tech companies (which Tesla is, much moreso than a car company). 

 

That's what they want people to believe

Why do you guys love bashing Tesla so much? I'd consider them a tech company. Especially since they're affiliated with SpaceX. Their cars use a lot of innovative and cool technology. Their cars run off of some pretty elaborate software that allows for things like auto-pilot. Ludicrous mode allows you to go from 0-60 in like 3.2 seconds. Their SUV has doors that electronically slide directly up so that if someone parks really close to you, you don't have to worry about being able to open the door enough to get in. Their cars have a lot of cool, innovative features.

 

It's a little ridiculous how much crap is controlled by their software, though. You're not able to fully take advantage of their 120 mile range (or whatever it is) unless you pay an extra $9000 for nothing more than a software upgrade that allows you to utilize every cell in the battery. I just picture all these rich people getting stranded somewhere a year after buying the car and caving in like it's nothing, calling Tesla and giving them their credit card information to process $9000 to get the update, so they can suddenly and conveniently able to drive their car all the way home.

Why do you guys love bashing Tesla so much? I'd consider them a tech company. Especially since they're affiliated with SpaceX. Their cars use a lot of innovative and cool technology. Their cars run off of some pretty elaborate software that allows for things like auto-pilot. Ludicrous mode allows you to go from 0-60 in like 3.2 seconds. Their SUV has doors that electronically slide directly up so that if someone parks really close to you, you don't have to worry about being able to open the door enough to get in. Their cars have a lot of cool, innovative features.

 

Who's bashing them?

 

They are in a class by themselves, where electric cars are concerned. 

Self-driving cars are going to have so much radar and other expensive stuff in the bumpers that every knick will total them. 

 

I'm worried about the software being hacked. Someone could operate the car remotely and drive you off off a cliff.

Why do you guys love bashing Tesla so much? I'd consider them a tech company. Especially since they're affiliated with SpaceX. Their cars use a lot of innovative and cool technology. Their cars run off of some pretty elaborate software that allows for things like auto-pilot. Ludicrous mode allows you to go from 0-60 in like 3.2 seconds. Their SUV has doors that electronically slide directly up so that if someone parks really close to you, you don't have to worry about being able to open the door enough to get in. Their cars have a lot of cool, innovative features.

 

 

 

A lot of it is this "More than just a car" garbage that makes people who have been around cars all their lives extremely sarcastic since we've heard that over and over from every car company. No, it's just a goddamn car. I don't care about your side quests when even your "regular car" has to be treated like a Ferrari.

They are in a class by themselves, where electric cars are concerned.  [/color]

 

But not for long.  The other manufacturers will all have good electric cars in the early 2020s and they'll be able to make them more cheaply.  For a brief period of time Apple produced the only smartphone of the sort that every manufacturer now makes.

Also, the $7,500 federal tax credit only applies to those who pay $7,500 in federal tax.  If you pay less in a year, you don't get to roll it over to the next year. 

That's really regressive. Few in the target demo for the Model 3 are going to be able to take full advantage of the credit.

Why do you guys love bashing Tesla so much?

 

I'm happy for them, but I'm not spending $80,000 on a car.

 

 

That's really regressive. Few in the target demo for the Model 3 are going to be able to take full advantage of the credit.

 

Most people who can afford a $45,000 car (figure $35k base plus $10k average option order per buyer) are going to pay at least $7500 in federal income tax.  However, the bigger issue for Tesla is that that credit will expire for Tesla pursuant to its own terms (i.e., even if it is renewed--it would need to be expanded for Tesla's customers to keep it).  That is because the credit is intended to subsidize the startup of electric car manufacturers (Tesla is so far the only successful one) or new models and facilities of existing OEMs, and therefore automatically phases out after the company has sold its 500,000th qualifying vehicle.  Tesla will blow through that next year if they get their production in place.

^From the article: "According to Niedermeyer, Model 3 reservation holders who participated in the study said they were “more than twice as likely to own a Toyota as any other brand,” and a “significant portion” reported a household annual income of between $25,000 and $49,000 in 2015. (The Model 3 MSRP is expected to be around $35,000 before tax incentives are included.)

 

“With the majority of its potential Model 3 customers coming out of affordable, reliable cars like the Camry,” he wrote, “they will not tolerate the level of service Tesla is currently providing.'"

 

These folks might be swinging above their weight or plan on keeping the car a long time.

I read that, too, and that's mindboggling to me.  No one should drive a car that costs more than their annual income.  Honestly, 50% is pushing it.  I think the Model 3 will be a fantastic car but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone making below $70k.  I honestly want to know what "significant portion" means in this context.  I'm sure a lot of Model 3 owners will be upgrading from Toyotas, not arguing that part, just want to know more about the number of people making under $50k still plunking down for a Model 3.  At the very least, that statement raises an "inquire further" flag in my brain.

The entire automobile industry is reliant upon people not understanding that they are paying interest on a depreciating asset. 

The entire automobile industry is reliant upon people not understanding that they are paying interest on a depreciating asset. 

 

That's why most car salesmen talk in terms of monthly payment amounts, not the actual cost of the car. You can easily make a car "fit someone's budget" by lengthening the term of the loan in order to get the monthly payment down to an amount the buyer could technically afford.

Some people call Four Square Technique outdated, but it still gets used. In the Four Square, you make four squares on a sheet of paper. One has the price of the new car, one has the trade-in amount of the old car, one the monthly payment and one the interest rate. The salesman puts it in front of customers to figure out what number is most important to the customer and works from there. Since numbers make people incredibly emotional, the salesman has to temper that by taking from one side of the square to give to the other.

The entire automobile industry is reliant upon people not understanding that they are paying interest on a depreciating asset. 

 

More accurately, they're the beneficiaries of a lack of alternatives in the vast majority of American markets.  I fully understand that my car is a depreciating asset (in fact, early-model electric cars like mine have been depreciating rapidly and will continue to do so because the pace of technological progress in the industry is such that early model cars are "more obsolete" vis-a-vis their age than gas cars of equal age).  But that doesn't mean I can go without one.  It just means that I basically never buy new.  The Model 3 I've reserved will be the first ever new car I've purchased, and I very well might try to make it last for 10+ years, especially if the autopilot hardware is strong enough (or swappable enough) that the car can make the transition to the coming automated transportation era.

The entire automobile industry is reliant upon people not understanding that they are paying interest on a depreciating asset. 

 

Yeah, those idiots!

 

That's why I always lease.

^ lol

I very well might try to make it last for 10+ years, especially if the autopilot hardware is strong enough (or swappable enough) that the car can make the transition to the coming automated transportation era.

 

You are the most optimistic futurist I know.

That's why I always lease.

 

The guy I work next to has a 26 year-old daughter with 5 kids.  One of the dads is out of the picture and the other one is locked up in Lebanon.  She works at a cell phone store. Her previous car still had debt but she just bought a brand-new VW Passatt.  Neither he nor she has a larger car so she quite literally does not have access to a vehicle in which she can move all of her kids legally.

 

These are the kinds of disastrous decisions people are making out there, by the thousands, every day. 

^Usually in this country it goes the other way where people are buying vehicles that are way too damn big for their needs.

What she needs is a mini-van but she chose to get the cool car, instead. It's funny to think there was a time when mini-vans were actually popular. At least it seemed like they were, in the mid- late 90s. Right before everyone got SUVs. People used to buy mini-vans, even though they didn't even have kids. I was just a small kid but that was my observation. Now, you see a mini-van and you think welfare queen with six kids.

 

^From the article: "According to Niedermeyer, Model 3 reservation holders who participated in the study said they were “more than twice as likely to own a Toyota as any other brand,” and a “significant portion” reported a household annual income of between $25,000 and $49,000 in 2015. (The Model 3 MSRP is expected to be around $35,000 before tax incentives are included.)

 

“With the majority of its potential Model 3 customers coming out of affordable, reliable cars like the Camry,” he wrote, “they will not tolerate the level of service Tesla is currently providing.'"

 

These folks might be swinging above their weight or plan on keeping the car a long time.

 

The people in the study making $25k or a little above per year are likely to get approved for a loan that size and have cash for a down payment? Sounds like they're using an inheritance or money saved from a trust fund. At the very least, having their parents co-sign. I'm sure insurance on a Tesla is also outrageous. I just don't see how you could possibly make that work with a salary that small... Unless they plan to live in their car.

 

You can barely pay for rent, utilities, a phone bill and groceries with $25k a year. Why on earth would someone making 25k consider getting a Tesla?! Who are these people?

Who are these people?

 

They're all around us.  People are just as irrational with big purchases as they are with day-to-day ones.  People buy the wrong house and the wrong car all the time.  They go to the wrong college and enter the wrong program. 

^ people are very irrational.  i have friends that make way more money than my household and never save anything in Roth IRAs, college funds for kids, or even basic long term savings.  What they do have are houses that too big and too expensive, new luxury cars every few years and all kinds of financed luxury goods. 

Plus, if you make people think the car IS tech, then you get people that are unwilling to spend that kind of money on a car but are willing to spend it on "tech".

Well, I know that people in general are irrational, I just think it's odd that people making $25k a year are able to secure financing for a $35k-40k car. Maybe Tesla provides its own financing. They're a very centralized company; same with SpaceX. They operate all of their own dealerships without third parties being involved and it's very efficient. Elon Musk recently hired a lot of Software Engineers who report directly to him as the goal is for autopilot to be fully autonomous in the next three years and has become probably their biggest priority (they're competing with Google and Apple for God's sake.) Personally, I wonder if financing will be more relaxed since a self-driving car could conveniently drive itself back to the dealership the day after you miss a car payment. That would be hilarious! The weird things that my mind comes up with....

^Yes, no repo man! 

 

I believe that the dealership new-car financing is actually done by a separate company.  Ford has "Ford Finance", or whatever.  They do it for tax purposes, no doubt.  I have never and will never buy a new car so I'm not sure how it works. 

IIRC, Tesla financing is generally underwritten by Wells Fargo.  Not 100% sure about that.

 

I very well might try to make it last for 10+ years, especially if the autopilot hardware is strong enough (or swappable enough) that the car can make the transition to the coming automated transportation era.

 

You are the most optimistic futurist I know.

 

ROFL And how many of us do you know?  Either way, not all of us think the world is going to die when SkyNet and the Matrix team up to release the Andromeda Strain to deal with pesky organics.

Another side quest! Why sort things out with boring body shops and parts suppliers when you could be creating CYBORGS?

 

 

 

Elon Musk Forming Company Dedicated To Merging Humans With Machines

 

Remember when Elon Musk said humankind would have to somehow merge with machines if we want to stay relevant in the face of the inevitable war between us and our robot overlords? He wasn’t kidding, and he’s formed a new company dedicated to figuring out how to do just that.

 

https://consumerist.com/2017/03/27/elon-musk-forming-company-dedicated-to-merging-humans-with-machines/

Recipe for disaster:

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-assemblyline-idUSKBN17Q0DE

 

The Muskateers will shrug off a 6 month or even year delay and the Muskman knows it. 

While not totally applicable to this topic, Tesla rolled out their solar roof ordering this week with installation set for June.

 

Just six months after claiming that the solar roof will cost less than a regular/dumb roof BEFORE factoring in electricity costs, consumers are finding that statement by Musk to be patently false.  Many users are finding that the Tesla estimator to be pricing a new roof 5-6 times higher than a regular roof.  Even after factoring in the tax credit, the cost will still be 4-5 times more if someone chooses a Tesla solar roof.

 

To show that a solar roof is more cost efficient, Tesla estimates the total cost of electricity saved over THIRTY YEARS.  This, of course, estimates the buyer will purchase a Powerwall or two to go completely "off the grid" (ignoring if this is even possible in overcast/snowy states like Ohio).  Some buyers do not see a full "payback" for more than 30 years.  The estimate calculator assumes a 2% annual increase in electricity costs (while, of course, fully ignoring the additional money paid for the solar roof/Powerwall could be invested and return a 7+% annual yield, conservatively).

 

So once again, it appears Musk over-promised and under-delivered on a "new" or "innovative" product.  Perhaps, eventually, this vision of a cheap solar roof will come to fruition, but this initial roll out certainly is not it.

He's just a mouth.

^^Really?

 

I guess Jmeck and GCrites were right. He's a good bullsh!tter.

 

Roofs are already an expensive project for a homeowner; it's going to be hard to justify spending 4-5x as much when you have to wait 30 years to break even. I'm guessing people will get these roofs financed and after paying off the loan, it would obviously take even more than 30 years to break even on it. It's also a risky purchase when you consider there may be better alternatives to his roof in the future or if much more efficient solar shingles from Tesla come out 5 years later. The millionaire tech moguls who can actually afford his cars will probably trade their roof in for a new model, making their infinity guarantee pointless.

 

I don't know how I feel about Elon Musk anymore. On one hand, his projects seem well-intended and we need people like him to get everyone riled up and investing in electric cars, solar panels, space exploration, etc. His visions really are good for humanity at least. However, on the other hand, he's damaging his credibility - blatantly lying left and right and giving a lot of people false hopes about what's soon going to be in attainable within their budget. He's really just been in the business of taunting and teasing people who make less than six figures, if you think about it.

 

I don't think Tesla is going anywhere though. They'll ultimately thrive. People buy "cool stocks" and lately, it seems exclusiveness, at least from the onset, is key to a good business model. Facebook now is no better than Myspace was - we all had to eventually cave in or felt obligated to accept friend requests from our crazy family members and annoying co-workers when before Facebook went public, those a-holes weren't able to be in our network. Google's Gmail accounts used to be by invite only. Apple products... well, I guess they've just always been unreasonably high-priced but I'm sure you're all catching what I'm throwing down. Those are all really successful, well-branded/well-liked companies now. I think Elon is a marketing genius more than he is a tech genius and I think he is being very strategic when he's announcing all these great, obtainable products that are soon to be available, when soon after (repeatedly!) we find out he mysteriously fell short on meeting his production quotas and price points for the 99%.

 

Whenever he has to face scrutiny he just gets people really excited about some new glorious thing. For example when someone died from Tesla's AutoPilot software glitch, I don't think he even commented on it. The next thing people saw on his Twitter account was an announcement that he's about to make an announcement about another revolutionary idea.

There ARE reasonably priced electric cars on the market - in the $25-$30k range. I'm pretty sure there's at least 10 models in America, alone but they're not "cool." It's interesting that you don't see very many of them at all, on the road. They can't be selling very well, yet there are a LOT of environmentally conscious people out there. I know a lot of people who care a lot about the environment, recycle, the whole nine but drive new or late model gas guzzlers.

 

 

The problem with financing solar panels is that not only will much better solar panels exist in ten years, the ones you have will deteriorate.  So by the time you pay them off, they will only collect 85-90% s much electricity as they do now.  Plus, the new ones that will be available will be way better.

 

So buying solar panels now is like buying a Tesla Model 3 under the pretense that not paying for gas will save you money.  It won't, especially if you're financing the thing as opposed to buying a 3 year-old conventional car with $50k miles on it.  Buying something expensive that "saves money" is just begging for attention.  Look at my car!  Look at my solar panels!

Also Tesla overcharges for what maintenance the car does need. An inspection and cabin air filter change is $500.

 

The only real way to save money is to not consume.

Also Tesla overcharges for what maintenance the car does need. An inspection and cabin air filter change is $500.

 

The only real way to save money is to not consume.

 

That's also the best thing for the environment, ironically.

Yeah, you've gotta keep in mind that electric cars are only like 20% better for the environment than gas powered cars. Anyone that continues driving a single-occupancy vehicle around and thinking that they're doing something great for the planet is just wrong. That being said, there are other benefits. Widespread adoption of electric cars will really help cities with air quality problems, because all the fuel that's being burned in our cities today will go away and instead be burned at power plants far away from the city. It's also going to be much quieter which should improve the quality of life for people in cities.

Yeah, you've gotta keep in mind that electric cars are only like 20% better for the environment than gas powered cars. Anyone that continues driving a single-occupancy vehicle around and thinking that they're doing something great for the planet is just wrong. That being said, there are other benefits. Widespread adoption of electric cars will really help cities with air quality problems, because all the fuel that's being burned in our cities today will go away and instead be burned at power plants far away from the city. It's also going to be much quieter which should improve the quality of life for people in cities.

 

That's hard to say without knowing the source of the electricity used to power the car. 22% of electricity is now generated by a renewable energy source (wind, solar, etc.). So if you are using a renewable energy source which produces no waste to charge your EV, then you are much better than "20%" of an internal combustion vehicle.

 

Gas powered cars are only about 20% efficient given how much waste they produce. Electric cars are about 60% efficient if they are powered by coal-based electricity.

 

To your last point...the next key is to stop burning coal at the power plants. Like oil/gas, there is only a finite amount in the world which are burning through at speeds thousands of times faster than it took to form.  As we shift our transportation to electric based, we're going to have to massively increase the supply of clean electricity via solar and wind.

Well if the average gasoline car lasts 10 years whereas the average electric car lasts 20 years, then there is a significant reduction in energy usage based on what it takes to manufacture and then scrap a car.  Same issue with wind turbines and solar panels...if the wind turbines going up right now are still spinning around 100 years of now, they are much more efficient than if they only last 20.  Nobody seems to really care about that part of the equation, though.   

Magnets in the electric motors get weaker by the second.

Magnets in the electric motors get weaker by the second.

 

I just googled "how long do wind turbines last" and got nothing but Koch-type anti-wind propaganda.  This shows you what is wrong with the internet today.  So much fake news...I have a hard time believing that the performance of wind turbines deteriorates so quickly that they become "uneconomical" after just 12 years.  If a turbine needs to be disassembled and have a new motor installed every 15-20 years I could understand that.  I just have a really hard time believing that the pole and the actual blades "wear out".  I guess rust is a major issue for offshore installations, but shouldn't be so much of one for turbines in Texas or wherever.   

^ The maintenance on a wind turbine can't ever approach the extent of work required for a coal-fired power plant. Those plants need constant maintenance. Their massive boilers are under constant corrosion. 

I'm much more concerned about electric car motors since people are unlikely to save the car when it gets slow. Maybe a cottage industry will arise for rewinding the motors and giving them fresh magnets much cheaper than fully replacing them. The rewound motors have potential to be faster and more efficient than stock. People used to do this with their R/C cars until the early '90s to make their own "Modified" motors.

Also Tesla overcharges for what maintenance the car does need. An inspection and cabin air filter change is $500.

 

The only real way to save money is to not consume.

 

For the moment, Tesla has an effective monopoly on maintenance.  That will change as electric cars become ubiquitous enough to support third party repair shops.  And of course the only real way to save money is to not consume, but there's no prize for dying with the most money.  Some things are worth the money.  My little LEAF is still a lot of fun to drive, and I've test-driven a Tesla and they are just an absolute joy to be behind the wheel, even without the P upgrade.

 

Yeah, you've gotta keep in mind that electric cars are only like 20% better for the environment than gas powered cars. Anyone that continues driving a single-occupancy vehicle around and thinking that they're doing something great for the planet is just wrong. That being said, there are other benefits. Widespread adoption of electric cars will really help cities with air quality problems, because all the fuel that's being burned in our cities today will go away and instead be burned at power plants far away from the city. It's also going to be much quieter which should improve the quality of life for people in cities.

 

I don't know where your 20% number comes from.  As D&S noted, it's a sliding scale based on the ultimate fuel source used.  But more importantly, it's a sliding scale based on vehicle replacement rate.  One promise (still a bit early to know for certain) of electric cars is that because of their vastly fewer moving parts, they'll last longer than conventional cars.  If a Tesla lasts to 300,000 miles, its benefit against a similar-sized ICE car that dies at 200,000 miles is going to be a lot more than 20% on that basis alone, regardless of per-mile benefits.

 

Edit: I see jmecklenborg also effectively made this same point.

 

I'm much more concerned about electric car motors since people are unlikely to save the car when it gets slow. Maybe a cottage industry will arise for rewinding the motors and giving them fresh magnets much cheaper than fully replacing them. The rewound motors have potential to be faster and more efficient than stock. People used to do this with their R/C cars until the early '90s to make their own "Modified" motors.

 

It will depend on how long the motors last before there's a noticeable downgrade in performance, I guess.  I admit I haven't looked as closely at this issue.  If this happens after 50,000 miles, that's a real problem, but also one that there could be real money in fixing, to effectively reset the clock for another 40,000 or 50,000 miles.  If this is something that becomes noticeable after 150,000 miles, then there's much less likely to be money in fixing it because owners will simply let their cars go and get new ones, especially for current-generation (or perhaps I should start calling them previous-gen) cars like my LEAF, with its 24kWh battery.  By the time it gets to 150,000 miles (it's a low-mileage car because it can't serve as a road trip car, so it's a 2013 model, probably manufactured in 2012, with only 30,000 miles on it), I imagine that whoever owns it at that time will be ready to trade it in, or will be someone who simply doesn't care if it's lost a little bit of pep off the line.

I wouldn't get your hopes up for a significantly longer useful life for an electric car versus an internal combustion vehicle.  Engines aren't typically the life limiting component in a vehicle.  It's all the other stuff that adds up and makes replacement a more attractive option.  Sure, on paper the motors that they use in electric vehicles may last 1,000,000 miles, but most of the components on that car won't make it a quarter of that.  You're still going to have issues with shocks, the brake system, air conditioner, body corrosion,  etc.  Just like a normal ICE vehicle. 

 

 

I'm much more concerned about electric car motors since people are unlikely to save the car when it gets slow. Maybe a cottage industry will arise for rewinding the motors and giving them fresh magnets much cheaper than fully replacing them. The rewound motors have potential to be faster and more efficient than stock. People used to do this with their R/C cars until the early '90s to make their own "Modified" motors.

 

It will depend on how long the motors last before there's a noticeable downgrade in performance, I guess.  I admit I haven't looked as closely at this issue.  If this happens after 50,000 miles, that's a real problem, but also one that there could be real money in fixing, to effectively reset the clock for another 40,000 or 50,000 miles.  If this is something that becomes noticeable after 150,000 miles, then there's much less likely to be money in fixing it because owners will simply let their cars go and get new ones, especially for current-generation (or perhaps I should start calling them previous-gen) cars like my LEAF, with its 24kWh battery.  By the time it gets to 150,000 miles (it's a low-mileage car because it can't serve as a road trip car, so it's a 2013 model, probably manufactured in 2012, with only 30,000 miles on it), I imagine that whoever owns it at that time will be ready to trade it in, or will be someone who simply doesn't care if it's lost a little bit of pep off the line.

 

It's not miles. It's time.

 

Frankly, the lack of a transmission is a much bigger difference. Automatic transmissions are still terrible reliability-wise and are only going to get worse with 6-8-10 speeds.

Timing belts killed more '90s and 2000s cars than anything. Thankfully the engines are now powerful enough that they can go back to chains.

Yeah, you've gotta keep in mind that electric cars are only like 20% better for the environment than gas powered cars. Anyone that continues driving a single-occupancy vehicle around and thinking that they're doing something great for the planet is just wrong. That being said, there are other benefits. Widespread adoption of electric cars will really help cities with air quality problems, because all the fuel that's being burned in our cities today will go away and instead be burned at power plants far away from the city. It's also going to be much quieter which should improve the quality of life for people in cities.

 

I don't know where your 20% number comes from.  As D&S noted, it's a sliding scale based on the ultimate fuel source used.  But more importantly, it's a sliding scale based on vehicle replacement rate.  One promise (still a bit early to know for certain) of electric cars is that because of their vastly fewer moving parts, they'll last longer than conventional cars.  If a Tesla lasts to 300,000 miles, its benefit against a similar-sized ICE car that dies at 200,000 miles is going to be a lot more than 20% on that basis alone, regardless of per-mile benefits.

 

Edit: I see jmecklenborg also effectively made this same point.

 

The 20% number is a ballpark figure. Of course it depends on how your utility generates their electricity, etc. I was just trying to make the point that electric cars are only slightly more efficient than gas-powered cars. Anyone who drives an electric car thinking they're "saving the planet" and not polluting the environment is wrong. At the end of the day people driving an electric car to work are harming the planet a lot more than people who take transit, walk, or bike to work.

^Fuel and emissions are only one part of the problem. How do you dispose of used car tires? What happens to the seats and non-metal parts when the car is eventually scrapped? How many square feet of asphalt pavement does the car require? How many people are injured or die in car crashes?

 

An electric car is still a car.