Sounds like you’re describing HEVs for the most part which “buyers” are choosing because they are a more efficient investment.   IMO the vast majority of people are not going to spend additional money for something that doesn’t benefit them directly.  Fuel efficiency in itself is not enough if it comes at too high a price.  It goes against human nature which is to prioritize yourself and your family’s interests first.  Hybrids mostly improve city fuel economy at what is now a relatively minor initial cost penalty which explains why they are becoming more popular.  Battery-electric on other hand cost more to own so masses are not adopting as quickly.  Initially BEVs were marketed as cheaper to own but as additional cost data rolled in, prospective buyers started to tap the brakes (no pun intended).  I honestly believe the simplest way to influence buyer behavior is to control costs.  It will not be “fair” to 100% of population but nothing will.  What I really don’t want are EPA lawyers dictating what our next vehicles should be.

Is it 2WD or 4WD?

Article reminded me much of the same could have been said about Cybertruck and we know how that’s turned out.  Agree with comments that market must be very limited for six-figure weird vehicle intended for young rich audience who are also highly progressive and expressive.    

Owners manual - emission warranty section

I don’t mind the side or rear, but that front is awful.

The thing that acts against CAFE today is that much of the low hanging fruit with reducing emissions and improved fuel economy have already been achieved.   Currently, Corporate Average Fuel Ecoonomy is assessed in terms of gallons per mile, so in the early days, going from 13 mpg to 27 mpg was a huge improvement in fuel economy but going from 27 or 28 mpg to say 32 mpg or progressively higher will cost a fortune while delivering only smaller and smaller savings in the amount of fuel used.   Just my opinion, One of the big failings of CAFE today is the over reliance on the highway fuel economy number where the engine is arguably at its most efficient. Continuing to focus on this only serves the bureaucratic statasticians  who cling to comparing today to past performance  instead of aiming at areas where the ICE fuel consumption is higher.   Perhaps focusing more on the city cycle where electrification works best would be a much better strategy, that and following European zero emission zones in metropolitan areas may attack  pollution and fuel consumption in a more meaningful way. I could be completely wrong on this but encouraging electrification in city cycle would help the EPA achieve the evolution of ICE vehicles to a more efficient package that also benefits buyers.

Yes, Chinese team has become very good at developing new top hats especially given the versatility of C2 and regional preference via the local supplier base in China.

Yeah, I misread my source of information related to Tesla and LFP. It appears Tesla is also licensing CATL technology in order to build its LFP batteries. There was indication that they were in the process of developing their own technology however, that apparently has not come to fruition yet. So it appears the LFP batteries they’re building in the Giga, Nevada, factory are not proprietary.   I can see at some point how batteries will be a commodity, but during these early years, they can be a strategic advantage. With that said, I wonder if there shouldn’t be more collaboration between the US manufacturers on battery development in order to rid themselves of Chinese reliance.  

I would think the new target market will be fairly small when you take income into consideration and the price point they are aiming for.      They claim they aren’t abandoning their heritage, but it appears they are to me.

I don’t think the people they claim to be catering to are interested in cars