Electric vehicles (EVs), their emissions, and future viability

GoFaster said:

I agree with your assessment with one modification. There is some argument towards EV in that they don't have emission controls - a friend of mine is a heavy truck mechanic, and on all the late model trucks, the emission control systems are THE biggest source of down time and maintenance costs. Some of them have been getting better as they get the hardware and calibration sorted out but it's still a major headache that doesn't exist with an EV.

Click to expand...

Hopefully President Trump's EPA will cease their meddling at the point of pointless diminishing returns.

GoFaster said:

But having said that ... knowing that Cummins is working on electric heavy-truck powertrains, I'd be waiting to see what they come up with.

Click to expand...

I'd assume that will be a hybrid diesel-electric powertrain, so in effect an over the road locomotive. Best of both worlds, massive electric torque when needed and an efficient diesel engine.

Cummins has shown a battery-electric powertrain. No diesel.

migbro said:

That's true, of course. You'll have to excuse me as I don't keep track of Tesla prices but my impression is they're up in the stratosphere of $60K to $80K. No-one spends that kind of money just for transportation and there's a lot of choice in that price range.

Click to expand...

Have you priced full sized trucks lately? Many of the 150/1500s on the lots right now have an msrp of $60k+ US. I see a lot of “commuter” trucks that are well over $70k everyday and these are trucks that will never see anything over a few bags of dirt in the bed.

kjclow said:

Have you priced full sized trucks lately? Many of the 150/1500s on the lots right now have an msrp of $60k+ US. I see a lot of “commuter” trucks that are well over $70k everyday and these are trucks that will never see anything over a few bags of dirt in the bed.

Click to expand...

The cheapest F-150 I priced earlier this year on a nearby dealer's lot had an MSRP of $42K (V6, short bed, crew cab, 2 WD, minimal electronics, cheap interior, etc). The other 350 trucks on the lot were higher and topped out at over 70K MSRP.

aja8888 said:

The cheapest F-150 I priced earlier this year on a nearby dealer's lot had an MSRP of $42K (V6, short bed, crew cab, 2 WD, minimal electronics, cheap interior, etc). The other 350 trucks on the lot were higher and topped out at over 70K MSRP.

Click to expand...

Two strikes against what I’m looking for. Something that will tow at least 8000 pounds and at least a six foot bed. We will be buying a travel trailer for retirement and the ones we like and can afford run from 7000-7500 pounds. I figure a little extra towing capacity won’t hurt. We will also be putting the bikes in the bed. Wheel to wheel, they’re just over 6 feet. I plan on a building a rack where I can just run the bikes in without taking off tires.

kjclow said:

Two strikes against what I’m looking for. Something that will tow at least 8000 pounds and at least a six foot bed. We will be buying a travel trailer for retirement and the ones we like and can afford run from 7000-7500 pounds. I figure a little extra towing capacity won’t hurt. We will also be putting the bikes in the bed. Wheel to wheel, they’re just over 6 feet. I plan on a building a rack where I can just run the bikes in without taking off tires.

Click to expand...

I had the price of that bottom line truck (a 2017) down to $27 K. Decided against it since my wife could not easily climb into it.

migbro said:

The Tesla Semi is vaporware and I'm expecting one of Tesla's next big surprises to be a sudden and "unforeseen" collapse of the company.

You can not run ever-increasing negative cash flows for ever. Sooner or later the muppets will catch on to the Ponzi scheme.

Click to expand...

Amazon.com 1999

https://youtu.be/6cTjhzSgdwE

That nutty Bezos guy is wasting his time. Nobody reads books anymore.

turbobrick240 said:

That nutty Bezos guy is wasting his time. Nobody reads books anymore.

Click to expand...

My kind of guy ~~ Worth billions, and drives a "OLD" cheap Honda

aja8888 said:

I expect what will take the Tesla stock down faster than an avalanche is a 15% correction in the market. "Safe harbor stocks" on the recovery will be firms that have demonstrated continuous earnings for decades.

In the financial crisis of 2008-09, banks where too big to fail, but a ton of over-leveraged firms went out. Tesla is not a bank.

Click to expand...

And that's why I haven't invested in Tesla yet. I was too late to get in early and at this point it looks like there is a market bubble in general. I'd be in for the long haul, but the buy-in price needs to be right for me to pull the trigger.

aja8888 said:

I had the price of that bottom line truck (a 2017) down to $27 K. Decided against it since my wife could not easily climb into it.

Click to expand...

We walked from a $42k price negotiation because we felt the Ram advertising was too misleading. They advertise $10K in discounts but in reality most people will be in the right position to only get $5k. With supplier pricing and discounts, I got to about $8k off msrp. Of course part of my problem is wanting the ecodiesel.

dremd said:

Amazon.com 1999

Click to expand...

Perhaps. However Amazon's stock only started taking off after they proved their big investments into the online retail business can work, but also turn a profit. TSLA remains a speculative stock has taken off on the promise of profitability. Big difference.

Unless Tesla can corner the market on lithium Ion batteries that significantly reduces input costs; I don't see the upside in TSLA.

Here's the main thing with TSLA that makes them unique: vision and actually working towards that vision.

None of the legacy automakers have yet proven that they're working towards a strong EV vision, and until that happens, TSLA will be quite highly valued. And, while there are Chinese manufacturers like BYD that are visibly working towards an EV vision, they aren't doing things to near the extent of Tesla (and are focusing on transit and other fleet applications), and aren't positioned in the luxury space, so I don't see them taking TSLA's valuation down.

If a legacy automaker actually goes whole-hog into a Tesla-like infrastructure deployment (or, for that matter, piggybacks on Tesla's infrastructure), and actually converts a significant portion of their lineup to EVs that are legitimately desirable rather than being compliance cars, then TSLA's in trouble, at least in their current form as an automaker. They may have some competitive advantages in the energy industry, as well as with their US manufacturing of batteries and solar cells (in the midst of a protectionist policy era in the US), though.

Having a vision and working toward it is not unique in business. That's part of the business plan.

Unfortunately, lots of businesses did the above and some were successful and some not.

When (if) Tesla folds up shop, their technology and assets may survive if acquired by other "legacy" firms, or maybe even a Chinese company.

My point is that Tesla's vision and willingness to follow through is a rather unique one in the automotive industry today, and one that the stock market appears to be rewarding.

Someone else having the same vision and actually following through on it will likely hurt TSLA in the stock market.

My fear is that if/when Tesla gets big enough to threaten the big 3, they will combine muscle and force Tesla to either be acquired or just disappear. It's happened many times before. With global competition, I guess I should say the big 5. Ford, GM, Fiat, Toyota, and VWAG

bhtooefr said:

Here's the main thing with TSLA that makes them unique: vision and actually working towards that vision.

None of the legacy automakers have yet proven that they're working towards a strong EV vision, and until that happens, TSLA will be quite highly valued. And, while there are Chinese manufacturers like BYD that are visibly working towards an EV vision, they aren't doing things to near the extent of Tesla (and are focusing on transit and other fleet applications), and aren't positioned in the luxury space, so I don't see them taking TSLA's valuation down.

Click to expand...

In terms of an investment, there comes a time when a vision needs to turn a profit. Steve Jobs imagined 1000 songs in your pocket. He made that happen & a struggling computer company transformed into a multi-billion dollar media powerhouse.

No doubt EVs are cool, but in the end; they are just cars. Teslas have cool features...Big deal. Better cars perhaps, and with advanced features, but the reality is they are still cars - not gamechangers. . Steve Jobs's vision turned an entire industry upside down. Musk is rattling the cage a little, but in the end, he's a car salesman that inexplicably wants to go to mars.

I disagree about Tesla's valuation being linked to the luxury car space. All the excitement is coming from their new "affordable" model - not so much from the S or the X. The Kia Soul is a huge success, mostly because at an MSRP of $16,100 - it really is affordable. I could see Korea or China selling an amazing EV for under $20,000 years before Tesla can do it. If or when the competition finds a way to make that everyman's EV profitable - they will. At that point, Tesla is in serious trouble.

In addition to having a vision and a brilliant mind, Musk is incredibly wealthy, and is "all in" on his business ventures. I don't doubt that he would expend a considerable portion of his fortune, if needed, to carry Tesla over until it becomes profitable.

kjclow said:

My fear is that if/when Tesla gets big enough to threaten the big 3, they will combine muscle and force Tesla to either be acquired or just disappear. It's happened many times before. With global competition, I guess I should say the big 5. Ford, GM, Fiat, Toyota, and VWAG

Click to expand...

And how would they do that?

TSLA is a publicly traded company. The only way the other manufacturers could "force" Tesla to disappear is if they came up with competitive products that beat Tesla at their own game ... and I wouldn't exclude this possibility although it looks like it would be at least a few years down the road. You can't "force" a publicly traded company to "be acquired" ... someone has to be willing to buy a majority the outstanding shares (at a premium that is high enough for current shareholders to accept the deal). At current valuations TSLA is extremely expensive, and even if there were companies that "could" buy them out, why "should" they buy them at a premium to today's inflated valuations of TSLA despite fairly obvious trouble on the horizon? It doesn't make any sense.

Of course, if TSLA runs into trouble such that the share price crashes, then that's quite another matter, and I wouldn't exclude this possibility from happening, either ...

One of the things Tesla has done right has been recognizing that the cars and the charging infrastructure go hand in hand. The other manufacturers have been seemingly doing their best to make the charging infrastructure someone else's problem ... and until this changes, Tesla has an ace in the hole. If the other manufacturers gang up and get serious about installing SAE Combo quick-charging stations *everywhere* ... including across the street from every single Tesla Supercharger! ... and come up with good products, Tesla probably won't be able to keep up. The Model S is 6 model years old with no sign of a next generation, or even a makeover, on the horizon.

GoFaster said:

The Model S is 6 model years old with no sign of a next generation, or even a makeover, on the horizon.

Click to expand...

I would argue that the Model S has seen more changes in the last 5 years than the Jetta has in 15 years. My 2012 P85 feels almost like an antique compared to a 2017 P100D. Tesla doesn't do 'generations' they don't even do 'model years' when there's an improvement that gets approved it goes into the next car.

nwdiver said:

I would argue that the Model S has seen more changes in the last 5 years than the Jetta has in 15 years. My 2012 P85 feels almost like an antique compared to a 2017 P100D. Tesla doesn't do 'generations' they don't even do 'model years' when there's an improvement that gets approved it goes into the next car.

Click to expand...

One car is a 2012 P85. The other is a 2017 P100D.

I'm with you! I can't believe how much the Model S has changed over the years. It's a totally different car now.




Time to go trade in that old 2012 clunker for the 2017 model.

GoFaster said:

One of the things Tesla has done right has been recognizing that the cars and the charging infrastructure go hand in hand. The other manufacturers have been seemingly doing their best to make the charging infrastructure someone else's problem ... and until this changes, Tesla has an ace in the hole. If the other manufacturers gang up and get serious about installing SAE Combo quick-charging stations *everywhere* ... including across the street from every single Tesla Supercharger! ... and come up with good products, Tesla probably won't be able to keep up. The Model S is 6 model years old with no sign of a next generation, or even a makeover, on the horizon.

Click to expand...

Tesla is doing the heavy lifting. I can't blame CEO's of Ford, GM, Toyota, et al making the absolute minimum investments in electric cars until they know how it's all shakes out.

Exxon Mobil is an energy company. There's no law I know of that prevents them from selling kWh's alongside gallons. Given a reasonable ROI, a nationwide rollout of DCFC stations, could happen.

Franz Holzhausen did an amazing job designing the exterior of the Model S (and the new Roadster). I don't think a major redesign could improve the aesthetics much. In fact, I don't like the current trend of many of the big auto manufacturers incorporating too many design elements and radical body lines in new models. Smooth, flowing lines look much better to my eye. A classic Porshce looks so much nicer than a Lamborghini, imo.

Yes, the smooth, flowing lines....like the classic jelly bean profile.

Exactly. The jellybean profile served the type 1 well for many, many years with just minor refreshes. And that design still brings smiles to many faces.

nwdiver said:

I would argue that the Model S has seen more changes in the last 5 years than the Jetta has in 15 years. My 2012 P85 feels almost like an antique compared to a 2017 P100D. Tesla doesn't do 'generations' they don't even do 'model years' when there's an improvement that gets approved it goes into the next car.

Click to expand...

Huh? You really do not know much about Volkswagens, do you. The [current] NCS Jetta is an entirely different platform than the --2010 car.

Given the fact that the NCS Jetta sells quite well in the markets in which it was intended, it likely will not need much changing at least for the next couple years.

The NCS, like the model S, also just got a light exterior refresh. I'd say the current Chrysler LX products got a heavy interior / exterior refresh, and I'm seeing a fair few of them on the road.

-J

I will fully grant that they did a very good job with the original design of the Model S and they still look good out on the road. It doesn't need an exterior makeover.

The interior, on the other hand ...

The seats have been redone twice now, and the "skin" on the screen interface has gotten a few major updates too.

-J

GoFaster said:

I will fully grant that they did a very good job with the original design of the Model S and they still look good out on the road. It doesn't need an exterior makeover.

The interior, on the other hand ...

Click to expand...

The interior is awful. Like, really, really awful. I was thinking the 3 was going to be less bizarre, but it is just as bad. Sometimes, the wheel does NOT need reinventing.