Plenty of other electric cars on the market now too - many of them decent competition.
Alkso Tesla hasn't shipped a truck. Rivian has shipped, Ford has now shipped. If and when the Cybertruck makes it to market, Ford and Rivian will finally see some competition.
Once GM gets on the electric pickup market, it's game over for the wonky Tesla unless they end up selling exclusively to the types who don't actually do truck stuff (the G-Wagon crowd).
GM is already shipping the Hummer. It’s just really expensive so they won’t be a viable competitor for most of the market until the Chevy version arrives.
I own a model S but I think the F-150 is truly the next competitor. Other cars were either niche (Taycan) or not that great (i3, leaf). The bolt really was the second best option. Lucid is great too but they're not to scale yet.
Once the lightnings are easy to acquire at a dealership, I think Tesla will have its work cut out for it. The F150 is the best selling car/anything in the US.
i’m done with dealerships. i wish ford and gm had created clean-sheet, direct-to-consumer sub brands for their electric products. and didn’t gm do something pretty radical when they rolled out saturn in the 80s (separate dealers with non commissioned staff)? they could have at least done that. instead we get markup and sleaze.
Tesla always accrued competition pretty fast in whatever domain it explored, its big advantage being brand and battery life.
For my part while I'd like a vehicle with Tesla autonomy, the appalling QA/finish (Teslas still look cheap) and the support policies mean I'll go to an EU or Asian brand when I finally pick an EV (at least if there's anything left by that time that doesn't look like some trashy gamer mouse on wheels).
Very happy to report that the QA and finish on the Teslas built in Berlin and Shanghai are so much better than the ones in the USA. A whole other level.
Personally I’m excited for some competition. Tesla appears to have a big battery lead and is innovating with the assembly process. Without competition there’s been no reason to include vehicle 2 home power and cause extra wear on the battery pack, Tesla previously said the cybertruck won’t have V2H, but now that it’s offered with the F150, I hope they reconsider (I’ll probably cancel my CT preorder and get a Lightning if they don’t)
I ended up getting so tired of the CYBERTRUCK wait that I cancelled my deposit and ordered a Rivian. No doubt even though the wait is still long for me, I see them on the road regularly now and strongly suspect I’ll have one in hand long before the first CYBERTRUCK delivers to anyone.
The Supercharger network is a selling point as well. Much of the US is well covered. The chargers seem more robust than competitor's set-ups (which are often broken when you arrive).
Trying to charge a non-Tesla during a trip can be a bit of a crap-shoot. Will the station be available? Will it be functional? Do I need to create yet another new account on yet another new app to access it?
This won't last. But until the competition makes their charging network better, it's a selling point for many buyers.
Does Tesla's patent portfolio serve as a competitive advantage? I don't follow such things, so I don't know.
Regardless of patent portfolio, I think it's a safe bet that Tesla views their (vaporware-ish?) self driving tech as a competitive advantage. Probably why they emphasize it so much and Elon seems absolutely fixated on it.
Tesla's supercharger network still seems to me a lot more reliable and easy-to-use than Electrify America (which Ford uses), but EA is building out fast. I'm also a bigger fan of Tesla's cylindrical batteries than Ford's pouch batteries, but time may prove me wrong.
I think Tesla still has a leg up on range. I looked into buying an F150 but the range is just a bit low for me. The Lightning has a purported EPA range of 320 miles which if you subtract off the top 10% and bottom 10% means it really has 250 miles of usable range at EPA standards which would probably drop it to 150-180 if you're driving it at highway speeds with a load. It's just a bit too low for me if I'm going to take this thing camping or hauling a trailer for a boat.
That said, I think 150-180 miles is plenty of range for people who would just drive this thing to work and back.
Supercharger network, much longer range, significant investment in battery technology that should make their cars comparatively cheaper, FSD when it arrives, fantastic safety scores and cult like brand loyalty. Tesla has a lot going for it atleast for the next 5-10 years.
> Their head start for launch is pretty meaningless.
You're comparing something that exists to something that doesn't yet exist, and you have no information on future volume, then calling the first thing "meaningless." I don't understand that at all.
Your point is entirely predicated on Tesla producing Cybertruck in such large volumes that it dwarfs Ford's F-150 Lightning, but you have no factual basis for that claim.
> the amount of these trucks ford can produce is very small. Their head start for launch is pretty meaningless.
Far from it. One, they're pre-selling (note: selling, not taking deposits for). Two, they're making 150,000 a year and plan to make 600,000 in 2023 [1], the latter representing about 5% of the American light truck market [2] and about 50% of the total number of vehicles Tesla builds in a year [3].
Getting US consumers to want EV’s in large numbers is the real problem. Sounds like Ford is getting people excited. I’m sure they’ll be ready to double output as needed.
It’s nice, but I do lust for the stainless steel of the Cybertruck. My Dodge Ram looks like shit after just a few years due to paint chips, rust, etc. It’s really quite disappointing for a vehicle meant to be on job sites and other rough environments.
No. You simply wait the 14 months it takes to get a new one. Last I heard my brother was waiting like a year for him to use his Model 3 again after an accident, and instead had to borrow our Mom's old van.
It's disheartening when I want to build out in a new van soon and the only electric van on the US market is the Ford E-Transit with an abysmal 130 mile range when loaded down. Local dealership has two on the lot that are already spoken for by businesses. When asked about ordering one the sales reps told me "maybe 2023" as they were more than 9 months out from getting their next batch which was also spoken for already.
I'm starting to get the feeling that supply chain issues are going to be prevalent for the rest of the 2020 decade.
2022 Transit order books closed months ago. The 2023 order book information and opening dates land tomorrow (so goes the rumor) in the USA. iirc deliveries of 2023 Transits are projected to start in the fall.
The 130 mile range on the E-Transit is plenty for the current target customers who are buying them as fast as Ford can make them, but not enough for more rural uses. Give it time, more electric vans are coming. Rumor was that 2023 would see introduction of an actually orderable Ram Promaster, probably as a 2024 model but with optionally more battery than the current E-Transit.
e-vans are not there yet unfortunately. deliveries is a huge issue because of supply chain issues but also price point / load capacity / mileage is a big issue ...
I really hope in 3 years we have competitive e-vans so that we leave diesel vans behind
If the ID Buzz long wheelbase version is offered as a 5-seater (2 front seats, 3 bench 2nd row) then I would consider it once it comes out. The ID Buzz is significantly smaller than even the smallest Transit van, it sounds likely to be more comparable to the Transit Connect in the USA. 2 very different size classes.
I'm still a bunch of years away from a new vehicle purchase, but the long wheelbase ID Buzz is still a bunch of years away from general availability in the USA. So things might line up. The key spec I'm waiting on is roof load limit, if it's in the 150lb range then that will exclude it from my consideration as with a smaller interior size I would want/need to use the roof for various loads which would fit inside a normal full size van or in the bed of a pickup.
I would contend this is at least part of the reason why Elon has been engaging in so many antics lately: to keep this out of the news. Ford even held a press event in mid-May[0] but there was hardly any coverage due in no small part to the distraction caused by the Twitter buyout news. Since most professional journalists pretty much live on Twitter, they talked about little else during the time. Meanwhile there is still no ship date in sight for Tesla’s “Cybertruck”, is there?
Lest anyone think that this is a silly idea in terms of the amount of money being spent, it’s worth noting that at least one article claims Ford’s F-series truck business produces revenue of about $42B annually[1], which is coincidentally (wink, wink) very close to the amount of Elon’s Twitter purchase ($44B), something to consider before dismissing the idea as not possibly worth it.
Those numbers have absolutely no relation to each other. What would be the point? Those $42B of revenue are from the ICE line, not EVs, so how would a couple weeks of publicity even affect that?
This doesn't even sort of make sense. Twitter was in the news and this wasn't because Twitter is actually a bigger story: you're right that most journalists live on Twitter, so, its policies have massive influence on the national discourse as a whole. Ford releasing a very expensive truck to the few people who want and can afford very expensive trucks is a niche story.
I think if that were true, we'd see Tesla a lot more focused on building and testing more prototypes. Maybe they'd even get them to production at the expense of Y volume.
Instead they seem to be laser focused on maximizing Y and to a lesser extent 3 production.
I'm kind of torn here - great, it's electric and not a gas-guzzler. But how many people actually need a 3 ton vehicle? Just the carbon footprint of building the thing must be insane, forget the damage to the road etc.
Edit: just to be clear: I'm not questioning the business logic here, clearly people are buying these things. But it's makes this kind of news bittersweet - if we want to get out of this mess, we're going to have to convince people to stop buying this type of thing
A 3-ton truck, for the vast majority of its buyers, makes their lives harder and less pleasant but they do it anyway because of desires manufactured by marketing and vanity.
I kind of agree with all those points? We have to change our behaviour fast, because those with real needs (the poor family trying to eke out a subsistence living in rural india) are going to feel the full brunt of the Co2 we and our neighbours have been spewing out our whole lives. And instead we're congratulating ourselves on building electric status symbols
I'd actually go one step further and say that these ARE needs, if the goal is to live a fulfilling life that is worth bringing children into...and what are we if not tools for propagating the human race?
Correct. And this is why, at the population levels of the world, the future is bleak in terms of the environment. Our way of life at the current population levels is not sustainable.
I don't think it's a fair comparison with most of those things; a smaller house is actually smaller, a warmer/colder house is actually a different temperature. A lighter vehicle doesn't have to make any material difference to the driver.
Trucks are popular in the US. Not sure where you're from but the F-150 is the most popular truck in the US. Therefore, making it available in an electric model makes a lot of sense.
Most people don't need an F-150 with a combustion engine, but that doesn't stop them from getting it. In much the same way that they won't need a 3 ton electric truck, it won't stop them from getting it.
It’s not entirely organic though. “Light trucks” get a tax deduction for business owners and slip through a lot of regulatory cracks regarding fuel economy standards. From there, marketing actually has a bigger hand in shaping consumer demand than people give it credit for. They sell these cars to sell a certain lifestyle aesthetic of manliness.
If the production incentives were different, there’s no reason we can’t imagine they’d have tried to code rugged manliness as a rugged 4x4 like was popular in the 90s or an absurd muscle car like was popular in the 70s instead.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I'm not questioning the business model, I know trucks are popular and I'm sure they'll sell hundreds of thousands. What I mean is that for me this type of news is a silver lining around a massive dark cloud of people driving full speed into the climate catastrophe. Yey, an electric vehicle... that's a 3 ton truck that 99% of buyers don't actually need.
Trucks are classified into groups based up how much payload they can carry. The F-150 is Ford's 1/2 ton light duty truck. F-250 their 1 ton truck and the F-350 their 2 ton truck. If you want a 3 ton truck you are getting into commercial vehicles.
If you are discussing trucks and want to talk about gross vehicle weight you should probably clarify that is what you are referring to.
It's about not letting perfect be the enemy of good. Yes, this thing is way too big and heavy for what almost all of its buyers need, but it's still a hell of a lot better than the gas version. A gas F-150 will use over 50 tones of gas. The electric version will use 30 kg of lithium, for sure, but they are both mined, and one is even recyclable.
I totally agree with your point (which is why I think electric cars are a good idea in general, as opposed to some who would argue that theyre a distraction from the real imperative of public transport and "short distance living"). But there's a pretty big gap between perfect and an electric truck. A towbar on a standard electric car would cover everything that these people actually need
I need one about 1% of the time. However when I need a truck it is for things I can't rent a truck to do. Most rental trucks don't have the right brake controller for a large trailer (rental trailers have surge brakes - I'm never going back to them), and often they don't have the right hitch (permanent 2 inch ball - 2-5/8 balls are common, as a 5th wheel or gooseneck). I keep getting people telling me to rent a truck, while it would save a ton of money, in practice it isn't possible.
Most consumer vehicles in the USA are already right around 2 tons unloaded. Even small pickup trucks have GVWR of 3 tons (my Chevrolet Colorado which is a mid-sized truck has a 6000 lb GVWR). A 3 ton vehicle is not THAT big, here.
If you actually use a pickup truck to do pickup truck things more than a few times per month, it's not cost effective to own a different vehicle.
I really wonder why cargo trailers aren’t more popular. You can put a tow hitch on a friggin Miata and still haul as much stuff out of Home Depot as you want.
> But how many people actually need a 3 ton vehicle?
Much of this is marketing from the Big 3 over the last 25 years. They've been driving consumers to larger truck platforms with marketing for decades. The truck platforms are cheaper and easier to produce than alternatives. It allows them to share parts across more of their portfolio.
A lot of the marketing over the last 30 years has been targeting fragile egos. I thought maybe we jumped the shark when they started selling baby wipes in black packaging as Man/Dude wipes but apparently not.
I have no doubt that in the near future Huggies and Luvs will convince men that it's tough to wear black diapers and crap their pants while doing many things.
Do you have any factual data to back up your statement that few buyers of a F-150 need a F-150?
I own a F-150 and know many people that also own one. Most of the people I know with them regularly haul or tow payloads which require it. I use my F-150 at least once a week to haul a multiple horse trailer. In the summer I also use it regularly to access my beach house which is only accessible with a 4 wheel drive vehicle. A few times each summer I also use it to help haul those who think AWD is the same thing off the nearby beach.
I live in a suburban condo development. Most of my neighbors have no idea what I use my F-150 for and I'm sure think it serves no useful purpose.
You left out the extra grid power needed to move these things. Which negates some of the gaz guzzling benefit, if more people move up to heavier vehicles. Which they are, apparently half of the pre-orders have come from people who never owned a truck before.
It's interesting to note that these more "environmental" EVs are resuscitating Hummer, which was already killed off for being a gas guzzler
I do. And the carbon footprint of building the thing is deep in the noise compared to the CF of the use phase of an ICE truck. In other words switching from ICE to an electric truck makes a dramatic positive difference for the planet if you account for both trucks' entire lifecycle.
I live in a rural area and I need a truck for hauling and for towing four different kinds of trailer. I drive my diesel truck sparingly these days because its CF bothers me. I'd trade it for an F-150 Lightning tomorrow if the F-150 was actually available.
You might be interested in the Federal push for hydrogen fuel cell evs as the carbon foot print is smaller compared to the overhyped current electric vehicles:
-green way to generate hydrogen and fertilizer already found
-hydrogen fuel cells have weight advantages over current evs
-hydrogen fuel cells are cost economically advantaged to replace traditional diesel transportation in trucking, trains, boats, etc.
Green hydrogen uses about 3x as much electricity per mile than just using the electricity directly in an EV. I'm not sure how that can have a smaller carbon foot print.
A Toyota Mirai weighs more than a Tesla Model 3, so there's no weight advantage.
You could ask the same questions about virtually every vehicle on the road. A model x weighs in at slightly over 2.5 tons. A model y is about 2.25 tons.
Yeah, an electric Maverick or Ranger would be pretty great. Just like Tesla started with the higher end Model S, and eventually got to the higher volume Model 3, I'm assuming Ford is starting with the higher end (and presumably margin) Lightning, and will get to lower price points eventually.
Prior to COVID, Ford was selling 900k F-150s per year (their highest volume vehicle line). Continuing on their path those will all be Lightning models - a large number of very heavy, energy intensive vehicles driving around.
I'm not torn, this is a disaster. In my town people who want to signal how "green" they are, but who are too lazy to ride a bicycle, buy a Tesla (used to be a Prius, and before that it was a diesel VW, Volvo, or Mercedes). At least until quite recently, this has prevented monster trucks from being in style. But now, you can have a monster truck and greenwash at the same time. It's going to ruin the roads and kill a bunch of pedestrians. There's already half a dozen Rivian R1Ts, despite the local 3-ton weight limits.
life is filled with things we don't need. We don't need 5G. We don't need internet. Datacenters are pretty big carbon footprints. Are you going to be a general home contractor with a Mini Cooper? Are you getting into the forest for camping in your Mini Cooper? How about camping with a family of 4 or 5?
Readit News
I doubt that Tesla's Cyber truck will be out anytime out in the near future and at a price that can compete with the F-150.
Alkso Tesla hasn't shipped a truck. Rivian has shipped, Ford has now shipped. If and when the Cybertruck makes it to market, Ford and Rivian will finally see some competition.
Once GM gets on the electric pickup market, it's game over for the wonky Tesla unless they end up selling exclusively to the types who don't actually do truck stuff (the G-Wagon crowd).
Once the lightnings are easy to acquire at a dealership, I think Tesla will have its work cut out for it. The F150 is the best selling car/anything in the US.
The additional levels of trim on the F150 are decent (esp. extended range) but the base model is amazing value for the price.
Hopefully this puts pressure on Tesla to stop touting the high end BS (like dodgy autopilot) and focus on adequate value for their base models.
For my part while I'd like a vehicle with Tesla autonomy, the appalling QA/finish (Teslas still look cheap) and the support policies mean I'll go to an EU or Asian brand when I finally pick an EV (at least if there's anything left by that time that doesn't look like some trashy gamer mouse on wheels).
Trying to charge a non-Tesla during a trip can be a bit of a crap-shoot. Will the station be available? Will it be functional? Do I need to create yet another new account on yet another new app to access it?
This won't last. But until the competition makes their charging network better, it's a selling point for many buyers.
Regardless of patent portfolio, I think it's a safe bet that Tesla views their (vaporware-ish?) self driving tech as a competitive advantage. Probably why they emphasize it so much and Elon seems absolutely fixated on it.
That said, I think 150-180 miles is plenty of range for people who would just drive this thing to work and back.
You're comparing something that exists to something that doesn't yet exist, and you have no information on future volume, then calling the first thing "meaningless." I don't understand that at all.
Your point is entirely predicated on Tesla producing Cybertruck in such large volumes that it dwarfs Ford's F-150 Lightning, but you have no factual basis for that claim.
Far from it. One, they're pre-selling (note: selling, not taking deposits for). Two, they're making 150,000 a year and plan to make 600,000 in 2023 [1], the latter representing about 5% of the American light truck market [2] and about 50% of the total number of vehicles Tesla builds in a year [3].
[1] https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1134628_ford-f-150-ligh...
[2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/199981/us-car-and-truck-...
[3] https://www.statista.com/statistics/715421/tesla-quarterly-v...
They almost quadrupled output from 40,000 to 150,000 because of demand.
https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/04/25/ford-f-150-lightning-ele...
Getting US consumers to want EV’s in large numbers is the real problem. Sounds like Ford is getting people excited. I’m sure they’ll be ready to double output as needed.
[0] https://reddit.com/r/cybertruck/comments/uvg7tm/another_look...
I'm starting to get the feeling that supply chain issues are going to be prevalent for the rest of the 2020 decade.
The 130 mile range on the E-Transit is plenty for the current target customers who are buying them as fast as Ford can make them, but not enough for more rural uses. Give it time, more electric vans are coming. Rumor was that 2023 would see introduction of an actually orderable Ram Promaster, probably as a 2024 model but with optionally more battery than the current E-Transit.
I really hope in 3 years we have competitive e-vans so that we leave diesel vans behind
I'm still a bunch of years away from a new vehicle purchase, but the long wheelbase ID Buzz is still a bunch of years away from general availability in the USA. So things might line up. The key spec I'm waiting on is roof load limit, if it's in the 150lb range then that will exclude it from my consideration as with a smaller interior size I would want/need to use the roof for various loads which would fit inside a normal full size van or in the bed of a pickup.
[0]: https://transportation.report/vehicles/2022-ford-f150-pickup...
Lest anyone think that this is a silly idea in terms of the amount of money being spent, it’s worth noting that at least one article claims Ford’s F-series truck business produces revenue of about $42B annually[1], which is coincidentally (wink, wink) very close to the amount of Elon’s Twitter purchase ($44B), something to consider before dismissing the idea as not possibly worth it.
[0] https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2021...
[1] https://thenewswheel.com/ford-f-series-42-billion-revenue-20...
I’m surprised this odd speculation is the top comment.
Instead they seem to be laser focused on maximizing Y and to a lesser extent 3 production.
https://startupnation.com/manage-your-business/teslas-open-s...
Edit: just to be clear: I'm not questioning the business logic here, clearly people are buying these things. But it's makes this kind of news bittersweet - if we want to get out of this mess, we're going to have to convince people to stop buying this type of thing
How many people need to set the A/C below 80F or the heat above 60F?
How many people need to fly to Hawaii for a vacation? Drive to the beach.
How many people need to drive to the beach? Stay at home and knit.
How many people need to have kids? Each kid has a huge carbon footprint.
How many people need to drive to the mountains to go skiing?
Most things that make life easier, more pleasant, or more fun, are not needs.
Most people don't need an F-150 with a combustion engine, but that doesn't stop them from getting it. In much the same way that they won't need a 3 ton electric truck, it won't stop them from getting it.
If the production incentives were different, there’s no reason we can’t imagine they’d have tried to code rugged manliness as a rugged 4x4 like was popular in the 90s or an absurd muscle car like was popular in the 70s instead.
If you are discussing trucks and want to talk about gross vehicle weight you should probably clarify that is what you are referring to.
If you actually use a pickup truck to do pickup truck things more than a few times per month, it's not cost effective to own a different vehicle.
Much of this is marketing from the Big 3 over the last 25 years. They've been driving consumers to larger truck platforms with marketing for decades. The truck platforms are cheaper and easier to produce than alternatives. It allows them to share parts across more of their portfolio.
A lot of the marketing over the last 30 years has been targeting fragile egos. I thought maybe we jumped the shark when they started selling baby wipes in black packaging as Man/Dude wipes but apparently not.
I have no doubt that in the near future Huggies and Luvs will convince men that it's tough to wear black diapers and crap their pants while doing many things.
I own a F-150 and know many people that also own one. Most of the people I know with them regularly haul or tow payloads which require it. I use my F-150 at least once a week to haul a multiple horse trailer. In the summer I also use it regularly to access my beach house which is only accessible with a 4 wheel drive vehicle. A few times each summer I also use it to help haul those who think AWD is the same thing off the nearby beach.
I live in a suburban condo development. Most of my neighbors have no idea what I use my F-150 for and I'm sure think it serves no useful purpose.
It's interesting to note that these more "environmental" EVs are resuscitating Hummer, which was already killed off for being a gas guzzler
I live in a rural area and I need a truck for hauling and for towing four different kinds of trailer. I drive my diesel truck sparingly these days because its CF bothers me. I'd trade it for an F-150 Lightning tomorrow if the F-150 was actually available.
A Toyota Mirai weighs more than a Tesla Model 3, so there's no weight advantage.
That's a reference to carrying capacity, not the actual GVW. A Honda Accord weights over 3 tons GVW.
Deleted Comment
Dead Comment