Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 1001 posts

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#621

Post by acdha »

pornel wrote: post #546
rainsford wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a fairly common point as well in car reviews. Super fast cars of any type are only fun in a very limited set of circumstances, most of them not on a normal road. In contrast, even your daily commute can be made more fun with a car that's lightweight or has good handling or an engaging manual shifter or whatever. It's basically the entire premise of the Mazda Miata. It's an unfortunate trend with EVs t…

Instant torque makes lots of people grin. Most BEVs also have low center of gravity and even mass distribution, so they’re not as bad as a heavy ICE car. On public roads, 0-30mph acceleration is probably most fun you can have within realm of legal and sensible driving. Handling is not an issue at speed limits of public roads.

Handling is nice for freeway merges but it’s definitely not at high speed. Where I used to live in San Diego there were a couple of ramps where I’d see the SUV drivers wallowing around the curves, tires squealing, visibly struggling to stay in the lane, and it was just like “you do this every day, why?”

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#622

Post by grecy »

buildbot wrote: post #403
maximus-decimus wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've come to accept it for political stuff (abortion and gun rights), but I guess it didn't sink in for stuff that's clearly subjective like your favorite color or pizza topping.

Ask people about their thoughts on Hawaiian Pizza

I have my own opinon about pineapple on Pizza, but I'm not so full of myself that I think anyone with the opposite opinion is "wrong".

They're opinions and preferences, not facts.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#623

Post by shepherdjerred »

FireBeyond wrote: post #581
shepherdjerred wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That seems near illegal. Oh, come on. Tesla is not hiding this. It's the first thing you see in the pricing section, and it's the last thing you see at the bottom. Maybe it's illegal somehow, but this is certainly not immoral. Tesla is making the case for the efficiency gains of their vehicle based on what most people drive today. This is certainly becoming less relevant/useful as electric/hybrid vehicles become mo…

> We've assumed a fuel economy of 20.0 miles per gallon for a comparable gasoline powered truck. This is absolutely misleading. F-150, Tundra, RAM 1500, Sierra, every single one of these pickups has a better fuel economy than this. It's not really a comparable economy if you pick "a number worse than every alternative" as your baseline.

Are you sure? 20 seems pretty fair.

* https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2023_Ford_F150.shtml

* https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2023_Toyota_Tundra.s...

* https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2023_Ram_1500.shtml

* https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2023_GMC_Sierra.shtm...

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#625

Post by mrep »

wharvle wrote: post #346
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looked it up and the top 3 most selling vehicles this year were big trucks. A total of 1.3 million trucks just from the top 3 vehicles this year. https://www.caranddriver.com/news/g43553191/bestselling-cars... I doubt all these new trucks are for trades people. Honestly most tradespeople I see drive older trucks because they are beating them up anyway. There's a LOT of people driving trucks who are not trades peopl…

I’ve noticed large regional differences in truck prevalence (vs. more jeeps and even more SUVs, it seemed to my eye, in the relatively-low-truck regions) so that may be account for difference in perception. In my part of the Midwest, the vast majority of trucks aren’t seeing truck-like use more than a countable-on-fingers number of days per year. A relatively small proportion are owned by tradespeople, who are at lea…

My boat slip fee is $5,000 a summer.

I could pay for a decent amount of gas if I upgraded my car to a truck to be able to tow my boat.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#628

Post by shepherdjerred »

callalex wrote: post #519
shepherdjerred wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Or is it only OK when Tesla does it? There's no reason to assume I'm biased towards Tesla here. If any carmaker wanted to say "our car is X% more efficient, and the average person could reasonably expect to save $Y", and then discount that from the sticker price, I would be okay with that. I don't think it's deceptive at all as long as the estimate is reasonable, and as long as there is clear communication about th…

Then where do you draw the line? I, and almost the entire developed world, draws the line at price = number of currency units required to leave the store with the item for sale. Every car could otherwise claim a deduction because it’s more fuel efficient than a sports car or a Rolls Royce or an F-350. And some cars don’t need as expensive of tires, should they claim that deduction? What about cars that are 2 wheel dr…

I mentioned this in another comment: something like EnergyGuide [0] would be great for this case, that way manufacturers like Tesla could more easily and consistently communicate how their vehicles have a lower cost of ownership.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EnergyGuide

I also want to say, if Tesla was doing this in some shady way, e.g. not offering an easy way to view the true purchase price, or making unfair comparisons, I would be totally against what they're doing.

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#629

Post by throwworhtthrow »

pardoned_turkey wrote: post #383
Bluestrike2 wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CAFE standards have been around since 1975. Yes, they helped incentivize manufacturers to aggressively market trucks and SUVs, but they don't explain the recent increase in the size of those trucks. That part's new.

Despite some misleading pictures shared on social media, if you do an apples-to-apples comparison (e.g., a 1972 F-150 and a 2023 model with the same bed size), they are about the same length. The differences are vastly better driver safety and fuel economy. Even the differences in height are often overplayed by making bad-faith comparisons: https://i0.wp.com/www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/uploads... The main diff…

I know what it's like to be in the presence of a typical old truck, compared to a typical modern truck. The modern truck is wider and taller, accelerates faster, and has worse visibility. I'll trust my own eyes and experience over some conveniently angled photos and irrelevant "apples-to-apples". (To extend the analogy: you're doing your comparison using a cultivar hardly anyone buys anymore).

Re: Tesla Cybertruck Pricing and Specs

#630

Post by unethical_ban »

wepple wrote: post #251
js2 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd take that bet. The Ranger isn't manufactured anymore (edit: yes it is; can't recall having seen one though) and I've never seen a Maverick used commercially. I don't think I've even seen one that didn't look freshly washed. I mean, this isn't even hard to figure out: the F-150 is the best selling vehicle (not truck, but vehicle) in the U.S. for what, a decade or more?

+1 who in their right mind would use a maverick for actual work? Ford don’t even pretend to market to those folks. https://www.ford.com/trucks/maverick/ It’s a Subaru with a truck bed

It fits the niche that the ranger did 15 years ago. Same as the ranger having the capacity (except for bed) as the f150 the same time ago.

Think auto shops shuttling parts around, or needing to toss dirty parts in the back of the truck without needing the hauling capacity.

Post reply on HN