Is the Cyber Truck a Flop?

[EddieWalker]

Thanks for all the details. I didn't know about the charging station. Did they do a nice job installing it? I ran wire for a 50 amp outlet in my garage when I built it. Hopefully that's enough power if we decide to get an EV. How many miles per year are you allowed to drive in your lease without having to pay extra?

 

[tradosaurus]

I don't hate or fear them, but it gets old (1) the feeling that they're being forced on us and (2) the EV fanboys who treat you like you're some kind of idiot if you're not all in on them. They have their upsides, but plenty of downsides as well. They're not the best choice for everyone.

I think both points are all in your imagination.

 

[WinterDeere]

Well it was about to get ugly pretty darn soon. California and the other 17 states that follow them were set to ban sales of new internal combustion passenger vehicles starting in 2035. Because of the long development and production cycles to manufacture and distribute vehicles, this likely would have starting having real effects on consumer choices even sooner.

Thankfully for all of us, congress repealed their waiver that allowed them to go above and beyond EPA regulations.

Even if it did happen in CA in 2035, which it's not, it'd after the new-car-buying lifetime of 99% of the members here, before it rolled out to less liberal states. Something like 3% of all Americans will buy a new car after age 75, and it's closer to 1% after age 80.

How old will most of this forum be, by the time it actually passes in CA? How about KY, IL, or MI?!?

Total non-issue, for most of the old folks complaining about this fiction, of being forced to buy an EV.

 

[Fuddyduddy1952]

The fact is:
Key dates for ICE car bans on new sales:

2025: Norway plans to ban new ICE car sales.

2030: The United Kingdom and several other European countries have set this target.

2035: California is phasing out the sale of new ICE vehicles, with the goal of having 100% zero-emission new passenger vehicles by this year. The European Union has also set a target of 100% emissions reduction for new cars and vans by 2035, which effectively bans new ICE vehicle sales.

So at 73, wife 71, we'll most likely never live to see the elimination of ICE vehicles...but things are never all that simple. EV purchasers were (and probably once again) getting Federal and State rebates. Where does that money come from? We pay a LOT of taxes, as does my 98 year old Mother who hasn't driven a car in years. Tax punishment for investment dividends & capital gains without reward.
My wife & I bought several new vehicles from a local Ford dealership. Their service department had to install new 50T lifts and equipment to service Mach-E Mustangs (as well as other EV makes). $hundredsK. Who pays for that? We do next new car or truck we buy, although ICE.
Now charging. The electric grid must be upgraded for that. Towers, sub-stations, wind, solar, deforestation, solar farms. Who pays for that? We do...higher electric bills.
Fast charging: I admit I know nothing of new battery technology but it's always been batteries last longer with a long slow charge.
I can fill our car with gas in 3-4 minutes. To equal that charging time would require several hundred Amps which equals lots of heat.
The idea of a fast R&R battery pack replacement I'm on the good idea side (whoever thought of that ) and here's why:
EVs could certainly be designed with an easy procedure for that built into the frame. And yes it could be standardized with a few on hand. The replacement could be fully tested, "refurbished" so one would be getting a charged pack. OR they could instead opt out charging theirs. The downside to that would be cost. The station would have to price the swap accordingly.
The bottom line is historically technology changes and things are implemented never a permanent solution but trial & error at consumer's expense which is in fact another way of "force".
I've always said "today's new and improved is tomorrow's junk".

 

[deezler]

Even if it did happen in CA in 2035, which it's not, it'd after the new-car-buying lifetime of 99% of the members here, before it rolled out to less liberal states. Something like 3% of all Americans will buy a new car after age 75, and it's closer to 1% after age 80.

How old will most of this forum be, by the time it actually passes in CA? How about KY, IL, or MI?!?

Total non-issue, for most of the old folks complaining about this fiction, of being forced to buy an EV.

It's not a "total non-issue", this is a very real situation. California was completely intent on banning sale of new ICE vehicles, and once Trump is out, they will likely try again. 17 other states have voted to take their vehicle regulations straight from what CA decides. This is close to HALF of the US passenger vehicle market. If you think that automakers would not change their total product offering strategy based upon this, you are not thinking clearly at all. And because vehicle platform engineering and investment decisions get made some 5 to 6 years ahead of actual production, the ban would effective kick in sooner in terms of product choices. Here is the map of the potentially affected states:

The point that I was trying to make to you, was that by virtue of CA's decisions, our available vehicle choices everywhere in the USA would be heavily impacted, starting within the next several years. I don't take the threat of ICE-bans lightly at all, personally.

 

[WinterDeere]

It's not a "total non-issue", this is a very real situation. California was completely intent on banning sale of new ICE vehicles, and once Trump is out, they will likely try again. 17 other states have voted to take their vehicle regulations straight from what CA decides. This is close to HALF of the US passenger vehicle market. If you think that automakers would not change their total product offering strategy based upon this, you are not thinking clearly at all. And because vehicle platform engineering and investment decisions get made some 5 to 6 years ahead of actual production, the ban would effective kick in sooner in terms of product choices. Here is the map of the potentially affected states:
View attachment 4309312

The point that I was trying to make to you, was that by virtue of CA's decisions, our available vehicle choices everywhere in the USA would be heavily impacted, starting within the next several years. I don't take the threat of ICE-bans lightly at all, personally.

You make good points, and the eventual outcome probably lies somewhere between these two extremes we've each laid out. What I have learned, in 50 years of watching legislative bans of various products, is that they always take much longer than initially proposed, but they do eventually happen.

Personally, I'm not sweating it. I drive and prefer ICE's today, because the present ICE offerings better fit my needs and desires, than EV's. But over time, I anticipate that will change as the new tech improves and eventually becomes less costly, and I'm fine with that too.

 

[tradosaurus]

The fact is:
Key dates for ICE car bans on new sales:

2025: Norway plans to ban new ICE car sales.

2030: The United Kingdom and several other European countries have set this target.

2035: California is phasing out the sale of new ICE vehicles, with the goal of having 100% zero-emission new passenger vehicles by this year. The European Union has also set a target of 100% emissions reduction for new cars and vans by 2035, which effectively bans new ICE vehicle sales.

So at 73, wife 71, we'll most likely never live to see the elimination of ICE vehicles...but things are never all that simple. EV purchasers were (and probably once again) getting Federal and State rebates. Where does that money come from? We pay a LOT of taxes, as does my 98 year old Mother who hasn't driven a car in years. Tax punishment for investment dividends & capital gains without reward.
My wife & I bought several new vehicles from a local Ford dealership. Their service department had to install new 50T lifts and equipment to service Mach-E Mustangs (as well as other EV makes). $hundredsK. Who pays for that? We do next new car or truck we buy, although ICE.
Now charging. The electric grid must be upgraded for that. Towers, sub-stations, wind, solar, deforestation, solar farms. Who pays for that? We do...higher electric bills.
Fast charging: I admit I know nothing of new battery technology but it's always been batteries last longer with a long slow charge.
I can fill our car with gas in 3-4 minutes. To equal that charging time would require several hundred Amps which equals lots of heat.
The idea of a fast R&R battery pack replacement I'm on the good idea side (whoever thought of that ) and here's why:
EVs could certainly be designed with an easy procedure for that built into the frame. And yes it could be standardized with a few on hand. The replacement could be fully tested, "refurbished" so one would be getting a charged pack. OR they could instead opt out charging theirs. The downside to that would be cost. The station would have to price the swap accordingly.
The bottom line is historically technology changes and things are implemented never a permanent solution but trial & error at consumer's expense which is in fact another way of "force".
I've always said "today's new and improved is tomorrow's junk".

You make a valid point with the electric grid. Maybe this will force our gov't to relax regulations on nuclear power. Or maybe give discounts on electric bills to those who charge at night when energy usage is at its lowest.

Why would the Ford dealership have to install new 50 ton lifts? I'm pretty sure a diesel truck will weigh more than a Mach-E.

Once you get use to the convenience of charging at home the gas station analogy almost goes away. I wake up in the morning with a "full tank" in our Tesla since it's charging over night when energy usage is at its lowest.

 

[Fuddyduddy1952]

You make a valid point with the electric grid. Maybe this will force our gov't to relax regulations on nuclear power. Or maybe give discounts on electric bills to those who charge at night when energy usage is at its lowest.

Why would the Ford dealership have to install new 50 ton lifts? I'm pretty sure a diesel truck will weigh more than a Mach-E.

Once you get use to the convenience of charging at home the gas station analogy almost goes away. I wake up in the morning with a "full tank" in our Tesla since it's charging over night when energy usage is at its lowest.

The dealership had to install the lifts and equipment to work on EVs, what we were told.
If one bought an EV getting the rebates ($15,000 Fed+state) and they can charge at a lower rate they personally benefit. But there's no free lunch. ICE owner/taxpayers are paying those rebates and ultimately higher electric rates without any benefits which is my point.