Tesla Pickup Truck More Popular Than Ford F-150!

Guest “you couldn’t make this sort of schist up if you tried” by David Middleton

Tesla’s ‘Cyberpunk’ Truck Is Already America’s New Favorite Pickup: Study
By Sissi Cao • 07/03/19

Elon Musk has made no secret of his intention to someday build an electric pickup truck. The Tesla CEO has been teasing the idea for about two years and has said it’s “going to look pretty sci-fi.” Despite the fact that no one has a clue when Tesla will actually start manufacturing the truck or even what it will look like, the concept car is already the most popular pickup truck in America—at least on social media, a new study by automobile review site AutoWise found.

The study analyzed geotagged Twitter data of over 100,000 tweets and found that the Tesla pickup truck was being talked about in more states than the Ford F-150, the longtime best-selling vehicle in America.



From the Observer article…

Red = Imaginary Pickup Truck, Blue = Real Pickup Truck

Here’s a picture of the Tesla ‘Cyberpunk’ truck…

Here’s a picture of the coolest version of the Ford F-150…

The Ford Raptor, a real pickup truck (Motor 1)… It may not be a Jeep, but it’s cool!

Only in the Twitter-sphere of twits could an imaginary pickup truck be more popular than a real pickup truck that outsells all makes and models of electric vehicles combined in the U.S.

In production since 1948, the F-Series includes full-size pickup truckschassis cab trucks, and commercial vehicles. As of 2019 production, the Ford F-Series includes the F-150 pickup, Class 3-5 Super Duty trucks (F-250 through F-550), and the Class 6-8 Super Duty trucks (F-650, F-750). The most popular version of the F-Series is the F-150, now in its thirteenth generation.

The F-Series has been the best-selling pickup truck in the United States since 1977 and the best-selling vehicle since 1986[1][2]; it is also the best selling vehicle in Canada.[3] As of the 2018 model year, the F-Series generates $41 billion in annual revenue for Ford, making the brand more valuable than Coca-Cola and Nike.[4]


EV’s vs Ford F-Series

Sales data from Inside EV’s and Car Sales Base

Did you notice it? Tony Stark Elon Musk finally topped 20,000 Model 3 sales in June!!! Prior to falling 83% short of their Q3 2017 Model 3 production guidance, Tesla had forecast “1,500 Model 3 sedans in September and grow that to 20,000 vehicles a month by December” 2017. Tesla first managed to deliver more 20,000 Model 3’s in September 2018 (22,250), only 9 months behind guidance. They’ve only managed to hit the 20,000 mark three times (Sept. and Dec. 2018 and June 2019).

Tony Stark Elon Musk “promised stakeholders a Model 3 run rate of 500,000 cars per year by the end of 2018″… Tesla managed less than 140,000 in 2018. They’re on the same track in 2019 (less than 70,000 in six months).

The Cobalt Cliff Will Cap Tesla’s Model 3 Production Capacity At 250,000 Units Per Year

Oct. 23, 2017

John Petersen


Tesla (TSLA) has a problem that may be a company killer. Elon Musk has promised stakeholders a Model 3 run rate of 500,000 cars per year by the end of 2018, but Panasonic’s (OTCPK:PCRFF) cathode powder supply chain can’t support more than half of that volume. More importantly, expansion of Panasonic’s supply chain would be a Herculean task because its cathode powder supplier, Sumitomo Metal Mining (OTCPK:SMMYY), already is using 100% of its cobalt production to satisfy Panasonic’s cathode powder requirements.

While I would consider a sustained run rate of 250,000 Model 3s per year a major accomplishment, I don’t think a market that expects multiples of that production volume next year would share my admiration. Some of my readers will delight in observing that Tesla has a long history of ambitious promises backed by small and late deliveries, but that kind of criticism mutes the ugly reality that a 250,000 car per year run rate on the Model 3 won’t be enough to stem the tide of red ink or put Tesla in a position to service its debts.

We all know what happens when companies are chronically incapable of making a buck without the kind financial gimmickry that pervades Tesla’s financial reporting.


Seeking Alpha

As of July 2018, approximately 1/4 of Telsa Model 3 orders had been cancelled. That’s about 63,000 cancellations. As of June 2019, they had delivered only 209,146 Model 3’s.

What’s wrong with this picture?

Data from Car Sales Base and Market Watch

Maybe if Tesla only manufactured virtual automobiles, they could actually make money.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
July 17, 2019 6:19 pm

There is a limit in the market for virtue signalling second or third cars. Unless required, EV’s are not quite practical in their current design as an only vehicle.

John Endicott
Reply to  Tom Halla
July 18, 2019 7:40 am

Again, as pointed out in the comments of similar articles where you’ve made similar comments – that rather depends on where you live and how you use your car. Just because it isn’t quite practical for *you* doesn’t mean that’s true for everyone.

The vast majority of drivers commute short distances (less than 30 miles) to work (as most of my driving consists of commuting such short distance to and from work, an EV is a possibility as an only vehicle for me, even though I don’t currently own one and likely won’t any time soon, my current ICE is still going strong at 11 years of age and if it ain’t broke I see no reason to replace it. But again what is true for one person, in this case me, isn’t true for everyone).

As such an EV could be practical as a primary commuting vehicle for many such commuters – assuming they have easy access to a place to charge (which is fine for those that live in a house with a garage or other easy access to an outlet, not so much for those living in an apartment with roadside parking).

In short, for some people the current design works fine as an only or primary vehicle, for others not so much. Everyone’s circumstances are different. EVs are not currently a one size fits all type of product. But just because it doesn’t fit all does not mean it fits none.

Reply to  John Endicott
July 18, 2019 9:51 am

What matters is not the range of the drive you do everyday but the drive you have to do on occasion . Right along with cost and charging times , that is the killer. And yes a lot of EV’s are second cars , and in the case of the wealthy they may be further down the order with boats , aeroplanes and helicopters .

John Endicott
Reply to  knr
July 18, 2019 6:08 pm

Again, it depends on ones circumstances. Not every one drives longs distances frequently enough for it to be an issue for them. For someone who only takes a long distance trip once a year (for example), an EV is perfectly fine as a primary car, with an ICE as a secondary for those rare long trips (or a rental just for the duration of the trip). If, on the other hand, you’re taking long trips on a weekly basis, you’ll probably want an ICE for your primary car.

Reply to  knr
July 19, 2019 4:45 am

EVS are fantastic. They are far more efficient than ICE cars, have amazing torque and if you are lucky enough to have a garage, you start every day with a full tank. What’s not to like?

Reply to  Trebla
July 19, 2019 6:42 am

Wake me up when I hear the opinion of someone that has owned & regularly used an EV for at least 10 yrs (like many ICE vehicle owners have).

Reply to  Trebla
July 24, 2019 3:11 pm

Not “far more efficient” once you take into account the relative efficiency of creating and delivering electrical energy to your Tesla battery vs delivering 16-20 gallons of gasoline to your fuel tank.

Reply to  John Endicott
July 18, 2019 9:53 am

That map looks rather like a political allegiance map with the colours inverted. Coincidence, or simple a reflection of the virtue signalling appeal of an electric pick-up?

William Astley
Reply to  John Endicott
July 18, 2019 11:37 am

Electric only cars is OK if money is no object and you are good at planning to ensure you do not run out of power on a busy highway, in cold miserable weather, in a massive traffic jam.

People who own electric cars must accept that from time to time, they must delay or reschedule a trip, as their vehicle requires hours to charge and must be careful on every long trip.

…..we went 152 miles on the highway in the Leaf, before exiting at 5 percent remaining—slowing down slightly near the end of the trip to make sure we had an extra margin. Turns out we didn’t need it; after another 10 miles on local streets we were still at 2 percent.

Which vehicle would you pick?

Nissan Leaf – Maximum Range 226 miles in weather that is not too cold (car heater is not turned no) or too hot (car air conditioning is not turned on). Cost $39,400, Time to charge over night

Honda Civic – Range 372 to 471 miles, $20,000, Time to fill up 5 minutes


If more power, a 226-mile range, and a $39,405 base price—before considering the full $7,500 federal EV tax credit you can still get—collectively seems like the sweet spot for the Leaf, you probably have GM to thank.

….By shoehorning a new 62-kwh pack into the 2019 Leaf Plus, Nissan now has an electric car that, as we found this past week, will go more than 150 miles between charges, at U.S. Interstate speeds, in the cold.

Reply to  John Endicott
July 18, 2019 2:08 pm

Well, correct. If you don’t need to get there, then EVs will work for you. I don’t know the correct figures but much below freezing you get half the voltage out the battery on what already is limited range; and of course you’d want to run the heater which is no longer a waste product but directly drains the battery. Insult to injury, you need to heat the battery to charge it. My guess would be 32 degrees lat. north and above, the EV is going to be useless in the winter; maybe even fatally so.

Better hope for some good global warming to compensate.

John Endicott
Reply to  taz1999
July 18, 2019 6:39 pm

I know people in the 35 to 40 degree lat. north range of states with hybrids and EVs, they generally haven’t had any difficulty during the winter. Of course, how bad your winter is depends on more than just your lat. and two different locations on the same lat. can have wildly differing weather/temps.

Reply to  John Endicott
July 18, 2019 4:09 pm

What matters is three things:
Your daily drive
whether you own a home with a garage
How frequently you have to drive longer distances

John Endicott
Reply to  MarkW
July 18, 2019 6:02 pm

Exactly MarkW. For those people (and there are many of them out there- enough to form a niche market) who own a home with a garage and have a short daily commute, and whom drive long distances infrequently enough (among other factors), that an EV can make a decent primary car for them (with an ICE or the occasional rental as a secondary car for the those infrequent trips). Other people (and there are many more of them out there) who don’t have a home with a garage and/or have a long commute and/or drive long distances frequently (among other factors) an EV would be a very poor choice for a primary car. EVs have a long way to go before they’re a one size fits all option. But just because it’s an option that doesn’t fit one person does not automatically make it a bad option for those whom it does fit despite what some posters here (like Tom) seem to imply.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  John Endicott
July 19, 2019 10:26 am

For those who actually think an EV is a great choice “for them,” go buy one. Just don’t do it at an artificially low price subsidized by the *rest* of us.

Reply to  John Endicott
July 21, 2019 3:52 pm

One needs to take into account the obvious, haemorrhagic extravagance of squandered energy. The lugging of 30% of the vehicle curb weight mass around for the duration of its unsustainable, virtue signalling life as dead weight toxic battery.

Bob Rogers
Reply to  John Endicott
July 22, 2019 1:51 pm

It’s really not so much about how you actually use your truck as what you want to have the ability to do.

Just because I’ve never driven from the east coast to the Rockies doesn’t mean that being able to do so isn’t an important criteria when buying one.

Reply to  Bob Rogers
July 24, 2019 4:05 pm

There is also the real fear of the 1% day.

Ask Atlanta (GA, USA) commuters how many electric vehicles they saw stranded during snowmageddon, or when the fire closed a section of flyover, or whenever a few vehicles have a traffic-snarling fender-bender after a week-night baseball game.

Range anxiety is a real thing because nothing increases your likelihood of death or injury more than a stoppage on a busy highway. If you want to always get home, you can’t have just a 10% margin, or even 20%. You have to be ready for a really bad day, and have the resources at hand to avoid a really-really bad day.

July 17, 2019 6:40 pm

USA never fails to deliver at the extremes.
Musk is great entertainment if nothing else . . .

Russell Cook
July 17, 2019 6:55 pm

It might probably only take a solitary tweet about the F-150 by President Trump and the resulting re-tweets to overturn that alleged “popularity contest” in a heartbeat.

Charles Higley
Reply to  Russell Cook
July 18, 2019 9:12 am

A truck owner wants to be able to go out into the field/country and use the s**t out of the truck doing lots of heavy lifting and moving. One really only needs to check the gas level at the end of the day. With a Tesla truck, planning and making it through the day will become central to one’s thinking. Remember that most of this work is done when the weather is either really hot in the summer or really cold in the winter, both bad times to be relying on a battery (hot weather also hurts batteries and they are anemic in cold weather), ignoring the battery power is probably also used to keep the driver comfortable (alive). In winter, heating the cab is no cost at all; in summer, the A/C is nominal because of the large gasoline supply. However, on a battery, both are costly as they eat into what the battery has left. Robust and dependable is synonymous with F-150 and will never be applied (honestly) to an EV pickup truck.

Reply to  Charles Higley
July 18, 2019 2:51 pm

the reality is that the vast majority of pickups never leave the roadway, haul nothing more than a few bags of groceries (in the back seat, not the bed) and are 99.9% image and 0.1% functional.

John Dilks
Reply to  kenw
July 18, 2019 5:10 pm

That doesn’t matter. It will do what they ask it to do, when ever they need it to. We have no right to tell them that they can’t have it. The next owner will probably work it to death. If you want electric vehicle get electric vehicle. That is your right.

John Endicott
Reply to  John Dilks
July 18, 2019 6:47 pm

John, it rather does matter. Not everyone uses the same vehicle in the same way. For the type of people kenw describes, an EV or an ICE will easily handle the tasks they typically use it for and as such an EV would be a perfectly fine choice for them. For the types of people you and Charles describes, ICE is the way to go, as an EV currently won’t cut it. “the next owner” should choose to be the next owner of a vehicle that suits them rather than the current owner buying the vehicle based on what the next owner might or might not do. In short the current buyer does not know nor care what the “next owner” wants, nor should s/he.

Matthew Bergin
July 17, 2019 7:08 pm

How far will the Tesla truck get towing 6,000 lbs through West Virginia like I did with my 1992 4.9L F150 a couple of years ago. Not far I bet.I must admit my fuel mileage sucked but my truck has dual tanks that only take 5 minutes to fill.😁

Charles Higley
Reply to  Matthew Bergin
July 18, 2019 9:10 am

A truck owner wants to be able to go out into the field/country and use the s**t out of the truck doing lots of heavy lifting and moving. One really only needs to check the gas level at the end of the day. With a Tesla truck, planning and making it through the day will become central to one’s thinking. Remember that most of this work is done when the weather is either really hot in the summer or really cold in the winter, both bad times to be relying on a battery (hot weather also hurts batteries and they are anemic in cold weather), ignoring the battery power is probably also used to keep the driver comfortable (alive). In winter, heating the cab is no cost at all; in summer, the A/C is nominal because of the large gasoline supply. However, on a battery, both are costly as they eat into what the battery has left. Robust and dependable is synonymous with F-150 and will never be applied (honestly) to an EV pickup truck.

Reply to  Matthew Bergin
July 18, 2019 12:14 pm

wasn’t a ford but a gmc 2500hd but I just hauled 6.51 tons (per scale) of gravel in a 7×14 dual ram dump trailer.
other day had 3 loads running around 6.1 tons each in it.
hard to imagine ev doing this and running all day like this w/o fueling/charging.
this was interstate as well as stop and go city traffic while loaded.

Marc Sparks
July 17, 2019 7:22 pm

What’s Tesla going to do when Ford/VW & Renault/Nissan/Mitsubishi start to monopolise scare resources for Battery manufacture.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Marc Sparks
July 17, 2019 8:10 pm

IMO, Tesla is positioning itself to stop making cars and monopolise batteries, it already is positioning itself to do that with mega factories in China and simply make and sell batteries. That’s what I call grabbing the car making industry by the short and curlies.

Marc Sparks
Reply to  Patrick MJD
July 17, 2019 10:25 pm

They can try, but the major car manufacturers have already anexxed significant resources.

July 17, 2019 7:31 pm

Maybe if Tesla only manufactured virtual automobiles, they could actually make money.

That pretty much gets to the heart of the matter.

An example of a company that ran losses for a long time is Amazon. link Under the right circumstances you can sacrifice profit to build market share.

So, was Tesla justified in running losses in an attempt to entrench itself in the electric vehicle market?

Amazon was a disruptive innovation in the retail market space. Its competitors were bricks and mortar stores. link

Tesla competes against an industry that can easily build electric cars. In fact, everybody and their dog are building electric cars these days. Nothing that Tesla is offering is that innovative. I would not bet on Tesla’s chances.

Tesla may have bet the farm that his robotic production could produce vehicles cheaper than the other manufacturers. That isn’t working out so well. link Robots are hardly new and innovative. The traditional manufacturers have been using them for decades. My guess is that Musk didn’t understand the industry and may have assumed that the traditional manufacturers were stupid. I have a hint for him. When an industry is disrupted by innovation, the existing players aren’t usually stupid. Mostly it’s a question of entrenched value chains that keep them from adapting quickly enough.

Craig from Oz
Reply to  commieBob
July 17, 2019 8:41 pm

Problem is that Musk is loved by people who do not really understand industry.

Musk can twit ‘Got great ideas for a new pick up. Just need to write down some of the details’ and part of the world will happily go SQUEEEE!

A great percentage of the remaining people will why someone so high up the food chain is trying to micro manage engineering design.

Hard fact kids – Musk is not an engineer. He studied economics and physics. The man is an entrepreneur. He has grand ideas, which in itself isn’t a bad thing, but lacks the specialist experience to actually put most of his grand ideas into practice, instead attempting to forcefully apply his economics and coding experience to justify his grand dreams.

Again not a bad thing…. IF you can get it to work.

Musk can’t.

If you were to take an objective look at this achievements compared to his original objective statements he has failed to achieve nearly all of them. Even Space X – arguably his most successful achievement – when compared to his original stated objectives, has been a failure. Yes he has built rockets, but his intent was to bring the price of rockets down by a factor of ten and bring into regular service reusable designs. This has not happened.

Points for trying, but honestly the Musk bubble is going to burst. You probably want to be upwind.

Reply to  Craig from Oz
July 18, 2019 12:15 am

Partially. He’s established most of his current rep with spacex, which is likely to remain the entrenched leader in private (hah!) space ops for a long time.

Steve O
Reply to  Craig from Oz
July 18, 2019 7:02 am

For someone who studied both economics and physics, it’s odd that he had to do all the work and engineering to land his rockets first before doing the financial analysis that would show that the extra fuel needed to pull it off will always cost a lot more than what the rocket is worth.

A pickup truck is a logical product-line extension, and this is his usual marketing style, so no surprises there. Tesla’s problem is that they are trying to market a high-end luxury product into the mass market segment, and the numbers that they used to justify the endeavour were overly optimistic. Now they can’t even pull back into the luxury niche because they have purchase agreements with Panasonic for billions of dollars of batteries, and they need to stay in the mass market in order to work through their commitment.

mario lento
Reply to  commieBob
July 17, 2019 10:09 pm

I agree with your assessment. One thing, they are selling more EVs than all other mfgrs, sometimes combined. So they are sought after. So my question is, are they getting more tax credits or benefits than other EVs? As much as prior when I heard 30% of the cost was subsidized… (is that correct?) If so, would an even cost basis playing field change their edge?

Roger Knights
Reply to  mario lento
July 18, 2019 9:39 pm

Tesla, have sold 200,000 cars as of a year ago or so, has been on a schedule where the original $7500 tax credit was halved on Jan. 1 and again or July 1, to %1750 now. That will go away at year-end. Other competitors, except GM (and Nissan?), are getting the full credit.

Tax credits or other subsidies abroad are increasing, on net, especially in Germany.

John Endicott
Reply to  Roger Knights
July 19, 2019 7:54 pm

Just Tesla and GM have reached the 200,000 mark. Nissan was at 135K in June 2019 and isn’t expected to cross that threshold until 2022:


Eric Stevens
July 17, 2019 7:52 pm

I would love to see an electric pickup truck trying to negotiate water, say, 24″ deep.

The mind boggles, or is it the design office boggling?

Reply to  Eric Stevens
July 17, 2019 8:21 pm

More interesting will be it trying to tow a couple of tons. The slowing down I guess has to be all brakes because you can’t really use the engine to break and most EV have energy recovery on the brakes.

Reply to  LdB
July 17, 2019 9:17 pm

Even more interesting would be trying to tow my hay trailer that I routinely load up with 5-7 tons of hay. What kind of range do you suppose you would get doing that? And would a Tesla pickup even do that… or would it’s little toy electric motor burn up when you throttle up trying to get that load of hay moving?
Some of us out here in the world actually do real work and need real vehicles to get it done.. My F150 and F250 get it done here in central Kansas daily!!!

Reply to  Deano
July 17, 2019 11:27 pm

Does this cute little guy change your mind? Almost all railroad locomotives use electric motors. link The problem with electric vehicles is not the motors. The problem is with the batteries. The question is, how much electricity do you have.

Reply to  commieBob
July 18, 2019 1:10 am

Commie those have special setup to they are geared to low speed, high torque operation. So for them try the reverse I want to go from zero to 100Mph in 5sec please with no load obviously.

Some of the Tesla packs I have seen is are 135 kWh assuming 400V operation. The output power for an F150 is 335 kilowatts so okay we need two Tesla packs but don’t see an issue there you have a huge under tray area.

So the questions is can you design an electric motor to cover both situations.

Reply to  commieBob
July 18, 2019 4:20 am

LdB July 18, 2019 at 1:10 am

… So for them try the reverse I want to go from zero to 100Mph in 5sec please with no load obviously.


The trick is to get the horsepower to the pavement. You can’t use the same suspension to get good quarter mile times and to haul heavy loads. The motor isn’t the problem.

HP = Torque x RPM ÷ 5252

After that, it’s just a question of gearing.

Reply to  commieBob
July 18, 2019 5:36 am

Trains are diesel/electric. They don’t run off of batteries, but from large on-board diesel generators. Some commuter trains are all electric but they don’t use batteries either (they also don’t use solar or wind power).

Reply to  commieBob
July 18, 2019 6:31 am

commieBob: Yes, mine trucks have electric motors to turn the wheels. Nothing new there—have for decades. However:“The electricity is provided by two generators, each of which is driven by a 16-cylinder diesel engine with an output of approximately 1,700 kW,” Mine trucks are powered by diesel, not the electricity. Yes, the electricity turns the wheels, but the generator is the power. The motors are 100% dependent on the diesel generators. It’s not a conventional internal combustion engine (thought I suppose the diesel generators could be considered such) but it’s far from an electric. Take away the diesel and the truck never moves.

Hugh Mannity
Reply to  commieBob
July 18, 2019 11:51 am

Batteries not included:

“The GVW BelAZ 75710 uses four Siemens electric traction motors. Each of them has an output of 1,200 kilowatts (~1,800 hp). “The electricity is provided by two generators, each of which is driven by a 16-cylinder diesel engine with an output of approximately 1,700 kW,”

So it’s at most a hybrid…

Patrick MJD
Reply to  LdB
July 18, 2019 12:59 am

You turn the motors in to generators and if there isn’t enough battery to take the juice, the excess energy is dissipated as heat through resistors. Nothing new there.

Lee L
Reply to  Eric Stevens
July 17, 2019 10:56 pm

“I would love to see an electric pickup truck trying to negotiate water, say, 24″ deep” …

Existing electric pickups already do that. Your F150 may use gas or diesel for motive power but it is electric ( and heavily computerized) for control and sequencing of ignition and does run in 24″ deep of water, especially with a snorkel.

Reply to  Eric Stevens
July 17, 2019 11:56 pm

Be quite a light show if the battery shorts out while in the water.

Reply to  nc
July 18, 2019 8:14 am

The HMCS Chicoutimi comes to mind. link

You can build waterproof electrical systems and they work well, down to the bottom of the deepest ocean trenches. You have to do it deliberately and you have to know what you’re doing.

Reply to  commieBob
July 18, 2019 11:37 am

Yes but if one uses a pickup for what its designed for and not just driving around town problems will occur no matter how well engineered. I have thousands of miles backroad travelling and things break. Like I said will be quite the light show.

July 17, 2019 7:53 pm

If you promise to give me a $150,000 pickup for free of course I am going to like it more than a $50,000 pickup that I am going to have to pay for!

July 17, 2019 8:02 pm

“Maybe if Tesla only manufactured virtual automobiles, they could actually make money.”

yep, the virtual Uber drives could have all the virtual fun a virtual life can virtually enjoy.

Meanwhile in the real world, and after 20+ years of hype trying to convince everybody of the virtues of EVs, EVs are still only a niche product and ICE powered vehicles and products still rule the world’s roads, waterways, small aircraft, and power generation.

John Endicott
Reply to  tom0mason
July 18, 2019 7:51 am

Indeed. There are plenty of reasons why EVs were surpassed by ICE over a century ago despite EVs coming to market first. and many of those reasons are still valid today. EVs have a niche in the market, but until those reasons are mitigated, a niche is all they will occupy (barring government taking over the market and mandating only EVs can be bought).

Bryan A
Reply to  tom0mason
July 18, 2019 10:09 am

If they did, they would be Virtually Wealthy…can you buy one with Bitcoin?

Christopher Simpson
July 17, 2019 8:09 pm

Why wouldn’t there be more tweets about a proposed Tesla pickup truck than about the very real F-150? One is an exciting prospect that has obviously become a popular topic of conversation. And it’s telling that most of these tweets are in states known for being very “liberal” and “progressive” and therefore fans of such things.

Hell, to be frank, there isn’t even any evidence what portion of these tweets are particularly favourable.

Ben of Houston
Reply to  Christopher Simpson
July 17, 2019 8:44 pm

On the other hand, your dad, uncles, and Grandpa probably have at least 2 F-150s between them. If you are from the Southwest, that number goes up to 4 F-150s. 8, if your name is Bubba. Of course, Bubbas don’t normally use Twitter

Then, F-150s just aren’t popular topics of conversation in the same way that drive-through food isn’t that popular topic. You don’t tweet excitedly about that brand new McDonalds drive through, even if you use it 5 nights a week. It’s normal.

tsk tsk
July 17, 2019 8:20 pm

What’s wrong with this picture, you ask?

Well, they didn’t apply Mann’s Nature trick, of course.

July 17, 2019 8:30 pm

The June model 3 sales spike has to be due to 3P’s (the awd performance version) (vs the single motor and non performance, dual motor versions). My Kid beat the crap out of a 3P recently and he said it was faster than a 707 HP hellcat to 110 mph.

A lot of the 3P sales could be people ditching their old model 3 for the 3P version with 200 more HP. It must suck that the “pioneers” and “true believers” are the one saddled with the totally inferior versions of the car.

The 3P is the car that “car guys” will rave about to their car guy friends (If they buy one, of course), but like the 1971 Hemicuda convertible or the 1988 Fiero by Lotus or the 2009 Pontiac Solstice GPX Coupe, is it too late.

Oh and most people I know on twitter tweeting about cars have zero money, even in a Trump economy.

Bryan A
Reply to  UNGN
July 18, 2019 10:07 am

I wasn’t aware that they actually began production on their inferior 3’s (the ones that cost $35,000 and had Thousands of pre orders) I thought they were concentrating on their more costlier 3 versions

Alexander Feht
July 17, 2019 8:32 pm

Tesla is a very effective vehicle of distraction and diversion, guarding other Musk’s projects from watermelon attacks.

A proud Tesla-driving greeny, full of condescension toward those deplorable rednecks bacause he can afford more expensive and wasteful derivative fossil-fuel energy (instead of using it directly) is less prone to critisize communication satellites or Mars landing.

Patrick MJD
July 17, 2019 8:52 pm

Isn’t a Ford F150 sold in the US every few minutes?

Carbon Bigfoot
Reply to  David Middleton
July 18, 2019 4:35 am

Last good F-150 built was my 1998, six banger, standard transmission, 4X4, 8 ft. bed, standard cab that I put 120,000 miles on in 7 years and made the mistake of giving that to a family member.
By 2005 the only American pickup available with standard was a similar Chevy Silverado that I had for 10 years and only put 32,000 miles on, when the vehicle frame rusted out and couldn’t pass PA Inspection!!
Today I have a 2019 Toyota Tacoma off-road 4X4, 6 cylinder, double cab 5 foot bed, standard transmission that I only have 1000 miles on it—I love it. Getting 17 MPG country driving. will do much better in time.
I’m 6′-1″ 235 lbs. and wear a 54 jacket. I fit comfortably with plenty of leg room. Toyota has finally gotten the message. American manufactures need to do the same.
Man Trucks, American made, went downhill when women started to drive trucks and badgered their husbands into automatic transmission vehicles. Sorry ladies the truth hurts. You guys that favor automatic trannies are shiftless bastards!!

RR in Phoenix
Reply to  Carbon Bigfoot
July 19, 2019 6:40 am

My 2001 Ford F-150 Lariat 4×4 with the 5.4 V8 on 35 inch tires would disagree with you on that. 262,000 miles and still running strong with an automatic transmission. Love my truck! My bro drove several Tacomas and although they were great trucks, tight as can be inside. Riding shotgun and rubbing shoulders is not fun. Cabs were small and not very tall but it sounds like it only took Toyota until 2019 to correct some of those issues.

Craig from Oz
July 17, 2019 8:53 pm

This is seriously junk news.

Not technically fake news, but in real terms it is total junk.

Even if we ignore the fact that Teslas is vapourware, the metric for this report is based on how many STATES are talking about Tesla over F-150. Sure it could be argued that this is the same way government is calculated (or not, the finer points of US election systems is not something I would confess to being experienced with), but governments are decided using pre-agreed and documented rules.

Surveys for pointless car comparisons are not. This is the survey company defining their own rules in order to obtain their own results.


(to continue the explain just how pointless this report is, the survey – to the best of my knowledge – only calculates how often Tesla is mentioned and not the context. To compare we could use this logic to say that Trump is universally loved, after all, EVERYONE talks about his constantly.)

John Endicott
Reply to  Craig from Oz
July 18, 2019 7:55 am

Indeed. By this metric, Trump is the most popular president *EVER* and AOC the most popular congressperson. No other president has been talked about as much as Trump, and no other congressperson as been talked about as much as AOC. context of the talk apparently is unimportant.

July 17, 2019 9:32 pm

Serious question – can you clutch-start an EV if the battery goes flat?

Reply to  Mr.
July 17, 2019 10:53 pm

Mr. – this sounds like a ‘not quite serious’ question to me! Anyway, my answer is “No, but maybe if you park it on top of a huge hill and get it rolling down you might be able to get a bit of charge into the battery via the regenerative braking feature before you get to the bottom.” Assuming you can even open the door or steer the thing when the battery is flat, of course. Maybe a Tesla owner can tell us?

Reply to  BoyfromTottenham
July 18, 2019 10:04 am

I forgot to add – “asking for a friend” 😎

Reply to  Mr.
July 19, 2019 4:55 am

can you clutch start your automatic ICE car when the battery goes flat?

michael hart
July 17, 2019 9:34 pm

“…a new study by automobile review site AutoWise found.”

Who on earth would undertake such a nonsensical study in the first place? I presume that it was really just a paid advert.

July 17, 2019 9:53 pm

Ditched a lovely hot sedan with all mod cons in 2012 for a 12 years old F150 when we started rebuilding a house. THat thing takes the payload and gets us around at the cost of a bit of extra gas. Got to get attached to the thing. This is from retired academic ex city folk.

July 17, 2019 11:16 pm

Eggplant is the most popular vegetable. *

* In terms of color according to an internet poll conducted by the students of Tumbleberry High School on the school website.

Rod Evans
July 17, 2019 11:32 pm

A TESLA pick up truck is an oxymoron. Trucks are for people why want to actually do things. TESLA’s are for people who dream of doing things, and want other people to see them dreaming.

Reply to  Rod Evans
July 18, 2019 5:53 am


Reply to  Rod Evans
July 18, 2019 11:16 am


July 17, 2019 11:40 pm

As large, experienced manufacturers roll out electric cars, Tesla will be in trouble.
On the F-150, Ford has announced an all electric version, along with 16 other models by 2022

Dave Dodd
July 17, 2019 11:42 pm

Tesla truck? Really? Will it tow a 6000 pound trailer from Carthage, Texas to Central Arizona in two days flat, a distance of 1250 miles? Actually, I first drove TO East Texas (2 days), loaded the trailer and then towed it back to Arizona in 2 more days (4 days total, 1250 miles each direction, altitude gain 350 feet in Texas to 6500 feet in Arizona)

This, in my 1995 5.0L F-150 which had 120,000 miles on the odometer at the time. I did this in July 2018. Our 2018 winter started a bit early, in October last year, with a 2 foot snowstorm and continued through 4 more major storms until the end of May 2019, in which our last snowstorm for the winter dumped 31.5 inches. Our diurnal swings through the winter several times dipped to -20F. My F-150 never failed to start right up each morning and is running strongly nearly every day as I write this.

Tesla truck? Really? HaHaHaHaHaHaHa!!! We want trucks that WORK through the hottest Summers and coldest Winters out where I live! Your little Tesla Tonka Truck would be dead in a ditch by now!

a happy little debunker
July 18, 2019 12:20 am

My favourite form of terrestrial transport is a land speeder
Perfect for taking out those pesky Womp-rats

But, they haven’t invented that either!

John Endicott
Reply to  a happy little debunker
July 18, 2019 6:17 pm

Actually it was the T-16 Skyhopper that Luke would take out those pseky womp-rats with

Luke : “It’s not impossible. I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back home, they’re not much bigger than two meters.”

July 18, 2019 1:06 am

Did they search for “Tesla pick up, LOL”.

No, probably not.

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
July 18, 2019 1:30 am

Is TESLA an acronym for Totally Electric Schist Late Again or something similar?

Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
July 18, 2019 1:40 am

Tomorrow Everything Seems Like Ambrosia? 🙂

Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
July 18, 2019 1:42 am

Tiny Electric Sales Laughed At?

Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
July 18, 2019 1:53 am

Tax Evasion Sales Look Awful?

July 18, 2019 1:44 am

Tomorrow Elon Should Leave America?

John Endicott
Reply to  HotScot
July 18, 2019 7:59 am

Tomorrow never comes, it’s always somewhere in the future. Why put off till tomorrow what could be done today: Today Elon Should Leave America?

July 18, 2019 3:23 am

The only place the Tesla pickup truck will ever be more popular than a Ford F-150 is at the Tesla dealership.

July 18, 2019 5:01 am

“The study analyzed geotagged Twitter data of over 100,000 tweets and found that the Tesla pickup truck was being talked about in more states than the Ford F-150”

Ah, yes; of course they got those results by following Cook’s cooked books guaranteed method for achieving 97% false popularity.

July 18, 2019 5:39 am

Does it come standard with Alice in Chains MP3s? Or does that attract T1000s?

July 18, 2019 5:50 am

Ford has developed an electric pickup truck. It will be commercialized within a year, in my opinion, probably ready for sale as soon as Tesla’s pickup.
Using number of Twitter hits to determine the popularity of something that doesn’t even exist is even dumber than using it as a metric to judge popularity of an object that does exist.

Gunga Din
July 18, 2019 6:20 am

“Maybe if Tesla only manufactured virtual automobiles, they could actually make money.”

So Tesla’s future is in computer racing games?

July 18, 2019 6:23 am

That people talk about things that are new or unusual is not surprising.
The F-150 has been around for how long now?

You have to be beyond desperate to use the number of mentions in Tweets to determine over all popularity.

John Endicott
Reply to  MarkW
July 18, 2019 8:03 am

Since 1975, so half a century coming up in just six years.

old engineer
Reply to  John Endicott
July 18, 2019 10:44 pm

by google search says the F150 was introduced in 1948.

John Endicott
Reply to  old engineer
July 19, 2019 5:19 am

Your google-fu fails.
the F-series was introduced in 1948, the specific model designated the F-150 was introduced in 1975

THE FRIST F-SERIES WAS IN 1948-1952 IT WAS F-1 (1/2 TON AND F-2 (3/4 TON) THE F-150 CAME OUT IN 1975

July 18, 2019 6:48 am

I really, really question that map of who prefers what. I do not see rural people voting for a fantasy truck and an UGLY, VILE looking one at that. I can see people in big cities and maybe the rich progressives that buy up western states to trash voting that way, but not real people who actually drive in rural areas. I think someone gave their kid two different crayons and had them color in the states on the map.

Look up pictures of this vile thing—it’s horrible. I wouldn’t have one if they gave it to me. No self-respecting person would.

Flight Level
July 18, 2019 7:31 am

Teslarati fandom social media realistic information content is even lower than the one of phone sex ads.

July 18, 2019 9:19 am

My 1995 F 150 with the big straight six still gets 20 mpg highway, and that is with 235,000 miles on the odometer. That is impressive.

Reply to  goldminor
July 18, 2019 10:29 am

I choked at miles per gram until I got it was metres per gram. Impressive. : -)

No really, it’s 14.1 litres / 100km. In more SI’ish units, that resolves as 0.141E-6 m². Impressive.

July 18, 2019 10:43 am

I suppose it will be made at the late great, world’s largest solar factory in Buffalo? If the NY subsidy is just right.

Rod Evans
July 18, 2019 11:57 am

My Ford 4×4 gives me 40 MPG it has a 2 ltr diesel engine and starts every time. Those are imperial gals by the way. What would ever induce me to willingly change to an electric drive vehicle that can’t be recharged in any of the areas I drive, and even if there were chargers it would take 2 hrs to fill it with energy?

John Endicott
Reply to  Rod Evans
July 18, 2019 6:27 pm

Clearly an EV is not for you. Your circumstances, however, are not the same as the circumstances of every other potential customer on the planet. You do realize there are people who don’t drive in any of the areas you drive. There are people who don’t travel long distances frequently. There are people who live in parts of the world where temperatures aren’t frequently excessively cold (or excessively hot). Or any other circumstance people have brought up in this thread. In short while EVs might not be for *YOU* (or for any of the other people here who can’t see past their own circumstances) that does not mean they are not for anyone. There are, in fact, people (and not just rich folks looking to add a new toy to their toy box) for whom an EV would make a decent primary vehicle. You are not one of those people. c’est la vie.

Reply to  John Endicott
July 18, 2019 6:38 pm

I don’t like the thought of sitting on an electrical time bomb.

Tom Halla
Reply to  nc
July 18, 2019 6:41 pm

As batteries contain all the components of a chemical reaction, it is rather like an explosive, and if the energy density was increased, it could be one.

John Endicott
Reply to  nc
July 19, 2019 5:26 am

But you do like sitting on a chemical time bomb? you are, I assume, aware that many, many people have died in ICE vehicles whose fossil fuel caught fire? and I’m sure you are aware that many, many others who have died from the chemicals released (Carbon monoxide) from the normal consumption of that fuel? Not to mention those who’ve died from electrocution from the electronics in those ICE vehicles (you are already sitting on an “electrical time bomb” whether you realize it or not given the increasing use of electronics in ICE vehicles). Every form of energy has its dangers, there is no 100% safe energy source. Properly designed and used, however, and the danger is as miniscule as can be. That goes for both ICE and EVs.

Reply to  John Endicott
July 19, 2019 9:26 am

Most ice fires are from electrical or over heating caused. Those explosions on ice vehicles only happen in the movies. A gasoline fed fire in an ice vehicles can mostly be easily faught. An ev fire very difficult to extinguish. Then there is the danger of being electrocuted after a crash.

John Endicott
Reply to  John Endicott
July 19, 2019 8:13 pm

dismissing the dangers of ICE vehicles doesn’t make all the people who have died from them any less dead. And there are a whole lot more dead people from the very real ICE accidents than there are from your mostly theoretical EV accidents. So far, the ratio of EV fires to EVs on the road have been magnitudes smaller than the ratio of ICE fires to ICE vehicles on the road. and the number of CO deaths from EVs is zero. In short the safety record of EVs in regards to deaths is thus far much better than that of ICE.

I repeat: a properly designed and used vehicle (ICE *OR* EV), however, and the danger is as miniscule as can be.

Tom Halla
Reply to  John Endicott
July 19, 2019 8:23 pm

John, batteries rely on a chemical reaction, and are self contained. Having a high energy self contained substance is one of the requirements for an explosive. If one can keep a conventional ICE fuel from being well enough mixed with air, the oxidizer, no explosion or fire is possible.
As far as a hypothetical battery technology that contains anywhere the energy storage of a hydrocarbon fuel, I would not want to be around that thing in an accident.

Reply to  John Endicott
July 19, 2019 9:36 pm

You do realize the amount of ev to ice is tiny

John Endicott
Reply to  John Endicott
July 19, 2019 8:18 pm

Also I did not talk about “explosions”, that is your strawman. Each year, from 2014 to 2016, an estimated 171,500 highway vehicle fires occurred in the United States, resulting in an annual average of 345 deaths & 1,300 injuries. And a NHTSA study on non-traffic, non-crash motor vehicle fatalities found “somewhere between 200 and 250 deaths a year that are not known to be suicides result from vehicle-generated carbon monoxide.”

John Endicott
Reply to  John Endicott
July 20, 2019 6:12 pm

nc you do realize the total numbers are irrelevant, it’s the ratios (ie the per capita) that can be compared and the ratio of such accidents is smaller for EVs (thus far).

Tom, You can go on and on about you theoretical possible dangers till you are blue in the face, the reality is EVs currently have a very good safety record. reality trumps theory. All your “i wouldn’t want to be around when this theoretical thing happens” shows is that you are 1) looking for reasons to dislike EVs for no rational reason and 2) ignorant of the reality of their record in regards to such accidents. So far, on a per car basis, ICE have been more deadly than EVs. that’s the reality, like it or not.

Reply to  John Endicott
July 20, 2019 11:26 pm

You got figures or facts to back up your safety record?

John Endicott
Reply to  John Endicott
July 21, 2019 6:40 pm

If they’re as unsafe as you claim, you should easily be able to prove otherwise. Heck you’d be able to point to dozens of news reports of all the catastrophic accidents that should have happened by now. but you can’t. And yet finding news articles of deadly ICE vehicle incidents are easily found in daily news reports. In short, you are the one who made tha claim they’re unsafe (“an electrical time bomb.”) so the onus is on *you* to back that up with actual proof of them being as unsafe as you claim – you know actual reported instances of them causing death beyond what ICE vehicles have done on a per car basis.

Reply to  John Endicott
July 21, 2019 8:57 pm

Google ev vehicle fired, easy peasy

John Endicott
Reply to  John Endicott
July 21, 2019 6:50 pm

Some figures for you to consider:
In the US, the National Highway for Testing Safety Administration (NHTSA) shows that in 2016 there were 37,461 people killed in 34,436 motor vehicle crashes for an average of 102 deaths per day. Around 90% of those fatalities are “in-vehicle” casualties. Approximately 174,000 gas/diesel cars go up in smoke every year in the United States, according to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). EV fires have been almost nonexistent compared to the number of fires that occur in gasoline cars. There was one fire death in a Tesla Model X recently — just one — and it resulted in numerous headlines and apparently an National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation. Indeed, even one death is a tragedy, but 1 vs. 37,461 is a big difference. Furthermore, one or a few EV fires doesn’t compare to 500,000 gas/diesel car fires per year, even if we were to make the figures proportional to number of cars on the road.

Noe where’s your facts and figures to back up your claims of the inherent dagner of EVs? You have none.

Reply to  John Endicott
July 22, 2019 12:01 am

Sorry, do a google quite interesting. My issue is with those that think EVs are the second coming. That battery is a bomb and very difficult to deal with when it lights up

John Endicott
Reply to  John Endicott
July 22, 2019 5:31 am

If it’s so easy they why haven’t; you done it and posted the links that result? And why you are at it google for the deaths from ICE vehicles. To repeat:

In the US, the National Highway for Testing Safety Administration (NHTSA) shows that in 2016 there were 37,461 people killed in 34,436 motor vehicle crashes for an average of 102 deaths per day….There was one fire death in a Tesla Model X recently — just one — and it resulted in numerous headlines and apparently an National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation. Indeed, even one death is a tragedy, but 1 vs. 37,461 is a big difference. . even if we were to make the figures proportional to number of cars on the road, it’s still a big difference. You are worried about a theoretical bomb but have no problem with your current death box that you use daily. that’s an irrational argument on your part.

My issue is with those that think EVs are the second coming.

then go find someone that does, but if you do I suggest you come up with something more rational as an argument, otherwise they’ll think you are as loopy as you think they are.

July 18, 2019 12:16 pm

musk = vaporware.
nuff said

Tom Abbott
July 18, 2019 6:07 pm

At one time, I test drove a used 1961 Ford pickup by using it to commute to a job site 40 miles away. That test drive ruined me on Ford pickup trucks. That was the roughest riding vehicle I have ever been in! It just beat you to death with every bump in the road.

A few week later I bought a used 1965 Chevy longbed pickup and that was about the smothest riding vehicle I every had. The contrast between it and the 1961 Ford was stark. I had a 2012 GMC Yukon Danali that had a very good ride. Probably about the same wheelbase as my 1965 Chevy pickup.

But every time I think about Ford pickups I think about riding in that bouncing 1961 Ford. I’ll stick with Chevy and GMC.

I know why sedans are losing their lustre with customers. Have you every sat in the back seat of one? Terrible! I took a ride in the back seat of a Chrysler 300 for about 150 miles and that was sheer torture. It doesn’t surprise me people are opting for SUVs of various sizes. At least their seating is half-way comfortable and roomy. No so in your average sedan.

Roger Knights
July 18, 2019 9:53 pm

Ford has partnered with and invested in an American EV-maker (name forgotten) whose pickup truck will be out sooner than Tesla’s.

Here’s a 2-day-old article on SA titled, “Tesla’s pickup truck will face tough questions on reliability”:

Roger Knights
July 18, 2019 10:19 pm

From Seeking Alpha a few days ago:

Ford’s New Best-Selling Large SUV Is Effectively A Hybrid Mustang Underneath

Jul. 15, 2019 7:39 PM ET|29 comments | About: Ford Motor Company (F)
Anton Wahlman
Ford’s multifaceted 2020-2021 electrification strategy sees its first entry with the 2020 Explorer, which just started arriving in U.S. dealerships.

This will also be the first time that a Ford Explorer is exported to Europe – in plug-in hybrid (PHEV) trim nonetheless.

Ford has also taken the unique competitive approach of making the electrified Explorer the rare hybrid that can tow and go off-road.

Looking beyond The Explorer, 2020 will bring an all-electric crossover-SUV built in North America that seems to take the lead in the area of attractive design. Watch out, Tesla!

Then, possibly by the end of 2021, the promised all-electric F-150 pickup truck will arrive. Will it beat Tesla to market?

Patrick MJD
July 18, 2019 10:25 pm

But the carrying capacity of the truck is reduced to offset the weight of the battery. That costs money in a working vehicle.

AGW is not Science
July 19, 2019 10:28 am

I can just see the Minnesota boy “bragging rights” conversations when they’re in the dead of winter. “Made it to the store and BACK – on ONE charge!”

Johann Wundersamer
July 28, 2019 7:08 am

BMW Seitenwagen:

. https://youtu.be/u8OZeo28dhA

Verified by MonsterInsights