Will Competition Destroy Tesla?

[David]

3 hours ago, balthazar said:

That's not what the sales number say.
2016 : 24K
2017 : 27K
Model S peaked at 30K U.S. sales in 2018, and that was the year the Model 3 was in full swing (selling 140K).
2019 : 14K.
2020 saw a rise to 20K, but
2021 is only on pace for 16K. 

Model S is definitely slowed down.

I wonder what affect peoples tastes for cars versus SUVs has played in some of the numbers not just for Tesla but for all manufactures.

Tesla to me is overpriced for what they offer in the Tesla S. I think there are far better options out there and sadly only from an ICE option as no one else is building a true car BEV at this point due to the market pretty much dictating Trucks and SUVs.

Real sign will be sales if Tesla gets their truck to market and how it stacks up against Ford, gm and Ram.

13 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Unless Stellantis breaks out brand profit we don’t really know what they make.  But I assume the models that had tooling paid off years ago are profitable.  At some point though you have to update products, and if FCA had so many profitable models, why did they never have any cash?  And it seemed when Sergio was alive he feared the company would collapse without a merger, and merger (or takeover) is what they got.

🙄 What part of Sergio was stealing the profits from Dodge, Ram, Jeep, Chrysler to prop up the wasted effort of his Italian brands.  Specifically Alfa Romeo he took the billions wasted it on Alfa and still it struggles to live, it should have been left in the history books.

[smk4565]

3 hours ago, David said:

I wonder what affect peoples tastes for cars versus SUVs has played in some of the numbers not just for Tesla but for all manufactures.

Tesla to me is overpriced for what they offer in the Tesla S. I think there are far better options out there and sadly only from an ICE option as no one else is building a true car BEV at this point due to the market pretty much dictating Trucks and SUVs.

Real sign will be sales if Tesla gets their truck to market and how it stacks up against Ford, gm and Ram.

🙄 What part of Sergio was stealing the profits from Dodge, Ram, Jeep, Chrysler to prop up the wasted effort of his Italian brands.  Specifically Alfa Romeo he took the billions wasted it on Alfa and still it struggles to live, it should have been left in the history books.

If Chrysler was so profitable, why did they need a bailout in 2009, and get sold to Cerberus, then sold to Fiat?  And Daimler dumped them. Stellantis is their 4th owner in 15 years, an Chrysler hasn’t been able to survive on their own since the 90s and if it was such a cash cow, parent companies wouldn’t keep selling it off to get rid of it.

[oldshurst442]

16 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

If Chrysler was so profitable, why did they need a bailout?

 

ANSWER:

[surreal1272]

47 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

If Chrysler was so profitable, why did they need a bailout in 2009, and get sold to Cerberus, then sold to Fiat?  And Daimler dumped them. Stellantis is their 4th owner in 15 years, an Chrysler hasn’t been able to survive on their own since the 90s and if it was such a cash cow, parent companies wouldn’t keep selling it off to get rid of it.

You need to pay attention in class. That was a decade ago. They are making a profit now on cars like the Challenger and Charger while Tesla loses money on their cars. I sure as hell know that Daimler didn’t do a damn thing to help them. In fact, their ownership is what accelerated their bankruptcy but again, shhhhh, we don’t ever speak ill of your German masters. 
 

Btw, it’s been common knowledge for the last eight years that Sergio siphoned of the popular profit making domestic brands to fund those piles of $h! from Italy. You know that already so stop trying to play dumb about it just because other folks here don’t worship Elon Musk and his money losing cars. 

Edited June 16, 2021 by surreal1272

[smk4565]

2 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

 

ANSWER:

They split up because they knew Chrysler wasn't worth keeping.   Chrysler got the Charger/300 platform, the Grand Cherokee platform and the Crossfire from Mercedes.  Outside of the Ram 1500, their 2 most profitable vehicles of the past 15 years are because of Mercedes.   And then Fiat gave them the Promaster and Promaster City, the platform the for the Dart/200/Cherokee, the platform for the Renegade.  Chrysler has mooched off other companies for 20 years, and now all the Chrysler/Dodge/Jeeps will get Opel and Peugeot underpinnings and engines.  

[smk4565]

2 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

You need to pay attention in class. That was a decade ago. They are making a profit now on cars like the Challenger and Charger while Tesla loses money on their cars. I sure as hell know that Daimler didn’t do a damn thing to help them. In fact, their ownership is what accelerated their bankruptcy but again, shhhhh, we don’t ever speak ill of your German masters. 
 

Btw, it’s been common knowledge for the last eight years that Sergio siphoned of the popular profit making domestic brands to fund those piles of $h! from Italy. You know that already so stop trying to play dumb about it just because other folks here don’t worship Elon Musk and his money losing cars. 

Daimler gave them the 300/Charger/Challenger and Grand Cherokee, which is what that company is build on outside of the Ram 1500.

Italy gave them the Dart/200/Cherokee and Renegade.

Without Fiat and Daimler, Ram would be just the 1500, Dodge would have been the Journey and Caravan, and Chrysler would have been the Town and Country/Pacifica.  Jeep would have had the Patriot and Compass and Wrangler.  

[oldshurst442]

1 minute ago, smk4565 said:

They split up because they knew Chrysler wasn't worth keeping

They gutted Chrysler. Used ALL the money that Chrysler was making and threw her out. 

2 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Chrysler got the Charger/300 platform,

Chrysler had a RWD platform that they were designing all on their own. Daimler didnt want to further the project and gave them the old platform to work on while Mercedes a couple of years later got the new E Class platform

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Charger_R/T_(1999_concept)

Quote

 

This was the first rear wheel drive car built on the Chrysler LH platform with all of prior cars built on the same platform being front wheel drive. The car was rumored to accelerate from 0-60 mph in 5.3 seconds.^[5]

Following the Daimler Chrysler merger, the management went in another direction with the future of the company, and the concept car was not placed into production. A newly developed Dodge Charger (LX) would not reach production until the 2006 model year. The new Charger bore little resemblance to the 1999 concept.

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

the Grand Cherokee platform

 

CORRECTION:

You mean....Daimler used Chrysler money and Jeep engineering to make their shytty SUVs that they badge engineered the GC from...

Coincidentally, the shyttyiest GC was the one from the merger of equals...

10 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

the Crossfire from Mercedes.

The Crossfire was from the previous gen SLK while that same year, the SLK got a NEW platform...

And rumour has it, Daimler used the next gen Viper for its SL revival while Daimler almost canceled the Viper all together...

 

You will never admit it....but Daimler NEEDED Chrysler MORE than Chrysler needed Daimler. 

Daimler used and abused Chrysler and left Chrysler for dead...

Hence rthe bankruptcy in 2009...

Prior to that, Chrysler had bought Lamborghini, help fund the Diablo....it actually re-engineered the Diablo which angered Gandini. He later made the Cizetta which was the original Diablo creation.

Chrysler changed the world with the Viper.  With the mini-vans.  With the cab forward mid-sizers.  Hence the Charger concept.

Chrysler made the Prowler to test how to use and mass produce aluminum to which Daimler learned a few things...

You have got a lot of soul searching to do because your dear Mercedes is NOT all that...

[smk4565]

1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:

They gutted Chrysler. Used ALL the money that Chrysler was making and threw her out. 

Chrysler had a RWD platform that they were designing all on their own. Daimler didnt want to further the project and gave them the old platform to work on while Mercedes a couple of years later got the new E Class platform

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Charger_R/T_(1999_concept)

 

 

 

CORRECTION:

You mean....Daimler used Chrysler money and Jeep engineering to make their shytty SUVs that they badge engineered the GC from...

Coincidentally, the shyttyiest GC was the one from the merger of equals...

The Crossfire was from the previous gen SLK while that same year, the SLK got a NEW platform...

And rumour has it, Daimler used the next gen Viper for its SL revival while Daimler almost canceled the Viper all together...

 

You will never admit it....but Daimler NEEDED Chrysler MORE than Chrysler needed Daimler. 

Daimler used and abused Chrysler and left Chrysler for dead...

Hence rthe bankruptcy in 2009...

Prior to that, Chrysler had bought Lamborghini, help fund the Diablo....it actually re-engineered the Diablo which angered Gandini. He later made the Cizetta which was the original Diablo creation.

Chrysler changed the world with the Viper.  With the mini-vans.  With the cab forward mid-sizers.  Hence the Charger concept.

Chrysler made the Prowler to test how to use and mass produce aluminum to which Daimler learned a few things...

You have got a lot of soul searching to do because your dear Mercedes is NOT all that...

Daimler paid $37 billion for Chrysler and sold it 9 years later for $7.4 billion because Chrysler was losing so much money.   The fact that Daimler was willing to take a $30 billion loss just to get rid of it shows how bad their financial situation was.  Also that no one was willing to pay over $7.4 billion for the company, which needed government bail out 2 years later.  

Daimler got nothing from Chrysler, Chrysler didn't make any money, and they didn't use any of those platforms or powertrains, other than the joint work on the ML and Jeep Grand Cherokee, which the ML got 2 new platforms before the Grand Cherokee got one.  If Chrysler has so much money, why did it take until 2022 model year for Jeep to update a chassis from 2005, why is the Charger still on a 1990s Mercedes platform?  Why doesn't Chrysler lead the market in EV?   Why don't they have an all new Charger every 6 years like Toyota puts out a new Camry every 6?

 

https://money.cnn.com/2007/05/14/news/companies/chrysler_sale/

 

Here you go, in 2006 Chrysler had a $1.5 billion loss, while DaimlerChrysler overall had a $7.3 billion profit.  So the Daimler side made $8.8 billion while Chrysler lost $1.5.

Edited June 17, 2021 by smk4565

[oldshurst442]

That is more on what Daimler was doing to Chrysler

 

Daimler was giving Chrysler OLD platforms to work with and then bitchin' why Chryssler aint sellin'...

YOU are doing the same thing here...

Chrysler came out with the Charger concept in 1999.  It was a WORKING RWD car.   Chrysler gets RWD, OLD platform in 2005...    Chrysler had to work miracles to make it modern...

Chrysler has a new sporty model in mind...Daimler agrees to make it a version of the SLK...   Daimler puts it on the OLD platform while the SLK gets a new gen.  The Crossfire doesnt sell, the critics bemoan the Crossfire and Daimler doesnt understand why. Proceeds to blame Chrysler...

Chrysler comes up with a mid-engine concept. WANTS to build it.  Daimler says NO!

Daimler is afraid that a Chrysler will shyte on ANY Mercedes...

 

Chrysler has a new gen Viper going on.  One that will be able to be sold in the near future as Chrysler knows safety standards are going to be tightened.  Daimler cancels the project.

It is rumoured though that Daimler uses this exact project to make their SL revival.  Just a rumour though.

What IS true, is that the Viper soldiers on with the old platform, that does NOT conform to the new safety standards.  The merger is finished...   Chrysler is gutted form Daimler.  The bankruptcy happens just 2 short years later...   Chrysler is gutted once again.  Fiat comes along, greenlights a new Viper based on the old platform, Chrysler makes it into a track beast, besting out ANYTHING that Daimler makes...  but BECAUSE its on an older platform that airbags wont be able to be put it, the Viper MUST be put to sleep.  The world blames Chrysler and/or Fiat but the REAL problem was Daimler because Daimler didnt want anything from Chrysler to shyte on anything Daimler.     The proof is that the LX cars did NOT get new tech either from Daimler OR Chrysler, because daimler did not ALLOW it.  The Crossfire being the previous SLK gen while the SAME year the SLK is on the NEW platform...

Really dude...I dont care..

Believe what you wanna believe.   

Mercedes is NOT all that...

While you prop up Tesla in this thread...you have shat on the Corvette...the thing is...the Model S plaid ALSO beats out ANYTHING from Mercedes INCLUDING the million dollar plus shyte box from AMG called AMG-One..

 

PS:  When Stellantis/Chrysler said that Dodge wants to get back its fastest sedan title away from Tesla...the Charger that Dodge wants to gibe us AINT a V8...but an EV.

But your delusional hatred of anything American prevented you from seeing that and assumed that Dodge meant Hellcat V8...  Please dont bother me with your nonsense...

 

 

[oldshurst442]

https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1046235_report-mercedes-benz-sls-amg-was-originally-the-next-viper

If you've thought the 2011 Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG looks a lot like the Dodge Viper, you're not alone. And it turns out you may well be even more correct than you thought you were: a new report out today says the SLS AMG was originally the next-gen Dodge Viper, borrowed from Dodge while Daimler still owned Chrysler.

The news is both surprising and completely expected all at once. The proportions of the car, the spy shots during development, even the character of the car itself all seem to bear a lot of Viper influence. But to think the $180,000 SLS AMG is based off work done by Dodge's engineers as they envisioned the next Viper? A bit unexpected.

Nevertheless, that's precisely what happened, according to Inside Line. According to an unnamed insider, the all-aluminum chassis was already in the prototype stage and an all-new suspension design was in the works when Mercedes decided to put the also-in-development SLS AMG on the same path.

 

And there is soooooooo much to read into here...

Chrysler is sooooooo shyte...that Mercedes decided to develop the SLS AFTER the Viper and Mercedes used the Viper as a start. 

You really have a lot of soul searching to do...

 

Edited June 17, 2021 by oldshurst442

[surreal1272]

10 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Chrysler was losing so much money.

Which was Daimler’s fault since they were the owners. What are you not getting here? Fact is that Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep did BETTER under Fiat ownership than under Daimler. The problem there was Sergio siphoning profits from those groups to fund his steaming piles of junk in Italy. Again, this is a fact, not opinion.

10 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Here you go, in 2006 Chrysler had a $1.5 billion loss, while DaimlerChrysler overall had a $7.3 billion profit.  So the Daimler side made $8.8 billion while Chrysler lost $1.5.

Again, the fault there lies with its owners. Who was that btw? Thats’ right. It was Daimler. You are not making as convicting argument here. The lesson here was that a company like Chrysler could not succeed off of platform sloppy seconds like the Crossfire and the 300. 

[surreal1272]

And let me end this diatribe with this. You talk about what Daimler gave Chrysler, like the LX platform (again, sloppy seconds) like it was such a great thing. Well, as an eight year owner of one of those LX models (Magnum), I would personally like to tell Daimler to go F themselves. Don’t get me wrong. I loved the car overall but the interior was not one of those reasons. Daimler was responsible for the budget of those cars and let the bean counters turn a decent car into a Fisher Price plastic laden nightmare on the inside. That is a fact.

[surreal1272]

10 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

While you prop up Tesla in this thread...you have shat on the Corvette...the thing is...the Model S plaid ALSO beats out ANYTHING from Mercedes INCLUDING the million dollar plus shyte box from AMG called AMG-One

A billion times this! He loves pointing out all the cars the Tesla beats 0-60 but never mentions his favorite brand in those statements. It’s why I can never take him seriously. Just leave the damn fanboy Pom Poms in the closet and stick to the facts. 

[oldshurst442]

It was the Italians that gave way for the nice LX interior upgrades.  Especially the Dodges. 

Daimler flubbed on what could have been a phoquing awesome partnership and merger with Chryco.   

Instead, Daimler was too stuck up in their German ways that questioned what Chrysler cars SHOULD be in the US market, got extremely jealous of the potential of what Chryco engineers could do with the American cars and totally bean counted, sabotaged, misappropriated Chrysler's share on the money and totally phoqued up Chrysler.

That ME412 was the last straw...  

Im willing to bet that Daimler German asshats found it to be insulting for Chrysler to take a Mercedes V12 and engineering a very super supercar around it.   Not only that, Chrysler engineers seemed to IMPROVE upon the V12 with forged internals and better flowing cylinder heads...     The very first HYPERCAR!  

But the German idiots didnt realize that THIS car could have ENDED the Corvette's life.  Or they did know but probably  didnt want ANY of that spotlight to outshine the German part of Daimler-Chrysler...    Talk about cutting your nose to spite your face...

On the other end...   Daimler got Jeep SUVs on the cheap that bolstered their line-up at JUST the right time when the world went batshyte crazy for SUVs,  got a platform for their awesome SLS AMG that Chrysler engineers worked on bolstering their mega image in the US to folks like SMK.  

I guess, it was better that way, to phoque Chrysler but reap the benefits of owning Chrysler for a little while...

 

Edited June 17, 2021 by oldshurst442

[ccap41]

So... do we think competition will destroy Tesla? 

I think competition will make for better Tesla products. I'm thinking(hoping) that they don't go away(very doubtful) or sold to a legacy automaker(lame - they do unique things that legacy automakers don't allow with their corporate structure). It will certainly be an interesting future with Tesla gaining competitors every month it seems. 

[oldshurst442]

35 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

So... do we think competition will destroy Tesla? 

I think competition will make for better Tesla products. I'm thinking(hoping) that they don't go away(very doubtful) or sold to a legacy automaker(lame - they do unique things that legacy automakers don't allow with their corporate structure). It will certainly be an interesting future with Tesla gaining competitors every month it seems. 

I dont know if competition will make for better Tesla products as their leader and head CEO, Elon Musk, thinks that he is the smartest guy in the room.

He doesnt seem to learn, or more precisely, he doesnt seem to WANT to learn from others. Especially the legacy automakers.  Tesla might have (had) a superior EV product, that gap is FAST closing in on Tesla.  And I really do mean fast.  Faster than what I thought it would be.   THAT is the thing, Legacy automakers have some brilliant engineers of their own and Elon thinks that he has cornered the market with engineers...  The problem is that these legacy automakers have a century plus of history of engineering state of the art stuff.  THEY KNOW how to find and nurture and get the MOST out of THEIR engineers.  And legacy automakers, whether in Detroit or Wolfsburg also know a thing or two on how to engineer and mass produce a vehicle and they have THAT down to a tee...  something that Tesla and Elon REFUSE to learn how to do...

Elon not only has other projects in mind, his obvious choices in how he chooses to use recreational drugs make it apparent that Tesla is losing its edge slowly slowly that Tesla once enjoyed hugely over every other legacy automaker...

A product like an Apple computer, or iPod, iPhone doesnt come too often in life.  But Steve Jobs seemed to hit lightning in a bottle SEVERAL times in his tenure of Apple.  THAT is because Steve Jobs was CLEAR in his mind...

Jobs MIGHT have ALSO taken prescription drugs ALONG with recreational ones, but somehow, HIS mind was clear.

Musk on the other hand, his mind is clouted with BS.  It shows....   He aint THAT phoqued in his head though as how we see his manipulation of the stock market with bitcoin tweets and the like...

BUT...all that shyte takes AWAY from his concentration  of how he SHOULD ELEVATE Tesla to the NEXT level...

He has EFFECTIVELY ALLOWED FoMoCO, GM, VW to be on an EQUAL playing field on EVs when he enjoyed AT LEAST a DECADE of being in front of them JUST 2 short years ago...

When the onslaught of EVs come from these legacy automakers in the next year and two, Tesla will NOT be selling THAT many Model Xs and Model 3s...  Those Tesla cars are already long in the tooth in  2021 and they arent even THAT old... and there is NO talk about gen2 for these cars...    I wont even address the Model S and X...

When the 2nd gen of these EVs from VW, FoMoCo and GM come rolling along by the end of the 2020s, Tesla I feel, will be an irrelevant company...as a car manufacturer.  (NOT  as a powertrain and battery company, but as a manufacturer of vehicles) 

VW,  FoMoCo and GM, ESPECIALLY VW and GM, have ALL THE R&D money they could possibly need WITHOUT the help of smoke and mirrors stock market manipulation of ARTIFICIALLY valuing their companies at 600 mill.  

In fact, VW, FoMoCo and GM are CRIMINALLY UNDERVALUED that it seems it doesn't MATTER because it seems as FoMoCo, VW AND GM have found a way AROUND that and have the MONEY to equal and BETTER the Tesla tech with their OWN proprietary tech... 

And I like Tesla...

Its a shame that what Elon had, he is pissing it away... 

 

 

 

Edited June 17, 2021 by oldshurst442

[oldshurst442]

56 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

ARTIFICIALLY valuing their companies at 600 mill.  

600 bill.  it should have been written as.  

600 billion.

[surreal1272]

51 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

And I like Tesla...

Same. I have stated in the past (and to my detriment at times) that their EV tech is top notch and they deserve all the credit in the world for giving the industry a swift kick in the balls. However, I am a realist about their situation, which is built on a house of cards if you ask me and it's all because of Elon and his mindset. They do not have a firm grasp on the mass production aspect of their cars, as evidenced by the many reliability issues with them. Furthermore, while some folks like that minimalistic look if their interiors, it all goes south with they realize how cheap the actual materials are in their $100K EV. 0-60 times are all fine and dandy but if you switched just the words "2021 Tesla Model S Plaid" for "2008 Dodge Magnum SRT", all the bragging about 0-60 times goes right out the window when you realize the sheer cheapskate nature of their interiors because that was the simple fact of the matter. It's only the name "Tesla" that blinds some folks to that simple fact. 

 

For the record, I sat in two different year Model S cars (2015 and 2018) in Arizona. I stand by my statement about heir interiors.

[surreal1272]

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

I stand by my statement about heir interiors

“Their” not “heir”. What the hell autocorrect?

[oldshurst442]

On 6/16/2021 at 2:02 PM, David said:

Real sign will be sales if Tesla gets their truck to market and how it stacks up against Ford, gm and Ram.

The Cybertruck is not exactly THE definition of what a pick-up truck is.

If the Cybertruck goes into production as is or even it ever goes into production...

The Cybertruck is a toy.  Its a fantasy vehicle. Its a concept car made into production. 

Its a lifestyle toy meant to tell your green EV loving folk what you got.  But ONLY to the green ev loving folk that are rabid Tesla fans.

Because GM has also entered that realm of a fantasy, recreational toy meant to compare how big the green EV d1ck is with save the planet pricks....

And the thing is...GM has already successfully marketed THAT huge penis contest 20 years ago

 

TWICE 

 

And it seems the Hummer EV is gonna be a hit of Tesla proportions as well...

The Ford F150 EV and the GM EV pick-up truck twins will show case what an EV pick-up truck could and should be.  

The Cybertruck is nothing but showmanship.  And if that is the best of what Tesla could do...it has already lost...  

The Roadster 2.0 

should have been out already...selling to folk that are buying the CURRENT ICE C8 Corvette...

But the longer Elon is stalling it, the more time Chevy has got to perfect and out perform the Tesla Roadster 10 fold with the EV Stingray and the 1000 HP full on tri motor EV C8 Zora...

 

Like I said... Elon has FAILED to take Tesla on to the next level.  He ALLOWED his competition to get close to him and even surpass him...

Instead of getting the Roadster out when the ICE C8 came out and embarrass Chevrolet with its dinosaur ICE sports car, Musk allowed Chevy to showcase that ICE is NOT dead, ICE is still very fast, affordable.  Musk allowed GM and Chevy to gain MORE fans for the Vette, and Musk allowed Chevy engineers to tell the world that if you think this BASE ICE Corvette is fast...wait until the EV Vette hits the showroom.  IT WILL BE FASTER AND AFFORDABLE TOO!!!

While everyone was waiting for the Roadster 2.0 because we thought that was fast,   Musk allowed THAT momentum to slip through his fingers and now the EV C8 Corvette is the one we are eagerly awaiting for...

 

 

 

 

Edited June 17, 2021 by oldshurst442

[balthazar]

If Chrysler was so unprofitable, why did Daimler buy them?

[balthazar]

The Daimler-Chrysler' story is an interesting one, primarily colored by the oh-so-typical fudging of numbers on Daimler's part. They're ravenously money-hungry, and will do whatever it takes to make a buck. It's documented how Daimler bled Chrysler dry, and they never "gave" anything to Chrysler, they mandated and then forced Chrysler to pay. It got so petty that Daimler back-charged all international calls to Auburn Hills. 

[smk4565]

19 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

https://www.motorauthority.com/news/1046235_report-mercedes-benz-sls-amg-was-originally-the-next-viper

If you've thought the 2011 Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG looks a lot like the Dodge Viper, you're not alone. And it turns out you may well be even more correct than you thought you were: a new report out today says the SLS AMG was originally the next-gen Dodge Viper, borrowed from Dodge while Daimler still owned Chrysler.

The news is both surprising and completely expected all at once. The proportions of the car, the spy shots during development, even the character of the car itself all seem to bear a lot of Viper influence. But to think the $180,000 SLS AMG is based off work done by Dodge's engineers as they envisioned the next Viper? A bit unexpected.

Nevertheless, that's precisely what happened, according to Inside Line. According to an unnamed insider, the all-aluminum chassis was already in the prototype stage and an all-new suspension design was in the works when Mercedes decided to put the also-in-development SLS AMG on the same path.

 

And there is soooooooo much to read into here...

Chrysler is sooooooo shyte...that Mercedes decided to develop the SLS AFTER the Viper and Mercedes used the Viper as a start. 

You really have a lot of soul searching to do...

 

I know the SLS had some beginnings when they were merged.  But Daimler never told Dodge they couldn’t build a new Viper, Daimler walked with all those other platforms, they could have spent their own money on a new Viper.  They could make a Viper now.  You say they make all this profit yet haven’t put out a new vehicle that isn’t a Jeep in like 5 years.

2 hours ago, balthazar said:

If Chrysler was so unprofitable, why did Daimler buy them?

They were probably  making money in the 90s I assume.  Also Daimler had a dumb CEO then who was fired shortly after that merger.  

[surreal1272]

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

They were probably  making money in the 90s I assume.  Also Daimler had a dumb CEO then who was fired shortly after that merger.  

So we are in agreement. Daimler ruined Chrysler. Thanks for confirming that. 

[smk4565]

9 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

He has EFFECTIVELY ALLOWED FoMoCO, GM, VW to be on an EQUAL playing field on EVs when he enjoyed AT LEAST a DECADE of being in front of them JUST 2 short years ago...

When the onslaught of EVs come from these legacy automakers in the next year and two, Tesla will NOT be selling THAT many Model Xs and Model 3s...  Those Tesla cars are already long in the tooth in  2021 and they arent even THAT old... and there is NO talk about gen2 for these cars...    I wont even address the Model S and X...

When the 2nd gen of these EVs from VW, FoMoCo and GM come rolling along by the end of the 2020s, Tesla I feel, will be an irrelevant company...as a car manufacturer.  (NOT  as a powertrain and battery company, but as a manufacturer of vehicles) 

 

Ford, GM and VW combined have 4 EV's for sale right now, and that is even counting Bolt and Bolt EUV separately.  Tesla has 4 too, and none of what Ford, VW or GM has is as good as what Tesla has right now.  No one caught Tesla yet.  

Also you are just assuming that if Ford and GM or VW build EV's people will start buying them and shelling out $50k for a small SUV like the iD4.  People in the USA aren't buying the Tiguan in any big number and that is a $25,000 SUV, why are they going to spend double Tiguan money, for an SUV the same size and performance as a Tiguan?  

People still buy brand names.  Toyota still has a better brand image than Ford or Chevy for example.  Tesla has a better brand image than any mainstream car, and better than most of the luxury cars.  Saying Ford or Chevrolet are going to go head to head with Tesla is like saying Ford is going to go head to head with Lexus and Audi and charge Lexus and Audi prices and get people to pay it.  It isn't going to happen.  

And yes the Mach-E will get some initial sales bump but Kia, Hyundai, Toyota, Honda will all jump in there too, and those brands do pretty well.

[oldshurst442]

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

I know the SLS had some beginnings when they were merged.  But Daimler never told Dodge they couldn’t build a new Viper, Daimler walked with all those other platforms, they could have spent their own money on a new Viper

Daimler LIMITED Chrysler's budget when they were merged together...

Daimler LIMITED and outright DENIED their choices...

The RWD Charger concept was postponed. Daimler denied further development of that RWD chassis. And when they greenlit the RWD LX cars, Daimler made them use the old E Class platform.  

I guess it was less expensive?  But YOU just said that Chrysler made money in the 1990s...

YOU GUESS???

OF COURSE THEY DID!!! 

THEY MADE MONEY HAND OVER FISTS WITH THE MINIVANS, THE CAB FORWARD LH CARS AS THESE WERE SMASH HIT SELLERS, WITH RAM AND JEEP AND OTHER SUVs LIKE THE DURANGO!!! 

Chrcyo made money even selling Lamborghini after Chryco had a little bit of a hiccup in those 1990s.

But...they had enough R&D money to start HUGE pet projects LIKE the Viper, the PROWLER, the RWD Charger that they wanted to bring out BEFORE there was a Daimler-Chrysler merger...

So...after the merger, when Daimler left Chrysler dead and gutted... where would Chrysler find the money?  

Its easy for Daimler to do an SLS...they USED STOLE Chrysler's already ADVANCED in R&D platform!!! The chassis was an all aluminum chassis. Something that Chrysler engineers learned to do when they owned Lamborghini and decided to experiment with the Prowler...

 

Nevertheless, that's precisely what happened, according to Inside Line. According to an unnamed insider, the all-aluminum chassis was already in the prototype stage and an all-new suspension design was in the works when Mercedes decided to put the also-in-development SLS AMG on the same path.

 

Ive posted THAT exact thing above but I highlighted other stuff....I highlighted other things here because you seem to want to gloss over facts...

https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/car-design/a27637/the-secret-history-of-the-plymouth-prowler/

 

.As it turns out, the car was far more than a 1990s spin on a 1933 Ford—it was Chrysler's largest-ever experiment in building aluminum cars, coming nearly 20 years ahead of the aluminum car revolution we're seeing today.

"The whole thing really was an exercise in research for how to use aluminum materials," Gale says of the Prowler. "At the time, Chrysler really didn't have a lot of applied research. So in my view, this was a great way to kind of force us to take a look at aluminum stamping, aluminum forming, extrusions, welding, and combining that with composite materials.

"Prowler was really more about that than it was the car itself, and I was kind of the one that pushed that. I was just anxious to see us have that kind of research," Gale says.

"At the time, we could see where things were going to go, especially if you looked at a long-term trend, with fuel economy and weight," Gale told me. "And yet we really didn't have the kind of expertise we felt we needed. So having [Prowler] happen, having the ability to bring [aluminum] panels into a production environment, definitely provided us with knowledge that we wouldn't have gained in other ways."

 

You are calling the Daimler-Chrysler CEO of Daimler stupid?

Why?

For merging with Chryco?

Chryco in the 1990s was a very high time for Chryco.  Something that Chryco hadnt seen since the 1950s and 1960s.   Chryco was on a styling hit parade in the 1990s like they were in the 1950s and 1960s.  Chryco didnt see that kind of engineering prowess since the 1950s and 1960s...

Chryco was on a roll in the 1990s and yes...that stupid CEO phoqued it all up for Chryco.   He did however advantage Daimler though through all that sabotaging he did against Chrysler...

You admitted without knowing it that Daimler WAS the cause for Chryco's demise in 2009.

The merger ended in 2007.  The downfall of Chryco WAS during the merger...BECAUSE Daimler was a shyte for nothing company...  BEFORE the merger...Chrysler was FLYING high! 

Mercedes though...BEFORE the merger...was in SHAMBLES.

BMW was kicking their ass!

AUDI was kicking their ass!  JOHAN was in command then!

SHYTE...even Lincoln was outselling Mercedes then! 

 

 

Edited June 18, 2021 by oldshurst442

[surreal1272]

11 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Tesla has 4 too, and none of what Ford, VW or GM has is as good as what Tesla has right now.

The Ford F-150 Lightning and Mach-E greatly disagree with your half-baked assessment and for all of Fords flaws, both will be more reliable than any Tesla.

Edited June 18, 2021 by surreal1272

[smk4565]

6 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

The Cybertruck is nothing but showmanship.  And if that is the best of what Tesla could do...it has already lost...  

The Roadster 2.0 

should have been out already...selling to folk that are buying the CURRENT ICE C8 Corvette...

But the longer Elon is stalling it, the more time Chevy has got to perfect and out perform the Tesla Roadster 10 fold with the EV Stingray and the 1000 HP full on tri motor EV C8 Zora...

 

Like I said... Elon has FAILED to take Tesla on to the next level.  He ALLOWED his competition to get close to him and even surpass him...

Instead of getting the Roadster out when the ICE C8 came out and embarrass Chevrolet with its dinosaur ICE sports car, Musk allowed Chevy to showcase that ICE is NOT dead, ICE is still very fast, affordable.  Musk allowed GM and Chevy to gain MORE fans for the Vette, and Musk allowed Chevy engineers to tell the world that if you think this BASE ICE Corvette is fast...wait until the EV Vette hits the showroom.  IT WILL BE FASTER AND AFFORDABLE TOO!!!

While everyone was waiting for the Roadster 2.0 because we thought that was fast,   Musk allowed THAT momentum to slip through his fingers and now the EV C8 Corvette is the one we are eagerly awaiting for...

Cybertruck will be on sale before the F150 Lightning or the electric Silverado, and Cybertruck does some cool stuff, I think people will buy it.

The Tesla Roadster is 3 times the cost of a Corvette, also anyone that is a Tesla fan, won't buy an ICE car, so they aren't buying Corvettes, plus the Model S is faster around a track than a C8.

Also when is the Corvette going to take the Nurburgring record?  Right now it is 42 seconds a lap slower than the AMG GT Black series, which in a few months will be Mercedes 2nd quickest car.  

Corvette has good performance per dollar, always has, but it isn't some world killer sports car.  The Veyron has a 275 mph top speed, the Corvette's is like 200.   The Corvette does 0-124 mph in 12 seconds, the AMG One does it in under 6.   And even if they build a 1,000 hp Corvette in a few years, the Rimac Nevera is on sale now with 1,900 hp and an 8.6 second 1/4 mile time.  

[oldshurst442]

14 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Cybertruck does some cool stuff, I think people will buy it.

No they wont.

The world saw what the Hummer looks like, so they will stay the PHOQUE away from it.  Only rabid Tesla fanboys will buy that. And ONLY the ones that have the room for one. THAT equals to NOT many...  The Hummer is also huge...but it has a more BROADER appeal.

The Hummer H1 and H2 were PREMATURELY canceled.  With the EXPLOSION of Jeep SINCE the cancelation of HUMMER ICE and the introduction and SUCCESS of the Ford Bronco only tells me that the HUMMER EV willl TROUNCE the Cybertruck in sales.  They are indeed in the same category those two...

14 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The Tesla Roadster is 3 times the cost of a Corvette, also anyone that is a Tesla fan, won't buy an ICE car, so they aren't buying Corvettes, plus the Model S is faster around a track than a C8.

Again...GLOSS over the fact that in 2022...an EV HYBRID Vette is gonna appear. 

GLOSS over the fact that the C8 YOU are referring to is the BASE PHOQUING CORVETTE THAT COSTS HALF THE PRICE OF A PHOQUING PLAID MODEL S...

YOU JUST ADMITTED THAT ONLY TESLA FANBOYS ARE GONNA BUY THE ROADSTER OVER THE C8 EV...BUT THE VETTE HAS 1000% MORE FAN BASE THAN THE ROADSTER HAS AND EVER WILL!!!

AND...THE VETTE EV HYBRID WILL EMPLOY SOME C8 Z06 TRACK SUSPENSION...   I SERIOUSLY THINK YOU SHOULD STOP THE SHYTE CONVERSATIONS...THE CORVETTE'S MISSION AT THIS POINT IN TIME IS TO BE A TRACK BEAST...ITS A SPORTS CAR YOU DUMMY!   THE C8 YOU SEE NOW IS A BASE MODEL!!!

IT IS ITS MISSION IN LIFE TO BE A TRACK BEAST!!!

YOU THINK THE MODEL S WITH ITS 5000LBS WEIGHT IS GONNA STILL BE A TRACK WINNER WHEN A LIGHTER, MORE CAPABLE SPORTS CAR WILL COME OUT??? IF YOU THINK THAT, YOU ARE STUPIDER THAN I THOUGHT!!!

 

14 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

but it isn't some world killer sports car.  

YES IT IS!!!

THE VEYRON EXISTS BECAUSE IT WANTS TO DEFEAT SPORTS CARS LIKE THE CORVETTE!!!   THE CORVETTE IS THE PRIMARY CAR THESE HIGH EXOTICS TRY TO BEAT YEAR AFTER YEAR...

BTW...IT WOULD BE SILLY IF BUGATTI BUILT A ONE MILLION DOLLAR CAR THAT GETS TROUNCED BY A SIXTY THOUSAND DOLLAR ONE.  AND IT NEARLY DOES WITH HALF THE HORSEPOWER...

 

Edited June 18, 2021 by oldshurst442

[oldshurst442]

The Model S and now the Plaid is a testament on what Tesla could do.  No doubt. 

The Roadster 2.0 when Musk showed it, it took the world by storm.  And rightfully so! 

These are amazing machines.

But to simply prop them up only to shyte on the competition is wrong.  Its wrong because the competition HAS caught up to Tesla.  

The Roadster 2.0 was unveiled in 2017 and it was supposed to come out in 2020. Well, in 2017, the competition for EVs from the legacy automakers was DISMAL!  THAT is why we could put Tesla on SUCH a HIGH pedestal...then

There was NO Corvette C8 let alone a HYBRID Mid -Engined one that is gonna be out for sale in 2022. next year.

The Roadster was supposed to be out LAST year.  The Roadster 2.0 is not even planned to come out in 2022...

In 2017, there was NO Mustang Mach -E to show us that even Ford for phoque's sake could bring out an EV that RIVALS a Tesla product.  

There was NO EV F150 concept to tell us what FoMoCo has planned.   THE biggest F150 news in 2017 was  GM STILL bitchin' and whining on their ads that an aluminum  bed is bad for business.  

The Porsche Taycan was still a pipe dream...

There was NO Audi E Tron GT.  If the Taycan was a pipe dream, the E Tron GT was semen still stuck in the balls of a limp penis VW Group not even ready to shoot and fertilize an egg...

THAT is how advanced Tesla was OVER its competition in 2017...

In a short 4 years...EVERYBODY has caught up to Tesla...

The next update to the Taycan and the Plaid Model S will be an insignificant blip... which by Porsche standards not liking to lose to its competition...will probably BE in 2022...

The Corvette Hybrid C8 will bury the Roadster in news and performance. 

The Cybertruck will be a farce while the Hummer EV will be the NEW star in rap videos.]

And ALL THAT is happening in the next 2 years or less...  

YES...Tesla has got 4 models.  4 OUTDATED models...with a 5th outdated model, the Cybertruck, ready to be laughed at BECAUSE Elon Musk has smoked his braincells to death...  

 

Edited June 18, 2021 by oldshurst442

[smk4565]

45 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

 

IT IS ITS MISSION IN LIFE TO BE A TRACK BEAST!!!

 

 

Corvette C8 Nurburgring time:  7:29.9

Corvette C7 Z06 Nurburgring time:  7:13.9

Mercedes-AMG GT Black Series Nurburgring time:  6:43.6

 

Get back to me when the Corvette beats the AMG GT.   

[oldshurst442]

7 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Corvette C8 Nurburgring time:  7:29.9

Corvette C7 Z06 Nurburgring time:  7:13.9

Mercedes-AMG GT Black Series Nurburgring time:  6:43.6

 

Get back to me when the Corvette beats the AMG GT.   

It will...soon.  

PS:  

YOU are comparing a BASE PHOQUING CORVETTE TO A HIGH END BLACK SERIES GT...

Edited June 18, 2021 by oldshurst442

[smk4565]

27 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

 

But to simply prop them up only to shyte on the competition is wrong.  Its wrong because the competition HAS caught up to Tesla.  

 

 

How many sedans on market today do 0-60 in under 2 seconds?  Or forget sedans, just cars in general?  The Rimac in Europe but not here yet and the Model S.  How many EV's have a 400+ mile range?  Only the Model S.  How many even hit 325 miles or more?  Only Tesla's.   No one has caught up yet.  And they might, but Tesla won't stand still either. 

1 minute ago, oldshurst442 said:

It will...soon.  

Better be fast because Mercedes is going to break that 6:43.6 record in the next couple months.

[balthazar]

Why are U.S. Model S sales down 50% from 3 years ago?
Are people moving on from just 0-60 numbers?
Is the now 10-year old Model S just too out-of-date?

[oldshurst442]

17 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Better be fast because Mercedes is going to break that 6:43.6 record in the next couple months.

No it wont...

 

 

[balthazar]

If Tesla remains static, they will be surpassed and falter.
And IMO, if they stop making vehicles and merely supply batteries/motors to other manufacturers, they failed.
They've certainly made missteps (who hasn't); they should never have dumped the Roadster, then announced a return almost 5 years ago now. All those potential roadster buyers are long gone.

We'll have to watch & see what happens.

[surreal1272]

10 hours ago, balthazar said:

If Tesla remains static, they will be surpassed and falter.
And IMO, if they stop making vehicles and merely supply batteries/motors to other manufacturers, they failed.
They've certainly made missteps (who hasn't); they should never have dumped the Roadster, then announced a return almost 5 years ago now. All those potential roadster buyers are long gone.

We'll have to watch & see what happens.

To be fair, the original roadster never sold well for the same reason it wouldn't sell well today. Outside of the Miata, no one wants those type of cars anymore. That niche died (for the most part) in the 90s, if you ask me.

[surreal1272]

11 hours ago, smk4565 said:

How many EV's have a 400+ mile range?

In the next year, there will be a half dozen models making that claim. As others have told you a thousand times already, the competition is closing in and closing in fast and they are going to provide a far more reliable product, in most cases. Also, show us the take on the long range models and you might have an actual argument. Until then, it's just more pom pom waving. 

[ccap41]

23 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

In the next year, there will be a half dozen models making that claim. As others have told you a thousand times already, the competition is closing in and closing in fast and they are going to provide a far more reliable product, in most cases. Also, show us the take on the long range models and you might have an actual argument. Until then, it's just more pom pom waving. 

Who all is claiming 400+ miles of range? I'd love to see it but that's a hell of a distance. 

[oldshurst442]

3 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Who all is claiming 400+ miles of range? I'd love to see it but that's a hell of a distance. 

Whether there will be or not...

THERE IS NO PHOQUING NEED FOR 400 MILE RANGE...(if one has a charger at home...if and WHEN charging times drop....when there are ENOUGH charging stations at every street corner...)

gasoline powered cars barely have over 400 mile range...   

But...gasoline powered cars cant be filled up at HOME... 

Its the SAME old tiring argument...

 

[oldshurst442]

I read a comment somewhere where a poster was commenting on range for EVs...

He said:

"there is no need for a 400 mile range battery and more in an EV"

why?

"A gasoline powered car lugs around 400 plus mile of range in the form of gasoline. gasoline is heavy, but ONLY when  the tank is full. When its empty, it aint heavy.  We also dont drive with a full tank of gas all the time. Its only full once. We drive the first mile and its no longer full and its 1 mile less heavy. And we dont rush to fill 'er up the next day either.  Some of us dont even fill 'er up all the way. Some of us wait until we squeeze the last fume out of the gas tank before we gas up again.   A battery powered car lugs around that heft ALL the time REGARDLESS if on a full charge or a 0% charge.  When charging times drop to the levels of gasoline fill-up times, there wont be a need to lug around all that heft."

 

Think about that for awhile...

 

 

Edited June 18, 2021 by oldshurst442

[ccap41]

33 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

Whether there will be or not...

THERE IS NO PHOQUING NEED FOR 400 MILE RANGE...(if one has a charger at home...if and WHEN charging times drop....when there are ENOUGH charging stations at every street corner...)

gasoline powered cars barely have over 400 mile range...   

But...gasoline powered cars cant be filled up at HOME... 

Its the SAME old tiring argument...

 

WUT? 

I'm not arguing for or against a needed 400 mile range or "filling up" at home.

I was simply asking what manufacturers are coming out with 400 mile range vehicles. 

[surreal1272]

42 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Who all is claiming 400+ miles of range? I'd love to see it but that's a hell of a distance. 

Even though it's an outlier, the Lucid Air is claiming over 500 miles of range. I'd have to see that to believe it, to be honest though. There is an Audi A6 variant claiming 400. I may have overstated the one year claim but I do believe within 5 years, 400+ mile range will be more the standard than the exception. 

[ccap41]

8 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Even though it's an outlier, the Lucid Air is claiming over 500 miles of range. I'd have to see that to believe it, to be honest though. There is an Audi A6 variant claiming 400. I may have overstated the one year claim but I do believe within 5 years, 400+ mile range will be more the standard than the exception. 

I had to Google the EQS, they're targeting 478 miles on the Euro cycle but it's estimated to be under 400 in the EPA's cycle. 

500 miles is insane. I only see a need or even a want for something like that in a long-haul truck, be it a semi or dually 3500/350's(loaded rating or something similar). 

[oldshurst442]

41 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

WUT? 

I'm not arguing for or against a needed 400 mile range or "filling up" at home.

I was simply asking what manufacturers are coming out with 400 mile range vehicles. 

True...but I wasnt questioning you or your stance REGARDING 400 mile range either...

I was just stating that there might NOT be a need for 400 mile range and COMPLIMENTING your post rather than questioning it...

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

Who all is claiming 400+ miles of range? I'd love to see it but that's a hell of a distance. 

But YOU are quite defensive there...

Is it because you are sooooo comfortable if phoquery posts?

Like you want to mess with my mind because I cant take an adolescent  joke about a phoquing your mother joke when my mom passed away just a few months prior.

When we are ALL NOT adolescent's anymore and chances are at OUR age, a parent might pass away because...parents DO get older and DO NOT live forever?

I mean....sex with your momma jokes...  do they EVER get stale?  

Like never?

Stop the phoquery!!!

[David]

16 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Cybertruck will be on sale before the F150 Lightning or the electric Silverado, and Cybertruck does some cool stuff, I think people will buy it.

The Tesla Roadster is 3 times the cost of a Corvette, also anyone that is a Tesla fan, won't buy an ICE car, so they aren't buying Corvettes, plus the Model S is faster around a track than a C8.

Also when is the Corvette going to take the Nurburgring record?  Right now it is 42 seconds a lap slower than the AMG GT Black series, which in a few months will be Mercedes 2nd quickest car.  

Corvette has good performance per dollar, always has, but it isn't some world killer sports car.  The Veyron has a 275 mph top speed, the Corvette's is like 200.   The Corvette does 0-124 mph in 12 seconds, the AMG One does it in under 6.   And even if they build a 1,000 hp Corvette in a few years, the Rimac Nevera is on sale now with 1,900 hp and an 8.6 second 1/4 mile time.  

WRONG, Tesla has stated the Tesla Y will be the first auto in production at GigaFactory Texas starting end of 2021 followed by the Cybertruck early 2022 the same time that Ford F-150 Lightning EV is scheduled to go into production. Musk keeps saying Cybertruck 2021, but he has ZERO credibility in actually staying on with delivery dates. He says things to keep folks interested, but has yet to actually deliver on schedule.

See Massive Progress At Tesla Giga Austin: March 12, 2021 (insideevs.com)

I can tell you Tesla will not have the options Ford will offer or Chevrolet for their EV truck.

Tesla has ZERO real world details let alone test mules running compared to Ford has had test mules running for the last half of year and has clearly posted their actual specifications for the Lightning EV.

[smk4565]

23 hours ago, balthazar said:

Why are U.S. Model S sales down 50% from 3 years ago?
Are people moving on from just 0-60 numbers?
Is the now 10-year old Model S just too out-of-date?

Because they can get a Model 3 or Y for cheaper and the Model S is old.  I think Model S could use a bigger update than it got, the did a mid cycle refresh a few years back, and when it was time for a new one, they did another mid cycle refresh.

12 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

In the next year, there will be a half dozen models making that claim. As others have told you a thousand times already, the competition is closing in and closing in fast and they are going to provide a far more reliable product, in most cases. Also, show us the take on the long range models and you might have an actual argument. Until then, it's just more pom pom waving. 

Personally I hope Mercedes buries Tesla the way they did most of the other luxury brands.  I am not a Tesla fan.  I am just being realistic that it isn’t going to be so easy.  

12 hours ago, ccap41 said:

Who all is claiming 400+ miles of range? I'd love to see it but that's a hell of a distance. 

The Tesla Model S does it now, the Mercedes EQ S will do it.  End of list.

[smk4565]

12 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

Whether there will be or not...

THERE IS NO PHOQUING NEED FOR 400 MILE RANGE...(if one has a charger at home...if and WHEN charging times drop....when there are ENOUGH charging stations at every street corner...)

gasoline powered cars barely have over 400 mile range...   

But...gasoline powered cars cant be filled up at HOME... 

Its the SAME old tiring argument...

 

Agreed but some will want a longer range so I think it is smart to offer a 400 mile option.  All these EV’s are best served with a 200-250 mile range, any more than that is  just hauling extra battery weight for no reason.  But easy enough to sell a long range option.

Edited June 19, 2021 by smk4565

[balthazar]

10 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

the Model S is old

I thought all that mattered was 0-60.

[surreal1272]

8 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Because they can get a Model 3 or Y for cheaper and the Model S is old.  I think Model S could use a bigger update than it got, the did a mid cycle refresh a few years back, and when it was time for a new one, they did another mid cycle refresh.

Personally I hope Mercedes buries Tesla the way they did most of the other luxury brands.  I am not a Tesla fan.  I am just being realistic that it isn’t going to be so easy.  

The Tesla Model S does it now, the Mercedes EQ S will do it.  End of list.

No. The Audi A6 and Lucid Air both will. You really need to educate yourself.