Technology

60070 readers

3660 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

228

Tesla scraps its plan for a $25,000 Model 2 EV (arstechnica.com)

submitted 8 months ago by boem to c/technology

109 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Maggoty 48 points 8 months ago (17 children)

They can't make a good car at triple the price. Why would anyone buy this one?

[–] AA5B 7 points 8 months ago (11 children)

Personally I was shopping Tesla Model Y vs Chevy Blazer. At a glance, this seems to fall right in with what you’re saying but the reality was very different.

Tesla started off with an advantage by actually being available
even when Blazer was released, as a new model, it had much worse quality issues, very little availability, and huge markups
Tesla was a mature model, with no quality issues
Tesla was much less expensive
Tesla was rated 100 miles more range
Tesla is much more efficient
Tesla has an outstanding charging network
Tesla has a much easier purchasing process, with fewer middlemen to scam profits
Tesla software and automation is on a whole different level

The decision really wasn’t close

[–] poopkins 11 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Regarding the sales process: in Tesla's early days, they received an exception to the requirement for needing to use dealerships. Generally this is very shady and is outright unfair towards other car manufacturers—even Rivian didn't get this same special treatment because lawmakers saw how Tesla abused it.

Tesla's growing monopoly on charging networks isn't something to be proud of, in my opinion, and neither is their proprietary charging cable. We need open standards.

Also, Tesla's mileage estimates are notoriously exaggerated. Perhaps technically you can get the claimed range if the entire trip is downhill…

[–] AA5B 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

why is wanting to sell direct shady? You may have reasons to think this particular situation is, but the model is not inherently shady. Meanwhile car sales from dealerships have a long standing and well deserved reputation for shadiness. Surely not all are, but the sales model encourages it. Many of us dread dealing with a dealer after experiencing shady sales practices, so are happy to try a different model and see if it will be different. Certainly this was one of the only car purchases I’ve had where I didn’t feel dirty and abused.
Tesla’s chargers are standard. Sure, they had to create their own since there was no standard at the time, but last year their cable and connector was accepted as a standard in the US and adopted by the majority of manufacturers
There is no monopoly on chargers, there is only Tesla installing more than everyone else, and making sure they work. Now that most manufacturers are adopting that standard, their vehicles are becoming welcome on Tesla’s network
while you’re right that I don’t get the range that was on the sticker for my Tesla, this is “normal”: my old Civic got 12mpg, my old Subaru got 21mpg, yet both were rated over 30. How you use it makes a huge difference

[–] poopkins 4 points 8 months ago

It would be better if direct sales were allowed, but unfortunately dealerships are required by law in almost all US states. The shady bit is how Tesla got one of the few exceptions and continues to be exempt despite being among the leading car manufacturers in the USA. All other leading manufacturers are required by state laws to sell their vehicles through dealerships.

Tesla's NCAS chargers only began to allow non-Teslas to use it from 2019, so this is kind of recent history in terms of car ownership and network coverage.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Also, Tesla’s mileage estimates are notoriously exaggerated.

To be honest, this is like the ones from every other car, both EV and ICE.

[–] poopkins 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That hasn't been my experience, but perhaps regulations are stricter in the EU.

[–] bitchkat 4 points 8 months ago

EU uses the WLTP method of testing range and its way more optimistic that the process we use in the USA.

[–] LouSpooner 3 points 8 months ago

I've driven 120k miles on my Tesla, and have a different observation on range and efficiency. Even with sub-optimal winter tires and roof rack rails, I can still attain rated efficiency. It does require appropriate temperatures and speeds though, more sensitive to that than ICE cars in my experience. 80k miles in a Chevy Bolt demonstrated about the same tendencies.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

We are getting the standard in the form of NACS, but Tesla still owns the chargers. They could always abandon NACS and switch it up/require a costly adapter.

[–] AA5B 1 points 8 months ago

We are a long way from hitting any limits in the number of deployed chargers. It’s a wide open market and there’s government money to make it easier. Any company could have as many chargers now, if they chose to spend the money. Any company could have chosen to do the maintenance to keep their chargers in working order.

While Tesla’s lead in chargers is one of the reasons I chose them, I’m not sure it’s reasonable to call it a monopoly. We’re still at the beginning of the market, with huge untapped potential and room for all to grow

load more comments (6 replies)

load more comments (11 replies)