Detroit’s Worst Nightmare: America Losing Interest In Pickups, SUVs - Autoline Exclusives

[Rick73]

Exactly why a future Tesla Model 2 or Q, or whatever it’s called, needs to be small enough and cheap enough compared to 3/Y that it does not compete directly; in order to avoid excessive cannibalization.  Obviously there will be some cannibalization regardless.  Original reported plans for what became known as the $25K Model 2 were based on a car significantly smaller and lighter than a Model 3, with +/- 53 kWh battery capacity.  Now cost is up to $30K IIRC and that is probably after $7,500 tax credit, so I’d guess base price may be at least $37,500; not that much more affordable than a RWD Model 3.

[Sherminator98]

7 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Exactly why a future Tesla Model 2 or Q, or whatever it’s called, needs to be small enough and cheap enough compared to 3/Y that it does not compete directly; in order to avoid excessive cannibalization.  Obviously there will be some cannibalization regardless.  Original reported plans for what became known as the $25K Model 2 were based on a car significantly smaller and lighter than a Model 3, with +/- 53 kWh battery capacity.  Now cost is up to $30K IIRC and that is probably after $7,500 tax credit, so I’d guess base price may be at least $37,500; not that much more affordable than a RWD Model 3.

 

Here lies the problem though-in the NA market and to a lesser extent the EU, cheaper product will be compromised in such a way that it will turn off perspective buyers off. Until batteries get cheaper or labor is super cheap(like China), it’s going to be hard to make a profit off a EV that sells at $25k, not just start at or after US Federal tax breaks, which imo aren’t long for this world 

[rmc523]

16 hours ago, twintornados said:

I just traded my 2023 Explorer Timberline for a 2025 Maverick AWD Lariat hybrid....the Explorer was nice, but could not get over 23 MPG even if I drove it off a cliff....

 

Did you expect to get more?

 

14 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

The problem with Tesla to a degree is the lack of diversity in their product lineup. A cheaper product from Tesla will just hurt 3/X sales because it won’t be that much different from them and be more appealing to customers in price. I’m sure the S had some sales taken from it the 3 also. 
 

The cyber truck was an attempt at diversifying the lineup but just did everything wrong. 

 

I still don't understand how they haven't redesigned the S (and to a lesser extent the X) yet.  You can't go 12-13 years without a significant redesign and expect sales to stick around.

I also don't get the reports that they're concentrating more on Robotaxi production vs. a low-cost model.....I don't get who the target market for the Robotaxi will be?  Unless they're making it for themselves and will operate them as a Tesla service?

Edited April 30 by rmc523

[Rick73]

2 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

Here lies the problem though-in the NA market and to a lesser extent the EU, cheaper product will be compromised in such a way that it will turn off perspective buyers off. Until batteries get cheaper or labor is super cheap(like China), it’s going to be hard to make a profit off a EV that sells at $25k, not just start at or after US Federal tax breaks, which imo aren’t long for this world 

In fairness, Musk started talking about a $25K car so long ago that if we adjust for inflation, the cheapest BEV sold in North America, the Nissan Leaf at roughly $30K, is already in that price range, or below it.  But yes, the base Leaf is compromised by a 40 kWh battery which only provides 149 miles of EPA range.  We also do not know if actual cost is higher and Nissan is subsidizing Leaf to keep it in marketplace.  Manufacturers like Tesla that are all-electric do not have that luxury, and every model must be profitable.

 

Cheaper batteries will help, but so would greater vehicle efficiency, which Leaf sorely lacks.  The EPA 149-mile range with 40 kWh is well under 4 miles per kWh, when other cars like the larger Lucid have already reached 5 miles per kWh.  That efficiency alone would increase Leaf range to 200 miles.

 

What many people that follow Tesla have been expecting is a smaller Model 2/Q with Tesla and or Lucid efficiency that can deliver at least 250 miles of range with +/- 50 kWh useable battery capacity.  If they can get price down to $30K like Leaf, that would be a sweet spot for many EV buyers.  Obviously not all EV buyers want an affordable compact sedan-like car.

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

I also don't get the reports that they're concentrating more on Robotaxi production vs. a low-cost model.....I don't get who the target market for the Robotaxi will be?  Unless they're making it for themselves and will operate them as a Tesla service?

For now at least Musk is Tesla, and IMO he seems 100% committed to a vision where we don’t drive at all.  He may fear that cheaper BEV options will work against his master plan where we all move around in Robotaxis.

 

I have no doubt whatsoever that if Tesla/Musk had wanted to build a more-affordable, simple and base BEV, with same approach that Slate is taking, and not focused so much on self driving, they would have already done it years ago.  The cheapest Chinese cars are really pretty basic yet can get driver from point A to B just like a Civic or Corolla.

[sullynd]

4 hours ago, rmc523 said:

I still don't understand how they haven't redesigned the S (and to a lesser extent the X) yet.  You can't go 12-13 years without a significant redesign and expect sales to stick around.

It’s practically an electric Panther at this point. It’s ancient. I am surprised they didn’t design the 3/Y to grow into a new S/X.

 

I wouldn’t be shocked if eventually Tesla becomes a powertrain and software supplier.  Would people turned off by Musk be less turned off by a Mercedes powered by Tesla (batteries/motors and/or FSD)? 

Edited April 30 by sullynd

[Sherminator98]

3 hours ago, Rick73 said:

For now at least Musk is Tesla, and IMO he seems 100% committed to a vision where we don’t drive at all.  He may fear that cheaper BEV options will work against his master plan where we all move around in Robotaxis.

Doing that would hurt Tesla even more then Cybertruck did. 
 

A self driving car has very limited potential at this point and having it interact with other drivers on the road is just asking for problems, even with AI assistance 

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Sherminator98 said:

Doing that would hurt Tesla even more then Cybertruck did. 
 

A self driving car has very limited potential at this point and having it interact with other drivers on the road is just asking for problems, even with AI assistance 

The bigger issue for Tesla is that their boss has effectively alienated a big chunk of people who would have been return buyers for years into the future. All of that gone and now we’re heading into tougher times….. so good luck with that.

Edited April 30 by jpd80

[Rick73]

33 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

The bigger issue for Tesla is that their boss has effectively alienated a big chunk of people who would have been return buyers for years into the future. All of that gone and now we’re heading into tougher times….. so good luck with that.

Absolutely.  A lot of Americans, including many Republicans, do not like Musk, the World’s richest man, involved so deeply in politics.  Just the potential for unprecedented conflicts of interest are too great.  If it happened, and I’m not saying it has, there would be no way of knowing because we are beyond established checks and balances when it comes to Musk and information flow.  In the past presidents, who are elected by the people, gave up control of their businesses while serving, in order to avoid even the perception of  such conflicts of interest — not that they can't happen anyway.

 

Anyway, I prefer politicians who are dignified and respectful, and conduct themselves with a level of decorum appropriate for their office/position.  Musk is not elected, but given his active role in government, his behavior has been unacceptable IMO.  “Acting like a clown” as one guy put it must have also damaged the Tesla brand.  Short of him leaving Tesla voluntarily or forced, I’m not sure Tesla can fully recover.  At very least he needs to walk away from politics ASAP and get back to minding his businesses.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

 

 

Anyway, I prefer politicians who are dignified and respectful, and conduct themselves with a level of decorum appropriate for their office/position.  

I prefer politicians who do the right thing for the country and I could not care less how they act as long as they get things done.   And considering the absolutely horrendous stuff that’s happened the last 20 years it’s not hard to imagine why people are upset.  $250M for things like the Uzbekistan cotton industry?

[Captainp4]

On 4/28/2025 at 11:08 AM, rmc523 said:

 

So already shifting the goalposts?  "it's everything we want but......"

 

That said, as I've mentioned in other threads, the pricing on that thing doesn't make sense when you have Maverick on the market for nearly the same price with far more features.

 

 

Makes sense to me regarding Maverick.  And even if they were "only" buying for MPG/$ equation, it's more practical than other competition/body styles unless you truly needed covered space.

Essentially my point, the people that are loudest about wanting exactly what this company is providing will find some other reason it's not right and not buy it, imo.

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

I prefer politicians who do the right thing for the country and I could not care less how they act as long as they get things done.   And considering the absolutely horrendous stuff that’s happened the last 20 years it’s not hard to imagine why people are upset.  $250M for things like the Uzbekistan cotton industry?

What’s wrong with wanting both?  They are not mutually exclusive.  A politician can act dignified and also do the right thing.  Leaders should be held to a higher standard and Musk’s chainsaw display was unnecessary and reprehensible.  The fact that the other side may be and act even worse doesn’t matter to me.  I won’t lower myself to their level.  I want people who represent me and my party to act better than that.  A politician’s character does matter, and I won’t vote for jerks even if I agree with most of their views.  Fortunately jerks are usually also stupid which makes not voting for them easier.  😀

[Rick73]

35 minutes ago, Captainp4 said:

Essentially my point, the people that are loudest about wanting exactly what this company is providing will find some other reason it's not right and not buy it, imo.

If it were “exactly” what they wanted, how can they find some other reason not to like?  😝

[Captainp4]

27 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

If it were “exactly” what they wanted, how can they find some other reason not to like?  😝

Because they'll move the goal posts.........

[akirby]

54 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

If it were “exactly” what they wanted, how can they find some other reason not to like?  😝

Because what people say they want and what they’re willing to buy are 2 different things.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

What’s wrong with wanting both?  They are not mutually exclusive.  A politician can act dignified and also do the right thing.  Leaders should be held to a higher standard and Musk’s chainsaw display was unnecessary and reprehensible.  The fact that the other side may be and act even worse doesn’t matter to me.  I won’t lower myself to their level.  I want people who represent me and my party to act better than that.  A politician’s character does matter, and I won’t vote for jerks even if I agree with most of their views.  Fortunately jerks are usually also stupid which makes not voting for them easier.  😀

Both would be great, but rarely happens nowadays.  Just because they project a respectable persona publicly doesn’t mean they act that way in private.

[jpd80]

Ford’s situation seems to be  different to GM and Stellantis who have a different exposure level to tariffs.

Edited May 1 by jpd80

[twintornados]

20 hours ago, rmc523 said:

...Did you expect to get more?

 

I kicked myself after I bought it because I promised myself I would buy a hybrid when I got it. Don't get me wrong, it was a nice vehicle, but I wanted more MPG's and bought the wrong vehicle for that goal. What pissed me off was guys driving their full size pickup trucks bragging about getting 23 MPG and I was thinking, "If they could get 23 MPG in their truck, why am I only 23 MPG in my Explorer?" So, yes, I did expect a little more. 

[rmc523]

4 hours ago, twintornados said:

 

I kicked myself after I bought it because I promised myself I would buy a hybrid when I got it. Don't get me wrong, it was a nice vehicle, but I wanted more MPG's and bought the wrong vehicle for that goal. What pissed me off was guys driving their full size pickup trucks bragging about getting 23 MPG and I was thinking, "If they could get 23 MPG in their truck, why am I only 23 MPG in my Explorer?" So, yes, I did expect a little more. 

 

That's fair regarding mileage of the trucks.  At least you were still getting far better than my Bronco 😛 

Edited May 1 by rmc523

[akirby]

5 hours ago, twintornados said:

 

I kicked myself after I bought it because I promised myself I would buy a hybrid when I got it. Don't get me wrong, it was a nice vehicle, but I wanted more MPG's and bought the wrong vehicle for that goal. What pissed me off was guys driving their full size pickup trucks bragging about getting 23 MPG and I was thinking, "If they could get 23 MPG in their truck, why am I only 23 MPG in my Explorer?" So, yes, I did expect a little more. 

I don’t think the hybrid gets much better than that.  

[Rick73]

13 hours ago, Captainp4 said:

Because they'll move the goal posts.........

Agree moving goal posts happens sometimes, but what I think is more common in casual discussions is that not all “specifications” are covered in advance.  When a guy says he wants a car with at least 200 HP and a month later wants at least 300 HP, that’s undoubtedly moving the goal posts.

 

However, when a guy says he wants his next car to be red, does that mean that any red car should do?  IMO to assume that is illogical and presumptuous.

 

Similarly, if a guy says he wants a red V8 sedan but doesn’t mention a price limit, and is shown a $80K BMW, and then says he wants it under $50K, is that moving the goal posts?  I don’t believe so.  I think that’s mentioning previously-undisclosed additional conditions which is very different.

 

Honestly, there are so many variables that impact what vehicle we end up buying that to think a person will list them all in casual conversation is unreasonable.  In the case of Slate truck mentioned previously, it may very well be exactly what some people had described they wanted, but being a startup manufacturer could be a deal breaker.  IMO that’s a reasonable and valid concern and is not the same as moving goal posts.

[twintornados]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

I don’t think the hybrid gets much better than that.  

 

In my first month of ownership with the same commute...I am between 33-35MPG. I'm good.

[akirby]

25 minutes ago, twintornados said:

 

In my first month of ownership with the same commute...I am between 33-35MPG. I'm good.

 I meant the Explorer hybrid.

[jpd80]

54 minutes ago, twintornados said:

 

In my first month of ownership with the same commute...I am between 33-35MPG. I'm good.

Wow, that’s a big jump in fuel economy, do you miss the extra room or not really?

[akirby]

25 minutes ago, twintornados said:

 

In my first month of ownership with the same commute...I am between 33-35MPG. I'm good.

 I meant the Explorer hybrid.