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 • 07/03/19Elon 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.
[…]
Observer
From the Observer article…
Here’s a picture of the Tesla ‘Cyberpunk’ truck…
Here’s a picture of the coolest version of the Ford F-150…
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 trucks, chassis 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]
Wikipedia
EV’s vs Ford F-Series
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?
Maybe if Tesla only manufactured virtual automobiles, they could actually make money.
Tomorrow Elon Should Leave America?
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?
The only place the Tesla pickup truck will ever be more popular than a Ford F-150 is at the Tesla dealership.
Ah, yes; of course they got those results by following Cook’s cooked books guaranteed method for achieving 97% false popularity.
Does it come standard with Alice in Chains MP3s? Or does that attract T1000s?
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.
“Maybe if Tesla only manufactured virtual automobiles, they could actually make money.”
So Tesla’s future is in computer racing games?
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.
Since 1975, so half a century coming up in just six years.
by google search says the F150 was introduced in 1948.
Your google-fu fails.
the F-series was introduced in 1948, the specific model designated the F-150 was introduced in 1975
https://www.answers.com/Q/What_year_was_the_Ford_F-150_introduced
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.
Teslarati fandom social media realistic information content is even lower than the one of phone sex ads.
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.
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.
I suppose it will be made at the late great, world’s largest solar factory in Buffalo? If the NY subsidy is just right.
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?
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.
I don’t like the thought of sitting on an electrical time bomb.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
You do realize the amount of ev to ice is tiny
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.”
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.
You got figures or facts to back up your safety record?
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.
Google ev vehicle fired, easy peasy
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.
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
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.
musk = vaporware.
nuff said
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.
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”:
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4275221-tesla-pickup-truck-will-face-tough-questions-reliability
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
Summary
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?
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4275090-fords-new-best-selling-large-suv-effectively-hybrid-mustang-underneath?li_source=LI&li_medium=liftigniter-widget
But the carrying capacity of the truck is reduced to offset the weight of the battery. That costs money in a working vehicle.
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!”
Didn’t we read from a Thai schoolboy Mother that “Elon Musk should be shot dead”:
https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-huawei&ei=EuQyXdXLKaLprgSF4qPQDA&q=Thai+school+boys+caught+in+cave+Elon+musk+unhelpful&oq=Thai+school+boys+caught+in+cave+Elon+musk+unhelpful&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-serp.
Here we go:
https://www.newsweek.com/elon-musk-should-be-shot-says-mother-british-caver-billionaire-called-pedo-1034548?amp=1
BMW Seitenwagen:
. https://youtu.be/u8OZeo28dhA