Unsubscribed to "E for Electric"

[bwilson4web]

Hi,

I'd grown increasingly bothered by his advocacy of a sponsor combined with more and more backhanded comments about Tesla. Then today:

When he suggested Elon should praise the same company responsible for the diesel cheat, well my patience was exhausted. But I'd already noticed he was becoming all commentary and lacked engineering facts and data. Even played back at 2x speed, his commentary had become a waste of time (not to mention an annoying, whining voice fixed by playing faster.)

Bob Wilson

 

[David Green]

Hi,

I'd grown increasingly bothered by his advocacy of a sponsor combined with more and more backhanded comments about Tesla. Then today:

When he suggested Elon should praise the same company responsible for the diesel cheat, well my patience was exhausted. But I'd already noticed he was becoming all commentary and lacked engineering facts and data. Even played back at 2x speed, his commentary had become a waste of time (not to mention an annoying, whining voice fixed by playing faster.)

Bob Wilson

Bob, Tesla and Elon Musk make lots of mistakes and are so easy to find fault in. Musk tweeted about taken an S to the Nurburgring, obviously without talking to his engineers, and or even understanding what is involved in a Nurburgring lap. Model S is one of the worst track cars made once you go past a quarter mile, and makes some corners, and the Nurburgring is the benchmark track all performance cars are measured by. The Model 3 is slightly better, but still pretty bad, hence the reason Tesla has never made any effort other than 0-60 runs, and quarter mile. Elon deserved to be ridiculed when he pops off with the mouth and I told you that when the "Model S to Nurburgring next week" comment was first made. I commented that he would likely quietly back down from that comment, and a Stock Model S performance would have a hard time getting within one minute of the Porsche's time. Tesla has been left behind now in performance EV's, that is plain and simple. Your comments about tweaking, and software update show how little you know about production car Nurburgring track records, they are done with cars in production trim and calibrations, and verified by a 3rd party. They check everything before and after the run, and GM has stated many times they do not optimize the settings for the record run, they set everything right down the middle, including the engine used, and oil run. They take a sample of 10 engines, and take the one that is in the middle of their spec, not the strongest one, they also run OEM recommended oil, and there is no zero weight magic tricks. GM also does to use professional drivers, they have their chassis engineers drive the cars. (actually might be better because those engineers have thousands of laps on the Nurburgring working on suspension calibrations, and know every inch of the track)

 

[interestedinEV]

did not want to wade into this discussion but here is a great article that looks at it objectively (as a result many people are going to find fault with the article as it challenges a part of your belief)

In the battle of the Tesla Model S and the Porsche Taycan, it's really no contest (TSLA)
https://news.yahoo.com/battle-tesla-model-porsche-taycan-152200227.html


There is a great comment in the article
Tesla owners don't care about Nürburgring laps, while Porsche owners most definitely do
..........................................
Of course, Wall Street short-sellers cheerleading for Tesla's demise are going to herald the Taycan's arrival as a watershed moment when Tesla's luxury-sedan business collapses as all the Model S customers jump to Porsche. Likewise, Tesla bulls will argue that the Taycan is too expensive and not tech-y enough to unsettle the Model S.

They're both making the same error: assuming that the cars are attempting to capture the same customers. Sure, there could be some overlap, but for the most part if you seek high-performance four-door electric driving, and you have the cash, the Taycan is your ride. If you want an electric alternative to something like a BMW 5- or 7-Series, the Model S has always been for you.

 

[bwilson4web]

Oh yea, like the I-Pace and e-tron killed the Model S/X. Something I suggested to Nikki of "Transport Evolved" when she published a lament about comparison to Teslas:

She didn't mention it but Tesla references are what is called "earned media," free advertising.

A better comparison is to the top line ICE cars, equivalent class, of the next pretender. Compare with their ICE cars is a better answer.

Bob Wilson

 

[David Green]

Oh yea, like the I-Pace and e-tron killed the Model S/X. Something I suggested to Nikki of "Transport Evolved" when she published a lament about comparison to Teslas:

She didn't mention it but Tesla references are what is called "earned media," free advertising.

A better comparison is to the top line ICE cars, equivalent class, of the next pretender. Compare with their ICE cars is a better answer.

Bob Wilson

Well Bob you are way off your own topic, but while you are here, X and S have taken a huge beating from the I-Pace, and E-Tron, and soon the EQC, and Taycan will join the party. Since the launch of I-pace Tesla has lowered S and X pricing by over 25% and sales volumes have tanked, S being down 60% YOY in the USA. You know car companies only make money on products in high demand with factories running near capacity, S and X have cut capacity to one shift, but you know the factory and company fixed cost remain, as does servicing Tesla's tremendous debt. Revenue is Way Down in Q3 over 2018 as you will see in the next earnings report, which will trigger another selloff in the stock, unless Elon can pull a rabbit out of his hat.... I doubt it...

Back to the topic of your post, ... you post videos of the E-Tron charging in freezing weather with a cold battery, and use that to compare with your model 3 on summer trips. Biased to say the least... I see it as false reporting..

 

[David Green]

did not want to wade into this discussion but here is a great article that looks at it objectively (as a result many people are going to find fault with the article as it challenges a part of your belief)

In the battle of the Tesla Model S and the Porsche Taycan, it's really no contest (TSLA)
https://news.yahoo.com/battle-tesla-model-porsche-taycan-152200227.html


There is a great comment in the article
Tesla owners don't care about Nürburgring laps, while Porsche owners most definitely do
..........................................
Of course, Wall Street short-sellers cheerleading for Tesla's demise are going to herald the Taycan's arrival as a watershed moment when Tesla's luxury-sedan business collapses as all the Model S customers jump to Porsche. Likewise, Tesla bulls will argue that the Taycan is too expensive and not tech-y enough to unsettle the Model S.

They're both making the same error: assuming that the cars are attempting to capture the same customers. Sure, there could be some overlap, but for the most part if you seek high-performance four-door electric driving, and you have the cash, the Taycan is your ride. If you want an electric alternative to something like a BMW 5- or 7-Series, the Model S has always been for you.

I agree with most of this, but some Tesla owners are former Porsche drivers, which now might be given a reason to go back to Porsche.... Taycan without a doubt will conquest some Tesla buyers, just like I-pace and E-Tron have. There are many people who bought Tesla because they thought it was the coolest thing (perceived value) Model s in the same room with the Taycan is not the coolest thing, Taycan has much more cool factor, performance, and looks much more advanced.

 

[interestedinEV]

I agree with most of this, but some Tesla owners are former Porsche drivers, which now might be given a reason to go back to Porsche.... Taycan without a doubt will conquest some Tesla buyers, just like I-pace and E-Tron have. There are many people who bought Tesla because they thought it was the coolest thing (perceived value) Model s in the same room with the Taycan is not the coolest thing, Taycan has much more cool factor, performance, and looks much more advanced.

Most new models will take share away from the incumbents, some may take away more, some less. Will Taycan, I-Pace, E-tron, the MB EQC will take away some buyers from the S/X. I do not believe it is going to be very much, but there may be some short term loss as a person who was ready to buy the S/X may go somewhere else. However, it will serve to expand the overall market, increase the acceptability for EVs and would benefit all manufacturers including Tesla. So it is not all negative, though there may a short term pain for Tesla.

Now you (@David Green) believe that the short term effects of all of this, coupled with Elon's management capabilities (or the lack of it) will cause Tesla to go under. As far as I am concerned the jury is still out on that and I personally do not believe that will happen but we should agree to disagree.

Again, Taycan is a great car but will not meet my current needs and budget.

 

[David Green]

Most new models will take share away from the incumbents, some may take away more, some less. Will Taycan, I-Pace, E-tron, the MB EQC will take away some buyers from the S/X. I do not believe it is going to be very much, but there may be some short term loss as a person who was ready to buy the S/X may go somewhere else. However, it will serve to expand the overall market, increase the acceptability for EVs and would benefit all manufacturers including Tesla. So it is not all negative, though there may a short term pain for Tesla.

Now you (@David Green) believe that the short term effects of all of this, coupled with Elon's management capabilities (or the lack of it) will cause Tesla to go under. As far as I am concerned the jury is still out on that and I personally do not believe that will happen but we should agree to disagree.

Again, Taycan is a great car but will not meet my current needs and budget.

Yes, I think Elon's strategic mistakes will doom Tesla ultimately, the competition is just little pin pricks, but those pin pricks add up over time, and as more competitors show up. Also I am starting the think EV's have not hit an inflection point and are still a novelty in the USA market, so far this year the growth rate has dramatically slowed, and the last 2 months we have lost volume posted in 2018, that is not a trend we want to see continue? Tesla is constructing the Shanghai GF, which will raise their production volume to around 500K cars a year, and I do not believe there is a market for all those cars, If I was Elon, I would rush the Model Y into production in China as it has a bigger addressable market than 3, and should be fairly simple to pull forward. I predict a major collapse in model 3 business when the Y becomes available, why buy another set of Model 3 tooling for GF3 when that car will likely not carry large volumes long term?

Taycan in the form unveiled now is too expensive for me too... It's cool, but so is retirement someday.

 

[interestedinEV]

the competition is just little pin pricks, but those pin pricks add up over time, and as more competitors show up.

This is exactly what I have been saying for quite some time, that none of the current competition will make a big dent for now, but there will be a small loss for Tesla nonetheless. New competition that could have more of an impact is at least a year away. There may also be a temporary market contraction, which is normal for new products on the growth curve. This will add pressure on Tesla as volumes decline due to market forces. I think we are finally near agreement on these points.

Where we are not in agreement is that you are predicting the definitive demise of Tesla within the next year. I think that while there are dark clouds in the horizon, Tesla still has tricks up its sleeve and Elon will find a method to survive. And only time will tell what happens.

 

[David Green]

This is exactly what I have been saying for quite some time, that none of the current competition will make a big dent for now, but there will be a small loss for Tesla nonetheless. New competition that could have more of an impact is at least a year away. There may also be a temporary market contraction, which is normal for new products on the growth curve. This will add pressure on Tesla as volumes decline due to market forces. I think we are finally near agreement on these points.

Where we are not in agreement is that you are predicting the definitive demise of Tesla within the next year. I think that while there are dark clouds in the horizon, Tesla still has tricks up its sleeve and Elon will find a method to survive. And only time will tell what happens.

I think the part you and other here seem to miss is that even in Tesla's profitable Qtr's, (few and far between), the profits are very small, and only when production is full speed on all production lines. When Tesla gets those pin pricks each one knocking S and X volumes 1% (hypothetical number as we know E-Tron hit them harder) you do realize the tiny profit quickly gets eaten up? Now when you compare todays average sale price to the average sale price in Teslas last profitable quarter, there is a huge delta, I am guessing about 20% price reduction across the board, and the gross margin has been sinking. How do you hold up those small margins?

I do not know when Tesla will go down the tubes, and the last cash raise gave them time, but not sure how much, Bottom line, the cash position will continue to take a beating and I think wall street is more disciplined then ever, especially if we enter a recession.

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Of course, Wall Street short-sellers cheerleading for Tesla's demise are going to herald the Taycan's arrival as a watershed moment when Tesla's luxury-sedan business collapses as all the Model S customers jump to Porsche. Likewise, Tesla bulls will argue that the Taycan is too expensive and not tech-y enough to unsettle the Model S.

They're both making the same error: assuming that the cars are attempting to capture the same customers. Sure, there could be some overlap, but for the most part if you seek high-performance four-door electric driving, and you have the cash, the Taycan is your ride. If you want an electric alternative to something like a BMW 5- or 7-Series, the Model S has always been for you.

Looks like a pretty good, and well-balanced, article to me. Thanks, "interestedinEV"!

I deplore how the EV news sites -- definitely including InsideEVs news -- always try to gin up competition between auto makers, calling every new EV on the market a "Tesla killer", as though every new EV entering the market is poised to enter a head-to-head cage match fight to the death with Tesla Inc.

And I absolutely agree: There isn't much overlap between those jonesing for a Porsche and those who lust after a Tesla car. What the EV revolution needs is more vehicles of different types. A lot more different models in different categories, from SUVs to pickups to station wagons, to microcars for the European market.

It's pretty silly to believe -- as a few of the more rabid Tesla cheerleaders apparently do -- that Tesla can single-handedly supply most or all of the global EV market. (I consider myself a strong Tesla fan, but not a "cheerleader". That is, I'm not someone who thinks Tesla can do no wrong.) I'm glad to see VW/Porsche finally start offering something better than the mediocre U-Up and Golf EV. Hopefully VW will soon start making and selling a BEV that will appeal to the mass market -- which this Porsche Taycan clearly won't, since it's so high priced. VW has been promising that for decades now; it's exciting to see that, according to reports, it's finally getting close to actually coming true!

* * * * *

I was astonished -- I'm still astonished -- at how a very recent IEVs news article about a tweet from Elon Musk, tweaking Porsche's nose about putting a "Turbo" label on the all-electric Taycan (which, having no internal combustion engine, clearly has no turbocharger), garnered over 600 comments! I've never seen that many comments to a single article before on IEVs. Good grief, all that tempest-in-a-teapot over something so utterly trivial?

But it occurred to me that this indicates a lot of free marketing via social media for both Tesla and Porshe! So in that sense... Go Porsche! Go Tesla! ...and Up the EV revolution!

 

[bwilson4web]

There isn't much overlap between those jonesing for a Porsche [, insert maker here, raw] and those who lust after a Tesla car.

Two of my last three cars were disassembled by Sandy Munro & Associates:

• 2014 BMW i3-REx
• 2019 Standard Range Plus Model 3

At one time, Autoweek magazine made fair, unbiased, performance reviews. Then they had an editorial change and joined the 'gasoline sniffers.' Consumer Reports cares about a driver, 'comfy chair', experience and seem surprised by reader survey results that don't match their expectations. Edmunds excels with long term reviews and head-to-head drive tests ... like the old 'smackdown' series. But self-selecting car news is driven by what is important to this retired engineer.

Daily I start with:

• selected YouTube - not all are equal and many just like to hear themselves talk
• InSideEv - a reasonable collection from other sources and market tracking
• PriusChat - having owned Prius from October 2005 through March 26, 2019, it is still full of sane people
• Tesla Owners, Motors, and BMW i3 forums for our two cars

What attracts me are empirical, engineering data and analysis ... an engineer's bread and butter. What repels me are 'talking heads' and wandering, ad hominem, psychotics.

Bob Wilson

 

[interestedinEV]

It's pretty silly to believe -- as a few of the more rabid Tesla cheerleaders apparently do -- that Tesla can single-handedly supply most or all of the global EV market.

Adding some more thoughts to your statement. GM sold about 3 million vehicles (all brands) in the US last year (they sold more in China) out of about a total sales of 18 million vehicles in the US. This is about a 16% market share. Even if BEVs are only 30% of the US market in say 5 years and Tesla wants to own 80% of the US market (assuming volumes stay steady), they need to be selling 4.4 million BEVs per year in the US within 5 years time.

Not going to happen for a variety of reasons. One is that competition will jump in with those types of volumes and do what it takes to stay there. Second, Tesla does not have the current revenue stream to support such massive expansions in capacity in the US alone (yes they want to set up a GFs all over but together they will not meet such volumes even in totality). Third, there is a very large mix in these 18 million vehicles (sub-compacts and hatchbacks) to sedans to CUV/SUV to heavy trucks etc.). Even GM is not very competitive in many segments and they have to kill brands like Pontiac, Olds, Saturn etc. a few years back. Tesla has to be in every segment or totally dominate some segments (light trucks, SUVs) to reach such volumes. Again, unlikely to happen.

Fourth, there could be disruptive forces like someone with deep pockets getting directly into the Automotive manufacturing business (Google, Apple, Amazon have some presence but more in autonomous driving, not really into owning car assembly lines. Wyamo has retrofitting facility.). Tesla can be a major player in the automotive but they need to play their cards right.

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Edmunds excels with long term reviews and head-to-head drive tests ... like the old 'smackdown' series.

Yeah, I think that for automotive reviews, Edmunds.com stands head-and-shoulders above the rest. Unlike Consumer Reports they actually are car guys with a lot of depth and breadth of knowledge to their reviews; they actually perform, for some models, their own MPG/ range tests, which -- altho I'm not a "car guy" -- seem to me to be even more accurate than EPA tests; and I don't see that they have the tendency to run "milk-and-water" reviews of cars like the major car mags, which are too afraid of losing advertising to give any car a bad review.

The only problem with Edmunds.com that I've found is that they don't review everything, by a long shot. But then that's understandable, since they only review what they buy themselves anonymously, and obviously they don't have enough money to buy every model year of every model on the market!

​

 

[R P]

Yeah, I think that for automotive reviews, Edmunds.com stands head-and-shoulders above the rest. Unlike Consumer Reports they actually are car guys with a lot of depth and breadth of knowledge to their reviews; they actually perform, for some models, their own MPG/ range tests, which -- altho I'm not a "car guy" -- seem to me to be even more accurate than EPA tests; and I don't see that they have the tendency to run "milk-and-water" reviews of cars like the major car mags, which are too afraid of losing advertising to give any car a bad review.

The only problem with Edmunds.com that I've found is that they don't review everything, by a long shot. But then that's understandable, since they only review what they buy themselves anonymously, and obviously they don't have enough money to buy every model year of every model on the market!

​

Unlike the rest, CR buys their cars for testing, and are not beholden to anyone for their results. I would trust CR tests and reviews above all others, not just because they are unbiased, but how comprehensive and thorough they are. Before any major purchase (like cars, etc) I always check them out to see what they say. Have served me very well over the years.

The previous 2 vehicles I bought ended being the their #1 and #4 ranking picks for long term reliability,... of all cars, mainstream and luxury. And the resale values supported those rankings. I got 60% of what I paid 5 years earlier for the car that I traded in for my Kona. Pretty hard to beat that... So yeah, I have a lot of faith in CR.

 

[bwilson4web]

Sorry bu CR has a bias for driver ‘comfort’ that has no relationship to fuel efficiency. But when I did a multi-variable analysis, I found their score is based on driver creature comforts. But this was 3-4 editorial boards ago.

A former Prius owner, they are less bad but it isn’t clear from their YouTube that they really got the memo from their reader surveys. Edmunds is more balanced.

Bob Wilson

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Unlike the rest, CR buys their cars for testing, and are not beholden to anyone for their results. I would trust CR tests and reviews above all others, not just because they are unbiased, but how comprehensive and thorough they are.

Consumer Reports is biased not only in favor of driver comfort, but also what they call "reliability", which they measure by an annual survey of car owners, apparently based on the number of visits to a service center. CR apparently ignores the difference between trivial problems and major ones, so they get a big down-check from me for that.

But even worse is the erratic and apparently arbitrary way they interpret their survey results. Here is one chart from CR:

If you look at CR's rating for the 2015 model year, you see that they have given the car an overall "poor" rating. Yet there isn't a single category in which the car has earned a "Poor" rating. In fact there's only one single "Fair" rating, and every other rating -- every single one -- is "Good" or better!

And if you look at the other ratings on that chart, they don't add up either.

Now, I don't know if this is a result of complete incompetence on the part of CR, or a heavy bias against EVs. Given similar complaints on this forum from Honda Clarity PHEV owners, who say CR's reviews and ratings don't at all match their owner/ driver experience, I suspect it's heavy anti-EV bias.

I used to have a lot of respect for Consumer Reports... before I started reading their bizarre, self-contradictory, and frequently flip-flopping reviews of Tesla cars. No doubt CR is good at rating such things as dishwashers and laundry soap. But clearly they have no business rating cars, or at least not EVs.

​

 

[R P]

From what I have read and experienced with my own cars and with my son's M3, seems to me that CR was pretty accurate. Of course Tesla owners may not like that. So instead they attack CR. If CR would have had glowing reports, then they would be best in the world. Come on guys, get serious...

I have bought two new cars in the last 2 years, and neither has required any shop time for even a minor adjustment or tweak. And a previous vehicle (rated #1 by CR) never required any repairs or adjustments of any kind the whole 5 years I owned it. But I can't count the number of times my son has had his M3 in for warranty repairs of some type in just over a year since he got it.

 

[interestedinEV]

Remember the audience and what they look for. The average person who wants to know what is the best "deli meat" or which insurance plan to subscribe too or toaster oven to buy, is looking for different criteria than the reader of Car and Driver (there could be some overlap but not too much). No car can push all the buttons that a customer can conceivably want. CR has a methodology developed over the years, the focus with a focus on total cost of ownership, safety etc., things that appeal to people who are concerned about costs and convenience. (

CR apparently ignores the difference between trivial problems and major ones, so they get a big down-check from me for that.

If you a person in a job that does not give you much flexibility to take in the car to the dealer to fix a small rattle or knob falling off, you care about the small problems too. I do understand your point that a engine failing issue is not the same as a door handle falling off, but it is the number of small problems that is the criteria. Not saying Tesla has too many of them, but providing another perspective as to why "many trivial problems" cannot be ignored).


And to be fair, CR has forced some changes from Tesla and called Tesla out with for example the autonomous driving. They may not have enough history with EVs, that does not detract from their other valid comments. If "door handles not falling off" is important to you, then may be you should look at CR. If the thrill of taking sharp curves floats your boats, there are other sources. So CR has its place as do the others. Merely because CR has been critical of Tesla does not mean that they are wrong on every count.

 

[R P]

Remember the audience and what they look for. The average person who wants to know what is the best "deli meat" or which insurance plan to subscribe too or toaster oven to buy, is looking for different criteria than the reader of Car and Driver (there could be some overlap but not too much).

Are you kidding!!?? CR is a subscription service. You have to pay to read their reports on a product. Yes, other publications will report what CR says, but to hear it from the horse's mouth in detail you have to pay. People may be willing to pay for major purchases, like cars, home theater systems, but not likely for minor purchases. And CR has very much become the main go to source for car buyers wanting thorough and unbiased reviews.

And yes, even Elon Musk pays attention to them.