say 150 mile range. Battery swap takes 10-15 minutes. That way you don't carry around all this excess weight 360 days of the year but you can extend range for when you're dumb enough to use electrics for long stretches of road.

At the end of the day, the vast majority of EV will be either on-board generator, or gas+ev hybrid where the engine provides sufficient motive power under all conditions to be driven at steady state or acceptable 0-60 times and onboard 40-80kw primary battery pack.

Sponsored