The ELR is no competition for the Model S (or anything else, at that ridiculous price). I've said before that the Panamera is the closest thing to a competitor the Model S currently has, but I have no doubt that the Cayenne will continue to cannibalize sales from it. And no, I don't work for GM or any other auto company, nor do I own stock in (AFAIK; could be some in mutual funds) or have any emotional investment in any auto or related company.evnow said:
ILETRIC said:
DNAinaGoodWay said:
Zythryn said:
While it would be a setback, I doubt that it would kill the company. And that much further delay strikes me as unlikely anyway. I guess we will know soon.GRA said:
I am utterly baffled as to why you think those will be Model X competition. Will they be generally available EVERYWHERE? Or just in California like almost every other EV? And why would a PHEV be competition with the Model X? If people want to burn gas there are a large number of SUV/CUVs, including some luxury models, to choose from.
Here's why I think the PHEV CUVs will be competition (although less so with current gas prices) for the Model X. People who are capable of buying one of these essentially don't have to consider cost effectiveness, so whether one or the other has lower operating costs is effectively irrelevant (not to say that some people won't make a decision based on that, but it's not a particularly rational one). But unlike the case with the Model S, most people who are looking at an SUV/CUV place a high value on the letter 'U' of the acronym, and given the current lack of SC infrastructure, range decrease in cold weather and inability to carry loads on the roof (as well as the higher base price), the Model X trails a PHEV in all these areas.dgpcolorado said:
I'm not missing it, I just think it's a practical irrelevance (I care far more about 30-50 and 50-70 passing times, where the cars should be much closer together, but either will be ample), and far less important to many SUV/CUV customers than the ability to go anywhere they want without planning it ahead of time, in winter, while carrying whatever gear they want on the roof. YMMV.eloder said:
That is because you don't value the USP of X - it is a long range BEV SUV.GRA said:
Yeah, that must be why I've been commuting by bike and doing my errands on foot for the past 15 years, because I don't care whether I burn fossil fuels or not. :roll:evnow said:
My bad then, if that is what you do.GRA said:
desiv said:
Not sure that's true.Rebel44 said:
I've never said that 'everyone' else is better off, I've said that mainstream consumers are more likely to be willing to transition to PHEVs than BEVs and find the transition easier, given their respective current capabilities and prices. Once into a PHEV they can then easily move to a BEV once one meets their needs. I'd rather have an 80% solution now than wait for a 100% solution years from now, when BEVs/FCVs or what have you can be mainstream. A reasonably affordable 200 mile EPA BEV will be acceptable to quite a few mainstream customers, far more than an 80 mile BEV is, but the infrastructure needed to make BEVs the all-around choice to replace ICEs will be lacking for many years yet.evnow said:
