Electric Vehicles Are Great for Long Trips

[bitrex]

On 7/11/19 7:40 AM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:

torsdag den 11. juli 2019 kl. 04.50.38 UTC+2 skrev bitrex:
On 7/10/19 10:37 PM, Rick C wrote:

I don't really know anyone in the 30-early 40s demographic that takes
long road trips regularly, we're mostly too busy with families, wives
and/or girlfriends, toddlers and/or young children, elderly parents,
working 40-60 hours a week, etc.

When we were in that age group, we drove from NY/VT to IL twice a year
to visit the family. We did it for the 30+ years while our parents
were living.

He is just being obstinate. On one hand he argues that his HV is great because he can use gasoline on long trips. Then when arguing against EVs, in particular, Teslas, he tries to argue that people don't take longer trips.


Point was that I don't use it for trips further afield than 50 miles
regularly enough to make paying the higher price tag that cars with 250
mile+ long range batteries cost worth the premium.

the price difference was 26k vs 35k-40k can buy a lotta gas for $9000. I
definitely haven't come close to putting $9000 worth of gas into it.
more like $150 of gas a year.

The first generation Nissan Leaf started with a range of about 80 miles,
topped out at a range of 110 miles they didn't sell several hundred
thousand of these cars because the consumer found that wholly inadequate.

A sporty pure EV sedan/runabout, maybe even a lightweight two-seater,
that had a 100 mile range and fast charging that I don't have to pay
luxury-car price for would be my ideal. Nobody makes that car, yet.

that what Tesla started with:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Roadster_(2008)

at $112,000 a truly absurd vehicle appealing only to the most
pathological of very wealthy balding middle-aged tech dudes, as a 7th
exotic sports car in the garage of the Cupertino bang-pad, useful only
for bringing 17 year old goth girls of questionable emotional stability
home from night clubs for "photo shoots"

 

[bitrex]

On 7/11/19 10:03 AM, John Larkin wrote:

On Wed, 10 Jul 2019 23:11:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/10/19 1:16 PM, John Larkin wrote:

I don't really know anyone in the 30-early 40s demographic that takes
long road trips regularly, we're mostly too busy with families, wives
and/or girlfriends, toddlers and/or young children, elderly parents,
working 40-60 hours a week, etc.

We drive up into the Sierras, and we know people with young kids who
like to go up there too. It's about 190 miles, 3 hours at best, 6 or
more in a blizzard. I can work up there, as can some friends.

A full tank of gas is reassuring, working up towards 7200 feet when
it's snowing.



Yeah San Fran tech people do all sorts of fun stuff with their free time
I'm sure.

People all over the world enjoy their leisure time.


For the rest of us there are a lot of activities that fall into the
category of "financially irresponsible" like spending money on
luxury-priced electric vehicles, say. Driving into the mountains in
luxury vehicles with kids in blizzards. and so forth.

My big objection to hauling brats up into the Sierras is that our
internet rate drops to a crawl as all those kids go online to look at
movies and play games. 4th of July weekend was horrible.

It gets so bad that the only things left to do are reading and hiking
and cooking etc.

My original objection was essentially Tesla wants to be a luxury car
manufacturer. They don't wanna do anything else. They want to build and
sell luxury electric sedans, luxury electric SUVs, luxury electric
trucks, and so forth to a global market of wealthy consumers for luxury
products.

Which is a fine business model, selling products to people with money
makes a certain sense. Buuuut....why did we give Elon Musk so much of
our government subsidy money for this purpose.

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 1:09:16 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 7/11/19 6:58 AM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
bitrex <user@example.net> wrote in news:TNxVE.151930$xm4.39525
@fx45.iad:

like spending money on
luxury-priced electric vehicles,

You really do not understand. It is technology priced, not 'luxury
priced'.

And its cost amortizes itself out over time. But you apparently lack
knowledge of that premise as well.


cars aren't assets like cash, stocks, or real estate they're just
forever-depreciating rust. and the depreciation curve on luxury vehicles
is almost always far worse relatively speaking than cheaper vehicles.
anything you could realistically save on fuel over the life of the car
in a luxury-priced new EV is immediately crushed out by the harder
depreciation hit, the higher excise taxes, etc.

Nobody buys a 40-60k car new off the lot, electric or otherwise, to save
money as compared to some economy vehicle that costs 15k less or
"amortize" a goddamn thing.

Yes, when all cars had the same level of maintenance and fuel costs, that was true. With EVs there are big savings in ownership costs. How often do you change the oil in your HV? Do they measure the hours the engine is running? The way you talk it never runs and so might actually suffer from corrosion if not run enough or run, but not up to full operating temperature.... oh, how complicated ICE are.

Yeah, some will buy the cheapest car they can to save money. But others will buy a car that gives them a low ownership cost and still gives them a good quality and fun car to drive.

--

Rick C.

+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 1:22:11 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 7/11/19 10:03 AM, John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jul 2019 23:11:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/10/19 1:16 PM, John Larkin wrote:

I don't really know anyone in the 30-early 40s demographic that takes
long road trips regularly, we're mostly too busy with families, wives
and/or girlfriends, toddlers and/or young children, elderly parents,
working 40-60 hours a week, etc.

We drive up into the Sierras, and we know people with young kids who
like to go up there too. It's about 190 miles, 3 hours at best, 6 or
more in a blizzard. I can work up there, as can some friends.

A full tank of gas is reassuring, working up towards 7200 feet when
it's snowing.



Yeah San Fran tech people do all sorts of fun stuff with their free time
I'm sure.

People all over the world enjoy their leisure time.


For the rest of us there are a lot of activities that fall into the
category of "financially irresponsible" like spending money on
luxury-priced electric vehicles, say. Driving into the mountains in
luxury vehicles with kids in blizzards. and so forth.

My big objection to hauling brats up into the Sierras is that our
internet rate drops to a crawl as all those kids go online to look at
movies and play games. 4th of July weekend was horrible.

It gets so bad that the only things left to do are reading and hiking
and cooking etc.



My original objection was essentially Tesla wants to be a luxury car
manufacturer. They don't wanna do anything else. They want to build and
sell luxury electric sedans, luxury electric SUVs, luxury electric
trucks, and so forth to a global market of wealthy consumers for luxury
products.

Which is a fine business model, selling products to people with money
makes a certain sense. Buuuut....why did we give Elon Musk so much of
our government subsidy money for this purpose.

You seem to be very confused. Tesla wants to sell electric vehicles. They understand the economies of scale and realize the price will come down with time and volume. Anyone who wants to compete in the EV market has the same limitation... like GM selling a less capable car for about the same price.

I've always given the big iron companies credit for knowing what the market wants. Clearly GM had other reasons for selling the Volt and Bolt other than meeting market demand. The Volt barely sold and the Bolt will likely be dropped as soon as GM has another EV available. For some reason GM wanted to have the first mass produced EV in the US. I'll wait for the US companies to produce their real EVs before I knock them too much.

--

Rick C.

+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[bitrex]

On 7/11/19 2:20 PM, Rick C wrote:

On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 1:22:11 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/11/19 10:03 AM, John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jul 2019 23:11:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/10/19 1:16 PM, John Larkin wrote:

I don't really know anyone in the 30-early 40s demographic that takes
long road trips regularly, we're mostly too busy with families, wives
and/or girlfriends, toddlers and/or young children, elderly parents,
working 40-60 hours a week, etc.

We drive up into the Sierras, and we know people with young kids who
like to go up there too. It's about 190 miles, 3 hours at best, 6 or
more in a blizzard. I can work up there, as can some friends.

A full tank of gas is reassuring, working up towards 7200 feet when
it's snowing.



Yeah San Fran tech people do all sorts of fun stuff with their free time
I'm sure.

People all over the world enjoy their leisure time.


For the rest of us there are a lot of activities that fall into the
category of "financially irresponsible" like spending money on
luxury-priced electric vehicles, say. Driving into the mountains in
luxury vehicles with kids in blizzards. and so forth.

My big objection to hauling brats up into the Sierras is that our
internet rate drops to a crawl as all those kids go online to look at
movies and play games. 4th of July weekend was horrible.

It gets so bad that the only things left to do are reading and hiking
and cooking etc.



My original objection was essentially Tesla wants to be a luxury car
manufacturer. They don't wanna do anything else. They want to build and
sell luxury electric sedans, luxury electric SUVs, luxury electric
trucks, and so forth to a global market of wealthy consumers for luxury
products.

Which is a fine business model, selling products to people with money
makes a certain sense. Buuuut....why did we give Elon Musk so much of
our government subsidy money for this purpose.

You seem to be very confused. Tesla wants to sell electric vehicles. They understand the economies of scale and realize the price will come down with time and volume. Anyone who wants to compete in the EV market has the same limitation... like GM selling a less capable car for about the same price.

I've always given the big iron companies credit for knowing what the market wants. Clearly GM had other reasons for selling the Volt and Bolt other than meeting market demand. The Volt barely sold and the Bolt will likely be dropped as soon as GM has another EV available. For some reason GM wanted to have the first mass produced EV in the US. I'll wait for the US companies to produce their real EVs before I knock them too much.

The other manufacturers have probably been holding back in part to see
what Tesla would do with the Model 3 and where the average sale price
and production numbers would end up. They didn't really know. A 35k
out-the-door priced well-equipped 3 made in large quantity anyone could
get right off the site? Revolutionary product, hard to compete with.

The 35k Model 3-for-everyone turned out to be a juke by Tesla just a
stripped-down model without even a heated steering wheel that you have
to special-order with a two month lead time. they don't want anyone to
buy it at that price and IMO never will. It doesn't exist for all
intents and purposes.

Kudos to Musk for faking them out I guess. Uncertainty likely forced GM
to price the Bolt lower, into the realm of losing money or barely
break-even at best, financial territory Tesla is intimately familiar
with at this point

 

[bitrex]

On 7/11/19 2:20 PM, Rick C wrote:

On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 1:22:11 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/11/19 10:03 AM, John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jul 2019 23:11:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/10/19 1:16 PM, John Larkin wrote:

I don't really know anyone in the 30-early 40s demographic that takes
long road trips regularly, we're mostly too busy with families, wives
and/or girlfriends, toddlers and/or young children, elderly parents,
working 40-60 hours a week, etc.

We drive up into the Sierras, and we know people with young kids who
like to go up there too. It's about 190 miles, 3 hours at best, 6 or
more in a blizzard. I can work up there, as can some friends.

A full tank of gas is reassuring, working up towards 7200 feet when
it's snowing.



Yeah San Fran tech people do all sorts of fun stuff with their free time
I'm sure.

People all over the world enjoy their leisure time.


For the rest of us there are a lot of activities that fall into the
category of "financially irresponsible" like spending money on
luxury-priced electric vehicles, say. Driving into the mountains in
luxury vehicles with kids in blizzards. and so forth.

My big objection to hauling brats up into the Sierras is that our
internet rate drops to a crawl as all those kids go online to look at
movies and play games. 4th of July weekend was horrible.

It gets so bad that the only things left to do are reading and hiking
and cooking etc.



My original objection was essentially Tesla wants to be a luxury car
manufacturer. They don't wanna do anything else. They want to build and
sell luxury electric sedans, luxury electric SUVs, luxury electric
trucks, and so forth to a global market of wealthy consumers for luxury
products.

Which is a fine business model, selling products to people with money
makes a certain sense. Buuuut....why did we give Elon Musk so much of
our government subsidy money for this purpose.

You seem to be very confused. Tesla wants to sell electric vehicles. They understand the economies of scale and realize the price will come down with time and volume. Anyone who wants to compete in the EV market has the same limitation... like GM selling a less capable car for about the same price.

I've always given the big iron companies credit for knowing what the market wants. Clearly GM had other reasons for selling the Volt and Bolt other than meeting market demand. The Volt barely sold and the Bolt will likely be dropped as soon as GM has another EV available. For some reason GM wanted to have the first mass produced EV in the US. I'll wait for the US companies to produce their real EVs before I knock them too much.

GM is definitely headed in the right direction selling electric
SUVs/crossovers targeting the 35k-and-under price point. I don't really
see any other direction for them in the EV regime at this point, at
least. That's fine I think there's a large market there, the Bolt isn't
the right vehicle for it, it wasn't really designed for the average
American buyer, anyway. Looks weird. Popular in South Korea where half
the design team was located.

 

[bitrex]

On 7/11/19 3:07 PM, bitrex wrote:

I've always given the big iron companies credit for knowing what the
market wants.  Clearly GM had other reasons for selling the Volt and
Bolt other than meeting market demand.  The Volt barely sold and the
Bolt will likely be dropped as soon as GM has another EV available.
For some reason GM wanted to have the first mass produced EV in the
US.  I'll wait for the US companies to produce their real EVs before I
knock them too much.


GM is definitely headed in the right direction selling electric
SUVs/crossovers targeting the 35k-and-under price point. I don't really
see any other direction for them in the EV regime at this point, at
least. That's fine I think there's a large market there, the Bolt isn't
the right vehicle for it, it wasn't really designed for the average
American buyer, anyway. Looks weird. Popular in South Korea where half
the design team was located.

I think that's a safe bet for GM because I think, psychologically
speaking, Elon Musk doesn't give a sweaty flying fuck what the average
American in the market "wants."

He views the mass of American car buyers as no-money retards who don't
deserve his product, don't understand it, too stupid to understand it,
and definitely does not want to become the next Ford or Volkswagen
trying to sell "the people's car" at minuscule margins.

Tesla wants to be a global company selling the cutting-edge at
cutting-edge prices, the low-end of the American market is only of
incidental interest to Tesla.

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 3:18:36 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

I think that's a safe bet for GM because I think, psychologically
speaking, Elon Musk doesn't give a sweaty flying fuck what the average
American in the market "wants."

Uh, I guess that's why Tesla is selling every friggin' car they can make...

He views the mass of American car buyers as no-money retards who don't
deserve his product, don't understand it, too stupid to understand it,
and definitely does not want to become the next Ford or Volkswagen
trying to sell "the people's car" at minuscule margins.

I think you are projecting onto Musk. Meanwhile Tesla is defining the EV market for others to try to live up to.

BTW, no one else want's to be a maker of minimum margin cars only. That's why they all make the more expensive cars as well.

Tesla wants to be a global company selling the cutting-edge at
cutting-edge prices, the low-end of the American market is only of
incidental interest to Tesla.

Again, your projection. Tesla, like everyone else has to make a profit. Meanwhile, Tesla, unlike everyone else, has figured out that to sell EVs there has to be a charging infrastructure in place *before* you try to sell cars like the Chevy Bolt. lol

That's why Tesla has sold half a million EVs and no one else has.

--

Rick C.

+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 3:07:53 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 7/11/19 2:20 PM, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 1:22:11 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/11/19 10:03 AM, John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jul 2019 23:11:46 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/10/19 1:16 PM, John Larkin wrote:

I don't really know anyone in the 30-early 40s demographic that takes
long road trips regularly, we're mostly too busy with families, wives
and/or girlfriends, toddlers and/or young children, elderly parents,
working 40-60 hours a week, etc.

We drive up into the Sierras, and we know people with young kids who
like to go up there too. It's about 190 miles, 3 hours at best, 6 or
more in a blizzard. I can work up there, as can some friends.

A full tank of gas is reassuring, working up towards 7200 feet when
it's snowing.



Yeah San Fran tech people do all sorts of fun stuff with their free time
I'm sure.

People all over the world enjoy their leisure time.


For the rest of us there are a lot of activities that fall into the
category of "financially irresponsible" like spending money on
luxury-priced electric vehicles, say. Driving into the mountains in
luxury vehicles with kids in blizzards. and so forth.

My big objection to hauling brats up into the Sierras is that our
internet rate drops to a crawl as all those kids go online to look at
movies and play games. 4th of July weekend was horrible.

It gets so bad that the only things left to do are reading and hiking
and cooking etc.



My original objection was essentially Tesla wants to be a luxury car
manufacturer. They don't wanna do anything else. They want to build and
sell luxury electric sedans, luxury electric SUVs, luxury electric
trucks, and so forth to a global market of wealthy consumers for luxury
products.

Which is a fine business model, selling products to people with money
makes a certain sense. Buuuut....why did we give Elon Musk so much of
our government subsidy money for this purpose.

You seem to be very confused. Tesla wants to sell electric vehicles. They understand the economies of scale and realize the price will come down with time and volume. Anyone who wants to compete in the EV market has the same limitation... like GM selling a less capable car for about the same price.

I've always given the big iron companies credit for knowing what the market wants. Clearly GM had other reasons for selling the Volt and Bolt other than meeting market demand. The Volt barely sold and the Bolt will likely be dropped as soon as GM has another EV available. For some reason GM wanted to have the first mass produced EV in the US. I'll wait for the US companies to produce their real EVs before I knock them too much.


GM is definitely headed in the right direction selling electric
SUVs/crossovers targeting the 35k-and-under price point. I don't really
see any other direction for them in the EV regime at this point, at
least. That's fine I think there's a large market there, the Bolt isn't
the right vehicle for it, it wasn't really designed for the average
American buyer, anyway. Looks weird. Popular in South Korea where half
the design team was located.

Lo0ks wEirD? It looks like every other Chevy!

--

Rick C.

++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[bitrex]

On 7/11/19 5:25 PM, Rick C wrote:

On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 3:18:36 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

I think that's a safe bet for GM because I think, psychologically
speaking, Elon Musk doesn't give a sweaty flying fuck what the average
American in the market "wants."

Uh, I guess that's why Tesla is selling every friggin' car they can make...

I didn't say that producing what market research says the market really
wants is always a ticket to product success. sometimes it is and
sometimes it isn't.

Market research would probably say that most buyers want a car with a
"real" instrument cluster not a touch screen panel as the sole
interface. People associated with Tesla probably tried to convince Musk
to drop the idea, too. Clearly he didn't budge on it.

He views the mass of American car buyers as no-money retards who don't
deserve his product, don't understand it, too stupid to understand it,
and definitely does not want to become the next Ford or Volkswagen
trying to sell "the people's car" at minuscule margins.

I think you are projecting onto Musk. Meanwhile Tesla is defining the EV market for others to try to live up to.

BTW, no one else want's to be a maker of minimum margin cars only. That's why they all make the more expensive cars as well.

Musk has made a career of not even particularly caring what his own
corporate board and major financial stakeholders think and leaving them
in the dark about basic operational facts of the company, consistently.

I don't think it takes a great exercise of psychological projection to
figure that he doesn't hold the bulk of the car-buying public in any
particular higher esteem. You're on Team Musk - or you ain't.

Tesla wants to be a global company selling the cutting-edge at
cutting-edge prices, the low-end of the American market is only of
incidental interest to Tesla.

Again, your projection. Tesla, like everyone else has to make a profit. Meanwhile, Tesla, unlike everyone else, has figured out that to sell EVs there has to be a charging infrastructure in place *before* you try to sell cars like the Chevy Bolt. lol

That's why Tesla has sold half a million EVs and no one else has.

Seems unlikely to be the reason. The US fast charging infrastructure
sucked 5 years ago and it still sucks, it just sucks somewhat less.
there are like 5 Tesla-branded supercharge stations within 100 miles of
me and they sit unused most of the time just like that one up in Truckee
or wherever the fuck JL likes to go on about, I can see on my app
anytime when they're being used it's not often.

these underused super-stations scattered about were the selling point
that made people buy all those model 3 as opposed to something else? I'd
think they'd be utilized more often if it that were the innovation
setting the world on fire. I do see Model 3s around sometimes and when
they're at a charger it's usually at the same kind of ChargePoint Level
2 charger I and everyone else uses. There are just more of them around.

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 8:32:52 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 7/11/19 5:25 PM, Rick C wrote:
On Thursday, July 11, 2019 at 3:18:36 PM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

I think that's a safe bet for GM because I think, psychologically
speaking, Elon Musk doesn't give a sweaty flying fuck what the average
American in the market "wants."

Uh, I guess that's why Tesla is selling every friggin' car they can make...


I didn't say that producing what market research says the market really
wants is always a ticket to product success. sometimes it is and
sometimes it isn't.

Market research would probably say that most buyers want a car with a
"real" instrument cluster not a touch screen panel as the sole
interface. People associated with Tesla probably tried to convince Musk
to drop the idea, too. Clearly he didn't budge on it.


He views the mass of American car buyers as no-money retards who don't
deserve his product, don't understand it, too stupid to understand it,
and definitely does not want to become the next Ford or Volkswagen
trying to sell "the people's car" at minuscule margins.

I think you are projecting onto Musk. Meanwhile Tesla is defining the EV market for others to try to live up to.

BTW, no one else want's to be a maker of minimum margin cars only. That's why they all make the more expensive cars as well.

Musk has made a career of not even particularly caring what his own
corporate board and major financial stakeholders think and leaving them
in the dark about basic operational facts of the company, consistently.

I don't think it takes a great exercise of psychological projection to
figure that he doesn't hold the bulk of the car-buying public in any
particular higher esteem. You're on Team Musk - or you ain't.

Tesla wants to be a global company selling the cutting-edge at
cutting-edge prices, the low-end of the American market is only of
incidental interest to Tesla.

Again, your projection. Tesla, like everyone else has to make a profit.. Meanwhile, Tesla, unlike everyone else, has figured out that to sell EVs there has to be a charging infrastructure in place *before* you try to sell cars like the Chevy Bolt. lol

That's why Tesla has sold half a million EVs and no one else has.


Seems unlikely to be the reason. The US fast charging infrastructure
sucked 5 years ago and it still sucks, it just sucks somewhat less.
there are like 5 Tesla-branded supercharge stations within 100 miles of
me and they sit unused most of the time just like that one up in Truckee
or wherever the fuck JL likes to go on about, I can see on my app
anytime when they're being used it's not often.

these underused super-stations scattered about were the selling point
that made people buy all those model 3 as opposed to something else? I'd
think they'd be utilized more often if it that were the innovation
setting the world on fire. I do see Model 3s around sometimes and when
they're at a charger it's usually at the same kind of ChargePoint Level
2 charger I and everyone else uses. There are just more of them around.

What app do you have that shows supercharger use? Are you sure you aren't looking at destination chargers?

--

Rick C.

---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

bitrex <user@example.net> wrote in news:Y2KVE.13781$uX3.8333
@fx27.iad:

cars aren't assets like cash, stocks, or real estate they're just
forever-depreciating rust.

Not the value presented by the car, idiot. The value gained by the
cheaper operational costs.

You are really not too bright... even with your uninformed claim.

All of my ever owned cars are collector's items today, fetching
huge bucks over what they were originally.

The 1969 Olds F-85 with the All Aluminum 215 V-8, the design of
which was bought by British Leyland back in '63.

Go ahead, child... price one.

The 1963 Chevrolet Nova.

Again... go hunt up a rusty barn find... still not cheap.

The 1970 Chevrolet Monte Carlo (first year).

You are so lame, you probably couldn't touch one with your entire
retirement savings.

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, July 12, 2019 at 12:12:49 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 7/11/19 9:45 PM, Rick C wrote:

Seems unlikely to be the reason. The US fast charging infrastructure
sucked 5 years ago and it still sucks, it just sucks somewhat less.
there are like 5 Tesla-branded supercharge stations within 100 miles of
me and they sit unused most of the time just like that one up in Truckee
or wherever the fuck JL likes to go on about, I can see on my app
anytime when they're being used it's not often.

these underused super-stations scattered about were the selling point
that made people buy all those model 3 as opposed to something else? I'd
think they'd be utilized more often if it that were the innovation
setting the world on fire. I do see Model 3s around sometimes and when
they're at a charger it's usually at the same kind of ChargePoint Level
2 charger I and everyone else uses. There are just more of them around..

What app do you have that shows supercharger use? Are you sure you aren't looking at destination chargers?


It looks like the ones I can get status on are, yeah.

Three of the destination chargers I can see status on nearby are located
at bars/public breweries - odd choice. Nobody there at the moment but
it's only Thursday.

Destination chargers are provided for the convenience of patrons, not trip charging. What you see is not at all indicative of much of anything regarding Tesla popularity. We all know Larkin hates Musk and so hates Tesla irrationally. You seem to be very jealous of Tesla's success in a market where it can only be said that GM has failed.

For the Tesla Supercharger-charger locations you can only infer useage
from the "popular times" GPS history on Google Maps, you can't get
real-time bay status anymore on Chargepoint or Plugshare. I don't
believe it was always that way. Guess Tesla figured there was no point
in giving that info to third parties anymore

Uh, why bother with any of that when Tesla has real time supercharger status in their cars and phone app? Why would anyone care about supercharger status if you don't own a Tesla?

The most popular supercharger locations are at the Auburn Mall in
Worcester and Shopper's World in Framingham those can be crowded in the
weekday mornings, looks like. The Mansfield mall location is usually
pretty lonely also I know because I go there sometimes and see it.

And uhhh, that's all there is just about for the no-status type
supercharger infrastructure in southeast Massachusetts until you get to
Cape Cod. Rhode Island is served by 28 supercharger bays total.

It's a nice perk but are these really the Tesla "killer app" driving
sales at this point in most locations? I see more Model 3s on the road
now but did the owners around here really buy them because they thought
the couple of mall-chargers were the best thing ever? The Mansfield mall
isn't even that great a mall!

I'm surprised you don't understand EVs and charging. Even if a Tesla owner never uses a supercharger, they want to know they are there if they ever decide to take a trip. People like Larkin are intimidated by the rapid success of Tesla, so he has to research them so he can knock every little nit about them to the point of making up BS about getting trapped in snow drifts.. Someone else here has to dig so deep for him to come up with crap like needing to drive hundreds of miles with no notice while he had just drained the car.

The point is that for rational people, they want to know the charging exists so they can drive where they want if and when that happens. Other than North Dakota Tesla Superchargers allow that in most of the US. GM is not part of any charging solution and so Bolts remain tethered to an owner's home by the range tether.

When GM finally gets its head in the game they will produce competitive EVs.. But until then, they are hardly even an also ran. It's like they never actually intended for the Bolt to be a success.

--

Rick C.

---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[bitrex]

On 7/11/19 9:45 PM, Rick C wrote:

Seems unlikely to be the reason. The US fast charging infrastructure
sucked 5 years ago and it still sucks, it just sucks somewhat less.
there are like 5 Tesla-branded supercharge stations within 100 miles of
me and they sit unused most of the time just like that one up in Truckee
or wherever the fuck JL likes to go on about, I can see on my app
anytime when they're being used it's not often.

these underused super-stations scattered about were the selling point
that made people buy all those model 3 as opposed to something else? I'd
think they'd be utilized more often if it that were the innovation
setting the world on fire. I do see Model 3s around sometimes and when
they're at a charger it's usually at the same kind of ChargePoint Level
2 charger I and everyone else uses. There are just more of them around.

What app do you have that shows supercharger use? Are you sure you aren't looking at destination chargers?

It looks like the ones I can get status on are, yeah.

Three of the destination chargers I can see status on nearby are located
at bars/public breweries - odd choice. Nobody there at the moment but
it's only Thursday.

For the Tesla Supercharger-charger locations you can only infer useage
from the "popular times" GPS history on Google Maps, you can't get
real-time bay status anymore on Chargepoint or Plugshare. I don't
believe it was always that way. Guess Tesla figured there was no point
in giving that info to third parties anymore

The most popular supercharger locations are at the Auburn Mall in
Worcester and Shopper's World in Framingham those can be crowded in the
weekday mornings, looks like. The Mansfield mall location is usually
pretty lonely also I know because I go there sometimes and see it.

And uhhh, that's all there is just about for the no-status type
supercharger infrastructure in southeast Massachusetts until you get to
Cape Cod. Rhode Island is served by 28 supercharger bays total.

It's a nice perk but are these really the Tesla "killer app" driving
sales at this point in most locations? I see more Model 3s on the road
now but did the owners around here really buy them because they thought
the couple of mall-chargers were the best thing ever? The Mansfield mall
isn't even that great a mall!

 

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in news:949eeb0b-a7e6-
4f1f-be83-ef9b937258d3@googlegroups.com:

Lo0ks wEirD? It looks like every other Chevy!

What are you, a fuckin ford lover?

I'll take GM products any day over f o r d.

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, July 12, 2019 at 1:02:03 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 7/12/19 12:30 AM, Rick C wrote:
On Friday, July 12, 2019 at 12:12:49 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/11/19 9:45 PM, Rick C wrote:

Seems unlikely to be the reason. The US fast charging infrastructure
sucked 5 years ago and it still sucks, it just sucks somewhat less.
there are like 5 Tesla-branded supercharge stations within 100 miles of
me and they sit unused most of the time just like that one up in Truckee
or wherever the fuck JL likes to go on about, I can see on my app
anytime when they're being used it's not often.

these underused super-stations scattered about were the selling point
that made people buy all those model 3 as opposed to something else? I'd
think they'd be utilized more often if it that were the innovation
setting the world on fire. I do see Model 3s around sometimes and when
they're at a charger it's usually at the same kind of ChargePoint Level
2 charger I and everyone else uses. There are just more of them around.

What app do you have that shows supercharger use? Are you sure you aren't looking at destination chargers?


It looks like the ones I can get status on are, yeah.

Three of the destination chargers I can see status on nearby are located
at bars/public breweries - odd choice. Nobody there at the moment but
it's only Thursday.

Destination chargers are provided for the convenience of patrons, not trip charging. What you see is not at all indicative of much of anything regarding Tesla popularity. We all know Larkin hates Musk and so hates Tesla irrationally. You seem to be very jealous of Tesla's success in a market where it can only be said that GM has failed.


For the Tesla Supercharger-charger locations you can only infer useage
from the "popular times" GPS history on Google Maps, you can't get
real-time bay status anymore on Chargepoint or Plugshare. I don't
believe it was always that way. Guess Tesla figured there was no point
in giving that info to third parties anymore

Uh, why bother with any of that when Tesla has real time supercharger status in their cars and phone app? Why would anyone care about supercharger status if you don't own a Tesla?


The most popular supercharger locations are at the Auburn Mall in
Worcester and Shopper's World in Framingham those can be crowded in the
weekday mornings, looks like. The Mansfield mall location is usually
pretty lonely also I know because I go there sometimes and see it.

And uhhh, that's all there is just about for the no-status type
supercharger infrastructure in southeast Massachusetts until you get to
Cape Cod. Rhode Island is served by 28 supercharger bays total.

It's a nice perk but are these really the Tesla "killer app" driving
sales at this point in most locations? I see more Model 3s on the road
now but did the owners around here really buy them because they thought
the couple of mall-chargers were the best thing ever? The Mansfield mall
isn't even that great a mall!

I'm surprised you don't understand EVs and charging. Even if a Tesla owner never uses a supercharger, they want to know they are there if they ever decide to take a trip. People like Larkin are intimidated by the rapid success of Tesla, so he has to research them so he can knock every little nit about them to the point of making up BS about getting trapped in snow drifts. Someone else here has to dig so deep for him to come up with crap like needing to drive hundreds of miles with no notice while he had just drained the car.

The point is that for rational people, they want to know the charging exists so they can drive where they want if and when that happens. Other than North Dakota Tesla Superchargers allow that in most of the US. GM is not part of any charging solution and so Bolts remain tethered to an owner's home by the range tether.

When GM finally gets its head in the game they will produce competitive EVs. But until then, they are hardly even an also ran. It's like they never actually intended for the Bolt to be a success.


Weird statement about a car I see more of on the road around here than
the Model 3, by far.

Nobody is "serious" other than the one company, that is serious. If
anyone says they are also serious, see first statement. You are a True
Fanboi, in the service of the One True EV. Distribute referral codes to
the faithless generously, and blessings be upon Lord Musk (PBUH) so it
is written, amen.

You can call names if you want. The facts speak for themselves. Half a million cars so far and it will reach nearly a million by the end of the year.. Then production in China will add another 300k per year, then the model Y will add another 300k, etc. etc.

Tesla has done something pretty special. They have brought electric vehicles to mass production. It's not just me. There are more than half a million people who voted with their wallets.

--

Rick C.

--+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[bitrex]

On 7/11/19 5:19 PM, Rick C wrote:

GM is definitely headed in the right direction selling electric
SUVs/crossovers targeting the 35k-and-under price point. I don't really
see any other direction for them in the EV regime at this point, at
least. That's fine I think there's a large market there, the Bolt isn't
the right vehicle for it, it wasn't really designed for the average
American buyer, anyway. Looks weird. Popular in South Korea where half
the design team was located.

Lo0ks wEirD? It looks like every other Chevy!

Tesla also has a demographics problem wrt to their sales the
overwhelming majority of Model 3s sold domestically are sold to a
similar demographic, middle-aged white males in the IT/technology sector
in California.

That's one reason I probably see more Bolts than I do Model 3s around
here because 50% of the drivers/owners are women. I saw a woman driving
a Tesla, one time. I see more women than men driving Volts.

They are going to run out of tech dudes to sell these cars to,
eventually, the market will saturate.

 

[bitrex]

On 7/12/19 12:30 AM, Rick C wrote:

On Friday, July 12, 2019 at 12:12:49 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/11/19 9:45 PM, Rick C wrote:

Seems unlikely to be the reason. The US fast charging infrastructure
sucked 5 years ago and it still sucks, it just sucks somewhat less.
there are like 5 Tesla-branded supercharge stations within 100 miles of
me and they sit unused most of the time just like that one up in Truckee
or wherever the fuck JL likes to go on about, I can see on my app
anytime when they're being used it's not often.

these underused super-stations scattered about were the selling point
that made people buy all those model 3 as opposed to something else? I'd
think they'd be utilized more often if it that were the innovation
setting the world on fire. I do see Model 3s around sometimes and when
they're at a charger it's usually at the same kind of ChargePoint Level
2 charger I and everyone else uses. There are just more of them around.

What app do you have that shows supercharger use? Are you sure you aren't looking at destination chargers?


It looks like the ones I can get status on are, yeah.

Three of the destination chargers I can see status on nearby are located
at bars/public breweries - odd choice. Nobody there at the moment but
it's only Thursday.

Destination chargers are provided for the convenience of patrons, not trip charging. What you see is not at all indicative of much of anything regarding Tesla popularity. We all know Larkin hates Musk and so hates Tesla irrationally. You seem to be very jealous of Tesla's success in a market where it can only be said that GM has failed.


For the Tesla Supercharger-charger locations you can only infer useage
from the "popular times" GPS history on Google Maps, you can't get
real-time bay status anymore on Chargepoint or Plugshare. I don't
believe it was always that way. Guess Tesla figured there was no point
in giving that info to third parties anymore

Uh, why bother with any of that when Tesla has real time supercharger status in their cars and phone app? Why would anyone care about supercharger status if you don't own a Tesla?


The most popular supercharger locations are at the Auburn Mall in
Worcester and Shopper's World in Framingham those can be crowded in the
weekday mornings, looks like. The Mansfield mall location is usually
pretty lonely also I know because I go there sometimes and see it.

And uhhh, that's all there is just about for the no-status type
supercharger infrastructure in southeast Massachusetts until you get to
Cape Cod. Rhode Island is served by 28 supercharger bays total.

It's a nice perk but are these really the Tesla "killer app" driving
sales at this point in most locations? I see more Model 3s on the road
now but did the owners around here really buy them because they thought
the couple of mall-chargers were the best thing ever? The Mansfield mall
isn't even that great a mall!

I'm surprised you don't understand EVs and charging. Even if a Tesla owner never uses a supercharger, they want to know they are there if they ever decide to take a trip. People like Larkin are intimidated by the rapid success of Tesla, so he has to research them so he can knock every little nit about them to the point of making up BS about getting trapped in snow drifts. Someone else here has to dig so deep for him to come up with crap like needing to drive hundreds of miles with no notice while he had just drained the car.

The point is that for rational people, they want to know the charging exists so they can drive where they want if and when that happens. Other than North Dakota Tesla Superchargers allow that in most of the US. GM is not part of any charging solution and so Bolts remain tethered to an owner's home by the range tether.

When GM finally gets its head in the game they will produce competitive EVs. But until then, they are hardly even an also ran. It's like they never actually intended for the Bolt to be a success.

Weird statement about a car I see more of on the road around here than
the Model 3, by far.

Nobody is "serious" other than the one company, that is serious. If
anyone says they are also serious, see first statement. You are a True
Fanboi, in the service of the One True EV. Distribute referral codes to
the faithless generously, and blessings be upon Lord Musk (PBUH) so it
is written, amen.

 

bitrex <user@example.net> wrote in
news:4PUVE.35249$Kf5.27393@fx42.iad:

Tesla also has a demographics problem wrt to their sales the
overwhelming majority of Model 3s sold domestically are sold to a
similar demographic, middle-aged white males in the IT/technology
sector in California.

Fake Stat!

You are like Trump.

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, July 12, 2019 at 1:23:17 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:

On 7/11/19 5:19 PM, Rick C wrote:

GM is definitely headed in the right direction selling electric
SUVs/crossovers targeting the 35k-and-under price point. I don't really
see any other direction for them in the EV regime at this point, at
least. That's fine I think there's a large market there, the Bolt isn't
the right vehicle for it, it wasn't really designed for the average
American buyer, anyway. Looks weird. Popular in South Korea where half
the design team was located.

Lo0ks wEirD? It looks like every other Chevy!


Tesla also has a demographics problem wrt to their sales the
overwhelming majority of Model 3s sold domestically are sold to a
similar demographic, middle-aged white males in the IT/technology sector
in California.

That's one reason I probably see more Bolts than I do Model 3s around
here because 50% of the drivers/owners are women. I saw a woman driving
a Tesla, one time. I see more women than men driving Volts.

They are going to run out of tech dudes to sell these cars to,
eventually, the market will saturate.

You are funny.

--

Rick C.

--++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209