16,692 Cybertrucks sold in Q3 2024, more than 4 other EV pickups combined! Also 3rd best-selling EV overall in the US! 👏

[igs]

I don't think the numbers here are totally rosy for Tesla.

Obviously this is a Cybertruck forum, so it is appropriate to focus on the Cybertruck's numbers, which are not bad at 28,250 so far in 2024 (total of Q1, Q2, and Q3).

But did you happen to notice the Year-on-Year numbers for other Tesla models?

Model 3: down 34,067 (relative to the first three quarters of 2023)
Model Y: down 11,228
Model X: down 2,659
Model S: down 2,435

2024 is looking like a down year for Tesla sales in the US; the Cybertruck is the only bright spot. And this decline is happening while overall EV sales are growing.

Tesla sales have plateaued. This is why they canceled the Model 2 and Giga Mexico. Elon saw the writing on the wall and switched to automation, taxis and bots instead of more cars.

Sponsored

 

[Stinky10r]

EVs have to compete with gas cars, other EV's aren't that much competition to Tesla because they cost so much for what you get.

The primary competition are gas vehicles, for proof of this, just look at the vehicles other companies pay to market to Cybertruck Owner's Club, most of them are gas vehicles, the Toyota 4Runner, Dodge Ram 1500, etc. They wouldn't advertise here if they didn't think they could stem the tide of people buying EVs.

You won't find Tesla advertising on a Dodge Ram site, or anywhere for that matter, they want to win your business by offering more for less. And advertising is a cost that detracts from that.

The adverts seen are either forum sister sites or formulated from your search history.

 

[HaulingAss]

The adverts seen are either forum sister sites or formulated from your search history.

The point is, legacy auto is trying to reach new vehicle buyers before they buy an EV.

 

[Stinky10r]

The point is, legacy auto is trying to reach new vehicle buyers before they buy an EV.

If we're basing this off your original post it doesn't truly make sense. Ram is owned by Stellantis whom is trying feverishly to convert their entire lineup of cars to EV. So, Jeep, Dodge, Ram, Chrysler, and Maserati. Toyota is working on Hydrogen vehicles so that's your only argument. Once again, understand, that 6g 4 runner site, is a sister site amongst many others for the owners of this forum. They are advertising their other sites to you. Also, the way algorithms are written, all I see are ads for local cars on car gurus that I have searched or local electric companies that I recently searched for.

 

[Ljhughes8]

Something is worth what people are willing to pay. I'd be willing to pay $200,000.00 for this truck so I got a bargain! (consumer surplus)

Same here I could have bought another car but I did want to wait until my 1072000 time to come up.

 

[HaulingAss]

If we're basing this off your original post it doesn't truly make sense. Ram is owned by Stellantis whom is trying feverishly to convert their entire lineup of cars to EV. So, Jeep, Dodge, Ram, Chrysler, and Maserati. Toyota is working on Hydrogen vehicles so that's your only argument.

Don't look at what legacy auto says, look at what they do. Toyota's fixation on hydrogen cars is just a politically friendly way to say "We don't care about making the transition to EV, we want to keep leveraging old ICE technology, that has already been paid off years ago, to keep maximum profits through the transition to EVs". Hydrogen cars are the biggest joke in the auto industry. Toyota is basically calling their customers stupid when they say such things with a straight face.

Stellantis doesn't want to convert to EV any quicker than Toyota, they just make noises like they do, because it makes them look like they care, and they hope it will keep regulators from being too strict when they fail to make the transition. That explains most legacy automakers position on electrification, they have to pretend like they are trying to make the transition but that it's just not a viable technology yet. All they really care about is hiding the fact that they were caught with their pants down and avoiding making huge new investments that will take a decade to pay off. All legacy auto was caught with their pants down, now they are just faking it, that's why Tesla is a decade ahead of them in automotive technology.

All legacy companies are betting on the public's willingness to keep buying ICE cars, even as it becomes an increasingly uneconomical thing for consumers to do. That's why big auto is so keen on lieing and misinforming, they don't need well informed consumers, they need brainwashed consumers. It's not going to end well for them. My best guess says most of them will be bankrupt and sell off their ICE business to oil companies who will keep making as many as the bribed and paid off EPA will allow.

We live in a fake world where power and money determine the narrative. It's all about the narrative and how much wool they can pull over your eyes to make what they are doing seem reasonable to the average Joe.

 

[YDR37]

Tesla sales have plateaued. This is why they canceled the Model 2 and Giga Mexico. Elon saw the writing on the wall and switched to automation, taxis and bots instead of more cars.

Sales of the Model S and Model X peaked years ago and have steadily declined. Even Elon has stated that their continued production is mostly for "sentimental reasons".

So no one is going to dispute that the S/X are past their prime. The big question is whether the Model 3 and Model Y are about to follow the same pattern. The US sales numbers posted here show that both models are running behind, relative to the first three quarters of 2023. The Model 3 looks particularly vulnerable, with sales down by 20.5%. The Model Y is holding steadier, with sales only down by 3.8%.

It does seem like Tesla is betting heavily on autonomous driving; again, Elon has stated as much. The Cybertruck event in 2019 may be the last time that Tesla announces a new vehicle with a steering wheel.

 

[Stinky10r]

Don't look at what legacy auto says, look at what they do. Toyota's fixation on hydrogen cars is just a politically friendly way to say "We don't care about making the transition to EV, we want to keep leveraging old ICE technology, that has already been paid off years ago, to keep maximum profits through the transition to EVs". Hydrogen cars are the biggest joke in the auto industry. Toyota is basically calling their customers stupid when they say such things with a straight face.

Stellantis doesn't want to convert to EV any quicker than Toyota, they just make noises like they do, because it makes them look like they care, and they hope it will keep regulators from being too strict when they fail to make the transition. That explains most legacy automakers position on electrification, they have to pretend like they are trying to make the transition but that it's just not a viable technology yet. All they really care about is hiding the fact that they were caught with their pants down and avoiding making huge new investments that will take a decade to pay off. All legacy auto was caught with their pants down, now they are just faking it, that's why Tesla is a decade ahead of them in automotive technology.

All legacy companies are betting on the public's willingness to keep buying ICE cars, even as it becomes an increasingly uneconomical thing for consumers to do. That's why big auto is so keen on lieing and misinforming, they don't need well informed consumers, they need brainwashed consumers. It's not going to end well for them. My best guess says most of them will be bankrupt and sell off their ICE business to oil companies who will keep making as many as the bribed and paid off EPA will allow.

We live in a fake world where power and money determine the narrative. It's all about the narrative and how much wool they can pull over your eyes to make what they are doing seem reasonable to the average Joe.

What are you talking about? Hydrogen is just solving the same problem EV's do first off. EV's are not the end all be all. Sorry if you feel that way.

Secondly, if you actually have seen what Stellantis has chopped many of their worst vehicles and replaced them with EV's. They plan for all of their brands in the US and Europe to be fully electric by 2026. To see what they have done I think you should get out and get a fresh bit of air.

Lastly, technology in cars used to transfer down in this way. Aircraft, to Formula 1, to sports cars, to regular cars. The flow of technology. So, if we consider how many legacy manufacturers are in Formula EV, we see all legacy manufacturers whom all produce fantastic EV's and one manufacturer missing from the picture.

New Charger EV

https://www.dodge.com/next-gen-charger.html

Next BMW M3 will be both EV and ICE

https://www.carscoops.com/2023/09/b...coming-in-2027-will-coexist-with-ice-version/

BMW and Toyota merging on Hydrogen tech

https://www.automotivedive.com/news/toyota-bmw-collaborate-shared-fuel-cell-system-ev/726239/

 

[Crissa]

Way overpriced? Rivian , ford lightning (with the equivalent add one to equal a cyber truck ). Chevy diesel 2500, ford Raptor are all priced in the 90k/100k range plus, they are all over priced now a days. iMO

Noted, the average price of a new truck went from $50k in 2019 to $60k in 2023. The Cybertruck was supposed to be $50k in 2022. It's now $80k. $80k is greater than $60k.

It doesn't matter what the other EVs are doing, if you're outside what the average buyer can pay, you're going to see limited sales.

-Crissa

 

[Gaximus]

EVs have to compete with gas cars, other EV's aren't that much competition to Tesla because they cost so much for what you get.

The primary competition are gas vehicles, for proof of this, just look at the vehicles other companies pay to market to Cybertruck Owner's Club, most of them are gas vehicles, the Toyota 4Runner, Dodge Ram 1500, etc. They wouldn't advertise here if they didn't think they could stem the tide of people buying EVs.

You won't find Tesla advertising on a Dodge Ram site, or anywhere for that matter, they want to win your business by offering more for less. And advertising is a cost that detracts from that.

The ads on this site are hosted by AdSense, they track what you search and look at from all other sites. ICE trucks are advertising here, they just pay AdSense, and they are showing “You” gas trucks, because you probably visit those sites. I’ve never seen a gas trucks advertisment on this site. But I have seen some Chevy Silverado EV ads, but mostly tech stuff, and porn for some reason.

 

[Jack27]

Noted, the average price of a new truck went from $50k in 2019 to $60k in 2023. The Cybertruck was supposed to be $50k in 2022. It's now $80k. $80k is greater than $60k.

It doesn't matter what the other EVs are doing, if you're outside what the average buyer can pay, you're going to see limited sales.

-Crissa

Judging by the end of quarter sales as posted ithey are doing just fine. It isn’t like this truck was already a production vehicle and they made a few changes so they can nail down the price, it’s new to market new machines new figures out ish! and just because he thought he could deliver it at the lower price once production ramped up they clearly couldn’t make it happen. I really don’t think it’s price gouging but that’s just my opinion. But evens if it was its kind of his call
Do I think I payed an extra 20k to get it early and am mad about it. Not one bit it’s the price I had to pay to get it , the price is the price take it or leave it folks .
Also I don’t know where you are gettin. That price from?
I think people are conveniently using the price of the rear wheel drive and applying it to the price of the all wheel drive
I was originally a rear wheel drive order and I know it was around 70 and the AWD was $80. And I ordered the day of the first 5 released and it was on the web site
Anyway you all act like this is a Tesla thing. The price for a ford raptor in 2019 was 53k. Today the price for a 2024 is 80k wait I know how literal you are so it is Actualy for the bare bones model $78,400. It simply isn’t true about being over priced. The AWD wasn’t for the “average buyer”, just like they have the model 3 then they have the M3 performance. There’s levels to this ish! The rear wheel drive is the truck you all say was 70k not the AWD and that one might be for the average buyer but it ain’t out yet so don’t know what to tell all these folks acting like Elon Tesla owes them for missing the original projected price mark .. maybe they need to get the ford lighting and make that there new home?
Edit the ford lighting base model

 

[HaulingAss]

What are you talking about? Hydrogen is just solving the same problem EV's do first off. EV's are not the end all be all. Sorry if you feel that way.

Secondly, if you actually have seen what Stellantis has chopped many of their worst vehicles and replaced them with EV's. They plan for all of their brands in the US and Europe to be fully electric by 2026. To see what they have done I think you should get out and get a fresh bit of air.

Lastly, technology in cars used to transfer down in this way. Aircraft, to Formula 1, to sports cars, to regular cars. The flow of technology. So, if we consider how many legacy manufacturers are in Formula EV, we see all legacy manufacturers whom all produce fantastic EV's and one manufacturer missing from the picture.

New Charger EV

https://www.dodge.com/next-gen-charger.html

Next BMW M3 will be both EV and ICE

https://www.carscoops.com/2023/09/b...coming-in-2027-will-coexist-with-ice-version/

BMW and Toyota merging on Hydrogen tech

https://www.automotivedive.com/news/toyota-bmw-collaborate-shared-fuel-cell-system-ev/726239/

Hydrogen from fossil fuels is not an economically viable technology, even with volume efficiencies. Green hydrogen is even less economical, it's a dead-end when it comes to powering vehicles.

I'm sorry if you are not well-versed enough in the specifics of the technology to understand this, but it's a fact. Hydrogen would need some kind of unforseeable breakthrough on a fundamental level to be economically viable.

Sure, hydrogen power sounds fantastic if you only understand the industries talking points, but it is so uneconomical and difficult to scale in any manner that makes practical sense that it is nothing but a dead-end. And the people pushing it know this, they just hope you are not smart enough to see that truth.

 

[YDR37]

Hydrogen from fossil fuels is not an economically viable technology, even with volume efficiencies. Green hydrogen is even less economical, it's a dead-end when it comes to powering vehicles.

I'm sorry if you are not well-versed enough in the specifics of the technology to understand this, but it's a fact. Hydrogen would need some kind of unforseeable breakthrough on a fundamental level to be economically viable.

Sure, hydrogen power sounds fantastic if you only understand the industries talking points, but it is so uneconomical and difficult to scale in any manner that makes practical sense that it is nothing but a dead-end. And the people pushing it know this, they just hope you are not smart enough to see that truth.

It's true that hydrogen has a lot of disadvantages, including cost. However, hydrogen does have one notable advantage over fossil fuels or batteries: more energy for less weight. Everyone knows that EV batteries are heavy. An equivalent amount of gasoline or diesel weighs less. And an equivalent tank of hydrogen is even lighter.

Weight doesn't matter so much if we think about vehicles that drive on the road. It's well known that battery-powered EVs are heavier than comparable ICE vehicles, but the extra weight is manageable.

The hydrogen option becomes more interesting if we think about vehicles that fly in the sky. In this case, weight is absolutely critical, so hydrogen is very attractive for this application, while batteries are not. Furthermore, while hydrogen fueling infrastructure is lacking, it would be possible to serve the airline industry effectively with a relatively small number of large hydrogen fueling facilities at major airports -- easier to construct than matching the existing gas station or supercharger networks.

So while the current cost of hydrogen is a real problem, I wouldn't write it off just yet. But it's more likely to succeed in aircraft, not cars. Airbus has targeted 2035 for the release of a commercial hydrogen plane, so there is a good chance that it will arrive before the Tesla Robovan.

 

[Crissa]

Judging by the end of quarter sales as posted ithey are doing just fine. It isn’t like this truck was already a production vehicle and they made a few changes so they can nail down the price, it’s new to market new machines new figures out ish! and just because he thought he could deliver it at the lower price once production ramped up they clearly couldn’t make it happen. I really don’t think it’s price gouging but that’s just my opinion. But evens if it was its kind of his call
Do I think I payed an extra 20k to get it early and am mad about it. Not one bit it’s the price I had to pay to get it , the price is the price take it or leave it folks .
Also I don’t know where you are gettin. That price from?
I think people are conveniently using the price of the rear wheel drive and applying it to the price of the all wheel drive
I was originally a rear wheel drive order and I know it was around 70 and the AWD was $80. And I ordered the day of the first 5 released and it was on the web site
Anyway you all act like this is a Tesla thing. The price for a ford raptor in 2019 was 53k. Today the price for a 2024 is 80k wait I know how literal you are so it is Actualy for the bare bones model $78,400. It simply isn’t true about being over priced. The AWD wasn’t for the “average buyer”, just like they have the model 3 then they have the M3 performance. There’s levels to this ish! The rear wheel drive is the truck you all say was 70k not the AWD and that one might be for the average buyer but it ain’t out yet so don’t know what to tell all these folks acting like Elon Tesla owes them for missing the original projected price mark .. maybe they need to get the ford lighting and make that there new home?
Edit the ford lighting base model

Long. Incorrect, and assuming things I did not write.

That they just reached out to a million people in two weeks and haven't filled the next two months' deliveries.

-Crissa

 

[HaulingAss]

It's true that hydrogen has a lot of disadvantages, including cost. However, hydrogen does have one notable advantage over fossil fuels or batteries: more energy for less weight. Everyone knows that EV batteries are heavy. An equivalent amount of gasoline or diesel weighs less. And an equivalent tank of hydrogen is even lighter.

Weight doesn't matter so much if we think about vehicles that drive on the road. It's well known that battery-powered EVs are heavier than comparable ICE vehicles, but the extra weight is manageable.

The hydrogen option becomes more interesting if we think about vehicles that fly in the sky. In this case, weight is absolutely critical, so hydrogen is very attractive for this application, while batteries are not. Furthermore, while hydrogen fueling infrastructure is lacking, it would be possible to serve the airline industry effectively with a relatively small number of large hydrogen fueling facilities at major airports -- easier to construct than matching the existing gas station or supercharger networks.

So while the current cost of hydrogen is a real problem, I wouldn't write it off just yet. But it's more likely to succeed in aircraft, not cars. Airbus has targeted 2035 for the release of a commercial hydrogen plane, so there is a good chance that it will arrive before the Tesla Robovan.

Either you weren't following the discussion very closely, or your train of logic had a derailment of epic proportions.

I was only speaking to hydrogen cars, there is zero use case for mass-produced hydrogen cars. Zero. That's why the number of hydrogen fueling stations for cars has actually been declining, from its already dismal numbers. Because batteries can do it better, and at lower cost. Toyota is on a wild goose chase to decieve their customers. They can only pretend to be on the leading edge of automotive technologies.

It's all about charging infrastructure (which costs too much for hydrogen anyway). With ubiquitous charging everywhere cars go, charging time becomes irrelevant. The cost of the energy, on the other hand, will always matter.

Sponsored