I wonder if the average customer knows about the cult of Musk, or if they're aware of him as much as they know the CEO of the fridgemaker Bosch (if you're asking "who's the CEO of Bosch", yeah that's what I'm wondering if that's the reaction of the average people to "CEO of Tesla").
My instincts is electric cars are probably flying off the shelves in Europe now due to gas prices (but on the other hand, hello recession), maybe if German car buyers don't know about Musk the German media should start printing more about him to boost the sales of VW and other German cars, and Musk can tweet about conspiracies...
I'd give them a fair chance. Although it received a lot less hype, the ID.4 basically has the same driving assistance systems as what Tesla's "Fully Self Driving" can do.
And in Germany, the ID.4 is roughly 25% cheaper than a Tesla Model 3.
I think ID.4 is a significantly better car and I trust the manufacturer much more than Tesla. But the average guy on the street doesn't even know about this car.
People who schemed to harm the environment for profit while Tesla was trying to develop the technology base to help seem like a pretty clear indicator who is more trustworthy.
But I guess one person is douche on twitter and that whats most important.
Ok, so what did he do that is worse then a global conspiracy to subvert environment regulations that did huge amounts of harm to millions of people, specially children in cities?
My guess is you don't like their handling of developing FSD. That seems to be the most often mentioned on here.
How about his blatant securities fraud(s), horrendous Vegas loop, constant lies, blocking unionizations, paid beta test “FSD”, pumping dogecoin, teslas removal from ESG…I could go on forever.
Yeah, a dispute with the SEC about the meaning of a twit is much more important for the world then the millions of children breathing unhealthy air.
Really details of security law that basically hurt nobody except some short term traders as most really is the most important thing in the world.
> horrendous Vegas loop
Seems like that is for the costumer to decide and they were happy and even want to extend the system. But I guess twitters opinion
> pumping dogecoin
Talking about something you like is not illegal. In fact by just mentioning dogecoin you made it more famous and pumped it.
Unless you can prove pump-and-dump scheme its totally irrelevant.
> teslas removal from ESG
You mean the index where oil companies are ESG compliant and Tesla isn't. Yeah that really is far more important then lying millions of cars gas output. Like, why would you even care about that?
> Yeah, a dispute with the SEC about the meaning of a twit is much more important for the world then the millions of children breathing unhealthy air.
Really details of security law that basically hurt nobody except some short term traders…
Wow. Is this the kind of society you want? One where the richest man in the world can profit from securities fraud? If us peons can’t commit fraud, neither should Elon. Shit, by your logic we should all be out committing financial crimes right now! FYI it wasn’t a dispute he settled for 20MM, but he’s rich enough to not care.
Don’t forget about about solar city, where musk knowingly purchased a distressed company owned by his cousin without disclosing the info to shareholders. Add nepotism to my list please.
Also note his ongoing twitter acquisition. He’s clearly manipulating the stock price to get a better deal AFTER agreeing to the purchase and waiving due diligence. He’s being sued.
On the Vegas loop, he delivered nothing close to what was promised. The carbon/man hours expended building that horribly inefficient Tesla advertisement could’ve been used to created a reasonable transit system.
On dogecoin…lol. You can’t be serious. He’s promoting an obvious joke as a serious financial asset to uneducated, poor “investors”. Dogecoin is down 90%.
Thanks for ignoring the FSD beta testing and union stuff.
He’s been accused of sexual misconduct, called that Thai dude a pedo, and became ultra rich off countless empty promises. We were supposed to have FSD, a mars colony, neuralink and a hyper loop by now. He’s sold bullshit all the way to the top and STILL receives subsidies from the government…then turns around and sells them to the polluting auto companies he claims to replace.
VW subverted US fuel regulations which are notoriously tweaked _against_ diesel. The NOx emission control would relax at _highway speeds_, not in the city. This was an engineer's response to a protectionist legal framework. Keep in mind that diesel engines are notably more power efficient than gasoline ones, ho knows how much less CO2 would have been emitted had diesel been allowed to become more mainstream in the US?
> So you have much more trust in the manufactures who pulled a global scam against the environment?
Better to lie to the detriment of the environment than to the detriment of the consumer like Tesla does.
What VW did is essentially what developing countries do for their citizens by declaring bogus CO2 numbers in order to make the IPCC/UN/COP happy and keep granting the welfare and quality of life of their citizens providing energy they badly need to live like they deserve.
Too bad they got caught, hopefully the model can be replicated by TATA and Great Wall Co. Ltd as well as other car manufacturers which are located in jurisdictions which are not subject to the ESG tyranny.
The lure of lying is you can ignore reality all together. You can even pretend you didn’t get caught lying. You can pretend people still trust you or listen to you.
Tesla faked swappable batteries to con millions (billions?) in carbon credits out of the California state government, if we want to talk about environment scams.
Sorry but that is nonsense. The Carbon Credits have nothing to do with swappable batteries.
They got some money to demonstrate the technology and they did. They never committed or were required rolling this technology out on a large scale. And it was really not that much money.
If that is the example you go to, you are really deep in the barrel to come up with something.
The real winner is Tesla by a large margin and LR and SR version are ever more efficient than this.
Also I find the result of the EQS suspicious low given the weight of the vehicule, whereas the Tesla's consumption is surprisingly high. I don't think it should be over 200wh/km at 130km/h under normal conditions.
It's interesting that VW seems to use a standardized 82kWh battery back in their MEB platform and achieves basically the same range as the Tesla 3 with 75kWh. Appears this is engineered to the point.
Why is Teslas Efficiency 10% better? My understanding is that they use SiC transistors in their inverter while the MEB uses Silicon IGBTs. A trade-off between reliability (Si), cost (Si), performance (SiC). How much of the difference is caused by this?
Efficiency seem to be Wh/km. During the summer, with mixed driving I get about 168 Wh/km, and year round 185 Wh/km in a Tesla Model 3 AWD. Not everyone needs to drive autobahn speed. ;)
> It's interesting that VW seems to use a standardized 82kWh battery back in their MEB platform and achieves basically the same range as the Tesla 3 with 75kWh
The table is mixing net (usable capacity) and gross (total capacity) battery sizes. The battery in the ID.4 is 82 kWh gross but 77 kWh usable. The ID.4 is also an SUV model whereas the Model 3 is a sedan.
Well, Tesla also has a buffer after 0% and still some energy after it stop moving. This might be what explain the "bad" figure here. A model 3 at 130km/h on the flat in good weather conditions should not exceed 200wh/km normally. (Based on experience with my own car).
My point was that the posted article is non-sense, and likely really just an advertisement piece for the german cars.
Claiming the EQS is best because it has a decent range with a 107kwh battery is infuriating. We should be moving to smaller battery on light efficient vehicles and not make monster 3 tons EV like this.
> Tesla also has a buffer after 0% and still some energy after it stop moving.
The Model 3 performance is 80 kWh total capacity (82 kWh on the newer ones).
> We should be moving to smaller battery on light efficient vehicles
No. People will buy the cars they want. If they want the luxury of an Mercedes EQS then that's what they'll buy. If they want the excess of a Hummer EV then they'll buy that too.
There need to be better batteries with greater energy density for a smaller pack weight once decent range is achieved.
Amen. Limiting oursleves will never be the answer.
It's time for tree huggers to provide the same quality of life of oil.
If they can't then it's on them not on the consumer. Time to put up or shut up.
The new Cadillac Lyriq is a step in the right direction.
But I also must say that the 59,995$ MSRP Gasoline Corvette C8 is a step in the right direction as well.
When people dream that's the sort of cars they dream about: attainable luxury of a Lyriq or the attainable C8 which is essentially an affordable Ferrari made in Detroit.
People don't want to own a Tesla which is plain on the outside and frankly speaking very empty and low quality once you step inside
Depends on the model they actually used. If you assume the Tesla had a 80 kwh battery, the whole test does not make any sense in regards to the ID4 results for example.
The facts are the following:
- Tesla is known for its electrical system efficiency
- The model 3 as a drag coeff of 0.23 vs 0.28 for the ID4.
- The model 3 perf weight 1844 kg vs 2045 kg for the ID4.
Regardless of how badly this test was conducted, especially at highway speed, there is no way in hell the model 3 does not beat the ID4 in this test unless it was conducted in bad faith (which I think is likely).
So either the Tesla they used did not have a 80kwh battery, or they didnt conduct a fair test. It's impossible for an ID4 to beat a model 3 in efficiency in the same conditions on the highway.
Edmunds comes to the same conclusions independently [1]. Maybe Tesla's efficiency is overstated? No idea.
ID.4 seems to outperform their WLTP/EPA range numbers whereas most Model 3s seem to under-perform in the real world. Maybe VW has learnt from the Diesel scandal.
> If you assume the Tesla had a 80 kwh battery, the whole test does not make any sense
It does have an 80 kWh battery. Again, you're confusing usable capacity and total capacity. Your table is wrong. You're comparing a Model 3 Performance's usable capacity with the MEB cars' total capacity.
> there is no way in hell the model 3 does not beat the ID4 in this test unless it was conducted in bad faith
Maybe this will help you. Here's a range test of a Model 3 Performance with the 82 kWh battery. Note that he measures the usable capacity at 76 kWh:
Aren't all these cars (except Ford and Porsche) like a class bigger than Model 3? Id4 has 550l of boot space vs Model 3's 425l. It also sits a lot higher. Of course an SUV will be less efficient (but somehow people still choose to drive them)
I dispute the fairness of claiming the Model 3 has worse range when it's obviously the most efficient vehicle of the lot and the most appropriate BEV if you care about driving at highway speed.
> I dispute the fairness of claiming the Model 3 has worse range when it's obviously the most efficient vehicle
This is a crazy twisting of thought. Like, it's 100% true that the model 3 has worse range. That's like "oh, it's not fair to claim that the model 3 is smaller when it's actually the lightest vehicle". I mean, "oh, it's not fair to claim X about the model 3 because while that's true, on this other metric Y the model 3 ranks differently".
The Group comprises ten brands from five European countries: Volkswagen, Volkswagen Commercial Vehicles, ŠKODA, SEAT, CUPRA, Audi, Lamborghini, Bentley, Porsche and Ducati.
Volkswagen and Toyota are always vying for world's top automotive manufacturer (by vehicles sold). Toyota bet heavily on hydrogen and really wants the world to go that way, they're only reluctantly giving in to electric vehicles and that's been very recent. So they're not prepared to take over by 2025. The U.S. automakers are largely only dominant in the U.S. and the U.S. market is very decidedly meh on electric vehicles.
That leaves Volkswagen. A brand Europeans trust and the European market is much more accepting of electric vehicles. I can totally see Volkswagen dominating the electric vehicle market. 2025 seems a little aggressive, but we don't know Volkswagen's plans, either.
I worked for VAG during the Dieselgate-scandal, and I'm reading Ewing's book outlining the whole ordeal and it's been a sobering review of those years.
Personally, I'd like to see this happen especially since the Russian invasion has shown how catastrophic this model is, but the truth is VW in France is still fining them for their involvement in Dieselgate [0], which his one of their biggest Markets in Europe and they still sell Turbo Diesels.
I have a Golf that burns LPG, and I bought it for environmental reasons after owning a Prius in the US. But after a long time in the Auto Industry I'm just so jaded that I'm trying to live a life without a car entirely, it's one of the reasons I moved back to Europe where it was possible.
I know we are seeing more Teslas in Europe but there is a really big problem with the availability of features. You are just not buying then same car in Europe as you are in the US and a lot of people give them back because of it.
The only difference I know is the autopilot feature set and I don't think anyone cares (unless you paid for FSD but most people dont buy that option for that reason in Europe).
> lot of people give them back because of it.
What ? What are you talking about ? This is non-sense.
It's in the latest print magazine of the ADAC from n=548 Tesla customers there was a alpha return rate of 13.80% and a beta return rate of 14.50%. Mercedes (n=728) has a alpha return of 5.8% and a beta of 6.7%. VW (n=912) has alpha 7.4% and beta from 6.8%. It's a lot.
Tesla only make BEV. The Mercedes and VW stats seem to include all their vehicules and it just make another meaningless stats. People know what they get when they purchase a ICE vehicles whereas BEV is new territory. This stat is comparing apple and oranges...
I'm really impressed by the amount of anti Tesla FUD in here...
I propose we let the sales figures talk and see what people are buying instead of claiming people dont want them...
In March, in Europe, Tesla had 2 models in the top 3 for new registrations (all types of cars included).
This may not be the case here and I couldn't quickly find data -- but Tesla has done "drops" in the past where they deliver many pre-ordered vehicles in a certain month and completely annihilate other EV sales that month.
That said, Tesla has undeniably strong sales. I have no idea how VW currently compares and if they are really going to make a dent.
Tesla currently has this high-end "halo" but as it's trickling down to more consumers, I think some of their high-price customers will migrate to Porsche, Lucid, Rivian, ID.Buzz (even the EQS) but they'll sell more cars to the broad masses. Then it will be interesting to see how regular customers feel about the $10k auto-pilot and supposed build-quality issues.
I don't own a Tesla but test-drove a few Model S and that acceleration is exhilarating, and vomit-inducing for back-seat passengers :)
> I propose we let the sales figures talk and see what people are buying instead of claiming people dont want them. In March, in Europe, Tesla had 2 models in the top 3 for new registrations
Volkswagen has been selling the most EVs in Europe since 2020 when they overtook Tesla:
There seems to be a fairly strong Elon cult and Elon anticult. Both camps seem to be blind to their bias and get overtly emotional about this topic.
Whoever has the top spot in 2025 or whenever remains to be seen. Pointless to speculate much. Right now Tesla has a strong EV industry lead, a very strong financial position and an unprecedented growth rate.
I think in 2025 whoever has secured the materials and/or contracts for batteries will win. There won't be enough for everyone in 2025. In 2030 +- few years this will change, that's probably when we'll see the real competition occur.
When I've read your first sentence this popped in mind: is there a cap to Elon cult/anti cult?
Like, is there a ceiling for the amount of people that will care about Elon, which is an individual, in a negative or positive way, that would limit Elon reach and the effect it will have on Tesla.
I'm not saying Tesla doesn't have it's own merit, of course it does, but Elon personality cult helped a lot marketing it, and popularizing Tesla stock. I'd even say that Elon is way more popular than Tesla as a brand.
But I wonder when they'll reach this cap... and Elon alone won't be enough, and you'll just see the big brands like VW, that have caught up in terms of tech, doing their own thing and taking larger and larger chunks of the EV market.
Because what Elon seems to forget is that a personal brand only goes so far. Like, Steve Jobs eventually learned this at Apple (not saying he promoted a personal cult, I don't think he did), and they started to build and invest in Apple as a brand.
> I'm not saying Tesla doesn't have it's own merit, of course it does, but Elon personality cult helped a lot marketing it, and popularizing Tesla stock.
Elon seems to have fully embraced the Trump technique of being a bombastic personality who has completely disabled their internal filter. The result being that your popularity becomes almost binary between very strong supporters and detractors. There is nobody that "can't decide" what they think of these guys. Sadly, I think the fawning groupies that this technique produces has an almost intoxicating effect on the practitioners.
> Elon seems to have fully embraced the Trump technique of being a bombastic personality who has completely disabled their internal filter
The thing about the business community is that it has always ran away from individuals expressing the behavior of Musk and Trump because there are so many other avenues for rich people to unleash the "USvTHEM" part of their brains.
Football, Soccer, Hockey, Formula1, Nascar, Indycar, America's Cup, Basketball, Golf...not to mention Political races at the County, State and Fedral level.
Even the Mafia suspends territorial wars for business deals. And I mean the real mafia not the Paypal mafia.
But maybe for people who easily fall prey of ideologies all those avenues aren't enough and strongly need some USvTHEM in the stock market as well.
Volkswagen chief making optimistic prediction about own success has zero to do with "Elon anti-cult". We do not need to both sides everything and especially not things that dont even have two sides - like marketing claims or companies bragging.
Serious question: Why electricity and not hydrogen?
I really wanted to buy an electric car as our main (and only) family car but the technology is not there yet. And it never may be, because the metals required for batteries will probably become the next oil - unevenly distributed around the world with huge ecological impact.
Because the generate electricity => use it to create Hydrogen => fill your car => Hydrogen fuel cell creates electricity => electricity used in electric motor chain is massively less efficient than the generate electricity => charge your battery => electricity used in electric motor chain.
Add do this that most of the distribution network for electricity is already in place, large scale, which for hydrogen you have to build it.
We have had an electric car as our only vehicle since 2016 without any issues. We drive about 20 000 km/year. Our relatively small solar panel installation (7 kWp, 59 degrees north) generates about the electricity our car uses on a yearly basis.
Because hydrogen is a real pain in the ass to store/transport since it needs to be kept under extremely high pressure or very low temperature.
That said, you can take hydrogen and some carbon and make hydrocarbon / long-chain hydrocarbon molecules (e.g. gasoline, diesel, methane, etc.), which we already have infrastructure in place to move, store, and use.
I'm not sure why nobody takes synthetic generation of hydrocarbons seriously. It's carbon-neutral, and seems like it would be a pretty good stop-gap until we figure out better storage of electric charge.
- Hydrogen is even less "there" than battery tech. It is basically still in the research phase. Nothing but a few demonstrations yet, while battery cars are here.
- We already have a power grid. We do not have a hydrogen grid. A new hydrogen network would cost billions. Charging at home is super cool. Home hydrogen filling sounds much too exciting.
- Efficiency is substantially worse. Most sources will be dispatched electrical (solar, wind), so the round trip through hydrogen wastes most of your capital.
Toyota is still plugging away, and Germany seems committed. So we'll probably see hydrogen trains, and other specialist deployments. But personal transport will be electrical.
Why not both? It doesn't need to be exclusively one or the other.
Hydrogen fuel cells will probably end up seeing more use in heavy duty vehicles (trucks, buses, planes, trains) for better range and a lighter powertrain. Light duty vehicles will be BEVs.
Building out the hydrogen infrastructure to fuel many, many light duty vehicles is expensive, but building out hydrogen infrastructure to support heavy duty vehicles is less of an issue because there are fewer of them.
76 comments
[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 63.4 ms ] threadMy instincts is electric cars are probably flying off the shelves in Europe now due to gas prices (but on the other hand, hello recession), maybe if German car buyers don't know about Musk the German media should start printing more about him to boost the sales of VW and other German cars, and Musk can tweet about conspiracies...
VW grew significantly faster in bev sales from 2020 to 2021 than Tesla did (and that's talking growth by absolute numbers, not relative).
2020 Tesla sold 499535 BEVs. 2021, 936222. 436687 more. 87.4% growth.
So VW did not grow faster than Tesla by absolute numbers. VW did have a higher growth percentage, though.
And in Germany, the ID.4 is roughly 25% cheaper than a Tesla Model 3.
I think ID.4 is a significantly better car and I trust the manufacturer much more than Tesla. But the average guy on the street doesn't even know about this car.
And if you go look at the breakdown of the two cars, there isn't really anything that makes the ID.4 stand out in terms of technology.
And in terms of software/electronics its clearly not as advanced, VM even clearly admits this.
Its better value to be sure.
But I guess one person is douche on twitter and that whats most important.
My guess is you don't like their handling of developing FSD. That seems to be the most often mentioned on here.
To be fair, even the name is misleading. It's not fully-self-driving.
Yeah, a dispute with the SEC about the meaning of a twit is much more important for the world then the millions of children breathing unhealthy air.
Really details of security law that basically hurt nobody except some short term traders as most really is the most important thing in the world.
> horrendous Vegas loop
Seems like that is for the costumer to decide and they were happy and even want to extend the system. But I guess twitters opinion
> pumping dogecoin
Talking about something you like is not illegal. In fact by just mentioning dogecoin you made it more famous and pumped it.
Unless you can prove pump-and-dump scheme its totally irrelevant.
> teslas removal from ESG
You mean the index where oil companies are ESG compliant and Tesla isn't. Yeah that really is far more important then lying millions of cars gas output. Like, why would you even care about that?
Wow. Is this the kind of society you want? One where the richest man in the world can profit from securities fraud? If us peons can’t commit fraud, neither should Elon. Shit, by your logic we should all be out committing financial crimes right now! FYI it wasn’t a dispute he settled for 20MM, but he’s rich enough to not care.
Don’t forget about about solar city, where musk knowingly purchased a distressed company owned by his cousin without disclosing the info to shareholders. Add nepotism to my list please.
Also note his ongoing twitter acquisition. He’s clearly manipulating the stock price to get a better deal AFTER agreeing to the purchase and waiving due diligence. He’s being sued.
On the Vegas loop, he delivered nothing close to what was promised. The carbon/man hours expended building that horribly inefficient Tesla advertisement could’ve been used to created a reasonable transit system.
On dogecoin…lol. You can’t be serious. He’s promoting an obvious joke as a serious financial asset to uneducated, poor “investors”. Dogecoin is down 90%.
Thanks for ignoring the FSD beta testing and union stuff.
He’s been accused of sexual misconduct, called that Thai dude a pedo, and became ultra rich off countless empty promises. We were supposed to have FSD, a mars colony, neuralink and a hyper loop by now. He’s sold bullshit all the way to the top and STILL receives subsidies from the government…then turns around and sells them to the polluting auto companies he claims to replace.
Better to lie to the detriment of the environment than to the detriment of the consumer like Tesla does.
What VW did is essentially what developing countries do for their citizens by declaring bogus CO2 numbers in order to make the IPCC/UN/COP happy and keep granting the welfare and quality of life of their citizens providing energy they badly need to live like they deserve.
Too bad they got caught, hopefully the model can be replicated by TATA and Great Wall Co. Ltd as well as other car manufacturers which are located in jurisdictions which are not subject to the ESG tyranny.
Vehicles aren't a societal purchase, they are an individual's purchase. They should maximize the welfare of the individual who pays up the money.
I'd be disappointed if VW didn't keep researching ways to get around emission targets for the benefit of the consumer and against ESG tyranny.
They got some money to demonstrate the technology and they did. They never committed or were required rolling this technology out on a large scale. And it was really not that much money.
If that is the example you go to, you are really deep in the barrel to come up with something.
"German AutoBild March 2022 – EV Range Test at Highway Speed" (In German): https://www.autobild.de/artikel/e-auto-autobahn-reichweite-t...
They Tested 28 Models - Top 10:
---------------------------------------------
Mercedes EQS -> 444 km ( 276 Miles)
BMW iX xDrive 50 -> 434 km ( 270 Miles)
Ford Mach-E GT -> 367 km ( 228 Miles)
Audi RS e-tron GT -> 367 km ( 228 Miles)
Porsche Taycan 4S -> 352 km ( 219 Miles)
Tesla Model 3 Performance -> 337 km ( 209 Miles)
VW ID.4 GTX -> 332 km ( 206 Miles)
VW ID.4 Pro -> 328 km ( 204 Miles)
Audi Q4 e-tron 40 -> 326 km ( 203 Miles)
Skoda Enyaq iV80 -> 316 km ( 196 Miles)
---------------------------------------------
Sure your EQS has 444 km but have fun recharging that 107 kwh monster battery...
The name of the game is efficiency and here are the result in that test:
The real winner is Tesla by a large margin and LR and SR version are ever more efficient than this.Also I find the result of the EQS suspicious low given the weight of the vehicule, whereas the Tesla's consumption is surprisingly high. I don't think it should be over 200wh/km at 130km/h under normal conditions.
It's interesting that VW seems to use a standardized 82kWh battery back in their MEB platform and achieves basically the same range as the Tesla 3 with 75kWh. Appears this is engineered to the point.
Why is Teslas Efficiency 10% better? My understanding is that they use SiC transistors in their inverter while the MEB uses Silicon IGBTs. A trade-off between reliability (Si), cost (Si), performance (SiC). How much of the difference is caused by this?
I don't know why they get better efficiency but I suppose that they still have some significant technological advantages compared to the others.
Plus better EV tech? More efficient power curves. More efficient regenerative braking.
The table is mixing net (usable capacity) and gross (total capacity) battery sizes. The battery in the ID.4 is 82 kWh gross but 77 kWh usable. The ID.4 is also an SUV model whereas the Model 3 is a sedan.
My point was that the posted article is non-sense, and likely really just an advertisement piece for the german cars.
Claiming the EQS is best because it has a decent range with a 107kwh battery is infuriating. We should be moving to smaller battery on light efficient vehicles and not make monster 3 tons EV like this.
The Model 3 performance is 80 kWh total capacity (82 kWh on the newer ones).
> We should be moving to smaller battery on light efficient vehicles
No. People will buy the cars they want. If they want the luxury of an Mercedes EQS then that's what they'll buy. If they want the excess of a Hummer EV then they'll buy that too.
There need to be better batteries with greater energy density for a smaller pack weight once decent range is achieved.
It's time for tree huggers to provide the same quality of life of oil.
If they can't then it's on them not on the consumer. Time to put up or shut up.
The new Cadillac Lyriq is a step in the right direction.
But I also must say that the 59,995$ MSRP Gasoline Corvette C8 is a step in the right direction as well.
When people dream that's the sort of cars they dream about: attainable luxury of a Lyriq or the attainable C8 which is essentially an affordable Ferrari made in Detroit.
People don't want to own a Tesla which is plain on the outside and frankly speaking very empty and low quality once you step inside
The facts are the following:
- Tesla is known for its electrical system efficiency
- The model 3 as a drag coeff of 0.23 vs 0.28 for the ID4.
- The model 3 perf weight 1844 kg vs 2045 kg for the ID4.
Regardless of how badly this test was conducted, especially at highway speed, there is no way in hell the model 3 does not beat the ID4 in this test unless it was conducted in bad faith (which I think is likely).
So either the Tesla they used did not have a 80kwh battery, or they didnt conduct a fair test. It's impossible for an ID4 to beat a model 3 in efficiency in the same conditions on the highway.
ID.4 seems to outperform their WLTP/EPA range numbers whereas most Model 3s seem to under-perform in the real world. Maybe VW has learnt from the Diesel scandal.
[1] https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-cons...
It does have an 80 kWh battery. Again, you're confusing usable capacity and total capacity. Your table is wrong. You're comparing a Model 3 Performance's usable capacity with the MEB cars' total capacity.
> there is no way in hell the model 3 does not beat the ID4 in this test unless it was conducted in bad faith
Maybe this will help you. Here's a range test of a Model 3 Performance with the 82 kWh battery. Note that he measures the usable capacity at 76 kWh:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sj3vUh5RqMc
A similar test in an ID.4 GTX. Measured at 75 kWh usable:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFz2mz5GOL0
The actual kWh you get out of the battery depends on a variety of factors like driving speed, temperature, battery condition and age, etc.
It also seems arbitrary to claim efficiency is the "name of the game".
Surely consumers will choose whether they prefer long range, low cost of charging, fast charging etc, and there's no one right answer?
https://insideevs.com/news/522577/mercedes-eqs-fast-charging...
I dispute the fairness of claiming the Model 3 has worse range when it's obviously the most efficient vehicle of the lot and the most appropriate BEV if you care about driving at highway speed.
This is a crazy twisting of thought. Like, it's 100% true that the model 3 has worse range. That's like "oh, it's not fair to claim that the model 3 is smaller when it's actually the lightest vehicle". I mean, "oh, it's not fair to claim X about the model 3 because while that's true, on this other metric Y the model 3 ranks differently".
Comparing the mileage of cars that are sized wildly different is kind've pointless.
... so basically everything
That leaves Volkswagen. A brand Europeans trust and the European market is much more accepting of electric vehicles. I can totally see Volkswagen dominating the electric vehicle market. 2025 seems a little aggressive, but we don't know Volkswagen's plans, either.
And still Toyota outsold them for decades.
I worked for VAG during the Dieselgate-scandal, and I'm reading Ewing's book outlining the whole ordeal and it's been a sobering review of those years.
Personally, I'd like to see this happen especially since the Russian invasion has shown how catastrophic this model is, but the truth is VW in France is still fining them for their involvement in Dieselgate [0], which his one of their biggest Markets in Europe and they still sell Turbo Diesels.
I have a Golf that burns LPG, and I bought it for environmental reasons after owning a Prius in the US. But after a long time in the Auto Industry I'm just so jaded that I'm trying to live a life without a car entirely, it's one of the reasons I moved back to Europe where it was possible.
0: https://www.largus.fr/actualite-automobile/dieselgate-recour...
> lot of people give them back because of it.
What ? What are you talking about ? This is non-sense.
I'm really impressed by the amount of anti Tesla FUD in here...
I propose we let the sales figures talk and see what people are buying instead of claiming people dont want them...
In March, in Europe, Tesla had 2 models in the top 3 for new registrations (all types of cars included).
Source: https://insideevs.com/news/583329/europe-plugin-car-sales-ma...
That said, Tesla has undeniably strong sales. I have no idea how VW currently compares and if they are really going to make a dent.
Tesla currently has this high-end "halo" but as it's trickling down to more consumers, I think some of their high-price customers will migrate to Porsche, Lucid, Rivian, ID.Buzz (even the EQS) but they'll sell more cars to the broad masses. Then it will be interesting to see how regular customers feel about the $10k auto-pilot and supposed build-quality issues.
I don't own a Tesla but test-drove a few Model S and that acceleration is exhilarating, and vomit-inducing for back-seat passengers :)
Volkswagen has been selling the most EVs in Europe since 2020 when they overtook Tesla:
https://eu-evs.com/marketShare/ALL/Groups/Line/All-time-by-Y...
Volkswagen's sales are split across multiple models from multiple brands.
Whoever has the top spot in 2025 or whenever remains to be seen. Pointless to speculate much. Right now Tesla has a strong EV industry lead, a very strong financial position and an unprecedented growth rate.
I think in 2025 whoever has secured the materials and/or contracts for batteries will win. There won't be enough for everyone in 2025. In 2030 +- few years this will change, that's probably when we'll see the real competition occur.
Like, is there a ceiling for the amount of people that will care about Elon, which is an individual, in a negative or positive way, that would limit Elon reach and the effect it will have on Tesla.
I'm not saying Tesla doesn't have it's own merit, of course it does, but Elon personality cult helped a lot marketing it, and popularizing Tesla stock. I'd even say that Elon is way more popular than Tesla as a brand.
But I wonder when they'll reach this cap... and Elon alone won't be enough, and you'll just see the big brands like VW, that have caught up in terms of tech, doing their own thing and taking larger and larger chunks of the EV market.
Because what Elon seems to forget is that a personal brand only goes so far. Like, Steve Jobs eventually learned this at Apple (not saying he promoted a personal cult, I don't think he did), and they started to build and invest in Apple as a brand.
Elon seems to have fully embraced the Trump technique of being a bombastic personality who has completely disabled their internal filter. The result being that your popularity becomes almost binary between very strong supporters and detractors. There is nobody that "can't decide" what they think of these guys. Sadly, I think the fawning groupies that this technique produces has an almost intoxicating effect on the practitioners.
The thing about the business community is that it has always ran away from individuals expressing the behavior of Musk and Trump because there are so many other avenues for rich people to unleash the "USvTHEM" part of their brains.
Football, Soccer, Hockey, Formula1, Nascar, Indycar, America's Cup, Basketball, Golf...not to mention Political races at the County, State and Fedral level.
Even the Mafia suspends territorial wars for business deals. And I mean the real mafia not the Paypal mafia.
But maybe for people who easily fall prey of ideologies all those avenues aren't enough and strongly need some USvTHEM in the stock market as well.
So they feed off a bunch of rivalries:
Elon vs. short sellers
Elon vs. SEC
Elon vs. Big Oil
Elon vs. OEM
WSB vs. Citadel
WSB vs. Melvin Capital
WSB vs. Bridgewater Associates
WSB vs Davos
I think 99% of people don't care either way. It's just that vocal 1% that does.
My point about (anti) cults was how it seems to affect the discussion. A fact based debate would be preferable to emotional quarrel.
These are the sort of memes that cult members make to attract the attention of the cult leader, who rewarded them with a like:
https://twitter.com/coffeetabletsla/status/15291750261125529...
I really wanted to buy an electric car as our main (and only) family car but the technology is not there yet. And it never may be, because the metals required for batteries will probably become the next oil - unevenly distributed around the world with huge ecological impact.
So, seriously, why not hydrogen?
Battery electric vehicle: 73% Fuel cell vehicle: 22% Internal combustion engine: 13%
https://insideevs.com/news/332584/efficiency-compared-batter...
Add do this that most of the distribution network for electricity is already in place, large scale, which for hydrogen you have to build it.
We have had an electric car as our only vehicle since 2016 without any issues. We drive about 20 000 km/year. Our relatively small solar panel installation (7 kWp, 59 degrees north) generates about the electricity our car uses on a yearly basis.
That said, you can take hydrogen and some carbon and make hydrocarbon / long-chain hydrocarbon molecules (e.g. gasoline, diesel, methane, etc.), which we already have infrastructure in place to move, store, and use.
I'm not sure why nobody takes synthetic generation of hydrocarbons seriously. It's carbon-neutral, and seems like it would be a pretty good stop-gap until we figure out better storage of electric charge.
- Hydrogen is even less "there" than battery tech. It is basically still in the research phase. Nothing but a few demonstrations yet, while battery cars are here.
- We already have a power grid. We do not have a hydrogen grid. A new hydrogen network would cost billions. Charging at home is super cool. Home hydrogen filling sounds much too exciting.
- Efficiency is substantially worse. Most sources will be dispatched electrical (solar, wind), so the round trip through hydrogen wastes most of your capital.
Toyota is still plugging away, and Germany seems committed. So we'll probably see hydrogen trains, and other specialist deployments. But personal transport will be electrical.
Why not both? It doesn't need to be exclusively one or the other.
Hydrogen fuel cells will probably end up seeing more use in heavy duty vehicles (trucks, buses, planes, trains) for better range and a lighter powertrain. Light duty vehicles will be BEVs.
Building out the hydrogen infrastructure to fuel many, many light duty vehicles is expensive, but building out hydrogen infrastructure to support heavy duty vehicles is less of an issue because there are fewer of them.